Rekha Patel loses her house

[He Who Knows]

I've gone back over this thread and unless I've missed something neither Wrecka nor Ken Thompson have mentioned liens. Isn't Ken referring to filibustering the neighbour's insurance threshold? Usually legal protection has a ceiling of £100k but I've never heard of the person insured being made to pay once the ceiling is smashed.

[Wakeman52]

Plexus Law Limited that act on behalf of my neighbour on their last financial record available on companies House, it indicated £2 was all that they had in the bank

That could be something to do with the fact that the company had only just been formed (June 2015). There are only abbreviated accounts, as it came under the total exemption limit, so there was no requirement for the submission of anything more. Further, the original company had only nominal/formation share capital at the date the return was made up to. The name was subsequently changed to Plexus Law Ltd. There is recent activity, suggesting that total share capital was increased by GBP120,000 in July.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09641584

[Wakeman52]

Isn't Ken referring to filibustering the neighbour's insurance threshold?

Am I correct in assuming that the neighbour's solicitors wouldn't have to make an appearance in the obstruction case? That concerns Rekha and Cheryl against the bailiffs, not Plexus' interest in the sale of the cottage.

[AndyPandy]

If she does start any further litigation in the Courts I can see that she's going to be slapped with a Vexatious Litigant Order.

Really is trying to emulate Tom Crawford.

[longdog]

If she does start any further litigation in the Courts I can see that she's going to be slapped with a Vexatious Litigant Order.

I thought that had already happened.

[AndyPandy]

If she does start any further litigation in the Courts I can see that she's going to be slapped with a Vexatious Litigant Order.

I thought that had already happened.

Really, I don't recall it!?

[Hercule Parrot]

I've gone back over this thread and unless I've missed something neither Wrecka nor Ken Thompson have mentioned liens. Isn't Ken referring to filibustering the neighbour's insurance threshold? Usually legal protection has a ceiling of £100k but I've never heard of the person insured being made to pay once the ceiling is smashed.

Would be a very poor idea. I doubt the insurers would abandon now, because their own costs are much greater than the amount due directly to the neighbour. They will not walk away with that loss. But even if they did, I imagine the neighbour would have no difficulty in finding a little more money from somewhere, safe in the knowledge that it would be fully recovered from Wrecka's equity in due course. Her lawyers might continue the case on an indemnity basis. There is £100k of un-owed value left in Patel Cottage, no-one's going to be scared away by the thought of a few more hearings.

[Firthy2002]

She isn't on any of the lists.

[Hercule Parrot]

Question: How does knowing the name of a magistrate assist in defending the case?

The Court should not allow distractions of this kind, the question is long settled. Magistrates attempted to introduce a policy of anonymity 30yrs ago, and they were soundly put in their place by the High Court.

R v Felixstowe Justices, ex parte Leigh and another [1987] 1 All ER QBD.
"HELD – The principle of open justice required that those who did justice should be known to the public and, accordingly, the power of magistrates to control their own proceedings did not entitle them to sit anonymously or to withhold their identity from the public and press"

[Burnaby49]

Question: How does knowing the name of a magistrate assist in defending the case?

The Court should not allow distractions of this kind, the question is long settled. Magistrates attempted to introduce a policy of anonymity 30yrs ago, and they were soundly put in their place by the High Court.

R v Felixstowe Justices, ex parte Leigh and another [1987] 1 All ER QBD.
"HELD – The principle of open justice required that those who did justice should be known to the public and, accordingly, the power of magistrates to control their own proceedings did not entitle them to sit anonymously or to withhold their identity from the public and press"

This is an issue that came up frequently in the cases I've attended. Idiots demanding the judge's name and oath of office. Canadian judges give neither. This has nothing to do with secrecy, the judge is named in the daily court list, but because judges, as a matter of policy, do not answer questions from the parties relating to the judge himself. You can't just start quizzing judges about their names, qualifications, oaths, or anything else not directly case related.

[He Who Knows]

Wakeman52 wrote:Am I correct in assuming that the neighbour's solicitors wouldn't have to make an appearance in the obstruction case? That concerns Rekha and Cheryl against the bailiffs, not Plexus' interest in the sale of the cottage.

Yes Thelma and Louise's 28 November magistrates hearing for obstructing a High Court Enforcement Officer is a CPS-led criminal case so has no bearing on Plexus Law's civil action against Rekha Patel in their quest to recoup £90k+ from her.

[He Who Knows]

We have Stef Shambala of Warrington back on the Rekha Patel FB page again trying to explain to gullible Kate about "Flackstones"

Kate Hirst: Can you put pictures of the roof on Rekha trying to explain to John what it is you were apparently guilty of in the first place!!

Stef Shambala: Rekhas builder was accused of cutting off "flackstones" from [the neighbour's] house, there were NO FLACKSTONES...the pictures PROVE it and the guy who lived in the house confirmed it, this has all been one wierd scam to steal Rekhas beautiful home she worked so hard for! [The neighbour] needs to be IN court with the builder and the guy who owned the house who even TOLD [the neighbour] that there were NO FLACKSTONES......they were tiles ffs and Rekha being the beautiful being she is paid her neighbour before she found out that the claum is FALSE

Kate Hirst: I know stef I was just trying to show my husband. The situation is unreal and totally unnecessary

Stef Shambala: Haha I know it is for others benefit more só as we have a few trolls on the post

Kate Hirst: Let's hope they never have to suffer like Rekha Patel
She's so strong! I'd have crumbled by now

[Wakeman52]

this has all been one wierd scam to steal Rekhas beautiful home she worked so hard for!

There are several obvious flaws in this rant:

1) Hanover Cottage was empty for, I seem to recall, a while (years, even) before it was bought by Rekha. Presumably, if the neighbour had wanted it (why?), she could have bought it on the open market;

2) One hell of a conspiracy here then, involving a previous occupant, the local council's conservation / planning officers, the neighbour, some unspecified builder (of the six-gun & stetson variety?), Uncle Tom Cobley and all. Duh!

3) The contents of Rekha's 2011 retrospective planning application to High Peak BC, admitting that thackstones, on the neighbours wall FFS, had been cut off. With a stone saw.

Stef Shambala has posted more on Facebook:

Soooo proud of my beautiful strong sister, she will NOT be silenced by the criminais who stole her house, she will NOT just go away, this dance with the corrupt system has to end with Rekha curtsying victoriously.....ALL THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THE CLAIMS ARE FALSE, so when she gets her chance to really be heard in a fair court(haha)!, then some heads are gonna roll.....this is why they are criminalising her, check out the trolls on her updates!!! Keep this issue alive and fueled with love, Rekha is standing up for more than her house

The woo is strong with this one.

[John Uskglass]

Rekha being the beautiful being she is paid her neighbour before she found out that the claum is FALSE

WTF is she on about? As far as I recall, there's been no indication that Patel paid her neighbour anything. Precisely the reverse is true, as far as I understand it. If she'd paid to have the damaged thackstones reinstated, RP wouldn't be in the mess she is now. Or have I missed something?

[Wakeman52]

If she'd paid to have the damaged thackstones reinstated, RP wouldn't be in the mess she is now.

Actually, Rekha did pay the original damages award. Under protest and after it had risen to GBP17,000 from around GBP8,000. It's her subsequent attempts to get that award overturned that have led to her current predicament.

[Penny Wise]

Question: How does knowing the name of a magistrate assist in defending the case?

The Court should not allow distractions of this kind, the question is long settled. Magistrates attempted to introduce a policy of anonymity 30yrs ago, and they were soundly put in their place by the High Court.

R v Felixstowe Justices, ex parte Leigh and another [1987] 1 All ER QBD.
"HELD – The principle of open justice required that those who did justice should be known to the public and, accordingly, the power of magistrates to control their own proceedings did not entitle them to sit anonymously or to withhold their identity from the public and press"

I find it hard to believe that a name was not given, especially as she is named in the tameside report of the case

https://tamesidereporter.com/2017/08/co ... -in-chaos/

The defendants, their supporters and Mr Thompson all refused to stand for Chair of the Magistrates, Caroline Turner, upon her entrance to the court.

[Penny Wise]

Barry strikes again on Rekha's FB page

[aesmith]

Referred to on PLD here, has anyone seen these two mythical reports proving the absence of thackstones? Just wondering what they really say, maybe a survey of the foundations, or electrics or something which simply didn't mention anything about the roof at all.

Colin Peters
It's good to hear from you Rekha and to know that your family is okay. Please Rekha, the next time that you have the opportunity to appear before magistrates again, take your 2 expert reports with you and lay them before the magistrates as an information, in proof of the acts of fraud and deception which you have endured at the hands of ****** and ******. In fact, don't wait to go before the magistrates. Take the battle to them and make an application to lay an information. If they refuse you then they are making a mockery of Lord Dennings precedent at LAZARU V BEASLEY 56 when he averred that no order of a court and no judgement of a minister will be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. FRAUD Rekha since all of the evidence available proves beyond doubt that there has NEVER EVER been the historical architectural stone feature built in to your neighbours wall which has caused you so much loss and distress.

[He Who Knows]

Colin Peters wrote: It's good to hear from you Rekha and to know that your family is okay. Please Rekha, the next time that you have the opportunity to appear before magistrates again, take your 2 expert reports with you and lay them before the magistrates as an information,

Colin Peters has been popping up on various sites for months. His FB page shows him as an old builder who keeps banging on about the thackstones being Wrecka's rooftiles. He's been shafted in the past and won't let it go - keeps setting up on-line sites about his plight and posting it to anyone who'll listen. He fails to understand that any reports Wrecka may have produced would've been seen by the numerous judges who have presided over this 6-year case. That's what courts are for. Otherwise we'd have trial by Facebook. Duh?

[He Who Knows]

Found him! Here's Colin Peters a year ago making comments on the Manchester Evening News article. Interesting that another builder ('Hillman 998') actually went up on the roof at the time and saw the thackstones!! http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... k-11517681

Frankmanc
Colin Peters is one of Rekha Patel's 'Free Man On The Land' friends. Google them - David Icke is part of it. They go round the UK disrupting courts, police, bailiffs etc & wasting taxpayers money & police time. Chrisy Morris is one, he got arrested by Derbyshire Constabulary the day Miss Patel was evicted. It massively boosted his Youtube channel tho & he'll get even more advertising revenue - so worth a 400 mile round trip & couple of hours in the nick. It's all on his FB page. None of it helps Miss Patel pay her £70k legal costs tho. Poor kid.

423 days ago
Billybob2
That explains a lot. His information is based on Miss Patel's concocted story rather than fact. Thanks for the info

ColinPeters
I thank you Frankmanc' whoever you might be, for illuminating me on the existence of the U tube programme. concerning Miss Patels cottage. However, I have viewed the website and have noted that it is little different to the roof as featured in the estate agency brochure which originally advertised the property as being for sale. There, it can be clearly seen that there was a thick fillet of sand/cement mortar running up the gable, the top of which, although it is flush with the pointing to the gable wall, stands out because it was a different sand/cement mix to the mortar fillet below it.
I rest my case on top of your own.

423 days ago
Billybob2
Clutching at straws Colin. The evidence is all on the side of the poor neighbour who's house was potentially permanently damages and who has been through years of stress because of Miss Patel who even now shows complete disregard for others in her arrogance to continue to deny her wrong doing. She is in the wrong, all public records confirm this. Admit defeat and move on.

424 days ago
Frankmanc
Completely fabricated story, Colin. The March 2011 BBC1 programme on Youtube 'Britain's Empty Homes', season 2 episode 11, shows the thackstones in HD. I rest my case. (Are you Rekha Patel's boyfriend or stalker?)

424 days ago
ColinPeters
Let's have some truth about all this. Many years ago the cottage adjacent to Miss Patels cottage was demolished and replaced with the existing 2 story building which now stands there. In their building of this property, the builders butted up to the cottage wall and on reaching the cottage roof level, encroached upon the cottage roof and built the outer masonry leaf leaf directly on it. There has never ever been any so called 'thack' stones or even crow steps built into the gable wall. Any claim that there ever was would be false.

424 days ago
Billybob2
Check the evidence! ! It's all in the public domain. Even if this were the case (which it isn't! ) the Thack stones were not the only issue please refer to Miss Patels retrospective planning application, you can find this on High Peak Borough Web site.

424 days ago
Hillman998
What a crock it's common practice to render up under thak stones and over the years the cement gets added to if the roof develops a leak so you end up with a large fillet of cement I gave this woman I price for this roof but it was rejected because she said she could get it done cheaper!!!!!!!!!!!!!and I am quite happy to stand up in any court and say the thak stones were there when I Iooked at it

425 days ago
Billybob2
Tell the high Court that and see how far you get. She had ample opportunity to sort it out amicably, 5 years in fact. She knew what the risks were yet she still went ahead and even now is denying responsibility, how arrogant is that!!??! No sympathy.

425 days ago
RedmickMcThomas
Its called "Charging order against the property to recover a debt. As the debt is a substantial one the only asset that would recover the debt would be her property and this would only be taken as the last possible resort so she must have been totally belligerent regarding payment of said debt in the past. If she had acknowledged that debt as her responsibility a payment plan would have been approved by the court and in this case I suspect enforced by the court. If in the near future she could have proven her case the money would have been returned by the court. Don`t blame the bailiffs for doing as they are commanded by the court they have a duty to enforce this order. Simple answer is " Pay Your Debts".

425 days ago
Juggers
I have no sympathy for her. It's a listed building and we all know you can only do certain things to the outside of a listed building. But as usual with this TYPE of person they think they don't have to obey our rules and regulations. So now she paid the ultimate price for doing as she pleases. I hope she can't get the property back.