|Subject: Bodenham Manor|
|From: Veronica |
|Date: 10/4/14 11:37 am|
Well ... that's the way it stands at the moment.
Inspector Jeremy Reakes-Williams
West Mercia and Warwickshire Police
Dear inspector Reakes-Williams
This firm, Alpa Forensics Limited act, Pro-Bono, for Guy of The Taylor Family, with addresses in Hereford.
Pursuant to the Tomlinson Report, we are conducting a forensic examination of cases, throughout the UK, of repossessions and mortgage fraud by which hundreds of citizens are being reduced to penury following the theft of their personal and commercial property.
Our research, so far, provides a large body of evidence that corruption is widespread in this activity. It involves Mortgagors, Solicitors, "Bailiffs", Valuers and, to some extent, employees within the Land Registry. We have proof of complicit, corrupt conduct by which, in many home re-possessions, Solicitors are facilitating theft and the oppression of citizens by abuse of the Courts, frequently involving the forging of false "Court Documents".
Complicit Bailiff firms then employ entirely unlawful, thuggish methods to force victims from their homes, with consequent massive implications for the well-being and cohesion of families and society.
We have evidence that, in some cases, the evictions are motivated by expectation of massive reward upon re-sale or development.
Perhaps most worryingly is the apparent collusion of Police forces and attendant massive miss-use of Police resources.
We attended a Hearing in Hereford Crown Court on 21st March 2014 before Judge Daniel Pearce-Higgins
The hearing was, purportedly, for the Court to consider an Application by Guy of The Taylor Family for annulment/voiding of a patently false Bankruptcy Order made against him. Mr Taylor exhibited good evidence that the "Trustee" in the case had no standing, and the purported solicitor who made the fraudulent bankruptcy application, could not by the rule of law be a solicitor due to his having a criminal record for, among other offence's, benefit fraud.
There existed another case within the Court in which Guy of the Taylor Family seeks remedy against Barclays Bank. In that case, good evidence was before the Court of serious corruption within Barclays, whereby a named Manager had "manufactured" a circa £900K "loan" purportedly made to Taylor, additional to a previous, largely paid-off loan for a similar but lesser amount. The evidence seen by us suggests this is a further example of Bank Officials generating false, bogus "loans" for the gain of the bank employees by way of commission incentive. This practice is widespread and accounts for a part of the massive heist of moneys within the failed banking system of this country.
Judge Pearce-Higgins insisted, on the day, to consolidate the claims/hearings, contrary to proper practice.
We, along with some 25 or so citizens in the public gallery, heard what can only be termed a travesty of a hearing- a "Kangaroo Court". The Judge, who had compromised himself in earlier hearings, delivered what was clearly a pre-written (by whom?) judgment against the Applicant. He airily dismissed protestations that neither of the Respondents, the bogus "Trustee in Bankruptcy" nor the allegedly corrupt solicitor, were in court and available for cross-examination.
Parties who WERE in court, included a well-known Barrister specialising in securing false Bankruptcy Orders, 2 Solicitors from a prominent firm acting for Barclays and 2 unidentified "suits"
The Applicant resisted/ protested the blatant failure of the Court to either consider the entirely separate matters case by case, OR take any account whatsoever of the manifest falsity and failure to adjudicate on the blatant perjury evidenced, or the Court's disregard of the absence of 2 key Parties, being the Solicitor and the false "Trustee in Bankruptcy"
The Applicant, further, stated in strong terms that as this hearing was yet another example of what is now clear to be "normal" failure of the Civil Justice System, that private criminal prosecutions will be initiated against those being protected by errant "Judges".
We are clear that this "hearing", only briefly set out here, is further evidence, were it needed of the virtual collapse of the English civil justice system. We await a transcript of the "hearing".
Upon giving his "Judgment", the "Judge", being in law the Court, MUST deliver a sealed, signed, dated JUDGMENT AND ORDER resulting from the proceedings. Failure to do so invalidates the proceedings.
NO ORDER OR JUDGMENT has been handed down within the prescribed time. A normal Order would say; "Upon reading the evidence"... "upon hearing the Applicant"... Upon hearing the Respondent"...
The fact that these tenets were ignored means that any "Judge" is de facto sitting in his private capacity.
We now turn to the events subsequent to this charade of a court process.
You are aware that on Wednesday 2nd April 2014 at approximately..9.30am. the Police force under your command, with Inspector Crumpton in command, heading a body of, we understand, circa 70 officers, in support of circa 20 "Bailiffs", with a Police helicopter overhead, descended on a Taylor Family residence, being the tenanted Bodenham Manor.
Property Agents Lambert Smith Hampton of 79 Mosley St., Manchester M2 3LQ are responsible for making application to evict, upon being instructed by Barclays Bank. We will be addressing separate questions to the Agents.
Presumably on the risible pretence that such massive over allocation of resource was essential to keep the peace, comply with your health and safety obsession and, by the way, give tacit or active support to EVICT LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, SEIZE PROPERTY, AND STRIKE FEAR INTO UN-INVOLVED FAMILIES?
NO LEGAL/LAWFUL PROCESS GIVING RISE TO THE STATUTORY DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY LAW AS PRE-CONDITION FOR ANY EVICTION HAD BEEN FOLLOWED.
It beggars belief that a senior, presumably intelligent Police Officer who, upon being told by a horizontal person surrounded by bottles that "I am not drunk" is trained to believe what he knows to the contrary, is, nevertheless content to accept that any "Bailiff" who waves what is in fact no more legal a document than a sheet of toilet paper, is content to risk criticism or, even, sanction for his failure to make even rudimentary check as to the lawful validity of the authority by which he is complicit in a seriously unlawful act.
In this case the STATUTORY PRE-REQUISITE court order, being the Writ of Possession (Form 66), duly sealed, signed and date-stamped by a competent Court was ABSENT, -not shown to anybody, least of all your colleague Inspector Crumpton. Before witnesses Inspector Crumpton was moved to say that he was satisfied that the document in evidence was, indeed, valid, legal. He, therefore, stands on his statement that the process was lawful and anybody standing in way of eviction would be arrested. Guy of the Taylor Family has now issued Notice, via the Court, that all Parties involved, including Inspector Crumpton, confirm the lawful nature of their conduct arising from their acceptance as lawful of the documentation exhibited to them by any employee of Evict UK.
The subject case, so well chronicled in regional and national Press and on the social networks, has many of the hallmarks of complicit, unlawful acts designed to evict and oppress. Worryingly, it resonates with similar cases we are currently involved in. The Force, of which you are, Sir, a senior member, are routinely and willingly facilitating land and property theft on a massive scale. At the same time, you signally fail to look in the right direction when any body with good cause, asks you to investigate serious white collar crime. You have no resources (or competence?) to investigate and prosecute REAL crime while being all too ready to abet/ assist thugs masquerading as Bailiffs
In order that we may provide our client with the appropriate advice and support, we ask you to kindly provide us, by return, with the following:
1. Who, which Officer, authorised the massive allocation of taxpayer's resources in support of the eviction and criminal conduct at Bodenham Manor on Wednesday 2nd April 2014?
2. What is your estimate of the cost of the support provided by your force including the helicopter photographic intelligence gathering?
3. How many, to your knowledge, of the personnel employed by Evict UK are former police officers?
4. On whose authority did the seizure and retention of all the property and personal effects removed from the property take place? On what lawful basis do you say that, in pursuit of a claim for possession of a property subject to a Charge or Mortgage which is legal. it is lawful for unidentified agents, with police protection, to steal the private goods and chattels of un-involved people?
On behalf of the Family Taylor we reserve all their Rights.
You will appreciate some aspects of this case need urgent resolution.
We would be grateful for your full response as a matter of urgency.
For: Alpa Forensics Limited.