Trying to bring environmental issue in the decision process
 
       
grannehörande  TUNA 25-12 2021
både TUNA 25.12 and vår tomt, som var en enhet, är ontaminerade med mikroplast		 ansökan
se under
Contamination
TUNA 25.12 är kontaminerad med mikroplast

 svar myndigheternas
ställningstagandet
 
 
Short chronology of TUNA 25:12
1 there is a series of problems with the enterprise "Get Ost"  owned by Glenn and Ninna Björne since beginning of 2000
2 at that time 25:12 and 32:2 have the same owner Glenn and Nina Björne
3 during the time preceeding 2017 there are  some health inspections on the property .
4 in 2017 Kjell Anselius, neighboring 25:12 reported a garbage, ensilage mixed with the manure being deposited on the 25:12
5 the property 32:3 is sold and 25:12 remains in the hands of Glenn and Nina Björne.
6 the problems with the removal of the manure and ensilage plastic are mounting
7 on 2018-01-18 Glenn and Nina Björne transfer  the ownership of the 25:12  to their son Lucas Björne. At that time both Lucas and Glenn Björne are in debt. At this point the Lándskrona authorities should had reacted.
8 at some point the property 25:12 is sold by Lucas Björne to David Andreen, the current owner who tries to sell part of the property further.
9 comments
ref  7,  how was it possible that Glenn and Nina Björne were able to transfer the property to their son despite that they were in debt, thus escaping the responsibility for the contamination of the properties 25:12  and 32:3
   
Short chronology
in 2017 Kjell Anselius, neighbouring 25:12 reported a garbage, ensilage mixed with the manure being deposited on the 25:12
at some poing 25:12 and 32:3 had one owner Glenn and Ninna Bj;rne
there is a long series of dating many years back
in 2017 Kjell Anselius, neighbouring 25:12 reported a garbage, ensilage mixed with the manure being deposited on the 25:12
 
 
 
disrespectfully mocking a citizen, is not worthy of the Swedish administration culture
correspondence with Mr. Hanak
kronofogdens målnummer U-18091-22/1250
  correspondence with Mr. Hanak, as one can see Mr. Hanak deflects the question by answering something else. In order to confuse the citizen Mr. Hanak in a response doesn't include the original e-mail  where there is a question. Very clever way to fool citizens what I know from the countries where I have worked with Mr. Hans Blix. The same approach.  
Let's follow it step by step
     
to Hanak 2022-05-24 the entire e-mail
 
the answer of Mr Hanak 
 
     
from Hanak
2022-05-24		 the COMMENTS TO THE ANSWER
I assume Mr. Hanak thinks I am a cognitively impaired and responds with an irrelevant e-mail, absolutely no reference to the question above, see it
despite that I attach a photo of the ensilage pile, the photo is made by  Kjell Anselius
  
 
below the photo of 25:12 taken by Mr. Aselius from his property in 2017
 
here is the photo made by Kjell Aselius
the neighbour rapporting ensilage storage on the property 25:12		  
     
  let's help mr. Hanak , the photo is taken by Kjell Anselius from the house as on the picture below, the complatn is made by Anselius 2022-04-10 see below  
   
here is the clear reference to the issue  
     
  the first attemt to get an answer from mr Hanak and
the first "confusing answer"		  
     
  correspondence with mr Hanak, as one can see Mr. Hanak deflects the question by answering someting else. In order to confuse the citizen Mr. Hanak in a response doesn't include the original e-mail  where there is a question. Very clever way to to fool citizens what I know from the countries where I have worked with Mr. Hans Blix. The same approach.  
Let's follow step by step
to Hanak 2022-05-17 no answer
to Hanak, reminder 2022-05-24  
from Hanak
2022-05-24		 Mr Hanak refers to anther property not the property I ask for i.e. 25:12
he removes the e-mail with the question  so  nobody sees that he just trying to confuse the citizen.
     
 
   
ABOUT: TUNA 25:12
BYGG 2021.68
and BYGG 2021.69
kronofogdens målnummer U-18091-22/1250

we at 32:3 did not allow to dig in manure/silage plastic as we want to have a proper disposal of the plastic not threatening he ecology of  Ven and Öresund.
The plastic at 25:12 was dig down somewhere, see the photo of Mr. Aselius		  
major consideration  
we do not consent with the decision  
no decision papers and justifications regarding above case where provided to me and I had no chance to exercise basic civil rights.  
administrative weakness, information is only sent by registered letters. If citizen is not available at the living location the citizens civil rights are neglected