andclick below individual links

THE HM LAND REGISTRY RECORDED,

THAT DEPUTY DISTRICT JUDGE MORROW-BROWN,

HAD TRANSFERRED THE TITLE OF CRAIG FRASER,S PROPERTY

AFTER RECEIVING £65,000,


IF THIS WAS THE CASE, WHY WASN'T CRAIG FRASER EVER

GIVEN NOTICE OF A TRANSFER, OR A PR-SEIZURE HEARING,

INCLUDING THE FACT THAT, A JUDGE WOULD BE REQUIRED

TO KNOW, THAT AN UNLAWFUL TRANSFER OF PROPERTY,

NULL AND VOIDS ALL OF IT'S INSURANCE,,


​​​a Notice Of Right, Pre-Seizure Hearing, 

So Issued and Served,


shall Notify the Defendant that within 5-days of Service thereof,

he may demand such hearing and present such evidence,

touching upon the Validity of the

Plaintiffs claim for Immediate Possession,,


if the Defendant fails to make demand for

a Pre-Seizure Hearing, the Constable will be directed

to take Property as described in Affidavit,


a Summons has to be Served on the Defendant for Hearing

no more than 20-days later,

the purpose of a Pre-Seizure hearing, is to allow

a claim for Immediate Possession Action

to be Tried, and to Protect Defendants

Use and Possession of Property from

Arbitrary Encroachment, and to prevent Unfair,

or mistaken Deprivation of Property,,


section 22-3-1360 Notice and Opportunity for

Pr-seizure Hearing Required Waiver,


No Property shall be seized under the provisions of

this article, unless five days Notice and

an Opportunity to be Heard, have been afforded,


the party in Possession as herein provided ,


provided however, any person in Possession of the Personal Property, may waive the right to a Pre-seizure Hearing,

if the waiver is Conspicuously Displayed in the Contract

and includes the wording,

"Waiver of Hearing prior to Immediate Possession",

in order for the contractual waiver to be effective,


the Plaintiff must show by Affidavit, that the Defendant has,

in Writing by Contract, or Separate Written Instrument,

Voluntarily, Intelligently, and Knowingly, Waived his Right to a Hearing, prior to Repossession of such personal Property,,


the Judge may Order Immediate Delivery of the Property

to the Plaintiff upon Receipt of such Affidavit,,


JUDGE MORROW- BROWN DID NOT CONDUCT A PRE-SEIZURE HEARING, PRIOR TO, ALLEGEDLY ACCEPTING A PAYMENT OF £65,000,

TO ALTER THE HM LAND REGISTRY RECORDS,


THIS IS PROVEN, due to the fact that

for many months AFTER Judge Morrow-Brown

had allegedly altered the HM Land Registry Records

the Coventry Building Society continued to accept

craig fraser's Mortgage Payments,

as the Owner Occupier of his Property,


the LAW Protects us, by Ensuring Vacant Possession, and the

Redemption of a Mortgage, prior to a change of Title,,​​

​[ JUDGES CANNOT LAWFULLY ACCEPT PAYMENT,

NOR TRANSFER​ A TITLE, *WITHOUT VACANT POSSESSION*,

AND *REDEMPTION OF THE MORTGAGE* ]


the LAW UPHOLDS THAT, Deputy District Judge Morrow-Brown

was required to SUMMONSand SERVE, craig fraser with

NOTICE OF A RIGHT TO A PRE-SEIZURE HEARING, 

*Prior To, Acceptance of £65,000 For His Property*

*UNLAWFUL PUBLISHING AND

PROCESSING OF DATA*

TITLE, means EVIDENCE of a RIGHT TO POSSESSION, 

and ACTUAL OCCUPATION of OUR PROPERTY,


the HM Land Registry PUBLISHED and PROCESSED FALSE DATA

about craig fraser,s Property, without his knowledge or consent,

whilst HE was the SOLE OCCUPIER, of his Property, of which declared him as a Trespasser in his own home,

the HM Land Registry, continually played for time,

by refusing to comply with our complaints, and continually Withholding Documents, of which they claimed to have relied on, to sell the TITLE of craig fraser,s Property

via altering it into the Sole Name of Rachel Last,

Data is Processed with Consent,

and to the extent necessary for purpose,

Data is Not Transferred, without Guaranteed

adequate levels of Protection, and Consent,

Processing is required to be under appropriate security measures, with protection from, and against unauthorised or unlawful processing, and against accidental loss, destruction or damage,

we have a lawful right to be informed about the

purpose of the processing of our data,

the HM Land Registry did not inform craig fraser of

their Data Publishing and Processing of the TITLE DEEDS, 

to his Personal Property,

​​on the 27th june 2017 the HM Land Registry changed the TITLE of craig fraser's Property into the Sole name of Rachel Last,

by doing this, the HM Land Registry, created

A PURCHASERS TITLE FOR RACHEL LAST,


of which is the DELIVERY of THE BILL OF SALE,

that occurs at the Time and Place fixed by law,

or agreed to by the parties, that does everything necessary to put Property Completely and Unconditionally,

at the Purchasers Disposal, by giving POSSESSION,

WHY DIDNT THE HM LAND REGISTRY NOTIFY craig fraser,

OF THEIR DELETION OF HIS HOME OWNERSHIP FROM THEIR REGISTER,


IF THE HM LAND REGISTRY and TREASURY RECORDS

WERE TO BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE,, 


DEPUTY DISTRICT JUDGE MORROW-BROWN

 SHOULD HAVE SERVED craig fraser WITH HIS COURT ORDER,

GIVING HIM A DATE TO VACATE HIS HOME OF 22-YEARS,

IN ORDER TO SECURE VACANT POSSESSION,

FOR HIS CLIENT, RACHEL LAST, 

OF WHICH THE JUDGE FAILED TO DO, 



DEPUTY DISTRICT JUDGE MORROW-BROWN

SHOULD HAVE PERSONALLY ENSURED, THAT THE £65,000 THAT THE COURT ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED FOR THE SALE OF craig fraser's HOUSE,

WAS PAID INTO HIS BANK ACCOUNT, VIA CHAPS

[clearing house automated payment system],

NO MONEY WAS PAID TO craig fraser, THAT MAY EXPLAIN WHY THE TRANSFER DOCUMENT WAS NOT DATED,

OF WHICH WOULD COVER UP THE MISSING £65,000,

THAT RACHEL LAST ALLEGEDLY PAID TO JUDGE MORROW-BROWN,


FOR THE FOLLOW UP AND THE CLAIM

SEE BELOW, AND ON THE INDEX,


https://www.cocoainterspace.com/see-continuation-of-land-registry-money-laundering--and-the-claim.html, 

see further proof below of

the HM Land Registry Money Laundering,


THERE HAD NEVER BEEN A COURT HEARING 

 REGARDING CRAIG FRASER'S PROPERTY,


the HM LAND REGISTRY RECORDED THAT A

  COURT ORDER DATED 23RD MAY 2016,WAS RELIED ON,

TO TRANSFER  THE TITLE OF craig fraser's PROPERTY,

OVER A YEAR LATER IN JUNE 2017 ,,


​​*COURT ORDERS FOR PROPERTY TRANSFERS ARE 

REQUIRED BY LAW TO, INCLUDE A *CLOSING DATE* 

FOR THE SALE AND COMPLETION,

OF WHICH IS USUALLY COMPLETED WITHIN 3-MONTHS,

THESE SUCH ORDERS, ARE NULL AND VOID BEYOND 6-MONTHS,


THIS IS PROOF, THAT THE HM LAND REGISTRY USED

FALSE DOCUMENTS TO STEAL craig frasr's PROPERTY* 

the FRAUDULENT HM LAND REGISTRY RECORD below,

ALSO INCLUDES 'A NON EXISTENT COURT CLAIM NUMBER C00CV234

*craig fraser had NO KNOWLEDGE of the

HM Land Registry Fraud*,

Until Rachel Last turned up at his HOME of 22-YEARS,

to notify him that it is Her House Now, 

and he has 14-days to GET OUT ​​​  

​​​​​ see proof below that;

RACHEL LAST NEVER PURCHASED 

craig fraser's PROPERTY,,

NEITHER DID SHE SIGN AND DATE, A TRANSFER OF TITLE,


see proof below, of craig fraser,s Mortgage Books and

Payments, including via Halifax Bankers Draft Mortgage Payments, 

to the Coventry Building Society,

​*OUR MORTGAGES PROVE OUR LEGAL OWNERSHIP*,


*craig fraser's MORTGAGE PAYMENTS,

ARE DATED AFTER, the HM LAND REGISTRY,

had DELETED HIS MORTGAGE and HIS PROPERTY OWNERSHIP,

from their REGISTRY,,


THE COVENTRY BUILDING SOCIETY, WILL NOT REMOVE ANYONE FROM THEIR MORTGAGE LIABILITY WITHOUT WRITTEN CONFIRMATION,

THAT A TRANSFER HAS BEEN COMPLETED,


THE COVENTRY BUILDING SOCIETY CONTINUED TO ACCEPT MORTGAGE PAYMENTS FROM craigfraser FOR THE LIABILITY OF HIS MORTGAGE,

AS THE LEGAL OWNER OF HIS PROPERTY,

41, CATESBY ROAD, RADFORD, COVENTRY, CV6 3EU,

the HM Land Registry and the Treasury, 

Data Processed Records below, Claim that, 


THE HM LAND REGISTRY AND TREASURY DOCUMENT BELOW,

IS NOT DATED, PROVING THAT IT IS A FALSE INSTRUMENT, 


*JUDGES AND WITNESSES ARE REQUIRED TO NOTARISE INSTRUMENTS, BY DATING AND SIGNING THEM*


*THE DATE THAT WITNESSES NOTARISE SOMEONE'S SIGNATURE*,

IS THE DATE OF THE NOTARISATION,

OF WHICH CORRESPONDS WITH THE SIGNATURE,

AND NOT THE DOCUMENT,


 THE DOCUMENT BELOW, THAT THE HM LAND REGISTRY

SOLD TO craig fraser, CLAIMING IT TO BE 

THE TRANSFER OF HIS PROPERTY,

PROVES ITSELF TO BE A FALSE INSTRUMENT,

OF WHICH CONSTITUTES CRIMINAL TRESPASS,

THEFT AND MONEY LAUNDERING AGAINST craig fraser,

BY THE HM LAND REGISTRY AND THE TREASURY,


IN ADDITION, craig fraser HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM HIS MORTGAGE, PROVING THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO CONFIRMATION TO HIS BUILDING SOCIETY OF ANY SUCH TRANSFER,

*A MORTGAGE PROVES LAWFUL OWNERSHIP*,


THIS HM LAND REGISTRY DOCUMENT BELOW,

ACCUSES DEPUTY DISTRICT JUDGE MORROW-BROWN OF SERIOUS CRIMINAL OFFENCES, AND MONEY LAUNDERING,, 

NOTARISATION DATES HAVE TO BE SHOWN, TO PREVENT FRAUD, BECAUSE THEY CAN BE ALTERED LATER,,​ 

​​​​​​ see proof below that; 

the Security of Our Private Property has

been Compromised by the HM Land Registry

and the Treasury, via 

Money Laundering and Theft,


​*the HM Land Registry ARE COMPELLED BY LAW, 
'PRIOR TO' TRANSFERS OF TITLES, TO;

*FILE THE BILL OF SALE IN EQUITY TO THE TREASURY*
PROVIDING PROOF OF 

*THE EXCHANGE OF MONEY, 

VACANT POSSESSION AND COMPLETION*,
[ any onerous gifts also implies a sale ]​,


on 27th June 2017,

by the HM LAND REGISTRY and THE TREASURY, TRANSFERRED THE TITLE AND OWNERSHIP,   

of craig fraser's PROPERTY INTO THE

SOLE OWNERSHIP OF RACHEL LAST, 

*WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT,

WITHOUT A PURCHASE, OR AN EXCHANGE OF MONEY*

see below, a copy of the HM Land Registry Title,

see 2-samples below, of the HM Land Registry's, cover up

and fraud, by continually giving craig fraser and his Lawyer

the run around, with further false claims,, 


there had Never been a Transfer,,

so where did they get their Transfer DATE from ?

the HM Land Registry Sold craig fraser a Copy of a Fraudulent ​Title Deed, for his Private Property 

*41 Catesby Rd, Radford, Coventry, CV6 3EU* 

of which is further Money Laundering,,


the copy enabled his Lawyer yvonne pears, to Investigate

and Pursue Justice for craig, Due to the Fact that ;


THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF 

craig fraser's Property, into RACHEL LAST'S SOLE NAME,,

FIRSTLY REQUIRED;


*PROOF OF RACHEL LAST'S, TRANSFER AGREEMENT*

 and *PROOF OF RACHEL LAST'S PURCHASE of PROPERTY* 

VIA a MONETARY PAYMENT, TO CRAIG FRASER, 

of which had Never taken place,,

From: customersupport@landregistry.gov.uk <customersupport@landregistry.gov.uk>
Sent: 22 May 2018 13:46
To: craigfraser10@outlook.com
Cc: CustomerAssurance@landregistry.gov.uk
Subject: FORMAL NOTICE Incident: 1...
 

[Image]
Enquiry reference: 180509-004250   Application reference:   Title number:WM336901                                                                                                                                                         
Dear craig fraser

Thank you for your email dated 9 May 2018 which has been treated as a complaint by Land Registry, I am one of the Team Leaders for HM Land Registry’s Customer Support team and have reviewed the concerns you have raised.
The property is 41 Catesby Road, Coventry CV6 3EU.
I have investigated your complaint and I confirm:
You requested documents that were sent to Land Registry resulting in the register being altered by a removal of your name as the registered proprietor of the above property.
We have replied to you on this point and advised you what documents we hold and how to obtain copies thereof. This information was forwarded in our emails of 13 March 2018, 3 April 2018 and 9 April 2018. 
 
The transfer deed dated 9 June 2017 has been executed by a District Judge on your behalf accordingly there appears no provision in the Land Registration Act or Rules why the Land Registry should not accept the transfer for registration. Only a court of law can decide whether the transfer should not have been registered and until a court makes such a decision, no alteration to the register can be considered. 
Accordingly your complaint is not upheld.
 
I hope that my response has resolved this matter for you. HM Land Registry operates a two-stage internal complaints procedure and this is our second-stage response.
If you remain dissatisfied and wish to take this further, then you can ask us to review your complaint under the final stage of our complaints procedure. If you want us to do this, please let me know.
 
Yours sincerely
Emma Chattin
HM Land Registry

PRE-SEIZURE HEARINGS

craig fraser was the Sole Occupier and Mortgage Payer,

of his Private Property,

of which was his Home for over 22-Years,

he has NEVER been SERVED, NOR SUMMONED to COURT,

in regard to his Property,

[no Judge shall have cognisance of a Civil Action, when the Title to Real Property shall come into question ]

https://www.cocoainterspace.com/see-continuation-of-land-registry-money-laundering--and-the-claim.html

a change of Title is a Final Decision,

by an administrative authority, 

without the rights to redress,

of which endeavours to remove safeguards

and rights of redress and appeals,,


craig fraser's property had been acquired

by joint enterprise between the HM Land Registry,

the Treasury and Rachel Last,

of whom were all Unjustly Enriched 

by the Unlawful Acquisition, and Trespass

upon craig fraser's Private Property,

of which is further proof of Money Laundering,​

www.cocoainterspace.com