Website Related


Solicitor's Statement at the AGM held 14/11/18

The Unofficial Website was up for discussion at the last AGM, the company solicitor informed the residents that he couldn't really go into much details in relation to this matter as it was subject to ongoing Court Proceedings.  (This in fact was a blatant lie)

It is a deplorable and disgraceful state of affairs when the Company Solicitor of the SRA Ltd  has been downright dishonest to the extent that he appears to be willing to tell a blatant lie in the interest of, and to achieve his client's goals.

While the matter was being discussed the company solicitor was asked a number of questions by the site owner regarding the grounds for proceeding with the alledged legal action, when notification would be received etc, on each occasion he stated that he refused to discussed the matter.

On checking with the Cleveland Magistrates Court just to make sure of the facts before writing this article, it would appear that to date (14/1/19) there is no record whatsoever of any case - either ongoing or pending.

This raises a number of important questions:

1) Why is this solicitor in the employ of the SRA Ltd when he cannot be trusted to be open and honest?

2) Why did he lie to not only to the questioner at the AGM but to the residents as well?

3) Did the solicitor blatantly lie on the instructions of the director and committee in the hope that this would assist them to achieve their goals, i.e. to close down the website, humiliate and intimidate the owner of the website?

4) Why should the residents be expected to contribute towards the fees of a solicitor whose integrity is questionable?

The director, committee, accountant and managing agent collectively collude in their objectives which they indicated by their actions during the AGM itself.  Do they not realise that they continuing to act as they do they dig themselves into an even bigger hole by allowing the company solicitor to openly lie?

So I have a suggestion to all of the above parties - lets stop playing stupid games, stop spending the residents service charge on illegitimate expenses, be open and honest about where the service charge is being spent by giving a complete breakdown/analysis, act fair and without favour towards all residents and finally - give your heads a shake and take your responsibilities seriously!


30/11/18 The following email has today been sent to the accountant and cc'd yo the director, committee and the managing agent to keep them in the loop

(these are the actual statements included in the minutes and distributed to the community)

Dear Mr. E............

As I am unaware if you had been issued with a copy of the official Minutes of the 2018 AGM, there are a couple of references to the meeting which was held at your office in February 2018. 

1)   Mrs. L..... stated that Mrs Sherwood had been to inspect the accounts at Mr. E..........’s office on 2 occasions and had taken lots of copies of invoices away.

2)   Mrs C.... advised that both Mrs Sherwood and Mrs B.... had been back to Mr. E.........'’s office a second time and had inspected the accounts and taken away several documents.

3)   Mrs. T...... stated that she and Mr. M..... were only present at the meeting because you felt intimidated by me.

4)   A statement which was attributed to a resident who firmly denied making it during the meeting, stated that “Mrs. Sherwood was dishonest and was the one telling lies”

I am raising these statements because they have been included in the official minutes, which as you know cannot be altered as they are supposed to stand as a ‘true’ record of events.  The only opportunity for any amendment to be noted would be at next year’s AGM, and that the minutes have already been distributed to all of the residents on the estate.   These statements are Libelous and am seeking Redress from all concerned who were responsible for compiling the minutes, and I would very much appreciate your confirmation that: 

That I and Mrs B.... did not in fact inspect any accounts, and that we only ever stayed for 1 meeting with you, all of this I had documented at the time and will be available should I need to produce proof.

That the only document we left your office with was the printout outlined above, again this was documented at the time.

Due to these statements and the fact that the minutes have already been circulated, my good name and reputation has been compromised, and I have already requested a Public Apology to be issued to the residents in an attempt to regain some semblance of redress.

I look forward to your response and hope you will appreciate that to destroy a person’s reputation without any evidence is disgraceful and has to be challenged.


AGM 2018 Minutes - Items raised during the Website Discussion

An appalling and defamatory Lie

There is a note in the minutes referencing a resident who is supposed to have made the following statement:

'stated that Mrs Sherwood was dis-honest and she was the one telling lies'

The resident concerned did not make this statement and my understanding is that she has already contacted either the committee or the managing agent to vehemently protest and make her feelings known about this appalling accusation.  I would like to know who instructed this statement to be included in the official minutes, and to have the gall to attributed it to a resident who is totally innocent of the act.

The ultimate responsibility lands on the shoulders of the managing agent, the director and the committee for allowing this defamatory and untrue statement in the official Minutes, and to allow it to be distributed to the residents - how dare you issue such a disgraceful untrue statement? 


Videos:  One committee member brought up the matter of the humorous videos which had been included on the website some time ago and later removed. 

The committee member concerned lied when she stated during the meeting and again in the minutes, that four letter swear words were contained in the videos, she was at pains to state how disgusting it was that this should be on the website and how did I think it was funny.  Further information on this subject can be found here together with a link to the actual transcript of the video entitled 'Rant'.


Cost of removing the website question

One resident asked me if I was happy for the residents to pay the cost of taking down the website, I responded that the responsibility would be on the director and committee who, if they decide to go ahead with their threatened legal action and lost the case, then obviously it would be the residents (including myself which is utterly absurd!) who would eventually pay.

The website clearly states that it is 'Unofficial', it also clearly states it is 'independent of the official Sycamores Residents Association' - is there something there which the director and committee do not understand?  A definition in case it is needed.

Unofficial - not officially authorized or confirmed

Independent -  free from outside control; not subject to another's authority


Resident question regarding the website - AGM held on 14/11/18

Update 18/11/18:  While the matter of the website was being discussed, one of our newer residents asked the question - why did I think the estate needed a website?  I responded stating that I did not think it needed a website, it was and remains an unofficial website.  The companies approval was not sought and it remains a personal site and is not subject to their approval or content control.

If the gentleman concerned had actually read the front page of the website, he would have understood the reason for creating this unofficial website as it is clearly stated there for all to see.  Perhaps he feels it's ok that the people who have been elected to look after the residents interests, which include being fair and open in their dealings, and who handle large sums of the residents money, should not  be held responsible for their decisions as to where it is being spent! 


AGM 2018 Minutes: Interaction with the company solicitor

I had already placed this item on the website prior to the minutes being issued, on reading through them the solicitor did not respond to all of my questions with what is noted in the minutes i.e. 'he was not prepared to discuss' - below is the actual response received from him. 

Once the discussion on the website took place, the solicitor stated that he could not comment on the matter of legal action, however he stated that legal action was in the process.   I asked the solicitor the following questions:

  • Could he tell me how much his solicitor's letter in 2017 cost? - his response - No

  • On what grounds were proceedings going forward? - his response -  he was unable to discuss it.

  • Would he notify me of the grounds by letter? - his response -  No

  • So could I assume that I would hear directly from the court itself - his response - Yes.

  • When asked if he knew how long it would take for the court to make contact - his response - No

During the dicussions one of the committee requested that the clipart (which had already been removed from a number of pages earlier and placed in the Archive Section), be removed completely, this I refused to do.  The director, secretary, other committee members, and the managing agent then requested that their names and all references to them be removed from the website, this I agreed to do.  It was at this point that I was informed by the managing agent that the director and committee members intended to take me to court on the grounds of Harassment and Distress - it was not clarified at the time if this was going to be seperate court cases by the individuals or be included in the one the solicitor was referring to - no doubt time will tell!.

See here for one of the topics which was brought up and included elsewhere on the website.


Website up for discussion once again.

It's interesting to note that on the Agenda for the upcoming AGM, that item 4  is the 'Unofficial Website'.  The managing agent was emailed on Oct 22, 2018 and again on the Nov 2, 2018 asking what was the reason for this - to date there has been no response.

Given the failed attempts over the past 15 months to close down the website by issuing a number of threatening and intimidating letters from the company solicitor which did not achieve the desired result, there may be only 2 possible senarios for why the website is up for discussion once again..

1)   Could it be that realisation has finally dawned on the director and committee that the website is not going away and it's time to welcome the website’s existence and actively participate in it!  

2)    The director and committee may have decided to try to obtain a consensus from the residents during the AGM by putting it to a vote as to whether they should go down the legal route and proceed with taking me to court.

In the event that senario 2 is why the website is up for discussion, the director and committee have a duty to inform the residents before any vote might be taken on the matter, that in the event any court case was lost by the committee, the residents would eventually have to cover any costs involved, this would be either through an increase in the service charge or it coming out of the sinking fund. 

Also worth a mention is that there will be additional costs for a further 2 solicitors letters sent during 2018 (June 12, 2018 and June 25, 2018), which are not included in the 2017/18 accounts which will be presented at the AGM, and won’t show up until next years account 2018/19. 

It’s worth pointing out that in the last solicitors letter dated June 25, 2018, the solicitor stated that he was proceeding and that I would be served with the relevant papers directly, as it turned out this was a blatent lie because he did not proceed.  It is highly questionable how ethical the company solicitor has been making this statement given that the sole purpose of the letters were designed to threaten, intimidate or alternatively limit free speech by controlling the content on the website. 

It is also questionable whether the current director and existing committee collectively are capable of making responsible decisions when it comes to where, and on what, the residents service charge is used, especially when some of their past decisions and actions are taken into consideration.  These have all been widely documented on the website and is in fact the root cause of all the objections to the website's existance. 

Thedirector and committee collectively have shown themselves to be guilty of using the residents service charge inappropriately in relation to this matter, and sadly of abusing the trust placed in them by the residents.  


Probability Meter

The last communication from the company solicitor was on 26/6/18, when he stated that he was proceeding to issue the relevant court papers on the instructions of the director and committee of the SRA Ltd.  Since then there has been no further communications with regard to any action, consequently it can only be assumed (rightly or wrongly) that the director and committee may have decided not to follow through with their earlier decision.  Under the circumstances the notice which had been placed on the front page of the website on 12/6/18 has been removed.

Update 4/8/18: 7 weeks has now passed and the probability of court action has been reduced from Low to Very Low.

It is good to draw attention to the fact that we (the residents) are actually paying for all the decisions made by the director and committee on our behalf, and one wonders why, they have not made any attempt to find a better way to resolve the issues which have been raised on the website, without going to the expense of going down the legal route.  They have had ample opportunity to challenge everything published but failed to do so for their own reasons, some of their actions has on occasion left them wide open to ridicule which has been reflected on the website.  All that has ever been asked of them is to be accountable and transparent especially where financial matters are concerned, they appear to have a major problem with that concept and once again the question has to be asked -  WHY?


Click Here to read about the 'Petition' which was taken late 2017 to bring down this website.


January 8, 2021

Copyright  L Sherwood,  All Rights Reserved, 2017-2020