tirsdag 21. mai 2019

No. 1525: We have not applied for a wall in Stormyrveien for the past 100 years when we built, that PBE will not comment on this, just showing that they have no factual and serious arguments against us!

No. 1525:
We have not applied for a wall in Stormyrveien for the past 100 years when we built, that PBE will not comment on this, just showing that they have no factual and serious arguments against us!

The picture from the wild west, so were the "rules" here at Hellerudtoppen when we built. Therefore, neighbor has just across the road closest to their wall in the road. This is just fine, PBE thinks here in Oslo. While we who have it far from the road should tear, talk about being malicious and discriminating people.

This is what Ferdigattest AS writes in application on behalf of us to the Planning and Building Administration here in Oslo:

"By the way, not all the walls in the area were established before the house plan became applicable. Several of the walls in the area appear to have been established after 2006. From the point of view of the case, we cannot see that any cases have been registered in the Stormyrveien which concern explicit walls over the past 100 years.
We assume that some walls are considered in sc. other buildings, but notes that it may nevertheless appear that the owner of the measure is right that several of the walls have not been subject to a material assessment.
Mht. natural transition towards the road, it is pointed out that the fewest sites in the area have a natural transition to the road. On most sites along the Stormyrveien, walls and or cuts have been established in one form or another. Several of these have the same size as the current wall. ”

Here it is pointed out that no wall has been applied for here in Stormyrveien over the last 100 years, that they then behave like this to us who sought with professional help witnesses of a vile and narcissistic manner.

This also states Ferdigattest AS here:
"Initiator contacted PBE and inquired if it was okay to bring up a new wall where previous walls had been standing. According to the initiative owner, this was experienced as unproblematic and exempt from application. The initiative owner regrets that he has misunderstood, but it is nevertheless pointed out that one had hardly contacted PBE if one did not act in good faith, and that one led up the wall as one thought was in line with the regulations. This notion is reinforced by the fact that there are apparently no support cases in the immediate area, despite the fact that several walls have been established there. Furthermore, care has been taken that the work was carried out expertly.

Former wall lay in old land border. New wall is led up where old wall lay. Unfortunately, there was something wrong with the old boundaries, which has meant that the wall is a few cm. out on a regulated road. This was first discovered by surveying. The wall is located almost exactly on the previously mentioned land boundary, which is therefore something wrong. ”

Here, Ferdigattest AS says that loading me / us for this and demanding that the reef is to go far, far above the stretch. After all, there is talk of a few sqm2 dispensation we need. When others get what builds very much more extensive than us. Then
We have investigated the case, and it looks as if PBE went through the "all" houses here and it was only in 2016 that they started by instructing everyone to submit a written application. Before that, it was "freely forward" and wanted the West here in Stormyrvej.

What the Planning and Building Administration has opposed to us is actually service errors, manipulation, abuse of power and abuse of authority!

Let me give some small examples, include only a few "kind" examples as one cannot complain either, endlessly. I do as the word of God encourages us. Lay the old back and stretch out for what lies ahead.

1.) When they started raving with us already in 2014 I was completely "fresh" and did not understand much. What they were doing to us was that the booth was too close to the road. This was just nonsense, something they should and should see right away as a professional. Our house is closer to the road than the booth, ergo this has no meaning. These are service errors and manipulations they were doing to us. This also became a case that ended with the County Assembly, sad but true.

2.) We have asked them to visit so they can see everything around here personally in the eyes, but they will not. Only hidden inspections when we are at work.

3.) When they have argued and written the decision and others. So, they have mostly been such as have never been to us, but they write right into the weather what they mean and which we should pay attention to.

4.) When they pointed out that we should have applied for a wall, staircase and storage room. Then we initiated a great deal of money and received a huge application. What do they do then? On the contrary, it rejects. It is so rude and manipulative that they do, that words do not extend!

Final Comment:

What is with our case is that there is no matter really. The little we have "violated" by so-called illegalities is so minimal that it is like a storm in a water glass what PBE here in Oslo is doing.
They must take into account that here at Hellerudtoppen it was wild West before we built, everything was allowed.
Well next door just over the road has a wall that is so up in the road that I have never seen it "worse"!

Now the neighbor in Krokstien has built a new wall, they are now doing exactly the same. No reaction then from PBE.

This is from neighbor behind us in Krokstien 3 who built this wall 1 year ago. It lies is in a turn, 25 cm from the road. Yes, it was not just before the wild West here in the outskirts of Oslo, but also now.
But strangely, everyone else promises to do everything they want and more.
We are going to demolish even if we have built is not a hindrance or shyness to anyone, but those who lay the wall 20 - 25 cm from the roadway are obviously there !!!!

søndag 19. mai 2019

No. 1524: There is of course a great darkness both over and in people who think they do "the right thing" when they can allow themselves to do such things as PBE here in Oslo does!

No. 1524:
There is of course a great darkness both over and in people who think they do "the right thing" when they can allow themselves to do such things as PBE here in Oslo does!

Adolf Hitler was a German Nazi politician and dictator. He was appointed Chancellor in 1933 and was Head of State in the years 1934-1945.
Hitler agreed with former Chancellor Franz von Papen that the National Socialists and the German nationalities should enter into governmental cooperation. January 30, 1933, Hitler was appointed Chancellor.

The rest is history - about an evil story. Hitler and PBE are both "legal" authorities. Of course, people do not kill in PBE, but now they are going to claim money from us just because of We will not follow their orders, just as the Nazis were doing. They began in the small, but ended up in the totalitarian.
Well, the one who believes blindly in democracy and believes that "democracy" always has "right" is probably in the wild.

It is only when Jesus comes and establishes his millennial peace kingdom that there will be perfect justice. Before that we will only see fragments of justice!
In the case against us, it is pure evil that lies behind our orders. Why can I say it so dramatically?
When we are verbally promised to build several times a simple wall that does not stand out in any way. A booth that neighbor's neighbor gets exempted from utilizing the utilization rate of the plot 57 times more than us. They are allowed to have their standing and we rip ours. This is nothing more than a falsum that is bite initiated by dark and lying forces in PBE here Oslo's heads and hearts. As they have set out in their rigid decisions, unfortunately defended by the Civil Ombudsman, County Council and Norwegian courts. Believe blindly in democracy that it always does "right," is actually a seduction and delusion!

Will also say that everything is built on our property, give such orders as this is so against democracy and ordinary sentiment that it testifies that this is not really democracy, but the dictatorship!

Joh.e. 16. 2b There comes a time when every one who kills you will believe that he shows God a worship.

We humans are spiritual and moral beings in a completely different way than expensive. But what is most important about the animals in relation to us humans?
It is that in the animal world it is the strongest that prevails and governs.
Among us humans, there are completely different things that are important and that matter. Not least to do what is morally right and good.

The foremost to do what is right and good should be the people who work and are in the public authority, the Scriptures say.

Room. 13. For the rulers are not afraid of the good work, but of the evil one. But will you not have to fear the government? Do what is good, and praise it; 4 For it is the servant of God, good for you. But do what evil is, then fear! for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is the servant of God, a vengeance of punishment upon him that doeth evil.

It was the "official" Rome as in Rome, among other things. in the Colosseum and elsewhere, the most barbaric and horrific executions, barbarity and struggles for rides performed in all sorts of variants to see battle, blood, death, and even more horrific acts.

It was the "public" Germany with a legally and democratically elected people leader and obviously totally offended Adolf Hitler who killed not only 6 million Jews. But was responsible for World War II with its barbaric and horrific misdeeds that one expects more people to die in this horrific war as it was people in Germany when the war started.
Anyway, blindly believing in the public authorities is much, much worse than believing in much else.
Of course, we must take our assessments and not accept everything if it turns out that what the government is doing is of the evil, and not of the good!

There is a difference between stealing 1000, - and 1 Million, but it is theft both.

PBE here in Oslo has, of course, not gone as far as Nazi Germany did, but there are nevertheless the same evil principles that underlie this.
There are "legal" public bodies that settle down. Think they can and act like other people are shit and run over them.
In fact, here they are quite similar, and will not listen to other people's arguments, but just drive on!

I think it is right, biblical, and healthy democratic ones we do, just like everyone else who has opposed injustice, discrimination and other things. I think on Martin Luther King Jr. who stood up for the respondents, who had been suppressed and discriminated in the United States for hundreds of years.

When he got up and forth it was with a lot of resistance, and it was actually not only he who opposed the injustice and terrible treatment the dark-skinned or black had received in the United States for so long!

I / we fight a legitimate democratic struggle or process when I / we believe that both we and Norway's population are led behind the light with a state or municipal agencies that act arrogantly!
Like us in blind obedience is forced to follow even though it goes against all common sense and democratic and healthy principles.

Our case is that we have been discriminated against, treated unfairly and have not done anything that violates what others have done.

1) Difference Treated.

I have been reading through with other people who have done something "illegal". All those who have such a small degree of violation and who seek PBE in a good and serious manner have been granted an exemption. That we do not get is really discriminatory.

2.) Unfairly treated.

When Almost the closest neighbor builds "illegally" at the same time as us, and gets dispensation 57 times more than we do. Then we are really unfairly treated! We have not asked to end up in this position. But the reality is like that. We are 120% innocent in this case, but PBE is 1000% guilty due to their evil actions towards us to behave as they have done now for several years! Only evil people like this, no one who wants and works for the best of others.

3.) We have not done anything that violates what others have done.

Others just think of where we live, for example. long wall, higher wall and located much more in the road than our wall. In our view, the fact that we must tear everything down is that Norway's greater and worst "illegality case" is not on our part. But from the Planning and Building Administration side here in Oslo.

Final Comment:

It is only when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom of peace that there will be perfect justice. Democracy that we have in the Western world is far from perfect. But that's what we have to deal with.
Adolf Hitler became lawfully vigilant, it just shows the weakness of democracy that it is power that prevails.
Here we see that PBE lies, operates with power abuse, discriminated against, treated unfairly and has not done anything that violates what others have done.
What can one do then? We have tried to promote this within the County Governor, the Civil Ombudsman and the courts here in Norway. Where one protects one another, lies, distorts the truth and most things are laid out if possible to push us down.
What we come up with arguments is not believed. What should one do then?
They now want us to remove these lovely things we have built.
Of course, we do not want this, of course, it is only dark that will do such a thing.

It is also strange that the person who decided our case at the County Assembly Marius Vamnes who represented the County Governor in Oslo decided that we should demolish the wall, staircase and storage room on our property.

But he approved everything that Kjell Inge Røkke has built if there were a thousand times more "exceedances" than ours!

This is democracy! Nothing but a fake and a bluff! The truth is not, but lies!

onsdag 15. mai 2019

No. 1523: PBE is now trying to scare us into obeying their orders to tear down daily fines, this is abuse of power, bullying and harassment of the worst sort!

No. 1523:
PBE is now trying to scare us into obeying their orders to tear down daily fines, this is abuse of power, bullying and harassment of the worst sort!

Got mail in from PBE where they write among others. the following: "In our letter of 29.04.2019, it was informed that if no complete application for this measure is available by 01.06.2019, it will be subject to follow-up of illegality."
In other words, now there are daily fines that they are trying to scare us with.
We know who is doing this, playing on fear of sounding. Yeah, right there you were thinking.

The mail from PBE:

Rejection of appeal against decision not to give further postponement - Crook path 2 C It is referred to their letter of 03.05.2019 regarding the above.

Case concerns

The case concerns the complaint of the Planning and Building Administration's decision not to give further postponed deadline on orders for removal of the retaining wall and storage room. In addition, a new case officer is requested for the illegality case. Regarding the stairs, the agency has not issued any order for this. Parts of the stairs enter the area regulated by road and are therefore illegally listed.

Background for the case

In the mail of 11.04.2019, a postponed deadline was requested to comply with orders for rectification / reversal / removal of illegal conditions in the form of retaining wall, storage room and staircase.

The support wall against the road is partly part of a regulated road surface and has a design that cannot be approved as it stands today. In our letter of 29.04.2019, the deadline was set to comply with the order for the support wall until 01.06.2019. It was informed that no further delay would be given.

Today's outside and standalone booths can, as it stands today, not be approved according to today's rules. In the meeting with the municipality on 11 April 2016, a smaller store was outlined which could possibly be sought. However, it was pointed out that the fine still depends on the exemption from the regulation plans' degree of utilization. Postponement was subsequently granted until 01.06.2019. It was further stated that if a complete building application is submitted by 01.06.2019, the illegality case for the booth may be suspended pending the treatment.

It is pointed out that the stairs down the road are illegal as it is designed today. The staircase must be retracted so that it does not stand on a regulated road surface and it must then be searched. In our letter of 29.04.2019, it was informed that if no complete application for this measure is available by 01.06.2019, it will be subject to follow-up of illegality.
Case number: 201510929-32 Page 2 of 3

Rules regarding complaint

Pursuant to section 33 (fvl) of the Public Administration Act, the agency must carry out a preparatory examination of the complaint. If the conditions for processing the complaint are not available, the complaint shall be rejected. That the complaint is rejected means that the reality of the complaint, that is to say, the matters complained of, is not taken into consideration.
After fvl. Section 28, first paragraph, only individual decisions can be appealed. What is considered an individual decision is defined in fvl. § 2: a) decision, a decision made during the exercise of public authority and which generally or specifically determines the rights or obligations of private persons (individuals or other private legal entities); b) individual decisions, a decision relating to rights or obligations of one or more specific persons; "
Refusal of deadline request is a procedural decision. Process-leading decisions are not individual decisions.
Process-leading decisions are only of importance to the case processing, and have no consequences for the reality of the case. Examples of other process-leading decisions may be; decisions relating to deferred implementation until the complaint has been finalized, cf. section 42 of the Public Administration Act, decisions that set a deadline, rejection of a request for oral hearing, appointment of experts, etc.
The reality of this case is that an order has been made for the removal of both the retaining wall and the store which is final. In this case, a number of postponements have been given and the final decision is a decision not to postpone the deadline beyond the last set deadlines.

Decision Because the agency's decision not to give deferred deadline is not "individual decision", cf. the Public Administration Act section 33 second paragraph last sentence and section 28 first paragraph, the appeal is rejected.

The rejection decision can be appealed The agency's decision in this letter to reject the complaint, however, is an individual decision. That means you can complain about this decision. A complaint can be sent to the Planning and Building Administration within 3 weeks.

When it comes to requesting a new case officer on the case, we find no reason for this.

Planning and Building Administration Technical Department Unit for Construction Inspection Open City

This document is electronically approved 13.05.2019 by:

Therese Brøndum - group leader Anne-Marie Vikla - Department director

Our answer:

Answer - Rejection of a decision not to give further postponement - Krokstien 2 C mail of 13.05.2019 with ref: 201510929-32

Oslo 15 / 5-2019

Why we do not see it as relevant and relevant to comply with PBE NOK
of is simply that you do not answer our relevant questions.
As well as not guiding us in a good and fair manner as one might expect from a public agency. As we were promised with a meeting with Nils-Henrik Henningstad and Lena Catrine Amdal on 11.4.19.

1.) You want us to submit a new and complete application. It is good, but we have already submitted the "world's" best application through Ferdigattest AS. Better and more complete application than this, we find it difficult for us to send when you apply for the construction of masonry, stairs and storage rooms. It was with text, pictures and drawings. Others sit on the "kitchen table" and get the most through. How good an application should we deliver to be heard?
It's just a problem here, it's that PBE has two standards.
One for us, one for everyone else.
All we do is cause problems for you as we do not understand why? Then we don't have the ability to see things that you do. It is just like we are on two different "planets" where we think you are looking at us with an evil eye for reasons we do not understand. You claim that we are settling in, doing illegal activities etc. There is no doubt that our reality perception is totally opposite to PBE here in Oslo as it has emerged in the latest emails. We do not even agree on the facts of the case, then it is understandable that the cooperation that was promised is at the bottom.

2.) Now, the stairs you are going to kill are never mentioned before by you.
It was we who took it up at the meeting on April 11 to bring clarity to our lot in the road. We have not yet received an answer to any of you if we have asked several times. Only on 2 - 3 occasions are you threatening with daily fines etc. if we do not remove the stairs spore immediately.
It can easily be arranged so that it does not go out into the road, where as we see it is only talk about max. ½ meter more than we agreed with Mrs. Aubert Lange.

3.) We have received guidance several times, here is what actually happened.

We moved in here in 2012. In 2013 we called down to our then case officer Kaja Lange Aubert. It was called down 2-3 times, to make sure we did the right thing.
It is not easy to reproduce this six years afterwards, and when there were several phone calls it feels like one when it is six years later.

What happened to the phone calls we had with our then supervisor Kaja Lange Aubert?

Do you remember remembering that we called down mid-April and August 2013? It is six years back in time, it is a long time ago and difficult to remember in detail every word as it was said, but in my memory she replied like this.
Then I asked about the following, we set up stairs and wanted to set up a wall. Trapp I think we set up 2013, when before this we had had a rope that we threw ourselves down on in the Stormyrveien, and believe it or not, it is to this level you have given us orders to return to.
That we should use a rope to throw us down on the road with. You do not believe it, but we had it before we built the staircase, which gave us orders to demolish it, grasp it that can. We do not, never applicable to our security and everything to comply with such obscure and dark decisions that PBE operates with.

I asked what was needed to build a wall, to which I got the answer that if a wall had been built there before, it was not mandatory to build one on top of it. This replied Kaja Lange Aubert.
I said yes, and then Kaja Lange answered Aubert that then it was NOT APPLICABLE WHEN IT WAS BUILT A WALL FROM BEFORE!

I further said that we envision a wall of 1.5 - 2 meters and 1 meter fence.
This was no problem, she said, as others from before have higher walls than you. Their is 2.5 meters with 1 meter fence.

In 2013, I even called an extra time, for the sake of safety and asked the same, and the same answers were given.
As long as there was a wall there before, we didn't have to search even though the wall was different. In other words, we got permission in advance of our construction of this wall.
It was also asked and talked about distance from the road where 1 meter from the road surface was what had to be due to snow skiing etc.

4.) It is that neighbor in Stormyrveien 9 c that is in the air section from us 50 meters has been granted exemption from the utilization rate of 57 times more than us. Have you heard of anything worse? Not we, and they are allowed to have their standing, but we must tear ours.

Here's the calculation. And it's also important, I don't want them to tear anything. But they must keep everything. What is evil here from everyone's side is that we should tear down what we have built that is excellent and beautiful, and not to anyone's disgust. It is not poured "different" into someone else's walls or something, as ours is much lower than many others. Even the neighbor's who is a 2.5 meter high wall, while ours is 185 cm high.

The neighbor in Stormyrveien has also searched several times and received an exemption. They have been doing this l meadows after we built, when they were "finished" with everything in March 2018.

Reading through the documents several things are set up before they have applied for an exemption.
This applies to the property in Stormyrveien 9 c, and for our part this is completely, perfectly fine.
Blue. a tool shed of 10 sqm, and other.
Had eg. The dispensation here has been 2 - 3 times more than us, this case had also been very relevant.

But here they have built, searched and built several times and use the same argumentation as us.
A long-awaited outbuilding etc.
But then they have blasted everything with 57 times the utilization rate of the plot.
They build in the same period as us, located a few meters from us.
They get yes, we get no. In other words, there are a thousand reasons that you overlook to give us the minimum dispensation we need. How to apply without getting guidance is difficult as you always keep in mind that everything we do does not hold. While what others do, it keeps goals, no matter largely on the whole.

5.) Since we have been allowed and have built masonry, storage room and staircase. It has been applied before, we believe that it is only their difference treatment and unwillingness that underlies that no wall, staircase and storage room are approved and this has come in orderly conditions.

6.) You have been on a visit here, about a hidden inspection. We have stretched ourselves as far as we can and tried to get order in all conditions. Even though this has not led to you, you are now starting to threaten with daily fines, etc. What you are doing is at such a low level. Are you going to such a step to start demanding us for money etc. So, of course, the road is short for the mental stresses to be too big for us that sick leave and hopefully not disability benefits etc. are waiting?

For such a pressure as you put us down after you think we have done something illegal that for us is completely, completely beyond! In our eyes, all that you are doing is illegal and unnecessary. It is experienced as harassment, bullying and abuse of power.

7.) We will never do anything about anything on our property outside the stairs. We can agree that should be withdrawn. But it is we who have brought this on the path, not you. We also ask for our lot to be withdrawn, but have not yet received an answer. As we see it, half a meter must be more than enough? May hope for a constructive and good answer here by you.

8.) For the sake of fault, we appeal the rejection decision to the PBE and that we are not allowed to change the case officer. We also complain about these short deadlines, we complain about everything that PBE stands for and does. Nothing matters, and they do not have the standard one would expect from a public agency. The smallest goal must be that one is solution-oriented and that one does not make a difference between the municipality's inhabitants.
It's bad the whole PBE is in our eyes when they can do and adopt what they do, which is without goals and meaning.

The fact is that we disagree with you in absolutely everything. That we are going to demolish the wall and that it lies "too far" out in the roadway when the neighbor's is 20 cm from the road and our 1 meter. Just tell you that you want to tear, destroy, and engage in discrimination beyond anything we have ever been to! 57 times the neighbor gets to use the plot, they get to keep and we are going to demolish.
We are not close to thinking about meeting their demands as the differential treatment you are doing is, to our eyes, shameful and evil. The fact that we should not keep the nice and functional we have built is simply unthinkable with our eyes. The orders you come with are unfair and primitive.
The only thing here is that we get approved masonry and booth, and change on the stairs by not letting it get out of the way as it does now!

9.) Our case can not be compared to that of others without further ado as we have a commitment to build the wall. Will also emphasize that all we have built is more for the benefit of neighbors than nuisance. It is in favor of us, it is in favor of those in the rental apartment. There is really nothing negative about it all, it's just positive benefits!
It is in favor of absolutely everyone, even neighbors behind us using stairs to get easier to their own house, so as not to walk around completely if they park or come from the Stormyrveien.

10.) It is also weird that neighbor, closest who have the same farm and utility number as us, Peter Faarlund in Krokstien 2 d. Also has too high a wall, but there it looks like the dispensation goes through only they get the papers submitted.
No, what you are doing is nice to us when you have a "law" for others. Where everything goes through and a "law" for us, where everything is difficult. Our understanding of reality and PBE are real as night and day.

Berit and Jan Kåre Christensen
Crocodile 2 c
0672 Oslo

fredag 10. mai 2019

No. 1522: I / we have been molested and actually bullied by the Norwegian state and various public bodies on several occasions, to date have not received any kind of apology or redress!

No. 1522:
I / we have been molested and actually bullied by the Norwegian state and various public bodies on several occasions, to date have not received any kind of apology or redress!

Ultimately, I believe the word of God, which says the following, "Me hears the vengeance, I will repay, says the Lord."
The harassment, persecution and neglect that I have been subjected to repeatedly by various public authorities. It reminds me of Hans Nielsen Hauge 200 years afterwards what he experienced and experienced.
Of course not close, but bad enough anyway.

When I look at all the accusations we have received from the public authorities, the list has been long now. To mention some. Or where we / I have been clinging with the authority due to authorities' abuse of power and obvious misjudgments!

1.) Around 1990, Oslo stormed the police our apartment and penetrated where I stood naked after having showered. My wife opened the door, and they needed a lot of power and cut off my passport, Norwegian. I am both Danish and Norwegian citizen, have dual citizenship. Their claim that I was so-called illegal immigrant was nothing but a lie! The passport was deprived and I would get you back, something I never got. Then the police station at Økern, the one who is today at Stovner, was talking about crook strikes from the police here in Oslo.

2.) In 2004, BV picked up our kids when we were at work, me and my wife. Basic claims and only Devil's company from BV, all claims were lies and exaggerations from beginning to end.

3.) Around 2014, Jan Aage Torp notified me with a fictitious review when he hated me for preaching against remarriage. He aimed to get me 2 years in prison and probably get the most money when he demanded desertic redress. The case itself and the trial were nothing but a goal from the police and the courts to convict me. They managed to lie and deceive. What I was convicted of was neither in the charge nor debated in court, this was a word of justice.

4.) My Father died in January 2013 and by a mistake it was paid a little too much money. This was something our lawyer Harald Hetland would have arranged for. This was not done, and NAV went straight to my employer and took money on behalf of my sister who had not repaid the money. This was nothing but a simple theft of NAV. I won on all points after much writing work. But never a single apology from the authorities even if they stole money that was mine and not someone else's!

5.) We have been ordered to demolish wall, staircase and storage room. Although we have built this among other things. with and received guidance from the municipality on how to build everything. What we have built is very nice, but should be a few cm further out in the road than allowed. Although everyone in a similar situation like us gets a dispensation. The wrong with us is horrible when ia. neighbor has received a dispensation 57 times with regard to the utilization rate of the plot. It is a standard for us and a completely different standard for everyone else. This tells about harassment, bullying and freezing! Bad what the Norwegian state does and nobody reacts. But everything is in spite of this, under God's custody and control.

Picture of how maybe Hans Nielsen Hauge was dressed? Hauge was first imprisoned 10 times, and only on the 11th time did they cure him for 11 years for only having Christian meetings without a priest or an official present (he had broken the so-called convention poster). The state power can unfortunately be the tool of evil at its times. Personally, I think Hauge was well dressed when he was a messenger of God, certainly the greatest we have had here in Norway?
There is little and no pictures of Hauge, but I know one who met Hans Nielsen Hauge. It was Joel Barsjø who met Hauge who came to him during prayer and spoke to Barsjø, who was told by God through Hauge.

2 Tim. 4. 5 But be ye sober in all things, suffer evil, do the work of an evangelist, finish thy ministry. (1930 translation)

5 But you must be sober in everything you do. Carry the suffering, do your work as an evangelist and complete your ministry. (2011.)

The basic text: endure ailments

As a believer one must expect one to come into trouble that one has no form of guilt in. And that one gets incredibly bad and unfairly treated. Scripture clearly states that we as believers must suffer evil, carry our suffering. The basic text here in the Apostle Paul's letter to Timothy states that we are to endure plagues. It seems to me perfectly suited to much of what say believers experience in this world, we must endure bothering.

Nuisance, what is it and what does it mean? Plague is something that comes into your life, which doesn't really take your life. But it disturbs and lowers the quality of life. It's like going to the store where one wants something that costs 1000, - but one only has 500. Or if one is 184 cm like me, but the bed is only 150 cm long. Then that's the problem.

I have been bothered by the public Norway. Every time, it is clear that everything was completely unnecessary needed, but to date has never received any kind of apology or redress. This is a nuisance, but as a believer, we must respond differently to those who afflict. Although we are the ones who are being tormented!

There is no real answer to how to act and progress. But there are some things that we as believers should not do at least. It is to repay evil with evil, or reproach with shame.

1 Pet. 3. 9 So that you do not repent of evil with evil or blasphemy with words of reproof, but on the contrary bless; for you were called to inherit blessing.

Furthermore, it is stated here in Petersbrev.

1 Pet. 3. 13 And who is it that can hurt you, if ye gain good? 14 But if ye suffer for righteousness, ye are blessed. But fear not for them and be not dismayed; But sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts; Load your good ways in Christ, to be ashamed of what they reproach you as evildoers. 17 For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer when one does good than when one does evil.

In our case, the actual can not say anything to us as we sometimes have not retaliated something negative to be the same way again. We have been constructive, clear and honest.
Although the people we have met in the various public agencies have not been. I am very pleased with that and it says great, great respect. All glory to Father in Heaven and Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord!

Final Comment:

I am very aware that in no way is there anything to be reproached for, I am only a human being like everyone else.
Jesus was the Son of Man, who was in the Father's bosom and became like us. Of course there is not me.
But what I mean is unfair, ugly and evil. That's when other people have one standard for, and a completely different standard for me.
It should and should be the same standard for everyone, but it is not.
There are two different standards, then this also becomes a form of harassment, persecution and bullying! Making a difference between people, is deeply harassment, persecution and bullying.

At the same time, whether we as a believer should and can tolerate ailments and much. Then it is not right and "fair" that it is so.

There are two things I want to mention in the end, which is also important to take with you.

1.) These people who treat us badly will sooner or later come into trouble. If you have other difficulties, you will sow bad sperm. What you sow you will sooner or later get back for. This I have seen so many times, sooner or later you will "meet" yourself in the "door!"

2.) Rooms. 12. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, my beloved, but give up the wrath. for it is written, Me hearken to vengeance, I will repay, saith the Lord.

Just have to say we've been angry, tired and frustrated many times. It is completely understandable and human. But as far as I know, neither I nor anyone else in my family have cursed those who have done and wronged me, I am very pleased with that.
Nor did they approach them privately or do anything negative to them.
Ultimately, I believe the word of God, which says the following, "Me hears the vengeance, I will repay, says the Lord."

It is this which, after all, is so great and reassuring, God will take care of all human beings, all situations, and everything will come to an end where everyone will have their righteous judgment.

But pray for us and the case, after all we believe in a solution and it is possible also for people who have done wrong to realize this. Change and do the right thing, finally, hallelujah!

onsdag 8. mai 2019

No. 1521: PBE here in Oslo appears to be doing "Norges-rekord" in discrimination against us where everything we do is bad, while others get dispensation when it comes to whatever they do or build!

No. 1521:
PBE here in Oslo appears to be doing "Norges-rekord" in discrimination against us where everything we do is bad, while others get dispensation when it comes to whatever they do or build!

We had a meeting with PBE here in Oslo, where they made a meeting report and we gave our answer. Here is the minutes and our answer.

Date: 06.05.2019 Their ref .: Our ref .: 201609223-69 Always stated by inquiry Case file: Nils-Henrik Henningstad Archive code: 531

Construction site: KROKSTIEN 2C Property: 143/104/0/0 Initiative: JAN KÅRE CHRISTENSEN Address: KROKSTIEN 2 C, 0672 OSLO Seeking: FERDIGATTEST BYGGESAK AS Address: Postboks 9385 Grønland, 0135 OSLO Action type: Wall / retaining wall Assignment type: Entry type

Meeting record - Krokstien 2 C Date of the meeting: 11.04.2019 kl. 1:30 p.m.
Meeting participants:
Initiator: Jan Kåre Christensen and Berit Nyland Christensen
Employee lawyer: Knut Magne Howlid
From the Planning and Building Administration: Nils Henrik Henningstad and Lena Amdal.

Agenda for the meeting In 2014 and 2016, an application was made for the construction wall and storage room on the current property, in connection with house C. The measures were not allowed, but both the wall and the booth were already listed.
On 9 March, a request was made for a meeting between the project owner and the Planning and Building Administration by the owner of the measure, regarding the return of the support wall and the masses that have been fulfilled. On the basis of this, the Planning and Building Administration called for a meeting to clarify what can be allowed on the property.
Additional information from the project owner was submitted after the meeting, 12.04.2019 and 15.04.2019.
The planning and building agency's answers and comments
Support wall out towards road A supporting wall has been erected which, according to our maps, is partly located on a regulated road surface. It also has a height that goes beyond the regulation plan § 6.5.
Case number: 201609223-69 Page 2 of 4

Regardless of how much of the wall is located on the road, no part of this wall can be approved with such a location. The wall must be drawn into the housing-regulated part of the property in order to be considered. By placing the wall inside a housing-regulated part of the property, as well as reducing the height to 0.5 meters so that it is in line with the zoning plan, it can be approved. It will depend on exemption from section 29 of the Road Act.
It has recently been approved a change of the outdoor area down the road at the neighboring house Krokstien 2 B, where from the Planning and Building Administration clear guidelines were provided for how large terrain interventions can be permitted and that no exemption will be granted for exceeding the plan's provisions.
Outside standalone storage facility The owner of the measure informed in the meeting that they have space available from the neighboring property, and that the utilization is therefore lower per. today compared to the situation at the time of application for the fine. It is nevertheless still dependent on the exemption from the regulation's provision on the degree of utilization.
In order for the Planning and Building Administration to be able to grant exemption according to pbl. Chapter 19, the considerations behind the provision must not be substantially disregarded and it must together be an overweight of objective advantages compared to the disadvantages of giving the dispensation. Since the property has recently built four new detached houses up to the permitted utilization, in line with the plan, exceedances beyond the plan's provisions will be practically immediately considered to be a significant breach of the reason behind the provision, since then an exploitation beyond that plan and the property is allowed allows. If the property has been transferred area from the neighboring property so that the basis for calculation of utilization has become larger, this will result in a minor exceedance of the utilization on the property. Based on the documentation submitted, it appears that the areas are only registered for registration, and therefore cannot be used as a basis for a calculation of utilization. In this case, this area must be transferred from neighboring property to Krokstien 2, in order to influence the calculation of the utilization.
We will nevertheless recommend on the basis of this to make a new calculation of the utilization on the property, and see if it is possible to re-project the existing booth so that it is in line with the regulations plan. As the booth appears on drawings, such as two stalls, it may be possible to remove half of this and still maintain the function as an exterior storage room on the property. Although we understand that the areas of the basement that are rented out also need storage space, the dwelling is approved as a detached house and therefore has only a claim for a storage room.
Stairs down to the road A stairway next to a retaining wall down to the road is also partly placed in area regulated to the road surface. If the staircase is drawn into housing-regulated property and does not increase the utilization on the property, it will be possible to design and place this so that it can be allowed.
Similar issues in the area It was shown in the meeting to some addresses in the area, where there were support walls of similar size and / or height as on Krokstien 2 C, and asked questions Reply - additional comments to meeting minutes - Krokstien 2 C Date of the meeting: 11.04.2019 kl. 13: 3

Oslo 8 / 5-2019

Our ref .: 201609223-69 approved by Nils Henrik Henningstad

Must be short here as we have already indirectly answered the majority here to you in our reply to their mail from 29.4.19. but only comes with some small comments. Our response was sent 3.5.19

1.) Meeting we had on 11.4. was fruitful and good, it seems we do not come here in this email. The answer is characterized by being of the old variety from the "trench!" Meeting was good, the mail we got to be a meeting record is not in line with our opinion. In fact, the best meeting we have had with PBE since Kaja Aubert Lange was our case officer, since it has really been like the black night and had with PBE to do until the meeting that is referred to.

2.) The reason why we do not want to comply with their order to move a wall is not mentioned at all in this letter. It is really bad that this is not mentioned. We have, as I said, been promised to build the wall that we have built of you through our then case officer, Kaja Aubert Lange. There is nothing to indicate that we should go back to this from something that appears in this writing and everything else that you have used of arguments. On the contrary, that wall, staircase and storage room should stand as it stands today, we just seem to be reinforced more and more.

3.) Seems it is being tried to say that the houses are recently listed when we have lived here since 2012, 6 ½ years, then they are not recently listed.

4.) That the booth should be demolished, parts of it when it is already only 11 sqm2 sounds sought out. It's already so minimal and small. Begin tearing such a small shed, it is against all sense. Either it gets stuck, or it is just fine to tear the whole shed. It is then made as a small sports booth and there is a plank wall in the middle that divides it in half. This is a small sports booth that does not fit to share. There are not two stalls, but a small sports booth that is internally divided with a divider.

5.) When we do not compare any properties with ours in Oslo city, we have also applied. When neighbor and so many others have been allowed to set up most things, they actually exploit the plot so much that with their argumentation it is like saying that if one drives a Tesla then the speed limits do not apply. But running a Skoda, they apply.
When we listen to their argumentation, that really no properties on the Hellerudtoppen are comparable. Then it is impossible to get something through, then you have only decided that you should continue to be angry and impossible to us!

6.) We filed a dream with so-called illegal matters, we do not have to go any further than to our neighbor in Krokstien 2 d who also has an illegal wall. They then get dispensation even though it is much longer and more extensive. Don't think it's possible to make such a difference to people. It is completely, completely incomprehensible, as this is in fact the same property. Why this is not comparable is not for us to grasp. The wall is then much larger and longer than ours, and over 0.5 meters, it is well 135 cm, and well over 20 meters long. Same farm and utility number, what should it be that it is not comparable? You'll find something, and when we pair this, there's always something new. Whatever we do, it's wrong. What others do here in Oslo city, is mostly right even though they get disp 57 times to a greater extent than us and the case was closed recently. It is unimaginable which low point of argumentation that PBE has put on!

7.) It is sought to say that our wall is so bad and cannot under any circumstances be approved. It is only 18 cm "too far out". And that it is built according to PBE instruction and guidance here in Oslo, by Mrs Aubert Lange.
Others have walls down and up and side by side, simply everywhere that is higher than ours. More out in the road than ours and are bigger etc. Our wall does not stand out in any way. Except that before we built the wall it was 80 cm to the road, now it is 1 meter. As well as before, it ran shit and other things out into the road and down by minor, mud and water. Now the filling mass on our property, in other words, everything is much, much better. Tear this off with the argumentation that you use as being shooting yourself and others in your foot. It is stupid and totally unnecessary!

8.) Comparing our neighboring property, in Krokstien 2 b is an impossibility. We have built a wall according to PBE guidance, albeit verbally. Then they are not comparable as they have not built anything at all yet, and we built our wall five years ago. Here it will be like talking about the snow that fell 5 years ago and comparing it to the snow that will probably come next year. It's not comparable. Like comparing apples and bananas, there are two different fruits and cannot be compared. Only apples with apples and bananas with bananas. We are to be compared to those who built before the so-called house plan when we were supervised, this plan was never mentioned. The only one mentioned during the conversation was other walls in the Stormyrveien that ours
did not get higher than them, someone it is not. It is actually over half a meter lower than the ones we were compared to.

9.) Very happy that you mention such a case as in the Tamburveien. There is even a concern message from the Fire and Rescue Service. With us it is the opposite. When the car came here when our daughter needed urgent help, they were unable to find their way and arrive in the Crook Trail. But they drove down the Stormyrveien, used our stairs and the driveway. Without having had stairs and the way to come, they hadn't found out. Yes, it only testifies that PBE here in Oslo does not want us any good, and let what is appropriate is as it is. The fact that the booth, staircase and wall must stand untouched had been the absolute best. The property and so-called illegality in Tamburveien and ours is like comparing apples and bananas, it doesn't work. They really have a big problem, for us is the wall and such a staircase is a blessing. Comparing this as you do here just testifies that you need to come to the inspection and see that all the arguments you bring fall into "fish".

10.) The whole writing is really again again as a write against us, where a head does not want to come to meet us. For us, PBE's goal is to make things most difficult for us. Although our exemptions that we need are minimal to what others get. Here again you want to be difficult, then of course it will not be easy! When the nearest neighbor in Stormyrveien has been granted an exemption 57 times more than us and they are allowed to keep. And that you do what you can for us to tear, what else should we do? The application we sent through Ferdigattest AS was so good and comprehensive that it did not go through when I read hundreds of other issues here in Oslo. Both legal and illegal things, I really do not understand that you have to start adding the goddess, not the wrong side. So it goes perfectly well with what we have built when the dispensation we need is virtually nothing, it is of negligible nature that our lawyer Knut Howli has pointed out!

11.) You write that we should return everything as it was before. Then we will search again, and some of this can be approved with a halved stall, remodeled staircase and build a new wall. The booth can be approved by "incorporating" the 4 sqm in Krokstien 2 a - d. Firstly, this will be so expensive that after we have torn everything and got everything back to what it was before, we can just forget everything other. It becomes too expensive as we have already used up our saved funds at a lawyer, government lawyer, judges and applicant's for the certificate of completion and other things. The rest will then be used to get the property returned in their opinion. If we then start building stairs, walls and booths that have then been approved. After new treatment and everything is reversed, then just forget to build something more, then there is no more funds to collect and we are also so tired of this case. To start building here again we look at as not relevant! We'll then get away the stairs that you want to get the rope back as we had before?

What you come up with from statements that we are supposed to make is nothing but ugly, evil and primitive in our eyes. Needless to remove what is built. Which is as good and not a hindrance to anyone, even bus, boss car or fire truck. On the contrary, for a fire or a motor car, it is much better with a stairway up from the Stormyrveien than that they should drive into the yard in Krokstien 2 as there are mostly cars and other things that make it difficult for such vehicles . In fact, for our safety, what we have built is a must.

12.) Believes that the only thing right is that you come up with a visit with us, not a hidden sighting this time as a time off. So that you can see that all we have built is no different or dominant in any way whatsoever in relation to everyone else.

13.) Since everything we do, search with professional applicants and otherwise have put as much work and money into it. And when others submit an application almost written on the "kitchen table" and they get everything through. Then it becomes difficult for us all that we do, because anyway it is not good enough. Or it is not relevant, etc. How should we get a new application? There will be an impossibility with such a cross through difficult and difficult attitude towards us. Had you added goodwill, treated us equally as everyone else. Then our case had been in "goals" long, long ago. We see it as difficult here. Everything we have built is awesome.
But it is just that PBE looks at what we have done with unwillingness and wants it not to be approved then for incomprehensible reasons everything with us will come in the category of illegality cases.

14.) We send in about 50 dispensation cases to you, and you try to leave those cases are those who did not receive any exemption. Whatever we come up with, you use everything against us, never for us. So how can we win? Although our avh the dispensation is almost insignificant. While others who have up to 57 times more have taken advantage of the plot, receive exemption. Several others have walls that are almost clear to the asphalt, but we have a very good distance of 1 meter. Then it should be seen with the most difficult eyes when it is obviously out in the road. What about the others?

15.) Of everything you have come up with, statements and arguments, it justifies in our eyes more and more that the problem here is really just one thing. PBE unwillingness to us, nothing else!

16.) For example, it is claimed. that Stormyrveien 9c and other properties are not legally comparable. Then the question is which paragraph or regulations it says in?
An illegality is an illegality. Is aware that some properties have different utilization rates etc. But if you exceed this, then you need an exemption to get it approved. Of all the arguments that PBE has presented to us, we can, by and large, only see a difference in meaning between our property and that of others. It is that PBE extends far ahead of others in general here in Oslo. They do not extend at all to us. When others get a dispensation, it is just as "expected". When we receive a rejection, we either misunderstood or corrected us. PBE here in Oslo seems almost hopeless to us as we have experienced it! They are not at all interested in meeting us, even though they are so mischievous and amenable to most others. Here, injustice and differential treatment are greater than greatest. 57 times is nothing to be expected on the whole? The only difference that we read is that they were allowed to utilize the site their 25%, while we 24%. They exploited it at 61.3%, and we at 24.6%, that this is not comparable when they completed it all in 2018 is not easy for "ordinary" people to understand when PBE just throws out that it is not legally comparable when one does not the trouble of explaining it either. Then it is not easy to understand and understand what PBE actually means, when they basically never explain anything, nor how we can understand if possible.

17.) You compared our property with the one in Tamburveien 10. Here, it runs the bus service past our house twice an hour and we have never heard a sound saying that it was a problem. Not a car or anything else. While in Tamburveien 10, it is totally different. They have been pointed out by public authorities. Then we realize that building a "illegal" is a problem. But with us, we really don't understand. Look here for what the Fire and Rescue Services say about the property in the Tamburine Road.

18.) It is also stated about the aforementioned property: "BYM has been on inspection in Tamburveien 10 and notes the following: The support wall is set up 1.0-1.3 meters from the former fence towards the road, which then also causes the wall to go property boundary several meters along the road down towards the corner. The road has become correspondingly narrower and asphalt is cut off and laid inside the wall at the moment. There is no good visibility or space for larger vehicles. ”

With us, everything is the opposite, that they get problems is understandable as there is also poor visibility and they have settled. We have not settled at all, we called down to Kaja Aubert Lange at PBE here in Oslo, and got clear and good guidance. We built as recommended and by guidance, and what we have built is wonderfully good and no one has poor visibility here or anything else since the roadway has become larger and wider since we built our wall. Comparing this as you do in your email is just as incomprehensible to us as anything else you have done and do in this matter!

Berit and Jan Kåre Christensen
Krokstien 2 c
0672 Oslo

søndag 5. mai 2019

No. 1520: We have fought against the state and the public and won every time when all charges against us have been erroneous and constructed!

No. 1520:
We have fought against the state and the public and won every time when all charges against us have been erroneous and constructed!

Carl Fredrik Wisløff said that the truth always comes up, even though it has little bones to go on! So also in the cases that I have experienced with the state, the municipality, the police and other government agencies. They always lose when they go out with people who stand for God and the truth. Why? They sit outside the area they are set to manage, fight against evil, and for good. Not the opposite, as they sometimes do.
Scripture says the following:
Joh.e. 8. 44 You have the devil's father and you will do what your father wants. He has been a murderer from the beginning and is beyond the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
People if they are municipal employees, state employees, or whatever they are, are always the father there to be used and misled by the Evil One.
Therefore, the scripture says that we should take care of, or we can easily let ourselves be misled.
This is what scripture says and exhorts us to do.
1 Joh.b. 5. 18 We know that every one who is born of God does not sin. For he who is born of God preserves him so that the evil one cannot touch him.

Room. 13. 1. Everyone must be obedient to the authorities he has over them. For there are no authorities that are not from God, and those who are found are God-ordained. 2 Whoever opposes them, therefore, opposes what God has ordained, and those who do so will receive their judgment. 3 For those who rule shall not fear the one who does good, but the one who does evil. If you do not want to fear the authorities, do the good, and you will be praised. 4 The government is a servant of God, for your benefit. But if you do evil, you have reason to be scared. For the government bears no sword for no reason, but is the servant of God who will execute his punishment on the one who does evil. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to be obedient, not only for fear of punishment, but also for the sake of conscience. 6 Also pay tax for the same reason. For the authorities, God's servants are responsible for all such things. 7 Give everyone what you owe them. Pay taxes to anyone who is to have taxes, customs to those who are to have customs, show respect for those who are to respect, give honor to the one who will have honor.

The authority should be "For those who rule, shall not fear the one who does good!"

When it comes to me and my family, the authority has repeatedly done the opposite, so I know that this fight that we now face the authority we will win when we do the good, and the authorities are doing a regular lie and manipulation!

We have experienced, as said several times, being stepped on and almost bullied by the authorities here in Norway, who are little fun and okay.

Blue. when my father died and it was known that some money had been paid too much in retirement. Then the estate was up and settled. We had the Lawyer on the case all the time as they should have arranged everything up with. But they first went to my sister, when she didn't have the money they went to me.
Of course I paid back the money I had received too much.
What did they do then? Then they also demanded me for the money my sister owed.
I refused this of course, then they went straight to my employer and fetched over 30,000, - kr there.
This I strongly opposed, and won on all points.
They never came with a single excuse or I got some sort of tort and pain. Not a penny. This only shows again and again when the authority behaves like "bandits and robbers." So it is perfectly legitimate to watch from and make them aware of this.

In this case, NAV made many roars, to shorten to a few points.

1.) When Nav found out that too much money was paid out, the estate was up and down. The person who was then responsible for this was our lawyer Harald Hetland, which we paid just over 100,000 NOK, if not more when he also sold my father's house and made money in absolutely everything.

2.) When they demanded money from me, it wasn't okay. But that they also demanded money from me that my sister would pay. It was so ugly and criminal it is possible to do something. This was simply stealing, as I have nothing to do with her life and finances.

3.) Then NAV went through the Namsfogde here in Oslo to my employer and picked up the money my sister was going to pay. This is not rude, it is worse than rude and criminal. This is a form of "rape" and settle down that surpasses most things?

4.) Finally I got the money back and won in the NAV appeal body on all points, hallelujah! It will happen again also now to the Planning and Building Administration here in Oslo. They have also made as many and several serious mistakes as I will mention briefly here:

1.) They promised us to build masonry on old wall was not mandatory. And we built a lower wall than the neighbor's over on the other side as agreed.

2.) We have built a small storage room which should be some sqm2 over utilization the pitch on the plot. Others, also neighboring away in the road, have done the same and exploited the utilization rate of the plot over 57 times more than us. That we are told to demolish as PBE stands stubbornly testifies to such work that words do not extend!

3.) Our wall is located 1 meter from the paved road, and others lie several places 20 - 25 cm. We are instructed to demolish our wall as it is probably 18 cm into a regulated road surface and has a design that can under no circumstances be approved as it stands today, the letter from Oslo municipality says. While others have a wall that stands 1 meter into the regulated road surface. The difference treatment is so bad and ugly that words do not extend!

4.) We wanted to bring clarity to stairs that lie in regulated road surfaces and there is nothing difficult to cut it and lay it differently. Then we are told to tear it down and search again. Here, the chiefs have not cared about the stairs, but had focus on booth and wall. When we mention this as we have done before, they overdo us in the worst possible and undemocratic way. It is so bad that words do not stretch.

5.) Our whole thing is completely "sick" and is completely put out of all professions. It is really a small file case that PBE and the entire public Norway have been able to do the worst possible. What they are doing is like shooting sparrows with guns. Here, use far too strong instruments in relation to what is required to achieve a goal. In our case, the municipality should have convened a meeting and then inspection, and taken it from there. They were visiting - a hidden sight. When we asked if they would go to the inspection, we never heard anything. The way in which PBE here in Oslo has performed, words do not simply extend!

This goes to victory as it is so obvious that PBE here in Oslo argues and dangers with lies and fanatics stretching. Not something that is true, right or good!

One of the many emails we sent, it becomes too elaborate to bring all the emails back and forth. Adds someone who makes it possible to get an insight into the matter.

Complaint to Nav for refund of Case 14202170 - Case 232558

Want to complain once again on this decision as this is so unreasonable and it is pure mafia activity that hubs do in my eyes.

1.) You slap your mind with paragraphs, the more you make mistakes, the more paragraphs you throw at us. You demand things that we do not have control of, but as lawyer Hetland is responsible for, namely Karl Johan Christensen's estate. It is not right for you to run away with me and my sister. You suddenly find a mistake after two years, then it is completely wrong to loose our way in this way. It's not us you contact and pursue, but lawyer Hetland is legally responsible for Karl Johan Christensen's estate. Why don't you understand that?
2.) We have had a lawyer on this case since January 28, 2013. Why do you not understand it. As you see fit, you use these para graphs as you like at all times.
3.) You should only contact a person, this is our lawyer Hetland, but you just as well as you like.
4.) I will now be within 2 months. pulled half my wages, it is absolutely unheard of that you draw me when we have paid Hetland close to 80,000, for him to have full overview. This is cutting mafia business.
5.) That for which you are going to force me, the innocent part of the knee, lays you up that I am the only one. We are two heirs, but the mafia must have their money. This is unworthy, unperturbed and fraudulent to behave in such a simple way and would demand this money from me and not my sister, and that the amount is too large in such a short time and not least URET.
6.) That you first contacted us after a total of 3 years. It should have been good enough for you to have canceled the whole case.
7.) When you contacted all the funds in the estate were paid out. How can that keep doing that way and start demanding after the estate has long been settled, you spent far too long.
8.) I can continue writing, but as you are doing is more like a mafia business than what you expect from a democratic state !?

Jan Kåre Christensen

New mail:

From: Jan Kåre Christensen <jk.chris@online.no>
Posted: Thursday, June 2, 2016 13.26
To: post@advokathetland.no
Copy: navi@nav.no; 'Henriette Nordås'; beritch-0803@hotmail.com; oslo.namsfogd@politiet.no
Subject: Case 14202170 and Case 232558

For Nav collection and Lawyer Harald Hetland!

Case 14202170
Case 232558

After my father died three and a half years ago, now hub requires us for money that is perceived as totally unreasonable and unprofessional!

Nav contacted us first 1 ½ years ago. So 2 years after my father's death to claim us for money. It's really 2 years late.

Then they started again six months ago.

The estate is up and down a long time ago, the money distributed and then demanding money that is so far back is experienced both unreasonably and incorrectly!

This should go to NAV's "taboo quota" and collar lapses against Karl Johan B. Christensen's estate. It is both my and my sister Henriette's opinion!

It is NAV's sommel and that the estate has ended which makes it only NAV that can be loaded for this, no one else!

Lawyer Harald Hetland and we two siblings cannot decide that NAV is really waiting for 2 years to send out claims, and then it goes 1 year to the next time they send out claims, then with interest so that the amount was not 20,000 longer, but over 23,000. This is uproff!

Jan Kåre Christensen

New mail:

Subject: Case 232558
NAV Klageinstans Vest

PO Box 6245
5893 Bergen

1.) Following the procedure of NAV, where they have made all mistakes possible. So I mean that both me and my sister should get a redress!

SEK 50,000 each had been fit!

2.) We are not allowed to mail by our lawyer until almost the deadline has expired, then when NAV has drawn us into this case. Should we get a copy by mail.

3.) NAV has been criminals. The estate of my father has one that controls it. Advoy Harald Hetland. But they have, against all rules, gone straight into my salary account through the Namsfogde in Oslo.

The amount is SEK 10,892.00.

This is money that NAV has collected, which is obviously criminal since everything is going through the estate. No one can do as much as NAV does!

Feel free to ask to explain everything to the case officer!

Jan Kåre Christensen

The document that shows that the whole case did not belong to us anymore, but Lawyer Harald Hetland who did not respond to NAV's mailers. So they went to me and my sister to get money that we had nothing to do with.

Last mail to NAV, where I thank you to get my money back. But all the work I did, I got 0 kroner for.

Service complaint on Case 232558


Got a letter dated 15.06.17

First of all, I'm happy that I got the money back as NAV stole from me without going to Linjeveien through lawyer Harald Hetland who has had and is paid to settle the death of Karl Johan B. Christensen from 28 January 2013 !

1.) Want to complain about the miserable and terrible service we have received from NAV.

2.) Want to complain about NAV who has not dealt with lawyer Harald Het-land in this case.

3.) Want to complain about NAV who will not pay me 9,000, - kr for having spent approx. 100 hours on this case.

4.) Would like to complain about NAV who try to excuse themselves to the degrees in the mentioned letter dated 15.0617.

5.) Want to complain about Nav who could take the liberty to go to the namsman in Oslo and get money before a final decision was made on the case.

6.) Want to complain about NAV that it took 4 ½ years this case, which is at least 4 years too long!

7.) Want to complain about the NAV that they brought money only from an heir, not 2 before a final decision was made!

8.) Want to complain about NAV who doesn't make any excuse but tries to justify itself after doing a mildly miserable job!

9.) If NAV wants to learn from this case. When we had a lawyer that we paid after all 80,000, - to fix our father's estate. That we should then have taken over the case without a written document for this. That Nav blindly trusts a lawyer who does not speak true is a mystery to me! We have it in writing that it is he, not us, who has governed this estate. Here, NAV is blindly relying on someone who lies without checking the facts. It's bad that a claim is taken for good fish without any facts or documentation being available. Then I can just send a letter to Nav and say what I want, and you act accordingly. Here NAV makes a classic mistake to rely on a condition without any kind of documentation. This is bad of someone who is set to manage that they blindly rely on a statement from an ad-vocalist who is partly corrupt. That gets 80,000 SEK for a case that I reckon he has spent a maximum of 2 working days on. Inconceivable!

10.) Want to complain about everything that NAV has done in this case, nothing is really good. The worst thing is that one does not come with an excuse, giving me 9,000, - which is only a symbol sum when we eg. have paid our ad vocate 10 times more to do the job I have done.

Do not want this to happen to the district court or anything. Only one service complaint in the NAV system. Is happy the case is over, as 4 ½ years is long enough! Half a year should have been max on such a simple matter as here, not 4 ½ years!
Then it should not be difficult to give me $ 9,000 for all the work I have put into this case!

Jan Kåre Christensen

torsdag 2. mai 2019

No. 1519: Our response to PBE here in Oslo believes that we should not relate to the facts of the case that we have been granted permission to build a wall as they order to demolish!

No. 1519:
Our response to PBE here in Oslo believes that we should not relate to the facts of the case that we have been granted permission to build a wall as they order to demolish!

My wife, Berit Christensen got a word from the Lord that confirms what I have experienced in this matter. It is that we should be quiet, and the Lord will fight for us.
It is those who do not believe that public authorities cannot lie, make mistakes and other things that are negative.

Just think of Bill Clinton, he lied under oath that he had never had sex with Monica Lewinsky where they had done the opposite.
Even inside his office and in his home they had been doing.
Here it is, we have been promised that we should build a wall on our own property. We did it, then PBE can't come up with anything else in retrospect
Still pray for us and the case, that PBE makes sense so that we keep the nice and practical things we have built and that have been up for now for over 5 years.


Here's our answer:

Request for deadline - Krokstien 2 C Oslo 2 / 5-19


1.) Nils-Henrik Henningstad promised we would have a meeting ahead of the new application, do we get it?

2.) How much is stairs out in the roadway that you claim?

Other things down the Stormyrveien if there are walls, stairs and other things are much more out in the road. Therefore, we want to know how much it is about how much stairs are in the road.

3.) We thought that by appointment we should get a new case officer, who would look at the case and we should get feedback from. This has not been done, there is again a breach of force in their side.

4.) Lena Catrine Amdal and Astrid Myhra are so aggressive and again with abuse of power towards us. We see this as completely different from Lena Catrine Amdal and Astrid Myhra, as we have on several occasions been promised to build the wall of our former case officer Kaja Aubert Lange. As it is built, albeit verbally. And that our booth is so "little" exceeded with regard to the degree of utilization of the plot, that there is more tile pickup from their side than relevant rejection. Therefore we hope for a completely different and better tone in from Lena Catrine Amdal and Astrid Myhra than what has happened until now! The threat that they are doing just seems like more abuse of power from PBE that has been done for us for years now!
NB! Aubert Lange performed very well and neatly, we want her back on the case. The case officers we have received afterwards have not been fair and factual.
We want to have Nils-Henrik Henningstad or Aubert Lange on the case, the only people in PBE that we trust.

5.) We complain about the deadline for refusal, that it should be until the whole case has been processed.

6.) Only thing we agree with you is that the stairs should be adjusted.

Therefore, we need the exact number. Although others down the Stormyrveien road are more in the road than our stairs, we think it is reasonable that we pull it in max ½ meter.

7.) It is you who have made trouble to first allow us to build the wall, without us being told otherwise. That you are now going so hard against us, it is unreasonable and abuse of power.

8.) Hoping for a dialogue with you, no more oversteer. The meeting we had on the 11.4 was very good, that you choose to send such a "scare mail" has no impact on us, as you weep, ravage, override and just engage in ill-manipulation and lies. We have received more than enough of this from PBE and the public agencies otherwise. Hope for a change of you!

9.) Meet the answers, we think the only reasonable thing is that the stairs are adjusted a maximum of ½ meter, and that the wall and storage room stands as it says, there is no booklet with this. You're just looking to make noise and show power, or abuse their power! Threatening and scary propaganda you are doing, it is stillborn to us. You have tried that for several years, and nothing has led to this.

10.) You write that the wall is in the roadway etc. Then many other walls and others have to do the same and who must be demolished. It is walled along the Stormyrveien road which is 20 cm from the roadway etc.

When we talked to Kaja Aubert Lange I asked her if the wall is 1 meter from the road, it is sufficient, which she answered yes to. That you have once again not understood that we do not relate to the statutes and other things that you come up with afterwards, as we have been given oral permission to build the wall. We relate to that, everything else is not relevant.

11.) You are again trying to ignore the facts and the truth, that we have been allowed to build the wall, and it is not a shame to anyone or excels in any way. It will be standing, and we will not relate to what you impose on us until we have had a dialogue and talked together as promised at the meeting of 11.4.19 with Lena Catrine Amdal and Nils-Henrik Henningstad.

12.) Do you think, especially Catrine Amdal and Astrid Myhra are unfit to have with us, because here it is a downside attitude. That's why we want others caseworkers. Preferably Nils-Henrik Henningstad and Kaja Aubert Lange.

13.) When it comes to the wall, we do not relate to anything other than what Kaja Aubert Lange has told us, everything else is not relevant and has something to do with our case.

14.) A response that stands in "style" to the meeting we had it 11.4. where you said that you want to meet us and get a solution to this matter. Not the hateful who stood in the mail from 29.04.2019 signed that the two very twisted and kverulantful people Catrine Amdal and Astrid Myhra. They do not want us to have anything to do in the future.

15.) Will also emphasize that Kaja Aubert Lange has been on our side all the way when she was in contact and case law, as opposed to the other kverulants we got later who only made nausea and misunderstandings.

16.) When neighbor Roar Telje cov- ered regarding rental, Mrs. Lange mated him fine. See here for mail of 20.11.2013:

17.) The wall is certainly 18 cm too far out, there is nothing to exaggerate that the wall should be removed. Others both in Stormyrveien and elsewhere stand much further out in the roadway. The traffic and everything else goes smoothly here, you just try to make that we have done so much "illegality" that is exaggeration to those degrees. We built the wall as agreed with Kaja Aubert Lange, and it is lower than the neighbor's over on the other side and stands much further inside than the neighbor's over on the other side which has a wall that is 20 cm from the road, ours is 1 meter, is perfect. You write the following: "The support wall is partly part of a regulated road surface and has a design that cannot under any circumstances be approved as it stands today."

If this is the case, then it becomes completely unreasonable to discriminate against us as our wall is considerably longer from the road than many others. And 18 cm is really in practice totally insignificant as it is 1 meter to paved road, far more than in many others. Mrs. Aubert told us in 2013 that 1 meter from the road was more than enough. That you change such opinions and other things, you get to take on their "race"!
What you are about to "scare" is like pissing in the North Sea and thinking that it is flooding, it is completely set out of all proportions and understanding of reality their reasoning and beliefs, they are completely, preferably beyond reality.

See picture.

18.) Completion certificate As writes the following in the application that with regard to masonry and everything else has worked fine, and the 18 cm is like a drop in the sea. It certainly has no impact on traffic or anything, and it is just the opposite of what you claim and dictate the scare propaganda. One thing we built the wall is all much, much better and before that the filler mass lay even farther towards the road than what it is now, you simply fabricate lies and once again lie. And trying to scare and that we should relate to real and fabricated falsehoods.

Completion certificate Byggesak AS, Pb 9385 Greenland, 0135 Oslo writes at Paal Løvaas:

"Concerning the wall has been standing for several years and is illegally built: For this reason, reference is made to items earlier in the letter. It is recognized that the wall is illegally listed according to. current requirements, and the wall in accordance with normal practice is therefore sent an application afterwards.

Regarding placed masonry over previous walls: According to the initiative gardens, the wall is located directly above a former low wall and fence. Since it is difficult to precisely specify this, it is difficult to estimate whether this is 100% correct on the millimeter. We note, however, that there has previously been a fence and a lower wall in sc. the relevant areas. This appears on the enclosed photo documentation.

Concerning the height of the wall: The height of the wall varies. It is not correct that the wall at the lowest is 1.75 m. However, it is true that by mistake it was written that the wall at the highest was 1.5 m in the warning. This was corrected on all alerts with the pen at the correct height, and is considered with it clarified. In fact, we do not fully understand what neighbor wants to achieve with this quotation. Height also comes clearly from both the drawing and the map.

Concerning the wall, negative consequences for road traffic and maintenance are: This point also seems to be necessary to point out that it is somewhat striking that neighbor in Stormyrveien 4, 5 and 6 has signed these statements. It is important to emphasize in this context that the promoter of this project does not in any way want to indicate his neighbors as he sees that some have done in this case, because he has misunderstood the regulations and the listed wall. But when all three neighbors Stormyrveien 4, 5 and 6 themselves have walls that are all close to or within regulated road boundaries, it becomes difficult not to mention this. In addition, when there are several other walls in the area with similar location, it must be said to be an established practice in the area in question with walls up to - and indeed also in - regulated road boundaries. In fm. Both Stormyrveien 4 and 6 also lie the walls all the way out to the paved road. In Stormyrveien 5 is a garage and wall with approximately the same ploading in ft. the roadway as the measure now being sought. We can hardly see that the wall in Krokstien 2c significantly affects the road surface more than these measures. The fact that 2 neighbor (s) have a continuous exit of more than 20 m, and that none of the 3 neighbors have a random access on their own grounds, is considered to contribute significantly more negatively with respect to. traffic conditions than the right wall along the road for which this is sought. But as mentioned - it is not the responsibility of the shipper to hang up in the neighborhood. You only want to get your order in order. Mht. This point is also obvious that the wall that lies right out in the road surface to some extent affects road technical considerations. However, after an overall assessment, the wall is not considered to have a significant impact on road technical considerations. Mht. Road traffic is affected to a limited extent since visibility etc. on the right stretch is not changed to any great extent. In this connection, it appears to the previous statement. Mht. maintenance, it is pointed out that the asphalt edge remains with sufficient distance to the wall, and that there is a road fault in the area in question, so that one can store some snow here. Otherwise, there is a considerable area where the wall goes to terrain where snow has been stored in recent years. Initiatives have never experienced this as difficult. As far as we understand, the City Environment Agency has not registered a single complaint or incident in recent years, neither with respect to the case. that the areas in question are hazardous to traffic or maintenance problems. We note that the wall has been standing for a long time without the road authority in the municipality - who manages and maintains the road - has not registered any problems, neither with regard to. use or operation. "

19.) When others in our neighborhood (and otherwise all over Oslo city) who are building at the same time with us get dispensation for far, far larger and more complicated conditions. Up to 57 times more than us regarding utilization rate (including Stormyrveien 9 c). Then it testifies that you want to make everything most difficult for us. Then again, there will be discrimination again, and once again the supervisory duty of theirs is over. It is leather argumentation you are doing to us, not root in reality and sensible and good solutions!

20.) Reading of so many so-called illegality cases we have gone through here in Oslo is the tone that you use so easily and easily. Do not understand why you are opposed to us, as we see it, so do you with differential treatment and then it will also be these difficulties that we now see. After all, we have received permission and guidance from you on how the wall should be built and the excess over the booth is so minimal. That we should then be treated so badly and unfairly testifies to discrimination and a desire to be difficult. Why are you treating us so badly? There is not a single reason for that, we have not been difficult or behaved badly in any way. You are looking to destroy us and let this cost us the "shirt". Too expensive the whole thing has become, and with their new order everything becomes even more expensive. This does not take you into account nor in this area that the case for us has become unnecessarily expensive and cumbersome!

21.) We have been constantly trying to meet you and live what you have wanted and demanded.

Then we also applied for cages and walls through Ferdigattest AS. Although we had been promised to build the wall. Even this didn't help.

22.) We have tried to get things in order, including stairs. You didn't even mention it before we picked it up at the meeting on 11.4. what do you do then? Running on with hardest shoots it should be demolished even though it has been up for now for over 6 years and never been obstructed or created any difficulties for anyone. Not even the bus that passes by here at least twice an hour throughout the day. It was we who mentioned the stairs that you are now exaggerating the "problem" with the witness only about which darkness is in it.

23.) We consider ourselves the honest and "professional" in this matter, to comply with the demands of people who promise something one day, and pull it the next day. We do not want that without a dialogue. You have "power," but that power abuses you. And this time and again! At the meeting on April 11, you said it was a search that we had experienced as difficult as we had a good meeting with you that we have not had since Kaja Aubert Lange was our case officer. Then comes the next mail as before, full of truing and abuse of power. No improvement, just as bad as it has been before, if not worse!

24.) That you are now starting to threaten with daily fines and will follow up as illegitimate cases etc. Witnesses and just tells you that you are trying to psyche us out and scare us to obey orders that are totally wanted. We have been allowed to build the wall and you have guided us. And the excesses on the utilization of the booth are so insignificant. That here is only one thing that is right, that one makes sense and uses the section on exemption. That is why it is given to be used in lesser excess conditions. Our booth is also very pretty and is only visible in on our property. As well as that our house is further down the road, therefore there will be no obstacle either to the distance to the road which was the "big" problem the first time we applied for the booth to remain, and not to be torn down as you have now agreed and wishes.

If not then we shall be threatened, forced and given daily fines to be intimidated and forced to tear down walls, booths and stairs. For us, there is a great darkness over PBE in Oslo, which means that here is the evil that prevails!
Sad that it is so, but it is the spirit of being able to grasp another mind and sensing and getting in touch with dialogue!

25.) Will emphasize that all we have built is not something that is a hindrance, shyness or obstruction to anyone. It is not something that "stands out" that is higher, bigger or anything other than what is otherwise here in Stormyrveien. That this should be a "monster" of a wall that you have claimed etc. Is so far from the reality it is possible to come, even the neighbor over the other side has a higher wall than us and it also lies much more in the road than ours. Everything that is built should and should be approved without any significant change if you want to add the "goodwill" and come to meet us!

26.) The wall is probably 18 cm too far out, but 1 meter from the road. Walls built after us just here in Stormyrveien are similar. That this should be the "big" problem of being too far out and having to be demolished. Is argumentation with level that it is a disaster to piss in the North Sea, it can become flood. The argumentation that you are doing is only to hit us, not at all solution-oriented!

27.) Complaints in from neighboring are also constructed. We have built everything on our own property, they even have one and the other that is "alike" with what we have built. Here is the argumentation that does not hold "water" at all. This is just "rail argument!"

28.) You believe that we should have knowledge of small houses etc. When we were supervised and Mrs Lange gave us recommendation how the wall should be built. Then the dwellings were not mentioned at all. That this is now being dragged in again and again is irrelevant as this is something that has never been mentioned before Mrs Lange was taken off the case. It is Mrs Lange's guidance that will be the basis for everything to be done in this matter, we have argued from day one even if you did not want to relate to the facts and the truth!

29.) Want a dialogue and a meeting, starting with a visit here on our property! So that one can by sight, can see that everything that is built is really in the most beautiful order.

30.) That we have received such different advice that one day is all right. As Mrs Lange wrote about this in mail that with us was only minor matters. That it is now "prohibitive" is not correct. And that the double communication is that has made the problems that you have come up with.

This is what Ferdigattest AS writes in our application regarding the guidance or misleading we have received:
«The municipality's duty to provide guidance:
 Reference is made to section 11 of the Public Administration Act. If it has not been communicated sufficiently clearly and clearly from the supervisory authority that the measures trigger an application duty and exemption from the current plan basis, then this should also be emphasized in an overall assessment of already implemented measures. The initiative owner must be able to trust that one can follow the advice that one applies with the relevant authority. This follows naturally from the Public Administration Act. For this reason, it is pointed out that the responsible applicant has only been described the oral communication between the municipality and the initiative owner on the part of the owner. We note that the municipality has failed to comment on this in its decision. ”

31.) Kaja Aubert Lange was very straightforward and understanding, and guided us in line with common practice here at Hellerudtoppen. Here it was "freely forward" for everything. The fact that we are about to demolish is just because PBE is running a "double game." Something legal one day, nothing legal the next day. This also pointed out to our responsible applicants Ferdigattest AS:
"By the way, not all the walls in the area were established before the house plan became applicable. Several of the walls in the area appear to have been established after 2006. From the point of view of the case, we cannot see that any cases have been registered in the Stormyrveien which concern explicit walls over the past 100 years. ”

Looks through what has happened here at Hellerudtoppen and especially at Stormyrveien. Then it looks like "everything" was allowed here before 2016. Afterwards then, everyone should be taken. Except for us, which is an "old" case that "compares" to the "standard" that is the basis of our affairs even though we were given guidance when "everything was allowed" here at Hellerudtoppen. Hopeless to relate to such people who change their minds all the way.

32.) Knowing it has become a lot negative, but our understanding of reality is so totally different from what comes out in PBE's decisions and orders at times. These are the ones in PBE that seem "normal" and straightforward. But in the next, you are the opposite. We had an uplifting and cone Structural meeting for the first time since Mrs Aubert Lange was the case officer. Then we get a mail as well as new decisions with threats. Okay, you have the power, but that power abuses you when we have been promised to build the wall of Mrs Lange on several occasions, and the booth's excess is minimal. The power you have, it abuses you towards us, it all reminds me of the "big" boy who knows he is strongest, and uses power to push down.

It is a form of bullying when it's all about such a great deal of difference you put in front of us in this case!

Berit and Jan Kåre Christensen
Crocodile 2 c
0672 Oslo