Sir Victor Blank – Chairman
Lloyds-TSB plc
25 Gresham Street
London
EC2V 7HN

STRICTLY PERSONAL
OPEN LETTER 

My Ref.: Jn06NDUA
Your Ref.:

Re: Attached copies relative to complicity of bank staff in undisclosed activities & highly questionable participation in organised constructive damages on citizens / clients.

I attach hereto copy of an affidavit that was duly sworn in December 2004 and I beg to refer you to paragraphs 5, 6 and 7. I hasten to add that the original was delivered to me five months after it was sworn. (F3*)

I attach also reprint of a letter to the accountant Andreas Eleftheriou FSCA, FCEA, CMA, MBIM. You will note that reference is made to his part in a fraudulent invitation by the Inspector of Taxes in 1979. (F4*)

I submit the documents to you personally because of undisclosed activities behind the scenes for which bank staff and officers are accountable. I explain briefly below:

1. Acquisition of the property in North London was through a bank loan. When the loan was paid off, I qualified that I did not wish for the charge to be removed because at some later date I would be looking to funding for improvements to the property.
2. The aforesaid should clarify why I submit the copy of the affidavit (F5*) to you. The fact that officers of the bank entertained / allowed a charge on the property, by the Inland Revenue, without any reference to me was and remains most inappropriate to say the least, and highly questionable when one considers other activities, defaults, failings and impositions by bank officers.
3. The charge, evidently, was placed by the Inland Revenue and that action appears to have been in addition to the inexcusable and unjustified demand for alleged liability for income tax attributable to earnings / funds not received and the subject of fraudulent court proceedings. The activities naturally created legal costs charges for the benefit of being defrauded by one and all. (Some particulars and evidence in the public domain qualifying WHY ‘fraudulent’ the court proceedings).
4. Years later I had cause to apply for a bridging loan. In the course of my meeting with the bank manager at the Lloyds Branch in Palmers Green, London N13, the bank manager went to another room in order to telephone and speak to his colleagues. Security, out of town, I was told.
5. Later I was caused to raise issue as to why the need to go to another room, and why no compliance with my request but an alternative offer that I was not happy with. (More particulars when I am invited by you or a senior officer to furnish such, also when I release full details in the public domain, the Internet).
6. I need only add that on the very day and soon after my meeting with the bank manager others decided to change the scenario that prompted the meeting with the bank manager and the request for the bridging loan. Note please that the alternative offer from the manager, was not acted upon by me at the time, because I recognised that things were not as things appeared or as presented to me.
7. Needless to say the manager was moved on.

I attach also copy of a letter which I received in July 2000, after I had cause to write to Sir Brian Pitman. I add that the issues I had to raise with the Chairman, at the time, were indicative of more questionable activities, highly questionable and as yet not clear with the exception that the objectives were to impose additional ‘depletion of assets’ through typical failures to comply with instructions.

Sir, the issues that I raise with you personally in no way could ever be presented or argued as mistakes and or as slips,/ errors.

Consider the following:

8. I did not fall to the idea / sale of an endowment policy mortgage when I was negotiating a loan for the acquisition of a family home, residence. I did, however, without prompting from any other, secure the mortgage with a mortgage policy for peace of mind and security for my family in case either myself or my wife passed away before the mortgage was paid off.
9. The mortgage life policy was cancelled by me after an abuser of judicial chair occupation indulged at my expense. A District Judge, without authority to act in such matters, simply misappropriated funds intended for an invitation to treat, which the fraudsters who operate out of and within the family courts had no intention to proceed with as their invitation to me had been. Particulars will be released in the public domain as I prepare for appropriate claims against the relevant offending department.
10. Following on from the above, I request that you arrange for an officer of the bank to contact me. The need to look into the grounds why the bank just carried on meeting demands for the mortgage life policy, after March 1999, in contempt of my instructions must be addressed. Intent to cause depletion of funds had been also the scenario when Standing Order instructions were ignored LEADING TO BANK CHARGES, which promptly followed.
11. Instructions had been given to the bank manager to pay off the VISA account which I NEVER USED PERSONALLY, thereafter, as of July 1999. The instructions were to meet only the debit charges from Demon Net from the current account and not to meet any other charges without reference to me.

The fact is, that bank officers and staff engaged in the undisclosed, to me, charges on my property. (F2*)

I need not have to repeat and emphasise the fact that the Inland Revenue activities and charge were and remain inexcusable and unjustified. I dare say that criminal intent was present as of the moment when a FORGERY was introduced and promoted by the legal circles in the course of the High Court proceedings that deprived me of my earnings. More than just financial deprivation had been imposed on me by abusers of trust and public office and the consequential activities / parts of bank officers and staff are highly questionable when the issues are looked at collectively.

The affidavit evinces the activities, and the parts of bank staff and officers. Inquiries at the Land Registry will confirm the realities. The ‘issue of the manager’s need to confer with some distant colleague in private, about matters that related to me and my property, needs to be addressed without fail. Ensuring that I was not privy to the exchanges between the manager and ‘the security officer’ WAS RECOGNISED and EXPOSED during the visit to the Land Registry, as covered in the affidavit. (F1*)

I request, at this juncture, that you ensure that steps be taken for a senior officer be appointed to look into the serious issues I raise with you.

Note please that I took all necessary steps as of the time when attempts were made to entrap me in fraud on central government funding for property improvements. Particulars will be posted in the public domain as of the moment the offenders receive my submissions and challenges.

Attempts to entrap me in scenarios intended to create anticipated tax scripts also failed. No need to point out that such attempts could only have been related to the UNDISCLOSED & INEXCUSABLE CHARGE on my property. ALL WILL BE REVEALED in the public domain as I proceed with claims that rest and are founded on the type of organised activities touched by me in this communication.

I request that you access the URLs, below and recognise that I regard my duty to report criminal activities to be sacrosanct.
A. http://www.uk-human-rights.org/courts.htm#2006
B. http://www.uk-human-rights.org/confraud.htm#RECOGNISE
C. http://www.uk-human-rights.org/skelarg1.htm
D. http://www.uk-human-rights.org/attempts.htm#VII
E. http://www.hsbcfraud.co.uk
F. http://www.uk-human-rights.org/theyknow.htm.

At ‘A’ the FORGERY introduced & used for corruption / perversion of justice with all of the ensuing and consequential ‘criminal in intent impositions / activities’.
At ‘B’ the most blunt of arrangements in place for constructive frauds on Mr & Mrs Average, the taxpayers.
At ‘C’. the argument called for when challenging reckless misconduct of the courts business.
At ‘D’ the attempts by a Local Authority to ‘steal’ a mere £165 that called for the appeal published in the page, and the appeal leading to the introduction of the Bill of Rights.
At ‘E’ the victim of improprieties by Midland Bank officers (as at ‘C’) publishing his own web-site consequential to the challenges published at ‘C’.
At ‘F’ the constructive frauds on the taxpayers, through the courts, reported to government in the first instance and thereafter to the press and the world at large, in the public domain. Billions plundered year in year out, because of morons with the mentality of the woman I reported & expose(d).

I look forward to an invitation to meet with a senior officer when the extensive issues will be expanded upon in order that the improprieties and the participation of bank officers be addressed appropriately.

Sincerely

Andrew Yiannides

    One of my major sources of information was a former Grand Inspector Commander of the Thirty First Degree of the Ancient Rite who had withdrawn from Masonry in 1968 for religious reasons.(*F) As with so many other people in the labyrinthine world of Freemasonry, I was led to him by way of a series of contacts. He agreed through a third party to be interviewed by me concerning his conviction that no active Christian could in all conscience remain a Freemason.
When I met him I learned that he was a judge, and a particularly quick-tempered one. Although I had heard of him, I had hitherto known little about him.
    We spent a long time talking about Masonry and religion, but after a while I began to ask him about the Ancient and Accepted Rite of the Thirty-Third Degree. He was, after all, only the fourth initiate to the Rite who had agreed to see me. He answered quickly. "No, I dare not go into that', he said. 'We'd better stick to religion'. It seemed a perfectly normal answer - I had received many such replies over the months of my investigations. It sounded like the usual rebuff. But I thought immediately afterwards how strange it was that he had used the words 'dare not'. Most people said, 'I'd better not, or 'I'd rather not'. I remarked on his use of the word. He said, 'Anyone in public life has to be cautious.'
    'Cautious,' I repeated. 'That's a masonic word of recognition.
    'You've obviously delved into the ritual, so you know,' he said. 'But I mean cautious in the sense everybody understands it.'
    'What must you be cautious about?'
    'Mr Knight, I don't like this line of questioning. I agreed to speak to you in general about terms about why my commitment to Jesus is incompatible with the masonic religion. I do not wish to be drawn into discussion of matters covered by whatever undertakings I have….. taken.'
    'By undertakings, do you mean masonic oaths?
    He paused. Yes, I do. I prefer the word obligation to oath. It's not the same.'
    I remember thinking as I turned the conversation back on to track I wanted to follow that it would be interesting later on to return to this question of the distinction between an obligation and an oath. I never did.
    'Why do you have to be cautious, careful? I said. You're not a Mason any more. I've got copies of all the rituals of the 4^th to 33^rd degree. There is no obligation which could possibly be interpreted to forbid you from telling me what you meant when you used the word "dare" in an ordinary conversation.'
    'This isn't about my religious convictions, is it?'
     'Many of your former masonic colleagues are very powerful people in this country. Do you think there would by some kind of reprisal if you gave away any secret?
    'Not of the kind you write about in your book about Jack the Ripper'. He laughed. A bit hollowly, I thought.
     'Well, not murder, no, I wouldn't have thought so.' I, too, laughed. I felt oddly embarrassed. 'But there is some kind of reprisal to be feared then? Something more subtle?
     He began to look angry. He had made a slip. 'That was a figure of sp---- I was making a joke.'
    'But you said---'
    'I know, I know! And I do not believe for one moment that what you suggest in your book has happened in real life - then or ever.'
     I could see the rattled ex-Mason automatically slipping back into the practice of a lifetime. Sometime you shall divert a discourse, and manage it prudently for the honour of the worshipful fraternity. I would not be diverted into defending the evidence and arguments in my first book. I felt I was close to something. I pressed on.
     'Leaving murder aside, can I ask you…..' And then it hit me. 'Can I ask you, as a Christian, have you ever seen at first hand any sort of reprisals carried out by Freemasons using masonic influence against any non-Freemason or anti-Freemason?'
    All at once, he seemed to relax, or to somehow collapse into a smaller man as he let all the anger go out of him. 'As a Christian….' He paused thoughtfully, and I noticed how very many times he blinked his eyes during this hiatus. I wondered at one point if he was praying for guidance. He drew a long, slow deep breath. 'As a Christian, I have to tell you that I have never in my whole life witnessed or heard about a single act of hostility by a Freemason or group of Freemasons that was sanctioned by Grand Lodge or Supreme Council.' He looked at me significantly as he laid stress on that qualifying clause. 'There,' he said. 'I have said nothing which betrays my obligations.'
     'I have heard from quite a lot of contacts about organized action by groups of Freemasons that have resulted in the financial or social ruin of certain people.' I said.
     'So have I.' He said, still looking me straight in the eye as if telling me this was important. 'So have I, Mr Knight,'
     'Have you direct knowledge of such happenings?'
     'Not of such happenings which had the backing of official Freemasonry.'
     'But of action which was unofficial? In other words Masons abusing the Craft for their own ends?'
     'You know the answer to that, from the way I have said what I have said.'
     'I have also heard about people who have "crossed" certain Masons and finished up in prison…..'
     He stopped me in mid-sentence by placing a finger on his lips.
     'If I told everything I know about Freemasonry being betrayed by its members, it would surprise even you,' he said. 'It would make your hair stand on end. I can't tell you any more.' Then, as if it was an afterthought, but I don't believe it was, he said 'Give me your phone number. You might hear from someone in a few days.'
    I gave the number. 'Who?' I said.
    The finger went back to his lips and he went to fetch my coat.
    'God bless,' he said as I left, and I ran pell-mell to a sandwich bar nearby Chancery Lane to scribble down the notes on which this account of our meeting has been based.
    Four days later I received a phone call from a man who told me he had seen my advertisement for people with information about Freemasonry in an old copy of the New Statesman.* He said he had read my Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution and would like to meet me. I tried, as I tried with all my callers to get him to say something concrete on the phone, but he would not even tell me whether or not he was a Mason. I had already received a dozen or so similar calls, some of which had proved useful, some wild goose chases. But the researcher's world is the natural habitat of wild geese and red herrings, and one accepts the necessity of chasing them. Despite his unwillingness to talk - perhaps, in a way, because of it - I arranged to meet him the following Saturday in the vestibule of the Café Royal. From there we would go to his club. He said his name was Christopher. Whether this was his Christian name or his surname I didn't know.
   When I arrived, he was sitting in the armchair to the right of the fireplace just inside the entrance, smoking a small cigar in a holder and reading that day's Times. He was tall, more than six feet, slim and aged about fifty. Everything about him spoke of affluence, except his plain National Health Service glasses. We went to his club, which he pledged me not to name, as it could be used to identify him. It turned out that Christopher was one of his three Christian names and that he was a very senior Civil Servant in Whitehall. He had contacted me, he said, not as a result of seeing the New Statesman advertisement - although he had seen it when it appeared - but at the request of my cautious Christian judge. He asked me what I wanted to know. I said I took it that he was a Freemason. He nodded and took some papers out of his slimline briefcase. He wanted me to be in no doubt as to his bona fides.
    After examining the papers I told him I was interested to know what a person might have to fear from a group of influential Freemasons if circumstances made him, for instance, a threat to them in the business world; or if he discovered they were using Masonry for corrupt purposes; or had fallen a victim of their misuse of Freemasonry and would not heed warnings not to oppose them.
    'It is not difficult to ruin a man,' he said. 'And I will tell you how it is done time and again. There are more than half a million brethren under the jurisdiction of Grand Lodge. Standards have been falling for twenty or thirty years. It is too easy to enter the Craft, so many men of dubious morals have joined. The secrecy and power attracts such people, and when they come the decent leave. The numbers of people who would never have considered for membership in the fifties are getting larger all the time. If only five per cent of Freemasons use - abuse - the Craft for selfish or corrupt ends it means there are 25,000 of them. The figure is much closer to twelve or thirteen per cent now.'
    It transpired that Christopher was one of a small and unpopular group within Masonry who some time in the early seventies had decided that either they had to get out of the Brotherhood or they had to do something 'to stop the rot' which the blinked officers of Great Queen Street refused to admit was there. His reason for talking to me was to assure me that the Brotherhood was an essentially good body of men devoted to all that was best in the British social system and which promoted brotherly love and contributed to the wellbeing of the country and to the relief of suffering. He wanted this put firmly across to the public, and his group wanted pressure brought to bear on those in positions of responsibility within the Brotherhood to put Free masonry's house in order - to institute proper policing, to close down Lodges used for shady dealings and to root out corrupt brethren and expel them. The group - it had no name - also wanted the whole business of masonic secrecy looked into by Grand Lodge, most of them believing that secrecy was more harmful than helpful to Masonry.
    Christopher explained that Masonry's nationwide organization of men from most walks of life provided one of the most efficient private intelligence networks imaginable. Private information on anybody in the country could normally be accessed very rapidly through endless permutations of masonic contacts - police, magistrates, solicitors, bank managers, Post Office staff ('very useful in supplying copies of as man's mail'), doctors government employees, bosses of firms and nationalized industries, etc., etc. A dossier of personal data could be built up on anybody very quickly. When the major facts of an individual's life were known, areas of vulnerability would become apparent. Perhaps he is in financial difficulties; perhaps he has some social vice - if married he might 'retain a mistress' or have a proclivity for visiting prostitutes; perhaps there is something in his past he wishes keep buried, some guilty secret, a criminal offence (easily obtainable through Freemason police of doubtful virtue), or other blemish on his character; all these and more could be discovered via the wide-ranging masonic network of 600,000 contacts, a great many of whom were disposed to do favours for one another because that had been their prime motive for joining. Even decent Masons could often be 'conned' into providing information on the basis that 'Brother Smith needs this to help the person involved'. The adversary would even sometimes be described as a fellow Mason to the Brother from whom information was sought - perhaps someone with access to his bank manager or employer. The 'good' Mason would not go to the lengths of checking with Freemason's Hall whether or not this was so. If the 'target' was presented as a Brother in distress by a fellow Mason, especially a fellow Lodge member, that would be enough for any upright member of the Craft.**
   Sometime this information-gathering process - often involving a long chain of masonic contacts all over the country and possibly abroad - would be unnecessary. Enough would be known in advance about the adversary to initiate any desired against him.
    I asked how this 'action' might be taken.
    'Solicitors are very good at it,' said Christopher. 'Get your man involved in something legal - it need not be serious - and you have him.' Solicitors, I was told, are 'past masters at causing endless delays, generating useless paperwork, ignoring instructions, running up immense bills, misleading clients into taking decisions damaging to themselves.
    Masonic police can harass, arrest on false charges and plant evidence. 'A businessman in a small community or a person in public office arrested for dealing in child pornography, for indecent exposure, or for trafficking in drugs is at the end of the line,' said Christopher. 'He will never work again. Some people have committed suicide after experiences of that kind.'
    Masons can bring about the situation where credit companies and banks withdraw credit facilities from individual clients and tradesmen, said my informant. Banks can foreclose. People who rely on the telephone for their work can be cut off for long periods. Masonic employees of Local Authorities can arrange for a person's drains to be inspected and extensive damage to be reported, thus burdening the person with huge repair bills; workmen carrying out the job can 'find' - in reality cause - further damage. Again with regard to legal matters, a fair hearing is hard to get when a man in ordinary circumstances is in financial difficulties. If he is trying to fight a group of unprincipled Freemasons skilled in using the 'network' it will be impossible because masonic Department of Health and Social Security and Law Society officials (see pp 189-90) can delay applications for Legal Aid endlessly.
     Employers, if they are Freemasons or not, can be given private information about a man who has made himself an enemy of Masonry. At worst he will be dismissed (if the information is true) or consistently passed over for promotion.'
     Christopher added, 'Masonic doctors can also be used. But for some reason doctors seem to be the least corruptible men. There are only two occurrences of false medical certificates issued by company doctors to ruin the chances of an individual getting a particular job, which I know about. It's not a problem that need greatly worry us like the rest.'
     He continued for about half an hour to list examples of the ways in which corrupt members of the Brotherhood could defeat opposition, repeating every few minutes that these kind of circumstances involved a minority of the brethren and that most would be utterly appalled at even the suggestion that such things were happening, let alone countenance them. That they were happening at all reflected the deterioration of the Craft inasmuch as its entry requirements were no longer stringent enough. Those in power in Freemason Hall knew something of what went on, but they felt defeated by it and preferred to look the other way rather than take steps to eradicate it. If Christopher and his group failed to force the issue into the open, he said, the organization would become so morally polluted that it would simply cease to exist. But he was not solely concerned with the Brotherhood. It was the victims of those who used Masonry as a source of personal power who had to be helped as well.
     'Only the fighters have any hope of beating the system once it's at work against them,' he told me. 'Most people, fighters or not, are beaten in the end, though. It's …. You see, I …. you finish up not knowing who you can trust. You can get no help because your story sounds so paranoid that you are thought a crank, one of those nuts who think the whole world is a conspiracy against them. It is a strange phenomenon. By setting up a situation that most people will think of as fantasy, these people can poison every part of a person's life. If they give in they go under. If they don't give in it's only putting off the day because if they fight, so much unhappiness will be brought to people around them that there will likely come a time when even their families turn against them out of desperation. When that happens and they are without friends wherever they look, they become easy meat. The newspapers will not touch them.
     There is no defence against an evil which only the victims and the perpetrators know exists.