Z ostatniej chwili!

Ciekawa też jest odpowiedź Prokuratorii Generalnej z dnia 25.03.2013 na moją APELACJĘ z dnia 31.12.2012.

Pozew o odszkodowanie od Skarbu Państwa (art. 417.1 par. 2 Kc i art. 424.1b Kpc) i bieżące dokumenty są zamieszczone poniżej. >>>>

  It will be a story of injustice, which was done in 1995 by the former Deputy Prime Minister Jacek Janiszewski. The story about destruction of the life of the individual, quite a large family and a sizeable group of people associated with the victim. Moreover, it tells about the key role of Ministry of Justice, which, instead of fixing the harm with available legal steps, charged into battle against the victim (alongside the team of lawyers from State Treasury Solicitor’s Office) to finally finish him. Let the beast die and do not raise his head anymore. And the story was like this:

Michael Turzyński concluded agreements with the Agricultural Property Agency of the State Treasury in Warsaw (APA) (Regional Office in Szczecin), concerning agricultural real estate leases:

1 / dated 31.08.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/472/93

2 / dated 10.09.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/4465/93

3 / dated 31.08.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/471/93

4 / dated 25.08.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/466/93

5 / dated 19.11.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/800/93

6 / dated 20.12.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/801/93

7 / dated 03.11.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/723/93

8 / dated 15.11.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/772/93

9 / dated 31.12.1993 an agreement SEA – 42423/807/93

and agreement concerning lending of the Sulino farm for a fixed term that is the end of the harvest in the year 1995. Total area – over 6 000 acres of meadows and cultivated fields.

In addition, there have been concluded agreements concerning so-called hire purchase of movables dated (amounts before denomination of polish zloty):

25.08.1993 – the amount of 5 899 712 100 PLN initial payment = 30% and payment of further installments on 30.09.1994, 30.09.1995 and 30.09.1996

31.08.1993 – the amount of 12 354 569 900 PLN initial payment = 30% and payment of further installments on 30.09.1994, 30.09.1995 and 30.09.1996

19.11.1993 – the amount of 19 057 087 900 PLN initial payment = 30% and payment of further installments on 30.09.1994, 30.09.1995 and 30.09.1996

31.12.1993 – the amount of 11 717 044 500 PLN initial payment = 30% and payment of further installments on 10.31.1994, 31.10.1995 and 31.10.1996.

On 03.13.1995, in the letter signed by the deputy director of the Regional Branch of the APA in Szczecin, Leszek Szydłowski (deputy of Jacek Janiszewski) all lease agreements were terminated with immediate effect.

And a reason for termination of the agreements set forth by APA was that Michał Turzyński was delayed in his rent payments for at least two full periods.

It should be noted that the APA did not show any accounting documents, indicating that these allegations were true. Ant it was, according to APA, the main reason for such a sudden and wholesale solution to end all leases and contracts of lending.

As it later turned out (after at least two years, in December 1997), the only basis on which the agency relied ending all contracts with Michał Turzyński was the private, four-page statement of the payments and receivables of Michał Turzyński prepared by accounting employee of Szczecin Branch of APA Mrs. Jolanta Chylińska (dated 01.12.1997).

It should be emphasized that, in spite of this single statement, there has not been any accounting documents proving correctness of numbers contained in the statement or the way of calculating the interest.

What is important, for the period of 19 years of various processes any of the courts (whether it was the court in Szczecin or in Warsaw) did not bother to investigate if the data shown by the Agency is correct and whether they have any basis in the accounting records. In general none of the courts was interested even if such documents exist and whether the accounting was conducted and if there was leaseholder booking account kept. APA, as organization representing the interests of the State Treasury, was obliged to keep such records.

A similar story applies to the ‘so-called’ settlement agreements concerning purchase of assets belonging to lease rent by Michael Turzyński, with the difference that in this case the statement of the payments and receivables, ​​in a similar, private and mysterious way, was signed on the date 15.03.1995 by Chief Accountant of the Agency – Krzysztof Dzięcielski.

In the period from August to December 1993 Michał Turzyński made several requests to APA concerning permission to carry out a major repair of the historic social and administrative building as well as cowshed with 300 stalls located in the farm Krąpiel. The request also concerned the modernization of associated equipment in pigpens as well as meat processing plants and slaughterhouses. The modernization was carried out on the basis of a draft submitted by the representatives of the American company from Detroit, visiting farms leased by Michał Turzyński in November 1994.

APA approved the proposed renovations as well as the allocation of the cost of repairs against the next rents.

In spite of the fact, that most of the renovation works were done until 13.03.1995 and the repair was settled on the amount of 1 692 083,20 PLN, ARP did not include ANY of these agreed-upon amounts in a letter denouncing all lease agreements.

Moreover, it is important, that Michał Turzyński did not know about the termination of the lease agreements while he was entering his farms on 13.03.1995. Denouncing letter was delivered on the address in Blizne (near Warsaw), Michał Turzyński was absent, therefore he could not learn about the case. In addition to that, the employees of the Agency took over (and did not return to this day) a complete accounting records of Michał Turzyński, made in the computer system, as well as maps, valuations, opinions and other documents from his office.

In such way millions of PLN for the repair work was lost and not accounted for, due to the lack of documents – and to the delight of the robbers from Agricultural Property Agency of the State Treasury Regional Branch in Szczecin.

Presented at the hearing (the lawsuit IC 48/06) cost estimates and the testimony of a witness confirming the work done in the historic administration building was not adjudged, recognized and accepted by either the Agency or the courts of Szczecin – both instances.

In 1995, Michał Turzyński filed a lawsuit against APA before the District Court in Szczecin, to prove the ineffectiveness of the termination of all leases. It was finished after 7 years of combined proceedings by the Court of Appeal in Poznań (judgment dated 14.08.2002). In the judgment the court stated that… Michał Turzyński did not have any legal interest (article 189 of the code of civil procedure) filing such a lawsuit.

It should be noted, that for the content of this judgment did not matter that – appointed by the District Court in Szczecin, in the proceedings IC 633/95 – expert Stefan Kronczewski, in his opinion stated that the accounting dated 28.05.1999 clearly proved that there was no two-month delay in payment of rent for any of the lease agreements.

There were also other deficiencies of this opinion, e.g. bad calculation of the rent for 1995 or admission, as a basis for further calculations, of the described above ‘the statement of Jolanta Chylińska’. This opinion has become a landmark in the subsequent processes between Michal Turzyński and the Agency to the extent that none of the courts (including the Supreme Court) has not used the words ‘Michal Turzyński’s delay in payment for two full periods of payments.’

This proceedings have had its sequel in the form of a claim for damages for Michał Turzyński, which ended up being imposed on such compensation in the first instance by the Regional Court in Warsaw and the dismissal of the claim by the Court of Appeal in Warsaw – the decision which was maintained by the Supreme Court, also in Warsaw.

According to Michał Turzyński courts flagrantly violated the law in this matter when they decided to disdain the word “full” from the article 703 of the Civil Code, which allowed them to create interpretation which was totally different from the one intended by legislature. Therefore currently there are compensation claims and proceedings against the Minister of Justice.

Another judicial proceeding undertaken by Michał Turzyński was the submission of the claim for the restoration of his possession. The claim was submitted before the District Court in Szczecin.

After approximately two years, the District Court in Szczecin passed judgment that it has no jurisdiction to resolve the matter and moved it to the District Court in Stargard Szczeciński, where it finally begun in late 2001 and in 2002, after nine of complaints and requests to the Court, The President of the Court and President of the District Court, President of the Regional Court in Szczecin took this case under his supervision and supported my complaints concerning slowness and negligence of the District Court in Stargard.

The claim was dismissed by the District Court in Stargard – judgment dated 14.03.2002, after that Regional Court in judgment dated 20.09.2002 dismissed the appeal of Michał Turzyński.

The interesting fact is that the District Court found, that there had been a violation of possession by the Agency, but during the seven years of proceedings there were many changes – both objective and legal, ant therefore restoration of the ownership could not be reconciled with the rules of social intercourse. The protection of the ownership would violate the property rights of the third parties.

What about rights of Michał Turzyński…?

The compensation proceedings initiated by a petition (dated 05.02.2004) concerning payment of the amount 5 112 589 PLN for the property taken by the Agency from Michał Turzyński took place before the Regional Court in Warsaw, first under the signature I C 413/04 IC and later II C 1136/06 and was completed by the judgment dated 13.09.2007, dismissing the lawsuit due to the expiration of claims.

The reluctance of the Court to a fair consideration of mentioned case brought serious consequences concerning lack of a clear assessment of the values, illegally taken from Michał Turzyński. The courts did not take into account:

1. Unilaterality of the proceedings concerning taking over the assets of Michał Turzyński (purchased and paid without delay) – it should be noted, that none of the employees of Michał Turzyński, nor any of its agents, and of course not himself, was not authorized by the APA to participate in commissions stocktaking his (robbed) assets. The mere acquisition took place without any judgments, writs of execution, even participation of judicial officer (bailiff) or other court employee of any instance. Prepared opinions of so-called experts include copied values of the assets of the acquired assets from tables drawn up in 1993, when the purchase took place,  and are signed only by the employees of the Agency, mobilized for that time under pressure from loss of employment. In that case there were conducted proceedings by the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Stargard and Regional Prosecutors office in Szczecin , but of course without any results.
2. arguments related to economic changes in Poland in that period, which are:

• a high degree of inflation
• fixed prices concerning supply of machinery and equipment

• fixed purchase prices of agricultural productions
• other indicators that affect the value of the equipment and materials

3. the lack of skills of persons employed in the Agency, especially in the field of accounting, business law, statistics and even handing money in trade proceedings.

After receiving Michał Turzyński’s assets the Agency had its own valuation of the property, not allowing Michał Turzyński to participate in the proceedings. Hence he could not control the course of acquisition of his assets, nor to estimate the quantitative and qualitative values of his property. Moreover he did not participate in the Agency’s various doings aimed at reducing fixed initial values to generate non-existent debts, aiming to destroy the person of Michał Turzyński – as indeed happens effectively today.

The initial valuation of the assets was specified as 2 932 012,18 PLN (after the denomination). Afterwards, in an unknown way it was reduced by the amount of 86 941,90 PLN stating that this reduction was a compensation for the costs incurred by the valuation of the assets performed by the Agency. It was not documented (as usual) in any way.
Meanwhile, after years, Agency on 18.02.2014 decides to send a letter to the Regional Court in Warsaw-Praga (Ref. III C 956/13, in which the reduction of the same amount is justified by… its own correction of the assets contained in the note book of that day (!) 27.10.1997 (and therefore the claim was expired pursuant to article 554 of the Civil Code).
Bottom line – what was the need, such were the documents…

It should be emphasized that this note increases artificial and unreal debt of Michał Turzyński, allegedly resulting from the contract of sale dated 31.12.1993 no. 173/93, according to which the later proceedings were pending before Regional Court in Szczecin (IC 296/03)

Therefore the Agency considers that the value of the assets received from Michał Turzyński is the amount of 2 845 070, 38 PLN.

But it is still not enough. So the Agency makes another correction, for the amount of 255 456 75 PLN in respect of alleged employee liabilities of Michał Turzyński, which he had supposedly to pay to agency workers.

And there again appeared the problem of accounting documents. The total lack of them did not allow the chief accountant Krzysztof Dzięcielski to defend Agency and the plea was rejected by courts in Szczecin (all instances).

It appears therefore that instead of the amount of 2 676 555, 43 PLN the Agency should have settled with Michał Turzyński the amount 2 932 012, 18 PLN

The question remains, however it is included in the amount of 255 456,75 – is the amount of 86 941,80:

• the provision for unpaid employees
• the cost of valuation of the assets received by the Agency
• the adjustment of value of the assets received from Michał Turzyński

Is the APA authorized to prepare various incriminating documents just to justify subsequent processes and demands that are being made to already paid by Michał Turzyński amounts?

What is the judicial value of the documents presented during proceedings in courts, if the Agency does not hesitate even to send to court the documents allegedly justifying another non existing claims against Michał Turzyński.

And this is not the end.

In the proceedings before the Regional Court in Szczecin IC 48/06, when it became clear that the claim put forward as to the amount of 255 456,75 turned out to be unfounded, Michał Turzyński reported to deduct the amount from the principal claim of the Agency, filed to this proceeding.

Regional Court in Szczecin acknowledged the amount of 255 456,75 PLN (and the amount of 778 930,28 PLN – see end attachments to the letter MT 26.06.2014) as claims of Michał Turzyński, but the deduction was not allowed. Why not? Well, because, the Agency would have to dismiss the plea because the amount of these claims were filling with an excess both the principal amount and any interest claimant would have. They would not cause the thousands of alleged interest, which were demanded by Agency.

The court recommended that the amounts mentioned above should be deducted in the proceedings commenced by the Regional Court Warsaw-Praga (signature III C 736/09)

It is just that the Agency does not want to recognize the deduction also in this case, moreover the Court of Warsaw hastily issued dismissal of the lawsuit of Michał Turzyński. Currently there are performed actions to re-open proceedings before the court of first instance.

Agency did not respond for the letter from Michał Turzyński (dated 26.04.2012, and addressed to the local branch of the Agency and to the President of the Agency) which contained inquiry: ‘in which proceedings the Agency considers accepting the deduction’.

However, during the hearing on 14.06.2012, before the Regional Court in Warsaw (IV C 967/10) attorney of the defendant (the Agency) declared that ‘he does not accept any claims withheld’ end of story.

Currently there are undertaken enforcement proceedings, at the request of the Agricultural Property Agency, including of course paid liability 6 811 000, 00 PLN, concerning all the assets of Michał Turzyński – including his disability pension which is paid in amount of 593 PLN (monthly).

Warsaw courts recede any action taken against enforcement proceedings – holding at various scams and tricks (read http: //paraprawo.pl/zagadnienie-9-czy-istnieja-granice-niezawislosci-dla-sso-ewy-dietkow) and the Prosecutor’s Office in Szczecin treats obvious scams of attorneys and courts as capricious whims of the child (e.g. read http://paraprawo.pl/zgloszenie-podejrzenia-popelnienia-przestepstwa/)

To be continued…

Z ostatniej chwili: Sprawę nadal prowadzi SSO Ewa Dietkow a mój wniosek o Jej wyłączenie odrzuca osobiście i to jednoosobowo!

Apelacja odrzucona bo podrobione moje podpisy, bez jakiegokolwiek sprawdzenia, SSO Ewa Dietkow usankcjonowała postanowieniem 03.07.2013 jako prawidłowe potwierdzenie doręczenia!  Czy dlatego nie dopuszczono do jej wyłączenia? Moje zażalenie na to postanowienie z 17.07.2013 zostało odrzucone w dniu 29.07.2013 a od spóźnionej w takim wypadku apelacji SSO Ewa Dietkow zażądała 20.000 złotych wpisu!

…the place where we can expect justice? Or do we have to wait for the justice until the Judgment Day? Complaint to the ECHR in Strasbourg adopted in Poland colloquial term “go with it to Strasbourg”. We can go… but what for? Here are the reasons for the doubts and also latest news on that matter! >>>>

07.02.2014 pozostanie w pamięci Pani Haliny Baudler i mojej jako symbol uprawomocnienia przez Sąd Apelacyjny w Warszawie faktu bezprawnego zaboru mienia wielkiej wartości. Funkcjonariusze Skarbu Państwa POlskiego bez żenady i bez odszkodowania, pozbawili w 2008 roku HB własności hipotecznego mieszkania z czystą hipoteką i bez długów oraz egzekucji nielegalnie (naszym zdaniem) wydanym wyrokiem. Mimo złożonych przez HB kilku skarg, Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości nie ruszyło w tej sprawie palcem. Obecna rencistka tracąc dorobek swojego życia, wybuli dodatkowo 5.400 zł kosztów na rzecz Prokuratorii Generalnej. Odpis wyroku z uzasadnieniem pokazuje, że obywatelowi nie gwarantuje się pełnego wyboru przez Sąd faktów ale jedynie ich selekcję niezbędną dla uzyskania zgodności wyroku ze stanowiskiem Prokuratorii Generalnej zastępującej Skarb Państwa. 

Minister Gowin i Prezes Milewski pozwani solidarnie przed Sąd o milion złotych odszkodowania, sygn. akt I C 508/11. Pismo Sądu 30.01.2013 a z nim pytanie:

Najnowsze dokumenty znajdują się w kontynuacji wpisu.

Ogólnie jest chyba wiadome, że RWE Polska SA to element układanki o końcowej nazwie RWE AG Rheinisch-Westfälisches Elektrizitätswerk a z polska: „Reńsko-Westfalski Producent Energii Elektrycznej”. Firma ta w roku 2002 przejęła władztwo nad dotychczasowym polskim dystrybutorem energii elektrycznej – STOEN SA przejmując tym samym praktyczną władzę nad Warszawą. Od tej pory w Warszawie nic nie może się dziać bez wiedzy i udziału RWE Polska SA. Wiedzą o tym dobrze i władze Warszawy i funkcjonujące w Warszawie urzędy, sądy i inne instytucje z prądu korzystające. >>>>

Sąd współpracujący z komornikiem (por. też Zagadnienie 3) może odebrać właścicielowi zarząd jego mieszkaniem i samo mieszkanie i to w kilka lat po zakończeniu egzekucji i wydaniu postanowienia o jej kosztach. A jakich kosztach – czytajcie poniżej w “ósemce” i dalej o bieżących wydarzeniach, w których przymusowe wymeldowanie. >>>>

Z ostatniej chwili

W roku 1978 planowanie podróży od krańca do krańca Europy choćby (nie mówiąc o ziemskim globie), zdawało się zamierzeniem z rodzaju science fiction i to nie tylko w gronie studentów niezamożnych i bez specjalnych rodzicielskich koneksji ale także wśród tych dobrze sytuowanych i ustosunkowanego pochodzenia. >>>>

Zarys tej podróży powstał w szalonej głowie autora na lotnisku Okęcie tuż po wylądowaniu samolotu LOTu, którym wróciłem z Singapuru (podróż czwarta), gdy w megafonach dało się słyszeć zapowiedź: “…wylądował samolot, rejs nr…z Moskwy, pasażerowie przylatujący z Buenos Aires proszeni są…”. >>>>

Działo się to niedługo przedtem, jak wiele krajów w odpowiedzi na ogłoszenie aktorki Szczepkowskiej o zniknięciu z Polski ustroju komunistycznego, zniosło wizy turystyczne dla obywateli Polskiej Rzeczpospolitej – nadal Ludowej. >>>>

Nasza nowa demokracja przyniosła Polsce zmiany, których nikt rozsądny nie potrafił przewidzieć nawet w istotnej ich części. >>>>

W roku 1975 pogranicze turecko – irańskie było bardziej spokojne od najbliższej północnemu Cyprowi zatoki Iskenderun. >>>>

Felietony o podróżach rozpocznę od mojej pierwszej, zagranicznej podróży z roku 1972 w czechosłowackie wówczas Tatry >>>>

Czy nowy, uważany za katolika były Minister Spraw Wewnętrznych a obecnie Minister Sprawiedliwości, Marek Biernacki zainteresuje się, jak podlegli mu komornik i sędziowie, łamiąc prawo, grabią inwalidę z jego renty? Czytajcie też dodane “Z ostatniej chwili“. I żeby nikt nie miał wątpliwości, Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie oddalił moje zażalenie z dnia 02.05.2013 postanowieniem z dnia 06.11.2013. A jak je uzasadnił…to dopiero historia. Zobaczmy co na moją skargę z dnia 19.11.2013 odpowiedział Prezes Sądu Okręgowego w Warszawie. Sprawę skwitował pismem z dnia 29.11.2013 zawierającym jedno zdanie rozwinięte, podpisane przez Sędziego Wizytatora Paulinę Asłanowicz – bohaterkę III części mojego felietonu o wizytatorach. Zauważenia wymaga fakt, że ja skarżyłem poświadczenie nieprawdy w uzasadnieniu orzeczenia Sądu Apelacyjnego a Wizytator postawił zasłonę dymną z nieograniczonej niezawisłości sędziów – także od prawa?  >>>>