Desert Pearl A British Fraud 5

Legal Ombudsman Office UK cannot obtain a response form the Legal Alliances Worldwide Ltd. They are forced to contact the Solicitor Regulatory Authority UK to request if this body can send a letter to the firm.

Again the Irish citizen is exposed to delays by the LAWL which the Ombudsman refuse to acknowledge. Furthermore what is quite shocking is the fact that in the investigation of March 29th 2012 carried out by the Legal Ombudsman office the late submission by the legal firm favorable. The early submission of conclusive evidence submitted by the complaint ant is ruled outside of the Legal Ombudsman time limits in handling such cases. It is quite clear the the legal firm delayed their replies to the Ombudsman's. Therefore the LO chased them up to gather information to defend the solicitor. As the solicitor in question was made aware of the complaint it was not for the Legal Ombudsman office to chase him down. Had solicitor not responded, without being chased down by the LO office, the Irish clients would have won their case. It appeared the independent and fair Legal Ombudsman Office intervened to obtain a response were one was not forthcoming initially. This action of intervening forced the legal firm to respond. No such common courtesy was afforded to the Irish victim when information presented to the investigator of the 2011-12 investigation carried out by the LO office was mysteriously removed from the investigation. See https://youtu.be/EZumQK6R3kI Information presented in contact details and the full Denton report to investigators at the Legal Ombudsman offices UK were: (1) Ignored (2) Hidden (3) Seen as unlawful. No reason from the Legal Ombudsman office was ever received as to why Denton report was removed from the investigation, yet all the legal firms late submissions was accepted and ruled upon in the firms favor. The legal refused to present the clients due diligence with the Legal Ombudsman of the UK claiming that the firm did not have to produce the conveyance report because it was the firms property. The Ombudsman claimed the legal firm carried out the due diligence before the clients set about purchasing their property on DP1. What was most notable was that the legal firm had been paid in full for all legal fees and disbursements and yet they were being denied a copy of their due diligence report. The Legal Ombudsman suggests the Irish clients pay the legal firm more money to obtain their legal right and entitlement to the documentation they had already paid for in full. So much for independence and fairness principles. The Legal Ombudsman office again punish the Irish citizens in their investigation of 29th March 2012 by siding with the legal firm whom refuses to produce a copy of the clients due diligence for examination by all concerned. What became clear was that both the legal firm and the Legal Ombudsman office UK refused to deal or suppressed any information dealing with any information surrounding the right to title of the land known as Desert Pearl One. This is critical. In the contract of 8th May 2008 the legal firm forwarded their Irish clients the contract of purchase. In this contract the solicitor and sole owner states that the land DP1 is freehold. Therefore it had no liens or mortgage on the land. However the Legal Ombudsman along with the Solicitor Regulatory Authority UK refuse to accept the Denton Widle Sapte Report of June 2009 undertaken by parties on the ground in Egypt. The report outlines the fact that a mortgage exists on the land called DP1 in favor of the Bank of Abu Dhabi for 25 million Egyptian pounds. The Legal Ombudsman and Ms Dicicco refuse to acknowledge information presented on the land issue to the investigator. Ms Kate Dicicco had already made her mind up before the findings were presented on the 29th March 2012. She state "I will still be including my view that some of your complaints are out of time but I will also try to give a view on the poor service complaints of where possible". What was clear was the the Legal Ombudsman UK had preempted the outcome of the investigation based on the time limited they imposed not once taking into account the legal firm actions delaying for time and submitting information only because the LO office had contacted the SRA. This is clear case of Discrimination towards Irish citizens in favour supporting a senior British solicitor and it judicial system.


To lodge a complaint contact: enquiries@legalombudsman.org.uk