Page 210 - Bundle for MF Final

Bates no 209

CLAIM NO F00BN141
FIRST DEFENDANT'S POSITION STATEMENT

46 The FD was appalled because, although the Claimant appeared to have - at long
last - confirmed the £500,000 was a loan, he had falsely "slipped in" that it was
21
"sec on Nutley Place". This had never been agreed •
47 AS A RESULT. THE FINAL HEARING CONCLUDED THAT THE £500,000 WAS A
GIFT AND REDUCED FD'S LIFELONG MAINTENANCE ACCORDINGLY.

48 A few days after the Final Hearing had ended, the Claimant relaxed, and nothing
would stop him claiming that the £500,000 was a loan: at better still "a
contribution towards property··. What a difference a day makes!

49 If the Claimant had simply told the Final Hearing (as he is shouting now) that the
£500,000 was a loan or a contribution towards property there is very strong
possibility that FDs lifetime maintenance from her ex-husband would have
remained in place.

50 The reason he refused to do so was to hide his own crimes. The Court will be
asked to consider whether it makes him liable for her losses.

7. LOANS OF £81,000

51 Evidence shows that most of the Claimant's loans were made to APMS and not to
the FD. For example, on 3 rd October 2017, the Claimant emailed APMS to say:

"Could you pleas contact Barclays ASAP befor you go on holiday, see if they can releas some
of the money attached to the flexible mortgage to pay for your maintenance until you sort your
shit out.

like last month. I will lend you another month of maintenance you are court orde to pay for
Louise and the childrn. This is money which I lend you for now, because I don't want to see
your childr suffer"

52 The FD was always very grateful for the Claimant's assistance but worried that
22
APMS would renege on in his debts. She resolved that if this happened she would
assume responsibility. She still retains this position 23 •

53 The email is very significant for another reason because it again demonstrates the
Claimant's cunning. He knew, beyond doubt, that his deposit of £500,000 had
been into the main mortgage account and could not be withdrawn unless Nutley
Place was sold. He also knew that "account attached to the flexle mortga"was
already at its limits and could not be touched.

54 He knew the email was a sham and that Barclays would not release a penny.

8. GIFTS GENERALLY

55 The Claimant has a distasteful track record of making gifts and then clawing them
back. See McKApp paragraph 214 et seq. The most significant example is £500,000
"gift" but the Claimant also appointed the FD as a director of CRS Aviation Ltd and

21 It reveals the level of his cunning. ff had been exhibited it would have become the ONLY written corifirmation of the false
TOLATA type position he is now maintaining.
22 Which enabled her two youngest children to remain in school
23 There is an arithmetical error and a slight overc/aim