Grasp; Karen the respondent, is 63.. and; (1) whilst married, was kept away from finance & bills, (2) has no skills or qualifications. ( 3 ) was pregnant at 17, married the applicant at 20, had 4 children, & now has 9 grandchildren. ( 4 ) Correction, her energy, skills & concern, for 40 years have been as a devoted mother, to her, and the applicant’s children, and their, 9 grandchildren. ( 5 ) She is now without work, living on state aid, being £378.08 a month, (I’ve seen the Giro). She get’s by, via the help of her family & friends. ( 6 ) The respondent, has told the applicant, she may have to leave the family home, as there’s only dregs of the central heating oil left. She also has to accommodate, the 2 family pets. On doing so, the state utility caps will cease, & the property will be uninsurable, as unoccupied & insecure. The garage door, doesn’t lock, so provides access, to the home. Currently the respondent has little option, than reside as is, & adhere to every demand, of the applicant’s.

Other than destroy, the respondent financially, her self esteem & spirit. What do the applicant, solicitor & barrister, with the aid of the UK court, aim too achieve. Via evidence of an applicant, who with Macular Degeneration, C, takes lead from his solicitor, to navigate the court. Then he’ll drive home & start working. Of course he’ll deny all that, as he’s falsified his residential address, as he’ll deny moving in with the respondent’s sister, & defrauding the Inland Revenue, & falsifying data, put in front of the Financial Remedy Judge, via the assistance, of Layla his Roythones Ltd. solicitor. The applicant’s credibility, & motive will be further questioned when considered relevant. E. The evidence of applicant; David John Cragg, 22 Coniston Close, NG2 6ND. There’s no evidence it’s self composed. So the overwhelming influence of his advocate, is assumed. Save being presented with, the applicants draft, when I’d of course apologise, for a sound assumption.