Bradford and Bingley

LATEST NEWS RE CROOKS R US

THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY IF ANYONE WISHES TO USE ANY PART OF THESE DOCUMENTS PERMISSION IS DEFINATELY NEEDED FROM MYSELF, ROY JENKINS. ANYONE CAUGHT USING THEM FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSE WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION TO DO SO WILL BE PROSECUTED. THEY ARE PUBLISHED TO GIVE OTHERS HOPE AND TO SHOW THEY MAY BE BEING LIED TO BY BANKS. THANK YOU.

_______________________________________________________________________________

I APPEARED BEFORE LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON ON THE 25TH JANUARY 2012, THEY OBVIOUSLY HADN'T READ MY BUNDLES BUT A CASE LAWYER HAD WRITTEN OUT THEIR JUDGMENT. WHEN I REMARKED THEY HAD READ OUT WRONG DAYS AND YEARS, THEY HAD IGNORED A FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WRITTEN/SIGNED BY PAUL JORDON HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY I WAS TOLD TO SHUSH. THEY IGNORED THE FACT THAT JUDGE WICKHAM HAD ENTERED INTO SECRET CORRSPONDENCE AND RECEIVED SECRET DEFENCE DOCUMENTS WHICH JUDGE WICKHAM BASED HER JUDGMENT ON. I ONLY FOUND OUT ABOUT THESE WEEKS AFTER SHE HAD MADE HER JUDGMENT.

I SENT FAXED LETTERS TO MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL, MR JUSTICE BEAN, CASE LAWYER IN THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE REQUESTING THEY SEND ME THE AUTHORITIES OR STATUTES THAT ALLOWED JUDGE WICKHAM TO ENTER INTO SECRET CORRESPONDENCE WITH ALL OF THE DEFENDANTS AND FOR JUDGE WICKHAM TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT SECRET DEFENCE DOCUMENT ALL WITHOUT SENDING COPIES TO ME OR EVEN NOTIFYING ME ABOUT THEM.

NO ONE WILL ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE STAFF IN THE COURT ADMINISTRATION OFFICE WHEN I DELIVERED MY BUNDLES TO GET THEM STAMPED STATED THIS WAS A CRIMINAL ACT ON THE PART OF JUDGE WICKHAM. YET WHEN THIS WAS POINTED OUT IN COURT TO LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON THEY SUDDENLY WENT DEAF. THEY READ FROM ALL THE DEFENDANTS BUNDLES BUT MINE WHERE CHERRY PICKED BY THESE TWO. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE BEST JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE WORLD. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE RULES OF LAW THAT SHOWS THIS IS LEGAL. CAN YOU IMAGINE THE UPROAR IF THE JUDGE IN THE STEPHEN LAWRENCE CASE WAS FOUND TO HAVE ENTERED INTO SECRET CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE DEFENDANTS LEGAL TEAM.

 

IF YOU HAVE HAD YOUR HOME REPOSSESSED AND WONDER WHY THE JUDGE YOU WERE BEFORE REFUSED TO LISTEN TO YOUR CLAIMS, HERE ARE THE WORDS SAID TO ME OUTSIDE TELFORD COURTS BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS PAUL JORDAN AND THEIR OUTSIDE SOLICITOR R LANE OF WRIGHT HASSALL OF LEAMINGTON SPA: JORDAN'S WORDS: OUR BARRISTER H JACKSON SORTED OUT THE JUDGE TODAY TO STOP YOUR CASE AND HE WILL SORT OUT ANY OTHER JUDGE YOU TRY TO APPEAR BEFORE.

AT THE HEARING ON THE 25TH JANUARY 2012 THE ONLY PERSON TO TURN UP WAS ME, I HAD STATED IN LETTERS TO THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE COURTOFFICE THAT I WANTED THE HEARING TO BE HELD UNDER OATH SO THE DEFENDANTS COULDN'T LIE IN COURT, SO NO ONE TURNED UP FROM THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY TO DEFEND THEIR CEO'S AND JORDAN, DITTO JUDGE WICKHAM, DITTO TWO CHIEF CONSTABLES, DITTO ALISTAIR DARLING MP. THEY KNEW THE VERDICT AS SOMEONE FROM NUMBER TEN HAD ORDERED MY CASE TO BE BURIED.

I WON'T SAY TO MUCH ABOUT MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL AS THAT IS BEING LOOKED INTO.

WHAT FOLLOWS IS DOWN TO YOU AS TO WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THE FACTS OR NOT, I'M NOT TRYING TO INFLUENCE YOU ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ITS YOUR DECISION.  

 

THIS IS MY SECOND FAXED LETTER TO BRUPBACHERS OFFICE, IN COURT ON THE 25TH JANUARY 2012 I HAD ASKED THE COURT CLERK IN COURT ROOM 76 WHOM I NEEDED TO CONTACT TO OBTAIN A FORM TO REQUEST INVESTIGATIONS INTO LORD JUSTICES. HE GAVE ME THE NAME OF A PERSON IN BRUPBACHERS OFFICE WHO ON MY CONTACTING THEM WOULD SEND ME THE APPROPRIATE FORM I NEEDED. AS OF TODAYS DATE THE 20TH OF FEBRUARY 2012 NOTHING HAS ARRIVED FROM THIS OFFICE. I WONDER WHY.

THIS IS THE PERSON WHOSE NAME AND FAX NUMBER WAS GIVEN TO ME AFTER LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON HAD LEFT THE COURT ROOM. ITS A SIMPLE AND EASY REQUEST BUT THIS OFFICE TRIED SEVERAL DIRTY TRICKS TO RUN ME OUT OF TIME, AN EXAMPLE I FAXED BRUPBACHERS OFFICE REQUESTING THE CORRECT FORM NUMBER I NEEDED WHEN APPLYING FOR A HEARING, INSTEAD OF WRITING BACK THIS OFFICE PHONED MY HOME STATING THE FORM NUMBER I REQUIRED WAS N251, THIS TURNED OUT TO BE AN EXPENSES FORM, THE NUMBER I REALLY NEEDED WAS N215. THEY GAVE ME FALSE NAMES WHEN I ASKED WHOM I WAS SPEAKING TO ALSO.

COPY OF MY LETTER TO BRUPBACHER WHICH INCLUDED A LETTER ADDRESSED TO LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON. AS OF TODAYS DATE 20TH FEBRUARY 2012 NO REPLY FROM BRUPBACHER OR THE TWO JUDGES.

COPY OF MY LETTER TO LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON SENT TO THEM CO OF THE COURT MANAGER BRUPBACHER AT THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE. WHEN IN THE COURT ROOM BEFORE THESE TWO I EXPRESSED MY CONCERN OF WHAT PAPERWORK OF MINE HAD BEEN PUT BEFORE MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL WHEN SHE TURNED DOWN MY JUDICIAL REVIEW. LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS SAID "WE HAVE TO ASSUME YOUR COMPLETE BUNDLE HAD BEEN PUT BEFORE MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL BY BRUPBACHER" HERE WAS IN THE SECOND HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND BEFORE ONE OF ITS HIGHEST JUDGES BEING TOLD I HAD TO ASSUME MY BUNDLES HAD BEEN PUT BEFORE MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL WHEN SHE MADE HER JUDGMENT ON MY JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION. HER JUDGMENT CERTAINLY DIDN'T SHOW SHE HAD ANY OF MY BUNDLE BEFORE HER AS I HAVE NOW ASKED TO BE INVESTIGATED.

 

THE REST OF THIS LETTER IS SELF EXPLANATORY. 

THIS LETTER TO CAMERON OUR PRIME MINISTER WAS IN MY BUNDLE BEFORE LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS AND MR JUSTICE MADDISON, THEY CLAIMED THEY HAD READ THIS BUT THEN FAILED TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COMMENTS. MY TIME TO MAKE MY CASE WAS CURTAILED BY THESE TWO I CAN ONLY REPEAT I WAS TOLD THAT NUMBER TEN HAD ORDERED MY CASE BE BURIED. WHY? SIMPLE WE THE PUBLIC PAID OUT 44 BILLION TO BAIL OUT THIS BANK, I BELIEVE THE FIGURE OF ANYTHING FROM 300 MILLION TO 850 MILLION WAS STOLEN FROM SHAREHOLDERS OF THIS BANK BY THE GOVERNMENT. THE PERSON HIRED BY CAMERONS OFFICE TO FIX A SHARE PRICE WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS AROUND 50 PENCE A SHARE HAS ALSO NOW BEEN PROMOTED ONTO THE BOARD THAT LOOKS AFTER THIS BANK. STINKS DOESN'T IT.

THE REST OF THE LETTER IS SELF EXPLANATORY, CAMERON REFUSES TO ARREST OR CHARGE ME BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE HIMSELF AND LOADS OF OTHERS ARRESTED TO.

CONCEALING OFFENCES ACT:319.

I WENT BEFORE THESE TWO IN COURT ROOM 76 AT 2-04PM I WAS OUT BEFORE 3-00PM, THIS TIME INCLUDED THESE TWO LEAVING THE COURT TO DISCUSS WHAT I HAD SAID, RETURNING TO THE COURT ROOM IN EITHER 3 MIN 20 SEC OR 4 MIN 20 SEC AND READING OUT A MULTI PAGE JUDGMENT WHICH HAD OBVIOUSLY ALREADY BEEN PREPARED UNLESS SUPERMAN WAS IN THE CHAMBER TO WRITE IT OUT IN THE TIME THEY LEFT THE COURT ROOM AND CAME BACK IN.

THIS IS A FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH BY PAUL JORDAN HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY DATED 3RD NOVEMBER 1999, JORDAN KNEW THE CONTENTS OF THIS FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WERE JUST THAT WHEN HE SIGNED IT AND ENTERED IT INTO THE COURT SYSTEM TO GAIN A JUDGMENT WHICH IS A CRIMINAL ACT, THIS STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS SNEAKILY REMOVED FROM THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS BUNDLE GIVEN TO THE COURTS AND FROM THERE ON THEY REFER TO A STATEMENT OF TRUTH MADE IN 2000 AS JORDAN'S FIRST STATEMENT OF TRUTH..

JORDAN CLAIMS I REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE BUILDING OMBUDSMANS DETERMINATION; FACT THE OMBUDSMAN WROTE TO THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY DEMANDING TO KNOW WHY OUR ARREARS WERE SO HIGH, THE OMBUDSMAN ALSO WROTE THAT AFTER LISTENING TO THE TAPES I MADE OF MY CONVERSATIONS WITH JORDANS OFFICE THEY WERE UNTRUTHFUL IN THEIR COMMENTS, I THINK HE MEANT TO SAY BLATANT LIARS, THEY NEVER REPLIED TO THE OMBUDSMANS LETTERS.

JORDAN STATES THAT EVEN IF THE MONIES WERE REFUNDED TO THE CLAIMANTS WE WOULD STILL HAVE SUBSTANTIAL ARREARS. ON THE DAY JORDAN SIGNED THIS FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH OUR ARREARS WERE FOR �59-00, ON DECEMBER THE 31ST OF 1999 WE WERE IN CREDIT.

SUBSTANTIAL ARREARS START FROM �10,000 DEPENDING ON WHICH BANK WANTS TO MAKE A CLAIM AGAINST SOMEONE

JORDAN STATES HE DENIES ANYONE HAS BEEN UNTRUTHFUL INCLUDING HIMSELF. YET THIS SAME JORDAN WROTE TO ME CONFIRMING THE ARREARS WE HAD ON THE DAY HE SIGNED THIS FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS IN FACT FOR �59-00, HE CLAIMED SOMEONE IN HIS OFFICE WROTE OUT HIS STATEMENT OF TRUTH AND HE JUST SIGNED IT. BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING. SOLICITORS TELL YOU NOT TO SIGN ANYTHING UNTIL YOU HAVE READ ALL THE SMALL PRINT.

FOR FIVE YEARS WERE WERE FINED ADDITIONAL INTEREST (WHICH WAS ILLEGAL) EVEN THOUGH REGULAR PAYMENTS WERE MADE. THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS GENERAL SECRETARY/DIRECTOR KEVIN MCGUINESS ADMITTED IN HIS LETTER THAT THE BANK WERE TOTALLY UNAWARE WE WERE BEING FINED. YEP LIES AGAIN. THERE IS MUCH MORE ON JORDAN.

IN A LETTER FROM THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS LEGAL OFFICE THEY ADMITTED THAT THEIR GENERAL SECRETARY MCGUINESS ACTUALLY SAT ON THE OMBUDSMANS PANEL TO ADVISE HIM HOW TO DEAL WITH COMPLAINTS AGAINST HIS OWN BANK, IF YOU WONDER WHY THE OMBUDSMAN IGNORES YOUR COMPLAINTS THIS IS THE REASON.

JORDAN IS NOW WORKING FOR THE LEEDS BUILDING SOCIETY IN THE SAME JOB.

THIS LAW IS THE ONE BROKEN BY JORDAN HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY. READ THE PART DERRY V PEEK, JORDAN HAD NO EXCUSE HE COMMITTED A CRIMINAL ACT THAT WOULD PUT HIM IN JAIL FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. CHIEF CONSTABLE CUNNINGHAM OF STAFFORD POLICE FORCE WAS SENT THIS RULING, IGNORED, STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE FORCE CHIEF CONSTABLES SIGNED FOR BUNDLES SHOWING THE FRAUD BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY, IGNORED. THE REASON CID OFFICERS AND COMPANY FRAUD OFFICERS OF THIS FORCE BLATANTLY LIED AS A LETTER FROM MR IRELAND HEAD OF STAFFORDSHIRE CPS CLEARLY SHOWS.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO COVERING THEIR OWN BACK SIDES BRITISH POLICE ARE AMONG THE BEST IN THE WORLD, BANANA REPUBLICS ARE WAY BEHIND THEM.

CHIEF CONSTABLE SWIFT AND OTHER CHIEF CONSTABLES STATE IN THEIR LETTERS THEY CAN'T SEE WHAT JORDAN DID WRONG.

LETTER TO MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL REQUESTING SHE SEND ME THE AUTHORITIES AND STATUTES OF LAW WHICH ALLOWS A JUDGE TO ENTER INTO SECRET CORRESPONDENCE WITH DEFENDANTS AND ACCEPT SECRET DEFENCE DOCUMENTS WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE APPLICANT. MY REQUEST WAS IGNORED BY THIS JUDGE.

 

NATURALLY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY CLAIM IN THEIR LETTER THERE WAS NOTHING SECRET ABOUT THEIR CORRESPONDENCE WITH JUDGE WICKHAM. IF IT WASN'T SECRET THEN WHY DIDN'T THEY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY SEND ME COPIES OF THESE LETTERS NOR JUDGE WICKHAM. THEY DIDN'T THINK I WOULD MANAGE TO GET A COPY OF SOME OF THEM IS WHY.

LETTER FROM MY LOCAL MP HE OF THE INFAMOUS HITLER NIGHT IN A FRENCH HOTEL NOT SO LONG AGO. I SENT COPIES OF SOME OF THE ABOVE LETTERS TO BURLEY TO BE PASSED TO CONMERAN, HE REFUSED TO DO SO AS HE STATED CAMERON THOUGHT THEY HAD NO MERIT. MAKE YOUR OWN MIND UP ON THIS.

LETTER I RECEIVED FROM TAPSELL MP, THE OTHER MP JENKIN NEVER EVEN BOTHERED TO REPLY TO MY LETTER. THIS PAIR OF CLOWNS DID AN ARTICLE IN THE DAILY MAIL BRAGGING HOW THEY HAD CONFRONTED CAMERON IN THE HOUSE OF CROOKS DEMANDING TO KNOW WHY NO BANKERS HAD BEEN ARRESTED FOR THE MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS, MONEY IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNTS. THEY BOTH CLAIMED CAMERON IGNORED THEIR QUESTIONS.

I SENT THEM SOME DOCUMENTS SAYING THIS BACKS UP YOUR QUESTIONS. SO THEY LIKE THEIR NAMES IN THE PAPERS TELLING EVERY ONE THEY ARE SUPER HEROES TO THE PUBLIC YET WHEN GIVEN A REAL CHALLENGE THEY DUCK OUT OF IT.

COPY OF MY LETTER TO JENKIN MP ALONG WITH COPIES OF EMAILS SENT TO BOTH HIM AND TAPSELL AND TO THE DAILY MAIL. NOT ONE REPLY FROM JENKIN OR THE DAILY MAIL AND ONLY THE ABOVE REPLY FROM TAPSELL. TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR MPs GUTLESS AND SELF INTEREST. 

 

JUDGMENT FROM MR JUSTICE BEAN NOTE WHAT HE SAYS: OBSERVATION THIS IS THE MOST VEXATIOUS JUDICIAL REVIEW CLAIM I HAVE EVER SEEN.

YET WHEN THIS JUDGE WAS ASKED SEVERAL TIMES TO PROVIDE ME WITH THE AUTHORITIES AND STATUTES THAT HE HAD TO HAND TO SHOW IT WAS LAWFUL TO ENTER INTO SECRET CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN A JUDGE AND DEFENDANTS, HE EVENTUALLY SENT A REPLY THROUGH A CASE LAWYER IN THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE. SHE STATED THE JUDGE WOULDN'T REPLY WHILE THE CASE WAS ONGOING.

SO I'M VEXATIOUS FOR TELLING THE TRUTH YET THE JUDGE WHO COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS IS AS PURE AS SNOW. THEY DO SAY NO JUDGE WILL FIND ANOTHER JUDGE OF MISCONDUCT IN COURT IN CASE THEY END UP IN THE SAME SITUATION.

THIS ARTICLE SHOWS CAMERONS GOVERNMENT HELPING TO COVER UP FRAUD, AGAIN IT SHOWS THAT THE GOVERNMENT USED PUBLIC FUNDS IN COURTS FOR FIVE YEARS TO STOP 40 PEOPLE FROM BEING ARRESTED.

LETTER TO THE COURT MANAGER BRUPBACHER ASKING WHAT DOCUMENTS/BUNDLE OF MINE WAS PUT BEFORE MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL BEFORE SHE MADE HER JUDGMENT TO FAVOUR JUDGE WICKHAM AND ALL OF THE DEFENDANTS. NEEDLESS TO SAY BRUPBACHER AGAIN REFUSED TO REPLY. THIS WAS POINTED OUT TO THE TWO JUDGES ON THE 25TH JANUARY 2012, I MIGHT JUST AS WELL HAVE BEEN TALKING TO A BRICK WALL.

LETTER AND EMAIL TO OSBOURNE AT NUMBER ELEVEN DOWNING STREET, I POINT OUT SEVERAL DIFFERENT CRIMINAL ACTS TO HIM WHICH I ASK HIM TO REPLY TO, I ALSO ASK OSBOURNE WAS IT TRUE THAT NUMBER TEN OR HIMSELF HAD ISSUED A GAGGING ORDER THROUGH THE COURTS ON THE PRESS TO STOP THEM PRINTING ANY ARTICLE OF MINE. NO REPLY YET AGAIN.

NEITHER CAMERON, OSBOURNE, CHIEF CONSTABLES, LORD JUSTICES CAN CLAIM THEY WERE UNAWARE OF THE FRAUD AND CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY ETC, THEY ALL WERE SENT PROOF AND THE JUDGES AND CHIEF CONSTABLES SIGNED FOR THE EVIDENCE. 

LETTER FROM IPCC CONFIRMING THEY HAVE NO IDEA IF THE POLICE WHOM THEY PASSED MY COMPLAINTS TO TO DEAL WITH HAD ACTUALLY DONE ANYTHING ABOUT THEM, THEY ALSO HAD NO DOCUMENTS OF MINE IN THEIR FILE. LIARS.

LETTER TO CHIEF CONSTABLE CUNNINGHAM OF STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE FORCE, HE WAS SENT COPIES OF HALSBURY'S LAWS OF ENGLAND:FRAUD CONCERNING JORDANS FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH, HE WAS SENT A COPY OF ANOTHER FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH, HE WAS AGAIN REQUESTED HE ARREST AND CHARGED PEOPLE LIKE JORDAN.

I POINT OUT THE MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE BY HIS OFFICERS, CONSPIRICY TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE. HIS ASSISTANT BEALE REPLIED ON CUNNINGHAMS BEHALF THIS LETTER FROM CUNNINGHAM HAS TO BE READ TO BE BELIEVED. THIS IS THE SAME ASSISTANT CHIEF CONSTABLE BEALE WHO IS UNDER INVESTIGATION BY THE IPCC FOR WITH HOLDING VITAL EVIDENCE IN A MURDER CASE FROM THE PROSECUTION AND JUDGES. GOD HELP US ALL WITH OFFICERS LIKE THIS. SORRY TO REPAET THE LETTER IS SELF EXPLANATORY.  

FURTHER LETTER TO CHIEF CONSTABLE CUNNINGHAM THERE ARE MANY, THEY WERE SENT TO ENSURE CUNNIGHAM COULDN'T DENY ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THEM. THIS LETTER SHOW ALLIS A SOLICITOR WHO IS THE THE CEO OF STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE AUTHORITY WAS IGNORING REQUESTS SENT TO HIM. I WAS INFORMED BY STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE AUTHORITY THAT ANY CLAIMS RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC RE OFFICERS MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE, CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED BY POLICE OFFICERS WERE SOLELY DEALT WITH BY THIS AUTHORITY.

IMAGINE MY AMAZEMENT WHEN I PROVIDED ALLIS WITH EVIDENCE OF MY CLAIMS FOR HIM TO INVESTIGATE ONLY FOR ME TO RECEIVE A REPLY FROM ALLIS STATING HE HAD TURNED ALL THE DOCUMENTS I HAD SENT THE STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE AUTHORITY OVER TO CUNNINGHAM TO INVESTIGATE.

THE POLICE AUTHORITIES IN THE UK COST MANY MILLIONS OF POUNDS TO DO THEIR JOBS THEN LIKE THE IPCC TURN OVER COMPLAINTS AGAINST POLICE BACK TO THE OFFICERS BEING COMPLAINED ABOUT TO INVESTIGATE THEMSELVES. DID YOU WONDER WHY SO FEW CORRUPT OFFICERS ARE EVER CHARGED FOR ALL SORTS OF CRIMES INCLUDING RAPE. 1000 PLUS POLICE OFFICERS ALLOWED TO RESIGN BY CHIEF CONSTABLES AND THE IPCC SO THEY WON'T BE CHARGED. THEN THESE CRIMINAL OFFICERS ARE ALLOWED TO JOIN OTHER FORCES AND CARRY ON AS NORMAL

LETTER TO CAMERON QUOTING THE CONCEALING OFFENCES ACT:319 OF WHICH CAMERON IS GUILTY OF, AGAIN I ASK CAMERON TO INVESTIGATE JUDGE WICKHAM FOR COMMITTING CRIMINAL ACTS IN COURT. AS PER USUAL NO REPLY FROM CAMERON.

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE CLARKE COMPLAINED RECENTLY HE WAS FED UP OF TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE HORDE'S OF FLUNKIES AT NUMBER TEN TO TRY TO SPEAK TO CAMERON. CAMERON THINKS IF HE HIDES IN THE CELLAR HE CAN IGNORE EVERYTHING SENT TO HIM. THATS NOT WHAT YOU WERE VOTED IN FOR CAMERON.  

THIS IS AN ARTICLE SHOWING HOW MANY TORY MPs HOLD OR HAVE HELD JOBS IN BANKING. CAMERON COMES FROM A BANKING FAMILY AS DOES OSBORNE, THINK THEY WILL TURN ON THEIR OWN. NOT A CHANCE. AND YOU WONDER WHY CONMERAN REFUSES TO TAKE ON THE BANKS. HE IS IN IT UP TO HIS NECK.

ANOTHER REPLY FROM BURLEY MP HE OF THE NAZI THEME NIGHT IN FRANCE. BURLEY STATES MY COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED BY NUMBER TEN OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS WHICH HE HAS SEEN. YET WHEN ASKED UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT TO PROVIDE ME WITH COPIES OF THE EVIDENCE OF INVESTIGATIONS INTO MY CLAIMS BY NUMBER TEN. NOT SURPRISINGLY BURLEY MP REPLIED BY STATING MPs ARE EXEMPT FROM FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS. HOW BLOODY HANDY AND WHAT A BLOODY LIAR HE HAS SEEN NOTHING BECAUSE NOTHING EXISTS RE INVESTIGATIONS INTO MY CLAIMS TO NUMBER TEN. HE IS A BLOODY DISGRACE TO HIS CONSTITUENTS.

YET AGAIN BURLEY MAKES CLAIMS THAT MY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY ALL THE PEOPLE I HAD WRITTEN TO, YET AGAIN BURLEY REFUSED TO SUPPLY EVIDENCE.

BURLEY WITH THE PERMISSION OF CONMERAN HELD A MEETING IN HIS CONSTITUTION WITH CHIEF CONSTABLES, POLICE AUTHORITY CHIEFS, THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY THIS HAD BEEN ALLOWED. CAMERON WAS BACKING UP BURLEY BY SAYING YOU CAN HAVE THIS MEETING TO SHOW WE DON'T CARE WHAT JENKINS OR OTHERS SAY WE WILL COVER OUR OWN BACK SIDES.

B & Q MUST BE MAKING A FOTUNE OUT OF WHITE PAINT IN DOWNING STREET AND BURLEY CONSTITUENCY.

THIS IS A COPY OF A LETTER TO SANTS THE CEO OF THE FSA WHO ALLEGEDLY INVESTIGATE CORRUPT BANKS. SANTS OFFICE STATED I SHOULD SEND A FILE LAYING OUT MY CLAIMS AGAINST THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY WHICH I DID, I WAS TOLD THE INVESTIGATION COULD TAKE SOME TIME. I DID PHONE A FEW TIMES TO BE TOLD MATTERS WERE IN HAND. THREE YEARS AFTER HANDING MY FILE TO THE FSA THEY STATED THEY HAD LOST IT. SO FOR THE THREE YEARS THEY HAD BEEN TELLING ME IT WAS IN HAND THEY SHOULD HAVE SAID WE DESTROYED IT.

I WILL BE SHOWING A COUPLE OF LETTERS FURTHER DOWN JUST WHAT SO CALLED INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION GROUPS SET UP BY NUMBER TEN COPNTAIN MEMBERS OF THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY BOARD.

THIS IS A REPLY FROM CHIEF CONSTABLE CUNNINGHAM WRITTEN BY HIS ASSISTANT BEALE WHO IS UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR DELIBERATELY WITH HOLDING VITAL EVIDENCE FROM THE PROSECUTION AND JUDGES IN A MURDER CASE BY THE IPCC.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY TO MUCH AS THIS LETTER IS BEING SENT TO THE IPCC AND CAMERON/BURLEY AND I DON'T WANT TO GIVE TO MUCH AWAY. NEEDLESS TO SAY CUNNINGHAM CLAIMS IN THIS LETTER THAT CRIMES COMMITTED AGAINST MY FAMILY WERE NOT RECORDED BY THE POLICE. YET THIS SAME FORCES DISCIPLINARY OFFICE CLAIMED ALL THE RECORDS OF THIS WERE IN THEIR VAULT. SO WHO'S THE LIAR CUNNINGHAM OR THIS OTHER OFFICER?? TIME WILL TELL.

FURTHER LETTER TO SANTS YET AGAIN POINTING OUT CRIMINAL ACTS BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY AND OFFICERS FROM STAFFORD POLICE FORCE.

LOOK AT THE LIST AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE FROM RODRIGUES CEO OF THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY DOWN TO RODRIGUES CHAIRMAN OF ENERGIS. THESE DIRECTORS OF THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY HAVE ALL BEEN APPOINTED TO JOBS IN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION GROUPS SUCH AS THE FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN.

RODRIGUES CEO OF THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY WAS APPOINTED TO THE BOARD OF THE FSA BY NONE OTHER THAN GORDON BROWN. ALISTAIR DARLING THEN RECOMMENDED RODRIGUES BE THE CHAIRMAN OF ENERGIS. THIS COMPANY WAS INVESTIGATED AS IT WAS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH RE MONEY. GUESS WHO INVESTIGATED THIS COMPANY?? NONE OTHER THAN THE FSA AS IF THEY WERE GOING TO FIND A BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUES OF ANY WRONG DOING.

THIS IS A LETTER TO ANNE ABRAHAMS THE PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN, SHE WAS HEAD OF THE LAW SOCIETY PREVIOUSLY, NOW SHE IS HEADING ANOTHER GROUP. I HAVE LOADS OF LETTERS FROM HER. THIS LETTER IS ONLY ONE OF MANY CONTAINING LOADS OF PROOF. ABRAHAMS DECISION I WAS LIVING IN CLOUD CUCKOO LAND THE CRIMINALS WERE AS WHITE AS SNOW. ABRAHAMS SENT ME A STATEMENT MADE BY TWO SENIOR CUSTOMS OFFICERS. THESE TWO CLAIMED IN THIS STATEMENT TO ABRAHAMS THAT THEY FIRST MET ME ON A PUB CAR PARK NEAR MY HOME IN A TOWN THEY NAMED. THIS TOWN IS 20 PLUS MILES FROM WHERE I LIVE, I HAVE NEVER LIVED IN OR NEAR THIS TOWN IN MY LIFE.

I ASKED ABRAHAMS FOR THE NAMES OF THE TWO OFFICERS WHO HAD SENT HER THIS STATEMENT, REPLY CAME BACK FROM ABRAHAMS. SOD OFF YOU ARE GETTING NOTHING. A NICE LADY AT ABRAHAMS OFFICE SENT ME COPIES OF DOCUMENTS I WASN'T SUPPOSED TO SEE. ONE BEING A DIRECTIVE FROM ABRAHAMS OFFICE STATING :DO NOT REPLY TO ANY OTHER LETTERS FROM JENKINS. THE PERSON WHO SIGNED IT HAS I BELIEVE BEEN IN THE NEWS A FEW YEARS AGO AS A WHISTLE BLOWER.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------  

LETTER FROM WRIGHT MP CLAIMING HE HANDED MY TAPES AND DOCUMENTS TO THE CABINET OFFICE, YET HE PROMISED AT THE MEETING I HAD WITH HIM HE WOULD HAND THEM TO BLAIR. THEY GOT LOST EASIER AT THE CABINET OFFICE. D MILLIBAND WHEN ASKED WHAT HAD THE CABINET OFFICE DONE WITH THEM GOT ONE OF HIS STAFF TO WRITE TO ME AFTER I HAD SENT HIM A FREDDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST. WHEN I SENT A SECOND LETTER TO THE PERSON MILLIBAND HAD NAMED I WAS TOLD HE NO LONGER WORKS AT THE CABINET OFFICE, AND NO WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE WHO CAN DEAL WITH YOU.

THIS IS A REPLY LETTER FROM THE FSA RE MY COMPLAINT AGAINST THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY, NOTE IN PARAGRAPH THREE THEY REFUSE TO GIVE ME ANY INFORMATION INTO THEIR INVESTIGATION INTO THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY AS THE FSA IMPOSES RESTRICTIONS ON HOW WE DEAL WITH CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.

I HAVE OTHER LETTERS FROM THE FSA STATING WE CAN'T GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION YOU ASK FOR AS IT INFINGES THE RIGHTS OF THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY. SO THEY COMMIT CRIMINAL ACTS AND THE FSA DEFENDS ITS BOARD MEMBERS ON THE FSA.

JUST ONE OF MANY RECEIPTS SIGNED FOR BY SWIFTS STAFF RE BUNDLES OF EVIDENCE, THEIR ARE OTHERS INCLUDING SIMS NOW OF WEST MIDLANDS POLICE FORCE.

THIS IS A LETTER FROM HARRY IRELAND CHIEF CROWN PROSECUTOR FOR STAFFORDSHIRE. HE CONFIRMED THAT NONE OF MY FILES HAD BEEN HANDED TO THE CPS AS STAFFORDSHIRE CID AND COMPANY FRAUD OFFICE HAD CLAIMED HAD BEEN. THEY STATED WE HAVE HANDED YOUR FILE RE THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY TO THE CPS TO SEE IF A PROSECUTION COULD BE BOUGHT AGAINST THEM. IRELAND CONFIRMED HE HAD LOOKED THROUGH CPS ELECTRONIC FILES AND PAPER FILES AND NO FILE OF MINE HAD BEEN HANDED TO THE CPS BY STAFFS POLICE.

THIS IS A LETTER TO THE CIVIL APPEALS OFFICE WHOM I HAD HAD BEEN TOLD TO CONTACT RE MY ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE CASE BEFORE LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE. AFTER BEING TOLD BY THIS OFFICE THAT MY COMPLAINT HAD BEEN PASSED TO A DEPUTY MASTER TO INVESTIGATE THE MATTER. I EVENTUALLY WAS TOLD A COMOPUTOR PRINT OUT OF THIS DEPUTY MASTERS REPORT WAS ON THE WAY. WHAT I ACTUALLY RECEIVED WAS A WHITE PIECE OF PAPER WITH THE WRITING ON IT IN PENCIL. DIDN'T EXPLAIN A THING.

THE PERSON I APPEARED I NOW KNOW WAS NOT LONGMORE.

HHJ RUBERY ALLOWED, AIDED AND ABETTED THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY TO BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT WHEN THEY DELIBERATELY IGNORED HIS COURT ORDER OF OCTOBER 2004 IN WHICH HE ORDERED THIS BANK TO INCLUDE IN THE COURT BUNDLE PROOF OF TWO CREDITS BEING MADE TO MY ACCOUNT AS THEY HAD TOLD JUDGE ISLEY IN A PREVIOUS CASE THEY HAD DONE SO. THEY IGNORED HIS ORDER. YET AS YOU CAN SEE RUBERY THEN IN THIS JUDGMENT TELLS ME IF I IGNORE HIS COURT ORDER I COULD/WOULD BE SENT TO JAIL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT. SO I CAN BE BUT NOT THE CRIMINALS.

THIS IS A REPLY FROM A CHIEF CONSTABLE OF STAFFORDSHIRE, YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT HE WOULD HAVE DISCUSSED THIS LETTER WITH HIS LEGAL OFFICE. EARLIER I ADDED THE HALSBURY'S LAWS OF ENGLAND:FRAUD, SO ON READING JORDANS FALSE STATEMENT OF TRUTH DATED 3RD NOVEMBER 1999 AND THE FACT JORDAN ADMITTED IN WRITING HIS STATEMENT WAS FALSE. STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE FORCE CLAIM NO CRIMINAL ACTS WERE COMMITTED BY JORDAN, YET THE ABOVE LAW SHOWS HE CLEARLY DID AND HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED. SO WHY WASN'T HE?? COVER UP FOR CORRUPT POLICE OFFICERS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE.

THIS IS A LETTER FROM STAFFORD COURT MANAGER CONFIRMING SHE HAD PUT MY LETTER TO HHJ RUBERY ON HIS DESK AND THAT RUBERY DIRECTS THE MATTER BE DEALT WITH IN THE COURT HEARING OF THE 28TH JANUARY 2005.

THE LETTER TO RUBERY I SENT STATED THAT THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY WERE REFUSING TO SEND BOTH MYSELF AND THE COURT THE PROOF OF CREDITS TO MY ACCOUNT ON THE 4TH MAY 2000 BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY.

WHEN THIS WAS PUT TO RUBERY IN COURT HIS REPLY, I'M NOT INTERESTED. AS JORDAN AT TELFORDS COURT STATED " OUR BARRISTER CAN SORET OUT ANY JUDGE YOU TRY TO APPEAR BEFORE" ALL THE PROOF NEEDED.

 

THIS IS A LETTER SENT BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS OUTSIDE SOLICITORS WRIGHT HASSAL TO THE FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN, BEAR IN MIND THIS BANK HAD ALREADY ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THEIR GENERAL SECRETARY/DIRECTOR SAT ON THE OMBUDSMANS PANEL TO ADVISE HIM HOW TO DEAL WITH COMPLAINTS AGAINST HIS OWN BANK.

PAGE ONE YOU SEE LANE CLAIMS JORDANS FIRST STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS DATED APRIL OF 2000, YET I HAVE PROVIDED ON HERE THE REAL FIRST STATEMENT OF TRUTH WHICH WAS A FALSE ONE DATED 3RD NOVEMBER 1999 MADE BY JORDAN WHICH WAS A FALSE ONE WHICH HE ADMITTED IN WRITING.

ON PAGE TWO LANE NOW CLAIMS THAT ONE OF THE CREDITS TO MY ACCOUNT WASN'T MADE UNTIL LATE 2001, YET JUDGE ISLEY AFTER BEING PRESENTED WITH FALSE SPREAD SHEETS STATES IN HER JUDGMENT DATED THE 5/5/00 " I AM SATISFIED THAT THE CREDITS WERE REFUNDED ON THE DAY BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE 5/5/00. YET HERE ARE THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY BLATANTLY LYING AGAIN TO THE OMBUDSMAN. THEY NEVER MADE ANY CREDITS WHICH IS WHY THEY CAN'T PROVIDE PROOF OF THEM.

ON PAGE FOUR LANE FOR THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY STATES THAT JORDAN MADE AN ERROR IN HIS FIRST STATEMENT OF TRUTH DATED APRIL 2000 BUT IT WAS AMENDED IN A LATER STATEMENT MADE BY JORDAN IN 2001.

ERROR IS THE VSTART OF FRAUD, THESE WERE NOT ERRORS BUT ACTUAL CRIMINAL ACTS. CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW NOT ONE CHIEF CONSTABLE OR ONE LORD JUSTICE COULDN'T SEE THIS EVEN WHEN POINTED OUT TO THEM??

PAGE FIVE LANE ADMITS TO HIS BARRISTER JACKSON HANDED BOTH JUDGE ISLEY AND MYSELF IN ISLEYS COURT ROOM A BUNDLE OF 30 DOCUMENTS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 30 DOCUMENTS HANDED TO MYSELF AND THE JUDGE WERE THE TRUE VERSIONNOT THE FALSE ONE MADE BY LANE. THESE BUNDLE OF DOCUMENTS WERE PAGE AFTER PAGE OF FIGURES NOT LANES VERSION. WHY DIDN'T THE JUDGE ADJOURN THE HEARING OR EVEN ASK WAS I PREPARED TO ACCEPT THIS SURPRISE DOCUMENTATION. SHE DIDN'T BECAUSE YET AGAIN SHE HAD BEEN SORTED OUT BY THESE CROOKS.

THIS IS A LETTER FROM THE STAFFORD COURT MANAGER THIS WAS IN REPLY TO MY LETTER ASKING WHY HHJ RUBERY HAD ADJOURNED MY APPELANTS HEARING ON HIS RECEIVING ORDERS FROM THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY TO DO SO AS THEY NEEDED TIME TO ENTER THEIR BUNDLE INTO COURT. THE COURT MANAGER CLEARLY STATES THAT UPON RECEIVING THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEYS REQUEST TO ADJOURN MY HEARING I SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONTACTED TO ASK MY PERMISSION IF IT WAS OKAY.

THE COURT MANAGER CONFIRMS I WAS RIGHT IN STATING THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY HAD NO RIGHT TO BE AT MY APPELLANTS HEARING, BUT THAT DIDN'T STOP THEM SENDING ME A COSTS BILL FOR �4,000 FOR A HEARING THEY HAD NO RIGHT TO ATTEND EXCEPT TO LISTEN.

MY CASE IS TYPICAL OF THE CORRUPTION BY BANKS/COURTS/POLICE IN COVERING UP CRIMINAL ACTS BY NUMBER TEN AND OTHERS. ITS ABOUT TIME SOMEONE DID SOMETHING FOR THE MILLIONS WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST THEIR HOMES OR IN TE PROCESS HAVE HAVING THEM REPOSSESSED BY CORRUPT BANKS./

 

  

 

 

The above letter from Stoke on Trent courts was in reply to my request that HHJ Rubery personally sent me a copy of his reasoning for the hearing of the 28th January 2005. By his refusal to send it he is admitting his guilt in aiding and abetting the Bradford and Bingley to be in contempt of court. Rubery knew they were lying in his court before him.

This is a copy of my reply to HHJ Rubery's Letter dated 7th October 2009.

You can see Rubery states I could have asked for a transcript of the hearing, as I point out to Rubery in my letter I already have a tape of the hearing one that was made by others for me, I point out to Rubery I have had transcripts before from judges one from a District Judge Davies in a case concerning HM Customs, Judge Davies had removed a load of stuff before the transcript was sent to me fortunately he forgot to take out the part where he stated that Mr. Jenkins has given me names of people involved, all removed.

I have pointed out to Rubery that my letter is not a threat but a statement of intent, a signed statement of truth has been made and will be used to bring these people to justice. My letter shows that i informed the CEO of the Bradford and Bingley Crawshaw that the hearing had been taped, further the solicitor Lane from Wright Hassall in Leamington Spa had been informed of this fact as was their barrister Jackson two or three years ago.

PAUL JORDAN THE HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY STATED OUTSIDE TELFORD COURT AFTER HHJ PERRETT HAD DISMISSED THE CASE SAID" THE JUDGE WAS SORTED OUT TODAY TO STOP YOUR CASE AND WE WILL SORT OUT ANY OTHER JUDGE YOU TRY TO APPEAR BEFORE"

NOW TELL ME JUDGES AREN'T BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY BANKS.

 

 

 

This is a copy of my reply to Lyons who claimed in his letter to me that there was no individual or organization within the Commons to investigate bent Members of Parliament. This is my reply to Lyons. Lyons has failed to reply to the contents of this letter and the documents of proof he was sent also.

 

This is a copy of faxed letters to HHJ Rubery dated 9th June 2009. This letter was faxed to his office at Stoke on Trent courts and Stafford courts. Again Rubery has refused to reply to my claims. If you look on the home pages of this site you will see a copy of Rubery's court order dated the 8th October 2004 which he ordered the Bradford and Bingley to produce evidence of proof of two credits they told DJ Isley had been credited to my account the day before my hearing before her.

It was pointed out to Rubery in a faxed letter to Stafford courts on the 21st of January 2005 that the Bradford and Bingley were ignoring Ruberys court order and they were refusing to release the documents Rubery had demanded they provide. On the 21st of January 2005 the court manager for Stafford court faxed me to say my letter of that date had been placed on Ruberys desk.

On the 28th January 2005 in Ruberys court room when asked where the documents of proof were concerning the two credits to my account that the Bradford and Bingleys barrister H. Jackson had claimed had been already credited to my account on the 4th May of 2000 the day before the hearing on the 5th May 2000. After a discussion with Wright Hassall's solicitor Richard Lane, they then told Rubery that as the credits were invisible ones the Bradford and Bingley had been unable to comply with his court order. These credits are so invisible no-one can find them at all. It was pointed out by myself to Rubery on the 28th Jan 2005 and again in June of 2005 that the Bradford and Bingley were in contempt of court to which Rubery replied he wasn't interested.

Strangely in 2008 when the information commissioner wrote to the Bradford and Bingley asking for copies of the two credits, the Bradford and Bingley sent him the false spreadsheets they used in court in 2000, on pointing this out to the ICO commissioner he told me to sod off.

Still, like the FSA, Financial Ombudsman, ICO etc, they are authorities set up by Bliar and Brown and are bought off by these two.

Millions losing their homes through this corrupt government.

Letter to Mr. Sants CEO of the Financial Services Authority dated 11th August 2008

This letter was sent to Sants on the 11th August 08. Mr Sants has been faxed documents showing HHJ Rubery allowed the Bradford and Bingley to be in contempt of his court order which they ignored. As President Brown has stated recently, he will do anything to keep banks going under :) so will judges.

IT MUST BE NICE TO OWN THE GOVERNMENT, POLICE, JUDGES ETC.

You will see in this letter to Sants we name members of the board of the Bradford and Bingley and which independent authorities they sit on. The 1986 Building Societies rule and regulations states that no serving member of a bank/building society may be involved with or sit on the board of the Financial Ombudsman. The Financial Ombudsman stated in a letter that Bliar had no objection to this going on.

In 2004 and 2005 a file with a copy of documents was sent to the FSA c/o its CEO Tiner, in 2007 I was told the FSA had lost them? On sending more documents I was informed by letter from the FSA that my file had been handed to an investigator with the FSA re. the Bradford and Bingley to deal with.

In a further letter the FSA stated sod off when I requested I be kept informed of their investigation. I was told it infringed the rights of the Bradford and Bingley to do so.

So millions lose their homes yet these clowns are allowed to get away with criminal acts that cost families their homes, marriages etc.

You will see I have named members of the board of the Bradford and Bingley and which independent authorities they sit or sat on.

Bliar and Brown give us rubbish on how they deal with crime of banks etc and yet they put these people on boards that are supposed to be independent from the government.

SANTS AND TINER WERE FULLY AWARE OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED BY THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY BUT FAILED TO INFORM BROWN OR DARLING WHEN THIS BANK WAS BEING NATIONALISED EVEN THOUGH SANTS WAS INVOLVED WITH NATIONALISING THIS BANK ALL THE WAY. WHY DID HE NOT SPEAK UP?

We see pocket of bankers being filled to overflowing but hey, when you own the authorities why should they worry? Your kids will pay for it.

Your children and grandchildren will be paying for the rest of their lives for the rottenness and corruption of this government. It's going to get much worse yet.

The items below and on the other pages of this website are the very government authority people who are supposed to protect you and your families yet you can see they lie and cover up with impunity knowing their backsides are covered by the likes of Bliar and co, the Tories are exactly the same.

Evidence will be printed to show that Bliar, Brown, Tony Wright MP and many others have acknowledged these criminal acts and just ignored them, then Bliar and Wright MP have the nerve to say they are as clean a a babys bottom.

You can do somehing about it but you have to fight for your childrens futures otherwise they won't have one.

The above court order was issued by HHJ Rubery on the 8th October 2004, you will note he orders the Bradford and Bingley to include evidence of two transactions. This was evidence of proof of two credits this bank had claimed in court in May 2000 had been credited to my account the day before the hearing in 2000. The spread sheets and figures they used in court in May of 2000 at Stoke on Trent court before DJ Isley have been proved to be false, this bank happily admitted in writing they were false, but hey when you own the judges and police they know they have nothing to worry about.

At the hearing on the 8th October 2004 Rubery was puzzled when i was reading out to him document 124 which was Paul Jordan's, head of legal services for the Bradford and Bingley letter in which Jordan stated very clearly. NO CREDITS ARE IN EXISTENCE ON THE BRADFORD AND BINGLEY FINANCIAL RECORDS FOR THE 4TH MAY 2000 SHOWING TWO CREDITS HAD BEEN MADE ON THAT DAY TO YOUR ACCOUNT. They had told Judge Isley on the 5th May 2000 they had credited my account with two credits and then produced the spread sheets with these two credits on as proof. Rubery suddenly stopped me and asked me which file was i reading from as he couldn't find the document I was reading from. I told Rubery its the same file I serviced on the courts and the Bradford and Bingley. Rubery stated he didn't have this file then granted me leave to appeal. The court manager from Stafford court wrote to me stating her office had failed to provide Rubery with the Indexed File. Load of rubbish! Rubery was going to dismiss my appeal out of hand he didn't know about Jordan's letter because he hadn't read my file. So the court manager has to take the blame.

On the 21st of January 2005 I faxed the Stafford court manager confirming the Bradford and Bingley were refusing to comply with Rubery's court order, the court manager faxed me back the very same day to confirm she had placed my faxed letter of the 21st January 2005 on Rubery's personal desk. NO REPLY FROM RUBERY.

On the 28th January 2005 in court I pointed out to Rubery that the Bradford and Bingley were in contempt of court, not interested was the reply. Rubery asked the barrister Huw Jackson acting for the bank, where are the records from the banks financial records to show these credits. After a discussion with Richard Lane of Wright Hassall of Leamington Spa this pair of clowns stated. "My Lord the credits are invisible ones that will only show up when Jenkins sells his home":)) Which Rubery said was Okay. THEY SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST AS CONFIRMED IN WRITING BY PAUL JORDAN HEAD OF THIS BANKS LEGAL SERVICES. I have had experts trying to find these credits and no one can.

Please bear in mind that when I appeared before Lord Justice Ward at the High Courts in London in July of 2002 he stated in his judgment, paragraph 32- "the figures before me do not appear on the societies financial records and this matter needs investigating". Ward was confirming the documents and figures used by this bank in court in May of 2000 were non existant and false. But Rubery again stated he wasn't interested 

I asked Ward politely to instigate a police investigation into the criminal acts committed in court by the Bradford and Bingley, first he claimed it wasn't within his remit to do so, then later in his judgment he states it could be done at a judges discretion, now i have to wonder why Ward refused to instigate a police action?

The hearing on the 28th January was a joke from start to finish, when I asked Rubery awkward questions he pointed to Jackson and Lane and stated in the middle of the hearing "I want you two in my chambers after this hearing" which is a malfeasance by a public official, no I wasn't invited to the judges chambers.

Rubery had loads of evidence before him from the banks solicitor Jordan etc, the decission was in and no matter what was said, I know which side my bread is buttered on. Any one wishing for more of this just contact me there are many other such documents concerning Rubery and other Stoke on Trent and Stafford court judges.

Now we show how bent HHJ Rubery actually is, the Bradford and Bingley demanded a restraining order be issued against me to stop my making further court claims against them, Rubery was actually beaming when he agreed to this and made the order he was told to make he didn't even think about it. You can see clearly Rubery states that if i ignore his court order I WILL BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND SENT TO JAIL. Yet when it was pointed out to Rubery in his court on the 28th January 2005 that the Bradford and Bingley were in contempt of court for failing to produce the evidence he personally had demanded he said in the first hearing in January of 2005 that he wasn't interested, and at the second hearing in June of 2005 he stated "I'm not going down that road again"

I have been informed that Rubery when stating I would be in contempt of court etc was doing so under ORDER 42 and without stating as such that I was vexatious, further in being ordered by the Bradford and Bingley to stop me from taking the matter further Rubery in essence conspired with the Bradford and Bingley to pervert the course of justice by lawful process (strange law) and threats which in essence has made me (bankrupt in law) which denies me all access to Justice because of Rubery's abuse of the Judicial Office.

It was shown to Rubery by using my yearly mortgage statements that the Bradford and Bingley had issued false mortgage statements two years after I received the original ones for 1999 and 2000. Richard Lane solicitor acting for the Bradford and Bingley admitted in writing over a year after the 2000 court hearing that one credit wasn't actually paid until nearly two years after they had told Isly in court they had paid them the day before the hearing with DJ Isley in May of 2000 and presented her with spreadsheets of figures to prove this.

When it was pointed out to Rubery and other High Court judges that in May of 2000 in DJ Isleys court the barrister for the Bradford and Bingley Jackson actually handed Judge Isley and myself a bundle of documents in the court room which I now know is called Surprise Documentation. Isley as the judge in charge of the case should have asked me did I want to accept them or have the hearing adjourned, she did neither. I was informed by Stoke on Trents Court manager that any evidence to be used in a hearing has to be serviced at least seven days before a hearing. Again proving the Bradford and Bingley seemingly buy the court system as well.

Huw Jackson barrister admits all of this in his letter to the Bar Council which will shortly be displayed on here

I have been fairly fortunate and there is no way these people will get away with the criminal acts they have committed. I have waited patiently for a long time to really hit these arrogant people, now it is my time

I do not disbelieve any poor soul who has gone into court and come out confused as to how they have lost their homes or whatever. Two barristers favourite sayings to me were "I have had breakfast with the judge and if you do what we want no costs will occur" This was also made to me in writing by the Bradford and Bingleys solicitor Lane he claimed "if you accept that my client has done nothing wrong all costs against you will be dropped" doesn't this tell you i was dealing with bent judges.

This is a letter from Stafford Court manager dated the 1st of October 2004 this was in reply to two faxes i had sent asking for explanations, once again I was informed it was HHJ Rubery that was involved, and that he had demanded that this case was his and his alone.

I had filled in a Court Appellant document requesting a hearing for an appeal, I already had a letter from the Stoke on Trent Court manager (below) confirming no one needed to inform the Bradford and Bingley if I or the court didn't want to as they had no legal right to attend the hearing.

I believe my hearing was set for the 30th of September 2004 at Stafford courts for a hearing I now know was going to be before HHJ Rubery. At 4-00pm the day before the hearing I received a call from Stafford Courts Admin office to tell me my hearing for the following day had been adjourned, when I asked on whose instructions I was told Judge Rubery had adjourned the hearing on his receiving orders from the Bradford and Bingley to do so because they hadn't had time to include their papers. When I pointed out to the person I was talking to that no one had asked my permission to adjourn the hearing and that the Bradford and Bingley had no legal right to be there anyway, I was told hard luck it's adjourned and then slammed the phone down on me.

You will see in the managers letter in paragraph two that it was Wright Hassall for the Bradford and Bingley who by a faxed letter had demanded the adjournment by Rubery.

In paragraph three you will see the court admit they were in the wrong not to have phoned me first to gain my permission for the adjournment.

In paragraph four you will see the manager confirms the Bradford and Bingley had no right to be at the hearing as it was my hearing alone, she then apologises for the way I had been treated.

Yet HHJ Rubery knew the Bradford and Bingley had no right to demand my hearing be adjourned, I have a faxed letter from the Bradford and Bingleys solicitor Lane stating he requested (demanded an adjournment from his mate Rubery) on the grounds he hadn't had time to enter paperwork for this hearing, the day after the adjournment I received a bundle from the Bradford and Bingley for costs of nearly 4,000 pounds for a hearing they had no right to even be at, Rubery is stamped all over this all the way through. Hopefully shortly we will have adverts in local papers requesting any poor person who has had the misfortune to appear before Rubery and co join us to get justice.

The above court manager in a later letter apologised yet again for failing to put before Rubery my court files for the hearing of the 8th October 2004, was it deliberate or not, Rubery referred to this matter at the court hearing of the 28th January 2005 when I brought the matter up, he dismissed it out of hand.

This is a letter from Stoke on Trents court managers office, again another cover up. When I appeared before so called HHJ Perrett at Telford courts (the hearing was changed from Stafford courts to Telford courts at 4-30pm on the evening before the hearing I assume because the judge allotted the case was honest) before the hearing Jackson the barrister was seen coming out of Perrett's chambers smirking, the first words out of Perrets mouth when we went into his court was he wasn't going to allow this hearing as it wasn't  new evidence which it was, he then stated as shown in his judgment that he had no idea why HHJ Rubery had allowed my appeal. So Perrett was calling Rubery an idiot. I told Perrett I was going to the Court of Appeal in London to which he stated I will not give you my permission he then got up and stomped out.

 

Outside of the courts both Jordan and Lane ran after me they said they would drop all costs if I didn't go to the Appeal Court in London, when I stated I was going to go they stated I wouldn't get a proper hearing because they sort the judges out as we have sorted the judge out today, I have the exact words on documents which I don't keep at home so these are as I recall near enough but not exact. But remember them when you appear before judges that they are sorted out.