KULAKSIZ 5 v Akfinans Bank Limited - Lying by Omission

KULAKSIZ 5 v Akfinans Bank Limited - Lying by OmissionWITHOUT PREJUDICE

KULAKSIZ 5 v Akfinans Bank Limited…..Appeal decision of the 14th November 2017.

Over the last twelve years, I have come to expect vindictive behaviour, untruths and intimidation from Akfinans Bank Limited. We all know it is a common ploy to demonise those you are doing wrong to in order to justify your bad behaviour.   Somehow, I did not expect the Judiciary through the High Court to buy into this sort of behaviour too.

How else can you explain the unbelievable decision by three High Court judges who summarily threw me out of the case citing the award I had made in my favour in my Breach of Contract action. An award that no longer existed due to the self same High Court cancelling the case back in October 2013.

To compound this I cannot believe my own Advocate allowed it to happen. He too knew the award case they refer to no longer existed.  It must have been mentioned in the High Court Appeal Hearing, the bank must have asked for me to be removed during the Appeal hearing in October 2016.  My Advocate never made me aware of this in the two years between that hearing and the judgment.   He could and should have made sure the Judges knew they were being asked to remove me based on an award that no longer was relevant or current.

I can be forgiven for thinking I was well and truly stitched up and no one was going to make me aware of anything lest I put a spoke in their wheel.

The level of incompetency and/or worse deliberate hiding of facts gives me more ammunition for my case with the ECHR.

This is not how I wanted to spend the rest of my life, but make no mistake, I will spend it seeking justice and righting the wrongs done to me.

As my old grandmother used to say….don’t get angry, get even.

Never give in, never give up

Pauline Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 comment to KULAKSIZ 5 v Akfinans Bank Limited – Lying by Omission

  • Polly Marples

    If it smells like a con, looks like a con…it is a CON.