Birmingham Meeting

Ho Tony,

Could you let us know what was said at the Birmingham meeting?

Willsb. The Rear Admiral turned up and offered to buy all the houses, he liked the fact there is plenty of water at Jumilla for his fleet! Only kidding, just trying to inject some humour as things have been a little heated of late. Cheers Joanniemac

Hi Jonniemac,

Thanks for the humour no problem with that at all, just would be very interested to see what Tony has to say about the meeting!

Wllsb, Without the aid of a crystal ball, I predict everyone that turned up were impressed by what they had heard and decided to sign up for another 5 years of misery. Cheers Joanniemac

Hi joanniemac
 

Well let's wait and see if he tells all!

Hi Wilsb,

Sorry for the delaying in replying to you but I was rather tired after driving about the country & then going straight back to work.

The Birmingham meeting was very hot and there about 24 purchasers attended the meeting. HdT got harranged about the lack of BG's , that they didnot ringfence the money ,  the gentleman doing so was very assertve. However, another attendee stated that liquidating HdT was not an option as it would result in losing our money and he said that HdT had given a very convincing presentation but he was worried about Ambersun.

It turned out that there were a lot of Ambersun purchases there and they were not happy with Ambersun & wanted assurances that HdT would have better, more informative and helpful agents in the futures. It was asked if they were still dealing with them & they said no & that they had not been in communication with Ambersun for 2 years.

I spoke briefly explained what SARC had done in checking up on licences, water & asking HdT where is the money? Also stating that purchasers are saving themselves not HdT and as we are purchasers are doing the saving, that we will continue to be involved in meetings with HdT to ensure complaince with the agreement & for purchasers to have a say in the development.

Shortly afterwards, due to the heat people got up had a drink , chatted amongst themselves and began to sign up , except for the gentleman who had earlier told HdT of about the BG's & said that he has commenced legal action against his UK solicitor

The meeting ended positively and I chatted to quite a few people & I heard lots of complaints about solicitors, their charges & lack of communications/advices. I got the impression that purchasers are now becoming more annoyed with the legal professions behaviour throughout the adminstration process etc rather than HdT. In fact a couple of people said that they thought that hdT has balls to come and meet with them, expain things & take the flack.

That is the gist of what happened & i hope that it is of some help

 I WANT A POSTIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL

Tony R17 18

Hi Wilsb,

Sorry for the delaying in replying to you but I was rather tired after driving about the country & then going straight back to work.

The Birmingham meeting was very hot and there about 24 purchasers attended the meeting. HdT got harranged about the lack of BG's , that they didnot ringfence the money ,  the gentleman doing so was very assertve. However, another attendee stated that liquidating HdT was not an option as it would result in losing our money and he said that HdT had given a very convincing presentation but he was worried about Ambersun.

It turned out that there were a lot of Ambersun purchases there and they were not happy with Ambersun & wanted assurances that HdT would have better, more informative and helpful agents in the futures. It was asked if they were still dealing with them & they said no & that they had not been in communication with Ambersun for 2 years.

I spoke briefly  from where I was sitting at the back & explained what SARC had done in checking up on licences, water & asking HdT where is the money? Also stating that purchasers are saving themselves not HdT and as we are purchasers are doing the saving, that we will continue to be involved in meetings with HdT to ensure complaince with the agreement & for purchasers to have a say in the development.

Shortly afterwards, due to the heat people got up had a drink , chatted amongst themselves and began to sign up , except for the gentleman who had earlier told HdT of about the BG's & said that he has commenced legal action against his UK solicitor

The meeting ended positively and I chatted to quite a few people & I heard lots of complaints about solicitors, their charges & lack of communications/advices. I got the impression that purchasers are now becoming more annoyed with the legal professions behaviour throughout the adminstration process etc rather than HdT. In fact a couple of people said that they thought that hdT has balls to come and meet with them, expain things & take the flack.

That is the gist of what happened & i hope that it is of some help

 I WANT A POSTIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL

Tony R17 18

Gob Smacked  !!!!!!

A fool hardy desperate pleaStill with no real substance the proposal is still pie in the sky .Who did you check the licences ,water etc with Almu ,I could write that script !!!!! .

 Tony ! have you thought this through  do you really trust those in charge of HDT/SJ to get it right this time around .Almu will as usual fall in to abucket of roses Tony but what about you ? Do you have the power of your convictions .You have helped these crooks avoid the law are you prepared for the back lash WHEN things go wrong again .You are playing with fire Tony .

Hi All,

i have reposted my update that willsb requested from me.

As for the remarks from JA .

I have met several clients of clients of the solicitor representing  the group set up by Anna Mickelwright, over the weekend, who said that they are unhappy with not being given information,not being told about the meetings and the fees.  I met other solicitors clients and all are angry with their legal fees and what they are getting for their money.There is a backlash coming but it is due to purchasers realising the reality of their situation & becoming very annoyed with their solicitors.

I must point out:

The  agreement was agreed by the judge before hdT were allowed to present it to us. The licences etc were checked & are OK( even my Spanish solicitor/barrister told me this)

If there was or even is anything that could be clasified as criminal that would be dealt with seperatly under criminal not mechantile law. Any action could be taken concurently and criminal action would not be dependent upon the outcome of the HdT vote.

If SADM goes ahead ALL purchasers, including new ones will all be treated equally with regard to BG's. This has been a point that has been stated by HdT and asked for by SARC.

If HdT is liquidated there is very little chance of us getting any signifcant amount of money back, if anything. even my Spanish solicitor/barrister told me this)

All the best

Tony

Brief report of meeting below

This message was last edited by TonyMal on 26/05/2010.

This message was last edited by TonyMal on 26/05/2010.

The solicitor representing the group set up by Anna issues regular bulletins and promptly answers questions. I guess that because the meetings are biased, solicitors in general would not have any interest in them. I have received detailed and comprehensive advice from the said solicitor, I much prefer to follow that than rely on hearsay.

Dear Tony

With due respect the firm of solicitors whom you mention and like mattjo says have always given us monthly bulletins and always answered my email questions i have put to them, so personally i have no complaints, as for not telling thier clients about the HDT meetings why would they when they are designed to cajoll people into saying yes to the proposal, surely if they recommended to all their clients to attend these meetings this would effect their own professional standing as they have recommended rejecting the proposal, we have to believe that they are acting at all times in our best interests otherwise what is the point ever in having any legal representation at all.

Kind regards

mark

Hi Mark,

I was only reporting on the comments being made by individuals & I accept your comment defeneding them, as I have no knowledge of the basis of the comments that were made. That is why I did not mention the solicitor, as I thought that if other clients had a different experience they could post & say so without us mentioning any names.

As for attending the meetings, i can assure you that I personally think that you should of have been told about them and been able to attened. HdT did not do a hard sell or pressurise any one into signing and I think people enjoyed giving them some stick.

Regarding professional standing, any professional should enable a client to make an informed decision based on asmuch information as possible & give them the probabilities of different courses of action. In the medical field you can go and get a second opinon and you decide whether you will or will not be treated. So I think that  all purchasers should of been told of the meetings & made thier own mind up about attending not have the decision made for them.

I do however fully understand & accept your point of view.

All the best

 I WANT A POSTIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL

Tony R17 18