Advice please - What to do about Junky Neighbours From Hell?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Hi everyone,

I live in a respectable suburb of a major UK city (although the suburb does border a much larger, rougher and more predominantly white working class area). There is a primary school on my road and as a result there are plenty of young families in the area. I've lived here for a year and haven't experienced any trouble. It's a nice, safe, friendly neighborhood.

However... that changed a couple of weeks ago when three chavs moved into a flat next door. Since moving in, they've knocked on our door at least 5 times to request neighbourly favours like sugar, a dustpan and brush etc and whilst I can't really complain about that I AM starting to worry about what they're up to. For example, I've seen numerous people sprawled unconcious outside their door over the last few days. My flatmate tells me he saw one guy trying to get into the house through the freaking catflap, and there are always people turning up outside, entering the flat and then buggering off pretty quickly. All three of them look like total junkies and it turns out that at least one (the most obviously emaciated and sunken-eyed) is currently undergoing rehab. The long and short of it is they are filthy chav junk dealers and my admittedly and thankfully limited experience of chav junkies is that they will steal absolutely anything from absolutely anyone to feed their habit. Only yesterday, the neighbour that lives directly above their flat had a massive barney with them, and I later found out that this was because one of the chavs had broken into the poor guy's flat and stolen something (I may go round and see him, the nice neighbour that is, to find out exactly what happened). The guy made it clear that he had his eyes on the chavs and that he doesn't want them knocking on his doors asking for any favours. My neighbour on the other side runs a B&B, and she had one of the chavs knock on her door and claim they had lost a golf ball in her garden and could they please come through the house to find it...

Now I'm sure this may all sound like pathetic middle class angst to some of you and no I don't suggest putting all heroin addicts in some ghetto on the moon, but these people are disrupting the life of my neighbourhood and it's only a matter of time, I feel, before something really ugly happens.

Does anyone have any similar experiences? Do I have to wait to be physically assaulted or robbed before the social housing department that found them the flat move them out again? This probably sounds really pussy, but I am a bit scared and I just want them to fuck off. One of the rooms in our flat functions as the studio and is full of instruments and recording equipment, and although it's all insured in theory, I don't want to have to put that theory to the test.

nottelling, Thursday, 23 June 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

fuck i hate junkies

yeah i've had similar. added to the injury was they had a kid of about 3 who they'd lock in his room while they went out and he would be screaming.

we moved.

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Thursday, 23 June 2005 21:52 (twenty years ago)

Get a big dog.

kirsten (kirsten), Thursday, 23 June 2005 21:53 (twenty years ago)

I don't suggest putting all heroin addicts in some ghetto on the moon

I do unless they're actively trying to stop. Despite the one guy in rehab, sounds like the others possibly aren't and I guess nor is he if he's hanging around with them.

Making off like a lucky bandit / Kate (papa november), Thursday, 23 June 2005 21:56 (twenty years ago)

get good locks and a chain for your door. get a baseball bat and keep it there, ready just in case. don't cultivate any kind of relationship with them. don't get into an ill-advised vigilante group with your neighbours. just stay out of their way and they'll probably be too busy fighting with the rest of your neighbours to bother you.

yes, it's a sucky approach, but ... it's the best i can think of. i mean, what's the alternative? fight them?

[stops, because he can feel an enormous rant about the death of society/the evils of post-thatcherite capitalism/why people = shit coming on]

grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 23 June 2005 22:03 (twenty years ago)

OK... there's a guy asleep on their doorstep as I write. This really does suck. If I had a digital camera I'd post the view from my bedroom window and you'd realise why I don't want to move.

I might phone the council tomorrow.

nottelling, Thursday, 23 June 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

Do an anon tipoff about dealing/drug production to the cops. They'll get raided. I'm serious, a friend of mine did this to his neighbours and they got arrested and hauled off! Peace resumed.

Trayce (trayce), Friday, 24 June 2005 02:53 (twenty years ago)

man this happened with us too. next day they're back and really paranoid and fucking hassling the old lady who was the caretaker of the flats.

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 02:55 (twenty years ago)

Hm, point. I wonder if telling the real estate agents they're dealers/users and that the police have been around a lot would get 'em evicted.

Trayce (trayce), Friday, 24 June 2005 03:50 (twenty years ago)

i once ratted out a junkie roommate of mine* to the landlady, but then i found out that the landlady herself was a drug dealer (and that's why she wasn't especially responsive about it).

*he owed me money. you gotta do what you gotta do.

jody l'anti-vierge (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 24 June 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

yeah, but where do you want to guy asleep on the doorstep to go? just away from you?

scout (scout), Friday, 24 June 2005 05:04 (twenty years ago)

not to be bait or whatever, but just saying...

scout (scout), Friday, 24 June 2005 05:12 (twenty years ago)

if i were you, anonymous tenant, i'd just move. why prolong the torture?

new neighbours/socialism/care in the community vs concentration camps - c or d?

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 07:41 (twenty years ago)

Complain to the landlord repeatedly over any incident that affects you. Talk to other neighbours and see if you can get them to complain to the landlord as well.

If they start turning the place into a shithole, or cranking up music at all hours, call your local environmental health department and ask what they can do.

Complain to the police over any incident that affects you. Ask for and write down the log/incident number, so you can quote it at the landlord when you complain. If you think they are dealing, talk to the police about it.

Do not buy a baseball bat, buy a cricket bat, and some cricket stuff, stumps, balls etc. That way if you wind up using it you can claim that you just picked up the most convenient thing at hand to defend yourself (this assumes you are in the uk)

It does not sound "pathetic and middle class" at all. Having scum living next door, or in your near vicinity can ruin your life, which I and other people know from experience. It isn't a class-based issue.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 08:39 (twenty years ago)

unfortunately the use of the word "scum" in this context is very much a class-based issue.

thatcherism/friedmanism opened the door on the fraud of society and covertly idolises drug-dealing as workable model of free enterprise while all the time encouraging us to dump our shitloads of blame on the victims rather than the perpetrators.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 08:51 (twenty years ago)

1/I am working class.
2/if I have scum living next to me, and if their behaviour impacts on my life in a negative way, which it has done in the last year, then I am a victim.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 08:57 (twenty years ago)

i have limited potential to do anything = drug dealing looks attractive

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:01 (twenty years ago)

Sarah had junkies living in the flat below her in Peckham. They (or their clients) broke into her other naighbour's flat and tried to break into Sarah's while she was inside.

Do everything you can to get rid of them. I'm not sure the best way of getting the police to take an interest, but I suggest going to the police station and asking to speak to a cop rather than just phone them up - personal contact will give your complaint more oomph and, hopefully, it'll be taken more seriously. Take more pics and show them to the policeperson too.

Markelby (Mark C), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:05 (twenty years ago)

The answer is clear, start dealing smack to them.

1. They won't touch your stuff
2. Cash

Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:06 (twenty years ago)

Sounds like a shitty situation. Would they really be more likely to rob the house next door though? I mean, wouldn't they be more likely to rob the house a few streets down where they would be unknown and not under suspicion?

I actually used to live next door to a junky couple. They were nice. The guy helped me start my car a few time,

Seuss, Friday, 24 June 2005 09:40 (twenty years ago)

times.

Seuss, Friday, 24 June 2005 09:41 (twenty years ago)

Seuss, it's the customers who rob the houses next door - *they* don't give a fuck.

Markelby (Mark C), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:48 (twenty years ago)

Funnily enough, some friends had this situation, where the house across the road was. (They don't live there anymore for unrelated reasons, my friends I mean).

One day, the guy came over and said that "theres been some kids looking over your fence, so I'd lock away whatever they're interested in, mate"

Junk dealers, better than neighborhood watch...

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:49 (twenty years ago)

When I was living in Glasgow we had our house burgled by drug addicts four times in six months. Each time, they'd wait for the insurance company to fork out for new video, hi-fi, jewellery etc. and then rob us again. I'd advise you to keep a diary of anything dodgy you see and yes, make personal contact with your local police station rather than phone. Do you have neighbourhood watch? A diary of everything you and your neighbours witness would be more powerful than just your own - co-ordinate your efforts.

Out of interest, why are you logged out? They're not ILX regulars, surely?

Mädchen (Madchen), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:57 (twenty years ago)

I meant Manchester not Glasgow, sorry!

Mädchen (Madchen), Friday, 24 June 2005 09:59 (twenty years ago)

Yes call the cops. Taking matters into your own hands can be a tragic mistake, these people are sick and desperate by defintion, often w/recourse to even sleazier characters and the means to extract various unimaginably awful forms of revenge.

I dealt with this for years in the dope-plagued NYC of the 80s. One of my neighbors was a middle-aged school crossing guard who ran a junkie salon in her apt, admitting a stream of lowlifes into the building EVERY DAY. Another neighbor could regularly be seen on the adjoining roof outside my window, climbing into other people's apts. No doubt this guy stole my cheap stereo and then my B&W portable TV, but confrontation didn't seem like a viable option. Junkies got nothing to lose, but I do. So I got stronger locks and window guards, survived for a couple more years and then moved out.

m coleman (lovebug starski), Friday, 24 June 2005 10:11 (twenty years ago)

I presume they're logged out to avoid the usual "you're a tory scumbaiter" flamewars that often ensue when you least expect. (which hasn't happened)

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 10:28 (twenty years ago)

so where would you have the junkies live? they have to live somewhere. calling them scum solves nothing, actually makes matters worse and goes nowhere towards curing them, which is ultimately what has to happen. maybe the financial bullet has to be bitten and we have to go back to specialised live-in treatment centres where addicts and go and be treated properly by experts, gradually rehabilitated into the world and regularly followed up after they come out again.

i mean, that's what we want, isn't it? junkies to be cured so that they don't have to break in, nick your stuff and cause aggro to feed their habit. no junkie was ever cured by prison. usually it just introduces them to a couple of handy new habits.

you know, it's that decadent humanist socialist pie-in-the-sky nonsense about treating the CAUSE rather than the EFFECT innit.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 10:55 (twenty years ago)

got a spare room marcello?

m coleman (lovebug starski), Friday, 24 June 2005 10:58 (twenty years ago)

Advice please - What to do about Asylum Seekers From Hell

Wonder how many responses that question would have got.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:02 (twenty years ago)

That's not the question that was asked though, is it?

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:03 (twenty years ago)

call the police and ambulances repeatedly, do it as often as you can *with reason*, don't just do it for the sake of it, but keep doing it whenever you deem it necessary - people passed out on doorsteps of a decent hood is perfectly good cause for concern. this way the police build up a log of problems and will have reason to raid the premises if necessary and this information can also be called in if court action is taken to have them evicted. this sort of thing it really can make life miserable.
where i used to live looked onto two flats run by a housing association, both previously lived in by nice families and then moved into by junkies - 1 was a total lunatic who tried to kill himself a acouple of times by jumping out of the window of his flat and the others were just noisy, disrespectful, aggressive, thieving cnuts who i had several run-ins with - same deal, constantly knocking on doors on the premise of "borrowing" stuff. 1 was placed on long-term section, which i was glad about both for my own sanity and safety and his own, the others moved on eventually.
i dunno if they were evicted or just got the message and left after my neighbour (a right hard bastard, but a really great neigbour who helped me out with a shitload of diy stuff and someone i often used to have a beer and a chat with out on the balconies) was presented with a used syringe his little girl had picked up outside. i know he and some friends "had a word" but it was also followed up with a lot of official phonecalls by everyone else.
i do not advise my neighbour's strategy because 1) you are likely not as hard as him and could get the shite beaten out of you. 2) it's illegal. however, you can get all sorts of things done in this sort of situation, but you have to make the calls. do not live with this - you don't have to. also do not get a baseball bat, they'll do *you* if you hit anyone with one of them.
btw the use of the word "chav" makes this a class-based issue. junkies are generally scumbags, whether they wear burberry caps or savile row suits.

stelf)xxxx, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:03 (twenty years ago)

and marcello, i basically agree. but when it's happening next door to you, all you want is them out of your life. that's not nimbyism, either, it's just a fucking horrible thing to have to live with every day.

stelf)xxxx, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:05 (twenty years ago)

Equating "asylum seekers" with "junkies" isn't negative stereotyping at all, now, is it?

Yeah, I know. DNFTT. Back to training with me.

Don't engage with your neighbours directly. I asked my neighbours to turn down their stereo at 4 in the morning, and was met with threats of violence because they were drunk. Situations like that, just go straight to the police.

MIS Information (kate), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:06 (twenty years ago)

kate, shut up.

i still see old ladies waiting at the royal free bus stop at lunchtime saying that "coloured" people are a horrible thing to have to live with every day.

it's prejudice, impure and simplistic.

see you have to rid of this concept of "scumbags." junkies are not scumbags. they are SICK. as in ILL. if it's happening next door to you, then call an ambulance before you call the police.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:09 (twenty years ago)

well, yeah, but if someone is goona rob my shit or make me sick or ill thru lack of sleep and general stress of living near them, my compassion flies out of the window. also no one chooses to be of a minority group (nor is being black or gay a sickness that needs treatment) and being of a minority group doesn't mean that you usually impinge on other people's right to a decent peaceful life, , so i really don't understand what level that comparison is supposed to work on. anyway, i'm not here to look after every dysfuncntional screw-up who wants to ruin their own lives and those of other people. yeah, they should have help, but i'm not the person to give it.

stelf)xxx, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:14 (twenty years ago)

Why should kate shut up?

The thread starter has people who appear to be dealing, and people who appear to be sussing out adjacent properties living next door to them at the very least. They didn't ask for this, it was landed on them. These people are not entitled to just drop into any area and start behaving like that. It's not OK. If they are addicts, it does not excuse acting like that. Basically, I agree with this:

so where would you have the junkies live? they have to live somewhere. calling them scum solves nothing, actually makes matters worse and goes nowhere towards curing them, which is ultimately what has to happen. maybe the financial bullet has to be bitten and we have to go back to specialised live-in treatment centres where addicts and go and be treated properly by experts, gradually rehabilitated into the world and regularly followed up after they come out again.

Although I have no problem calling people who ruin other people's lives "scum", and I have friends whose lives have been royally fucked up by scum neighbours, but when this shit lands on YOU, it suddenly isn't an issue of "how should these people be treated by society", it becomes an issue of "how do I get these people away from me before I get my house turned over".

Or, to put it another way. Surprise! Stelfox toallly otm.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:18 (twenty years ago)

What exactly do you mean by "chav"?

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:19 (twenty years ago)

i was wondering that too. i gather it is some slang term i don't recognise.

gem (trisk), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:20 (twenty years ago)

well if you want to be a tory beast of the field then that's your decision and evolution remains stuck in the monetarist gutter. the point of "civilised" humanity is that we don't react in kind. the differential is what - allegedly - makes us civilised.

if someone was likely to rob me or make me sick or ill etc. i'd want to find out why. if i couldn't then i'd just move. end of story.

(nb: specifically kate needs to shut up about me. works both ways. but i said i wouldn't go back there. and i'm not. so we should continue ignoring/hating each other and stick by it. absolutely fine by me)

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:20 (twenty years ago)

With the use of the word "chav", all my sympathy evaporated

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:22 (twenty years ago)

and norman, the fact you can't see that your question b is the a-side to question a speaks volumes. proper treatment would get them "away from you."

also at various times in my actual "career" i've worked extensively and long-term with serial drug abusers and addicts, so i know how it works & you don't, so don't try it. go read the daily mail if you believe that kind of crap.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:23 (twenty years ago)

Which hurts more, Your broken finger, or someone else's broken leg?

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:26 (twenty years ago)

surprise norm? i'm usually pretty sensible abt stuff like this! anyway, i agree in priciple, marcello. they shouldn't be lashed out with nowhere to go but their choice to fuck up their lives, regardless of whether they can't choose to stop now, is not everyone else's responsibility on that very basic personal level of having to live nextdoor to them. sure, as a society we should help people, but as individuals with lives, families and our own stresses and problems, no.

stelf)xxxx, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:26 (twenty years ago)

Middle class people never become junkies of course

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:27 (twenty years ago)

Also, how does "moving away" actually solve the problem?

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:27 (twenty years ago)

(the "surprise" was sarky, I generally agree w/you about a lot of stuff)

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:28 (twenty years ago)

I presume they're logged out to avoid the usual "you're a tory scumbaiter" flamewars that often ensue when you least expect. (which hasn't happened)
-- mark grout (mark.grou...) (webmail), June 24th, 2005 11:28 AM. (link)

Hah. Famous last words...

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:28 (twenty years ago)

if someone was likely to rob me or make me sick or ill etc. i'd want to find out why. if i couldn't then i'd just move. end of story.

i agree - but its really fucking hard. as i said, i moved away. sometimes though, its very difficult to see where people with these "problems" have been driven/coerced to it. some of the junkies i know are from priveleged backgrounds. driven to drugs by the stress of the need to achieve.

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:29 (twenty years ago)

... they're not chav junkies then so they're alright - they're good junkies

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:30 (twenty years ago)

(xpost)

exactly! the same thatcherism that keeps us all locked up in our "very basic personal levels," shit scared of what's outside (which is useful 'cos then you can stay in and watch, oh, sky 1). the "need" to "achieve" (and who inculcates that in us? oh yes, the media again) and the greater struggle to hang on to it. from our perspective it's the struggle to hang onto our possessions, our home. from their perspective it's the struggle to hang onto life. it's ugly but it's two sides of the same free enterprise coin.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:32 (twenty years ago)

i still don't want them near me or my kids.

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:33 (twenty years ago)

i still see old ladies waiting at the royal free bus stop at lunchtime saying that "coloured" people are a horrible thing to have to live with every day.

but isn't it rather obvious that being affronted "coloured" people living next door is entirely different to having actually problematic neighbours with actual anti-social behaviour? ie one is prejudiced reaction to outsiders, other is reaction to behaviour of outsiders? those old ladies' problems are that their neighbours are "coloured", not their neighbours actual behaviour, which is surely the crux of this issue?

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:34 (twenty years ago)

to be honest i have been equally disturbed by fucking piano students.

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:35 (twenty years ago)

Thugs and robbers are scum. They are inexcusable regardless of class, colour or addiction.

Why should this usual 'don't call them this, don't call them that' shite come into it?

This guy is living with dangerous neighbours who happen to be drug addicts and possibly dealers. Most likely theives as well.

The problem to be addressed is not "what should we address the people as without incurring wrath" but "how do we resolve this shitty situation caused by the SCUM next door."

(And moving out of ones old house and letting them get on with it is not really a viable option, is it?)

Rumpie, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:38 (twenty years ago)

Thugs and robbers are scum. They are inexcusable regardless of class, colour or addiction.

Yes, so why was the word "chav" used about a hundred times in the inital post?

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:39 (twenty years ago)

(xpost)

and you wonder why your husband just lies on the couch when he comes home?

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:40 (twenty years ago)

bush-worshipping yank retards please keep off this thread, i'm trying to have a serious discussion here, i.e. you keep out of it.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:41 (twenty years ago)

round and round we go

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:41 (twenty years ago)

Advice please - What to do about the United States of America?

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:42 (twenty years ago)

and i say all this as a twenty-something resident in a plush street in wimbledon, much younger and definitely much poorer than all our neighbours. i have no problem with my neghbours complaining if our hedges are untrimmed or if the rubbish gets scattered everywhere on bin day or if my housemates play music too loud too late. i have a problem with the neighbours who abhor the mere presence of a council house in such salubrious surroundings.

and you wonder why your husband just lies on the couch when he comes home?

troll.

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:42 (twenty years ago)

why troll? she posted a thread about it. if she doesn't want people to respond she shouldn't have started it.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:44 (twenty years ago)

i'm trying to have a serious discussion here

and you wonder why your husband just lies on the couch when he comes home?

It doesn't sound like it.

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:46 (twenty years ago)

As seems to keep happening, a serious thread with a serious subject gets taken over by people debating semantics. Maybe the threadstarter just used the word chav as a catch-all word to define some bad people.

They've been taken to task now about their unwise choice of words. How on earth is that more important than their lives being ruined?

Markelby (Mark C), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:47 (twenty years ago)

the continued criminalization of hard drugs in western culture is counterproductive to the extreme

charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:47 (twenty years ago)

what does chav mean again?

Homosexual II (Homosexual II), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:47 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I do wonder why, cause it bears absolutely no fucking relation at all to what's been said here.

Rumpie, Friday, 24 June 2005 11:48 (twenty years ago)

chav: its a a sausage with batter on it stuck in a stick

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

gareth is very otm there.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

A "serious discussion" does not equal running down people who disagree with you as tories or little englanders or daily mail readers.

"Chav" meant something once - it is a meaningless term now.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

why troll? she posted a thread about it. if she doesn't want people to respond she shouldn't have started it.

because this isn't that thread, and because it was just another snide slight from a bitter twisted git who gets a kick from poking everyone else's sensitive areas.

and also because the pattern happens every single time, follows the same boring path rigidly and to the timetable. and because your vitriol has nothing to do with the thread's theme, and everything to do with fighting the same little personal battles again and again. for all you bluster, i find the 'compassion' you're enjoying beating people over the head with here absolutely unconvincing. its just another reason to take potshots at others, and its as ugly as it is transparent.

i mean, how would you like it if people dragged up the painful things you've shared with all of us here, just to make a nasty dig? or are only some things 'sacred'?

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

Be fair to M, people have dragged up the painful things etc to make a nasty dig.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:51 (twenty years ago)

mr schneider yesterday, for example. but he did apologise, so fair do's.

chick, you might like to answer the issues i've raised on this topic instead of being Stasist.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:52 (twenty years ago)

whoah - this is getting a little personal, and i know nothing of the histories involved. surely marcello is just basically saying: people with drug problems are a product of a society that sets people up to lose then marginalises them for it?

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)

Actually, Marcello, what I would like to know is what would you do in the thread starter's situation? If you have worked extensively w/hardcore drug addicts, then surely your insight into this would be useful?

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:54 (twenty years ago)

It's pretty obvious what "chav" meant in this context - council estate scum

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:55 (twenty years ago)

(xpost x 2)

exactly.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 11:55 (twenty years ago)

Our equivelant of 'chav' is 'ned' - those who are not neccesarily from council estates or lower class - but they are troublemakers. That's what the term is used to describe.

For crying out loud, I'M poor, I live in a council flat in a pretty crappy area, so do many of my friends.

Rumpie, Friday, 24 June 2005 12:00 (twenty years ago)

and i thought that was disgusting too. and i would have assumed that hving to suffer that might've made M more sensitive to it. but i've lost my patience with just watching him stomp on people.

xpost

marcello, i think focussing on the 'chav' use at the beginning is missing the wood for the trees. if the poster had said "a bunch of junkie-looking types have moved next door, they haven't done anything but i don't like em and want to get rid of them" then, yes, that would be reprehensible. but the poster is responding to actual anti-social behaviour and the suggestion of criminal activity, ie is behaving in totally reasonable protection-of-self-and-family manner.

of course, drug addicts should be treated like sick people and not criminals, i entirely agree. they should be rehabilitated, 'cured' if possible and cared for if not. hell, i believe, to a certain extent, in the decriminalisation of drugs, if only because prohibition isn't working and because the criminalisation suports gangsterism and violent crime attendent with this very prohibition. but that isn't the crux of this particular malady - the poster has no way to effect such a social change, and is therefore asking for practical suggestions to help his experience.

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:01 (twenty years ago)

The problem I have with these arguments (and like stevie says, they go the same way every time) is that Marcello claims to be speaking from a compasionate high-ground, yet this compassion is only for abstract ideas. When it comes to individuals, his "compassion" disapears completely and is replaced by nasty ad-hominem attacks.

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:01 (twenty years ago)

Our equivelant of 'chav' is 'ned' - those who are not neccesarily from council estates or lower class - but they are troublemakers. That's what the term is used to describe.

That is indeed what "ned" means, but that's a word and concept that's been around for decades - "chav" is not an equivalent

Dadaismus (Dada), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:03 (twenty years ago)

Here in Nottingham, we call them "twats".

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:05 (twenty years ago)

norman, we had this situation, laura and me, when we lived in this flat in oxford, quite near the train station. we became gradually aware that one of the downstairs flats was being used for dealing. people would come in and out of there all night long. the chap who actually lived there was absolutely fine and sociable so long as he wasn't using, but he became dodgy when he was out of it, standing naked on the staircase, vacant-eyed, or banging on everyone else's doors, trying to break them down. once he broke into our flat. he went through wardrobes, cupboards etc. but didn't actually steal anything. that same evening he hammered at the door relentlessly screaming abuse. i rang up some people i knew at the littlemore, pulled a few strings, then went out onto the landing, managed to calm him down (i knew he was always more bark than bite) and drove him over to the hospital. i signed him in and explained the situation to the consultant on call. he was well known to them.

after that i didn't see him again for about six months when i saw him coming down park end street. he was clean and utterly charming, though clearly vulnerable. i rang up dr ******* to make sure he was receiving proper follow-up in the community, and yes he was taking his medication, turning up for regular counselling, on cold turkey/methadone programme, etc. etc.

now i could just have called him scum, ranted and raved as he was ranting and raving outside our door that night, called the police and he would have been out of the nick in three months and back on the street/in our block using. but i thought there were better methods one could use if we didn't want this to keep happening every night.

so it was a combination of self-protection and external help. everything in balance.

so my advice to the original poster is: you got off on a relatively good foot with these neighbours, so try persuading. odds on they know fully about the pit they're in (just because they might not have a degree doesn't mean they're incapable of thinking or recognising). you just need to be patient and tolerant.

it isn't ideal advice, and you might not find it particularly practical in the short term, but the alternatives don't, i think, bear thinking about.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:05 (twenty years ago)

of course, drug addicts should be treated like sick people and not criminals, i entirely agree.

in which case we are all sick - no?

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:08 (twenty years ago)

in what way?

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:08 (twenty years ago)

why are we all here, for a start?

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:09 (twenty years ago)

ah, addicts to ILX. yes. there should be counselling, therapy. interventions.

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:10 (twenty years ago)

and doing something about those jungkeys over there on ILM

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:11 (twenty years ago)

Chav has come to mean all kinds of things from the equivalent of 'ned' to 'nouveau riche'. As I've said before on other threads, I hate it. 'Ned' is still pretty narrow in definition.

Mädchen (Madchen), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:11 (twenty years ago)

I pity the poor benighted beggar who has to live next door to one of those ILxors.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:11 (twenty years ago)

i think that's fine advice, marcello (waaaaaay xpost)

stevie (stevie), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:13 (twenty years ago)

thank you, sir.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:15 (twenty years ago)

x-post But without 'strings to pull' what wd you have done?

Dr. C (Dr. C), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:16 (twenty years ago)

"Charver", in the NE of England, basically means the same as "Ned".

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:16 (twenty years ago)

dr c - even i wasn't an nhs management bod who Knows People In High(ish) Places, i think i would have done the same thing, i.e. just get him over to the hospital, explain the circumstances and how it related to me (viz. we were neighbours, break-ins, rants, etc.). i wouldn't have been tempted to - ha ha - try it.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:20 (twenty years ago)

but marcello - aren't the people (and structures) involved in helping people just the tools of the shitstem that put them there?

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:23 (twenty years ago)

Would you have blamed somebody else if they had called the police, though? Or even if they'd opened the door and bricked the guy in the face?

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:24 (twenty years ago)

Advice please - I have a minor problem with the council.

Answers

Your country should adopt communism, and you sir, are a cunt.

Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:25 (twenty years ago)

norman, you asked me for advice and i answered the question that you asked fully and sensibly. i'm not going to get into a stupid argument with you, particularly one which i also answered in that post. read it again.

(mullygrubber xpost)
no, that badiou way of thinking applies to lawyers and politicians. you can't really apply it to doctors. "wouldn't it be better if we had a society that didn't require doctors and hospitals?" = "wouldn't it be better if we never grew old or ill or died?"

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

Can we get an ASBO for the internet? Seems like Marcello needs one right about now...

Concerned Citizen, Friday, 24 June 2005 12:43 (twenty years ago)

I think the first recipient of an internet asbo would be "anonymous sniper", actually.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:44 (twenty years ago)

Marcello, it seems to be the case that addicts are visiting the flat and the people who live in it are dealers (let's assume they're addicts too). So even if the thread starter could devote as much time, effort and resources as you did in the situation you admirably dealt with, into dealing with every individual who comes to the flat looking for some gear, how do you propose s/he deals with the dealers? Have a calm discussion in which s/he recommends they book into a clinic? I don't think so. The thread starter is worried about personal safety and possessions. Yes, it sucks that we live in a capitalist consumerist society. Yes, I agree legislation on drug use exacerbates the problems described. But none of that is relevant cos it's a situation that has to be dealt with because it's already out of hand, surely.

beanz (beanz), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:47 (twenty years ago)

listen, i've made myself abundantly clear. i've offered a reasoned and workable argument and all you seem to be doing is repeating the same broken needle "my personal possessions my personal safety personal personal ME ME ME" groove which i am patiently trying to tell you is the greater problem.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:51 (twenty years ago)

Who me? I haven't posted to this thread before. Humour me a moment and tell me if you seriously suggest that the thread starter goes to the dealers' flat and tries to recommend they check into some medical institution.

beanz (beanz), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:57 (twenty years ago)

you haven't understood a word i've said, have you?

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 24 June 2005 12:58 (twenty years ago)

The solution that worked in your situation, Marcello, was the right one because of your knowledge/experience, and the nature of the problem itself lended itself to a humanitarian response.

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:00 (twenty years ago)

the thread starter needs to put into motion an agenda that will change the current attitude towards junkies as dispossessed and give them a firm basis with which to set about self determination beyong drug abuse

mullygrubbr (bulbs), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:02 (twenty years ago)

so my advice to the original poster is: you got off on a relatively good foot with these neighbours, so try persuading. odds on they know fully about the pit they're in (just because they might not have a degree doesn't mean they're incapable of thinking or recognising). you just need to be patient and tolerant.

it isn't ideal advice, and you might not find it particularly practical in the short term, but the alternatives don't, i think, bear thinking about.

That doesn't seem opaque to me. I was just wondering seriously – not trying to wind you up – if by "persuading" you mean "persuading to seek medical help". I would suggest calling the police if a crime is being committed and calling an ambulance if there's a medical emergency. I have no love for the police but surely it doesn't make me a capitalist collaborator with the Institutions that Repress Us (forgive me for putting words in your mouth) if I suggest seeking professional help if one thinks one's safety's at risk?

xxpost

beanz (beanz), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:06 (twenty years ago)

Marcello OTM all over the fucking place.

Whoever suggested getting a cricket bat instead of a baseball bat - that is one of the most skewed seriously fucked up pieces of logic i've ever read here.

because:

A) beating their brains out with a bat when they come to steal your stuff won't change a damn thing, and would make it way way worse.

B) buying a cricket bat and equipment so you have an excuse to bash their brains in is as bad as one of them breaking in to your flat.


The problem of hard drug addiction is a problem with society as much as it is with the individual. The society is ill. As is the individual. Getting a few people sharing a flat removed will do nothing except remove it from your area. Instead it'll be a different ILXor making this thread. If you want to get rid of this problem in your neighbourhood then get at the issue deeper. Yeah, this might sound unrealistic and idealistic and not a short term solution but people have to get more involved and care more about the people and problem or it will not go away.

On a more serious note: Report them to the RIAA for turning their flat into a hub of downloading music (or child porn). Watch how quickly they are removed/raided...e.t.c.

Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:11 (twenty years ago)

You don't buy the bat so "you have an excuse to bash their brains in", for fuck's sake, _if_ you buy it, it's to defend yourself with. I was given this advice some years ago by a police officer, btw. I do not, personally own a cricket or baseball bat, but know people who do.

I do not think marcello is otm here at all, really.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:18 (twenty years ago)

Yeah but how do you defend yourself? A polite game of cricket?

If it comes to it you have the bat to hit them with to defend yourself. Ok fine. But what chills me to my very core is when people suggest buying a cricket bat instead of a baseball bat to make it easier to defend yourself against being implicated from the crime you commit by hitting them with said bat.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:22 (twenty years ago)

But while I agree fundamentally with what Marcello is saying i also deeply sympathise with the personal effects of the problems outlined in the first post and elsewhere.

Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:23 (twenty years ago)

I agree with Marcello that problems in society are making the situation worse and that we're conditioned first to seek "selfish" solutions. But I think it's facile to suggest that one should avoid seeking a "selfish" solution in every case; and in this case it seems to be the dealers who are more selfish than the thread starter. I have every sympathy with the addicts but not much for people who set up a dealing business in their flat and let it fuck up neighbours' lives.

beanz (beanz), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:23 (twenty years ago)

Well, that's what the cop said to me. (x-post)

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:26 (twenty years ago)

And, I do not think it's at all unreasonable for people to be concerned about their personal safety, and neither do I think it's unreasonable for people to not want their posessions, which they have worked for, to be stolen. I don't think this is particularly selfish, "me me me", or whatever.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:28 (twenty years ago)

Well, personally i think that's bad policing.

(xpost)

I agree totally with what you just said as well. But my problem is that crimes should be treated evenly and the system should be just if it is going to work. None of this "buy a cricket bat then we wont have to charge you" business.

Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:30 (twenty years ago)

**The problem of hard drug addiction is a problem with society as much as it is with the individual. The society is ill. As is the individual. Getting a few people sharing a flat removed will do nothing except remove it from your area.**

Come on what can you practically DO. They're threatening your safety and security. The society's sick, yeah, yeah. But, what would you DO? Talk nicely to them? Marcello's example is admirable, but unrealistic.

While you're waiting for society to change and these arseholes to sober up, how would you protect yourself, your loved ones and your posessions? Call me a capitalist, bourgeoise, middle-class so&so, but I wouldn't stand by while these shits take from me to feed their squalid habits.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:34 (twenty years ago)

I'm pretty sure that defending yourself, your family and your property is *not* a class thing.

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:44 (twenty years ago)

Hari, if someone breaks into my house I want to be able to defend myself as well as possible. If they're a desperate crackhead, doubly so. What would you do? "Look, why don't we sit down and talk this through", or possibly, if things seem threatening "sir, prepare to defend yourself, marquis of queensbury rules".

Looking threatening is 3/4 of the battle. It's that or a fucking kitchen knife.

Markelby (Mark C), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:48 (twenty years ago)

It hardly ever happens though mark, this is why the tabloids find it so easy to rip up a storm. People are usually burglarised when they're out. If the burglars come in and find someone at home, they run. This "arm yourself" business is just letting your imagination get the better of you AFAIC. I know, because it happens to me too.

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:55 (twenty years ago)

the danger in 'defending yourself' is that you end up attacked with your own weapon. if you raise the stakes, really, you have to win, or you'll get messed up.

i'm not saying people should 'have a chat, old bean', or that people shouldnt feel angry or scared when under threat, this is perfectly natural, but the last thing you want is to be waving knives at bats at people that might actually be pretty capable of taking them off you and using them against you

charltonlido (gareth), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:56 (twenty years ago)

Um, the tabloid bit and the imagination bit were supposed to be connected there.

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:57 (twenty years ago)

Waving knives at bats makes bats sarcastically go "oh I'm really scared".

(Sorry.)

mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 24 June 2005 13:58 (twenty years ago)

They say it really high pitched though so you can't hear it.

Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Friday, 24 June 2005 14:03 (twenty years ago)

the main crux of my argument is that my default mechanism is that *i do not want to know my neighbours even exist*. if they are nice, then that's great and there's an opening to get more friendly, but i do not want to care for them, counsel them through their problems (especially when they are of their own making) or be bothered by their neuroses. end of matter.

stelf)xxxx, Friday, 24 June 2005 14:09 (twenty years ago)

Very interesting response. Apologies if my use of the word "chav" has offended anyone, I will use "ne'er do well" in all future posts.

As someone pointed out upthread, I'm not really so concerned with the political ramifications of my neighbours' behaviour, I just want practical advice on how to deal with the situation. Marcello, I sincerely appreciate the example you gave of how you dealt with a similar situation, but I really can't see how applying the 'Marcello Method' would work in my situation. At the moment these ne'er-do-wells are wide eyed, anti-social, aggressive nutjobs who would, I'm sure, find it extremely patronising were I to knock on their door, invite myself into their home with my plummy accent and advise them on how best to conduct their lives. If they think it's appropriate behaviour to break into the flat above theirs and steal, then they're beyond reasoning with, IMHO.

So, I suppose I will just wait until something REALLY* bad happens, then pursue the matter with the police in person. And get a chain lock.

Re someone's point upthread about all junkies being scum, that may be true personality wise, but someone who can afford to maintain a habit without breaking into other people's property is surely preferable to someone who can't.

* I don't know how to italicise.

nottelling, Friday, 24 June 2005 14:57 (twenty years ago)

nottelling, do you have a 'London bar' on your door? If not, I suggest getting one, it'll help protect your door against people kicking it in, and also make sure your windows are as secure as possible. Your landlord should be willing to do this for you, and send someone round to install it etc without charging you--though if they're reticent, offer to pay for the bar (costs about 20 lbs I think). Chains are way easier to break, and when you're not inside, it's not effective.

Mark's described what my neighbor situation was upthread--I had the bar installed after the burglary, but it was several months more before the squatters were evicted, and luckily my door held against prying the deadbolt and attempts to kick it in. (There probably wasn't enough room in the hallway for anyone to force it.) The police had absolutely no effect on the people causing the problem, even though they spoke to them at the time.

Some other advice I was given that may be useful: document any incidents--date, time, problem, etc. Keep your landlord informed. Don't invite anyone inside your place. Store valuables elsewhere if possible. If you are being robbed, or you know your neighbors are, calling the police and telling them that the burglars are on the premisis will bring them faster.

Hope this helps.

sgs (sgs), Friday, 24 June 2005 21:43 (twenty years ago)

Other things that help:

Get the number of your local police station and use that rather than calling 999, it'll be faster.

Don't get a bat. You'll wake up in the middle of the night with some junkie waving it over your head shouting "gimme your money!" This happened to my brother's gf when she lived in Manchester. Except it was a lump hammer he was waving.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Friday, 24 June 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

two weeks pass...
Update.

Got back from a weekend away to find the door handle of the entrance to my flat had been partially pried open ie the lock/handle had been forced abount an inch from the door. I don't really understand how this could have occurred without someone stupidly having left the front door open (we share the front door entrance with the tenants in the ground floor flat). So... I'm phoning the local constabulary tomorrow and getting xtra strong locks fitted.

The scum next door will not prevail.

stillnottelling, Thursday, 14 July 2005 23:18 (twenty years ago)

Marcello: moving costs money.

shookout (shookout), Friday, 15 July 2005 04:26 (twenty years ago)

newsflash: everything costs money.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 15 July 2005 04:54 (twenty years ago)

Even free lunches???

L@@K !! *RARE*!! (nordicskilla), Friday, 15 July 2005 04:56 (twenty years ago)

they don't exist man

shine headlights on me (electricsound), Friday, 15 July 2005 05:03 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.