And so it begins. 

My lawyer, mr. Thomas, is preparing the summon for the court.

Knowledge of the applicable corpus of the law and its procedural meandering is essential, as someone should explain to our Project Manager. No, reading the statute of the Vereniging Tot Instandhouding van het complex Tuinwijk-zuid te Haarlem is not enough, and here is why. 

My intention has always been, and is, to hold the members of this association and, especially, the member of the boards (2013-2025), responsible for their behaviours: for the bullying, for the lying, for the discrimination, for the manipulation, for the attempted gaslighting and for the denied implementation of agreed and voted actions, e.g.: the so-called Gardens Maintenance Plan, the Tuinvisie.

Those are the ones which come to my mind at the moment, the list might be incomplete.

Burgerlijke Wetboek 2.8 recites: 

  “Een rechtspersoon en degenen die krachtens de wet en de statuten bij zijn organisatie zijn betrokken, moeten zich als zodanig jegens elkander gedragen naar hetgeen door redelijkheid en billijkheid wordt gevorderd.”

This, in a way, is reflected in the article of our very own statute (art 3.3):

“De vereniging heeft ten doel..
het bevorderen van een goede verstandhouding tussen de eigenaren en de gebruikers onderling, onder meer door het geven van regelingen omtrent het gebruik van het gemeenschappelijk gedeelte, waaraan elke eigenaar/gebruiker gebonden is, en welke ten doel hebben elke eigenaar en zoveel mogelijk gebruikers een optimaalgenot te geven van het hen toebehorende, echter zoda nig, dat het even grote belang van andere eigenaren en gebruikers en het gezamenlijk belang daardoor niet wordt geschaad;”

So, as I said: my intention was (and is) to hold those responsible of violating these articles to their well-deserved consequences.

BUT, and you have to know how civil law procedure works, in this case; raising violation of art 2.8 BW is possible ONLY against a decision of the association, you cannot summon someone in court “per se” just to have violated, in one own’s opinion, such articles.

And there is no judge in Berli …sorry, in the Netherlands, who will repute such a summon admissable if there is not an economic value attached.
A financial damage, money lost or the danger thereof, basically. Not a chance, my lawyers were clear about it.

And here we finally are:

1. THERE IS the desicion, voted with the last budget, of the association (via its lovely board members): to “fine” me for an appletree they refuse even to identify (!!!), hence 
2. THERE IS, for me, a possible financialy damage, hence 
3.  I CAN summon the association (members and board) to contest such decision and, through this and by this, 
4.  I CAN claim violation of the art. 2.8

And laid bare the whole story of “playing” hide-and-seek with the rules, lying via email, discriminating me and my points for discussion before and during the ALVs, etc. 

I have plenty. Emails, recordings, witnessing. Five years of fun. As I said: plenty.

And, in real life, this will be exposed on every media channel avaible and there will be consequences for the association, and for each single owner.

Because it is ludicrous to believe that “what happens in Tuinwijk zuid, stay in Tuinwijk zuid”; this helps only those who believe they are controlling the narrative and the life itself of this association. And damage everybody else. 

Hence my intention not only to bring responsibles to the consequences of their actions but also to make all of this public, since there is a public interest. Once again: what is the real value of Tuinwijk zuid? We are talking: real estate value.

If one’s read the propaganda of the board everything is good, everything is fine, everybody is happy, nothing to see here, keep moving, these are not the droid you are looking for. 

Is it true? Just read the communication above. And shouldn’t everybody knows about it? I believe it should, it’s public interest. And an economical interest cannot be based on lies and pretences or, better: this is usually the case, but nobody can complain, once the truth dismantles the hustle, that they incurred in losses! How about trying to do things RIGHT and play fair, for a change?

By the way: did the board spread the news about the last letter of the gemeente? Or would have crashed with the lyricism of the last newsletter? 

And can they solve the problem? Has been something like 5 years and the only action they have taken has been illegally trying to sanction me for 1300 euros, which I have not and will not pay (hint to Munnik: it would be more serious to ask money for a “factuur”, not for an “offerte”, by the way). 

Hence a reminder of what is art. 2.9 BW

1.

Elke bestuurder is tegenover de rechtspersoon gehouden tot een behoorlijke vervulling van zijn taak. Tot de taak van de bestuurder behoren alle bestuurstaken die niet bij of krachtens de wet of de statuten aan een of meer andere bestuurders zijn toebedeeld.

2.

Elke bestuurder draagt verantwoordelijkheid voor de algemene gang van zaken. Hij is voor het geheel aansprakelijk terzake van onbehoorlijk bestuur, tenzij hem mede gelet op de aan anderen toebedeelde taken geen ernstig verwijt kan worden gemaakt en hij niet nalatig is geweest in het treffen van maatregelen om de gevolgen van onbehoorlijk bestuur af te wenden.

There will be consequences, personal and social, for the members of the board who have failed to perform their roles with decency and impartiality. 

Finally, a notice to all the bystanders: this, all of this is happening because you are doing nothing. Absolutely nothing. And that is exactly what it takes for evil to win: that those who consider themselves “decent people” do nothing and let it happen. 

I will not.

Winter is coming!

Carlo, member of the association “Vereniging Tot Instandhouding van het complex Tuinwijk-zuid te Haarlem” since April 2013

P.S. It would be good to have good counseling in such matters, with experience of vereningrecht (n’est pas, dhr. Fransen?) and real mediation, instead of following the dangerous recommendations of people too close to the boards (past and present ones) or simply those unable to see past his or her nose.

Someone called me “asociaal” in a couple of occasion, during the ALVs, because, basically, I do not let him or the rest of the gang bully me without fighting back. According to them, I should let them abuse me quietly, meekly.

Such people never fight for justice, because justice will only mean arriving faster to a harsher sentence. And shorter hedges, of course.

And afvalbakken in the east garden hidden from the view of any garden goer.

“Asociaal”, a strange Dutch word.