ADAPTED FROM A POSTING OF 23/2/2012.
Today’s posting contains only a few examples of the arrogant nonsense and blatant lies published by Nicholas Robinson in Autumn 2011 on the exclusive 67 member Greenock Morton Trust forum!
Mortonjag’s readers will recall that in order to gain power on the Morton scene, the lying accountant manufactured a fictitious debt by manipulation of figures ‘conned’ from Jim Gallacher. He claimed that he would prove that debt in court, but when the Trust’s solicitors indicated that ex-Chairman ‘Dunco the Clown’s ‘open and shut’ case was unlikely to succeed, Robinson went muck raking.
Unbelievably, the self proclaimed ‘vastly experienced insolvency practitioner’ hadn’t bothered to check Jim’s financial status prior to raising the Small Claims action! When he first discovered Jim’s Trust Deed a year after it had been signed he immediately attempted to transfer blame for his massive ‘cock up’ to Jim! Such is the nature of Nicholas Robinson.
HE LIED ON THE TRUST FORUM, LIED TO THE TRUSTEE, AND LIED TO THE COURT, MISLEADING A SHERIFF IN THE PROCESS. ROBINSON WILL BE BROUGHT TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT IN DUE COURSE.
IN NOVEMBER 2010, THE SELF PROCLAIMED ‘VASTLY EXPERIENCED INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONER’ ALLEGEDLY CHECKED THE WRONG PUBLICATION! WHEN EVERY OTHER BEAN COUNTER IN BRITAIN WAS STILL CONSULTING THE EDINBURGH GAZETTE AS STANDARD PROCEDURE, NICHOLAS LOOKED AT THE REGISTER OF INSOLVENCIES! WHAT A SILLY BILLY!
With no proven indebtedness to the G.M.S.T., Jim Gallacher was never under any obligation to the Trust, as had been explained in detail to their client by genuinely ‘vastly experienced’ insolvency specialists.
by Nick.Robinson » Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:39 pm
A couple of points on the discussion on here.
1) We should not now go to a proof. I do not believe that doing so will enhance or damage the reputation of the trust any more that not doing so but what is clear is that if the matter goes to proof it will cost us significantly more in our own legal costs than we can now recover. The facts are that if we win, we will only stand to gain a few pence in the pound at best.
LIAR – YOU REJECTED A £3,500 TRUSTEE ENDORSED BOND WHICH COVERED A FULL AWARD AND COSTS AT SMALL CLAIMS RATES. YOU DID SO BECAUSE YOU WERE TERRIFIED OF A FULL HEARING OF YOUR OWN ‘EVIDENCE’!
2) Jim Gallacher had no right to defend this case. Those rights vested in his trustee whom it seems, knew nothing about the claim until advised by me and consequently all of the legal costs expended by both sides and the court’s time have been wasted.
LIAR – THE TRUSTEE EXPLAINED TO YOU UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT THE CASE COULD PROCEED, AND ONCE YOUR SCAM WAS BUSTED, MR. GALLACHER DID DEFEND THE ACTION. CONTRARY TO YOUR GLOATING MISREPRESENTATIONS ON GREENOCKMORTON.ORG, YOU LOST.
3) 18 witnesses for the defence have apparently been listed by Jim and all of those will mean that the hearing is unlikely to conclude in one day if allowed to continue. This would appear to be all part of the determination to maximise the costs the trust is exposed to.
LIAR – TWELVE OF THOSE WERE YOUR OWN WITNESSES AND THREE OF THE STATEMENTS WERE PERJURIOUS. YOU BASED YOUR CERTIFIED ACCOUNTS ON THOSE STATEMENTS MR. ROBINSON WITH NOT AN IOTA OF PROOF.
YOU REFUSED TO PUBLICLY EXONERATE JIM AFTER YOUR CLAIM WAS REJECTED. YOU CONTINUED TO FALSELY INSTRUCT THE SOLICITORS FOR A FURTHER YEAR COSTING JIM – PERSONALLY- ANOTHER £3,000. ULTIMATELY YOUR £5.000 OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT OFFER WAS REJECTED BECAUSE YOU FLATLY REFUSED TO APOLOGISE AND INSISTED ON CONFIDENTIALITY. FURTHER NEGOTIATION WAS INVITED BUT YOU WOULD NOT BUDGE!
4) I wonder who knew about Jim’s trust deed? It seems to me that the principal advisors here are damned either way. If Ernie did not know, his client has let him down fairly badly as the trust deed has major ramifications for the case. If he did know then his egotistical all seeing eye has failed to grasp some fundamentals of insolvency law and knowing and not disclosing it shows him for the manipulative and disturbed creep that he is. In either case, I think he can kiss goodbye to the costs incurred to date and explain that down under.
THE DEFENDER’S ‘PRINCIPAL ADVISERS’ – HIS SOLICITOR’S DEDICATED INSOLVENCY DEPARTMENT – GUIDED HIM THROUGHOUT.
IT WAS ‘VASTLY EXPERIENCED’ NICHOLAS ROBINSON C.A. WHO FAILED TO DO ‘DUE DILIGENCE’ AND THEN LIED TO THE COURT, THEREBY DEPRIVING JIM OF HIS RIGHTFUL ‘COSTS’.
THIS ONE’S AN ABSOLUTE ‘BELTER’!
‘Had we known about it, the case would not have proceeded and it was not recorded in the Register of Insolvencies when I checked in November 2010 prior to the case starting.
THE ACCOUNTANT IN BANKRUPTCY HAS FORMALLY CONFIRMED THAT IN NOVEMBER 2010, AN INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONER WOULD HAVE SEARCHED THE EDINBURGH GAZETTE.
FURTHERMORE, IT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE REGISTER OF INSOLVENCIES IN EARLY DECEMBER – ALMOST A MONTH BEFORE THE ACTION WAS RAISED.
NICHOLAS HAS BEEN A VERY NAUGHTY BOY INDEED, AND REALLY SHOULD SAY ‘SORRY’, BUT NICHOLAS UNDERSTANDS THE CONCEPT OF HUMILITY EVEN LESS THAN THAT OF TRUTH!