Confirm text replacement with template category text
All the text in the message will be deleted and replaced by text from category template.
|08 Apr 2018 18:55 #5|
NMMNG Part 6
After sixteen months of quite extraordinary meetings with Optimax owner Russell Ambrose, each one covertly recorded, we signed a Settlement Agreement on 27 September 2012
Although the terms included my having to give up the ‘Optimaxruinedmylife.co.uk' domain name (ORML), being somewhat smarter than the average corrupt businessman, there were other terms I vehemently argued, and with Russell naively clueless about my intentions, some of these were removed and/or rewritten, leaving holes that made what was intended to be my ‘gag’ looking like a fishing net!
Russell really thought that by paying me an insulting amount of compensation (his barrister told the judge at our last court hearing that this was in fact a 'commercial decision’) that I’d leave him alone and walk away from this sickening unregulated industry, as everyone who signed an agreement before me had done. But I'd told him many times that was not my intention, that I would continue to try and help damaged patients, and campaign for government regulation.
Unfortunately for Russell, as soon as he took down ORML.co.uk, damaged patient Ashley Bures, aka Mr Abs, published ORML.com (Google "Mr Abs Optimax").
In 2014 Ashley also published Optimaxreviews.co.uk.
Ashley was a police community support officer (PCSO), intending to pursue a career as an emergency response driver, but after laser eye surgery in July 2011, left with severe photophobia, MGD, etc… he’s now desk bound.
And as I believe I may have previously posted, during our meeting at Optimax Finchley Rd clinic on Saturday 7 November 2012, to discuss compensation for Ashley, Russell was recorded suggesting that he find a way to cheat him through the police eye test to become a 999 driver.
By March 2013 Russell was no longer even pretending to work with me to help my Optimax clients, his damaged patients, after finally realising that I’d got the better of him, that Optimax did not have immunity, as he’d arrogantly or stupidly believed up to this point, helpfully providing me with inside info and documents intending to damage his main competitor.
And on the occasions when Russell described David Moulsdale as a psychopath, I couldn’t help but think, ‘pot, kettle, black'!
In July 2013, our beautiful relationship exposed as the fiction it had always been (Russell made assumptions and I never corrected him!), in response to my warnings of legal action for his repeated breach of our agreement, he emailed, 'If you want to start a war then I will fight it till the end.’
(And with my twelfth legal claim against him issued last month, he meant it!)
In May 2014, on the verge of issuing my first claim, we agreed to a voluntary and informal mediation meeting, i.e. without court involvement.
On the morning of Wednesday 21 May, accompanied by a barrister, I met with Russell at his solicitor's central London offices.
Russell stayed quiet for a while, letting his solicitor speak for him, until he couldn’t take any more of my goading - and for the first time I witnessed Russell cast aside his, ‘I’m really a nice guy’ cloak and show his true colours to all present.
Seated around a massive boardroom table, virtually spitting at one another, he and I all but climbed across it to claw at each other's throats (I'd have won!), but his solicitor was the calming voice and we continued.
I was extremely surprised when they offered a global settlement, to buy out my agreement AND to pay off Ashley, which of course included taking down his ORML website and Optimaxreview site, the latter doing more damage in my opinion.
I was asked to provide our ‘expectations', the amount we would each want to sell out.
After the meeting I called Ashley and told him what had been discussed.
I wasn’t really interested in selling out my agreement (I like having Russell bleeding on the end of the hook in his mouth, because it’s him I hold responsible for the damage to my eyes) and nor did I want to see ORML sites taken down.
But Ashley wanted money, not interested in campaigning, so we discussed the option of my brokering a deal with David Moulsdale that would enable him to get what he wanted, and keep the ORML sites up.
That evening I sent a text to David Moulsdale.
The next morning, Thursday 22 May, having completely forgotten, I was surprised to wake up to a text from David!
And I hear your screams of frustration when I say - to be continued...
|30 Sep 2017 15:03 #4|
NMMNG Part 5
Daily Mail story cont’d from NMMNG Pt 4...
To recap: January 2015, Optical Express issued legal proceedings against the Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers Ltd) for defamation and malicious falsehood, alleged to have arisen out of an article published online and in the Daily Mail*.
I told the ANL legal teams that OE would never let this go to trial, because win or lose it would destroy OE with guaranteed national media/press cover.
And of course I was sadly right!
By January 2017 ANL had an excellent defence, mostly thanks to my help, which included giving RPC lawyers access to OERML website.
They discovered that on the dates OE claimed the Mail article had damaged their business OERML had twice the number of views than did the Mail online!
Six days before the deadline for service of witness statements, the evening of 21 February, OE’s lawyers unexpectedly contacted ANL’s legal team and accepted the offer made in June 2016 (approx £50k).
RPC lawyer Louise Turner called me early the next day with this disappointing news, and though not surprised I was of course devastated at the loss of expected media cover.
Louise asked me not to publish details of the settlement, or the extent of my involvement with them, until OE had agreed legal costs with ANL, because they didn’t want to upset OE. Ridiculous because OE knew I was involved, not least because all the defence witnesses came via me/OERML!
A complicated situation, because after ANL made their offer in June 2016, OE are unable to claim legal costs from that date. However, ANL can claim costs from OE, which I understand may be close to £1 million!
I told her that I couldn’t just ignore the fact that the trial was cancelled and had to publish this at least.
Within half an hour of speaking with Louise I had a call from Julian Darrell, Deputy Head of Editorial Legal Services at ANL.
He said he’d prefer I didn’t post anything at all but that of course he couldn’t stop me doing so. I assured him that I would not publish details until the costs had been settled, and that I’d even run my post by him before publishing - on condition that I was given a story, as I was promised had they won.
Julian agreed, but said it couldn’t be about OE. Not a problem I replied, plenty more to talk about, the RCO standards, NHS, etc…
At this time a freelance journalist told me that no matter what Julian Darrell had promised me, I would not get a story in the Mail because they would want to keep OE happy. When I repeated this to Louise Turner she told me it was ridiculous.
I kept my word, ANL did not.
I gave them one last chance and emailed Liz Hartley on 29 May...
'Since late 2015, interested journalists who contacted me backed off because editors refuse to touch anything concerning OE because of the Daily Mail case.
Editors now need to know it’s safe to publish, so this week I intend to start posting new information that will include emails and transcripts of my recorded meetings with industry members, plus details of the OE/ANL settlement.
Publicising this scandal is vitally important to warn others of the serious risks of unnecessary refractive eye surgery, and my campaign for government regulation is my raison d’être, but without media co-operation I have only my social media sites to rely on.
Whether or not OE pay ANL's costs is not my concern, but stopping untold thousands more people having their lives forever ruined by this industry most definitely is, and I am informing you of my intentions simply so that you will understand why I must take this action.’
No response, yet still I waited in hope…
On 23 July I finally accepted that my freelance journalist friend knew what he was talking about when The Mail On Sunday published an advertorial for Optical Express!
Not only did ANL renege on the promise of giving me a story, but they totally insulted me - and the OE damaged patients who provided them with witness statements - by promoting Optical Express!
The moral of this story, don’t ever believe press promises!
And I’ll have more to say about that after Rip Off Britain on Friday...
*Read original Daily Mail article on OERML website forum, posted 05 Jan 2015 09:38: "Daily Mail 7 Jan '15"
|24 Sep 2017 20:39 #3|
I launched My Beautiful Eyes campaign calling for government regulation of the refractive eye surgery industry in January 2012. Since then it has been an uphill struggle to get stories into the press and media, but I’ll cover that another time.
Over the years I’ve been provided with countless internal documents, including emails and other info, courtesy of Optical Express employees with a conscience, both current and ex.
This includes the Patient Advisor Flow, a sales manual for OE staff, which corroborated Stephanie Holloway's claims at her trial v OE & Dr Joanna McGraw in September 2014, when Judge Edward Bailey awarded her £569,000 (plus interest) in damages.
In November 2014 I was contacted by an anonymous person offering me info about OE. We spoke on the phone a few times, and when he realised that he could trust me, he told me that he was an OE surgeon and wanted to help!
Shivers down my spine, beyond my wildest dreams
The surgeon told me that he was planning to leave OE, he had voiced his criticism of OE’s business model within the company, had questioned a flawed presentation by Steven Schallhorn, and that David Moulsdale was fully aware of his complaints.
This was of course Dr George Settas. A brave man, because like any whistleblower, he put his career on the line by speaking out.
George said he would stay with OE a little longer to provide me with as much info as he could.
But unfortunately David Moulsdale somehow discovered our association, and in December 2014 he unexpectedly turned up at the Peterborough clinic where George was working, accompanied by Fiona Moreton [now Fiona Morton].* He told George that as he disagreed on the way OE was run he thought it time to part company.
Also unfortunately, Moulsdale relieved George of his OE issue Blackberry phone, before he’d had a chance to forward all the info stored on it for my attention.
Earlier in 2014 George had filed a report with the MHRA about problems with the MPlus X lens, used by OE and Optegra, and he promised that he would give an interview to Observer journalist Daniel Boffey as soon as he quit OE.
With his departure sooner than anticipated, on 4 January 2015, a double page story on the problematic MPlus X lens was published in The Observer newspaper, and The Guardian online.
I had also spoken with Daily Mail journalist Ben Spencer who followed with the same story the next day.
The Daily Mirror published a similar article, but it was only the Daily Mail that David Moulsdale decided to issue legal proceedings against, for approx £21.5 million.
I was then contacted by Liz Hartley, Head of Editorial Legal Services at Associated Newspapers Limited (Daily Mail publisher), asking if I would talk with the RPC lawyers representing ANL.
Meanwhile ANL made a public apology, acknowledging that (according to OE) no-one had ever gone blind from treatment at Optical Express.
OE didn’t waste a moment in publishing this news on their site, shared by optical publications.
On behalf of ANL, in June 2016 RPC made a settlement offer to OE. I believe it was near £50,000. The offer was not accepted.
By December I was working closely with the RPC lawyers: I met with them, we spoke regularly, they would even contact me on a Sunday evening asking for info, and I supplied all relevant documents in my possession - two trolley loads of files!
By this time I also had details of OE patients who were now blind as a result of refractive eye surgery, be it post op negligence or other, and in my opinion OE didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning!
From day one I had told the lawyers that there was no way OE would let this go to trial, but they disagreed. And with guaranteed national press and media coverage throughout the expected 5 weeks trial, I held my breath and crossed my fingers that I’d be proven wrong.
The lawyers were quite aware that my sole motivation was publicity, which I believed would not only destroy OE, but also highlight my campaign for government regulation of the industry, urgently needed to protect the public.
January 2017 arrived, and I started to convince myself that maybe there was a chance we would make it into court on 11 June, but at a hearing I'd attended in November 2016, ANL's counsel had asked that OE provide security for the costs if they lost. I believe this was in the region of £1 million, and OE had yet to do comply.
Exchange of witness statements was also now overdue, and at a closed hearing on 16 February, OE were successful in obtaining an extension until 27 February.
*June 2018: Fiona Moreton appears to have changed the spelling of her name to Fiona Morton - presumably to avoid SEOs bringing up OERML posts!
Fao legal teams concerned:
The above account is accurate to the best of my knowledge, written from memory, with reference to emails and details RPC lawyers shared with me.
If any of my claims are incorrect or untrue, please contact me and I will amend accordingly.
|14 Jul 2017 09:47 #2|
'NO MORE MS NICE GUY' Part 3
As I posted on 7 June, if the press are too scared to upset this industry and continue to pussy foot around what is one of the biggest scandals of this century - I am not!
And I will continue to publish information previously held back in the hope that an investigative programme (e.g. Panorama) would pick up what is an incredible story of corruption, at the cost of people's eyes and lives!
My unexpected journey started in February 2011, but with so much to recall the facts won’t necessarily be in chronological order.
In 2012 I gave interviews to a number of newspapers - as did a number of other damaged patients in 2013, in England and Scotland - all killed thanks to legal threats from both Optimax and Optical Express lawyers!
Following my first interview for BBC London News in March 2012 (see YouTube), I was interviewed and photographed for an intended double page story in The Sunday Express, asked to guest on the One Show, and various other TV programmes. I was inundated with calls, all wanting an exclusive!
Within a week they all went cold and were ignoring my calls!
Russell Ambrose (Optimax owner) later admitted to me that this was his doing, and - to be fair - at the time I had little evidence to support my claims to help defend the legal threats he made against the media - but I have plenty now!!
I fought and fought for publicity, until BBC radio investigative journalist Nicola Dowling broke the media deadlock in 2014 with the BBC 5 Live Investigates exposé...
Then Stephanie Holloway’s case made big news in September 2014 when she was awared £569,000, followed by Daniel Boffey's exposé in the Observer on 4 January 2015 concerning the problems caused to hundreds of patients fitted with the faulty M Plus X lens.
There’ve been other bits and pieces of press/radio/TV since then, but not the bombshell that we so desperately need to expose this industry!
And unfortunately, since Optical Express issued their (approx) £21.5 million claim against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) re Daily Mail's cover of Daniel Boffey’s story, every time a journalist has contacted me keen to write a story, they’ve come back to me a few days later with excuses for suddenly losing interest.
One freelance journalist told me earlier this year that there was no way any paper would touch a story about OE while the Mail was in litigation!
The 3-5 week trial was scheduled for 12 June last month, but as I posted at the time, it was cancelled after Optical Express settled with (ANL) in February.
I was very much involved with helping ANL's defence lawyers, providing extensive and invaluable evidence that they intended to rely on in court, and I am party to the main points of the settlement agreement. However, in February, ANL lawyers asked me to keep this quiet for the time being, because, as costs are yet to be settled, they didn’t want to upset OE!
I agreed, with an assurance that I would meanwhile be given a story in the Daily Mail (that did not mention OE). However, they reneged on this, and I might as well now be invisible, my totally emails ignored by ANL’s legal team!
The details of this will be posted soon, but for now, this is a transcript of my recorded conversation with Russell Ambrose (RA) on 19 April 2013.
NB: You do need to read Part 1 for this to make sense - posted 21 June.
During a heated discussion about fully informed consent, Russell said, 'If I could find a better way of eliminating inappropriate patients - none of my doctors are under pressure to treat inappropriate patients, that’s hand on heart! And if I could find a - a better way of eliminating the personality that can’t take the complications I’d like to do that.'
I responded, 'I don’t think it’s personality that can’t cope with complications, it’s people, every person - it doesn’t matter what their personality, if they think there’s a chance their eyes are gonna be screwed up they’re not going to do it! And I know for a fact that the chances of your eyes getting screwed up are a damned sight higher than 1 or 5%! I’m looking [at] more like 30%. [RA shaking his head] Yes! 30% minimum who’ve got dry eyes.'
[NB: Please remember this was four years ago, and not only do I now believe the percentage of patients with problems after refractive eye surgery is closer to 40%, possibly more, but I also know that Dry Eye Syndrome (DES) is just one of MANY debilitating and serious complications caused by this unregulated surgery.]
RA: 'I wouldn’t be in this business if it was anything like that!'
Me: 'You won't be in it much longer the way it's going!'
More bickering about fully informed consent...
RA: 'I should have gone 5 years ago… What do you want, what shall I say to David [Moulsdale] if he rings me back, or if you want me to ring him?'
Discussion about Ashley Bures and my campaign and how much RA thought DM would pay me to take down OERML… [More to come on Ashley aka Mr Abs and Optimxruinedmylife.com]
RA: 'Let’s go back to the issue… I think you may send him bust.'
Me: 'I know I am, but Ashley’s going to send you bust as well!'
RA: 'Well that’s his problem.'
Me: 'No it’s your problem, it’s not his money he’s losing.'
RA: 'Ok fine, if he's goes bust you won’t get a penny.'
Me: 'I don’t care - money’s not important to me Russell! I can’t believe you’re negotiating for Moulsdale!!'
Russell then said I should take the money from DM before he went bust, and I asked what would I do then…
Me: 'No no no, this is my raison d’étre!'
RA: 'He’ll be bust soon and you’ll find someone else to rattle.'
Me: 'No no no, then I’ll write the book... then I give you your money back.’ [my Settlement Agreement ‘gags’ me from publicising much of what I want to]
RA: 'I don’t want my money back I just want a peaceful life. And I want a peaceful life from you Sasha.'
Me: 'This is my life. I love - I love the fact...'
RA: 'You love stirring the pot….'
Me: 'No - that I’m helping ppl and stopping them...'
RA: 'But I’m helping ppl doing this…'
Me: 'Yes, screwing up their eyes!'
RA: [laughing] 'No I don’t screw up ppls eyes...'
Me: [pointing at my eyes] ‘Hellooooo?!'
RA: 'Things can go wrong, that’s called life, and I do my best to stop it going wrong.'
Me: 'There’s less chance of things going wrong if you don’t actually aim a laser at your eyes!'
RA: 'There been millions pf ppl who’ve benefited from this!'
Me: 'And there've been 100s of 1000s damaged...'
Me: ‘Yes! It will all come out, trust me - it WILL come out!'
This one recording is 59 minutes long so there is of course lots more to it, and with approx 40hrs of my meetings with RA recorded, lots more to come!
I did a lot of girly giggling throughout and often made Russell laugh, but I somehow think I don’t have that effect on him nowadays!
To be cont'd...
|05 Jul 2017 19:38 #1|
'NO MORE MS NICE GUY' Part 2
One indisputable fact about those profiting from this industry is that they lie - over and over again - to patients, press, politicians, judges...
I could probably fill a book with examples of the lies I’ve been told/heard/read since first challenging this industry.
I’ve seen documents with patients’ signatures forged by clinic staff, medical records dishonestly altered (mine included), I’ve seen surgeon’s signatures forged on operation discharge sheets, and so much more.
And to all involved, as I have so often told you, the truth will eventually out!
The latest lie I recently uncovered concerns Wilbert Hoe, the incompetent and negligent surgeon who operated on my eyes in 2011.
I have no religious beliefs, but as an onlooker had always perceived Buddhism to be the least aggressive religion (note I say ‘least’); compassionate, honest, with a core belief in karma.
(Having lost a few Twitter followers after voicing political opinions in May I have no intention of engaging in any theological discussions)
Surprising then that Wilbert Hoe is a devout Buddhist, who has shown no honesty, no compassion, or regret for what he did to my eyes!
In 2013, a third party told me that Dr Hoe claimed he had not been informed of my post op problems until one year later...
Disclosed under my most recent SAR, I received copies of emails dated March 2011 that Optimax exchanged with Wilbert Hoe (and optom Swati Malkan), discussing my initial complaints and problems.
Therefore, not only did he know that I had problems one month after surgery, but why did he not ever suggest that he examine my damaged eyes? In fact, I met Wilbert Hoe only once, on the day he ruined my eyes and my life!
(I intend to complain to the ICO that Optimax failed to disclose this and other information under my first SAR in 2015.)
Wilbert Hoe apparently also told colleagues that he had wanted to apologise to me, but after I wrote to him in 2015 asking for a witness statement for my first court claim, Russell Ambrose’s lawyer allegedly warned him not to respond for insurance reasons.
I do not accept his alleged pathetic excuse for failing to demonstrate a modicum of basic human decency, not least because,
1. Prior to my first legal claim in 2015 Wilbert Hoe had FOUR years in which to apologise to me.
2. Wilbert Hoe is now retired.
3. Wilbert Hoe was self employed when he ruined my eyes.
In 2016, both the GMC and GOC dismissed my complaints against Wilbert Hoe and Swati Malkan respectively, believing a pack of lies told on behalf of both parties.
Imagine my delight therefore, when last week I found a copy of the 2015 response from Optimax CEO Beata McManus to the GMC, where she has written ‘none’, denying that Optimax were aware of any concerns that could affect Dr Hoe’s fitness to practise!
Reminder: Maria’s eyes were damaged one month after mine, and she issued legal proceedings v Optimax and Hoe.
Beata McManus has therefore added her own to the litany of lies I have on file...
NB: The aforementioned emails gave reason for me to challenge the GOC’s decision re Swati Malkan, and the case is now being looked at again with new evidence I provided.
I have today called the GMC to pursue my complaint re Hoe too - retired or not!
NMMNG Part 3 coming soon...
|21 Jun 2017 21:17 #0|
'NO MORE MS NICE GUY' Part 1
Witness statement from my second court claim v Russell Ambrose/Optimax to give you a brief glimpse into the Machiavellian machinations of this corrupt industry.
Please note that for legal reasons parts have been edited out.
1. Short sighted (myopic) from the age of 14 I wore glasses only for distance vision.
2. Aged 57 I had healthy eyes and perfect unaided near vision.
• My prescription was minus: Right eye -4.25/Left eye -4.00.
• I was able to wear contact lenses as an option to glasses for distance.
3. 18 February 2011, I underwent laser eye surgery at the Croydon branch of Optimax to improve my distance vision.
4. Within days I realised that my vision was worse than before surgery. In a lot of pain I was horrified to discover that I had totally lost my near vision.
• Since then my vision has deteriorated significantly.
• I later discovered that I had been overcorrected and left with hyperopia, the polar opposite to myopia.
5. As well as numerous other side effects, I was seeing starbursts (glare) from all lights, and suffering chronic photophobia (light sensitivity) and painful dry eyes. I have to wear sunglasses in brightly lit environments - even at night.
6. 8 March 2011, my doctor prescribed anti depressants. I was later referred for CBT, but after two sessions the therapist said he was unable to help me (it is impossible to forget that your eyes are irreparably ruined). I also developed stress induced asthma.
7. Within 2 years of surgery my distance vision regressed rapidly, so much that I was back to blurred distance vision without glasses (and my eyes continue to deteriorate).
8. I obsessively researched all I could about the refractive eye surgery industry and discovered it was unregulated and that I was apparently one of many thousands similarly damaged by laser eye surgery.
9. April 2011, I published my website 'Optimax Ruined My Life’ (ORML)
10. January 2012 I launched My Beautiful Eyes; patient advisory service and campaign calling for government regulation of the industry. This is now my full time (unpaid) work. I liaise with a number of legal teams in England, Scotland, and Ireland, who represent increasing high numbers of damaged patients - some left blind!
11. MP John McDonnell (now Shadow Chancellor) agreed to support my campaign after being given details of the significantly high numbers of patients damaged by unregulated eye surgery. We have worked closely together since then fighting for regulation.
12. April 2012, I launched 'Optical Express Ruined My Life' (OERML) website. Optical Express is Optimax’s main competitor.
13. February-April 2011, I wrote lengthy letters of complaint to the Defendant, Optimax owner Russell Ambrose (RA), which were replied to by office staff.
14. 9 May 2011, having published ORML website two weeks earlier Sukhvir Chahil contacted me to ask if her employer Russell Ambrose could call me. When we spoke the next day RA asking if he could come to my house and talk with me. I refused and agreed to meet at his office.
15. At our first meeting on [Friday] 13 May 2011, RA told me that he rarely had complaints from patients, that to have even one patient a year like me was unusual. My first question was to ask if he took responsibility for the damage to my eyes and he said he did.
• On the advice of a lawyer I recorded this meeting to get his admission on record.
• I recorded all further meetings as I didn’t trust RA.
16. RA told me I could have surgery to return my vision to how it was pre surgery, and offered to pay for me to see Prof Gartry @ Moorfields (Private) Eye Hospital. At that time I knew nothing about eye surgery and I wanted to believe him.
17. Prof Gartry told me that I had been overcorrected and that it was impossible to return my eyes to their previous condition. When I told Prof Gartry that my research showed that problems were far from rare, he told me about a 2005 Bill calling for government regulation. He told me this had not succeeded, thanks to pressure from the high street industry. (It was thanks to this information that I launched my campaign.)
18. Many more meetings with the Defendant followed, and I pointed out the many problems I’d become aware of and suggested he allowed me to visit his clinics to advise how services could be improved for the benefit of patients. He told me we could discuss this after we reached an agreement.
19. After numerous and lengthy meetings between myself and the Defendant I eventually agreed to accept 
21. After signing the agreement RA and I continued to meet, supposedly to help the Optimax damaged patients who were contacting me. However, when I mentioned visiting his clinics as we’d discussed, he said there was no need, that there were no problems. Instead he asked me to help him find a way to identify prospective patients who were likely to complain if they had problems after surgery so to avoid treating them. He seemed to think this was perfectly reasonable.
22. After a few more meetings it became apparent that RA had no intention of improving his services, his true motive was to encourage me to destroy the business of his main competitor David Moulsdale, CEO of Optical Express.
23. The Defendant's arrogance in believing that I would ignore his part in damaging patients was staggering, but as he was providing me with so much evidence of the corruption and flaws within the high street industry I didn’t correct him. He also provided me with hard copy printouts of ASA rulings and CQC investigations concerning Optical Express.
24.  He suggested I stop helping people and look after myself, repeatedly encouraging me to accept a bribe from his competitor David Moulsdale to take down OERML. He claimed the site was damaging Optimax as well as OE and offered to broker a deal with DM. (At this time he did not know I was recording him)
25. RA also advised that, if I decided to accept an offer from DM, he would put the money through an Optimax account and take 10% commission. When he eventually learned that I had recorded our meetings he claimed he had been joking.
26. 25 February 2013, I advised RA that I was going to Miami to visit a scleral lens specialist in the hope that he could make lenses to help my vision. Unfortunately it was a wasted trip as my eyes are now too painful to tolerate lenses of any kind. 
27. 15 April 2013,  he told me that I should, 'look at the bigger picture’. 
28. He then showed me calls logged on his Galaxy phone from David Moulsdale, claiming the latter wanted to settle with me and what should he tell him. (Recorded)
To be cont’d…