Experience of Judicial System in Switzerland

Daily Life, Swiss News and General Topics
1
I though I would post this for you to show you that:

1) The police are not straight in Switzerland

2) The Judicial System is not very good.

Some of the story is repeated because I have copied and pasted my defence/appeal notes.

In June 2004, I purchased the 100% share capital of a Swiss company. The only asset of the company was a block of apartments in Ticino.

The reason that I in effect purchased this building was that my mother was renting an apartment in the block and when the building was sold would be evicted and “she wanted to live there with her husband for the rest of her life”.

The reason that I purchased the company as opposed to the building from the company was that I was able to negotiate a substantially cheaper price on the deal.

The downside was that any existing tenant’s contracts would continue.

I appointed my mother as administrator of the company and I appointed myself director.

I was advised and became a resident of Switzerland on paper for this purpose and so I did. However, I put my address as the address of my mother.

There was a tenant (I’ll call him “The Greek” as was originally from Greece) that had treated the building as his own. When the previous owner informed the existing tenants that there was a new owner, The Greek knocked on my mother’s door and told her: “that we need to make sure that we don’t let the knew owner have any control and to make things difficult for them” unaware that it was her family that owned it.

The problems began.

The company received a letter from the Commune (Council) that there were kennels on the premises without planning permission. These had been built by The Greek and he was breeding dogs. However, he was not feeding the dogs, so they were barking all the time and he was not cleaning the kennels out so there were plenty of flies around. As administrators, we had complaints from the other tenants about The Greek regarding the dogs, parking and abuse to visitors.

I had noticed that his tenants file was twice the size of the three other tenant’s file combined. I noticed that his lease had run out three years before, so one month before the end of a year, I gave him notice to leave. He then discovered that I was the owner.

He knocked on the door of my mother’s apartment and was abusive to her and told her “he was going to make our lives miserable and cost us a fortune”.

He applied through the “Rent Tribunal” to stay. The normal is that the Rent Tribunal will give another 4 years of stay and even after that, you can request further stay. For those that are not aware; tenants seem to have a lot of power against their landlords compared to the UK.

I approached a solicitor who told me that I would have to come up with good reasons to have him removed quickly. Such reasons are major developments/refurbishment of the building and law breaking matters or needed use of the apartment for the company.

I therefore changed the Memorandum & Articles of the company to go into property development and its office to be based in one of the apartments (The Greek).

I then put an application to the courts on the following grounds:

1) The company getting in trouble due to the Greek building a kennel without planning permission.

2) Abusive behaviour (including witness statements) from other tenants, former tenants and visitors and former Administrator.

3) Development of Hobby Room in the cellar of the building.

4) The Greek’s apartment required as administration and trading address of the company.

Court hearing took place in 2005 and The Greek was given 2.5 years to get out from original notice date. i.e. he had a court notice to vacate his apartment by the 31 January 2007. Court hearing over rule any Rent Association decisions.

After this judgment; all kinds of things occurred in the building; e.g. The oil line was disconnected from the boiler resulting in the cellar being flooded with oil. The washing machine money box was broken into and the unit smashed. All this occurred despite all external doors of the building being locked. It was obvious who was doing it bearing in mind that the only tenants were my uncle in one apartment; my mother in another; and me in the other. There was no proof so nothing was done.

Come the 31st January 2007 (date to be out of the building), The Greek had cleared his furniture out of the apartment but left all his possessions in the garage and his cellar. He had not returned his keys. He was in arrears of rent and expenses of Chf 7,000.

My mother rang his office (despite the fact that we discovered that he doesn’t work officially and was on benefits) to inform him that I was going to go and collect the key from him.

I walked into his office and requested the key from him. He told me that he didn’t understand English and asked me if I spoke German. I replied in German that I spoke a bit of German. He replied that he didn’t speak German???? He made out that my mother had been given the keys back and owed no rent. He started shouting and waving his arms around. I made it quite clear that I was tired of his lying and behaviour and that I would wait until he gives me the keys. In the end he fell over a bit of furniture. As a result of this fall, he cut his cheek slightly. He went running out of his office into the car park shouting that I was trying to kill him. I just stood there at the doorway of his office until somebody actually stopped. I told them to telephone the police which they did and they turned up. I explained the event and showed them my ID and they said I could go. I informed The Greek that I would be back the following day to collect the key.

The following day, I went to collect the keys to the apartment at the office of The Greek.

The Greek saw me coming to the office and did a runner into his car (remember his car ! ). I had my digital camera so took a photo of him sitting in his car. I then went home and wrote a letter telling the court that he had broken the court order by not clearing his stuff out and returning the keys as per the court order.

I then went back to court in early February where the judge gave The Greek until the 14th March 2007 to clear the apartment of his belongings and return the keys and that he would be liable for rent and expenses until that date.

The Greek did vacate the premises by the 14th March 2007.

I then put a court order in for legal costs, unpaid rent and expenses that equated to Chf 11,000.

In July 2007, I was told to come to the police station for an interview. My mother explained that I did not speak Italian so the police said they would get their interpreter.

I duly went to the police station where I was informed that I had beaten up The Greek and that the Greek had written a statement against me. The police then showed me a couple of pictures of the office of The Greek and I confirmed that I believed that to be the office. They then showed me pictures of a large CCTV camera in the office and pointed at a Video Cassette on the desk of the police inspector. There was no CCTV camera in the office but said to the police inspector through the interpreter that there was no reason for me to continue writing a statement other than that the Judge would be able to play the video back and see that I did nothing to The Greek. I laughed to myself as I saw the police inspector and interpreter discussing the situation and the policeman’s face go red.

The interpreter and the police inspector then carried on typing the statement and then presented it to me to sign.

I informed them that I would not sign it as the interpreter was appointed and remunerated by the police and did not trust what was in the statement. However, I explained that I was happy to take the statement home and get my mother to check it out and if correct I would sign it and return it immediately. They refused to let me do this. The policeman then got the interpreter to sign the statement. I was then presented with another piece of paper with a list of reference numbers and told to sign it. I asked what it was regarding. They said that it was to confirm my visit to the police station. I also refused to sign this and told them that I was happy to take this home and get my mother to verify what was on it. They told me that I could not leave the police station until I signed it. I told them that I had no choice but to become a resident of the police station then. The interpreter and policeman then left the room. 10 minutes later, they returned and asked me to sign it again. I refused. They then gave me the piece of paper and let me go.

I went home and showed the piece of paper to my mother who rang a lawyer.

The reference numbers were for the following and I gather admission to:

1) GBH (Grevious Bodily Harm)

2) Threat to Kill

3) Abusive Language

4) Forced Entry

5) Hostage Taking

My mother rang the police station and asked what all this was about and explained that I was willing to come down to the police station with her and make a formal statement and sign it but was not prepared to sign something the police inspector and interpreter had written. The Police Inspector agreed that we go to the police station the following day to do this. The following morning my mother and I went to the police station. The Police Inspector only wanted to see my mother. I assumed that he wanted a quiet word. 20 minutes later my mother came out of the interview room basically telling the police inspector that he was out of order.

She then informed me that the police inspector had given her the same piece of paper with charges as me plus an extra one “Sending me on a Contract”.

We left the police station and thought nothing of it. (July 2007).

In September 2009, I received by recorded delivery that I had been found guilty of cuts to the face (GBH charge) and the others had been dropped. All the charges to my mother were dropped. I was given a 29 day prison sentence and Chf 800 court costs.

I spoke to a lawyer and he explained that I should appeal because there would be a civil claim made by The Greek without doubt. I therefore appealed.

In the mean time The Greek had appealed against the small sentence that I was getting and that the other charges should not have been dropped against me and my mother.

I responded to this with a defence in that I had a court order for the keys as his statement stated he did not have to vacate the premises by the 31st January 2007 (the guy was a confounded liar). The judge threw his appeal out.

In the mean time I was preparing my defence against the criminal conviction and prison sentence. I obtained the statements that he had made and pulled together the following defence for my lawyer from the statements he had written. I include this here so you can see what I was up against:

Introduction

CashBoy finds himself having to defend himself against a charge under Article XXXXX for abrasions against The Greek which he categorically denies.

We will prove that:

1) The Greek lies and his statements cannot be taken seriously

2) The Greek has hidden evidence that would have cleared CashBoy of his charge against him.

3) Mr The Greek has obtained monies and benefits from the authorities of Switzerland fraudulently and not used them for what they were given for

4) Mr The Greek is taking legal action for his personal financial gain and what he believes as revenge against his previous landlord and their management.

5) That Mr The Greek is the aggressive character and not Mr CashBoy.

6) That Mr The Greek has a history of non payment of debts.

7) That Mr The Greek has a history of breaking the civil laws of Switzerland.

2
Facts of the Incident

On the 1st February; I was in the shopping centre, and I saw somebody looking like Mr The Greek coming out of the “Boutique Atene Pellicceria”. To make sure that it was Mr The Greek, I followed him to see if he would go to an office “Comunita Greca” (which at this time, I did not know where it was). He did indeed enter an office “Comunita Greca” and I followed him through the open door where he was about to sit down.

I was therefore sure that this was Mr The Greek.

I said; “The Greek” – Chiavi Chiavi Palazzina Castello” whilst making a twisting gesture with my hands to represent the unlocking of a door.

Mr The Greek looked at me and immediately started shouting. I could not understand what he was shouting about.

He was aware that I was coming to collect the keys as director of MyCompany SA of the apartment that Mr The Greek had been renting from MyCompany SA.

This apartment, Mr The Greek was supposed to vacate on the 31st January 2007 as per the Court Order (Appendix B11).

He did not give me the keys but continued to shout.

I picked up the telephone handset and told him to telephone my mother or the police and stood waiting.

He continued to shout, walk around his office and waving his arms around and pushing furniture about which I found peculiar. Eventually he tripped over a piece of furniture and fell to the ground. I moved a table out of the way and tried to help him get up. He refused help; got up himself; and stormed out of the office shouting. I had no idea what he was shouting about. I then walked out of his office calmly and followed him into the car park as I did not want to be left in his office on my own.

Mr The Greek continued shouting. Eventually somebody stopped in a car and got out. I told him to call the police: “telefone Polizi !”.

I wanted the police to come because it was in the interest of MyCompany as this would be proof that Mr The Greek was not willing to return the keys which was against the court order.

Lots of police and security came. I was asked for my ID. I had none. I gave my full name and address and date of birth. An interpreter came and I explained that I had come to collect the keys to the apartment. They made a couple of telephone calls and then told me I could go on my way. I informed Mr The Greek and the police that I would be coming back tomorrow to collect the keys from Mr The Greek. At no time did I believe that I would later be accused of beating Mr The Greek up.

You can read from the witness statements that I was calm and never lost my temper or appeared agitated as described by Mr The Greek. I was described as smartly dressed and did not have the appearance of somebody who had been in a fight.

The following day (2nd February 2007), I went to the offices of Mr The Greek to collect the keys again and took my camera with me.

I knocked on the door of the “Comunita Greca”. There was no reply.

However, I noticed Mr The Greek was in his car (Green 4WD Jeep – TI 203571). I decided to photograph the car of Mr The Greek and of him seated in the driver’s seat of his car. (Appendix C).

It was quite obvious that Mr The Greek had no intention of returning the keys to the apartment.

On the 3rd February 2007; a letter was sent from MyCompany to Avv Paolo Sauvain (Avvocato of Mr The Greek and copies sent to the Pretura Mendriso – Sud; Signor The Greek (Appendix D). This letter stated that Mr The Greek had failed to vacate the apartment on the 31st January 2007 as stipulated by the Court and return the keys.

MyCompany Sa went back to Court and obtained a SFRATTO for Mr The Greek and family to vacate the building by the 15th March 2007 and return the keys. Mr The Greek complied but left debts of rents, expenses and legal costs which we have still been un-successful in collecting.

In June 2007, I was surprised to be called to be interrogated by the police in Mendriso with regard to an incident of the 1st February 2007.

I went for the interrogation on the 19th June 2007.

There was an interpreter remunerated and acting for the police at the interrogation. I was not happy that I was unable to use my mother as an interpreter and then be content to sign a statement that I knew was what I had stated. At the interrogation, the police told me that Mr The Greek had stated that I had punched him repeatedly etc. which I obviously denied as they were untrue.

The police showed me pictures of the inside of the office of “Comunita Greca” and of a CCTV camera that was positioned to cover the whole area of the office and showed me two video boxes. I explained to the police that I deny the statements of Mr The Greek and that the CCTV video would show the aggressive shouting behaviour of Mr The Greek and the falling of Mr The Greek in his office. It would therefore show my total innocence to the Court and that there was therefore no reason for me to continue with the statement.

The policeman then explained that there was no video.

I stated to the policeman that Mr The Greek must be withholding this video which would show my innocence.

I then told the policeman I would be happy to write a statement and sign the statement provided my mother did the interpreting (free of charge).

I decided not to sign the statement written by the police and interpreter being unsure of the contents.

The policeman then produced a sheet of paper from his printer and the interpreter informed me that this was purely for me to acknowledge that I had had an interview with the police. I also refuse to sign this not knowing the meaning of the contents and suggested that I took it home to have my mother confirm the contents and if satisfactory would return it to the police station the same day. The policeman informed me that I would not be allowed to leave the police station until I signed it. I stated I would have to remain at the police station as I did not feel it right to sign something I did not understand. After 10 minutes, the policeman let me leave with the unsigned document.

I returned home and showed the document to my mother.

This document was a declaration of “reati”. She telephone the police to arrange by appointment a meeting with the police, myself and my mother; where a statement would be written and agreed by all concerned. It was agreed that this could be done at 9:00 on the 21st June 2007).

On the 21st June 2007 at 9:00, my mother and I arrived at the police station. The police were not interested in seeing me for any statement.

However, they then interrogated my mother regarding my supposed actions which she stated truthfully and refused to sign any statement or declaration of “reati” which they presented her with.

ANALYSIS OF MAIN POINTS OF STATEMENTS & EVIDENCE THE COURT WAS GIVEN

A1-A4

Mr The Greek states: “that he was sitting at his desk and J. CashBoy walked up to The Greek and removed his glasses and punched him repeatedly and kicked him all over his body for 20 minutes”.

This is obviously far fetched and untrue. Mr The Greek would not just have had one small cut on the side of his face from a fall and no bruising to the body. I do not believe that if somebody was going to punch Mr The Greek in the face that they would bother to remove his glasses.

It can be ascertained from the witness statements that the incident occurred between 17:00 and 17:30. An ambulance was not called for a long time as an ambulance did not arrive until after 19:00 (witness statement - Appendix A paragraph xx).

It should also be pointed out that the bus ticket (Appendix A5) for the journey Ospital >Bellavista was time marked as 20:28.

Let us assume the ambulance arrived at 19:15. It would take 15 minutes to put Mr The Greek in the ambulance and drive him to the hospital in Mendrisio. This would lead to a time of 19:30.

The bus ticket is time marked 20:28 and would have been bought at the time of boarding the bus. Let us assume that it would take at least 15 minutes to be discharged from the hospital and walk to the bus stop and assuming that a bus was already waiting which is most unlikely.

This would mean that the medical care would have ended at 20:13. This means that Mr The Greek could not have had more than 30 minutes of medical assistance in total at the hospital.

The fact that an ambulance was not called for one and a half hours after the incident and that the medical time was less than 30 minutes does not substantiate the claim of Mr The Greek of “continuous punching and kicking for 20 minutes”; i.e. a lie .

A5

We now need to look at the medical statement from the hospital that Mr The Greek has supplied (Appendix A5).

Firstly, if we look at the bottom of the page; we see that the “Data di emissione 27.04.2005”. This is more than one year and 9 months before the event.

Secondly, we now look at the top of the page and one can clearly see that the heading “PRONTO SCCORSO” was added to the top of this page from another document and obscures the person the letter was addressed to.

We believe that this is therefore fraudulent evidence .

A6

Letter from the Ufficio Di Conciliazione dated the 22nd January 2007 clearly states that Mrs Mother as administrator of MyCompany SA was refusing to extend the time Mr The Greek could remain in La Palazzina.

The powers of the Pretura di Mendrisio is over and above that of the Ufficio Di Conciliazione. The Pretura di Mendrisio clearly stated that the date for Mr The Greek to leave was that of the 31st January 2007and Mr The Greek knew this (Appendix B).

There was no reason to let The Greek stay longer as he had not paid any rent or expenses since November 2006 despite him receiving his rent through Housing Benefit through Belinzona.

A7

Certificato Medito is dated the 16th Janaury 2006.

This Certifcato seems to contradict the fact that Mr The Greek claims that he has had major heart surgery.

It does state xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx that could explain the reason that Mr The Greek fell over his own furniture.

A8

These two pictures prove that I deed indeed returned to the office on the 2nd February 2007 to collect the key the following day as I had informed Mr The Greek that I would.

It also shows that I took a picture of Mr The Greek in his car which we will be discussing later.

I cannot see how these pictures show me to be aggressive.

This also proves that the fall Mr The Greek had was not that bad as the following day he was back at work.

A9

We believe this letter is actually written by Mr The Greek.

The same person also seems to sign “pp” for “la segretaria – D. Politu”

The signatures on Appendix A9 and also the signature of Mr The Greek on Appendix A10 seem to have the same style and flow.

A10

I think any body reading this and knowing me personally will realise this is complete rubbish and written by somebody with mental problems.

I am quite happy to be interviewed by the police regarding all these claims. My apartment is welcome to be searched as well as I have nothing to hide.

I am quite happy to be tested for any substances as I have never taken drugs; never smoked cigarettes; am not on any medication (probably had an asprin more than 10 years ago). I only drink alcohol and this is only wine and amounts to 6 to 10 litres per annum.

It appears that Mr The Greek knows I am actually a clean living person by his with drawl of helping the authorities (Appendix A36 ).

A52

This is the same as Appendix A6 and discussed above.

A57 – A60

This is Mr The Greek dreaming of making a civil claim against me on his teeth.

It should be noted the statement from the dentist “Fratture delle rachie ??”.

This would imply that Mr The Greek has requested the dentist write this and the dentist does not even know if they are fractured from his fall.

Oddly enough teeth 24 and 25 appear to be on the opposite side of his face that he cut when he fell over.

A61

I am actually surprised that Migros would allow staff to give the details of receipts of customers to anyone.

I do not actually know how Simone S. would know of my appearance to warn Mr The Greek.

Perhaps Simone S. should be interviewed, to question whether he really said this to Mr The Greek.

A62

Newspaper article based on Mr The Greek telling everyone around that I went there to beat him up, when he knows the truth was that I went there for the key and he fell over his own office furniture.

A63 – A66

These show pictures of Mr The Greek’s office showing how disorganised and un-professional it looks.

Note the large pictures of the CCTV camera clearly covering the view of the office BUT Mr The Greek was unable to supply the video coverage of the incident.

3
CHARACTER OF MR THE GREEK

The behaviour of Mr The Greek as a tenant of MyCompany SA as pleasant, reasonable or honest:

(1) History of late payment and non payment of rent despite receiving Housing Benefit from the Canton and Comune.

(2) Disputes and late payment and non payment of expenses.

(3) Construction and extension of dog kennel on residents communal land without permission from the landlord.

(4) Construction and extension of dog kennel on residents communal land without permission from the Comune.

(5) Construction and extension of dog kennel on communal land of the residents preventing the residents from having access to their right of way on communal land.

(6) Keeping more than one dog on the premises contrary to the tenants lease and without permission of the landlord

(7) Keeping more than one dog on the premises without registration and contrary to permission of the commune.

(8) Running a business (breeding and selling dogs) on residential property without permission of the landlord.

(9) Running a business (breeding and selling dogs) on residential property without permission of the Comune.

(10) Letting dogs run over and excrete on the communal gardens and residents allocated gardens of La Palazzina.

(11) Preparation of dog food and feeding of dog food in the washing/drying areas in the building of the residents

(12) Rude, aggressive and unacceptable behaviour towards tenants, visitors of tenants, administrators and council officials.

(13) Claiming of communal parking areas at front of the building to be exclusive parking for him self.

(14) Un-Hygienic premises due to dog excretion left in kennels creating smells in residents apartments an attracting flys.

(15) Noise to residents throughtout the day and night from dogs barking, fighting and setting each other off.

(16) MyCompany SA incurring unnecessary substancial cost and time (administration and legal) in trying to sort out the complaints from tenants and the Comune regarding Mr The Greek.

(17) Theft of electricity for heat and light of kennel by illegal wiring into the electric circuits of the landlords building without permission.

The fact that section.............. ; .................... were dropped is proof that the claims of Mr The Greek were incorrect.

I now intend to prove that Mr The Greek lies, withholds information and that Mr The Greek statements cannot be taken seriously.

APPLICATION FOR LEGAL AID

Appendix F shows the application for legal aid that Mr The Greek has made.

Mr The Greek has always boasted to our family that:

(1) He owned the shop Boutique Atene Pellicceria (Vestimoda SA) in the Sanfontana Centre with his wife.

(2) He owned the Comunita Greca in the Sanfontana Centre

(3) That he had a house in Greece.

None of these items appear on his claim form for legal aid.

The claim form also states that only his wife has a car. She drove a Renault Megana.

Mr The Greek drove a Cheep Cherokee 4WD. Appendix C shows the vehicle with him sitting in the seat of the driver.

The claim form states that Mrs The Greek earned only CHF5,566 per annum working in the Boutique Atene Pellicceria (Vestimoda SA).

Mrs The Greek used to go to work every day in the morning and come back in the evening whilst she lived in La Palazzina.

She would have earned more than CHF 30,000 in Migros for those hours.

Every time we were in the Sanfontana shopping centre we would check to see if Mrs The Greek was there. She was usually there and it was clear that she managed the shop.

If you look at Appendix E53, you will see a letter heading from the Boutique Atene Pellicceria (Vestimoda SA) and payment of CHF10,484.10 to MyCompany SA for rent arrears.

It seems very generous of an employer to pay the rent of an employee; especially when this amounts to two years of her salary.

There is no mention on the application form of income to Mr The Greek for his work as president of the Comunita Greca.

Mr The Greek however clearly advertises his services in the telephone directory and outside the premises of the Comunita Greca (Appendix G).

The judge need to understand that Mr The Greek is able to make accusations and go to court and appeal because he gets legal aid.

As said earlier, Mr The Greek always told us that we were going to pay heavily for making him leave la Palazzina.

MR THE GREEK TODAY

It is not surprising that Mr The Greek is proud to have Swiss Nationality.

No way would Mr The Greek live like this in his home country of Greece.

He now lives in a large house in Morbio Inferior (Appendix K); the rent no doubt paid for by the government through housing benefits.

He drives a newer Suburu Forester Estate Car ( TI 188637); breeds dogs and continues to have an income from the Comunita Greca.

MY SITUATION

I would have been better off not appealing on an economic basis.

I do not see the reason why I should be given a criminal record for something I did not do.

It has taken me more than 9 days (prison sentence length) to prepare this appeal (prison would have been easier) and cost me a lot more in legal and court costs than the fine.

However, I have principles and do not accept the lies of Mr The Greek.

CONCLUSION

The character of Mr The Greek has been clearly shown in the enclosures. It has been proven that Mr The Greek is the aggressive person.

It is the word of Mr The Greek against mine.

Mr The Greek has withheld the video of the incident that would have shown my innocence.

It has been clearly shown that my motive to go to the Greek Centre was only to collect the key and Mr The Greek actually new I was coming.

It has been shown that Mr The Greek has been claiming legal aid fraudulently.

It has been shown that Mr The Greek has been claiming housing benefit from the government and has misappropriated these monies by not using those monies to pay the rent those monies were given for.

Even Mr The Greek admits that he exaggerates. Where does an exaggeration end and a lie begin?

I also stated that there has to be no doubt and that if there are no witnesses to the actual event then there has to be doubt and therefore no proof.

I was in court on Monday and won the case; i.e. NOT GUILTY and NO CRIMINAL RECORD.

I had The Greeks psychologist questioned under oath.

I had a statement from the doctor at the hospital that his cut to the face was not from a punch but a fall.

However, this has cost me Chf 8,000 and to be honest have not been able to apply for contracts not knowing where I stood until Monday after the verdict.

I was surprised that the matter was ever put before a judge and that I was found guilty without having made any representation at all.

I know that we are not in the UK; but the process in the UK would have been as follows:

1) The Police would have told The Greek; it is your word against his and there will be no case.

2) The CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) would drop the case knowing they would loose and it be a waste of public money.

3) The lower court (Magistrates) would have insisted that I attended and made my points and would have found me not guilty.

However this managed to go in effect to the equivalent of the High Court in the UK.

My lawyer is telling me that I am very unlikely to get any of my legal costs back from the courts or The Greek as he has no money.

4
Lesson 1: this is not UK

Lesson 2: get a Rechtsschutsversicherung

Lesson 3: don't mess with The Greek

Glad to hear you got out of it. I guess you'll have to look at it as a of 8'000 CHF school fee. Forget and move on.

5
I am really happy for you that you won your case, sounds like you went through the wringer to prove yout point. But I do have to take exception to the two points below. Every police force has a crooked cop or two but the vast majority do a good job & do it properly following the law. Every judicial system worldwide is flawed, miscarriages of justice happen; thankfully the Swiss system worked for you in the end.

6
It was hard enough reading it, let alone going through it... Well done !

7
...and after all that, didn't your mum leave to live above Migros?

Glad it turned out well for you (-8000 CHF & stress) - at least it shows that the Judges know what they are doing.

8
Thank you Cashboy for a bloody good read. I had to take a break to make lunch in the middle so am now finished reading. A few things occur to me as being mistakes on your part: Why did you go to his office on your own, already knowing the type you were dealing with? Why did you ever go to the police station on your own, knowing that you would - more than probable - need a translater and you would have had at least the police on your side cause they wouldn't have tried any funny stuff in the first place So, I am just saying ok? With that I want to say "Good job for winning and am sure it has cost you more than just the money"

Suggestion: As Tilia said, Get Rechtschutzversicherung, join Beobachter including the assistance, join Mieterverband cause I'm afraid this country's legals are less than kosha I'm afraid and I thought the Americans were bad suing each other. This country takes the biscuit for wanting to do one over on the next man.

I am not leaving though, just getting myself ready for what probably lies ahead at some stage, due to no fault of mine but where as a foreigner I will be shat upon... just cause

9
On a separate topic, I too have been a little surprised at the Swiss system.

Case 1

I, along with many others, was victim of multiple instances of vandalism, each one reported to the police. I heard through the news that the perpetrator had been caught, but have never been contacted by the police about the case. Maybe it is not necessary to have me give evidence, but a simple notification of the case would be courteous, and possibly enable me to proceed with civil action to recover uninsured costs/stress/hassle etc.

Case 2

I was a witness to a road rage incident which involved a purposeful ramming of a car by a bus (yes, ZVV...) I was 'invited' to give evidence (on pain of fine or prison if I did not attend !) - it was not at all intimidating giving evidence against the accused, with him sat right behind me in the prosecutors office ! Of course, I was never informed of the outcome.

In both cases there appears to be a lack of courtesy to the victim/witness.

10
Well done Cashboy, you certainly persevered with that one.

I find it interesting that Mr Greek applied for legal aid without fully declaring his assets. If I were in your shoes I would visit the land registry and find out exactly what he does own, and then show the court and the social services, and possibly the tax department the evidence of his assets.

With his character he is almost certainly defrauding all three in some way or another.

11
I thought that I would just advise people on the situation to date.

After winning my appeal, I thought that would be it and I would be compensated for at least all my legal fees.

Unfortunately when I was reading my appeal to the Appeal Judge, the judge could tell that I was pretty professional and calm compared to the "Greek" that started shouting in court against what I was saying and that what the Greek was stating was not credible.

The appeal judge therefore stopped me and asked "If I was Guilty or Not Guilty" which I obviously stated I was not Guilty.

However, the Judge of the lower court appealed back at the local Lugano court.

She did this because the Judge at the Appeal Court basically criticised her decision and the local court was charged for my appeal and costs.

I asked my lawyer if I should put together the defence of their appeal as their appeal was completely pathetic and I had already prepared everything for the original appeal that I won. My lawyer told me that it would not take him long, was a formality and he would prefer to do it himself.

I did not even see what he was submitting because he submitted it the day before the deadline and did not include any of the defence that I had written for the original appeal (he had this in hard copy and electronically by e-mail as attachments and also on a disc that I had given him.

The shocking thing was that I was found guilty by the Appeal-Appeal court in Lugano basically because my lawyer has failed to put what i originally gave him plus rip apart the judges statements.

I have now had to appeal to the Federal Court.

I am not happy about this appeal either because my lawyer again left it to the last minute (in fact I was so concerned flew to Switzerland three days before the deadline to make sure it was submitted. When I arrived and read what he was submitting, it was complete toss and I told him to submit copies of everything I had given him in my preparations in the original appeal and told him that the CCTV camera was an important factor on the basis that the onus to prove my innocence was that the Greek should produce the Video. he said that as he had not mentioned this in his defence last time, he did not feel that it should now be mentioned. I told him that it was one of the major points. He agreed, but after i had left Switzerland, he sent me a copy of what he had submitted and he had not included my original appeal and di not mention the CCTV camera. In fact i stopped talking in the police station because I said that there was no need because the CCTV Video would reveal all and my lawyer stated that I stopped talking in the police station under my rights under some section number which actually looks like I was unco-operative when in fact I went to the police station with my mother to write a statement(see original story) of which none of this he has submitted.

He then included another invoice for CHF6,800 for his services. I have refused to pay this on the basis that:

1) This appeal is due to him loosing the defence because of the abysmal defence he put together that he charged CHF4,800 for.

2) That he did not include what I asked him to that were the very basic points.

3) That I will pay him when I win the case in the Federal Court and I am paid for all my legal costs and expenses that my lawyer assured me that I would get.

I can actually tell you that I have not been working much for the last two years as a result of this case and I certainly have not felt able to apply for work in Switzerland as a result. I have been staying in the UK in a reclusive state (couple of members on this forum are aware of that) as my costs are cheaper in the UK.

I have to warn you that the lawyers do not appear to be very logical or capable in Switzerland and just seem to be money grabbers.

In fact after all this, my lawyer had the cheek to say to me that even if I am found guilty, the offence is not that bad. I am innocent and he states that after requesting so far CHF20,000 from me !!!

I have told him that if I loose in the Federal Court, I will have no choice but to appeal to the European Court where I can get a UK lawyer/barrister to act for me

My concern is that when I win, the Swiss courts will state that my lawyer did not mention all the facts and the decision was based on what he provided and therefore not be compensated for all my legal fees and expenses.

12
Yep; you are correct; she moved to Mendrisio to live above the Migros because she could buy the reduced items after 16:00 leaving me with a couple of empty apartments.

13
Lawyer sounds rubbish, like a lot of natives I experience here! They are definitely not shy in charging though, it was one of the first things I realised after arriving here.

We are now in a couple of legal battles ourselves and because we are not natives or 100% fluent in the language they assume you are stupid.

Will post on here the outcomes because you learn a lot on journeys like this. Illegal contracts and fraud seem to be okay to natives if they can make sh1t loads of money. They complain like mad about foreigners but seem to think the rules and law do not apply to them. They look at you with contempt and just tell you to pay it is the way it is, really!

End of rant!

14
There is nothing so galling as giving in to an in-just system. The inner self screaming to fight it, driven by logical common sense. The outcome seems obvious.

...and then it goes wrong, or not the way you had hoped.

This is when you must question the real cost to yourself, and value the ability to detach and let go. Some call it a moral victory, I would say a personal rise.

15
If such is mentioned in court, then the shark should find it hard to fight a negligence case which may lead to governing disciplinary procedures. He may well want to settle quickly by deducting a sizable portion of the bill.

16
so true... I could go on and on about how my UBER expensive Bahnoffstrasse attorneys were basically useless/incompetent with everything except producing invoices!

And the courts... I could write a book!

17
Hey cashboy, I also live in Lugano and let's just say I know somebody who's a lawyer here in CH.. so I'm familiar with the scene!!!!

I'm sorry you had to find out the hard way, but police here indeed are as bad as they come anywhere else... it's just that they put up an act and act nice with the "locals"... but they are just as abusive and incompetent as they are anywhere else.....

Never trust what a cop tells you, also I'd dare say never trust what you are told by an official public department employee. I've been lied to in my face like nothing by both public employees and police officers, thank God I know how the system works here and never believed any of those lies... Always question what they're telling you or ask for reference and ALWAYS try to get their responses written. From my experience, it's best to inquire about things with letters...They are less likely to lie there and if they do, you have evidence of it and argue it! tThis is specially true for those jerks in the immigration department, they are the worst liars of all....

Thing is, there is nothing much you can do about it... just the way it is. This isn't the States, it's really hard to prove anything here because they have such strict privacy laws... In fact If I stand correct, no one is allowed to film you or take a picture of you unless you know about it and I would suppose it wouldn't even count as legal evidence(the pictures you took). But then again I'm no lawyer, anywa this is why in the supermarkets and publics places, there's usually a notice somewhere saying that you're being filmed. Usually what it says here is "Area video sorvegliata"....

In fact one time, as an anecdote, I had an appointment and was running late to the train station when I got there I had no time to make the ticket, so I figured I'd just jump in as it was only for one stop! Only 4 minutes away! Unluckily for me when I hopped in the railway police were there and I couldn't have thought of anything worse than playing the stupid american tourist thinking I could get away with it, with just a slap on the wrist.Anyway I pretended not to speak Italian and I heard them conspire against me and say all kinds of stereotype bs and I understood it all... It was funny... not so funny when that 300 FRS. ticket arrived and I could've fought the case cause they were accusing me of giving falsely information when all I really did was play stupid... but that would've meant extra money and no assurance of me winning the case, then again it was my word against theirs and thing is, I never stated I was a foreigner or anything... all I did was just speak English and pretend I didn't understand anything. You should've seen the look on their faces when they rang to check my ID and when they found out I was in fact Swiss!!! LOL

But anyway, I don't want to get into trivial details...

Point is I wouldn't trust the police for s...t here or believe anything someone who works in a public office says, just because he/she said so... It may very well all be BS.

I was also impressed at the inefficiency of the lawyers here, noo as much as for their greediness, 'cause maybe 90% of the lawyers worldwide are greedy... but for the money you're paying you'd expect them to do at least a DECENT job, right??? But alas, there are few decent law firms here in Ticino....

Anyway man, I wish you the best of lucks and I'm sorry you had to go through all of this!!!!! But do apply to the Federal Court don't let this mythomaniac Greek to get away with it!!!!!!

18
I'm trying to figure whether you are trolling.

Hmm, I assume this nugget of wisdom is based on your run-in with the transport police. In which you have basically acknowledged that:

- you rode the train without a ticket

- and you tried to screw over the police by playing the "american tourist" stereotype, even though you are Swiss-Peruvian.

I am hardpressed to feel your indignation of the police "stereotyping" you, when you yourself play-acted up to the same stereotype...

which you know because

I would say your sample size ist bit small, to make judgement calls on the legal profession as a whole.

19
just goes to show that you need to manage everything yourself, because nobody else is going to look after your interests as well was yourself!

20
I thought that it was time to up date you on this legal case:

I came to the conclusion that my lawyer (it appears most lawyers in Switzerland) is useless and is not street wise. This is certainly the case compared to my lawyer/barrister friends in the UK.

I decided to tell my lawyer that he is a really nice guy but doesn't have a clue on how to win a criminal case!

I have therefore told him that I shall write everything (explanations etc.) and he just needs to complete the statute law and handle the formalities as a lawyer.

I typed in all the transcripts (200 plus pages); statements from witnesses; accuser; what my lawyer has written to the courts in defence; verdicts of judges; medical reports into word documents and then used Google-Translate to try an understanding of the whole situation.

I understand that some of you will be telling me that Google-Translate is no good etc. etc. but I really cannot afford/want to spend more monies than I have to when I can see that when i win this case my accuser has absolutely no monies to pay me back and is now retired on a state pension and 100% housing benefits. In fact this is the reason that he keeps appealing because he is getting legal aid. My position is that have been unable to take on any employment/contracts because I have a criminal record at the moment and keep getting called to Switzerland to go to court to fight this case.

Now, from all the paper work I have read in detail, I have discovered the following.

In the UK, you can only be found guilty if the accuser can prove "without doubt" that you are guilty. If there is any doubt of your guilt, you are innocent!

This is exactly the reason I was found not guilty by the 1st appeal Judge as well as the fact that what the accuser had written in his statements and said in the appeal court were not credible and actual lies and the judge could see this. After translating everything, I discovered that he actually accused me of walking into his office, shutting the door behind me, removing his glasses, punching him repeatedly in the face and then throwing him to the floor and kicking his body for 20 minutes and then taking a hanker chief out of my pocket and poisoning him with plutonium and that I was a professional assassinator.

Any UK/USA judge would just think the guy is mentally ill but not in Switzerland by the looks of things.

The law/statute books also similarly have this "analysis of all the circumstances and evidence collected to make a decision".

I was therefore found guilty by the next appeal judge over the first appeal judge on this basis.

My lawyer and I have actually concluded that as the Appeal-Appeal judge is from the same Lugano court as the original judge who was female that she must be giving him good blow jobs because there is no way I could be found guilty otherwise.

I was found guilty on the following basis by the Appeal -Appeal Judge:

"I went into his office and shut the door behind me". Fact is that the door is spring loaded and therefore automatically closed behind me.

"I was in the office of the accuser for 10-20 minutes and did not speak a common language so must have beaten him up". The fact is that I went to collect the key and was waiting for him to give me the key or for him to telephone the police so that I would then have evidence that he had refused to give back the key against the court order.

Statements made by "witnesses" heard him shouting and when he walked out of the office had his shirt undone". He always shouted and I actually said nothing. His shirt was undone, not ripped as in a fight but unbuttoned as part of his drama/pantomime and that he walked out before me and the fact that all the witnesses stated that I did not look as if I had been in a fight and two of the four stated that I was actually content that the police were called and arrived.

So my advise and my lawyer's advise is for any of you in a confrontational situation in Switzerland, is to make sure that you do it in a public place because it is possible that you could get into a situation that I find myself; i.e unable to get a proper job for the last two years, end up with a criminal record, over Chf 25,000 in legal costs and over 8 flights from the UK to see lawyer and attend court and this is still not over.

I have put together myself, for my lawyer (he is incompetent), my appeal after already having to fly back to Switzerland to put a formal appeal-appeal-appeal in the court.

Over the last three years of this going on; the judicial system has changed and there is now another layer (Appeal Court as opposed to the final appeal at Federal Tribunal level) of court. This is quite an interesting situation as this is held in Locarno. The hearing could be just by paper-work submissions or by actual presence of accuser and accused (me) before a judge decided by the judge.

I hope that it is a presence in court situation because my lawyer seems to be pretty lax in detail in his submission and to me basically lost the accusers appeal last round.

I was in court in October 2011 for sentencing despite me appealing against conviction and my next call to court is now to the Civil court for demands of compensation (supposedly smashing the teeth of the accuser and traumatic damages). By the way; I was asked by the judge if I had ever gone to see the accuser/plaintiff since the event. I stated: yes, the following day to collect the key. The judge then said she meant for me to apologise to the plaintiff, where I said: no. The judge asked me if I wished to apologise and I replied that I was unable to aplogise for something I did not do so I actually got a larger "point score" and fine than I could have received.

I would like to now show you how useless the lawyers are in Switzerland.

When I was interviewed by the police. They showed me 16 pictures of the office where the supposed incident took place. 7 of the photos were of a CCTV camera in the office. My lawyer, despite me telling him that they are relevant never included them in any appeal/defence. After going to court for sentencing, I was having coffe with him and two other lawyers discussing the CCTV.

I argued that the CCTV was vital to be mentioned as:

It is the duty of the plaintiff to prove without doubt that the accused (me) is guilty and not for the accused (me) to prove that I am innocent. And that if there is any doubt, then I cannot be found guilty. I also stated that if the CCTV tapes had been produced from the CCTV (not submitted) then it would be proved without doubt that I was innocent. Another fact is that the CCTV was so prominent that I would have noticed it and assumed that it was functioning and recording and would therefore be unlikely to beat the accuser up on the fact that all would be taped and from the witnesses after the event stating I was calm was unlikely that i lost my temper.

All three solicitors sat there and told me it is irrelevant to the case and hence I have insisted that this as well as other facts/statements be included. These lawyers actually don't seem to have a clue on how to fight a case. I actually have started to become paranoid that my lawyer is actually loosing the cases so that he can appeal and get more legal fees out of me. I even told my lawyer that.

I expect the Appeal of the Appeal of the Appeal to be heard in March 2012 and until then my life is at a standstill and I continue to read and laugh at the financial market.

If I lose, then I am off to the Federal Court and then the European Court where at least I can use a UK Barrister and legal team.

I shall keep you informed unless I am in prison.....................LOL