Gilles Pedron's Guilt Explained!
Mr. Gilles Pedron, as has been previously stated, is a lawyer in the town of Angers France and as such has extraordinary responsibilities. A lawyer, by definition, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. A lawyer's conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer's business and personal affairs. Mr. Gilles Pedron is guilty of violating and abusing the public and professional trust bestowed upon him. We will examine why the above accusations are warranted.
In December 1997, Mr. Gilles Pedron informed the indivision that numerous repairs were needed to the house he rents from them. Along with this request, he mentioned he would entertain purchasing the house but at a reduced price due to the current condition. One member of the indivision became suspicious of Mr. Gilles Pedron's offer because it came at the same time he demanded an exceptional amount of repairs to be done. The indivision had been very diligent in keeping the house in good repair. Indeed they had given the managing agency authority to arrange for repairs up to a given generous amount without the need for immediate permission. This being the case, how could such a large amount of repair become necessary so suddenly, was the thought by a curious member of the indivision. That member arranged to visit the property the following May 1998.
In the mean time the renter became adamant that the indivision make the repairs once he found out the indivision was not interested in an immediate sale. His demands bordered on the outrageous. Mr. Gilles Pedron acquired estimates for high quality wallpapering to be done in several rooms of the house. Further he insisted on having roofs replaced on a couple of sheds in the garden. Upon receiving the second demand for repair the indivision recalled records that revealed new wallpaper and fresh paint was applied to most walls of the house at the time Mr. Gilles Pedron took possession. The remaining walls were in good condition. During the visit damage, smoke stains-dirt-graffiti, was observed on the walls. Refer to pictures on our Corrupt Lawyer article.
During this time the indivision received conflicting reports from different sources about the actual value of the property. Mr. Gilles Pedron's offer was for 550 thousand French francs, $91.6 thousand American dollars. Another report by the property management company (Legros Immobilier) indicated a value of 600 thousand francs, $100 thousand American dollars. Still another by a so-called reliable source claimed 635 thousands francs. Interestingly, when the indivision member arrived in Angers and solicited a valuation from Century 21 Realty a value of 800 thousand French francs, $133.3 thousand American dollars, was given contingent upon the house and surrounding property being put back to good order. In fact the agent went on to say that the house could be worth considerably more if some additions and modernizations were implemented. He cited that the neighborhood would support a higher value and in fact the house adjacent recently sold for 1 million 200 thousands francs, $200 thousand American dollars.
Arrangements were made well in advance through the managing agency, Legros Immobilier, to visit the property. Upon arrival and meeting with the agency the indivison discovered further abnormalities. Receipts were presented by the agency for work they approved to be done on behalf of the indivision. However according the rental contract some of the work performed was clearly the responsibility of the renter. A very important document was missing from the agencies file (etat des lieux) that describes the condition of the property at the time the renter took possession. It was also found that approval had been given to the renter to cut down a mature tree in the garden. However no verification of the renters alleged deceased condition of said tree was made by the agency according to Serge Legros, owner of Legros Immobilier.
Directly after the Legros meeting Serge Legros accompanied the member of the indivison to the property where Mr. Gilles Pedron was present. Initially as viewed from a distance on the street the view presented a shock. Discoloration on the front wall of the house gave an appearance of a let go abandoned property. Upon entry to the garden the disorder was shocking. Piles of debris were scattered about and along the garden wall. Dead bushes and trees were observed. The garden path along with the fishpond was so dilapidated they were almost unrecognizable.
In general the house and surrounding property were obviously not maintained and in fact gave the appearance of being deliberately abused. In our initial story that outlines and provides pictures of the horror that was found it is quite clear that the condition the house was found was not just an issue of poor maintenance. Obviously the renter had let go normal maintenance but little things such as the deliberate piling of debris in the garden and letting trees and shrubs die and lay where they fell added to the already present suspicion that the renter had ulterior motives. Especially since he knew well in advance about the visit by the indivision. In due course other abuses such as letting go maintenance of a new heating system installed near the beginning of the renters occupation was discovered along with certain other issues we can not publish at this time.
Soon after the indivision member returned to the property to meet with a contractor to give an estimate for work to be done on the roof. Mr. Gilles Pedron was again present and questioned the indivision member as to whether the indivision would replace the roofs on the two woodsheds. Mr. Gilles Pedron was told that the roofs would be removed and not replaced. In fact he was told that several months ago when the issue first surfaced an order was given to Mr. Legros to remove the roofs. An order never carried out. Mr. Gilles Pedron became infuriated by this news and vowed to have the issue settled another way.
After the horrible but sad visit to the property the indivision requested the renter to leave but put back the house to the good condition he found it in. Mr. Gilles Pedron adamantly refused saying, "I will never give up the ship". His strong refusal was accompanied by an equally strong promise to take the indivison to court to force them to his will. After all he is a lawyer with powers, credibility and esteem far beyond the common person. Presently he is still proving it.
Mr. Gilles Pedron has most likely coerced the court appointed expert who evaluated the current condition of the property. Of course the garden no longer presented the disarray present at the time the incriminating pictures were taken at the indivisions initial visit. Furthermore somehow the expert was made well aware of the articles on La Chronique d'Angers and was most likely cooed into believing Mr. Gilles Pedron is a victim. However the expert goes overboard in his praise of Mr. Gilles Pedron's, care taking efforts, in a report submitted to the court by him. Indeed he go so far as to not only praise Mr. Gilles Pedron's care of the property but recommends modern and innovative accouterments to embellish the abode in question.
We bring this affair to you the public and ask some questions. Would an honest man do what Mr. Gilles Pedron has done? Would he act as Mr. Gilles Pedron has acted? Wouldn't an honest man try to discuss his grievances and those against him as opposed to becoming a hot head and running straight to court? Mr. Gilles Pedron has never tried to discuss the issue. Indeed Mr. Gilles Pedron has at all times acted superior and above the law. Mr. Gilles Pedron is a disgrace to the legal system of France. He has convinced his colleagues and peers that the state of the property is nothing more than a matter of normal wear and tear and to prove he is not lacking in maintenance he is happy to display a suddenly well swept and arranged abode.
Mr. Gilles Pedron has recently been defined as a "good father" to the house he is renting however this has no relevance in the present situation. Indeed it would seem that such rhetoric is nothing more than an attempt to clothe a wolf in sheep's clothing. What is relevant is the documented abuse found at the time of the visit to the property. The observed lack of maintenance is a clear violation of the rental contract. As stated in the contract the indivision has the legal right to terminate the contract and request Mr. Gilles Pedron to vacate the premises. Mr. Gilles Pedron was requested to leave and he refused. The question of the owner's responsibility to repair or replace is moot. Mr. Gilles Pedron's attack against the indivision has been one great smoke screen to mislead his peers and employer away from the fact of his guilt.
The case is still to be heard by the court in Saumur however Mr. Gilles Pedron remains unsatisfied. He has taken offense that this issue is published openly for the public to see. He again has run straight to court however this time on charges of libel against the indivision. We at La Chronique d'Angers do not blame him. Should we were a crook the last thing we would want would be for the whole world to know about our illegal business. Indeed the typical operating procedure for a guilty individual when discovered is to discredit the accusers. Mr. Gilles Pedron is doing just that.