Francis Read - solicitor.
I wrote this to solicitor Francis Read whilst still under the
impression that he had no knowledge of Steven Daultrey's criminal past. Neither
did I know at this time that Turner also had a criminal past. What a set up!
02 August 1996
Francis Read Esq.
19-20 Grosvenor Street
Dear Mr Read,
Thank you for responding to my letter.
It is now more clear to me that your involvement in the activities of Turner and
Daultrey might have been at a greater distance than I first supposed. The
enclosed copies of my correspondence might provide more background to my reasons
for questioning you in the past and will explain the terse tenor of my letters.
Michael Turner is a liar and a cheat. He is a manipulative, duplicitous,
egotistical incompetent who nevertheless boasts a measure of presence and
credibility enabling him to dupe a sizeable number of people. It is obvious to
me that Daultrey has assisted him in his activities. The purpose of engaging
Daultrey at your firm, as a solicitor to Jetstream Marketing Limited, was no
doubt to convey to me, as a prospective dupe investor, the credibility of
Turner. Had I known that instead of visiting a professional, legitimate
solicitor, I would be meeting one struck off in 1982 for all manner of dodgy
activities, I would not have had any further dealings with Turner let alone pour
my entire savings into a business that he subsequently ruins. Daultrey has at
all times represented himself as a solicitor and I have had occasion to request
his mediation in matters of dealing with creditors of Jetstream. He continued,
until May 1996, to represent himself as a solicitor from the offices of Richard
Donellan in Mayfair. Donellan, as you probably know, was suspended in February
1996 for reasons that the administering firm, Parrot & Coales, describe as
significant anomalies of accounting.
Had Daultrey been a legitimate solicitor instead of a clerk enacting a
fraudulent masquerade, I would have expected to be advised on the drawing up of
a shareholders' agreement between Turner and myself. Naturally, I would have
found at this time that Turner was indebted to various parties to the tune of
more than thirty thousand pounds rather than the seventeen hundred first
indicated to me. I might also have found out that he had presided over or
directed several other ruinous operations.
It would appear that your offices have been used for the purposes described
above and you might begin to wonder if there are any other people in a position
similar to myself who have yet to discover the situation. The Law Society states
that its rules are quite specific with regard to people representing themselves
as solicitors and that in my case there is little evidence to prove actual cause
of loss. Frankly, this is not good enough as the principles at stake -
regardless of the letter of the law - are profoundly important.
Most people would agree that, whilst the law may well be an ass, it is all that
stands between us and total anarchy. The scenario I have described suggests that
the law is failing us and that it should be trusted no more than the guarantees
offered by a street peddler trading out of a suitcase. It might suggest that I
may seek and gain employment as a neurosurgeon, enjoying complete immunity from
infuriated patients who suffer at my hands.
I have notified other major creditors of Jetstream who include Lloyds Bank, Isis
Factors Plc and other concerns including the liquidator, N.M.G.W. in Bristol. As
Lloyds Bank is pursuing me for the business loan to Jetstream I have pointed out
that the solicitor who witnessed the guarantors' signatures has been suspended
and that this entire scenario questions his validity as a witness.
You will understand that there is absolutely no point in my corresponding with
Turner or Daultrey as I would not be able to believe even the simplest of
statements from them. If Turner told me that blue is a colour I would have to
seek confirmation from a reliable source. I am now completely bereft of money or
assets, surviving on income support of some forty-seven pounds per week. My
losses amount to seventy thousand pounds in savings prior to entering into
business with Turner; salary foregone; loss of capital gain that would have been
represented by Jetstream as a properly orchestrated concern, as well as
suffering an enormous toll on my health.
I was infuriated by your seeming indifference to my questions and your
apparently treating me as a peripheral insignificance. There is nothing
contained within this and the accompanying copies that you may not share with
whomsoever you see fit or appropriate. Suffice to say that I now feel you should
be more deeply apprised of my viewpoint in this matter. I absolutely will not
stop my attempts to gain redress for what I and other parties consider an
appalling state of affairs. If the law insists on remaining inert or impotent in
this matter, then I shall be exploring all possible avenues of satisfaction and
compensation for having been duped and misled by parties that any one of us
should be able to view with a measure of trust.
I do not expect a response as this has been provided out of what I now believe,
in view of your last letter, is no more than common courtesy. This will be sent
by fax and confirmed in the post.
Crooked solicitors are laughing
Before you retain a solicitor, read