Wednesday 29 December 2010

Corrupt Police & IP-How they aided a crook.51.

As I told you in my last post, today I got the decision from the Parliamentary Ombudsman. As expected a TOTAL WHITEWASH. Everytime you contact them they go running to the IPO, and they feed them full of lies because it is obvious they will NEVER admit to any wrongdoing. It is a total farce, but one I wanted to go through so I could show you that YOU WILL NEVER GET JUSTICE WHEN YOU HAVE TO RELY ON ANY GOVERNMENT BODY. They all band together and cover each others arses.
One interesting statement he made was that even though I gave the IPO evidence of perjury and Forgery, they did not believe me, or the evidence of Kunzli or Martin as apparently we are all liars. Yet Robert Busbridge is an angel, whiter than white and they can believe everything he says. Rather than give the evidence to the right authorities to decide whether these crimes were committed, I am damned by the IPO who act as Judge and Jury and without so much of actually examining my evidence closely
Look at copies of all my letters to them on this last futile act and see their reply. See the evidence in emails and documents I gave them that proved that the IPO had promised to deal with this perjury in Jan 2010, which they reneged on. Some of these are already on this site and the latest will be added to the documents link in due course.

Saturday 25 December 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 50.



As you will have seen if you have been reading this blog, the IPO have consistently refused to deal with the obvious perjury and forgery committed by Busbridge. So in August 2009 I approached my local Police Force....Dorset Police to ask them to take over and investigate these criminal actions by Liarman. If you have read my book which is accessible by the link on this site, you will have seen how I have not got on with them. This makes them as corrupt as the IPO. Firstly Dorset Police said the perjury would have been committed in London, so they asked London Police to take over my complaint. The Met said perjury had not been committed. This despite me giving the police a dossier in which I gave over 200 pages of evidence documents and lists of all the lies told, plus what documents had been forged. Affidavits by Kunzli my old Swiss agent and Martin Busbridge, Busbridge's brother. On the links you can see all the documents for this whole story and you will find some of the documents concerning the police. In any case I will soon put on copies of all the recent documents concerning my efforts to get the Police assholes to do the job they are paid for.
These will include my reports to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) about the refusal of both forces to uphold the law. I have at the same time been trying to get the two police forces and the IPO to give up to me copies of all documents about me both on a personal level and to do with the collusion between the two police forces and the IPO. I know that emails and letters and phone calls have passed between these people as I have two of them that a dopey copper, DC Brimicombe left in my dossier when I made him give it back to me after his refusal to investigate.
The lies and excuses these asshole police have made to wriggle out of their responsibilities, beggars belief. From saying that perjury couldn't have been committed as none of the lies in all Liarmans statements were not made on oath, to only the judge who heard the case could instigate proceedings, to they were not done on our patch Mate! and so on, ad nauseum. You will see all this in the link where I will put all their letters and documents that I have not already put on the existing links.
The recent case this week of the Scottish politician Tommy Sheridan who was done for perjury and found guilty will show you how duplicitous the Establishment of this country are. Here you have a well known person who has committed the same crimes of perjury as Busbridge and he gets done for it. At a cost of £millions he goes through a long three month trial. Yet Busbridge who committed over 200 acts of perjury and four acts of forgery, who is a non entity as indeed I am, has his criminal acts completely ignored by the IPO and now the Police. Now why is that I ask?
The interesting thing, and this highlights how corrupt our politicians and judiciary are, indulging in hypocrisy and lies, is that the prosecuting QC said that his acts which he admitted did not have a victim, had to be prosecuted to the full, "because perjury is a SERIOUS CRIME that cannot be ignored as it cannot be allowed to become the normal behaviour of people" Well Mr Prosecutor why is it that this man can get away Scot free with over 200 acts of PERJURY AND FORGERY, when Sheridan lied once or twice and was not involved in forgery? He did get £200,000 off the News of the World and most of us would not lose sleep over that, whereas Busbridge initially lied to the Police to get me charged with perjury in order that he could get me incarcerated in jail and so collect £500,000 off Chrysler. So you tell me who is the bigger crook out of these two!!!
My requests for documents under the freedom of Information Act have been met with the same old lying by the IPO and the two Police Forces that either they can keep them away from me or they don't exist. The IPO tossed me a few scraps of evidence to keep me happy and thus be able to say they had kept to the Act requirements, but I know they are keeping the ones with the real incriminating evidence. Both Dorset & the Met have openly admitted they liaised with the IPO despite my asking them not to as all they would get is biased comments about me and them covering their dirty backsides in order to not be seen to have been at fault in not investigating my complaints that I was being subjected to perjury in ALL the six hearings 2004-2010.
So it is damn obvious that emails between them exist. I have one of them where a Mr Hayward of the IPO lies to the Dorset Police that perjury could not have been committed. Then one that the IPO did give me where he tells DC Brimicombe that I had the temerity to have a blog on the whole subject. THIS BLOG. This prompted the DC to slag me off and tell me he know knew all about me and what I was up to. Whatever that meant. Hayward says to the DC when giving him my URL (and do not forget the IPO knew of my blog because the execrable Busbridge gave them the details)"I found some of the entries so shocking and offensive that beware if you read it" Well my answer to this wimp is if he and his other cronies in the IPO had not treated me like SHIT since 2000 and lied and acted corruptly, then I would not have to even have a blog or say anything about what I think of them or their actions, thus upsetting his girly sensibilities.....WOULD I?
The other two emails given me showed that as far back as 2004 and before the first of the corrupt hearings, the IPO had formed black thoughts about me PERSONALLY, as I knew they had and have. I am described as being a "difficult" person to deal with and "angry" Doesn't this show anyone that if you feel shat upon by any government department and you will not take it lying down and fight back, you suddenly become a person who is "difficult" and "angry" etc etc. They make me want to puke, these civil servants, for the way they treat their paymasters...we the PUBLIC. If you read like I do, all the horror stories of other members of the Public who also have suffered at the hands of our civil servants in many different ways, too many to mention here, you will see my story is only normal for their behaviour.Well others may give in but there is no way I am doing that.
So at present I have reports in with the Information Commissioner about the refusal to give me the documents I have asked for from the Dorset Police and the Met and the IPO. Then I have reported the IPO to the Parliamentary Ombudsman for perverting the course of justice by interfering in my efforts to get the Police to investigate criminal acts by telling lies to them about me and what constitutes perjury. I have a request in before that fat slob Ken Clarke who I cannot stand (as he is a lover of criminals and a typical upper class judicial twit) to investigate why the OJC & JACO did not act against that corrupt judge Hobbs QC.

Saturday 11 December 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 48.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE SUBJECT OF CORRUPTION IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE WHOLE OF THE CIVIL SERVICE IS CORRUPT ALONG WITH MUCH OF THE JUDICIARY. IT IS LIKE LIVING IN RUSSIA BUT WITHOUT PEOPLE GETTING KNOCKED OFF!!I have recounted to you about the corrupt Judge Hobbs along with his crony in the IPO, Mr James, head of the Tribunal Section, and now I can tell you about corrupt British Police. Both the Dorset Police and the Met have refused to investigate my assertions about Busbridges forgery and perjury committed in all his hearings and at the trial he instigated against me in 2000. In their corruption and collusion with the IPO they have tried to brush all that aside by saying perjury could not have been committed at a tribunal as all the evidential statements were not made under oath. This of course is a nonsense from the legal angle as if you read the Perjury Act perjury is committed when you make false statements under a statement of truth which is what you do when making IPO tribunal statements. Each document finsishes where you state it is the truth !!!!!
Then when I proved that was trash, they tried another load of crap on me by saying it was an ongoing CIVIL case.
Well first of all there is NO ONGOING CASE and secondly perjury and forgery are clearly criminal acts.!!!!!
Then they said that I should get a lawyer and take my own legal action when this preposterous statement is so ludicrous I do not know how the have the gall to make it. For it is the same as saying to someone who has been severely beaten up almost to death by saying no we will not investigate this as it is a civil matter between you and the criminal who beat you up. WHAT ARE THE POLICE THERE FOR????????? Not to investigate criminal acts of crime, it seems.
The Dorset Police used the excuse to say that as the Judge at the trial did not ask for perjury and forgery to be investigated, then that is the end of it. Yet if you read the CPS website on perjury it clearly states that this is not so. In any case I was charge pretty damn quick by the Dorset Police when Busbridge reported me for the same alleged offences. There was no telling him to pursue it by civil means etc, but then Busbridge 's beat friend and employee was an ex Met cop working out of Sutton. You can be sure he used his influence to get his ex mates to act against me.
It all adds up to a very smelly state of affairs. Is there a whiff of Masonic goings on here I wonder? For as I say Busbridges right hand man was an ex copper and we all know how Masonic influences there are in the Police and most probably also in the civil service incl the IPO!!It would explain the inexplicable way the IPO have consistently denied me justice even in the face of overwhelming proof of Busbridges forgery and perjury and the stealing of my business and IP.
So now I have started the grinding course of taking my complaints about the Police through the process which has to start with their internal complaints procedures. Let me tell you that this is expressly designed to waste time and thwart you. The first stage has resulted in a refusal still, not to investigate it. Now it is at the second stage and both Dorset and the Met are sitting on it and wasting my time, but the outcome is a foregone conclusion....yet another refusal.
So then it will be onto the IPCC who will also do nothing and then it will be to the Justice Minister. Who knows what all these corrupt bastards will do, but in the meantime a crook, a criminal and a conman liar gets away with it.
THIS PROVING YET AGAIN THAT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY FAVOURS THE CROOKS AND CRIMINALS AND NOT THEIR VICTIMS!!!!!!!!! AND KEN CLARKE IS THE EPITOME OF THIS AS HE SITS ON MY COMPLAINT ABOUT A CORRUPT JUDGE AND HE DOES NOTHING!!!!!

Thursday 9 December 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 47.

AS PROMISED....ALL THE DOCUMENTS OF WORTH FOR THIS SORRY CASE ARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING..........................
You can now see for yourself that I have been telling the absolute truth about everything that has gone on in this case. All the lies of Busbridge there for you to see and all the crap he filled the IPO's heads with, WHICH THE BASTARDS BELIEVED. Of course they had their agenda anyway to want to believe him and disbelieve me.
You can also see how Liarman Busbridge is passing off my product on his website as his own creation by showing articles where the reader is told that the car shown is a "Cobretti Viper" when in actual fact it is one of mine 

-being either a Brightwheel or a Classic Replicas Viper. Some cars are actually cars I built with my own hands like the Red V12 one and the Viper4 Cortina car.
The list of documents is in date order so that if you also read the book which I have written and which details the whole history in minute detail, which you can now also download, the documents are in order of the history as shown in the book.

LATEST EVENTS. Like I have said a number of times, I am not sitting here doing nothing. Every day I am working to bring this bastard to book and to get Justice against him. You will see my efforts in the book, which by the way will be published and distributed in the very near future in the New Year. This will go out to a long list of people, which I have drawn up. Members of Parliament, the media, University Law schools so students can see how the IPO deal with people who create IP and many IP barristers and specialists. The name of the IPO will be shit after it goes out,if I have anything to do with it, so I hope they enjoy it. 2024 as I have said elsewhere not one person I sent the book to ever acknowledged receipt let alone helped me in any way. YET MY BOOK IS ON AMAZON SO ALL THEY WERE INTERESTED IN IS TO MAKE MONEY OUT OF IT.
I am doing everything I can to get Busbridge arrested and charged with forgery and perjury independently of the IPO. It isn't easy but I will keep on until the equally bastard Police get off their overpaid fat arses and do what we the Public pay them to do. Arrest Criminals like Busbridge.
Like I said already there are a number of avenues that I can go down to get Busbridge and the IPO and I am going down all of them. I am also trying to get that bastard corrupt IPO, Judge Hobbs investigated for his corrupt handling of the appeal by Busbridge in 2006, against the Landau hearing which went against him. That report is with Ken Clarke, but I am not holding my breath there as he is a fat Tosser anyway and one of the Judiciary cartel Establishment.
If the Police do not act it will be with the IPCC to investigate their corrupt collusion with the IPO to deny me JUSTICE.
I am also trying to get both the Police and the IPO to release copies of emails and letters between their two corrupt bodies. I have already got a couple of interesting documents from the IPO which clearly show that even in 2004 the IPO were viewing me as a difficult person and making personal remarks about me.(thus showing bias and yet at that date I had hardly had much communication with them so why had they real early on feel they had to say what they said and this again raises the question as to why they had these thoughts early on, about me) So what they are now thinking about me now after 8 years of hassle with them???? and these will be thoughts that will have had effects on how I was treated in all the hearings. Which is bloody obvious anyway by the unbelievable decisions that they have made. Of course they are not showing me ALL the documents so it will have to go all the way to the Information Commissioner. The point is all their stupid actions in denying me, goes against them anyway as by refusing to release documents ONLY SHOWS THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE!!!!
The same with the Police and here they are refusing to show me ANY documents even though I already have three that show their dirty deeds, and how they are behaving by refusing to investigate criminal acts by Busbridge. So they too will be reported to the INF/Comm.
So it goes on 'til the bastard is nailed. Dogged Perserverance is the name of the game and I have buckets of that and always have had.

Wednesday 6 October 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 46.

We can now easily see that the Intellectual Property Office since 2004, when the first hearing by Reynolds took place and right through to this last Invalidity hearing in front of Salthouse, have overseen hearings that were riddled with faulty decision making, and the ignoring of their own TMA Law or their Rules.

1/ REYNOLDS; Would not accept a perfectly good evidence document that would have demolished Busbridges case, Would not accept a valid legally made evidence statement made by my solicitor for a higher Court. Had he accepted it would have shown beyond doubt that Busbridge was my agent.
Made several wrongful statements in order to back up his decision. Saying I had abandoned the mark/ I had not controlled the advertising of Busbridge and he could take over the T/M after BRL ceased business even thought there was no evidence they owned it/ ignored the law on abandonment/ saying wrongly that I had not used my T/M during my relationship with Liarman and that gave him the right to it, when the evidence showed otherwise.


2/ FOLEY: He proceeded to look at the application under the TMA Section 64 (1) when he should have proceeded under 64 (5).

Made mistakes by saying it was not an error in the Register when it was an error.

Said he will not revisit previous hearings, then spends much time doing this.

Said I made an application for Rectification when I never did.

He ignored partnership laws which said that Liarmans take over of his brothers assets were illegal.

Obviously did not understand how the IPO should react to bankruptcy.

Made unsubstantiated claims about Martin Busbridge accepting an indemnity. (Which can be shown by Martins later Affidavits)


Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 45.

I have today been notified that indeed Busbridge did not offer up any statements of evidence for the Hobbs appeal. I find this astonishing as what he said in his Statement of Grounds was utter irrelevant tosh and certainly not valid legal argument to get an appeal. In fact it wasn't even legal argument but just him whinging about how hard done by he was.

This explains why Hobbs merely referred to the fact that he had read it. Now had this been a pukka appeal hearing and not the corrupt party it was, Hobbs would have referred to those grounds in at least some ways. As it was irrelevant crap he kept away from saying anything about it.

It pretty much nails this hearing as the utterly corrupt tea party it was, designed solely to allow the IPO's golden boy, Busbridge to get away from having his trade mark taken from him as Landau said it should, and eventually to be able to allow them to take away mine. That would then stop me from suing them as they knew I hadn't the money to do that, unless some fairy God Mother came along in the form of a kindly IP lawyer who thought his profession was being brought into disrepute and wanted to do the right thing in the form of a civic duty, and help me right all the despicable things the IPO have done and allowed to be done by Liarman. Pigs might fly.

So on this theme I have to tell you once again how unlikely that seems to be. For I have been trying for some time now to find a lawyer who would just answer a series of 17 legal questions I want answers to. If I could get these answers I could then show that legal minds have looked at certain aspects of the whole history of the IPO's actions since 1992 and they have broken rules again and again. (if I am right of course and I think mostly I am)
So I approach no less than FOUR lawyers with whom I had been associated with over the past ten years. Either they had given me legal assistance by answering questions or they had represented me when I was bringing my fight against Chrysler to a head. I reckoned it better to try and use people who knew me. The first gave a terse "NO way" the second wanted me to pay him tens of thousands so he could start a legal action against the IPO and Busbridge and refused to answer just the questions. The third said they were too busy, and the fourth hasn't replied.

I think that most lawyers are only interested in the big picture, the big money spinning case. Wasting time answering a few questions is not their forte. Or it could be that they just do not want to take on the IPO as it may give them black marks in their future contacts with them.
Maybe they think that their is some case going on because I keep getting asked what case am I involved in, and this spooks them as they do not want me spouting their remarks, as they may have got their questions wrong. All the questions I think are quite straight forward and deal mainly with questions of law as it stands. Whatever it further brings them down in my eyes.

In this country as say opposed to the USA there is virtually no Pro Bono work done and I think that speaks volumes for the way British lawyers regard the poorer part of the British Public and that their hearts are wallets and not hearts. Of course I will get my answers one way or the other and then I will be able to present a case for suing the IPO.

Another interesting subject I can report again, is that I have just read a very interesting book called "A country fit for criminals" The name of this book really caught my eye when I saw it in my local library. It is written by a very experienced man who spent most of his life in prison work and work with the Probation Service. Here are some interesting and true quotes that relate to my case:-

1/ WHILST WRITING THIS BOOK WAS CONTACTED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAD BECOME DESPERATE IN THEIR SEARCH FOR PROTECTION FROM CRIMINALS. ALL SPOKE OF THEIR TOTAL FAILURE TO GET LOCAL POLITICIANS, MP'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICIALS, POLICE OR INDEED ANYONE TO TAKE NOTICE OF THEIR DESPERATE SITUATIONS.

2/ THE ROTTING INFLUENCE OF THIS EVER GROWING MOUNTAIN OF CRIMES WHICH ARE NEVER DEALT WITH FROM PSYCOLOGICAL, LEGAL OR JUSTICE STANDPOINT IS FAST UNDERMINING OUR FAITH IN LAW AND ORDER AND OUR BELIEF IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.

3/ ALL GOVERNMENTS SINCE THE 60'S HAVE GONE OUT OF THEIR WAY TO INTRODUCE POLICIES THAT HAVE ENCOURAGED CRIMINALS TO BECOME MORE CRIMINAL. NUMEROUS OBSTACLES HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE WAY OF ARRESTING AND CONVICTING THEM.

4/ WHEN I STARTED AS A POLICE PROSECUTOR EVERYONE WANTED TO PROSECUTE. THE POLICE WANTED TO PROSECUTE, THE COURTS WANTED TO DEAL WITH CASES AND MAGISTRATES WANTED TO SENTENCE. NOW NO ONE WANTS TO DO ANY OF THESE THINGS.

5/ PROSECUTORS MUST ALWAYS THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT THE INTERESTS
OF A CRIME WHEN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO PROSECUTE AN OFFENDER. HOWEVER IN PRACTICE THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THEY HAVE TO MAKE THIS DECISION RESOLVES SO MUCH AROUND COSTS AND THE NEEDS TO SAVE MONEY THAT THE VICTIMS ARE RARELY GIVEN THOUGHT.

6/ THE PURPOSE OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM CRIME AND PROVIDE JUSTICE FOR THOSE VICTIMISED BY CRIMINALS.

7/ OVER 90 PER CENT OF OFFENCES ARE GOING UNPUNISHED.....THE GOVERNMENTS DETERMINATION 'TO FILTER OUT' AS MANY OFFENDERS AS POSSIBLE FROM THE JUSTICE SYSTEM BY WHATEVER MEANS, IN ORDER TO CONTROL EXPENDITURE, RATHER THAN BRING THEM TO JUSTICE.

All those statements cover my situation in one way or the other and they show just how this country has deteriorated in my lifetime. This CONMAN BUSBRIDGE had played this system as it is now and has got away with it at each turn. So from day one when he could see that he could lie to everyone in authority and get away with it, it emboldened him to go on and commit more lies because he knew he would be believed and no one would dig even a little and expose his lies. The lies just got more and more bold and outrageous and now we have reached the end and he was able to con the IPO completely all along the line and they have been more concerned about a criminal than me, THE VICTIM!! (As shown by the remark Annand said when she said she was really sorry for all the cases he had had to go through!!)

There is on the web a similar story to mine which I came across yesterday. A chap the same age I me had been conned out of his IP but this time not by a member of the public, but by no less than members of a government department......Business Links. Now I know something about these people as I too aproached them some years back to see if I could get funding to expand my business. I personally thought it was just another smoke and mirrors case, all talk and no action. I never got anywhere and dropped them as yet another example of government uselessness.

However in his case he gave them his business plan to prove he had a viable proposition. He too needed funds to be able to start it. These Link assholes saw it was a good viable project and stole all his plans while telling him that is not a goer. They are now operating a viable and ongoing business that is based on his plans. He like me has been totally unable to get justice, due to the fact that in this asshole of an unequal country of ours that favours the criminals and the feckless and the rich, there is no longer any legal aid. There is more to his story than I have put here and if you are interested go to his website www.tfc-training.com/intellectual_property_theft.htm

Tuesday 5 October 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO- How they aided a crook. 44.

In my last post I mentioned that Annand said that she thought that Foley had first of all applied the wrong Trade Marks Act to this appeal, then she did not agree with the way Foley had talked about previous hearings when he should only be dealing with rectification and not revisiting old hearings, nor did she agree with his bringing up the question of Insolvency, you have to wonder about the veracity of any of the hearings I have been involved in.

I have long thought that our justice system stinks, no matter what arm of it you look at. I guaranty that if you presented any long and complex case to say 6 different hearings or Court cases and the people involved in those hearings or court cases were in each case totally different, yet they were presented with exactly the same evidence, you would get 6 different interpretations and 6 different results.
The same seems to happen in IPO cases because IP law and rules are to my mind, so mind bogglingly complex and open to different interpretations depending on who is hearing them It also appears to me that because of the endless rules it would take a hearing officer with a mind like a computer to be able to remember all these laws, let alone what they all mean.

Each hearing as I say has shown to me that each hearing officer did not have a handle on the evidence before him nor any overall understanding of all the laws that could apply to that case. So in the Reynolds case he made gross errors in interpretation of the laws and failed to treat good evidence in a way it should have been.
Landau obviously took a completely different look at the same evidence and came up with a completely different decision.
Hobbs seemed to also think that what Landau decreed did not tally with his ideas as could be seen by what he and James discussed in the 32 pages of case history many of which covered the same grounds as Landau did, but came to different interpretations
Foley it appears made mistakes as I have pointed out and Annand said so, so her interpretations were different to Foley's and she saw what Landau had covered and said in a different way too.

This all makes me believe that all these people don't know what the hell they are doing. Then when you look at all the mistakes various IPO workers have made over the years as well and that is evidenced in all my letters and paperwork I have from day one in 1992 to 2010. All in all this lot are an incompetent rabble who it is hard to have any faith in at all. And that is on top of the fact that I believe that the IPO have worked all these hearings to come out with the results they wanted, anyway. This for the reasons I outlined in the last post.

I am busy researching for info on how appeals should be conducted as I have intimated. I have told you already how the T/Sol are prevaricating on whether to let me know what evidence Busbridge put in to the Hobbs appeal and whether they have guidelines for judges hearing appeals. Once I get what info I need, then I will be putting it all together and showing how the Hobbs appeal was definitely crooked.
I have already sent in my complaint about the Hobbs behaviour at that hearing and his slagging off of me and how the OJC and the ombudsman have whitewashed my complaints to them, to no less than Ken Clarke MP, the Head Of the Justice Ministry and this through my MP. I will push my MP for him to act on my behalf on this as I am determined to bring this rat Hobbs to book.
Next stop if all that fails is the media with my evidence.

Monday 4 October 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO- How they aideed a crook. 43.

I have now been sent the transcript of my own appeal against the decision of Hearing Officer Foley in favour of the Busbridge.

Professor Annand heard it if you remember and have read all this blog. Why I wanted to read it is because I obviously could not remember all that I said or more importantly, what she said. I did remember that she mentioned several times that she could not deal with previous matters and had to stick strictly to matters concerning only Foley. THIS IN STARK CONTRAST TO HOW HOBBS HEARD THE APPEAL BY LIAR. Again if you have been reading all this story you will remember that I have accused Hobbs of corruption for the way he conducted his hearing did and not deal with any evidence that Liarman may have put in. That all he did was give advice to Liarman and slag me off. Which I was positive, was all against all the rules, not only applying to Judges, but rules that applied to how appeals had to be conducted.

Now having read the Annand transcript it is perfectly clear that this bastard corrupt Judge Hobbs is as guilty as hell. The way the two appeals were heard has to be seen to be believed, for it is as plain as your nose he never conducted any of that hearing as he legally should have done- if you study how Annand
conducted her Appeal Hearing.
I have been trying to get the Treasury Solicitors who appoint these supposedly independent persons, to tell me what Rules or Laws they work under to control how these appeals are conducted. To show that there are indeed such rules the A/P's have to work to, just let me tell you exactly what Annand said:-

1/ What Landau did or did not say is not within my jurisdiction to decide upon."

2/ "When the boundaries of what is happening have not been appreciated"

3/ "What Hobbs said is nothing to do with me"

4/ "They were different proceedings, so it is not upto me to say anything"

5/ "It is not my jurisdiction"

6/ "I must say I have no power to say anything about Mr Reynolds decision ....or your fight with Chrysler"

YOU COULDN'T BE CLEARER THAN THAT, IN MY ESTIMATION, especially the remark about the fight I had with Chrysler, for Hobbs mentions that when he slagged me off. It clearly shows that the way Hobbs conducted his hearing was not only against Judges rules but against other rules, which if the IPO have told me correctly are called Civil Procedure Rules. (I will look those up and see what I see)

The IPO kept telling me that they couldn't advise me on how an appeal before an appointed person should be conducted, as they are solely under the jurisdiction of the T/Sol and they have proved for the past week to be as slippery as an eel.

They know I am after Hobbs and they know that should they give me the information I am after, they will be helping my efforts to bring him to heel and justice. Their Mr Prior who I have had dealings with before and found to be a totally unhelpful twerp, has proved to be as unhelpful as ever this time, too. I asked him to let me know if Liarman had put in any evidence statements into the appeal as Hobbs never mentioned any such statements. In fact Hobbs never discussed anything Busbridge had said in his defence. Nor did he discuss the decisions of Landau which Busbridge had allegedly appealed in front of Hobbs. It was all advice, advice and more advice. Whereas with Annand she talked non stop about my evidence and Busbridges evidence and only about what Foley had said or did not say. As he was the Hearing Officer of the hearing I was appealing, then that is OK.

In my many thoughts on how Hobbs conducted this sham appeal, one has to ask again, why did he do this and now I think I can tell you my appraisal or hypothesis of his actions..........................
The IPO have known for a long time (actually since about 2002 at least) that I have been so pissed off with them over their crap actions, and incompetence that has meant Busbridge has been able to continue since 1992 to steal business off me, by his stealing my car designs and trade mark from me. They have helped him do this in many ways which are adequately described throughout this blog.

I have lost a whole lot of money through all this, my business, and my health and happiness. So damn true I want to sue the ass off the IPO and they know that. In other words I have lost a lot, so have a strong reason to want to sue them. On the other hand Busbridge has no reason to sue them at all. Quite the opposite. For why would he want to bite off the hand that has been feeding and helping him all these years? Knowing that, who do you think the IPO would have favoured, to get this Trade Mark? Anyone with half a brain would be able to see that if the IPO could wangle it by any means and even foul means, to give Busbridge the mark, then the chances of them being sued would diminish to almost zero.

Being civil servants they could not take the chance that I could put them up on the dock where all their transgressions and incompetence would be laid bare. High up managers wouldn't want to be seen as useless as it would effect their jobs and pensions and whatever. So like all true corrupt assholes that proliferate in the huge State machinery we now have, they worked out their dirty plans, probably starting in 2002 and have been at it ever since. Of course once they started it there was no going back and in they went ever deeper. Landau nearly upset the apple cart but Hobbs was no doubt roped in to extricate them.

Now why would Hobbs do that? Well as I have said many times up to now, he is in up to his neck with the IPO and is obviously very much beholden to them. Most of his work is for them and no doubt if you read between the lines at the number of times his name crops up on IPO websites, you will see like I see that he is mentioned all over the place. I expect the IPO worship him like a God.(He probably thinks he is, too) So if the IPO approached him he would fall over himself to please them and keep very much in with them. It would do his street cred no end with them. The Treasury Solicitors will no doubt be also well in with the IPO shower, on the premise that all civil servants stick together to protect each other. They remind me of a daisy chain....the bastards.

The Insolvency Service who were supposed to deal with Busbridges bankruptcy did exactly the same incompetent job as the IPO and then lied through their back teeth to cover up the fact that Busbridge pulled a fast one over them over the trade mark and keeping from them that he was trying to flog it to Chrysler for £500K when he is supposed to be BANKRUPT!!!!! They should line all civil servants up and shoot the bloody lot as they are all useless, and then start again with strict controls over them and how many of them there are.

Going back to this woman Annand. Even though it appears she did follow the rules of how an appeal has to be conducted, for me that does not let her off the hook and make her whiter than white, or even shows she is independent as she boasted she was and would be so. For there were a few remarks that showed to me that she too is probably in the pay of the IPO, for don't forget she too works for the IPO as a hearing officer so she CANNOT be independent in matters where I am fighting the IPO as much as I am fighting Busbridge. At the beginning of this appeal she spent much time on dealing with my request to have allowed further evidence out of time. This because Foley had in explaining his decision had put at least 50% of his reasoning into the fact that Busbridge must be allowed to have the mark, said that he legally owned the application for the Mark. This because the Insolvency Service had sent Busbridge a letter confirming that they had not had any interest in the mark asset. This letter had been sent not long before the hearing, so was recent, yet when I contacted them to complain that they were helping an ex bankrupt who had no claim to the mark, I was told they couldn't comment on what they had been told by Liarman back in 1993 or what they had thought about this asset. This because they had destroyed all the files to his bankruptcy. Yet they could say to Busbrdige with positivity that they had not had any interest in it. How could they say this now if they had no files to consult?????? Yet another example of behaviour of a government department that begs many questions.
So I tried to have it out with them and this took a long time being as civil servants only work at one pace....snails pace. The time limit for me to get in my evidence for the appeal before Annand went by and hence why when I had as many answers as I was going to get, I tried to put them in. During the first half of the hearing she spent a lot of time trying to blind me with science. Telling me that most of what I was trying to put in was already in the files of the Registry. Quite frankly I could not be bothered arguing with her as I sensed she had made her mind up anyway, so after my telling her a number of my thoughts which I felt was wasting my time anyway, but I wanted it down on record anyway, I let it go. My point here without stating every thing she said or I said is that it became plain she did not want to see why I was trying to address what had been said by Foley. After all the appeal was arguing why I thought Foley was wrong in his decision making. That seemed as if she just did not want to see that and she made all these excuses for not allowing it. This to me shows that she had a certain program made up, already on her mind and it did not include agreeing with me at all.
Then she caps it all by intimating that all the waffle about the Insolvency matters not a jot as it has nothing to do with what the hearing by Foley was all about. That was to allow Busbridge to Rectify the Records. In plain English that means getting his brother Martins name taken off the application to register the mark and ultimately to end up with only his name shown as owner of the mark. She says that whatever way this appeal goes Busbridge will still have his name on the ownership of the mark. Either as sole owner or joint owner.
Now Landau had clearly said it should be in the joint names and trading as Cobretti Engineering. As Cobretti had gone bankrupt and was a partnership that no longer traded then it should die a death. All that as you will have seen was ignored by the IPO when Busbridge appeal against that was dropped.
She then goes onto saying that in any case, all the arguments one way or the other about the Insolvency Service etc has nothing to do with the appeal. I then point out that the appeal is appealing what Foley brought up and he made a big deal about the Insolvency. She replies that she does not have to agree with Foley in any case.
So once again we have yet another hearing were the officer hearing it disagrees with what previous hearing officers have said or the path they have gone down. This opens another can of worms which I will not go into here as I will deal with that in my next post. She then goes onto discussing the actual Foley decision and my appeal against that, which I will not go into in great detail, for reasons you will see. I have already commented elsewhere on all her arguments on that in back posts of this blog.
She at one point says that in her opinion that what Landau said in his decision and that I complained it had not been enacted, is shown by her comment; " Can I just say that Landaus decision in fact, evaporated because Mr Landaus decision was concerned with assignments that were withdrawn" Quite why when she has already firmly stated that she will not be drawn into or comments on other cases, beats me. But it shows that maybe she wanted to defend the IPO and their actions by saying this erroneous remark. I pointed out to her that she was wrong as Landau did not just deal with assignments but dealt with legal matters over the way the partnership broke up and more. She then shuts up by saying: "What Mr Landau said or did not say is not within my jurisdiction to decide upon" So why did she make that comment about why it "evaporated"? More like it was just bloody well ignored, I say!!
Now she nails her colours to the mast by saying something that for me shows she has sympathy for Liarman. She says; " Really I feel for both of you, in that you have had to do a lot of proceedings".(good grammar for a Professor!) Now I know she has read all the history of my fight against Liarman stealing my IP. Yet astonishingly she says she has sympathy for Busbridge, yet any proceedings he has had to undergo is entirely his own fault for being a lying ,stealing, thief of my IP property. So why has she got sympathy for this criminal? She will have seen what he has been up to and she will have seen he is nothing more than a conman thief.
Then she shows that in fact she has already made up her mind about this appeal before it has even taken place, for she states: " I will give the decision in writing. It should not be too long getting to you" Indeed it was written up and delivered within a WEEK and that is unprecedented because all other decisions have taken months to get to me, even as much as EIGHT months. This shows to me that she knew before hand what her decision was and what she would say. The actual appeal therefore was a waste of time for me as what was its purpose? It was all just smoke and mirrors once again. Make it look like you are getting heard and something you say and bring up at the hearing can have an effect. Bullshit!

Tuesday 28 September 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 42.

I have in this blog talked about so called evidence given into all the hearings by the conman RB and how most of it was irrelevant trash and denigratory to myself. How the IPO allowed all this nonsense. Now I have unearthed an IPO document which states:- "The information declared in the documents should be strictly confined to the points at issue" So once again you see that throughout all the hearings in this case (some 7) RB filled ALL his evidence statements with irrelevant nonsense and denigratory trash about me. -WHY.
In his last lot of so called evidence statements (for his Invalidity action against my registration) he even sent them a thick wad of copies of the pages of this very blog. Yet Lord Wolf has said "poorly drafted and elliptically worded documents can lead to confusion and to a waste of time and resources for both parties"
So why have the IPO consistently ignored what RB put into ALL his statements? This at complete variance with their own rules and laws ???
I have also talked about the corrupt way the Hobbs Appeal Hearing was conducted and I am now researching just what is allowed to be heard and how an appeal has to be conducted. I have asked the Treasury Solicitors to provide me with any guidance documents as to how an appeal should be conducted. So far they are dragging their feet on that one and we all know why. So we shall see.
I have also got RB's Statement of Grounds for that case. He lists 6 reasons for appealing and NOT ONE OF THEM HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DECISION REASONS THAT LANDAU GAVE IN 2005 FOR RB TO LOSE HIS REGISTRATION!!
So much for Statement of Grounds should only contain statements that are strictly to do with the points at issue. Once again why did the IPO and the T/Sol ignore that?
I have also asked the T/Sol for a transcript of my own appeal against the Foley decision. Prof Annand had said she was only going to look at the issues in hand which is what she should have done. When I get this (if the T/Sol don't invent lies for not being able to provide this) I can then compare how the Hobbs appeal was conducted as opposed to how she conducted a similar appeal hearing. I will report on that when I can.

Thursday 16 September 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 41.

Now to the reasons why this corrupt mob, the IPO, must have decided to act they way they did.
As in the previous post where I have said they kicked off in 1992 by behaving in a strange way.
First they refuse to accept bona-fide evidence from my Patent Agent that Busbridge had been an agent of mine and therefore had no legal claim to my Trade Mark. Then they ignore our evidence that his partnership was no longer in being and that as the application he had been made in the partnership name, surely this now meant the application had to fail.
Then they had held back Busbridges application to register and let mine proceed even though he had applied first. So by the end of the nineties and into early 2.000's I was mightily pissed off with this mob and this feeling was further exacerbated when they allowed Busbridge to put in an application to make my Trade Mark Invalid. So in late 2001 I started strongly complaining to the IPO and their Chief Executive Officer.
I made it plain that I thought that the IPO were incompetent and that they were costing me money in lost profits by having allowed Busbridge to be able to trade with my Trade Mark. So they from that date were on notice that I was of a mind to sue them. What they did not know is I really had no means to be able to do that. I simply could not afford to do it and if I had, I would have done it long ago. In fact had I had 'Loads O' Money' I would have shut Busbridge up, back in 1992 and have dealt with the IPO too.
I have the belief that this could be one of the reasons why the IPO wanted me out of the way. Also you have to believe that civil servants are well known for wreaking revenge on people they see as a threat or they want to shut them up. You read story after story of the tricks they pull to do this, so I would not be the first. They are renowned for wanting their own way and will do anything to get their own way. So a powerful argument there, for their behaviour.
Then you have to ask questions about what was the relationship between Chrysler and the IPO
in the beginning. I know full well what American companies are capable of doing having been in business there. The Yanks are the most corrupt of the so called leading and most civilised nations. They will stop at nothing for the almighty dollar.
Chrysler wanted to register their sportscar, which in the USA they also called Viper, in the UK and Europe. They probably thought they would sell loads here and they had a race series lined up for it, to promote it in Europe & the UK. So they would not be happy that their efforts in the UK were being thwarted. They had the money and the services of top UK IP lawyers to do what was necessary to GET IT REGISTERED. What we have to ask is how far were they willing to go?
In my mind and knowing Yanks intimately as I do, I wouldn't trust Chrysler as far as I could throw the fat bastard Yanks. The way they dealt with me over about 10 years was execrable and typically Yanky. They twisted and turned and you couldn't trust their word for one second. It would certainly answer my thoughts and questions as to why the IPO behaved the way it did even from early 1992. Maybe one day I will prove it, and you can be assured I will not stop trying to find out.

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 40.

In my post, of two back, where I talk about my local Police, I need to show you just how these devious civil servants work. When I had a meeting with this useless copper called Brimicombe and he had a fit of the intimidation's against me because I wouldn't let him get away with saying perjury had not been committed, he let the cat out of the bag.
He said "I have read all your blog" and it was said with the tone of voice that telegraphed that he thought negatively about it. I would say that in his mind, after he had read it, he thought one or all of the following:-
1/ I was a nutter hell bent on revenge against the IPO and or Busbridge.
2/ What I have said and how I have said it in this blog is outrageous.
3/ That I was telling lies and none of what I have said is true.
4/ That what I have said and how I have said it shows I am a real nasty character and should therefore be dealt with by them as such.

Now what you have to understand here is how did he know I had a blog running on the IP issues?
For what I have not told you is that Busbridge in his efforts to blacken my name, as he has done consistently since day one, sent the IPO a copy of my blog in amongst his so called evidence at the last hearing in January 2010. He said he was doing this as an act of civil goodness to show the IPO what an awful character I was. He made a point of telling the IPO that I had said nasty things about them. Well I damn well would wouldn't I? For that is the whole point of the blog.....to expose the IPO AND LIAR BUSBRIDGE for what they all are.
Of course the IPO can damn well do nothing about my blog....free speech and all that, and no doubt thought that this blog is not being seen by too many people and that it would have no effect. On that score they are right, but all that is about to change as I am about to make every effort to up the ability of this blog to be seen by many more people.
Back to the Police and the IPO. So the IPO tells this copper that I have the temerity to have this blog and you can just imagine what else they tell him about me as I have said already. I can imagine the torrent of personal abuse and lies against me they will have indulged in. All this to brainwash the copper against me as a person! Hence why his attitude towards me on a personal basis from when I first starting talking to him, changes to the present time and this fit he had against me.
It also explains why they decided they would not investigate it and thought up all these feeble lying excuses to do this.
This act by the IPO, of course, can be said to be an act of perverting the course of Justice. The IPO simply do not want to see me have success in any way in bringing them all to book for their lies, corruption, incompetence, failures to carry out their own Laws and Rules etc. I go even further, I now believe that in the early days there is a good chance they deliberately put my opposition application to oppose Chrysler's application to register my Mark, in front of Busbridges similar application which he PUT IN JUST BEFORE MINE. Now I am sure that their rules would say that the earlier application would be heard first. That would make sense for DO NOT FORGET I LOST MY REGISTRATION OF MY MARK THIS LAST JANUARY 2010 ON THE GROUNDS THAT BUSBRIDGE APPLIED TO REGISTER THIS MARK BEFORE I DID!!! So why wasn't this same law applied at the beginning, back in 1992?????
If you look at the course of events starting at that time, at the actions of the IPO as to when they let me and Busbridge have our applications heard, it is all out of order. WHY DID THE IPO LET ME HAVE MY APPLICATION TO OPPOSE CHRYSLERS APPLICATION TO REGISTER MY MARK VIPER, BEFORE THE APPLICATION BUSBRIDGE ALSO HAD PUT IN TO DO THE SAME???????
The Rules have to be that the person who put in the FIRST application had it heard FIRST!!
had that rule been applied in 1992, the outcome of this long saga of lies and corruption would have turned out very different and I say the IPO knew it would and it would have inevitably turned out in favour for me. By twisting things it seems that they were able to work it, minus a few glitches like the Landau decision which fucked up their schemes, to have it turn out the way they wanted it to.
I say this is yet another act of corruption by the IPO and that there were forces at play here that I have yet to find out what they were.
Then you have this alleged appeal hearing that took place in 2005 before this Judge Hobbs. This was supposed to be an appeal by Busbridge against the decision of Landau who said Busbridge had to lose his registration as I have outlined before. Now an appeal hearing is supposed to follow a pattern. Busbridge would have had to put in his statement of Grounds of Appeal, in which he outlines the LEGAL reasons he thought the Landua decision was not lawful. He may also have put in other statements of what he saw as facts to be considered by Hobbs in support of his appeal.
At the hearing Hobbs should have gone over some of those statements and asked for clairifications if needed, ask Busbridge did he want to add verbally to any of those statements, and so on. If you read the transcript of that hearing it is quite clear that this was no APPEAL HEARING! It was nothing mnore than a MEETING between the IPO in the figure of Mr James, who is a big wig manager of the tribunal section and Hobbs the hearing Judge and Busbridge.
Straight away you have to ask, why had the IPO sent such a senior figure to the hearing as James? I say it is because this hearing has been worked out in advance by the IPO and Hobbs, who let us not forget IS NOT INDENDENT, AS HE SHOULD BE as he is virtually an employee of the IPO because of all the work he does for them, that the hearing will be a discussion and not an appeal hearing. (This is against all the Rules for appeal judges)
Why do I say this? I believe that the IPO simply did not want it to be an appeal hearing even though Busbridge had asked to appeal, because they wished Busbridge to be able to circumvent the decision of Landau and this would be a means to surrupticiously achieve this under the guise of this being an appeal hearing. It would be dressed up as such but was really just a way of guiding Busbridge towards a path were he could go down and achieve eventually, a registration in his own name and Landau could be forgotten as if it had never happened.
So this is exactly what happened. Hobbs and James engage in spending two thirds of the time that hearing took in giving advice to Busbridge under the guise that they were only talking about case history. But a proper appeal hearing does not discuss case law. Case law would show up in the decision document AFTER the appeal had been heard and the hearing officer is making out the reasons for his decision. By doing this Hobbs & the IPO can tell Busbridge, verbally, what his legal position is by by mentioning similar cases. Hobbs even makes a point of asking Busbridge after they had finished if he UNDERSTOOD ALL THAT THEY HAD TALKED ABOUT. That gave the game away as what he really was asking is, "Did you understand all the hints we gave you in all those talks?" But these arrogant bastards didn't give damn as this meeting was not attended by anyone who could blow the whistle. No ordinary IPO employees, only their top man who is in on it and of course Hobbs, who no doubt would do anything in order to higher his cred with the IPO.
Then Hobbs goes into giving Busbridge loads of advice which as I have said is illegal. All designed to show him what track he must take to circumvent the position he is in. James even openly states that if he takes this track and asks the IPO to take a stance, "THEY WILL NOT STAND IN HIS WAY" NOW IF ALL THAT IS NOT CORRUPT, I AM A MONKEYS UNCLE!
And as I have told you already Hobbs even throws in some insults about me for good measure, knowing I could not answer or fight back. No doubt they all thought I would never find out about all this. (Again against the Rules for Judges)
Further proof that this is what really happened and is shown by the reluctance and the lies of the IPO when I kept asking what had happened with this hearing and what was the decision. I was lied to as was my MP as to why there was a delay in finding out what the decision of the appeal was. In actual fact there was to be no decision as Busbridge had been advised to drop the appeal and go off on the path he had been advised to do so by Hobbs. The IPO wanted to keep that quiet for as long as possible so Busbridge had the time to do what he had to do. So it all came to pass that he was successful in being able to ignore the decision of Landau and to eventually get his registration of my mark and to eventually get the IPO to take my mark off me in last January.
NOW IF ALL THAT IS NOT CORRUPT I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS!! and that is why I am saying that the IPO, Mr JAMES AND JUDGE HOBBS ARE ALL CORRUPT.
What needs to be answered is why did the IPO not want me to have registration. I will tell you why I think that is, in the next post.

Tuesday 14 September 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 39.

For some 13 months now I have been trying to get our wonderful Police force to charge the liar conman with multiple counts of perjury. The IPO over the years since 2002 have steadfastly refused to even look at perjury for reasons which I think I know why, but of course proving it is my next big job. Anyway I gave my local plod idiots an official notification of all the counts of perjury and all the documentary evidence that proved it had been committed.

What do they do, they get straight on the phone to the IPO and they talk them out of doing anything. I can imagine the tale they span them, like I am a nutter hell bent on causing trouble and everything had been dealt with by them and there was no problems to be dealt with. But the worst stuff they brainwashed the cop who was speaking to them, was that there could be no perjury at an IPI hearing as no the persons in it did not have to take an oath. Now this cop either was a complet oaf to take thaat in or he and the IPO thought they coud get away with that lie. So when I was back with the Police asking them that as the IPo had not kept their promise way back to the Police, that they would deal with all the alleged perjury tec at thate 2010 hearing-whcih of course they had no intention of doing so They came back to me, and this was last August and said that the IPO were best placed to deal with it and I should give them the chance to do that at the last hearing that was coming up- the one last January 2010

Well of course as you will have seen they did not deal with it, and so in August when I found that out, I went back to them. They messed me about for weeks and weeks and it seemed that they were not going to do anything. So I kept pushing them by giving them a concise list of each and every act of perjury, forgery and perverting the course of justice committed since 2002, plus the documentary evidence to back up each allegation. Still nothing, then after complaining to their Inspector that nothing was happening, I was suddenly told after three months of being messed around that they will not do anything. Their excuse being that it was not committed in their area. This completely ignoring the fact that they charged me with perjury on a bunch of perjured lies from conman Busbridge back in 1999 and for alleged perjury committed in London. It is so clear that they have been brainwashed by the IPO.

Indeed they had been and it shows just how corrupt the IPO are and were anti me and were going to stop at nothing TO STOP ME EVER SETTING UP JUSTICE AND SHOWING ALL THE PERJURY THAT WAS NEVER DEALT WITH BY THE IPO, and clearly had set up the Police to wreck this meeting we were having. For he now had another cop sitting in, obviously as a witness, for he knew that he was going to indulge in severely having a go at me. He was very angry and shouting and sticking his face near mine to frighten me and maybe thought due to whatever the IPO had told him about me, maybe I would react physically. as I was nothing more than a criminal. But it was he that was acting as if he would indulge in physical acts against me as they do.  So in effect I was now the ' not only of Busbridge but now the POLICE - a Victim' He accused me of trying to make money out of the IPO and that no crimes had been committed (here he was referring to Busbridge and no doubt also the IPO) When I tried to claim that perjury was a criminal offence and he should know that full well, that sent him off on another shouting rant. I could clearly see that he was not going to lift a finger, so I stopped him going on and left the room thinking I would report him to the Chiet Constable-which I did -to absolutely no effect- as is usual. For what the IPO did in brainwashed this cop with all the lies they would clearly know were lies and so should the Police have full well have known-The Police & IPO should have been severely dealt with. But as one has no money it means once again criminality is not dealt with and they get away with it.  So folks, if a murder has been committed in Dorset it would be a waste of time going to our Dorset Dickheads because they won't want to know! Well I suppose that is what you get with a load of country bumpkins acting as coppers!!!


I also had to put up with these raving corrupt cops saying that the IPO had said that it was impossible for conman to have committed perjury, as all the statements had been heard in a tribunal where no oath had been taken. Another example of corrupt excuses from the IPO as we all know that statements made to tribunals come under the same Perjury Act 1911 (amended).They think you are so stupid that you will believe this Certainly the cops do or is it they just jumped on that to get out of it?
 

So the fight goes on in a number of fresh ways and it is nowhere near over yet.
Now I have also reported the corruption committed by the corrupt Judge Hobbs QC at the appeal hearing  in 2005, which I have reported way back in this blog, to Kenneth Clarke. This as he is the Head of the Judiciary. Of course this blubbery, scruffy oaf, didn't even have the decency and nor did his staff, to acknowledge receipt of my complaint. So that necessitated getting my MP to act once more as a postman and deliver a second copy of the first one and in person. A month has gone by and still not a peep. I am taking bets as to how that will end up.
This is so far, a never ending campaign by the Establishment to cover up for each other. Not one department has EVER dealt with the criminal acts of this conman.
I urge anyone reading this blog to read an excellent book by a David Fraser called "A Land Fit for Criminals" Now immediately the title says it all and I have only read a few pages and already he has come out with some statements that are so parallel with what I think. I quote:-
"Every year 30 million people are victimised by criminals.
The book is aimed at the general public to help them understand how and why our justice system disrupts and disadvantages them, rather than the CRIMINALS!
It identifies the justice systems preoccupation with the offender.
They are driven by ideology and cost saving and are no longer interested with the protection of the Public.
It highlights the harmful effect of crimes on its victims and the lack of recognition by Parliament, civil servants, and criminal justice practitionersof its corrosive effect on the standard of life and general well-being of millions of people.
Alienation of the public by the police and the jusicial system in general....and the failure to provide justice and retibution for victims.
All spoke of their total failure to get local politicians, MP's, criminal justice officials or indeed anyone to take any notice of their desperate situation."

You can apply all those statements to my case with this conman and all the assholes in the civil service that I have been forced to deal with. It is 10 years since he wrote those words and as the very same situation is still here with us, that shows that nothing changes and never will until the Revolution, as they say.

Tuesday 15 June 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 38.

In my last post I said what has happened to me over the past 19 years is an injustice. Whoever is reading this blog now may not have read all of it and the story from the beginning. So for those I am going to do a breakdown on just what an injustice this has been. One in very brief form, so I will list the ways injustices have been done, starting from May 1992;

1/ The IPO accept the application from Busbridge (RB) to register what is my own trade mark I used from 1986 (and this was unknown to me) and in the name of himself and his brother Martin (MB). Yet a few weeks later the partnership breaks up in June 92 and yet RB asks the IPO a few weeks later to do a minor change to the names shown on the application, but still it will show the two names even though the partnership has broken up and no longer exists.

I notify the IPO and ask why they still have the application in the name of a none existent partnership........IGNORED. Their mistake No 1.

2/RB applies to the IPO to oppose Chryslers application to register the same mark (VIPER).

3/ I oppose the same application but even though I have applied AFTER RB, it is my application that is allowed to go ahead and even though the RB opposition IS NOT WITHDRAWN that is allowed to slumber on with no action. Mistake No 2 as RB's opposition should have been the one to be going ahead before mine.

4/ In 1993 RB goes bankrupt.......I notify the IPO and ask why are you now allowing an application to go ahead when not only is there no partnership but the remaining bloke (RB) is now bankrupt......The IPO IGNORE ME AGAIN.......Mistake No 3.

5/ My opposition to Chrysler starts going down the path to an eventual hearing and the IPO puts the application of RB to register, on HOLD until my case finishes!!! Why, because he applied to register before I did, as my slow Patent Agent who thinks that as I can prove I had usage going back to long before RB can ever do so, have precedence. Why did the IPO not let RB's application go ahead instead of putting it on hold????????? Mistake No 4. My own application went in in 1996.

6/I eventually win against Chrsyler after 10 years of time wasting by Chrsyler at great cost to me, and I am GIVEN REGISTRATION STRAIGHT AWAY.......Mistake No 5. (bear in mind that RB has an application to register before me)

7/ I am almost immediately told by the IPO that now they will let RB's held up application to register, go ahead. I am put in the position that I am forced to oppose it.

8/ Around this time RB puts in an application to have my registration made invalid on the grounds that he put in an application before me. I complain that we have now parallel actions and surely they should hear my opposition first as if I win then the other is academic. They agree. Mistake No 6. For now it should have been obvious to the IPO that by their own rules as RB applied before me, on paper he has the strongest claim? Even though his application should never have been allowed in the first place due to his bad faith and having been allowed to continue in the face of the partnership breaking up and being bankrupt. Of course to the IPO, these are of no consequence to them, as they care not a fig for the real law (partnership law for one) Mistakes No 7. ( more mistakes will also be seen to have occured later on as to whether he should have been allowed to keep up his application)

9/ At the opposition to his application to register hearing, despite masses of evidence that I was the legal owner and registered on the evidence of my use back to 1986, ( Do not forget that common law states the first to use a mark is the legal owner of it) the vacuous hearing officer gives RB registration. At this point I have to say that his decisions DID NOT INCLUDE THE OBVIOUS ONE IN THAT HE APPLIED TO REGISTER BEFORE ME.... no he uses a series of incredible other reasons which are laughable. As I am not rich I cannot afford to oppose in the High Court, and have to let it go. Their mistake again in giving registration to a crook who lied over 160 times in his evidence and who they believed ....Mistake No 8.

10/ In that hearing I at least got the IPO to look at a legal point over alleged assignments of the mark by RB and another hearing was held in 2005 when this time a decent uncorrupted hearing officer points out that the application had been made illegally, as the other partner (MB) had not given up his rights to the 50% of the partnership assets etc etc. One to me (so I thought)

11/RB can appeal and does.(2006) He is heard before a barrister called Hobbs and when you look up his history he is a big wheel in IPO circles. It seems that he is revered and can do no wrong. Now if you read the transcript, he breaks all the rules of Judge by giving RB free advice and showing clear bias, and sets RB off on a track whereby he is told he can circumvent the last hearing officers decision. Big mistake No 9. I have reported this corrupt bastard but I will give you good odds, the ruling classes will be banding together to protect the fucker. Mistake No 10. This of a judge gives the game away because he makes remarks about me and what he thinks about my action against Chrysler, and I am not even part of this appeal nor has that action got anything to do with this appeal. More on this in the next post.

12/ The crook RB can now go on to apply to rectify the registry records and get his brothers name booted off. Which of course he does. (2008) He wins of course and all my evidence is ignored once more. The more this goes on the more I can see that the IPO have an agenda to not let me win, despite whatever evidence I supply. So  he wins again. I believe their reasons are biased and corrupt. Mistake No 11.

13/ Of course I now have to appeal (2009) even though I know by now that I will not win. I don't and any good evidence I give of past incorrect actions etc, are ignored. Mistake No 12.

14/ I am at the end of the line now and RB has registration and of course now the IPO can and does let RB reactivate his Invalidity action which he had started way back in 2002. This time I think I must take on a lawyer to make sure that this action is led by someone that can get all the past corrupt actions of both the IPO and RB corrected. His evidence is is correct and is based on the invalidity of the application of RB in the begining way back in 1992. However even though I warn him that I believe the IPO would not let me win, as to do so will open the way for me to sue them for all the corrupt actions they have committed since 1992, he obviously thinks he will win. Of course we lose AGAIN! and ALL our evidence is totally ignored!!! Mistake No 13. (Unlucky for me) The IPO use the IP law which apparently says that the first to apply, even if the application was illegal and corrupted , has precedence. Now I ask why did the hearing officer back in 2004 when I opposed his application to register the mark, use this law???? It stinks to high heaven. Everything that we used as evidence that this action should fail due to perjury and bad faith, breaking of partnership laws etc, is ignored.

So what we have here is a crook that comes along and pinches your designs and products AND trade mark. In other words he pinches your whole business!! The IPO back all his illegal actions and believe absolutely all his hundreds of lies that he tells in absolutely every document he puts in as evidence. Everything you say is ignored and even questioned as to whether it is true. They intimate you are a forger of a document (the agency agreement between you and RB) that you
have been found not guilty of in a court of law. The obvious forgery and perjury of RB is ignored even though you have consistently complained about it, and even though the IPO say they will investigate at this last hearing....and do not do so!! It reeks of corruption, because they are plainly biased and they obviously have this agenda to not let you win in any way. Even when you have legal representation who concurs that I have been shamefully treated and that the actions of the IPO are unbelievable.
This means that the course of getting justice is a joke and brought into disrepute. That a governmental department is prepared to ignore obvious and persistent acts of perjury and forgery and perverting the course of justice. What does that say about the IPO?????
What does that say about all the members of the public who create I/P in copyright, trade marks, design rights, or patents, getting protection from crooks who wish to steal their I/P ?? How can they get protection from a bunch of incompetent bastards who when they know someone is going to sue them for incompetence, do everyhting they can to do them down and stop you from doing that. Tell me what is the point of the IPO??????? They are like EVERY CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT IN THE LAND....UTTERLY USELESS, INCOMPETENT AND ANTI THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO EXPOSE THEM FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE!!!!!

NOW DO NOT FORGET THAT THEIR CORRUPTION IS FURTHER HIGHLIGHTED BY THE FACT THAT MARTIN BUSBRIDGE WHO TURNED UP IN 2009 AND WHO CONFIRMED WHAT I HAD BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG, ABOUT RB BEING MY AGENT, WHICH THE IPO DISBELIEVED, HIS EVIDENCE IS DISMISSED AS THE RAMBLINGS OF A PERSON WHO IS OBVIOUSLY HAS AN AGENDA OF HATE AND ANGER AGAINST HIS BROTHER. ALL HIS EVIDENCE OF HOW HE WAS DONE BY RB OUT OF HIS SHARE OF THEIR BUSINESS IS ALSO IGNORED. ALL THE LEGALITIES ABOUT HOW RB TOOK OVER ILLEGALY THE ASSETS OF THEIR PARTNERSHIP ARE DISMISSED WITH QUESTIONABLE CASE LAW, WHICH MY LAWYER SAYS WAS INCORRECT. IT IS JUST UNBELIEVABLE.

Saturday 12 June 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook. 37.

Since my last post I have talked with my lawyer to hear what he now thinks about my appealing
this monstrous latest decision and after he had conferred with a barrister.
Just like appealing against the first monstrous decision made back in 2004 when I lost my opposition against the reptile from registering my trade mark, which I could not afford to take before a High Court, I would have to do the same here to appeal this one. I told my lawyer that I could only do it if it were done on a no win no fee basis.
So he says that he can only do that if a barrister has a look at the facts surrounding this last hearing and decision. He comes back and says he thinks that if the IPO stick rigidly to saying they had to stick to IP law which says that the first applied for registration has precedence over one made after, no matter about the surroundings facts of perjury, and bad faith and the fact that the application was not done lawfully in the first place, then we will lose the appeal. Or at least we could lose, as it would depend of course on some wretched Judge, and we all know how they are in this wretched country.
So the upshot is, like all lawyers who operate on the 'we will win no matter if we win or lose'
syndrome, he will not take the slightest chance and I would have to be willing to fork out maybe £20,000 and the rest. That is out, so the Forces of Evil win AGAIN!!!!! The CROOKS AND CRIMINALS WIN AGAIN AND THE LAW ABIDING LOSE OUT AGAIN. Such is life in this rotten country of ours where only the rich stand a chance of winning, for they can fill the pockets of the fat cat big time lawyers.
However there is one avenue that I can still go down and I am just starting off down that one. But I have no faith in the government departments you are forced to use and this last avenue will rely on yet another bunch of civil servants. The only maybe, saving grace, is that they have no connection with the corrupt IPO mob. I am hoping that it will not turn out to be yet another case of; 'we civil servants have got to all stick together and cover all our arses' We will see.

HOWEVER I HAVE TO SAY THAT EVEN IF THE EXCUSE THEY ARE NOW USING THAT BECAUSE KINGS PATENT AGENTS FAILED TO PUT MY APPLICATION IN TO REGISTER THE MARK A FEW DAYS AFTER BUSBRIDGE DID, WAS VALID (AND DO NOT FORGET I HAD RIGHTS TO THE MARK UNDER COMMON LAW WHICH THEY HAVE IGNORED). THEN WHY DID THEY NOT SAY THIS FROM THE START, WAY BACK IN 1992? WHY DID THEY PUT ME TO THE TIME AND EXPENSE OF 8 YEARS OF FIGHTING THEM? WHY WAS I ABLE TO USE THE MARK FROM 2002 TO 2010 AND THEY SAID NOT A THING ABOUT THIS EXCUSE THEY ARE SAID TO USE IN 2010 AND NO ONE EITHER ON THE BUSBRIDGE SIDE OR ANY OF THEIR HEARING OFFICERS SAID-YOU CAN PLAY NO PART AS YOU WERE LATE IN PUTTING IN YOUR APPLICATION TO REGISTER.

 


Monday 17 May 2010

Corrupt Police & IPO- How they aided a crook. 36.

Well I got the decision at last, but only after chasing the bastards. Give you all ONE GUESS AS TO WHICH WAY IT WENT.................You may remember in previous posts and indeed in my last post, I said quite clearly that I doubted it would go my, way because for the IPO to agree with my arguments would be to admit they had been incompetent.
I have to say I make a better clairvoyant than a fighter of incompetent civil servants, because their decision document is an absolute disgrace in every way. It is even more brazenly arrogant, biased against me, deliberately ignoring 75% of my legal arguments AND the legal arguments of my lawyer, than I believed it could be. In fact EVERYTHING that my lawyer put forward in writing and verbally at the hearing, was TOTALLY IGNORED. It is like I never took on a lawyer at all. Every legal point he put forward to show how the IPO had taken wrong decisions and what the law actually said, was IGNORED. They even had the cheek and arrogance to say that they only allowed him to speak in my defence at the hearing.......'as an indulgence' by them. It must be pointed out that he only spoke for me and not for Martin Busbridge, who represented himself.
It was intimated by the hearing officer, one George Salthouse that I was forger, that Martin was
consumed with hatred for his brother, that obviously everything he said could not be believed.
Plus a whole lot more which I am not listing here but will in time be shown, by putting a link to this document, in due time.
Unbelievably they did not mention ONCE our complaints as to the persistent perjury that Busbridge was guilty of, and which they said before the hearing they would deal with. These poxy civil servants are so consumed with covering their arses from all the incompetent mistakes they have made since 1992, that they are willing to lie and cover up for a person who is nothing short of a CRIMINAL. However in my opinion they did slip up by ADMITTING THEY ALLOWED ME TO HAVE THE REGISTRATION OF VIPER (my trade mark since 1986) IN 2002 AND IN VIOLATION OF THEIR OWN RULES. Now if they are correct in this and I believe they are not, you have to then take it that since 2002, I have spent 8 years locked in legal battle with Robert Busbridge and the IPO trying to put right the wrongs of the IPO, all for nothing. You have to ask the IPO, if I was not even legally entitled to my own trade mark, then why did they allow me to fight FOUR hearings which took up an enormous amount of my time and cost me at least £10,000? The reptiles even charged me £500 last year to renew my registration that I should not have even had. (according to their latest pronouncement) Not to mention the huge costs I had to pay for this latest hearing when all along they say they MADE A MISTAKE IN ALLOWING ME TO HAVE REGISTRATION. SO THAT MEANS FOLKS, I WAS MADE TO PAY TO DEFEND A REGISTRATION I DID NOT REALLY HAVE......... for they pronounced that my registration now stands as if it had never been made. Get your head round that!!!!!!!!

I HAVE TO SAY THAT IF I WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OWN THAT TRADE MARK 'VIPER' FROM DAY ONE, WHY WAS IT THAT CHRYSLER DID NOT USE THAT ARGUMENT AND WIN ON THAT POINT. WHY DID THEY NOT STRAIGHT AWAY APPEAL IT ON THAT POINT-THAT I HAD NO RIGHTS TO IT AND WHY IS IT THAT THE BUSBRIDGES WOULD HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO IT WHEN THERE IS SO MUCH EVIDENCE THAT I STARTED IN JAN 1986 TO USE IT ON MY COBRA REPLICA. WHY DID A PATENT SPECIALIST AGREE THAT I DID OWN IT AND FAUGHT CHRYSLER ON THAT POINT. Why was it that the IPO has never in the past and all the battles, letters and hearings-ever say that, over all those years. ONLY COMING UP IN 2010 WITH THAT LIE OF AN EXCUSE AND INDEED IF THEY WERE RIGHT I HAVE A CASE FOR ALL THE HASSLE AND LIES  & COSTS THEY HAVE PUT ME TO AND ALL BECAUSE THEY MADE A MISTAKE (AND THAT ONLY IF WHAT THEY CLAIM IS TRUE & I BELIEVE IT IS NOT TRUE-BASED ON WHAT I KNOW ABOUT IP LAW WHICH I HAVE BONED UP ON EVER SINCE 1992. PLUS WHY DID THEY SAY I WAS A FORGER WHEN I WAS EXONERATED IN COURT ON THAT ACCUSATION AND MARTIN BUSBRIDGE HAS NOW SHOWN BY HIS EVIDENCE THAT THE ALLEGED FORGED AGENCY DOCUMENT WAS NOT FORGED BUT SIGNED BY HIM AND HIS BROTHER. IT IS ALL LIES PUT OUT BY THE IPO BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO AND GET AWAY WITH IT.......AND ALL THAT IS EXACTLY SEEN IN THE RECENT POST OFFICE CASE NOW OUT IN THE OPEN IN 2023/24.  BUT LIKE MY CASE HAS GONE ON RIDDEN WITH LIES  BY THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, THE POST OFFICE AND THE GOVERNMENT SINCE THE EARLY NEW MILLENIA. 


Tuesday 4 May 2010

Corrupt Intellectual Property Office-How they aided a crook. 35.

Since my last post after the hearing of the 28th Jan 2010, we are here three months later and still no decision given. Are the IPO scrabbling around trying to think of how they can squirm out of the predicament they have got themselves into??? I mean they have spent the time since 1992 listening to a serial perjurer lying to them ad nauseum and now his lies have been blown and they have been put into the position that they simply have to do something about the perjury.

However of course to do so means they will be admitting that they are dysfunctional, incompetent and have given succour to a criminal and have walked all over a legitimate owner of a trade mark and have ruined that persons life and health, in doing so. AND WE ALL KNOW HOW MUCH CIVIL SERVANTS JUST HATE TO HAVE TO ADMIT THEY ARE INCOMPETENT. Are they scrabbling around trying to work out just how they can get out of the hole they have dug themselves into, hence they delays? Their own guidelines say that a decision should come within 4-6 weeks and here we are at twice that time. My solicitor rang them a month ago asking what was going on, to get the answer that they were just starting to put together their decision, so what were they doing for two months after the hearing?? My guess is that they are having problems working out how to give an honest decision and deal with the serial perjury committed by this criminal who has run rings round them. In the meantime he happily is trading on with his copy of my product and using my trade mark, as if nothing has ever happened and he has committed no crimes. On the subject of crimes I have heard that in 1991/2 he did indeed commit crimes which I am trying to find a way of being able to bring to the attention of 'our simply wonderful Police' ??
I just wonder what their answer is going to be, but if it is another one of their whitewashes, they will have another fight on their hands as I do not intend to let them get away with their 19 years of sheer incompetence -to my detriment. I will fight them until my death if necessary as I have never been willing to put up with the ruling classes of this rotten country. They walk all over the ordinary folk, all the time and I am just one of hundreds of thousands who have suffered at their hands. Look at how the bastards treat our armed forces when they have suffered dreadful injuries and that is only one example.
SO KEEP WATCHING THIS SPACE AS WE MAY GET A DECISION SOON AND THEN IT IS ONTO THE AFTERMATH OF THAT, AS IT'S NOT OVER UNTIL I GET REAL JUSTICE!!!


Their own guidelines state that decisions should be forthcoming within 4-6 weeks and here we are at a point of time that is TWICE THAT LENGTH OF TIME. My solicitor even asked them a month ago what was happeneing and was told that the decision making was about to be started and we should get the decision in April. SO WHERE IS IS IT?? JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED AND ALL THAT. However the IPO are not interested in justice and I just wonder where it will all go. If justice is not forthcoming they are going to have a real fight on their hands as I am not going to cave into the bastards. I will die first before I do that, so we will see and if it does not come this month then the fight will start

Saturday 30 January 2010

Corrupt Intellectual Property Office-How they aided a crook. 34.

The hearing was as I expected. A no nonsense, bruiser type bother boy, hearing officer, called Salthouse. He was no doubt hand picked by the IPO to make sure that the Busbridge brothers did not come to blows or indulge in endless slagging each other off. And of course to make sure the hearing was conducted to the good of the IPO.

I thought that Robert Busbridge showed his usual colours of a cringing, snivelling liar, trying to belittle his brother and of course me. He told his usual lies of how he was a saint and saviour of the customers of Brightwheel Replicas after it had ceased trading, when of course by my taking on the brothers as my agent after this event, it gave those customers somewhere to go, and they benefitted beacuse this of course gave Cobretti business. He also tried to pin the bankruptcy of BRL on me, when he knew full well that the company had ceased trading due to my partners closing it down AFTER I had resigned. The hypocrosy of this evil man knows no bounds, for he completely ignores his own bankruptcy and the effects on HIS creditors.Well I hope the IPO ignored all that kind of irrelevant crap. However they have form for not ignoring it and being swayed by his lies.
My lawyer did a very good job of laying out case law regards the partnership and the non legal way it finished, thus making the application by only one partner, for registration, void. He also gave many reasons why the application for the Invalidity of my registration should fail, all based on law. How the two main reasons Busbridge relied on for this application, namely passing off and he having a prior right to me, where all legally wrong. Pointing out that it was he that was guilty of passing off my product and trade mark not the other way round.
I will attach the skeleton argument to this blog soon, so you can all see our argument.

Now this Salthouse made a comment at the beginning of this hearing which ABSOLUTELY LAID IT OUT INTO THE OPEN WHY TEH IPO HAVE SPENT SO MUCH TIME OPPOSING MY EVERY MOVE FROM 1992 RIGHT THROUGH TO THIS 2010 HEARING. HE SAID THAT THE IPO WERE WELL AND TRULY FED UP WITH MY CASE WHICH HAD GONE ON FOR SO LONG AND TAKEN UP SO MUCH OF THE IPO's TIME THAT THEY WERE GLAD THAT THIS SHOULD END IT ALL. THAT IT WOULD RECIFY A MISTAKE THEY HAD MADE. (Now the never said exactly what he meant by all that but it is clear to me what he meant).

 For what he was saying was that as far as the IPO were concerned the Hearing Officer who heard my opposition case to Chrysler over registering my Trade Mark, had made a mistake and obviously that would have given Chrysler the case and my Trade Mark. I have long thought that there was jiggery pokery involved in that case and I have as you will see, said that I always thought that Chrysler bent arms in the British Government to get this Trade Mark (that they already had registered in all of the EU, given to them). Don't forget that they would have spent an enormous amount of money to set it all up to sell their 'Viper' in the EU & the UK. I wouldn't mind betting that the Hearing Officer who heard that case was under orders to do that. Now he was quite an old bloke ready I think fcoming up to retirement. Just maybe he didn't follow orders of being old stock so wouldn't get involved in non legal goings on-hence why Salthouse SAID A MISTAKE HAD BEEN MADE WHICH NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED and waffled on some more about this-see the transcript and you will see what I am saying. IT ALL STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN-ONCE AGAIN.

Of course now we have to wait for the IPO to issue their decision, but I have absolutely no faith in them whatsoever, as I have constantly said. They have an agenda which is best known only to them. Once that decision is given, of course if it does go against me, I will appeal it. We will know exactly what had been in the IPO minds all along and we will then have their mindset out in the open and will be able to fight it. I got the impression that their minds were already made up prior to the hearing and the hearing was just window dressing. For they have read the written evidence and as they said have read all the previous hearings, so what was said at this hearing was nothing new.
Of course one big thing that the have to address, and we made sure we made comment on that, and that is the question of all the lies and perjury eminating from Robert Busbridge. We made sure we pointed out that the IPO had specifically said they would deal with that at the hearing.
Of course we made sure that his lying and dishonesty and making applications in bad faith, were highlighted. Of course now we had a second witness to all the dishonesty namely Martin.
I personally cannot see how the IPO can find for Robert based on his obvious lying and bad faith, and partnership law and IPO law that were not adherred to. But as I have said over and over again-the IPO have shown time and again they have an agenda on this case that is hard to fathom. So we will see.
In the meantime Robert Busbridge will be sweating it out, and if his demeanour at the hearing is anything to go by, which was not so cocky as before, he will be sweating it out.

Wednesday 20 January 2010

Intellectual Property Office-How they aided a crook. 33.

THE 2010 HEARING BEING A DUAL HEARING ON MARTINS APPLICATION TO RECTIFY THE BUSBRIDGE REGISTRATION AND ROBERTS APPLICATION TO MAKE MY REGISTRATION INVALID. 28th January 2010. 9.30. London.

At last we are at a position were both I and Martin MAY get justice at last? Firstly Martin can get to see the fraudulant application to register a Trade Mark that did not legally belong to the Busbridges, and made in his name without his knowledge, get reverted to being listed at the IPO as having been made in the partnerships name and not as Robert Busbridge was able to fraudulantly get changed by perjury to only his name. Then the Landau decision at last enacted and the Registration will not be allowed to be renewed and will fall by the wayside.

If that happens then Roberts cheeky application to have my legal registration made invalid, will automatically be thrown out.

On top of this there is the perjury committed by Robert, not once but dozens of times, in order to gain registration. I as you will know if you have read this blog from the beginning, I have complained about his blatant perjury to the IPO and they said they would deal with this at this hearing.......WE WILL SEE, but as I now have a supposed expert lawyer representing me this time, maybe the IPO will now see that they will not be able to continue with their blatant disregard for justice and for not following the laws and rules. However I cannot help wondering if they even give a stuff, and will just go on blundering ever deeper into their cover up of their past injustices and maladministrations. For if they do find for me and Martin then they will be admitting that they made mistakes in the past. Those of you that understand the mindset of civil servants will know they JUST HATE ADMITTING THEIR MISTAKES AND WILL DO ANYTHING TO GO ON HIDING THEM. So watch this space for maybe a miracle will happen or maybe it will be business as usual?
I will want to see Robert Busbridge charged with PERJURY & PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE and if the IPO refuse to do this, then I will push the Police to do it. I am absolutely determined he is not going to get away with it, especially when he wasted over £100,000 of Public money, in having me charged with forgery and perjury, this by fraud.