Reply To: Post your thoughts

Profile photo of Arthur
Moderator
On Arthur wrote:

@ Cool: basically, that’s it. Dank je wel kerel.

@ Reggae: you hit it hard on the head there. That’s my feeling also. My lawyer says it’s almost impossible to prove that type of bank fraud, but he is considering to bring it in in appeal. Next month I will get a concept of his appeal papers.

We did not really sign a paper at the Registered Accountant in 1997, but we made up a contract for the business that was registered at the Chambre of Commerce in 1995. In that business contract it clearly says that the partner that is continueing the business after the other partner left, will take over the debts and revenues. The Chambre also registred clearly my date of leaving in 1997, but the judge overlooked that too in his verdict. I managed to recover a copy of that contract in my most recent research, as it couldn’t be found before at curator nor Chambre. And I’m awaiting my lawyer’s comment if he will bring it in in appeal. Banks, by law, have to follow the business changes registered at the Chambre. Good point there too, Reggae. 8)

And no, there will be 3 new judges in appeal that will look at this case, instead of 1 in round #1. Luckily!

Billy Corgan, December 2, 2008 : "Not everyone understands our death trip. But you do. And that's what matters."