Exceptional event exposes banks responsible for the last financial crash.
On 10/03/2020, Bank-A applied to repossess a property. A court hearing was scheduled for 13/04/2020. On 03/04/2020, Bank-A wrote a false statement to mislead the court. But COVID-19 adjourned the hearing and on 09/04/2020, just 6 days later Bank-A wrote to apologise and accept legal service.
This victim was given a counterclaim because, during lockdown, proof was obtained that 6 weeks before applying to the court, Bank-A was escalating this borrower’s offer to repay their entire loan to the top of Bank-A’s organisation, and looking to uphold this borrower’s complaint for being mis-sold.
AI was then used to find a legal trail of hundreds of thousands of equity charges worth tens of billions registered at HM Land Registry in the name of Bank-B. In 2008, all these charges were transferred to Bank-C, and again in 2010 to a third-party trust. But, knowing that all but just 2 months of these charges were not owned by them, Bank-A fraudulently acquired the charges at HM Land Registry.
On 24/08/2023, a sitting judge in this case said evidence of this has merit. On 21/12/2023, Bank-C wrote confirming all this and that the charge was paid off in 2010. But when Bank-C realised they gave proof of their fraud, their choice of lies conflicted so heavily with Bank A’s choice of lies, this revealed all three trusted high street banks as contributors to the last financial crash.
Case study press packs
- A trial skeleton argument of this company’s counterclaim for potentially hundreds of millions. Including evidence which invalidates £14 billion worth of UK charges. This was sent to Bank-A on 06/06/2023, which resulted in the low court following Bank-A’s request not to follow due process and the High Court having to intervene twice.
- Including over one year of delay because of COVID-19, we have documented court orders and judges’ statements over four years. With delays of at least two years and significant extra costs because of court administrative, procedural, and even legal misdirections. All of which helped Bank-A, harmed their opponent and failed to meet most of the courts’ own objectives. This is a step-by-step guide to how banks abuse the courts’ trust and exploit the unlawful distribution of equity.
- This has already helped multiple victims connect for joint claims against Bank-A and Bank-C.