UK - Neelu Berry opens my eyes

[rumpelstilzchen]

Edward William Ellis has cropped up before:

https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/ ... t-the-rcj/

[exiledscouser]

That appears to be incitement to commit fraud, despite the disclaimer.

Which ironically is a common law offence.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Further. The first link refers to a striking off in 2013, the second link above to an original suspension from practice in 2006, wherein we find this which pretty much says it all about how he came to be a bird of the same feather with Neelu.

The Respondent sought to put further documents before the Tribunal.
He first raised
this matter
by an undated letter received at the Tribunal’s offices on 27th October
2006
.
The documents (three lever arch files) related to the Respondent’s petition to
the Master of the Rolls for renewal of his Practising Certificate. The Respondent
believed the documents to be relevant to matters before the Tribunal because, he said, they demonstrated systematic perversion of the course of justice by The Law Society

and in particular by the Applicant. The Respondent submitted that his hearing before the Tribunal could not be fair if the Tribunal did not first establish the integrity of The Law Society’s processes and the Applicant’s personal integrity

I am a bit puzzled by the disparity of dates. Reading what details there are it seems he was suspened at first (2006), the suspension may have been lifted but he carried on misbehaving and was finally struck off.(2012-2013)

A bit of background shows how this all began to go wrong for him.

The Respondent, born in 1
952, was admitted as a solicitor in 1978. The Respondent
practised at all material timesunder the style of Ellis & Jessup Solicitors at
Westholme Chambers, 134A Sandgate Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT20 2BW.
7
.
In November 2002 a Mrs FM made complaint to the then Office for the Supervision
of Solicitors (“the Office”) concerning the manner in which the Respondent’s firm
had dealt with the estate of her mother and in particular had dealt with litigation
between the estate and her brother over the beneficial ownership of a property.
8
.
The Office undertook an investigation of this complaint, first contacting the
Respondent by telephone on 15th May 2003. On 5th June 2003 the Office wrote to
the Respondent requiring a reply. The Respondent did not reply but wrote on 9th June 2003 to Mrs FM.
The content of this letter was inappropriate. It included the
line “It is an abuse for you to totally fail as a client, live in denial of the truth and then complain because the impossible has not been achieved,” and a suggestion
in jest that one of two ways of getting some money would be “murder Michael (her brother) and get away with it”
.
Subsequently on 8th September 2003 the Respondent entered into
correspondence directly with the Office. On 10th October 2003 the Respondent was advised that the matter would proceed to a formal adjudication and his response for that purpose was required. There was a lengthy exchange of correspondence between he Office and the Respondent.

The rest seems to follow with a grisly inevitability.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Edward William Ellis has cropped up before:

https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/ ... t-the-rcj/

Not the item I was thinking of, but fun anyway. I think he cropped up in a housing matter.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Not specific to this thread, but every long running and catastrophic saga that I have seen covered here on Quatloos seem to start with one foolish and illadvised decision which is then pursued with a dogged persistence worthy of a nobler cause.

If they had taken the advice of the man on the Clapham omnibus in the first place instead of hewing to their own wierd, m'learned friends would be in the street with begging bowls instead of ordering doubles all round in the Lamb and Flag.

It must happen every day that people do take sensible advice, and abandon lost causes before it is too late, lucky people who never run across the likes of our few sad and sorry gurus pushing the usual rubbish, or who are bright enough to see the nonsense for what it is.

Since I follow similar nonsense in the Americas, it does seem they have it bigger, crazier and more dangerous over there, something to be thankful for.

Somehow the likes of Neelu have a harmless, domestic feel to their goings on, even the more rabid ones seem to be unarmed apart from pointless paperwork. Our lot don't even do 'filings' worth a damn compared with the US.

[exiledscouser]

Edward William Ellis has cropped up before:

https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/ ... t-the-rcj/

Not the item I was thinking of, but fun anyway. I think he cropped up in a housing matter.

Edward Ellis once again getting hoofed out of the courts by either ten burley men (Neelu) or two very big security guards (one John Banks) depending on whom you consider to be the most reliable witness.

He's like some persistent drunk being serially ejected from a pub which has barred him. According to Neelu who perhaps isn't the most coherent of witnesses he's been kicked out no less than ten times thus far.

He's back at it at 2pm today in fact - I wonder what the outcome will be?

[Gregg]

In America, our cops carry guns, which adds potential for violence you don't see in England, but more importantly, our crazy people carry even more guns that the cops, without the training in restraint, which make it a miracle that we ONLY kill 33,000 of each other every year.


So, just to provide us with some perspective here, we kill 33.000 a year here with guns. In 2015-16 (the twelve months beginning in March), there were 26 fatalities from gun-related crimes in England and Wales (equivalent to 130 because Great Britain 1/5 the size of the US). but what would be your national response to 33.000 dead from guns?

[longdog]

In America, our cops carry guns, which adds potential for violence you don't see in England, but more importantly, our crazy people carry even more guns that the cops, without the training in restraint, which make it a miracle that we ONLY kill 33,000 of each other every year.


So, just to provide us with some perspective here, we kill 33.000 a year here with guns. In 2015-16 (the twelve months beginning in March), there were 26 fatalities from gun-related crimes in England and Wales (equivalent to 130 because Great Britain 1/5 the size of the US). but what would be your national response to 33.000 dead from guns?

Mass shooting sprees have only really happened twice in living memory in the UK, the Hungerford shootings in which Michael Ryan killed 16 and then himself and the Dunblane shooting in 1996 when Thomas Hamilton shot 16 young school children (five and six year olds), one teacher and himself.

The Hungerford shooting led to the banning of all centre-fire automatic rifles, the Dunblane shooting led to the banning of all handguns and some restrictions on the capacity of shotguns held on a Shotgun Certificate.

If we had the same rate of firearms deaths per head of population the number would be 1269 per annum. As you point out it's actually in the low double figures.

Incidentally I was a keen shooter up until the post Dunblane restrictions made it more effort than it was worth and it was clear in both cases that the police, who were responsible for issuing Firearms Certificates, had failed in their duty to protect the public. Ryan should never have been given an FAC for the rifles he owned (an AK type and a .30 carbine) because he wasn't a member of a rifle club. Hamilton had been reported to the police for brandishing guns in public, he was suspected of being mentally unstable and a suspected paedophile who had been drummed out of the scouts and he was not a regular member of any pistol club. These factors should have led to the withdrawal of his licence.

[Siegfried Shrink]

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2017/07/cant-pay/

This was where I had seen Mr Ellis before.

[notorial dissent]

And here, silly me, I'm still trying to work out what an "equity lawyer" is. I have to assume is is some heretofore uncatalogued sub-sub-species of fakus or pretendus lawyerus.

[exiledscouser]

News from the courts;

Ved Chaudhari said
So we went along at 2pm today 30 Nov 2017 - the doors to Court 37 in West Green were either locked with two male security guards standing guard or unlocked with two security guards preventing us going in to ask the judge to let our advocate into the building to represent us.

Oh dear. But no matter, don't give up hope, there is a sure-fire 'remedy' to be tried which cannot fail;

So we are back in court 37 on Friday at 12pm, thats 01 December 2017 in Strand London

[notorial dissent]

I keep wondering, does she actually think a judge is going to let her and her band of dim and bewildered just wonder in to their courtroom and throw papers at them with out actually having a filed case? I mean you'd think she was just causally dropping in for tea and a chin wag the way she is going on.

Of course considering Neelu's very tenuous grip on reality that may not be far from the truth.

[SteveUK]

News from the courts;

Ved Chaudhari said
So we went along at 2pm today 30 Nov 2017 - the doors to Court 37 in West Green were either locked with two male security guards standing guard or unlocked with two security guards preventing us going in to ask the judge to let our advocate into the building to represent us.

Oh dear. But no matter, don't give up hope, there is a sure-fire 'remedy' to be tried which cannot fail;

So we are back in court 37 on Friday at 12pm, thats 01 December 2017 in Strand London

Some folk never ever get the bloody hint

[notorial dissent]

News from the courts;

Ved Chaudhari said
So we went along at 2pm today 30 Nov 2017 - the doors to Court 37 in West Green were either locked with two male security guards standing guard or unlocked with two security guards preventing us going in to ask the judge to let our advocate into the building to represent us.

Oh dear. But no matter, don't give up hope, there is a sure-fire 'remedy' to be tried which cannot fail;

So we are back in court 37 on Friday at 12pm, thats 01 December 2017 in Strand London

Some folk never ever get the bloody hint

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that she's not even within light years of a clue.

[Zeke_the_Meek]

As usual, security escorted out of the Royal Courts of Justice building

No, Neelu, it isn't 'usual'. This does not 'usually' happen to people, let alone repeatedly. What's the definition of insanity again?

I'm still baffled at how this Ellis character got to where he is. I understand that it's a long, hard and expensive slog to become a solicitor, and solicitors would be - by proxy - in the best position to spot legal bullshit from ten miles away. This is the equivalent of a doctor getting through medical school, learning everything there is to know about the human body, then deciding that bones don't exist on Tuesdays.

I can understand how now he's at rock bottom he might as well carry on (and really has no other option but to take what little money he can from the Neelu's of the world), but it's the bit in between that I can't fathom.

[ArthurWankspittle]

I'm still baffled at how this Ellis character got to where he is. I understand that it's a long, hard and expensive slog to become a solicitor, and solicitors would be - by proxy - in the best position to spot legal bullshit from ten miles away. This is the equivalent of a doctor getting through medical school, learning everything there is to know about the human body, then deciding that bones don't exist on Tuesdays.

It happens. He's not the only solicitor who has "lost it". I think the guy who claimed the Nazi were going to atom bomb the London 2012 Olympics was a lawyer. Neelu herself was a pharmacist.

[Burnaby49]

Try Glenn Bogue, our Canadian equivalent. He's the equal, nay, the superior of any demented UK lawyer. But that might just be the chauvinist in me speaking. Judge for yourselves;

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=11412

[Siegfried Shrink]

Ellis messed up a legal matter, blamed the client, wrote some inappropriate letters, did not deal with the complaint the client made, and it spiralled from there to suspension, striking off, and today's man.
There are links back up the thread a little to what happened in the first place, from records of SRA tribunals.

[Hercule Parrot]

News from the courts;

Ved Chaudhari said
So we went along at 2pm today 30 Nov 2017 - the doors to Court 37 in West Green were either locked with two male security guards standing guard or unlocked with two security guards preventing us going in to ask the judge to let our advocate into the building to represent us.

Some folk never ever get the bloody hint

I think this situation is progressing towards a quiet tragedy of English justice. For centuries, any citizen has been able to bring an urgent grievance before the High Court, and obtain an immediate emergency injunction or whatever. In my view this is a noble and historic protection which should be prized alongside Judicial Review. But this little pack of nasty, obsessive fruitcakes (led initially by Gedaljahu Ebert and Patrick Cullinane) are exploiting this access to a ridiculous degree.



It's not just the 10 occasions where security had to throw them out, but the dozens more hearings where a costly & scarce courtroom (complete with judge, lawyers and ancillary staff) has been wasted listening to nonsense about SwissIndo, Lizard Paedophiles etc. This must be very disruptive, especially in a court system which is already overstretched and underfunded.

The sensible option would be to restrict the individuals - ban them from the building, require applications to be made through a (real) solicitor or submitted for review by a named gatekeeping judge, impose (and enforce) costs orders etc. However the management layer of HMCTS may feel that restricting or removing the walk-in service for all citizens is a more attractive option, and this sort of thing is an excellent pretext.

[The Seventh String]

I doubt Neelu & co. ever get to take part in a judicial hearing of any kind other than ones they were ‘invited’ to by a letter titled “Summons to appear before...... to answer the charge of....”

All they do is wander into a court building and pester staff and passers-by until security spot them and show them the way out. Once back on the pavement they make yet another video as proof of their failure.

Then they repeat the exercise in the hope that this time the result will be different.

Actually, it wouldn’t surprise me if there were an instruction that if Neelu enters the building then unless she’s there about some real, valid legal stuff she’s to be handled gently but shown the door as quickly, quietly and smoothly as possible. All public sector, and doubtless quite a few private sector, organisations have ways and means for minimising the impact of the “green ink” brigade.

Though come to think of it, in my time as a servant of the public I found it wasn’t the letters written in green ink you had to worry about, they were usually OK. Wax crayoned block capitals on lined purple paper on the other hand....