Para Legal Signed N244 Statement is she Legally allowed?

[Rongo]

I have received a reply to my High Court Claim re Fraud. A Para Legal in Firm representing the Defendant has signed a statement but not the Statement of Truth, as to facts of N244 Form Claim for Fraud. She was provided with Evidence of Documents showing Fraud over 18 months ago, & they are provable. Is a Para Legal Qualified to sign a Statement of Truth, on behalf of a Client? Bearing in mind Defendants are also Solicitors? Is this deliberate?

[R0b]

Hello

It's not clear what you mean a 'statement' but not statement of truth, can you clarify?

As to whether a paralegal is qualified to sign a statement of truth, the answer is yes if the paralegal works for a firm of solicitors.

See Practice Direction 22 para. 3.1

Then look at CPR 2.3 for definition of legal representative, which refers to a solicitor's employee. Paralegals are likely to be regarded as falling in this category.

[Rongo]

Good morning Thank you for response,
Apologies for what is below, is convoluted.
There are (3) Defendants. All Solicitors. It’s my own personal living nightmare! No(3)Defendants. Their Solicitor has signed Statement of Defence. The (2) Others who are now joint Defendants. The Para Legal, who carried out correspondence etc has done a Witness Statement, but I noticed that neither Defendants (1&2) have signed the Statement of Truth contained in the N244 Defence statement. I am trying to ascertain as I am now requesting: that both parties sign a separate Statement of Truth for this N244 re Replies in Defence that, as I understand it is a Solicitor/Partner or all Partners, in each of the Law Firms, involved who should sign this. A Senior person? Not a Para Legal. I am a LiP & know they try to use their knowledge, to avoid requirements. The allegations are Fraud, Breach Fiduciary, failure to disclose to the Court (2016) or myself (2006) Search Documents that (1st) Defendant had produced & obtained in (2006) he destroyed the reports, & concealed the existence of (1st) Searches completely & failed to disclose them, when asked a direct Question, “Could he check if was a sewer”, he Stated that there was not a sewer & all ok, (he committed Fraud again when he lied re the existence of sewer, as per Confirmation of Search letter and (1st) Defendant had written against my Question in Email that “non according to Search & then denied he could remember How matter was dealt with! This sewer turned out to be a big “Reverse Flow Flood Defence Sewer, only Water Company could move. A domestic sewer, would have been no problem,So I am applying to Court to request all (3)Partners involved in (1st) Firm provide a statement of Truth & that (2nd) Defendants also do one, because as as soon as I discovered the (3) Documents I notified everyone of what I had found, and failure to Disclose (1st) Searches to me in (2006) I understand is serious. Plus the Failure to Disclose to Court the existence of same documents even though he no longer had them, the whereabouts of Documents. (1) Contract Letter, Annotated, showing cost of the searches we paid by cheque, struck through & above without (£) sign Cost of searches he disclosed as being the Search results.(2) A search provider Order/Invoice document showing cost & date of the (1st) Search & (3) a “Final Invoice” quoting the only amount we paid, as a payment “on account”, which it was not & quoting the (2nd) amount as “To cost of Searches”, which we were unaware of these events or documents, as had we been, the Prooerty would never have been bought! I had lost appeals to change to Fraud & obtain copy of a document. (3rd) Defendant had acted for me & refused to ask, relevant questions re obviously Fraudulent altered docs, the 2nd Search docs we didn’t know were false” but having had to accept negligence, I was angry, as knew there was Fraud. I determined to make further search for Documents.Bearing in mind I had to move twice before I ever went to Court & moved twice since, & am in process of moving again! the documents I discovered looked just like the same as the rest. Fact is the (1st) Defendants had never disclosed the existence of (2) Searches to us! The (3rd) Defendants, Solicitor, told me “ he was not my Letter Box” as in just to ask questions for me! & if I didn’t (stop asking questions, re the obviously altered (2nd) searches), (which I didn’t know were not the only Searches ordered) he stated “I would have to go back to being a LiP”. I know Fraud is serious allegation but I don’t think a Solicitor is supposed to refuse to make legitimate requests for information, re documents, clearly not a Fishing exercise! Especially in that manner! He was bullying. So I signed release & went back to LiP. I am in my 70’s now & determined not to be as the Lyrics of “The Who” song goes “I won’t get fooled again”. They are claiming I abused process, Vexatious litigation.Wasting Court time.Trying to re approach same arguments. Which, since Appeal to change to Fraud, was refused, and the issue Fraud has never been dealt with by the Court, that is why I started a new claim. As is, I understand correct way to do it, but who am I? I also understand, that as I raised the question of Fraud previously, it shows I tried and that they denied the truth & still withheld knowledge of Fraud..Judge at Appeal hearing had asked their Barrister, were there anymore Documents relating to the issue. Ther Barrister stated, no there were no more documents but the Clients clearly knew there were. A rather Biblical approach when (Peter denied knowing Jesus 3 times!) Not very Ethical with regard to me. Your comments would be appreciated. Kind regards.

[MIKE770]

Rongo = split your posting up into threads for easy reading