Below is copied the letter from Mrs Paula Tench then of Jacksons, solicitors of Darlington, County Durham. Solicitor Alison Stott, then of Aykley Vale Chambers, Durham City had supplied solicitor Mrs Tench with the Particulars of Shirley Carr's claim in cases DH400950,DH400898 and NE401650. They had been prepared in consolidated form which was contrary to the order made at the Durham County Court on the 1^st of June 1994. Stott should have been aware of that order but of course in January of 1996 she declared to the Newcastle County Court presided over by recorder Jon H Fryer-Speddingthat up until that time she had not been acting for Carr but had only been assisting her. That declaration is backed up by affidavits sworn after it and submitted in proceedings before John H Fryer-Spedding. Spedding heard the latter declaration when it was made.

The question has arisen as to what documentation Carr had supplied to Stott during the time she was using Stott to assist her? However solicitor Mrs Tench wrote to Stott detailing that it was her understanding that the cases were to be tried separately. The Particulars of Claim were then supplied to solicitor Mrs Tench by solicitor Stott but this time they were sent to solicitor Mrs Tench in triplicate. This time the Particulars of Claim simply crossed out each part which did not relate to the other cases but the content was the same (Evidence of this to follow). So in these circumstances solicitor Stott was aware that the cases were to be tried separately. She then failed at any time to make known to the Courts the latter fact and then went ahead and acted for Carr in my alleged bankruptcy which arose from the costs awarded by recorder John Fryer-Spedding.

A solicitor, as an Officer of the Courts, is duty bound to declare anything which they know is improper in legal proceedings. Solicitor Stott was also fully aware, as evidence will show, that solicitor John Paul Graney had sworn false information in his Statutory Declaration that had been used to lodge a caution at HM Land Registry on the land subject of case NE401650. Again solicitor Stott kept quiet about that. Some of the questions that arise, and there are many, is why did Stott act for some considerable time as Carr's assistant and mislead everyone into believing that she was acting as Carr's advocate?