This is a previous record - recent entries: Contents
fuse entry in the Land
Friday, February 5, 2010, arbitrariness 50.Tag
country is pledge - pledge does land - mortgage money is
Where, how, who?
Where, how, who?
The "involuntary" voluntary "mortgage
The registration of a legal mortgage by GES Article 22, which is central to those who wait, is federal law. The registration of a state based on agreement (ie, contractual) basis lien to secure the restitution claim (with notification by the landlord) is permitted. GES, and SKOS know ARGES However, no guarantee in advance how it is practiced in the Valais.
prerequisite for this is clearly the free will and free legal capacity of the deposit plate, which is also in the normal sense of justice of the citizen. The "Lex Darioli" violated its basic principle: "If the social assistance applicant denied the organization of such mortgages (- ...) thus is not entitled to social assistance," arbitrary constitution and existing legislation. Even for a refusal of this kind, the competent social welfare authority the council under applicable law to issue an appealable decree. Whoever is in distress needed urgently missing part of the basic security of life, which he is entitled.
The land registry in business and a land registry in the social welfare can not be assimilated into the matter and already over time.
In social assistance, the claim is, in many cases, temporary or on a clear time period. The legitimate need of is extradited, he is entitled to an injunction, but he can not wait six to eight months to appeal ruling. He needs immediate help and no forced "involuntary" voluntary "agreement.
The combination between today's existing elements in the bestgehenden legislation to the particular situation of land ownership in the Valais into account and the already detailed, this SKOS guidelines is likely to give direction.
The mortgage assurance should be at a later sale due or when entering the mode of inheritance. It needs clear guidelines.
It would be desirable that the State Council until there is a different system, would instruct the DSW, the municipalities and the SMZ, such improper "involuntary, voluntary" mortgage registrations to be omitted. The obligation to repay is mentioned on the respective orders and the train, GES, and the SKOS ARGES directives.
basis to ensure reimbursement
The Civil Code sets the parent to the legal framework governing the registration of a basic deposit to secure the refund and to enable it. A new welfare law has to take account of this perspective. The basis of social assistance is superficially the lack of income for livelihood and could not be guaranteed.
The implementation of the guarantee and refund, the fundamental rights of the needy and ensure compliance, and in the processes of decent, very safe procedure handle. Outsourcing and partial privatization of social security may not develop strong life of its own and should be the "growth" controlled "inflation" can be prevented.
with a publicly notarised, in the land registry office eigetragenen Treaty, is safe from all the services provided in terms of a debt with a mortgage. The civil law commerce natural process, can not and should not be transferred directly to one on the socio-legal obligation.
case of social assistance are taken into account in the settlement and the road to registration, the particular circumstances. This is not a lender and borrower. The "quasi Rating" "Birds do or spoil," as the "Lex Darioli" includes such is the wrong way.
Social assistance takes the place where no other option, the absolute minimum subsistence guaranteed by the Constitution is safe. Hence there are restrictions in terms of income for livelihood, resulting from the circumstances of the occurrence of need result. have reasons of economic or health reasons. The benefits office should not create through its new security policy for recipients and block emergency reserves, which can relieve the public sector in the future and may compensate, to advance or destroy. Each case must be examined in detail.
The mortgage is mortgage and exploitation, it allows the creditor to recovery of the property to the amount of principal. The capital of the community and the purpose of economic assistance (social assistance) are different from a pure banking business. This has an impact on the assertion of patent rights.
The Municipal Act assigns the responsibility of social services available in the local council. More legal basis in addition to the cantonal GES, ARGES and the Swiss oriented SKOS guidelines are not, the discretion of social services and the gaps in the legislation are now too big.
The following questions are allowed:
Has the DSW for the "Lex Darioli" - preset standard agreements in form and content, or may in the sense of "JEKAMI" (anyone can join) tinker each community or each SMZ, even an agreement together?
For the benefit of whom is the registration? Who has the refusal, without prior issue not even entry help? (available only authority is the local council)
A mortgage is registered, It is argued that is taken out a loan? Who, when, why and how on the land or real estate loans are taken out, or cause its recovery?
Where does the money, they are bound to end? There are guidelines and guardrails for a possible mortgaging and cash flow? How to deal with the possible, illegal payments and agreed deletion of unused "credits" is?
Can the county, the SMZ with the interest-free economic support and their Grundpfandkapitalien working interest in other profitable areas of the administration of social assistance?
If given the right to equality for the recipients within the canton, and between different communities? Is there a specific check and does it function?
The blog readers were given an insight in recent weeks with the pressure we were facing a targeted manner. Objective: the imposition of an "involuntary" voluntary " Mortgages, covering up the misconduct, pure harassment and attempting to influence pending cases.
Illegal forced expulsion, aiming for debt collection procedures for compensation costs, the adjustment of social assistance while not necessarily need to have, possession, storage and locking of the housing inventory, including clothing. Defamation and the need to rent a room on our own expense, to a bleeding site and the remaining funds, etc.
Despite the still lawfully awarded Entitled, 30 the municipality since 04. 09 any payments made. But with the health insurance premium of CHF 499.20, the exploitation of the land could have been triggered since the cash for their bonuses, must have certificates of loss.
We still do not have available to register a mortgage or for refusing to help because the registration was not obtained. The presented "involuntary" voluntary ", agreement template is amateurish and legally unusable without serious settlement, now of CHF 224'362 .25 31 12. souped whopping 08 on Fri 320'000 .00, improper coercion instead of signature production.
"coercion is not a good will, even if it is sold as such"
NB: The blog insights and experiences in the limited operations are practiced Social assistance, the community of Zermatt and the SMZ Nikolaital as it should be. Any generalization to social work done in other communities and SMZ centers is not the intent of this blog.
The agreement
Tuesday 9 February 2010, 54th caprice Days
agreement and welfare
Social assistance is a public function. An agreement is created between the public (state and municipal) and private (social assistance recipients), as administrative law or administrative law contract agreement.
release the following "involuntary" voluntary "agreement, the disputed position of the municipality and the resulting situation.
The financial claim, the (added) settlement of the municipality of 06 05. 09 of 31 developed 12. In 2008 by Fr 224'362 .25 to 19 01. 10 to CHF 320'000 .00 to a "respectable, immoral offer".
The various stages of growth, without accounting of each expenditure:
30th 12. 08 display a statutory basis for deposit received social assistance Fri 224'362 .25.
06th 05. 09 Settlement of SMZ Nikolaital to receive from us 07th 01. 09 requires more than CHF 243'155 .70. The sub-total at 30 12. 08 has decreased from the 30th ad 12. 2008 by CHF 2'2406 .55. The demand grew, without invoicing for "not paid rent contribution" of CHF 23'020 .25.
settlement of 06 05. 09: by the State Council are Fri 158'401 .10 of 01 01. 03 to 31 12. 05 recognized social assistance.
From 01 01. 06 are by the State Council are Fri 61'734 .35 31 12. 08 of the settlement of social assistance, compared with the municipality not be recognized. Denial reason: alleged breach of the duty to clarify the municipality. State Council decision of 25 06. 08.
05th 12. 08 Judgement of Cantonal Court
The decision of the District Court clearly states that the disputed support from 01 01. 06 the municipality and the state, but not as we are concerned about the court and not decided.
13th 05. 09 legal request reimbursement from the municipality of Zermatt complaint with the District Court Visp
The first in point Demanded sum of CHF 243'155 .70 plus interest, is the 19th in the agreement 01. 10 included, the total net of interest of the disputed settlement of 06 05. 09, which differs by about CHF 50'000 .00 from the final orders and clarify is .
13th 08. 2009 decision of the municipal council of the municipality of Zermatt on the refund. The complaints procedure has been suspended by the State Council. Total receivables 247'555 .70 Fri. included (damages the community of) two months' rent totaling Fri 4,400 .00 to be settled inadmissible on public assistance.
The following excerpt 4.1. from the disposal across the couple's adoption of the law sought by the action of 13 05. 09, plus two months' rent of CHF 4'400 .00 damages.
With its Decision of 25 11. 2009, the State Council decreed the suspension of the treatment of the complaint, however by the end of the process of reimbursement. The appeal against this decision has, according VVRG Article 51, be suspended.
The municipality is therefore still committed to the economic support. This means that they must remedy according to the present situation created the laws to, especially in the furniture and housing.
27th 01. 10 Email the community of
Sent: Wednesday, 27 January 2010 18:32
To: german.taugwalder @ bluewin.ch
Cc: zermatt.ch dany.biner @; Thomas.Bucher @ SMZ-vs.ch; Christoph Bürgin
Subject: Your letter of 23 January 2010
plants: 100 119 Taugwalder.pdf agreement
Good day Mr. Taugwalder
your letter of 23 On 26 January 2010 January 2010 we received.
In our various messages, most recently on 21 January 2010, we have communicated our position concerning your situation clearly. Our offer that we support beyond our legal obligations and without acknowledging any legal liability in your home search, you have not picked up today. In this regard, we have forwarded attached form to sign - this is also the social medical center Nikolaital in Tasch.
We have demonstrated our ability and refer for the other to the District Court and State Council made and our previous emails.
Sincerely Head Administrative Department / Head of Administration Deputy.
The municipality relies more on State Council and District Court decisions, but without calling procedure number or date of the District Court ruling.
19th 01. 09 The "involuntary" voluntary "on the" Lex Darioli "based craft work, entitled" Assistance Housing Search, "the relevant municipal council, the mayor and the head of SMZ Nikolaital confirms certain weaknesses in the parish hall. Advise the hobbyist the pointed attorneys or lawyers pointed the hobbyist? For the attitude of the author, there are only two possibilities: a) non-mastery of the Office or b) intention.
The agreement
An agreement is a binding agreement between two parties, based on the voluntariness of both parties, the agreement is submitted to a dictation, the purpose for which the municipality obtained by coercive situation, in advance would be void. The existence of an agreement depends on additional conditions. They are:
first The parties
lack of agreement on the definition and function of the parties. It is mentioned that SMZ Nikolaital (2) and county (10) and the couple Taugwalder (3) in the text, the SMZ Nikolaital in this Agreement Party. The measures provided for the sole signature of the receiver point to the one-sidedness of the draft.
second The purpose and object of the agreement
the title "Assistance Housing Search (1) shows there are a major problem of current situations, but not related to a registration of a mortgage. It is "a voluntary legal mortgages (4) in the 1st prize in the amount of CHF 320'000 .00 (5)" calls, even though the entry of a legal mortgage in connection with the securing of social assistance Germany is illegal. Found a statutory basis is not voluntary.
It is in (2) and (3) from a support, the speech, which under (10) with "a possible aid" called into question, and (11) of the registration subject is intended to enhance obviously with the delay in the pressure or harassment.
third Interests of the parties, rights and obligations
From the description, the obscure references go, one side's interests Residents of the community out, namely the registration of a legal mortgage which is not allowed.
The amounts in dispute would be subject to the signature of the beneficiaries under the associated services to be accepted. The current reimbursement method of the municipality would be invalid, signed and acknowledged the high-coiffed sum of CHF 320'000 .00 of an "involuntary" voluntary "mortgage. The SMZ should Nikolaital his claims with the changes do not prove correct, and not explain curiosities in accounting.
The present official estimate for the EL of the plots are about 20% less than the required mortgage, an investiture in the 1st Rank for CHF 320'000 .00 (5) is not possible.
The amount of CHF 243'155 .70 (6) and Br 8.105.20 (7) are identical to those in the legal request for reimbursement to decide on the judge, including social assistance, the State Council approved. A signature also means recognition.
covered in (8) listed Fri 18'240 .00 refund rent house Helena not welfare, as these at 30 04. 09 was set and the dispute settlement in the 06th 05. 09 contain exhaustive. There is no agreement on social assistance, in the agreement referred Fri 50'499 .10 (9) contradict existing law.
We had no way to bring our interests. The municipality or the SMZ Nikolaital mentioned only in return those who assisted with the registration of mortgages, probably the most expensive "apartment search" and a possible help, "without setting the 30th they have illegally since 04. 09, refused.
The claims consist of the subscribers, the parent of GES, ARGES and SKOS, awarded binding present in the final orders and judgments of the District Court.
4.The common approach
The usual in an agreement mentioned need for joint action is missing, the agreement is submitted unilateral dictates of the municipality, the discharge of their misconduct, to the detriment of beneficiaries.
are instead forced and voluntary utilization of the emergency, by the previously organized by the community of dubious forced removal of the existing housing, and the withholding of contributions lawfully awarded.
5.Anwendbares law as a legal basis
details of legal principles and the applicable law, on which the agreement supports are missing, on the contrary in (2) attempts to "outside of the legal obligations and without acknowledging any legal obligation" binding, overriding right to exclude and bypass.
The invalidity of an agreement with even the conscious cooperation to achieve success in an unlawful, which gives the impression of an attempt to cheat.
abuse of Switzerland. Penal Code Article 312, an official offense. Ads? Why? The unfortunate "poor Authorities, "but you want to add something. We live black drivers more dangerous than the SBB "black-yellow-up" wrong driver.
"... after the revelers felt: in neri Criminali Lafrini"
