| Navinder Grover: Teacher Stern (TS), The Chimpanzees’ Tea Party (CTP) and the Aston Lloyd Ponzi Sch |
| Navinder may be a doghut and a tactless dupe who's being used by bigger fish, but he's with capacity and participation with Nimish Patel, |
| 7th of Apr, 2013 by Tom Cahill |
Navinder Grover: Teacher Stern (TS), The Chimpanzees’ Tea Party (CTP) and the Aston Lloyd Ponzi Scheme
*Navinder Grover has the following CV, which’s been featured on the TS website, where he’s a partner (please see at end of article).
However, ever since finding himself
“an unlucky dupe” in a Ponzi Scheme masterminded by Kulvir Virk, he’s found himself on the de-facto Creditor’s Committee, which was set up by the bogus insolvency professionals, who freely admitted to knowing Virk Previously. Despite this being said in front of at least 200 people, Bijal Shah now has denied this in writing and said that their acquaintance was a business one and not from the one social function initially dreamed up.
This flight of fancy aside, there was apparently a vote to decide on members of the “Creditors’ Committee” (CC/CTP), but it was never counted. Further, it’s hard to establish how it can be a committee of creditors, if none of them were creditors, but were just tricked into thinking that they were. Notwithstanding the impossibility of the fraud being mistaken as misadventure from the most scant glance, there was no money in the company, so an Administration was actually not applicable if it had been a non-criminal excercise. Again, as things proceeded, and the CC was established, their first job was to sign a confidentiality agreement, to not tell anyone of anything that was discussed.
From this point onwards, it can only be regarded as a part of the fraud, therefore, referred to as the Chimpanzees’ Tea Party (CTP) to avoid confusion or false support of it’s legitimacy, as it’s a fraud, money laundering and bribery conduit, under the colour of law.
In short, Navinder has played the nodding dog as:
1.---Fraud (the initial show stopper of the bullshit insolvency procedure, based on the initial frauds: flase profits announced, false dividends issued (Robert Wing: £300k, etc.); flase attribution of assets to the firm, which were not the firm’s, false declerations of profit for selling those assets, false delineation of those sold to buyer/held in trust assets, etc.;
2.---Money Laundering;
3.---Bribery Act (anti-bribery obligation procedures);
4.---Contempt of Court (re. Filing of misleading papers in support of bogus insolvency procedures);
5.---Fraud (re. Filing of misleading papers in support of bogus insolvency procedures);
6.---Failure to inform the police of the above crimes, which is a crime;
7.---Abuse of the Insolvency Act’s clear guidelines on administration of their procedures;
8.---Apparent ignorance of the role of the “Creditors’ Committee” in setting meeting agendas, etc.;
9.---Apparent confusion over the difference between equitable title holders and creditors, and company assets and assets retained unlawfully, which belong to people who have paid for them in full according to the express conformation of the company who’s the subject of the bogus insolvency;
10.---Apparent ignorance of the fact that the surrounding, conjoined Ponzi Scheme entities who had all been treated as one firm for incoming and outgoing payments as though one firm, allowing them to trade and to continue to take money in, and to remove money from the jurisdiction;
11.---Pretending to not understand about the impossibility of KBSP Partnership being involved in doing a full audit of the books of all of the Aston Lloyd Ponzi Scheme’s constituent subsidiaries’ books, without being criminally involved in the fraud;
12.---Apparent confusion over the process whereby a non-existent, alleged Agent and “Seller’s Solicitor” in Colemans-ctts, might refuse access to any of “their client’s” records, including instructions, appointment records, briefs, advice, deinstruction notices; etc;
13.---Never put in any reports to the wider dupes involved that I’ve seen;
14.--- Never formally objected to anything that the de-facto insolvency practitioners have done or not done;
15.---He’s—in fact—done a poor effort, so far as the crime aspect, as he’s no actor and has not even done any dummy objection, by way of play acting, to be quashed and proven “wrong”.
His firm have been alerted to my objection to his continued status as a practising solicitor, and have been instructed to suspend him pending investigation and termination without benefits as soon as can be practically possible. Failure to comply will have not-undeserved consequences for them, if they chose to duck and cover. Crime is crime. Criminals who think it’s fine as they work as solicitors are mistaken on this occasion.
16.---What better place to explain themselves than here on Scam Informer? Over to you, Jack ([email protected]). Why does Navinder still appears to be a partner at your firm on your website since I told you he needs to be given the boot last week?
All comments welcome, but keep them clean.
Thank you for reading.
Tom Cahill
[email protected]
Skype: t0mcahill
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
NAVINDA’S CV from the website of the firm where he’s a partner, Teacher Stern
Commercial litigation, Confiscation and Insolvency
Navinder is an experienced commercial litigator, who is also the Head our Civil Restraint and Confiscation Team as well as our Insolvency Team.
Navinder is also a robust and experienced commercial litigator who has handled claims on behalf of high net worth individuals, multinationals and nation states. He is involved in a broad range of complex litigation matters, from contractual and property to professional negligence disputes.
Since 2003 he has lead teams of solicitors in civil restraint and confiscation proceedings. Over this time, Navinder has advised a wide range of clients including a Saudi billionaire, various corporate entities and family members of the Defendant, whose assets have become innocently entangled in criminal restraint or confiscation proceedings.
He has brought actions against both the CPS and the Defendant and has successfully secured the release of both cash and assets worth millions of pounds from Restraint Orders. He has also obtained orders to allow for the recovery of his clients’ costs from the Crown. He is a member of the Proceeds of Crime Lawyers Association.
He has recently advised a variety of clients on insolvency and restructuring issues, providing bespoke and pro-active advice to directors and investors. He has provided advice in relation to pre-packaged Administrations which have enabled clients to continue to trade through these challenging times. He is regularly instructed by Administrators, Liquidators and Trustees in Bankruptcy and has pursued a large number of successful actions on their behalf. He is an affiliate member of the Insolvency Practitioners Association.
Navinder is the firm’s expert on Conditional Fee Agreements, Legal Costs Insurance and costs. As a result, he provides strategic contributions on many of the firm’s high value claims and advises, where appropriate, on alternative funding options to maximise our clients’ ability to pursue litigation cost effectively.
Year qualified
1999
Education
University of Birmingham – LLB
Work for Teacher Stern includes:
• Obtaining multiple injunctions and judgment against an employee of a client who had stolen in excess of £250,000 from its accounts before enforcing against his property
• Successfully settling a shareholders dispute relating to a multi million pound property development in Wales.
• Obtaining an injunction against the main contractor in a construction dispute and then mediating through to a settlement within a few days thereafter
• Managing and settling a £4.2m professional negligence claim for a national mortgage lender against a firm of surveyors
• Securing the release from a Restraint Order of a £1.7m company sold by the Defendant to a client days before a Restraint Order was obtained
• Successfully recovering £250,000 belonging to a client from a Restrained account managed by a CPS appointed Receiver
• Defending a claim pursued by a Defendant/CPS that a client had to pay £950,000, which would have satisfied a Defendant’s Confiscation Order
• Successfully challenging a Liquidator who sought to retain money owed to a client partly on the premise that this client was “tainted” by the high profile Restraint Order against the client’s brother.
• Advised the directors and investor of a prestigious British brand women’s retailer on insolvent trading and general structural issues, before facilitating a swift and clean exit from the business.
• Obtaining judgment against a director of an insolvent company for misfeasance
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What's Snide of Richard Slade's doing with his photo on here? Is he a negative publicity addict? Is he not happy with one article on Scam Informer? Remove your photo from this page at once Tricky Dicky. You are not welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Conspiracy Theories & Navinder Grover's claimed ignorance of the Official Receiver
Please remember, he is meant to be a fellow dupe who's advising people who are in the same position as he. He's not a Creditor. Saying he is one is a lie. It cannot benefit anyone but the criminals. If a crime happens, bank account after bank account round the world can be traced, and the assets confiscated; or, if the criminal pops up in some foreign jurisdiction with a load of money everyone will know where they’ve got it and the same can be attempted by reverse engineering back the way round.
The "Trust Issue" which he speaks of is a different one to the one which the barrister appointed by RE10 speaks of during his opinion. The barrister speaks of the constructive trust. The barrister, says that he objects to the word "Investor/s" as none of us are investors, as we all bought actual stuff and it's ours, not to be shared out or sold by the Stinkers (aka de facto insolvency practitioners (de facto Administrators/Liquidators)) at Re10, and not to be sold to criminals such as Tolga, who sold the land at Tuzla Lake, owned the building company, allegedly had a charge on the land, but not one shred of evidence has been produced to evidence this. Obviously none of this bentness bothers the contentious Navinder Grover.
There are a number of trust issues. The two main, obvious ones are the following:
2. There's the "if it wasn't a fraud one" which may have happened following the fraudulent initial, yet abortive "constructive trust" which was set up before hand, when the money was handed over, as it wasn’t done as per the contract.
1. Then there’s the clearly understood “constructive trust” which Michael Jeffries described in his 2012 opinion, which was then deceptively disreported by the Stinkers, and Grover in his covert role as Support Stinker, whilst in deep cover as an Expert Chimp on the Chimpanzees’ Tea Party.
As my article comment, The Idiot's Guide to the Aston Lloyd Ponzi Scheme explains, the cross jurisdictional issues are all a load of nonsense. In both equity and in legal terms (see Wikipedia, and read the first parts of the barrister's opinion), the law in this country's very, very, very clear. If an agreement's made here, it doesn't matter where the subject happens, it's the law of the land here, that counts, so long as nothing else has been agreed counter to this. Any number of scam fraud enabling SPV companies won't change that. As numerous expert commentators explain, if this wasn't the case, the delivering party in any cross-jurisdictional agreement, could start shifting the goal posts, and there would be little point in agreeing anything here, as it would all be a big confusing mess.
When you've got an SPV company which's wholly owned, to consider this some kind of cross-jurisdictional fraud magic wand, like Navinder--soon to be ex solicitor--Grover is lying, then why didn't the criminals just crack on and buy themselves a load of Ferraris via that company, via some dodgey foreign sounding Tom, Dick or Harry?
Bijal Sha and Nimish Patel have been telling people massive porkies from day one. However the barrister's opinion that they've claimed supports their views and constricts them in doing what is “best” for us all has NOTHING to do with the trust issue that they speak of and everything to do with the trust issue which means that they're criminals, who are undertaking a fraud, money laundering, bribery, contempt of court (submitting as well as various details to the court which are untrue), and, offences relating to the Insolvency Act.
If the Stinkers were actually doing nothing wrong, why the confidentiality agreement, why the zero communication of any substance, and, why the denial of requests for supporting documentation?
It has been noted that Bijal’s submitted statement to the court promised to lots of things. He’s not done any of them, nor should he have, as it’s a fraud, and suggesting that they’d be appropriate in this light, is an attempt to further the fraud. However, it’s a draft. IT’S NOT A WITNESS STATEMENT IF IT’S A DRAFT. And, IT’S GOT TO BE SIGNED.
Winding Up Petition
I don’t honestly know what the implications are re. The Winding up petition. I’ll yield to Navinder’s expert knowledge of them, presuming that if he says it doesn’t matter, then it does matter, as he’s a liar who is pretending to be thick, and no one’s as stupid as he pretends to be.
It is VERY interesting that Navinder’s happy to record such drivel to you all, when he’s not inclined to write to me to explain why I’ve raised the unpleasant realities about him to his entire firm. I think I’d be more interested in explaining this and making it impossible for me to come to such conclusions. It is normal behaviour to object to being accused of things that ruin your career, unless of course Duck and Cover is being relied upon, but honest people don’t have to D&C, so I think it’s worthy of note.
If you want any of the doc.s mentioned, please email me and I’ll gladly send you anything you need. Any substantiation which has been relied upon shall also be provided.
Thank you for reading,
Tom Cahill
[email protected] |
|
|
|
David Saulsbury
- - - - - [email protected]
- - - - - Tel: +44 (0)20 7242 3191
- - - - - Fax: +44 (0)20 7197 8152
who I'm told by his staff is the head of Teacher Stern, has been made aware of this posting and the associated You Tube videos. Instead of getting rid of Navinder Grover or even accepting any phone calls, he, via his secretary told me not to contact him or the firm again, so he's set his stall out as a criminal.
This was a similar reaction to Oliver Jackson of Mundays Solicitors when I pointed out that the Wind Up Petition (see you tube video in ALPonz series: Google: ALPonz) was part of a fraud and that they needed to consider what the ramifications of the helping out with it were.
Battens solicitors reacted similarly, but their role was a whole lot more involved. They actively touted for business amongst the victims, and then conspired with Colemans-ctts to make sure that no case against them could ever happen. They didn't even manage to successfully make a successful pretence at an action, stopping short even of contacting the SRA and putting in a complaint or putting their insurers on notice. They are very, very much more guilty of complicity and organised crime than the rest of the parties concerned that I've mentioned.
One other party is very much involved but pending the outcome of both a civil case and criminal investigation into them by the Metropolitan Police and another by the City of London Police, I have Undertaken not to mention them.
I am not conceding that this is a legal Order as it definitely isn't. Judge Mackay certainly stated that it was totally illegal for him to have me remove information pertaining to a crime that I was a witness form the internet.
But, none the less, the judge concerned, a good friend of Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden, Judge Seymour QC, thought that xxxredactedxxx's own written admission that he had done what I alleged that he had done was not in fact evidence of crime, and instead of having him and Tim arrested and tried for contempt of court alone, then for fraud and conspiracy, was not what he thought appropriate.
He told me me that it was part of ---MY!!!--- witness statement, against the totally vexatious, and ridiculous Harassment charge that the Claimant had bought against me.
So I can only speculate on the evidence which I have seen, to wonder how high the corruption goes. It is certain that Judge Seymour QC has laid down an impressively controversial Order, which was very brave as Orders are in writing and a lot of people bear witness to what was presented to him at the hearing concerned. An Order which totally contradicted the order of Judge Mackay, following a hearing where he said that any ban on publication of information which had not been proven to be false was totally unlawful, which is obviously where the law does stand on these matters. I don't see how there can be any doubt about what's going on here. I think it's an absolute disgrace.
Remember that a favourite trick of these scum is to call accusing them or enquiring about crime harassment, as opposed to cooperating with enquiries or taking actions on the defamation track for alleged false accusations. Unfortunately some of the judiciary seem to enjoy supporting this total abuse of the system.
Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden has been involved here, as an 'independent advocate', whilst it turns out actually working for the firm in question, who I can't name, and it appears that despite having a very low level of intelligence and being totally devoid of any logic or adherence to the civil procedure rules, is supported by some of his judge friends in any ridiculous things he states, however irrelevant. Further, he has not put his insurers on notice and has not told them that he is committing perjury by pretending to be an independent advocate, when he's got a vested interest, knows full well that his employer's a criminal, has had all of the evidence, proving this, and still insists that this is not the case, despite his email which you may wish to seek out for your better understanding.
Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden (described in many places as having 'unprecedented access' to the police), 'independant advocate' and xxxredacted made a malicious criminal accusations against me for harassment and the police showed great gusto in going along with these as though sending an email to someone, which was copied into the police, concerning allegations of fraud, was actually serious criminality.
Unfortunately for them, the got a lowly detective (and his obnoxious, ugly Welsh side kick), named DC Andrew Fischer and DC Barron of Holborn Police Station (part of the Met. or Metropolitan Police) involved.
Andrew Fisher xxxredactedxxx and his employee, Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden (also being his 'independent advocate' for him and the firm he works for and is employed by) decide that it would be a good idea to conspire in the background to have a civil injunction put in place by pretending to serve me with the paperwork, then have the Order passed, then have me break it, making me eligble for arrest. A trick which Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden apparently specializes in.
DC Andrew Fischer dropped the ball, by mentioning the hearing on the phone to me, then back tracking and refusing to give me details of it.
He then attended the hearing, stinking and all puny and scruffy in a black donkey jacket with all hairs and dandruff on it, with big, thick glasses. He spoke with a shake in his voice, when he approached me and told me that if i hadn't turned up he'd have come to Kent to arrest me---which is a total lie---as it's a civil hearing. He backed down and Timothy, seeing that the harassment and intimidation was not working and that the court staff were wondering who this creepy, peadophile/sex offender-type creep was, accosting y father and myself, dragged him off and made him leave.
The totally crooked Lawson-Cruttenden, then proceeded to lie and say that he'd made a complaint about Andrew Fischer to the tipstaff (court ushers), but obviously being total lies, couldn't bring himself to confirm this in writing.
Both previous to the civil hearing and subsequent to it, Andrew Fischer made constant threats, supported by his obnoxious female Welsh side-kick DC Barron. DC Barron told me that if I called up again, she'd arrest me for harassing her. She's a horrible criminal of the kind the Met's hard working men and women have to put up with, being a total embarrassment to the uniform, which is probably why they like to keep her in plain clothes in the office at Holborn.
Further, they refused to continue to investigate the alleged crime which they'd generated a crime reference agasint me for. Andy Pandy stating that fraud was none of his business. He then closed the crime down, having refused to investigate it.
Now, for those of you who think that I would be glad to hear this, I wasn't, and nor should you be. In harassment cases, it's a course of conduct, so they never get closed unless presumably they were found to be based on a false accusation, which is nigh on impossible. However such is the clout which Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden and his accomplices have with the Freemasons, that there's that they can order these things, and they will happen; this, despite them being totally incriminating in their own right.
If I had harassed someone, and they were even taking a civil action for the same thing why would they want the police to drop the investigation that they'd allegedly had all their staff write statements about?
I very much doubt that the staff even knew about the alleged harassment and am sure no witness statements will ever materialize.
Google:
Chris Spivey
and search for:
Mark Duggan Murder; or,
Madeline McCann
if you want to see what we have to pass for elite police units in the UK at present in the UK. If nothing else it will make you laugh. I hadn't realized that they are using the same bent, freemason-stitch up officers on Operation Grange as they did on the Barry George, Jill Dando assassination. She was about to start to investigate paedophile rings in the government and judiciary when she got randomly targetted by nutter Barry George---no evidence required.
I've also covered the Paedophile, Lord Alistair McAlpine on a few videos on You Tube. If you search: t0mcahill, you'll find the three of them. His book about the false allegation is very prescient here also.
It is important to remember that as well as:
assassinating Mark Duggan for being a link to their promotion of black on black crime, by Trident officers;
acting as agent provocateurs in the London Riots, starting the fires, then having children arrested and jailed for very long terms for allegedly joining in;
being primarily concerned with paedophile protection duties (see McAlpine videos); and,
being a bastion of all things thuggish, foul and degenerate (note sodomy flag now on the top of some police stations in Wales) a.k.a. communist subversive,
the police have also got another role which they enthusiastically assist with---albeit mainly unknowingly, in the promotion of fraud. This is part of the Freemason plan to terrorize the public out of not keeping their money in the high street banks, where it can be devalued and stolen by their financier friends. This is all part of the Freemason's Great Work, which uses Carl Marx's ramblings to deprive the people of any assets, that they will be helpless to resist the Satanic World Order, which they've planned, as documented by Albert Pike in his Three World Wars prediction, and the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion which describe the subjugation which we see happening. Stealth Communism is very much related here. Communism being a thinly veiled mask for Satanism.
I made a police report which generated a crime reference number, following the Order which forebode mention of the company in question, making it a fresh issue. I make no accusations in the report aside those implied by the fact I filed it. The report consists of XXXredactedXXX admitting not having witness statements, which I alleged that he didn't have, which he clearly confirms, and goes further to say other far more incriminating things.
This may seem harsh, but in the war against corruption we must remember that to protect or cover for a criminal is in fact a crime. It may also do us no harm to remember that to know of a crime and to not investigate is also a crime in it self. Certainly the oppression of information on a crime is a crime also, so he's guilty of all of these.
In the ALPonz case there are many criminals who all conspire to promote its continuance and prevent the dispatch of those who are involved in it.
Navinder Grover's particular role, as assistant to:
Bijal Shah, Re10, English;
Nimish Patel, Re10, Indian;
Adam Stephens, Re10 (ex, now Smith Williamson); English
Finbarr O'Connell, Re10 (ex, now Smith Williamson); Irish
are clearly all criminals, as we can also tell by their endorsement by:
David Alexder
Regent Emeritus of the UK Chapter of International Fraud Examiners
DO YOU THINK HE COULD BE A FREEMASON???
These people are evil parasites who need to be strung up and left hanging until their parasitism is seen for what it is. |
|
|
Post your Comment
|
|
|
