FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT

 

 

On the 18th August 2003, a fraudulent document, which in this case, is also known as a false instrument was submitted into court and became a legally binding COT3 agreement without my knowledge or consent.

 

It is a criminal offence for anyone to submit a false instrument into a court!  Details regarding the offence of using a false instrument in court can be found in the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981.

 

I have the evidence to prove this, because as by law, as stated by Lady Justice Smith in my case:-

 

  • “For the settlement to be binding, it had to be recorded on form COT3, completed by an ACAS officer”

     

    The document that became legally binding upon me, was not the above.

     

    I have checked this out further on various websites and through various people.  So there is no doubt the statement in the judgment given by Lady Justice Smith is correct, because by law:-

     

  • A compromise agreement (now known as settlement agreement) can become legally binding without ACAS’s involvement.

     

  • But for a COT3 agreement to become legally binding by law, it must have the involvement of ACAS and be completed by an ACAS officer on an official ACAS (COT3) form.  By law, ACAS must inform the Employment Tribubal Services.

     

    By law, the agreement/contract signed by Wilf Holt, cannot be enforceable upon me.

     

    But still to this day, a fraudulent document/false instrument remains a legally binding contract between me and Dunlop Tyres Ltd after my case was dealt with by the civil courts.

     

    Government legislation – Fraud Act 2006

     

    As well as a false instrument being accepted by the Employment Tribunal Services and becoming legally binding upon on me unlawfully, the following acts of fraud were carried out by Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB personally on me.  The following sections of the Fraud Act 2006 are the reasons why:-

     

  1. Fraud Act 2006 Section 2, which explains:-

     

    Fraud by false representation (1) A person is in breach of this section if he- (b) intends, by making representation- (ii) to cause loss to another or expose another to a risk of loss.

     

    It cannot be argued that I was forced into loss of earnings because of the fraudulent agreement Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB signed!

     

    Fraud by false representation (2) A representation is false if- (a) it is untrue or misleading, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

     

    Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB, not me, accepted the termination of my employment contract on medical grounds after I was classed by 100% of medical professionals as fit to return to work under DDA 1995, which is what I set out to do by going to the ET.  It was an untrue and fraudulent agreement that Wilf Holt signed!

     

  2. Fraud Act 2006 Section 4, which explains:-

     

    Fraud by abuse of position (1) A person is in breach of this section if he- (a) occupies a   position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person, (b) dishonestly abuses that position, and (c) intends, by means of the abuse of that position- (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

     

    Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB promised to represent me at an ET to safeguard/protect my employment status, which was in my financial interests!

     

    Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB dishonestly/falsely claimed I agreed to leave work on medical grounds after I made it clear to him that I was classed as fit to return to work and that is all I would negotiate regarding settlement.  Returning to work and be treat fair!

     

    The fraudulent agreement that Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB signed caused me a big loss.  I went from approx £300 per week gross pay, to less than £35 per week total benefits.  It was nothing but a massive loss caused by fraud!

THE GREAT BRITISH

(il)LEGAL SYSTEM

 is helping CAB make me homeless