Richard Davidoff, of ABC Estates, has dropped his defamation case against ex-Number 10 policy advisor and leaseholder Nick Hargrave.
He has also had to repay Mr Hargrave’s legal costs, which LKP understands amount to around £300,000.
Mr Davidoff took offence after Mr Hargrave – who lives in a block of flats in Battersea, south London, that Mr Davidoff used to manage – referred to ABC Estates in critical terms on Twitter / X on 7 May 2022.
Mr Hargrave was re-Tweeting a Tweet by LKP linking to its article about two ex-employees of ABC Estates who Mr Davidoff had successfully sued after criticising the company with Google reviews using fake names.
Mr Hargrave referred to the article as a “sad tale on whistleblowing from the leasehold world”:
Mr Hargrave also commented on the LKP website, saying: “The boys referred to above were foolish in their methods and imprecise in their wording – and have unfortunately paid a heavy penalty.”
Mr Davidoff, joined in the action by his wife and daughters who are directors of some of his companies, claimed these comments were libellous and sought an injunction, unlimited damages and costs against Mr Hargrave.
Mr Hargrave, employing solicitors Payne Hicks Beach, responded with a defence of truth, honest opinion and publication on a matter of public interest in a statement of case that amounted to more than 50 pages.
Mr Davidoff’s legal team responded to these points on February 6 this year, but abandoned the case on 18 April.
Payne Hicks Beach references the dispute on its website here:
Victory for Nick Hargrave in Davidoff & Ors v Hargrave.
Hanna Basha and Nick Grant of Payne Hicks Beach’s Privacy and Media Team represented Mr Hargrave with the assistance of barristers Adam Speker KC and Sam Rowe, both of 5RB
Below are the publicly available statements of case from the court file:
https://www.leaseholdknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/HargaveDefence7Dec2023.pdf
https://www.leaseholdknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/HargraveSummaryofDefence7Dec2023.pdf
https://www.leaseholdknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/DavidoffReply6February2024.pdf
Related posts:
Leaseholder and ex-Number 10 advisor to David Cameron issues call for reform of property managers after Richard Davidoff case
Richard Davidoff fails to block right to manage – from a residents’ management company where he is the only director
Richard Davidoff ex-employees apologise for libel, meanwhile fines against ABC Estates pile up
Two ex-employees of ABC Estates fail to stop Richard Davidoff defamation action over critical Google reviews with fake names (and ‘face £36,000 costs so far’)
Libel lawyers for Richard Davidoff, of ABC Estates, fail to get Google to hand over online reviewers’ identities
MPs set up new parliamentary group to reform leasehold
My “freehold” Barratts house was new when we moved in in September 1975. Our then solicitor told us that Barratts included a peppercorn lease payment of £24 a year “which was just to give them a little income, nothing to worry about”. The payment was made to Barratts via local estate agent. However, when there was a huge building slump in 1980’s the house builder Barratts sold all their leases to “a firm of solicitors” calling themselves Simarc Property Management. By that time, I was a divorced single mother living in the house with our three children, working and responsible for the mortgage and all bills. Notification of the sale had assured there would be no changes. However, I soon found out that the changes were vicious. My elder daughter was diagnosed with a Stage 3 malignant melanoma in March 1992. Her diagnosis and massive surgery came as a huge shock. Her further skin grafts and chemotherapy went on for a year. When I missed a payment by seven days and received a bill from Simarc with “late payment charges, solicitors fees” and other made up nonsense amounting to hundreds of pounds that I could not afford to pay. So added to my trauma was a fight with Simarc. My daughter “could die”, I was alone raising our two younger children and the pressure was horrendous.
At December 2003, my elderly mother suffered a fall. She suffered a broken shoulder but was discharged from hospital in need of 24/7 care. During January 2004 my mother was very ill and was taken into hospital where I was able to stay overnight. When I returned home to change my clothes, I picked up my post and amongst it was a demand for “late payment” demand from Simarc for £400 and rising by the day AND they had gone to Nationwide (my mortgage lender), saying they wanted payment from them or they would foreclose on the lease on my home and Nationwide were about to give them whatever they were demanding, despite no court had ever been involved. It was outrageous. They were “charging” for “retrieval of deeds” and solicitors charges, when they were the solicitors. The day I buried my beloved mother I had been on the telephone to Simarc arguing with them over these made up charges that were ballooning by the day. My mother, widowed when my badly injured 8th Army Soldier father returned from France and lost his battle, had been by my side, a support throughout my sad divorce and she loved my children. I can honestly say I considered this world too wicked, that I thought I’d be better off dying myself.
I am 78 now and have a small amount of mortgage left to pay. I cannot afford the extortionate amounts these greedy solicitors Simarc are asking for this £24 per annum “lease” on this freehold house. What am I to do? I fear that my children will end up being scammed by these vultures after I die.
This £24 per year might sound
Please continue your missive Lynda, it seems to have been cut short?
I would say as a sensible first step, make an appointment to see your MP, and whilst waiting, go and see Citizens Advice.
Lynda
I admire your courage and obvious bravery for not giving up no matter what the challenges of life were thrown at you.
The money for nothing ground scam must be abolished along with the entire Freehold – Fleecehold “racket” within this term of Parliament in my opinion.
I believe that Lynda has been treated disgracefully by the Establishment. Enough is enough.