tribunal d'instance

[pachapapa]

It seems that you have not at any stage appeared before a judge in the Tribunal d'Instance; if that is the case then your neighbour must have initiated the attempt at Conciliation by making a formal request to the "greffe" ( sort of court clerk) of the Tribunal d'Instance who would then arrange for the Conciliateur to start the conciliation by inviting the parties to appear before him with a view to achieving an aimable resolution to their differences.

Can you confirm if this proposition is correct or not? Cheers, PPP.

[NormanH]

This is what I have been explaining for the last few posts..

The conciliateur (who in this case seems to be acting as a Médiateur) is there to avoid going to court unless there is a real case to answer.

The stage with judge etc is still a way off...

[pachapapa]

[quote user="NormanH"]This is what I have been explaining for the last few posts..
The conciliateur (who in this case seems to be acting as a Médiateur) is there to avoid going to court unless there is a real case to answer.
The stage with judge etc is still a way off...
[/quote]

OK but be convenient if OP clarifies so we know where we stand.

[Russethouse]

[quote user="charnizay"]To Keni  -  HI :) My neighbours have only been in their house for 4/5 years and are away for long periods in Nepal/South America et al. We have had our house for 9 years now, there was no established use of this land other than by ourselves and other visitors who used it. Our Maire is a very nice man and runs a good ship.
Thanks for your wishes, I would not wish this sort of thing on anyone.
Regards Charnizay
[/quote]

Could it be that the neighbours were mislead about the piece of land by the previous owner of their property and are taking out their frustration on you ? 

 

[Keni]

It's good to have a good Maire/ Our first was a ******d, allowed a lot of things to apparently happen and allegedly pocketed kickbacks, and worked well for his 'friends'. Our second Maire was a neighbour, a brilliant man, had to retire due to motor neurone disease (unfortunately just died). The present Maire was his sub, who took over and is also apparently a good Maire, We support him and he seems to support us! Can't ask for more than that these days!

Re charnizays' remark: Yeh, I'd check out (from neighbours) if they know anything about this use of the land from their previous owner.

 

[charnizay]

Hello Pachapapa  -  I have not ever appeared before a judge at any stage, I am sure that my neighbour has initiated this attempt at a reconcliation. (Well, I hope so).

I think that I can confirm that the conciliateur de justice is there to avoid this paltry affair from escalating.

I have learned that what the person known as NormanH has said is correct, although I will soon find out because I am to see the conciliateur on 10th May.

Regards Charnizay

[charnizay]

Hello Russethouse

Yes this could indeed be the case, not only have my neighbours possibly been mislead by previous owners but it is also possible that the notaires have been a little careless. I think that we are easy prey for them to take out their frustration on - but hey! that's life.

Regards Charnizay

[charnizay]

Hello to all who were interested enough to offer advice/support etc. over my worries concerning my neighbour.

A situation was made known to me that the neighbour concerned was making complaints about someone else. This time regarding some ivy growing against a neighbouring barn.

A gaz torch was borrowed by the original neighbour who has been giving me grief and he then burnt (not intentionally I'm sure) the ivy and 3 barns to the ground.

I think it will now take an army of conciliators to reconcile this person with all of his other neighbours, and I feel a little vindicated.

[Benjamin]

Looking back on this thread, your posting on 28 April mentioned a meeting on 10 May.

Did that ever happen?

[idun]

I'm surprised he wasn't arrested. When you start setting alight to something on a building, good sense says that you are also burning the building. Being stupid is surely not an excuse when a criminal act is being commited, which I think is arson. I say arson, as he deliberately set fire to something.... that was not an accident.

[charnizay]

Hello - Yes I did go along to a meeting with the conciliator de justice on 10th May 2012. The meeting was pleasant enough, it took the form of myself and the conciliator along with my translator sat in a private room at the Hotel de Ville.

I was given a chance to explain why I was using my garden wall for the storage of some pieces of iron which so upset my neighbour. I found the conciliator to be attentive and although we managed to make certain that I was breaking no laws no reconciliation was achieved.

My neighbour is considering building a wall to hide the iron pieces as I cannot presently remove them and I was able to make it clear that I had no objection to this. The conciliator made a visit to my neighbour's property to view the "eyesores" for himself and it was reported back to me, through my translator, that my neighbour had been advised not put a fence or wall there because it would interfere with various access' held by myself and other neighbours.

As you will know from my latest posting there have been developments with the behavoir of this particular neighbour and I think/hope that this affair will just die away now, naturally in the goodness of time the iron pieces will be reused and/or removed.

I thought that the service of mediation with the conciliator was very good . It is offered free of charge and I feel that it could avert/diffuse lots of serious problems that occur between neighbours.