Sunday, 8 March 2009
And here is the Barrister James Couser.
On his website he states:
"He has particular expertise in the field of asset recovery following liquidation, and insolvency practitioners and solicitors acting for creditors regularly instruct him in respect of these and related matters"
However, my family business was wound up in July 2005, and James has been representing his clients, the Joint Liquidators, since then.
It's now March 2009 and Couser has obtained nothing for the creditors he claims to act in the interests of, while ignoring the fact that the Director he continues to pursue is a major creditors. All he has done is incurr costs.
More on Couser soon
For those of you who access this blogg in an attempt to second guess what I am doing: please feel free - this is but a snippet of what I have on you.
Since July 2007, I have continued to fight the system, collating more damning evidence. I have also been extremely active working on my book.
Lies, Lies and More Lies
how the legal can fail to protect the innocent
the true story of how the British legal system does nothing but protect its own
Soon to be published, this public interest book will expose the activities of the professionals we pay to supposedly represent our interests. Preceded with an easy to understand 'top tips for not getting conned by your solicitor' The national book launch will be supported by an aggressive print media features campaign, local media outreach and a broadcast tour of relevant radio and TV stations, direct to consumer, lobbying and public affairs programme.
If you would like a pre-print edition of my book, I would be delighted to share it will you.
Be assured that every damning exposure and allegation I make in Lies, Lies and More Lies will be backed up by original documents I have in my possession from the likes of The Specter Partnership (solicitors), Anthony Hannon (official Receiver), The Insolvency Service, The Department of Trade and Industry; and Citroen Wells for whom both Phillips and Mehta represent. Their exposure will be for the benefit of thousands of people.
We are in the grip of the recession and as more businesses go under, the blood sucking antics of the Insolvency Service and Liquidators will be exposed.
WARNING: Take it from me, if your business goes into insolvency, the Joint Liquidators will do anything, absolutely anything to try to breach your limited company protection. The are all about their money and they will go to great lengths to prove you acted inappropriately when you ran your business. And so goes your Limited Company protection. The bloodsuckers will go for everything you have - your home, savings, pensions. They will stop at nothing if they think they have a chance of getting money from someone who has already lost everything they worked for.
Think Back: AS a business, did you have ever received a statutory demand. Did you know that this form failed to detail your legal rights of responce as is the law, and it therefore denied you your human rights. The powers that be (e.g DTI, Insolvency service, Government solicitors) know this, and they will do everything they can to deny accountability and prevent the truth coming out.
But they are accountable and many good businesses would still be trading if it was not for their failure. I am leading the charge on this. The nature of British law is that it has to be challenged; only through this can more just laws be created. I am currently taking my claims to the European Court of Human Rights.
If found in my favour, the consequences for the Government will be huge. Not only will 1,000s of Directors have been denied their human and legal rights on the basis of an illegal and morally flawed statutory demand form, but many companies will have gone under as the result of government failure; with all the untold suffering this causes employers and employees, their family.
Rest assured, it won't be long before the government will be held to account!
As a final note - there is some some very interesting information regarding James Couser (Barrister), a Barrister for whom it can be proven unprofessional, inappropriate and potentially illegal activity. Watch this space...
Be back soon, so hold in there.
Monday, 6 August 2007
It's been a number of months since I have been blogging and now I am back to continue to support you in getting solicitor smart.
Why the break?
As in all matters where you are up against self-service and corrupt employees of the establishment, it is critical that the fight for truth doesn't become all consuming. Life goes on.
In addition, a break will no doubt lull those who have lied, cheated and abused the court system into thinking they are in the clear. How wrong they are.
Hannon and his cronies will be bought to account for their actions. These people are still out there practicing, no doubt inflicting suffering on more innocent people.
UPDATE ON PROCEEDINGS.....
...The Investigation into the company by the Public Interest Unit
Many months ago the Public Interest Unit of the Insolvency Services analysed and completed their review of my Company's records. I have been informed that they were satisfied with their investigation. We did nothing wrong and their review no doubt showed this.The Public Interest Unit have taken no action against myself or any of the former directors of the company as they know we did nothing wrong. Yet, on the basis of the same information they have reviewed Hannon and his cronies:
- Froze the bank account of a former director
- Stated that criminal proceedings may be bought against the former directors
- Misled the court knowing the true facts
- Supported the lies of the Specter Partnership, the people who closed the company
The release of the Report will demonstrate:
- Hannon lied again and again
- Hannon knowingly misled the High Court, Peterborough Crown Court, his boss and the Chief Executive Officer of the Insolvency Service
...The Malicious Act of Someone Trying to Ruin the Innocent's Career
More updates to follow!
Saturday, 28 July 2007
Saturday, 14 April 2007
Don't forget to read my previous Blog posts to learn more about A Hannon (Official Reciever, Cambridge) his superiors and bad solicitors!
The Bugging of my Home!
In July 2006 my home was bugged with four bugging devices, two in my office and two attached to the external phone lines.
I make no allegations about who bugged my home. BUT someone wanted to know what I said and did! Maybe someone doesn’t want the public to hear what I have to say!
The police visited my home and in direct responce to their questions I informed them that I was, was intending to, or had taken legal action against:
- Anthony Hannon, Official Reciever, Cambridge
- Citreon Wells (Joint Liquidators - M Mehta & M Phillips)
- The Insolvency Service
- The Department of Trade and Industry
- The Specter Partnership (solicitors)
- Buckles Solicitors
- Belmont Hansford Solicitors
The police subsequently informed me that that no crime had been committed.
The placing of the bugging devices
The bugs were placed by a couple pretending to be viewing my home as potential purchasers.
While the women attempted to distract me by talking about the cooker (!!), the man went back to look at the bathroom; instead I saw him sneaking into the office. Suspecting that they were up to no good, and when my e mail no longer worked, I searched the office and found two bugging devices: a microphone and a computer reader. Subsequent to this I found the two telephone taps.
Hidden under the phone socket behind a curtain I found the small penny sized microphone (picture on right above). It was fixed to the wall by three thin wires, one of which had doubled back on itself. It is when I cut myself on this wire while searching that I saw this bug.
I discovered that the microphone is known as a ‘cat’ as when opened (picture above) this is what it looks like. I believe these are imported from the US and easily purchased in UK.
The computer reader
Attached to one of the hard drive ports on the back on my computer was what I believe is a key board reader, designed to read what you write and what web sites etc you access on your computer.
The phone bugs
Within the external phone box on the wall outside my flat (3rd floor), I found two phone taps attached to the phone wires. Made of a clear rubber materials they were about a quarter of the size of a stamp.
The 'buggers' were entertained by an evening of video pornography!
After finding the bugs at about 7.30pm (within an hour of them being placed!), I left them in place and ran a pornographic video on replay all night. That would have given them something to listen to!
Let me say it again, I make no allegation as to who bugged my home. But someone out there wants to know what I say and who I write to. Maybe someone doesn’t want me to tell my story, but whatever their reasons the fact remains: my home and privacy have been violated. Someone must be held to account!
Read more about my story below, follow my blog and you can reach your own conclusions.
Thursday, 12 April 2007
Hannon lied to me and the Treasury Solicitors by denying ever being consulted!
A one and a half page e mail is evidence that he lied and this and the correspondence from the Treasury solicitors confirming Hannon's lies will be posted on Monday!
In July 2006, one of the Joint Liquidators from Citroen Wells applied for a Freezing Order to freeze all of the assets of one of the former Directors of the Company.
Freezing orders are right at the edge of a Judge’s jurisdiction and their purpose is surely to freeze the assets of money launderers and drug barons, not the innocent!
You would think that such an Order, obtained in closed court were there is no opportunity to defend yourself, would only be granted on the basis of factual and correct information. Not so.
In support of the freezing order, Hannon provided false and misleading financial information following a direct request from the Joint Liquidators for evidence in support of their application for the freezing order being sought against a former Company Director.
Hannon lies about being consulted
Yet, when I asked Hannon’s boss, N Latif, if he and Hannon knew anything about the freezing order I was informed that neither he or Hannon knew anything about it prior to my call, and that neither of them had supplied any information to the Joint Liquidators.
Further to this, and on asking the Treasury Solicitors if Hannon had supplied any information in support of the Freezing Order, they stated that they would consult with their client (Hannon). There then followed a letter stating that after consulting with their client, Hannon had confirmed that he had not been consulted.
However, upon receipt of this letter and after forwarding it to the solicitors acting for the Joint Liquidator, they wrote back attaching two e mails. One from the Joint Liquidator to Hannon (dated 27 July 2006) requesting information on the company finances in support of their application for the Freezing Order, and a one and a half page e mail from Hannon (dated 27 July 2006) in response to this request.
Hannon’s e mail in response, contained entirely false and misleading financial information that was used in the High Court:
- Hannon alleged that there were £350,000 of unexplained cash withdrawals with full knowledge of the fact that much of this was staff wages and other sums that were clearly accounted.
- Even after being informed at a meeting at the offices of the Insolvency Service in front of N Letif and two other staff members that he had double accounted a payment going out of the Company account of £50,000. Hannon with the knowledge of his boss and D Flynn at 21 Bloomsbury Street did not remove this sum from his figures.
- Hannon alleged that the Company owed their Bankers £600,000. He stated in his email that he had a letter confirming this and that he would forward that letter to the Joint Liquidators. The letter was never forwarded, nor has the letter been found in the files that were Hannon's possession. There is nothing to substantiate the extent of the sum he alleges was owed to the Company bankers.
Hannon lied about not being consulted. Hannon lied to the Treasury Solicitors saying that he had not been consulted. Hannon’s lies were used in the High Court.
D Flynn, the Treasury Solicitors and Hannon’s boss, N Latiff were all shown the evidence that Hannon had lied, yet no one has done anything about it.
A week after the freezing order was granted it was removed at the return hearing on the basis of the information provided being unsubstantiated.
Yet again Hannon has got away with lying to the detriment of the innocent, yet there is nothing anyone can do about it and his bosses, in their failure to act, do nothing but protect their own.
.....update on my continuing battle against the system .....
At the recent hearing at the Peterborough Magistrates Court (considered in detail in Blog post dated 2 March), while under oath and under cross examination in the witness box, I have a suspicion that A Hannon, Official Receiver for the Cambrideshire region of the Insolvency Service, may have committed perjury when he claimed that his boss had instructed him to report the alleged incident committed by my son to the police.
Perjury is obviously a very serious allegation against an officer of the Court. With this in mind I contacted A Hannon’s superiors to ascertain the truth before formally reporting to the police that A Hannon may have been committed perjury.
Are Hannon's Superiors Protecting Him?
In a written reply to my first letter, and no doubt in response to this question, N Latif wrote:
'Because of the serious nature of your assertions I will be writing to the court for a copy of the transcript of the hearing. Once I receive this I will be in a position to consider your comments in detail'.
Following Latif’s initial response I sent him, D Flynn and the Treasury Solicitors a letter from my son’s solicitor’s confirming the statement made by A Hannon in court.
Since sending this copy letter, on five occasions I have requested of N Latif, D Flynn and the Treasury Solicitors a simple yes or no as to whether A Hannon was telling the truth in the witness box. While the only response from the Treasury Solicitors has been an acknowledgement of one of my letters, I have recived a single reply from N Latif in which he stated that:
'He saw no reason why A Hannon should not have reported the incident to the police'.
A carefully written response written in such a way to avoid denying or accepting what was stated as truth by A Hannon in court? This response seems to me to be the type of wording advised by a solicitor. You can make your own mind up.
Most recently on 11 April, I wrote to all three parties stating that unless I receive a clear yes or no to my question by 5pm today, I would report the matter to the police. There has been no response from the Treasury Solicitors or N Latif. However, D Flynn replied stating:
'You have had a response from N Latif on this question and you must take whatever steps you consider appropriate'.
As an informed reader, in considering the above facts I am sure you can form your own opinion regarding the truth in this matter.
Whatever your conclusion, ask yourself two questions:
1. Why is it that a solicitor who acts on behalf of her Majesties Government, a Regional Director of the Insolvency Service and the Inspector General and Agency Chief Executive of the Insolvency Service refuse to answer a very simple question ‘was A Hannon instructed to report the alleged incident to the police as A Hannon claimed while under oath?’
2. Are the individuals concerned conspiring to pervert the course of justice?
Someone must hold these public servants to account and I am now left with no option but to formally report this matter to the police.
Watch this space!
Wednesday, 21 March 2007
At the High Court today the Judge dismissed my personal claim against A Hannon, the Official Receiver, and dismissed my application to amend my claim for misfaence in public office.
After hearing and seeing the evidence that showed beyond doubt that Hannon had:
Knowingly supplied incorrect information to the Courts
- Knowingly supplied incorrect information in support of an application to freeze a former-Directors assets
- Lied to the Peterborough Police resultant in my son being arrested, thrown in a cell and charged with threatening behaviour
- Lied in Court when giving evidence before this charge against my son was dropped
- Lied to his bosses and former directors of the Company
Hannon can do and say what he likes and not be held accountable!
It is an outrage that this liar can inflict so much harm on people, lie to the very people he is meant to represent (the Courts) and be allowed to get away with it.
How can a man who has shown so little integrity and a total disrespect for the truth be allowed to do what he wants and be protected by the law. How many other people have suffered as a result of his lies?
I won't let this one rest and it is my intention to go public on this to warn others!
Sunday, 18 March 2007
Back off to the High Court in London to continue my battle against the DTI, Official Receiver (Anthony Hannon) and the Specter Partnership.
Standing up to the establishment! Fighting for our rights! Demanding a just, fair and equitable system!
Not a system where government officials can claim immunity from prosecution while:
- Knowingly misleading the Courts with knowledge of the true facts
- Deliberately misleading the police to get my son charges for threatening behaviour
- Misrepresenting the truth
- Ignoring the true facts
- Committing slander
- Abusing the process that is meant to protect innocent parties
Watch this space for the outcomes!