We agreed a Joint Venture Partnership with C&C...
A Joint Venture Partnership is formed when two or more businesses decide to combine their resources in order to fulfil and accomplish a specific task in which the venture is it's own entity, separate from the participants' other business interests... and still they just had to screw us, why would they want to do that!
After which Tim Sargeant quoted "Caveat Emptor....
"Is it really our fault if your solicitors are to stupid to read what we put in front of them"
The Fraud Act 2006
Failing to Disclose Information, by that failure to make a gain or cause loss
"Tim Sargeant wrote to us setting out a settlement schedule amounting to £650,000 to be paid within 10 days of the directors making agreement in settlement for our removing the website while settling the costs of Barn 1 argument and Barn 2 fencing and tree growth... we accepted that offer and he reneged.
The Fraud Act 2006
Failing to Disclose Information, by that failure to make a gain or cause loss
In our experience you shouldn't expect City & Country to do anything outside of a Courtroom for their Blatant Abuse or Breach of Contract nor for them to discuss or settle any disputes or claims. You must be prepared to engage solicitors making all of the concessions and whilst issuing pre action protocol letters. C&C will only deal through solicitors and if you get put in the hands of Simon Marner your well and truly fucked.
The Fraud Act 2006
Failing to Disclose Information, by that failure to make a gain or cause loss
We sacrificed our business for C&C...
We had foolishly entered into a "Joint Venture Partnership" with Tim Sargeant and in so doing we had sacrificed our Equine Business by selling our Building which had enabled City & Country to off load a pair of dilapidated, redundant and derelict barns which had been refused planning consent with no prospect of it ever being granted without our entering into that "Joint Venture Partnership".... so why did they screw us in every possible way other than to providing C&C with a start up fund!!!
Our contract with C&C provided a Three Page Overage Schedule
Tim Sargeant claimed that the Three Page "Overage Schedule" attached to our mutual contract did not say that C&C would undertake the Barn Conversions it was just to show that we could have earnt £410,000 if C&C had undertaken the works albeit the contract had implied that C&C would have been undertaking those works on the barns and not selling them to property developers. "Unjust Enrichment"
The Fraud Act 2006, Section 1 (2) "Fraud by False Representation" Dishonestly intending, by that failure, to make a gain or loss
Our contract with City & Country implied that the company would undertake the conversion works of the barns for which we would have received an Overage Payment of £410,000 as depicted in the contract. It never implied that C&C would or could sell the Barns to other Property Developers such as "Silvermist Properties Ltd" for them to take the profit from our Joint Venture Partnership!
The Fraud Act 2006, Section 1 (2) "Fraud by False Representation" Dishonestly intending, by that failure, to make a gain or loss
Tim Sargeant offered to sell Restrictive Covenant for £200k
Tim Sargeant granted us an unconditional license against the constraints of the Restrictive Covenant that he had applied to our property for the benefit of our neighbours. We had been assured by Tim Sargeant that Howard Parkinson had not passed the benefit of the restrictive covenant onto the owners of the Barns. Tim Sargeant had claimed that C&C owned that Restrictive Covenant which he attempted to sell to us for the sum of £200,000....
Under the Fraud Act 2006 Section 1 (2) Fraud by False Representation Section 1 (
Confiscation Order under the Proceeds of Crime Act....
"When a Defendant is convicted of a crime the Confiscation Order levied on the defendant would amount to the benefit from the defendants criminal act is an amount equal to the defendants benefit from the crime committed from which we shall seek a substantial damages claim from City & Country.... The Crown Prosecution Service have the power to Confiscate Such Assets due to the Proceeds of Crime Act"
The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (1) The Act From which we are at liberty and entitled to make a substantial Damages Claim from the confiscation order made upon City & Country.
Tim Sargeant built C&C on a Lie while taking what was ours.
We had entered into a contract with City & Country by way of a partnership agreement whereby we would provide the company with the opportunity to enable them to off load a pair of redundant agricultural barns which had no commercial value whatsoever and they screwed us. But why would they do that, it was supposed to have been a partnership agreement whereby we sell them our newly built stables giving up our business and they carry out the conversion works on the redundant barns... scum!
Undue Influence is the modern day Fraudulent Calumny which would ordinarily be used for matters centred around wills and probate matters... but the law also relates to blatant lies that are used to influence the decisions and udgement of others which constitutes a matter of fraud. Tim Sargeant had consistently lied to our neighbours namely the Nicol's and Oven's in an attempt to exonerate himself from blame. But with regards to the Marshall's being the most recent owners of Barn 1 claims had been made that the fence was in the correct poisiton on the Marshalls land when C&C own survey showed that tonbe a false statement prompting our neighbour to stand fast demanding GPS surveys and solicitor involvement that cost us inexcess of £10,000 and for what?
Tim Sargeant wrote claiming "It's all Vile Lies and untruth
Tim Sargeant wrote claiming that everything contained within the websites was Full of Vile Lies and untruths... so why doesn't he just sue me for Libel and put a stop to it? Aboslutaley everything that is contained within my websites, centred around Tim Sageants actions and behaviour, can be proven and verified.
The answer to that is that absolutely everything that is written is true and can be verified
City & Country withholding our land is an Abuse of Position
Tim Sargeant had granted us an unconditional license against the constraints of the restrictive covenant he had imposed on our property having claimed that Howard Parkinson had confirmed that the covenant had Not been passed on to the owners of he barns. Tim Sargeant had grant us that license to house and breed a commercial herd of pigs against the constraints of that restrictive covenant claiming that C&C owned that covenant for which he had provided the companies formula for determining a price for us to buy that covenant from him which amounted to £200,000. Albeit he went on to claim that he "Felt like Piggy in the Middle" as Mr Piggy he was more than happy to make a deal and take our money.
Given that Simon Marner, on behalf of C&C, refuse to remove the six covenants imposed on our property whilst being held by or neighbours, we are unable to conclude the transfer of our land which precludes us from earning a living. We are losing in excess of £1,000 every week that passes as we are unable to complete our stables to house and sell our horses. Tim Sargeant claims that we should have mitigated our losses by building our stables in another location and that we needed to prove to him that we needed our stables to be on our retained land in that location which we did and still he refuses to conclude the transfer albeit we proved the need in that location. Our losses for a 3 year period stand at £164,000.
Under the Fraud Act 2006, Section 4
Withholding our Land represents an
"Abuse of Position" thereby allowing
us to claim substantial losses through
the Magistrates Court
The Sargeant's Mugged us in Broad Daylight
Based on our experience we would warn anyone against entering into any form of contract with any of City & Country's companies. The Sargeant's along with the "City & Country" Board of Directors had set out to purposely Mugg us in Broad Daylight showing little concern for the terms and conditions of the contract that they blatently abused.
Under the Fraud Act 2006 Section 1 (2) Fraud by False Representation Section