Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:51 pm

The press love him don't they, big piece again in Eggo, fined two thousand pounds plus two thousand five hundred pounds costs, apparently sending written threats to one of his tenants, I'm sure someone can put a link up.

What's that saying about people in glass houses, he was so obsessed with the alleged threats made during the red and blue nonsense and all the while he's putting his own out there and in written form as well. :roll: :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:59 pm

He has been asking for labourers on here of late.
Perhaps he should have been asking for a decent brief. :D

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:08 pm

BigGwynram wrote:The press love him don't they, big piece again in Eggo, fined two thousand pounds plus two thousand five hundred pounds costs, apparently sending written threats to one of his tenants, I'm sure someone can put a link up.

What's that saying about people in glass houses, he was so obsessed with the alleged threats made during the red and blue nonsense and all the while he's putting his own out there and in written form as well. :roll: :lol:


Why the problem with him?

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:11 pm

The blokes a f*cking prick

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:12 pm

Okay - he a poster on here? Excuse my ignorance but I've never heard of him see. :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:19 pm

Goes under the name of angry man [and others]

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:25 pm

rontom wrote:Goes under the name of angry man [and others]


Makes sense now. :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:33 pm

Was wondering who'd be the first one to put this up.

Isn't it interesting that the labour supporting press fail to say that my property was damaged, tenants were months in arrears of their rent, failed to leave when agreed too, failed to contribute to maintenance costs then they were to blame for the issues and the list can go on.

They also fail to say that the fine was mainly down to the fact that they had to separate the civil and criminal issues for the situation. Meaning that I can now claim damages for more than what I was fined for.

However I'm sure that won't stop people thinking the worst hey ;)

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:36 pm

Angry Man wrote:Was wondering who'd be the first one to put this up.

Isn't it interesting that the labour supporting press fail to say that my property was damaged, tenants were months in arrears of their rent, failed to leave when agreed too, failed to contribute to maintenance costs then they were to blame for the issues and the list can go on.

They also fail to say that the fine was mainly down to the fact that they had to separate the civil and criminal issues for the situation. Meaning that I can now claim damages for more than what I was fined for.

However I'm sure that won't stop people thinking the worst hey ;)


All that may be the case, but you can't go writing written threats. But you know that now though. ;)

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:41 pm

SBF1 wrote:
Angry Man wrote:Was wondering who'd be the first one to put this up.

Isn't it interesting that the labour supporting press fail to say that my property was damaged, tenants were months in arrears of their rent, failed to leave when agreed too, failed to contribute to maintenance costs then they were to blame for the issues and the list can go on.

They also fail to say that the fine was mainly down to the fact that they had to separate the civil and criminal issues for the situation. Meaning that I can now claim damages for more than what I was fined for.

However I'm sure that won't stop people thinking the worst hey ;)


All that may be the case, but you can't go writing written threats. But you know that now though. ;)


Not as bad as the threat of your parents living in a condemned property which is the reason I needed them out in the first place so that they can give in there.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:42 pm

SBF1 wrote:
Angry Man wrote:Was wondering who'd be the first one to put this up.

Isn't it interesting that the labour supporting press fail to say that my property was damaged, tenants were months in arrears of their rent, failed to leave when agreed too, failed to contribute to maintenance costs then they were to blame for the issues and the list can go on.

They also fail to say that the fine was mainly down to the fact that they had to separate the civil and criminal issues for the situation. Meaning that I can now claim damages for more than what I was fined for.

However I'm sure that won't stop people thinking the worst hey ;)


All that may be the case, but you can't go writing written threats. But you know that now though. ;)



exactly :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:43 pm

Well Adam the fact you have been fined in a court of law does not look good on you. There are propers ways to go, you might not like them but that does not give you the right to make your own laws.

I'm taken it you have been fined under a criminal act. I can't see how you can claim that back under a civil one.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:50 pm

With all these convictions mounting up, it could help with your employment agency you must have loads of contacts INSIDE, perhaps you could help the community you love so much by putting some work the way of ex cons, it must be hard for them to get back into the workplace with convictions on their record, you could use it as a selling to, locksmiths, opening locked cars, shoplifters, whoops shopfitters I meant then, security guards (you know poacher turned gamekeeper) furniture movers, bailiffs,the list is endless. ;)

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:52 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:Well Adam the fact you have been fined in a court of law does not look good on you. There are propers ways to go, you might not like them but that does not give you the right to make your own laws.

I'm taken it you have been fined under a criminal act. I can't see how you can claim that back under a civil one.


That's not what ive been told but given the bad legal advice I've had so far you could be right but it won't be for the lack of trying. Yes it looks bad but they went back on a previous agreement and when you have the mortgage company on your back because they haven't paid and go in and see the damage they had done to your property than its takes a special person not to be angry. Especially when your own parents are still living in a condemned house because they refusal to leave.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:54 pm

BigGwynram wrote:With all these convictions mounting up, it could help with your employment agency you must have loads of contacts INSIDE, perhaps you could help the community you love so much by putting some work the way of ex cons, it must be hard for them to get back into the workplace with convictions on their record, you could use it as a selling to, locksmiths, opening locked cars, shoplifters, whoops shopfitters I meant then, security guards (you know poacher turned gamekeeper) furniture movers, bailiffs,the list is endless. ;)


Yeah mounting up. Not to mention they are all over 12 years old but as most of my clients are based in England then it wont effect my business at all.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:03 pm

May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:06 pm

Can we leave this quite nasty hate brigade there?

Not very pleasant to read and this is a Cardiff City forum?

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:08 pm

Adam's a bit of a clown on here at times but writing a threatening letter would be the least I would have done to get these people out of my house for my folks to move in, esp if they had damaged it to.

I actually agree with him on this issue.

Good luck regarding this issue Adam.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:20 pm

CraigCCFC wrote:Adam's a bit of a clown on here at times but writing a threatening letter would be the least I would have done to get these people out of my house for my folks to move in, esp if they had damaged it to.

I actually agree with him on this issue.

Good luck regarding this issue Adam.


It is the last thing I would have done. Youdon't want to give your enemy ammunition to use against you.

My experience is to send the boys around. You have to have bottle to do that but it works alot more efficient than doing the proper thing. It one of those situations where proper can let you down.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:28 pm

Threatening tenants, wishing cancer on folk, mocking the dead cocklepickers.

A very unsavoury individual.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:42 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:
CraigCCFC wrote:Adam's a bit of a clown on here at times but writing a threatening letter would be the least I would have done to get these people out of my house for my folks to move in, esp if they had damaged it to.

I actually agree with him on this issue.

Good luck regarding this issue Adam.


It is the last thing I would have done. Youdon't want to give your enemy ammunition to use against you.

My experience is to send the boys around. You have to have bottle to do that but it works alot more efficient than doing the proper thing. It one of those situations where proper can let you down.


Your right matey, if any of my tenants start taking the piss, like a minority seem to do, there is only one way and that happens to be outside the law. They will be given the opportunity and then be forcibly removed. :evil:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:54 pm

Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:02 pm

sleepers wrote:
Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really

Irrelevant.

He gave them notice as he wanted his parents in that house.....it is his afterall.

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:13 pm

Mario Polotelli wrote:Threatening tenants, wishing cancer on folk, mocking the dead cocklepickers.

A very unsavoury individual.


A cynic would say the above are all acts likely to catch the public eye. I had a passing urge to
ring the Echo after the "DIE OF CANCER" jibe. Then it dawned on me that the desperately sad
individual might have wanted exactly that. Attention.

But having said that. He's stuck to his word and has left this site for good.

Oh, hang on. :o :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:20 pm

sleepers wrote:
Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really


My parents are coming to their later years in life and I want to provide for their needs. Is that such a issue with you or are you oneof these people who don't care for your own parents.?

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:25 pm

taffyapple wrote:
Mario Polotelli wrote:Threatening tenants, wishing cancer on folk, mocking the dead cocklepickers.

A very unsavoury individual.


A cynic would say the above are all acts likely to catch the public eye. I had a passing urge to
ring the Echo after the "DIE OF CANCER" jibe. Then it dawned on me that the desperately sad
individual might have wanted exactly that. Attention.

But having said that. He's stuck to his word and has left this site for good.

Oh, hang on. :o :lol:


Dont forget his quote that he thinks anyone who wears the new red shirt should be beaten up :roll:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:29 pm

sleepers wrote:
Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really


Very good point.

Would have saved a lot of time and mam and dad would be settled in long since now

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:48 pm

jinks-rct wrote:
taffyapple wrote:
Mario Polotelli wrote:Threatening tenants, wishing cancer on folk, mocking the dead cocklepickers.

A very unsavoury individual.


A cynic would say the above are all acts likely to catch the public eye. I had a passing urge to
ring the Echo after the "DIE OF CANCER" jibe. Then it dawned on me that the desperately sad
individual might have wanted exactly that. Attention.

But having said that. He's stuck to his word and has left this site for good.

Oh, hang on. :o :lol:


Dont forget his quote that he thinks anyone who wears the new red shirt should be beaten up :roll:


Yeah must be such a bad guy thats why you were begging for me to come into business with you :lol:

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:53 pm

taffyapple wrote:
sleepers wrote:
Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really


Very good point.

Would have saved a lot of time and mam and dad would be settled in long since now


No,they would have been settled long before now if the tenants left when they agreed to leave

Re: ADAM BROWN HEADLINES AGAIN

Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:54 pm

Angry Man wrote:
sleepers wrote:
Angry Man wrote:May I also state that the tenants turned down five different properties yet the moment the council offered them social housing they jumped at it. Ensuring that they'd bypass through social housing ladder which has over 2, 500 people on tge waiting list.

if you offered them five different properties because you wanted to move your parents intoo there house,
why didnt you offer your parents one of the five properties they refused,common sense really


My parents are coming to their later years in life and I want to provide for their needs. Is that such a issue with you or are you oneof these people who don't care for your own parents.?

it is not a issue with me,i was asking a question you jumped up prick