|
|
Solicitor Details
| Name |
James Montague |
| Address |
James McNulty & Co. 25-27 George's St, Omagh |
| County |
Tyrone |
| Rating |
 |
Ratings
| Date |
Rating |
Name |
Comments |
| 7th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris Omagh & Derry |
VLPS Omagh 29th December 2007. I was foolish also in 1994 to write to the Law Society Northern Ireland about James Montague. The Secretary of Law Society Northern Ireland suggested that I instruct another Solicitor in Northern Ireland to take 'Legal Action' against James Montague. Having watched the RTE Prime Time Programme (2006) about Legal Corruption in the 26 Counties of Ireland. The answer by the Solicitor interviewed was 'that he would not take legal action against a solicitor colleague'. Likewise in the 6 Counties of Northern Ireland. 'There is Not a Snowballs Chance in Hell' of one Solicitor taking legal action against a Solicitor colleague'. An Estate Agent who spoke at the VLPS meeting in Cavan Town in July 2007 (on VLPS Website) described the Law Society as 'The Solicitor's Trade Union'. The Scottish Parliament has scrapped the Law Society in Scotland and replaced it with an 'Independent Commission' to regulate the Legal Profession. Ireland deserves a similar 'Independent Commission'. If any person with 'bitter personal experience of Mr. James Montague wishes to contact me my mobile phone number is 0771 514 0648 I have recently met face to face 3 other people who received a very poor legal service from James Montague. Meeting these 3 people has increased my self-esteem 300%. Thanks to the VLPS Meetings and Website there is an alternative to 'Suffering in Silence'. At my first VLPS meeting in Mount Errigal Hotel Letterkenny, I recall one businessman describe a solicitor as 'Lower than a Snake and a Snake Crawls on it's Belly'. It is high time that devious Solicitors like James Montague were made accountable for their 'Underhand Dealings'. Expose their Legal Corruption to the World on the Website and VLPS meetings 'Pro-Bono-Publico' (for the good of the public). |
| 7th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Derry & Omagh |
Extract from Judgement of Judge David McFarland on 30th March 2007, Mr. James Montague having attended as the 'key witness' for Christine Meyler against me. Incredible how Mr. James Montague's memory has improved. "Mr. Montague remembered the meeting. He remembered Charles Ferris signing the document, and at the same time expressing satisfaction at the resolution of the matter. He described Charles Ferris's satisfaction as a clear and abiding memory that he had of that meeting. He rejected the suggestion that Charles Ferris had refused the offer, and that he had procured the signature to the document as some form of acknowledgment of being advised of the offer and its rejection. He also confirmed under cross-examination that he would have explained the nature and implications of the document to Charles Ferris before he signed it." James Montague attended on two occasions again in November in the High Court Belfast against me. There will be more Court Cases to follow no doubt. Most strange for a solicitor who stated to another VLPS member in Omagh that "he leaves attending court to the young solicitors in his firm". |
| 7th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Victim Omagh |
Also had the bad luck to be clients of James Montague and to have trust in him. He has caused my family considerable financial and emotional harm from which it will be very difficult to recover. A catalogue of the most disgraceful abuses of trust spanning decades. On complaining to the Law Society they vigourously defended Mr Montague. We hadn't a chance. |
| 29th of Dec, 2007 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
In 2004 a Government Department which I had cause to have dealings with asked me to provide confirmation that I owned a certain property which I understood I owned as a result of an inheritance.
I consequently asked Mr Montague, who had always been my solicitor, to provide the necessary confirmation to the Department in question. In early 2004 he wrote to the said Department confirming that I was the sole owner of the property.
Later on that year, as a result of a series of totally unrelated events, I discovered that I did'nt,and never had owned the property.
Over ten years previously, a client of Mr Montague had taken out first title on the said property, facilitated by Mr Montague.
I went to another solicitor but soon discovered that he was closing ranks with Mr Montague. I promptly sacked him but not before he had inflicted considerable damage to my case.
I can't find another solicitor to take on my case.
I made a complaint to The Law Society in 2005 asking them to consider whether or not Mr Montague had a conflict of interest in the case.They did'nt even bother to acknoledge my complaint.
I will never know what Mr Montague has cost me.
What I do know from my experience is that the legal profession in general including Mr Montague and James Mc Nulty & Co. in particular have created a lawless society in N.Ireland.
A State of anarchy ably assisted by The Law Society. |
| 14th of Jun, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Omagh VLPS, 10 June 2008. That would be James alright, hiding in his foxhole, not being man enough to take responsibility for his actions. A sad cut of a man having to hide his face every time he goes out. A career destined to end in ignominy. Well deserved. |
| 2nd of Aug, 2009 |
|
Ben |
Darren O'Neill, 30 July 2009. James was certainly a good man when he destroyed my defenceless severely disabled vulnerable 80 year old mother behind her back.. Read her story on this page and then call me a liar. If James doesn't want to show you the paperwork you can contact me on this page if you wish and I will show you the paperwork. Somehow I doubt if you will. |
| 9th of Oct, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
Congratulations James, you have made it to the Hall of Shame. A fitting tribute. |
| 9th of Oct, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Nurse Lecturer |
The case stated by Justice Anthony Hart is now posted on my case history. Some interesting questions for Court of Appeal. Another day in Court for Solicitor Christine Meyler, represented by her husband Kevin McGuigan and their star witness James Montague. The miracle man who could not remember about a court case on 30th May 1989 and now nineteen years later "he has crystal clear recall and an exacting memory of the minutiae". An incredible awakening. Of course he is handicapped as he no longer has my late father Charles Ferris' legal file. This legal file mysteriously disappeared in transit. The legal file was sent to Patrick Fahy according to James Montague in 1994 and according to Patrick Fahy my late father's legal file was never received by Patrick Fahy. A journey of 170 yards. The description by the businessman from Lifford at Mount Errigal Hotel that "Solicitors are lower than snakes and snakes crawl on their belly" is very appropriate. |
| 27th of Aug, 2009 |
 |
Shut up |
I find it rather amusing that this Solicitor could be the mastermind of some conspiracy to deprive people of land and property.
I have had many dealings with this firm and have nothing but respect for the work they do.
It appears that many VLPS members visit this site to slander J Montague and for no other reason. Could it be that one VLPS member is pretending to be other people?
Anybody interested in the truth should read a very funny Court of Appeal decision called Ferris - I think it speaks volumes about the level of insanity in the mind of Mr Ferris ..... sorry I meant Vlps. On the other hand the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal might be part of this conspiracy to rob Ferris? It really is like an episode of the X Files with Mr Ferris trying to expose the truth but coming up just short.. or it may be that he is just mad.
|
| 10th of May, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Someone once said to me, "If you have nothing good to say about someone say nothing" so I will say nothing. |
| 13th of Dec, 2007 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
Mr Montague was my solicitor for all of my adult life. About 15 years ago my wife and I took out a mortgage to build our house and we again remortgaged a couple of times down the line to take advantage of discount deals which became available at various times. Mr Montague handled all of these and was paid well for this. Most recently about two years ago we again remortgaged, however this time to take advantage of free legal fees available from the new lender, we decided to use the new lender's solicitor. As it turned out, what should have taken only a couple of weeks dragged into months before our new mortgage was sorted. After much stress and worry and pointless enquiries and extra cost as our previous discount period had now ran out we learned there were problems. Apparently our new lenders discovered that our house had been mortgaged from the outset on foot of title documents for a different property. This was indeed the case. The title documents referred to a small plot of land which I owned and not the house. Because of the good faith of our new lenders, and no thanks to Mr Montague, a problem of his making, we thankfully got the mess sorted out. This was all a very serious matter. |
| 24th of Dec, 2007 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
VLPS Omagh, you had a very nasty experience. What has really angered me greatly is that my late father was a client of James McNulty and then James Montague so never between the years and specifically 1986 to 1993 would my late father have even doubted for one second his trust in solicitor Mr. Montague. I visited and spoke with my father on 8th October 2005 (day before his death) and although he was unwell with a heavy cold we discussed the legal case as Christine Meyler had issued a summons against me and I was due to attend Omagh County Court on Wednesday 12th October 2005. My father stated he didn't feel he would be well enough to attend as a witness but stated that all I could do was do my best and state that there never was any so called agreement signed as such in James Montague's office in June 1989. My father ended our conversation by describing the whole legal situation from October 1986 to October 2005 as "A journey through Hell created by solicitors such as James Montague" and Pat Fahy. It is just so difficult to unravel the 'white-collar' or rather 'white-paper' CRIME. Knowing that there are two other victims of Mr James Montague with the courage to provide warnings to others is a great comfort, and hopefully prevent in some small way James Montague creating more victims. |
| 10th of Dec, 2007 |
|
VLPS |
This doesn't surprise me, but what Mr Ferris describes is a honeymoon compared to my story with regards to my dealings with Mr Montague - watch this space. |
| 9th of Dec, 2007 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
Had the misfortune along with my father Charles Ferris (now deceased 9th October 2005) in 1986 to place 100% trust in James Montague. A County Court date was arranged for 30th May 1989, but James Montague had forgotten about having to attend and legally represent my father. James Montague had also forgotten to arrange for the barrister to attend Omagh County Court on 30th May 1989. This was despite James Montague having sent a letter dated 7th May informing my father of the court case on 30th May 1989. Despite not having a barrister, my late father won his case as Judge Babbington ruled that an application for ownership by the other party and the judgement was Dismiss on Merit. I was with my father at a meeting (after 21st June 1989) and my father refused a derisory offer. I was a client of James Montague in 1989 in the purchase of my present home in Derry and later in August 1994 dealing with the purchase of a house in Belfast. In December 1994 after contacting Land Registry we were told by letter that the property had been registered in May/June 1994 on the terms of the derisory offer of June 1989. |
| 20th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris Omagh & Derry |
VLPS Omagh 17th January 2008. Could not agree more with your comment 'let them be condemned by their own poisoned pens.' Got this small quote from a 'Red Indian Chief' as he and his people were being driven into a 'reservation'. "Continue to contaminate your bed, and you will one night suffocate in your own waste". This warning should also be heeded by James Montague and the Law Society. There was 9,000 hits on the website in the past 24 hours so the World is watching and taking notice of the legal corruption. |
| 28th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Victim of James Montague & The Law Society |
I too was shafted by James Montague. The Law Society treated my complaint with a closed mind. They should be mindful that they demean themselves and the legal profession every time they allow James Montague to use them as his mouthpiece. The Law Society is destroying the 'body politic' of the legal profession. |
| 31st of Jan, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
I was told in my youth, "Have No Truck with the Law or the Clergy". James Montague occupies the role of Saint James as well as Solicitor. Avoid Avoid on both counts. |
| 26th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris |
I found this snippet on RYS by an American attorney against Solicitor Adrian Bourke (brother of Mary Robinson). Very good insight about the 'toothless' Law Society. -- I watched the RTE special about Solicitors. I saw Adrian Bourke on there and they never mentioned his sister was the former President. I never knew this until I researched it. Unfortunately if a solicitor has ties to Government, it's hard to just have him removed or punished. Getting the American Press involved to show how corrupt Solicitors are and how the Law Society protects them would create a firestorm and a international embarrassment. I have been in contact with friends here in America who work for the Big Three media outlets here and a plan is almost in effect for a story on the Solicitors and the Law Society. I was on the Law Society web site and went on to Complaints and scrolled down to what the Law Society cannot do. I almost fell out of my chair. They stated they don't handle complaints of Negligence if where legal action is a more appropriate remedy??? We do not handle complaints of inadequate service from more than five years ago??? I think the gig is up on Blackhall Place. What type of dancing takes place in Belfast? |
| 17th of Jan, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
I can understand the sentiment that it would be foolish to complain to the Law Society about James Montague, however I will tell you my experience. I was a long standing client of James Montague when problems arose. When I began to ask questions he became 'unavailable'. When I complained to the Law Society James Montague attacked my integrity, which the Law Society latched onto to reject my complaint. They obviously liaised very closely. When I questioned the Law Society about their handling of my complaint, I received a hostile rebuke. The letter questioned my integrity, gave very questionable legal advice and acted as spokesman for James Montague putting a spin on the facts which could only have come from James Montague. In effect, they broke just about every one of their own rules. I believe my complaint was useful because I now have a wealth of evidence giving a valuable insight into the relationship between James Montague and the Law Society. My advice to victims of James Montague is to complain. Whilst your complaint will fail it will help to build a useful body of evidence on James Montague and his relationship with the Law Society. Complain and let them be condemned by their own poisoned pens. |
| 28th of Jan, 2008 |
|
Disinherited VLPS |
I was becoming more dissatisfied with my solicitor James Montague and decided to change. After several months no papers were forthcoming and I complained to the Law Society. James Montague responded with a battery of derogatory allegations against me. I was about to find out that James Montague had corrupted my affairs very extensively. The Law Society dismissed my complaint. When I queried this the Law Society said they had investigated my complaint even though my status as James Montague's client was "questionable". I read this as a further derogatory attack on me in keeping with James Montague's tone. It proved that my complaint was prejudiced from the outset. If the Law Society had these doubts then I had a right to be told at the beginning and given a chance to prove that James Montague had indeed been my solicitor, which I could easily have done. I believe the allegations made against me were intended to intimidate me. If that is the case then they have failed. I am not frightened nor will I be silenced. |
| 5th of Feb, 2008 |
|
VLPS Drumquin |
VLPS Omagh 29th December 2007. It appears that all the Solicitors in Omagh are in each other's pockets. I have had some very nasty experiences over the years. They promise you the earth and do very little and definitely close ranks against you. They are more like a swarm of wasps or a nest of rats. James Montague presents like a parish priest but 'James is no angel'. He uses his previous school teacher habits to intimidate and dominate you. Perhaps he may come down a 'peg or two'. |
| 19th of Feb, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
VLPS 18th Feb. 2008. The solicitors in Omagh, not least James Montague, have earned a notoriety throughout the country and even further afield. They have earned Omagh an ignominious reputation akin to that of a Wild West frontier town where the only law is that of the lawyers. With a rotten corrupt Law Society manning the parapets they are untouchable, a law unto themselves. There is a public crisis of confidence in the legal profession in Omagh which only an enquiry as you suggest can tackle. |
| 18th of Feb, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
I believe the business of James Montague and the Law Society to be of a nature that an investigation at the highest level is urgently needed. Any such investigation should be started by running advertisements asking their victims to come forward. There would be a flood. I would be more than happy to provide any such investigation with a wealth of damning evidence. |
| 6th of Mar, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry VLPS, 18 Feb 2008 |
Good idea, I agree 100%. Hopefully the wider group of VLPS will respond to your suggestion for 'advertisements asking for victims to come forward'. I see that two new solicitors have just started in the firm of James McNulty & Co Solicitors of which James Montague is the Principal Solicitor. It would be a power for good if the campaign also acts as a 'warning' to such young solicitors to practice the 'law' and not 'legal corruption'. |
| 12th of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry, 6th March 2008. Regarding 'advertisements asking for victims to come forward'. Thanks to VLPS I have met quite a number of James Montague's victims. The ads would be a great idea and would bring more of his victims to the fore. It would certainly hasten progress in exposing James Montague. |
| 16th of May, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
It is heartening to see James Montague's victims coming forward to tell their stories and that this site has received over two million hits. Thousands will read Mr Montague's page every day saving countless people from his clutches. No doubt Mr Montague's colleagues are the most avid readers. You can't blame them because they too have a right to know who they are working with. This page should also be essential reading for his trainees, and indeed all trainee solicitors, so that they can learn how not to be a solicitor. |
| 28th of Apr, 2008 |
|
Lost and found |
Loses documents. Creative in finding them. |
| 12th of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Picture the scenario. James Montague has been looking after your legal affairs for over twenty years. Recently you have been having some doubts and you begin to ask questions. Suddenly James is not taking or returning your calls, he is ignoring your letters and when you call to his office he is either not available or has gone away. You are getting worried so you try a new solicitor - months pass and nothing - now you are running a cold sweat. Then you discover your new solicitor is buying James time. You complain to the Law Society to find out there are serious problems. James holds all your papers and you are completely in the dark. He holds all the aces and he is now playing poker using every aspect of your business as chips. You look for solace from 'her master's voice' Moira Neeson of the Law Society, but hey, it's all your fault, you're the bad guy. Not quite the solace you wanted. At least now you know the questions - where is the missing will, the missing estate, the missing inheritance, the six figure property missing from your portfolio? Four years have now passed and James has managed to completely avoid communicating with you, bravely hiding behind Moira Neeson. No, you are not a fictional character, but a real person with a real family whom James Montague has all but destroyed. |
| 12th of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
Joe Ferris, 6th March 2008. My best advice to the two new solicitors with James McNulty & Co is that their careers are poorly served as protegee of James Montague. |
| 18th of Apr, 2008 |
|
Belfast VLPS |
This article may help Omagh VLPS, 8 April 2008. Sheena Grattan (2000) Testamentary Negligence SLS Legal Publications (NI). Has an interesting article on page 19.
'During the course of his judgement Harman J also made the following observations about will-drafting within the legal profession: "Clients are apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for the drawing of a will... (They are) therefore apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for drawing a will. He said clients are quite pleasantly relieved about the low rate of fees charged because as (one of the solicitors who gave evidence as an expert witness) frankly said to me, solicitors tend to regard instructions for a will as what I, I hope politely, called seed-corn for the future, and he slightly more harshly described as a sprat to catch a mackerel – the mackerel being the administration of the estate which is a notoriously fee-generating occupation. The social desirability that persons should die leaving wills that have been professionally settled and the necessity of limiting the time and therefore cost, of preparing a will point to no duty being imposed by law which will increase the time involved." This shyster of a solicitor certainly knew how to 'gut' the mackerel. Appears to have no conscience at all. |
| 26th of Feb, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
VLPS Drumquin, 5th of Feb 2008. It is the Law Society that underwrites these pillars of etiquette regardless of who they destroy. That is not a consideration for Moira Neeson of The Law Society every time she rows in behind them to bail them out. She is tarnished by their distasteful reputations. |
| 9th of Apr, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
I am from a good family. We were always dignified and stood by each other. Our parents died and left a large estate. James Montague of James McNulty & Co. has always been our solicitor. He has over a considerable period proceeded to carve up the estate. He has used every deceit and every underhand trick imaginable. My family has consequently been torn apart by destructive in-fighting from which it will never recover whilst James Montague sadistically sits back and pulls all the strings. He is a nasty piece of work who should be avoided at all costs. |
| 14th of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Joe Ferris, 6 Mar 2008. Sadly, by virtue of their association with Jim Montague his two rookies are already damaged goods. Are they not aware of the outrage in the high street at the excesses of Jim Montague and James McNulty & Co. Solicitors, or has Jim not told them? |
| 24th of Jun, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Now that the VLPS is beginning to bite, the next logical step would be to take out a group law suit against James Montague - let's say 20 million to begin with. It's not about the money, which should go to good causes. |
| 15th of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS observer |
I could scarcely believe what I have read on this page, then I thought, well, not even the most fertile imagination could make this up. What appears clear to me is that the full rigours of the Law, which Mr Montague and Ms Neeson so obviously hold in the highest possible contempt, should be brought to bear on them. |
| 3rd of Apr, 2008 |
|
Belfast VLPS |
This article really takes the biscuit as to how the lawyers and the Court of Care and Protection plundered the estate of Freddy Andrews. Not much help from the Law Society either... Sunday World, March 23, 2008. MENTALLY HANDICAPPED SON WHOSE FUND WAS PLUNDERED: Sunday World article, March 23, 2008. Freddie Andrews was left a fortune in trust, now he can't even pay the nursing home fees... Imagine the disappointment if you placed your trust in a solicitor such as James Montague, who was so twisted that he used the title deed for the wrong property. Would he put your money into the wrong account also? And then SNEER at you, like a cornered rat, like he did recently in the High Court at Belfast when being cross-examined by Mr. Joe Ferris. |
| 21st of Apr, 2008 |
|
Goffer |
Courier, 19th April 2008. I was also a 'goffer' for James Montague. I have moved on now but he still holds the documents. That way he can still exercise control over me. He knows that I can't really cause a fuss because if it ever came out how he drew up the documents, they wouldn't be worth the paper they are written on. Classic James Montague entrapment. |
| 19th of Apr, 2008 |
|
Courier |
Pass the parcel, 14th of April 2008. James Montague used me like this. He gave me the document and told me to go to specific individuals and have them sign it and return the document to him. I did this and he then signed the document as having been witnessed by him. |
| 14th of Apr, 2008 |
|
Pass the parcel |
There have been cases where James Montague has passed legal documents out of his office to be signed. The documents would then be returned to James Montague where he would witness them. A dubious practice. |
| 22nd of Mar, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
VLPS Omagh 13 Dec 2007. Yes, that's me. Mr Montague, for whatever reason, used the title deed for the wrong property to secure our original mortgage. As a result of our decision to use the new lender's solicitors on remortgaging, this was detected. We were brought under suspicion and could have faced possible serious charges. It begs the question whether Mr Montague is fit to practice. |
| 8th of Apr, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
VLPS Omagh 13 Dec. 2007 & 22 Mar. 2008. Hi! It's me again. Whilst James Montague was using the wrong title deed to secure our mortgage you might be forgiven for wondering where the proper title deed was during this time. I am not quite sure but I can tell you what I do know. My wife and I bought the site in the early 1980s. James Montague handled the purchase and it was actually him who drew up the title deed which would have remained in the 'safe' custody of James McNulty & Co. - as we thought. Ten years later we obtained the mortgage which James Montague handled using, as we now know, the wrong title deed. What happened next is stranger than fiction. Several years later a major bank contacted us to say that they held documents belonging to us in their vault. We met at their request and they handed over the documents. They could offer no explanation as to why they had these documents. As we weren't familiar with legal documents we scarcely looked at these twice and put them away in a drawer. It was not until the problem arose on remortgaging that we checked these to find that they were in fact the proper title deeds. You will appreciate that this is understandable as the only way of telling the difference between the title deeds was the folio numbers. Even the first lenders didn't realise that they had the wrong title deed. Thankfully we were able to give the proper title deed to the new lenders resolving the problem. Were it not for their good faith we would have been in serious trouble through no fault of our own. That is how we got the mess sorted. So, there you have it, the title deed would appear to have been missing for over twenty years. Were it not for that fateful phone call from that bank, my wife and I would now be on the inside, looking out. Is that legal incompetence or what? |
| 11th of Apr, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
VLPS Omagh 8th April 2008. Shocking stuff. You should take your case to the Law Society and post the result on this page. I would love to know how Ms Neeson worms James Montague out of trouble again. |
| 3rd of May, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
Walk past this place. They put my light out. James Montague beggars belief. |
| 9th of May, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
VLPS, 29th April 2008. I am aware of an elderly person who James Montague treated very badly. The person made the mistake of trusting him and was repaid with the most unspeakable betrayal, brutality and cruelty. |
| 10th of Jun, 2008 |
|
Omagh VLPS |
A VLPS member was taking a case against James Montague at Omagh Court recently and guess what? James Montague did not turn up. Perhaps James Montague has 'a fear' or has his 'memory started to go funny again'. James, where are you? Omagh Court is calling you. |
| 12th of Jun, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
James Montague gave evidence in the High Court, Belfast for Christine Meyler 'against myself'. James Montague gave evidence that the "The Ferris Family were 'fighting tooth and nail' in the courts". Wait for it. Neither he nor Ms. Christine Meyler could mention a single case of the 'Ferris Family' fighting tooth and nail in the courts. Given the experience of VLPS, 29th April 2008, no doubt this is what James Montague would like to see happen. Another VLPS member in Fermanagh had a more farming description for solicitors like James Montague. This Fermanagh farmer described them as "they are like maggots". |
| 6th of Jul, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
I was once told that I was appointed executor of an estate by a person recently deceased. I had no idea what this meant but said that I would do whatever was required of me. For several months I heard nothing until one day I was approached by what I could only describe, in hindsight, as a shady looking character. This person reached out with what I could see was a document rolled up tightly like a newspaper with the signature box exposed. I was asked to sign the document in order to 'clear up' the will. Of course, thinking I was doing the decent and noble thing, I signed the rolled up document without question. Yes I know, what an idiot, but I was acting with trust. I have since been tormented by guilt to think that a decent human being entrusted me with their will and estate and I never saw the will and blindly signed documents, not knowing to this day what I signed. Again I remind you I was acting on a basis of trust. All of this was hidden from me for a reason which I will never know. I will always have to live with the guilt that I failed to protect the deceased from what I now know to be a complete scoundrel. James Montague was the solicitor in question. |
| 29th of Apr, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
I recently found a friend of mine in a distressed state. I asked him what troubled him and he told me a very disturbing story. His late uncle was a very modest man who worked hard all his life to provide for his family and to build up a very successful business. Sadly he grew old and fell into poor health. He consequently made a will leaving the business to his two sons. The older son, believing everything to be his as of right, somehow got wind of the will (I wonder who tipped him off?). He physically threatened the father, by now a very vulnerable old man in poor health. The father, under threat, told the son the full story about the will. James Montague, the family solicitor, then had the younger son written out of the will. The family is now permanently broken. James Montague is the man. |
| 12th of Jun, 2008 |
|
Omagh VLPS |
Thought this quote in Solicitor Sean McGlynn's ratings may also apply to 'Holy James': "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time". Abraham Lincoln (attributed), 16th president of US (1809-1865). |
| 3rd of Oct, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Omagh VLPS, 30 Sept 2008: His yellow streak is a mile wide. He has been hiding from me for five years. A lot of unanswered questions. |
| 16th of Aug, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris Omagh & Derry |
I attended a public lecture in Saint Joseph's Hall Omagh given to the Woman's Group by Solicitor James Montague. The title of the lecture was 'Wills & Probate' Came across as having a very good knowledge of the law. Amazingly when he was asked by a member of the audience. "What happens to the Client's will when it is made out by a Solicitor? The answer was, "This is a very weak point, there is no official record kept of the will and it is all down to the 'Trust' of the Solicitor!" When asked another question about how to best manage financial matters for tax planning. The answer, "The wise person leaves nothing!" Given the quote from Senior Law Lecturer Sheena Grattan at QUB. Sheena Grattan (2000) Testamentary Negligence SLS Legal Publications (NI) Has an interesting article on page 19.
‘During the course of his judgement Harman J also made the following observations about will-drafting within the legal profession:
“Clients are apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for the drawing of a will…..(They are) therefore apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for drawing a will. He said clients are quite pleasantly relieved about the low rate of fees charged because as (one of the solicitors who gave evidence as an expert witness) frankly said to me, solicitors tend to regard instructions for a will as what I, I hope politely, called seed-corn for the future, and he slightly more harshly described as a sprat to catch a mackerel – the mackerel being the administration of the estate which is a notoriously fee-generating occupation. The social desirability that persons should die leaving wills that have been professionally settled and the necessity of limiting the time and therefore cost, of preparing a will point to no duty being imposed by law which will increase the time involved.”
James Montague is very good at getting the 'Whole Mackerel'!!As specified by VLPS Omagh July 6th 2008. |
| 27th of Aug, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
In 1994 Solicitor Christine Meyler provided an 'Oath' document to Royal Courts of Justice, Belfast and a significant part of this 'Oath' document is false. For example, my Great Grandmother Anne Ferris deceased 4th September 1925 had 8 children and 33 Grandchildren and my late father Charles Ferris was one of the 33 Grandchildren. In the 'Oath' document presented by Solicitor Christine Meyler it states:- 'Without Grandchild' This as stated previously is 'completely false'. Unbelievably, according to Solicitor Ms Christine Meyler, my late father Charles Ferris never existed, along with the other 32 grandchildren of Anne Ferris deceased 4th September 1925. Can anyone explain? I had a brief consultation with the late Roddy O'Connor in 1970 and he most certainly was well aware of the grandchildren of Anne Ferris and even told me how one of her grandchildren Patrick Ferris was his 'Election Agent'. Unbelievable how things change. P.S. This is the 'Legal Corruption' that James Montague has appeared in Dungannon Court on one occasion and in the High Court Belfast on two occasions as the Chief Star Witness for Solicitor Chiristne Meyler against me. 'Birds of a feather stick together' or what?? |
| 29th of Aug, 2008 |
|
VLPS Omagh |
I have read this page and I find that it does not even come close to describing James Montague. It is evident from this page and certainly from my experience that James Montague preys on elderly vulnerable people who cannot fight back. One cannot appreciate how devastating James Montague's trickery is unless you experience it first hand, as I have. |
| 3rd of Sep, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
Found this quote in Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers. "Of all the professions that have evolved in our society, none have ever come close to matching the legal profession for downright deceit and dishonesty. The legal profession is immutable, intransigent, self-protective, unaccountable, incompetent and corrupt. For over 500 years this profession has been tyrannising, misleading and oppressing the Scottish people". "How long have the Irish people suffered at the hands of the 'corrupt legal profession' such as my late father and I experienced with James Montague"??? |
| 22nd of Sep, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Joe Ferris 19/9/08. Well done Joe. I for one will be there. It's past time that James Montague was brought to Justice. |
| 11th of Sep, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
Joe Ferris, 8/9/08. I too was 'stonewalled' by James Montague and a band of legal vultures. |
| 8th of Sep, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Nurse Lecturer |
Some 'homework' for James Montague. I think this quotation speaks volumes in Rip off Ireland. I would like you to ponder on this
quote from Nelson Mandela. "In Law and Philosophy, one asks, 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?'
(Who will guard the guardians themselves?) If the prefect does not obey the rules, how can the
students be expected to obey? In effect the prefect was above the law because he was the law and
one prefect was not supposed to report another." (page 47, Long Walk to Freedom, 1994). I think
Nelson Mandela 'hits the nail on the head'. Solicitors, Barristers and Judges 'are above the law'
because they are the law. In the 22 years that I have been involved in the 'legal corruption' as
mentioned in my case history on CrookedLawyers.com I have met many Solicitors, Barristers and
Judges. I haven't met a single one (from October 1986 to September 2008) who could speak or write
the words 'Truth' and 'Justice'. |
| 6th of Sep, 2008 |
|
VLPS |
If you are considering engaging James Montague to work for you - don't. If you are an existing client of James Montague, have your affairs independently checked urgently and remain prepared for a nasty shock. |
| 19th of Sep, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Omagh & Derry |
James Montague is missing from court again - I was in Omagh Court today Friday 19th September 2008 in Court one along with five supporters from Donegal, Strabane & Omagh. The Plaintiff & Litigant in Person was there at the appointed time and at 10.30 am Judge McKibbon asked the Plaintiff (who was accompanied by five of his own family & neighbours). The court clerk Patricia Campbell was asked to issue a call for the Defendant James Montague of James McNulty & Co. Wait for it, James Montague must have forgotten about the case and no one appeared on his behalf. Barrister Martin McDonnell in a rather halfhearted whisper said something about having a 'Watching Brief'. Judge McKibbon announced that the court would rise and he would seek some answers. At about 10.45am Court Clerk Patricia Campbell announced to the 'Plaintiff and Litigant in Person' that there would be a 'Full Hearing' of the case on Friday 16th Jaunuary 2009. At about 10.50pm Solicitor Christine Meyler came into court number one and looked around with rather 'a lost look about her and left again'. Judge McKibbon returned to the Court at 11am and confirmed the date for the Full Hearing and apologised to the Plaintiff & litigant in person for the delay. This would be a great opportunity for the victims of James Montague to appear as supporters and to see and hear for ourselves. Friday 16th January 2009 at 10am in Omagh Court House, a date for your diary! |
| 21st of Sep, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Nurse Lecturer |
High Court have accepted my 'case stated' for Court of Appeal. I have just received details from Judge Harte that I can proceed with my case to the 'Court of Appeal'. This will be another outing for James Montague as the 'Star Witness' for Christine Meyler. Hopefully another date for the diary! |
| 30th of Sep, 2008 |
|
Omagh VLPS |
I was in Omagh Courthouse on Monday 29th September 2008 and believe it or not James Montague was spotted walking through the town with his 'umbrella'. There were 3 legal victims/survivors of James Montague together at the door of the Courthouse. I wonder did Solicitor James Montague become overwhelmed with a yellow streak and scurry past the Courthouse? |
| 30th of Sep, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Nurse Lecturer |
The 'false oath document' is scanned on my case history on www.crookedlawyers.com with a short explanatory note. I was on a VLPS support demonstration for Patrick Corrigan in Longford Town on Monday 22nd September 2008. Great support as I had a Tyrone VLPS placard. I gave a copy of the 'false oath' to the Garda Sergeant. I told him, I must be another son of God given that my father never was born according to Solicitor Christine Meyler. The Garda Sergeant was completely baffled. 'Double click' the scanned copy of the false oath to enlarge to A4 size. |
| 19th of Oct, 2008 |
|
vlps |
There has been reference to James Montague being a coward. That he may be, but not always. He is very brave when he has a very vulnerable 80 year old pensioner in his office setting her up to get cleaned out by one of his more favoured clients. Full story to follow. |
| 23rd of Oct, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 19/10/08. The 80 year old pensioner to which I refer was a wonderful human being, generous, trustworthy and devoutly religious. She was severely disabled and housebound, yet was of such a strong mind that she arranged to meet James Montague in his office to make her arrangements. Despite having to go up a long stairway with great difficulty to Mr Montague's office, she was not deterred. James Montague left her with nothing, not even her dignity. She was to die not even owning the clothes on her back. |
| 28th of Oct, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry, 23/10/08. From the moment his victim left his office, James Montague used all his guile and cunning to remove her name from her title. Wiped off the face of the earth as if she had never existed, a piece of dirt on James Montague's shoe. To do this he hatched a complex conspiracy. The story begins. |
| 20th of Oct, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris, Nurse Lecturer |
vlps 19th October 2008, would like to meet you. I have 'cut & pasted' the 12 pages from Solicitor James Montague's RYS. And this is lodged as part of my case to the Court of Appeal. I have met three other Victims of James Montague in the Omagh area. We did meet an elected representative in Omagh and he told us that there were a lot of complaints from clients of James Montague. We need to STAND UP AND BE COUNTED. My address is Joe Ferris, 14 Alanvale Crescent, Kilfennan Estate, L/Derry BT47 5SJ, mobile 0771 5140648. It is time we put an end to his abuse of vulnerable people. Look forward to hearing from you. I am also really looking forward to cross-examining solicitor James Montague again during the Court of Appeal. The report from victims on this website are crying out for justice. |
| 29th of Oct, 2008 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer vlps 23rd October 2008 |
I was in Court One Omagh Courthouse today Wednesday 23rd October at 10am along with VLPS members from Donegal, Strabane, Sixmilecross, Greencastle and Mountfield (Nine in Total) as supporters for a VLPS member who is suing Solicitor James Montague. Judge David McFarland was presiding. Judge David McFarland advised the VLPS member who is a personal litigant to seek legal representation. Also Judge McFarland stated that Solicitor James Montague had called and had explained to Judge McFarland as to the reason why he solicitor James Montague had not filed 'a defence' to the previous hearing or made an appearance on Monday 19th September 2008. Judge David McFarland explained that solicitor James Montague had not 'filed a defence' because he was being very considerate towards the Plaintiff and 'if he filed a defence the Plaintiff would be fixed with substantial costs'. This very considerate & sensitive, 'warm & cuddly' James Montague is so very different from the experience of vlps 23rd October 2008. However, the actions of Judge David McFarland is so very different to his 'admonishments' towards myself at Dungannon Court on 19th February 2007 when Judge David McFarland remonstrated to me for having written a detailed letter to him about the 'CORRUPTION' in my case with the words, "You must not write to the Judge". Double Standards for Solicitor James Montague, when 'a full discussion' is mentioned as having taken place 'Behind Closed Doors'. In lay man's language 'Judge David McFarland has already heard solicitor James Montague's version of the truth and has 'also judged against the VLPS member and lay litigant in person' 'Game Set & Match to Corruption'. The quote from Nelson Mandela. "In Law and Philosophy, one asks, 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' (Who will guard the guardians themselves?) If the prefect does not obey the rules, how can the students be expected to obey? In effect the prefect was above the law because he was the law and one prefect was not supposed to report another." (page 47, Long Walk to Freedom, 1994). I think Nelson Mandela 'hits the nail on the head'. Solicitors, Barristers and Judges 'are above the law' because they are the law. "JUDICIAL COVER UP As Plain as the Nose on our Faces" |
| 2nd of Nov, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 28/10/08. The lady of our story visited Mr James Montague's office in 1987 to make her will. Mr Montague wrote it in his own handwriting. He and his secretary Siobhan O'Neill both witnessed it. Mr Montague promised the lady that he would make sure her will was properly implemented. Fortunately, there was another witness present who is prepared to testify to that. Sadly the lady died in 1990. In those three intervening years, it was a measure of Mr Montague's contempt for her that he didn't contact her, not even once. From the moment the lady left Mr Montague's office on that fateful day in 1987 it is now clear that Mr Montague had three objectives: 1. To strip the lady of her title; 2. To make sure that her instructions never saw the light of day; and 3. To make sure her beneficiary, also a client of Mr Montague, didn't inherit. He succeeded in all three objectives. I will briefly digress. On 3rd August 2004 Mr Montague wrote to the Law Society regarding this lady, "Further to yours of 8th ult. we can advise that we have no knowledge of any will made by M--- --- mother nor did we ever receive instructions from any source about a will." With no help from the Law Society, it was later discovered that a 'conveyance' drawn up by Mr Montague in 2002 existed which gave title to, wait for it, the executor of the now missing will. The executor also being a client of Mr Montague. I will come back to this again. The plot thickens. |
| 8th of Nov, 2008 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
I can agree with vlps, 2nd November 2008. I along with five other VLPS members met with an elected councillor to Omagh Council earlier this year. This elected councillor stated that "there were a lot of complaints about James Montague's office". I have also seen Mr. Montague being cross-examined by Joe Ferris in Dungannon Court and Belfast High Court. From my observation of Solicitor James Montague, he gave a very flustered performance on all three occasions, and to me, 'he was lying through his teeth'. Reminded me of the look of 'a dog that was caught killing your sheep'. |
| 11th of Nov, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 2/11/08. To recap: (1)16 April 1987-James Montague's 80 year old client met him in his office,made her will and left the will with complete instructions in James Montagues 'safe' keep.(2)1990- Sadly his client died.(3)1 July 2002-James Montague drew up deed granting his deceased client's title to the executor of her now missing will.(4) 3 August 2004 James Montague wrote to The Law Society,"We can advise that we have no knowledge of any will---nor did we ever receive instructions from any source about a will." |
| 12th of Nov, 2008 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
Can I suggest 'Litigant in Person' mentioned on 19th September 2008 be aware that the Corrupt Judges can still send you to Jail in order to 'Protect' their Corrupt Solicitor Colleagues. See RYS Donegal for Judge John O'Hagan and RYS Corrupt Solicitor Sean McGlynn November 12th 2008. 'The Jailing of Daniel Gallagher and 'Habeus Corpus' application by his wife Elva Gallagher to the Four Courts in Dublin. Best be prepared. |
| 12th of Nov, 2008 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
Can I suggest 'Litigant in Person' mentioned on 19th September 2008 be aware that the Corrupt Judges can still send you to Jail in order to 'Protect' their Corrupt Solicitor Colleagues. See RYS Donegal for Judge John O'Hagan and RYS Corrupt Solicitor Sean McGlynn November 12th 2008. 'The Jailing of Daniel Gallagher and 'Habeus Corpus' application by his wife Elva Gallagher to the Four Courts in Dublin. Perhaps best to be prepared and know how to have someone else organised to make Habeus Corpus application. Given that Judge David McFarland has already stated he had secret meetings with Corrupt Solicitor James Montague. |
| 18th of Nov, 2008 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
Good news, Daniel Gallagher was not sent back to prison today. Some encouragement for when you Omagh VLPS get James Montague into court. |
| 23rd of Nov, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 11/11/08. James Montague's 80 year old victim was known as Annie. She married in the 1930s. She and her husband bought a small holding and worked very hard to build it into a very large estate. Sadly her husband died in the 1960s. He left his estate to Annie. James McNulty & Co. was the family solicitor with whom they had a very good relationship. About 1970 James Montague took over from James McNulty and remained Annie's solicitor until her death in 1990. You will see from my last entries that James Montague, in his letter to the Law Society dated 3 August 2004, could only bring himself to refer to Annie as M's Mother, despite having been on first name terms with Annie as her solicitor. Firstly, this was very disrespectful, however as this story unfolds you will see this is the tone set by James Montague. He uses this well known tactic to introduce prejudice into the mind of the reader, demeaning and demonising his victim, portraying himself as the victim. You will see that James Montague uses this tactic with increasing ferocity. He was set to disown Annie. |
| 6th of Dec, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 23/11/08. When Annie's husband died in the 1960s she still had a lot of hard work left to rear her young family. Sadly as the years passed, Annie fell into poor health. One of her sons Ben remained at home and cared for Annie. Ben married and with the help of his wife cared for Annie and their children. One day in 1987 Annie asked Ben to take her to meet James Montague in his office to make her will. Annie and Ben met James Montague in his office on that fateful day - 16 April 1987 - the day she made her will. Annie bequeathed her house and the residue of her estate to Ben, but little did she or Ben suspect that James Montague had other plans. Annie's will was set to vanish just as if it had never existed and her name was set to be removed from her title ensuring Ben did not inherit. |
| 10th of Dec, 2008 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
VLPS 6th December 2008. Your account of James Montague's treachery and deceit is probably what the elected member of Omagh Council was making reference to. I am more convinved that Solicitor James Montague was 'lying through his teeth' when being cross-examined by Joe Ferris in Dungannon County Court and Belfast High Court. VLPS 6th December 2008, keep EXPOSING THE CORRUPTION. |
| 21st of Dec, 2008 |
|
vlps |
See my last entry 6/12/08. Annie met James Montague in his office on 16 April 1987 to make her will. Ben was a witness and can testify to this. When it came to appointing an executor Ben remembers that James Montague very forcefully suggested a name to Annie to which she agreed. Little did she or Ben know that this was James Montague setting his plan in motion. By agreeing to James Montague's suggestion, Annie had made a fatal mistake which was to be the end of her and Ben. Consequently, when Ben saw James Montague's letter to the Law Society dated 3 August 2004 denying any knowledge of Annie's will, it was a devastating blow to him. You should remember that up to this point Ben thought everything was in order regarding Annie's and his affairs. After all, James Montague had always been Annie's solicitor and also had been Ben's solicitor throughout all of his adult life. Ben, at this stage, still had no knowledge of the fact that James Montague had drawn up a title deed on 1 July 2002 giving title of Annie's estate to the executor of her will, in effect, making sure Ben did not inherit. Ben has only recently uncovered this evidence which he now knows he was never meant to see. |
| 12th of Jul, 2009 |
|
Anon |
To JL 20th June 2009 and GT 24 June 2009. You're missing the point. This page is not about James Montague, it's about his VICTIMS. |
| 5th of Aug, 2009 |
|
vlps |
So Darren O'Neill talks about good men. Is he talking about Omagh's solicitors? If he is ,then he can perhaps tell us if he is self appointed or did the canny legal eagles just employ another mouthpiece? I have met a lot of 'good' people trying to put their lives back together again after having been crushed by solicitors, not least James Montague. |
| 23rd of Mar, 2009 |
|
vpls |
can the long standing client answer this very simple quesion. has it occured to you how the late Charles and Bridget Ferris (deceased) parents of 8 children and in a sworn statement by Christine Myler that the 8
are now dead and died without having children of their own, we suddenly see that the late Anne and Charles senior Ferris (deceased) children did in fact marry and have children one of them namely Joesph Ferris who is the defendant in this case??????????????????????????????? |
| 6th of Aug, 2009 |
|
avoid |
When I saw Darren O'Neill's comments it prompted me to read Mr Ferris' case. As I understand it, Mr Montague asked Mr Ferris' dad to sign a document rejecting a derisory offer for his property but the document was in actual fact an acceptance of the offer. If this is the case, and I can see no reason why it isn't, it is an outrage and I think Mr Ferris has every right to fight for justice for his now deceased dad.In the circumstances Mr O'Neill's comments are a bit churlish. |
| 3rd of Mar, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer Skeleton Argument by Dermot Fee QC & Barrister Gary McHugh and they state my late father Charles Ferris was entitled to be the Full Owner and yet James Montague provided evidence under oath that my late father Charles Ferris had |
Telephones: Bar Library
BELFAST: (028) 90241523 91 Chichester Street
FAX: (028) 90231850 BELFAST
BT1 3JQ
25th February 2009
FAO Appeals and Lists office
Dear Sirs,
RE: Christine Meyler as an executor of the Estate of Joseph Patrick Ferris (Deceased) v. Joseph Ferris
Please find enclosed herewith Skeleton Argument for the scheduled hearing on Monday 2nd March 2009, on behalf of the Plaintiff/ Respondent;
Yours sincerely
GARY McHUGH BL
Enc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
No 05/022648/A01
BETWEEN
CHRISTINE MEYLER
AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH PATRICK FERRIS (DECEASED)
Plaintiff/Respondent:
-and-
JOSEPH FERRIS
Defendant/Applicant:
____________________
CASE STATED
____________________
UNDER ARTICLE 62(1) OF THE COUNTY COURTS (NI) ORDER 1980 IN RESPECT OF AN APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT FROM A DECREE OF THE COUNTY COURT FOR THE DIVISION OF FERMANAGH AND TYRONE ON 30th MARCH 2007
SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
__________________
1.By way of a Case Stated dated 17th September 2008, Mr Justice Hart has posed three particular questions for this Court, the second question being reduced to three parts.
2.For the purposes of this argument, the Plaintiff/Respondent shall address each question in turn and answer the questions seriatim. In so addressing the questions posed by Mr Justice Hart, the Plaintiff/Respondent has considered the contents of a document entitled “Skeleton Argument of Evidence by Defendant/Appellant” dated 19th February 2009 and served on the Plaintiff/Respondent’s solicitor on 20th February 2009.
QUESTION 1:
3.0 Was I correct in finding that the agreement of June 1989 was binding upon Charles Ferris, and therefore that he was only entitled to a 2/9th share of the lands?”
3.1 Answer:
It is submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff/Respondent that a determination of this question lies with the consideration of the oral evidence which was elicited at both the original County Court Hearing before His Honour Judge McFarland and upon appeal before Mr Justice Hart. It is submitted that no questions of law or legal argument pertain to a determination of the answer to this question as the factual matrix giving rise to the agreement of June 1989 was determined upon considering the evidence of Christine Meyler solicitor, James Montague solicitor and Mr Joseph Ferris. It is submitted that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence as concluded by His Honour Judge McFarland and Mr Justice Hart, was that there had been explicit and express agreement between the relevant parties to “split” the interest at folio 2974 in accordance with the agreement of the 20th June 1989. (See paragraph 9 and 10 of the Case Stated.)
4.0 QUESTION 2:
(i)Were the errors in the oath sworn in support of the application for a Grant of Letters of Administration in the estate of Ann Ferris capable of being regarded as fraudulent?
4.1 Answer:
The Plaintiff/Respondent replies that the “errors” are not capable of being regarded as “fraudulent”.
It is submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff/Respondent that where the Defendant/Appellant contends that the oath sworn by Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris were fraudulent, then the onus is on the Defendant/Appellant to prove the fraudulent nature of the same. It is submitted that in the course of the oral evidence brought before the Learned County Court Judge and subsequently before Mr Justice Hart, no evidence was led by or on behalf of the Defendant/Appellant which could remotely be construed as demonstrating fraud.
4.2The Plaintiff/Respondent contends that where the Defendant/Appellant seeks to demonstrate “fraud”, he must prove, to a very high standard, that the conduct of Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris in the oaths sworn by them amounted to dishonesty. It is submitted for the purposes of this argument that dishonesty must incorporate the criminal test for the same as set down by the Court of Appeal in Ghosh [1982] QB 1053 and particularly page 1064 paras D – E.
4.3The Defendant/Respondent contends that if the Court does not consider an absolute application of the criminal standard of dishonesty would be applicable for the purposes of answering the case stated, assistance may be gleaned from Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary, Vol 1 at page 998 as to what may constitute fraud or a fraudulent act for the purposes of the index proceedings.
4.4In Stroud at page 998 it is submitted the Learned Author provides helpful examples and instances of what may constitute fraud and the Plaintiff/Respondent adopts the same and in particular the following:
“The Court has never ventured to lay down a general proposition, what should constitute fraud’, per Lord Eldon, LC. In Mortlock – v – Butler, 10 Ves. June 292 at 206. But it is ‘something dishonest and morally wrong’ per Wills J ex p Watson 21 QBD 301 and it is inconsistent with a claim of right made in good faith, however unfounded, The People (A-G) – v – Grey [1944] IR 326.”
4.5It is submitted that there is no evidence or material to sustain any interpretation that the oaths sworn in both the application of a Grant of Letters of Administration in the estate of Anne Ferris is capable of being regarded as fraudulent.
5.0 QUESTION 2:
(ii) If so, what, if any, effect would such a finding have upon the Order I made dismissing the appeal?
5.1 Answer:
The Plaintiff/Respondent contends that even where a Court were to determine that the oath sworn as discussed above was fraudulent, this can have no effect on the central, substantive feature of this case, namely that the agreement of
June 1989 was made properly, in good faith and is binding on the parties and their heirs and successors. The circumstances giving rise to the oath sworn by Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris, it is submitted, are fundamentally extraneous to any determination of the substantive action and the prospective entitlements of the Plaintiff/Respondent and the Defendant/Appellant having regard to the subject lands.
5.2 QUESTION 2:
(iii) Even if the errors were not fraudulent, were they capable of affecting the validity of the subsequent assent?
5.3 Answer:
It is submitted that this question is answered in the negative as no feature of the oath can be seen to impact detrimentally, or otherwise, on the intention of the parties who swore the oath. By analogy with a Deed of Conveyance, the Plaintiff/Respondent asserts that where the oath may contain a false description, it does not prejudice its intended effect as reflected in the latin maxim falsa demonstratio non nocet. The Plaintiff/Respondent respectfully refers the Court to Wylie’s Irish Conveyancing Law (3rd Edition) page 615, para 17.24.
5.4Mr Justice Hart adopted the analysis of Judge McFarland as set out on Paragraph 12 of Judge McFarland’s judgement which we say is a proper analysis of the position. In any event this is a matter capable of rectification, as suggested by Judge McFarland, by the chain of title being clarified. This clarification requires the registration of Charles Ferris Senior as Fee Simple owner of the Folio by adverse possession following his death. His wife Bridget then occupied the land until her death and the surviving children of Charles and Bridget came to an agreement on the division of the lands which has been found to be a valid and enforceable agreement (i.e. the June 1989 agreement).
6.0 Question 3
Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945?
6.1 Answer:
Yes, for the reasons set out at Answer 2 (iii) above.
25th February 2009
Dermot Fee QC
Gary McHugh BL
LIST OF AUTHORITIES
NAME OF PROCEEDINGS: Christine Meyler as an executor of the estate of Joseph Patrick Ferris (Deceased) v. Joseph Ferris
PARTY PROVIDING THE LIST: The Plaintiff/ Respondent
NAME OF COUNSEL: Dermot Fee QC
Gary McHugh BL
CASES
1.* Ghosh [1982] QB 1053 (Page 1064, Paragraphs D-E)
TEXT BOOKS
1.* Blackstone’s Criminal Practice 2009 (Page 384)
2.* Strouds Judical Dictionary (6th Edition) Vol. 1 (Page 998)
3. Wylies Irish Conveyancing Law, 3rd Edition.
STATUTES
1. Limitation (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
Date Event
March 1901
Registration of subject lands in the name of Anne Ferris
1908
Partial Transfer of some of the Lands
4th September 1925
Anne Ferris dies an intestate Widow
25th November 1945
Death of Charles Ferris Snr.
6th April 1962
Death of Bridget Ferris, wife of Charles Ferris Snr.
12th December 1985 Letters of Administration granted to Bridget Ferris and Joseph P. Ferris.
May 1986Bridget Ferris and Joseph P. Ferris make joint application to the Land Registry to be registered as joint registered owners of the Folio. Charles Ferris objects.
30th May 1989 Contested registration application considered before Omagh County Court and application of Bridget Ferris and Joseph P. Ferris dismissed.
June 1989 Agreement reached in relation to the division of the lands.
18th May 1994 Bridget Ferris and Joseph Ferris swear oath to extract a Grant of Letters of Administration (Intestate) in the estate of Anne Ferris.
31st May 1994 Assent created where Bridget Ferris and Joseph P. Ferris as Personal Representatives of Anne Ferris assent to the vesting in Bridget Ferris (as to7/9th share) and Charles Ferris (as to a 2/9th share) on the Land comprised in Folio 2974 County Tyrone.
15th December 1994 Bridget Ferris transferred by way of gift her 7/9th share to Joseph P. Ferris
16th September 1997 Charles Ferris transferred by way of gift his 2.9th share to Joseph Ferris.
15th May 2000 Joseph P. Ferris dies and Christine Meyler is appointed by his last will as his executor. Under this will he bequeaths his 7/9th share to his six children in equal shares.
7th June 2005 Equity Civil Bill (Partition Proceedings) issued.
7th October 2005 Notice of intention to Defend.
8th November 2005 Notice for Further and Better Particulars.
22nd November 2005Defendant’s “Defence” and Counterclaim.
9th January 2006 Statement of Evidence on Behalf of the Defendant
23rd February 2006 Replies to Particulars
19th May 2006 Statement of Evidence on behalf of the Plaintiff
19th February 2007 County Court Hearing
30th March 2007 Judgement of His Honour Judge McFarland
23rd April 2007 Notice of Appeal
September/ October 2007 County Court Appeal Hearing
8th April 2008 Judgement of Mr. Justice Hart
17th September 2008 Case Stated by Mr Justice Hart
2nd March 2009 Court of Appeal Hearing.
LIST OF KEY PERSONS
Name Role
Anne Ferris Lands first registered in her name
Charles Ferris Snr.
One of Anne Ferris’s 8 children
Bridget Ferris One of Charles Ferris Senior’s daughters
Joseph P. Ferris
One of Charles Ferris Senior’s sons
Charles Ferris One of Chares Ferris Senior’s sons and father of the Defendant
Christine Meyler Plaintiff and Solicitor
Joseph Ferris Defendant/ Appellant
James Montague Charles Ferris’s former Solicitor
(Word Count 1,786) Friday 27th February 2009 J.F.
|
| 26th of Mar, 2009 |
|
victim |
To longstanding client 10 of March 2009.I am sure no one is surprised that the court ruled against Mr Ferris. After all it is not the role of the court to get to the truth.Their role is to protect their own.A decision by a corrupt court is certainly not a reason for Mr Ferris to withdraw his comments. If what Mr Ferris says is the truth then why should he withdraw these comments. Your title is unfortunate. I was also a longstanding client of Mr Montague and during all of that time whilst he was happy enough to take a fortune off me in fees he destroyed me and my family. |
| 28th of Mar, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer |
Long Standing Cleint 10th March 2009 I would also like your response on behalf of solicitor James Montague to these questions.
Clarification requested on aspects of Court of appeal Monday 2nd March 2009. Joe Ferris Appellant & Litigant in Person. 05/022648/A01
My witnesses, inclusive of members of the Victims of the Legal Profession Society (VLPS), who were present during the above hearing, namely Daniel Gallagher, Elva Gallagher, Tommy McManus, Helen McCusker, Edmund Fox, Eugene Owens and Charles Ferris, have outlined a number of points as VLPS and ‘Legal Experts by Experience’ that require clarification as follows:-
1. How can there be a ‘proper hearing’ of the ‘Court of Appeal’ when the Plaintiff solicitor Christine Meyler, was not present for the hearing?
2. How can the ‘abrupt’ ending to the hearing be explained, with only limited reference to the 32 ‘bullet point’ questions that were presented in evidence by me as a ‘Litigant in Person’ to the Court of Appeal?
3. Why was there a need for any agreement in 1989, when the law of the land at the time in 1945 clearly stated that my late father Charles Ferris was the full owner of the property in Folio 2974 on the death of his father on 15th November 1945?
4. How can the ‘Court of Appeal’ condone that my late father Charles Ferris, as the ‘rightful owner of Folio 2974’ was ‘conned’ by solicitor James Montague and solicitor Christine Meyler, both ‘officers of the court’ from 1986 to the date of my late father’s death 9th October 2005?
5. Where did the need ever arise that my late father as the ‘full owner’ should sign away seven ninths of his property?
6. Why would you have to fix something, if you already are the full owner?
7. Where did the need ever arise for my father to sign away seven ninths of his property?
8. How can the ‘Court of Appeal’ condone the behaviour of Mr. Dermot Fee QC and Barrister, Mr. Gary McHugh, who both concealed the legal fact ‘that my late father Charles Ferris as the eldest son was entitled to the property in Folio 2974, on the death of his father on 15th November 1945’ from both Judge David McFarland at Dungannon County Court in February 2007 and Justice Anthony Hart at the High Court in Belfast October 2007?
9. My late father was devastated when he received a diagnosis of having cancer in 1997, he could see no possibility of getting any justice in his lifetime and could see no alternative but to transfer the two ninths to my name, in the hope that I one day would get to the bottom of the corruption. How can the ‘Court of Appeal’ further compound the ‘injustice’ by ignoring the ‘law of the land’ that from 1945, my late father was the rightful owner of all the property in Folio 2974?
10. How can the ‘Court of Appeal’ accept the false evidence, that the purported agreement, was the result of negotiations between Bridget Ferris, Joseph P. Ferris and my late father Charles Ferris, when solicitor James Montague sent a letter, retyped verbatim:- ‘James McNulty & Co. Solicitors, 25 – 27 George’s Street, Omagh, Co. Tyrone, BT78 1DS Your Ref: CM?GG?5615 Our Ref: JM/AMCE/CCS.53 16th June 1989 Re: Application of Bridget & Joseph P. Ferris Folio Number: 2974 County Tyrone. Dear Sirs, We acknowledge yours of 15th inst with Notice of Appeal attached. Obviously no agreement or consent can be forthcoming until the Appeal is disposed of. Yours faithfully, James Montague. Messrs. R. H. O’Connor & Co., Solicitors, Omagh.?
11. How can the ‘Court of Appeal’ accept the evidence of solicitor James Montague as being the ‘truth’ when solicitor James Montague concealed the details of this Appeal from my late father? I only became aware of this letter from communication from solicitor Christine Meyler dated 23.02.2007 Ref: CM/MM/2275 Dear Mr. Ferris, Re: Partition Proceedings – Joseph Ferris Deceased Please find enclosed as directed by the Judge copy of my attendance note dated 25th May 1994 together with copy letters from McNulty & Co dated 16th June 1989 and 22nd June 1989. Yours faithfully, Christine Meyler.
12. How can the Court of Appeal ignore the point of law that is confirmed at paragraph 6.0 Question 3 Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. Entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945? Answer Yes. 25th February 2009 Dermot Fee QC Gary McHugh BL?
CC. www.crookedlawyers.com www.rateyoursolicitor.com
|
| 24th of Mar, 2009 |
|
vlps |
Re entry of 10 3 09. What the judiciary and solicitors involved in this case can't seem to fathom is that the public have no confidence in what they see as an elite clique bathed in priviledge, patronage and croneyism looking after their own.The ordinary person has no chance of justice with these people.This public perception is a most unhealthy scenario and will hasten the day of change. |
| 24th of Mar, 2009 |
|
VLPS |
Longstanding client, 10th of March, 2009. So James Montague has finally crawled out from under his stone to give himself a three star rating. True to form, he still hides behind his cronies in the judiciary. |
| 24th of Mar, 2009 |
|
VLPS OMAGH |
To entry of 10 mar 2009.This judgement would certainly not be grounds for Mr Ferris to remove his comments, as having read his arguements, as an objective observer I have no doubt Mr Ferris is witness to the truth and it is the truth which will prevail. |
| 7th of Mar, 2009 |
|
VLPS |
It is refreshing that this exposé is the first time people like James Montague have been exposed and challenged and will hasten the day when they will face charges. |
| 7th of Apr, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer |
Here are the 32 questions that the Court of Appeal 'failed' to even acknowledge. Perhaps 'Long Standing Client' will answer on behalf of Solicitor James Montague.
Bullet Points for Court of Appeal Monday 2nd March 2009. Joe Ferris, Appellant & Litigant in Person. 05/022648/A01
Question One? Non-Agreement of 20th June 1989.
1.How can the incredible ‘super-sonic’ time factors be explained?
2.How can solicitor James Montague explain the sequence of ‘time-travel’ that enables James Montague to write a letter dated 22nd June 1989 to Christine Meyler, stating ‘Dear Madam, we return herewith documents which you sent to us which include the Agreement which has been executed by our client. These are sent on the undertaking that the Notice of Appeal already served will be withdrawn. Yours faithfully, James Montague’?
3.Can solicitor James Montague explain how the letter written by him on Wednesday 21st June 1989, then posted in Omagh Town Post-Office, can be sorted and delivered to my late father Charles Ferris in a mountainous rural area, in order for my late father to receive this letter, then make an appointment with solicitor James Montague and arrange/attend this appointment jointly with myself as purported on Thursday 22nd June 1989?
4.How can solicitor James Montague explain this impossible ‘time-frame’?
5.Can solicitor James Montague explain how the purported agreement could be implemented at Land Registry, for the registration of Folio 2974, whilst at the same time my late father’s ‘written objection’ was still ‘lodged’ at Land Registry against any dealings with Folio 2974?
6.Can Solicitor James Montague explain the reasons for leaving this ‘written objection’ lodged at Land Registry?
7.Did solicitor Christine Meyler request an ‘undertaking’ that the ‘written objection’ lodged at Land registry would be withdrawn?
8.How can solicitor James Montague and solicitor Christine Meyler explain the ‘supersonic’ speed of getting the ‘purported agreement’ signed in June 1989, with the ‘non-implementation’ of those ‘purported agreement’ by registration of the property, i.e. Folio 2974 at Land Registry?
Question Two?
9.Why did solicitor Christine Meyler embark on the ‘contortion’ of going back to 1925 to administer the estate of Anne Ferris in 1994, (Folio 2974) when her clients had already administered the estate of their father Charles Ferris deceased November 1945 and (Folio 2974) in 1985?
10.How can solicitor Christine Meyler administer the estate(in 1994) of Anne Ferris deceased 1925 as now containing the property, i.e. Folio 2974 when her clients administered the estate (in 1985) of Charles Ferris deceased 1945 as containing the property, i.e. Folio 2974?
11.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the false information in the oath document, namely that Anne Ferris had 33 Grandchildren and not as stated in the oath, ‘without grandchild, or other descendant, the issue of a predeceased child, her surviving’?
12.Can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the relationship of Joseph Ferris & Bridget Ferris to Anne Ferris deceased 1925?
13.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the fact that Joseph Ferris & Bridget Ferris who signed the ‘false oath’ were actually denying that they were grandchildren of Anne Ferris?
14.It is asserted that ‘to demonstrate “fraud”, he must prove, to a very high standard, that the conduct of Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris in the oaths sworn by them amounted to dishonesty’ . How can solicitor Christine Meyler be ‘complicit’ in that as the solicitor on record from 1988, said Christine Meyler, was the solicitor representing, Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris, in so doing was ‘an officer of the court’ with respect to the facts of the 1985 administration, in which Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris, were the ‘legal representatives’ as the lawful children of Charles Ferris Snr (son of Anne Ferris deceased 1925) and logically therefore ‘grandchildren’ of Anne Ferris deceased 1925. In the ‘fraudulent oath’ in 1994, Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris provide ‘false information’ namely, that Anne Ferris, deceased 1925, ‘without grandchild, or other descendant, the issue of a predeceased child, her surviving’?
15.Fraud, ‘a false representation by means of a statement or conduct made knowingly or recklessly in order to gain a material advantage’ (page 232 Oxford Dictionary of Law). How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the purpose of the ‘false information’ in the ‘fraudulent oath’ sworn by Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris in 1994?
16.How can solicitor Christine Meyler disregard her responsibilities as an officer of the court as specified? : ‘It is impossible for the office to verify the content of each application. Indeed the office is entirely dependant on the solicitors lodging the application to ensure the factuality of the content of the application. The oath document which contains all the relevant detail in relation to entitlement to the grant is a sworn document and as such will be taken by the office as a statement of fact (provided it is completed properly). (Stephen Watson 2nd January 2007)
17.How can solicitor Christine Meyler be complicit in facilitating Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris ‘to gain a material advantage’ as due to ‘incorrectly attested oath on the foot thereof an illegal assent was presented to Land Registry’ (in 1994) for the registration of Folio 2974, in subvention of the ‘written objection’ lodged by my late father Charles Ferris (in 1986) and which had been validated by Omagh County Court on 30th May 1989?
18.What actions has solicitor Christine Meyler taken, to ‘rectify’ the ‘false information’ provided for the administration, in the estate of Anne Ferris deceased 1925 as this ‘false instrument’ is now in the Public Records Office and persons undertaking ‘genealogy’ will be misled, due to the false information?
19.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the rationale for ‘abandoning’ the legal process in which all the property, i.e. Folio 2974 devolved to Charles Ferris (deceased 1945) one of the sons of Anne Ferris (deceased 1925) and ‘switching’ to a legal process in which the 8 children of Anne Ferris (all of whom had issue) would have an entitlement to the property, i.e. Folio 2974?
20.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the ‘abandoning’ of a ‘full entitlement’ to the property, i.e. Folio 2974 and ‘relegating’ to an ‘entitlement’ to part of a one eighth share?
21.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain as to why the ‘false oath’ and ‘invalid assent’ were required in 1994 and a distinctly different application to Land Registry from the Section 53 application in 1986/1989?
22.What was ‘deficient’ with respect to the purported agreement of June 1989 that it could not be implemented on its own merits?
23.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the ‘exclusion’ of my late father (in 1994) to implement the purported agreement of June 1989?
24.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the ‘Forceful Eviction’ of my wife Attracta, my daughter Roisin and myself from the property, i.e. Folio 2974 on 30th June 2000, (by my late uncle’s family on the instruction of their solicitor Christine), if this seven ninths and two ninths agreement and ownership of the property, i.e. Folio 2974 was legal and binding?
25.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the fact that she was also ‘advocating’ the ‘thuggery’ of my late uncle’s family in the ‘forceful eviction’ of my wife Attracta, my daughter Roisin and myself from the property, i.e. Folio 2974 on 30th June 2000, (by my late uncle’s family on the instruction of their solicitor Christine), if this seven ninths and two ninths agreement and ownership of the property, i.e. Folio 2974 was legal and binding?
26.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the fact that my late father only became aware of his ‘purported ownership’ after I wrote to Mr. Walker at Land Registry in December 1994?
27.How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain the fact that she sent ‘a threatening letter’ to Brian Ferris (son of Charles Ferris the purported two ninths legal owner of Folio 2974) on 7th June 1996 and also reported (as a criminal matter) that Brian Ferris was grazing his herd of cattle on this land to the RUC, if this seven ninths and two ninths agreement and ownership of the property, i.e. Folio 2974 was legal and binding?
Question 3
28.Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945?
29.Yes Charles Ferris would have entitlement to the lands to which his father Charles Ferris (Snr.) was entitled at the date of death, subject to any entitlement of his mother. No steps were taken to register, formalise or any way deal with such entitlement and members of the family continued to occupy and use the said lands. There was some dispute as to what happened to the land after Charles Ferris Snr’s death. See paragraph (4) of Judge McFarland’s judgement and paragraph (7) of High Court judgement. Those who continued in occupation and possession of the lands had a potential claim by way of adverse possession. This is what prompted the Section 53 application in 1986 and the County Court hearing in 1989. These competing claims were then dealt with by the agreement of June 1989, which the court has found binding upon Charles Ferris.
30.How can the sworn evidence of solicitor Christine Meyler and solicitor James Montague be accepted as ‘truth’ when both solicitors have previously provided evidence under oath, ‘that my late father had no legal entitlement by way of inheritance and only established an entitlement under the intestacies of his sister Mary (deceased 1975) and his sister Ellen (deceased 1982) and this was the only basis of his entitlement to a two ninths share’ in the property, namely Folio 2974?
31.How can the sworn evidence of solicitor Christine Meyler and solicitor James Montague be accepted or relied upon by the Court of Appeal, when both solicitors ‘misled and misrepresented the legal facts’ given as stated by Dermot Fee QC and Gary McHugh BL, that my late father was entitled to the ‘Fee Simple’ estate as the eldest son of ‘Charles Ferris Senior as Fee Simple owner of the Folio by adverse possession following his death’ deceased 15th November 1945?
32.How can the Court of Appeal condone, the blatant abuse of process and misuse of the valuable time and energy of the court system, (from 1986 to 2009) by solicitor Christine Meyler and solicitor James Montague, in the harassment of my late father and myself (and my six brothers and five sisters) and in so doing ‘denied’ my late father and his lawful children our rightful inheritance and ‘peaceful enjoyment of our private property’ as defined in the European Court of Human Rights?
CC. www.crookedlawyers.com www.rateyoursolicitor.com
|
| 28th of Mar, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to Long Standing Client 10th March 2009 |
Long Standing Client I am in the process of appealing this to the House of Lords in the first instance.
Not that the House of Lords are anything to write home about, given that it has just taken Derek Hodgson in England 27 years to prove that he was innocent and should never have been convicted of murder and spent 27 years in jail as an innocent man.
In October 1986, I attended with my late father Charles Ferris to see solicitor James Montague.
My late father explained that he had acted as the ‘owner’ of the land and our ancestral home from 1945 as the eldest son.
Solicitor James Montague, stated that this could not be the case as ‘Direct Rule from 1972 by England’ now had ‘put-an-end’ to the rights of the ‘eldest-son’ due to the 1925 English Law of Property.
In my late father's case of ownership of our ancestral home this is now answered by two barristers for solicitor Christine Meyler.
Twenty-three years (approx) later. The two barristers for solicitor Christine Meyler unbelievably contradict solicitor James Montague, when they answered the following question:-
Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945?
Answer: Yes. Dermot Fee QC, Gary McHugh BL 25th February 2009
Long standing client, ‘Beware the Ides of March’. It is a pity you weren’t’ able to get solicitor James Montague to attend the Court of Appeal in Belfast.
I will post all my questions that I presented, of course the Court of Appeal did not or could not answer, not even one of my questions.
Also both solicitors James Montague and Christine Meyler were also absent.
|
| 10th of Mar, 2009 |
|
Longstanding Client |
PERHAPS MR. FERRIS WOULD READ THE JUDGMENT BELOW AND THEN BE SO COURTEOUS TO REMOVE HIS COMMENTS.
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
04/03/09
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
_________
ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
_________
BETWEEN:
CHRISTINE MEYLER AS EXECUTOR OF THE
ESTATE OF JOSEPH PATRICK FERRIS (deceased)
Plaintiff/Respondent.
And
JOSEPH FERRIS
Defendant/Appellant.
_________
Before Kerr LCJ, Higgins LJ and Coghlin LJ
_________
KERR LCJ
Introduction
[1] This is an appeal by way of case stated from a judgment given by Hart J in which he dismissed an appeal by Joseph Ferris from a decision of His Honour Judge McFarland. In a written judgment delivered on 30 March 2007, the County Court judge had made a declaration that the plaintiff as personal representative of Joseph Patrick Ferris was entitled to seven ninths and that the defendant was entitled to two ninths of any interest that the late Charles Ferris (senior) had in the land comprised in Folio 2974 County Tyrone.
The history of the proceedings
[2] In May 1986 Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris made an application to the Land Registry to be registered as joint owners of their family’s ancestral home. The application later proceeded in Bridget’s name alone. Charles Ferris, brother of Bridget and Joseph P and the father of the defendant/appellant, objected to the application and the matter was referred to the County Court. On 30 May 1989 His Honour Judge Babington QC heard the application at Omagh County Court. Bridget Ferris applied to the court under section 53 of the Land Registration (Northern Ireland) Act 1970, to be registered as full owner of the subject lands comprised in folio 2974 by way of adverse possession. Charles Ferris was named as objector. The application was dismissed. Bridget Ferris appealed against the Order but the appeal was withdrawn on 27 June 1990.
[3] On 7 June 2005, the plaintiff, Christine Meyler, solicitor, as personal representative of the estate of Joseph P Ferris (deceased), issued partition proceedings against the defendant by way of Equity Civil Bill. The plaintiff sought an order for sale of the property. The defendant resisted the claim and asserted that, as successor in title to his late father, Charles Ferris, he was entitled to a half share in the subject land. At Dungannon County Court the judge made the declaration that I have referred to in the opening paragraph of this judgment. The defendant’s counterclaim was dismissed.
[4] The defendant appealed to the High Court from the decision of Judge McFarland. The appeal was heard by Hart J who, in a written judgment delivered on 8 April 2008, dismissed it and affirmed the orders made by Judge McFarland. The defendant applied to the High Court to state a case for the opinion of the Court of Appeal. Hart J acceded to that application and on 17 September 2008 he stated a case posing a number of questions for the opinion of this court. The appeal was heard on 2 March 2009. Throughout the proceedings, Mr Ferris has represented himself. The plaintiff has been represented by Mr Dermot Fee QC and Mr McHugh, of counsel.
Background facts
[5] The first registered owner of the subject lands was Anne Ferris. She was registered as owner on 16 March 1901. Anne Ferris died intestate, a widow, in 1925. She was survived by eight children, one of whom was Charles Ferris senior, the grandfather of the appellant. Charles Ferris senior occupied the land from his mother’s death in 1925 until he died intestate on 21 November 1945. It was asserted (or accepted) by all parties at the County Court hearing before Judge McFarland that Charles Ferris senior had acquired title to the lands either under the rules of adverse possession or proprietary estoppel. Judge McFarland observed that all the siblings of Charles senior had died with issue and that they may therefore have had an independent claim to an interest in the land. For that reason he did not make a ruling in relation to the full ownership of the land. At the appeal hearing, Hart J noted that “so far as the parties to the present proceedings are concerned, it is common case that Charles Ferris senior remained in sole occupation of the lands after his mother’s death until his death in 1945”.
[6] Charles Ferris senior was survived by his wife Bridget and their five children, Charles (father of the appellant), Joseph P, Mary, Ellen and Bridget. Charles Ferris senior’s widow lived on the lands until she died intestate on 6 April 1962. Their daughters, Mary Ferris and Ellen Ferris, died intestate in 1975 and 1982 respectively. Neither had any children. Bridget (junior) and Joseph P Ferris claimed that, after their mother’s death in 1962, they occupied the lands and on 12 December 1985, letters of administration were granted to them in respect of their father’s estate.
[7] In May 1986 Bridget and Joseph P made a joint application to the Land Registry to be registered as owners of the lands. Later Joseph P allowed the application to proceed in Bridget’s sole name. Their surviving sibling, Charles Ferris, (the appellant’s father) objected to the application and, as I have set out at paragraph [2] above, the matter was referred to Omagh County Court where the case, based on Bridget’s assertion that the lands had passed to her by adverse possession, was dismissed. Legal representatives present during the hearing in 1989 gave evidence at the later hearing in 2007 that the case had been dismissed because Judge Babington was not satisfied that Bridget had been in sole possession of the lands for the necessary 12 years. The lands had also been occupied during this time by her sisters Ellen and Mary.
[8] After the case was dismissed, negotiations took place between Bridget’s solicitor, Christine Meyler and Charles Ferris’ solicitor, James Montague. On foot of the discussions a proposed agreement was drawn up by Ms Meyler in the following terms:
“It is hereby agreed between the parties that the lands in Folio No 2974, County Tyrone, be registered in the names of both Bridget Ferris and Charles Ferris in the following shares as tenants in common:
(a) Bridget Ferris as the owner of 7/9 of the lands;
(b) Charles Ferris as the owner of 2/9 of the lands;
(c) Joseph Ferris withdraws any claim to be registered as owner of any portion of the said lands.”
[9] The agreement was dated 20 June 1989. Ms Meyler gave evidence both before Judge McFarland and Hart J that it had been signed by Bridget Ferris and Joseph P in her presence. Mr Montague gave evidence that his client, Charles Ferris, had signed it in his presence on 22 June 1989. The two solicitors agreed that the 7/9 and 2/9 split was based on the 1/3 ownership of Bridget and the equal inheritance from their deceased sisters Ellen and Mary. Bridget, Joseph P and Charles were entitled to 1/3 each from the estates of Ellen and Mary. This enhanced Bridget’s share to 5/9. Joseph P gave his share to Bridget which increased her share to 7/9. The terms were negotiated by the solicitors as a settlement of the issues raised by the County Court case and the appeal.
[10] Mr Montague testified that on 21 June 1989 he had written to Charles Ferris and asked him to attend the office to execute a Form of Consent in relation to the registration of the lands which were the subject of the dispute. The following day, Mr Montague sent a letter to Ms Meyler enclosing the agreement which had been signed by Charles Ferris. The letter stated that the agreement was forwarded on the undertaking that Bridget’s Notice of Appeal would be withdrawn.
[11] On 26th May 1994 letters of administration in the estate of Anne Ferris were granted to Bridget and Joseph P Ferris who had applied to be appointed as personal representatives. By an Assent dated 31 May 1994 Bridget Ferris and Joseph P Ferris, as personal representatives of Anne Ferris, assented to the vesting in Bridget Ferris of a 7/9 share and Charles Ferris of a 2/9 share of the land in Folio 2974. On 15 December 1994 Bridget Ferris transferred by way of gift, her 7/9 share to Joseph P. Ferris. On 16 September 1997 Charles Ferris transferred his 2/9 interest in the land to his son Joseph Ferris, the appellant. On 15 May 2000 Joseph P died and by his will, appointed Christine Meyler as his executor. He bequeathed his 7/9 share in the lands to his children in equal shares.
The hearing before Judge McFarland
[12] The first – and, as he found, principal – issue before Judge McFarland related to the agreement of 20 June 1989. The dispute about the agreement that emerged in the County Court hearing had two aspects. The first of these concerned the circumstances in which it was made. The second aspect related to the effect of the agreement. The judge introduced his consideration of the first aspect in paragraph 8 of his judgment: -
“[8] It is clear that these terms [of the agreement] were negotiated by the solicitors as a settlement of the issues raised by the County Court case [before Judge Babington], and the subsequent appeal. Correspondence from Mr. Montague clearly refers to the agreement in that context. The document was prepared by Ms. Meyler and sent to Mr. Montague. On the 21st June 1989, Mr. Montague wrote to Charles Ferris in the following terms:
‘Could you possible (sic) call with us on Thursday to execute a Form of Consent in relation to the registration of the lands the subject of the dispute? It is important that you try to see us on Thursday as the Judge will be sitting on Friday but will then be absent for a number of months until the start of the new session in September’
Although the document bears the date the 20 June 1989, it is clear that this must have been the date when it was typed rather than executed, as the 20th was a Tuesday. No issue is taken about the date, but there is a substantial dispute as to what happened in Mr. Montague’s office on the Thursday.”
[13] Before Judge McFarland, as indeed before Hart J and this court, the appellant contested vigorously the suggestion that his father had signed the agreement on 22 June 1989. This is how Judge McFarland described the evidence given on this subject: -
“[9] As far as Ms. Meyler is concerned, she negotiated the terms, engrossed the document, and sent it on for signature. She received it back without comment, and [had] no reason to believe that there was anything untoward about the settlement. Mr. Montague was handicapped by the fact that he had sent his file to the Charles Ferris’s new solicitors, Patrick Fahy & Co., and had to rely on his memory and sight of documents produced at the hearing. (Not a lot turned in this case on the absence of the file, although it has to be acknowledged that Mr. Montague’s file passed from his possession into the possession and control of Charles Ferris and his then new solicitors. No satisfactory explanation was given to the court about its whereabouts, although Mr. Joseph Ferris did tell the court that Patrick Fahy & Co had told him that they did not have the file.)
[10] Mr. Joseph Ferris said that he attended the offices of Mr. Montague with his father. He said that his father had not been aware of any negotiations, and as soon as he was advised of the proposed settlement he immediately rejected it. Mr. Montague then asked him to sign the document as an acknowledgment that he had been told of the offer and had rejected it. He remembered that his father did sign some document and he believes he may have, or Mr. Montague may have, put a line through the document to signify rejection. The original document bears no such line or similar mark. Mr. Montague remembered the meeting. He remembered Charles Ferris signing the document, and at the same time expressing satisfaction at the resolution of the matter. He described Charles Ferris’s satisfaction as a clear and abiding memory that he had of that meeting. He rejected the suggestion that Charles Ferris had refused the offer, and that he had procured the signature to the document as some form of acknowledgement of being advised of the offer and its rejection. He also confirmed under cross-examination that he would have explained the nature and implications of the document to Charles Ferris before he signed it. Two of Charles Ferris’ children gave evidence about their understanding as what had transpired at that time. Brian Ferris said that his memory was that his father had been unhappy about the dispute at the time. He had heard his father say that “there would be another day”. Another son, Charles Ferris (Junior) , said that his father told him that he had “never signed”, although he did remember him saying, at or about the time of the court hearing that he had made a comment along the lines – “I thought I got my share” , this being made in the context of Bridget and Joseph P’s share.”
[14] Judge McFarland painstakingly analysed the relevant evidence in relation to the signing of the agreement and the subsequent events which touched on the circumstances in which it was signed and the motivation of those who wished to either assert or challenge its existence or validity. In a series of propositions set out in paragraph [15] of his judgment, he has explained why he came to the unequivocal conclusion that Charles Ferris signed the agreement having full knowledge of its contents and its implications.
[15] On the effect of the agreement, Judge McFarland was equally emphatic. He held that it was binding on Charles Ferris and his successors and assigns. He therefore made a declaration that the plaintiff as personal representative of Joseph Patrick Ferris was entitled to seven ninths and the defendant to two ninths of any interest the late Charles Ferris (senior) had in the land comprised in Folio 2974 County Tyrone.
[16] A secondary issue on the hearing before Judge McFarland related to the oath for administrator which had been sworn by Bridget Ferris and Joseph P. Ferris on 18 May 1994 in order to extract Letters of Administration in the estate of Anne Ferris. There was a factual error in the oath. It recorded that the children of Anne Ferris, save for Charles, died without issue. Anne Ferris in fact was survived by several grandchildren at the time Bridget and Joseph P swore the oath. The appellant argued that the oath was ‘fraudulent and pejorative’. The judge decided that this claim had no direct relevance to the proceedings before him but, in any event, he concluded that the misstatement in the oath was “certainly not fraudulent”.
The hearing before Hart J
[17] Much of the ground that had already been extensively traversed before Judge McFarland was lengthily revisited in evidence before Hart J. He came to the same conclusions on all issues as had the judge at first instance and he dismissed the appeal. Again, a meticulous examination of the material evidence was undertaken and equally firm conclusions to those arrived at by Judge McFarland were reached. At the request of the appellant, however, Hart J agreed to state a case for the opinion of this court on the following questions: -
1. Was I correct in finding that the agreement of June 1989 was binding upon Charles Ferris and therefore that he was only entitled to a 2/9 share in the lands?
2. (i) Were the errors in the oath sworn in support of the application for a Grant of Letters of Administration in the estate of Anne Ferris capable of being regarded as fraudulent?
(ii) If so, what if any effect would such a finding have upon the order I made dismissing the appeal?
(iii) Even if the errors were not fraudulent, were they capable of affecting the validity of the subsequent assent?
3. Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Senior, entitled by operation of law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 1 November 1945?
Discussion
[18] The central theme of these proceedings has been the validity and effect of the agreement of 20 June 1989. Two experienced judges have comprehensively considered all relevant evidence relating to the circumstances in which that agreement came into existence. They have both concluded that the evidence in support of an agreement having been made in the terms that the solicitors described in their evidence was overwhelming. We have reached the same unmistakable conclusion. It is wholly unnecessary to rehearse the powerful analysis undertaken by each judge to support the conclusion that both reached. The scrutiny of the evidence in paragraph [15] of Judge McFarland’s judgment and paragraph [17] of Hart J’s judgment is a model of thoroughness. No conclusion other than that which they reached was possible.
[19] The effect of the agreement is equally unmistakable. It was as found by both judges and as is reflected in the declaration that Judge McFarland made. The suggestion that there had been fraud in the preparation of the oath of administrator was entirely incidental to the legal position of the parties based on the effect of the agreement but, in the event, this was a preposterous suggestion with no obvious incentive for anyone who might be accused of having perpetrated the avowed fraud.
[20] It is highly doubtful whether the first question posed in the case stated gives rise to an issue of law since its answer depends on an analysis of the evidence rather than the resolution of any legal principle. There can be but one answer, however, and that is that Hart J was unquestionably correct in reaching the conclusion that he did. We therefore answer the first question ‘Yes’. We doubt whether the second question has any legal significance whatever in this case but, again, we are so utterly convinced that the circumstances in which the erroneous declaration was made are so far removed from any question of fraud, that we will content ourselves by answering the question 2 (i) ‘No’, question 2 (ii) ‘Does not arise’ and question 2 (iii) ‘No’. We consider that the third question is not relevant to the respective legal positions of the parties as they require to be considered in the context of this appeal and we decline to answer that question.
Conclusions
[21] None of the arguments advanced by the appellant has succeeded. With regret, we feel bound to say that all were doomed to inevitable failure. This appeal should not have been brought and it is now dismissed.
|
| 11th of Apr, 2009 |
|
MJR |
NJQ Hodges LL.B (Surrey)plays both sides with one hand out for legal aid and the other one in the rich opponents pocket.
|
| 11th of Apr, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to Long-Standing Client of solicitor James Montague & Not a VLPS 27th March 2009 |
Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945? Answer: Yes. Dermot Fee QC, Gary McHugh BL 25th February 2009
Long standing client & Not a VLPS would either of you please ask solicitor James Montague to explain how Solicitor James Montague could provide evidence under 'OATH' in which solicitor James Montague's evidence was:- 'THAT MY LATE FATHER CHARLES FERRIS DECEASED 9TH OCTOBER 2005 HAD NO LEGAL ENTITLEMENT TO THE LAND'. Solicitor James Montague provided this 'FALSE EVIDENCE' in the County Court for Fermanagh and Tyrone sitting at Dungannon Courthouse and also in The High Court Royal Courts of Justice Belfast.
How can 'Long-standing client and Not VLPS explain the 'CONTRADICTION' of 'LEGAL FACTS' between solicitor James Montague's evidence and the 'LEGAL FACTS' now provided after 23 years by Dermot Fee QC, and Gary McHugh BL 25th February 2009.
NB.Dermot Fee QC, Gary McHugh BL are NOT representing me, they are representing solicitor Christine Meyler, who SUMMONSED my late father Charles Ferris to OMAGH COUNTY COURT IN 1988 and 1989.
Looking forward to you/your response on behalf of solicitor James Montague. |
| 29th of Mar, 2009 |
|
To Longstanding client(James Montague) 10th Mar, 2009. |
James Montague,Now that you have given yourself top rating you must now either confront your victims or admit to your skullduggery. The truth will set you free. Since you have up until now hid your face from your victims you should now arrange to meet your victims.Pick a venue of your choice, post it on this page, and I am sure your victims would be very keen to meet you there. After all, they are at least entitled to an explanation but somehow I think you are not man enough. |
| 27th of Mar, 2009 |
|
Not a VLPS |
Well Joe?? |
| 28th of Mar, 2009 |
|
victim |
Day and daily James Montague's victims endure a life sentence without any hope of reprieve.The legal system protects him and further punishes his victims. This man must be investigated at the highest level.How can he go about his business knowing he has destroyed so many people. |
| 30th of Mar, 2009 |
|
Omagh Vlps |
longstanding client,10 3 09. Do you really think people are stupid. Either you are james montague or christine meyler or someone closely involved with you in this case. Who else would take the time to record what is obviously an intimate knowledge of the case. I was also a longstanding client of james montague and he caused me untold harm. He also did great harm to a lot of people very close to me.You are obviously giving the fingers to victims whose vivid accounts are recorded on this page.Typical of the contempt in which james montague holds his victims who have made him rich. |
| 16th of Apr, 2009 |
|
To MJR 11th of April 2009 |
Your entry is not clear to me. How does it relate to Mr Montague? |
| 9th of Apr, 2009 |
|
I am a vlps |
Well james - confront your victims?? |
| 15th of May, 2009 |
|
vlps |
To pat the baker, 13th may 2009. I was a client of James Montague. He left me literally penniless with his deceipt. I don't know his colleagues, but when I see them around they shun me, so I guess they are complicit. They would do well to remember the story of the rotten apple, so I guess they are the real losers. |
| 13th of May, 2009 |
|
pat the baker |
What are the other solictors that work in mc nulty like???
|
| 21st of May, 2009 |
|
Loughmuck VLPS |
Solicitor James Montague nearly cost me my farm of land. Very dodgy, crafty gangster. Cost me a lot of money, long runs the fox. I will hope to see James Montague getting some manners. I may even confront him at Fintona Golf Club. |
| 10th of Jun, 2009 |
|
To MPQ 9 6 09 |
Lucky you, stick 'round long enough with montague and you might change your mind. |
| 5th of Jun, 2009 |
|
VLPS |
How long are you going to hide James? Confront your victims, or are you not man enough? |
| 28th of May, 2009 |
|
to loughmuck vlps 21 may 2009 |
you were lucky. montague cost me and my family everything. he even took our names. |
| 5th of Jun, 2009 |
|
Donegal VLPS |
I was in Omagh recently and met up with a man from Dromore region of County Tyrone. This man told me that James Montague was in early training for the priesthood. Given the Scandal of the Abuse of Children by Catholic Christian brothers and the cover-up by the Catholic Priests. Perhaps Society was lucky that James Montague had to step into the Business of James McNulty & Co Solicitors, due to a family bereavement (according to this man from Dromore) I seen James Montague in Omagh Court when a VLPS member had taken a case against James Montague for a 'fraud deed' and I observed solicitor James Montague 'smirking and winking at the barristers behind. |
| 9th of Jun, 2009 |
|
MPQ |
This was an excellent solicitors firm and I had no problem dealing with them when buying a new house. They were helpful at every stage of the process. |
| 16th of Aug, 2009 |
|
To JL and GT |
I have also known Mr Montague for the best part of forty years.I eventually learned to my horror that those were years of deceipt and betrayal. I learned that Mr Montagues comfort zone was one of secrecy and witholding key facts about my business from me,his client. |
| 17th of Jun, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer 'Legal Health Warning' |
Eternal Vigilance:- at all times required to avoid being 'ripped off'.
Beware the ‘apparent friendship and concern’ by the solicitor for you as their client, this ‘apparent friendship and concern’ could become betrayal.
When I accompanied my late father Charles Ferris (1916 to 2005) to a consultation with Solicitor James Montague (Omagh) in October 1986 we would both have trusted solicitor James Montague 100% with our lives.
We believed every word that solicitor James Montague told us, especially that my late father had ‘no legal rights in law’ (1925 England Land Act) to his ancestral home and land.
In February 2009 (twenty three years later approx) two barristers, for the opposing solicitor Christine Meyler (Omagh) both state 100% differently as detailed below.
6.0 Question 3
Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945?
6.1 Answer:
Yes, for the reasons set out at Answer 2 (iii) above.
25th February 2009
Dermot Fee QC
Gary McHugh BL
If our ‘trusted’ solicitor James Montague can become 100% deceptive so may your apparent pleasant and ‘trusted’ solicitor!
Watch & Pray, but above all Watch:- Pro-Bono-Publico (For the Good of the Public) J.F. June 2009 |
| 20th of Jun, 2009 |
|
ANON |
To MPQ the dealing with house transactions is avery simple one for solicitors ,but they make there monies out of the old and deceased persons and estates ,the people left behind are the near relatives who have to deal with these low life scum of society. |
| 20th of Jun, 2009 |
|
JL, Omagh |
I was surprised to read the negative comment on this page as I have known Mr Montague for some 38 years now.I see much of the previous comment designed to smear the good name of a man who has built up a reputation of excellence in the legal profession locally. Mr Montague has always been straight in his dealings with our family. He is well respected in the locality and I have no doubt well appreciated by the majority of his clients. Keep up the good work James and ignore the sore losers. |
| 24th of Jun, 2009 |
|
GT Omagh |
I totally agree with comments by JL, Omagh [20-June 2009].I have known Mr Montague 30 years + and just cannot understand the above to be assocciated with the man I know personally and professionally. |
| 9th of Oct, 2009 |
|
VLPS |
Word is James Montague is thinking about giving it all up because its all getting a bit too much for him.Please don't Mr Montague,at least not yey anyway, as I want to be there when they 'cuff' you and drag you screaming from your office. |
| 28th of Jun, 2009 |
|
Ben |
To JL, Omagh 20th June 2009. If you would be bothered to read my late mother's story on this page, what you would find is a factual account of how James Montague treated her, of Mr Montague's appalling abuse of trust which can be authenticated by a vast volume of legal documents uncovered by me and in my possession. Nothing added, nothing taken away. Hardly the comments of a sore loser.For the record, James Mc Nulty and Company was my late parents solicitor since the 1930s. They had an excellent relationship with James Mc Nulty and carried on that relationship with James Montague. James Montague betrayed that trust, he has sullied the name of James McNulty. To remind you,my late mother Annie was 80 years old when she made her will with James Montague. She died 3 years later and since then her will and estate has vanished without trace or explanation. James Montague waited until she died before he made his move, under cover of secrecy. If some person is prepared to defend my late mother's rights and to tell her story, does that make that person or my late mother ,'sore losers?' |
| 1st of Sep, 2009 |
|
To Shutup 27th Aug 2009 |
Is that it? Is that your arguement? Do you really have to throw your toys out of the pram just because your cage is rattled? Your vitriolic attack on Mr Ferris is certainly a case of shooting the messenger.Deal with the facts!!!!!!!! |
| 5th of Aug, 2009 |
|
To Darren O' Neill |
When you say good men,are you talking about Omagh's solicitors? Do you really believe this? I doubt if anyone does. |
| 5th of Aug, 2009 |
|
vlps |
Frank Smith, 25th Jul 2009. Would you wise up? What you say is not true. Having read this page do you really expect anyone to take you seriously. |
| 7th of Aug, 2009 |
|
vlps |
If Darren O'Neill(30 July 2009)
has indeed read the above feedback then he can be in no doubt that James Montague has crushed many victims in his path. Instead of addressing that he instead takes a swipe at Joe Ferris. He certainly sneers at, and holds victims in contempt,a trait of Mr Montagues. |
| 30th of Jun, 2009 |
|
Ben |
To JL, Omagh, 20th June 2009. My late mother Annie met James Montague in his office and made her will. She bequeathed her house and the residue of her estate to me. Several years later, after her death, I discovered that James Montague had arranged for one of his clients to take out, 'first title', yes, that's right 'first title' to her entire estate, including the house. I guess that makes me and my late mother sore losers. What does it make James Montague? |
| 30th of Jun, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to JL Omagh |
Apart from the 'mis-representation' of solicitor James Montague, which I have mentioned above.
I was completely gobsmacked to meet another person in Omagh, who showed me a will written using a fountain pen.
I immediatly recognised the beautiful handwriting as possibly that of solicitor James Montague.
Wait for it your solicitor man of 'excellence' denied and with the written support of Moira Neeson from the Law Society 'both in harmony'
State that this will written in such excellent handwriting and signed by your man of 'excellence' solicitor James Montague
'Did not Exist'. If you would like to inspect this document and the correspondence give me a ring on 07715140648 |
| 2nd of Aug, 2009 |
|
VLPS |
25th and 30th July 2009. Joe Ferris, vlps and indeed all of us have a moral duty to fight and expose injustice where we see it. As someone once said, "To put up with injustice is not a virtue but rather the sin of passive compliance with evil". |
| 25th of Jul, 2009 |
|
Frank Smyth |
A first class solicitor and firm in every respect. Keep up the good work. |
| 16th of Aug, 2009 |
|
AVOID |
To JL 20th June 2009. Far from building up a reputation of excellence in the legal profession locally,James Montague has earned himself the reputation he richly deserves as epitomiesd in this page.Look at the facts JL. |
| 16th of Aug, 2009 |
|
victim ofJames Montague |
Little did James Montague ever think he would be exposed to the world.This is a vital step in the cleaning up and clearing out of a rotten legal profession. |
| 30th of Jul, 2009 |
|
Darren O'Neill |
Reading the above feedback I have to say Joe, you really need to get a life. I hope you give your nursing students and lectures as much time as you do to slandering the name of good men. Time to move on before this consumes you (or maybe it already has?) |
| 5th of Aug, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris to Frank Smyth & Darren O'Neill |
Can you give any examples of when 'telling the truth' is slandering the name of good men? If both of you have the time, read the Ryan Report and there also you can find that 'the evil chritain brothers' were 'exhonerated' by other so called 'good men' namely so called Catholic Priests, Bishops and Cardinals. I have all the 'facts' as evidence. Perhaps that is why Judge David McFarland (a jumped up solicitor) insulted me by stating that I was:- 'a prolific writer and reader of documents, he is meticulous in the extreme' Dearest Darren, if you have any proof that I have slandered solicitor James Montague, then send your complaint to my regulating body. The Nursing & Midwifery Council at www.nmc.uk.org You may be aware of Dr. Harold Shipman and following from that DHSS investigations concerning 'Confidence in Care' namely that 'Professions Can No Longer Be Trusted to Self-Regulate' Darren, is the DHSS guilty of slandering the name of good men too? |
| 16th of Aug, 2009 |
|
VLPS OMAGH |
When one looks at comments from Mr Montagues 'star' chamber,'not a vlps' 'losers' 'get a life' etc etc, it is a frightening spectre.Apart from being totally bereft of any arguements, these 'friends' of MR Montague display a breathtaking selfighteous
arrogance. So predictable from a morally bankrupt legal profession, a profession that has now been exposed as a real threat to the very fabric of our society. |
| 21st of Aug, 2009 |
|
Ben |
James Montague, you know who I am! Well you remember the day my late mother and I were in your office,the 16th April 1987, the day she made her will with you.As you know, she died in 1990,an opportunity not lost on you.You are a shameless coward who dosn't have the courage to meet me and tell me to my face what you did with my mothers will,estate and monies she bequeathed in her will, all unaccounted for. |
| 31st of Aug, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer this may help solicitor James Montague to keep up to speed with his accomplice solicitor Christine Meuler |
After spending from 10.30am to almost 2.30pm on Friday 28th August 2009 Along with 12 VLPS members from different locations, including Dublin, Donegal, Armagh, Fermanagh, Derry & Tyrone. (13 VLPS members and thanks for being in attendance)
Listening and observing the 'pantomime' with Gortrush Park Kevin McGuigan representing his dearly beloved, (who lives in a beautiful mansion at Retreat Close) a leafy suburb of Omagh.
Whilst solicitor Christine Meyler was giving evidence in the witness box, it was amazing how she told Judge Miller, many 'terminological in exactitudes'.
Solicitor Christine Meyler under oath stated that my late Aunt Bridget Ferris spent some time living in Glenhordial, because Aunt Bridget had the FLU.
As Sir Winston Churchill stated when negotiating with then Taoiseach Eamon DeValera. He, Eamon DeValera was prone to 'Terminological In exactitudes'.
How can solicitor Christine Meyler explain how this so called 'FLU' lasted for 6 months or more? And in 'previous attendance' notes solicitor Christine Meyler states that 'Bridget Ferris, had been living at Glenhordial from December 1993 and Oh Dear Solicitor Christine Meyler's attendance note was in late May 1994.
However, solicitor Christine Meyler and solicitor Barry Fox were both executors of my Aunt's will. This is quite amazing, when compared with advice from DARD Succession Planning for Farmers. 'It is important that you choose a solicitor who understands the specific issues involved in the transfer of a farm business and executors who have a good knowledge of your particular business.'
Given that barrister Gary McHugh, had previously stated on 11th March 2008, that my late Aunt Bridget, had made a series of wills, namely, four in total, all within a short period of time. Can any VLPS members explain why an elderly person would make a series of wills in a very short time?
Then in June 1996, solicitor Christine Meyler wrote a threatening letter to my brother accusing him of trespassing on land at Mullaghmore. Under oath solicitor Christine Meyler stated that this ‘trespass’ was on the land described as the ‘home-farm’.
This home-farm, saga, is so interesting, my brother was being alleged to be trespassing on his father's land. Land that had been 'illegally' registered by solicitor Christine Meyler, giving our late father Charles Ferris, ony a two ninths ownership in 1994.
Low and Behold in February 2009, ‘Legal Counsel for solicitor Christine Meyler’ namely, Senior Barrister Dermot Fee (who ranted about this website) and Barrister Gary McHugh, both stated in written evidence, that from 1945, my late father was legally entitled to full ownership of home-farm.
Therefore, in 1996, my brother, must have been trespassing on the adjacent land, called ‘Coyle’s Land’. Even, based on solicitor Christine Meyler’s own hand in ‘illegally’ depriving (along with accomplice solicitor James Montague) my late father Charles Ferris of seven ninths of his land, leaving my late father with a two ninths ‘undivided share’.
How could it be alleged that my brother, was trespassing, by grazing his herd of cattle on this home –farm, therefore, excluding the adjacent ‘Coyle’s land. (Which my brother , has continued to farm, from 1966 to this present day)
Is this another ‘Terminological In-exactitude’ by solicitor Christine Meyler? How would it be possible for my brother to be trespassing on ‘Home-Farm’ given the solicitor Christine Meyler special of ‘two ninths’ undivided share to our late father Charles Ferris. I wonder what Judge Miller, will say? Will, he also say, such a silly, stupid lie, so silly and so stupid a lie that it cannot be a lie?
This ‘home-farm’ was registered ‘covertly’ at Land Registry by solicitor Christine Meyler in May 1994 using an ‘assent based on the inaccurate oath’ namely that my great grandmother deceased 1925, did not have any ‘grandchildren’.
Another ‘terminological in exactitude’ my great grandmother deceased 1925 had 33 grandchildren. One of whom was my late father Charles Ferris and of course my late Aunt Bridget Ferris.
The ‘invalid registration’ was sent to Land Registry on the 31st May 1994 and the property was registered on 3rd June 1994. Bring back those ‘super-efficient’ Land Registry staff of 1994. Given that Barrister Gary McHugh stated to Judge Miller, that a letter sent by on 15th May 2009 to a Mr. Malcolmson at Land Registry, had not been acknowledged, even on 28th August 2009 (a time scale of 106 days).
The only clue to the delay was that Barrister Gary McHugh, also stated that Mr. Malcolmson at Land Registry was, you guessed correctly; ‘A Solicitor’. And he was currently on vacation.
However, 106 days on vacation, is a little hard to believe, even for a solicitor in Land Registry.
How can Land Registry explain that in May/June 1994 an application for registration, probably a very complex process, was completed within 3 days and now in May/June/July/August 2009 that after 106 days not even a Land Registry Letter of Acknowledgement?
How can any VLPS members explain that an elderly person’s will requires two solicitors from the same Law Firm, i.e. R.H.O’Connor & Company. And now only the ‘brass name plate’ remains. Given that solicitor Christine Meyler under oath also stated from 1980 to 2009 she was solicitor for the late Bridget Ferris (over 25 years) and when Judge Miller asked, “Did you walk the Lands?” The answer by solicitor Christine Meyler was “No! I never walked the lands.”
Having a solicitor as an executor, who never walked the lands, is a far cry from the DARD Succession Planning for Farmers. 'It is important that you choose a solicitor who understands the specific issues involved in the transfer of a farm business and executors who have a good knowledge of your particular business.'
How could an executor who never walked the Lands ‘have a good knowledge of your particular business.'? When compared with a person with a ‘rural culture’ and familiar with the names of every field based on its topography and utilisation, e.g. meadow, craft, hill, bog, mountain, rough run, wet run, dry run, etc. It is so strange that my late Aunt Bridget, described as a ‘country person’ and yet her two executors are both ‘highly cultured town persons.
On Monday 31st May 2009, two other VLPS members and myself decided to ‘walk the lands’ and I was able to explain to the other two VLPS members exactly as to how the only used ‘farming entrance’ to the back farm is from the ‘home farm’ and with no ‘right of way’ through ‘home-farm’ for the ‘back-farm’. We were able to inspect the dividing gate and temporary dividing fence, that was only recently erected by my brother to fence off a small bottom field for silage and to separate the cattle from his sheep. We were able to see that the gate dividing the two pieces of land had been opened quite recently, with tracks of sheep and cattle accordingly.
One of the VLPS members from, you guessed it a country culture described the two pieces of land as more or less ‘an open run’.
The two VLPS members and I finished our walk by having a ‘stroll’ in the Lovers Retreat to see the incredible contrast and feasted our eyes on the beautiful mansion on Retreat Close, you guessed it, belonging to Solicitors Christine Meyler and Kevin McGuigan.
The VLPS member from a country culture described the mansion as ‘most certainly not an open run’. Due to the ‘electrically operated gates and the pristine flower beds’. The VLPS members also described the ‘spectacle’ as more ‘like a millionaire’s mansion’.
How can two solicitors in a small town live like millionaires? What a contrast to the state of my ancestral home, that is being vandalised, and reduced to wreck and ruin, from 2005, largely due to the actions of solicitor, Christine Meyler and her husband solicitor Kevin McGuigan.
It was great to be back walking across the lands of my ancestral home, given that my Great Grandfather, is mentioned in the ‘hearth roll’ of Cappagh as living there in 1860, before his ‘forced departure’ to New York USA and to die there in 1901 and lies buried like so may of the thousands of ‘Uncounted Irish’ from the ‘Great Famine of 1845’ in a Foreign Land.
I told Sir Brian Kerr, the former Lord Chief Justice in March 2009, in the Court of Appeal, in Belfast, (and now a member of the House of Lords). After he described the ‘fraudulent oath as a stupid, silly fraud, so stupid and silly that it could not be a fraud’. That, I (Joe Ferris) intend staying on our land and I (Joe Ferris) will not be leaving our ancestral home.
I (Joe Ferris) hope that solicitor Christine Meyler and her husband solicitor Kevin McGuigan & accomplice solicitor James Montague all get this message loud and clear and recognise that ‘We … Haven’t Gone Away and We … Will Not Go Away’.
|
| 25th of Aug, 2009 |
|
Avoid |
What must your friends think James? |
| 31st of Aug, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to Ben 21st August 2009 |
Could, I ask Frank Smyth and Darren O'Neill for their comments to your precise dates and the devastating effects.I saw recently Mary McAleese (barrister) and President of Ireland advising in a newspaper item that I typed into the User Forum of RYS namely that 'people/neighbours should get nosey to protect the elderly person from abuse and exploitation'. Darren & Frank can you get nosey with solicitor James Montague and prevent him from abusing more elderly clinets? J.F. |
| 30th of Oct, 2009 |
|
AVOID |
James Montague,by deceipt, destroyed my family.So many decent lives brutalised by this man. |
| 9th of Sep, 2009 |
|
VLPS OMAGH |
Nobody on RYS.COM can be credited with taking James Montagues name from him. He did that all by himself. |
| 29th of Sep, 2009 |
|
Insanity |
Ferris,
Two quick points - I note that in your forum you have been making reference to a case that made the news recently. This is the one about the lady who shared the house with the farmer and won her case is claiming a chunk of his estate.
You seem to think it was terrible that the Judge heard a case involving his friend- I agree this would have been terrible and he should have stood aside.
However if you read the ruling, the press and have a working brain you will see that when the Judge was talking about speaking ill of "his friend" he was talking about a witness in the case - not himself.
Not that you would be one to let the truth get in the way of a good rant!
I needn't be surprised this is coming from someone who thinks the VLPS charter (or whatever you may call it) is as important as the US declaration of independence!
That is really my second point but I needn't write on as I feel I've made my point |
| 29th of Jan, 2010 |
|
The school around the corner |
Of course James Montague would never give bad advice (Kevin Mc C, 12th Jan, 2010) about tax evasion, tax avoidance,the breakup of large estates, replacement of original documents with forgeries, destruction of wills or the looting of estates. The gentleman he is, he would have due regard for his clients, particularly deceased clients. |
| 6th of Oct, 2009 |
|
To 'Insanity' 29 9 09 |
Again, your arrogance is palpable. You can debate with an adversary and still respect them, something you are not capable of. Mr Ferris has a first name.You refer to Mr Ferris as Ferris, clearly in derogatory tone,showing your contempt for him.You fool, you have therefore lost the arguement before you have begun. Mr Ferris surely has you rattled. |
| 6th of Oct, 2009 |
|
Avoid |
I spoke to someone recently with some experience of the legal profession. They asked me if I had seen the 'RYS' site. I said that I had. They then asked me if I had read comments on Mr Montague. I said that I had. They then said to me ' 'Mr Montague is in serious trouble'. I said, 'yes he is'. |
| 6th of Oct, 2009 |
|
vlps omagh |
Insanity of 29th sept. 2009.You imply that Joe Ferris is a liar.If you have evidence that he is ,then you are compelled to spell it out.There is something you should know. You cannot shake off RYS.COM which is here to stay. James Montague has been exposed like the proverbial rabbit in headlights.His years of secrecy and decption have come back to haunt him. Ironic that someone so secretive is now so public. Five million readers, I believe. Well done RYS.COM. |
| 7th of Oct, 2009 |
|
Observer |
I recently saw a photograph in the press of a gathering of the dudiciary, Law Society and the legal profession. This was an intriguing insight into an elitist group of people. This is a group encapsulated in their own netherworld, totally divorced from the community and people from which they come. They are an alienating isolated group with a siege mentality totally wrapped up in their very own little, 'Raj'. |
| 8th of Oct, 2009 |
|
Ben |
James Montague! I put it to you again-what did you do with my late mother's will, estate and money, all of which are unaccounted for? You were her solicitor so you must explain.How long do you think you can avoid me? Sooner or later you are going to have to tell me to my face.If someone treated your mother the way you did my mother, how would you feel? How could you exploit a vulnerable elderly person in this way? Your cruelty knows no boundarys. |
| 8th of Oct, 2009 |
|
Vlps Omagh |
I was at a well attended VLPS meeting the other day. In open forum victims openly discussed crimes perpetrated against them by Omagh's solicitors. This is certainly ground breaking. Solicitors like this can no longer hide behind their veil of secrecy. Up until now, their most potent weapon. |
| 24th of Oct, 2009 |
|
vlps |
'Insanity' 29th sep 2009 says to Mr Ferris, 'Not that you would be one to let the truth get in the way of a good rant!' If 'insanity' has anything to back this up then let us see it.To date there is nothing that would back up the statement made by 'insanity'. Whereas James Montague's situation is different in that there is a strong body of evidence, including legal documentation available to support the charges laid against him. |
| 24th of Oct, 2009 |
|
vlps |
Do not engage this man. |
| 10th of Nov, 2009 |
|
jm |
I think this says it all.."The evidence of Joseph Ferris cannot be regarded as being particularly accurate. I use this neutral term, as I am uncertain as to whether he has simply lied, has fantasised about this case, or, as a result of his unhealthy obsession with the case, has rejected in his own mind any possible set of facts which contradict his version of what could have happened. Whatever the reason, he cannot be regarded as a witness of truth. He has already lied to the police about the alleged forgery, and, in my view, gave blatantly inaccurate evidence to the court. His assertion that as a member of the nursing profession he is bound to tell the truth does not require comment from me." Judge McFarland |
| 4th of Nov, 2009 |
|
C.Meyler |
To all the Solicitors of this wonderful Site, remember the truth will set us all free!! |
| 7th of Nov, 2009 |
|
Declan |
The infamous Mr. Montague stikes again. Given that Mr Montague thinks eveyone's mad and telling lies, perhaps Mr. Montague should explain the works more clearly? I think Mr. Montague has a severe case of; 'How he himself has lived his life he judgeth his neighbour! One must conclude therefore this makes Mr. Montague criminally insane and a compulsive liar. |
| 25th of Nov, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to C. Meyler and all the Solicitors in Omagh Association of Solicitors |
Given your statement, 'remember the truth will set us all free!! Could we begin with Solicitor Mrs Christine McGuigan (nee Christine Meyler). Can Solicitor Christine Meyler tell the truth as to what happened to the £13,500 compensation awarded to Barry McElroy in February 1993 at Belfast High Court (Barry was awrded the compensation at the age of seven for injuries caused by a dog at age four)? Barry McElroy has up to 2009 never received a penny! Where has the money gone? |
| 25th of Nov, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris to JM 10th November 2009 |
JM. "What is stopping Judge/Solicitor David McFarland from having me prosecuted for his assertion that I 'cannot be regarded as a witness of truth. He has already lied to the police about the alleged forgery, and, in my view, gave blatantly inaccurate evidence to the court.'? JM also what is stopping you as a so called 'officer of the court' from having me charged with perjury? My postal address is 14 Alanvale Crescent, Kilfennan Estate, L/Derry, BT47 5SJ for your High Court Applications. Do you or Judge/Solicitor David McFarland, have the necessary male testimonials to do so? Joe Ferris. |
| 25th of Nov, 2009 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer for JM and Insanity |
Question 3 Was Charles Ferris as the eldest son of Charles Ferris Snr. entitled by operation of Law to the lands upon the death intestate of his father on 15th November 1945? 6.1 Answer: Yes, for the reasons set out at Answer 2 (iii) above. 25th February 2009 Dermot Fee QC Gary McHugh BL
Would Insanity & JM please respond to the answer provided above? I think you are both the same person, i.e. Solicitor James Montague; how does this answer Yes compare with the 'MISREPRESENTATION'that you provided to my late father Charles Ferris (8/7/1916 to 9/10/2005) that he had no legal rights to his family home, when he was your client from October 1986 to February 1993? I would like your answer if the truth doesn't choke you? Joe Ferris. |
| 7th of Dec, 2009 |
|
To JM 10th of Nov 2009 |
James Montague. You call Joe Ferris a liar. Why don't you answer the charges placed before you on this site? Every victim on this site knows the value of your word.As everyone knows, your source, Judge Mc Farland, is a figure of ridicule, not to be taken seriously. He is a buffoon whose job is to protect the likes of you.As a victim of yours, I have no doubt who the liar is, and it's not Joe Ferris. |
| 5th of Dec, 2009 |
|
Ben |
So the word is that Stephen Gately's will is missing. This is about the most cruel thing that a solicitor can do to a client.When, years after my mothers death, as her beneficiary,I discovered James Montague had got rid of her will, disposed of her estate, and her substantial monies still unaccounted for, completely disinheriting me without my knoledge. It's worth remembering Mr Montague was my late mother's solicitor and also my solicitor.When I uncovered what he had done, I felt violated. My late mother was in poor health, severely disabled and trusted James Montague implicitly.He exploited her vulnerability, set her up and cleaned her out, also cleaning me out in the process.JM 10 9 09. what have you got to say to that? If you think I am lying then say so. |
| 12th of Dec, 2009 |
|
victim |
I see James Montague(10th 0f Nov. 2009) is lecturing Joe Ferris about telling lies. He has a quare cheek on him to lecture his victims like this. I will always curse the day I ever met James Montague. He has to be the most deceiptful person I have ever had the misfortune to meet.Whilst I was his client he stripped me clean, never losing his smile. |
| 12th of Jan, 2010 |
|
Kevin McC |
Many thanks James for all your sound advice over the years. There are plenty of people out there who know the good work you did and wont forget it. |
| 24th of Jan, 2010 |
|
To Kevin Mc C 12th Jan 2010 |
Clarify your position on James Montague's victims. There are certainly plenty of people out there who know the good work James Montague has done to destroy so many decent people, He should be in prison. By your comments you are complicit in his evil. |
| 25th of Jan, 2010 |
|
To observe |
Strange Kevin Mc C entry dated 12th Jan, 2010. It curiously reads like an epitaph. Freudian slip? |
| 10th of Mar, 2010 |
|
South Down Man 1st March2010 |
Curious how you happened to stumble across revelations about James Montague.I dont see any ranting, just cold hard facts. |
| 2nd of Feb, 2010 |
|
impartial |
It seems that virtually all these comments are from one J Ferris. The way they read he needs psychiatric help. |
| 1st of Mar, 2010 |
|
South Down man |
Joe Ferris get a life. Came on this site to leave a comment about a solicitor in Newry who has just handled a property purchase for me and stumbled across your ranting. Seems to be that you have a personal vendetta against this guy and nothing else! |
| 15th of Feb, 2010 |
|
To impartial 2nd Feb 2010 |
It is perfectly clear from the diversity of complaints about James Montague that virtually all comments are not from Joe Ferris.You are obviously a solicitor insulting peoples intelligence again.You have been exposed James, and you don't like it. Too bad. |
| 4th of Mar, 2010 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to Impartial 2nd February 2010 |
Glad to see you are at least reading this website. Sorry to disappoint you that I am not the author of all the comments against 'Holy James'. I would direct you to the Forum Section of RYS in which you will see that I have posted my 139th article today Thursday 4th March 2010, mainly from Irish Newspapers that might even 'HELP TO' 'open your eyes' to the 'white collar' snakes/solicitors, that are still very much alive in Ireland in 2010. J.F. |
| 27th of Apr, 2010 |
|
TO Queens University 22 April 2010 |
If you aspire to any level of credibility you should address the corruption of James Montague exposed here. Do you really think people are stupid serfs who are supposed to look up to your ruling criminal class. You will have to do better than take cheap shots at a man whose integrity shines like a beacon. Joe Ferris, you are really getting to these people. Come on James, surely you can do better than this? |
| 1st of May, 2010 |
|
Joe Ferris Nurse Lecturer to Queens University 22nd April 2010 |
Your comment:- [it is a shame there is not a rate your nursing lecturer website.] Speaks volumes.
The reason there is a Rate-Your-Solicitor-website is because you so-called 'Lawyers' are so arrogant and ‘above the law of the land’ you are not accountable to the democratic elected government.
Nursing, is a profession, which has an 'independent regulator' not like the Law Society and Bar Council Trade Unions with 100% protection of 'Serial Liars/Lawyers' and 0% protection of the public.
Why are you hiding behind the name 'Queens University'?
Take off your 'sheepskin wig' and 'cloak' and reveal your identity to the public.
Can you respond to a favourite phrase of 'disgraced solicitor' George Brangham? As head of the CSA and lecturing on The Mental Health Order (NI) 1896.
To quote, George Brangham. Would you please,"Put-Up-Or-Shut-Up"?
Can I also invite you to ‘reveal your true identity’ rather than remaining ‘annonymous and faceless’ so-called legal person or persons? J.F
j.ferris3@ntlworld.com and mobile 07715140648. |
| 22nd of Apr, 2010 |
|
Queens University |
Dear Joe
We would like your to leave your chosen profession of nursing and come and lecture the law students at Queens. We are impressed with your legal knowledge and your talents are obviously wasted in nursing.We understand that you would probably spend more time at night preparing legal lectures than you do at nursing lectures. Your students have told us your lectures are rubbish anyway and it is a shame there is not a rate your nursing lecturer website. Anyway if interested in the law lecturing call us on 0909 9425317.
|
| 28th of Jun, 2010 |
|
Dear Samantha 8th June 2010 |
When I saw this site I did think about the morality of it all. Then I thought about the obvious corruption in the legal profession. It would clearly be a greater crime not to expose corrupt solicitors. The public need to be alerted. The only way to protect an unsuspecting public is to name and shame. Surely, Samantha, James Montague's credentials are obvious to the reader. Well done RYS.COM |
| 28th of Apr, 2010 |
|
Regarding Queens University 22nd Apr 2010 |
Fair play to you Joe. You really have Montague and his craven cronies annoyed. The truth is getting to them. |
| 30th of Apr, 2010 |
|
victim |
Nothing alters the fact that James Montague has cruely betrayed a lot of his clients. |
| 30th of Apr, 2010 |
|
Queens man |
Surely Queens University (22nd Apr 2010) don't take a professional role in 'dishing' the dirt online. Queens administrators must investigate this immediately. The university is being brought into disrepute. |
| 28th of Jun, 2010 |
|
Ben |
Samantha 8 6 10. My mother was over eighty years old, in poor health and very vulnerable. She met James Montague in his office on 16th April 1987 On that day she made her will and left instructions with James Montague regarding her substantial estate. Ask James Montague what he did with her will and estate, including her monies, which remain missing and unaccounted for to this day. Then call him a good man. |
| 8th of Jun, 2010 |
|
Samantha |
Reading the above feedback I have to say Joe, you really need to get a life. I hope you give your nursing students and lectures as much time as you do to slandering the name of good men. Time to move on before this consumes you (or maybe it already has?) |
| 10th of Aug, 2010 |
|
Ben |
To businessman 3rd August 2010. You are really getting abusive and obsessive James. I take it you are calling my mother a nutter. Sadly she died before she could find out that James Montague robbed her blind. He stole everything she had. If you want to call me a nutter, fine.Contact me on this page and I will show you the paperwork. You won't James because you already know. My, you are rattled. Your abusive outburst says more about you than your victims. |
| 2nd of Aug, 2010 |
|
JP. |
Is it the barrister James Mc Nulty that owns this practice and has anyone any dealing with Mr Mc Nulty or Mr Martin Mc Donnell QC? |
| 11th of Jul, 2010 |
|
Dear Samantha. 8th june 2010 |
Your comments insult James Montague's victims. You are either a friend of James Montague or stupid, probably both. James Montague is the architect of his own demise. The public must be warned about your friend. |
| 11th of Jul, 2010 |
|
Joe Ferris to Samantha |
Dear Samantha, please engage brain. If you know anything about 'the good men' I presume you mean 'crooked solicitors' like James Montague. As you will note, my name and postal address is listed above. Would you and your 'good men' please issue a 'writ for slander' against me.The motto of VLPS www.crookedlawyers.com and www.rate-your-solicitor.com is "YOU CAN NEVER IMPROVE ON THE TRUTH" I await your 'writ' in support of your good men. |
| 3rd of Aug, 2010 |
|
Businessman |
has anyone moaning on these pages had a breakdown yet - you're obsessives who wouldn't know how to get through the day without having something to cry about. somebody should start a rate my client dot com to warn law firms about nutters like these |
Rate this solicitor
|
|
