google-site-verification: google320503b3a0976d93.html

Defendant No. XXX: Richard Frank Brundle, co owner and director of FH Brundle:

This Defendant tried to distance himself from civil proceedings and refused to reply to any correspondence to try to keep himself out of any charges. However, he co-signed and participated in filing accounts at Companies House and was actively involved in setting up the new Company in 2010 and depositing 13m pounds into it immediately after he had received my letter in 2010 that was replied to by himself and Defendant Michael Frank Brundle. MFB who was also responsible for issuing fraudulent proceedings based on false witness testimony and signing a summons and reply to defence and counterclaim as a statement of truth. This is called fraud and perjury in an attempt to conceal a criminal conspiracy. See Particulars of Claim index Page>> Defendant law firms or click here. This person was also given a CBE for running his daddy’s firm and now the firm is run by his son MFB. You know what they say don’t you ? Shirtless to Shirtless in three generations, because they don’t have any business accumen or talent and so they go around robbing people and calling themselves Christians. I will be writing to the Palace shortly to petition the revocation of that CBE because he doesn’t deserve it. I later sent him an earlier version of a proposed fraud claim that I intend to bring except that was for the civil courts - we’re going into the Criminal Courts. he signed for the letter and so is very well aware of the situaiton and has continued trying to conceal it. I allege he is guilty of the criminal attempts of concealment, corroboration, fraud by false representation, conspiracy. There are also a range of civil fraud act offences and companies act offences such as fraudulent trading. The Charges against this person are: Fraud Conspiracy Concealment Recklessness Aiding and Abetting Subornation to Perjury Other offences under the crime and disorder act, breach of the peace, etc. It is unbelievable that he ‘didn’t know’ what was going on becuase he would have had to authorise bank transfers and funds for the civil court cases. It is also unbelievable that he would have left MFB to spends hundreds of thousands of pounds of ‘family’ or ‘firm’ money without having any knowledge of it and yet he has refused to co-operate or provide any evidence that would give him an alibi. He is also involved with the Group 2 Defendants and is named as a person with significant control of the company. Questions: (i). Why wasn’t he involved in the actual proceedings and, as the senior owner of the firm, why wasn’t it him that signed the Statements of Truth that we know to be false? (Summons, Reply to Defence & Counterclaim in CC13P00980). (ii). Why did he refuse to provide a copy of the 2010 letter to me that states ‘we don’t sell wooden fencing, only metal fencing” ? If a chairman of a national firm was was going about business in a lawful way and was not trying to conceal patent fraud, there wouldn’t be any problem producing their copy of this letter because there are many firms that ‘don’t sell wooden fencing, only metal fencing’ but they are not trying to find a way to get around a patent that they know they have stolen. This letter proves attempts of concealment and mens rea, along with all the other evidence: using my name to order the goods, pretending only to be a ‘reseller’ trying to keep all three firms separate, refusing to provide any evidence that they could have any lawful way of knowing about the privileged letter of 25th July from KOB in Belgium to me in the UK, immediately forming a new company in 2010 after I had approached them with samples when they realise they have been caught, etc. I had lost my copy of this letter and they thought that by claiming that they ‘don’t sell wooden fencing, only metal fencing’ it would argue around the ‘use’ in the patent because they had tried to modify my patent/product to fit to metal metal fencing, but as proven in evidence, their product still infringes my patent regardless of whether it is wooden fencing or metal fencing and there unable to get their own patent. They concoct a criminal plan to try to evade the wording of the patents act and then in 2012 after my letter demanding an explanation, they immediately go running to a London Law Firm Collyer Bristow LLP to start concocting legal defences to conceal crime and to protect Betafence. Then they issued and served legal proceedings based on perjury and false witness testimony, heavily aided and abetted by the United Kingdom Government and Judiciary, because the United Kingdom refuses to recognise the value of intellectual property rights under any circumstances whatsoever. It’s a fucking disgrace, isn’t it. Immoral sleazy disgrace. (iii) If he maintains ‘he didn’t know’ and ‘it wasn’t him’ then upon receiving my samples in 2010 or my letter in 2012, what steps did he take to find out about the lawfulness of what he and his firm were doing? Any response needs to be supported by documentary evidence in the form of letters to Betafence or emails that can be verified in a lab as proven to be original and authentic and authored in any of the years 2004 to 2012, but particularly in 2010 and October 2012. We know in evidence that he only took steps to try to conceal the crimes.

Defendant No. XXX: Michael Frank Brundle, co owner and director of FH Brundle:

I allege this Defendant is guilty of conspiracy, fraud, perjury, corroboration, concealment, criminal attempts, fraudulent trading, and participation in serious crime. This person is a talentless little loser who is running daddy’s firm and doesn’t have any skill, talent or gift to think of anything for himself. Therefore to impress his daddy and his little loser friends, he thought I would be an easy target and so he set about to defraud and rob me of my patent rights. He corroborated with the Defendant law firm Collyer Bristow LLP, DR. Stuart Baran and Mr. Patrick Wheeler to file and served malicious proceedings based on fraud and perjury that he signed himself as a statement of truth. This is proven by the content above and the undeniable hard evidence found on the Defendant Law Firms pages (go back to Particulars of Claim and scroll down>>Defendant Law Firms). POLICE: You need to look into the whole documentation from the civil proceedings, largely 20 section white numbered bundle and then the petitioning of bankruptcy proceedings and then the application for a second restraining order against me that has been by serious crime. I will also publish the details here when I am back in the UK. These two Directors and co-owners of the firms FH Brundle and their sole trader operations have been used as criminal fronts for company liability from 2010 onwards. However, these Defendants were committing these crimes as sole traders long in 2004/2005 - long before they formed the firm to try to conceal assets gained from the proceeds of crime. We also now have other witnesses coming forward making the same allegations against these people. Contact me for a witness list. Both of their firms; the sole proprietorship and the company formed at Companies House are also named Defendants. These business entities have been used to carry out the crimes. Defendants No.s: XXX XXXX. More questions coming for this Defendant: Update January 2020 - see 2019 Confessions & Revelations Page

Defendant: Britannia Fasteners Ltd & Sub-Defendants: Defendants No’s. XX / XX / XX / XX (Directors of Defendant Britannia Fasteners Ltd) Background and What We Know: We know from the emails and statements provided by the Indian Manufacturer and the other evidence, that Britannia Fasteners were ordering the offending goods and other goods in my name. We know Betafence had to give the ‘Stamping Authority’ to the Indian Manufacturer to authorise the distribution or sell of the goods to Britannia Fasteners. We know that they never employed anyone with the name Richard Perry and then someone tried to change my tax details at HMRC to make it look like I lived and worked within 45 minutes of their office. We know the Directors of Britannia Fasteners submitted a second falsified CAD drawing to the Patent Office in 2012 to try to continue the dishonest claims that they had thought of the product before me. We don’t know which of the Directors did this and it doesn’t really matter because they are all concealing evidence which is an offence and trying to cover one another. The questions below should help find which of the individuals did what, because I want to get them as well as their firm. Just for my own satisfaction. Britannia Fasteners are already caught. 1). David Arthur Ford ask: (These questions can be asked of every Defendant here). (i) What were the terms or reasons for this person to resign or be terminated as a Director in 2012 and after I had held conversations by correspondence with Betafence and a telephone call with his firm, alleging offences? Was this the person in the firm using my name to order the goods and using the email address ‘sales @ britanniafasteners .co.uk? (ii) I had sent registered letters to his firm and also to the home addresses of his colleagues involved. The registered letters were particulars of claim for a fraud claim to be issued in civil courts which has not yet happened. By chance his colleagues received their copies a day or even a few hours before the post office attempted to deliver the letter for this Defendant. he refused the letter and claimed to have moved from that address and had ‘gone away’. The post office returned the letter to me with their rejection label and ‘gone away’ confirmation. Why did Defendant David Ford return this letter as ‘gone away’ when he still lives at the address if he doesn’t have anything to hide? (actus reaus and mens rea). (iii) Which co-defendant tipped him off? (this would also further prove concealment, conspiracy, criminal attempts etc. of that Defendant). (iv) Which one of them made the death threats aimed at me by telephone to J. Marriot of Fenceline Supplies? (v) Which of his colleagues submitted the 2nd falsified CAD drawing to the Patent Office during the opinion request to continue the concealment and to try to make it look like they had thought of my product/idea before I did? The 2nd CAD drawing (copy found 20 section white numbered bundle) this time ommitted the 2005 copyright date found on the first drawing, which we now know to be false. This is fraud by false representation, concealment, tendering of false statements on oath or otherwise, conspiracy, corroboration, criminal attempts of theft etc. (vi) what did he or his firm tell the Indian Manufacturer to make him believe that he was dealing with me and that I had authorised the use of the patent, which I did not? How did the Indian Manufacturer know to contact me? The Indian Manufacturer claimed ‘we are already selling your range of products in the UK’ (copy of email found under evidence page) and presented a purchase order from ‘sales @ britanniafasteners .co.uk’ using my name to order goods. (vii) Can you confirm that you or the firm Britannia Fasteners Ltd ever employed anyone by the name Richard Perry and show proof of employment records, National Insurance Numbers, Payslips etc? (viii) Did you contact HMRC to try to change Richard Perry’s personal tax details to make it look like he lived and worked within 45 minutes of your firm’s premises? If you didn’t, who did? (ix) Did you make the telephone call to Richard Perry in 2006 - 2008 asking him ‘do you want to go to India?’ and if you didn’t which one of your colleagues did? Police - you can trace the call records to 07772 509740, my business phone which is still active. (x) Why didn’t Britannia Fasteners Ltd attend any of the civil court hearings between 2012 - 2017 despite being a named Defendant and added to proceedings in 2012, if it wasn’t to maintain the ruse that ‘all three firms are wholly independant business entities’ as per the false witness testimony of Patrick Wheeler, Stuart Baran, Michael Brundle and Collyer Bristow llp? if you were going about your business in a lawful way, surely you would be desperate for a chance to put your evidence and alibi to the court to clear your name for the sake of your fimr? (xi) Who filed the suspect patent application in 2004 less than six weeks after contacting your firm and/or Betafence asking if they would licence my products/patent? (xii) What invention was this patent intended to protect if it wasn’t the very same idea that Mr. Perry had already patented? (xiii) If it wasn’t the same idea, why have you or your firm refused to submit these details to the courts between 2012 - 2017 because this would surely give you some defense? (xiv) Do you have any records of this ‘mysterious product’ if there ever was one or any sales records of it or even anything at all proving it was ever invented prior to my patent? (xv) Why doesn’t your firm Britannia Fasteners or Betafence or even FH Brundle have any patent on the alleged offending product when you have patents on everything else you sell? (xvi) Who imported the offending goods? (xvii) Why didn’t you simply have the goods manufactured in the UK when it would have been cheaper than ‘going to India’? (xviii) Can you explain why Britannia Fasteners, an established small business dealing on behalf of Betafence, claims never to have made any profit until 2012, when I began investigating the firm for fraud - the very same year David Arthur Ford was terminated or resigned? (evidence at Companies House). If the Witness is hostile, the answers to the above questions can be obtained from the emails between myself and the Indian Manufacturer, the Compaines House records and from the other Defendant firms and individuals. Nevertheless, at this point, it really doesn’t make a lot of difference now because of all the evidence that we already have. The answers to these questions just help bury the rest of them and stop the individuals behind these firms from acting as Directors or managing money. 2). Kevin Duncan Adams Concealment, Corroboration, Conspiracy between other Directors to try to protect Betafence, Fraud, Aiding, Abetting, Subornation to Fraud, Criminal Attempts, Deception, Passing Off, etc. 3). Steven Leonard Jenks Concealment, Corroboration, Conspiracy between other Directors to try to protect Betafence, Fraud, Aiding, Abetting, Subornation to Fraud, Criminal Attempts, Deception, Passing Off, etc. 4). Steven James Nicholl Concealment, Corroboration, Conspiracy between other Directors to try to protect Betafence, Fraud, Aiding, Abetting, Subornation to Fraud, Criminal Attempts, Deception, Passing Off, etc.

I had written to all of the Directors by recorded deliveries of which most were returned, and also by normal

post with certificate of posting. I had also sent recorded deliveries to their home addresses that were signed

for and not a single one of them came forward to confess or provide any explanation. David Ford who was

tipped off by one of the others that the delivery was coming claimed he had ‘gone away’ and didn’t live at the

address.

Defendant: Betafence LTD Questions: (i) Besides a falsified CAD drawing sheet which we know shows falsified dates to try to precede my patent filing date, what evidence does Betafence have that proves they ever commerically produced this product before I did 2002-2003 when we know from their own drawings and patent applications that it didn’t exist until 2005? They would have production invoices for tool, sales invoices, purchase orders, emails between designers and production, export invoices - all the usual documentation that you can prove if they genuinely had thought of the product as they claim. I know because i’ve done it dozens of times in producing my own products. (evidence of this see Defendant Law Firms pages click here and their own witness statement submitted to a court 20 section white numbered bundle, James Timlin ‘because 2005 is when we first sold the product’). (ii) Considering that I pursued your Company at length long before I had approached FH Brundle and that I had lengthy dialogues with your KOB Solicitors and your Belgium Office demanding explanations and answers for alleged patent infringement and fraud, can you explain why you didn’t issue the proceedings for ‘unjustified threats’ yourselves? I would have thought the costs incurred paying KOB were wildly more than the costs FH Brundle incurred sending one or two letters to me from Collyer Bristow and Betafence were trying to keep the spotlight off of themselves. (iii) Why haven’t you enforced your costs order from CC13P00980 of £15,000? Is it because you don’t want any more evidence to materialise where I may be entitled to subpoena it? (iv) Because Betafence didn’t issue a bankruptcy petition or statutory demand, why was Betafence and their legal representative Merk Serby at Wake Smith Solicitors holding conversations with Hayley Bird at the Bristol Official Receiver and at the time when you knew I still had open appeals and a 2nd pending claim? Hayley Bird states herself that she had been holding conversations with Betafence and had colluded with Betafence and the other Defendants to refuse to sell me a right of action at any time before the Sept 2015 strike out hearing. (v) Why doesn’t Britannia Fasteners Ltd appear on your website as a reseller or distributor of any of your products, when you clearly work closely with them to import and distribute the Nylofor beam bracket? Isn’t it true that Britannia Fasteners is your criminal front? (vi) If you didn’t know Britannia Fasteners Ltd were selling/ordering/handling/dealing in this Nylofor product, now that you do, what legal action have you taken against them to prevent it? If you haven’t taken any, why not? I suggest that you haven’t taken any action because you got together with them in 2004 to collude to defraud me by using my name on purchase orders and forged design sheets provided to manufacturers to produce the product that infringes my patent, because you didn’t want to pay me the money I was lawfully and rightfully entitled to and you thought that if I ever found out I would have little chance of making you pay up because I’m a small individual without any money or assets. (vii) For the Patent Office Opinion Observations in Reply, you provided Britannia Fasteners Ltd with yet another freshly printed falsified drawing of the Nylofor beam bracket product this time omitting the ‘Copyright 2005’ statement which they then sent to the Patent Office to try to influence the outcome of the Opinion. (20 section white numbered bundle) Isn’t it the truth that you thought that by passing the drawing through Britannia Fasteners Ltd you would evade any criminal charges or punishment if/when I prove the case and because what you are doing is fraudulent and you wanted to try to keep your hands clean? (viii) If the answer to the above question is no, then why didn’t you reply to the Patent Office Opinion Request yourselves through your UK Head Office with your own drawing? (ix) Why are you refusing to provide the content of the suspect patent application of 2004 that I allege is a mere re-application for the idea I already patented in 2003? (x) Why did you try to keep Britannia Fasteners out of proceedings in 2012 - 2017? What do they know that you don’t want divulged to a court or on the public record? (x)a) If Britannia Fasteners were not guilty of conspiracy and fraud etc. then surely if they claim to be an independant firm then why didn’t they attend a single court hearing over five years and why did they return all the recorded delivery post of summonses etc that i had sent them? Because the reason for the question is that if they ‘didn’t know’ and believed they were going about their business in a lawful way, surely any firm facing this type of serious allegation would be absolutely desperate to come forward and present evidence that ‘it wasn’t us’ for the sake of the reputation of their business and to clear their names? Instead we have nothing - they refuse to answer the phone, they refuse all emails, they continue to try to evade court and any punishment, they file false accounts at Companies House and file falseified CAD drawings to the Patent Office on behalf of Betafence. (xi) What did you tell the Indian Manufacturer to make him believe he was dealing with me and how did he know about me and my products? (xii) Do you have any proof that you indemnified FH Brundle against fraud and criminal offences in the form of letters or correspondence? It would be useless anyway because they could have lied and they can’t indemnify against crime. (xiii) If my allegations are wrong, then why haven’t you simply, and in your own free will, provided a single shred of evidence that would give you any alibi? (xiv) In relation to the CAD drawings and my patent filing date: If Betafence claims to have thought of the product in June 2003 miraculously 6 weeks before I filed my patent, then why didn’t they ever file their own patent in those six weeks? We know they didn’t because i’ve gone through every single record in the British Library and there isn’t one - not even an abandoned or withdrawn application. The only application is the one of October 2004 after I had approached them to licence my patent which they declined. In addition, the way the patent system works in the UK is that Betafence wouldn’t have known about my application the second I filed it, because there is a process the application goes through until it is recorded in the British Library Patents & Designs Journal or until publication. This takes time - at least 6 months. So therefore that would in fact take us until the end of 2003 in the timeline. Therefore, if they claim to have drawn it in 2003, why isn’t there a single application for a patent on the Nylofor product, even between June and December 2003? Or even from June 2003 until October 2004? (xv) Who drew the freshly drawn or ‘printed off’ 2nd CAD drawing and supplied it to Britannia Fasteners Ltd to supply to the Patent Office during the Opinion Request? If Betafence claim the whole thing didn’t have anything to do with them and try to blame Britannia Fasteners, then how did Britannia Fasteners get hold of a freshly drawn Betafence CAD file? This drawing is purportedly drawn by Mr. Humphries - The Police need to speak to this man. Cross reference employment records between Bekaert Fencing that became Betafence to find out which individual is behind it. It actually doesn’t matter - we’ve got Betafence and there isn’t any way out of it. Dates of employment of Mr. Humphries etc. which firms he worked for etc. If he didn’t draw or supply the second drawing ommitting the 2005 copyright date, then who did? Who had access to the CAD files? If they were going about their business in a lawful way, they would have this evidence and would simply present it in their own defence or provide evidence that gives an alibi. Now there is just too much against them. I have many more questions for these thieving little shits but this is to help the Police and to speed up their investigation more than anything, until I lodge criminal charges in the criminal courts. I will lodging an appeal in Bath County Court to rescind the bankruptcy order as soon as I arrive back in the UK based on this proof of serious and organised crime. All the evidence can be found in their own records and in the civil court case documents. I will publish more of it shortly.