My name is Nigel Guppy. I and my family are on the receiving end of an abuse of legal process. I have found it very difficult to convince myself to go down this route as I am a proud individual but the consequences of not doing so are very serious for me and my family.

Having already shared my experience with friends and the local hockey community , I have been persuaded to do this as many have said they would like to help and this is the only way that I can do things in an open and transparent way and allow them to donate anonymously if they so wish . I am asking for support to raise funds to continue an ongoing legal defence against myself and my children.

What is an SD (Statutory Demand)? - It is a method by which a claimant tries to bulldoze a demand for payment giving only 21 days notice and is aimed at pressurising the defendant(s) into agreeing to their demands under financial duress. It is also a preemptive action to try and make the defendant(s) bankrupt.

I hope when you read this narrative that you will agree that where I and my children find ourselves is both immoral and unfair abuse of the legal process.

When I retired from full-time employment, me and my family wanted to purchase and develop good quality houses of multiple occupation to help the local public sector employees to find decent accommodation at affordable prices having previously experienced the poor quality available accommodation when my son first went out to work and moved away from home.

We commenced this process from early 2023, but were hit with an unexpected hurdle that could never have been predicted.

We arranged private investors funds to purchase a property in Taunton (Somerset) having done our due diligence by obtaining independent Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors valuations beforehand and speaking to the Architect who had previous experience of the site.

We submitted a planning application to Somerset Council with the reasonable expectation of being granted planning permission within 6 months for the 15 bed House of Multiple Occupation but due to the poor performance of Somerset Council planning department and significant delays in obtaining phosphate mitigation offset credits, it took 17 months, which was way beyond a bridging facility of 12 months. This resulted in default rates being applied and the eventual repossession of our then family home in July 2024. This was caused by the private investor who was also involved, who whilst fully informed of the situation with regards to planning delays, became unnecessarily hostile which was also why we could not settle the bridging loan in time and is now trying to make me and my children bankrupt by issuing statutory demands against us all.

Let me say at this juncture that we knew what we are signing up for with the bridging loan and thought that we had covered all angles for the exit but nobody could have had a clue that it would take 17 months for planning.. Its unheard of, or was until now. We have since been advised that it would be unproductive to attempt to take the council to court for negligence as they act for the government of the day.

We would just accept our fate if we had been dishonest, negligent or downright unprofessional but 2 solicitors and a barrister have informed us that we have done nothing wrong and are victims of the abuse of the legal system and council processes.

We are currently trying to defend the statutory demands (SD's) and counterclaiming against the private investor and we are advised that our case is very strong due to the "abuse of process" by the claimant.

Unfortunately, the claimant knew when issuing the SD's that for us it would be difficult to defend, "solely on the basis of the cost of litigation". This we believe is immoral and we do not understand how or why a claimant can use this form of demand when everyone knows it is abuse of process but we are advised it goes on.

Unfortunately, we are now advised by our legal team that we need to be prepared to cover up to another £50,000.00 in legal costs which we do not currently have and time is now of the essence. If we do not continue the process we will be at the mercy of us being David v Goliath "purely on financial grounds" and then having to accept an outcome just because we cannot afford to fight back.

Our legal team is very confident of our success in having the SD's set aside if we can fund the continuation of the action and issue our counterclaims. Using SD's as abuse of process is not looked on favorably by judges and the level to set these actions aside are of a low proof threshold once, in particular, the counterclaims are also submitted.

One of our solicitors is fully supportive of us being able to make valid counterclaims and is waiving legal privilege to become a witness on our behalf.

What is our objective? - All we want is to be able to confront the claimant on equal terms and to arrive at a negotiated solution using the "Alternative Dispute Resolution" process but currently the claimant has no wish to resolve matters in any way by negotiation.

If you could consider donating towards our cause it would be greatly appreciated, however small, as the consequences to us as a family, if we cannot defend this, are significant and we could then end up homeless again. This seems a ridiculous state of affairs in modern Britain when we have done nothing wrong and set out to help the local communities.

On the basis of a positive outcome, I will delegate my future efforts to assisting anyone who finds themselves in a similar position as its just plain wrong that this this can even happen.

Any funds received will be used only to fund our legal expenses.

If anyone wants to discuss further and obtain more background information, I am happy to oblige.

Thank you for your time and due consideration.

Nigel Guppy.