1.
Once we had moved to Pott Row, we instructed a
firm of solicitors known as Kenneth Bush Solicitors (hereinafter “KBS”) to
bring a claim against Fenland District Council for unlawfully committing arson
and burning down my barns, burning other property belonging to me and bringing
about miscarriages in my pigs due to the stress of a fire.
2.
My wife and I became perplexed at the delay
that KBS had created in not bringing a legitimate claim against Fenland
District Council. This led us to believe that KBS might have been working
against their own client and working with Fenland District Council in an
attempt to prevent my wife and I from obtaining a valid judgment against FDC.
3.
In two years with KBS, they did not raise a
claim against FDC and simply delayed. I knew that I had to bring a claim within
six (6) years because of the Limitations Act 1980.
4.
My wife and I could not understand why KBS
handed such a valuable case (at that point in time the case was worth
approximately £350,000 GB including interest) to the most junior of staff. This
did not make sense to us, and further confirmed our belief that KBS were not
working in their client’s best interests which we believe is a breach of the
Solicitors’ Code of Conduct.
5.
Once I had made an official complaint to KBS,
a Jonathan Eales (whom I believe is a partner in the firm) wrote me a letter in
which he falsely claimed that I had made threats against an unqualified
solicitor in the firm. The allegation was completely untrue.
6.
After being with KBS for two years, during
which time they failed to raise a claim against FDC, my wife and I de-instructed
them.
7.
My wife and I then instructed Hayes & Storr
(hereinafter “H&S) (The Old County Court House, County Court Road, King’s
Lynn, Norfolk, PE30 5EJ)
8.
H&S also sat on my claim for almost 2
years, and in all that time they also failed to raise a claim against FDC.
9.
My wife and I believed that there was some
kind of collusion between KBS, H&S and FDC, since it now became obvious to
us that there appeared to be an intention to allow the six year limitation to
expire and then we would have no legitimate claim against FDC. If this scenario
were true, I believe that KBS and H&S were illegally paid by FDC to ensure
that I could not bring my claim against them (and they would then save a lot of
money).
10.
On 10 July 2012, I travelled to the Fakenham
branch of H&S to make an official complaint about their failures in handling
our claim.
11.
Like KBS before them, H&S not only sat on
my claim for almost two years, but they also gave it to the most junior of
staff to deal with. With compound interest, the claim was now worth in the
region of £400,000) and it did not make sense that an experienced litigator
would not handle the claim.
12.
Once I arrived at the Fakenham branch of
H&S, I noticed that the offices where I would normally meet with staff were
being painted. I therefore had to discuss my complaint in the Reception area of
the Fakenham branch.
13.
I noticed that there were three receptionists
present.
14.
I passed the time of day with one of the
painters and decorators as he moved around the branch.
15.
I informed H&S that my wife and I were
unhappy with the way they were handling our claim against FDC.
16.
In front of the three receptionists, I calmly expressed
my discontent that time was running out on my ability to bring a claim against
FDC and I said that I would be reporting H&S to the Solicitors’ Regulation
Authority (hereinafter “the SRA”) for delaying – and failing to bring – my
claim.
17.
At no time did I make any threats to kill
anyone and at no time did I offer any violence to anyone.
18.
After I had made my complaint, I left the
building. I did not hear about any complaints from H&S.
19.
Then
on 14 August 2012, I attended an interview process for the appointment of a
Borough Councillor. I was interviewed and felt that I gave a good account of
myself and my political experience.
20.
However, later that same evening, at
approximately 6pm, a James Morgan (a partner in Hayes & Storr) held up his
mobile telephone in front of the Committee of the Northwest Norfolk
Conservative Association and claimed: “...I have some information directly from
the police to say that Mr Fulcher is going to be arrested today for Threats to
Kill...”
21.
I have evidence
in the form of the Minutes of that meeting [Exhibit RF1].
22.
I believe that the Minute-taker has since been
dismissed.
23.
I believe this could be because she privately
sent a copy of the Minutes to me.
24.
I believe that Mr Morgan could not have known
that I was going to be arrested that evening (in the event, I was not arrested
that evening) unless he had been improperly informed by the police, or that he
was going to make such a call to the police later that day, or that he had
already made such a call to the police himself.
25.
I have subsequently applied for the disclosure
of the Computer-Aided Despatch (CAD) report which would show when a telephone
call about me was made to the police, but up to the point of my writing this
Affidavit, the CAD report has not been provided to me.
26.
The fact it has not been provided to me leads
me to believe that it does not exist and, if I am right that it does not exist,
then it follows that my entire trial, conviction and sentence is a nullity.
27.
If I am correct that it does not exist, then
it means that a number of people (including James Morgan) have conspired to
pervert the course of justice, that they have, indeed, perverted the course of
justice and it would mean that they would have to be arrested, charged and sent
to trial.
28.
On the evening of 14 August 2012, six armed
police officers attended my property at Ramblewood Farm. I was not at home. WPS
Karen Faulker [PS3465] led the operation.
29.
My wife Karen Fulcher was present when the
police visited. She told them that I was not at home.
No comments:
Post a Comment