Please note that text in red denotes my comments

A letter from Laing to me dated 30/1/1990.

Dear Mrs. Wright,

Re: Francis Street, Smithfield and Millfield, Belfast.

I write with regard to your recent letter to Mr Yescombe of Bank of Tokyo International.

I regret learning that you feel that you have not been kept fully informed on the administration of your brother's affairs. All of this information will have been held by the Official Solicitor's Office, which was acting on your brother's behalf.

You will appreciate that in assembling the site for such a large project a considerable number of separate interests and ownerships are involved. I cannot at this stage provide any information concerning your sisters property. However if she could write to me supply details of the property I would be happy to confirm details of the means by which any acquisition was secured. Turning to your brothers interests, I believe we acquired two separate parcels of land.

    65/69 Smithfield and 1/3 Francis Street

    This was acquired from the Official Solicitor acting on behalf of your brother for a consideration of 150,000. The transaction was completed on 1st October 1987 and was authorised by an Order of Lord Justice McDermott.

    61 Smithfield and 9 Francis Street.

    Negotiations for this site were undertaken originally with Andrews & Co (Belfast) Ltd. However the company was unable to produce title documentation for the site and it transpired that there was a dispute between the company and your brother (represented by the Official Solicitor) as to ownership. Acquisition of this land was in consequence secured by way of the Compulsory Purchase Order negotiated by the Department of the Environment, the Vesting Order for which was dated 13 November 1987. Compensation under this compulsory purchase of 300,000 was awarded and has been paid by Laing.
    Thereafter this sum should have been distributed by the DoE to the various parties holding interests in the site. These arrangements are not something that we are privy to and thus I am unable to comment on to whom the compensation has or will be paid.

    You will see therefore that all issues relating to the previous ownerships of the land and any claims or actions that are pending from such have no effect on the title that we derived from the DoE.

I do believe that the questions raised in your letters impinge upon a range of areas of property law and the administrative trust arrangements of the Official Solicitor. I am unable to advise you on these matters and suggest you seek clarification of these from you lawyer.

I trust that these comments assist.

Yours sincerely

R H Taylor
Joint Managing Director.