Confirm text replacement with template category text
All the text in the message will be deleted and replaced by text from category template.
|27 Nov 2018 18:09 #19|
I only noticed this bizarre message today, sent to my Facebook messenger last week
It is indeed non-medically qualified businessman Daryus Panthakey, and I'm guessing a very recent photo, given his stressed expression and loss of weight.
Entirely understandable with what's going on in The World of Accuvision right now, details to be publicised later in 2019.
This older photo of Daryus Panthakey shows a happier man, excuding confidence, believing that he, and his non-medically qualified team, would continue to profit from their activities without being bothered by silly rules, like needing to be a bona fide GMC registered doctor to perform eye surgery!
A huge thank you to 'Facebook User', and if you have any photos of Johann and Kareena Panthakey (similarly invisible on the world wide web) we'd love to see them!
|16 Nov 2018 11:38 #18|
No idea why as I’m still waiting for Twitter to tell me!
But I do know who - non medically qualified Accuvision owner Daryus Panthakey who illegally operated on me in 2006!
If you read my last post you’ll see that he threatened to serve me with High Court proceedings in September and when I said go for it he backed off!
But he’s bothered enough to complain to Twitter!
Draw your own conclusions ????
|16 Nov 2018 11:33 #17|
|06 Oct 2018 15:10 #16|
At around 11.30am on the 27th Sept Sasha phoned Campbell Dye. She told him that I was also on the call, and if there is one lesson I learned early on from Sasha Rodoy it is to record important conversations!
She told Campbell Dye that her client (me) was still waiting to be served with proceedings which I had been told would be by midnight on the 25th Sept. Mr Dye replied that he was waiting for instructions from his client (Daryus Panthakey) and said, “But you’re right, proceedings haven’t been served and I’ll explain why in the email that I send to you."
Sasha asked Mr Dye if he could in the meantime tell us if his client intended to serve proceedings and Mr Dye said, “Claims will not be served on you or Mr Tomlinson.” Eh? Sasha’s not the one being sued!!
Sasha then said to Mr Dye, “Can I just recommend something to you? Firstly, and you can quote me here, you will be unaware but your client has been operating illegally for more than fifteen years, there are investigations ongoing, he has not been entirely honest with you, there are big chunks missing out of the chronological events [you] sent to my client [me]. Now, what I suggest to you is, google your client’s name and see how many photos you can find of him. And that’s why he won’t be serving proceedings! ”.
Mr Dye said "Alright, I hear what you’re saying. Thank you.” (Legalese for - "I know my client is a lying git!”)
Less than an hour later I received this email from Campbell Dye confirming what he had said in the conference call earlier.
Subject: Our Clients: Daryus Panthakey/Accuvision Limited
Date: 27 September 2018 at 12:29:43 BST
Dear Mr Tomlinson
Ms Rodoy called this morning to speak to me and you were in attendance on the call.
We wrote to you last week setting out our clients' case against you in defamation. We explained that our clients had issued a Claim Form against you in the High Court and that, when we wrote, it was our clients' intention to serve those proceedings on you before midnight on Tuesday 25 September 2018, the latest time permitted by the Court for service of those proceedings.
You responded promptly to our letter, but in terms which did not provide any proper basis to justify the comments you have made against our clients. Our clients remain firm in their view that they have been defamed and that your conduct constitutes harassment.
However, our client has concluded that it would not be the best use of its time or proportionate to continue those legal proceedings against you at this time and the Claim Form has not been, and will not be, served on you.
Our clients' rights remain fully reserved in relation to your past conduct (to the extent that action is not barred by the limitation period) and any future conduct. Our clients will be monitoring what you say and write about them and you should not assume that our clients will allow any future harassment and/or defamation to pass unchecked.
Commercial Dispute Resolution
DAC Beachcroft LLP'
Why, considering that I have been posting my allegations online for more than 4 years, did it take Daryus Panthakey this long to initiate legal action? And why has he decided not to follow through with his legal threat after making such a fuss?
Read Campbell Dye’s 19th Sept letter “NOT FOR PUBLICATION” again! ????????????????
I am not going to stop until Daryus Panthakey and all those who've ever been involved in his illegal activities are brought to justice. My resolve is even stronger after seeing the horrific damage that Accuvision have inflicted upon Greg Brady.
|04 Oct 2018 10:46 #15|
'From: Dye, Campbell J
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018, 18:14
Subject: RE: Your ref: CXD/ACC517
Dear Mr Tomlinson
Thank you for your email of 19 September on which I now have my client's full instructions.
You have asked me to copy Ms Rodoy on all future communications with you. It is my understanding that Ms Rodoy is not a qualified and practising solicitor or barrister. If my understanding is correct, would you please let me know immediately since, in those circumstances, I must (as a matter of professional conduct) communicate only with Ms Rodoy. If, however, I am correct that Ms Rodoy is not legally qualified, would you please explain what you and she consider to fall within her role (as you describe it) of patient advocate?
The law of defamation and harassment is complex and I, therefore, encourage you again to seek professional legal advice, in addition to the support being provided by Ms Rodoy.
I note, too, that you intend to publish our letter, despite our request that it be kept confidential between the parties, their advisers and the Court (if necessary). You should be aware that any publication by you or any third party (including Ms Rodoy) may constitute further harassment and/or defamation and I must reserve my clients' rights in that regard.
Publication of our correspondence with you may also involve you publishing your personal and/or sensitive personal data. Our clients cannot be held responsible for any such disclosure. In that regard, whilst my clients are content to copy communications to Ms Rodoy if that is your wish, I need to have your formal signed consent for my firm and my clients to send to her information which may constitute personal or sensitive personal data (including information relating to your medical care). I attach a consent form. Unless and until I receive the signed form from you I will not copy Ms Rodoy on any communications.
As to the law of defamation itself, I am not able to advise you for obvious reasons but a claim for libel can succeed where the allegations are untrue or substantially untrue, irrespective of the state of mind of the defendant. However, for the reasons set out in our initial letter, our clients do not consider that you are entitled to continue honestly to hold your opinions or beliefs about our client. The issued claim against you is also for remedies under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 but I note you do not deal with that in your letter.
The question of costs is, of course, a matter for the judge at trial but any legal advisor you go to will be able to explain the basis on which costs will be ordered and it is important that you fully understand the potential consequences of your decisions.
A Claim Form does not have to be served immediately after issue. It has to be served within 4 months and we will be serving the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim on you no later than midnight on Tuesday 25 September.
It is disappointing that you have failed to set out any detailed explanation for your denial of the claim against you. That means that my client will, therefore, proceed with the litigation.
Commercial Dispute Resolution
DAC Beachcroft LLP
100 Fetter Lane
London EC4A 1BN'
I waited until midnight on 25 September but no High Court claim was served.????
So I emailed Campbell Dye:
No reply, so Sasha tried.
Then we received an automated message that Cambell Dye would be back in his office the next day.
|02 Oct 2018 13:08 #14|
20 September - I called his bluff! ????
"Dear Mr Dye
I acknowledge receipt of your emailed letter of 19 September 2018.
To the best of my limited legal knowledge, defamation refers to false claims. However, all allegations I have made about your clients, both verbally and electronically, were repeated with my firmly held belief that they are true.
Hence I stand by everything I have said and/or written concerning the illegal activities of your clients, Daryus Panthakey and Accuvision: consequently, I have no intention of issuing apologies, retractions, or to provide an undertaking not to repeat my allegations, or indeed comply with any of the demands listed on page 5 of your letter.
With regard to your client’s (s?) legal costs, that is of course a matter for the Judge to decide when we go to trial.
Furthermore, I would remind you that I am not bound by legal privilege, and I have every intention of publishing your letter.
Please accept this as my substantive response.
Meanwhile, you claim that your client has issued proceedings against me in the High Court, yet my understanding is that when proceedings are issued service immediately follows. I look forward to being corrected if I have been misinformed.
Finally, in her role as patient advocate, Sasha Rodoy, founder of My Beautiful Eyes Foundation, has represented me since 2013, as your clients are aware, and Ms Rodoy will continue to represent me in this respect. Please therefore copy her in on all future communications to me.
16 minutes later Mr Dye replied: