Dear Mrs. Bowers,
First of all I would like to thank you most sincerely for allowing me to talk to you. We have never been allowed this privilege except on one occasion when Mr. Hall brought us into his office and told us we must not speak until he said the work 'comment'. Two and a half hours later, when we had tried to interrupt his speech we were informed again that he had not said the word 'comment'. We then decided that it was time to go home.
My elderly mother, after my father's death, was totally under the control of Mr. C. Gilpin the "Christian" entrepreneur and his solicitor Mr. Herbert Wright with the result she also lost her interest in my father's firm. Solicitor, executor and trustee of my father's Will, Miss G. Sullivan handed over Feddie's and my mother's estate to Mr. Herbert Wright and unfortunately we, the other members of our family, were not informed.
When my father was alive he gave Freddie a small wage which he put in the Bank. My mother had access to this and kept using it after my father died. The Bank Manager was aware that this money was to keep Freddie and made no objection. Is this what Miss Sullivan is referring to? My mother kept Freddie, paid all household bills including rates etc but this has been conveniently overlooked.
Even when we put Freddie into the 'Care' of the Courts, she still paid oil bills, electric bills, and £20 per week for taxis to take Freddie to the Unit in Purdysburn Hospital. These bills were paid by cheque and can therefore be verified. We posted the mail for her.
So this idea that my mother deliberately went out to defraud Freddie is unbelievable. She was only one more pawn in Mr C. Gilpin's hands. She was compelled to use her own money for Freddie's expenses.
Neither my mother nor members of our family had access to Freddie's money as it was put in the Industrial Bank in Bangor under the names of Charles Gilpin and Herbert Wright so there was no way my mother could have taken money out of this account. Solicitor Miss Sullivan was not involved and could have had no knowledge of what took place when all Freddie's and my mother's affairs were totally in the hands of Charles Gilpin and Herbert Wright after my father's death. We had to wait until we brought the fraud squad in to find all this out.
We found Official Solicitor Hall's threat in Court to sequest my mother's money was sickening to say the least especially when she could not defend herself. We had to ask the Doctor to give us a note to say she must not be disturbed. Mr. Hall even delivered mail to her when she could not even read or understand anything at that time because of her illness and old age. Why a woman of 90 had to be attacked in this way is very hard to understand.
The people who divested Freddie of Windtavern Street and Little King Street, his home at 14 Castlehill Road and Francis Street, his showroom and ground and his property at 14/16 Marquis Street were never attacked. Why???
The way out of this mess appeared to be to accept all sales as correct and get rid of Francis Street and Freddie's large showroom and ground as soon as possible. It was considered legal and right. We did not fight this case for eight years for money but for Justice and to protect a mental patient.
Messrs. Laing in the first sale agreement was apparently supposed to sell this property back to Neville Johnston, Mr. Charles Gilpin's Company. What happened to that agreement? Messrs. Laing needs this and obviously cannot continue with the shopping complex CastleCourt until they get this showroom and Francis Street so there was no rush to throw it away in order to accomodate Messrs. Laing. As far as all these people are concerned, Freddie doesn't need the money. Freddie's family have no rights and have been treated up until now as of no concern. In fact and in practice they have been accused and treated like criminals.
We fought for eight years to get all Freddie's properties back. We even walked up and down outside the showroom in protest and wrote to the Ryland Group with the result we managed to get the showroom back. We understand the Ryland Group took action against Messrs Tughan & Co. So since Freddie was put in the 'Care' of the Courts we have not been idle. If both Official Solicitors had spent more time in investigating the sales of these properties instead of attacking an old woman we would have had no need to approach the Fraud Squad.
We do wish we had met you eight years ago. It would have saved us going through Court hearings that were valueless. We will never understand how Freddie's signature on legal documents was accepted by the Official Solicitor and the Courts.
The Fraud Officer who was three and a half years on our case exposed fraud, forgery, misappropriation etc. Official Solicitor Hall has a copy of his investigation yet he found it necessary to call all these official police findings "notes and jottings" and NEVER brought them, nor did he allow anyone else to bring them, to the attention of the High Court Judge to whom he made his own reports. It makes things less complicated if you attack an old woman and deny Freddie of his basic human rights. Even my older brother, Billy, lost everything too and spent a year under his doctor's care after he was forced out of the family business my father had left him.
Solicitor Miss Sullivan took Counsel's advice about Billy's genuine and legal attempt to purchase Freddie's showroom but it was turned down because of Freddie's incapacity because the deal would have had to go through the Courts and the Courts would not have approved it. So there are obviously double standards here, one set of standards for our family and another set of standards for all the other people involved in the 'purchase' of Freddie's properties.
I do hope by explaining things that you will see the situation from the family's situation. We have not been allowed to put these important points forward - in Court for example.
We are sorry you have been landed with such a mess but we will be only too glad to help you in any way we can.
(Mrs) Eileen Wright
Unfortunately, Official Solicitor Mrs. Deirdre Bowers did not live up to our expectations but carried on just as her predecessors had done - see this and this