Page 174 - Combined file Solheim

URGENT
Note for Marina Faggianato for the round table meeting
Confidential in contemplation of proceedings

 The Beaver case was still active in February 2020 when he appeared at the CCC Old
Bailey on a proceeds of crime recovery action. This could be the start of a cooperating
participant plea bargain or merely tidying up a loose end. WE DO NOT KNOW, and
official interest may still be ongoing; MJC suspects it is;
Page | 5
 If Mr Solheim paid bribes to get his AIG claim approved, enforcement would be by
the SFO; despite all the Fake News it is to be feared;

 Bottom line: we should keep an open mind on the AIG claim and cannot assume it
was legitimate. If bribes were paid, it is the end of the road fpr Mr Solheim and LPJS’s
£500k. They should recognise this shared common interest and aim a fair and
confidential settlement.

7. PROCEEDS OF CRIME RECOVERY
 Any agreement between the parties could be overtaken by POC recovery action by
the National Crime Agency or the Serious Fraud Office. As things stand, MJC rates the
chances of such action at 10 per cent; BUT THIS IS A GUESS;

 Any settlement agreement should be cancelled if POC action is taken. It would be
idiotic for LPJS to give credit to Mr Solheim for funds that are liable to seizure or
recovery by the insurance companies;

 Mr Solheim’s indemnity is worthless because (a) he could be in prison at the time or
(b) have disappeared overseas and Norway and the UK have no extradition
agreement;

8. LPJS SAID IN SOME OF HER STATEMENTS THAT THE £500,000 WAS A LOAN
 This is only because Mr Solheim would not say (over a period of months and under
pressure to clarify what he knew was a critical position) whether the £500k was a
loan or a gift. Looking back, the ambiguity is jaw dropping;

 APMS was the first to allege the £500,000 was a gift and threatened to grab some or
13
all of it for himself;

 LPJS took the unilateral decision (as she was entitled to do) to reclassify what she
believed to be a gift as a loan;

 LPJS did not need Mr Solheim’s approval to make this change and swore in her next
statement what she believed was true at the time. However, none of her Form E lists
the £500,000 as a loan nor did the various working schedules she agreed with Mr
14
Solheim;

 Mr Solheim reclassified many of his gifts as loans and then as TOLATA investments.
LPJS stated the truth at the time; what’s the big deal for her and not for him ?
15
 Mr Solheim read LPJS’s statement and declined to comment on it. He also refused to
attend a conference with Counsel (Richard Balchin) to clarify the status of the £500k
and did not ask a single question after it had taken place:

Bates Number Bates No174
E:\COBASCO CURRENT\LOUS DIVORCE\CURRENT PAPERS\Sigve Solheim litigation\Short note for MF rev1.docx