Tuesday, 19 August 2014

The Interim Charging Order

Update 18th September; My objections to the Charge being made final have now been filed with the Court and served on Mr James' solicitors. It will be heard by Master Cook, Royal Courts of Justice, by telephone on the 30th.

Update 2nd September; The Land Registry has rejected my objections and entered Mr James' Interim Charge on my home. The next step is the court hearing on the 30th September. The Land Registry does not tend to consider legal points which formed my objection, it remains to be seen whether the court will.


This, in italics below, is the interim charging order which council chief executive Mark James is attempting to enter on the Land Registry. I have until Thursday register my objections. I have already done so, in the strongest possible terms.

The next stage is the court hearing where Mr James will be seeking to change 'Interim' to 'Final', currently listed for the 30th September 2014. Due to the expense involved, I asked for it to be moved to Wales, but for it not to be a telephone hearing....the court has now directed that it will be a telephone hearing. So that's that, looks like I'll have to defend my home by phone.

My objections and arguments to the final Charging Order must be filed with the court at least seven days beforehand. If my objections are not successful then Mr James can apply for the next stage of enforcement.

Interim Charging Order;
"RESTRICTION; No disposition of the registered estate, other than a disposition by the proprietor of any registered charge registered before the entry of this restriction, is to be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or their conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to Mark James at [address]. being the person with the benefit of an interim charging order on the beneficial interest of Jacqueline Thompson made by the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division on 19th June 2014 (Court reference HQ11D04250)"

Recent posts;
Blogger will "fight to the bitter end"
Western Mail reports on libel enforcement


Anonymous said...

Mark James was the instigator - he risked nothing - but has been rewarded thousands. What an illustration of them and us. It's like someone else paying for his lottery ticket - he wins - and keeps the spoils. Disgusting.

Anonymous said...

Justice is dead; we have instead - law enforcement by those able to jump or manipulate the hurdles of the law-makers.

Anonymous said...

Irrespective of the merits of the actions that led to the award of damages, and whilst acknowledging the right of Mr James to enforce the court order, all this does seem reminiscent of medieval times when wealthy barons would use the full force of the law to crush troublesome, powerless and poor peasants (with all due apologies to Jacqui).

Surely, now is the time for Mr James to relish his victory and show magnanimity, and, rather than force Jacqui into homelessness, to publicly forego his damages.

If his reputation means so much to him, what better way could there be to bolster it?

caebrwyn said...

Thank you for the comments.

@Anon 15:10
I will quote from direct correspondence from Mr James;
"...it is my intention to instruct solicitors to vigorously pursue the payment of damages due to me, by all legal means."

Apologies for not publishing your comment, I believe you are referring to the pension scandal and it was the CEO of Pembrokeshire, Bryn Parry-Jones, who gave it to his wife. What Mr James did with his, we don't yet know but so far, no one apart from the MP Jonathan Edwards has dared to suggest that he pays it back.


Although I seem to have little choice in the matter due to the method of enforcement chosen by Mr James, I would also like to state my position, that, apart from the fact that I cannot afford to pay, I am also refusing to pay this Order for damages.

Anonymous said...

If more people had your courage and tenacity this world would be a much better place to live in. Good luck Jacqui and may God be with you! Shame on you Mark James ... you are no Christian!

Anonymous said...

I agree with the previous comments. It seems to me that the law is used increasingly to reinforce privilege, a very regressive trend.