October 18, 2019

Tchenguiz’s £2.2bn compo claim ‘liberally interspersed with assertions of fraud, falsity, dishonesty and improper motive’, says judge

(Sounds like an email to Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation from an aggrieved leaseholder …)

TchenguizTelegraphVincent Tchenguiz’s £2.2 billion legal action against accountants Grant Thornton has suffered a set-back as his documentation was described by a judge as “too long and failed to make clear the facts of the case”.

Tchenguiz wants compo from Grant Thornton which he believes was responsible for his arrest, with his brother Robert, in February 2011 by the Serious Fraud Office.

This was based on incorrect evidence, which resulted in taxpayers compensating the brothers to the tune of around £3 million each, plus legal costs.

But Vincent’s claim against Grant Thorton has encountered a hitch as Mr Justice Leggatt described his submission “some 50 pages of narrative, liberally interspersed with assertions of fraud, falsity, dishonesty and improper motive which are not at that stage particularised”.

“Statements of case must be concise. They must plead only material facts … and not background facts or evidence. Still less should they contain arguments, reasons or rhetoric,” Mr Justice Leggatt ruled in London’s Commercial Court on February 20.

The court’s rules state that a filing’s maximum length should be 25 pages, whereas Mr Tchenguiz submitted 94 pages.

The Telegraph’s full report can be read here

Mr Tchenguiz’s residential freehold portfolio, deeply indebted and long for sale, amounted to one per cent of the UK total including those of the majority of retirement sites, fancy London riverside sites and the city of Huddersfield.

These were combined with ownership of Peverel, the UK’s largest property manager, which went into administration after the brothers’ arrest.

Comments

  1. Michael Epstein says

    Mr Tchenguiz,
    If you wish to continue in your desire to “Butcher” those opposed to you, by all means carry on, but in fewer words please!

  2. Is this the same Tchenguiz Brothers who purchased Peverel Group CBG in 2007?

    Is this Serious Fraud Office the same SFO who in a two week period from 16/12/2009 decided that Peverel Management Services Ltd and Cirrus Communications Services Ltd who Price Fixed 65 Developments some 2,000 Residential Pensioners out of £1.4 (million pounds) of unnecessary Warden Call Systems/Fire Systems?

    Is this a similar QUANGO as was, The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) who spent 4 years and £500,000 finding Peverel now First Port guilty of the Price Fixing but instead of a fine or other punishment, patted them on the back and said CARRY ON CHEATING?

  3. A Reviewer says

    So whats new …

    Short on fact, long on unsupportable allegations, and an epic belief that he is right in all things …

    Sounds like a Peverel marketing brochure

    Happy debt

Skip to toolbar