Page 162 - Bundle for MF Final
P. 162

Bates no   161






                                                               APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE OF A M KENZIE FRIEND
                                                                                          c
                                                                                PART 8: DETAILED COMMENTS
                     9.7   THE £500,000 GIFT:LPJS'S WILL
                      189.  LPJS's will - executed on 16 November 2016 four weeks before the £500,000 was
                                                   th
                         transferred - is definitive: the Claimant had no interest in Nutley Place and would never
                         acquire one 173 •

                      190.  In November 2106 4.  LPJS discussed her will with the Claimant and he raised no
                                            17
                         objection to it. The document was left unprotected in the Nutley Place office and was
                         accessible to the Claimant at all times until the day he moved out. The Claimant asked
                         LPJS for the name of the will writing firm  (which is Core Law) she had used and said he
                                                              th
                         would employ them to write his will.  On 5 June 2017, his bank account shows he paid
                         Core Law £210.00.  If this case goes for trial, disclosure of the Claimant's will be sought.

                      191.  In his REPLY in these proceedings 175 ,  the Claimant denies any knowledge of  LPJS's
                         will 176  or any conversation about it.  However, it is likely that a forensic examination of
                         the document for fingerprints and  DNA will prove yet another of the Claimant's lies.

                     9.8   THE £500,000 GIFT:AT LASTS ASKS FOR AN AGREEMENT

                      192.  The Claimant never asked for any documentation or security over the £500,000 until
                         after he had flounced off in July 2018.  At that time, when he knew LPJS was desperate to
                         pay school fees, he offered to lend her £50,000177  on the condition that she  "would start
                         signing  some agreements'.  LP JS refused to sign anything and instead the Claimant tried to
                         extort money from her parents 178 •  When this failed he issued these proceedings.

                      193.  After consulting solicitors, the Claimant came up with the idea of a TOLATA claim that
                         most of the payments he had ever made were "contributions to property".  He rewrote
                         history to support his claims: which are grossly untrue.

                     9.9   THE £500,000 GIFT:DISASSOCIATION FROM THE £500,000

                     The Claiman t went to extreme lengths to disassociate himself from the £500,000 in LP J's
                     mortgage account.  In essence he abandoned it.  He:

                         •  Transferred the £500,000 to LPJS's mortgage account through a convoluted process
                            that disguised the transaction in his Nat West account and in the mortgage account  (see
                            Attachment 2);

                         •  Disguised the AIG policy in his schedule of Assets and Earnings as a loss of licence
                            benefit:

                         •  Repeatedly told Kingsley Napley that he was "broke" and urgently needed interim
                            payments when he was awash with cash;





                      7
                     1 3 LPJS's will makes it clear that her  100% interest in Nutley Place would pass to her children on her death.  The
                     Claimant knew this and raised no objection
                     1 74  No more than a few weeks before  he  transferred £500,000
                     1 75   The only document he has signed in these proceedings- everything else has been signed by his Solicitors
                     176  He  makes no mention of his  own will
                     1  77 He did not say whether as a loan or a gift
                     1 78  W hich I had asked him not to do because  his claims were nonsense and they were suffering from ill health
                                                        38  I  Pag e
   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167