More fantasies from TB

My friends, this was taken from PFA2:

Edward Smethurst's 5-bed house in Norden, Rochdale, Lancashire is up for sale

Post Tony Bennett Today at 14:58
Edward Smethurst, from the early days, was described as 'The McCanns' Co-ordinating Lawyer'.

He had quite a job on his hands, co-ordinating extradition lawyers in Portugal and England, co-ordinating libel lawyers in Portugal and England, co-ordinating the Solicitors to the Fund, Bates Wells and Braithwaite (notorious for the amount of work they do for the Freemasons, and no doubt a few other lawyers along the way.

No doubt he was richly rewarded for his services. He played a cameo role in the Panorama programme transmitted on 19 November 2007, just after he met Robert Murat (see below).

It was no coincidence that he is the trusted, in-house lawyer of double glazing tycoon Brian Kennedy, who employs him to run his legal department at his Latium Group, based at Wilmslow in the heart of the 'Kennedy Triangle' in mid-Cheshire.

According to Kennedy, it was sheer altruism which caused him to set up and run the McCanns' private investigations team, based in a house he bought for the purpose in Knutsford, Cheshire (also in the 'Kennedy Triangle'). Kennedy, no doubt with legal advice from Smethurst, carefully researched the best agencies to help in the search for Madeleine and came up with, er, Metodo 3, Kevin Halligen and Dave Edgar.

Smethurst flew out in November 2007 for a meeting which his boss Brian Kennedy wished to keep secret. The meeting took place in the Algarve home of the Eveleighs, aunt and uncle to Robert Murat. There, Robert Murat, his Mum, his aunt and uncle met for what was described as 'dinner' with Brian Kennedy, Edward Smethurst and Murat's jet set lawyer, Francisco Pagarete.

It was seriously suggested that this meeting was all about trying to find Madeleine McCann.

It was highly unusual, if not actually illegal under Portuguese law, for a British double glazing magnate and his lawyer to be meeting with an 'arguido'.

Perhaps, as has been suggested, they were there to discuss Jane Tanner changing her evidence about the identification of Robert Murat, and changing the evidence of the 'Tapas 3' - Russell O'Brien, Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield/Mampilly - that they had seen Murat hanging around the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing. Soon after this cosy dinner chez Murat, all four did indeed chnage their stories [see Robert Murat article under 'Articles' at

Or maybe it was to discuss some legally watertight deals, with Smethurst along to give handy legal advice? Months later, Murat netted a six hundred grand libel award, along with another hundred grand each for his girlfriend Michaela Walczuk and his mate who wiped his hard drive before the police could get to it, Sergei Malinka.

Smethurst, an admitted Freemason, makes much of his work on behalf of the McCanns, highlighting it in a recent puff for his latest business venture, 'Palladium', a firm which appears to specialise in helping companies which might be the victim of frauds, clearly one of his many areas of expertise.

He managed to get round Rochdale Borough Council's planning laws in the past two years and is now tarting up the adjacent property just 100 yards down Meadowhall Lane, namely Ashworth Brook Farm, an even larger property which will be worth well over a million quid when it is finished. It's not that private, though, being situated on a public footpath.

Smethurst clearly likes the remote location, five miles from the centre of Rochdale, high on the moors.

If you'd like to make an offer for Smethurst's current home, it's going for £795,000:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for ... 11202.html

An offer of three quarters of a million might just do it


Tony Bennett
Addict
Addict

Posts: 2437
Join date: 2009-11-25
Age: 63
Location: Harlow, Essex

Back to top Go down

Re: Edward Smethurst's 5-bed house in Norden, Rochdale, Lancashire is up for sale

Post Tony Bennett Today at 15:10
Reminder of a letter sent by The Madeleine Foundation to the Law Society in July 2009:

The Madeleine Foundation
Combating child neglect
Tel: 01279 635789
e-mail: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Website: http://www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk
Tuesday 14 July 2009

Head of Regulatory Investigations
Solicitors Regulation Authority
8 Dormer Place
LEAMINGTON SPA
Warwickshire
CV32 5AE

Dear Sir/Madam

re: Bringing the Solicitors Profession into disrepute – Mr Edward Smethurst – gross breach of Planning Regulations, showing ‘utter disrespect for the planning process’

I write to bring to your attention the dishonest conduct of a Solicitor called Mr Edward Smethurst who lives in the Rochdale area.

He has submitted drawings for the conversion of two barns on land near Rochdale. I quote from a report published in the ‘Rochdale Observer’ earlier this year which in turn quoted from a report by a Council officer, which refers to several significant inaccuracies in plans that he submitted for Council approval.

These are the verbatim comments of the Council official:

1) “The ‘existing’ drawings do not accurately reflect the size of the original house”

2) “The ‘existing’ drawings do not accurately reflect the size of the original barns”.

3) “The inaccuracies are:

a) the end barn is shown much wider than it was originally,

b) a door is included on the north-east elevation of the end barn which was not there originally,

c) the single storey element to the farmhouse has been shown wider than it was originally,

d) two windows are included on the north-west elevation of the central barn which were not there originally, and

e) the ridge of the end barn is shown much higher than it was originally”.

The newspaper also quotes the view of the Council Officer concerned with the application. Here are his reported comments:

“It is thought that development works commenced at Black Dad Farm in the autumn of 2007; an enforcement complaint was made to the council in October 2007.

“The applicant [Edward Smethurst] maintained a view that the works were simply repairs to the two barns and did not require planning permission.

“A planning application for the change of use, conversion and single storey extensions to the two barns to provide additional living accommodation was received in December 2007, but withdrawn in January 2008 after the agent for the application was advised that it would likely be recommended for refusal and that the ‘existing’ plans submitted did not accurately show the original farmhouse and barns.

“A meeting was held with the applicant, his agent, Council’s planning solicitor and planning officer in February 2008 and the applicant was informed that the Local Planning Authority’s view was that the barns were being reconstructed not repaired, and that planning permission was required for this reconstruction and for the extensions to the barns and farmhouse, and the change of use of the barns to form additional living accommodation for the dwelling. In this meeting the applicant was informed that the development would likely not comply with the Council’s adopted policies for development in the Green Belt. The applicant was also informed that works should cease and that any further work undertaken was at the applicant’s own risk.

“Works have progressed at Black Dad Farm and the reconstruction and extension of the farmhouse and barns is mostly complete. The proposed sun lounge and garage extensions had not been constructed at the date of writing this report.

“As the two barns have been substantially demolished prior to their reconstruction, the Council’s planning solicitor and planning officers do not consider the works undertaken to be a repair of the barns, as claimed by the applicant in the Design and Access Statement, but consider them to be a major reconstruction”.

There is more information about Edward Smethurst's dishonest conduct on page 30 in this link:

[url=http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/pdf/2009_03_ ... ittee2.pdf[/size]]http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/pdf/2009_03_ ... ittee2.pdf[/url]

The letter informing Edward Smethurst of the rejection can be viewed here: [url=http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/swiftlg/Medi ... -31488.pdf[/size]]http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/swiftlg/Medi ... -31488.pdf[/url]

A further report in the Rochdale Observer, Saturday 18 April 2009 said:

“The work was also opposed by the occupants of a neighbouring farm, Dairy House Farm. They said building work at Black Dad had progressed over the past 17 months without planning permission.

"The area, they contended, was full of historical character and its building should be preserved and protected. Councillor Wera Hobhouse, who has cabinet responsibility for the environment, told the committee that planning permission should be denied. She alleged Mr Smethurst had shown 'utter disrespect' to the planning process by working on the building. ‘These are major alterations to a building in the green belt which will erode the rural character of the area’, she said”.

Rule 1(d) of the Solicitors’ Practice Rules 1990 states: “A Solicitor shall not do anything in the course of practising as a Solicitor, or permit another person to do anything on his or her behalf, which compromises or impairs or is likely to compromise or impair any of the following:

d) the good repute of the Solicitor or the Solicitors’ profession”.

Edward Smethurst appears to have broken that rule. He has flagrantly and deceitfully breached planning regulations and, in the words of a Rochdale Borough Councillor, has shown ‘utter disrespect for the planning process”.

I consider that Edward Smethurst has most certainly brought the Solicitors’ profession into disrepute and I trust the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority will take whatever action it considers appropriate. Edward Smethurst is a prominent Solicitor whose name has been linked to certain high profile cases in the past two years.

Please inform me as soon as possible what action you propose to take.

Yours faithfully

The Madeleine Foundation


Last edited by Tony Bennett on Fri 10 Dec 2010 - 15:23; edited 2 times in total


Tony Bennett
Addict
Addict

Posts: 2437
Join date: 2009-11-25
Age: 63
Location: Harlow, Essex


Back to top

Oh Gawd he never gives up does he. But this is the hallmark of a true madman of course. Obsessive behaviour.

Creep and his obsessive behaviour He is just not right in the head this man.

I agree with you Catkins.

Bennett goes on about 'perhaps' this was discussed, or 'perhaps' that was discussed. This is just rubbish, with absolutely nothing but Bennett's imagination to back it up with. And what happens, his 'friends' lap it up.

So now he goes after Smethurst.

He reports him to the Solicitors REgulatory Authority for some alleged breaches of planning regulations. Even if there are irregularities, Smethurst will be asked to correct these by the RELEVANT authority, which is not the SOlicitors Regulatory Authority. BEnnett is claiming that Smethurst by his actions should be disbarred, or censured, or whatever happens.

Honestly, what should happen is that the planning authority should do its job, and deal with this. Bennett is making a very big jump from Smethurst not complying with planning regulations to there being an intent to deceive, and a lack of ethics. I have had to redo plans before that have gone to council, and it wasnt because we were trying to deceive.

Bennett is a joke. As if the Solicitors Regulatory board would take advice from him. They will take 'whatever action they see fit', which will be nothing. And as usual Bennett's machinations will get him no where.

One should take great care to avoid unwarranted or inappropriate interference in other people's affairs. Making judgements which are actually the province of some other individual or institution is quite wrong, especially when those judgements are based on ignorance or little bits of misinformation!

I agree with you dianeh, maria theresa.

Your words are also mine Rosie.

Bringing the profession into disrepute? That's rich coming from Bennett.

Rosie

TB's enormous mind numbing diatribes are as good as sleeping tablets. They certainly put me to sleep.