David Rutter

Jaqueline
Hesketh

Alison Muir

Lisa
Richardson

Richard Carlson

Dawn Coller

Sarah Adlam

Jonathan Burton

Paul Garner

Simon Scott

Andy Littlefield

Andrew Davies

Visit NOT Metropolitan Police Still No 3 on MSN search  (Sir Ian Blair) . . The totally unofficial web-site  www.sir-ian-blair.co.uk of C C Cole  created solely to bring to the attention of Sir Ian Blair the disgraceful behaviour of Croydon Met Police. & advertising my other web-sites www.metpolicecroydon.co.uk  & www.croydoncouncil.info AND NOW www.metpolicelondon.co.uk . . . www.lawyerbaiting.co.uk & www.ingramwintergreen.me.uk   “The site that tells the truth about these useless Solicitors.” see also www.dennissmatthews.co.uk and the excruciating www.iwg-solicitors.co.uk
and now in the vain hope he might get his policemen to actually catch some CROOKS.
wp5262305f.jpg

At the End where we find . . . . YET MCP Law say their client’s Aunty and Uncle were able to buy this property, through the patronage of plaintiff 1’s ‘fixer’ . . . . without having to go through ANY of the above. . .  . . . . what an INCREDIBLE story . . . . . SWORN ON OATH TO THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. . . . by both plaintiffs and MCP’s J Burton and presented to the Court by Sarah Adlam and her pet Barrister Matthew Hutchings as FACT.

COLIN IS BACK . . . My sites have fallen by the wayside for a year while I was being sued unsuccessfully in the High Court of Justice . . . . Not for Defamation or Lible; because every word in them is true. . . but for Harassment under the 1997 Act. . . Trouble is  . . One of MCP clients had to PERJURE himself to do it. With the assistance of MCP Law of course who had no right to be in the same Courtroom, even as a spectator, according to the rules, let alone prosecuting. There will be a tale to tell of Conspiracy to Defraud. Theft, Fraud,  Conspiracy to Perjure, and just about every malpractice a Solicitor Sarah Adlam and Barrister Matthew Hutchings could manage.
The main reason my Police sites were reinstated is not to have a go at dear old Sir Ian . . . He’s got enough criticism out there without mine. It was because it became impossible to re-launch all my sites individually . . . . They are so intricately entwined.. BESIDES . . . It’s about time The Police started doing their JOB  . . . ARRESTING CRIMINALS and PERJURERS and not making excuses NOT TO
BUT  a clever and only reasonably determined detective, (or reporter) who actually wants to clear up such crimes as PERJURY with WRITTEN EVIDENCE,  . . .none of this hearsay stuff . . . . TO cover up FRAUD, CONSPIRACY to DEFRAUD, THEFT . . . and very likely, MONEY LAUNDERING as well . . . . . . needing only a day or so to spare .  Can follow the clues on my sites . . . . then answer  the question at the end.
Why have I had to re-launch this site? . . . because after closing it down when I had no need to, in  the honest belief that finally my complaints would be settled . . . FIFTEEN MONTHS ON . . . not only has it not been settled . . . .  but every offer WE have made to do so   . . AT THEIR REQUEST. . has been  SUBSEQUENTLY  ignored . . .
. . . . . . . and is still being ignored . . . That’s called . . . OPPRESSION by ABUSE of PROCESS.
And we never were going to get a settlement with MCP running the show.  . . MCP to my Solicitor 11/05/07
“Additionally  we would need some form of undertaking from your client in relation to him not re-instating the web-sites . . “ . . . WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INJUNCTION AT ALL . .  It’s what THEY wanted to happen . . Piggy backing off their clients claim to suit  THEMSELVES . . And Sarah Adlam knew that too . . . BECAUSE SHE WROTE IT.

Merelie v Newcastle Primary Care Trust . . . .
23. Moreover, the Court will no doubt generally be wary of any attempt to present as harassment, conduct which would more aptly fit within the scheme of some other tort such as defamation, but which is not available in itself as a cause of action for some reason (e.g. the statutory limitation period). . . or because it’s TRUE
55. The early indications seem to be that the courts are likely to seriously restrict the circumstances in which a claimant will be able to use the 1997 Act to bring a claim which would otherwise fail.

wp5a942e80.jpg
wpb8078238.jpg
wpe07c8df4.jpg
wpf1041c4e.jpg
wp9e04816c.jpg
wp0a0528af.jpg
wp75799bde.jpg
wp0d878e6d.jpg
wpb6cd51c3.jpg
wpc8df1768.jpg
wpa3cb4818.jpg
wp78a1cdae.jpg

A gentleman like my self doesn’t like to disparage a lady. And whilst some of them don’t actually deserve this treatment they are collectively responsible. . . Besides I doubt any of them gave a moments thought to the hurt and damage the DELIBERATE criminal behaviour of  Rutter, Richardson, Burton and ADLAM . . caused my lovely wife and kids over these past two years.

ROGUES GALLERY

PARTNERS IN CRIME
The CROOKS at MCP Law

On Scotland Yards own NOT official web site

www.sir-ian-blair.co.uk

You want to catch a few criminal easy peasy Ian?
Here they are.

Conspiracy to Defraud Contrary to Common Law. You won’t even have to do the leg work . . .it’s all here on my sites. Just follw the footsteps.  Might be safer to stick to asbos on Kids  though. Locking Lawyers up is a bit tricky. You never know what Lodge they’re in.

wp3fd2ccb7.png

If the person signing is not the bidder the signatory warrants that authority has been given by the bidder.

 

Name of signatory ………………………………….

(please print)

 

Address …………………………………………..
(if different from bidder)

 

…………………………………………………….

 

Tel no ……………………………………………...

 

Capacity in which signed ………………………….

(eg Agent, Director, Solicitor etc)

 

Please note there should not be any alteration to the form and any mis-entries which have to be corrected must be signed in full, in the margin.  

I wish to bid by proxy/telephone (delete as required)

The bid that I hereby authorise is

Auction Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .

Lot no  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Address.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

\Maximum  Bid  £ (figures)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(words)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(The figure must be a definite one and is not to be calculated for example by reference to other bids such as one bid above any other bid. Any uncertainty could result in Barnett Ross not bidding)

I attach a cheque for £  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(being 10% of the maximum bid)

Signature  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

Date  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

AUTHORITY FORM FOR BARNETT ROSS
TO BID ON BEHALF OF AN ABSENT BIDDER

               23 February 2006

60

243 Portland Road

South Norwood
 

London  SE25

NO MAX

wpfdc00185.png
wpfdc00185.png
wp613191b9.png
wpfdc00185.png
wpfdc00185.png


Proposed purchaser  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(for contact purposes)  (hereinafter called ‘The Bidder’)

Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tel No Business  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tel no Home  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

Solicitors Name  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tel No  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . .

Person dealing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 

I hereby authorise Barnett Ross staff on my behalf on the Terms and Conditions set out over leaf headed “Bidding by telephone or by letter’ which I have read and understood.

In the case of a proxy bid Barnett Ross Staff will bid on your behalf.

In case of a telephone bid Barnett Ross staff will relay your bid provided that telephone contact is made.

ANDREW MAHON

3 PETTIGO ROAD, KESH

CO FERMANAGH, NORTHEREN

IRELAND,   BT93 IQX


           
02868 632102 / 07775 665878

wpfdc00185.png
wpfdc00185.png
wp32373e95.png
wpfdc00185.png

FRAUD ACT 2006

10 . Participating in fraudulent business carried on by company etc.: penalty
(1) In Schedule 24 to the Companies Act 1985 (punishment of offences), in column 4 of the entry relating to section 458 of that Act, for “7 years” substitute
"10 years".
(2) In Schedule 23 to the Companies (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 (punishment of offences), in column 4 of the entry relating to Article 451 of that Order, for “7 years” substitute
"10 years".

10 YEARS . Come on the MET . . Get busy.

And here it is  . . . The blank  .  . . . . . . . . Of all the CRUCIAL elements that ARE ESSENTIAL according to Barnett Ross’s own rules  . . . AUTHORITY TO BID ON BEHALF OF AN ABSENT BIDDER.

This is not the ACTUAL form presented in evidence . . . but it is a pretty good representation of it.

Any scathing comments I could make about  how FRAUDULENT this document  is would clearly be superfluous.

Except to say that the handwriting looks THE SAME HANDWRITING as that of WHOEVER doctored the  MEMORANDUMS of
SALE on the previous page.

In other words Andrew  Mahon NEVER even saw this form that he was supposed to have filled in.

From barnett Ross’s own rules  . . “Bidding by telephone.”

1 The bidder must complete a separate authority form for each lot . . . . . .

NOT Barnett Ross  Auctioneers.
We laugh at Money Laundering Regulations.  No identification documents necessary. Just telephone and we’ll bid for you . No proxy form need be filled in.  No signature required. Don’t want to give a name? No problem. We make one up for you .  Steven Grossman makes sure YOU get that SPECIAL property. Contact Andrew Mahon Northern Ireland for details. (Andrew Mahon specialises in gaining entry to your property by pretending it’s his.)
Wankers @ IWG recommend Barnett Ross at the Radisson Portman Hotel.

The claims made on this and other sites about Barnett Ross are based on documents lodged with The High Court of Justice which can be viewed by anyone willing to pay the appropriate Court fees.

wpfdc00185.png
wpfdc00185.png
wpfdc00185.png

On this page. . . What we are asked to believe is that Andrew Mahon on behalf of plaintiff 2’s Aunty and Uncle picked up the phone from Northern Ireland. And bid £112,000 on the basis of THIS FORM on THIS PAGE. Without a single signature from himself. Or signature from either Aunty or Uncle giving him permission to do so, or for the Auctioneers to change the bidder’s name to theirs. . . . or would have been theirs if RIDACO DEVELOPMENTS had been anything to do with them.. . . . . . UNCREDIBLE.
But it must be true
BECAUSE JONATHAN BURTON AND SARAH ADLAM AND BOTH THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE SWORN TO IT UNDER OATH.

wp5a7d37cd.png

BARNETTROSS Notice to all bidders (In RED)

14. PROOF OF IDENTIFICATION The purchaser and/or bidder is to provide original documentation to confirm proof of name and address. Please refer to page 1 for acceptable documentation.
Page 1 . . . The purchaser and bidder is to provide one original document from each column together with a copy for us to attach to the contract.

wp0b895b8c.png
wp32373e95.png
wpfdc00185.png

And since this form has ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL VALUE WHATSOEVER  . .
WHAT IS IT DOING IN THE FILE? WHO WAS IT MEANT TO DECEIVE? OTHER THAN THE BANK TO GET A LARGE MORTGAGE?