Herman J. Berge
Oksenøyveien 14
N-1366 Lysaker
Dr.Holms vei 17/D
0787 Oslo
NORWAY
Via facsimile: +47 67 55 65 57- +47 22 14 92 66
Dear Herman Berge,
I refer to your numerous letters and
faxes addressed to my mother Mrs. Amelia Riis, to Mr. Escaut, to Mr. H. Rey,
where you claim compensation for – initially
1,8 mill NKr, then 2,5 mill. NKr, and finally 27.927.140 Norwegian
Kroner ( Euro 3.325.000 !) in the estate of my
deceased father, Mr. Einar Riis.
My mother has asked me to help her
in responding to your allegations. This letter should nevertheless be regarded
only as a supplement to the response from Mrs. Amelia Riis’s lawyer/s.
When I contacted you in
In addition to this we are frankly
quite dismayed by your legal “interpretations”. In our opinion, you are
submitting claims and allegations that have little or no basis in the
factual and legal circumstances in this matter.
My family’s attitude towards you has
always been marked by fairness, correctness, openness, and even friendship,
even after you started what must be regarded – in our eyes – as a somewhat
“bizarre” behavior in the beginning of Sept. 2006. Your inexplicable attitude
change towards us, as well as the reasons for your persevering conduct is to us
still unintelligible, but we are gradually and unwillingly forming a completely
different picture of your real intents behind your past years’ engagement with
our family.
We feel you have exploited the
psychological as well as the practical difficulties our family suffered after
my father’s death on May 30th, and my mother has already indicated
to you she has felt your conduct as being “threatening” and a form for
extortion.
Your actions prior to dad’s death,
the content of your subsequent claims for fees, costs and compensation, the way
you, in our opinion, have manipulated my mother into signing several statements
in your favor, shows that these so-called “agreements” and “Wills” that you are
referring to, in our opinion, must be regarded invalid or illegal.
We are now under the impression that
you have used several techniques of manipulation and misguidance to put
yourself in a position where you have been able to misuse and exploit my
father’s trust in you for your own personal economical benefit.
You have, in our opinion, isolated
my parents from obtaining any other outside legal advice and persuaded them
into believing that you were the only “savior” of the Riis family’s wealth.
During this time period you have started new legal claims and suits leading to
nowhere, thus increasing considerably our family’s costs and expenses.
The so-called “agreements” and
“Wills” you are basing your claim on must in our opinion under all
circumstances be regarded as invalid and/or illegal as a result of
misrepresentation and manipulation of facts, exploitation of delusions,
misguidance on your side prior to when they were entered into. It is
further our opinion that these so-called “agreements” must be regarded as “unfair”
based upon the circumstances behind them.
With reference to
your letter of
It is also our opinion that you at
this time understood that Mr. Einar Riis - as a result of several years of
frustration over unsatisfying results in the Norwegian courts – was in fact in
such a state of mental frustration where he easily could be manipulated by a
person pretending to agree to most of his statements, even though the evidence
for such statements and opinions either was lacking completely or was quite
poor.
Based upon the wordings both of the
so-called “agreements” of 1998, 2000, and 2001 we cannot see that you
were entitled to any of the payments that you received in 2003 from my
father and my mother. My father was in our opinion furthermore led to believe
that this over-generous payment of 5.200.000 NOK would assure him and our
family competent legal assistance in years to come. Your attempts to blame my
father for you, not being able to obtain the necessary licenses to become an
attorney in Norway, and becoming a “persona non grata” in Norway is in our
opinion also highly questionable.
The amount paid to you in 2003 (5.200.000
NOK) – for what we
feel was another lawyer’s work – must in our opinion at best be regarded as a completely
discretionary gift.
During 2005 my father suffered a
couple of strokes and was as you know hospitalized in
To this it must be added that it has
been your own choice to work on a no cure no pay
basis
When it comes to the calculation of
your “claim for compensation” in an amount of NOK 27.9
millions, to pretend to have worked for the last 8 years for 7 days a
week, for 5 or even 15 hours a day all year, cannot be considered serious. No
specification for this “work” has ever been submitted by you, neither have my
mother nor have my father agreed to any of the hourly “lawyer”-rates that you
are claiming, nor are the results for this “work” so evident; on the contrary.
In our opinion you have mislead my
mother and father into pursuing several different cases that have lead to
nothing else than an increase of costs and expenses for them, and proceedings
partly also against your own client’s will. Based on this, we question again
whether you were pursuing your own or your client’s interests.
It is our opinion that the payment
of 5.200.000 NOK under all circumstances must be regarded as a so-called “testamentary
disposition” that would have required a valid Will to have any legal
justification.
To the knowledge of my sister, my
mother and myself; there is no such valid Will in existence.
You have evidently previously never considered such papers you are now
referring to as being “Wills” yourself, since you have never mentioned them to
any of us, or to Maitre Rey’s Notary office.
As far as we can see, none of the
requirements set out in the Norwegian Inheritance Act with regard to what
documents and what formalities needed to be executed before a document can be
regarded as a valid Will have been fulfilled. These
documents you refer to as “Will” have in our opinion no legal basis whatsoever
and you are not entitled to make any claims based upon them. You should also be
familiar with the fact that the testator under Norwegian Law at any stage may
decide to amend or alter his or her Will before his or her death and that a
person that is mentioned in a valid Will, cannot issue a claim against the
estate or the other heirs based upon the fact that such valid Will later was
amended.
Having said this, (i) the mere fact
that you seem to have received an amount of NOK 5,2
millions for work that in reality was not conducted by
you, (ii) that such disposition would have required a valid Will and (iii) the
fact that such Will was not in existence at the time of payment, it is our
opinion that you are under an obligation to repay an amount of NOK 5,2
millions to the estate of my father. Of course I should mention that there
should be calculated interests on this amount.
We are familiar with the letter
dated
As far as we can see, you have
received full compensation for this time period. Both to my sister, my self and
to mother it also seems as if you during the subsequent period several times
have tried to persuade, pressure and/or manipulating my father into granting
you additional economical benefits, without succeeding to obtain a firm
agreement of such salary.
I would also like to point out to
you that the so-called “employment status” that you at some times
have been referring to, as far as we can see only have been a pro-forma
arrangement constructed by you so that you should be able to represent my
parents in front of the Norwegian Courts. At this time you were lacking the
rights to appear and represent my parents in front of the Norwegian Courts,
since you were not and still are not a fully qualified lawyer under Norwegian
Law.
Since both you and my parents were
all quite familiar with the fact that this “employment status” was mere fictional
and created ad hoc by you for the purpose of misleading the Norwegian
Courts into allowing you to represent my parents, we can not see that you can
base any legal rights what-so-ever upon this so-called “status”. Under no
circumstances can we see that there has existed any Contract of Employment
between my father or my mother on the one side and you on the other side. If it
is your intention to claim that such a contract existed, we ask that you
immediately submit this contract in original.
Based upon this it is our opinion
that you have no claim for compensation. On the contrary, we feel the
payment you received in 2003 of NOK 5,2 millions should
be repaid to the estate.
Regarding your facsimile dated;
October 24 to Mr. Henry Rey, informing him about the existence of “another
son” neither my mother, nor my sister, nor the undersigned, have any
knowledge of such a son. We strongly suspect this is a further attempt to delay
the notary procedures, and we ask you to produce evidence of the
existence of said “son”.
Regarding your facsimile dated
October 30, 2006 to my mother, please be informed that both Amelia, my sister
and I am of the firm opinion that both the “statement” dated September 2,
2006 and the so-called “statement of indemnification” dated
August 25, 2006 must be regarded as invalid. The reason for this is
that these statements were made under “duress”.
It is definitely our opinion that
you also have mislead my mother into believing that she owed you such an amount
as referred to in the above statements. This belief was caused by you
misrepresenting facts with regard to what amount was due to you under the
so-called previous “agreements” and what amounts had been paid to you by then.
Based upon recent information it
also seems that you have failed to comply with certain legal deadlines
regarding some of the cases that you were supposedly handling, resulting in
loss of our rights. We are considering claiming damages for the costs and
expenses your “legal assistance” have caused.
You have in numerous occasions in
your letters referred to Mrs. Amelia Riis’ “withdrawal of authorizations
to act on her behalf as a “breach of contract”. We are of the opinion that your
whole conduct from the beginning of Sept. - when you “disappeared” soon after
having obtained the mentioned Sept. 2nd statement - to your faxes sent on Sept.
10th to M. Rey, to the bank, with the purpose of
halting the Notary Act in Monaco fully justify such decision. If a “breach”
of anything should here be mentioned, we suggest you read your own letter where
you state you “cannot work” with Mrs. Amelia Riis anymore. We would also like
to remind you, that just after my father’s funeral you assured us that no legal
deadlines were coming up prior to January 2007. This proved not to be true and,
whether by willful misconduct or by negligence, you must definitely be regarded
as “in default” out of this perspective as well.
With reference to the several
million Norwegian Kroner (probably an amount in between 2,5 and 3 million NOK!)
you “persuaded” my father and my mother into investing in a shipping project
of a friend of yours, we have asked you already to forward all information
pertaining to these family assets. Based upon your latest comments in
regard to these projects, we fear that you already regard these as your own
“investments”. We are therefore also obliged to take reservations about the
nature and the managing of these “investments”, until further investigated.
Please be informed that unless we
have received confirmation within November 30th, 2006 that
you waive any so-called “claim for compensation” of NOK 27.9 millions or any
other sums, and the claim following the Sept. 02nd 2006 statement by Mrs.
Amelia Riis, we will consider starting proceedings against you for repayment of
all sums paid to you in the past, including the above named NOK 5,2 millions NOK plus interests. You will further have to
expect that additional claims for damages and compensations may be submitted to
you as a result of your actions in this matter.
In concluding, I am obliged to say
that several occasions have in my opinion been lost to try to solve this matter
in an amicable way. I am always open for honest, serious, and constructive
approaches, but this will not prevent our family from taking the necessary
steps to protect its interests.
On behalf of my mother I must again
ask you to stop harassing her with any further letters and faxes. Until further
notice all correspondence in this matter should be addressed to my mother’s
lawyer Mr. Escaut in
Regards,
Kenneth Riis