Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#71 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 18 Mar 2016 17:37

Mark1960 wrote:The chimp now thinks that because they were allegedly allowed to take the car for a test drive, they are excused for all subsequent actions. In other words, he is saying that anybody given possession of something for a short while can keep it as it was taken with their consent of the owner
I'm going to ask him to lend me his car then.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#72 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 17:44

Mark1960 wrote:UB-I know you are reading this thread. If you can somehow get Capital Con to contact me or contact this forum, I think that I might be able to help him.
It looks like, after reading this post, that Sheila has finally decided to answer on the thread. She finishes with this:
So that I do not have to read back on your thread, can you remind me whether or not you have a car outside of your property?
Just who the hell does she think she is? The thread is less than 2 pages long yet she feels it is too much trouble for her to read back? Yeah-She really is concerned about Capital Con isn't she?

What a pity she didn't put the same energy into helping him as she has in trying to discredit the defendants from the Newlyn trial.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#73 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 18 Mar 2016 17:51

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
chimp wrote:It is acknowledged that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the EA s they acted completely correctly. Hence the frantic backpedaling going on in various places.
Acknowledged where? They took a car that was registered to a company for a personal debt. They acted completely incorrectly you fool. No-one has ever said Newlyn's will now be litigated against - the creditor is the one liable. No-one on here has ever said anything different.

The backpedaling noises you can here are coming only from Minehead and Stalybridge.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#74 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 17:56

:lol: :lol: :lol:

He's probably reacting to Amys post where she stated that Sheila was back peddling. As he clearly has the brain of an 8 year old, he reacts like an 8 year old does and simply echoes what his accuser has said. I've seen him do this many times and its one of the reasons that it is futile attempting to debate or reason with him.

Jason has successfully pulled off a minor miracle by getting this couple off and this cretin suggests that we are back peddling. You couldn't make it up.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4052
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#75 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Amy » 18 Mar 2016 18:01

8 year old is being far too generous Mark.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#76 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Mar 2016 18:30

Dodge is not right.

It wasn't section 2. It was section 5 of the Theft Act.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#77 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 18:45

jasonDWB wrote:Dodge is not right.

It wasn't section 2. It was section 5 of the Theft Act.
Are you really surprised?

He has no idea or understanding of what has gone on. He is an imbecile. He is just waffling on and on, trying to make it look like he understands the situation. Amy summed it all up perfectly earlier on today:
I love the way Dodgyballs attempts to write with such authority trying to silence everyone but completely cocks it all up.
I'm beginning to suspect there is some kind of mental defect. What normal, rational person who struggles to read or write thinks that they are some kind of authority on the law? Not just any law but all aspects of law. From consumer credit, to civil, to criminal. Dodge is an authority who has plenty to say. I think the problem is that he's been allowed to go unchallenged for so long on CAG, backed by Sheila (who is equally as stupid/highly unqualified).

I know you have a different sense of humour to me but I find it hilarious that such a moron fails to see what a complete & utter fool he makes of himself. Can't you see the similarities to "Only Fools & Horses"?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#78 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Mar 2016 20:48

Some of the points being made do not make any sense. A garage lets strangers with kids and dog drive away a car, not bringing it back. How did these people get to the garage ?

Not sure the exact position has been clarified anywhere.
You have all relied on Sheila's version of events.

She has never had direct communication with my client or the proceedings.

The car was taken from a police traffic stop while Stacie was driving it.

Newlyn seized it, Stacie walked away with the keys.

There is sympathy for Village Car Sales who lost the car. It must be remembered the car dealer bought it from A1 Environmental Ltd, a company with an ebay history of selling knock offs, sold the car without its keys and logbook. That is the risk Village Car Sales chooses to take for a potential profit.

Village Car Sales redress is only available by reclaiming the money paid to A1 Environmental Ltd. A1 Environmental Ltd reclaims the money it paid, from Newlyn.

Looking at the financial transactions between Newlyn and A1 Environmental Ltd, there is evidence of seeking to defraud my client by circumventing the operation of Paragraph 50 of Schedule 12 by setting high costs for A1 Environmental Ltd and Newlyn only taking the statutory fees from the proceeds of sale.

By placing the high costs within A1 Environmental Ltd, Newlyn was under a belief that gets round a detailed assessment of the costs of taking control of goods. Fortunately, it doesn't. There is no commercial relationship between the debtor and A1 Environmental Ltd, and its costs are disproportionate to the original debt.

The Kirby case means, any car handled by a company having a commercial relationship with the bailiff company, can have its costs assessed for proportionality.

On that note, Newlyn has an up-coming detailed assessment hearing in connection with an unrelated car it took several years ago. Newlyn failed to follow court directions to show and explain bona-fide storage expenses in connection with its storage costs.

Newlyn also have a number of multiple £235 simultaneous enforcement detailed assessment hearings coming up. I spread the work out with different solicitors, so each one can charge its £1600 on each individual case, and my paralegal services invoice is paid on each one I prepare. They all include reference the "Larnyoh" case where Newlyn blamed its IT supplier OneStep Solutions Ltd. They have since been exonerated.

This could spell the end of high storage fees and open the flood gates to recover storage fees using the detailed assessment hearing scheme.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#79 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Mar 2016 21:32

That could well be what happened. proving mens rea in the circumstances would not be easy.
Mens Rea was never the prosecutions case.

The CAG debate is academic. The verdict has been made. No amount of Sheila ringing around Luton Crown Court and Peter Bailiff-can-take-my-hire-purchase-car is going to change that.

Sheila doesn't have any direct access to my clients. We have a private (and public) members board for a very good reason. To give confidentiality from CAG snoopers, (or LB as to that matter - credit to Amy!).

I could never have achieved any of these on the CAG board. The Solicitors Journal article proved that. Anyone quoting law is banned and deleted, and there was evidence from the forum admin log that Marc Gander was the one doing the deleting. It is as if Marc is adverse to anyone with a legal intellect.

His choice of forum moderators. They all have commonality. Unpopular at school. Jobless stay at home. Poor literacy skills. No evident social life. Being a CAG moderator gives them a sense of power, albeit, a cyberspace one.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#80 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 21:43

I don't think that anyone is relying on Sheilas events.

It would be illegal for a garage to allow a potential buyer to drive off in the car, be it a shaven headed biker or a pretty little family, complete with dog. The garage would need to satisfy insurance conditions, which would mean that an employee with correct insurance would have to ride inside the vehicle with the "buyer"

If Harding and her chimp are suggesting that this garage knowingly let an uninsured driver loose on the road, then there can be little sympathy for it.

I personally take everything with a pinch of salt, be it from you or Harding. 9 times out of 10, the truth lies somewhere in the middle in any case. Knowing that the debtor didn't have a pot to p##s in, I think it likely that you were there in court and your posts at lunchtime on the day were from there.

On a final note, obviously Par 50 of Schedule 12 is not relevant here, as it all happened under the old regs.

I won't hold my breath about it being the end of high storage fees-I remember you saying something similar about a bailiff not being able to charge for his fees after the Middlesboro case. We need to keep our feet on the ground here. One swallow doesn't make a summer. The Luton result is a fantastic achievement but you need to keep your feet on the ground. Life has a habit of knocking you down when you least expect it.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#81 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 21:54

Is there any limit to his legal genius?

20.18 last night:
So was the initial seizure lawful ?

From what you say it wasn't, because the car would have been owned by a company with a limited liability.
Is this correct ?

21.30 tonight:
Nope ther is no fault to the EA in this case , they did everything by the book as did the council, the EA did not sell a car owned by a limited company.

What a waste of such natural talent.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#82 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Mar 2016 21:59

Mark1960 wrote:Knowing that the debtor didn't have a pot to p##s in,
What made you believe the client is of limited means?

I wouldn't judge him by his appearance.

Mark1960 wrote: I think it likely that you were there in court and your posts at lunchtime on the day were from there.

I was nowhere near Luton. It was all done from my desk. Text messaging is instant.

My client was originally represented by a barrister, but after he saw my written legal arguments, he told my client to ignore it and plead guilty.

My client fired his barrister and represented himself before the jury. I gave him a crash course over the phone on public speaking and presentation skills. He knew how to deliver his summing up to the jury.

I have too many cases running concurrently to be attending them. That is one of the reasons why I partnered up with solicitors and relocated to serviced facilities on Southampton Row in Holborn. I can dispatch client applications to the RCJ just a few minutes away.

The other reasons was the disrespect judges showed towards McKenzie friends. That is fine with me, so I have solicitors do it instead. The court service central funds, or the taxpayer, pays costs.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#83 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Mar 2016 22:05

What made you believe the client is of limited means?
Something that has been posted elsewhere (by you). I don't think its fair to go into detail on the open forum.

I was nowhere near Luton. It was all done from my desk. Text messaging is instant.
Well you seemed pretty confident in what the result was going to be. That must have been some crash course you gave him if it enabled him to be so confident of the juries verdict.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#84 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Mar 2016 22:22

He is quite a lively character. I had confidence in him to deliver the summing up spiel.

I did the defence knowing that if he was convicted by the jury, he could appeal on legal technicality.

That was why I was confident of an acquittal. The judge knew where the case was going.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#85 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 18 Mar 2016 22:47

Fenella wrote: In Court it was stated that Ross Kirby and his partner Stacie Greengrow arrived at the car sales premises on a Sunday afternoon with their young child and small dog. Mr Kirby indicated that he wanted to test drive an estate car. He selected the Volvo V70. He indicated that he wished to drive the car himself (as opposed to being a passenger). The garage owner was initially hesitant and required some documentary evidence that Mr Kirby was licensed to drive. Mr Kirby provided a copy of his driving licence. As it was a Sunday afternoon, the only staff member available was the owner of the car sale business. At the time, other visitors were viewing vehicles and with Mr Kirby indicating that he was a keen prospective purchaser, the garage owner allowed Mr Kirby and his partner to take the vehicle on a 10 minute test drive. His business insurance covered such test drives.

After 20 minutes, the garage owner became slightly concerned and went to see whether the couples car was still in the car park. It wasn't. The garage owner became very concerned and accordingly, checked the CCTV cameras. This revealed that the couple arrived at the car sales premises as passengers in another vehicle. CCTV cameras also revealed that when Mr Kirby took the vehicle on the test drive, the other vehicle followed. It was then that the garage owner realised that this devious company had taken the Volvo V70.

available was the garage owner.

other people viewing vehicles and the with the only staff member being the garage owner, he allowed Mr Kirby to take the vehicle on a 10 minute 'test drive'.

There were other visitors viewing cars at the same time and given that it was Sunday afternoon, the garage owner
And she knows all of this despite not being present. Makes you wonder who has told her all of this.... and why. I can think of just one person.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4052
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#86 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Amy » 18 Mar 2016 23:37

How does one test drive a car as a passenger?

Thank god those cctv cameras were not only fully operational but placed in just the right places in order to glean all this information.

Quite extraordinary.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#87 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 19 Mar 2016 07:49

I suspect that being a "kept" woman, Sheila has never gone out and bought a car. When she did own a car (she hasn't owned one since around 2011/2012, can't think why?), it would most likely have been bought for her by Tony.

If she had have ever bought a car off the forecourt, she would realise (as Amy did in the above post) that you cannot test drive a car as a passenger. Test drives take place with a member of the garage staff in the passenger seat as it will be that person who is correctly insured via the garages insurance policy. Simply providing a current licence is not enough to convince the garage that there is sufficient insurance in place to permit the buyer to take the car out on his own. Indeed, most normal insurance policies will not cover you to drive a showroom car. Even if there was a facility in a policy, it would only be for 3rd party insurance.

This is another one of Sheilas lies. There is no way on earth that a garage would let a potential purchaser out to test drive a car on his own, and certainly not an entire family complete with dog. It just shows what an idiot she is.

Even if the story was true, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things? Does it matter how the car was taken? either by the spare key or by the test drive?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#88 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 08:58

I'll ask my client to visit and tell his side of the story.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#89 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 19 Mar 2016 09:17

This is going to run and run - Fenella is in full rant this morning. Others over there are asking legitimate questions which she is dodging clumsily. This all boils down to one thing - Jason. Simply because this is one of his clients, everything that happened must be lies and the defendants should not have been cleared.

Why doesn't she put the same effort into the EA on CAG who was cleared of assault even though it was heard by a 999 operator? The same EA who has a history of vile aggressive behaviour.

There is another common factor in all of these cases as well, but now is not the time to discuss that.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#90 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 10:01

The client has never had any direct contact with Sheila Harding.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4052
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#91 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Amy » 19 Mar 2016 10:05

Nice edit of test driving as a passenger Sheila.

Glad to see you are paying attention especially given that it is only Saturday.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#92 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 10:11

I can now confirm Sheila has made it all up.

The witness statement of the car dealer is accurate.

His only redress is A1 Environmental Ltd because they failed to disclose the car is subject to ongoing legal proceedings.

I am giving my client Sheila's name and address because she is slandering them on the CAG forum by insinuating he stole a car. I'll also give him Marc Ganders address in Hampstead because he has control over the forum.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
monkeynuts
Site Admin
Posts: 624
Joined: 07 Nov 2012 13:46
Location: Macclesfield

#93 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by monkeynuts » 19 Mar 2016 10:16

Pote Snitkin wrote:A dog and small child? Had a car seat with them did they? Plus how did they all get there. Did they have another car then. Surely the trader should've taken the keys. Why is she so obsessed in wanting to destroy this couple who have been found not guilty by a jury privy to all the facts?

I am sure now with all this evidence on record, and that Sheila has names them directly they have a very good case from slander as Mark mentioned earlier.

This continued course of action is just building them a bigger case.
An awake populous is a bailiffs worst nightmare!

User avatar
monkeynuts
Site Admin
Posts: 624
Joined: 07 Nov 2012 13:46
Location: Macclesfield

#94 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by monkeynuts » 19 Mar 2016 10:30

Pote Snitkin wrote:
Fenella wrote: In Court it was stated that Ross Kirby and his partner Stacie Greengrow arrived at the car sales premises on a Sunday afternoon with their young child and small dog. Mr Kirby indicated that he wanted to test drive an estate car. He selected the Volvo V70. He indicated that he wished to drive the car himself (as opposed to being a passenger). The garage owner was initially hesitant and required some documentary evidence that Mr Kirby was licensed to drive. Mr Kirby provided a copy of his driving licence. As it was a Sunday afternoon, the only staff member available was the owner of the car sale business. At the time, other visitors were viewing vehicles and with Mr Kirby indicating that he was a keen prospective purchaser, the garage owner allowed Mr Kirby and his partner to take the vehicle on a 10 minute test drive. His business insurance covered such test drives.

After 20 minutes, the garage owner became slightly concerned and went to see whether the couples car was still in the car park. It wasn't. The garage owner became very concerned and accordingly, checked the CCTV cameras. This revealed that the couple arrived at the car sales premises as passengers in another vehicle. CCTV cameras also revealed that when Mr Kirby took the vehicle on the test drive, the other vehicle followed. It was then that the garage owner realised that this devious company had taken the Volvo V70.

available was the garage owner.

other people viewing vehicles and the with the only staff member being the garage owner, he allowed Mr Kirby to take the vehicle on a 10 minute 'test drive'.

There were other visitors viewing cars at the same time and given that it was Sunday afternoon, the garage owner
And she knows all of this despite not being present. Makes you wonder who has told her all of this.... and why. I can think of just one person.
Hmmm I went to a car sales place on a Sunday once to test drive my new car and guess what.... they said "come back tomorrow as we have no staff to accompany you"

As Mark (I think) pointed out earlier they needed a staff member with appropriate insure for the trade plates..... Sheila wake up and stop living in a land of fairytales!
An awake populous is a bailiffs worst nightmare!

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#95 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 19 Mar 2016 11:47

Knickers continue to be wildly twisted on CAG. The chimp is relentless in his quest to prove the bailiff's did no wrong. He blunders on saying that only the civil court would be a place to establish ownership but he fails to grasp that is for when no alleged theft has occurred, for example who owns a car when a couple split up. As usual his grasp of the law is flawed.

This case was not an ownership dispute, it was an allegation of theft. The jury heard the evidence and decided no theft took place as the defendants still owned the vehicle. The car will now be returned to the defendants as it's their property. The car trader is now free to start a civil action against whoever he sees fit. He even has the option of starting a civil claim against the defendant to claim ownership under the good faith rule but would most likely be more successful in claiming against who he bought the vehicle from.

The court heard evidence from Newlyn's, that is logical. The jury decided that the initial seizure was unlawful - they were not asked to consider this but they have come to that logical conclusion otherwise they would not have decided that no theft occurred as the defendants still owned the vehicle. The jury deliberated for four hours, and followed the trail right back to the feet of Newlyn's. As soon as they realised that seizure was unlawful then everything that followed was void.

Fenella is now shrieking about how disgraceful it is that details of this case are being posted. She clearly fails to see the hypocritical irony of that seeing as she has spent the last 3 days posting confidential witness statement information that can only have come from one source. This regulated person has breached confidentiality. Fenella has relentlessly slandered the defendants and she will have to deal with the consequences.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#96 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:06

I can now confirm PF was NOT involved in the criminal proceedings. He wasn't even there.

Sheila has NOT contacted Village Car Sales, they are seeking their own legal advice, and

She has never spoken with the client. He has heard of the name 'Sheila Harding' but didn't know in what capacity she acted.

She has no direct information in connection with the Luton case.

Client has a right to bring a slander action against Sheila for saying he and Stacie, by their full names (which we did not publish); - "Debtor 'steals' vehicle from new owner after it had been sold by enforcement company", on a public internet forum.

I can't see Sheila achieving anything positive. She drags PF into the mire, about a proceeding he has no connection with, or exposing him giving case material, including personal data, to an interloper. Putting Marc Gander at risk of receiving a NOA in connection with her posting on his CAG board, and the moderators, so far, have taken no action with rules of his own forum.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6459
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#97 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Pote Snitkin » 19 Mar 2016 12:16

So she's making wild stabs in the dark. She has now fully flipped the dolally switch:
Bringing a little bit of light hearted humour into the debate, if the weather were nicer, I would love to be taking a test drive in a newer vehicle but I cannot bear to give up my dependable 4 year old Cherokee Jeep. It has probably been the best vehicle that I have ever owned and with the number of miles that I drive each week, is vital.

But having two 4x4's in the family is just plain silly. My next car will be my treat to myself.
Trying to change the subject methinks.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#98 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:32

Witness statement of car dealer.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#99 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 19 Mar 2016 12:41

Pote Snitkin wrote:So she's making wild stabs in the dark. She has now fully flipped the dolally switch:
Bringing a little bit of light hearted humour into the debate, if the weather were nicer, I would love to be taking a test drive in a newer vehicle but I cannot bear to give up my dependable 4 year old Cherokee Jeep. It has probably been the best vehicle that I have ever owned and with the number of miles that I drive each week, is vital.

But having two 4x4's in the family is just plain silly. My next car will be my treat to myself.
Trying to change the subject methinks.
She's posted that in direct response to my comments that she hasn't owned a car since around the time of her last court conviction. She has told me so herself. Indeed, when she was invited to attend a meeting with the Met regarding the ANPR, she travelled over 3 hours each way on the hottest day of the year on a stuffy National coach to London & back. Why would she slum it like that if she had her own car?

I see Jason has posted a witness statement confirming that a test drive did take place and that insurance was in place. Reading that statement as well as others from the case (including 1 from Newlyns who according to the chimp weren't involved), it is very worrying that Sheila has also clearly had access to these statements (or at least some of them). It is noteworthy in the statement that the owner did not want to press charges because it would affect his insurance premium.

What is very, very concerning is that Sheila has not only been given access to these confidential documents but she has also posted sensitive information on a (ahem) social media site. Given her relationship with PFG, the spotlight clearly falls on him as a possible source for leaking this information.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#100 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:44

Amanda Lambley - Newlyn
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#101 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:45

A1 Environmental Ltd. Louis Sanders.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#102 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:46

Bystanders
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13070
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#103 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Mar 2016 12:48

8 witnesses. Note, PFG absent.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#104 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 19 Mar 2016 12:59

The question has to be asked (make that questions)

Why have the CPS provided these statements to Newlyns?
Why have Newlyns in turn passed them onto Sheila?

I think the 2nd question is easily answered-Sheila is used as Newlyns publicity tool on the internet. Every time there is a high profile Newlyn case, Newlyns version of events is published via Sheila. I know for a fact that the information regarding the Larnyou case came directly from PF as I have a forwarded copy of his email. I would be very surprised if this latest information did not come from the same channel. This (if true) poses a 3rd question. Why are Newlyns passing this information onto a 3rd party solicitor who is not employed by Newlyn?

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#105 Re: Newlyn "stolen car" prosecution fails at court.

Post by Mark1960 » 19 Mar 2016 13:05

Sheila just came out with this gem:
I promise though to take the cars back
I wonder if she also promises to tax them? :lol:

Post Reply