Land Registry Fraud (no. 31)

Background

This is a case of criminal trespass, of a boundary dispute and of original title map deeds versus UK Land Registry General Boundaries. It is also of false claims, potential false address and the rich Claimant’s abuse of legal system.

Place of Crime – Kings Lynn, W. Norfolk England. Victim – 82 year old Lady and her Son, who has a spinal injury.

Case Summary

April 1 2009 – Claimants destroy old boundary fence, over 50m and plough 200sqm of Defendant’s Land. Replace fence with stronger poles and upright the pushed over straining post. Three times on 3 April, May and June, fence is broken, cut and finally ‘shredded’ as barbed wire replacement is cut into a 100 pieces of dangerous loops left on the garden. Pets & wildlife at risk.

Tractor driver says – ‘you are not using it, so we will’. Works for agent Velcourt on behalf of Eaubrink Farm GmbH. Show Victims deed map ownership to workers, Farm Manager and Director.

No letters or phone calls returned from Velcourt or local farm. Police called but they say – boundary dispute, it’s civil.

Lawyers from Velcourt, representing all Velcourt and Eaubrink GmbH accuse a 82 year old of trespass and building a fence on their land. Issue claim from Christian-F-Hansen Strasse 19 address in Hamburg. Mother and Son sued. He has heart attack on eve of hearing, so in hospital for Hearing. Mother informs Court reception on way to hospital. In absence, Claimant insists carry on and transfer case to Norwich 160km across County round trip. Case awarded to a Claimant who also demands a penal notice and injunction if walk on or put up owner’s fence again. Prison for 82yr old who has never touched the fence.

Case in joint names and jointly and severally liable. However, charge is in name of Herr Bernard Reemtsma, with a Hamburg Address. Must contact him for his permission, if want to raise any money from property – to fight, or pay off the alleged ‘debt’. Claim is for crop and for removal of fence. Approx £360 with a handful of sugar beet planted in rough soil in April 2009, which failed.

Cost of Injunction, Lawyer, Barristers is now £9,000. Case appealed to London but no oral hearing granted and Court delay provision of transcript to victims.

Path blocked to any higher appeal Court, with no oral hearing allowed to speak.

Charging order now put in sole name of Mother and Son refused entry into Court, despite being witness to fact, a party to debt and litigant friend. Court refuses any entry and as Mother unable to attend Court for Health reasons, she has GP and MP letters to support, they award Order of Sale on 30th July 2012.

Application for retrial and an Appeal is blocked, until Circuit Judge who made original decision rules no retrial and no Appeal, with sale to commence 23rd September 2012 for forced sale price around half its market value, by Valuer employed by Claimant, Seller of all surrounding land to Herr Reemtsma for six million pounds and Lawyers of Reemtsma and Velcourt, Shawcross of Herefordshire, whose Senior Partner is a founding Director of Velcourt and is a conflict of Interest lawyer of Reemtsma.

Submissions of Fact

1) B.Reemstma/ Eaubrink Farm GmbH was not the owner of the adjacent land in April 2009, when his agent removed the boundary fence. A boundary track was also removed, as aerial shot shows.

2) Claimant and Court relied on plans of General Boundaries not Root of Title Conveyancing maps, as per House of Lords case law (1999)and in precedent cases of Steward v Gallop & an (2010)

3) Claimant used a forged LR map with an exaggerated extension into field by hand drawn means, claiming to be of Land Registry.

4) Claimant withheld root of title deeds showing our ownership. A Court fraud.

5) No attendance, either by a medical absence, supported by medical report or GP letter, or barred from Court entry – Infringes rights to present a defence.

6) Initial request to transfer to a local Court and another jurisdiction ignored.

7) Claim form address is neither place of residence of place this business is in fact carried out. This makes claim void so an appeal challenge made to Order for Sale on Thursday 20th September to RCJ. A more local appeal to vary the order also made as second position to allow a means back into Court and for a challenge on valuation, timing and a means to raise funds, when Reemtsma is contactable, at a working address?

8) Crop damage claimed is for a weak crop planted into unused soil of 40yrs, in April 2009, when Claimant did not own the land. This is a fraudulent claim.

Our contacts: 07919 497 144 and this email, which you may forward to any German Journalist who is interested in this case. Please do circulate to ‘help’.

Bernard Reemtsma is claiming he works from Christian F Hansen Strasse with the Eaubrink Farm GmbH, but the telephone numbers given at Firm 25 and Unternehmensregister are those of World Imperial Tobacco and they say he has not worked there for 12 years. Bernhard has caused tremendous grief and stress to an 82 year old Lady with a history – Father took surrender of 1st World War German Fleet at Scapa Flow & personally saved drowning German Sailors – he used to say “they are all some Mother’s Sons”. Mother lost twin brothers in her sight during the Blitz.

We have German friends now and had met many extremely honourable and pleasant Germans, until this Bernhard Reemtsma, who is causing extremely draconian pressure and measures for a few metres of land that are on all old deeds & we had owned it for 12 years previous to his coming. The land is on deeds going back until 1970 for here, so this aggressive theft is horrendous. Throwing Barristers, Penal Notices and not once speaking, or writing first, was a very un-neighbourly act.

Reemtsma Family is trying to do some good, with their charity in Hamburg – elderly, sick and disabled catered for, then you see a very different side – elderly victim 82 and disabled Son, aggression and this Charity Address in Hamburg runs this International Company and a few more with Swiss foundation and telephones go through to a Tobacco Company that sell 90 billion cigarettes to Ukraine (so that is bad for the ‘youth’ of Ukraine), and apparently sell individual ciggies to African Children aged as young as 8 to get them all addicted young, when they cannot afford a packet. A duality of minds and profiteering that harks to a much darker time.

Does Reemtsma need 200sqm of our land when he has 1800 hectares? Does he need to sell our house, or buy it so cheap?

Since then, Herr Reemtsma found some nasty henchmen who were physically violent to the home owners. DISGUSTING when brute force rules and when ‘the law’ has become ‘the criminals’!…

7 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Charlotte Dimock
    Dec 09, 2012 @ 11:33:53

    I notified Land Charges in March 2000 of a charge and details being sent to me for another person, l followed it up by returning the documents with a covering letter addressed to the person l had already spoken to. I also contacted the person the charge was for and was asked to keep a copy of the document for her.
    What l did not know was this other person and her ex husband had a caution on property / land (50 acres) l was recorded as the proprietary owner of.
    As with most “frauds” involving property / land , this was able to happen because of the “open register” at Land Registry that our Government opted for in 1990, allowing ANYONE to put a different address for service on property / land and it not be challenged by Land Registry. The fraud of the property / land
    was also tied into further land with my home . The common denominator was that both these plots of land had high values because they were ear-marked sites for large projects.
    As the owner of a Registered Title , any “error” in the caution register that affected me as the “proprietary owner” was grounds under the “indemnity” for
    immediate “Rectification of the Register”.
    Instead of this “Rectification of the Register” in March 2000 with the “error” of a charge for someone else against my Registered Title and stored in the “caution register, and this caution only being put against my title months before in 1999, was allowed to stay against my title until February 2007.
    Between March 2000 and February 2007 it caused me all manner of problems.
    Money paid for my divorce ( £6,900.00) was credited for the years 2002-2003 to this other persons account for a bill of £103.50p, and no correction.
    Errors in my postal address and reference number for my legal aid were told to Land Registry on 29 th October 2002 . Copy l have obtained of a letter from my Land Registry Office on 22 nd October 2002 , to the Deeds Department of my mortgage provider says there is a charge , when the charge had been dealt with at a court hearing in June 2002 that l was not provided with the details of until January 2004.
    This charge could only have been the charge for this other person / cautioner and yet a charge was also raised against myself , and still with no correction for the unlawful and known about charge of this other person.
    Audits were being done against my Registered Title , while there was two incorrect plans lodged for that title that were actually two identical plans to represent 3.42 acres and 50 acres . The postcode error that had been allowed to be lodged at Land Registry in 1994 to further this fraud was also known on record by Land Registry in October 2002 and again not corrected.
    In April 2010 l was written to by the then Chief Executive of Land Registry ( Marco Pierieoni) stating that l was the owner of a Registered Title and assuring me that l could not be deprived of land by a wrongly recorded postcode lodged at Land Registry.
    However this wrong postcode and the failure once it was on record as known about , combined with the unlawful and uncorrected charge for someone else who was a cautioner , enabled the theft of property / land (50 acres) and further land at my home that is my access and orchard.
    Involved in this fraud are Land Registry, Legal Services Commission, The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry , Law Society ,East Lindsey District Council,Lincolnshire Police , Seven Firms of Solicitors, Three Barristers and several Judges.
    The orcastration to enable these thefts has a trail of lies ( on oath), lisening in on my phone line ( device found by BT in 2003), fraud ,forgery, defamation of my character, court entered altered documents, lies on court forms, and misleading the courts in June 2002 when there was written promises on the court paperwork.
    I have records of all this and the involvement of TWENTY – NINE PEOPLE at Legal Services Commission who were meant to have sorted matters of the problems with my divoirce solicitors and a charge that was never for me.
    Two Investigating Officers at the OSS , the involvement of the CAB all to no avail.
    The second round of this was Land Registry confirming the access and orchard as included into my registered land ( l have original , certified documents to show this), to then some months later , survey the land for a neighbour who worked for the local council in planning.
    This neighbour admitted to a police officer in front of me and my helper on 30 th March 2008 that he knew the “land” (access and orchard) was my registered land , and false information was entered into court for this incident by this neighbour and their solicitors to mislead the court.
    An unprobated will was allowed into evidence ( not part of the remit of the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry to involve themselves in “wills” or “probate”).
    The Adjudicator for this constructed hearing was himself a commissioner for Legal Services Commission and should have declared his interest in the case and he did not do this.
    As he was also a barrister and had taken the oath to do with “conflict of interest ” and was aware of the previous history of the case involving Land Registry and LSC and it being related to the case he was to sit on, this amounts to gross mis-conduct, a fact he has always denied.
    I was prevented by this same Adjudicator from appealing as he instructed Land Registry to impliment his decision , while overlooking my appeal that was acknowledged as received by his office.
    I even had the indignation of a letter from the Chief Adjudicator ( Edward Cousins) , saying l had been allowed a further month , asked for by my acting solicitor ( as another owner of a bit of the land, had not died as had been thought, and he had come forward), and l had not “bothered” to appeal.
    Since then l have been to the High Courts in London and been refused my appeal out of time, and taken it back to the Rolls Building in February this year to be told that l am “very stupid” and that “you deserve to loose your home”.
    Throughout Land Registry have hidden my own transfer /conveyance document and refused a DPA request that would have provided office copy of it. This one document would have negated any litigation and would have protected the two plots of land /property l have been deprived of.
    Hull Land Registry have written offering me £300.00 for the inconvenience of my not being provided with this document that the Head of the Economic Crime Unit says is my property and no one else should have had it.
    My legal costs amount to over £135,000.00 and this has cost the ratepayer over the THIRTEEN YEARS of FOUR MILLION POUNDS.
    The two plots of land share one same interested party , involved in both thefts , this person is the brother of the District Councillor here . She sat on the panel at the IPCC to elect Dame Anne Owers as chair to the IPCC .
    Lincolnshire Police have acted corruptly throughout and the IPCC give dispensation whenever l try to complain about Lincolnshire Police.

    Reply

  2. Elizabeth Wraith
    Oct 07, 2013 @ 18:17:56

    Charlotte,
    I have had the same problems over the last ten years involving The Land Registry, Adjudicator To HM Land Registry, High Court Judge (out of time), forged documents allowed to register title on two properties, Lincolnshire Police do nothing as they state ‘historic’. It appears your story is a mirror image of mine. I would like to know more about your story and if it has been resolved. I would appreciate a reply. Many thanks.

    Reply

    • Stuart Wilkie
      Mar 24, 2014 @ 17:57:47

      The matter is still ongoing with costs now at £22k, excessively added to after a ‘win’ in the High court upped the valuation, BUT no interest to pursue fraud or conflicts of interest

      Reply

  3. Charlie Dimock
    Dec 06, 2013 @ 14:48:37

    Dear Elizabeth Wraith
    please feel free to contact me on my e-mail address:-
    CharlieD1mock@yahoo.com

    Reply

  4. Stuart Wilkie
    Mar 24, 2014 @ 17:58:58

    Stuartwilkie3@gmail.com if you want to discuss case – Stuart

    Reply

  5. Mrs M Judd
    Jun 22, 2014 @ 10:15:49

    I am in the same position,i am a victim of Land Registry fraud the assistant Adjudicator to the LR covered up for their mistake and I just can not get any justice this as cost me thousands of pounds.I have all the Legal documents to the Land which is stamped by the High Court of Chancery Division

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,729 other followers

%d bloggers like this: