Deleted

DavetheDog

So, with the case in mind that the trading standards are bringing to court against all the persons known to us I have been doing a bit of digging today, and been looking at information on Town & County Law at Companies House. This is purely speculative, but I noticed that the profits / losses from 2016 and 2017 are of a similar amount, around the £60k figure. However 2017 shows a huge amount of £502,582 of ‘administrative expenses’, whilst this was only £26,448 for the previous year. Could this be where some of the alleged money laundering has been going on? The information is freely available to anyone to look at on the Companies House website, you can see all the companies the Mr.Pratt ( haha) has been a director of and how all the other defendants are also registered as directors of the same companies. There seems to be several, all linked to each other by the same registered addresses and directors.
I don’t profess to know much about money laundering but I reckon a better way around it would probably be to use different names and addresses rather than tying yourselves together with the same piece of string.

MR_Blg

Thank you Paul , the time you have put into collating all that information is greatly appreciated.

I was wondering what would happen given the fact that Mr Devita is now bankrupt. The fact that Mr Platt may become liable for the full amount of the costs incurred for the intervention etc has just brought a smile to my face. However what action would the SRA take if he did not pay the costs , what clout do they have to be able to retrieve them ?

As you stated ,the events that are now unfolding, impending court case and maybe Police action for other matters this does appear to be a tangled web, and not one that will have an early conclusion I suspect.

Neighbourhood_Watch

Edited - Apologies all round, I got confused with the identical house next to them which had sold.

Minit

Neighbourhood_Watch wrote: »

Just saw this article in the local papers, they were my ex neighbours (de vitas) they spent a whole ton of money (high tens of thousands) on decorating and altering their house with grand plans for extension too, new Jags and Mercs all the time, anyway its now SSTC sold at a loss. At least the mystery of how they lived how they did has been solved.

How did you find out they had sold?

I wasn’t aware their house was on the market?

Minit

Thanks for the update. Do we know who asked for the dismissal?

AndyPix

I think this has to be considered spam now.


For the couple of you that care - why not set up a whatsapp group instead of filling the forum with this nonsense


You promised to pique my interest 8 pages ago - this is just now a monologue of you reporting stuff

Minit

Do we know what the non practicing solicitor was being charged with?

Minit

AndyPix wrote: »

I think this has to be considered spam now.


For the couple of you that care - why not set up a whatsapp group instead of filling the forum with this nonsense


You promised to pique my interest 8 pages ago - this is just now a monologue of you reporting stuff

Nobody is forcing you to keep reading.

MR_Blg

Are we able to determine the individual charges for each defendant at this stage of the proceedings?

MR_Blg

Thank you , as always your input into this post has been invaluable.