Submitted by ROK (as a comment)
Attorney General and Deputy Prime Minister Freundel Stuart
It would be good to get to the bottom of the problem with Violet Beckles. She went through so many lawyers and non lawyers as well as Government Departments like the Land Registry, UDC and the Minister of Social Transformation himself) that it ain’t funny and can’t get a piece of the land for which she has papers.
Ms. Beckles has papers for land all over Barbados: Halls Road, Whitepark, Lightfoot Lane, Sandy Lane, Kensington, Christ Church; you name it, Beckles got papers for land there. She claims to have inherited all the land belonging to a lady she used to work for. Apparently, this lady used to buy land with every cent she had. She seemed to be fixated on buying land.
When the lady died, it was either that she had no children or trusted Mrs. Beckles to handle the land (I think she had a stepson). Mrs. Beckles has two problems. First she never had the lands transferred into her name as they are still in the name of the lady she said gave them to her. So while there is proof that the lady owned the land, there is no proof linking the land to Mrs. Beckles; nothing to connect back to her.
Second, she never made a move to collect rent on the properties and establish control. For example, a doctor set up a clinic on a piece in Sandy Lane; there is also Kensington oval and now the Courts of justice, but Mrs. Beckles never came forward to own the land until something big was happening to the land.
All these lands were being occupied by persons without let or hindrance for more than fifty years. How do you uproot somebody after the statute of limitations on land has expired and the occupants have gone to the lengths to get a good title?
I told Mrs. Beckles a long time ago that she is treasuring the papers and she must get up and deal with the land. She did not trust anybody to even see the deeds. I believe that today, especially because of the statute of limitations that her deeds are worthless against any land for which a title was subsequently issued.
In other words, children who came along living on the lands with their parents genuinely believed that their parents owned the land. Let me throw in a scenario which happened nearly ten years ago.
I got a call from an elderly man from St. Lucy (somebody put him on to me) who said he got notice to move off his own land which he had bought many years ago. Apparently, when the tenantry was up for sale, he bought his and a piece that his friend was on because the friend could not pay for the land.
This was allowed by the plantation and was actually recorded in the plantation log. However at that time no papers were issued for the lands.
In the meantime the children of his friend grew up thinking that the land belonged to their father. All those children subsequently left home and emigrated. Therefore, having not received any payment for the land and his friend dead and gone, the old man occupied the land since he purchased it. He gave his home to his wife and children and he took control of the land which his friend occupied but which was his.
One of his friend’s sons had come back to take control of what he felt was his father’s land. He proceeded to file a title suit, got it and then went on to give the old man notice to move and had actually gone to further lengths with plans to develop the land.
The long and short is that the lawyer handling the case withdrew the suit and informed his client. I gave him all the proof collected and he was finished with his search, he was satisfied that the old man was the proper owner and since he was occupying his own lands, no statute of limitations could be applied and as a matter of fact the son could not claim that he was occupying the land without let or hindrance.
This is therefore, Ms. Beckles mistake. She never took control. It is such a pity because she would have been a multi millionaire today, rather than the condition in which I last saw her. Not sure where she is or her condition now.
The main question to ask though is what caused her to sit on the title deeds and not try to collect a cent in rent from any of those properties or even secure them from squatters and encroachers over all those years?
It would be good to get to the bottom of the problem with Violet Beckles. She went through so many lawyers and non lawyers as well as Government Departments like the Land Registry, UDC and the Minister of Social Transformation himself) that it ain’t funny and can’t get a piece of the land for which she has papers. Ms. Beckles has papers for land all over Barbados: Halls Road, Whitepark, Lightfoot Lane, Sandy Lane, Kensington, Christ Church; you name it, Beckles got papers for land there. She claims to have inherited all the land belonging to a lady she used to work for. Apparently, this lady used to buy land with every cent she had. She seemed to be fixated on buying land. When the lady died, it was either that she had no children or trusted Mrs. Beckles to handle the land (I think she had a stepson).
Mrs. Beckles has two problems. First she never had the lands transferred into her name as they are still in the name of the lady she said gave them to her. So while there is proof that the lady owned the land, there is no proof linking the land to Mrs. Beckles; nothing to connect back to her. Second, she never made a move to collect rent on the properties and establish control. For example, a doctor set up a clinic on a piece in Sandy Lane; there is also Kensington oval and now the Courts of justice, but Mrs. Beckles never came forward to own the land until something big was happening to the land. All these lands were being occupied by persons without let or hindrance for more than fifty years. How do you uproot somebody after the statute of limitations on land has expired and the occupants have gone to the lengths to get a good title?
I told Mrs. Beckles a long time ago that she is treasuring the papers and she must get up and deal with the land. She did not trust anybody to even see the deeds. I believe that today, especially because of the statute of limitations that her deeds are worthless against any land for which a title was subsequently issued. In other words, children who came along living on the lands with their parents genuinely believed that their parents owned the land. Let me throw in a scenario which happened nearly ten years ago. I got a call from an elderly man from St. Lucy (somebody put him on to me) who said he got notice to move off his own land which he had bought many years ago. Apparently, when the tenantry was up for sale, he bought his and a piece that his friend was on because the friend could not pay for the land. This was allowed by the plantation and was actually recorded in the plantation log. However at that time no papers were issued for the lands. In the meantime the children of his friend grew up thinking that the land belonged to their father. All those children subsequently left home and emigrated. Therefore, having not received any payment for the land and his friend dead and gone, the old man occupied the land since he purchased it. He gave his home to his wife and children and he took control of the land which his friend occupied but which was his. One of his friend’s sons had come back to take control of what he felt was his father’s land. He proceeded to file a title suit, got it and then went on to give the old man notice to move and had actually gone to further lengths with plans to develop the land.
The long and short is that the lawyer handling the case withdrew the suit and informed his client. I gave him all the proof collected and he was finished with his search, he was satisfied that the old man was the proper owner and since he was occupying his own lands, no statute of limitations could be applied and as a matter of fact the son could not claim that he was occupying the land without let or hindrance. This is therefore, Ms. Beckles mistake. She never took control. It is such a pity because she would have been a multi millionaire today, rather than the condition in which I last saw her. Not sure where she is or her condition now.
The main question to ask though is what caused her to sit on the title deeds and not try to collect a cent in rent from any of those properties or even secure them from squatters and encroachers over all those years?
Barbados Underground 
I do not, of course, know the full facts of the matter, but is Ms Beckles claiming that POSSESSION of the title deeds give her a right to OWNERSHIP of the lands?
Physical possession of the land deeds means nothing unless the deceased owner of the lands left the lands to Mrs. Beckles in her will. I also have to wonder what Mrs. Beckles definition of “gave” her the deeds to the land means exactly.
We can be heartless and as Anonymous has surmised see possession of the deeds as meaning nothing making this a slam dunk case.
What would be interesting is to ascertain if all the tenants who currently occupy the lands being contested by Violet Beckles have a duty whether moral or otherwise to determine clear title to lands they occupy. This is interesting especially in the case of those tenants who would surely have borrowed from financial institutions through the years. Isn’t a prerequisite to have title to land when borrowing to erect structures?
I thought this saga had died a natural death.
Ths is an extremely complicated case. There are so many questions answered, the answers of each of which would affect the outcome. Here are the first one of MANY.
Is there actually a will leaving these properties to Ms. Beckles? If the answer is yes, then you may be able to proceed. If no, she has a problem.
You need to establish what Ms. Beckles alleged entitlement actually is. That is step one and there is no point in proceeding any further until that is known. Foregt about statutes of limitatins, squatters rights, land taxes – all. They cannot even be considered, until you establish on what basis ownership is claimed.
We have many legal eagles who frequent BU, show this old woman a light JUST in the event she is the victim. The law cannot always show itself to be an ass at the most delicate of times.
@David, it would be impossible to advise without a full statement of the facts; in the absence of this we can only hazard useless guesses. Much as we might feel some sympathy for Ms Beckles, Anon @4:12 pm is right. We need to determine her “actual” entitlement. One does not acquire title to land in this jurisdiction merely by asserting that the former owner left it for you; on her death bed or otherwise.
“The law cannot always show itself to be an ass at the most delicate of times.”
I find this statement almost incomprehensible. The law is shown to be an ass only when the letter of the law is not followed.
ROK,
I T’OUGHT YOU WERE DEALING WID BL&P. What shite this is ’bout Becles now…? You can’ be in two places at de same time….!
Errol Niles just get a’ international big boy to admit that his expert submission to de FTC on behalf of the BL&P people is based on a Null Hypothesis and should be taken with a pinch of salt and you talking ‘bout Beckles? DIS IS NEWS THAT STARCOM AIN” GUN CARRY…!
I, myslef, have some questions. Who has been paying the taxes on these lands for the past 50 years. Why did she wait all these years to come forward. How did she come by the deeds? Did she know what they were at the time she acquired them? Did she just take them from the lady’s house? Did she occupy the lady’s house or any of her property?
Is it not possible that she stole these ‘papers’ from the dead old lady and was afraid to act?
@ROK
In as much as you have a relationship can you try one more time to do some investigative work here? Know you are busy but…
@Anonymous
The saying “the law can be an ass” in the Bajan lexicon is well known and most BAJANS should understand, if you don’t agree you are entitled.
Never overlook the fact that the law is no ass..
.. but the people who administer it are
Posession is still 9/10 of the law.
Immediately the old lady died Mrs. Beckles should have acted to assert her ownership of the lands if she believed that the properties had been left to her.
She should have occupied or rented out the houses and collected rents for the lands, and paid the taxes, and then she should have gone to court to have legal title transferred to her.
Let us suppose that I married in 1940. In 1950 my husband migrated and shortly thereafter set up home and family with another woman. I did not see my husband at all between 1950 and 2000 when he died. There was no divorce. At the time of his death am I the widow, because I hold the marriage certificate? or is the other woman the widow since she held the man for 50 years?
@Jeff
All I can tell you is that I saw maybe volume 1 of the deeds because there were so many. What I did was try to run down some of the larger pieces.
Her main point is that possession of the deeds gives her the right to the land. She does have a will which she claims is the last will and testament of Beatrice.
This looked so straightforward to me that I could not believe she could not get back one piece. We took the deeds to the land registry and found matching documents; did the search.
On hindsight, one thing I personally did not try to establish was the authenticity of the will. I think that I left it alone because it needed an attorney to take it the rest of the way. She just could not find one.
My summary is that it is either that she would uproot too many people of importance in Barbados or she genuinely does not have a case. Those are the possible reasons for attorneys not taking it on.
@David,
This one needs more than I can give. If Jeff has the time I can certainly introduce him to her.
@J: in this case Mrs. Beckles did not establish possession, the occupiers did.
Now you understand why she lost.
@Pat: That may be the next problem. I don’t think Mrs. Beckles was paying taxes, but then that is a problem between the state and her.
Pat, your question is the second one I would have asked. I would like an answer to the first one, without which we cannot go anywhere.
ROK, having possession of the title deeds means absolutely NOTHING. If that is all she has, then there is nothing that establishes her ownership of the lands as the name on the title deeds will likely not be hers. Ask her if she has a will leaving the properties to her and if so, the legal eagles at BU need to see it.
Then, we will get into Pat’s question about taxes and distressed possession etc.
J, your comments are completely off point. The lady is not advancing a claim of matrimonial rights, but of inheritance rights. You don’t understand ROK’s question and request at all. Re-read what the man has said…..SLOWLY…… and try to open your mind to his questions.
Some weeks ago, BU carried a post seeking the institution of basic legal studies in our school classrooms. I sincerely believe that ROK’s post highlights and underpins this desperate and completely ignored need. We see Pat, not a lawyer but who has worked in law, go unerringly from my question of the nature of Ms. Beckles supposed entitlement right, to land taxes and distressed possession. AND SHE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!
Without any basis or other information other than that supplied to date by ROK to support my guesstimate, I would say that Ms. Beckles probably (a) did not have an entitlement in the first place (i.e. the old lady from whom she claims to have inherited merely handed her title deeds (which does not confer title on Ms. Beckles) but did not execute a will (which would have conferred title on Ms. Beckles)); (b) others have been in posession of and paying land taxes on these lands for a period well in advance of that prescribed by law and are therefore allowed (if they have not already done so) to claim distressed possession of the lands and have title deeds issued vesting title in them.
You are mistaken, ROK, in your answer to Pat, in that the payment of taxes may well NOT be a simple matter between Ms. Beckles and the State. Indeed, the State may have exercized its right long ago and advertised and sold those properties in settlement of outstanding land taxes.
Get us more information, ROK, but I must be honest, it does not look good.
BAFBFP // October 18, 2009 at 6:16 PM. People of real stature and commitment like ROK are capable of taking on far more than just one issue at a time. Indeed, they are impelled to do so. Which is what makes them people of real stature and commitment who are ready (and able) to take on BL&P and others like them. Don’t try to limit and restrict their commitment to our society.
@ROK,
One important piece of information is that she had a will which she purported to be “the last will and testament of Beatrice”. This document, if valid, is the key to the matter…
@J @10:50pm
The maxim “possession is nine tenths of the law”, for all its populism, is meaningless and inaccurate. The person with TITLE has the whole ten tenths!
Rok,
You should file an application to the courts on her behalf, but remember that the legal boffins thrive on making financial matters as complicated as possible in the legal minefields to convert assets and properties into legal costs, so remember you must get your act together and shit sorted.
@Anon
In terms of the land taxes, I meant it as you put it over.
I agree with your assessment of her overall position because what she has been doing is trying to get people to acknowledge her right rather than exercise her right. It is truly a question of her entitlement which is throwing doubt in her direction.
That is where I had to leave it off. All I can tell you is that she had some formidable people fighting on her behalf including a Senior Housing Planner at the UDC who was at the time trying to establish ownership of tenantries so that occupants could purchase their tenantry lands.
Ms. Beckles case threw up a lot of doubt over the ownership of places like Halls Road which was in the news. I think David Seale had come forward as the person who was collecting rents in Halls Road.
Ms. Beckles has backed off every single case of land dispute without it going the distance, so far. As a matter of fact, those who asserted their rights over Ms. Beckles did not get any further resistance from her, except for these exposes in the news every now and again.
That does not mean she does not have a right, I think the expense would have been too much for her, but having been there and seeing the general responses and dismissals to her claims, I can tell you that you are correct in saying it really does not look good.
@Jeff Cumberbatch
You are obviously correct. How can this will be validated?
@Jeff Cumberbatch
I am willing to work with you if you are willing to pursue the will. It is the only road that makes any sense.
One thing I can tell you is that Mrs. Beckles does not want those papers out of her sight so if this can be done by extracting info from the will; to find a copy in the registry or otherwise prove that it was Beatrice’s last will, let me know and I will proceed as you direct.
PLEASE REMOVE YOUR PHOTO
AND PLEASE USE ANOTHER NAME
————–ROK——————-
ROK and Jeff. If Jeff is working on it with you, ROK, it is in excellent hands. If you need any input from me, let me know. It is not going to be easy and I also have to warn that David Seale, if he is indeed involved, does not take short cuts. No way he would be charging rents without having reasonable belief that he was entitled to do so. Also, if he does not have entitlement, once this is proved to him, I think you will find that he will come to a satisfactory settlement very swiftly and without any bad faith. He is not going to fight an unpopular case in which he is wrong. He relies on Bajans buying his goods.
This is a case well worth following by the BU family. It is likely to demonstrate and inform on what can and what cannot be done in land law in Barbados. It is far more important to the average Bajan that the fate of RAMSAR and the Graeme Hall Nature Sactuary and what happens when an exclusive bunch of millionaires fall out. I hope we will be kept up to date.
@ ROK,
I would say that the first thing for her to do is to get the will probated. If Ms. Beckles is lucky it won’t be challenged. I think we all agree that if she is going to assert any interest in the land it will be by virtue of the will. As a matter of expedition, Ms. Beckles may want to seek a Grant ad litem, which is a grant of administration that will give her the right to bring an action on behalf of the estate of the deceased person (who presumably has proper title to the property). Perhaps if she went this route she won’t have to wait for action to be taken by the executors named in the will.
It would be in her best interest to do this as soon as possible because it seems that this matter has been going on for quite some time. If that is the case, time has probably started to run for the purposes of adverse possession.
@Jeff
You said:
“The maxim “possession is nine tenths of the law”, for all its populism, is meaningless and inaccurate.”
I am going to disagree slightly with your comment here Jeff. The maxim is not entirely meaningless (but it is misleading). A person in possession of land (who has displayed an intention to exclude all others) has rights against everyone except a person who can show better title. If a paper owner fails to take action protect his/her interest in the land within ten years then they lose the right to bring an action in court to recover possession. So bearing that in mind I would say that possession of land (which is adverse to the true owners of the property) is about six tenths of the law.
Brian Power
I understand that ROK is an ol’ Lodge Boy. That is the necessary and sufficient condition for his not being considered a homosexual. You should seriosly consider someone else to stalk. Try BFP, probably your best option in blogosphere. Hook up with a Bourne!
Anonlegal, might we be jumping the gun by applying for an adminstrator (ad litem or otherwise) at this stage? Surely we need to establish who the named executors are first (if any) and if they are still alive. If they are alive, we have to establish if they are prepared to serve and, if not to apply for the court to appoint executors. I have not done this sort of thing for a long time, but surely the application for probate and letters testimentory will effectively stay anything to do with the land or dispossition of it until after probate is granted. Once it is granted and with executors in place, surely we don’t want an ad litem adminsitrator? What are your thoughts on that? Of course, first off we need to see this will (or rather Jeff does). I would have thought it better just to apply for probate and go through that process first and then the executors can do what is needed once they have the authority of the courts to take the place, as personal representatives, of the testatrix. Cleaner and less expensive.
I agree with your percentage on distressed possession, but might have put it just a tad higher.
Very interesting case.
This thing seems capable of fairly easy resolution, and yet nothing has been done after all these years? And after so many lawyers have allegedly seen the documents? Something just does not seem right, and if the will has not yet been probated, why not?
I am minded to see what I can do but I shall be very busy until the end of November. Incidentally, isn’t Dr Lenda Blackman now working on this matter?
@ Anonlegal,
Agreed about the adverse possession point, but you know that if the adverse possessor is one day short of the required limitation period, the true owner can step in, assert his title and succeed in his claim! Perhaps, one tenth of the law (smile).
@ Anonlegal
Are Letters of Administration only applied for if there is no will and one wants to continue to manage the estate until it is settled? If there is a legal will why would one apply for Letters of Admin. Did the probate laws and laws intestate change in Barbados?
Good points Anon.
To be honest, I actually didn’t click on the link in ROK’s submission. I just did so and read the court decision.
It seems that Violet obtained letters of administration with will annexed in 1986 (which probably means that executors were deceased or that none was named in the first place).
The biggest problem Violet faced (based on the court decision) is that the court was not convinced of the authenticity of the deed on which she relied. It seems that the deed in question was not properly stamped or executed nor was it recorded. She may be in some problems if all the deeds in her possession are similar.
Pat:
Yes, the grant of administration issued when there is no will is called letters of administration.
The grant of administration issued when there is a will with no named executors is called a letters of administration with will annexed.
Probate is granted when there is a will with named executors who want to prove the authenticity of the will.
In a way, they are all grants of administration that are given different names based on the circumstances.
@Anon
I read in the Telegraph last year, where a tenant in a one million pound house in London did not pay rent for ten years over some disputed repairs with his landlord.
Apparently, there is a law under which he applied for title ownership and the courts declared the property his. In another case a man had squatted and built a shack on a beautiful parcel in the countryside and applied for ownership, under the said law, and got 5 acres with a trout stream to boot.
Does this law, I assume it to be Common, also apply in Barbados? If so, Mrs. Beckles has probably lost everything by now, if, and only if, she was the legal owner.
In another case closer to home. A lady owned quite a sizable piece of land in Cave Hill. She discussed with me bequests she wanted to make to the children. I advised her to transfer the land while she was alive and forestall any sibling quarrels and rivalry. I advised her how to go about it and she did.
At that time, she told me there was a lady who was good to her, who would help with the laundry, etc. and because of this she never charged rent.
The original tenant lady died. The landowner’s daughter is now owner of that piece of land. The tenants son is living in the house and has not paid any rent either. Now the daughter has him in court and wants rents or removal.
When I was home this March, the brother told me the story. I, more or less was noncommittal, not wanting to play both sides. The son holds that all he is going to do, if he cant get the land free, or continue to live rent free, is to apply for it under the tenantry act as it has more than 5 tenants on it and he has lived there all his life.
Problem is the original owner is now in a nursing home suffering alzsheimers and dont know anything.
What is your take on this case. It is now in the Court.
Pat, if it is in court, I can’t comment. As for the ones in the UK, these sorts of cases crop up there regularly. I have a vague recollection of reading the one you speak of. You are right also that an administrator would not usually be needed except in cases of intestacy.
Jeff, I agree that the case ought to have been easily resolvable and, like you, that it has not been settled, makes me think that something may not be quite right. However, I think we have to take on board that 50 years ago there were extensive incidents of people not even recording their title deeds, but keeping them under the bed or somewhere like that. Who really knows what the story is here. Usually a body with so many parcels of land would have kept the deeds in a deed box in their solicitor’s fire-proof vault – and they would have been recorded. However, I know of many cases where when people got old they wanted to have the deeds with them to take out and look at. But there is something here we are missing.
Fascinating.
Poor Ms. Beckles “oh what a tangeled web weave when we practiced to deceive”.What took her so long to straighten out this problem.I guess she already knew the answer but after all this time shethink that if politicians can get away with owning other people land maybe she can too.ms beckles give it a rest you can”t win .but then againif at first you don’t succeed try try again.good luck
People cyan learn to charge rent, even only one dollar a month, if y’all want to be kind?
As for de leffin to chill’un, effin yuh doing it, leave it clearly said and communicate to all.
Some people does be wicked enuff, even wid dem siblings.
Money makes some people intuh monsters…or maybe dem is just monsters an de money brings it to the fore….
Ef yuh let somebody stay pun land, chrage dem at least nominal rent!
Wid a rent book and receipt!
@ Doffie Greenidge
I agree with you. However, the owner told me that she did not know what to do with that piece and that she was not going to start charging rent. She also told the daughter that she was not charging rent for this particular spot and why.
I understand that as soon as the mother got sick, the daughter went to Bim and got herself a lawyer to force the man to pay rent. I think he has been given good advice and to date has not paid a penny, neither has he moved. I know he was served by the baliff, but where the case is now I am not sure.
I dont know the land, but understand it is sizable in Well Gap, Cave Hill. The land is rather narrow as the government expropriated some to build a road for the tenants and others.
I remember the owner going down to negotiate because, in her opinion, the government was not offering enough.
My take is that the daughter may be out of pocket and forced to sell at nominal rates as tenantry land. She should have chosen the piece in St. Lawrence right on the main road – higher value. The mother told me she was going to let her choose hers first.
Long words with little or no research , Violet Beckles use lawyers from the time Her Aunt BEATRICE HENRY DIED DECEMBER 13 ,1985. Sir Richard L Cheltenham Attorney at Law , Who took the original DEEDS and told Violet he cant find them , Cheltenham then went it to Business with Sir Charles O Williams AKA COW , ASk COW-Williams where is his DEEDS for all that land he claim he own Violet Beckles show deeds for the same land.Violet always try to get her rents but The lawyers like Richard P.Byer , Ralph Thorne QC or Quick Crook,Caroline Hurbert , G.Dennis Clarke QC, Balfour S Layne,Jennifer King,Lindsay Bolden,Ivan Jessimmi Cicely P Chase,N Keith Simmons,Roland Toppin,UDC Directors and their lawyers with a so called land bank.Samanth Cummings lawyer for NHC now in the land Registry , Stealing buy using the court with Fraud backed dated deeds where all needs must go back to a Plantation deed.Deeds begin same year and time as Henry died.Land tax transfer land tax numbers with no deeds,using every thing but deed to turn on water , letters from lawyers and there the one who rent out and get the rents. Albout 60 lawyers was paid by Violet Beckles and most of them took her land , hide the deeds , kept her rents as there own , till this day the land never sold , St Marys Church was getting the rents till about a month ago they stop after the news hit the radio and streets. News papers in Barbados so far dont want to carry the news any more for all them on the land also , Patrick M.T.Todd, Dennis Lowe, Christopher P.Sinckler,and other Minsters will not tell the truth, thats why they were removed before and here we go again still not telling the truth. The New COURT is also in Violet Beckels land not even the Chief Justice Simmons Have a GOOD deed FOR THE LAND IT SITS ON ,Oct4th 2004 He said then the BY DEED ALONE, and the court will move against land FRAUD and look where the court is and you place the court on that site?FRAUD SQUAD DEALING NOW , RUN ALL YOU QUICK CROOK LAWYERS AND SIR THIS AND SIR THE BIGGER CROOKS.WE WILL NEED MORE FUNDING TO MAKE THE JAIL BIGGER.So to say Violet Beckles did not do nothing is not True, misleading ,, We Will ask the Question , if Violet did not get paid for the Court land Who did ? and who did the court pay or took the land from , lets see the deeds from the court, Hope they not paid out to the wrong people like the UDC for years even thow they have to see and know the real deal.How can you tell Violet Beckles they cant pay out twice and she never got paid once?Ask Margaret Talma Chief Project Officer at the UDC . Talma is one of few who still at the UDC all went home for Udc was set up as a cash COW for the lawyers who stealing the Estate of Violet Beckles ,or go there to buy land , UDC dont own no land to have had a land BANK , that is and still is Violet Beckles land.Family land ,UDC# 1-246-228-8285, fax 228-8284. My cell 246-263-276 1,,,, MASSIVE FRUAD.The HIGHT COURT HAVE TO PAID FOR BEFORE CASES CAN BE HEARD …THE COURT IS A IN TRESPASS FRAUD STATE ,,, NEXT MOVE
Long words with little or no research , Violet Beckles use lawyers from the time Her Aunt BEATRICE HENRY DIED DECEMBER 13 ,1985. Sir Richard L Cheltenham Attorney at Law , Who took the original DEEDS and told Violet he cant find them , Cheltenham then went it to Business with Sir Charles O Williams AKA COW , ASk COW-Williams where is his DEEDS for all that land he claim he own Violet Beckles show deeds for the same land.Violet always try to get her rents but The lawyers like Richard P.Byer , Ralph Thorne QC or Quick Crook,Caroline Hurbert , G.Dennis Clarke QC, Balfour S Layne,Jennifer King,Lindsay Bolden,Ivan Jessimmi Cicely P Chase,N Keith Simmons,Roland Toppin,UDC Directors and their lawyers with a so called land bank.Samanth Cummings lawyer for NHC now in the land Registry , Stealing buy using the court with Fraud backed dated deeds where all needs must go back to a Plantation deed.Deeds begin same year and time as Henry died.Land tax transfer land tax numbers with no deeds,using every thing but deed to turn on water , letters from lawyers and there the one who rent out and get the rents. Albout 60 lawyers was paid by Violet Beckles and most of them took her land , hide the deeds , kept her rents as there own , till this day the land never sold , St Marys Church was getting the rents till about a month ago they stop after the news hit the radio and streets. News papers in Barbados so far dont want to carry the news any more for all them on the land also , Patrick M.T.Todd, Dennis Lowe, Christopher P.Sinckler,and other Minsters will not tell the truth, thats why they were removed before and here we go again still not telling the truth. The New COURT is also in Violet Beckels land not even the Chief Justice Simmons Have a GOOD deed FOR THE LAND IT SITS ON ,Oct4th 2004 He said then the BY DEED ALONE, and the court will move against land FRAUD and look where the court is and you place the court on that site?FRAUD SQUAD DEALING NOW , RUN ALL YOU QUICK CROOK LAWYERS AND SIR THIS AND SIR THE BIGGER CROOKS.WE WILL NEED MORE FUNDING TO MAKE THE JAIL BIGGER.So to say Violet Beckles did not do nothing is not True, misleading ,, We Will ask the Question , if Violet did not get paid for the Court land Who did ? and who did the court pay or took the land from , lets see the deeds from the court, Hope they not paid out to the wrong people like the UDC for years even thow they have to see and know the real deal.How can you tell Violet Beckles they cant pay out twice and she never got paid once?Ask Margaret Talma Chief Project Officer at the UDC . Talma is one of few who still at the UDC all went home for Udc was set up as a cash COW for the lawyers who stealing the Estate of Violet Beckles ,or go there to buy land , UDC dont own no land to have had a land BANK , that is and still is Violet Beckles land.Family land ,UDC# 1-246-228-8285, fax 228-8284. My cell 246-263-276 1,,,, MASSIVE FRUAD.The HIGHT COURT HAVE TO PAID FOR BEFORE CASES CAN BE HEARD …THE COURT IS A IN TRESPASS FRAUD STATE ,,, NEXT MOVE
Long words with little or no research , Violet Beckles use lawyers from the time Her Aunt BEATRICE HENRY DIED DECEMBER 13 ,1985. Sir Richard L Cheltenham Attorney at Law , Who took the original DEEDS and told Violet he cant find them , Cheltenham then went it to Business with Sir Charles O Williams AKA COW , ASk COW-Williams where is his DEEDS for all that land he claim he own Violet Beckles show deeds for the same land.Violet always try to get her rents but The lawyers like Richard P.Byer , Ralph Thorne QC or Quick Crook,Caroline Hurbert , G.Dennis Clarke QC, Balfour S Layne,Jennifer King,Lindsay Bolden,Ivan Jessimmi Cicely P Chase,N Keith Simmons,Roland Toppin,UDC Directors and their lawyers with a so called land bank.Samanth Cummings lawyer for NHC now in the land Registry , Stealing buy using the court with Fraud backed dated deeds where all needs must go back to a Plantation deed.Deeds begin same year and time as Henry died.Land tax transfer land tax numbers with no deeds,using every thing but deed to turn on water , letters from lawyers and there the one who rent out and get the rents. Albout 60 lawyers was paid by Violet Beckles and most of them took her land , hide the deeds , kept her rents as there own , till this day the land never sold , St Marys Church was getting the rents till about a month ago they stop after the news hit the radio and streets. News papers in Barbados so far dont want to carry the news any more for all them on the land also , Patrick M.T.Todd, Dennis Lowe, Christopher P.Sinckler,and other Minsters will not tell the truth, thats why they were removed before and here we go again still not telling the truth. The New COURT is also in Violet Beckels land not even the Chief Justice Simmons Have a GOOD deed FOR THE LAND IT SITS ON ,Oct4th 2004 He said then the BY DEED ALONE, and the court will move against land FRAUD and look where the court is and you place the court on that site?FRAUD SQUAD DEALING NOW , RUN ALL YOU QUICK CROOK LAWYERS AND SIR THIS AND SIR THE BIGGER CROOKS.WE WILL NEED MORE FUNDING TO MAKE THE JAIL BIGGER.So to say Violet Beckles did not do nothing is not True, misleading ,, We Will ask the Question , if Violet did not get paid for the Court land Who did ? and who did the court pay or took the land from , lets see the deeds from the court, Hope they not paid out to the wrong people like the UDC for years even thow they have to see and know the real deal.How can you tell Violet Beckles they cant pay out twice and she never got paid once?Ask Margaret Talma Chief Project Officer at the UDC . Talma is one of few who still at the UDC all went home for Udc was set up as a cash COW for the lawyers who stealing the Estate of Violet Beckles ,or go there to buy land , UDC dont own no land to have had a land BANK , that is and still is Violet Beckles land.Family land ,UDC# 1-246-228-8285, fax 228-8284. My cell 1,,,, MASSIVE FRUAD.The HIGHT COURT HAVE TO PAID FOR BEFORE CASES CAN BE HEARD …THE COURT IS A IN TRESPASS FRAUD STATE ,,, NEXT MOVE
Here we go again, this is embarrassing isn’t it?
What does a person need to prove ownership of property in Barbados ?
Given that Legal documents prepared by a Lawyer are required it should be an easy question for Jeff Cumberbatch or anonlegal to answer.
If Lawyers in Barbados have pride in their profession they would seek to eliminate the perception that they are a bunch of crooks manipulating the legal system for personal gain.
@Hants
It is not in the interest of lawyers so to do, with all due respect to Jeff Cumberbatch and Anonlegal. In fact in the local news this weekend Peter Boos a retired partner with Ernst & Young issued the challenge to Barbados policymakers that much of the fraud and dishonesty currently underway in the local profession can be cleaned up by making audits mandatory on lawyers client accounts. He indicated that these audits are routine in many other jurisdictions. Why can’t we introduce in Barbados? What would it require?
“So while there is proof that the lady owned the land, there is no proof linking the land to Mrs. Beckles; nothing to connect back to her.”
You know, this has been said over and over again…….if “the lady” that owned all that land, died and left no will naming Violet Beckles as the heir to all her land, the deeds are not worth the paper they are printed on. There is absolutely no proof that the deeds were even “given” to Violet Beckles. For all we know, Violet Beckles just may have helped herself to these deeds without the lady’s knowledge. “The lady’s” estate should have gone to the Office of the Public Trustee who should have done an in depth search for any surviving blood relatives of “the lady”.
Interesting indeed. Basically it requires a good lawyer to unwind the legal trail.
I note something in the article that raised my eyebrows, but cannot note it here.
Actually, anytime one purchases land, a title search is necessary, thus my reference to a legal trail. Surely one exists?
Secondly on the issue of client accounts, it is not only mandatory for lawyers but estate agents, overseas.
The interest on these accounts is also for the benefit of the clients.
As opposed to now, whereby any interest will acummulate to the lawyer’s benefit, thus it is their interest to hold monies as long as possible.
Supposing one has deposits for one million in respect of the purchase of three houses.
Think of the interest to be had at, say four percent on this?
Thus, held even six months would be a decent sum.
To enable action on this simply requires legislation on the creation of these client accounts, mandated audits and the penalty for breach, just as overseas.
Note that this is also required for estate agents.
That said, I only have one question.
Can the legal profession in Barbados survive financially, if one changes the status quo on this?
@Crusoe
Look forward to your searching comments on our next blog which will highlight the management of clients monies by lawyers. It is a perennial problem
Pingback: Time To Audit Attorneys’ Client Accounts « Barbados Underground
Look up the law on Massive Fraud , and tell me how long you can keep what you stolen or Fraud some one , Ask Stanford or Madoff.
St Mary’s Anglican Church is where Beatrice Henry went to Church and is bury.As soon as you go in to the gate on the right side about the 3rd head stone 1892-1985 . A small white head stone ,with the name partly removed.Go and see how well the Church take care of the person rents they were collecting as their own with out giving any to Violet Beckles behind her back . Even as they stop over the last years leaving the tenants at odds on who to give the rents to, same story also with the UDC. Call the Church or ask them . Office number 246-426-3746 and the Rectory 246-424-2461. Rev.La P is a very nasty man when you need info. I wounder what God , GOD or god leads his life and Church .In Barbados you have lawyers who are also in the Church as Rev . Two ways to get in your pockets and mess up your heads and steal your lands .Think for your self when dealing with these kinds of crooks
Again there is a Will to Violet Beckles and deeds probate done in high court 1986, Will made by Sir F . Smith and Stolen By Sir J Ham with COW
Violet Beckles died on 23 August 2010 at age 93. Never realising her dream.
It seems People love you think of the answers before they see the questions.The Prime Minister and all but maybe 2 Ministers is lying to have an office , . The Com. of Police know what is true and even him and is Fraud Squad pulling the Biggest Fraud of all after looking in to this case or Massive Fraud Matter , for over a year and now back of for they see Sir, QC,Jonny rented high court land to the court for ex CJ crook Simmons,,Why you think it was smelling so bad when they first open,,, a lot of She-it going on Still
All you need is the PLANTATION DEEDS Where are they? ,, they can tell you 1630 deed, 1730 deeds , 1830 deeds nothing after 1849 the cut off .NOT EVEN 1930. The schools dont teach and the teachers dont even ask the QUESTION ABOUT THE DEEDS AND WHY THEY HIDDEN OR REMOVED FROM SITE.
THIS IS HISTORY AND PUBLIC INFORMATION,,,,,
\
Violet Beckles lawyers went out and got the rents but they kept the rents as their own ask Richard Byer , one of over 60 lawyers
Ask the now PM Freundel Stuart, UDC Chris Sinckler as you can see all they crooks move up as David our PM gone.Ask UDC, ask NHC ask them all for the Plantations deeds of Barbados , dont be fooled , all still plantations we now just growing lies , crooks, Massive fraud and houses where all the lawyer make their money from. Mrs Ram , Babb, Halu all rich from taking with the help of lawyer and some now judges sitting on the bench .
alex.alex99@gmail.com ., i dont hide my words nor names , i can name then all …. where the police will not even look no more , . Jail to small to hold them all.When its time VOTE them out or stop going to CHURCH ,, FOR YOUR EYES WILL BE ON THE WRONG God,
i think owners of land in barbados should have more rights, the laws are too simple and people use loopholes to stay on your land and own it, for example, if someone live on your land for over five years you cant ask them to leave, and if say the owner live in another country, and someone take possession of the person’s land, the owner will have hell getting that person to leave, because if the person squat on your land, its lots of court appearances, so the problem with violet and i see it with lots of elderly people, they trust these lawyers too much, never give a lawyer the original of a title, always give them a copy, they could say they lost it and years later its theres.Some elderly plantation owners who had problems reading and writing, was often taken advantage of because they didnt know how to read the documents and what to keep and not give out, so they hope was trusting their lawyers. i think after the lady died violet should have go ahead and sell some of those lands, and never give out her original papers to all these lawyers.
its also a practice to trick elderly people, I know of an incident where a lady had a piece of land, a guy who have high education told her he would buy it from her, but only give her the down payment and promise to may monthly payments, with that he took the title and transfered it in his name in a matter of days. Now hear the good part, the elderly lady never got another cent for her land, and she calls him and he wont return her calls, so he got a piece of land for 700 dollars, and the title is in his name, the bad thing is she never let her kids know what the hell she was doing, she thought the former bank manager was her good friend. Some elderly people can get distracted when lawyers or other people come to them to purchase their land, the buyers only have to dress nice and come in a nice car, and the elderly extent all their trust. Wolves comes in sheep clothinng.
if violet went thru all these lawyers and she had clams to the lands, but lawyers lost some of her papers, wouldnt it be a good idea to at least give her one of her properties to live on? its obvious she was conned and tricked by all these people she went too. They should also checked and see if she was paying taxes on the properties and if she ever made an effort to sell some of those lands, because going to all those lawyers everything got too confusing. Even today people in their right mind, if they dont be careful people would use some loopholes to claim a person’s land, especially if you put your kids name on the tittle deed, in process of time, your kids husbands, wives, boyfriends or girlfriend can lay claim to your property, Write the wills clear, all the children only can live on this property, no one can tell the other to leave,
I think violet went to the wrong people, she went to all those high up rich lawyers, the first thing she should have done is make sure she got the tittles in her name and start selling some of those lands, at least she would have some money of her own, and keep one good piece for herself, as for lawyers picking up the rent, she should be the one picking up the rent, and if she dont get rent, start selling left and right, but when you go and get invlove with all these lawyers, they know the loopholes of the law and will use those to keep the land and the rent money. There was a divorce lawyer working for the husband, the couple was fighting over who would own the mansion, but guess what, in the end the lawyer was living in the mansion, long story short, dont even trust your lawyer, people need to advocate for themselves, she should have just got the titles and start selling, but I think she put her trust in all those high profile lawyers, and they pick up the rent and sold some of the lands without her knowing, because at one point plantation land was selling out dirt cheap, so people just bought up as many as they could, thats what beatrice did, but beatrice should have written up a simple will, leaving everything for violet.
Regardless of fact that Violet made contact with the wrong people, high up rich lawyers, fraud is a criminal act.
Loss Adjuster
Instead of Owen and his clowns having a Mass meeting they should offer some suggesstions to the solving of the Violet Beckles case. Or is it a better suggestion to coduct some arrests at the said meeting for both the Violet Beckles issue and others alike the Clico Affair and Al Barrack Saga.
Justice must be served for Violet Beckles and the Plantation Deeds fraud case against these corrupt attorneys/political demons…
When will it end…. Shame on you leaders…