Down District Council Traps My Fifth Lawyer in Their Web of Corruption

We arrived at Mr. Chambers' office in good time and in good spirits and left feeling quite ill. Mr. Chambers was prepared to take action against:
(a) the National House-Building Council,
(b) my neighbour Mr. Joyce,
(c) Mr. and Mrs. Campbell who sold us No. 56, and
(d) Mr. Brown the builder.

Mr. Chambers absolutely and resolutely refused to take any action whatsoever against Down District Council. By this time I knew that, as the third owner of No. 56, I had no contract with the builder and therefore could not take any legal action against him without taking action against the Council at the same time and I told Mr. Chambers so. It made no difference. I also told him that while I understood that I had to act against my neighbour as the owner of the defective No, 54, and was prepared to do so, I was not prepared to allow Mr. Chambers to include Mr. Joyce on a writ which neglected to include the main defendant Down District Council who now employed those whose negligence had put Mr. Joyce and myself in our respective positions. Mr. Chambers was adamant and refused to include DDC on the writ. I refused to allow him to take any action which did not include DDC and asked him for his account which I paid there and then. This account included Mr. John Pringle's fee. Mr. Pringle later became Judge Pringle.

Several months later the reason for Mr. Chambers' behaviour became crystal clear. A photograph appeared in both the Mourne Observer and the Down Recorder showing Mr. James Chambers, solicitor, standing between Mr. Bill Shaw MP and Cllr. Alfie Jameson, Chief Whip of the SDLP, and two others, being made chairman of the Downpatrick branch of the SDLP.

Mr. Chambers was being amply rewarded for his services to the party. Had he acted against Down District Council, he would have been acting against his political friends.

As well as contacting building contractor J.G. Dorrian, I had plumbing contractor Gibney Bros. engaged to install a new back boiler in my fire grate when J.G. Dorrian had repaired my chimney breast and wall. This was in the party wall dividing No. 56 from No. 58 on the opposite side of No. 56 from where the smoke from No. 54 was coming through that party wall.
I also had the new back boiler linked to the oil-fired central heating system Gibey Bros. had installed so efficiently the previous year. In order to protect my own family and the people in No. 58, I also engaged Supaflue engineers Jack Turner & Son from Belfast to line my flue. This should have been done when the house was built by Mr. Brown.
It may not have been a legal requirement, but 15 years before Carlisle Park was built, a building contractor called Mr. Branniff, was made to dismantle a properly built chimney in a local parochial house which he was renovating and rebuild it with proper flue liners by the local Building Control Officers, possibly the same people who were involved in checking the construction of Carlisle Park.

The terralux bricks or blocks which formed the jambs of my fireplace were quickly removed by J.G. Dorrian's men and those which were built into the back of my fireplace behind the hot water boiler were also removed. I was called to the scene. When the latter blocks were removed, the string of the staircase ( ie. the large wooden lath which is placed up the side of the staircase and against the wall) in No. 58 Carlisle Park had been actually scorched by my fire through the terralux as in the photograph below.

It is little wonder that the Commissioner for Complaints was forced to state,

"... this particular clay block should not have been used ... because of the possibility of fire and or hot gases being conducted via the cellular horizontal ducts to other parts of the dwelling."

When my own fireplace had been properly rebuilt, it was a very straight forward job getting the chimney flue lined. Of course it is always straightforward to the onlooker when professionals are involved. A long sausage-like tube was lowered from the top of the chimney until it reached the throat of the fireplace. It was then inflated to the correct diameter and a very fine, fluid, cement-like mixture, of volcanic origin, was poured down from the top of the chimney around the inflated tube which was sealed off at the bottom.
The chimney was filled right up to the top and the mixture was left overnight to set. The next day the tube was deflated and removed leaving a completely smooth and completely sealed flue.
The hole in the area of the party wall behind the fireplace of No. 54 at the other side of No. 56 had now been extended to about eight feet long and about eight high by J.G. Dorrian's men and all the rubbish had been removed from inside Joyce's chimney breast.

It was at this time that I was told that the whole inside of my house, the whole loadbearing structure had been built with terralux, party walls and front and rear walls. The outside skins of the front and rear walls were built with good solid bricks, rustic bricks, but I was told that the outer skins did not carry any weight. There was no way I could afford to do a job of this magnitude as I considered that I had borrowed all that I could afford to repay. I had obtained a further loan from the Nationwide Building Society to help with the work and to pay for the mortgage arrears I had managed to incur as a result of my loss of work recently.

When I borrowed the £4000 from the Allied Irish Bank it was my intention to repair No. 56 at my own expense and sell it as soon as the repairs were complete and proved to be successful. Now the money we had borrowed was almost all spent and we were being told that the whole house was defective. All this good work was in vain if the whole house was built with these rogue bricks as a journalist was later to call them.

A Bombshell

The 54/56 party wall was in the process of being re-instated when I received another bombshell, literally.

Mr. Dorrian had to go to another job for a few days before finishing my job. On one of these days when I was in No. 56 cleaning up as best as I could, a customer of mine called about a job he wanted me to do on his car. He was also a building tradesman. When he saw what I had decided to have done to the wall behind Joyce's fireplace, he asked me if I realised what I was doing. He told me that I was sealing up some open-ended blocks which had coal gas in them. He said that I was creating a time-bomb. Then I remembered a Rates Official, Mr. Hampton, who had told me on a visit to the Rates Office to explain my Rates arrears, that one night he was sitting in his living room in Millbrook Drive (part of the Carlisle Park estate) and his chimney breast just above his fireplace burst open into his living room.

While this tradesman stood in my hallway I rang the Commissioner for Complaints Office and told someone there what I had just been told, and I asked the person I spoke to in no uncertain manner just how long the Commissioner was going to tolerate this situation. The work in No. 56 was completed in a short time and we moved back to No. 56 on May 4th 1978. I received the following letter from the Commissioner for Complaints dated May 8th 1978;

"Commissioner for Complaints Act (NI) 1969
Dear Mr. Rice
The Commissioner has now agreed to investigate your complaint against Down District Council. He will write to you as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely
P W Lynch"

Now we were really getting somewhere, at last, or so I really believed. Was the Commissioner influenced by my telephone call? Probably not. Was he influenced by the fact that he knew of Mr. Chambers' refusal to act against DDC thus making me, as I eventually found out, statute barred from ever taking any future action against that Council? Probably not. The Commissioner was probably influenced by a letter sent to Dr. Paisley MP by DDC's Administrative Officer S. Campbell dated April 26th 1978;

"Dear Dr. Paisley,
The Department of the Environment for N.I. by letter of the 18th April, 1978, have forwarded a copy of a letter to you dated 3rd April 1978 from Gerald Rice, 11 Newcastle Road, Ballynahinch. After several inspections by the Environmental Health Department of the Council it was confirmed that smoke was entering No. 56 Carlisle Park, Ballynahinch, from the adjoining house at No. 54 and the Council at their meeting on 21st November 1977 agreed "that the Clerk to the Council together with the Building Control and Public Health Officers meet with the owners of the properties and the Building Contractor to seek a solution to the problem of alleged smoke nuisance. Failing agreement the owners should be advised to seek legal advice on the matter". This meeting was held in the council Offices on 8th December 1977 and for your information I enclose herewith copy of the report of that meeting. Since that date the Contractor has been unable to obtain necessary permission to gain access to the property to remedy the defects. Yours sincerely,
S. L. Campbell.
Administrative/Finance Officer."

Of course, as has been seen, that meeting specified by the Council and referred to by Campbell in his letter to Dr. Paisley MP did not take place because the owners of No. 54 refused to attend, but allowing for some equivocation, the truth was told in the last sentence of the above letter. The contractor was unable to gain access to the property to remedy the defects. Campbell was careful not to be specific about which property. The defects causing the nuisance of coal smoke to enter our home from the fireplace of No. 54 Carlisle Park were identified as the use of terralux blocks which adjoined the base of the flue in No. 54.
Mr. Joyce would not allow the contractor into his house and the Council dare not issue a Statutory Notice to coerce him. As will be seen later I have been accused of being the stumbling block in this whole affair, even by a Down District Councillor. There is however no equivocation in the last sentence of a confidential report to DDC written and signed by Chief Public Health Inspector Garth Jones. I received a copy of that Report from Dr. Paisley MP and it reads as follows;

"No. 56 Carlisle Park, Ballynahinch - Occupier Mr. G. Rice
Accompanied by Mr. Brown contractor, a visit was made to Mr. Joyce's No. 54 Carlisle Park, Ballynahinch on Wednesday, 19th April 1978 in order to explain the remedial work required to abate the smoke nuisance. Before visiting No. 54, Mr. Brown called at No. 56 Carlisle Park where it was observed that more of the party wall had been taken down and the whole rere (rear) of Joyce's fireplace back was exposed.

I asked Mr. Brown to explain to Mr. Joyce the work that he proposed to do and Mr. Brown stated that he did not think it necessary to mess up Joyce's house by removing the fireplace as he could abate the nuisance by plastering the wall at the back of Joyce's fireplace. We then went into Mr. Rice's house to ask his permission to do this work but Mr. Rice refused stating that the smoke would only come out somewhere else and would insist on Joyce's fireplace being removed and the defects sealed.

A discussion then took place regarding the terralux bricks in the party wall and Mr. Rice stated that the terralux bricks should be removed and replaced with solid bricks. At this stage Mr. Brown mentioned that the Building Control Officer should see the wall. I then contacted Mr. Milligan and arranged a visit for the next morning.

At 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 20th April 1978 with Mr. Milligan, Building Control Officer, Mr. Wilson, Senior Building Inspector a visit was made to No. 56 Carlisle Park. It was observed that smoke was entering No. 56 from No. 54 through a crack in the brickwork in the new part that Mr. Rice had exposed. Mr. Rice stated that he felt that all the terralux bricks should be removed and replaced with solid bricks but Mr. Milligan stated that it was not necessary and that the wall was built in accordance with the then Building Bye-laws. At this stage I again asked Mr. Rice if he would permit Mr. Brown to plaster the wall and I promised afterwards to ask the Coal Advisory Board to do a smoke test on Joyce's flue and if it was found that smoke was still entering No, 56 the matter would then be reviewed. Mr. Rice said that he would not permit this work to be done and if Joyce's fireplace was not fixed he intended removing all the terralux bricks in the wall and this would result in a mess in Joyce's house. We then left and I promised to contact Mr. Rice the next morning.

When I returned to the office I telephoned Mr. Barr of James Conlon , Solicitor and asked him if he could persuade Mr. Joyce to permit Mr. Brown to remove his fireplace and seal the defects as I felt if this was not done the situation would become much worse. Mr. Barr said that he would get in touch with Mr. Chambers, Mr. Rice's Solicitor and inform me of the position on Monday, 24th April, 1978. DATE 21st April, 1978 SIGNED G. Jones

District Chief Public Health Inspector."

Had I known just how desperate the Council Officials were at that time I would have held out a little longer and not engaged J.G. Dorrian to rebuild the wall, but I had to get my family settled again, I had to get my work going again and in any case I had borrowed all the money to repair the house myself. With hindsight I let the Council off the hook - for the time being.

In response to my letter of April 3rd 1978, Dr. Paisley MP wrote on my behalf to Minister of State Mr. Ray Carter on April 6th 1978. In his reply to Dr. Paisley on April 18th 1978 Mr. Carter stated;

"This matter lies within the day to day responsibility of the Down District Council and neither the Department nor I have a direct function in such matters but I understand that all the parties involved have reached agreement on the work to be done."

Mr. Carter wrote again to Dr. Paisley on July 31st 1978 after Dr. Paisley telephoned Mr. Carter's Private Office;

"As I said in my letter of 18 April 1978, this matter lies within the day to day responsibility of the Down District Council and I regret that there is no action that I or my Department can take to settle the dispute between Mr. Rice and his neighbour."

So, Down District Councillors were the ultimate authority in dealing with this matter, and how often Councillors complain that they have no authority except for rubbish bins and graveyards.
The Commissioner for Complaints had refused to investigate my complaint simply because he believed the information given to him by Mr. Allen and Mr. Jones was true and that my neighbour Mr. Joyce had no objection to the work being carried out as stated by Mr. Jones in his report to the Council of the December 8th meeting. The only work however that Mr. Brown was prepared to do and which Mr. Allen, Mr. Jones, Mr. Milligan and Mr. Conners wanted me to allow Mr. Brown to do was that which is described earlier and which would not have complied with the building law, which would have taken place in my house and which did not require Mr. Joyce's permission. This is why it was "arranged" that Mr. Joyce should not attend the December 8th meeting, and those arrangements were made I believe, by Mr. Jones and Cllr. Sloan when they visited Joyce's house after hours.

I made it difficult for all concerned when I insisted that any work done should comply with the building law. It was only when I threatened to knock down the party wall right into Joyce's house that a frightened Mr. Jones wrote the above truthful Report finishing with a very truthful last sentence. Again he did not think a copy would even be made available to me.

"Thank you Dr. Paisley".

The Commissioner for Complaints had not been told the truth. I believe Dr. Paisley used his influence with the Commissioner, and the truth , as usual, prevailed. In the two Reports signed by Mr. Jones there are significant contradictions.

In his first Report, Jones stated that Conners and Brown had agreed to remove the terralux bricks that formed the jambs of Joyce's fireplace and replace them with solid bricks. This work would of necessity have had to be done in Joyce's house.

In the second Report, Jones stated that when he challenged Brown to do the work that was stated to have been agreed to at the December 8th meeting Brown refused, stating that he did not think it was necessary to mess up Joyce's house by removing his fireplace as he could abate the nuisance by plastering the wall at the back of Joyce's fireplace. Since Brown was not going to mess up Joyce's house by removing his fireplace he was obviously not prepared to even plaster Joyce's side of the party wall which meant that he only wanted to plaster the back of Joyce's fireplace from inside my house.

This is exactly what Messrs. Allen, Milligan, Conners and Jones asked me to allow Brown to do at that December 8th meeting, although this is not recorded in Jones' Report of that meeting.

The reason Jones could not record that I was requested to allow the builder to do such work as plastering the back of Joyce's fireplace from inside my house at the December 8th meeting was,

firstly, such work would not have met the requirements of the relevant, and at that time, current Housing Regulations,

secondly, the senior Council Officials could not be seen to be making such a request in an official Report to the Councillors and

thirdly, the December 8th meeting had to show that agreement had been reached one way or another to uphold the pretence that DDC was administering its statutory duty to abate a nuisance.

Down District Councillors' decision to hold the December 8th meeting was a discretionary decision very cleverly made as an alternative to that Council doing its statutory duty by issuing a Statutory Notice. As has been pointed out before the Council dare not do this.

It is most unfortunate that the Commissioner for Complaints Act (NI) 1969 actually allows a statutory body such as DDC to make such a discretionary decision instead of doing its statutory duty as will be seen later in CC 19/78.

This is the main difference between the British Commissioner for Complaints and the original concept of an Ombudsman and it is misleading and quite wrong to refer to a Commissioner for Complaints in the UK as an Ombudsman. In Jones' second Report of April 21st 1978 he states that he made a visit to Joyce's house on April 19th in order to explain to Joyce the work that had to be done, ie the removal of terralux bricks from his fireplace. My permission was not needed for this work. This work would not even have encroached on my half of the party wall. DDC's senior officials at the December 8th meeting were not in the least concerned at Joyce's absence from that meeting, which was where the proper work to be done should have been explained to Joyce. Those senior officials allowed that meeting, a non-event, to continue for one and a half hours just for show and then told DDC that the meeting they had specified did in fact take place.

At the time of retyping this story in the year 2000, that meeting has still not taken place and now never can take place. Yet the English Parliament (see "Wrestle With The Angel" by Enoch Powell) to which the Commissioner for Complaints for Northern Ireland is answerable, has been made to accept that this meeting did take place, that it took place in the proper legal manner and that it was an acceptable alternative to DDC's issuing of a Statutory Notice and that justice was done.

The shocking truth is that even the Commissioner for Complaints Report CC 19/78 with all its shortcomings states by implication that justice has not been done. If my permission was given for terralux bricks to be removed from Joyce's fireplace as stated in Jones' first Report, why did the same man state in his second Report that he came asking for my permission to allow something different to be done by Brown? Jones stated quite rightly that I insisted on Joyce's fireplace being removed and that I stated that the terralux bricks or blocks in the party wall should be removed and replaced with good solid bricks.

Little did I realise at that time that the Housing Regulations of 1956 under which these houses were constructed actually insisted on the use of good solid bricks and that a large publicly funded subsidy was paid to Brown because Building Control Officers signed an official form O/OE stating that No. 56 and others had been built according to those Housing Regulations. According to Jones, both Conners and Milligan stated that the walls complied with the old Building Bye-laws. Whereas the Housing Regulations limited the builder to using quote, ".good thick solid brickwork", the old Building Bye-laws demanded solid walls built from either "good solid brick, block, stone or concrete".

In both the Housing Regulations and the Building Bye-laws the emphasis was on the word solid. No. 56 does not comply with either, even after all the work I did to it. Finally, in his first Report, Jones stated that in a telephone conversation with Joyce on December 12th 1977 Joyce told him that he (Joyce) would have no objection to Brown approaching him to do the work, yet in his second Report, Jones stated that four months later he had to even phone Joyce's solicitor to have the solicitor try and persuade Joyce to allow his fireplace to be removed. This too was unsuccessful.