CONT
Your clients should not be embarrassed by the content of my letters. THEY SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY ASHAMED OF IT. . . . AS YOU SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY ASHAMED OF THE CONTENT OF YOUR LETTERS. . . . but somehow I doubt you will be. There has been precious little shame evident from any of you.
Is it common practice nowadays for Solicitors to persistently be disingenuous on behalf of their clients? Or does that only apply to your firm? And why do you not reveal yourself either, and keep writing in the joint name of the company? Perhaps you are ashamed after all. I wouldn’t put my name to any of those letters either. . . I abhor stupid mistakes and lies.
Tell me . . on a scale of one to ten, which is more embarrassing for a Solicitor? To be ignorant of the law, or to deliberately lie on behalf of his clients?
Harassment is against the law, and I have repeatedly told you that I would never step outside the law. And I tell it to you one more, and last time.
But I do NOT give you any undertaking whatsoever that I will not severely “embarrass” your clients, both financially and otherwise, while they persist in taking the course of actions that they have and are still taking. And, fail to “deal with” all those very serious issues mentioned at the beginning of this letter. . . . In fact I promise to do so . . .TRUST ME.
Further, I have repeatedly stated that your client made the most outrageous phone call to me when he purchased the freehold and followed that up with an attempt to deprive us of the full value of our property. . . many tens of thousands of pounds. An accusation PUBLISHED many times. It’s called lease grazing . . . . other words for ‘legal theft by peaceable entry’.
And when that attempt failed, through his ignorance, you on the 23rd October wrote on his behalf in exactly the same vein, “would you please confirm that you have obtained the Building Society’s consent to sub-letting the upper floor flat.” . . tell me . . was this an attempt by yourselves to aid and abet your client in his aim? What other possible reason would you have for asking? . . . .. You’re fond of ultimatums. So, I’ll give you one.
If you do not reply to the contrary, with a plausible explanation, in a reasonable time, 12 Noon January 16th, I will assume that my suspicions are correct.
You want proof of his intentions? . . . .Ask your client why he apportioned the insurance money in the way that he did. For the six years we have owned the flat we have always paid 2/3 of the insurance money. Which is fair because we own 2/3 of the property. But Patel only asked us for 1/3, which of course we paid. Why do you suppose he did that? Generosity? It was NOT an oversight I assure you. . . it was DELIBERATE. . . . . and I know why he did it.
See if you are clever enough to know too? . . hhmmpphhh! . . . .As if.
I WARN YOU that if you persist in lying and threatening me in the way that you are. I am just as capable of RUINING yourselves as I am your clients, if I choose, using just the contents of your letters. If there is one thing the great British Public love less than a dishonest estate agent, it’s a dishonest Solicitor. They often expect the former, but will not forgive the latter.
You only have two shops. The last company that deliberately lied to me on behalf of their clients had 10 shops, and I closed six of them, before they went into liquidation. . . and they . . had clever Solicitors. . . . I warned you from the very first day of what would happen.
DO NOT THREATEN ME AGAIN. . . if you want to go to court . . JUST DO IT.
You have no idea what I am capable of, OR WHO I AM . . . . I WARN YOU. . . .
advise your clients correctly. . . I . . need none from you. But you write on 10th December that I “should obtain legal advice on what amounts to harassment under the Act” . . . .
Really? Clearly it is your own selves that need to get legal advice. And I’m not being facetious here. You have trouble understanding simple letters if they are too long for you. . . . I’d ‘go to silk’ if I were you.
And if I do decide to seek any advice . . it won’t be from a pathetic firm like yours. (and I have to say that in the plural since you have never written to me as an individual, despite my asking). You have served your clients abysmally so far. They are in far worse financial and moral position than they were when they approached you. . . . Exactly as I intended to convey to you they would be, in my very first letter (to you). If they continued to act directly, against my peaceful and legitimate interests, as they have done, and continue to do so. And what could be more peaceful and legitimate than providing good accommodation to genteel young ladies?
I informed you at the very start. . . . with the evidence . . . . of what I am capable of, and will do, to anyone who unfairly and in this case illegally, threatens those interests. You have ignored that advice to your client’s detriment, and continue to do so. And now to your own detriment. Personally I’d report you under the trade descriptions act, if you were my Solicitor. Frankly you should give your clients their money back.
CONT.
ADVISE YOUR CLIENTS THAT THEIR PROBLEMS HAVE BARELY BEGUN
. . . if they do not sort out the very grave issues that are really important.
But do you understand them now? Are there any words you need any help with? Are there any more points of law you would like advise on? Is this paragraph too long for you? Or this letter too long for you perhaps? Since you find “it is difficult to tell “ with long letters. Perhaps if I send them a page at a time you will be able to digest their content? Then you could let me know when you’ve managed to read each page. Or more importantly . . . UNDERSTOOD IT. And I remind you of my letter of 11 Nov . . . . . “Thank you for your letter of the, 04 November 2003. Which barely deals with the issues at all. (And parts of it, make me wonder if you actually understand what this is all about).”
I have every right (and justification) in English Law to do what I am doing to your clients. (and now to you) There are plenty of precedents for it. One in particular that I have demonstrated, that you have ignored at your client’s peril.
If you are advising them otherwise, then you a deceiving them, too.
If you are not, but are perfectly aware of your deceit to me, then it makes your threats to me all the more despicable. . . . which is it Sir? I suspect the latter.
Or maybe you are indeed ignorant of the Law?
Again I give you the same ultimatum above to reply . . . Friday 12 Noon.
Yours Very, Very Sincerely Colin Clifford Cole
Still more embarrassing . . . . is . . . getting caught after being told quite specifically and categorically you would be, with an explanation, that you arrogantly ignored.
I did indeed report Lister & Wood to the Law Society? What a waste of time that was. They did rule on the matter. They didn’t deny that Lister & Wood lied to me. But since I couldn’t prove that they were aware enough of the Law for them to know that they were lying I couldn’t say that it was malicious. Apparently not having knowledge of the law is not a serious matter for a Solicitor. Also none of the threats were made in an abusive manner . . . I kid you not . . . so that’s all right then. . . .and they were threatening me on behalf of their client, who had instructed them to so. . . . all perfectly proper then . . . So I reported them (The Law Society) to the Legal services Ombudsman . . . . And guess what . . . . . . . they concurred . . . . what a cosy relationship that is eh?
Therefore according to Zahinda Manzoor CBE Legal Services Ombudsman . . and I have this in writing . . . .it is perfectly ok for a Solicitor to lie to you about the Law as long as he doesn’t realise that is what he is doing. It is perfectly ok for a Solicitor to be ignorant of simple Law. It is perfectly ok to deceive you, by threaten you with an ULTIMATUM of court action. . . . . even though they know there is not the slightest chance or GROUNDS for them to do so. . . as long as they are polite about doing it . . . . amazing . . . and she got a CBE for it.
Therefore according to Zahinda Manzoor CBE Legal Services Ombudsman . . and I have this in writing . . . .it is perfectly ok for a Solicitor to lie to you about the Law as long as he doesn’t realise that is what he is doing. It is perfectly ok for a Solicitor to be ignorant of simple Law. It is perfectly ok to deceive you, by threaten you with an ULTIMATUM of court action. . . . . even though they know there is not the slightest chance or GROUNDS for them to do so. . . as long as they are polite about doing it . . . . amazing . . . and she got a CBE for it.
MORE INTERESTINGLY as of 19th July 2005 it seems that Lister & Wood have given up their website . . Or at least they have disappeared from any searches I have found. It seems that founder member Wood has left. . . . So what now for this BUNCH of TOSSERS? . . . . Maybe it is one down two to go . . . So visit my new web site at www.lawyerbaiting.co.uk . . Which will be in association with www.ingramwintergreen.co.uk . . . And . . www.dennissmatthews.co.uk . . . soon
Alf Stupidtoser, solicitor. Who Used to work for Lister & Wood Solicitors Croydon. According to the Law Society he has mysteriously disappeared. Maybe abducted by aliens. He is Believed to be carrying missing files. Have you seen this man. Please inform the Law Society.
This man is a malicious
liar and should not be
approached.
This man is a malicious
liar and should not be
approached.
WANTED
A Stupidtoser turned up later. According to The Legal Services Ombudsman this ‘person’ . . They didn’t call him a Solicitor was found working for M B Allen Solicitors in Shirley.
Who just happen to be the Solicitor that S J Patel usually uses. . . . am I being cynical
here?
Who just happen to be the Solicitor that S J Patel usually uses. . . . am I being cynical
here?
Alf Stupidtoser is not to be confused with Andy Stupidtosser the Croydon Council Planning Officer.
Don’t forget to visit my most excruciating lawyer bashing site at http://www.ingramwintergreen.org . . . but don’t go if you are squeamish and can’t stand to see a Solicitor’s bodily fluids . . winks
This chap is doing the same to Moss & Coleman Solicitors
Hornchurch Essex
he calls them tossers . .
www.mossandcoleman.co.uk
Hornchurch Essex
he calls them tossers . .
www.mossandcoleman.co.uk
UPVC Chamfered & Moulded Systems
Aluminium Subframe or Direct Fixed
Solid Hardwood Windows
Doors & Conservatories
Aluminium Subframe or Direct Fixed
Solid Hardwood Windows
Doors & Conservatories
ON THIS PAGE . .The 3rd of three pages devoted to the malicious lying, threatening, Bunch of Tossers Lister & Wood Solicitors Croydon & Selsdon. . . Alfstupidtosser goes missing . . Click here
. . and this guy is having a go at “LEGAL BULLIES”
Solicitors FDC Law,
Faulkner Daniel & Cruttwell, Midsomer Norton . . . .featuring Catriona “Merciless” Duthie @ St John’s Chambers, Bristol
Solicitors FDC Law,
Faulkner Daniel & Cruttwell, Midsomer Norton . . . .featuring Catriona “Merciless” Duthie @ St John’s Chambers, Bristol
ANOTHER amazing disappearing Solicitor David Ingram is not only a Ptnr at TOSSER Solicitors Ingram Winter Green, but a Director at NSCGlobal Ltd . .
http://www.nscglobal.com /aboutnscglobal/more/management#nonexecdirector
http://www.nscglobal.com /aboutnscglobal/more/management#nonexecdirector
Have I Got News For Croydon
What a STAR . . .
HARRY ROFFEY
In his Seventies and having a go at the HSBC and Kent Police.
His site is
www.corruptpolice.co.uk/
Unlike some of the scum opposite Harry is a really nice Guy until you upset him.
Bit
like me really.
See what I mean.
Click here
Colin’s NEW sites
Barnett Ross the no forms required to bid Auctioneers.
Contact Andrew
Mahon NI plaintiff 1’s chief fixer for details.
He knows Steven Grossman so doesn’t
have to fill out all those nasty Money Laundering forms.
Or ANY forms come to that.
www.barnett-
(Andrew Mahon
3 Pettigo Rd, Kesh,
Co
Fermanagh, NI.
02868 632102
0775 665878)
Steven Grossman MRICS
sgrossman@barnettross.co.uk
Have a word with Steve about how to avoid filling in all
those nasty PROXY forms.
He’ll do them for you.
“NO MAX” bids accepted.
And he’ll
invent a name
for you too.
Law Society Protecting Crooked Solicitors . . . But not from me.. . . Colin Blasts IWG (Ingram Winter Green off the WEB in 2006) Their own site was bottom of page three the last time felt like going that far down the list to look for them. . . In 2008 they are on their way out again . . Say bye bye to the Web IWG
Part of the www.dennissmatthews.co.uk Wanker Solicitor sites in association with
www.dennissmatthews.org . . . www.iwg-
SITES DEVOTED TO EXPOSING CROOKED PRACTICES of these Solicitors.
NOTICE TO ALL search engine, ISP’s, Nominet, Hosting Co’s, domain name providers
and the like. ANY adverse legal content on my sites . . . . Is AT LEAST ONE YEAR
OLD . . . but more likely 2 years old. . . . and therefore is EXEMPT from prosecution
in ANY form under UK Law by virtue of being OUT of STATUTE. Please ignore any threats
of legal action. . . They will just be ‘trying it on’. . . besides it’s ALL true
otherwise they would have sued me.as per Google search defamation limitation.Pre-