My Attempt to Resolve the Issues
Then followed years of trying to find a solicitor willing to sue another solicitor, very few and far between, unfortunately. The first one I tried, Mr Osborne, of Osborne, Morris & Morgan, Bletchley, told me that I would not be able to sue Mrs Beattie because she was a student while she dealt with my case. Therefore I would have to concentrate on Mr R C Elly, of Reynolds, Parry Jones and Crawford, who was in control of my case, and later I also discovered the Law Society's representative for the county of Buckinghamshire.
Meanwhile after consulting a local solicitor, I took my own case for variation of what is named `maintenance payment` at Oxford Court, with predictable results, my case was heard in a private room, by a Registrar, and was dismissed. North was present with a different solicitor than his divorce solicitor, and told me afterwards he had had to resign one year early, due to ill health, he was suffering from emphysema. This was about 8-10 years after he broke down and wept copiously in front of my children, telling them that he was dying, he was a chronic hypochondriac, who often practised weeping to gain sympathy from my children.
Then after resignation, North had heart disease, which had caused a stroke. Unfortunately for him he had not been promoted to Group Captain as he fully expected, because he had been a Wing Commander for 12 years. Elizabeth had just gained ten `O` levels and was hoping to repeat the success for her `A` levels, hence the start of the divorce. He was so sure of promotion, during the divorce action which took five years, but I reiterated that I had earned his rank, plus the income, the small part of which he felt he had earned he overspent many times. He was always reluctant to accept this fact, and was in continual denial, despite the dire annual reports that told him the truth, in fact that if his wife had not put the effort in, he would not have attained his rank. As I read the reports, he would gloat over my situation, the fact that the best way to keep a female slave is to threaten to take her children, operated so much to his advantage, because I was working primarily to keep them, not to benefit him.
A female Professor at Law recommended me to one of her proteges, Mrs Burton, a member of a solicitors firm in Northampton, Toller,Hales & Collcutt. After agreement to act for me, I was requested to bring all the files of the case with me, an enormous burden that had to be transported by a wheeled shopping trolley. As soon as I arrived I was taken into a private room where a male colleague who took charge of the files, and proceeded to sort through them, joined Mrs Burton. He seemed to know just what was important to him, and eventually departed with the stack. I was left with the residue with which to return, and after some time had elapsed I was requested to telephone the firm. I was informed that Mrs Burton had left the practise, and would be unable to continue with my case, and that the files that had been confiscated were not important to my action. I protested that they were my property, and I wanted them returned, but that plea was ignored, therefore I lost valuable evidence. The barrister that I had named to act for me had obviously been misled, judging by the letter of regret that he could not take my case that he sent to me. It had all been an enormous waste of my time, and I was refused the return of my retainer.
The pattern was repeated many times, after tracking a willing solicitor, I would be requested to pay a retainer, then describe my case. They all agreed that it was a strong case, and agreed to act for me. However, as soon as I disclosed the name of Mr R C Elly the attitude suddenly changed, and became guarded, even though I managed not to reveal Mr R C Elly`s name till the second visit to the office. Despite telephone calls, letters, and even visits to their respective offices, I would not be granted a further appointment. With my very low income, it took years to save up enough to pay the ever-increasing costs of the retainers, and caused hardship when they were not returned. Among the solicitors that practised this method was Mr Craxton of Pictons, Solicitors. Milton Keynes. But I could not give up hope, even though the solicitors became very hostile, obviously all male, if there were any female solicitors practising taking actions against their colleagues I had not heard of them.
I was in regular contact with my son who lived and worked in Oxford. Then when I applied to the Oxford Court again to vary my maintenance, after a few years interval, I visited my son's home only to find he had disappeared. When I had spoken to North in the Court, he had changed out of all recognition, through a series of strokes, and he informed me that he had married again. He never mentioned Jeremy's disappearance; therefore I believe that he had arranged the abduction, knowing I would be visiting him. I have not seen my son and have no idea where he is, since making that shocking discovery.
My elder daughter was living with her baby daughter quite content, after divorcing her violent husband, when her father forced her to move in with him at the married quarter in Walters Ash. There were various reasons for this action, firstly she would be made to look after him and do all the housework and cooking, then of course he would be able to claim the tax concession of having a daughter living with him, after losing the wife tax concession. But most importantly, she had to have another share of the subliminal mind control, where many of the facts with which she had grown up had to be altered. For instance she fully believed that I had been a `librarian, subtext ` library assistant` that her father had substituted, instead of my real job, and make him feel more important. Consequently the obverse is intended, to patronise and belittle me. However she managed to get away from him, with the help of a friend and eventually married for the second time, and moved to Aylesbury. She gave birth to another daughter, then a son, after which she moved to Swanbourne, which is just two miles from Winslow. I was a regular weekly visitor for about five years, when I recognised the signs that she had been tracked down, unfortunately, and was frightened. I expect that the usual tactics of intimidation by barely veiled threats to the children coupled with attempts at unfulfilled bribery were used. So to protect her and my grandchildren I broke contact, and stopped my visits, regretfully.
I was still trying every source possible to gain publicity, without success. After writing to various journalists, most would not bother to reply, but one or two contacted the M O D for confirmation of my allegations, only to receive a reply with an illegible signature, and minus a printed name. This was standard practise, and all letters denied any responsibility for exploiting officers wives, stating that they were not employees, but they had always been to expected to support their husbands, and that their solicitors would deal with the pension and gratuity payment.
Every television documentary programme that offered help to the oppressed viewer was approached without success, until a female owned Production Company responded to my request. It was arranged that a colleague would visit my house to meet a presenter from the company, and have lunch. I had previously sent information documents to the presenter, a Ms J Spreckley, then she took more documents from me promising to return them. A visit to my colleague's house was arranged under the guise of inspecting it for possible camera angles, by offering her a lift home. However I was very suspicious, and subsequently asked my colleague had she given any more personal information, which she confirmed, and was consequently upset, at being unwittingly used, when I explained my fears.
We waited for news of the forthcoming filming for several months, my letters were unanswered. Therefore my colleague telephoned, as I did not own a telephone, and was given the information that the film was off, and that the presenter was no longer employed by `Scarlet Television` because she had joined the BBC and had a job on the series `Brass Tacks`. We were astounded by this behaviour, and I contacted both the BBC and Scarlet Television, for the return of my property, The Editor of the BBC programme `Brass Tacks` overreacted and threatened me with legal action. Then the Head of Scarlet Television replied that they were in complete ignorance about our information and documents. Apparently the researcher had been practising her version of private enterprise, while secretly using her employers many facilities, transport, telephone, and office etc, for her own ends. I replied to the BBC Editor that if he did start legal proceedings I would counter sue, for the return of my misused property, and that it was his new employee that was in need of legal action. I also informed him of the name and address of her ex-employer to verify the information that I had given him. Consequently I received a parcel of not only my documents but also additional files from other unfortunate women, who had put their misplaced trust in the researcher. I often wonder if she had further fat files from other women, and had also been given lunch or other hospitality from these other women, because she had enjoyed lunch in my house that I could ill afford. Especially when I had only two rings on my cooker, with no oven or grill, with which to create a decent meal. This was most certainly an exception to the well-known rule that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
However there were no more appearances on `Brass Tacks` from her, even so it was a disturbing situation for me and my colleague, as we hoped that a female team would help us
These methods are practised by many organisations in Britain unfortunately, the adage that is obviously accepted as one of their mottoes, " Secrecy opens the door to Malpractice."
I decided on some direct action to gain publicity, by staging a peaceful demonstration outside the Houses of Parliament. My preparations were to enlarge a photograph of each of my children, and stick them on a placard, also to write in indelible ink on a segmented navy and white golf umbrella the facts of my case. My hope for a dry day was fulfilled because I was the only person outside the Parliament building with an opened umbrella, which people in the endless queues could and did read.
Unfortunately or otherwise there were barriers the first time I tried the action, because I had chosen the day of the opening of Parliament, believing that many cameras and news people would be present. There were many more military troops than observers from the public, which was a huge surprise, and the main impression I gained was of a sleazy outdated medieval theatre. I was not given much time in my position when I was arrested and the placard with my children's photographs on was taken away. But I was released straight away despite begging the very senior female police officer to arrest me and put the handcuffs on, as it was probably the only way I could get into Court again. After standing for an hour or two, while the people in the queue read the writing on my umbrella, I decided to go to see if I could retrieve my placard. I wanted to track it in daylight, if I could. Eventually I tracked it down in a nearby police station and signed for the undamaged return of my property, and vowed I would try again to test if it was the occasion that triggered the response.
A meeting in Westminster Hall for "Violence against Women" had been arranged, therefore I decided that I would combine another demonstration with the later attendance at the meeting.. It was another dry day, which enabled my umbrella to be read again by countless people, but it was the foreigners who were very shocked by reading of the outrages. Especially when I told them that the `Argentinean Mothers `as a group were able to obtain world publicity about their abducted families, but the British Mothers were ignored by their own press, for fear they would be jailed. However, in the afternoon, I was questioned by Lord Longford who took me into the Lords for further inquiries, but he promised assistance, that did not materialise, so that was a waste of my time. The meeting in Westminster Hall was also a waste of time, with plenty of speeches from the stage, from people apparently enjoying the sound of their own voices. I asked for help, but they were not interested, only in giving help to foreign women, for which they would probably receive a grant.
During this time North made the first of three attempts to have the Life Assurance Endowment Policy transferred from my name to his name. I had to be very robust in my explanations to the Life Assurance Company, probably because they could not believe a RAF officer would tell them lies, and were very reluctant to keep the Policy in my name. I had to send the proof of the Court evidence to them every time; I had been paying the fees also. North had not; he had the undeserved reputation of probity, gained by excessive secrecy about his true nature. Any respectability that RAF officer`s pass off as their own, is like their rank and income, earned by their wives. Around this time I received a considerable file on North's business dealings. From the enclosed information I learned that he was paying rent of £3,000 per annum to indulge his vanity by setting up shop in `The Old Horological Shop ` in Penn. This was money earned by me, which I should have had as my pension. He was selling the antiques that I had collected for 20 plus years, but managing to operate at a loss, which was not surprising to me. He had previously informed me that his current wife had her own pension, so they had a very much larger income than me, yet he was continually trying to cheat me out of the pittance on which I had to try to exist.
By chance, also at this time I learned that Mr R C Elly had been made President of the Law Society, obviously to reward and compensates him for the loss of his lucrative concession, gained via the CAB. Quite obviously my lack of success to bring a negligence action against Mr Elly via the many solicitors, was the result of my whistle blowing to the Head of the CABs.
During these years I was often surprised at the number of military wives who were continually trying to make their voices heard on television talk shows. Unfortunately the microphone was nearly always immediately taken away, as soon as the presenter realised the gist of the information. It did not make any difference whether it was a female or male presenter, they were both uncompromising in their attitude Only once was an officers wife able to give enough information to warn other wives. She had been divorced after both her and her husband had retired from the RAF, but had not received the promised half pension and half share in the gratuity payment, which had been entered on the monthly salary slip for nearly thirty years. It must be assumed that other officer's wives have been cheated after retirement, but the blanket ban on any form of publicity, enables military officers to cheat their loyal exploited wives. The order must have gone out to the T V presenters not to repeat such damning information. Nowadays there are not many serious debating issues, the programmes seem to have been dumbed down, yet military wives are more likely to be the victims of institutionalised violence, which is kept well hidden, as are other military crimes.
Then suddenly in January 1992 I received notice from my bank that my income had been stopped, this was due to North having died. I had to apply for Income Support because I was only allowed the lowest Basic State Pension, to pay the mortgage, and the rest of the bills, until Probate was granted. However when I applied to my Life Assurance Company to pay off the Endowment Mortgage with profits, I was astounded to learn that another Eileen North had claimed the Life Assurance sum. I was compelled to visit the Registrar for a death certificate, and once again post proof of my ownership of the Life Assurance. North had obviously searched for a wife with the same name as mine, except that my name was Eileen Mabel, whereas the second wife was Eileen Doris, which debarred her from claiming my money, after quite a battle of correspondence. Even from beyond the grave, North was still trying to defraud me, which was no surprise. Nearly a year passed before I was granted probate, which meant that the mortgage could be finalised, which was not much comfort, because it was due to mature naturally less than two months later. A local lawyer informed me that there was nothing left in North's estate to claim, apparently he had commuted his pension and had predictably squandered it.
The first intimation I received regarding the settlement of the mortgage, was a slip of paper in mid December from the Nationwide Building Society, with whom I had taken out my mortgage, with an illegible hand written message on it. After pondering the meaning I vaguely discerned the word maturity among the others; it was an absolute puzzle, because in the 20 plus years of business with the Society, I had never received any correspondence that was not typed. I wrote to ask for clarification, but the answer I received was far from satisfactory, confirming my suspicions. Therefore I wrote to the Life Assurance Company to inform me of the date that they had sent the final draft, because I guessed that they had sent the large sum, to pay off the mortgage, plus the profits, to the `Nationwide.` The NBS had received the notice nearly four weeks earlier, but had held on to the sum presumably to earn the considerable interest on the large amount, plus of course all the accruing interest while the correspondence was sorted out. Remarks such as " you have to allow for the delay caused by the Christmas mail " I countered by reminding them that mid November was too early to convince me that anyone would start sending Christmas cards, even to foreign addresses. They were most reluctant to pay the full amount of the interest, therefore it took four separate cheques before I was satisfied, because due to the considerable time wasted after the first delay, it was interest earned upon the interest. After that battle, I wondered if that was standard practice, and due to the confusion of a sudden death, plus the hand written note, etc, just how many, usually senior citizens, realised the short fall of their pay-out, and accepted it at face value.
A friend had discovered that there was an all female firm of solicitors in London, and gave me the name, hoping I could try them for some better service to sue Mr R C Elly. Because all the solicitors firms that I had tried were male owned, and generally very hostile, as soon as they knew the defendants name. The female owned firm was named Susan Oliver & Co SOLICITORS, with three offices in south London, but I learned later that there were some males employed by the firm. I made an appointment and had to pay a retainer, £280.00, but did not see a solicitor, I was interviewed by a legal assistant. I was requested to bring my documents once again, and we had to wait many weeks for my documents to be sent by Toller, Hales & Collcutt, so several letters were sent informing me of that fact, and much time and my money was spent before the rest of the documents arrived. After reading some letters and listening to my evidence, the assistant would recycle the same material in her own words, then write to me as if it was her advice. For instance I reiterated to her that The Lay Observer considered that I had just cause to sue Mr R C Elly for negligence, only to have the assistant tell me something similar, as if it were her original advice. She also told me that my case was a lost cause, despite knowing that my children had been abducted, although on the following letter she changed the wording to` a fruitless case.` I realised that she had to show proof of the time she spent, to justify her salary to her employers. I was paying very heavy fees for this arrogant treatment, which incensed me, because no progress was being made, and it made me physically ill with a very serious attack of Shingles. I complained and requested to see a solicitor to move out of this impasse, so it was arranged that I consult with a Barrister. My choice was the Chair of the Women's Rights, Ms Elizabeth Woodcraft Q C rightly hoping that she would do her best for me. First, I had to send £3,000, 00 then another £2,000,00. The appointment was set for afternoon, and having arrived promptly at the Fleet Street chambers I had to wait more than two hours, because the solicitors clerk who had been dispatched from the firm`s offices to accompany me in the chambers could not find her way, and got lost. Another clerk had to be telephoned at home on her day off, and swiftly change, then travel to the chambers, to take the notes; it was an absolute shambles. Eventually the conference started at 4 30 PM with Ms Woodcraft Q C eventually agreeing to take my case, although she admitted it would be difficult. That was not news but a forgone conclusion, and the conference ended at 7. 40.pm.
While I waited for the written confirmation of the conclusion, I was surprised to receive a letter from Susan Oliver informing me that due to `unforeseen circumstances` she had to close two of her three offices down, It was puzzling because I had not yet met a solicitor from the firm and apparently my case was still ongoing, after all I had paid £5,280.00. for this poor service. Plus wasting many days and a considerable amount of money travelling to the offices in Greenwich, Lee Green and the Chambers, off Fleet Street, it was incredible
The same week I received a letter from Ms Woodcraft Q C informing me that she would not be able to take my case, then the following day, another letter from Susan Oliver that her remaining office was closing, again due to`unforseen circumstances`. Obviously either someone or something had influenced these extraordinary decisions, it was an absolute abuse of power and the system. I was invited to transfer my business to the new office at Bromley, where Ms Oliver had been taken on as an employee. But I had had enough, the actual work that was accomplished was useless, and no progress had been made, therefore I declined. Having spent many years paying into the Assurance Company while they accumulated profits for me, only to have it disappear with no benefit to me in a few months, I was reluctant to throw any more away. Eventually I received a rebate of £1,413.43. with a time sheet, and realised that the system was grossly flawed, little wonder that the Solicitors Complaints Bureau is inundated with complaints, the name keeps changing, but it remains the Solicitors Protection Society, in my view, and many other disillusioned victims also.
Having obtained the official form from the Professional Conduct Committee, of the Bar Council, I made a strong complaint concerning the conduct of Ms E Woodcraft. I have not received a reply. Until Barristers and Solicitors have an independent Complaints system, they will not change, self-regulation is useless, and results in the public being ripped off.
Having enquired about the chances of personally taking my case to the European Court of Human Rights, I was assured that it was possible by a female representative. Predictably my plea was rejected, because my case had not been to Court in the last five years. That is a typical excuse, to prevent me obtaining justice. No doubt if I had been to Court inside their five year limit, there would be another convenient excuse used.
I realised that I would have to publish on the Internet, as everything else had failed, but it was slow progress, just when I tracked a source of help down, it would disappear. Eventually I tried the Café Java in Milton Keynes, who had a part time `typist` transfer my information to screen at snails pace, then failed to deliver a contract costing approximately £400.00 at first. After a visit to the Trading Standards department, the contract was produced, six weeks later. However in the small print there was a clause that the contractor could cancel my web-site after one day, naturally I refused to sign and pay. Unfortunately they had my information, which is, and has been a useful commodity to several people over many years.
I had been prepared to put my house on the market to pay for a private Court case but was now completely disillusioned by the solicitors, both male and now female. I cannot recall just when I learned that Mr R C Elly was now a judge, I believe at Kingston on Thames. It says a lot for my cynicism about the Law Society that I was not surprised at the news.
Having banked the residue of the excess sum from the matured mortgage for funeral expenses, I realised that the only way to publicise this matter was to use that money to purchase a computer. I would have to teach myself, so that eventually I could put my web-site on the Internet, which I did with very generous help, for which I am most grateful.
Back to home page