The Traffic Monsoon Receiver’s assistance motion has been granted.

The motion, made pursuant to the Hague Convention, seeks information in relation to the sale of a flat in Manchester, UK.

The Receiver’s motion seeks assistance from the Senior Master of the Queen’s Bench Division of the Senior Courts of England and Wales.

The request was made following the Premier Property Lawyer’s refusal to turn over specific information relating to the sale of the flat.

As per the granted motion in the US, help from the English court has been sought to get Premier Property Lawyers (the “Third Party”), to provide oral testimony from a company representative.

The subject matter on which the representative of the Third Party will be examined is:

(i) the identity of the Third Party’s client in relation to the Transfer;

(ii) the identity of the party that instructed the Third Party in relation to the Transfer, if different;

(iii) the authority on which the Third Party relied in order to facilitate the Transfer;

(iv) the checks undertaken to identify the individual(s) referred to at (i) and/or (ii);

(v) the nature of the instructions given in relation to the Transfer;

(vi) the instructions given in relation to the Proceeds;

(vii) the destination of the Proceeds; and

(ix) any other information that may relate to the Transfer and claims of the Receivership Estate related to the Transfer.

This should clear up who engaged with Premier, or in the alternative reveal gross incompetence on their part.

Additional documents related to the sale have also been requested from Premier.

These include

  • communications between Premier and their flat sale client, including any applicable contracts;
  • KYC documents related to Premier’s client, specifically documents related to anti-money laundering background checks as required by law;
  • instructions regarding where proceeds of the sale were to be sent after the flat was sold; and
  • closing documents related to the sale of the flat.

Again, pretty thorough. Either Premier will have to cough up or, at least in relation to KYC, admit they broke the law.

It should be noted that there doesn’t appear to be any personal connection between Scoville and Premier, so I don’t see why they’d object to the turnover of the requested documents.

Then again had Premier of complied with the Receiver’s original requests, we wouldn’t be here.

I’m not really sure how things play out from here regarding the English court side of things.

Whatever happens though I’m sure we’ll eventually catch wind of it in the US filings. Stay tuned…