How do you define #Corruption? Grand, Petty, Political. @anticorruption @MoJGovUK @UKHomeOffice

Source: How do you define #Corruption? Grand, Petty, Political. @anticorruption @MoJGovUK @UKHomeOffice

About obsesiverights

Retired London Firefighter. Six years service in Army 1962-1968. Joined London Fire Brigade in 1968, retired in 1997 due to service injury. I have experienced criminal conduct of solicitors using the courts processes for the purpose of crime, and found grounds to prove how this progressed to expose serious couruption of Public Authorities.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to How do you define #Corruption? Grand, Petty, Political. @anticorruption @MoJGovUK @UKHomeOffice

  1. A Warning in the Public Interest

    Significant Risk To The Public
    Francis Mostyn & Co. Solicitors 242 High Street Langley, Slough, Berks, SL3 8LL. Pose a significant risk to the public, as proven by their conduct in the “Matter of the Estate of Mary Kate Love which has driven a coach and horses through the Law, and Solicitors Rules and Code of Conduct.

    Francis Mostyn & Co. Solicitors were the Sole Trustees and Executors of our parent’s Estate. I was one of nine beneficiaries. The beneficiaries started contentious probate proceedings that were finaly settled by a High Court Order 1st March 2002 and all legal costs discharged. Francis Mostyn issued a Claim for non payment when he has already taken the money. I defend the Action – These unlawful proceedings continued for more than thirteen years, one false claim after another with the costs awarded against me, when there were no grounds for them to be started in the first place – I lose my house and contents to pay these costs —

    This fraud and abuse of process caused the High Court to make an Order that breaches Article 1 of the First Protocol: Protection of property, and Article 8, the right to respect for his of her private and family life, home and correspondence. The Statute of Limitations does not apply. The property remains mine in law.

    If this can happen to me it can happen to anyone that Francis Mostyn decides to target.

    Solicitors because of the nature of their profession hold a position of trust and authority. When a person becomes a Solicitor they agree to be bound by the Law, and the Solicitors Rules and Code of Conduct. To maintain public confidence they are Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

    SRA Complaint Investigation Findings
    Professional Conduct;
    2.1. “… offering a settlement that sought to preclude Mr Love from reporting his conduct to the Law Society, and by failing to advise of right to seek independent advice.
    2.2. “…. In advising Mr Love that could be Ordered to pay the associated costs” (of a Judicial Revue)
    Inadaquate Professional Service
    5.1 Francis Mosyn & Co. failed to deal with funeral expenses
    5.2 They issued a summons for their costs when those costs had already been deducted from the estate.
    5.3 They made Errors in the Accounts.

    Reasonable Expectation
    There is a reasonable expectation that the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) will conduct a fair and thorough investigation. Anything less is inadaquate, and undermines the purpose of the SRA. The SRA investigation overlooked factors it had a duty to consider, and then discontinued the investigation. The High Court Order 1st March 2002 proves the Slough County Court Order in Claim 4SL03940 is void as proceedings should never have started in the first place. [Macfoy v United Africa Company Limited (West Africa):PC 27 Nov 1961. References ; [1961] UKPC 49, [1962] AC152, {1961] 3 All ER 1169 Links: Balii Coram: ‘Lord Denning said ‘if an act is void, then it is in Law a nulity and all orders that flow are also nul’].

    The SRA failure to investigate Francis Mostyn’s motive;- resulted in Francis Mostyn Solicitor ignoring the SRA “Warning” acting for himself and instructing counsel he continue a fraud and abuse of process against a single unrepresented beneficiary breaching the Law, Solicitors Rules and Code of Conduct, – over more than thirteen years. This led to a void High Court Order for unlawful eviction of my son and I from my own privately owned house – 22 Windrush Avenue, Langley, Slough Berks, SL3 8ER to be sold to pay the costs of proceedings that had no grounds to be started in the first place.

    In Lazarus Estates v Beasley [1956] 1 QB 702, [1956] 1 All ER 341 Lord Denning said: “No Court in this land will allow a person to keep an advantage he has obtained by fraud. No judgment of a court, no order of a Minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels everything.

    English Case Law rules John Love owns the property, that the void High Court Order has taken.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s