Site map and contents

Please note that text in red denotes my comments

Official Solicitor Hall's First Report dated 30 January 1984 to the High Court - Paragraph 5.

5. The Patient's position.
A central feature of this case must, of course, be that of the Patient's capacity to manage his affairs and, in particular, to comprehend any dealings with property or income which had been provided for his benefit and support by his father during the latter's lifetime. I am satisfied, from medical reports provided by 2 consultant psychiatrists in November and December 1978, that the Patient was incapable of managing his affairs at any time since the date of his father's death - on 14 July 1972, and it also appears that he would not have had capacity following the first manifestations of mental illness in 1946 when he was aged 17 years. I am satisfied that this incapacity was known to all the members of the Patient's family at all material times. Mr Herbert Wright explained to me that the possibility that an application might have to be made (following the death of Mr Andrews senior) to have a Committee appointed to manage the Patient's affairs was never considered for the reason that it was known by everyone that any such initiative would cause profound distress to Mrs Minetta Andrews the Patient's mother, who had consistently striven (with her husband) throughout the Patient's lifetime to treat him as a normal member of the family and not to have him "branded" as someone with any handicap or disability. [Why hadn't you the professional courtesy and decency to treat Freddie in a similar manner, Mr. Hall?] The Patient's lack of capacity was obviously known also to Mr Charles E M Gilpin, a long-standing friend [???] of the family, who advised Mrs Andrews and other members of the family in regard to their affairs following Mr Andrews' death and who eventually, in 1973, suggested to them that they might obtain assistance if they placed their affairs, and those of the Patient, in the hands of Messrs Tughan & Co which effectively meant those of Mr. Herbert Wright. [Absolute nonsense, Mr. Hall. Mr. Gilpin confined his 'advice' to my elderly mother. He had no reason to advise Freddie because he knew Freddie would have no understanding of any matters relating to property. Mr. Gilpin was extremely careful NOT to let any other members of our family in on his 'advice' to my elderly and suffering mother simply because he knew he would not have been allowed to interfere in such an underhand manner or be allowed to involve himself in family matters which were absolutely none of his business. We would NEVER have allowed the family legal business to be transferred out of the hands of Boston & Sullivan who were entrusted by my father with good reason and who had done an excellent job for my father. It was part of Mr. Gilpin's plan to have my family's affairs removed from Boston & Sullivan to Herbert Wright for his own selfish ends, and you know that.] Acting on Mr Gilpin's instructions or introduction Mr Wright obtained written authorisations signed by Mrs Andrews and by the Patient, [This was totally criminal for Gilpin and Tughan & Co's employee Herbert Wright to accept a signed statement from my mentally handicapped brother when they both knew he was not capable of making a legal signature, which made a document signed by him meaningless. It was also criminal for these people to conspire to have such a catalogue of property deeds transferred from our family solicitors without the knowledge and consent of all our family members. Of course we all know now why this was done. You know why too, Mr. Hall.] both dated 25 June 1973, which he sent to Miss Sullivan (of Messrs James Boston & Sullivan) with requests for her to hand over the title deeds relating to their respective properties. Miss Sullivan complied with these requests and delivered all the title deeds in accordance with the formal authorisations given. From mid-1973, therefore, until the appointment of Mr Drennan as Committee in January 1979 all the Patient's title deeds relating to properties which have the subject of this review were with the effective control of Mr Wright and I am satisfied that he was the only member of the firm of Tughan & Co who was actively involved with the Patient's property and affairs [Again, Mr. Hall, what utter nonsense. I cannot understand why the Judge did not stop you there and ask how you know this, and, besides, why would you even venture to make such a statement that Herbert Wright was "the only member of the firm of Tughan & Co who was actively involved with the Patient's property and affairs" You were obviously protecting Tughan & Co's Mr. Burgess who was a senior member of the Law Society. Imagine you are the head of a firm of solicitors and a solicitor employed by you succeeded in wresting such an unusually massive portfolio of property deeds from another firm of solicitors. Are you saying that you would not be interested to the extent that you would not involve yourself personally in, at the very least, checking up on how that portfolio was being managed? Isn't it time you started telling the truth? In fact, Mr. Hall, I am beginning to wonder who really is the patient here. It seems you have even greater mental problems than Freddie.] until he handed over the remaining deeds to Mr Drennan. Mr Wright acknowledged to me that virtually from the outset he was aware of the Patient's incapacity but he declared that he, like Mr Gilpin, did not wish to cause distress to Mrs Andrews by raising any proposal for the appointment of a Committee.[And you believe that, Mr. Hall? You really do have a big problem.]

[We now know, Mr. Hall, that Miss Sullivan, solicitor of Boston & Sullivan, was one of the two Trustees appointed by my father to look after my father's affairs after his death. It is beyond question that Miss Sullivan would have taken her duty very seriously. Given the force which drove Mr. Gilpin and Herbert Wright to have their way in so much of our family's affairs, it can only be imagined what pressure, at least, Miss Sullivan was put under by these two men, to hand over all our family's affairs to Tughan & Co. Examples of their unscrupulous ways can be seen here and here. We also now know that, given the content of, at least, the above two links, that the second Trustee appointed by my father, Mr. Burnside, Accountant, of Jackson, Andrews & Co., did not do his duty as Trustee as he had sworn to do on January 15th 1976. It seems that Miss Sullivan was greatly outnumbered and overpowered, just like the Andrews family themselves.]


Site map and contents