Quatloos!

I would think that now this is out in the press that the head/principle of the school that employs her may well be inviting her in for a chat, this will cause some of the parents to express their concern at her ability to teach and what exactly she is teaching their children.

I know after helping my brother out at his business that was within a school that parents question the school over any slight incident that involves a teacher be it a good or bad incident(and this falls firmly into the later).

Bones wrote:

littleFred wrote:Welcome to Q, John Uskglass. Good spot!

This would be a standard company formation agent, so I wouldn't read anything into the first director. But why does she want a company? What does she intend doing with it?

It is a little strange that (I have only checked a random selection) he resigned as director on the same day each company was formed and no new directors have been appointed. He is also not recorded as ever being a director, of the three companies involved in the two sales of the cottage.

Thinking about it, I suppose they could have been set up as dormant companies for future use

Nothing strange about it, that's the normal procedure to establish a shell company. As you said a dormant company for future use. With the initial director gone it's ready to go anyone needs a company. Entirely standard here. You need to acquire a company, say to finally incorporate your prosperous one man proprietorship Bones Dogwalking Service, and you go see your accountant or lawyer. They just sell you one from inventory then, as sole shareholder, you appoint yourself the sole director,and you're off and running.

Burnaby49 wrote: Nothing strange about it, that's the normal procedure to establish a shell company. As you said a dormant company for future use. With the initial director gone it's ready to go anyone needs a company. Entirely standard here. You need to acquire a company, say to finally incorporate your prosperous one man proprietorship Bones Dogwalking Service, and you go see your accountant or lawyer. They just sell you one from inventory then, as sole shareholder, you appoint yourself the sole director,and you're off and running.

The thing that doesn't make sense in regard to those companies though, is that each one is set up with a different address, by way of example Rekha Patel Ltd, whilst has no directors has Rekha's address.

As with all the others, once this guy has resigned and the companies left with no directors, the address for each company is different

On the Sun's website too today

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2736631/t ... /#comments

Wakeman52 wrote: I see that the case has been referred to the Chancery Division for a ruling; no idea of the date for that. It'll be interesting to see if Ms Patel appears on the day. As she now believes that she's a tenant, she might think that she doesn't have to...

The Chancery Division is a court of equity, and Rekha is doomed to fail, due to the maxim: "He who comes to equity must come with clean hands". In other words, if someone has schemed to circumvent the law, they can expect no help from the court. The doctrine is intended to preserve judicial integrity, justice and the public interest.

I fear this will not end well for Ms Patel and I wish I could be a spectator in the gallery of the courtroom when the full wrath of the law descends on her and, quite possibly, her parents too.

I think she is of the opinion that publicity will help her - I think it will just help this all to blow up in her in her face

http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/pro ... te-cottage

The headline doesn't make much sense but here it is

On the subject of company formation agents, I used one myself many years ago, in relation to IT contracting. My name & address replaced that of the agents as a director as part of the purchase, exactly as described by others. The accompanying choice of registered office address is a personal preference. It's used (amongst other things) for correspondence, so, for example, the company accountant's trading address or an accommodation address can be given rather than a director's place of residence. The variations in address of the various temporary resting places for the title to the cottage are thus understandable.

As for the Rekha Patel Ltd shell - has this been set up for a possible transfer of the cottage from Tunkashila in due course, with Ms Patel becoming a director? Perhaps not, but then given the hubris so far displayed, I wouldn't be surprised.

If the Chancery Division rules that all the shenanigans in recent months are void - i.e that the transfers are fraudulent, and orders the property sold to clear the outstanding charges, then I would doubt that CGT will be a factor.

The reporting in the Hamster and now the Daily Brexpress continue to be lower than the poor standard displayed by the Daily Truth, not to mention the abysmal Tameside Reporter.

i agree that the whole episode is unlikely to have a happy ending for Ms Patel, her family, associates & friends, some of whom may have been roped in without knowledge of the background. I exclude David Ward, as he's already dug a big enough hole for himself without also getting involved in another dispute. Does anyone know if he's gone with a concrete barrier as part of the solution to his problem?

It's to be hoped that the next owner of Hanover Cottage treats it with the dignity a listed building deserves.

exiledscouser wrote:

Hercule Parrot wrote:No, should I? Don't recognise the name, so clue appreciated if interesting. Thanks

The Baron David 'Dave' Ward HP, The Baron..

Of course! Baron Von TrampBeard! Sorry, I'm so attuned to his enoblement that I don't recognise his former peasant name any more. How embarrassing, I suppose he'll lien me now for a trillion groats and I'll have to pay (again)....

Anyone know if the transfer is deemed to take place at market value as an anti-tax-avoidance rule? HMRC could be looking for £xx,xxx following all these "deals".

It certainly will be deemed market value for tax purposes. And given it's not the "new owners " main residence , will be subject to a nasty tax bill on both the rental income and capital gains when they sell it.

Of course, it's all irrelevant as the judge is about to tear up the transaction. Hopefully.

SteveUK wrote:Of course, it's all irrelevant as the judge is about to tear up the transaction. Hopefully.

Quite likely but I like the alternative of the judge reminding everyone to cough up several grand to HMRC and denying Rekha an audience because she isn't the owner and now has nothing to do with the house.

its going to be an interesting outcome thats for sure. I'm gutted that Baron David Ward sold it on so quick. What with the banksters chasing him for £££, the prospect of them pursuing Rekha's @house@ for a BDW debt would be beyond hilarity.

Rekha Patel has told NDTV that she is going to travel to India and 'work on a book to help educate others' about this. Good luck with that then. http://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad/why- ... ds-1654487

He Who Knows wrote:Rekha Patel has told NDTV that she is going to travel to India and 'work on a book to help educate others' about this. Good luck with that then. http://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad/why- ... ds-1654487

She sold the home, built in the early 18th century, to two private companies recently and has signed a 10-year tenancy agreement with them to carry on living in the property for a monthly rent of 50 pounds.

"I had tried everything possible and had no other choice. There are proper agreements in place with the two private companies and these are people I trust. The people of this village have been absolutely lovely. Many have taken days off work to come out and support me," she said.

He Who Knows wrote:Rekha Patel has told NDTV that she is going to travel to India and 'work on a book to help educate others' about this. Good luck with that then. http://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad/why- ... ds-1654487

Translation: I know I am going to lose spectacularly, and will be kicked out of "my" house soon and am likely to lose my job. I am trying to save face by saying I plan to go to India to write a book, so I will have an excuse for not pursuing this further in court. There will be no book,and I will disappear into irrelevance within a few months. This is my goodbye, my last hurrah, my last 15 minutes of fame.

??????????????

"Forgiveness is the way forward. It is between her and her conscience, she knows what she did was not right," she said, in reference to her neighbour.

Love this from her facebook page

Christine Ollinger Halovich Take care Rekha and great news story! Love how you "creatively" worked out what otherwise could have been a terrible outcome.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm - potentially going to prison, not what I call a great outcome !!

She paid £200,000 for the home? That seems pricey for a single person on a teaching salary. Especially when the home has to adhere to historical requirements, and needed work in any case.

Like others on this thread, I suspect the home was mostly, if not entirely, paid for by her parents. Who have got to be a shoo-in for some kind of Worst Parents of the Year award. In addition to imbuing their offspring with the worst case of Imaspecialsnowflakeitis I've ever seen in a human being, they bought her a house, did nothing as she lost it through her own stupidness, and then participated in real estate fraud to try and keep it.

I think this is an area that causes a significant number of people to get sucked into the FOTL movement: trying to live beyond your means. Once these persons get it into their head that somehow they are entitled to own homes or driving a vehicle that that their salary cannot support, they stupidly commit to putting themselves into debt. Then when the inevitable consequences arrive in droves, they desperately turn to those who promise a miraculous solution to their self-inflicted punishment rather than acknowledge their stupidity and accept the fact that they have to give up such a lifestyle.