Page 42 - Combined file Solheim
P. 42

APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE OF A M KENZIE FRIEND
                                                                                              C
                                                                                   PART 8: DETAILED COMMENTS
                    179.  At 13.00 the Claimant sent LPJS an SMS message saying:


                           “….. just paid in the cheque at Barclays, in NatWest transferring funds, ordered four
                           KG belly picking up on Saturday, been tack shop, got shavings, home soon Love”

                           At 13.05 he sent another SMS saying;

                                 “All done, U can ditch me now ha ha”

                    180.  Although this was probably intended as humour  it is a strange comment from
                                                                      167
                        anyone who has just made a loan of £500,000 with absolutely no security and especially
                        bearing in mind - having read LPJS will four weeks earlier- that he had absolutely no
                        financial stake in Nutley Place AND NEVER WOULD.


                    181.   LPJS responded at 13.16 “Thank God for that Bye” and added an applause emoji

                    182.  On his return to Nutley Place, the Claimant wished LPJS: “Happy Christmas, darling”
                        but there was no discussion about the deposit .
                                                                 168

                    9.4   THE £500,000 GIFT:ALLEGED BLOCKING OF THE ACCOUNT
                    183.  LPJS had no need to draw down the £500,000 and all was fine until June 2017 when
                        APMS discovered the deposit, alleged it had been underhand and that LPJS had been
                        deceptive by not reporting it to him.  The essence of his argument was that his
                        maintenance payments should have been reduced proportionately, based on the
                        comparative value of their assets.

                        As a joint signatory, APMS had unrestricted on-line access to the account and received
                        routine statements. Under Judge Bowman’s order, Louise had no obligation to advise
                        APMS of any improvement in her circumstances and had no intent to mislead him. APMS
                        told LPJS that she should consider herself lucky that he had not emptied the account . He
                                                                                                   169
                        implied that he had imposed a block and that she would be unable to draw on it.
                        However, by March 2018 (Attachment 7- a “Chat Call” with Barclays), he knew that both
                        his threat and block were meaningless:

                        APMS:    “If I opt to make a part pay-off of the mortgage balance itself, i.e. an over-
                                 payment, can I opt to withdraw that over-payment later?  Or should I make
                                 the over-payment into the current account and hence benefit from the offset
                                 with the flexibility to withdraw it?

                        Barclays:   “Hi Anthony, you wouldn’t be able to claim back any payments made directly
                                 into the mortgage I’m afraid”

                    9.5   THE £500,000 GIFT:LPJS DISOVERS THE BLOCK
                    184.  In his statement of Assets and earnings (Attachment 3), the Claimant states that he
                        “loaned Louise £500,000 to be drawn down for living expenses and secured against her
                        equity in Nutley Place. This was blocked by Anthony Siggers”. He did not claim – as he

                    167  Not something the Claimant is known for
                    168  His email of monthly savings of  £1,500 implies that he intended to settle the entire mortgage
                    169  This was an empty threat and no one could make withdrawals from the account
               Bates Number Bates No042                  36 | Pa ge
   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47