(UK) Elizabeth Watson

[AndyPandy]

......ultra vires of The Banking code, mortgage code, regulatory code....I.e. It's an illegal and lawless......

I'm presuming she's describimng the We're Bank here !!

[notorial dissent]

As I said, she hasn't clue one about what she is rabbiting on about. Rather pathetic really in an unbalanced sort of way.

[AndyPandy]

As I said, she hasn't clue one about what she is rabbiting on about. Rather pathetic really in an unbalanced sort of way.

The Bank of Scotland has sent her a bank statement for her loan (presumably mortgage) account that says she owes £407k, the rest like you say is nonsensical.

[Slowpoke]

More ramblings, looks like she was in court Sept 15th?

Elizabeth Watson

12 hrs
.
LETTER of 14 Nov 2015 from Liz Watson, REPORTING SOLICITORS GROSS CORRUPTION AND SRA REFUSAL TO INVESTIGATE, SENT TO SRA CEO, TREASURY & BANK OF ENGLAND .....
FAO: Mrs Catherine Dixon
CEO - The Law Society
Dear Mrs Dixon
SERIOUS FAILINGS BY SRA MEMBERS AND THE SRA REFUSAL TO DEAL WITH THOSE FAILINGS
This is for your urgent kind attention - a copy of my response below, to Sue Heads responsible for "supervision" of your members - and it is highly regrettable that she appears to be abandoning her duties in this role for reasons not understood. Her response is not acceptable to us in any way, shape or form.
It is our home and over £2million of assets and 22 years of our lives that have been blighted by this matter - especially in the past 7 years since it has been falsely litigated by brazen acts of a fraud on the court, such that four of your member firms are complicit in trying to steal, and it is attempted theft by pen and paper which can NOT be tolerated under ANY circumstances. There have been very serious violations and departures from your SRA Code of Conduct Rules.
yet Sue Heads has just tried to marginalise us and trivialise our complaint so as to whittle it away to inaction.
Yet, I've had a number of constructive phone conversations recently over the shocking recent discoveries on this matter, with other SRA staff who have been helpful and advised the case has been re-opened, so Ms Heads apparent attempt to wrongly shut it down again is a call for alarm - and is extremely worrying indeed such as to call for an urgent Public Enquiry into what is going on?
Perhaps this calls for intervention from the PRA investigatory body into firms from the Bank of England? Your new President, Jonathan Smithers, appears to be causing a number of concerns amongst British people who are falling victim to the most shocking and truly appalling predatory practices of crooked and dishonest solicitors having a field day in misappropriating assets and abusing their positions - all being condoned at a high level by the SRA , it appears. This can not be tolerated. It smacks of unlawful protectionism, for one thing. And a 'cosy coterie' club from which the innocent victims are excluded.
I am worried that Ms Heads may have been unduly influenced by the wrong-doers and if you examine the details of this matter, you will quickly realise that this is an extremely serious string of offences that have been committed by several of your member firms - so it is simply not possible to cry off doing what is only right for the SRA to do.
It is my perception there are clearly defined actions of joint solicitors conducting their business dishonestly in this complaint, with major departures from their professional duty on every conceivable front, according to the solicitors rules set out under the " The Professional Guide to Solicitors". The SRA's apparent disinterest in upholding any standards deemed 'safe' or appropriate by members of the Public like ourselves, calls for an urgent investigation into the SRA itself, perhaps?
The fact the rude non-responses and disappearing acts we have received from all the solicitors involved is so inanely short of the mark is in itself gross misconduct when aligned with the timelines of our case.
Therefore, I hope that you can take command of this situation and see to it that it is dealt with correctly and with full corporate accountability and in accordance with the SRA Code of Conduct and remit.
Regards
Elizabeth watson
FAO: Ms Sue Heads
Supervision - SRA
Dear Miss Heads
Notice of objection to your refusal to act on evidence of compound criminality by your members (Your ref: CDT/1079604-2013)
It is more than surprising to receive your letter of Friday's date, asserting that "you could not help in relation to our complaints" - we wholly object on the basis of what we have set out below.
You appear to have completely misunderstood (or misinterpreted) many key points in this matter, which I will endeavour to address so that you can now correct things from your end and fulfil your role and regulatory obligations.
First and foremost, wiith regards to the obvious "organised fraud" taking place between solicitors we have named and with the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal being the appropriate method to deal with such cases, why is this being by-passed?
The fact to date there has been no referral of matters to The Solicitors Discplinary Tribunal to date, is in and of itself, grounds for a serious complaint and major Public Enquiry. Any refusal to deal with such serious matters as those I have painstakingly gathered and presented to you, suggests there is an insidious set up involving institutionalised fraud and corruption at high levels, and is indicative of CARTEL behaviour.
If the SRA's inaction is attributable, however, to your personal misunderstandings about what has been reported, then that is a different matter. Going by what you have written in your latest letter, there appear to be many misgivings and wrongful interpretations from your side. So, for the avoidance of any further doubt, to name some of the main ones:-
1. There is NO "loan" ! I have never at any time stated that a "loan was obtained fraudulently". Where did you get this idea? I have explained many times that we have never received any loan nor any money from either of the 3 major banks who have put invalid charges against our property, dishonestly assisted by various SRA members at various times.
2. It is incorrect that there has been any lawful or valid litigation - only spurious litigation for evident money laundering purposes and evident attempted theft by your SRA members David Webb acting in collusion with David Monk and others. It is these two rogues who have committed compound frauds against our property, which have only relatively recently come fully to light, as all relevant evidence has been withheld from us for all these years. Further rogue members at Eversheds then peddled a false possession claim through HMCTS for 7 years without allowing any Part 31 Disclosure, seriously abusing the Court process and committing an unmistakeable FRAUD ON THE COURT !
3. I have asked the Law Society to please provide the Professional Indemnity Insurance details to enable us to take negligence action against all of your involved members (David Monk of Bennett Thomas, David Webb of Matthew & Matthew, Guy Perrins of Perrins Guy Williams, Eversheds LLP, Rudlings Wakelam solicitors for a start). Please provide these details to us by return, explaining procedure, since these dishonest members have withheld this information.
4. No issues have yet been "litigated" as you aver, because NO DUE PROCESS OF LAW has taken place! Not only this, because of the serious abuse of court process, the corrupt solicitors involved forced through an 'appeal' before any FINDING OF FACT took place! They then 'appealed their loss of their appeal THREE TIMES" until they eventually resorted to a BRIBERY DEAL in highly suspicious circumstances at the High Court of Appeal. It is disgraceful. We have not even been able to obtain Disclosure, let alone a fair trial nor even a Directions hearing in over 7 years!
5. You say you "can not investigate whether criminal offences have been committed" - WHY NOT??? - so, given the police are REFUSING to INVESTIGATE, then who can do this job please? The SFO are conflicted out because they compromised themselves in the wider background frauds of HBOS by allowing the Bank's ex-Head Auditor to turn the Queen's evidence on 12/9/2002 thus perverting justice and locking out a remedy to all the 400 victims and the CPS seem to be riddled with conflicts of interest from solicitors in high rank from the likes of Eversheds! So WHO will do this job of investigating CRIMES?
6. If the police and courts 'refuse to conclude that any solicitors involved has been guilty of professional misconduct or criminal behaviour' then what?
Does this mean you can all pass the buck and hide behind each other? Does It mean there is no due process or impartiality or independence if you can all pick and choose when to deal with serious wrong-doing and criminal violations of your rules?
7. It is plainly UNTRUE that "there are no new issues that you could investigate" - whatever do you mean by this comment? Please explain.
Are you saying there is no new information regarding offences being reported, or that you are refusing to investigate the matter unless others do so and therefore you are blocking avenues to obtaining a remedy here?
Since you are a private company, does this then leave the Public the option of taking steps against your own Organisation, if you are that dissociated from these horrific offences by your members? It is frightening to witness such injustice within the Law Society itself!.
8. We are completely taken aback and stunned by your comment that you "will not be responding to further correspondence with us on this matter either in writing or on the telephone unless it is clear we are raising new issues or concerns that require further investigation by us".
We take exception to this and do NOT agree because it is unjust and entirely wrong in these circumstances to close the door on this without doing a thing about these serious failings by your members.
So! Does this refer to "new issues" as in 'new evidence', or something else? What is meant by "new issues" ? Also, with respect, what evidence is there to support the suggestion that you have already investigated things? Please can you provide the supporting proof of any investigations you say you've already done, under the FOIA ?
We are not aware of you having done any investigations yet. We have not had a single report from you.
9. I have discovered the truth about there being NO INSTRUCTION to Eversheds from Bank of Scotland, purely by conversations direct with Bank of Scotland and others, resulting in Tim Pyle of Eversheds suddenly leaving the firm in January 2015 and the High Court of appeal directing that our remedy lays in bringing a FRAUD UPON THE COURT claim against Eversheds.
10. The issue of NO COURT SEAL on the alleged "claim" invalidly bought by Eversheds, is incurable under CPR 3.9, because there is no debt in existence and no contract to enforce, with no claim ever lawfully issued, therefore. This came to light on 15 September 2015 at Bournemouth County Court, when it was identified that the 'possession claim' bore NO COURT SEAL ( a clear violation of CPR 2.6) and so has never actually been issued. Therefore there is nothing to lawfully litigate.
The judge on 15/9/14 abandoned the court room and when he returned with the boxes of papers, no evidence of a sealed copy could be found. This demonstrates a serious abuse of court process by Eversheds, who are also your member of course.
The underlying wording of the 'claim' was also nonsensical, relying on an allegation of a 'default' on 2 bank accounts which the Bank of Scotland PLC have confirmed "do not exist on their ledger" as having been "opened fraudulently" using fake account numbers and false sort codes.
So there isn't even a validly brought claim that can "stand up'.
11. We have strong and compelling evidence against Matthew & Matthew which shows FRAUD, acting without ethics, acting without integrity, acting without instruction, failing to provide any Letter of Engagement, conspiracy, taking over the conveyancing from another solicitor firm without even notifying us (which is how we came to 'inherit' dealings with Matthew & Matthew, effectively by 'default'), money laundering, forgery, theft, misappropriation of our assets, criminal collusion and undue influence with certain parties in high positions, and much more.
We note that these are all actionable offences by your Disciplinary Tribunal.
12. Three sets of solicitors are implicated as complicit in the crimes committed against us and our property - all of them are your members. A further set of solicitors (Eversheds) have evidently acted on the 'instruction' of the rogue solicitors who have misappropriated assets, abused their positions, acted without instruction and acted without ethics or integrity to accomplish the thefts involved here.
It is therefore incumbent on the SRA to take appropriate action and refer this to your Disciplinary Tribunal procedure - particularly as you have a 'memo of understanding' with the Police to prevent them from taking action against your members. Otherwise the SRA will be sanctioning criminal activity and protecting it.
13. With all due respect, they are not just "concerns" I have raised. They are factual evidence-based crimes involving Serious Organised Crime using institutionalised fraud to accomplish misappropriation of assets against all the SRA Codes of conduct,accomplishing serious large-scale asset-stripping that your members have aided and abetted and been instrumental in executing. With full supporting documentary evidence. To call them "concerns" is quite insulting, to be frank. Because it is excessive understatement. The question to ask yourself is "what if it happened to me?"
What would you do then?
Regarding the various institutions you mention, each one of them appears to be more focused on covering their own back, than acting in accordance with their appointed role and remit in the Public Interest...
14. The police have refused to investigate because they are barred from doing so by your unconstitutional MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING and purported subjudice issues. There are many indications of "inappropriate contracts" being entered in to by them with the wrong-doers using the Proceeds of crime to accomplish the police inaction and to buy their silence. Many police are being bought off via easy loans or favourable terms where no entitlement exists for these loans, by way of 'payment' for keeping silent.
15. The FCA are electing to shirk their duty because they are conflicted by their involvement in these frauds with HBOS (amongst many other major financial institutions), confirmed in the Treasury Report and FSA Report of March 2012 and beyond, regarding their insider dealing and Market abuse in tandem with HBOS/Bank of Scotland who traded whilst insolvent and had a secret £25.7 billion 'bail out' by the Bank of England before the Lloyds merger.
In particular, the FCA had enabled the fraud and money laundering by failing to regulate HBOS in the Vavasseur/Dobb White fraud, and then wound up the main vehicle which issued the false 'securities' (being LOU's by Dobb White) in the full knowledge that this would prevent the victims / creditors from claiming on the mis-sold Dobb White professional indemnity insurance!
16. The ICO appear to be trying to eschew taking any action on the basis that the Data Protection Act is being widely abused to serve the agenda of criminals in any event, and various unjust "exemptions" etc are being cited as 'grounds for taking no action' - because it is common knowledge that criminals in UK enjoy full protection from prosecution, benefits and even rewards - the system is designed only to help them, not the victims!
17. The Serious Fraud Office are continuing to try to side-step the issues in the same way as they have done previously, because sadly, they became compromised and negatively implicated in the serious fraud of the wider case (Vavasseur & Dobb White) where they allowed the HBOS ex-Head Auditor (Fraser Mackay) to appears as a "witness for the Prosecution counsel" thus perverting Justice and allowing him to 'turn the Queen's evidence' to cover up the serious organised crimes committed. Knowing this, they have tied their hands by this compromising themselves and allowed Justice to be perverted on the wider Case, making a remedy for the victims far less accessible than it ought to have been.
18. The Bank of England have, indeed, been written to, but we have not even had the courtesy of any response, as yet. We note, however, that a report is due out next week on HBOS corruption, which is something I exposed with supporting evidence to them about 3 weeks ago, in mid October or so.
19. Please find enclosed a letter sent by Forensic accountant KAY LINNELL who wrote to Matthew & Matthew last year, and they wrote back an untruthful reply which suggested they had already provided the files. The fact is, they have provided nothing to us whatsoever, and have withheld all details of the fraudulent conveyancing they conducted over the sale of our previous house and purchase of our current property. David Webb was repeatedly putting the phone down and refusing to deal with the requests. He even returned letters back, and would not process our various SARN requests, even when the £10 cheque was sent!
We have asked them to provide proof of a LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT (because we never instructed them, but rather, inherited dealings with them on a 'default basis' because David Monk evidently became an employee there after a few years - but did not explain this and led us to believe it was just a 'change of address' on a "c/o" basis. Even this they have ignored! So where is one to turn?
It is galling to witness this firm resorting to telling compound lies in order to escape dealing with the issues - but how long can this be allowed to go on for?
20. it is a very unhelpful reply from David Webb - typical of his style, arrogant and obstructive, and in denial of what he has done. Its also a dishonest response because neither David Webb nor his firm have ever supplied "a full copy of the file" - it is plainly untrue - there have been NO conveyancing papers supplied in 22 years (not that we even instructed him or his firm) - and no original deed, no mortgage contract with either of the 3 false charges, no audited proof of moneys being delivered or accessible to us etc
21. Above all, he has evidently stolen our property at the point we moved in - by covertly substituting the Freehold that we paid for with a worthless LEASE containing unnotified & unauthorised 'restrictive covenants' drawn on the back of a fraudulent Title number. He has done this in collusion with David Monk, who was working with Webb and evidently passed it to him to deal with without disclosing this to us nor agreeing it.
This is why we will NOT agree to the SRA taking NO ACTION
At least the SRA are in a position to require that Matthew & Matthew disclose everything that David Webb claims to have supplied to us, even if it has to be sent to you, together with the specific accounting details that the Forensic accountant has reasonably asked for?
I am deeply distraught about the rank injustice and lies involved in the whole situation we find ourselves in.
Finally, if an SRA member can be struck off for embezzling £22,000, how much more should action be taken where assets exceeding £2 million are being stolen? That is the current value of our house (undeveloped re planning permissions at this stage, it will be more if developed).

[Hercule Parrot]

This is why we will NOT agree to the SRA taking NO ACTION

Unfortunately the SRA doesn't need your agreement to NFA, Elizabeth.

[AndyPandy]

When you can't face up to the reality that you've made disastrous decisions in your life, then of course it's everyone else's fault and all those agencies must be colluding against you.

Wake up you stupid woman and start taking responsibility !

[longdog]

More ramblings, looks like she was in court Sept 15th?

Elizabeth Watson
<snip>

TL:DR

Is there anything new in this or is it the same crap we've come to expect of a vapid, empty-headed pillock who thinks Brian 'Lawful Bank' Hayes is a credible source of legal lawful advice?

[notorial dissent]

SRA???? UK alphabet soup is more confusing than US, and that is scary.

Woman is stark staring bonkers. Does seem to have a rather over blown idea of her own position in things, if nothing else.

[longdog]

When you can't face up to the reality that you've made disastrous decisions in your life, then of course it's everyone else's fault and all those agencies must be colluding against you.

Wake up you stupid woman and start taking responsibility !

Having crossed the illustrious Ms Watson over on FaceTube and YouBook in the past it's obvious to me that your lack of sympathy for her plight is because you are a satanic, treasonous, masonic paedophile... At the very least!!!!11!!!

I think this video has something to do with it... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WUlg2nD2K0

[mufc1959]

SRA????

Solicitors Regulation Authority. This seems to be related to the guy from Shoosmiths (who acted for the lender) against whom she has a vendetta which, it seems, shows no sign of reaching an end.

[longdog]

SRA????

Solicitors Regulation Authority. This seems to be related to the guy from Shoosmiths (who acted for the lender) against whom she has a vendetta which, it seems, shows no sign of reaching an end.

There may not be an ending in sight yet but up until a year ago Elizabeth OTF Watson was promising that she would be vindicated in the child custody case where she was jailed for contempt for naming the child and spreading totally unfounded allegations of sexual abuse against the father... I took her to task for her blatant lying on YouToob about the case, giving links to the actual court transcripts, and all of a sudden her posts about how she had been acquitted and the judges were running scared disappeared.

The woman is an habitual liar with severe anger management issues who can never accept she was wrong and she lost. Her principle line of attack with anybody who dares disagree with her or, god forbid, actually cites solid evidence she is a delusional crank, is to accuse them of being a paedophile and hope they will go away. If brains were dynamite she wouldn't have enough to blow her hat off.

This woman is a world class whack-job.

[Hercule Parrot]

Woman is stark staring bonkers. Does seem to have a rather over blown idea of her own position in things, if nothing else.

That, in my opinion, is the crux of it. Having lived a privileged wealthy life, she is used to having things her own way. She was taken in by a conman and lost everything in an investment scam (which deserves sympathy) and now she wants the banks, courts and government to reimburse her losses (which doesn't).

[Bones]

Not seen or heard about mad lizzie in a while....

Wonder what happened to her

[SteveUK]

fear not. She's alive and 'well' on FB with continual postings of the usual gibberish. Nothing interesting, the usual fraud/conspiracy BS.

[Bones]

fear not. She's alive and 'well' on FB with continual postings of the usual gibberish. Nothing interesting, the usual fraud/conspiracy BS.

Thanks Steve, do you know if this fruit loop also lost her home...

[doublelong]

She got on the same bus as me back in oct or nov she got off in an area that is known for high DHSS rentals. I only recognised her as had been looking into all this freeman debt crap after a friend I have known since school, underachiever blames his short comings on the rest of the world, Told me how he was doing a DD claw back as all bills are paid twice.

[SteveUK]

fear not. She's alive and 'well' on FB with continual postings of the usual gibberish. Nothing interesting, the usual fraud/conspiracy BS.

Thanks Steve, do you know if this fruit loop also lost her home...

I believe she did, after falling for an apparent get rich quick scam.

Naturally it's all the fault of the bank, cabal, NWO, shills, your friends hamster etc etc

[letissier14]

Over on EFOTB

Elizabeth Watson Keep an eye out for SOVEREIGN PROPERTY ALLIANCE - a Registerd Charity due to be set up to protect property owners and occupiers and rout out White collar corruption etc! coming soon!
Like · 1 · 32 mins

[letissier14]

Over on EFOTB she writes


Elizabeth Watson
21 hrs

The DWELLING is INVIOLABLE .....
NOTE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW..
NOT POSITIVE LAW..(POSITIVE LAW IS LEGISLATION)
THEREFORE TO BREAK INTO A DWELLING TO EVICT IN ANY MANNER REGARDLESS OF THE REASON. IS TO BREACH ARTICLE 40.5 OF THE 1937 CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 40.5
LITERAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION

His place of residence is secure for every citizen, and it is not permitted to go into it forcibly except in accordance
with law.

ENGLISH TEXT
The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not
be forcibly entered save in accordance with law.

*******************************************************
The Master of the High court knows this well.... He is talking about so called Social Housing, but it matters not. The word Dwelling was chosen very carefully in the constitution for this EXACT reason. To PROTECT the PEOPLE.

The ELEPHANT in the room which no politician will ever mention is USURY ! ! ! /..... as long as there is USURY in the Monetary system this will continue. It is USURY that causes all of this... ALL OF IT.

Anyone that actually takes the time to look at the whole situation will see this clearly.

[guilty]

That's the Irish Constitution.

The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law.

Note that entry does not have to be pursuant to a warrant to be constitutional. It must be pursuant to law. Certain law provides for powers of entry exercisable without warrant