Occam’s Razor
Occam’s Razor "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate", predicts. If there are two opposing theories, one extremely complicated and another simple.
The simple theory is more likely to be true.
This is case of an accusation of harassment . . . Not from the normally understood
meaning of the word but by publication . . of these web sites. Yet all of the files
concerning the case (that are not just repetition of pages from this web site 2006)
relate to the sale of a property. 243 Portland Rd SE25 4XB. The reason for this is
That the circumstances of that sale are so unusual, that they could be seen to be
INCREDIBLE.
The prosecution clearly recognised that INCREDIBILITY. And presented those files to show that however INCREDIBLE it is still possible. If you have an INCREDIBLE circumstance, that you want others to accept, you must produce convincing evidence of it.
A straightforward sale would of course need little in the way of
file and very little
explanation.
For the removal of doubt, I have never called Daniel J Ginsbury “a lying, conniving, scheming piece of pig shit, low life life gutter scum”.
I merely ask the question? If all of the above is true would that make him one? Daniel Ginsbury declines to ans either the former or the latter. It is true that I accuse IWG of being a bunch of total Wankers for allowing these sites to be here and are not able to fathom a way out of this dilemma. Not worthy to call themselves Solicitors in fact.
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
The INCREDIBLE story is that relatives of the second plaintiff Aunty and Uncle wanted
to invest in the English property market for the FIRST TIME. They saw a property
in an auction catalogue. (The most INCREDIBLE document ever manufactured)
Because
they were bidding for the first time, from Northern Ireland, and therefore would
not be known to the auctioneers. They enlisted the help of a friend Andrew Mahon
who was well known to the auctioneers. . . . . (more about him later)
He was so well known that he was able to bid from NI over the telephone without having
to send in the written authority required by every Auctioneers in the country for
an auctioneer to bid on his behalf. . . . No signature . . . No deposit . . . No
MONEY LAUNDERING identifications for either him or for Aunty and Uncle. . . No authority
to bid over the telephone . . it was blank . . . No written authority from another
to bid on behalf of another . . . also blank.
Mahon was so well known in fact he
didn’t even have to name a figure he wanted to buy the property for . . . Instead
he got (apparently) someone at Barnett Ross the Auctioneers to fill in a telephone
bid form for him and enter (strictly against their rules) . . . a figure of NO MAX.
. . . there is no signature on this form either. .
In other words he was prepared
to pay whatever it takes to secure this INCREDIBLE purchase.
AFTER successfully bidding apparently, that familiarity was so substantial he was
THEN able to get the auctioneer at Barnett Ross to change the contract. . . . To
strike out his name (literally with a biro) and then replace it with a totally FICTITIOUS
TRADE NAME Ridaco Developments and subscribe it to these these relatives, Aunty
and Uncle . . . . again strictly against Barnett Ross Auctioneers rules . . . AND
against MONEY LAUNDERING regulations.
Again he was able to do this without having to give the Auctioneers, either written authority to do so. . the form is blank. Or showing that he had written authority himself, from the relatives to do so. . . . again blank . . . . or that they even existed.
So taken with the property were Aunt and Uncle, that they were prepared to pay 10% over the guide price, £112,000 without making a single enquiry, as to the state of the property, whether it had subsidence or not, or to any legal conditions, or outstanding matters. . . . they bought it totally blind. . . . . . Remarkable nerve, for first time buyers. . . . But more INCREDIBLE is the notion that an experienced property buyer . . Who just happens to be plaintiff 1’s ‘dirty job’ man. . . ie fixer. . . . Would buy this property unseen for ‘friends’. . and without making a single enquiry of the Auctioneers he knew so well . . . or take the trouble to phone the sellers solicitors as recommended in the ‘brochure’ . . . Ie that famous bunch of LIARS . . . . Ingram Winter Green . . . in fact my old friend Daniel (lying piece of pigshit) Ginsbury solicitor. . . . . . (don’t worry about defamation . . . I’ve been calling him that for two years without reply)
Their ‘story’ goes, from sworn evidence; that shortly after MCP received the documents for the property. They discovered there was a dispute. Which of course could have been identified with a single phone call from this experienced buyer, but was not.
The relatives were APPARENTLY dismayed at the implications and asked advise from
the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs realised that this could be a serious problem. So
decided to help out by taking the property themselves. Despite the fact that Mr Mahon
was the person responsible for that negligence. And being a WELL KNOWN property investor
himself could easily have done so. . . . .
But he’s NOT is he? . . . . he happens
to be plaintiff 1’s fixer . . . odd dirty job man . . . . Ie. anything plaintiff
1 doesn’t want to get involved in or his hands dirty in. . . . up front that is.
. . FOR INSTANCE arranging to get into my property Dec 2007 without my permission
(which would NOT have been given) or even knowledge . . until after the event. .
. . by claiming it was his property.
When I heard that the freehold had changed hands again (the 4th owner in 3 years) naturally I was suspicious. So I enquired of the new solicitors, MCP Law if the new owners had been made aware of the dispute by the sellers. . . . and let’s face it . . if you take a day or three surfing round my sites . . . A dispute doesn’t get more public than this. . . . on a Google search of that address when my sites were in full flow . . . The 1st THREE PAGES were results about this dispute.
MCP Law replied the new owners were not aware of the dispute when they bought the property. . . . . (which of course was untrue. They were aware of it. That’s why they bought it. . . . . . . from sworn evidence)
I then asked how could that be? Did you not make any enquiries before contract?.
They replied a month later which always makes me suspicious, that their clients bought the property at public auction and thus were not aware of the dispute. . . . . (which again was untrue since someone else bought the property at auction and they took over the sale . . .and were aware of the dispute when they AGREED to buy the property. . . . from sworn evidence)
Amazed I then asked what did that have to do with it? Surely the details would have been in the sale documents? . . (which of course they were . . . . along with many pages from my websites)
However MCP Law replied, “that their clients did not know about the dispute before they agreed to buy the property”. . . . . which is of course a LIE . . . because the clients agreed to buy the property BECAUSE of the dispute. (from sworn evidence)
This INCREDIBLE and deceitful account given, of the circumstances of the sale of
this property needed convincing evidence of its validity. And is why the prosecution
produced a Sale Pack as evidence to the Court for the Injunction.
HOWEVER, on proper
inspection, there is not a single document in this file that is not manufactured
by a solicitor, or written by a solicitor purporting to be from the client but was
not, or by an auctioneer or someone purporting to be an auctioneer. NOT A SINGLE
DOCUMENT that substantiates a single word of this INCREDIBLE story. . . . . . .
. . NOT ONE.
Those that were supposed to and would be required normally for MONEY LAUNDERING regulations, are so incomplete, so doctored, or so manufactured, that they clearly have no validity whatsoever. . . . and one document is an absolute impossibility.
Further there is not a single document in this file that is not manufactured by a
solicitor, or written by a solicitor purporting to be from the client but was not,
or by an auctioneer or someone purporting to be an auctioneer. That shows that either
Mr Mahon or Aunty and Uncle even exist, let alone knew anything about this sale.
. . . . . . . . . NOT ONE. . . (discovery later showed that there might be an
Aunty or Uncle but there is no EVIDENCE, signature or the like that Andrew Mahon
does. . . . or at least had anything to do with the ‘purchase’)
AND THEN you have
ask how it is that Barnett Ross Auctioneers changed the name (in biro) on the memorandums
of both SALE & PURCHASE from A Mahon supposedly to a TOTALLY FICTITIOUS name of a
Company that doesn’t even exist. . . AFTER the sale was over. So much for their
MONEY LAUNDERING RULES.
You also then have to query how it is . . . if this had been a proper auction . . . there were two bidders who had NO KNOWLEDGE of this dispute . . . Which you would need to get the price to 10% over the guide price. . . . two idiots bidding over the phone? I bet Mr Teitelbaum couldn’t believe his luck. . . . and then to find TWO Solicitor firms who are proven liars to see it all through . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nirvana . . . .
Occam’s Razor "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate", predicts. If there are
two opposing theories, one extremely complicated and another simple.
The simple theory is more likely to be true.
The simpler explanation; is that this auction never took place., the property was bought for peanuts for cash and a substantial mortgage was raised on the enhanced value of the supposed auction figure.
Desperate to sell the property, as had been their predecessor Patel, because of the
amount of protest I am capable of . . . (when my sites were in full swing IWG were
relegated to page three on any search on their name see Colin Blasts IWG Off the
Web as well as Daniel (lying solicitor) Ginsbury and Nathan Teitlebaum the previous
owner is still floating around on the web
(and within a week my sites have taken
over the web as if they had never been away . . . what dismay that must be . . especially
for IWG Solicitors who have spent hundreds of hours in 2007 cleaning up the searches
. . . which took me a few days to replace) . . . Click here.
Desperate to sell the property because of this sort of publicity
The IWG, Denniss
Matthews, Fineland Property Granny Robbing Scheme. . . . . Nathan Teitelbaum was
at a loss what to do. He couldn’t sell it by the same route he had bought it . .
. Ie buying it cheap then paying his crooked solicitors IWG to lie about it, thereby
denying the liability (which is called THEFT) . Because he knew I wouldn’t believe
it any more than I believed him.
So what seems to be more LIKELY . . . Ie Occum’s
Razor . . is that, faced with these difficulties Nathan Teitlebaum, Daniel Ginsbury
and someone unknown . . . YET . . . At Barnett Ross Auctioneers conspired to arrange
a FAKE AUCTION, involving the plaintiffs and their CROOKED solicitors MCP Law.
The
plaintiffs made a cash deal, on the cheap, and then these documents were manufactured
by MCP to try to show otherwise. And that the solicitors MCP Law then lied repeatedly
(which is not denied) on their clients behest to cover up their implausible scenario.
The purpose being, for the clients to be protected from any claim we MIGHT have against
them. And artificially enhance the value of the property to defraud the Bank for
a loan. . . . which is called MONEY LAUNDERING. . . . . . and despite asking for
further disclosures, in the matter of this Court Case (which are supposed to be a
PREREQUISITE to a settlement . . . not the other way round, insincere offers to settle
to avoid disclosure) we have NOT seen a single document that PROVES OTHERWISE.
. . . . there are plenty that purport to show it did though.
Which is more or less what I said or claimed on this web-
Which is no doubt why this MALICIOUS PROSECUTION is not for defamation or libel .
. . . . . electing instead for plaintiff 1 to PERJURE himself by claiming I had
been FAXING “extracts from my web-
In other words . . . . . TO SHUT ME UP.
My Dispute with Mr xxxxxxx.
“Naturally I told xxxxxxx to stick it in his arse. . . “
We used to own a nice flat above a shoe shop. Till along came S J Patel and unbeknown to me got planning permission by deceit which was connived in by Croydon Council, to turn it into a Take Away. Croydon Council failed to inform us of this trivial development. I believe deliberately since they falsified documents to try to show that they had informed me. (except that they got the wrong date and I must have replied a day before they sent them.) They have now been found guilty by The Local Government Ombudsman of Maladministration and fined a paltry £350. But it did prove I was right to complain. In other words claim to a dispute.
S J Patel is the lying conniving racist extortionist piece of shit who threatened me with physical violence. Manipulated and provoked, with racist lies about me, the previous tenant Pauline Dyer to threaten me with a gun, to write racist hate mail to me, and trespass on our property which Patel had told her was his.
He encouraged her to maliciously call the Police who trespassed on our property
and unlawfully threatened me with arrest and then got the Fire Brigade to destroy
some of our property (for which I got an apology but not one from the police which
is why I have three web sites about them) and much much more . . .
All on the back
of Patel’s deliberate plan to rob us of our property.(he actually phoned me and told
me he was going to do it . .
too bad he was reading the wrong lease wasn’t it?)
NONE of this is in doubt since it was admitted in Croydon Crown Court when P Dyer
found out the truth for the 1st time and realised she had been duped by Patel which
she admitted under oath. . . . . Cont . . . .
2006
NEXT PAGE . .
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.
AND IF A REALLY BRIGHT POLICEMAN or even a reporter has followed these links all way from
www.sir-
www.metpolicelondon.co.uk . .or
www.metpolicecroydon.co.uk . . or any one of my other numerous sites . . he /she will not even need to ask MCP Law. . . . to see the files . . . . . . etc overleaf.
Usage Statistics for mcp-
Generated 14-
In the history of the known World. Has one dealer in ANY commodity, EVER purchased
a property from ANOTHER dealer, knowing full well there was something wrong with
it. And PAID THE FULL PRICE?
The answer is of course NO. . . . unless your Irish
of course.
MEET
The UNCREDIBLES
Desperate to get rid of the property, because all his skullduggery had come to nought. Except wasted money on bent lawyers Patel had employed to maliciously threaten me. Lister & Wood of Croydon.
Patel managed however to sell this property to a Nathan Teitelbaum. Who promptly
got his bent Lawyers to conspire with the ones they had recommended to Patel (who
he knew wouldn’t ask any questions since they do it all the time I later found out.)
They conspired to hide from me the fact that the new owner had any knowledge of the
dispute and all that had gone on. Despite the fact that there was the threat of Court
action from Croydon Council against the owner of the premises to get an illegal flue
removed at that time. (which has now been removed but at considerable legal cost
to ourselves to have done so, and again an issue of dispute. The freeholder owes
me that money.)
This denial by Daniel Ginsbury (see search below) was a CRIMINAL attempt to defraud us of our considerable claims against the new owner of the freehold.
Conspiracy to Defraud Contrary to Common Law has a max penalty of 10 years in prison. Which is why IWG and Denniss Matthews can do nothing about my sites.
Teitelbaum, once again, desperate to rid himself of this property (especially the liabilities) sold it to a certain xxxxx xxxxxxx Wi Properties and Financial Director of FFFFFFFF Eeeeee Ltd NI.
Lisa Richardson (MCP Law) on xxxxxxx’s behalf claimed that despite this massive presence on the web xxxxx xxxxxxx, not only did not know about all this . . .but claims that Nathan Teitelbaum must have put the property into Auction and expected to sell it without anyone (ie xxxxx xxxxxxx) finding out about it. That he must have lied to the Auctioneer no doubt since there was no mention of it in the Auction Details.
In fact there was but the WI properties FALSELY claimed they did not know.
MCP also informed me that NO enquiries were made whatsoever. . . . well that was lucky wasn’t it? . . Teitelbaum just managed to find the one mug in the Country that doesn’t make enquiries and doesn’t mind if he has been ripped off, and has a Solicitor that doesn’t care, and doesn’t make enquiries either.
So why isn’t xxxxxxx suing Teitelbaum for fraud? Or if it’s Lisa Richardson’s fault
. . . her.? He’s had six months to do so.
Because it’s a pack of lies . . . that’s why. And indeed it was.
Why is it important that they deny knowledge of the dispute? Why is it his fault? Because if he knew about the dispute he would not have paid a full price for the property and got it cheap. Which means he bought it dispute and all. (same as buying a duff car cheap)
And if xxxxx xxxxxxx and his partner Iiiii Ccccccccc conspired with Lisa Richardson MCP Law to enact EXACTLY the same conspiracy as the previous lot. Then that makes them both as big A BUNCH OF CROOKS AS THEIR SOLICITORS. But they won’t answer that simple question preferring to just clam up, rather than do so.
What do you reckon lads . . . a pair of crooks?
So . . what did xxxxxxx do about these obviously trivial matters (to him) when he
supposedly found out about all this? Absolutely nothing. Unless you count getting
his Solicitors to write “we are sorry to hear about your troubles with the previous
freeholders.” as if it had nothing to do with him.
Well I’ve got news for you pal
. . . YOU are now responsible for ALL of it.
Absolutely nothing that is, apart from getting his tenant Ethyor Hussain to bash
the building about and put it in danger of rot and collapse. CONTRARY TO THE LAW
. . (The Party Wall Act 96) which he deliberately ignored. That bit is going to get
resolved soon in Croydon Crown Court where Hussain will be told to explain. I can’t
wait to see what he knows about this affair.
What else did xxxxxxx do when he found
out (apparently after he had bought the property in all innocence), that he was now
responsible for everything on this page. that he was now in dispute with ME . . and
one glance at this page would tell any sensible person that’s NOT a place you want
to be.
TRUST ME.
Was he upset in the least? Demanding his money back? Offering to sort out the problems? Upset with his Solicitors for not making enquiries?
Not a bit of it. What he did do is send me a bill for an extra £400 more for the
Insurance to pay for the fact that he had turned the shop into an Indian Take Away
solely for the benefit of himself and his tenant.
Naturally I told xxxxxxx to stick it in his arse. Which fortunately I am able to do because the lease says I can. Mr xxxxxxx is going to have a very sore arse by the time I’m finished with him.
How prophetic that statement might turn out to be. . . . There are a lot of sore arses in Prison . . .
where he’s going if I have anything to do with it. (by private prosecution if necessary. click here
Granny Swindler Nathan Teitelbaum uses Barnett Ross Auctioneers at The Radisson SAS Portman Hotel. Wankers Ingram Winter Green Conveyancing in association with The CROOKS at Metcalfe Copeman Pettefar Peterborough.
Ridaco Developments Northern Ireland (who?) will buy your property UNSEEN . . . “NO Agent will call to INSPECT” . . We pay 10% over Guide price even if the property is falling down. Fantastic Generosity. Only through Barnett Ross the no signature required Auctioneers. Contact A ndrew Mahon NI for details.
It’s THE UNCREDIBLES.
Watch Aunty and Unc-
Visit
Barnett Ross the no deposit no identification Auctioneers. We will cross out any
contract and put a TOTALLY FICTITIOUS name in it’s place. NO SIGNATURES? NO PROBLEM.
Telephone bid but no form? Don’t despair we’ll fill it in for you. Can’t set a price?
We will bid NO MAX for you. Never mind our rules. Barnett Ross’s Steven Grossman
makes sure YOU get the property you want. Barnett Ross @ Radisson SAS Portman Hotel
is recommended by Wanker Solicitors IWG ‘s Daniel
Aunty and Unc-
If someone sent me a contract purporting to be my obligation I would at least notice
it wasn’t MY NAME ON THE CONTRACT CROSSED OUT AND SCRIBBLED IN BIRO.
Still . . It
must be true BECAUSE JONATHAN BURTON AND SARAH ADLAM AND THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE ALLSWORN
TO IT UNDER OATH.
It must be true because despite the fact that THERE WAS NO CONTRACT . . The plaintiffs still “FELT OBLIGED” TO HONOUR IT ON BEHALF OF AUNTY AND UNCLE . . . . UNCREDIBLE.
Colin’s NEW sites
Barnett Ross the no forms required to bid Auctioneers.
Contact Andrew
Mahon NI for details.
www.barnett-
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.
No money laundering identity req at Barnett Ross.
Barnett Ross Auctioneers.
“NO MAX” bids accepted.
We laugh at Money Laundering Regulations.
Proxy forms filled out for you. No identification documents necessary.
No signature
required. We make up a name for you too.
Steven Grossman makes sure YOU get that ‘dispute’
property.
Contact Andrew Mahon Northern Ireland for details.
Google Please take note . . . . Click here
Poor put upon Solicitors Ingram Winter
Green . Who couldn’t use our perfectly adequate laws in UK to get my sites shut down
have put in a complaint to Google. Amazingly it is a statement made “under penalty
of PERJURY”. . . . AND here it is . . . What a pack of LIES. I’ve printed the COMPLAINT
as it appears on Chilling Effects web-
REMEMBER THEY HAVE SWORN TO THIS ON OATH UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.