Barnett Ross's UNCREDIBLE contract in a more UNCREDIBLE catalogue
Barnett Ross Auctioneers.
NOT
We laugh at Money Laundering Regulations. No identification
documents necessary. Just telephone and we’ll bid for you . No proxy form need be
filled in. No signature required. Don’t want to give a name? No problem. We make
one up for you . Steven Grossman makes sure YOU get that SPECIAL property. Contact
Andrew Mahon Northern Ireland for details. (Andrew Mahon specialises in gaining entry
to your property by pretending it’s his.)
Wankers @ IWG recommend Barnett Ross at
the Radisson Portman Hotel.
The beauty of being sued in the High Court of Justce is that in order to do so the
accusers have to provide a lot of documents to prove what they say.
From my ‘home
page’
“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. “
In
this file were a number of pages that didn’t look too suspicious when viewed in their
separate form. It was only when seeing them for real that I suspected ALL THIS WAS
A FRAUD.
(quite apart from the fact that the name scribbled on the Memorandums of
sale were NOT that of the purchasers. The purchasers that Sarah Adlam, Jonathan Burton
and both plaintiffs have SWORN under OATH had bought the property at this supposed
Auction)
When viewed for REAL . . . A number of pages were not separate as in the
file.
The ones in the file were in fact photocopies from the catalogue mentioned several
times in the affidavits made by the plaintiff’s and J Burton. It is as you would
expect a nice glossy catalogue, with pictures and B.Ross’s logos, pages of conditions
of sale, and everything you would expect to see.
AND sure enough there are the memorandums,
one each on behalf of both the vendor and the purchaser. Dutifully filled in and
signed. But with the wrong name on it . . . . which is what can happen if NO DOCUMENTS
accompany a supposed instruction to bid. AS THEY SHOULD
We know these memorandums
are part of the catalogue because at the bottom of each of them it says
“Do not detach
this page from the catalogue”
AND HERE THEY ARE REPRODUCED AS BEST I CAN . . . But
they are a very good facsimile. AND EVERYTHING (apart from the crossings out and
later additions in biro and the signatures) . . . IS PRINTED AS YOU SEE IT HERE.
. . . IN BOOK FORM
Well what’s wrong with that you ask??
Keep looking at them. Remember they are glossy
pages from a PRINTED CATALOGUE . . . Which by definition was produced before the
Auction.
Well I’m sure there is an explanation of why they produced the catalogue with A Mahon’s
name already printed in . . . He might have been the only one bidding on the telephone.
And would have had to arrange his bid several days before. And if that were the case
it might be explainable why the purchasers Solicitors Metcalfe Copeman and Pettefar
were ALREADY PRINTED in the catalogue.
BUT WHY THE BLOODY HELL THE PRICE THAT WOULD
BE ACHIEVED IS ALREADY PRINTED THERE . . . . IS BEYOND ME.
TALK ABOUT BACK TO THE FUTURE.
Of course there is probably some other desperate explanation. That they produced
this ONE OFF catalogue for this particular sale pack. (several days later it would
have had to have been)
SO quite apart from the obvious question WHY? . . go to all
that trouble when all the had to do is pin the memorandums to the catalogue that
supposedly would have existed for a proper auction.
The next question then is . .
. why go to the trouble of PRINTING in
A Mahon’s name and address and then crossing
it all out in biro and replacing it with a fictitious name RIDACO (which is NOT the
trading name of Aunty and Uncle.)
AND THEN signing it by TWO SEPARATE Auctioneers “on behalf of” the vendor and purchaser
. . . . . when ONE FORM would have sufficed since both are represented on the form
. . . . “that must not be removed from the catalogue.”
And why not fill in the bit
which says “if signing on behalf of the purchaser please complete the following.”
(or doesn’t that apply to the auctioneer?)
THE WHOLE THING SMACKS OF FRAUD FROM BEGINNING
TO END.
But it must be true BECAUSE JONATHAN BURTON AND SARAH ADLAM AND THE PLAINTIFFS
HAVE SWORN TO IT UNDER OATH.
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-
(Andrew Mahon 3 Pettigo Rd, Kesh,Co
Fermanagh, NI.
02868 6321020775 665878)
Barnett Ross Auctioneers . . . We laugh at
money laundering regulations.
But will the police investigate?
How Does He Do That? see here
Colin can put anyone on Google page 1 . . .
As will
these Barnett Ross sites be in a few days time.
Prediction March 20 2008. Colin’s
sites will take over the inter-
As in
AND WITHIN ONE DAY we find MSN has placed THIS PAGE at No 2
click here
Even Sir Ian Blair is not spared
MSN rates Colin’s sites at No 3 (used to be No 1)
The claims made on this and other sites about Barnett Ross are based on documents lodged with The High Court of Justice which can be viewed by anyone willing to pay the appropriate Court fees.
BUT . . . 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 with the Northern
Bank on the enhanced value of the supposed auction figure.
The simpler explanation
is; that proven conspirators Daniel Ginsbury, and Nathan Teitelbaum, conspired with
their pal Steven Grossman and another at Barnett Ross, with The CROOKS at MCP Law
and the plaintiffs along with Andrew Mahon AND Aunty and Uncle (who were probably
only asked to do a little favour) to carry out the above.
Which is called Money Laundering,
FRAUD and TAX Evasion (on resale)
Perhaps Barnett Ross would care to put the record
straight on that ???.
Because if they don’t . . . . AND QUICKLY . . . . . . then
I will then start to assume all of the above to be TRUE.
Documents don’t lie . .
. Only the people who wrote them.
Steven Grossman MRICS
sgrossman@barnettross.co.uk
RIDACO DEVELOPMENTS
99 xxxxxx ROAD
FINTONA
CO TYRONE.
RIDACO DEVELOPMENTS
99 xxxxxx ROAD
FINTONA
CO TYRONE.
N o Iam Abiggerone
I A M A Stupidtosser
10 . Participating in fraudulent business carried on by company etc.: penalty
(1)
In Schedule 24 to the Companies Act 1985 (punishment of offences), in column 4 of
the entry relating to section 458 of that Act, for “7 years” substitute "10 years".
(2) In Schedule 23 to the Companies (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 (punishment of
offences), in column 4 of the entry relating to Article 451 of that Order, for “7
years” substitute "10 years".
10 YEARS!!!! . Come on the MET . . Get busy.
2 Fraud by false representation
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2) A representation is false if—
(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
(a) the person making the representation, or
(b) any other person.
(4) A representation may be express or implied.
(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention)
Mortgage fraud occurs where individuals defraud a financial institution or private lender through the mortgage process.
The definition of fraud in the Fraud Act 2006 covers fraud by false representation and by failure to disclose information where there is a legal duty to disclose. False representations can be made explicitly or implicitly and may occur even where you know only that the representation might be misleading or untrue.
The value of a mortgage obtained through fraud is the proceeds of crime. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, you risk committing a money laundering offence if you acquire, use, have possession of, enter into an arrangement with respect to, or transfer this criminal property.
Billy's Money Laundering Home Page -
Billy's delve into the complex and world-
The UK law is the first law, other than emergency powers, which requires
any British citizen (indeed any resident) to report to the authorities not just actual
knowledge that a person is involved in a crime but also suspicion. Failure to make
such a report is a criminal offence and the person who does not make a report can,
depending on the precise circumstances, face up to 14 years in gaol.
The UK Government shows how serious they regard this issue by the fact that sentences
carry no remission: a person sentenced to 14 years will actually serve 14 years.
In some cases pleading ignorance is no defence and therefore, it is important that
organisations and employees at risk are aware of their obligations under the legislation
now in place. This places onerous obligations on companies and their staff to report
any suspicions and as mentioned above the penalties can be severe for ignoring these
obligations.
WELL I’M DOING MY BIT REPORTING IT. . . .
Conspiracy to Defraud
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/specialist/antimoneylaunder-
Traditionally, money
laundering has been viewed as the ‘processing’ of all illegal or ‘dirty’ money derived
from the proceeds of any illegal activity (e.g. the proceeds of drug-
Money laundering can be used as a means to disguise the nature of profits generated
from many types of criminality. This criminality can be tax evasion and thereby of
direct interest to the Inland Revenue. Or it can be other serious forms of criminality,
such as dealings in drugs, alcohol, tobacco or people trafficking. These crimes
are of interest to others such as Customs and the police, and the Inland Revenue
will work with these bodies to ensure that effective and co-
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. . . .
We know they knew
about the dispute when they “agreed to buy the property” . . . .
We know there WERE
NO CONTRACTS for ANYONE to buy the property.
SO DID THEY PAY THE FULL PRICE?
Until I see the ‘disclosures’ I asked for over a year
ago to prove they did . . . .
Then they didn’t. . . . ie FRAUD, TAX EVASION AND MONEY
LAUNDERING.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2613863.ece
Organised crime syndicates have been targeting residential and commercial property in increasingly sophisticated mortgage frauds using corrupt or compromised professional advisers, experts are warning.
They fear that the predicted slow-
There is growing concern that there has been a systematic attack on the mortgage
system by linked frauds. The Serious and Organised Crime Agency says that gangs are
using corrupt or negligent solicitors, accountants and financial advisers as part
of a fraud “infrastructure”, while the Serious Fraud Office has raided several offices,
including law firms, as part of its investigation into an alleged multimillion-
Crime gangs have used the opportunity to establish their own trusted panels of professionals to facilitate the frauds, he says. The scam begins when the fraudsters recruit a mortgage mule to buy their property, knowing lenders will typically offer offer 90 per cent loan to value ratios. Their tame valuer overvalues the property by anything from 30 to 100 per cent. The transaction goes through with the help of the solicitor.