Neebert.net
This response if from a complaint I made about my deputy, the
OPG made no attempt to get any of the documents relating to my claims nor did
they give me any chance to present them. It relates mainly to the fact I asked my
mother if she would sell me her half of 5 Eridge road, a house we owned jointly
at 50% 50%.
It had been a buy to let venture but after my home in
Kensington was wrecked in the flash floods in 20-7-2007 I decided to move there
after renting a flat for a short time.
Below an e-mail
from my mother to my deputy. She clearly agreed to sell me her share for
£140,000 and I would take her share of the £250,000 Mortgage, £125,000. This
makes a total of £265,000. As the house had been recently valued at £550,000
this would have been a good deal. My mother had paid off £120,000 of the
mortgage so really I would have been buying her share for £20,000. Mr Lemon did
not do this for me although he told me many times he would. The 2005 Mental
capacity act says he should be acting in my best interest, I lost over £100,000
because he did not carry out my instructions. I don't think lying to someone
and losing them more than £100,000 is acting in there best interests.
Hi Tom
Hope you enjoyed
your holiday and had a good break.
I should have
sent this earlier as I managed to contact my accountant at the beginning of the
week.
I gave him all
the figures, including the sum of £120,000 that Neil suggested would not incur
CGT, but
he said I would
have to pay that and thought a more appropriate sum would be £140,000. Do you want
to come back to
me on this?
Neil said to me
that he had to continue with a buy to let mortgage because to change it would
be very
complicated. As we had come to the end of our tracker
mortgage, this did not make a great deal of
sense to
me. Can you let me know if this is the
case, because I think the buy to let is more expensive
than an ordinary
mortgage.
Neil has not
managed to get another interview yet, so no change there.
Thanks,
Carol
Relating to the
house I live in: I paid £1,150,000, Mr Lemon wanted to offer £1,175,000. I told
him no, offer £1,150,000 she will accept this, and she did. The £1,200,000 was
before I had a chance to cost the work I would need to do to it.
From: Anthony
Barker [mailto:my-email-removed@neebert.net]
Sent: 14 January
2010 18:22
To: Lemon, Tom
Subject: RE: 17
Hardwicke Road
Yea that's fine,
she will most likely ask me exactly what's up and I can tell her I think £1.2m
is ok and they will agree.
As I mentioned
before I think £1.2m is a fair price and I have not seen anything else I like
in the same price region.
Well good luck
with getting the court to approve it and if they want to see I need no more
support I will happily see a neurologist, I don't see why it cant be used to
review me as well. If they charge £600 I suggest we try to get a report that
can be used for both purposes.
Regards
Neil
As I have now
bought the house does this mean I have improved?
-----Original Message-----
From: Rihan, Boz
[mailto:BRihan@prince-evans.co.uk]On Behalf Of Lemon, Tom
Sent: 14 January 2010 17:55
To: my-email-removed@neebert.net
Subject: 17 Hardwicke Road
Dear Neil
Further to our telephone conversation this
afternoon, I am forwarding Lynette's email for your information together with a
draft of my proposed reply to her.
Please confirm that you agree with my
response and I will send it to her.
As mentioned, the Court will not be
likely to approve the purchase unless we have a surveyor's valuation supporting
a value of £1.2 million and we can also put forward a justification for you
investing so much of your damages in property bearing in mind that a
substantial part of the original damages award was attributable to your care
and support costs over the coming years.
The Court will need to be satisfied
that your condition has improved far more quickly than the specialists had
understood would be likely when the hearing took place.
Best regards,
Mr Lemon kept
paying Kevin Cross and he did not inform me of all other payments.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Anthony
Barker [mailto:my-email-removed@neebert.net]
Sent: 10 January
2010 10:39
To: Lemon, Tom
Subject: Markets
I feel in the current
finical climate having my money in property is no bad thing. The national debt
amongst other things will lead to inflation and I have consulted with my mother
and she agrees that acquiring 17 Hardwicke road and letting it over the short
term would be the correct move from a finical point of view. The only problem
with this is the CoP, I would even let eridge road but this has other problems
as I do still wish to sell it and move capital into a flat which I would let.
This is because the return from the investment is far grater. I do not have
time to waste at the moment as I am working every day up to the 16th. I am
learning Fujitsu have taken on some very big contracts and would have an
engineer of my standard work seven days a week. There logistics partner Reco
have many failings and I do not want to be working six or seven days a week.
I am wondering
weather my time would be better spent looking for long term employment and
trying to secure 17 hardwicke road. My ultimate goal is to get 17 and pay my
brothers off when my mother dies and put both 16 and 17 hardwicke road on the
market as a single deal. This is by no means guaranteed to get a premium but
with the right marketing and in the right finical climate I could get a premium
price.
As for the CoP I
don't suspect the chance of an early review due to the fact I am excelling at a
very high demand job but I would like to inform you I do not wish any moneys to
be paid out on my behalf other than the £2500 for the van my father bought for
me. Please in future run any invoice requests by me before settling them. I do
not employ Kevin Cross, Natalie Smith or anyone else other than yourself so the
only money coming out should be the monthly £1200.
I hope you had a
good Christmas and new year.
Thanks
Neil
Play the game? The
game where he gets my money?
I had to quickly
finish renovation on my last house in order to sell it for a good price, my
works are thought to have increased the value by £125,000 - £155,000.
It has been sold
now and the profit was more than £50,000. He insults me greatly, he is my
intellectual inferior and if either of us are to lack mental capacity it can
only be Mr Lemon.
From: Rihan, Boz [BRihan@prince-evans.co.uk] on
behalf of Lemon, Tom [Tlemon@prince-evans.co.uk]
Sent: 08 September 2009 15:16
To: my-email-removed@neebert.net
Subject: 5 Eridge Road
Dear Neil
Further to our
meeting last week, I contacted your mother to obtain details of the amount
which she had paid on your behalf to the contractors. I understand from her, however, that in fact you have paid them,
presumably by overdrawing your account.
Neil, would you
please let me know the precise amount you have paid (which I believe was
£3,500) and I will then reimburse this to you.
I must again emphasise
however, that you must "play the game" and contact me before any
expenditure is agreed. As you know, you
do not have the legal ability to enter into contracts and it is going to be
embarrassing if I am constantly being asked to pay monies for expenditure which
you have agreed without my consent.
Embarrassing? Well
the fact of the matter is that I never ask him because he is stupid and I can
get the money I need from other sources. Mr Lemon told me to stop work on 5
Eridge road, if I had then there would have been no £50,000 profit. I should
not have be able to get £70,000 to renovate a house if under the Court of
Protection so for this fact alone it is pointless in me being under the Court
of Protection.
We previously
agreed that I would send you £1,200 per month for your general expenditure and
bills. You received a sum of £530
towards the end of August and I am now sending you, so that you are not
concerned regarding your financial position position, a further £670 and this
will be credited to your account. On 21
September 2009 I will be crediting a further £1,200 and will credit this amount
each month.
As mentioned
above, please let me know the amount of the gardening contractor's bill and if
you have any large amounts which need to be paid, please confirm to me so that
these can be settled up to date and any overdraft you have can be paid.
Best wishes,
Tom
The 2005 Mental
Capacity act clearly states a review should be granted in all but exceptional
circumstances.
From: Rihan, Boz [BRihan@prince-evans.co.uk] on
behalf of Lemon, Tom [Tlemon@prince-evans.co.uk]
Sent: 12 August 2009 16:49
To: my-email-removed@neebert.net
Subject: RE: Bank of Scotland
Dear Neil
Would you please
let me know whether the contractors have been paid. If
they have been
paid without supplying any invoice, this causes me a
great
difficulty, as I am sure you will appreciate.
Would you please
let me know - if the contractors have been paid, how
they were paid
and by whom.
So far as you
are concerned, have the contractors finished all the work
and are not now
likely to return?
Regarding the
discharge of my Deputyship so that you would then be able
to manage your
own affairs, I am afraid that this is not likely to be
approved by the
Court.
You will remember
that you mentioned this in passing at the meeting
attended by
myself, Bryan and your mother and Bryan explained that, in
view of the fact
that your damages claim had only comparatively recently
been settled,
based on medical reports confirming that you had suffered
physical injury
as a result of the accident, the Court would not be
prepared to go
to the expense of a further set of medical reports as
they would take
the view that any change in your condition is extremely
unlikely.
As Bryan explained,
a reasonable time will have to elapse before the
Court would be
likely to consider an application to discharge you from
its jurisdiction
and this would not realistically be seriously
considered in
under 18 months, and could well be longer.
Rest assured
that I will do all I can to make matters as straightforward
as possible for
you. I am, however, as I have already
explained,
constrained by
the Court Order and I have to account to them on an
annual basis for
all expenditure and this has to be justified and
supported by
receipts and invoices.
From a legal
point of view, you do need to appreciate that you cannot
contract and
incur these liabilities unilaterally. I
am the only person
who is able to
do this on your behalf and only then when I am satisfied
that the payment
is appropriate and is reasonable.
As has been
explained by both Bryan and myself, you must let me know in
advance of any
requirements you have for capital expenditure so that I
have an opportunity
of considering this and, where necessary, asking for
more
information. If the correct procedures
are not followed, then I
will have to
cancel contracts which you have entered into without my
approval, which
naturally I would prefer not to do.
If there is
anything you are unsure of, or would like to discuss with
me, please do
give me a call.
With best
wishes,
Tom
Tom Lemon
Partner
From: Neil
Barker [mailto:my-email-removed@neebert.net]
Sent: 12 August
2009 11:22
To: Lemon, Tom
Subject: RE:
Bank of Scotland
It was sold for
£675,000 as I was forced to sell it early in order to get my current house.
This I feel was not the best finical action but I did not pay CGT as my profit
was lost due to my deputy not doing what we had agreed.
Dear Tom
In a conversation with the owner of number
7 Eridge road I was informed that it had just been valued at 600,000.
Number 7 has a garage unlike number 5 but
my improvements being so successful should make up for the lack of parking.
If you have any trouble obtaining
valuations I would have no problem in obtaining three.
The garden is finished to the high
standard I agreed with the workers.
I will not be doing any more work on this
property until I feel the market has recovered to a level I can sell it for
£700,000.
On top of this I will not sell until I
have lived here for three or more years, as to avoid CGT.
All the best
Neil
He failed... He
did not buy the half of the house my mother owned, he had about a year to do it
and told me he would many times. Thank god it was my mother that got the money,
although she had to pay CGT on it and not paying off the mortgage cost me
£25,000.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Tom Lemon" <Tlemon@prince-evans.co.uk>
To: my-mothers-email-removed@prohealthuk.com
Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 9:31:57 AM
Subject: 5 Eridge Road
Dear Carol
I attach the surveyor’s report. I had asked him for a realistic
market
valuation to take into account today’s difficult conditions and to
exclude the benefit of the works of refurbishment and the
landscaping to
the garden for which Neil has paid. As you will see, this nets
down to a
value of £550,000.
Taking into account an approximate balance to be repaid on
mortgage of
£251,500, there would be net proceeds of sale (excluding any
discount
for estate agents’ fees and legal costs) of £298,500.
If I was to allow, say, £12,650 (to include VAT) for estate
agents’
commission and, say, £900 for legal costs, VAT and disbursements,
then
taking those also into account, there would be a net sum available
of
£284,950. Accordingly you would each then receive £143,475.
As previously discussed, we also need to agree the compensation to
which
you are entitled for having made mortgage repayments from June
2008.
So that we can agree a suitable figure for you, would you please
let me
know the number of monthly payments, which I understand were being
made
at £938.61 per month, paid from and including November 2008 until
the
recent interest rate changes. It would be helpful if you would let
me
have a note of the amounts paid between November 2008 to August
2009.
We had previously suggested that a fair "rent" for
Neil's occupation
from June 2008 would be calculated at £500 per week. If, however,
you
are to receive an adjustment in value to take account of the
mortgage
payments you have made, then if you are to receive one half of the
value
of the property, you would need to be responsible for one half of
the
mortgage repayments and would then be entitled to one half of the
rent
attributable to Neil's occupation for, as a co-owner, he would be
entitled to a credit for the remaining half.
I suggest that I calculate some more figures once I have heard
from you
regarding the above and with details of the mortgage payments you
have
made and the three of us can then discuss the proposed purchase of
his
share in the property by Neil and, subject to agreeing a figure, I
can
then seek the Court's approval.
Best regards,
Tom Lemon
Partner
This is my response to him
failing to purchase my mother's 50% share of 5 Eridge road, the house in which
I lived for about two years. He had about a year to do it and pay off the
mortgage. He failed on both counts. This lost me over £100,000. My mother got
so scared she decided to seek legal advice after she herd of a story where the
Court of Protection had got hold of
someone not under the CoP and they were not given it back. If he had done
as I requested I would have owned 5 Eridge road at a cost of £140,000 +
£250,000(the mortgage) +£70,000 (The money I spent renovating it. As it was
sold for £675,000 and the total cost would have been £460,000 I should have
made a little over £200,000. I got about half of what I should have in the end.
The made a complaint but the Office of the Public Guardian chose to ask my
deputy Mr Lemon if he did anything wrong rather than investigate the claim. Mr
Lemon said he had nothing wrong so the complaint was dropped, I tried to appeal
but they did not reply.
From: Anthony Barker
[mailto:MrBarker@neebert.net]
Sent: 16 March 2010
14:08
To: Lemon, Tom
Subject: RE: 5 Eridge
Road
I can understand this as
she has been waiting for payment by the court since I move in to the property
in 2008. The court may feel it can mistreat disabled people but there is noting
wrong with my mother, they have no right to treat her in the way she has been
treated and after witnessing how I have been treated she wants nothing to do
with the court.
Regards
Neil
-----Original Message-----
From: Rihan, Boz [mailto:BRihan@prince-evans.co.uk]On
Behalf Of Lemon, Tom
Sent: 16 March 2010 10:12
To: mrbarker@neebert.net
Subject: RE: 5 Eridge Road
Dear Neil
The Court has now given its consent to the arrangements I
put forward for you to redeem the existing mortgage and acquire your mother's
share.
If, however, she has changed her mind as seems to be the
case, then we will have to see what is proposed.
If she is going to propose through her solicitors a
completely new arrangement, then that will have to be approved.
As soon as I hear from her solicitors, I will let you
know.
Regards,
Tom
Tom Lemon
Partner
Poor John, I guess they
ignore both the 2005 Mental Capacity act and the Data Protection act...
I blanked out his details
as I am a law abiding citizen.
