BDC DECLARED WAR ON A 77-YEAR-OLD WOMAN

This might be the most shocking case I’ve come across since I began my blog. For reasons that remain unclear to me, civil servants at Bolsover District Council seem determined to destroy the life of an elderly council tenant in Shirebrook.

Before I continue, let me say this: I believe every human organisation is made up of three kinds of people — the best, the competent, and the malicious. In my experience, most BDC employees fall into the first two categories. Unfortunately, as in any institution, there are always a few whose actions are driven by cruelty, lack of imagination, or plain vindictiveness. In this case, the resident in question appears to have had the grave misfortune of crossing paths with the third kind.

VILE BUREAUCRACY
When this woman needed compassion and a fair solution, certain BDC staff responded with cold-hearted bureaucracy and a disturbing lack of basic humanity. According to a letter I received, this entire ordeal began during the Covid lockdowns. The resident, then 72, had limited contact with her children and struggled to manage her affairs alone. What followed was a five-year campaign of harassment, inhuman decisions, and bureaucratic cruelty from two employees of BDC. Things only worsened after BDC signed a deal with the government — a deal that promised them income in return for housing asylum seekers.

“NEW ARRIVALS” IN BOLSOVER
They’re arriving in numbers that BDC refuses to disclose. They are promised meals, clothing, medicine, even pocket money and housing — all guaranteed, all free (in reality it’s not free- we pay for it in taxes). The person who contacted me never explicitly blames these new residents, and neither do I.

But when you line up the timeline, it’s hard not to notice that the campaign against this woman intensified shortly after Labour-led BDC signed its “asylum dispersal zone” agreement with the Labour government. The implication is simple: BDC needed empty homes. And some people were easier to push out than others. Let me quote directly from the letter I received form reader of S247:

“It felt as though someone had an interest in creating the current situation—to enable the Council to pursue court proceedings and, ultimately, to use any justification available to remove my chronically ill and disabled 77-year-old mother, who has now suffered four strokes, from her home.”

CIVIL SERVICE- UNTOUCHABLE MANDARINS
I’ll be honest — I’m afraid to reveal the names included in the letter. After all, it’s the UK: freedom of speech is dead here, and two-tier justice is out for people like me. Truth is the enemy of the SIR Starmer state. Transparency is hate. Ignorance is bliss.

So I need to be careful. But… the BDC staff mentioned in the letter have reputations that precede them. I knew those names before. It’s not their first rodeo. Their behaviour suggests they enjoy powerful protection — the sort of “friends in high places” that make them feel untouchable, even as they drag a half-paralysed, 77-year-old woman into court. Can you imagine going back home after a day like that? “How was your day, honey?” and reply: “Oh, I dragged a paralysed 77-year-old woman to court. We won! What’s for tea?”

The letter paints a clear picture: mediation attempts were ignored. The Council showed no interest in compromise. In fact, it seems they went out of their way to escalate the conflict. Quote:

“I have tried to ask Ms (REDACTED) to resolve this matter amicably, without involving the court, out of concern for my mother’s health and dignity. But she has been unyielding and completely indifferent to how my poor, sick, and disabled 77-year-old mother feels or what she is going through.”

COURT BATTLE
In the end, BDC took the matter to court. A bureaucracy that bends over backwards for illegal immigrants, but won’t lift a finger to accommodate a legal resident in crisis. Instead of compassion, she got confrontation. Instead of understanding, she got a legal bill:

“There is also the issue of court fees, which Ms (CENSORED) intends to add to my mother’s existing rent arrears. I am unsure whether this is even lawful, as it would appear that court costs should be paid directly to the court—not added to a tenant’s arrears balance.”

WHAT CAN I DO?
When I was a councillor, I came across a similarly shocking case — a moment when BDC displayed the same cold, bureaucratic indifference and complete lack of empathy towards a resident in distress. Back then, I had the tools to fight it. I had a voice that carried weight.

Now, as a blogger… all I can do is write about it. I wanted this to be a grand exposé. I wanted to help. But truth be told, I don’t know how. Quote:

“Is it truly necessary to go to court and subject my 77-year-old, frail, and post-stroke mother to a hearing, when on even the calmest of days she becomes disoriented and confused about where she is or what is happening?”

MP WASHES HER HANDS OF IT
I advised the family to contact our MP. The response? A shrug. Apparently, this issue falls outside her responsibilities. She refused to do anything. Probably have some important interview in Westminster to attend. Residents? Who cares? Not… whatshername area of interest. I call her Bolsover Kamala. Or Ghost of Bolsover- because she “ghosted” all of us and went to shine in Westminster and Westminster only.

What about Shirebrook’s district councillors? They are drowning in scandals, more focused on cleaning up the disgraced Cllr Fritchley mess than working for the public. All of them. Their political games matter more than people’s lives.

And the Town Council? The resident didn’t mention them at all. Residents don’t see them as a force of good anymore. They are not on our side.

THE HEARING CAME AND…
Allegedly, BDC considered withdrawing from the case, but it was “too late”, and they “didn’t want to lose money.” The resident lost yet another battle in a five-year war with her own landlord. The court seemed unmoved by the fact she had fallen into arrears while in hospital recovering from a stroke. She will now appeal the decision.

THE LETTER
The letter I received contains far more chilling details: BDC staff entering the flat with their own set of keys. Items disappearing while the resident was away. Even the day she moved in was a mess — the property was filthy, damaged, and still full of furniture and rubbish left by the previous tenant. She paid out of her own pocket to make it liveable.

Now, after five years of effort, BDC bursts in through the door screaming: “MINE! HAND IT OVER — FOR THE ILLEGALS!” Or maybe I’m being unfair? Perhaps BDC will give this home to another woman in her seventies, only to torment her into court a few years later. How much time has been wasted? How much taxpayer money? Instead of sitting down to speak like human beings, BDC chose war.

BDC CIVIL SERVANTS REFUSE TO ENGAGE
BDC did not respond to my inquiry on this matter. Not even an email of acknowledgement. This isn’t a coincidence. According to a leaked internal email, particular residents have effectively been blacklisted, with instructions issued under Labour leadership to stop engaging with those deemed ‘difficult’ or ‘critical’. It appears I’m one of them.

This isn’t just bad practice. It’s a deliberate attempt to silence scrutiny. Residents who ask questions are stonewalled, while those who toe the line are rewarded with access and attention. It’s a two-tier system of engagement that has no place in local democracy.

And in the end, it’s ordinary people who pay the price: excluded, ignored, and left without answers from the very institutions meant to serve them.

Sylwester Zwierzynski info@shirebrook247.com