Surtie Inheritance Scam

Okay, okay. You win. I retract my statement. Or I lied…whichever suits you better.

I admit that I lied because I did not find sufficient information contained in this thread for any reasonably intelligent person to discover everything that I claimed I have. I couldn’t have, right? That’s just so very unpossible. You couldn’t do it. Therefore, I must have lied.

I sincerely apologise that I’m not able to help you satisfy your curiosi…I mean satisfy your desire and thirst for knowledge.

Actually, I’m glad I don’t really have this information. It’s much more fun pretending that there’s a group of individuals out there planning…well…whatever it is they’re planning - I don’t know what they’re planning. I’m merely lying and pretending…:unsure:
 
I won i won i won i won i won.
27 Million Dollars.













Then I woke up. Beer was warm. Damn.
 
Here's the full letter...
UDM Open Letter


Here are some excerpts...
1682489808929.png

Countered with...
1682489853821.png

Also...
1682489894209.png

Then there was this...
1682489962826.png

It's interesting to note that both the CEO of the PIC, as well as the PEO of the GEPF replied to his initial correspondence in January of this year stating that he should not be concerned, despite evidence pointing to the contrary
1682490215954.png

The PIC has been very vocal in their pursuit of their claim against AYO, since this was a matter that could easily have been decided in their favour. It was also highly publicised, yet the matter that could allegedly expose several wrongdoings in their practices over the past few years has thus far been hidden relatively well from the public eye.

The letter I posted above appeared in my newsfeed last night after it was published during the course of the day yesterday.

Since some of the particulars of claim have now been made public knowledge, I reckon it would be 'safe' to point out that there are other details in these particulars of claim that create quite a decent argument for this claim to be upheld. Yes, I've seen the original, complete particulars of claim. But no, I am not prepared to disclose information that is not mine to share...

But reading this letter last night again left me pondering a rather pertinent question: Would it be prudent to challenge this claim and run the risk of numerous irregularities exposed for public consumption if the matter is decided in the plaintiff's favour? Or would the more logical choice be to settle out of court for a substantially lower amount, and not have your dirty laundry aired out in public? :unsure:

Then of course, there are the several criminal prosecutions that could potentially ensue that needs to be factored into this decision-making process...:cautious:
 
BusyNobody said:
Since some of the particulars of claim have now been made public knowledge, I reckon it would be 'safe' to point out that there are other details in these particulars of claim that create quite a decent argument for this claim to be upheld. Yes, I've seen the original, complete particulars of claim. But no, I am not prepared to disclose information that is not mine to share...
Click to expand...
For the sake of clarity, I use the term 'original' to indicate an unabridged, unaltered version, and NOT the original document as submitted to the court
 
BusyNobody said:
For the sake of clarity, I use the term 'original' to indicate an unabridged, unaltered version, and NOT the original document as submitted to the court
Click to expand...


So there is a "secret" particulars of claim that contains convincing evidence?

And this was not submitted to the court?

But you have seen it and on this basis you think a settlement or victory is possible?
 
As said in many many many posts before this, there are people who are getting money but unfortunately not everyone who thinks they are "beneficiaries" are getting any. Thousands of innocent people have been scammed sadly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X