In a bizarre turn of events, a London High Court case unfolded with the “deceased” appearing live via video link to reclaim her home. June Ashimola, a 55-year-old Nigerian woman, found herself declared dead in absentia, triggering a complex legal battle over her £350,000 property in Woolwich. Having left the UK for Nigeria in 2018, Ashimola remained unaware of the fraudulent scheme orchestrated to usurp her estate until it was nearly too late. The case, presided over by Deputy Master John Linwood, exposed a web of deceit involving forged documents, impersonation, and intimidation, all aimed at wresting control of Ashimola’s property from her.
The elaborate scheme began with the fraudulent declaration of Ashimola’s death in 2019. Following this fabricated demise, power of attorney over her estate was granted to Ruth Samuel, acting on behalf of a fictitious individual named Bakare Lasisi. This supposed husband, claiming to have married Ashimola in 1993, emerged as the beneficiary of her estate. However, the court quickly unravelled this fabricated narrative, revealing the non-existence of Lasisi and the fraudulent nature of the marriage certificate. The judge pointed to a long-running campaign by Tony Ashikodi, a convicted fraudster with a history of property deception, as the mastermind behind this intricate plot.
Ashikodi’s past conviction for obtaining property by deception painted a clear picture of his modus operandi. His previous three-year prison sentence for similar offenses underscored his propensity for fraudulent activities. The court identified Ashikodi as the driving force behind the attempt to seize Ashimola’s property. He leveraged the false declaration of death and the fabricated marriage to establish a legal basis for the transfer of ownership. The judge concluded that Ashikodi and Samuel were either directly involved in the creation of the fraudulent documents or knowingly utilized them to further their deceptive scheme.
The court proceedings took an unusual turn when Ashimola, very much alive, appeared via video link from Nigeria. Despite visa issues preventing her physical presence in the courtroom, Ashimola’s identity was unequivocally confirmed through passport photographs. This dramatic appearance exposed the entire scheme and provided irrefutable proof of the fraudulent nature of the claims against her estate. The judge declared the death certificate forged and ruled that the supposed marriage to Lasisi was a fabrication. He rejected the purported emails from Lasisi, concluding that the individual likely did not exist or was unaware of his identity being used in the scheme.
The judge’s ruling meticulously deconstructed the fraudulent foundation upon which the claim against Ashimola’s estate rested. He dismissed the death certificate as a forgery, noting that only a copy was presented with no verifiable provenance. He emphasized the lack of evidence to support the claim of a genuine death. The purported marriage to Lasisi was similarly discredited, with the marriage certificate deemed a fraudulent document. The power of attorney granted to Samuel, based on these falsified documents, was consequently revoked, restoring Ashimola’s rightful ownership of her property.
The case concluded with Ashimola retaining ownership of her £350,000 home, a victory against a complex and audacious fraud. However, the legal battle came at a significant cost, with legal fees exceeding £150,000, potentially surpassing the property’s equity. This case serves as a cautionary tale about the vulnerabilities of absentee property owners and the lengths to which fraudsters will go to exploit them. It also highlights the critical importance of thorough due diligence in legal proceedings involving estates and the vital role of the courts in unraveling complex webs of deceit to protect the rights of legitimate property owners. The case underscores the need for vigilance and robust legal frameworks to prevent and prosecute such fraudulent activities.
