31-01-06 Dear Sir, Forum Case Number FA 0601000619521 In reply to the complainant I will say the following; - 1. My legal action (arbitration) against Laurent Giles Ltd. had a positive result, but I was obstructed by their voluntary liquidation. The subsequent web site was set up to obtain information on the now liquidated company formerly known as Laurent Giles Ltd., this fact is supported by the offer of a reward. This site is also a warning to other prospective design purchasers, to be careful of all designers, not just Laurent Giles Ltd. this is made quite clear on page one of the site. 2. It is undisputed that I purchased and now own a Laurent Giles Ltd., design; this allows me to use the name Laurent Giles Ltd. when referring to the vessel. I have used this name, as they were the designers of the vessel even though the company then known as Laurent Giles Ltd. changed its name and went into voluntary liquidation. It is also undisputed that there was an arbitration between Laurent Giles Ltd. and myself headed P.J.Tate & F.A.Tate - v - Laurent Giles Ltd. 3. This web site was formed before the alleged trade mark registration. I personally had no knowledge of any such registration. 4. No evidence has been submitted to support any of the statements made under the heading Factual and legal and I will say that the director of Laurent Giles Ltd., Barry Van Geffen was cautioned on more than two occasions for perjury at the arbitration P.J.Tate & F.A.Tate - v - Laurent Giles Ltd. To conclude we have merely laid out our experiences in our web site, we leave the reader to come to their own conclusion. I enclose a copy of the original web site. Respectfully yours. Peter J Tate.