The Agreement with Barclays did not restrain me from bringing associated actions, so in the summer of 2001 I laid an information before Yeovil (Lay) Magistrates Court claiming that Barclays solicitor had committed perjury  when bringing the original case in so much as the evidence relied upon were forgeries.   Furthermore, he failed to release the charges upon me as per the first settlement agreement, thereby committing misfeasance contrary to common law.
    
However, since my success in obtaining summonses against Barclays a year or so earlier the ‘system’ had initiated changes which meant that any private case brought had to be ‘pre heard’ before a district judge, (lawyer), so denying an individual his right to go before his piers with a criminal complaint which may embarrass the Establishment or bring the banking industry into disrepute.      The result of this change in the operation of the magistrate courts is fundamental because it enables the establishment to filter out any complaint it finds distasteful by causing it to be pre-heard by a lawyer not a lay person who may be sympathetic to the complainant.