Fraud uncovered after 10yrs!

[frettful38]

No it wasn't, the OP didn't pay a £6K judgement which led to the BR, she subsequently remortgaged and both the trustee and the solicitor paid the debtor. Which is why it is unlikely she will get the BR annuled or any of the related fees/losses back from the LL or anyone else come to that.

 

I thought everyone on here read threads all the way through before making assumptions.

 

The payment twice may be considered theft, and yes I know it is a criminal offence I just wasn't aware if there were any private civil remedies that were open, other than the normal money claim process.

 

 

Yes gizmo111 you are quite right about what you have said above. But you also agree that receiving the payment twice may be considered theft and you also agree that it is a criminal offense. Then if I can prove that he has committed this offense then why couldn't I prove the bankruptcy fraud then? This will cast a shadow of doubt on him.

Does this not put his character under suspicion? both these statements contradict one another, he cannot be a good creditor and get back what he thinks he was owed and then be convicted of theft. You can't have it both ways.

[frettful38]

Hi cadencealex,

 

The council were paying our benefit, and you are correct that things did go tits up but not because of anything we did wrong. This landlord promised to get us a mortgage and said that everything would be fine. He knew we were on benefits but he assured us that it was all above bored, being young, naive and newly wed we thought it would be a good idea to get a place of our own. He was also a good friend of my Uncle so we didn't really have any reason to doubt his honesty,

 

We had no intention of doing anything dishonest at all, and that is the truth

[cadencealex]

Hi cadencealex,

 

The council were paying our benefit, and you are correct that things did go tits up but not because of anything we did wrong. This landlord promised to get us a mortgage and said that everything would be fine. He knew we were on benefits but he assured us that it was all above bored, being young, naive and newly wed we thought it would be a good idea to get a place of our own. He was also a good friend of my Uncle so we didn't really have any reason to doubt his honesty,

 

We had no intention of doing anything dishonest at all, and that is the truth

 

 

I take your word that you were naive but I knew the housing Benefit had to be involved in this somewhere.

[frettful38]

I actually went to my council and told them what had happened to me and what we had done, but they said that was between us and the landlord

[cadencealex]

I actually went to my council and told them what had happened to me and what we had done, but they said that was between us and the landlord

 

 

Why don't you start from the beginning properly, on one post.. in paragraphs so that everyone can begin to understand. It doesn't make sense right now and you will get a better response if people can understand it, instead of it coming across as far fetched :grin:

[gizmo111]

Yes gizmo111 you are quite right about what you have said above. But you also agree that receiving the payment twice may be considered theft and you also agree that it is a criminal offense. Then if I can prove that he has committed this offense then why couldn't I prove the bankruptcy fraud then? This will cast a shadow of doubt on him.

Does this not put his character under suspicion? both these statements contradict one another, he cannot be a good creditor and get back what he thinks he was owed and then be convicted of theft. You can't have it both ways.

 

Why would it cast doubt on him - you say you went to court with a solicitor who said you may win, you lost he got judgement for £6k. Nothing suspicious about that. SUbsequently you didn't pay the judgement and he filed for your BR.

IMO the subsequent 2 payments will be found to be a mistake/miscommunication not theft or fraud, particulary if he is challenged and pays it back immediately.

 

Hi cadencealex,

 

The council were paying our benefit, and you are correct that things did go tits up but not because of anything we did wrong. This landlord promised to get us a mortgage and said that everything would be fine. He knew we were on benefits but he assured us that it was all above bored, being young, naive and newly wed we thought it would be a good idea to get a place of our own. He was also a good friend of my Uncle so we didn't really have any reason to doubt his honesty,

 

We had no intention of doing anything dishonest at all, and that is the truth

 

This I do not understand - you say he was your mortage broker and you had no mortage but were renting and claiming HB, but you also claim that you had to remortgage after the BR to pay £50k???? Perhaps as cadencealex has said you should post a clear timeline of events so we understand the whole story.

[frettful38]

OK here is what happened right from the beginning.

This was my case

 

 

The landlord was taking us to court for rent arrears, which we never owed him.

Case did not go to trial. I was made to consent out of court. This was because he bribed my solicitors, a week after making the consent order my solicitor migrated to Canada.

 

This was the consent order:

 

[/url]

We tried many times to pay this money off in installments but the landlord always refused. He then instigated bankruptcy against my OH. Even though there was a Judgment against me he never ever chased me for my debt. I do not understand why he never asked me for my debt.

Non payment of the Bill of costs led to Bankruptcy of OH

 

 

From this bill the Trustee in Bankruptcy added his costs, which were in the thousands. The only way we could stop our house being sold was to remortgage and pay off the trustee in bankruptcy.

 

 

Now please feel free to Judge away, I do not think my punishment fitted the crime do you?

Edited February 26, 2009 by frettful38

[cadencealex]

The point is. WHY was the Landlord taking you to Court for rent arrears when the Housing Benefit were making payments?

 

And why would you give him £1000 to get you a mortgage - how were you intending to pay this mortgage?

 

Nobody is judging you but in order for you to benefit from sound advice, people have to know the full story else their advice is useless.

[frettful38]

I stopped the housing benefit so that we could get back our £1,000.00 we gave him to arrange a mortgage, and my OH was about to start a job so we were capable of paying the mortgage and come off the benefits

[gizmo111]

I still don't understand if you were renting a property and claiming HB how you had a house to remortgage.

Whatever makes you think that a solicitor would take a bribe to conclude a case?

[frettful38]

We were renting in 1995, this property belonged to this landlord, a few yrs later we came off benefits , got good jobs then bought the house we are living in now. When the landlord found out we had bought a house he put a charge on it and it is this house we remortgaged to pay the bankruptcy debt off.

 

And I know for a fact that my solicitor took this bribe, why else would he discourage me going to trial where my original barrister said that i had almost 75% chance to win?

[gizmo111]

And I know for a fact that my solicitor took this bribe, why else would he discourage me going to trial where my original barrister said that i had almost 75% chance to win?

 

These are serious allegations with no basis, it is normal to come to an agreement with the other side before trial, you had at least a 25% chance of losing the case. Why did you agree to the terms of the consent order if you wanted to go to trial?

[frettful38]

My solicitor and barrister said that it was in my best interest not to go to trial, and if I knew then what I know now I would have, but that was my very first time in court and under so much stress and pressure. You would think that your legal representatives would have your best interests at heart, and do their best to advise you, and at that time I did not have any reason to doubt them, until later when everything fell in to place.

[frettful38]

25% chance of losing, if I had then I would not have had to pay the other parties legal fees because I was on legal aid

Edited February 26, 2009 by frettful38

[frettful38]

If I went to trial and lost my case as you say I had a 25% chance of losing then I would not have had to pay the other sides legal fees.

[frettful38]

Under the "Theft Act"

 

24A. Dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit

 

1) A person is guilty of an offence if-

a) a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by him or in respect of which he has any right or interest

b) he knows or believes that the credit is wrongful; and

c) he dishonestly fails to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled

 

2) References to a credit are to a credit of an amount of money

[frettful38]

gizmo111 you have quoted,

 

Why would it cast doubt on him - you say you went to court with a solicitor who said you may win, you lost he got judgement for £6k. Nothing suspicious about that. SUbsequently you didn't pay the judgement and he filed for your BR.

IMO the subsequent 2 payments will be found to be a mistake/miscommunication not theft or fraud, particulary if he is challenged and pays it back immediately.

 

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

 

I know for a fact that if he is challenged that he will not pay back this amount and he will never admit to a mistake. This only the court will decide. If the amount in question was for a couple of hundred pounds then one can understand a mistake can be made or overlooked, but nearly £6k I don't think you can class that as a mistake

[frettful38]

We will just have to wait and see now what happens,

[gizmo111]

gizmo111 you have quoted,

 

Why would it cast doubt on him - you say you went to court with a solicitor who said you may win, you lost he got judgement for £6k. Nothing suspicious about that. SUbsequently you didn't pay the judgement and he filed for your BR.

IMO the subsequent 2 payments will be found to be a mistake/miscommunication not theft or fraud, particulary if he is challenged and pays it back immediately.

 

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

 

I know for a fact that if he is challenged that he will not pay back this amount and he will never admit to a mistake. This only the court will decide. If the amount in question was for a couple of hundred pounds then one can understand a mistake can be made or overlooked, but nearly £6k I don't think you can class that as a mistake

 

How do you know that? How do you know what transactions he has through his bank account? he could quite easily when faced with a court claim admit it as an error and pay it back. To prove theft you will have to prove that he intended to permenantly deprive you of the money that he was paid twice. So far no one has pointed out the error to him and asked for it's return.

[frettful38]

OK seeing as you seem to know about this so much, do you think if I wrote to him and told him of this so called mistake he would just say, oh sorry, and yes I will return you back your money,

 

When I sent him a SAR not long ago he wrote back clearly to me saying

 

I DO NOT HOLD ANY INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AND IF YOU MAKE A CLAIM AGAINST ME I WILL SEEK AN ORDER FROM THE COURT THAT YOU PUT UP SECURITY FOR COSTS, AS FROM YOUR PREVIOUS RECORD YOU WERE NOT FORTHCOMING WITH VARIOUS COSTS AWARDS,

 

 

Over to you gizmo111!

Edited February 26, 2009 by frettful38

[frettful38]

So he's had this money for over 4 years, how much more permanent can he get? And he will have to prove to me that it was a mistake not the other way round.

When such a large amount enters someones bank account, unless your a millionaire don't you think it strange it can be overlooked?

[gizmo111]

OK seeing as you seem to know about this so much, do you think if I wrote to him and told him of this so called mistake he would just say, oh sorry, and yes I will return you back your money,

 

Probably not, but at the moment no one has formally pointed this out to him, you can't just accuse people of stealing money. You have no way of knowing how he will react until he does.

 

When I sent him a SAR not long ago he wrote back clearly to me saying

 

I DO NOT HOLD ANY INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AND IF YOU MAKE A CLAIM AGAINST ME I WILL SEEK AN ORDER FROM THE COURT THAT YOU PUT UP SECURITY FOR COSTS, AS FROM YOUR PREVIOUS RECORD YOU WERE NOT FORTHCOMING WITH VARIOUS COSTS AWARDS,

 

 

Over to you gizmo111!

 

AFAIK you cannot SAR individuals.

 

So he's had this money for over 4 years, how much more permanent can he get? And he will have to prove to me that it was a mistake not the other way round.

When such a large amount enters someones bank account, unless your a millionaire don't you think it strange it can be overlooked?

 

I would find it strange if it entered my bank account twice but you have no way of knowing what amount of transactions went through his account at that time. If a claim is issued for the money he won't have to prove anything he can just admit it as a mistake and make arrangments to pay it back.

[frettful38]

He is not an individual he runs a business, with whom we had dealings with. And the money did not go through his bank account, he was sent two separate cheques, for this I have proof. Both cheques were made out on his names, the trustee has confirmed this and so have my solicitors,

[cadencealex]

So, you gave him £1000 worth of taxpayers money to secure a mortgage.. and you think he's a thief?!

 

Housing Benefit is for rent. Not for securing mortgages. As your Landlord will know!

 

He had you over a barrel.

[frettful38]

The £1000 was not taxpayers money for your kind information, it was lent to me by my family, so I guess you should get your facts right before making such a comment. I have been a taxpayer for most of my life, so trying to make sarcastic remark like that is nothing more than to be little me.

 

And when the tables are get turned were see who has who over a barrel