43877

Dear Gavin Brown,

It is more than 2 weeks since I emailed you.

How did the .ZIP file work out?
When will you begin investigating?
What ELSE do you need from me in order to complete this?

May I point out that I first contacted your office in February and it is now June?

When can I expect an answer to my simple request? i.e. (below)

Whatever else happens I ask the Ombudsman to take over the investigation of Head 6 (and the underlying misconduct) HERSELF.

Will she or won't she? If not, why not?

I look forward to hearing from you (or from Ms. Manzoor herself).

Yours sincerely

Spenser Poultney

----- Original Message -----

From: Spenser Poultney

To: Legal Services Ombudsman

Cc: lexcel@lawsociety.org.uk ; bristol@legalservices.gov.uk

Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 11:30 PM

Subject: Re: 43877

Dear Gavin Brown,

Thank you for your various emails in response to mine which may be found here http://www.lcs-test.co.uk/Whelan.htm

Please be aware that I have yet to hear from BOTH parties on the CC list (lexcel@lawsociety.org.uk and bristol@legalservices.gov.uk)

I attach the contents of the CD-ROM dated 26th September 2006 as a ZIP file (3.61MBytes)

On a standard Windows PC simply unzip the attached file to the root of your C drive.

Navigate to C:\CCS-POL-CD and double-click index.htm - all other material is linked from here (including a copy of the 2004 CD-ROM sent to Greg Clark).

If you have any difficulties I am sure your IT folks can advise (please show them this email)...

...and PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW YOU GET ON?

Please note that whilst the CD-ROMs provide a very useful "snapshot in time" (i.e. what was KNOWN at that time) they:-

Relate only to "Head Six" of the complaints of 2008 (Heads 1 to 5 stand alone http://www.lcs-test.co.uk/lcs2.htm )
Some of the external links are now out of date
New evidence came to light in 2008 which PROVES many of the assumptions made then (and not investigated) to be FACT

At the time FDC Liar was mostly pleading "incompetence" and "mistakes" whilst still hiding the TRUTH (which they clearly KNEW all along) and misleading the public that Lexical and LSC accreditation and the Law Society somehow protects prospective Clients FROM such misconduct.

The Complaints and evidence as they stood in 2006 are clearly outlined in 17 paragraphs in index.htm

Key things which are now established FACTS

Jan 2008 - FDC Law's Client finally admitted there was no contract
In 2008 D J James found that FDC Law had misled D J Rutherford over costs in 2003
In 2008 D J James found that Wayman had DELIBERATELY included those other costs (i.e. the HEADING on the form H)
In 2008 D J James found that Wayman / FDC Liar had "Completely Ignored" The Client Care Code and Costs Direction (IPS)
We finally saw the records which proved that Nigel Long had LIED to D J Brookes in 2004 about the "reason" for the increase in costs - i.e. records which showed that the Estimates were based on £80/hr whereas the fabricated bill was based on £155/165
The admission under Oath (by Wayman) that Wayman should NOT have signed the bill in October 2004

Points 1 to 3 relate to "Heads" 1 to 13 on index.htm - amongst other things they show the MOTIVE Wayman had
- To mislead D J Rutherford on 29/07/03
- To LIE to the Law Society in 2004 and H H J Barclay
- To sign that FALSE DECLARATION in 2004 and to LIE to subsequent Courts
Point 4 shows IPS (misconduct in it's own right) - and ANOTHER reason/motive why FDC Law LIED.
Points 5 and 6 are the most serious
- By 2005 Wayman had seen a transcript of proceedings before D J Brookes and FDC Law MUST and KNOWN that Nigel Long LIED and yet they kept quiet about this when the matter was before H H J Cardinal (2005, Birmingham)
- In 2006 FDC Liar conned their Client into seeking Security for Costs KNOWING that BOTH ORDERS for costs were based on the LIES of Nigel Long - they deliberately misled D J Rutherford (once again) to service their own GREED - is there any other term than CRIMINAL FRAUD? It is bad enough that these lying vermin hid their incompetence, their IPS and their earlier attempts at double-charging. It is bad enough they took public funds to defend themselves KNOWING of their earlier failings and their duplicity. Being allowed to profit from it while the Law Society turned ever-blind eyes is adds insult to injury. To do the self-SAME in 2008 (Tosser Whelan's "copy-cat" false declaration) is surely the most arrogant stupidity yet? ...

I assume you HAVE the Judgement of District Judge R James handed down on 25th June 2008? I do not know what ELSE you have or do not have?

PLEASE answer the questions I asked the SRA in December 2008...

In ADDITION to the CD-ROMs ... I need to know:-

	How we deal with this?
	Who deals with what?
	Which "heads" will be taken on board by which regulator?
	What ELSE you need to know?

The LCS/SRA has not even bothered to look at the ALL NEW complaints... much LESS the New Evidence about the ORIGINAL complaints

I do NOT trust the SRA for OBVIOUS reasons and it is plain, even to a child, that they have not addressed ANY of them. Why?

Whatever else happens I ask the Ombudsman to take over the investigation of Head 6 (and the underlying misconduct) HERSELF.

I ask the LSC and Lexical to answer HOW they can allow FDC Liar to mislead the public?

I look forward to hearing from you (all).

Spenser Poultney (01/06/2009)

----- Original Message -----

From: Legal Services Ombudsman

To: spenser@lcs-test.co.uk

Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 9:16 AM

Subject: 43877

Dear Mr Poultney

Unfortunately the CD Rom which accompanied your letter dated 30 September 2006 to the then Consumer Complaints Service has sustained some damage (presumably in transit) which has rendered it impossible for us to access.

I should be most grateful if you would be kind enough to provide us with a copy.

Thank you for your anticipated assistance.

Yours sincerely

Gavin Brown
Operations Manager

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.