Move aside Mrs Baxendine, you’re far too nice. Bring on the big guns – Mr Stuart Valentine (Chairman of Council) enters the fray.

We have received an eloquently worded 14 Point letter outlining Stouts Hill’s robust position. We won’t go over the 14 points in detail but will briefly outline the rather naïve comments of Mr Valentine.

Points 1 to 3 outline the management committee’s professionalism and the nice and fluffy approach they take towards their members. It like a reassurance from your Father that you’re in safe hands.

Points 4 & 5 addresses those nasty unregulated, unqualified lot at Praetorian Legal. These are pretty bold comments in light of the fact that Stouts Hill and Mr Valentine would not know if we are unqualified as they do not know who we are and who we employ. However, the fact is we, Pratorian Legal, are unregulated as we do not operate as solicitors and that why we can offer our clients the legal advice and assistance  they need at a fraction of the cost of a regulated law firm. It should be note however, that Praetorian Legal carry Professional Indemnity insurance for the services we carry out on behalf of our clients. Unregulated does not mean unqualified contrary to Stouts Hill’s opinion.

Points 6 to 14 of Stouts Hill’s letter is merely self-opinion based as to why our client should abide by the Stouts Hill rules to which have no relevance to our client’s legal position in light of her challenging her timeshare agreement via the UK courts.

Point 12 of the Stouts Hill letter is worthy of a mention. Mr Valentine considers that advising our client to breach her contract is ‘immoral’, ‘unethical’ and ‘dishonourable’ and he considers that it is not advice she would be given by a regulated law firm. Sadly, Mr Valentine is mistaken and if an agreement lacks clarity as to exit and termination clauses then breach is the only remedy available in bringing matters to conclusion usually with the intervention of the courts.

Therefore, we have invited to Mr Valentine and Stouts Hill to take the appropriate action but to date they have failed to do so. We are rather bemused by the comments Mr Valentine makes in that his organisation will not be bullied by our client’s ‘so called legal advisors’, Praetorian Legal. This being the case the ‘ball is firmly in the Stouts Hill’s court’ and we have invited them to issue the threaten legal proceedings. One can only sit and wonder what Stouts Hill’s next move will be as they are not going to receive any further monies from our client until they are in receipt of a sealed UK court order compelling our client to pay.

However, any proceedings will be vigorously opposed and the Stouts Hill agreement challenged. A redacted copy of the Stouts Hill letter dated 11 September 2014 can be viewed here>>>> (The name and address has been redacted to protect our own client’s identity.)

No doubt further updates will be forthcoming.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.