Monday, September 13, 2010

How bogus solicitors robbed us of £735k

How bogus solicitors robbed us of £735k


Three months after paying for the property, Nick Christofi, his partner Sharon Griffin and their two sons should be settled into a large Tudor-style four-bedroom house in the desirable North London suburb of Hadley Wood.

Nick Christofi and partner Sharon Griffin
Conned: Nick and Sharon with sons Lewis and Harry and the Hadley Wood house they thought they had bought

WANT TO KNOW MORE?

MORTGAGE TABLES

mortgage Mortgage finder: Cut your monthly mortgage costs, with a quick comparison
- Mortgage tables
Instead, the family's life has been shattered after Nick discovered that he had been a victim of brazen conmen, who sold him the house while it was in the process of being repossessed, and then helped themselves to the full £735,000 asking price after setting up an all-too-plausible bogus solicitors' practice to receive the funds. The family's own lawyer, Pamela Murphy of Schubert Murphy, didn't realise it was a scam and is now disputing his claim that she acted negligently.
The Law Society also denies responsibility, although it carried details of the bogus Acorn Solicitors, based in Rotherham, on its website - and kept them there for six weeks even after the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) was informed that the practice was a criminal sham and police were investigating.
'This practice has been abandoned and the persons behind it are being sought,' say South Yorkshire Police, who are investigating the fraud.
The way the family were robbed of their money leaves open questions about the effectiveness of the legal profession to protect the public against criminality in its ranks.
'As soon as I realised what had happened, I informed the Law Society and the SRA,' says Nick, 40. 'Everybody wanted to wash their hands of this, until the police took what I was saying seriously.'
Several other property transactions involving Acorn Solicitors had been reported to the police as suspected fraud. The firm is also being investigated for pocketing several million pounds from frauds in construction contracts connected with the 2012 London Olympics.
Sharon, 42, and Nick, a small-scale property developer, were wanting to move from Cockfosters in North London to the more salubrious Hadley Wood nearby and were contacted in April by estate agents Sean Heaney about a house where the seller was after a quick sale.
The property was priced at £735,000, although the seller had paid £875,000 for it in December 2007. As the property was such a bargain, the agents were on only a one per cent commission to clinch a deal.
'Nothing decent usually comes up in Hadley Wood for less than £1million so I jumped at the chance to buy it,' says Nick, who was shown round the property by a man who said he was a friend of the seller.
With no time to sell their existing house, Nick borrowed £400,000 from his brother and another £200,000 from his brother-in-law in order to clinch the deal, and instructed Pamela Murphy, whom his family had used in the past.
Through the estate agent, Christofi's lawyers were put in contact with Acorn Solicitors, acting for the seller.
Acorn then repeatedly tried to speed up the process, which was completed in three weeks on May 21. Rather than move in immediately, Nick and Sharon had builders in to carry out refurbishment. But on June 9, they were astonished to receive a notice of eviction.
The house had been repossessed by Lloyds TSB, to whom the owner owed £843,000, with a repossession order granted last December. Indeed, the bank had sent in bailiffs in April, who found that the property was let to a family with young children.
'It is devastating what has happened to us,' says Nick. 'Both Sharon and I have been ill with stress because of this, not least because I owe all this money to my family. All we were trying to do was buy a house with a large enough garden for our children to kick around a football.'
The couple, whose sons Lewis and Harry are aged ten and eight, have managed to persuade Lloyds TSB to delay the eviction until October. Meanwhile, he is suing his solicitor Schubert Murphy for negligence. He says they failed to spot what he claims were ten 'tell-tale signs that Acorn Solicitors were bogus'. The firm denies negligence.
Most of these are minor inconsistencies, such as differing email and postal addresses and a website that never worked.
More seriously, although Acorn Solicitors were supposedly based in Rotherham, their client account was at a bank in Wembley, a highly unusual arrangement.
Schubert Murphy were unaware that solicitors in other property transactions had pulled out of deals with Acorn Solicitors and reported them to the police.
It is an additional confusion that there is a legitimate Acorn Solicitors based in Taunton in Somerset, and there is a retired solicitor called John Dobbs, the same name used as the registered solicitor of the fraudulent outfit. Neither are in any way connected with the bogus firm that was in Rotherham.
Nick and Sharon are pursuing the case with swanky City outfit Holman Fenwick Willan, who have taken it on as a 'no-win, no-fee' case.
'But unless they get a settlement before October, the bank will take back the house,' says Nick.
What will worry other home buyers is the prevalence of fraudsters establishing bogus solicitors, or cloning an existing one's identity and carrying out the conveyancing work with plausible competence.
Last week, the Law Society Gazette reported another case of identity theft when legitimate Bolton firm SK Solicitors were cloned by fraudsters in conveyancing transactions. Many may feel the response of the SRA and the Law Society to the Christofi case was especially feeble.
'I thought it was disgraceful that it took six weeks for the Law Society to remove the fraudsters from its website,' says Nick.
'Who else used that practice in the meantime?' In an email telling Nick that he was not eligible for compensation - because he had been robbed by a criminal rather than a crooked member of the legal profession - the SRA inadvertently leaked a series of emails between its bureaucrats.
'Perhaps we should advise "clients" that they appear to have been victims of an elaborate fraud and should make a complaint to the police,' wrote Tony Coletta on July 9. The public may be mystified why the SRA was not warning them about a practice that was already under police investigation.
The Law Society says it regrets that its website listing registered solicitors included a fraudulent practice, but pointed out that the data comes from the SRA.


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages-and-homes/article.html?in_article_id=512866&in_page_id=8#ixzz0zRrXSk3Z

Friday, July 23, 2010

Scandalous!

We have just recently discovered that we are the fairest agents in town!

Who knew that we were the only ones who will let you move out of a property without charging you the earth? Or that we are the only ones who don't charge any renewal fees?

Honestly, what is going on with the world if someone wants to charge you for changing the date on an electronic document, reprinting it and putting it in the post to you, or worse, just emailing it to you so that you have to print it yourself!

If you have ever dealt with an agent who makes you mad, try us. We are a little bit kooky but we are also fair and honest.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Capital Gain Tax

Capital Gains Tax - levelling the playing-field between individual and corporate investors
Source: http://www.savills.co.uk
Yolande Barnes, Head of Residential Research at property adviser Savills, comments on the changes to Capital Gains Tax (CGT) announced in today's Budget:

"The limiting of the CGT rate to 28% for upper rate tax payers is a welcome deviation from the feared 40% or 50%. Also to be welcomed is its introduction from midnight tonight. A delayed or phased introduction would have led to second home owners and investors selling to beat the deadline and might have increased supply, depressing prices.

For a higher rate taxpayer who bought the average priced home ten years ago, as a second home or investment, and who sells it tomorrow, the changes will mean that they pay an extra £7,500 compared to what they would have paid yesterday. This represents an extra 56% in tax on the £85,000 gain.

Longer term, the raising of capital gains tax may discourage individual investors who make up the vast majority of residential property landlords. Although the luxury of a flat 18% CGT was only in place for two years, its demise removes the incentive for investors to gear up against the expectation of significant capital growth.

The change announced today will, however, begin to level the playing field between investment returns comprised of income and those derived from capital gains. This means that there is less incentive to look for high capital growth prospects as against yield and rental growth. This may start to subtly influence investment decisions in favour of the latter.

The new CGT rate also begins to even out one of the many differences between corporate investors and individual investors in the residential sector and between individual landlords and professionally managed corporate landlords and, while there are many more anomalies between these two to iron out, it may, in theory at least, encourage individuals to invest in corporate entities rather than direct into property.

Overall, there are inherent risks in discouraging any type of landlord at this time of growing demand for private renting. There are currently insufficient numbers of corporate investors and fund managers to take up the slack if private individuals withdraw from residential lettings. Compelling 'pull factors' still need to be put in place as a matter of urgency to attract corporate or institutional investors to the sector and to increase rental supply."