|
Home is where the heart is!! |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
"I lost my home of 30 years because I was sued by an 'alleged' paedophile and lost.”
In simple terms, that is what happened. But – my story is far from simple. It involves professional negligence by solicitors who have acted supposedly on my behalf; the repercussions of their negligence; errors by building societies; and the steadfast determination of the solicitor that represented the 'alleged' paedophile to deprive my family of our home, despite the fact that neither he nor the 'alleged' paedophile will gain financially from its sale.
It is a very complicated story, and it's one that could make a good film, given the underhand tactics deployed within the legal system and between the financial and legal institutions that I thought were supposed to help the individual. Now that's an idea!!!
But – it is also a sad story. I've lost everything, except for the love and support of my family and good friends – which is why I am fighting back.
The videos and documents on this page tell my story. |
|
|
| My Story
(Part 1) Recorded 22nd March 2006 |
My Story
(Part 2) Recorded 22nd March 2006 |
| Terry and
the Rock Recorded 30th October 2008 |
Repoman Recorded 6th November 2008 |
| Dundas
and Duce Recorded 17th December 2008 |
Squattin
for Xmas Recorded 20th December 2008 |
| Terry and
the Neighbours Recorded December 2008 |
Terry on
MP's Recorded 13th May 2009 |
|
Click on the
tab 'Support Terry Campaign' |
|
|
|
|
| Saturday 23rd January 2010 I have today received two letters from Northern Rock - both dated 21st January 2010. The first letter gives me the redemption figure - but it is very similar to the previous redemption figure, and that one included the plot of land which includes the lake! So I am none the wiser!! The second letter states that it will look to enforce its power of sale if the proposed sale at £450k does not proceed. What about the appeal on 8th February 2010? I am so confused. |
| 7th January 2010 Today I received an email from my solicitor regarding Harper's letter of 8th December 2009. You will see in Harper's letter that he states 'I can see no reference to Grove Mill Cottage on the website'. Now the website he is referring to is that of Page & Wells', and the cottage he is referring to is my home!! Now look below and you will see the snapshot of my home listed as being sold 'subject to contract'!! You will also see that Page & Wells' description of the property includes the lake - but I own the piece of land containing the lake; I have the deeds; it was never mortgaged!! I just don't understand this. Does the person buying my home know that he/she is not buying a large selection of the garden??
|
| 25th December 2009 ARMSTRONG FAMILY HOMELESS FOR CHRISTMAS 2009 This Christmas my family are homeless, the first Christmas we shall be apart. Last Christmas we made the national news by my appearing personally for interview by Fern Britton and Philip Schofield on ITVs 'Good Morning' and on 'Tonight with Trevor McDonald' for squatting in our repossessed home (Repo man) as reported on this website.
My story began when I attacked an alleged, thus far unconvicted paedophile, who took me to court in 2004 on legal aid and won. Effectively I'm losing my home for protecting children from a paedophile ring. I've never been arrested and charged with assault. I can't afford to pay off the balance of the outstanding costs (c£55k) so we have lost our family home of 30 years. We were evicted for a second time just after last Christmas and I was arrested on camera to keep the peace. There were two camera crews present, BBC for 'The One Programme' and Meridian News. This final injustice drove me to attempt suicide soon after the eviction by jumping off a motorway bridge but I was thwarted by Kent police who stopped the traffic on the M20.
Our old cottage remains derelict for a second year, caught up in a legal battle. We have been told that we may have been deprived of our home illegally, in breach of Article No 1 of Protocol No 1 under Statutory Human Rights 1998, because the solicitor who evicted us for his top up fees will not benefit financially even if they ever sell the house.
I'm not a violent raving lunatic just a normal bloke who loves his family and hates paedophiles. Meanwhile we have nothing to celebrate until we can go home for Christmas. I am committed to doing all I can for other families facing eviction for whatever reason in the years ahead. Families are the basis of community and without community we don't have a country. I agree with the Prime Minister in this current recession - we must do everything in our power to keep families together in their own homes especially at Christmas for the sake of the children who are our future.
Not a very merry Christmas but if there's any justice hopefully a happy new year. |
| 3rd February 2009 A Brief Summery of Last Weeks Eviction We received the eviction warrant in the post on Friday 23rd January 2009, which only gave us just 3 days, including the weekend, to make the necessary arrangements for the eviction at 9.00am on the 26th. Whatever the rules are regarding eviction warrants, that’s a wholly inadequate period of time to make all the necessary arrangements. The situation created by Kingsfords Solicitors is deserving of close scrutiny. I believe that Kingsfords should state plainly what their reasons are for seeking eviction at this time. At the conclusion of the case Vale v Armstrong, Kingsfords’ client received an out of court settlement from the Halifax of c£60,000. Legal Aid paid Kingsfords for their work in representing both their client and the Halifax PLC at the trial. Kingsfords were granted a Consent Order by the court, which stated we would surrender the property to them after a period of time. This time was allowed by the judge, after representations were made by our legal team regarding our professional negligence claim against Thomson Snell & Passmore. The judge accepted the assertion that this claim should realise more than sufficient sums to cover Kingsfords' bill. Unfortunately an oversight by our legal team, regarding a reimbursement we had to make to the Legal Aid Board, resulted in the funds we received - after successfully establishing TS&P’s negligence - being only about half of what was due. Kingsfords received c£60k, which left a balance of c£45k. Kingsfords have since applied further costs and interest charges, so the sum we now owe them is c£55k. Bearing in mind this £55k represents Kingsfords 'Top Up' fees – they have already received in excess of c£100k from Legal Aid. It is my opinion that Kingsfords’ eviction action does not make economic sense, in terms of recovering the balance of the legal costs outstanding. This is because the Consent Order in place demands the property cannot be sold for less than £550.000 and Kingsfords’ charge is 4th in line behind Northern Rock, SPPL (part of Lehman Brothers) and the unsecured Morgan Stanley credit card debt which was later secured on the property. The total debt amounts to c£531.500 between them, less 50% of the equity which is due to Mrs Armstrong. Kingsfords would stand to get very little , if any, even if they could sell the property for the £550,000 stated on the Consent Order - which is completely unrealistic under the present financial constraints and the collapse of the housing market. Our best estimate of the current value of the property is around £400,000. There is no sound economic reason to make a family of four homeless when there is no hope of selling the house for any amount capable of achieving a successful financial conclusion to the Order of Sale in Kingsfords’ possession. It would have been preferable for all concerned were we permitted to stay whilst attempts are made to settle the debt ,or at least until the market improves and a better price can be achieved capable of clearing more of the debts. |
| 30th January 2009 Window of opportunity! We were evicted for £55k by Kingsfords solicitors because of the remaining unpaid costs in the case Vale -v- Armstrong. The day after the eviction Kingsfords e-mailed our solicitors, regarding arrangements to remove our belongings, and the last paragraph reads: WITHOUT PREJUDICE No doubt your client knows that if he pays my client the money due to him (or some of it) he will be let back in. Yours faithfully K A Harper Kingsfords Solicitors 5/7 Bank Street, Ashford, Kent, TN23 1BZ Telephone : (01233) 665544 Fax: (01233) 645836 DX 30205 Ashford Kent |
| 23rd January 2009 Today's Events - 23rd January 2009 On 22nd January 2009, we received a letter from a senior manager at Northern Rock, Scott Taviner, acknowledging our request dated 20th November, to come to an agreement to accept affordable mortgage repayments. Please note that Mr. Taviner's letter was dated 16th January 2009, but it didn't arrive in the post until 22nd January, this being the same day that Kingsfords Solicitors of Ashford, Kent, solicitors for the alleged paedophile, issued the attached notice of eviction , that we received today. Coincidence - more like collusion! It's been obvious to us all along that Northern Rock elected to use Kingsfords to do their dirty work |
| 15th January 2009 There have been developments regarding “Uncle 'Arry” which put a whole new dimension on the case, if confirmed. In support of Terry’s current position, he has received unsubstantiated reports indicating that Uncle 'Arry’s alleged paedophile ring has been active. All that is required is for the alleged victims, or their parents, to come forward and bear witness - which they are urged to do to protect other children. This news came to light when Terry reported on the repossessed website, that he had taken legal action against the Kent firm of solicitors Dundas & Duce, who were employed to give Uncle 'Arry independent legal advice with regard to the conveyance of his house to the Armstrongs. See the short film entitled Uncle 'Arry. The presiding judge in the trial Vale -v- Armstrong, Mr Justice Evans Loombe, heavily criticised Mr Duce in his summing up of the case HC03C00770 for failing in his duty of care to both Mr Vale and Mr Armstrong, pointing out that had Mr Duce executed his duties according to law the matter of Vale -v- Armstrong would never have arisen. Click the link entitled 'Dundas & Duce' to see a short film to understand the current situation awaiting trial. Terry intends to call Mr Vale as a principal witness together with all other concerned parties, including the relevant authorities - Terry’s former solicitors Thomson Snell & Passmore and their barrister Mr Waterworth of 10 Old Sq Chambers, who admitted professional negligence; Mr Vale's solicitors Kingsfords of Ashford, Kent and their barrister Mr Bartlett, who secured and executed the repossession of Terry's home; the Halifax Building Society and their solicitors Rees Page, who made an out of court payment of £60k to Mr Vale at the conclusion of the trial; Pope & Co solicitors and their barrister Mr Learmonth; Amanda Maycock at The Financial Ombudsman Service and Terry’s current solicitors Mr Ian Tysh of Berry & Berry. Having no trust in the legal system Terry is a litigant in person against Dundas and Duce, but he would welcome any advice from those with experience of such matters. |
| 20th November 2009 A Little Christmas Cheer! Yesterday I wrote an Open Letter to Ron Sandler, the Executive Chairman of Northern Rock, asking for them to spread a little Christmas cheer over the festive season. When my house lays empty for Christmas, haven’t Northern Rock the heart to let us stay there at least to watch the Queen’s speech? Terry |
| 17th October 2008 Rock and a Hard Place Northern Rock denies it’s aggressively taking back the homes of those in mortgage arrears and the government denies any day-to-day input. It’s the only fully nationalised bank. So should Northern Rock be repossessing homes at a faster rate than some other lenders? The bank’s chairman, Ron Sandler, said it was operating the same policy as it did before it was nationalised. And Gordon Brown insists the bank is run “at arms length” from the government. But some home-owners believe the Rock is taking a tough new line. See me on the Channel 4 report on this page. Terry |
|
We suspect that Northern Rock were
working with the alleged paedophile's solicitor because they can't
explain why they aborted two County Court Repossession claims. We
believe that they avoided bad press by using the alleged paedophile's
High Court eviction order to do their dirty work for them. Journalists have requested we publish on The Repossessed website written correspondence from Northern Rock's Solicitors (Wallers) apologising for filing repossession proceedings with the court saying it was in error, then writing again to say it was not an error and they have been instructed to reinstate the repossession proceedings. We believe that this serves to demonstrate either Northern Rock's administration of its' mortgage account book is seriously flawed or, more likely in our case, illustrates the decision by Ron Sandler to use the alleged paedophile's repossession consent order for costs to achieve vacant possession of the property at arms length. In addition, it has been requested that we publish Northern Rock's correspondence regarding its claim to the CTRL compensation payment. Northern Rock Claim for Possession 3 June 2008 Northern Rock demand CTRL Compensation 9 June 2008 CTRL Compensation explanation letter 13 June 2008 Northern Rock withdraw repossession claim 16 June 2008 Northern Rock no show in Court 1 July 2008 Northern Rocks error was an error 11 July 2008 Northern Rock Claim for possession 15 July 2008 Paedophiles costs eviction notice 25 July 2008 Northern Rock's second repossession claim 25 July 2008 EVICTED 13th August 2008 Northern Rock no show in court 3 September 2008
|
|
Terms and Conditions / Privacy Policy © the-repossessed.com |