Page 44 - Combined file Solheim

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 , LPJS discussed her will with the Claimant and he raised no
174
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
would employ them to write his will. On 5 June 2017, his bank account shows he paid
th
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 , the Claimant denies any knowledge of LPJS’s
175
will or any conversation about it. However, it is likely that a forensic examination of
176
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 £50,000 on the condition that she “would start
177
signing some agreements”. LPJS refused to sign anything and instead the Claimant tried to
extort money from her parents . When this failed he issued these proceedings.
178
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 Claimant went to extreme lengths to disassociate himself from the £500,000 in LPJ’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;

173 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
174 No more than a few weeks before he transferred £500,000
175 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
177 He did not say whether as a loan or a gift
178 Which I had asked him not to do because his claims were nonsense and they were suffering from ill health
Bates Number Bates No044 38 | Pa ge