BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[SantaClaus]

DR you should start taking some of my medication because you are deluding yourself and losing credibility on this site. I have seen explicit details of the scheme and if its not fraudulent and/or being sold fraudulently then we can all start "robbing banks" with impunity.
To those involved in the "derivatives/financial" trading scheme i urge you to take independent legal advice (and NOT me).
This criminal investigation could have a major impact on the Huitson Case i.e. if HMRC successful and confiscation order granted then no funds available for Huitson !!

Not worth listening to loony Jones who passes notes to HMRC in court.

Shall I bring you some Post-It pads for the Court of Appeal?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Attention all Montpelier Clients

Alan Jones

Most of the people who've been around the BN66 forum a while are already aware of this.

However if you don't know who Alan Jones is, or his history, then read this before you listen to anything he says.
Isle of Man Judgments Online

Continued here (see "Overall Conclusion", Point 162)
Isle of Man Judgments Online

It is clear that he's got it in for Montpelier and that's the only thing which motivates him to come on here spreading FUD.

[Alan Jones]

Alan Jones begin_of_the_skype_highlighting*****end_of_the_sky pe_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting*****end_of_the_sky pe_highlighting

Most of the people who've been around the BN66 forum a while are already aware of this.

However if you don't know who Alan Jones is, or his history, then read this before you listen to anything he says.
Isle of Man Judgments Online

Continued here (see "Overall Conclusion", Point 162)
Isle of Man Judgments Online

It is clear that he's got it in for Montpelier and that's the only thing which motivates him to come on here spreading FUD.

I am glad you made this post because it gives me an opportunity to update the forum on this.
The Judgments referred to above are the equivalent of the first Judgment re Huitson and we all know how wrong that was.

I have appealled against this Judgment BUT more importantly "new evidence" has come to light that was not available at the original High Court hearing before Deemster(Judge) Newey QC. The most important being that it is alleged that Mr Gittins made contradictory statements to the Isle of Man Court re my hearing and to the Royal Courts of Justice re the Huitson hearing.
The Staff of Government Division (Appeal Court with two Judges) were so concerned about these alleged contradictory statements that they referred the matter back to the original Judge who ruled that Mr Gittins has to go into the "witness box to explain himself".
The following is a word for word quote from the IOM Judges "we nevertheless consider that some of the contents of Mr Gittins' statements in Huitson do appear prima facie to contradict what he said in the Montpelier trial. Had Deemster Newey been aware of these statements he may have come to a different conclusion as to the weight to be given to Mr Gittins' evidence and that might have had an important influence on the result of the case"
Will this impact on Huitson case !!!

[normalbloke]

here we go again....

"...I have seen explicit details of the scheme and if its not fraudulent and/or being sold fraudulently then we can all start "robbing banks" with impunity." (to quote AJ)

Careful ...... you may well end up in court again on libel charges if you carry on like this..... The outcome for you may well be a prison hospital rather than a prison, but I'd be careful posting stuff like this. Obsession can be a dangerous thing which can really interfere with your already questionable judgement.

Do yourself a favour, instead of wasting everyones time here, go and see your doctor.

I hope all newer contributors/lurkers here are aware of the 'ignore list' facility.

[Alan Jones]

"...I have seen explicit details of the scheme and if its not fraudulent and/or being sold fraudulently then we can all start "robbing banks" with impunity." (to quote AJ)

Careful ...... you may well end up in court again on libel charges if you carry on like this..... The outcome for you may well be a prison hospital rather than a prison, but I'd be careful posting stuff like this. Obsession can be a dangerous thing which can really interfere with your already questionable judgement.

Libel only works if statements are "untrue". If they were "untrue" i would not make such statements.

[Alan Jones]

I am glad you made this post because it gives me an opportunity to update the forum on this.
The Judgments referred to above are the equivalent of the first Judgment re Huitson and we all know how wrong that was.

I have appealled against this Judgment BUT more importantly "new evidence" has come to light that was not available at the original High Court hearing before Deemster(Judge) Newey QC. The most important being that it is alleged that Mr Gittins made contradictory statements to the Isle of Man Court re my hearing and to the Royal Courts of Justice re the Huitson hearing.
The Staff of Government Division (Appeal Court with two Judges) were so concerned about these alleged contradictory statements that they referred the matter back to the original Judge who ruled that Mr Gittins has to go into the "witness box to explain himself".
The following is a word for word quote from the IOM Judges "we nevertheless consider that some of the contents of Mr Gittins' statements in Huitson do appear prima facie to contradict what he said in the Montpelier trial. Had Deemster Newey been aware of these statements he may have come to a different conclusion as to the weight to be given to Mr Gittins' evidence and that might have had an important influence on the result of the case"
Will this impact on Huitson case !!!

Another Isle of Man / HMRC conspiracy !!!

[RockTheBoat]

Alan Jones

Quite interesting that you should appear out of the woodwork (just before the COA) after months of absence...

Did HMRC let you out to play in the real world? something along the lines of "Hello Alan, there is the door, the appeal is next week, go annoy those pesky contractor BN66 protestors down at CUK for us will ya!"


I believe the saying " the friend of my enemy is not my friend" or similar applies here

go away

[normalbloke]

Libel only works if statements are "untrue". If they were "untrue" i would not make such statements.

Ah, so you are a qualified Judge as well now.. and one who doesn't need a normal court hearing before pronouncing judgment.

As the man said... please go away.

[helen7]

ALAN,

Can I please ask that you do not assist HMRC any further on this. I appriciate that you face bankrupcy but please take into concideration the hundreds of families that will be ruined by this legislation.

Remember; you also sold this scheme to naive people on the proviso that it worked and is legal so I think you at least owe us to leave well alone.

If you think that it is acceptable to contibute to Montpellier losing the BN66 case; can you please explain why?

Personally I have 3 children to support and a very sick husband who is unable to work; this ruling will ruin us.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Another Isle of Man / HMRC conspiracy !!!

For all I know you may have a strong case against Montpelier.

The point is you have been embroiled in a bitter legal dispute with them for 8 years and there appears to have been a lot of animosity on both sides, much of it personal.

It's clear you hold a serious grudge against them and I can understand that.

However, this makes everything you say inherently suspect, which is why I'm warning all clients of Montpelier not to pay any attention to you.