Book

cover

Financial Elder Abuse Book

You my order a copy from Amazon

Amazon UK goo.gl/vbnCqF

Amazon USA goo.gl/Mg6jDh

Fast PDF Download Here

“Well written account of the injustice perpetrated against an innocent man aided and abetted by the Irish legal profession to steal this elderly man’s money from him. The solicitor should be charged and jailed.”

“This is a very sad case of an elderly man being cheated by the law. It’s very detailed and definitely worth a read, cases like this abound in Ireland, where people will behave in truly shameful manner where land is concerned.”

“Shocking Corruption Exposed by Elderly Farmer. This is Rural Ireland 2015. You won’t see this on 6.01 News.”
“To commit fraud is an offense in Ireland. But the prosecution for such will depend very much on where you reside on the social scale”

“This story highlights the blue-shirt mentality of current regime. People should read it and stand up against FG cowards and Bullies.”

Bones of Contention

With Mr. Robert B. Marren Solicitor Mullingar

1. Allowed confusion to arise in relation to the exact disbursement of funds held by him;

2. Grossly delayed, without reasonable explanation, the administration of the estate, the deceased person having died in 2005 some ten years ago;

3. Showed a complete disregard for the interests of the beneficiaries, whom Mr. Marren, Solicitor, knew to be elderly, and by his conduct is depriving two of the beneficiaries, of the enjoyment of their share in the estate;

4. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a solicitor. There is no good reason why Mr Marren did not “bite the bullet” and pay over the full €82,500 when he received the funds way back on 27th of May 2013.

5. Being reluctant to resolve the issue in isolation to the rest of the Estate;

6. Not provided the detailed bill of costs to include a detailed breakdown of how the figure of €40,892.53 representing fees paid to Robert Marren & Co. were arrived at. The legal and auctioneering fees are excessive, and Michael Gavin and Eileen Linney should not be charged for same as the beneficiaries on the other side agreed to waive them. 05/07/13 Marron to Gavin and Linney enclosing copy letter dated 3rd of July, 2013 from T & N McLynn;

7. Breached the following regulation of the solicitors’ account regulations, 2001: • Regulation 4(2): by failing without delay to pay monies held or controlled by them in respect of outlays not yet disbursed into client account and failing to treat such monies in all respects as client money;

8. Breached the following regulation of the solicitors’ account regulations, 2001: Regulation 5: by holding monies to which they were beneficially entitled in a client account for longer than three months in respect of outlays already disbursed, or which should have been the subject matter of a bill of costs furnished to the client concerned;

9. Brought the solicitors profession into disrepute;

10. Denied Michael Gavin a share in the farming profits, to the extent that Michael Gavin was working for nothing over the 9 years in question from October, 2005 through to 2013;

11. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a solicitor with regards to the explanation he provides to explain how he arrived at his decision to award the moneys received from the sale of Pat Gavin’s livestock together with the Gross payments received from the Department of Agriculture without deducting any expense for the minding, looking after, feeding and caring for the animals for the nine years from 2005 to 2014;

12. Delayed making the decision regarding Michael Gavin’s share in the farming profits and rightful share of the grant monies received from the Department of Agriculture until the very end with the draft distribution account that contained countless errors on 18th September, 2014. Michael Gavin was lied to and led to believe that he would be refunded at closing by some of the beneficiaries. Why did Mr. Marren make a decision around March 2013 to accept Michael Gavin’s claim to owning half the livestock and all the sheep? But yet for no logical reason refuses to award him the net amount €116,789.11 due to him out of the Single Payment Entitlements representing my ½ share in the profits from farming the lands, which was also sent to Mr. Marren, Solicitor, on the 5th of December, 2015 for his consideration. There is no good reason why he took advantage of Michael Gavin’s good nature and delayed his decision in this matter until the end;

13. Squandered the Estate assets by hiring an additional accountant against my wishes at a cost of €8,751.45;

14. Accounting mistakes and lack of clarity;

15. Forced elderly Michael Gavin and widowed Eileen Linney to incur additional unnecessary expenses in drafting documents and letters time and time again to prove their claim;

16. Not furnished a detailed statement of all the legal costs to his client. Under Section 68 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 provides for charges to clients. Under these provisions a solicitor should furnish a detailed statement of all the legal costs to his client;

17. Not furnished a copy of Solicitor T & N McLynn’s Bill of Costs for the handsome fee of €38,941.00;

18. Provided incorrect invoice for Catherine O’Conner Accountant. Catherine O’Conner’s invoice states Total Amount Due €584.25 while Cash Account dated 18th July, 2014 “Fees paid to Catherine O’ Connor €6,857.25;

19. Not provided an invoice for William Penrose B.L. or explanation of why his opinion was sought for €1,230.00;

20. Not provided an invoice for John Dolan Auctioneer and breakdown of the fee he was paid. Auctioneer John Dolan did advertise the auction extensively with full and half page ads in the local newspapers. However based on the amount of interest and bids made at the auction, these ads served no purpose other than to promote John Dolans Auctioneering service as a whole. A free mention in the local parish newsletter would have sufficed.

With Mr. Toney Henry Tormeys Solicitors Athlone

1. Showed a complete disregard for the instruction of Michael Gavin and Eileen Linney, whom Mr. Henry, Solicitor, knew to be elderly, and by his conduct has deprived them the opportunity to have their objections addressed, and their €82,500 1/6 share of the land from the auction dealt with in isolation to the rest of the estate. Not to mention Michael Gavin’s share in the farming profits net amount €116,789.11 due to him out of the Single Payment Entitlements representing his ½ share in the profits from farming the lands.

2. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a Solicitor. There is no good reason why Mr Henry did not at least telephone Mr. Marren in an effort to avoid further proceedings;

3. Provided an inadequate professional service and it is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a Solicitor with regards to his reluctance to deal with any of our correspondence, and basically sit on the files for over 2 months.

4. It would appear that Tony Henry, Solicitor, by not undertaking to provide formal notification to Mr. Robert Marren, Solicitor (on or before the 16th of January) as instructed to do so previously by John Glynn, Solicitor, of the intention to institute proceedings in order to prevent Mr. Marren’s distribution of the Estate of Patrick Gavin, Deceased, was seeking to waste assets in further litigation, and incur enormous legal expenses of €60,000 to €100,000 based on his estimates and a further 3 years in court.

5. Forced Elderly Michael Gavin and Eileen Linney to incur additional unnecessary expenses.

With the Beneficiaries and their Solicitor T & N McLynn Athlone

1. They summoned Elderly Michael Gavin to the High Court in an effort to sell the roof over his head along with the lands among other things knowing full well that he was entitled to reside in the house for the rest of my days as per my late Fathers will.

2. They tricked Michael Gavin into minding the estate animals and broke promises that they would buy food nuts for the farm animals and also promised Michael Gavin that he would be compensated for minding the farm animals at closing and awarded the grant monies from the department of Agriculture.

3. They prepared and tricked Michael Gavin into signing their lease agreement on 27th August without providing Michael Gavin an opportunity to read over same carefully or to consider the matter. Consequently Michael Gavin was forced to get legal advice in order to amend a number of the conditions including his agreement to “having fully restored the lands to grassland by ploughing and reseeding by no later than the 31st of July 2015.” Lands that were never used for tillage, and even if they were who would commit to a short term 1 year lease with that condition.

This is underhanded and highlights the inadequate professional service provided by Solicitor T&N McLynn, Athlone. It is not of a quality that could reasonably be expected of a solicitor and served no purpose other than to force Michael Gavin to incur additional unnecessary expenses for legal advice to draft letters in response to the lease agreement they tricked Michael Gavin into signing. One would question also whether T&N McLynn is guilty of Misconduct by tending to bring the solicitors profession into disrepute.

With the Law Society of Ireland

1. Their failure to find any fault with Rober B. Marren Solicitor based on the 8 complaints made to them in regard to how Mr. Marren Solicitor Administered the Estate of Pat Gavin.

2. The Law Societies failure to find fault with the fact that Mr. Tony Henry Tormeys Solicitors, did not undertake the instructions given him on Michael Gavin and Eileen Linney’s behalf through another Solicitor.

3. Letter from Tony Watson Solicitor with threat to block Michael Gavin’s emails in an attempt to quench the truth of what occurred. What an immature approach for a man in his position “Deputy Head of Complaints and Clients Relations Section” to adopt.

Summary

Michael Gavin and his brother Pat lived together all their lives over 70 years in their humble home Dundonnell, Taughmaconnell in south Roscommon. After Pat died intestate, Michael Gavin continued farming and caring for the farm animals as he had always done.

The Department of Agriculture appointed Michael Gavin herd keeper for the animals after his brother’s death. Robert Marren Solicitor refused to award Michael compensation from the grant moneys paid down from the department.

If Michael Gavin did not continue the farming of the land then the estate would not be entitled to claim the Entitlements.

Michael Gavin offered to buy the farm from the next of kin beneficiaries, but they would agree to nothing and matters came to a head when under the guidance of Tony McLynn Solicitor Athlone they summoned Michael to the High Court in Dublin in an effort to sell the house along with the farm, making out that they would have difficulty selling the farm on its own.

Their Solicitor Tony McLynn of T&N McLynn Solicitors, Athlone was well aware that Michael had a right to reside in the family home for the rest of my days as per my fathers will, but that did not prevent them squandering the Estate Assets. Three days in total were spent in the High court, the first of which they did not attend, the second they spent in a waiting room arguing among themselves and on the phone to other beneficiaries in the United States of America. Finally on the third day the Judge refused their request to sell the roof over his head.

The High Court appointed Robert Marren Solictor, Mullingar administrator for the estate. Subsequently Michael Gavin and his sister Eileen Linney had one and only one meeting with Mr. Robert Marren Solicitor at his office located on Castle Street Mullingar, at which he enquired if they had their wills made. He informed them he intended to hire an additional accountant to oversee the accounts. Michael Gavin and Eileen Linney profusely objected to this and told him it was an unnecessary expense for the estate, but he bulldozed ahead regardless.

The issue of non-payment of grants from the Department of Agriculture to Michael Gavin the appointed herd keeper eat up many a letter and despite the fact that 2 of his estranged sisters Anne Sanford, Wellesley, Mass USA & Kathleen O’Keefe, Glanmire, Cork promised to buy feed stuffs and also promised that he would be reimbursed at closing. Michael never got a cent and in essence he was forced to use my old age pension and savings to feed the animals that would have starved otherwise for 9 years. They had no objection to accepting the gross payments from the sale of the animals, and although Mr Marren “made a decision” to finally accept his claim to owning half of the cattle and all of the sheep he could not see the logic to paying out the grant monies associated with same.

The beneficiaries failed to accept that Michael Gavin is entitled to half the farming profits (i.e. half the net proceeds of the Department of Agriculture Grants from 2005-2013 inclusive, after deduction of Income Tax paid in respect of the joint farming operation) and/or in the alternative, fair compensation for work done and services rendered by me in looking after the deceased’s animals over the period.

How can the estate expect to have it both ways? Michael Gavin should be awarded either the grant monies paid by the Department of Agriculture for the nine years he looked after all the animals, or in the alternative Michael should be paid reasonable farm labours wages and refunds for the expenses incurred in running the farm as appointed herd keeper by the Department of Agriculture.

Anne Sanford, Kathleen O’Keefe and the next of kin namely Mike Harte, Brenda Harte Waters, Michelle Harte, Philomena Duffy, Patrick Duffy, Catherine Duffy Kelly and Noel Duffy cannot have it both ways. They cannot on the one hand expect to receive the monies from the sale of my late brother Pat Gavin’s livestock together with the gross payments received from the Department of Agriculture, without incurring any expense for the minding, looking after and caring for the animals down through the years.

Catherine O’Conner’s Account Summary 24/02/2012 shows that throughout the entire farming period between 2005 and 2012 the cattle sales came to a figure of €46,589 and the expenses came to a figure of €45,918. Accordingly, the expenses in running the farm were almost equal to the proceeds of sale of livestock. Therefore the profit from the farming operation represented the monies received each year from the Department of Agriculture under the single Payment Scheme, the Disadvantaged Area Scheme and any other Schemes of the Department of Agriculture, less any income tax payable to the state arising out of the farming operation.

Those we have spoken to in relation to this matter FAIL to see the logic to the beneficiaries reluctance to see reason in this matter, how do they expect Michael Gavin to labour for free for 9 years at his own expense and pay vets fees and fodder to fatten cattle so that those that do nothing can reap the rewards of the GROSS profits. Michael Gavin believes with every bone in his body that he is entitled to be paid for the work done and services rendered and monies expended by him in looking after his brother’s livestock from the time my brother died up to the time the animals were sold, this you will appreciate involved the daily herding and looking after the animals to include feeding of the animals in Winter months to include purchase of food stuffs and discharging vets fees etc.

By denying Michael Gavin a half share in the profits it means that Michael Gavin WAS WORKING FOR NOTHING over the years in question from October, 2005 through to 2013. This is totally unjust and totally unacceptable.

Michael Gavin will not accept the present situation which is totally unfair and leaves him without any compensation whatsoever for his time and trouble in looking after the animals on behalf of the estate and also deprives Michael Gavin of any profit he may have earned in the rearing and looking after his own animals.

Please find enclosed a detailed breakdown of the net amount €116,789.11 due to Michael Gavin out of the Single Payment Entitlements representing his ½ share in the profits from farming the lands, which was also sent to Mr. Robert B. Marren, Solicitor, on the 5th of December, 2015 for his consideration. You will note that all Michael is looking for is my fair share of the profits in the running of the farm and fair compensation for the work I did in looking after the animals.
The lands were eventually auctioned and Michael Gavins 2 estranged sisters Anne Sanford, Wellesley, Mass USA & Kathleen O’Keefe, Glanmire, Cork placed the winning bid, however did not close in the required 30 day time frame. The 2 sisters got the consent from the remaining next of kin to waive their share, so they were required to hand over just 1/3 of the purchase money with the agreed condition that they would cover the expenses associated with the Property Auction. They visited with Michael twice and requested that he buy the property of them and then suggested they would put the land up for sale but never did.
Mr. Marren Solicitor refused to pay out Michael Gavin and his sister Eileen Linneys share of the proceeds from the land sale despite the fact that he had same in his possession for nearly 2 years. He went on to threaten them that he intended to distribute the Estate Assets if they did not hire a Solicitor
10
to issue proceedings to prevent him doing so despite their founded objections, namely €116,789.11 compensation for minding the animals for 9 years and the amount awarded to each for the land sale was short €12,500 each plus interest from the time Mr. Marren Received the funds.
Instructions were given to Tony Henry Tormeys Solicitors Athlone through their family Solicitor John Glynn Patrick Hogan & Co. Ballinasloe, to engage with Mr. Robert Marren on their behalf. However Tony Henry, Tormeys Solicitor did not undertake these instructions, nor did he inform them. So Michael and Eileen did not realize what had happened until the deficient checks arrived in the post.

Michael and Eileen met with Mr. Tony Henry Tormeys Solicitors Athlone, some 2 weeks after, however he saw no fault in what he done or failed to do for that matter. He suggested they could engage him to sue Mr. Marren at a cost of up to €100,000, 3 years in court and advised Michael to take his age of 83 years into consideration.

Complaints were made to the Law Society of Ireland with regard to Mr Robert Marrens Administration of the Estate and Mr. Tony Henry Tormeys Solicitors Failure to undertake explicit instructions. Needless to say no fault was found. Then Tony Henry had a cheek to scribe the letter he did to Eileen Linney a defenceless widow. The letter arrived the day before the letter from the Independent Adjudicator’s who, no surprise found no fault in the manner in which the Law Society of Ireland dealt with the complaints made. Begs the question how come Henry knew before they did and why did he not act as speedily to undertake the instructions given him on their behalf originally?

Michael and Eileen were later informed that Robert Marren refused to pay John Glynn, Solicitor, Patrick Hogan & Co. until they stopped threatening him as he puts it by reporting him to the Law Society of Ireland. Also an activist via social media told them that Willie Penrose TD BL stated he had not received his payment from Robert Marren, Solicitor, Mullingar. When this was reported to the Law Society they threatened to block further emails.