READ MORE: NEELU BERRY SET TO LOSE HER HOME IN 28 DAYS!
 |
| Neelu Berry |
Draft Notes of proceedings
ROMFORD COUNTY COURT
14 MARCH 2022 2PM
LISTED IN HEARING ROOM 1 BEFORE DDJ VOSER
BUT CHANGED TO HEARING ROOM 3 BEFORE DJ FRANKLIN EVANS
DJ: DJ Franklin Evans DJ
EM: EDWARD MEULI COUNSEL FOR CLAIMANT
EE: Edward Ellis Executor on the Will of Late Sadhana Dolly Chaudhari
NB: Neelu Berry sister of Late Sadhana Chaudhari
M: Marcelle as Advocate for Neelu Berry
H1PP8822 BANK OF SCOTLAND T/A HALIFAX V EST OF LATE SADHARA CHAUDHARI
EM MEULI Counsel for Claimant
DJ Can I ask, who is Miss Neelu Berry, is that you?
NB Neelu Berry no titles
DJ Who is the lady sitting behind you
NB She is my advocate Marcelle
DJ WHAT IS YOUR SURNAME?
M: Marcelle
DJ: That is most unusual You are refusing to give me your name
DJ: Who is the gentleman with you?
EE: I am Edward Ellis the Executor on the Will
DJ: Whose Will?
EE: The late Mrs Sadhana Chaudhari
EM: May I explain – This is a claim by Bank of Scotland t/a Halifax, loan made to 2 borrowers, Ved Chaudhari, father of Neelu Berry & Sadhana Dolly Chaudhari, Mr Ved Chaudhari died in 2013, legal title passed by right of survivorship into the name of his daughter Sadhana Dolly Chaudhari. Unfortunately she passed away in dec 2018 and since that date no payments have been made of the mortgage.
Neelu Berry who is in court, as the bank understands, is the occupier of the property and also the sister of Sadhana Dolly Chaudhari. She was appointed in Nov 2021, under CPR 19.8 2B(ii) to act on behalf of the Estate in these proceedings alone, not that she was liable. That Application had to be made because there had been no grant of probate in respect of SDC’s Will.
Substantive Possession Claim on 02 Feb 2022, NB & EE attended, EE was a solicitor, struck off the rolls some time ago and has GCRO until Feb 2022.
The matter was Adjourned till today, because list was tight, Pre-Action Protocol checklist which court did not have on file. The Estate was ordered to file a Defence of no more than 5 pages by 25 Feb 2022. A 5 page document entitled Defence & Counterclaim no factual legal basis for defending the claim
DJ: p208 Extraordinary document
EM: Straight forward repossession claim. Registered proprietors have died. £153,664.64 debt, current monthly instalments £485.24 /m last payment 3rd Dec 2018 £12,518.66, interest only mortgage, 6yrs 8months remaining
DJ: Is it interest only? What is the Morgan figure
EM: I have no Morgan figure because there is no borrower, but I can get it
DJ: Mr Ellis I haven’t decided if EE has locus to stand to appear today, but he announced that was the Executor which suggests that a Will has been submitted to probate
EM: There has been no Grant of Probate, no Will proved. That was dealt with in the application to appoint Neelu Berry. I’ve since taken instruction and done a search of the online publicly available records and there is no Will proved. Probate is onging, a caution has been lodged against the proof of the Will, Probate is ongoing
DJ: Probate has been applied for?
EM: It is unclear who has applied or when or if process resolved
DJ to EE: – By what right do you appear here today?
EE: Because I am the Executor on the Will
DJ: In your own personal capacity as the Executor on the Will
EE: I have the Representation appointment – The Executor is the representative
DJ: you are not entitled to be the representative on the Estate, that has been dealt with by CPR
EE: It was obtained by fraud, I don’t care what you do today, the purpose of today is to get an Audio record what you do when you are given notice that I am the Executor
DJ: Where is the evidence Well in that case you can leave…You claim to be the executor, where is the evidence you claim to be something
EE: Have you read the defence and counterclaim
DJ: It is gibberish it doesn’t add up to a lid of beans. Did your draft it?
EE: ofcourse Are you reading the Defence & Counterclaim or the hearing proposals.
DJ: You drafted this document? My Goodness Gracious I expect you are looking at the right one? It starts Is this the Defence. I am reading the document p208 in bundle. You drafted that document?
EE: Indeed,
DJ: Why?
EE: Because I am an Equity Lawyer. Since July 2004, I have specialised in corruption cases against judges for the Crown and Lord Bishops.
DJ: I see
EE: In order to do that I have special protection rights under the Parliament Session Agreements between the Crown and the Prime Minister. The Legal Services Act 2007, created crimes of unqualified legal services, special protection rights for me, prohibit the cabinet from using any unqualified crime prosecutions against me so I can provide unqualified services that force corrupt officers to make protection fraud demands and the only way to service those demands is contempt proceedings in the Civil courts. The other protection I have is when I’ve got the case all the way through to penalty, the Cabinet is prohibited from allowing contempt penalty enforcement. So we end up with the Corruption Proof against the State, Remedy Denial Fraud Proof against Law Courts. Crown & Lord Bishops use all the records..
DJ: The Lord Bishops is that?
EE: Yes
DJ: So the Diosese bishops, Church of England diosece bishops
EE: No How it works is, there are 2 Lord Archbishops,
DJ: They are Archbishops, I though you said Lord Bishops
EE: Yes there are 24 Lord Bishops,
DJ: Yes
EE: Upto 12 can sit as trial jurors, and upto 12 others sit as appeal jurors
DJ: I see
EE: So the Citizen, Crown and Lord Bishops are the Coronation Oath Enforcement Authority. An Equity Lawyer is anyone who has the expertise for case management that gets proof sets that gets the corruption remedy proof standard. The Coronation Oath Enforcement Authority uses the common law. Because I have special protection rights, I have been able to get proof sets corruption proof against judges, dismissal decisions against judges, with executional responsibility decisions against the Cabinet and Prime Minister.
DJ: I am going to stop you there Mr Ellis. I not satisfied that you have any rights at all to address the court, so I am not going to go any further, and if you insist to continue to address me I shall have you removed from the court.
EE: You can do what you like. Can you confirm that there is an audio record?
DJ: I am going to have you removed from the court unless you go of your own freewill
EE: I am not going to go of my own Freewill
DJ: You will be removed [presses alarm and pretends to continue] So Mr Meuli, continue please
EM: There is no defence been served by Neelu Berry
13 SECONDS LATER:
DJ TO SECURITY GUARDS: “COULD YOU PLEASE REMOVE THE GENTLEMAN MR ELLIS” then DJ ABANDONS THE COURT
SECURITY 1 (S1) TO EE LETS GO SIR
EE: YOU MUST TOUCH ME TO DEMONSTRATE USE OF FORCE
S1: YEAH REASONABLE FORCE
EE: I AM HERE AS AN EQUITY LAWYER CONDUCTING CORRUPTION CHARGES
S2: DO YOU WANT US TO DRAG YOU OUT RATHER THAN WALK YOU OUT?
EE: TOUCH ME. YOU ARE REFUSING TO TOUCH ME
S1: I AM NOT REFUSING TO TOUCH YOU. THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE, THAT’S ALL I AM SAYING
EE ALL THAT MATTERS IS THE AUDIO RECORD OF THE FRAUDS THE JUDGE IS GETTING
S2: THE JUDGE HAS ASKED US TO REMOVE YOU FROM THE COURTROOM, SO I AM ASKING YOU POLITELY, COULD YOU GET OFF THE CHAIR, LEAVE THE COURTROOM
EE: YOU MUST USE FORCE
S2: IF I NEED TO SIR, YES I WILL
EE: DUE PROCESS REQUIRES THAT THE JUDGE HAS COMMITTED THE FRAUD, THE AUDIO RECORD PROVES THE FRAUD
S2: THE JUDGE HAS ASKED US TO REMOVE YOU
EE: YES I KNOW, THAT IS THE EVIDENCE ON THE TABLE, I WILL READ THE EVIDENCE WE WERE GOING TO GET WAS FRAUD REMEDIES, OR ENFORCEMENT FRAUDS, ONE OR THE OTHER. AND THERE ARE TEST CASES GOING ON
S1: I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ANY OF THAT – LETS GO
S2: THE JUDGE HAS ASKED US TO REMOVE YOU FROM THE COURT
S1: SO YOU WANT US TO PHYSICALLY REMOVE YOU
S2: YOU CAN LEAVE THIS COURT RIGHT NOW
S1: GOES BEHIND THE CHAIR THAT EE IS SITTING ON AND SLIDES IT AWAY FROM UNDERNEATH OF EE, THROWING HIM OFF
NB: CAN YOU NOT MAN-HANDLE HIM HE IS VERY ILL OK DO NOT MANHANDLE HIM. PLEASE DO NOT MANHANDLE HIM
EE: WHAT MATTERS IS ITS ALL PART OF THE EVIDENCE
S2: THAT’S FINE
Edward appears to be alarmed and distressed. He is an end-stage kidney dialysis patient. He is forcibly removed from the building by the most senior male security guard White male S2 and another White male S1.
NB: Can I have your name please [to black security guard S3]
S3: I don’t have to give you my name
NB: to lady Can I have your name please
GC: Gemma
NB: Gemma Church?
GC: Yes
NB: Did you pass my documents to the judge
GC: Yes I did
NB: When was the listings changed for the court and the judge to be changed and what was the reasons for the change
GC: We can change the listings at any time due to Judges availability
NB: Right, so is Judge Vokes here today?
GC: No
NB: Is there a reason why he is not here today
GC: Yes there is
NB: What is the reason
GC: I am not at liberty to say, unfortunately
NB: Could you give me the names of the 2 security guards
NB to S2: Could you give me your name please?
S2: What for madam?
NB: You just manhandled somebody and I am a witness to that.
NB to M: I just overheard S2 say EE has been thrown out of the building – Judge asked them to remove him from the courtroom and they have removed EE from the building
SIX MINUTES LATER DJ RE-ENTERS in a JOLLY MOOD
DJ
DJ WAITS FOR SECURITY TO RESET THE ALARM UNDER HIS BENCH BEFORE CONTINUING 7 MINUTES LATER
DJ: Sorry about that. So what I've come to learn is that this is a claim for possession due to arrears on the mortgage and the lack of any persons who is liable to pay them so now over to you Neelu Berry. What have you got to say about this. You can refer to your advocate, you can sit down.
NB: I prefer to stand. so I have got a lot of issues with everything that he (EM) said
DJ: do you deny there is a mortgage
NB: sorry
DJ: do you deny there is a mortgage
NB: yes I do
DJ: what has it got to do with you?
NB: I live at the property
DJ: yes But the mortgage, the house is subject to a mortgage. I've got a copy of the mortgage deed here
NB: have you
DJ: yes
NB: can you show it to me?
DJ: no, you've got it
NB: can you see my sister's name on it?
DJ: it was signed by as i understand it your late father and your late sister
Em: p19 of bundle
DJ: did EE take your bundle away from you
Em: I offered it to NB but she asked for it to be passed to ee
NB: OK let's go through that document p19 there is no postcode, the 11 Dec 2003 balance of monies received £30,169.97
DJ: p19, where does it say
NB: your p19 to EM Do you have this document?
DJ SHOUTS! Can you use the bundle you have been provided
NB: That's what am relying on
DJ: NB listen we are not looking at that you use the bundle that has been provided, it's not like a wedding where you scatter confetti
NB: OK let's go back and look at the document then
DJ: we all need to be looking at the same thing. Use the bundle
NB: ok
EM: I don't think NB has the bundle, I gave it to Mr Ellis
DJ: oh! who has taken it with him!
EM: I don't think it's too much scribbles, so I am happy to give this over if that assists
DJ: that's kind of you
NB: OK so
DJ: so we are at p19 at the moment, And you wanted to tell me about a sum of money, Where is that?
NB: that was on other document I was showing you, I have, you don't have it
DJ: and what is the document ?
DJ: is it the mortgage?
NB: It is the balance of monies
DJ: Well I am looking at the documents that the lender has produced, would you please deal with those documents. what i am told so you know what the case you have to deal with is There is an outstanding amount of £153,664.64 charged on the property that you are occupying
DJ: of that sum £12,518 are arrears due under the mortgage since Dec 2018
NB: shall we go to p187
DJ: the Amended particulars of claim for possession.
NB: can you explain it?
DJ: I Think its because and EM will correct me if I'm wrong, the reason for the amendment because your sister's name had been written down as Sadhara and her real name is Sadhana. so to change the R to N
NB: can you provide me with a copy of the contract
DJ: I don't have to answer your question
NB: I am still waiting for the evidence of a contract between Sadhana and the bank of scotland
DJ: so what you're saying is have i got this right because your sister's name appeared on the mortgage document as Sadhara it doesn't bind her because her name is Sadhana, is that your point
NB: well that is one of the points. The other point is that EM has come here saying that there is no probate, and reason for that is because the name is wrong on the Land Registry because they made that mistake
DJ: why would that prevent there being a grant of probate which is for the Will not the registration documents, answer me that?
NB: are you impartial?
DJ: well i am impartial except when it comes to enforcing the law. You seem to me to be raising rather fluting points with respect because what you're saying is that if the land registry name is wrong that will disentitle your sister's estate from having a grant of probate
DJ: that's rubbish because the Grant of probate turns on the Will. Do you follow? Not whatever happens to be at the land registry do you understand?
NB: No I don't understand anything
The Will was logged with the bank, the Will in which Mr Ellis is the Executor, is with the bank, it is in the bundle, EM has it
DJ: where is it in the bundle?
NB: EM have you seen it? I am asking him if he has hidden it because a lot of documents are missing just like this document is missing because they are committing fraud. You know the law of contract, you are here doing business. Now I am here to get the damages for my sister, who couldn't acquire
DJ: What for? Did she have a legal
NB: EM said that she was entitled to survivorship when my late dad died
DJ: yes
NB: she could not get survivorship because the name on the land registry was wrong, so my late dads name still appears on the land registry if you care to look when my late dad's name is still there in 2022
EM: that is p46 official copy. You can see on page 19 the name is handwritten on the mortgage deed. You can see, it's very unclear. At the bottom of the signature page it looks more like an N than an R
EM: As you will see there is an application at the Land Registry to correct the spelling
NB: There you have an admission that you are in contempt of court from Judge Mckeown because Judge Mckeown asked you to take instruction and if so instructed to make an application for change of name and what do you do? You amend the claim form in contempt of the instructions of Judge Mckeown
DJ: wait a minute if we go back to the amended one that you were referring to a moment ago page 187 and I think before it is the amended claim form. What do you say the requirement is to change the name in the proceedings?
NB: it doesn’t match the contract, the original contract
DJ: no no you are talking across me the order that you referred to as the deputy judge Mckeown was in relation to proceedings do you follow
NB: NO
DJ: proceedings of the law
NB: No you were not there you’re making assumptions and stating them as fact.
EM: Just so that we are completely clear and there is no ambiguity, that is an application that is outstanding and order has been made on that
DJ: so let’s get it clear what it is it’s an application which I think was made on the 10th of March is that clear to amend the name of the late Sadhara Chaudhari to Sadhana Chaudhari and that is an application to amend the proceedings the name as it appears in the proceedings and that is really for the sake of good order exactly this point to be taken in the proceedings correct but what I think Neelu Berry is saying is that the mortgage itself was a nullity or didn’t count against the interest or didn’t bind and didn’t bind her late sister because the name had been wrongly written
EM: yes I am at a bit of a loss how that really works because if that is right then she doesn’t own the property because the registered proprietor of the property is Sadhara.
DJ: well let us put that to Neelu Berry and Neelu Berry if you’re right the misspelling of the name of the be all and end all about it and I think you’re wrong that would mean that your sister didn’t have any share in the property at all
NB: SO what has happened here is that that handwriting with the wrong spelling was not there at the time my sister signed that document because if she saw that she would’ve corrected that document
DJ: do you answer the objection that even if you’re right
NB: I’m going to go through all the errors I’m going to go through all the frauds
DJ: I’m sure you want to but I would like you to address those points as I’m sure if you don’t mind let us say you’re right and that because the mortgage deed has the wrong spelling or appears to her either it didn’t bind her or she did have an interest in the property which will pass to you once this mortgage has been paid off or she didn’t which is it?
NB: coming back to you
DJ shouting NO ! ANSWER MY QUESTION PLEASE WE DON’T HAVE ALL DAY WE'VE GOT 45 MINUTES
NB: are you aware
DJ: would you answer my question
NB: what you're talking about are routine frauds committed by banks which have been
DJ: I'm not asking you about fraud I'm asking you where the property was vested I’m trying to nail you down to what you’re trying to really say. It seems like you don’t really know what you’re trying to say. Is it vested in your sisters estate or not yes or no?
NB: which my sister paid £150,000 cash into the account with the bank
DJ: was the property vested in her name yes or no?
NB: the bank took the money from my sister she never owned the property she never owned it. She thought she owned it. It was owned by a fiction. I don’t know who that person is. That’s not my sister. The bank defrauded my sister.
DJ: wait a minute she thought she owned it but she didn’t is that what you’re saying? Is that what you’re saying? Stop asking questions and answer mine we don’t have all day
NB: Are you the resident judge?
DJ: answer my questions you said she thought she owned it but did she or not in fact
DJ: what is the truth?
NB: are you aware
DJ: oh for goodness sake yes or no did she own the property right you’re not gonna answer it thank you very much indeed
I don’t need to hear any more evidence
Mr Mueli there will be an order for possession in 28 days and are you seeking money judgment
Yes
DJ: Judgment in the amount of the arrears together with the costs that followed under the deed
EM: I seek judgement in the full sum of £153000
DJ: to EM: could you kindly file a minute of the order the number of points addressed, the recitals, the removal of Mr Ellis which was unusual event, and I think also the points raised by Neelu Berry which I find to have been utterly without merits
NB: You are hereby served with a criminal prosecution of you. You just threw that on the floor. You a treasonous criminal and you will be hung for it
DJ: Thank you! Good Afternoon! Judge abandons the court
NB: Mr Meuli are you aware of the FCA fining the bank £45 million for what you were doing here today. They are well aware of the proceedings today
EM: I am just doing my job
M: you have to be careful when you say you’re just doing your job you know the Nazis actually said they were doing their jobs
NB: you are guilty of treason and you will also be hung
NB: You better look up the documentation FCA you better look that up FCA and police and crime Commissioner Anthony Stansfeld report of 2019 when six bank managers were jailed
NB: The Judge has abandoned the court. I declare the proceedings void.
 |
| Neelu Berry |
 |
| Ramola D & Edward Ellis |
No comments:
Post a Comment