The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT letter on my web-site and it’s NOT in the file they used to get the injunction. MCP can’t claim there was no room for it . . . or time to include it. They managed to put every OTHER LETTER in  the file. . . . so it MUST HAVE BEEN DELIBERATE. (It’s probably buried in the pile of JUNK they produced at the Court Room door 5 minutes before the hearing. . . where the Judge wouldn’t find find it.) . . that omission alone would be enough to get this malicious case kicked out. It’s called; Deceiving the Court

Mr Colin Cole . . . . LETTER TO DAVID RUTTER

Thursday, 28 September 2006

David Rutter

Senior Ptnr

MetcalfeCopeman &Pettefar

Dear David

I refer you to the contents of http://www.mcp-law.org/page2.html

 In these letters PUBLISHED as long ago as three months previous.
(I always like to PLAN ahead) I asked some very simple and reasonable questions. Further I told you what would happen if I did not receive some HONEST replies.
When someone refuses to answer elementary questions there is always a reason. Usually because to do so, will reveal a LIE, a DECEPTION, a CONSPIRACY of some sort. (client confidentiality does not apply here, the questions are far too basic for that) BECAUSE of your failure to explain, it IS REASONABLE for me to now assume that the above is the case.

You have had three months to reply, but declined to do so.  And therefore, I do not believe your fairy story, that your client bought the 243 property unwittingly at an auction, since you will not give the date or whereabouts of that event.  You believed that by telling me, on behalf of your clients, a cock and bull story about an auction. That  I would think your clients had bought the property in all innocence.
BUT NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH COULD IT?
 

Even if that part about the auction does, in the unlikely event turn out to be true. Your answer, was clearly designed as a devious response in an attempt to protect your client’s position. WORSE it was a pathetic, patronising and clumsy attempt in the extreme. Any Solicitor would know, that the fact that someone purchased a property at auction does NOT absolve them from liability.
Which is what this endeavor was clearly designed to avoid.
And therefore had no place as an honest response to an honest question.

I believe that W I Properties knew exactly (or thought they did) what they were buying and thought, because they are resident in Northern Ireland, they would be difficult to sue, could get away with it, and be able to AVOID their responsibilities and LIABILITIES.

And that you, CONSPIRED with them to facilitate that goal.

I intend to label your firm . . . . . LIARS, CHEATS, CONSPIRATORS, and WANKERS along with W I Properties, IWG and Denniss Matthews from now on.
And you have only yourselves to blame for that disdain.
ANYONE WHO CONSPIRES AGAINST ANOTHER IS BENEATH CONTEMPT. To do so for paltry gain is worse. As I have previously said . . . your silence on the subject will no longer be tolerated. Nevertheless you still have this opportunity to refute all of the above. (provided it is accompanied with a reasonable explanation for rebuttal, if you can.)

    Future silence will of course over time go increasingly against you. . . . . the Internet will take care of that. It is just a fact of life.
What will also become apparent to others if you fail to counter the disdain I will heap on you. Is that you are not capable of defending your position in a Court of Law. In other words, not worthy to call yourselves Solicitors, especially charging other clients for that very service. . . . . http://www.iwg-solicitors.co.uk/page5.html

I will now set about making the Internet a place you will no longer wish to go.

As I have done for others. . . . who were equally deserving and forewarned but failed to heed. My sites are powerful enough to blast all but the very biggest Companies from the web.

To do so to your sites will be a walk in the park.
 

Colin Clifford “ignoring me is not an option” Cole

Chambers Dictionary ; Wanker  . . worthless, contemptible person.

And it’s obviously starting to work . . . already October’s stats have sailed past the stats for September . . . .  6th November 2006 . . 1063 visits and 12,644 hits last month. . The sort of stats a puny solicitor’s web site could only dream about . . might have something to do with the 100,000 email addresses I have and will send out over the coming months. Everyone loves a  good granny robbing story.

But these stats are still way behind my most successful site www.ingramwintergreen.org
Which has nearly 50% more hits and has done so since it started. . . Scroll down.

I have written many times to MetcalfeCopeman &Pettefar (mostly without success )regarding the sale/purchase of 243 Portland Rd SE25 by W I Properties as  MCP Law act for W I. Earlier this year they informed me that the freehold of the property has changed hands yet again. That’s the 4th owner since 2003. . . I naturally asked the sellers’ solicitors  Tossers IWG if they had declared the dispute that I have with ANY owner of the freehold of the property. . . . no reply.
However just like Ingram Winter Liars & Green had previously. MCP Law declared they had not been told. In fact no enquiries had been made. (or even inspection come to that). BUT this time to avoid the embarrassment IWG found themselves in, when I asked them last year. “Did you,or did you not, make enquiries before contract?” (to which IWG gave no answer.)
MCP Law came up with the clever? ruse of telling me, that “their client had bought the property at public auction”. . . .(they had to say something about not making enquires. Because that would make THEM look negligent if they didn’t . ie . the trap IWG fell into. Well when I say fell . . I mean jumped holding hands with their pals Denniss Matthews)
The problem for MCP Law then started when I asked the simple question . . “OK then . . Which auction?” . . . and surprise surprise . . they haven’t got a reply.  . . they have had three months to think of one . . . but for some reason they don’t want to answer that simple question. . I wonder why? .  And NOW WE KNOW WHY. .Their clients did NOT buy the property at Auction at all and they KNEW ABOUT the DISPUTE when they AGREED to buy the property.
Yet Jonathan Burton swears on OATH  . . . “This was not meant to deceive.”

When you’ve had enough of all this David . . . refer your client to Lisa Richardson’s letter of 11th July 2006 on their behalf. . . . . I can keep this up for ever . . . can you afford that? We both know what she did  . . click here . . and that is why you can do nothing about the damage I will do to your Company . . . don’t doubt that I am capable  read this page. . . http://www.lawyerbaiting.co.uk/page4.html

Right now you have an opportunity to avoid that fate.. . . but beware . . just as it takes a few months for the Internet to overwhelm you as it will . . it takes longer for the aftermath to die down.

Are you a complainer? Do you believe we are entitled to good service? Do you think complaining is a good way to get it? A major independent television company would like to hear from you. They  are looking for people who stand up for their rights and are proud to cause a fuss.  

 Click Here.

for instance

Affordable Health Insurance Information with a little mention of this site into the bargain.
Click here.

AXA Insurance go into the clairvoyance game.

Peter Hubbard Chief Executive Officer AXA Insurance,displays some remarkable gifts of precognition. Matched only by the clairvoyant abilities of Nicholas Cooke the broker Henderson Insurance Brokers Ltd Peterborough.
Click here.

From http://www.mcp-
law.co.uk/people/lisa_richardson.html

Lisa  works in Commercial Property and has been with MCP since 2003. She works with sale and purchase of commercial or mixed property by private treaty or through public auction, drafting and negotiating of residential and commercial leases, licences to assign, licences for alterations and general commercial property work.

Lisa specialises in general property work for Registered Social Landlords and before MCP worked within the legal department of a Registered Social Landlord and in a firm of solicitors within their Social Housing Department. Lisa has also worked on street purchases/sales under the Right to Buy and Right to Acquire legislation, land purchases for development, negotiating section 106 agreements and equity loan schemes. She is a Fellow of the Institute of Legal Executives.

lisa.richardson@mcp-law.co.uk

Lisa Richardson

So what exactly did she do? . . Well I’ll tell you. . .

It is not always possible to know exactly what goes on in a Solicitor’s office. But sometimes you can conclude it beyond all reasonable doubt as they like to say.

There are a number of facts that are not in any doubt whatsoever, the 1st and most important one is that you are here reading this page. . . a page not incidentally called  More Wanker Solicitors MCP Law. . . and are Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar happy about that . . too right they’re not. . . but why don’t they do anything about it? Apart from the obvious detrimental quality of the title (quite deliberate to prove the point) it is on a site not dissimilar to their own name of www.mcp-law.co.uk. . . . . most firms faced with the prospect of having a rival name would go to Nominet and try to get it back. But MCP are almost uniquely unqualified to do so, bearing in mind their extortion plot (or was it plots?) with a Co called "LINCOLNSHIRE TRADING COMPANY LIMITED" so the prospect of getting the name back is pretty limited indeed.

But that isn’t the problem they face. . . . most if not all respectable Companies faced with the sort of disparagement I am dishing out to them would immediately go to the Courts, If only to get an interim injunction against the operation of this site until they can sue me for defamation and libel, cost £150  It shouldn’t be too difficult for them, they are a Firm of Solicitors for heaven’s sake. . . or so they claim. . . . after all there are 45 legal eagles working for the firm . . . so one of them ought to know how to get an injunction. It’s easy even a Solicitor can do it.

So what’s stopping them. . . . Can’t be bothered? . . It’s not a problem? . . . Hmmm! do an MSN search  . . solicitors metcalfe copeman pettefar . . you will find one of my sites at No1 now . . above their own site. . . . and where MSN goes Google usually follows a few weeks later.  I have done the same to . . IWG solicitors  . . Google them and their site was No 36 on that search last time I looked which is bad enough except that the first 20 search results belong to me. . . try it . . and that is what MCP Law are going to have to cope with soon.  . . (In fact it’s worse than that now . . I can’t even find them anymore. . . . . you try . . . . . Click here for google search  . . iwg solicitors )

It’s a problem all right. . . So why don’t they do anything about it? It has to be something very serious indeed. . . . AND IT IS.

Let me explain What we also know for certain is that MCP Law  refuse to answer the simplest of questions that I have put them. It’s not as if they have refused to discuss the matter because they have already done so.  It’s just that they won’t answer the ACTUAL questions that I put to them . . See letter to David Rutter top of page.

The lovely Lisa pictured here “works in Commercial Property”. She is the conveyancing clerk responsible for looking after the account for W I Properties Ltd Northern Ireland owners Wxxxxxxx Nnnnnnn Kxxxxxxx (Accountant) && L&ck Rd Drumharvey Co Fermanagh NI and Ian Rrrrrrr Sssss Cccccc  $$$ Kill&droy  Rd Co Tyrone NI

WI bought the freehold to the property “243 Portland Rd SE25.”  earlier this year. . . But I have been in dispute with any owner of that freehold since July 2003. And when I say dispute, I don’t mean, an argument over fence. To get an idea . . if you do a Google search on that property or click the link you will see that EVERY entry on the 1st page is about that dispute . . and if you want to know the extent of it go to my most visited page DOPEY DAN J GINSBURY’S STUPID TOSSER SOLICITOR PAGE

And yet the lovely Lisa here knew nothing about this dispute when I wrote to her, asking if she had been informed of it when her clients bought the property.

“We are sorry to hear of your difficulties with the previous landlords. Our client was not aware of the problem  concerning the  flue prior to purchasing at auction.”

Which IS NOT  the answer to the question I asked.  . . . you will have to read the letters I wrote on this page to get the full story, but basically every question I have asked has been met with an evasive answer or a wall of silence.

So why is knowing about a dispute so important? Well unlike a dispute between persons which stays between those protagonists wherever they live.
A Property Dispute stays with the property. And devalues it by some margin. Which is why we all have to fill in that bit on enquiries before contract . .  ‘Are you aware of any dispute? . . and often . . ‘the likelihood of a dispute?’

As I say I have written over and over again, asking MCP Law , if either they or WI Properties were aware of this dispute when they bought the freehold? The problems I have with the lovely Lisa’s replies, re;- her client purchasing the property at auction are these. First of all what difference does it make? . . none whatsoever and she knows it. Either the details of the dispute were declared in “the details contained within the auction catalogue” . . or they were not.

If they were not you have to believe for more than a micro second that Fineland Properties Ltd and their crooked solicitor Daniel Ginsbury at IWG would be able to enter the property into a Sale and hope that some idiot would buy It, and remarkably and coincidentally  have a Solicitor that is so stupid that they wouldn’t bother to make enquiries before contract or wouldn’t find out about all this before completion.

Incredible? . . Impossible? . . Well that is what MCP Law are are expecting me to believe from their meagre replies. . .The other problem I have with this tale of buying the property at auction is this . . . when I asked the question  “OK then which auction and when?” . . I get no reply whatsoever.

Even if it was true that sale was made at an auction and WI Properties paid a proper market price for the property. . as soon as the lovely Lisa found out about  the dispute she would have advised her client accordingly. . . . so do you suppose this property co just said ?. . . “Oh never mind about that we will go ahead and buy the property anyway. We love properties with disputes. They are so much fun”.. . . . . Not likely they didn’t. What would have happened is, for this sale to go through regardless, which it did. Is that a threat to withdraw would have been made unless a new price could be negotiated . . Or they already knew  about it and that was reflected in the purchase price . . . so EITHER way WI Properties bought the DISPUTE along with the freehold.

Right now I am going to discount this explanation of buying the property at auction as a fairy tale until they come up with the precise details. . . . in other words this sale was made by Fineland Properties Ltd to WI Properties in full knowledge.

So what really happened then? . . . well something like this I should think.

WI Properties approached their’ conveyancing clerk the lovely Lisa with a problem. They had a property offered very cheap but it had a little niggling difficulty with it . . . there is a dispute. . . and a bigger problem . . . . ME
So the lovely Lisa and her client sat down (albeit metaphorically) and sorted out what to do about it. She would answer any letters and questions from me in as vague a way as possible and give the impression that WI had bought the property in all innocence and were not really responsible for what went on before. . . and if the questions (from me) got too close to the mark she would just ignore them.
In order for her not to look negligent by saying she had made no enquiries before contract she would say the purchase had been at auction. . .
Something on those lines. WHATEVER they agreed it was contrary to what she spelt out to me in her letters.

So what’s wrong with that? . . if you do a search  . . . solicitors jokes . . .  you get perhaps a million results. Most of them based on the theme “how do you know a solicitor is lying to you?  . . see if her lips are moving”
Solicitors lie all the time I’m afraid. Everyone knows it but it just seems to be accepted, especially if they do so on your’ behalf.

So what did the lovely Lisa do that prevents MCP Law  doing anything about these sites?  . . . .what is it that they know but won’t tell? . . .

When I threatened to expose this Co, start this web site for instance, someone a bit higher up the food chain at MCP would have looked into what to do about it. And they would have realised immediately (as I did from her very 1st letter ) that the minute Lisa Richardson ‘sat down’ with her client and arranged to do all the things she did, write all the things she did, and deny all the things she did.

Never mind unethical which it certainly was, that became A CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD and DECEIVE for gain. A criminal and imprisonable offence.

Unfortunately for the likes of Lisa Richardson and her ilk . . . telling lies is not a problem for a solicitor (or anyone else come to that it seems) and it certainly isn’t for The Law Society of England and Wales. (I have that in writing from them). . but CONSPIRING to  do so is. . . . and if ANY or all of the above is correct that makes her a CROOK and the Partners of the firm accessories after the fact . . . . or is there a clever Lawyer in there who is going to tell me differently?   . . . . I’d be pleased to see a better explanation of the Law. . . . any takers MCP?

AND THAT IS WHY THIS FIRM OF SO CALLED LAWYERS CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT THIS WEBSITE, and sit there wringing their hands like a bunch of wankers.

Until she or someone in her company gives me a proper and correct explanation that discounts any or all of the above then she is going to have to live with it from now on.  . . should look good on her CV.

The scale of the problem is this . . . by the end of this month October 2006 my sites will have received 90,000 hits  . . for this month alone  . . which by my reckoning adds up to over A MILLION hits per year. If this Company does nothing about this problem then the lovely Lisa will find herself with just as detrimental presence on the web as her predecessor . . . Daniel Ginsbury . . . do a search on him and see what you get.

Lisa Richardson’s subterfuges on behalf of her clients, were designed to defraud me of my claims of tens of thousands of pounds against the freeholder of my property and protect him from them.  . . .
 

NOW I am going to repay the compliment and cost MCP a lot more than that over the coming months. And all I have to do is sit back and let the Internet do it’s work. . .

Any firm that even risks it’s good name being denigrated in this fashion is by definition a BUNCH OF WANKERS, that goes without saying.

SO Mr David Rutter. What explanation are you going to give me that says I shouldn’t label you and your firm as just another BUNCH OF CROOKS? And spread that all over the Internet. Your ‘previous’ isn’t much in your favour is it? . . See MCP Granny robbing story and Extortion Plot I’ll take a lack of reply within  . . lets say a week from now . . . as CONFIRMATION OF THE FACT. . . . shall I?

Thank you all for reading this . . . you have just added to those stats.

And if you come back in a week or so time . . . and this is still here . . . with no reply from MCP Law . . . you‘ll know  it’s a fact. I’ll bet David Rutter in his wildest nightmares didn’t think some ol guy from south London could call his mighty firm a bunch of crooks . . . and get away with it.. . . . . bet he don’t think that now though.

Colin Cole

STILL HERE MORE THAN ONE WEEK LATER. . . . 8th November 2006 . . .
Told ya.  A bunch of crooks the lot of them.

Are your Solicitors mentioned on the
Solicitors From Hell site?

www.solicitorsfromhell.co.uk/

MY HERO

Harry Roffey who has been battling with HSBC for justice for years. But the amazing thing is he’s 72 years old and builds his web sites over a dial up modem . . . unbelievable guts and determination.

I love his big red bus.

http://www.hsbcfraud
.co.uk/4570.html

What did the lovely Lisa do that prevents MCP Law doing anything about this site?

Click here

From http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/site/criminal_justice/defraud.htm . .

Conspiracy to Defraud Contrary to Common Law

Offence: Conspiracy to Defraud Contrary to Common Law
It is an offence contrary to the common law for two or more persons to agree to embark on a course of conduct which, if the agreement is carried out in accordance with their intentions, will necessarily amount to or involve some third party being deprived of some thing which is his or to which he is or would be or might be entitled. The offence is extremely wide and even agreements which might have the effect of injuring a third party's proprietary rights in copyright material have been held to constitute the offence. (scott v metropolitan police commissioner [1975] ac 819)

Penalties: Conspiracy to Defraud Contrary to Common Law
The offence is triable only on indictment. Section 12(1) criminal justice act 1987 provides for a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.

And what did The Partners at MCP Law  . . . .  David Rutter, Richard Carlson, Paul Garner, Steve Welcomme, Dawn Collier, Andrew Davies, Ben Dures, Tim Stevenson, Sarah Adlam, Jonathan Burton, Jacqueuline Hesketh, Andy Littlefield, Martin Newton, Alison Muir, Eileanora Ni Charthaig and Simon Scott do about this CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR in their firm?

. . . absolutely nothing . . . or more likely they conspired in hope to cover it up. . . . another serious crime. . . . I have asked David Rutter for the precise nature of the offence . . there are a number of sub categories that an offender may be tried under . . . but he has not found himself able to reply to that request.

On my Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar Granny Robber page, “Stuart Nelson, a Partner at MCP raided the accounts set up for the beneficiaries of mainly elderly widows while executing their wills and holding power of attorney over their affairs.”

It is not too difficult for the layman to understand that if the other partners had been aware of his exploits and had sought to cover those up, in this same fashion, they would probably have been sharing a cell with him . . .not the ladies of course . . . they’ve got their own prisons to go to . . if there is enough room that is . . . (and I still fail to see how it is that no one knew . . . given Nelson’s lavish spending habits. . . but we’ll leave that aside for the time being.)

Yet the crime I have reported to the partners above  . . has a far higher tariff of sentence  than Nelson’s . . . . . it is a CONSPIRACY after all.  

But all they (The Partners MCP Law)  have done is turn a blind eye and acquiesced to it . . . . . . in other words a bunch of crooks the lot of them . . . . . or when are you going to advise me otherwise Mr Rutter? . . you’ve got the expertise . . . explain it to a poor ol’ pensioner will you? . . .
Your silence on the matter is starting to become deafening.

By the way . . . if any of the above would like to be excluded from the accusation  . . I would be delighted to do so on receipt of a reasonable reason why you should be . . . (odds 100/1 against anyone  taking the offer) Good excuse could be maternity leave . . won’t work with the fellahs though. Excuses not acceptable would be  . . . visiting space station . . . I lost my glasses for three months and couldn’t  read my pc screen. . . . my dog/children ate my files. . . . I lost my Alzheimer  pills.  . . .
or as in the case of my complaint to the Law Society about that other useless bunch Lister & Wood Norwood . . .  their excuse . . . and I mean the Law Society’s excuse was . . . “The person involved has gone missing and taken the files with him” . . . I kid you not . . . . they will say anything rather than investigate their buddy solicitors. . . . Click here

You’re all going to love my NEXT headline  . . I think I’ll be sending it from one of my other email addresses . . . crooks@mcp-law.org . . has a nice ring don’t you think?

Or I’ve got crookedsolicitors@sir-ian-blair.co.uk . . . that’s a nice one.

Let me know when you’re fed up with all this David. . . . . bit of advise . . . never take on someone who enjoys the fray more than you do . .  winks . . .  I’ve already bankrupted one Company bigger than yours (single handed) for conspiring with their client. . . I can do it again  . . . . AND WILL. . . . . click here.

Or put another way from the Crown Prosecution Service Site. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/
section8/chapter_b.html#03

Prosecutors should be aware that there are two forms of conspiracy to defraud:

And this is the one in question.

Common law conspiracy to defraud. Conduct falling under this heading consists of an agreement by two or more persons to dishonestly deprive another of something which belongs to that person, or to which he/she would be or might be entitled to, and an agreement by two or more persons to injure some proprietary rights of another, by dishonesty.

What is not commonly realised: ;
It is not necessary for the action that the individual undertakes to be a criminal act . . . as in the case here of Lisa Richardson. Her lies, and deception to me aren’t criminal. It is her conspiracy with her client to do so that is the criminal offence and makes her a CROOK. And it is her employers complicity (AFTER THE FACT) in that conspiracy that makes them CROOKS.

 AND THEY KNOW IT . .

Rogues gallery

2006

DISCLAIMER . .  Click here

My claims made on this  and other web sites are based on the fact that Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar ( MCP Law ) refuse to answer even the most basic of questions. They should have no reason, unless to do so would embarrass them or their clients in disclosure of lies, connivance, and conspiracy. In exactly the same fashion as the IWG, Denniss Matthews conspiracy. I have asked them over and over again to tell the truth but they have declined. It is reasonable and correct therefore to make the assumptions that I have and that are printed through out these sites. MCP Law still have the opportunity to refute these claims if they wish . . . Provided they can prove it that is.

 

In fact the reason they  didn’t refute them . . . is they were true. Lisa Richardson DID Conspire to Defraud.
Their clients DID NOT buy the property at AUCTION and they DID know about the dispute when they AGREED to buy the property. In fact they bought the property BECAUSE of the dispute. . . . All this has been sworn to under OATH by Jonathan Burton Solicitor at MCP. . . . But he calls it . . . . “Was not meant to deceive.”

2006

2008

See The Impropriety of Sarah Adlam.
Click Here.

See Colin’s Name and Shame page.

Acting Reasonably in the circumstances

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, 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. Google search  defamation limitation.Pre-action Protocol for Defamation In particular, time is always ‘of the essence’ in defamation claims; the limitation period is (uniquely) only 1 year,  .www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/protocols/prot_def.htm

MUG SHOTS

The uncredibles

MEET
The UNCREDIBLES

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-ross.co.uk
www.barnettross.org.uk
(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 IDENTITY forms.
He’ll do them for you.

And make a name up for you too.

More Wanker Solicitors the CROOKS @ MCP Law Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar Solicitors East Anglia