| 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   |  | 
 
	
  
    | For the European Court |  
    | Part 6 
		(Attachments L, 6, 7) |  
 
			
				| Attachment L Gertrud Moser,................. Binzen, Tel. 
				076...............   |  
				| Municipal administration Binzen 
 79589 Binzen
 | District Office Lörrach Construction law and commercial
 Palmstraße 3
 79539 Lörrach
 |  
				| 29/08/2016 |  
				| Public parking situation in the Johann-Peter-Hebel-Str. No. 1 to 
				10 Direct and indirect file numbers (not completely) 
					
						| 1030-10-03 | 192-10-03 | 21-0532.3-10 / 428-E |  
						| 184-09-03 | 1030-10-03 | 691-09-03/632.6 |  
						| 692-09-03 | 092.3 | 3.5.2012 without CFN of District Administrator |  Dear Madam or Sir, In July 2009, I have raised because of the new building of the 
				builders x and y Nachbarn-X,........(address) , objections due to possible lack of parking spaces. And I have 
				also asked whether the existing commercial Nachbar-X is 
				allowed. Instead of answering in writing to me a letters, I was 
				unfortunately invited to a personal discussion, in which I, 
				among others it was recommended that my opposition to withdraw. 
				That is what I did. In retrospect, I think it's an impertinence from the District 
				Office, the procedure was against me. I withdrew the contradiction without sufficient informations. I 
				did not know that a large tax consulting company moves in and 
				thus to an increased volume of traffic and availability of 
				public parking in the Johann-Peter-Hebel-Street leads. In order 
				for the redemption of my opposition is ineffective.It was also distracted from the actual problem. On my instructions to not be permissible commercial
				was not 
				followed. Only when I hired a lawyer, the District Office 
				pretended to have no knowledge of the commercial. I had thus 
				unnecessary legal costs that were not reimbursed me until today. This may be impossible because the mayor of Binzen also knew of 
				the commercial and was in correspondence with involved.The company Nachbarn-X has also least once involved in Binzener 
				crafts exhibition in the spring.
 
 |  
 
			
				| I. 
 | Following Problems have been created: 
 |  
				| 1. | Increased Traffic |  
				|  | The volume of traffic in the above part of the 
				Johann-Peter-Hebel-Street was from around 2005 through 2010 
				largely due to the trade of Nachbar-X. After completion of the new a tax consulting firm drew with 
				relatively many employees inside and customers. Thereby the 
				level of traffic increased in the residential area.
 A few years ago the practice of the family doctors of Binzen 
				moved from another Road into the building of the senior home, 
				official Hauptstr. No. 2,factually Johann-Peter Hebel-Str. 2. This also increased the 
				traffic, but I don't want to criticize, because a general 
				practice is an important positive part of a community.
   |  
				| 2. | Occupation of public parking places mainly through family Nachbarn-X
 
 |  
				| a) | Unfair parking regulations for House No. 8 Even before the creation of the new building was laid down that 
				the tax consulting firm ...x.................. moves in. Thus, it was 
				known that the number of employees and the number of clients is 
				relatively high. Accordingly, there parking place requirements. 
				Officially it was a residential building with office for a free 
				professional. Then there would be additional parking spaces for 
				the residential building. Around the house a special, reasonably solid gravel was applied 
				and planted trees. There are no parking markers. So then 
				sometimes park each 3 cars behind each other in two rows, which 
				is very inconvenient if the front 4 cars ready to take off in a 
				hurry. More 2-3 parking places can be used directly from the 
				street, but are uncomfortable because of this gravel covering. Therefore, some employees park regularly on the border of my 
				property. So during business hours possible visitors for me 
				cannot use these parking spaces. The next parking places are in another street.
 
 |  
				| b) | Unfair parking regulations for House No. 
				...... (x and y Nachbarn-X) They own 3 or 4 cars and a camper.
 The only parking place is no longer used by a wooden porch.
 The cars and the Caravan of house 
				no. ....... are mostly parked on the 
				property no. ....... or directly on the street on public spaces, 
				sometimes in house no. ........ Some time ago, there was a shortly parking visitor from me at 
				the entrance of house no. ...... Nachbar-X pointed out to him 
				that he has parked wrongly. This has once again showed me that 
				family Nachbarn-X any consideration refuses to me. But from me 
				they expect very much consideration since 2005. And they still 
				charged me to with false statements to the police, the public 
				prosecutors and the civil courts. Therefore, the following problem solutions would be possible:   |  
				|  | 1) | Nachbar-X would be forced to remove the wood building, 
				so he can regulary use one place for a parking car. Then nobody 
				is allowed to park in front of it. |  
				|  | 2) | I get an approval from the municipality or the District 
				Office that about once a month my park potential visitors may 
				use this parking place when the other remaining spaces are 
				occupied by tenants, customers or em-ployees of the tax office. This right I would probably take very rarely claim.
 
 |  
				| c) | Unfair parking regulations for 
				House No. .... (Nachbarn-X-Block of flats with 3 Apartments)
 There is only one parking space beeing used by the apartment 
				building, so that tenants park in public spaces. Earlier, the 
				basement was used for a car of a tenant. But that is a long time 
				ago. In my objections on 24/09/2010 to a balcony construction and use 
				changes in a "Angrenzerbenachrichtigung" (alert) on 14/09/2010 I 
				have unsuccessfully noted. (Point 4 Far too little parking 
				places for the apartment building Johann-Peter-Hebel-Str. ..... )
 |  
				| d) | Parking Place Reality 
				Nr. ...... Family Nachbarn-X Senior) The two groups are occupied by one or two cars.
 Previously, two pitches.
 Therefore, there are no objections or issues about "parking 
				place".
 
 |  
				| 3. | Similar chicane measures of District Offices in cooperation 
				with the mayor of ...... Binzen towards me 
 |  
				| a) | Instead of regulate properly the mentioned parking place and 
				the commercial situation I was bullied. 
 |  
				|  | After my letter of complaint from 08/07/2009 reached the 
				district office Lörrach, the office started a case file act for 
				me. Because i had a private tutoring in small scale i was forced 
				to a second parking place. Also the district office attacked me 
				that my private tutoring is not allowed without a application 
				for change of use for the concering room. In the next time there 
				was an obviously unnecessary correspondence. Result: I don't 
				need a second parking place and i don't need a application for 
				change to use my tutorial room. Meanwhile my neighbour Nachbar-X could continue his not 
				allowed Commercial with much traffic und occupying puplic 
				parking places.The Behaviour of he mayor and the Districe office was that they 
				didn't know that a private tutoring is not a commercial. And the 
				ignored the actual existing commercia of my neighbour. I can't 
				believe this.
 (New Translation Version for the European Court to understand 
				the Problem or perhaps the corrupt behaviour of the mayor and 
				the district office)
 For me it was a bullying behaviour from the District Office,
 to distract from the illegal trade and the unjust parking 
				regulations.
 
 
 
 |  
				| b) | False statements of
				Nachbarin-X to the police. On 08/07/2009 in the morning i brought my letters to the 
				community and the District Office.In the afternoon Nachbarin-X made their false statements to 
				the police.
 While there was further correspondence with the mayor and the 
				District Office, the police report arrived on 14/07/2009 the 
				police at the District Office, probably also at the municipality 
				Binzen and thus to the mayor. But i was not informed about the 
				police report. From this fact I learned much later on 03/08/2009 during my 
				access to the case files at the district court Lörrach. There I 
				learned that I have got into a judicial declaration of 
				incapacity due to this police report and the forwarding letter 
				from the District Office. Nachbarin-X told the police a horror story about me so that i 
				get into the judicial incapacity procedure. The resulting 
				police report is, in fact still kept on more years in the 
				so-called care Act or actual in the incapacitation of Act. Until today I have no rights to counter-evidences, for example, 
				Questioning witnesses. Nachbarin-X has made more false 
				statements and disparaging statements about me over the years. 
				Recently the police and the district office refuses evidences at 
				the Administration Court Freiburg.
 |  
				| c) | By the behaviour of the mayor and the District Offices can 
				not be excluded that the forwarding letter from the District 
				Offices had the purpose, a possible incapacitation of me. So 
				they could stop me to uncover the obvious construction and trade 
				law deficiencies. 
 |  
 
			
				| II. 
 | My Expectation: Detailed reports 
 |  
				| 1. | Parking Place Rules for House 
				No. .... and the possible change or adjustment to legal requirements.
 
 |  
				| 2. | Parking Place Rules for House 
				No. .... and the possible change or adjustment to legal requirements.
 
 |  
				| 3. | Parking Place Rules for House 
				No. .... and the possible change or adjustment to legal requirements.
 
 |  
				| 4. | Parking Place Rules for House No. 
				2 I don't want the possible change or adjustment to legal 
				requirements.
 The existence of a general medical practice is very important 
				for the community.
   |  
				|  | Basically I create structured and numbered letter to state 
				institutions. In such cases i got very often a short answer, 
				ignoring the individual points. This then means that individual concerns no response is given.
 I would therefore also a structured reply.
 |  
 
			
				| III. | Proposal of the District Offices to Amount of compensation for me,
 
 |  
				|  | because its unjust, illegal and inhumane practices have 
				contributed significantly to the many financial and 
				psychological burden for years. The community Binzen can take part in it also.
 That unfortunately I have chosen wrong, incompetent and 
				fraudulent lawyers,
				can not be held against me. In Attachment 1 is a current, incomplete list of expenses 
				incurred by me by the behaviour of family Nachbarn-X, the police, 
				the District Office, the District and Regional Courts, the 
				Prosecutor's Office, the Committee on Petitions BW, the 
				Administrative Court Freiburg and my lawyers. In Attachment 2 is a donation receipt. In protest against the 
				injustices and multiple false statements of 
				Nachbarin-X I 
				donated the opponent's legal fees and am now i am in a 
				foreclosure process in which I have to pay € 1,740 until 15 
				Sept. 2016th. Sincerely (?)G. Moser
 |  
 
			
				| Attachment 6 Gertrud Moser,........................ Binzen, Tel.: 
				07....................   Gertrud Moser, 79589 Binzen, Johann-Peter-Hebel-Str. 9 Deutscher BundestagSekretariat des Petitionsausschusses
 Platz der Republik 1
 11011 Berlin  20/07/2016 Petition 63006 Dear Madam or Sir, as you inform me by a letter the above mentioned petition is 
				according to online display in progress. Unfortunately, the implementation of my desired concern would be 
				just a drop a the bucket. 2012 and 2014, you have denied to public my public petitions and 
				thus the opportunity to vote of others for them. Your reasons 
				were inadequate to me. You mentioned general information about 
				care law (incapacitiy law) so that your are not concerning my 
				arguments. Meanwhile, i think that perhaps the lawyer and professional 
				caregivers lobby is against im-provements in care law, de facto 
				incapacitation law. Who owns property, the legal guardian must 
				pay by himself. In such cases, lawyers or professional 
				caregivers are employed. My petitions arose from my personal experiences. I therefore i point again to my case website: 
				www.gerichtlichesbetreuungsverfahren.de: Here i show how the 
				lack of the caring law, in fact the incapacitation law, has 
				changed my life radically negative. With my proposed improvements such case would be never 
				happening.
 also i point once again to my second information website:www.gerichtliches-betreuungsverfahren.de.
 There I included a lot of information including videos from TV 
				program.
 I therefore expect from you that you finally publish the 
				mentioned Petitions in the Attachment and actually work within 
				the meaning of the European Convention of Human Rights. SincerelyG. Moser
 |  
 
			
				| Attachment 2014
 |  
				| 20/07/2014 | 1. Petition: 53648; |  Pet 4-18-07-312-009146 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				Immediate right to witnesses, if there are legal consequences by 
				a police report, which is caused by the statements of a third 
				person. If a police report causes a judical procedure, then every German 
				court and / or the prosecutor shall immediately take appropriate 
				measures to verify the statements.
 |  
				| 20/07/2014 | 2. Petition: 
				Betreuungsrecht: 53655 |  Pet 
				4-18-07-315-009048 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				A judicial declaration of incapacity must be canceled or 
				interrupted, if the person in the process indicated that it was 
				initiated as a result of false statements.  The court then should 
				give priority to conduct an audit of the statements for their 
				truth, as with the help of witnesses. The person concerned shall 
				be granted the rights contained in Article 6 of the European 
				Convention of Human Rights
 |  
				| 25/07/2014 | 6. Petition: 53772 |  Pet 4-18-07-312-009150 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				The prosecution has to obtain the consent from the person 
				concernd if they want to obtain a medical report from a civil 
				court. This is especially important for the case that the person 
				concerned has lodged a criminal complaint and / or criminal 
				complaint against another person.
 |  
				| 26/07/2014 | 7. Petition: 53781 |  Pet 4-18-07-4034-009068 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				A Court Letter initiating a judicial declaration of incapacity 
				for the person has to be understandable, justified and written 
				in a decent language.  In addition, the putative legal 
				consequences must be accurately specified and provided with 
				typical examples, for example, Limiting the full legal capacity 
				to the limited capacity, no free choice of residence.
 |  
				| 23/09/2014  | 8. Petition: 54960 |   |  
				| Right to a public defender during legal incapacitation procedure 
				analogous Criminal Procedure § 140 The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: Right to a public defender during legal incapacitation procedure 
				analogous Criminal Procedure .If the potential legal incapacitation can not be detected as a 
				matter of urgency, the person concerned shall be given a 
				reasonable time to find a suitable lawyer.
 
 |  
 
			
				| 2012    |  
				| 12/05/2012 | 1. Petition: | Pet 4-17-07-4034-037530 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				For the proposal and beginning of legal incapacitation procedure 
				there must be procedural requirements.The person concerned must be informed in advance so that she/he 
				can avoid a trial.
 
 |  
				| 23/05/2012 | 2. Petition: Betreuungsrecht: | Pet 4-17-07-4034-037254 |  
				| The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights: 
				Before and during a legal incapacitation procedure for adults 
				the Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights must 
				be suitable and compelling adhered.    |  
				| 23/06/2012 | 3. Petition: Betreuungsrecht: | Pet 4-17-07-4034-037530 |  
				| = 1. Petition with particulary other arguments. The German Bundestag may decide a law with the following rights:
 For the proposal and beginning of legal incapacitation procedure 
				there must be pro-cedural requirements.
 The person concerned must be informed in advance so that she/he 
				can avoid a trial.
 |  
				| Proposed from
 Gertrud Moser, x--straße Nr. x, 79589 Binzen, 
				Tel.: ......Case-Homepage 
				www.gerichtlichesbetreuungsverfahren.de
 Information-Homepage 
				www.gerichtliches-betreuungsverfahren.de
 
 |  
 
			
				| Attachment 7 Only the Translation, Copy see German Version Answer by the German Bundestag German Bundestag Committee on Petitions
 Mrs
 Gertrud Moser
 Johann-Peter-Hebel-Str. 9
 79589 Binzen
 Berlin, July 22, 2016Reference: your E-mail by July 20, 2016
 Unit 4 Pet
 BMAS (Arb.), BMW, BMZ
 Upper Office Employee B............ N...................
 Platz der Republik 1, 11011 Berlin
 Phone: +49 30 227 -.....
 Fax: +49 30 227 -........ before .................. @ 
				bundestag.de
 Care Law, actual Incapacity LawPet 4-18-07-4034-028795 (Please specify all correspondence)
 Dear Ms Moser,
 |  
				| on behalf of the Chairman of the Petitions Committee of the 
				German Bundestag I acknowledge receipt of your letter, with 
				which you complaint the non-publication of your petitions from 
				the years 2014 and 2012. For this I refer to the already present you justifications for 
				the respective refusals. In addition, I would like to discuss 
				further the following: Even if it is the desire of the Committee on Petitions to 
				provide as many entries to the Internet, it is not possible even 
				in the face of their large numbers, comply with all disclosure 
				requirements. Clarity and focus on the essentials are just in 
				the interests of users and users of our discussion forums. Thus, the decision to publish according to uniform standards is 
				carried out, the Committee has developed in paragraphs 3 and 4 
				of its policy for the disclosure of petitions to criteria. After the procedural principles of the Committee including the 
				"Guidelines for the treatment of public petitions" that you 
				accepted when submitting your petition, with regard to the 
				publication of a rigorous assessment standard is applied. In 
				this context, also pointed out that no legal right to a 
				publication is. Regarding your current petition for guardianship law under the 
				above Case number you receive as soon as possible further 
				information Best regardsB.......... N......................
 
 |  
 
 |