Recap
Note: This is a recap of our interaction with Ms Wells and Mr Capponi from the end of April on. For anybody who might be claiming it is defamation, it certainly is not! It is only a warning to protect other people who might come into contact with the people in question, for them to know who the person they are dealing with is. This is all documented in our emails; complete exchange may be found at request. This is also to give people a chance to object if they see any untruthful, non-exact interaction.
Note: For clarity, the exact words in the emails are written in italics, the dates and the person who wrote it are either indicated at the outset or at the end in parenthesis.
****
Ms Wells sent a raccommandata asking for an assemblea over the Easter holidays, it arrived late. We suggested to sit and talk, Ms Wells declined saying it's better through email, that everything is written. Apparently Carlo must have voiced the idea of selling the house together as well on the phone.
At that point, Mr Capponi entered into the scene. We had reminded them about the expenses of the house from November on, Capponi stated we couldn't discuss this without getting a preventivo first. He also said the place was run badly and accused Carlo De Vincentiis as being responsible for the situation because he was the “only Italian”.
I wrote to Ms Wells that Mr Capponi's putting the blame on my husband was ridiculous given that her boys were practically Italian given they had been living in Italy from an early age, their fidanzate living with them were Italian as well.
Capponi was also claiming the buyer or a tenant would like to know the rules so they should be written. We, logically we'd say, said we had rules in place already, and as we were both selling our house we thought it was meaningless to write down things for other people who were going to use the place.
As he had claimed “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitare, a quanto riferito dai figli di Lismay, “incomprensioni”, termine da lei usato, o prevaricazioni concetto da loro espresso.” (Capponi, May 3rd)
we asked, legitimately, how a regolamento would have prevented what happened with the boys. The problem was not caused due to a lack of rules or dispute about what the rules were because they were not written, it was caused by first let's say a slip of responsibility when the electricity of the Garforth's jumped and they turned the outside electricity on us instead of them, then the problem escalated due to their negligence, uncare about the situation and not covering their mistake. It then reached a peak with Simon's, the younger son of Ms Wells, accusations of lying and other attacks. From where everything degenerated and started rolling down the slippery slope.
I wrote to Ms Wells saying we believe in good-intentions and when good-intentions are not there, peace cannot be imposed by regolamento. It was a long message detailing what had happened with her boys. I also reminded her:
“Your not living here does not relieve you from your maintenance responsibilities.” As, hopefully understandably, we do not wish to make any advance payment on your behalf, please see to it that you attend the grass for your part of the garden as agreed: either come and do it yourself or send someone over to cut it.” (Gülin, May 3rd close to midnight)
And at the end of my message, I made a proposal for selling the house together.
The following morning, Ms Wells only responded with an “Ok, thanks Gülin.” In the evening, there was a prompt response from Mr Capponi that surprised us. He had just jumped on the idea of selling the house together without addressing any of the previous arguments and had sent a detailed proposal about how to split the money! We were taken aback by this as he had not come up with a concrete proposal for the regolamento they claimed they wanted and was necessary. He sent this proposal without even discussing with us, and disregarding our saying we'd be sending proposals. (We thought it only logical we come up with a proposal as the idea/suggestion was ours. We would have expected the other party to ask “What do you have in mind?” first. Out of courtesy.) What Capponi suggested was only in their interest. Dismissing all the money we poured into the beautification of this place. So we were supposed to share the revenue according to the catasto and the miglioramento they were offering was 5 %; for us, a ridiculous percent. Naturally, we turned it down. We also closed the door on any possibility of selling the house together realizing that they would never be fair and would only try to make more money out of us.
So we answered declining his suggestion of selling the house together according to the catasto. I had written the answer in English as my Italian is not good. And after revising, my husband sent it with an opening “Buonasera, rispondiamo in inglese per maggiore chiarezza di comprensione reciproca, visto che in casa tra noi usiamo l'inglese.”
Mr Capponi's response was fierce! He said he cancelled the letter without even reading it, we were in Italy and we had to speak Italian. He said “Adeguatevi!”
From then on, it became a matter of ego for him to impose his will on us to translate something they obviously had read into Italian and force us to sell the house at their interest.
Three days later, 8th of May, we got a letter from Ms Wells addressed to Carlo claiming “Non ho potuto leggere l'ultima email che avete mandato perché giustamente è stata cancellata da Claudio.”
However, the rest of her message showed obvious implications that she had actually read our email. We had said “we believe it is best to sit down and talk this in person, face to face. We can sit down here, in your place or in the garden if you wish.”
Lismay was saying “Credo che è meglio se tutto passa per scritto.”
More than that, she wrote:
“La decisione da vendere la casa come villa è molto interessante pero non possibile se chiedete un prezzo fuori mercato e non possibile se non volete condividere in percentuale come ha suggerito Claudio.
Ha tutto il vantaggio per voi, ma niente per me.”
How was it possible she deducted all this if Claudio had really deleted our email without reading it and she had not read it?
Ms Wells's letter ended with “Cosi ho chiesto a Francesco di portare avanti il discorso dell’affitto, e sembra c'è già qualcuno interessato. Sarà forse[C1]* solo per un anno mentre voi potete continuare a provare a vendere la vostra casa ed eventualmente arrivare a un d'accordo per vendere l'intera casa insieme.”
There was a side note from Capponi saying [C1] “Lascerei questo fastidio per loro in tempo indeterminato, è meno sopportabile”
They had forgotten to delete the notes before sending the mail to us. I'd like to think it is life's way of exposing people with bad-intentions.
This shows how Mr Capponi has been trying to make life hell for us from the very beginning of our interaction as evidenced openly in his words. This is another clear evidence how Mr Capponi has been trying to disturb our peace.
What he and Ms Wells do not see and understand is that we do not see neighbors as fastidio. When moving here, we wanted neighbors because it is always good to have somebody to rely on when you are living in the countryside. To keep an eye on the house when you are away, to ask for things in case of need or emergencies. In fact, that has been the case until Ms. Wells's sons broke the rules and then tried to shift the blame on us. Sure, having neighbors who attack, who aggress you, who openly declare they want your unwell-being is hell.
In the same letter, Capponi was advising Ms Wells not to even say “Buongiorno” when addressing us!
At that point, it was perfectly clear that their aim was not to come to any sort of agreement with us but to make us uncomfortable, disturb our peace so that they could force us to sell our houses together for their own interest in their own terms.
Note: For clarity, the exact words in the emails are written in italics, the dates and the person who wrote it are either indicated at the outset or at the end in parenthesis.
****
Ms Wells sent a raccommandata asking for an assemblea over the Easter holidays, it arrived late. We suggested to sit and talk, Ms Wells declined saying it's better through email, that everything is written. Apparently Carlo must have voiced the idea of selling the house together as well on the phone.
At that point, Mr Capponi entered into the scene. We had reminded them about the expenses of the house from November on, Capponi stated we couldn't discuss this without getting a preventivo first. He also said the place was run badly and accused Carlo De Vincentiis as being responsible for the situation because he was the “only Italian”.
I wrote to Ms Wells that Mr Capponi's putting the blame on my husband was ridiculous given that her boys were practically Italian given they had been living in Italy from an early age, their fidanzate living with them were Italian as well.
Capponi was also claiming the buyer or a tenant would like to know the rules so they should be written. We, logically we'd say, said we had rules in place already, and as we were both selling our house we thought it was meaningless to write down things for other people who were going to use the place.
As he had claimed “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitare, a quanto riferito dai figli di Lismay, “incomprensioni”, termine da lei usato, o prevaricazioni concetto da loro espresso.” (Capponi, May 3rd)
we asked, legitimately, how a regolamento would have prevented what happened with the boys. The problem was not caused due to a lack of rules or dispute about what the rules were because they were not written, it was caused by first let's say a slip of responsibility when the electricity of the Garforth's jumped and they turned the outside electricity on us instead of them, then the problem escalated due to their negligence, uncare about the situation and not covering their mistake. It then reached a peak with Simon's, the younger son of Ms Wells, accusations of lying and other attacks. From where everything degenerated and started rolling down the slippery slope.
I wrote to Ms Wells saying we believe in good-intentions and when good-intentions are not there, peace cannot be imposed by regolamento. It was a long message detailing what had happened with her boys. I also reminded her:
“Your not living here does not relieve you from your maintenance responsibilities.” As, hopefully understandably, we do not wish to make any advance payment on your behalf, please see to it that you attend the grass for your part of the garden as agreed: either come and do it yourself or send someone over to cut it.” (Gülin, May 3rd close to midnight)
And at the end of my message, I made a proposal for selling the house together.
The following morning, Ms Wells only responded with an “Ok, thanks Gülin.” In the evening, there was a prompt response from Mr Capponi that surprised us. He had just jumped on the idea of selling the house together without addressing any of the previous arguments and had sent a detailed proposal about how to split the money! We were taken aback by this as he had not come up with a concrete proposal for the regolamento they claimed they wanted and was necessary. He sent this proposal without even discussing with us, and disregarding our saying we'd be sending proposals. (We thought it only logical we come up with a proposal as the idea/suggestion was ours. We would have expected the other party to ask “What do you have in mind?” first. Out of courtesy.) What Capponi suggested was only in their interest. Dismissing all the money we poured into the beautification of this place. So we were supposed to share the revenue according to the catasto and the miglioramento they were offering was 5 %; for us, a ridiculous percent. Naturally, we turned it down. We also closed the door on any possibility of selling the house together realizing that they would never be fair and would only try to make more money out of us.
So we answered declining his suggestion of selling the house together according to the catasto. I had written the answer in English as my Italian is not good. And after revising, my husband sent it with an opening “Buonasera, rispondiamo in inglese per maggiore chiarezza di comprensione reciproca, visto che in casa tra noi usiamo l'inglese.”
Mr Capponi's response was fierce! He said he cancelled the letter without even reading it, we were in Italy and we had to speak Italian. He said “Adeguatevi!”
From then on, it became a matter of ego for him to impose his will on us to translate something they obviously had read into Italian and force us to sell the house at their interest.
Three days later, 8th of May, we got a letter from Ms Wells addressed to Carlo claiming “Non ho potuto leggere l'ultima email che avete mandato perché giustamente è stata cancellata da Claudio.”
However, the rest of her message showed obvious implications that she had actually read our email. We had said “we believe it is best to sit down and talk this in person, face to face. We can sit down here, in your place or in the garden if you wish.”
Lismay was saying “Credo che è meglio se tutto passa per scritto.”
More than that, she wrote:
“La decisione da vendere la casa come villa è molto interessante pero non possibile se chiedete un prezzo fuori mercato e non possibile se non volete condividere in percentuale come ha suggerito Claudio.
Ha tutto il vantaggio per voi, ma niente per me.”
How was it possible she deducted all this if Claudio had really deleted our email without reading it and she had not read it?
Ms Wells's letter ended with “Cosi ho chiesto a Francesco di portare avanti il discorso dell’affitto, e sembra c'è già qualcuno interessato. Sarà forse[C1]* solo per un anno mentre voi potete continuare a provare a vendere la vostra casa ed eventualmente arrivare a un d'accordo per vendere l'intera casa insieme.”
There was a side note from Capponi saying [C1] “Lascerei questo fastidio per loro in tempo indeterminato, è meno sopportabile”
They had forgotten to delete the notes before sending the mail to us. I'd like to think it is life's way of exposing people with bad-intentions.
This shows how Mr Capponi has been trying to make life hell for us from the very beginning of our interaction as evidenced openly in his words. This is another clear evidence how Mr Capponi has been trying to disturb our peace.
What he and Ms Wells do not see and understand is that we do not see neighbors as fastidio. When moving here, we wanted neighbors because it is always good to have somebody to rely on when you are living in the countryside. To keep an eye on the house when you are away, to ask for things in case of need or emergencies. In fact, that has been the case until Ms. Wells's sons broke the rules and then tried to shift the blame on us. Sure, having neighbors who attack, who aggress you, who openly declare they want your unwell-being is hell.
In the same letter, Capponi was advising Ms Wells not to even say “Buongiorno” when addressing us!
At that point, it was perfectly clear that their aim was not to come to any sort of agreement with us but to make us uncomfortable, disturb our peace so that they could force us to sell our houses together for their own interest in their own terms.
Denial of Common Duties and Incivility
On May3rd, we sent Ms Wells an email reminding her of her responsibilities taking care of the common garden:
“As Simon dutifully reminded us, I'd like to remind you “Your not living here does not relieve you from your maintenance responsibilities.” As, hopefully understandably, we do not wish to make any advance payment on your behalf, please see to it that you attend the grass for your part of the garden as agreed: either come and do it yourself or send someone over to cut it.”
She and Capponi dodged this responsibility for several messages, then on 12th of May, Ms Wells wrote:
“As for my responsibilities for the garden and the house, I understand that you have cut the grass several times, thank you. If you want to prune the trees this year and collect all the olives then that is your decision, I will not be participating. When we have come to some agreement in writing about the division of the land or rules of the common parts you can start to ask for a “rimborso”spese” from that date, but not before.”
Note that she just thanks barefaced, no need for talking about paying her part. Then tells us we need to pay if we want olives... As if the trees do not need to be pruned even if we are not picking the olives and as if she is not obliged to participate for looking after the trees whether she picks olives up or not!
Mind you, a regolamento is not necessary by law for a condominio minimo of two like this. So she is basically blackmailing us to impose her will on us by not paying a spese which she is obliged by law. (Putting conditions which she has no right to in order to do her duties is called blackmail.) What's more, we had not even asked for the rimborsa delle spese, we had only reminded her of her duty to look after the garden. We have had an agreement with her sons since we have moved here in August 2010 and it has been honored all these years. It is important to note the fact that Ms Wells refused her responsibility from the very beginning, because it shows this is a pattern of behavior, not a one time slip.
As we wrote to Capponi on July 14th,
“Se Lismay non gliel’avesse già tradotta, lo facciamo noi:
“Solo dopo avere accettato un qualche accordo scritto sulla divisione del terreno o un regolamento delle parti comuni, solo da allora potrete cominciare a chiedere il rimborso delle spese comuni, non prima”.
Attiro la sua attenzione sulla delicatezza della formula “cominciare a chiedere”, non semplicemente “chiedere” (come a dire che di strada ce ne sarà da fare comunque per ottenere ciò che ci spetta) e aggiungo che, in qualità di comproprietaria, Lismay è tenuta PER LEGGE (non sulla base di un regolamento condominiale) a condividere le spese per il mantenimento della cosa comune.
Vede, la pretesa di Lismay è un buon esempio concreto di quanto sia inutile un regolamento di fronte alla volontà di una delle due parti a non ottemperare ad un accordo. E’ del tutto chiaro che il rischio di conseguenze per Lismay è estremamente basso, visto che parliamo di cifre irrisorie (100-200 euro?). Lei sa molto bene che nessuno si prenderà la briga di andare davanti ad un giudice per una simile controversia. E’ solo per questo che può infischiarsene senza vergogna. Se non ci sono fiducia reciproca e volontà di collaborazione, nessun accordo (scritto o non scritto, non importa) può funzionare.”
The response from Capponi on 22nd of July was “La proposta di Lismay era quindi troppo generosa in quanto presupponeva comunque un rimborso anche se non dovuto.”
They are simply and brazenfacedly trying to hide behind the excuse of not having a written regolamento not to pay their dues. They know very well that in such condominio minimo written regolamento is not required. But, there is a habit of use. A use that has been going on and honored for more than 8 years (from 2010 to 2018 when they left) with the sons of Ms Wells. The sons will be asked as a witness when we make a denuncia. We expect them not to lie. Actually it would be obvious as if there was any question about the regolamento until now, it would have caused problems and it would have been demanded long before by either party.
The claim Ms Wells and Capponi put forward for writing down the regolamento is “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo quello che è successo con i ragazzi.”
referring to the problem we had with her sons after they had left the electricity on us for three months in the summer of 2017. We have reminded her that the problem was not caused by an argument about what the rule were because they were not written, but because of irresponsibility of taking action when, inadvertently, the sons broke the rules. Plus, their negligence afterwards about settling the matter, their trying to attack us on other issues instead of taking up responsibility for their mistake maturely.
Mr Capponi and Wells have totally ignoring or distorted reality, constructing a crooked alternative in their minds.
We had been asking in several mails to both Ms Wells and Capponi and had not got an answer. On our email of 14th of July, we asked once again:
“Le abbiamo chiesto molte volte di dimostrarci con un esempio concreto a che cosa servono delle regole scritte e come possano aiutare ad impedire i litigi in un caso come il nostro. Le chiediamo ancora una volta se sa spiegarci come “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo” sarebbe stato utile ad evitare quello che è successo con i ragazzi.”
They have not been able to give an answer. As there is no answer. As the conflict had nothing to do with rules not being written. But they cannot accept it.
On July 28th we wrote: “le chiediamo per l’ennesima e ultima volta”
This time, we got an answer. The answer from Mr Capponi on August 4th was this: “Mi rendo conto che dei principi di civiltà non possano essere trasmessi a chi non vuole recepirli”
In fact, he's been insulting us and especially me with being uncivil, because I am “origine extra-communitaria.” Ci rendo conto che dei principi di civiltà e “basic decency” and “common sense” non possano essere trasmessi a chi non vuole capire.
This is important to note too. When Mr Capponi cannot answer a very valid question, he resorts to personal attacks. This is an example of his incivility. As will be demonstrated, unfortunately, this is a pattern of behavior too, not a one-time thing.
“Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.” - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Yes, “To err is human, but to persist in the mistake is diabolical.” People can make erroneous claims. That could have been excusable. But Capponi's insisting on the wrong statement is diabolical. What's more, his attacking us, resorting to ad hominems for pointing out his wrong is worse than diabolical.
His ego must have been hurt so very bad at his mistake that he just couldn't accept it and had no other choice than attack us.
On May3rd, we sent Ms Wells an email reminding her of her responsibilities taking care of the common garden:
“As Simon dutifully reminded us, I'd like to remind you “Your not living here does not relieve you from your maintenance responsibilities.” As, hopefully understandably, we do not wish to make any advance payment on your behalf, please see to it that you attend the grass for your part of the garden as agreed: either come and do it yourself or send someone over to cut it.”
She and Capponi dodged this responsibility for several messages, then on 12th of May, Ms Wells wrote:
“As for my responsibilities for the garden and the house, I understand that you have cut the grass several times, thank you. If you want to prune the trees this year and collect all the olives then that is your decision, I will not be participating. When we have come to some agreement in writing about the division of the land or rules of the common parts you can start to ask for a “rimborso”spese” from that date, but not before.”
Note that she just thanks barefaced, no need for talking about paying her part. Then tells us we need to pay if we want olives... As if the trees do not need to be pruned even if we are not picking the olives and as if she is not obliged to participate for looking after the trees whether she picks olives up or not!
Mind you, a regolamento is not necessary by law for a condominio minimo of two like this. So she is basically blackmailing us to impose her will on us by not paying a spese which she is obliged by law. (Putting conditions which she has no right to in order to do her duties is called blackmail.) What's more, we had not even asked for the rimborsa delle spese, we had only reminded her of her duty to look after the garden. We have had an agreement with her sons since we have moved here in August 2010 and it has been honored all these years. It is important to note the fact that Ms Wells refused her responsibility from the very beginning, because it shows this is a pattern of behavior, not a one time slip.
As we wrote to Capponi on July 14th,
“Se Lismay non gliel’avesse già tradotta, lo facciamo noi:
“Solo dopo avere accettato un qualche accordo scritto sulla divisione del terreno o un regolamento delle parti comuni, solo da allora potrete cominciare a chiedere il rimborso delle spese comuni, non prima”.
Attiro la sua attenzione sulla delicatezza della formula “cominciare a chiedere”, non semplicemente “chiedere” (come a dire che di strada ce ne sarà da fare comunque per ottenere ciò che ci spetta) e aggiungo che, in qualità di comproprietaria, Lismay è tenuta PER LEGGE (non sulla base di un regolamento condominiale) a condividere le spese per il mantenimento della cosa comune.
Vede, la pretesa di Lismay è un buon esempio concreto di quanto sia inutile un regolamento di fronte alla volontà di una delle due parti a non ottemperare ad un accordo. E’ del tutto chiaro che il rischio di conseguenze per Lismay è estremamente basso, visto che parliamo di cifre irrisorie (100-200 euro?). Lei sa molto bene che nessuno si prenderà la briga di andare davanti ad un giudice per una simile controversia. E’ solo per questo che può infischiarsene senza vergogna. Se non ci sono fiducia reciproca e volontà di collaborazione, nessun accordo (scritto o non scritto, non importa) può funzionare.”
The response from Capponi on 22nd of July was “La proposta di Lismay era quindi troppo generosa in quanto presupponeva comunque un rimborso anche se non dovuto.”
They are simply and brazenfacedly trying to hide behind the excuse of not having a written regolamento not to pay their dues. They know very well that in such condominio minimo written regolamento is not required. But, there is a habit of use. A use that has been going on and honored for more than 8 years (from 2010 to 2018 when they left) with the sons of Ms Wells. The sons will be asked as a witness when we make a denuncia. We expect them not to lie. Actually it would be obvious as if there was any question about the regolamento until now, it would have caused problems and it would have been demanded long before by either party.
The claim Ms Wells and Capponi put forward for writing down the regolamento is “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo quello che è successo con i ragazzi.”
referring to the problem we had with her sons after they had left the electricity on us for three months in the summer of 2017. We have reminded her that the problem was not caused by an argument about what the rule were because they were not written, but because of irresponsibility of taking action when, inadvertently, the sons broke the rules. Plus, their negligence afterwards about settling the matter, their trying to attack us on other issues instead of taking up responsibility for their mistake maturely.
Mr Capponi and Wells have totally ignoring or distorted reality, constructing a crooked alternative in their minds.
We had been asking in several mails to both Ms Wells and Capponi and had not got an answer. On our email of 14th of July, we asked once again:
“Le abbiamo chiesto molte volte di dimostrarci con un esempio concreto a che cosa servono delle regole scritte e come possano aiutare ad impedire i litigi in un caso come il nostro. Le chiediamo ancora una volta se sa spiegarci come “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo” sarebbe stato utile ad evitare quello che è successo con i ragazzi.”
They have not been able to give an answer. As there is no answer. As the conflict had nothing to do with rules not being written. But they cannot accept it.
On July 28th we wrote: “le chiediamo per l’ennesima e ultima volta”
This time, we got an answer. The answer from Mr Capponi on August 4th was this: “Mi rendo conto che dei principi di civiltà non possano essere trasmessi a chi non vuole recepirli”
In fact, he's been insulting us and especially me with being uncivil, because I am “origine extra-communitaria.” Ci rendo conto che dei principi di civiltà e “basic decency” and “common sense” non possano essere trasmessi a chi non vuole capire.
This is important to note too. When Mr Capponi cannot answer a very valid question, he resorts to personal attacks. This is an example of his incivility. As will be demonstrated, unfortunately, this is a pattern of behavior too, not a one-time thing.
“Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.” - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Yes, “To err is human, but to persist in the mistake is diabolical.” People can make erroneous claims. That could have been excusable. But Capponi's insisting on the wrong statement is diabolical. What's more, his attacking us, resorting to ad hominems for pointing out his wrong is worse than diabolical.
His ego must have been hurt so very bad at his mistake that he just couldn't accept it and had no other choice than attack us.
Lack of Logic and Unfair Judgement- Maleducati
Mr Capponi in his email of September 23rd claims it's impossible to communicate with us through raccomandata because we don't have our name at the gate. This is another point to pinpoint his irrationality as we receive all kinds of mail and we have never ever in all these 10 years have put our names, neither ours not Garforths's names have been on the letterbox. Ever. Plus, we received the first raccomandata they sent, safe from it being delivered late by the post! So completely without our fault.
On the contrary, it's totally their fault that they send a raccomandata and an assemblea date over on Easter vacation, and they blame us. That's their routine habit as well. Shifting blame and responsibility.
Why they couldn't decently have asked us to meet to talk over the matter of the house like we have done before, why we couldn't decently sit down and talk is all an enigma to us. Of course, we know the reason. It being the degenerated situation due to her sons mistakes. However, Ms. Wells claims she lives in the present. (Letter to Gulin, 12th of May: “I however live in the present and I do not see any reason for turning the pages back to years ago about things that happened between you and my sons that led to conflict.”) Unfortunately, this is another way she is fooling herself as all their actions demonstrate otherwise. I responded 26th of May saying: "I find this rhetoric of living in the present to be bosh. It's an argument people who do not wish to confront the past mistakes cling to. It's a very nice concept of course, but it is also something very very few people in the world actually manage to do.
The reason we are at this point today is because of yesterday. And if yesterday is not fixed and the hurts somehow “made right” there is no healing. Obviously, the present is tainted because of the past. So to me, obviously, if you want to heal, you need to go back and heal what has been broken. You need to fix the bonds of the community that has been damaged."
Capponi proves my point, that I am right, as he himself states on August 4th: “Gli attacchi riferiti dai ragazzi, le discussioni da loro riferite senza connessione logica dell’altra persona, il fiume di parole che uscivano da quella bocca (e adesso dalla penna) somiglianti più ad un vomito che ad una fonte di pace ed armonia sono sicuramente una mia invenzione.”
It is of course his invention. So they have constructed an image of us from what happened with the boys. This is totally without ground as they have not heard our part of the story, but came to conclusions about us only by stories told from one side. Of course, it's somebody from their side and as they are tribal they did not feel the need to investigate before judging. Showing total unfairness.
Capponi, in the same email called us “veramente maleducati” saying "questa è solo un giudizio di parte senza aver preso in considerazione le ragioni della controparte: veramente da maleducati.” referring to our statement that the incidence which led to the conflict with the boys was their irresponsibility. It is of course always us who is maleducati, they always have reasons and we have none! That's how self-centered they are.
So they have labelled us bad from what was recounted to them by the sons (who were, I repeat, the guilty party initiating the incidence which led to conflict) and are trying to make us pay for it. As I wrote to Carlo, CC'd to Lismay on August 5th:
“Simon and Raiza had wished us to have the worst neighbors after they left, I suppose Lismay and her delegato are seeing that it comes true. Trying hard to give us a hard time.”
Mr Capponi in his email of September 23rd claims it's impossible to communicate with us through raccomandata because we don't have our name at the gate. This is another point to pinpoint his irrationality as we receive all kinds of mail and we have never ever in all these 10 years have put our names, neither ours not Garforths's names have been on the letterbox. Ever. Plus, we received the first raccomandata they sent, safe from it being delivered late by the post! So completely without our fault.
On the contrary, it's totally their fault that they send a raccomandata and an assemblea date over on Easter vacation, and they blame us. That's their routine habit as well. Shifting blame and responsibility.
Why they couldn't decently have asked us to meet to talk over the matter of the house like we have done before, why we couldn't decently sit down and talk is all an enigma to us. Of course, we know the reason. It being the degenerated situation due to her sons mistakes. However, Ms. Wells claims she lives in the present. (Letter to Gulin, 12th of May: “I however live in the present and I do not see any reason for turning the pages back to years ago about things that happened between you and my sons that led to conflict.”) Unfortunately, this is another way she is fooling herself as all their actions demonstrate otherwise. I responded 26th of May saying: "I find this rhetoric of living in the present to be bosh. It's an argument people who do not wish to confront the past mistakes cling to. It's a very nice concept of course, but it is also something very very few people in the world actually manage to do.
The reason we are at this point today is because of yesterday. And if yesterday is not fixed and the hurts somehow “made right” there is no healing. Obviously, the present is tainted because of the past. So to me, obviously, if you want to heal, you need to go back and heal what has been broken. You need to fix the bonds of the community that has been damaged."
Capponi proves my point, that I am right, as he himself states on August 4th: “Gli attacchi riferiti dai ragazzi, le discussioni da loro riferite senza connessione logica dell’altra persona, il fiume di parole che uscivano da quella bocca (e adesso dalla penna) somiglianti più ad un vomito che ad una fonte di pace ed armonia sono sicuramente una mia invenzione.”
It is of course his invention. So they have constructed an image of us from what happened with the boys. This is totally without ground as they have not heard our part of the story, but came to conclusions about us only by stories told from one side. Of course, it's somebody from their side and as they are tribal they did not feel the need to investigate before judging. Showing total unfairness.
Capponi, in the same email called us “veramente maleducati” saying "questa è solo un giudizio di parte senza aver preso in considerazione le ragioni della controparte: veramente da maleducati.” referring to our statement that the incidence which led to the conflict with the boys was their irresponsibility. It is of course always us who is maleducati, they always have reasons and we have none! That's how self-centered they are.
So they have labelled us bad from what was recounted to them by the sons (who were, I repeat, the guilty party initiating the incidence which led to conflict) and are trying to make us pay for it. As I wrote to Carlo, CC'd to Lismay on August 5th:
“Simon and Raiza had wished us to have the worst neighbors after they left, I suppose Lismay and her delegato are seeing that it comes true. Trying hard to give us a hard time.”
Garbage- The Ultimate Lack and Denial of Common Sense and Basic Duties/Responsibilities
The younger son of Ms Wells and his fidanzata who have been living in this house have left their garbage out in the garden in November 2018 before they moved out. Even though Ms. Wells and her older son came several times to the premises to clear stuff from their house, they have done nothing about the garbage. We waited patiently for them to come and clean it for nine months, we didn't say anything not to cause trouble in our deteriorating relationship. But after realizing they had no intention of communicating civilly with us as they kept accusing us baselessly and threatening us, we reminded them of the garbage to be cleaned. Even if they had not been aware of the situation, which is almost impossible, they have been clearly notified of it and to clean it at the end of our two emails on July 29.
PS: Vi invitiamo a rimuovere al più presto i vostri rifiuti abbandonati ormai da oltre otto mesi all’esterno del locale dell’autoclave. O forse non si può fare senza un regolamento?
PS: Vi preghiamo di rimuovere al più presto i vostri rifiuti abbandonati ormai da oltre otto mesi all’esterno del locale dell’autoclave (in allegato trovate le foto). Ci auguriamo non veniate a dirci che per farlo occorra un regolamento.
The response we got from Claudio Capponi, who Lismay Wells has asserted that he was very rational, (“Certainly he is on my side but he is a very rational man...... I do not think that we are that cynical that we can only look at our point of view, we mean to be rational, fair and just, contrary to what you imagine!” email from Ms Wells on 12th of May.) was this:
“Ci sono rifiuti? chi stabilisce se sono rifiuti?"
Judge for yourself if the words of Ms Wells of saying they mean to be rational, fair and just and do not look at only their point of view is any credible.
We have responded with a message to Ms. Wells thinking she might be more rational and take action to correct this situation of the garbage in the garden. As Mr. Capponi had written a mail addressing Ms Wells and CC'd us instead of responding directly to us, we did the same and CC'd this email written to Carlo De Vincentiis by Gülin De Vincentiis on 9th of August to Ms. Wells.
“Garbage is garbage is garbage. Nobody in his right mind could claim those rotting things anything other than garbage. No, as a sane person, of course I cannot understand such a mind. It's now certified he is a nutcase but then, what I don't understand is Lismay... How come she doesn't say anything about this?
Where is the “I'm sorry Gülin, I'm sorry Carlo, I'm sorry on behalf of Claudio. I agree, he truly exaggerated.”
Where is the “I'm sorry on behalf of Simon and Raiza. They should not have left their garbage in the garden.”
Where is the “I will see to it that David comes and cleans the garbage right away.”?
Where is the sorry from her?”
There was again no response or action taken by them until they came for the flooding of the house on said September 20, Sunday. As the muratori, the guest and the agent Francesco will confirm, the garbage was still here. Some of them we had carried and left at their doorstep as it had become too intolerable for us.
We obviously should have called the vigili urbani, taken note of the garbage, and asked them to be fined. We of course have the photos, even videos of their garbage and how long they were left here for. So we reserve that right still.
Part of the garbage was cleaned on September 20, Sunday. The rest was left for the elder son David to come and pick up. In fact, it was finally picked up by David on September 25th, Wednesday. The day before, that is September 24th, when he had come without the key to the padlock, he had said he had left this place to live with his fidanzata not to get involved in such matters. I asked why, then, was he here? He said he loved his mum and wanted to help her out. He also claimed he was doing us a favor.
Now... This is an important point. Apparently, it's an intrinsic trait in the family. They don't see duties as obligations but a favor to the other people involved. I wrote him an sms after he left:
“You know what's so wrong with your thinking? Doing something that should have been done without anybody having to remind and keep on reminding you is NOT called a favor. Look it up in the dictionary. Favor: an act of kindness beyond what is due or usual.
What was due was that garbage not being there in the first place, or having been removed a year ago!
When you clean that garbage, you will NOT be doing us a favor but cleaning up behind your brother and/or covering your mother's buttocks. Mind you, if you do not, we will be calling the carabinieri and complaining about your leaving the garbage so that they put a fine on you. Enough yaa enough! Enough of the insolence!
You can dare say you are doing us a favor. No David no! You are only doing the duties that your brother and your mother did not do! You are doing something for THEM! Not US!”
It is true that we are glad the garbage is gone, but it certainly was NOT a favor, and that is exactly what is the problem with the logic of everybody in the family: They do not see their responsibilities as their duties, they do not want to pay the price if they fall behind their duties. Instead of apologizing for it and fixing it, they pretend they are doing us a favor. This is what infuriates me!
“Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.” - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Yes, “To err is human, but to persist in the mistake is diabolical.” And so many people, unfortunately, insist on their mistakes. That's one thing that makes the world a horrible place and escalates problems. Problems which could simply dissipate just so easily if the one in the wrong was courageous enough to accept his mistake.
The only person in the family who seems to be capable of self-reflection and has maturity to admit and understand once his mistake is shown is David. We are still waiting for the owner Ms Wells to show some maturity and ask for acceptance of apologies but we are not holding our breath.
Prologue:
This incidence too demonstrates perfectly well that written rules are meaningless where people are not well-intentioned. As I wrote to my husband and CC'd Ms Wells on 9th of August:
“Let's say it was written. That we need to spell out every small detail, the basic manners. What do you do when one person retorts to you “Ah is there garbage? Who establishes it is garbage?”
No, you don't deal with such people. There is no way to talk to such indecent, uncivil, decadent people. I'm sorry, but that is the case.”
Padlock
When we came here in August 2010, the Garforths who had been living here were using the gate with a padlock. The lock of the gate was broken and instead of having it fixed, they had just put a chain on it. At our initiative, we had the lock fixed and started using the gate properly. However, it was revealed that the lock was not the only problem but the gate itself was broken. In the summer, with the expansion of the metal, the gate did not close. We wanted it fixed but the inhabitants of the prima piano shrank from any expenses not strictly necessary even if necessary for a proper living space. As they were students, we did not insist on having the gate fixed and kept using it with a chain and padlock during the summer months. When the weather cooled down, we went back to the proper lock. This situation is known very well by every single person who has been living in this house for the last ten years.
Last year, when the younger son Simon was leaving the house he had mentioned that the owner was, as we knew, Ms Wells and we could speak to her about such matters if we wanted to. Truthfully, we knew that they do not wish to spend a single cent on the house, and given they were selling the house, given Ms Wells denied even the ordinary expenses, it was obvious she wouldn't be willing to do anything about it, so we kept quiet. However, as there are many news every day of gates collapsing, leading to both material and physical damage and even leading to death, given that we use it so often and we have a small child, we considered this an important issue and informed them with our email of July 28, that the gate needs to be fixed.
PP.SS. Vista l’opportunità di poter parlare di cose concrete, vi ricordiamo che - come sapete - il cancello è difettoso: i pilastri non sono stabili e and ogni stagione subiscono inclinazioni che non consento ilarità corretta chiusura. Esiste un pericolo concreto cui occorre porre rimedio. A suo tempo avevamo chiesto un preventivo, quantificato in 900 euro, per la sua sistemazione. Se vorrete proporne uno alternativo, lo attendiamo. In caso contrario, siete avvisati che per eventuali incidenti connessi al malfunzionamento del cancello o danni a persone o cosa, vi riterremo responsabili.
There was again no response from the party of the first floor. Summer came, the gate again would not close. So we took out the chain to secure the gate. Carlo De Vincentiis was extremely over-thoughtful, -as he always is... even with people who have been denying all responsibility- and left the chain only with a rope. The summer went by like that and as I was home with my daughter all summer, we made do with the rope. However, as schools started and I started leaving the house regularly, that is leaving the premises totally empty, the rope was too much trouble and not enough security. So I asked Mr. De Vincentiis to put the padlock. He said they might not have the key, as it is a habit that they lose their keys. (They do not have the keys to the letterbox, leave the letterbox we use in common overflowing with their post; they do not have the key to the electricity box and have asked us to give it to them over the years.) I protested saying the gate needed to be locked, if he had any reservations we would send them a message so that they would be informed of it. In fact, that's exactly what we did. Along with the message warning them about the leaks in our ceiling on 21st of September we wrote to Ms Wells:
“this is to inform you that – as we warned you long ago – the gate does not close. We waited long enough for you to show any care about it, with no result. We put back the padlock to secure it.”
Their agent Francesco would confirm the veracity that the padlock had a rope on it until that day as he came here on September 18th Wednesday with clients to show the house and has surely seen it. So they have been informed prior. What's more, they themselves were here on the property on September 22nd Sunday when they came for the water leakage and they, Capponi and Wells both saw the padlock on the gate; they have even investigated and had a look at the gate checking the corners etc. So they do NOT have the slightest argument that they were not notified and did not know, They do not have a gram of blame to put on us. However, that is exactly what they did on September 24th Tuesday.
When they appeared at the gate and started honking insistingly I went out. They ordered me to open up. As I had them in front of me, I wanted to talk. You see, we've been trying to talk with them for ages and they have been refusing.
I had tried to talk as well about the gate with Ms Wells when they were present on Sunday 22nd. She said “Yes we need to talk. It should be quick anyway. We talk about the abusi, the garage and the pool” and was walking away. Upon which I said “You only come here after your interest, right? What about other things? We do not need to talk about the garden and the gate?”
She said “Yes, we talk about whatever you want too. But in an assemblea. We write everything down.”
I said “We talk now. There are urgent matters.”
She declined, claiming we could not talk here, the place had negative energy. I couldn't stop expressing what I thought out loud. “So the bad energy does not come from the people and their denial of responsibilities but from the place.”
Ms Wells kept walking away, saying we talk in an assemblea and everything needed to be written down. We have nothing against writing things down, in fact, all our communication has been in writing all this time. On the other hand, there is no reason why we cannot just sit down and talk and then write down the conclusions but they have refused all our attempts somehow obsessed with legality.
Ms Wells also declared it was impossible to talk with me. I asked why. She said “You say I come here only for my interest.” I still wonder why it is wrong to state a truth. She has never shown the slightest interest in her duties regarding the house, only concentrating on her exigencies. And her saying “Yeah we talk about the abusi, it should be easy” was another perfect verification.
And how Ms Wells thinks it is possible to talk with someone saying “Ci sono rifiuti? chi stabilisce se sono rifiuti?" denying all logic and common sense is beyond me, as it would be beyond anyone with a gram of a brain cell.
Anyway... So now as I had them in front of me and they couldn't run away as they always do, I wanted to face them. As both Ms Wells and Capponi were claiming I was obliged to open the gate, I wanted to ask a couple of questions beforehand. I asked if they didn't know there was a padlock. Instead of answering, both Ms Wells and Mr Capponi started banging the gate and screaming at me in Italian. Ms Wells didn't show the courtesy to speak to me in English even if she knows that that's the language I can express myself properly and my Italian is not so good. Mr Capponi has been insisting I speak Italian because we are in Italy (as it is seen on the video as well) even though there is no such obliging people to speak the language of the country one is in, if there was such a law, most travel would stop. Plus, thank God there is no law in this country prohibiting people from speaking a language other than Italian in Italian territory! Anyway, they simply refused to respond to my valid question and have a decent conversation.
Then came the agression... Mr Capponi who is “one of the nicest people you could ever wish to meet” in Ms Wells' words or “one of the worst people you should better avoid at all costs” in my words started shouting “Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo...”, making a big square with his hands and pumping his hands towards me, laughing like a madman “hahahahaha hahahahaha.” He said and did this at least 10-20 times.
“Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Hahahahahaha.... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Hahahahahaha....” Capponi was screaming with delight and shoving his hand gesture on my face.
I think I can truthfully say it was one of the most disgusting moments of my life. I have been lucky enough not to see such depravity in my life apart from my father when I was young.
If they had lost their keys they were free to call a locksmith, have the padlock broken, replace it and present us the keys. Instead, they arrogantly presume that it is our duty to help them out whenever they need whereas they are free to shirk all their responsibilities. Instead of solving their problem which is a result of their irresponsibility, they choose to disturb our peace. Especially the vulgar curse Mr Capponi used repeatedly was to intimidate, seeing me as a woman alone. I bet he couldn't do this in the presence of my husband.
Even though Ms Wells was telling him to stop it, I am ashamed, as a woman, that she has not interfered physically and told Mr Capponi “Enough”. Perhaps she is intimidated as well.
This is to inform you what kind of a man he is. I regret not having taken my phone with me when I went to the gate to record this situation. I thought about it and went back in to the house to get it. While I was walking away he was shouting “Che faccia” behind my back and other things which I didn't really bother to listen to. I generally phase out when people speak Italian.
When I returned I had my phone in hand and wanted to register what had happened. So I was telling “You said 'Faccio in culo'” and Mr Capponi who claims not to know any English responded automatically as a guilty person denying his guilt. “No no no no, I didn't say anything.” (Registered in a video available if necessary.)
He was just lying rightout in my face. He knows he has said it. Lismay knows he has said it. I know he has said it. If there is a God, it knows he has said it. So who is he fooling? Those of you who have not witnessed the event.
But, as my husband observed and drew my attention, Mr Capponi saying “No no, I didn't say anything” is actually a confession of his guilt. Because anyone who is accused of saying such a thing would have said “What are you talking about?” Also, in such a case Ms Wells would have interfered as well backing him up. I called him a liar and Ms Wells did not come to say I was the liar or anything. Besides, as heard in the video and as can be seen in my messages to my husband at that moment I said “Faccio di culo” as I had not heard of that expression before. Luckily, I do not live in such a community who uses such words. It is therefore obvious that I could not accuse him saying something I did not know what it was in the first place. In fact, I got what it was only a bit after my husband explained it to me.
I also told the policemen who arrived in the scene that Capponi said “Faccio in culo,” neither Ms Wells not Capponi objected to the “accusation” so therefore I could say I have two more witnesses.
Anyway, back to the scene... As Ms. Wells had retreated to across the street and was not talking to me, I asked Mr Capponi in Italian if we had not sent them a message about the padlock? His response, which is recorded in the video I took at that moment is “Che cosa e padlock?”
He is pretending he didn't understand what a padlock is... The message I sent was in English and so they didn't know we put the padlock!
Haaaa that's why! He is so right. It was my mistake, of course, how could they understand? Lismay, the person I sent the message to is not British, she doesn't understand English, it's MY mistake that I sent the message in English, shame on me, so shameful of me, we are living in Italy and I am writing and speaking English! What outrage! What outrage! And I dare try to speak English with a British!
As it should be obvious by now... When somebody is beyond logic and reason, it is IMPOSSIBLE to talk to them. There is a limit to one's patience, there is a limit! There is a limit to keeping up the good will and quiet for the sake of peaceful living to people who are bullying and always denying all responsibility, trying to put it all on you. This is obviously a pattern of behavior and outlook in the family. Again, this denial of something which they have obviously been notified is another example of their bad-intentions and trying to disturb our peace.
Prologue and Epilogue:
When we got the email from Capponi declaring their denying of all responsibility for the leakage of their roof, it was the last straw for us! We have even told them we will not be giving them a bucket or a cloth in case they need it, they can go out and buy it!
It is important to do some self-criticism here and explain reasons behind my reaction:
Sure, I refused to be helpful to David when he came on Monday. But why should we be helpful to people who have been continuously denying all responsibility, trying to give us a hard time? Why? There is a limit to one's good-intentions. Unfortunately, good-intentions cannot grow, on the contrary, they wither away when faced with such irresponsibility.
Sure, I exploded at David when he came without a padlock on Wednesday. The story behind is this:
When the police came, I was more than happy. Because I wanted it all registered. However, I found out they do not file reports here, that I needed to do a querela for that. When I asked if I was responsible for their losing their keys, the policeman said we needed to find a solution. They seemed annoyed that they were called on duty for such a trivial matter. They even said it out loud. “The police cannot spend time trying to sort such things out. You solve it.”
Lismay suggested I should give them the key, they'd get a copy and bring it back. I said I couldn't do that, I didn't trust them, if they'd be coming back or not. Plus, I had only one key, I wasn't going to leave it to them. I said they should be getting a new padlock and give me the keys. Lismay agreed, said they'd be doing it now. When the police asked, “30-40 minutes” she said. The police was content. But when she mentioned going to Bricofer the other police said Bricofer was closed at this time. It opened up at 3. Lismay said they didn't live here and could not stay. Then she said something, I heard “David” and “key...” So I figured David would be bringing the padlock tomorrow and giving keys to me. Anyway, the police left.
Wells and Capponi went upstairs, going about their business. I sat and tried to shed this stress and vulgarity spouted at me. Then I realized, now they'll be bringing only one key and I'll be upset that I'll have to pay for another key because of their mistake/irresponsibility. As they were leaving I shouted out to Lismay to bring two keys. She said that I was the one to give them keys. I said No. She said, with an upset tone and shaking her head “Gülin, you just said yes in front of the police.” I said I did not say yes to that. David had to bring the padlock and the keys, I wasn't going to pay for them. She told me to get a scontrino and said she'd be paying. I laughed, I said if she wanted me to do something she had to advance me money, I'd be giving her the rest. She just waved and went away. I didn't care. It was for their interest. But of course, if that was what she said in front of the police she could use that against me. So I wrote an email to Ms Wells, explaining the situation, as now it is official they are liars, denying what has been said (by them or us) shamelessly, and informed her that she needed to bring the padlock with two keys.
So when David showed up without the padlock the next day, I truly exploded. I had had enough and had really run out of my patience. I exploded and went inside. However, realizing I had acted really bad and that David actually had nothing to do with this, I went back. This time, to try to talk with him.
Luckily, he was decent. However, he told me I could not change an agreement afterwards. I told him, I had not changed it. His mother was the one who changed it. Why should I be agreeing to something I said no to just a minute ago??! Why should I be agreeing to it? I didn't change the agreement, I just didn't get she changed it! Because it never occurred to me she could have said that, and I'd like to remind you this conversation is taking place in Italian in a very stressful situation and I am not that proficient in Italian. Simple.
We have a saying in Turkish “Both wrong and strong.” It means that someone is wrong, but he still tries to get on top of you, tries to overpower you. Instead of admitting wrongdoing and saying sorry. Such people infuriate me. And it escalates the problem. Whereas if people owned up to their mistakes, all problems could dissipate. Mistakes are excusable if one is willing to admit the mistake and take responsibility for it. But denial of the mistake is unforgivable.
We have run out of our patience and will no longer tolerate this kind of bullying from Mr. Capponi or denial of responsibilities from Ms Wells!
Insults and Threats
After Capponi had written that “Adeguatevi”, Lismay had, on May 19th, written that they had the first proposals for the regulations ready. She then said “Claudio is still waiting for your answer to his e-mail.”
We were appalled by this as well. Given that he was the one who responded so rudely, we thought he owed us an apology. So I answered “Yes we're still waiting for Claudio's apologies.”
The next day, the message we got from Capponi was attacking us/me personally, calling me puerile.
“Rimango quindi basito da questo atteggiamento di Gulin e ribadisco che non c’è spazio per sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione, non intendo portare avanti tutto questo con persone che adottano atteggiamenti puerili in cui si esprimono con termini tipo mi sento offeso oppure mi deve delle scuse con il rischio di arrivare a è stato cattivo con me e non ci parlo più. Non ho il tempo per questo, i giochi da bambino li faccio con gli amici e non sono e non intendo diventare vostro amico, voglio solo portare avanti una trattativa corretta per addivenire a regolamenti precisi”
He was putting words in my mouth, portraying a childish reaction. He was further accusing us with not obeying rules and customs, out of the blue. He was obssessed with making us write in Italian to him. “Resto quindi ancora in attesa di una vostra risposta nella Lingua Ufficiale dello Stato in cui siamo”
As if there is an obligation in this God-damn country to speak Italian, as if it is forbidden for anybody to speak any other language in the territories of this state!
Capponi as evidenced by his next email got more upset at us as we did not respond to a person who wished our bad-being and talked with a threatening tone. On May 25th, he wrote another email saying “devo constatare con rammarico che la vostra risposta tarda ad arrivare.” He was obviously pissed off we did not answer him. He continued with personal attacks. “In genere io penso di parlare con persone responsabili ed intelligenti fino a prova contraria.” Implying we are not responsible and not intelligent. In his next sentence he again had an aggressive, hostile tone:
“Quindi questa mail è l'ultima prima di procedere con una seconda raccomandata che costituirà un documento ufficiale, quindi con affermazioni difficilmente ritirabili.”
He repeated his insult of puerile again:
“ho trovato solo risposte puerili...”
He started referring to the abusi, saying “Sembra che ci siano parti condominiali da voi usate a vostro uso esclusivo senza che fino ad ora questo sia stato concordato” without specifying what he is talking about. He then came with more open threats:
“Ovviamente in mancanza di un accordo circa una suddivisione di parti del terreno, con definizione ad uso esclusivo che provenga da una regolare assemblea condominiale, qualsiasi vostro oggetto privato andrà rimosso. Trasformare il condominio, dove voi abitate, in un campo di battaglia a suon di carte bollate e avvocati penso che non sia, soprattutto per voi, piacevole e gratificante.”
The next was his imposition to make us write in Italian. “Rimango, quindi in attesa di una vostra risposta sollecita, in italiano...”
We decided to reply, we had not responded not to fall for provocations. The mail Carlo wrote on May 26th:
“Il principio della diligenza del buon padre di famiglia mi ha finora suggerito di non raccogliere provocazioni e di evitare di far precipitare un’ordinaria vicenda di tutela dei legittimi interessi di due parti, comproprietarie di un bene comune, in una inutile e dannosa vicenda giudiziaria. Per conto mio intendo continuare per quanto possibile a comportarmi così anche in futuro ma, vista l’impostazione che state dando al rapporto, ritengo indispensabile chiarire quanto segue.
Gli unici fatti concreti su cui siamo stati chiamati ad esprimerci sono l’eventuale frazionamento della proprietà comune e l’eventuale redazione di un regolamento condominiale. Poiché entrambe esigenze sono state sollevate da Lismay, ci aspettavamo logicamente delle proposte da parte sua. Su nessuno dei due punti, ad oggi, abbiamo ancora potuto leggere una vostra riga nel merito. Se qualcuno ha titolo a sollecitare qualcosa, a me pare che quel qualcuno siamo noi.”
Also answering to the puerile accusation, Carlo wrote:
“L’esistenza di divergenze di vedute - e finanche di tensioni - non giustifica la scortesia. Non è puerile chiedere rispetto in uno scambio di opinioni, è la base per un qualsiasi dignitoso confronto tra persone mature. Né io né mia moglie abbiamo trovato offensiva la sua risposta, solo estremamente scortese. Nessuno ha mai parlato di offese e tradurre in questo modo il senso dell’attesa di scuse è una palese distorsione”
I wrote to Lismay too. Exactly rebounding Capponi's insults to him. I also tried to fix things and invited Ms Wells for tea to talk. Response negative.
Capponi was so relieved he could make us write in Italian. “Finalmente una lettera in Italiano” begins his email of June 3rd. But he was still insisting on making us translate the email he claimed he had not read and deleted. “la vostra risposta sulla mia proposta ragioneristica non l’ho letta, solo sbirciata e ovviamente non capita, se volete essere così gentili da rimandarla in italiano mi interesserebbe molto leggerla.”
You see the ass-licking? Just to get what he wants, his domination.
All this is the “sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione” he was saying he wanted to avoid “e ribadisco che non c’è spazio per sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione.” (May 20, da Capponi) Why is he doing that now? Just to force us to write that email in Italian. Just so he can satisfy his small ego.
We didn't oblige.
And as he still had not bothered to send us the regolamento they were claiming they wanted and written, we kept our quiet.
9th of July he wrote again:
“il mio ultimo messaggio risale al 3 giugno, ed aveva un tono collaborativo, almeno questa era la mia intenzione. Non ho avuto risposta, cosa devo pensare? Che la collaborazione non sia nelle vostre intenzioni? Che preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale disponibilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti del primo piano? Che non vogliate impelagarvi in situazioni difficili e risolvibili solo con un dialogo? Che io non sia stato chiaro circa le mie intenzioni? Che non sapendo di cosa si stia parlando preferiate rimanere con la porta chiusa?”
We draw your attention to his accusation of us “Che preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale disponibilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti del primo piano?”
This time he had sent the regolamento he had written. (About two months after Lismay said they had written it and asked where to send it. As it is clearly evident from this fact that their intention had never been to have a regolamento but to disturb our peace.) As for the division of land, Capponi wrote it could be done in an assemblea thus saving time and money.
14th of July we wrote and told him what he was supposed to think:
“Deve pensare che noi crediamo nelle buone intenzioni delle persone. Sfortunatamente non abbiamo potuto riscontrare questo atteggiamento nelle vostre azioni. Purtroppo, il ricorrere alle minacce più o meno velate per rendere scomoda la nostra situazione è stato molto chiaro fin dall’inizio e, a parte il fatto di non avere alcuna intenzione di diventare vostri amici, non vogliamo dedicare neanche un secondo di più a questo rapporto, se non nella misura dello stretto necessario.
Le abbiamo chiesto molte volte di dimostrarci con un esempio concreto a che cosa servono delle regole scritte e come possano aiutare ad impedire i litigi in un caso come il nostro. Le chiediamo ancora una volta se sa spiegarci come “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo” sarebbe stato utile ad evitare quello che è successo con i ragazzi.
Forse può aiutare il riflettere sulla frase scritta da Lismay in uno dei suoi messaggi:
“When we have come to some agreement in writing about the division of the land or rules of the common parts you can start to ask for a “rimborso spese” from that date, but not before.”
Se Lismay non gliel’avesse già tradotta, lo facciamo noi:
“Solo dopo avere accettato un qualche accordo scritto sulla divisione del terreno o un regolamento delle parti comuni, solo da allora potrete cominciare a chiedere il rimborso delle spese comuni, non prima”.
Attiro la sua attenzione sulla delicatezza della formula “cominciare a chiedere”, non semplicemente “chiedere” (come a dire che di strada ce ne sarà da fare comunque per ottenere ciò che ci spetta) e aggiungo che, in qualità di comproprietaria, Lismay è tenuta PER LEGGE (non sulla base di un regolamento condominiale) a condividere le spese per il mantenimento della cosa comune.
Vede, la pretesa di Lismay è un buon esempio concreto di quanto sia inutile un regolamento di fronte alla volontà di una delle due parti a non ottemperare ad un accordo. E’ del tutto chiaro che il rischio di conseguenze per Lismay è estremamente basso, visto che parliamo di cifre irrisorie (100-200 euro?). Lei sa molto bene che nessuno si prenderà la briga di andare davanti ad un giudice per una simile controversia. E’ solo per questo che può infischiarsene senza vergogna. Se non ci sono fiducia reciproca e volontà di collaborazione, nessun accordo (scritto o non scritto, non importa) può funzionare.
Nella proposta di regolamento che lei ha invito c’è scritto che, nel caso di una mancata ottemperanza ad adempiere agli obblighi comuni di una delle parti, l’amministratore può adire le vie giudiziarie. Bello. Peccato che sia solo teoria. Come appena dimostrato, per situazioni banali come la nostra, non funziona in pratica.
Sempre nel suo regolamento, si leggono disposizioni dettagliate per l’uso di un lavatoio comune, con tanto di specifiche sui turni orari di utilizzo e l’imprescindibile richiamo a lasciare tutto pulito e in ordine dopo l’uso. Ma davvero pensa che in una casa di campagna con due famiglie sia possibile lavarsi le mani o sciacquare un bidone “solo” nel turno orario assegnato? E quali sarebbero le sanzioni da applicare per far rispettare un obbligo del genere? Per cortesia, non siamo ridicoli. Le regole sono una cosa buona se usate con senno, per aiutare la convivenza. Altrimenti (come in questo caso) sono formalismo aberrante.
Per concludere, siamo noi che ci domandiamo se preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale irresponsabilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti al primo piano, lasciando ogni onere su chi vive al piano terra.
In caso non sia così, quando Lismay avrà saldato la sua parte delle spese comuni affrontate finora (di seguito elencate) e dimostrerà un minimo di rispetto per le regole che insieme abbiamo convenuto, per la legge e per le responsabilità connesse alla proprietà, allora potrete cominciare a chiedere la nostra attenzione per discutere le vostre esigenze, non prima.”
I will not go further in detail. All exchanges will be filed in court for the querela.
I would only like to compile a list of Capponi's insults and point to his reflection problem.
It is ironical that he advised Ms Wells not to say even Buongiorno to us, told her to “Lascerei questo fastidio per loro in tempo indeterminato, è meno sopportabile” only to later on in one of his emails, August 4th, Capponi wrote:
“che bisognava smettere di vedere il condominio come un nemico da dominare secondo i propri principi.”
If Capponi had not seen us as enemies and did not try to dominate us with his impositions, we wouldn't have been in this situation in the first place. The illogical and unjust conclusions he came to after listening one-sided stories from the boys have led us into this situation. (So I hold them responsible for the mess they dragged us into due to their irresponsibility and negligence.)
And it is clearly evident to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and understanding of psychology that Capponi is projecting his enimosity on us by the above words. (It's also ironical that he is supposedly a psychologist. I wonder if this is like the tailor not being able to saw his own torn dress. Cobbler's children have no shoes.) As written in the article “The Psychology Of Projection: 8 Feelings We Transfer Onto Others” on Conscious Rethink:
“Deep in the recesses of our minds lurk many thoughts and feelings that we’d like to deny ever having.
These desires and impulses are so offensive to the conscious part of the mind that it launches various psychological defense mechanisms to keep them out.
One way it does this is by projecting these feelings onto other people (for the most part, but also onto events and objects) in an attempt to externalize the problem.
What does this mean? Well, let’s begin with a simple definition:
Psychological projection is a defense mechanism that occurs when a conflict arises between your unconscious feelings and your conscious beliefs. In order to subdue this conflict, you attribute these feelings to someone or something else.
In other words, you transfer ownership of these troubling feelings to some external source.
You effectively trick yourself into believing that these undesirable qualities actually belong elsewhere – anywhere but as a part of you.”
Actually, his insults reflect and describe himself too:
“nasce dalla vostra sprovvedutezza e ignoranza” (Capponi, July 22nd)
“Arrendendomi sfiduciato alla vostra possibilità di arrivare ad un comportamento più intelligente...” (Capponi, July 22nd)
On that same email Mr Capponi even accused us of getting unduely rich by simply asking for the reimbursement of expenses from them!
He also called us dishonest. Again it's a projection of his own dishonesty on to us.
Then in the email addressed to Ms Wells and CC'd to us:
“non dimostrano particolare intelligenza!!” (Capponi, August 4th)
“sta sfiorando la demenza o è solo un disturbo di personalità?” (Capponi, August 4th)
“Mi scuso di aver valutato la loro intelligenza superiore a quanto dimostrato ed avere dato la possibilità ad una persona irrazionale di riabilitarsi” (Capponi, August 4th)
“Dovrebbe lavare la sua penna dalle corbellerie e fastidiose sporcizie che ne escono” (Capponi, August 4th)
We do not deign to reply to any of these banal and vulgar insults. His words and his behavior speak for him. I only duly rebound all his words back at him.
The younger son of Ms Wells and his fidanzata who have been living in this house have left their garbage out in the garden in November 2018 before they moved out. Even though Ms. Wells and her older son came several times to the premises to clear stuff from their house, they have done nothing about the garbage. We waited patiently for them to come and clean it for nine months, we didn't say anything not to cause trouble in our deteriorating relationship. But after realizing they had no intention of communicating civilly with us as they kept accusing us baselessly and threatening us, we reminded them of the garbage to be cleaned. Even if they had not been aware of the situation, which is almost impossible, they have been clearly notified of it and to clean it at the end of our two emails on July 29.
PS: Vi invitiamo a rimuovere al più presto i vostri rifiuti abbandonati ormai da oltre otto mesi all’esterno del locale dell’autoclave. O forse non si può fare senza un regolamento?
PS: Vi preghiamo di rimuovere al più presto i vostri rifiuti abbandonati ormai da oltre otto mesi all’esterno del locale dell’autoclave (in allegato trovate le foto). Ci auguriamo non veniate a dirci che per farlo occorra un regolamento.
The response we got from Claudio Capponi, who Lismay Wells has asserted that he was very rational, (“Certainly he is on my side but he is a very rational man...... I do not think that we are that cynical that we can only look at our point of view, we mean to be rational, fair and just, contrary to what you imagine!” email from Ms Wells on 12th of May.) was this:
“Ci sono rifiuti? chi stabilisce se sono rifiuti?"
Judge for yourself if the words of Ms Wells of saying they mean to be rational, fair and just and do not look at only their point of view is any credible.
We have responded with a message to Ms. Wells thinking she might be more rational and take action to correct this situation of the garbage in the garden. As Mr. Capponi had written a mail addressing Ms Wells and CC'd us instead of responding directly to us, we did the same and CC'd this email written to Carlo De Vincentiis by Gülin De Vincentiis on 9th of August to Ms. Wells.
“Garbage is garbage is garbage. Nobody in his right mind could claim those rotting things anything other than garbage. No, as a sane person, of course I cannot understand such a mind. It's now certified he is a nutcase but then, what I don't understand is Lismay... How come she doesn't say anything about this?
Where is the “I'm sorry Gülin, I'm sorry Carlo, I'm sorry on behalf of Claudio. I agree, he truly exaggerated.”
Where is the “I'm sorry on behalf of Simon and Raiza. They should not have left their garbage in the garden.”
Where is the “I will see to it that David comes and cleans the garbage right away.”?
Where is the sorry from her?”
There was again no response or action taken by them until they came for the flooding of the house on said September 20, Sunday. As the muratori, the guest and the agent Francesco will confirm, the garbage was still here. Some of them we had carried and left at their doorstep as it had become too intolerable for us.
We obviously should have called the vigili urbani, taken note of the garbage, and asked them to be fined. We of course have the photos, even videos of their garbage and how long they were left here for. So we reserve that right still.
Part of the garbage was cleaned on September 20, Sunday. The rest was left for the elder son David to come and pick up. In fact, it was finally picked up by David on September 25th, Wednesday. The day before, that is September 24th, when he had come without the key to the padlock, he had said he had left this place to live with his fidanzata not to get involved in such matters. I asked why, then, was he here? He said he loved his mum and wanted to help her out. He also claimed he was doing us a favor.
Now... This is an important point. Apparently, it's an intrinsic trait in the family. They don't see duties as obligations but a favor to the other people involved. I wrote him an sms after he left:
“You know what's so wrong with your thinking? Doing something that should have been done without anybody having to remind and keep on reminding you is NOT called a favor. Look it up in the dictionary. Favor: an act of kindness beyond what is due or usual.
What was due was that garbage not being there in the first place, or having been removed a year ago!
When you clean that garbage, you will NOT be doing us a favor but cleaning up behind your brother and/or covering your mother's buttocks. Mind you, if you do not, we will be calling the carabinieri and complaining about your leaving the garbage so that they put a fine on you. Enough yaa enough! Enough of the insolence!
You can dare say you are doing us a favor. No David no! You are only doing the duties that your brother and your mother did not do! You are doing something for THEM! Not US!”
It is true that we are glad the garbage is gone, but it certainly was NOT a favor, and that is exactly what is the problem with the logic of everybody in the family: They do not see their responsibilities as their duties, they do not want to pay the price if they fall behind their duties. Instead of apologizing for it and fixing it, they pretend they are doing us a favor. This is what infuriates me!
“Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.” - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Yes, “To err is human, but to persist in the mistake is diabolical.” And so many people, unfortunately, insist on their mistakes. That's one thing that makes the world a horrible place and escalates problems. Problems which could simply dissipate just so easily if the one in the wrong was courageous enough to accept his mistake.
The only person in the family who seems to be capable of self-reflection and has maturity to admit and understand once his mistake is shown is David. We are still waiting for the owner Ms Wells to show some maturity and ask for acceptance of apologies but we are not holding our breath.
Prologue:
This incidence too demonstrates perfectly well that written rules are meaningless where people are not well-intentioned. As I wrote to my husband and CC'd Ms Wells on 9th of August:
“Let's say it was written. That we need to spell out every small detail, the basic manners. What do you do when one person retorts to you “Ah is there garbage? Who establishes it is garbage?”
No, you don't deal with such people. There is no way to talk to such indecent, uncivil, decadent people. I'm sorry, but that is the case.”
Padlock
When we came here in August 2010, the Garforths who had been living here were using the gate with a padlock. The lock of the gate was broken and instead of having it fixed, they had just put a chain on it. At our initiative, we had the lock fixed and started using the gate properly. However, it was revealed that the lock was not the only problem but the gate itself was broken. In the summer, with the expansion of the metal, the gate did not close. We wanted it fixed but the inhabitants of the prima piano shrank from any expenses not strictly necessary even if necessary for a proper living space. As they were students, we did not insist on having the gate fixed and kept using it with a chain and padlock during the summer months. When the weather cooled down, we went back to the proper lock. This situation is known very well by every single person who has been living in this house for the last ten years.
Last year, when the younger son Simon was leaving the house he had mentioned that the owner was, as we knew, Ms Wells and we could speak to her about such matters if we wanted to. Truthfully, we knew that they do not wish to spend a single cent on the house, and given they were selling the house, given Ms Wells denied even the ordinary expenses, it was obvious she wouldn't be willing to do anything about it, so we kept quiet. However, as there are many news every day of gates collapsing, leading to both material and physical damage and even leading to death, given that we use it so often and we have a small child, we considered this an important issue and informed them with our email of July 28, that the gate needs to be fixed.
PP.SS. Vista l’opportunità di poter parlare di cose concrete, vi ricordiamo che - come sapete - il cancello è difettoso: i pilastri non sono stabili e and ogni stagione subiscono inclinazioni che non consento ilarità corretta chiusura. Esiste un pericolo concreto cui occorre porre rimedio. A suo tempo avevamo chiesto un preventivo, quantificato in 900 euro, per la sua sistemazione. Se vorrete proporne uno alternativo, lo attendiamo. In caso contrario, siete avvisati che per eventuali incidenti connessi al malfunzionamento del cancello o danni a persone o cosa, vi riterremo responsabili.
There was again no response from the party of the first floor. Summer came, the gate again would not close. So we took out the chain to secure the gate. Carlo De Vincentiis was extremely over-thoughtful, -as he always is... even with people who have been denying all responsibility- and left the chain only with a rope. The summer went by like that and as I was home with my daughter all summer, we made do with the rope. However, as schools started and I started leaving the house regularly, that is leaving the premises totally empty, the rope was too much trouble and not enough security. So I asked Mr. De Vincentiis to put the padlock. He said they might not have the key, as it is a habit that they lose their keys. (They do not have the keys to the letterbox, leave the letterbox we use in common overflowing with their post; they do not have the key to the electricity box and have asked us to give it to them over the years.) I protested saying the gate needed to be locked, if he had any reservations we would send them a message so that they would be informed of it. In fact, that's exactly what we did. Along with the message warning them about the leaks in our ceiling on 21st of September we wrote to Ms Wells:
“this is to inform you that – as we warned you long ago – the gate does not close. We waited long enough for you to show any care about it, with no result. We put back the padlock to secure it.”
Their agent Francesco would confirm the veracity that the padlock had a rope on it until that day as he came here on September 18th Wednesday with clients to show the house and has surely seen it. So they have been informed prior. What's more, they themselves were here on the property on September 22nd Sunday when they came for the water leakage and they, Capponi and Wells both saw the padlock on the gate; they have even investigated and had a look at the gate checking the corners etc. So they do NOT have the slightest argument that they were not notified and did not know, They do not have a gram of blame to put on us. However, that is exactly what they did on September 24th Tuesday.
When they appeared at the gate and started honking insistingly I went out. They ordered me to open up. As I had them in front of me, I wanted to talk. You see, we've been trying to talk with them for ages and they have been refusing.
I had tried to talk as well about the gate with Ms Wells when they were present on Sunday 22nd. She said “Yes we need to talk. It should be quick anyway. We talk about the abusi, the garage and the pool” and was walking away. Upon which I said “You only come here after your interest, right? What about other things? We do not need to talk about the garden and the gate?”
She said “Yes, we talk about whatever you want too. But in an assemblea. We write everything down.”
I said “We talk now. There are urgent matters.”
She declined, claiming we could not talk here, the place had negative energy. I couldn't stop expressing what I thought out loud. “So the bad energy does not come from the people and their denial of responsibilities but from the place.”
Ms Wells kept walking away, saying we talk in an assemblea and everything needed to be written down. We have nothing against writing things down, in fact, all our communication has been in writing all this time. On the other hand, there is no reason why we cannot just sit down and talk and then write down the conclusions but they have refused all our attempts somehow obsessed with legality.
Ms Wells also declared it was impossible to talk with me. I asked why. She said “You say I come here only for my interest.” I still wonder why it is wrong to state a truth. She has never shown the slightest interest in her duties regarding the house, only concentrating on her exigencies. And her saying “Yeah we talk about the abusi, it should be easy” was another perfect verification.
And how Ms Wells thinks it is possible to talk with someone saying “Ci sono rifiuti? chi stabilisce se sono rifiuti?" denying all logic and common sense is beyond me, as it would be beyond anyone with a gram of a brain cell.
Anyway... So now as I had them in front of me and they couldn't run away as they always do, I wanted to face them. As both Ms Wells and Capponi were claiming I was obliged to open the gate, I wanted to ask a couple of questions beforehand. I asked if they didn't know there was a padlock. Instead of answering, both Ms Wells and Mr Capponi started banging the gate and screaming at me in Italian. Ms Wells didn't show the courtesy to speak to me in English even if she knows that that's the language I can express myself properly and my Italian is not so good. Mr Capponi has been insisting I speak Italian because we are in Italy (as it is seen on the video as well) even though there is no such obliging people to speak the language of the country one is in, if there was such a law, most travel would stop. Plus, thank God there is no law in this country prohibiting people from speaking a language other than Italian in Italian territory! Anyway, they simply refused to respond to my valid question and have a decent conversation.
Then came the agression... Mr Capponi who is “one of the nicest people you could ever wish to meet” in Ms Wells' words or “one of the worst people you should better avoid at all costs” in my words started shouting “Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo...”, making a big square with his hands and pumping his hands towards me, laughing like a madman “hahahahaha hahahahaha.” He said and did this at least 10-20 times.
“Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Hahahahahaha.... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Faccio in culo... Hahahahahaha....” Capponi was screaming with delight and shoving his hand gesture on my face.
I think I can truthfully say it was one of the most disgusting moments of my life. I have been lucky enough not to see such depravity in my life apart from my father when I was young.
If they had lost their keys they were free to call a locksmith, have the padlock broken, replace it and present us the keys. Instead, they arrogantly presume that it is our duty to help them out whenever they need whereas they are free to shirk all their responsibilities. Instead of solving their problem which is a result of their irresponsibility, they choose to disturb our peace. Especially the vulgar curse Mr Capponi used repeatedly was to intimidate, seeing me as a woman alone. I bet he couldn't do this in the presence of my husband.
Even though Ms Wells was telling him to stop it, I am ashamed, as a woman, that she has not interfered physically and told Mr Capponi “Enough”. Perhaps she is intimidated as well.
This is to inform you what kind of a man he is. I regret not having taken my phone with me when I went to the gate to record this situation. I thought about it and went back in to the house to get it. While I was walking away he was shouting “Che faccia” behind my back and other things which I didn't really bother to listen to. I generally phase out when people speak Italian.
When I returned I had my phone in hand and wanted to register what had happened. So I was telling “You said 'Faccio in culo'” and Mr Capponi who claims not to know any English responded automatically as a guilty person denying his guilt. “No no no no, I didn't say anything.” (Registered in a video available if necessary.)
He was just lying rightout in my face. He knows he has said it. Lismay knows he has said it. I know he has said it. If there is a God, it knows he has said it. So who is he fooling? Those of you who have not witnessed the event.
But, as my husband observed and drew my attention, Mr Capponi saying “No no, I didn't say anything” is actually a confession of his guilt. Because anyone who is accused of saying such a thing would have said “What are you talking about?” Also, in such a case Ms Wells would have interfered as well backing him up. I called him a liar and Ms Wells did not come to say I was the liar or anything. Besides, as heard in the video and as can be seen in my messages to my husband at that moment I said “Faccio di culo” as I had not heard of that expression before. Luckily, I do not live in such a community who uses such words. It is therefore obvious that I could not accuse him saying something I did not know what it was in the first place. In fact, I got what it was only a bit after my husband explained it to me.
I also told the policemen who arrived in the scene that Capponi said “Faccio in culo,” neither Ms Wells not Capponi objected to the “accusation” so therefore I could say I have two more witnesses.
Anyway, back to the scene... As Ms. Wells had retreated to across the street and was not talking to me, I asked Mr Capponi in Italian if we had not sent them a message about the padlock? His response, which is recorded in the video I took at that moment is “Che cosa e padlock?”
He is pretending he didn't understand what a padlock is... The message I sent was in English and so they didn't know we put the padlock!
Haaaa that's why! He is so right. It was my mistake, of course, how could they understand? Lismay, the person I sent the message to is not British, she doesn't understand English, it's MY mistake that I sent the message in English, shame on me, so shameful of me, we are living in Italy and I am writing and speaking English! What outrage! What outrage! And I dare try to speak English with a British!
As it should be obvious by now... When somebody is beyond logic and reason, it is IMPOSSIBLE to talk to them. There is a limit to one's patience, there is a limit! There is a limit to keeping up the good will and quiet for the sake of peaceful living to people who are bullying and always denying all responsibility, trying to put it all on you. This is obviously a pattern of behavior and outlook in the family. Again, this denial of something which they have obviously been notified is another example of their bad-intentions and trying to disturb our peace.
Prologue and Epilogue:
When we got the email from Capponi declaring their denying of all responsibility for the leakage of their roof, it was the last straw for us! We have even told them we will not be giving them a bucket or a cloth in case they need it, they can go out and buy it!
It is important to do some self-criticism here and explain reasons behind my reaction:
Sure, I refused to be helpful to David when he came on Monday. But why should we be helpful to people who have been continuously denying all responsibility, trying to give us a hard time? Why? There is a limit to one's good-intentions. Unfortunately, good-intentions cannot grow, on the contrary, they wither away when faced with such irresponsibility.
Sure, I exploded at David when he came without a padlock on Wednesday. The story behind is this:
When the police came, I was more than happy. Because I wanted it all registered. However, I found out they do not file reports here, that I needed to do a querela for that. When I asked if I was responsible for their losing their keys, the policeman said we needed to find a solution. They seemed annoyed that they were called on duty for such a trivial matter. They even said it out loud. “The police cannot spend time trying to sort such things out. You solve it.”
Lismay suggested I should give them the key, they'd get a copy and bring it back. I said I couldn't do that, I didn't trust them, if they'd be coming back or not. Plus, I had only one key, I wasn't going to leave it to them. I said they should be getting a new padlock and give me the keys. Lismay agreed, said they'd be doing it now. When the police asked, “30-40 minutes” she said. The police was content. But when she mentioned going to Bricofer the other police said Bricofer was closed at this time. It opened up at 3. Lismay said they didn't live here and could not stay. Then she said something, I heard “David” and “key...” So I figured David would be bringing the padlock tomorrow and giving keys to me. Anyway, the police left.
Wells and Capponi went upstairs, going about their business. I sat and tried to shed this stress and vulgarity spouted at me. Then I realized, now they'll be bringing only one key and I'll be upset that I'll have to pay for another key because of their mistake/irresponsibility. As they were leaving I shouted out to Lismay to bring two keys. She said that I was the one to give them keys. I said No. She said, with an upset tone and shaking her head “Gülin, you just said yes in front of the police.” I said I did not say yes to that. David had to bring the padlock and the keys, I wasn't going to pay for them. She told me to get a scontrino and said she'd be paying. I laughed, I said if she wanted me to do something she had to advance me money, I'd be giving her the rest. She just waved and went away. I didn't care. It was for their interest. But of course, if that was what she said in front of the police she could use that against me. So I wrote an email to Ms Wells, explaining the situation, as now it is official they are liars, denying what has been said (by them or us) shamelessly, and informed her that she needed to bring the padlock with two keys.
So when David showed up without the padlock the next day, I truly exploded. I had had enough and had really run out of my patience. I exploded and went inside. However, realizing I had acted really bad and that David actually had nothing to do with this, I went back. This time, to try to talk with him.
Luckily, he was decent. However, he told me I could not change an agreement afterwards. I told him, I had not changed it. His mother was the one who changed it. Why should I be agreeing to something I said no to just a minute ago??! Why should I be agreeing to it? I didn't change the agreement, I just didn't get she changed it! Because it never occurred to me she could have said that, and I'd like to remind you this conversation is taking place in Italian in a very stressful situation and I am not that proficient in Italian. Simple.
We have a saying in Turkish “Both wrong and strong.” It means that someone is wrong, but he still tries to get on top of you, tries to overpower you. Instead of admitting wrongdoing and saying sorry. Such people infuriate me. And it escalates the problem. Whereas if people owned up to their mistakes, all problems could dissipate. Mistakes are excusable if one is willing to admit the mistake and take responsibility for it. But denial of the mistake is unforgivable.
We have run out of our patience and will no longer tolerate this kind of bullying from Mr. Capponi or denial of responsibilities from Ms Wells!
Insults and Threats
After Capponi had written that “Adeguatevi”, Lismay had, on May 19th, written that they had the first proposals for the regulations ready. She then said “Claudio is still waiting for your answer to his e-mail.”
We were appalled by this as well. Given that he was the one who responded so rudely, we thought he owed us an apology. So I answered “Yes we're still waiting for Claudio's apologies.”
The next day, the message we got from Capponi was attacking us/me personally, calling me puerile.
“Rimango quindi basito da questo atteggiamento di Gulin e ribadisco che non c’è spazio per sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione, non intendo portare avanti tutto questo con persone che adottano atteggiamenti puerili in cui si esprimono con termini tipo mi sento offeso oppure mi deve delle scuse con il rischio di arrivare a è stato cattivo con me e non ci parlo più. Non ho il tempo per questo, i giochi da bambino li faccio con gli amici e non sono e non intendo diventare vostro amico, voglio solo portare avanti una trattativa corretta per addivenire a regolamenti precisi”
He was putting words in my mouth, portraying a childish reaction. He was further accusing us with not obeying rules and customs, out of the blue. He was obssessed with making us write in Italian to him. “Resto quindi ancora in attesa di una vostra risposta nella Lingua Ufficiale dello Stato in cui siamo”
As if there is an obligation in this God-damn country to speak Italian, as if it is forbidden for anybody to speak any other language in the territories of this state!
Capponi as evidenced by his next email got more upset at us as we did not respond to a person who wished our bad-being and talked with a threatening tone. On May 25th, he wrote another email saying “devo constatare con rammarico che la vostra risposta tarda ad arrivare.” He was obviously pissed off we did not answer him. He continued with personal attacks. “In genere io penso di parlare con persone responsabili ed intelligenti fino a prova contraria.” Implying we are not responsible and not intelligent. In his next sentence he again had an aggressive, hostile tone:
“Quindi questa mail è l'ultima prima di procedere con una seconda raccomandata che costituirà un documento ufficiale, quindi con affermazioni difficilmente ritirabili.”
He repeated his insult of puerile again:
“ho trovato solo risposte puerili...”
He started referring to the abusi, saying “Sembra che ci siano parti condominiali da voi usate a vostro uso esclusivo senza che fino ad ora questo sia stato concordato” without specifying what he is talking about. He then came with more open threats:
“Ovviamente in mancanza di un accordo circa una suddivisione di parti del terreno, con definizione ad uso esclusivo che provenga da una regolare assemblea condominiale, qualsiasi vostro oggetto privato andrà rimosso. Trasformare il condominio, dove voi abitate, in un campo di battaglia a suon di carte bollate e avvocati penso che non sia, soprattutto per voi, piacevole e gratificante.”
The next was his imposition to make us write in Italian. “Rimango, quindi in attesa di una vostra risposta sollecita, in italiano...”
We decided to reply, we had not responded not to fall for provocations. The mail Carlo wrote on May 26th:
“Il principio della diligenza del buon padre di famiglia mi ha finora suggerito di non raccogliere provocazioni e di evitare di far precipitare un’ordinaria vicenda di tutela dei legittimi interessi di due parti, comproprietarie di un bene comune, in una inutile e dannosa vicenda giudiziaria. Per conto mio intendo continuare per quanto possibile a comportarmi così anche in futuro ma, vista l’impostazione che state dando al rapporto, ritengo indispensabile chiarire quanto segue.
Gli unici fatti concreti su cui siamo stati chiamati ad esprimerci sono l’eventuale frazionamento della proprietà comune e l’eventuale redazione di un regolamento condominiale. Poiché entrambe esigenze sono state sollevate da Lismay, ci aspettavamo logicamente delle proposte da parte sua. Su nessuno dei due punti, ad oggi, abbiamo ancora potuto leggere una vostra riga nel merito. Se qualcuno ha titolo a sollecitare qualcosa, a me pare che quel qualcuno siamo noi.”
Also answering to the puerile accusation, Carlo wrote:
“L’esistenza di divergenze di vedute - e finanche di tensioni - non giustifica la scortesia. Non è puerile chiedere rispetto in uno scambio di opinioni, è la base per un qualsiasi dignitoso confronto tra persone mature. Né io né mia moglie abbiamo trovato offensiva la sua risposta, solo estremamente scortese. Nessuno ha mai parlato di offese e tradurre in questo modo il senso dell’attesa di scuse è una palese distorsione”
I wrote to Lismay too. Exactly rebounding Capponi's insults to him. I also tried to fix things and invited Ms Wells for tea to talk. Response negative.
Capponi was so relieved he could make us write in Italian. “Finalmente una lettera in Italiano” begins his email of June 3rd. But he was still insisting on making us translate the email he claimed he had not read and deleted. “la vostra risposta sulla mia proposta ragioneristica non l’ho letta, solo sbirciata e ovviamente non capita, se volete essere così gentili da rimandarla in italiano mi interesserebbe molto leggerla.”
You see the ass-licking? Just to get what he wants, his domination.
All this is the “sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione” he was saying he wanted to avoid “e ribadisco che non c’è spazio per sottigliezze gentili di comunicazione.” (May 20, da Capponi) Why is he doing that now? Just to force us to write that email in Italian. Just so he can satisfy his small ego.
We didn't oblige.
And as he still had not bothered to send us the regolamento they were claiming they wanted and written, we kept our quiet.
9th of July he wrote again:
“il mio ultimo messaggio risale al 3 giugno, ed aveva un tono collaborativo, almeno questa era la mia intenzione. Non ho avuto risposta, cosa devo pensare? Che la collaborazione non sia nelle vostre intenzioni? Che preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale disponibilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti del primo piano? Che non vogliate impelagarvi in situazioni difficili e risolvibili solo con un dialogo? Che io non sia stato chiaro circa le mie intenzioni? Che non sapendo di cosa si stia parlando preferiate rimanere con la porta chiusa?”
We draw your attention to his accusation of us “Che preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale disponibilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti del primo piano?”
This time he had sent the regolamento he had written. (About two months after Lismay said they had written it and asked where to send it. As it is clearly evident from this fact that their intention had never been to have a regolamento but to disturb our peace.) As for the division of land, Capponi wrote it could be done in an assemblea thus saving time and money.
14th of July we wrote and told him what he was supposed to think:
“Deve pensare che noi crediamo nelle buone intenzioni delle persone. Sfortunatamente non abbiamo potuto riscontrare questo atteggiamento nelle vostre azioni. Purtroppo, il ricorrere alle minacce più o meno velate per rendere scomoda la nostra situazione è stato molto chiaro fin dall’inizio e, a parte il fatto di non avere alcuna intenzione di diventare vostri amici, non vogliamo dedicare neanche un secondo di più a questo rapporto, se non nella misura dello stretto necessario.
Le abbiamo chiesto molte volte di dimostrarci con un esempio concreto a che cosa servono delle regole scritte e come possano aiutare ad impedire i litigi in un caso come il nostro. Le chiediamo ancora una volta se sa spiegarci come “un regolamento che se anche non obbligatorio sarebbe stato utile ad evitarlo” sarebbe stato utile ad evitare quello che è successo con i ragazzi.
Forse può aiutare il riflettere sulla frase scritta da Lismay in uno dei suoi messaggi:
“When we have come to some agreement in writing about the division of the land or rules of the common parts you can start to ask for a “rimborso spese” from that date, but not before.”
Se Lismay non gliel’avesse già tradotta, lo facciamo noi:
“Solo dopo avere accettato un qualche accordo scritto sulla divisione del terreno o un regolamento delle parti comuni, solo da allora potrete cominciare a chiedere il rimborso delle spese comuni, non prima”.
Attiro la sua attenzione sulla delicatezza della formula “cominciare a chiedere”, non semplicemente “chiedere” (come a dire che di strada ce ne sarà da fare comunque per ottenere ciò che ci spetta) e aggiungo che, in qualità di comproprietaria, Lismay è tenuta PER LEGGE (non sulla base di un regolamento condominiale) a condividere le spese per il mantenimento della cosa comune.
Vede, la pretesa di Lismay è un buon esempio concreto di quanto sia inutile un regolamento di fronte alla volontà di una delle due parti a non ottemperare ad un accordo. E’ del tutto chiaro che il rischio di conseguenze per Lismay è estremamente basso, visto che parliamo di cifre irrisorie (100-200 euro?). Lei sa molto bene che nessuno si prenderà la briga di andare davanti ad un giudice per una simile controversia. E’ solo per questo che può infischiarsene senza vergogna. Se non ci sono fiducia reciproca e volontà di collaborazione, nessun accordo (scritto o non scritto, non importa) può funzionare.
Nella proposta di regolamento che lei ha invito c’è scritto che, nel caso di una mancata ottemperanza ad adempiere agli obblighi comuni di una delle parti, l’amministratore può adire le vie giudiziarie. Bello. Peccato che sia solo teoria. Come appena dimostrato, per situazioni banali come la nostra, non funziona in pratica.
Sempre nel suo regolamento, si leggono disposizioni dettagliate per l’uso di un lavatoio comune, con tanto di specifiche sui turni orari di utilizzo e l’imprescindibile richiamo a lasciare tutto pulito e in ordine dopo l’uso. Ma davvero pensa che in una casa di campagna con due famiglie sia possibile lavarsi le mani o sciacquare un bidone “solo” nel turno orario assegnato? E quali sarebbero le sanzioni da applicare per far rispettare un obbligo del genere? Per cortesia, non siamo ridicoli. Le regole sono una cosa buona se usate con senno, per aiutare la convivenza. Altrimenti (come in questo caso) sono formalismo aberrante.
Per concludere, siamo noi che ci domandiamo se preferiate rimanere in una situazione di totale irresponsabilità della cosa comune approfittando dell'assenza di abitanti al primo piano, lasciando ogni onere su chi vive al piano terra.
In caso non sia così, quando Lismay avrà saldato la sua parte delle spese comuni affrontate finora (di seguito elencate) e dimostrerà un minimo di rispetto per le regole che insieme abbiamo convenuto, per la legge e per le responsabilità connesse alla proprietà, allora potrete cominciare a chiedere la nostra attenzione per discutere le vostre esigenze, non prima.”
I will not go further in detail. All exchanges will be filed in court for the querela.
I would only like to compile a list of Capponi's insults and point to his reflection problem.
It is ironical that he advised Ms Wells not to say even Buongiorno to us, told her to “Lascerei questo fastidio per loro in tempo indeterminato, è meno sopportabile” only to later on in one of his emails, August 4th, Capponi wrote:
“che bisognava smettere di vedere il condominio come un nemico da dominare secondo i propri principi.”
If Capponi had not seen us as enemies and did not try to dominate us with his impositions, we wouldn't have been in this situation in the first place. The illogical and unjust conclusions he came to after listening one-sided stories from the boys have led us into this situation. (So I hold them responsible for the mess they dragged us into due to their irresponsibility and negligence.)
And it is clearly evident to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and understanding of psychology that Capponi is projecting his enimosity on us by the above words. (It's also ironical that he is supposedly a psychologist. I wonder if this is like the tailor not being able to saw his own torn dress. Cobbler's children have no shoes.) As written in the article “The Psychology Of Projection: 8 Feelings We Transfer Onto Others” on Conscious Rethink:
“Deep in the recesses of our minds lurk many thoughts and feelings that we’d like to deny ever having.
These desires and impulses are so offensive to the conscious part of the mind that it launches various psychological defense mechanisms to keep them out.
One way it does this is by projecting these feelings onto other people (for the most part, but also onto events and objects) in an attempt to externalize the problem.
What does this mean? Well, let’s begin with a simple definition:
Psychological projection is a defense mechanism that occurs when a conflict arises between your unconscious feelings and your conscious beliefs. In order to subdue this conflict, you attribute these feelings to someone or something else.
In other words, you transfer ownership of these troubling feelings to some external source.
You effectively trick yourself into believing that these undesirable qualities actually belong elsewhere – anywhere but as a part of you.”
Actually, his insults reflect and describe himself too:
“nasce dalla vostra sprovvedutezza e ignoranza” (Capponi, July 22nd)
“Arrendendomi sfiduciato alla vostra possibilità di arrivare ad un comportamento più intelligente...” (Capponi, July 22nd)
On that same email Mr Capponi even accused us of getting unduely rich by simply asking for the reimbursement of expenses from them!
He also called us dishonest. Again it's a projection of his own dishonesty on to us.
Then in the email addressed to Ms Wells and CC'd to us:
“non dimostrano particolare intelligenza!!” (Capponi, August 4th)
“sta sfiorando la demenza o è solo un disturbo di personalità?” (Capponi, August 4th)
“Mi scuso di aver valutato la loro intelligenza superiore a quanto dimostrato ed avere dato la possibilità ad una persona irrazionale di riabilitarsi” (Capponi, August 4th)
“Dovrebbe lavare la sua penna dalle corbellerie e fastidiose sporcizie che ne escono” (Capponi, August 4th)
We do not deign to reply to any of these banal and vulgar insults. His words and his behavior speak for him. I only duly rebound all his words back at him.
