Baron David Ward

[rumpelstilzchen]

What if you pull out your colt of arms but the other side has a smith and wesson?

In that situation you implement Plan B.
You throw away your colt of arms, jump on your colt of four legs and scarper.

[Pox]

What if you pull out your colt of arms but the other side has a smith and wesson?

In that situation you implement Plan B.
You throw away your colt of arms, jump on your colt of four legs and scarper.

[SteveUK]

A bit more insight into David's pending eviction

Big Unplug Update.....
The Clock is ticking ...Tick Tock so we cannot be lazy...

TO Daniel Bellau
Charlotte Allan
Charles Bezzant
Aselle Djumabaeva-Wood
Matthew Pryke
Richard Pull
Neil Thomas
Hamlins LLP
Roxburghe House
273-287 Regent Street.
London.
W1B 2AD

CC (Cheshire Constabulary) Chief Constable Mr. Simon Byrne: simon.byrne@cheshire.pnn.police.uk
CC (London, Met Police) Chief Constable Mr. Bernard Hogan Howe: bernard.hogan-howe@met.pnn.police.uk
CC: CEO for Santander UK plc Mr Nathan Bostock:nathan.bostock@santander.co.uk
CC: comunicacion@gruposantander.com
CC: Mr G P Rymer. Head of collections For Santander UK plc.
CC: Carole Nettleton Solicitor for Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP cnettleton@fionabruce.co.uk

Your Ref: IOSN657 http://bit.ly/2gS38yU Acc No 090512030245079
Our Ref: HOW-HAMLINS-LIEN-001
Formally published declaration and affidavit of extensive fraud: http://bit.ly/2fWPpDH

Dear Ertac Hussein.
We note as of this date the 10th Day of December 2016 that there has been no response from Hamlins LLP to our previous correspondence dated the 01st of December 2016. This is a great concern and a cause of great distress and alarm.

We would note from your previous correspondence dated 15th Day of September 2016 that it is stated quite clearly by your selves that and we quote verbatim “the mortgage term has now expired” This is quite definitive and very clears that there is no longer a Mortgage condition upon the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW for the security of a Loan made by Santander UK plc.

It is therefore definitively clear that there is no longer a Mortgage condition on 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW where Santander CAN make a claim for Breach of contract AND use the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW as a security for the loan agreement. “THE MORTGAGE TERM HAS NOW EXPIRED” There is No More Mortgage condition upon the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW where Santander HAS a commercial or Legal interest in the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW. Any further insistence that there is. IS quite delusional.

There is however the mater of the Loan for the sum of £21,882.82 to pay attention to. We have not overlooked this FACT. It is ALSO a fact that a Court order was made in the Family Court at Warrington BY District Judge Lateef THAT Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP was granted the Authority and there is a Court order to the effect that Fiona Bruce LLP Recover the funds from the Aviva Endowment policy For the return of the Funds to Santander UK plc.

We have presented to Hamlins LLP the definitive and incontestable material evidence that Fiona Bruce LLP HAVE recovered the funds from The Aviva Endowment Policy for the reanimation of the £21,882.82 which is the settlement of the Loan from Santander UK plc. We have also so presented and shown this incontestable material evidence THAT Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP have Indemnified Aviva for any shortfall and by undertaking this and signing that indemnification THEN Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP are Liable for the shortfall AND are also liable and carries the obligation to return the funds in full to Santander UK plc for the loan of £21,882.82.

It is quite definitively clear for any village idiot to see that:
1. There is No More Mortgage condition upon the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW where Santander HAS a commercial or Legal interest in the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW.
2. Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP now have an d carry the obligation and Liability for the Loan of £21,882.82 from Santander to Mr David Ward and if they don’t make this payment in full THEN Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP ARE in Contempt of Court as there is a Court Order to this effect.
3. Mr David Ward carries NO further Liability or Obligation to Santander UK plc for the Loan of the £21,882.82 There is no longer any breach of Contract as this has now been resolved.
4. Santander Bank UK plc No Longer has any Commercial or legal claim or interest in the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW and Title to this Property is now the sole right of Mr David Ward.
5. Any attempt to take or reposes the property of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW by Santander UK plc OR any AGENT of Santander UK plc by force is now definitively a wilful and belligerent act of terrorism.

We would note to Hamlins LLP the following and bring your attention to:
http://cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/contempt_of_court/ Contempt of Court and Reporting Restrictions
Printed for your convenience in full and enclosed under this same cover.

We would note that there is no possibility of MR DAVID ANTHONY WARD being in contempt of court in a civil matter. We would also not that if there is an implementation of the use of force then this use of force would also be a wilful and belligerent act of terrorism.

We would note at this point that it is definitive where there is a court order for the reposition of 145 Slater Street Latchford Warrington WA4 1DW that any court Order for this can take a long walk off a short pier.

We will not tolerate what is a wilful and belligerent act of terrorism.

We would also note to Hamlins LLP THAT The Chief of police for Cheshire Chief Constable Mr. Simon Byrne WILL have copy of this Correspondence dated the 10th Day of December 2016 to Hamlins LLP and that the Chief of police for Cheshire Chief Constable Mr. Simon Byrne carries an obligation in his office to suppress what is definitively a wilful and belligerent act of terrorism and demonstrated intention by Hamlins LLP.

We should note that this should be definitive and presentable incontestable fact that Hamlins LLP are NOT a fit and proper person to be in a position of trust and that the licence extended to Hamlins LLP SHOULD be revoked with immediate effect AND that The Chief of police for Cheshire Chief Constable Mr. Simon Byrne Not only has the capability to do so But also has the Obligation in his office to do so when being presented with this incontestable material evidence to the facts. We would also now note that this is a criminal matter.

We will be forwarding this to all concerned and formally publishing this by all available media we have access to.
1000 emails in press, government office, and embassies in the commonwealth, along with the chief of police, plus MPs to state a few as follows, including the Province Field Marshal Michael Walker, Baron Walker of Aldringham, C/O: contactholmember@parliament.uk

[AndyPandy]

Stupid man, does he seriously think ANYONE's going to be convince by his idiotic arguments. Out by Christmas and maybe 14 days of porridge instead of turkey for Contempt ??

[Firthy2002]

The last cries of a man facing the inevitable.

[TheNewSaint]

His argument seems to be:

There is no mortgage on 145 Slater Street.
There is no mortgage on 145 Slater Street.
There is no mortgage on 145 Slater Street.
There is no mortgage on 145 Slater Street.

Therefore, there is no mortgage on 145 Slater Street.

Duh.

[notorial dissent]

Baron Boring must spend a small fortune on postage, by the pound judging by some of the nonsense he posts.

[The Observer]

We note as of this date the 10th Day of December 2016 that there has been no response from Hamlins LLP to our previous correspondence dated the 01st of December 2016. This is a great concern and a cause of great distress and alarm.

How could this be causing him great distress and alarm? I thought he had everything under control, right on schedule, then enemy where he wanted them because they would be afraid of taking part in an act of terrorism?

[littleFred]

It's a phrase David has encountered, and uses to make something seem bad.

If I do something with the intention of causing someone alarm or distress, I am committing an offence under CJPOA 1994 s154, subject to various qualifications.

I doubt that not replying to a letter would be an offence.

[notorial dissent]

We note as of this date the 10th Day of December 2016 that there has been no response from Hamlins LLP to our previous correspondence dated the 01st of December 2016. This is a great concern and a cause of great distress and alarm.

How could this be causing him great distress and alarm? I thought he had everything under control, right on schedule, then enemy where he wanted them because they would be afraid of taking part in an act of terrorism?

They didn't fall all over themselves admitting he was right and a legal genius. So it caused him great distress.

[TheNewSaint]

That letter has caused me to rethink my position that Baron David Ward has cognitive dysfunction. It is concise, and makes an arguable point. Apparently the Baron can summon coherence when the matter at hand is serious enough, e.g., being thrown out of his house into the snow.

a Court order was made in the Family Court at Warrington BY District Judge Lateef THAT Fiona Bruce Solicitors LLP was granted the Authority and there is a Court order to the effect that Fiona Bruce LLP Recover the funds from the Aviva Endowment policy For the return of the Funds to Santander UK plc.

I'm sure this is a fanciful and self-serving interpretation. But at least you can understand what he's asking, and it only takes him two pages to say it. He expects the endowment to pay off the mortgage, and that Fiona Bruce LLP (his wife's solicitor) was supposed to take care of this. My guess is that they did take care of it, there is a balance remaining, and the amount being requested is David's share of what's still owed.

[littleFred]

From the "Hamlins" PDF I cited above, the Aviva Life Policy would be surrendered for £14,021.98, to be divided between Mr and Mrs Ward. Following the divorce, I don't know who was responsible for the mortgage. Perhaps they both were, on the assumption that the house would be sold quickly.

From SteveUK's post above, the amount outstanding on the loan (the mortgage?) is £21,882.82. The shortfall is only £7800, and there are very few houses in the UK that would sell for less than £7800.

[TheNewSaint]

From the "Hamlins" PDF I cited above, the Aviva Life Policy would be surrendered for £14,021.98, to be divided between Mr and Mrs Ward. Following the divorce, I don't know who was responsible for the mortgage. Perhaps they both were, on the assumption that the house would be sold quickly.

From SteveUK's post above, the amount outstanding on the loan (the mortgage?) is £21,882.82. The shortfall is only £7800, and there are very few houses in the UK that would sell for less than £7800.

Even the highest of those amounts, £21,882.82, is not much as mortgage disputes go. It's hard to believe this couldn't be settled, except for Baron David Ward's pointless belligerence about everything. And it doesn't even seem to be rooted in his divorce; in all that avalanche of paper, I didn't notice an unkind word about his ex-wife (though it's possible I overlooked something). All his vitriol was aimed at lawyers, judges, government officials, police officers, people who come to shut off his services, and so forth.

[exiledscouser]

From the "Hamlins" PDF I cited above, the Aviva Life Policy would be surrendered for £14,021.98, to be divided between Mr and Mrs Ward. Following the divorce, I don't know who was responsible for the mortgage. Perhaps they both were, on the assumption that the house would be sold quickly.

From SteveUK's post above, the amount outstanding on the loan (the mortgage?) is £21,882.82. The shortfall is only £7800, and there are very few houses in the UK that would sell for less than £7800.

Even the highest of those amounts, £21,882.82, is not much as mortgage disputes go. It's hard to believe this couldn't be settled, except for Baron David Ward's pointless belligerence about everything. And it doesn't even seem to be rooted in his divorce; in all that avalanche of paper, I didn't notice an unkind word about his ex-wife (though it's possible I overlooked something). All his vitriol was aimed at lawyers, judges, government officials, police officers, people who come to shut off his services, and so forth.

The former Mrs. W does not get off that lightly, oh no. He's foisted some nonsense her way too;

That there is a formal and binding agreement that, Susan Ward has formally agreed that by bringing the above fraudulent claim with the wilful and premeditated intention to cause distress and alarm, which is a recognised act of terrorism, and that Susan Ward has formally agreed to be bound to commercial charges to the same degree

She's off to prison for seven to ten apparently for her;

premeditated intention to cause distress and alarm

The Baron foists onward;

That there is a formal and binding agreement that Susan Ward has formally agreed that the claim that MR DAVID
ANTHONY WARD has an obligation of service under the financial provision under Section 27 of the Matrimonial
Causes Act 1973 (Part 9) of Schedule 5 to the Civil Partnership Act 2004 is fraudulent in nature, which is also wilful and
premeditated fraud by misrepresentation, which carries a term of incarceration of seven to ten years, and the latter where there are multiple instances of

Then there is always someone to "Lien" on in a messy divorce;

That there is a formal and binding agreement that Susan Ward has formally agreed that the claim that MR DAVID
ANTHONY WARD has an obligation of service under the alterations of a maintenance agreement under Section 35 of
the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (Paragraph 69) of Schedule 5 to the Civil Partnership Act 2004 is fraudulent in nature,
which is also wilful and premeditated fraud by misrepresentation, which carries a term of incarceration of seven to ten
years, and the latter where there are multiple instances of, and that Susan Ward has formally agreed to be bound and
culpable for commercial charges to the same degree

How much? Sadly the Baron does not quantify but this link from which the above is sourced

https://discovertheevidence.org/images/ ... D00277.pdf

contains 139 pages of pure vitriol towards his (I'm assuming) long-suffering now ex wife.

Contrary to the usual Freemanesque ending to most of his letters, plenty of ill-will and vexation here towards the unfortunate Susan who is named no less than 92 times in the above link.

He reminds me a bit of a fictional character from my childhood called Beaver Hateman



from the delightful Uncle books by J P Martin. Hateman has a 'hating book' in which the names of his enemies are obsessively written in his own blood. The Baron's missives are (to my eyes at least) just missing a bit of O negative.

I saw this on Susan's eBay account; "For sale, Encyclopedia Britannica - perfect condition, no longer needed - husband knows everything".

Well actually I didn't but you get the picture.

I'm astonished that The Baron has allowed this to get to where it is. The other side will eventually recover their costs from him and this will probably swallow-up a sizable chunk of any equity coming his way once the battlements have been scaled, Castle Ward is finally ransacked and it's occupant de-throned.

An amicable agreement (or at the least one very much less ruinous - notwithstanding the sometimes understandable breakdown of relationships) would have been perfectly possible here but as TNS astutely observes, the Baron's own belligerence and general bloody-mindedness has thrown that possibility to the wind and with it any prospect of an adult settlement.

Add to that a queue of creditors from the CT, gas, electric some of whom may have registered liens or charging orders of their own on casa Ward and I fear that this will end very badly indeed.

I'd hate to live at number 147, I hope they are fully insured.

[notorial dissent]

I can't say that there is any mystery as to why she is the former Mrs Baron Bonkers. He really is a piece of work.

[rosy]

I do enjoy Baron Bonkers' long list of qualifications.

C&G. AC&G. ONC. HNC. MCP. MCP+i. MCSE. RBA. Para Legal. Attorney at Law.

I know what City & Guilds, Advanced City & Guilds, Ordinary National Certificate, Higher National Certificate, Microsoft Certified Professional, Microsoft Certified Professional plus Internet and Microsoft Certified Solutions Expert all are.

My children all did MCSE at school, and the C&G were vocational qualifications, offered in things like typing, plumbing and brickwork. ONC and HNC were vocational alternatives to academic exam qualifications as far as I can recall.

But what is RBA? Google isn't helping unless it's something to do with the Retail Banking Academy, which seems unlikely.

[Chaos]

But what is RBA?

really bad actor?

[SteveUK]

What I did garnish from his published court case whinge was (1) his missus started the proceedings and , (2) he's nuts , (3) he keeps citing his parking ticket win as some super evidence applicable to his divorce and eviction.

[notorial dissent]

But what is RBA?

really bad actor?

Really Boring Ass......

[#six]

Real Baron? As if