Evidential Inconsistencies
Letter 13 February 2013
1)All letters sent recorded delivery
Photocopy and exhibit
Call Royal Mail and ask for records of delivery – DON’T HAVE THEM?!
2)Have never seen either letters
3)Both letters are seen for the first time and show a defence for the first time. We suggested that defence in our letter before action. Other side presumed we would go away which is why they didn’t respond to letter before action. Once the N1 came in they fabricated this document to defend themselves.
4)All correspondence has been by letter and email. These two have not got email counterparts or are ever mentioned in the emails on the subject.
5)Nothing was mentioned about credit card charges in the meeting. There is nothing in the agenda either that TB has written prior to the meeting or in my handwritten notes pertaining to this very important issue. We say TB has used the meeting as an opportunist reference point to bolster her claim that an agreement was made.
6)The last sentence of the letter says ‘thank you’ for agreeing. This is an incredibly odd sentiment. If it had been agreed then why bother to go through the rigmarole of explaining all of this and then a spurious ‘thank you for agreeing’ at the end. Also the last comment in the letter as an aside. The rest is just padding and possibly they think that by setting it all out, this provides a defence.
7)Tone of the letter is not friendly. The defendant has thought about this fraud but has missed vital pieces, she has made the common mistake of forgetting to back-date her tone of voice. The situation and tone of the correspondence has been steadily deteriorating. Exhibit examples and clearly label.
8)Issue of backdated credit card charges. We say in an email from day before 12 Feb that she is unwilling and does not agree to back date the fees.
9)Why didn’t they fix all of the other dreadful omissions in the contract before? Why has the first letter not been expressly mentioned in the second letter? Why was a contract not actually issued until we sent the breach letter in March? They were quick to get a new contract out and it didn’t STILL include the credit card charges.
10)Before Valentine’s day I was still putting kisses at the end of my emails to Tracey. Ed was coming in sizing up the fat girls on reception for fitness assessments. This would have been a totally inappropriate tone of voice.
11)We have given them this defence by stating out what they need to do. They have back-dated these letters to give them some chance of success. It is a fraud against the court.
12)The real position at this time is demonstrated in the email of 12 Feb 2013 which highlights the factual position at this time that the only explanation for the unilateral contractual variation was, ‘it’s just business’ Offer to ‘sit down and discuss’
13)12 February email has a ‘x’ kiss at the end of it. It is also clear that all these issues are being dealt with over email so there is no need to send letter at the time. There were Dreadul goings on over invisalign and TB says countless times that she doesn’t like letters and prefers to speak on the phone..
14)12 February email from Lisa sum ends finally with, “I hope this covers all the finance and streamline questions. No mention of the letter coming that must have been written the same day. Why explain it like this on the email when you are going to send a letter also?
15)TB “nothing to worry about all round really” – still trying to sneak it, tone not contentious at this point Certainly never ever any allegations of fraud.
Letter 17 June 2013
- Not seen this letter prior to the defence pack arriving
- Supposedly sent two days before MJ informed Tracey Bell about the GDC complaint