‘Blind ambition can often result in misplaced trust’! 

In August 1997, I, (KC) sold my business, Priority Stainless (UK) Ltd (PSUK) to Raymond Kennedy, (RK). The sale was transacted and executed by Julian Harris Wood, (JHW) on 12 August 1997, a partner in the firm Parker Wood, (PW) of Stanmore Middlesex. A dispute soon after arose and on February 1998, KC reported JHW, PW and RK to Hampshire Constabulary (HC) to investigate, KC’s claim for a conspiracy to defraud KC out of his business for no consideration or compensation to the detriment of creditors and members of PSUK 1986 to 1997.

I attach a copy of a report by Eric Stonham, my expert witness in support of my claim that I sold my business including all documents belonging to the company PSUK.

Having reported JHW and RK to HC in February 1998, HC appointed DC Chubb, (DCC) of Hampshire Fraud Squad to investigate KC’s claim. In February 1999, KC’s first contact with DCC was when KC was arrested as a result of allegations made by JHW of PW and RK, the purchaser of KC’s business, PSUK in August 1997.

Between February 1998 and February 1999, DCC interviewed numerous parties associated with KC’s business PSUK and advised them to have no contact with KC as KC faced a long custodial sentence. Numerous witness statements on KC’s behalf support these claims having been made by DCC.

A letter from HC dated 8th November 2009, Para 2, ‘The factual background to your claim’ please see attached copy letter, confirms that HC acted on the evidence as alleged by JHW and RK against KC.

Upon reporting JHW and RK to HC in February 1998, JHW, used his firms resources to apply to have KC disqualified as a company director to the then DTI.

As a result of JHW’s actions with the support of DCC, KC had parallel civil and criminal proceedings brought against him by the DTI and the CPS all as instigated by JHW and RK with the support and backing of the DTI and the CPS as instigated by HC

Effectively KC’S life was put hold from February 1998 and his life was trashed by false allegations made to numerous friends, customers and suppliers associated with KC and PSUK. In 1999, DCC retired and DC Folkes, (DCF) took over the enquiry and vigorously continued to pursue KC in a very personal and vindictive manner. Copy correspondence from DCC to RK confirms.  ‘Dear Ray etc.’

At the DTI hearing in the companies court in London in November 2000, DCF was in attendance at the civil hearing, and whilst sat at the back of the court with JHW he was heard to say we’ll get ‘him’ on something?

‘A stay of proceedings’ was granted by the registrar in the case hearing on 15 November 2000 when the registrar  referred KC’s case to article 6 of the Human Rights Act, ‘right to a fair trial’ where parallel civil and criminal proceedings run together.

A later ruling by the senior High Court Judge, Justice Ferris set a legal precedent when he ruled that parallel civil and criminal proceedings can run together in the public interest as long as there is a fair trial in the criminal court. When asked if KC was to be charged before the stay of proceedings was granted, DCF said “probably, yes” This event took place in November 2000. Please see attached letter from Howes Percival dated 27 November 2000 confirming HC’s attendance in court.

On 11 January 2002 at South Hampshire Magistrates Court, KC was committed for trial. From the outset and since KC’s arrest in February 1999, KC had pleaded ‘not guilty’ to all charges as alleged.

On the 30^th September 2002, the case was to start and KC pleaded not guilty to all counts. A new indictment was preferred with leave of HHJ Selwood and the first indictment was quashed. The indictment was signed off and KC was re-arraigned on the new indictment. Upon the presentation of the new indictment, KC was pressured by his barrister RL to plead guilty to this new charge, claiming it had no meaning in law and was minor. KC was advised that the judge in the case does not want to waste his court time on a complex case which could take up to six weeks?

This could go against KC if he was to proceed with his innocence?

In advising KC, his barrister, RL effectively pressurised KC into pleading guilty to the new indictment as follows: KC was misdirected by RL to please guilty to a non-existant indictment in law. You cannot ‘fail to prevent production of any book or paper’.

‘FAILURE BY OFFICER TO ‘PREVENT PRODUCTION’ OF ANY BOOK OR PAPER OF A COMPANY IN LIQUIDATION, CONTRARY TO SECTION 208 (1) (e) OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986’

Before pleading guilty, RL advised that KC should get on with his life as a resident of Tenerife, where KC was caring for his then partner Shirley Ann Burton, (SAB) who had suffered a cardiac arrest on 13 January 2000 at St Mary’s Hospital in Portsmouth Hampshire. A successful kidney transplant resulted in her being brain damaged as a result of post-operative-negligence, a case settled out of court in Portsmouth courts on May 2005 before Judge Cawood for the benefit of KC’s former partner which KC was actively involved in pursuing on SAB’s behalf.

From the evidence KC now provides, KC can clearly demonstrate that he did not fail to deliver company records, i.e. any book or paper of a company in liquidation.

KC WAS NOT GRANTED ANY FAIR TRIAL IN PORTSMOUTH’S CRIMINAL COURT IN SEPTEMBER 2002 TO PLEAD HIS INNOCENCE AND – contrary to the ruling by Justice Ferris in November 2000 at the High Court in London. KC was not granted a fair trial as demonstrated by documentary evidence and disclosure as follows:

 Discovery of Documents and material evidence:

1. 1.     The company was sold by JHW to RK complete with company records on         12 August 1997. RK’s witness statement to HC confirms receipt of                     company records in relation to the size of the company PSUK

1. 2.      A letter from JHW of PW confirming receipt of company records in                    October 1997 before KC called in HC for their support to investigate his            claim of a conspiracy to defraud KC of his business.

1. 3.     A letter from KC’s expert witness report.

1. 4.     A copy of a letter from HC, dated Sept 2009 confirming that HC acted on           the allegations as made by JHW of PW the seller of KC’s business and               RK the buyer of KC’s business PSUK.

1. 5.     Copy correspondence from Kate Brown of the CPS dated 19 August 2004         confirming and I quote, “The situation was that two weeks before the trial         was listed, the Prosecuting barrister was made aware that proceedings             had been brought against you by the Secretary of State for Trade and                 Industry. The CPS and the Hampshire Constabulary were not aware of               this fact until that time. Enquiries revealed that the proceedings related             directly to the offences that we were pursuing. Having established this             fact, it would have been wrong in law to have continued a prosecution in           relation to those offences and therefore the Crown had no option but to           offer no evidence in relation to these offences. Having offered no                       evidence in relation to these offences, there remained one offence on the         indictment which represented a different offence from those already                   finalised in the Companies Court and you entered a guilty plea to that               offence and received a two year Conditional Discharge”.

                 (Please see attached copy) 

It is clear from the letter from Howes Percival, copy attached, that HC and the CPS were involved and aware of the DTI proceedings by attendance prejudicing KC’s defence in November 2000, some nearly two years before KC’s criminal trial in September 2002 and contrary to claims six weeks prior awareness by Kate Brown on behalf of the CPS, her email 19 August 2004.

In support of these grounds of appeal, please see attached reasons for appealing out of time and grounds for extension of time.

Personal introduction:

I’ve always wanted to see what I cannot see!

In business, ‘TIME’ is your greatest investment!
‘Trust In Me -‘Time’ is also your best friend’

My name is Kevin Crane, I am fifty-five years young and I have joint residency in the UK and the Canary Islands. Whilst studying for an OND in business studies in the late seventies, I joined GKN, Guest Keen & Nettlefold in 1977 in Manchester before moving to Birmingham in 1982 to work for IMI, Imperial Metal Industries. In 1984, I moved to Portsmouth to manage IMI Righton, a stockholder and supplier of non-ferrous metals, plastics and stainless steel fasteners to industry.
I started my first business in March 1986, Priority Stainless Ltd and before doing so and having considered all options open to me, the one recurring question was, did I want to stay in the comfort of a secure corporate environment, earning reasonably good money for my age with a new company car and all the usual perks of working for a major corporation?
The answer was yes and no, yes to the security of being cocooned in a professional environment and no to the bureaucracy of restrictive practices within such a working environment. What had taken ten years to attain, could be lost in a ten-minute decision to leave.
Every deed has a motive and in August 1984, I had just lost my mother to cancer when she was only forty-eight years young. At that very sad time in my life, I needed to focus, having just lost my best friend and I was twenty-five with a very creative imagination and a maverick mind towards business development. For once the book would stop with me in terms of debits and credits of all business decisions that I would make. Sales & Marketing were my strong points; my expertise in other areas of business was to be put to the test or the sword.

RISK 
‘To discover new oceans, you have to lose sight of the shore’
I knew that once I walked through ‘my own business door’ that said‘RISK’, having closed the door behind me, the sign would read, ‘No Going Back’. 
I had read the start up books, done my research, spoken to banks and was ready to start the game and what a game it has turned out to be. There are 64 squares on a chess board and I could fill every one of them with a business subject. Each subject would have its good, bad and ugly side and would incorporate the opening, middle game and end game of business life as seen through my own eyes and hopefully for the benefit of others starting out or just wondering what is around the next corner of their existing business.

‘ASKevin’ 
‘Attitude, Knowledge and Skill’
In a business environment, you need to possess the right attitude, knowledge and skill to succeed. Attitude, includes being positive, confident, enthusiastic, persistent, punctual, humorous, presentable and professional. Knowledge, applies to all areas of business that one is engaged in and in particular, your product knowledge, competitor activity and general business awareness including for example your statutory duties, as in my case, executing the role of company director.
If you don’t ASK, you don’t get and as business is a journey and not a destination, one is learning all the time and acquiring knowledge to apply to your business. Possessing the right attitude and having acquired the knowledge, we should hopefully possess the skill to achieve our goals and desired business results to overcome market forces that we have no control over.

‘I BELIEVE’ 
‘Good Judgment is based on experience and experience is based on bad judgment’
It sounds familiar and the insurance industry makes a considerable living from our own experience or the risk of a bad experience.
This leads me on to the subject of Director Disqualification, a subject which is in the ‘Public Interest’ for the protection of the public at large and my own six-year experience of this so-called ‘Rogues Gallery’ a product of the Government Agency, the Insolvency Service. I therefore, dedicate the past nineteen years of my life to the DTI, and injustice – August 1997 to October 2016.