Emily Slater – threatening letter for restraining order! 20120328

#blogging #bmvproperty #property #franchise #worstboss #civillaw How dare I ignore their interpretation of the law?? How dare I blog about them??

Throughout the last two years and longer there have been two laws being challenged – one being the (correct) Law of England and Wales (by me), the other the law according to Nick Statman, Malcolm Statman, Emily Slater and Cohen Cramer Solicitors! The tactics and interpretation of the law employed by Emily Slater and Cohen Cramer on behalf of their Clients Gateway Homes UK Ltd, Whitehall Franchise Ltd (Gateway Homes Nationwide Franchise Ltd) from day one were, in the eyes of HH Judge Robert Owen QC (Miss Omar being my Counsel)

Finally, the claimants do appear to have conducted this litigation against the defendant with unnecessary aggression. Miss Omar submitted such conduct constituted oppressive use of the legal procedure. In light of the events leading to and including the wrongful arrest on the 19th November 2012, the flimsy (if any) basis for the many allegations and the unmeritorious committal applications I am inclined to accept her submission. I reject Mr Richardson’s submission that the defendant’s publications were motivated by an irrational fixation or deeply hatred of the claimants. The actual words used by the defendant simply do not bear out that interpretation.

To give you an example of Miss Emily Slater’s [wrongful and threatening] interpretation of a temporary High Court Undertaking I publish below a letter from 28th March 2012, soon after litigation began on 2nd March 2012. How dare I act within the constraints of the law?? Bottom line from Miss Emily Slater throughout this and all the proceedings was that I was wrong and she was right ….. obviously she was wrong as she lost not one but two cases against a litigant in person!

Oh and to all those that know Mr Nick Statman you may all particularly believe that …. “Mr Statman is particularly distressed and anxious by your conduct” … “it is your intention to cause misery for Gateway and Nick Statman”

Download the redacted copy of the original Emily Slater Letter 20120328

Our Ref: 103281.008/ES/ES
Email: Emily.slater@cohencramer.co.uk

Mr S Brown

BY EMAIL & BY RECORDED DELIVERY POST

28th March 2012

Dear Mr Brown,

Our Clients: Gateway Homes Nationwide Franchise Ltd [Whitehall Franchise Ltd] & Gateway Homes UK Ltd (1) Gateway Homes Nationwide Franchise Ltd [Whitehall Franchise Ltd] (2) Gateway Homes UK Ltd -v- Mr Stuart Brown

Claim Number: HQ12X00803 [3BM90159]

We write with reference to the above.

We enclose a copy of an email that our Client has provided us with. This email is dated 27th March 20 12, entitled ‘Good Luck to all … you may need it ‘ arid was sent by you to the franchisees of Gateway Homes.

We refer you to Schedule B of the Order attached to your email, as previously agreed by the parties and filed at Court. Schedule B contains undertakings that you have provided to the Court. These are promises that you have agreed to be legally bound by. Specifically, at paragraph I of this Schedule, you have undertaken not to disclose details of the nature of transactions, the number of leads, and the profit margins and at paragraph 2 the terms relating to remuneration and operation under the Agreements.

Notwithstanding that you have provided these undertakings, your email discloses the following: –

“Gateway’s lawyers wrote to me on Tuesday 20th March 2012 terminating my contract and thereby taking back my six territories, 19 contracts in progress and over £100,000 of my money already paid, over £100,000 of losses and 2 years of working for nothing.”

It is our view that the above constitutes a breach of the undertakings.

As already indicated to you in previous correspondence attached to the undertaking that you have provided to the Court is a penal notice. This penal notice permits our Client to make an application that you be committed for Contempt of Court. For the avoidance of doubt, Contempt of Court is a very serious matter, which with it carries penalties including a fine, imprisonment and/or seizing of assets.

Given the seriousness of a breach of your undertaking, and the fact that you were fully advised by Mr Justice Keith at the hearing on 19th March 2012, we are astounded by the contents of your above email. Indeed it appears that you have a flagrant disregard for the undertakings that you have provided directly to the Court and Mr Justice Keith.

Clearly, the very fact that you have chosen to email the franchises not more than a week after appearing before the High Court is indicative that you either do not understand the seriousness of breaching the undertakings, or you are simply not concerned with the consequences of the same.

In any event, as we have stressed in all of our correspondence to you, we strongly advise you to obtain some independent legal advice.

For the avoidance of doubt, this letter should be considered a warning in relation to your conduct. If we consider that a further breach of the undertaking has occurred or you continue to engage in correspondence or action that we consider to be a breach, we shall make an application to the High Court to consider whether you should be committed for contempt. We shall do this without further notice to you.

Furthermore, it has also come to our attention that on your website ‘www.stuartsblog.org’ you have posted ‘blogs’ in relation to our Client. Specifically these blogs are (of which copies are enclosed): –

 1) ‘Stuart’s Blog- About Me’ (undated)
2) ‘Gateway Homes Franchise Left Me A Wreck Too dated 22nd March 2012
3) ‘Sorry to all house sellers in Lincolnshire that have been messed around by Gateway Homes’ on 23rd March 2012
4) ‘Sorry to all house sellers in Wolverhampton that have been messed around by Gateway Homes’ on 26th March 2012

lt is clear from your email to the franchises on 27th March and from the contents of your blogs that you intend to continue blog, publish online and email in relation to our Client.

We consider your actions to be harassment of our Clients’ employees and officers, particularly Mr Nick Statman who is personally named in your email of 27th March. Indeed the inference from reading the contents of your email and blogs is that it is your intention to cause misery for Gateway and Nick Statman, and you are vindicated because of your financial position.

We confirm that Mr Statman is particularly distressed and anxious by your conduct, and we therefore formally request that you: –

1) Immediately remove the postings I blogs as referred to above and any further postings in relation to Gateway, its franchise/franchisees, its employees and/or officers;
2) You undertake not to post anything further in relation to Gateway, its franchise/franchisees, its employees and/or officers;
3) You undertake not to contact Gateway franchisees, employees and/or officers.

In the event that we consider that you have engaged in any further action that constitutes harassment of our Clients’ employees, franchisees and/or officers, we shall make an application to Court for a further injunction restraining you, upon the terms set out above.

Furthermore, the continued presence of the blogs (i.e. if you do not remove the postings) is legally considered to be continued harassment and we will apply for a restraining order.

We confirm that if the Court is minded to grant an injunction on this basis and you breach the same, this constitutes a criminal offence and we shall request that a warrant is issued for your arrest.

This letter shall be used in support of an application for a restraining order both in relation to asking a Judge to grant the order and pursuing you for the cost involved with any such application.

We cannot stress to you the seriousness of these matters, and again reinstate that you should seek independent legal advice in relation to your position.

Finally, as per our attached email of 20th March, we understand that you own the following domain name: www.gateway-homes.biz.

As previously indicated, this is in contravention of Clause 18.1.7 of your post termination obligations under the Agreements that you held with our Client. In accordance with Clause 18.1.1 0.1 you are to:

“cease using any domain name incorporating any of the Trade Marks or the Trade Name or any part of any of them or anything confusingly similar to any of them and You must. at Your expense, do every ad or thing necessary to ensure the full and unrestricted use and ownership of any such domain name by the Franchisor.”

Therefore we would be grateful if you could now confirm that you will agree to transfer this domain name to our Clients immediately.

We look forward to your most urgent response, and in any event the removal of the posting by 12pm on Friday 30tn March 20 12, after which time we shall make an application to Court for a restraining order against you without further notice.

We trust that this will not be necessary.

Yours faithfully

Emily Slater
COHEN CRAMER
Encs

Blogger, Writer, SEO Consultant, Litigant In Person, SMM Consultant, Web Researcher

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply