Investigations in the public interestEvidence. Enquiry. Accountability.

Named questions / Costs enforcement

Claire Louise Sandbrook

Authorised High Court Enforcement Officer, Shergroup; identified in the 10 March 2026 order · Shergroup authorised-officer identification ↗

Jump to all 17 questions addressed to this recipient →

Claire Louise Sandbrook, official professional portrait
Claire Louise Sandbrook · ShergroupShergroup · official professional portraitImage source

Claire Louise Sandbrook and Shergroup / Public promises under scrutiny

Before pursuing a pensioner’s possessions, what did you verify?

Mr J challenges the ethics of the enforcement against Miss E. Sandbrook and Shergroup are asked for the costs-document checks, vulnerability assessment, safeguards and recorded reasons—not a general assurance that procedures were followed.

Public promises versus Miss E’s treatment → Claire Louise Sandbrook’s questions → Shergroup’s questions →

What checks preceded enforcement against Miss E?

The allegation and challenge: Mr J challenges Claire Louise Sandbrook’s handling and account of the writ process. He alleges improper enforcement and disputes the explanation of the seal and issuing registry; the supplied rough transcript now records the oral exchange, including Sandbrook’s answer and admitted error.

The recorded response: The sealed Dagnall order identifies Sandbrook and records acceptance of the wrong-registry error. It also records the procedural waiver, transfer and historical stay. The written finding must be read alongside the conduct Mr J challenges.

The answer required: The completed N293A is now published. Produce its certification history and the complete papers used to obtain the writ. Identify who received and checked them, what authority was relied on, and which steps were taken personally or by agents.

Read the costs, TPDO and writ investigation → Trace the dated sources →

The unnamed registry stamp: answer the provenance question.

Sandbrook’s 8 March account describes the preparation and submission chain, but says Barnstaple had no associated District Registry. The 10 March order records the wrong-office error. What original record authenticated the stamp used in that process?

View the stamp, her account and the court outcome → · SB-01: the direct question →

Questions addressed to Claire Louise Sandbrook

ENF-05 · Claire Louise Sandbrook / Jo Copp / Mark John Mayo

How did the writ reach the wrong issuing office?

The completed N293A has now been recovered. Produce its certification history, the exact documents supplied to obtain the writ and their sender and receipt dates. Reconcile the reported 9 February postal dispatch, 16 February email and Dagnall’s finding that the writ should not have issued through Central Office. What checks were performed before enforcement was pursued, by whom, and which actions did Sandbrook undertake personally rather than through agents?

The sealed 10 March order identifies the registry error and records the enforcement officer’s acceptance of it. Follow the record →

The complete question index

Questions across the case

17 questions addressed to Claire Louise Sandbrook. Each link opens its full wording, source and response position.

Filter the full register for this recipient

10 March hearing → 17 March refusal → disclosure appeal

The N260 was said to be available. Where is it?

The rough hearing transcript records Mayo offering to arrange resending through his solicitors, while Sandbrook participated in the hearing where non-receipt was challenged. Seldons’ later letter declined to reproduce it. Follow the offer, the refusal and the questions about what each person checked.

Follow the hearing-to-refusal record → Read Sandbrook’s changed registry account →

20 March 2026: the family sought verification at Barnstaple. A helpful usher expressed provisional doubt about the seal’s origin and referred them to civil administration. Read the extracts and the demand for the original sealing record →

New evidence branch / 25 September 2026

The recovered certificate. The registry contradiction.

See the N293A and its seal, compare Sandbrook’s account with Dagnall’s order, and examine the different interest-start wording. Fourteen direct questions address the submission, certification and disclosure record.

Read the evidence and named questions →

New / Sandbrook, Shergroup and Shergroup Legal

The unnamed stamp. The preparation account. The stay warning.

Claire Louise Sandbrook’s statements connect the certificate to Shergroup Legal’s preparation and submission. Miss E’s follow-up asks for the authentication records and explanations of the differing accounts. Read the latest correspondence and eight direct questions.

See the stamp and Sandbrook’s documented role → · Read the questions →