The tale of greedy little Pigling Bland (The Times)
michael
|
| MONDAY JULY 23 2001
|
| BT boss takes on 'squatters'
|
| BY HELEN STUDD
|
| A DISPUTE between the BT chairman and former
| BBC boss Sir Christopher Bland and the
| neighbours he regards as "middle-class squatters"
| is set to go to court in October.
| Geoff and Deborah Graham are claiming rights to
| the woodland in Andover, Hampshire, where they have
| walked their dogs for 14 years. The quarter of an
| acre, which adjoins Sir Christopher's country estate,
| Blissamore Hall, forms part of their garden and
| has been fenced off for many years. They discovered
| it had been registered under another landowner only
| after making an application to register the land
| themselves.
| Sir Christopher, 62, has refused to speak about the
| dispute but is said to regard the couple as
| "middle-class squatters" after failing to settle the
| matter on a personal level.
| He moved into the hall in Clanville on the outskirts
| of the town with his wife Jennifer, the Viscountess
| of Enfield, three years ago. He built the house himself
| to suits his passion for the outdoors.
| Sir Christopher, who joined BT in May this year, 'made'
| £14million from the sale of his stake in LWT, for whom
| he was chairman, when it was taken over in 1994. [Eyes passim]
| Mr Graham admitted he was deeply unhappy about the
| dispute: "I would hope not to lose it because the facts
| are on our side. We still have the piece of land
| enclosed - it is part of our garden and it has been for
| 14 years."
| The Land Registry has set a date in October for the
| solicitor to hear the case, and said it was highly
| unusual for cases such as this to go to court.
| A spokesman said: "As the matter has not been resolved
| at the moment, this hearing is the only way of resolving it.
| The solicitor or one of his deputies will sit to hear
| the case."
| Either party is entitled to appeal to the High Court
after the decision.
| [...]
|
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2001252002,00.html
http://www.upmystreet.co.uk/overview/?location1=SP11+9HL
| "UpMyStreet Asks" (chuckle)..
|
| Which of the following best describes your
| relationship with your immediate neighbours?
| Very friendly, talk with them a lot
| Know them to say hello to only
| Know them by sight only
| Don't know them at all
| Don't have any neighbours
"Currently suing the arse off them" is not an option
in the poll.
Gareth Davies
"michael" <news...@ttfn35.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3B5C9504...@ttfn35.freeserve.co.uk...
<snipped>
"Middle-class squatters"? He means that they're prepared to use the rule of
law to protect their rights - the rule of law being a quintessentially 18th
century bourgoise invention and therefore open to contempt. Aristocratic
wife swapping meets and magic handshakes would perhaps be more the order of
the day.
Gareth.
michael
> "Middle-class squatters"? He means that they're prepared to use the rule of
> law to protect their rights - the rule of law being a quintessentially 18th
> century bourgoise invention and therefore open to contempt. Aristocratic
> wife swapping meets and magic handshakes would perhaps be more the order of
> the day.
The "rule of law" plays no part in this.
How can it when the Land Registrar is involved?
From: http://www.vomit.cc/211999.htm :
> Our view is that the Land Registry was created to establish the
> ownership of land to enable the Masonic faction (P2 Lodge UK) to
> acquire as much property as possible by fair means or foul. In this
> it is aided and abetted by the Director General of Ordnance Survey.
> Our allegation is incredible but nevertheless we believe we can
> establish this before an impartial judge if one can be found.
From: http://www.vomit.cc/532000.htm
> SLEAZE AT THE LAND REGISTRIES
>
> Let us give you an example of censorship by Mrs P M Reeson at
> Weymouth District Land Registry (fax 01305 363646). This bint wrote
> on 18 December to the Masefields (Fax 01308 485729) as follows.
>
>| <<< Thank you for your letter of 8th December 2000.
>|
>| Under Section 112 of the Land Registration Act 1925, the following
>| are available for general inspection:-
>|
>| (a) The entries on the register ; and
>|
>| (b) Documents referred to in the register which are in
>| the custody of the Registrar (other than Leases or Charges).
>|
>| The above provision does not include the documents in respect of which
>| you have requested copies. I regret therefore that no copies can be
>| supplied to you.
>|
>| Yours sincerely
>|
>| P M Reeson. >>>
> Comment: The Land Registration Act has been completely altered since 1925.
> Registrars have discretionary powers but these appear to be reserved for
> Masons and other crooks.
From: http://www.vomit.cc/211999.htm :
> DURHAM LAND REGISTRY AND MAURICE KELLETT
> We interrupt .. to give details of a current outrage by Durham District
> Land Registry. A Mr Kellett received the following letter from the
> Chief Land Registrar (Fax 0191 301 0020) on 13 May 1999 in reply to his
> request at the beginning of April for copies of statutory declarations
> related to land which was being claimed by his privileged neighbour,
> Shirley Carr. The Masons in northeast England - the historical seat of
> Labour corruption, were targeting Mr Kellett.
> Statutory declarations were sworn by Paul Craney, a solicitor from
> Hetton-le-Spring. The declarations were false. This was admitted by
> Craney in an affidavit, which he swore later. Mr Kellett did not ask anyone
> to investigate anything. He would not ask the 33rd degree Lord Chancellor
> to investigate particularly since there was wrongdoing by members of the
> judiciary and specifically by Recorder Fryer-Spedding (retired).
>| Dear Mr Kellett
>|
>| LAND TO THE WEST OF 16 THE LYONS, HETTON LE HOLE
>|
>| I refer to your two faxes and our telephone conversation.
>|
>| I have carefully considered your request for copies of statutory
>| declarations from our files. You are not entitled, as of right, to
>| copies of such documentation but, under the provisions of section 112
>| of the Land Registration Act 1925, I have discretion to allow you
>| to have copies of them.
>|
>| In this case I have decided _not_ to exercise my discretion to allow
>| your request.
>|
>| You have asked for copies of the documents in connection with your
>| claim that Mr Recorder Fryer-Spedding acted improperly in reaching
>| his decisions in court actions between, your neighbour, Shirley Carr
>| on the one side and your father and yourself on the other. These
>| allegations are for investigation by the Lord Chancellors Department
>| and not by the Land Registry. If the Lord Chancellors Department
>| considers it necessary to inspect any documents which we hold in order
>| to investigate such allegation then it will approach us direct.
>|
>| I am sorry for the short delay in writing to you but I thought it
>| appropriate to refresh my memory of the circumstances from our files
>| before reaching a decision.
>|
>| Yours sincerely,
>|
>| Patrick Timothy District Land Registrar.
> Note: This is a case for a citizen's arrest of this upstart for misconduct
> in public office. The woman at Leicester is named Jackie Goodfellow - another
> upstart carried away by the praise from her bent superiors. These Monica women
> don't half let their sex down. Ann Abraham, the Legal Services Ombudsman, is
> another of the same. Janet Relfe at Bucks. is another one. By their selfishness
> they are denying the majority of women equality in the workplace.
From http://www.vomit.cc/512000.htm :
> THE LAND REGISTRY CHARLATANS
> Blanda and John Masefield (Fax 01308 485729) have received a letter from
> a cow in Weymouth District Land Registry which states "As you do not own
> the land in the above titles, you do not have any standing to object to
> the registrations, which have just been completed." Mr & Mrs Masefield
> have written a long letter dated 10 December to Chief Land Registrar
> Peter Collis. Collis will reply to the effect that all the matters have
> been considered and that there is nothing more to add. He will name the
> solicitor who has advised him with the intention of convincing the Masefields
> that he is being truthful. Here is what the Law Society had to say about
> a solicitor who fled to India after fraud amounting to £9 million. "The
> Law Society's regulatory body admitted it was tipped off but said
> that it was snowed under by thousands of complaints and did not have
> the resources to investigate." Parliament is dominated by solicitors and
> barristers. How did Collis get this job? Who appointed him and why? Is he
> another Gargoyle Blair crony?