—————————————————————————-–
AFFIDAVIT
NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
——————————————————————————–
I, Iain Clifford, a living man and the General Executor of the Estate known as [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP], declare and affirm the following statement of truth, based on firsthand knowledge and belief:
BACKGROUND AND AFFIRMATION
I have been the subject of a protracted and unlawful vendetta by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), culminating in Order 34/2023. This campaign constitutes a deliberate and premeditated effort to destroy my commercial standing, defame my reputation, and cripple the MATRIXFREEDOM Private Members’ Association.
The Disrupter documentary provides a comprehensive, evidence-based account of FCA misconduct, judicial failures, and institutional cover-up. It includes sworn testimony, financial records, and whistleblower evidence that corroborate this affidavit. The documentary aligns with the APPG’s findings and the Stansfeld report, reinforcing the call for a statutory public inquiry.
FCA COMPLICITY WITH HBOS AND THE CATALYST FOR INTEGRITY CENSURE
The Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) complicity in the cover-up of systemic fraud at HBOS is now well-documented through multiple independent sources, including the Anthony Stansfeld Report, the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG)
The Stansfeld Report highlights how the FCA, alongside the Bank of England and the Serious Fraud Office, failed to act on extensive evidence of forged documentation, fraudulent audits, and the concealment of the £1 billion HBOS Reading fraud. The Turnbull Report, authored by Sally Masterton, was suppressed for years despite naming individuals and detailing the fraudulent concealment of £40 billion in balance sheet holes. The FCA failed to protect Masterton, who was dismissed and silenced with a non-disclosure agreement until public pressure forced Lloyds to acknowledge the report’s authenticity.
The APPG Comparative Summary further corroborates the FCA’s pattern of ignoring whistleblower evidence, failing to act on credible documentation, and enabling regulatory entrapment. These failures are not isolated—they are systemic.
The FCA’s refusal to acknowledge HBOS’s role in the Maximiser and GTEP plans, and its deliberate misattribution of liability to Integrity, formed the basis for a fraudulent censure. This censure was then used to justify an £80 million FSCS payout, based on a report by a Queen’s Counsel who later admitted he had been misled by the FCA. The true liability rested with HBOS, not Integrity.
This institutional cover-up and scapegoating of Integrity was the catalyst for the FCA’s ongoing vendetta against me and the MATRIXFREEDOM initiative. It is a retaliatory campaign designed to suppress exposure of regulatory misconduct and to protect the reputations of those complicit in one of the largest financial cover-ups in UK history.
I have submitted formal complaints to the following authorities, all of which are incorporated into this affidavit by reference:
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO), detailing fraudulent conduct by FCA officers and systemic failures to investigate whistleblower evidence;
The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO), citing judicial misconduct by Mr Justice Sweeting and Judge Anthony Baumgartner;
The FCA Complaints Office and Complaints Commissioner, outlining regulatory abuse, entrapment, and suppression of evidence;
The Public Inquiry Committee, requesting a statutory investigation into institutional failures and regulatory collusion.
These are publicly available at: http://iainclifford.com
CORE ALLEGATIONS
Fraudulent Construct and Enforcement Abuse.
Order 34/2023 was engineered ex parte without evidence of regulated activity. The FCA’s supposed lead prosecutor “Alistair Mackenzie” remains unverified. This may constitute fraud by false representation under the Fraud Act 2006.
Abuse of POCA and Constructive Trusts.
The FCA used POCA unlawfully to freeze assets and impose a constructive trust with impossible terms. This constitutes trespass and breach of fiduciary duty.
JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT BY JUDGE ANTHONY BAUMGARTNER
I do not consent to any further judgments from Judge Anthony Baumgartner, whose conduct demonstrates gross negligence, institutional bias, and complicity with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA):
Failed to verify the identity or prosecutorial authority of “Alistair Mackenzie”, despite multiple lawful demands and the absence of any public record, oath, or delegation—thereby enabling a fictitious prosecution in violation of due process and the Fraud Act 2006.
Judge Anthony Baumgartner had a clear judicial duty to challenge the FCA’s conduct prior to issuing Order 34/2023. The FCA had published warning notices on its own website as early as 2021, yet failed to produce a single piece of evidence demonstrating that [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP], had engaged in any regulated financial activity.
Despite this, Judge [BAUMGARTNER] did not question why, after
multiple six-monthly reports, the FCA had still not identified any breach of FSMA or POCA. He did not demand evidentiary substantiation, nor did he hold the FCA accountable for its prolonged failure to establish jurisdiction
or prosecutorial standing. This omission is not merely negligent—it is indicative of a pre-agreed, complicit agenda to incarcerate me for
contempt of court under an order engineered without lawful foundation. His failure to interrogate the FCA’s narrative, despite overwhelming evidence of procedural abuse and fabricated authority, renders him unfit to preside over this matter and complicit in the institutional targeting of a lawful private initiative.
Judge Anthony Baumgartner acted in complicity with Justice Sweeting in relation to the judicial review proceedings that denied my right to
challenge jurisdiction. Justice Sweeting’s decision to strike out the judicial review—despite clear and unrebutted arguments that no administrative court holds lawful jurisdiction over a living man—was not only
procedurally flawed but constitutionally defective. Judge Baumgartner, fully aware of this context, proceeded to enforce Order 34/2023 without addressing the jurisdictional void or the absence of lawful standing by the FCA. This coordinated judicial posture reflects a premeditated agenda to suppress lawful objections and to incarcerate me under a contempt
framework engineered without lawful foundation. Their actions
collectively amount to a denial of natural justice and a breach of the judicial oath to uphold the rule of law without fear or favour.
Ignored over 500 sworn witness statements and multiple affidavits submitted by MATRIXFREEDOM members, all affirming that no regulated financial services were ever provided—constituting a willful disregard for exculpatory evidence and a breach of judicial duty.
Refused to acknowledge the lawful appointment of my Attorney-in-Fact, David Ayerst, who was forcibly removed from court despite holding a valid Power of Attorney.
This act violated both common law principles and statutory protections under the Powers of Attorney Act 1971 and the framework governing Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) as outlined by the UK Government 1.
Under UK law, an Attorney-in-Fact (or “Attorney”) is legally empowered to act on behalf of the Principal (the Donor) in matters of property,
finance, and legal representation, provided the Power of Attorney is valid and registered where required. The law does not require the Attorney to be a solicitor or barrister. In fact, the GOV.UK guidance explicitly states that an Attorney does not need legal experience to act on behalf of the Donor 1.
The removal of Mr. Ayerst from court, and the judge’s refusal to allow him to speak or represent my interests, constitutes a breach of my right
to lawful representation and due process. It also disregards the principle of agency in English common law, which permits a competent adult to appoint another to act in their stead in both private and quasi-legal matters.
This judicial obstruction was not only unlawful—it was strategic. It denied me the ability to challenge jurisdiction, present lawful notices, and assert my rights as a living man. It further evidences the court’s complicity in suppressing lawful objections and maintaining a procedurally defective prosecution.
Denied the right to a Court of Record, despite formal declarations and lawful notices served on the court, thereby obstructing the preservation of proceedings and undermining the transparency of judicial conduct.
Has not produced his judicial oath, as required under the Promissory Oaths Act 1868, raising serious questions about his lawful authority to preside over matters involving the liberty and property of a living man.
Has not produced any evidence that a Crown Agent is present or appointed at Southwark Crown Court, as required under the Crown Agent Act 1995—
rendering the court’s jurisdiction defective in both form and substance.
Acted in collusion with the FCA to suppress lawful objections, including failing to stay proceedings despite overwhelming evidence of abuse of
process, and proceeding with Order 34/2023 without verifying jurisdiction, standing, or evidentiary foundation.
Demonstrated a pattern of judicial bias, by consistently favoring the FCA’s
narrative, disregarding procedural fairness, and enabling the continuation of a prosecution built on fabricated authority and institutional retaliation.
DEMAND FOR JUDICIAL RECUSAL AND INVESTIGATION
Given the documented failures of Judge Baumgartner—including his refusal to verify prosecutorial authority, his disregard for jurisdictional challenges, and his obstruction of lawful representation—I formally demand his immediate recusal from all proceedings related to Order 34/2023.
Reference to the Andrew Green QC Report
The findings of the Andrew Green QC report, commissioned by the Treasury
Committee and published alongside the FCA and PRA’s internal reviews into the failure of HBOS, further substantiate the FCA’s systemic failures. Green’s report highlighted the FCA’s inadequate enforcement response, its failure to pursue senior executives, and its reluctance to hold individuals accountable for catastrophic regulatory breaches. These findings align with the institutional failures documented in the APPG summary, the Anthony Stansfeld report, and the BBC’s coverage of the HBOS whistleblower case.
The FCA’s refusal to act on the Turnbull Report and its suppression of Sally Masterton’s evidence are consistent with the patterns of regulatory evasion and scapegoating that led to the unlawful censure of Integrity and the fraudulent FSCS payout. The Andrew Green QC report is available in the public domain and can be accessed via the UK Government’s official archive
All research documents, reports, and supporting evidence referenced in this affidavit—including the Comparative Summary APPG v FCA v [IAIN CLIFFORD
STAMP], the Anthony Stansfeld Report on the FCA, and the BBC’s coverage of the HBOS whistleblower case—are available upon request. These materials substantiate the claims made herein and are part of the public record or have
been submitted to the relevant authorities.
Thousands of MATRIXFREEDOM members are closely monitoring every stage of this matter. Each response received from the Crown agencies—including the
JCIO, SFO, FCA Complaints Office, and Public Inquiry Committee—will be documented and reported in the public domain. This process is being transparently recorded to ensure institutional accountability. I will also be
interviewed by independent media outlets to discuss how each agency handles the complaints submitted. The public has a right to know whether justice is being
served or suppressed, and I am committed to ensuring that truth and transparency prevail.
I attach the script for the Disrupter Documentary which will be on general release over the next few days.
JURAT
I Iain Clifford, holding the office of General Executor of the [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP] estate, a divine (holy) living spirit, born again, incarnate with life as a man under God’s law, attest and affirm that the aforementioned is true and correct, attested to and submitted by a living,
breathing, self-aware man, under God. I further acknowledge that this is an act of my free will and Deed.
I solemnly swear and affirm, under penalty of perjury, that the contents of this document are the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
By: Iain Clifford
Iain Clifford
1st July Twenty Twenty-Five.
Witnesses
The undersigned witnesses hereby affirm that they personally observed Iain Clifford execute this affidavit, and that, to the best of their knowledge, the facts stated herein are true and accurate.
Witness 1
Proper Name: Andrew Michael Signature: Andrew Michael
Date: 1st July 2025
Witness 2
Proper Name: David Ayerst
Signature: David Ayerst
Date: 1st July 2025
Witness 3
Proper Name: Angela John
Signature: Angela John
Date: 1st July 2025
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I Iain Clifford, Certify the foregoing was provided by UK Special delivery mailed to:
Office of [KEIR STARMER] The Office of Prime Minister 10 Downing Street
London SW1A 2AA
Office of [KING CHARLES III]
The Office of the King Buckingham Palace London
SW1A 1AA
Office of [RICHARD HERMER] The Office of Attorney General 102 Petty France London SW1H 9EA
United Kingdom.
Office of [YVETTE COOPER] The Office of Secretary of State 2 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DF
Office of [ANDREW BAILEY] The Office Bank of England Threadneedle Street
London EC2R 8AH
Office of [NIKHIL RATHI]
The Office of Chief Executive of the Financial Conduct Authority 12 Endeavour Square
London
E20 1JN
Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO)
Judicial Conduct Investigations Office 3rd Floor, 10 Victoria Street
London, SW1H 0NN
Serious Fraud Office (SFO) Office of Director [LISA OSOFSKY] Serious Fraud Office
2-4 Cockspur Street London, SW1Y 5BS
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
FAO: Complaints Team 12 Endeavour Square London, E20 1JN
FCA Complaints Commissioner Office of [ANTONY TOWNSEND]
Office of the Complaints Commissioner 1 Horse Guards Road
London, SW1A 2HQ
Office of [DEREK ANTHONY SWEETING]
Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London
WC2A 2LL
United Kingdom
Office of [ALASTAIR MACKENZIE]
The Office of Criminal Prosecutions Team Financial Conduct Authority 12 Endeavour Square
London E20 1JN
Office of [MATTHEW STONE] The Financial Conduct Authority 12 Endeavour Square
London E20 1JN
Office of [PIETRO BOFFA] The Financial Conduct Authority 12 Endeavour Square
London E20 1JN
Office of [ANTHONY BAUMGARTEN]
The Office of Southwark Crown Court 1 English Grounds.
Southwark London SE1 2HU
Office of [DAME SUSAN ELIZABETH CARR]
The Office of Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) 81-82 Queen’s Building
Royal Courts of Justice Strand
London WC2A 2LL
Office of [SHABANA MAHMOOD]
The Office of the Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AJ
Office of [NICK GOODWIN]
The Office of HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) Post Point 1.10
102 Petty France London
SW1H 9AJ
Office of [DAME VICTORIA SHARP]
The office of the Royal Courts of Justice Strand
London WC2A 2LL
Office of [DAME SARAH ELIZABETH COCKERILL]
The Office of the Royal Courts of Justice Strand
London WC2A 2LL
As per Section 196(4) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) provides that: “Any notice shall also be sufficiently served if it is served by registered post or recorded delivery by virtue of section 1 of the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962” Furthermore: Under section 127(4) of the Postal Services Act 2000 (PSA 2000) and PSA 2000, Sch 8 Pt II, paras 2–3.