A Statement from Victoria Huyeng Myers CEO, Ice Phoenix Consulting Engineers to set the record straight
Following months of targeted public misrepresentation, including racial abuse, online harassment and reputational sabotage, I have made the decision to speak publicly.
Although I had hoped to remain silent on a matter that was legally resolved, tabloid articles published by SWNS (a tabloid distributor) and The Daily Mail have made that impossible. These outlets circulated defamatory headlines and libelous content while deliberately withholding key facts.
Their narrative has caused significant reputational harm to both myself and my business, Ice Phoenix Consulting Engineers.
The articles, presented as inflammatory fiction, amplified a smear campaign fabricated by Rosa and Murray Bell. This irresponsible reporting has fuelled widespread disinformation, personal safety threats, and damage to my professional standing and the company I lead.
As a professional engineer and business owner, I stand by the principles of transparency, integrity and respectful resolution. This factual account is intended to correct the ongoing disinformation.
Boundary Established and Rosa and Murray Bell's Claim Thrown Out Of Court
Since July 2023, the boundary of the Myers’ property has been positioned in full accordance with the legal records held by HM Land Registry.
In October 2023, Rosa and Murray Bell’s claim was dismissed in court. The judge confirmed that their case lacked merit, as the land in question did not legally belong to them. He ruled that the Myers’ fence was correctly aligned with the legal paper title boundary and was to remain in its current position.
Yet two years on, in February 2025, Rosa and Murray Bell remain embittered by their legal defeat and the reputational embarrassment within the neighbourhood. Rather than accept the outcome, they have resorted to a smear campaign, selling a fabricated story to the tabloids in an attempt to rewrite the facts and target Victoria personally.
It is deeply concerning that the tabloids failed to verify the accuracy of Rosa Bell’s claims. A basic fact-check would have revealed that she recycled allegations already disproven in court. Crucially, she omitted key details, such as the clearly marked dimensions on their own title deeds, and the fact that she and Murray Bell have repeatedly attempted, and failed, to claim the strip of the Myers’ land through adverse possession over the past five years, despite engaging multiple solicitors.
The selective exclusion of Victoria’s husband, Michael Myers, his role, his company, and even his photograph, reveals a deliberate editorial choice. The focus is placed solely on Victoria, seemingly to undermine her professional reputation and discredit the business she leads.
The boundary matter was conclusively resolved in 2023, with legal confirmation from both HM Land Registry and the courts. Any ongoing narrative from Rosa and Murray Bell stems not from fact, but from a sustained campaign of resentment, racial hostility, and vexation. The continued publication of false and inflammatory headlines by SWNS and the Daily Mail reflects a troubling lapse in journalistic standards, one that prioritises sensationalism over truth.
As these defamatory headlines persist, Victoria is compelled to issue this statement to set the record straight.
Direct links to the dimensioned title deeds and supporting documentation can be found at the bottom of this page:
The Facts
As early as November 2020, the Myers initiated mediation with Rosa and Murray Bell. This was not to provoke conflict, but to safeguard their property. Despite ongoing offers to mediate, Rosa and Murray Bell refused to mediate from the outset.
In April 2021, Rosa and Murray Bell wrote to the Myers stating their intention to begin construction of their side extension. They declared that they would build over the legal boundary line and would not appoint a Party Wall surveyor, as required under UK law and the Party Wall etc. Act 1996. Additionally, they planned to cut into the Myers’ gutter at several points (without permission), to redirect their extension’s rainwater into it. An act that was both unlawful and in breach of their planning application conditions, and would have caused extensive water damage to the Myers’ home.
The planning application submitted by Rosa and Murray Bell, including Certificate A, clearly showed the disputed strip of land belonged to the Myers. This confirms Rosa and Murray Bell were fully aware that the land they intended to build over was not theirs. Nevertheless, their construction plans proposed building across the legal boundary and directly against the Myers’ external wall, effectively turning it into a party wall without consent.
To prevent unlawful construction, the Myers engaged a solicitor and invited Rosa and Murray Bell to participate in the Boundary Dispute Protocol (BDP). The protocol concluded swiftly in July 2021, after both parties exchanged surveys. Rosa and Murray Bell conceded that they would need to apply for adverse possession to proceed with their plans.
Following this outcome, Rosa Bell consulted multiple solicitors in an attempt to submit an adverse possession claim. However, to date, all legal advisors have confirmed that Rosa and Murray Bell remain ineligible to apply.
The boundary between the two properties remains legally owned by the Myers, as clearly indicated by the T-mark on their title deed. Between 2021 and 2022, surveyors, HM Land Registry, and the Police all affirmed that the fence belonged to the Myers and could be repositioned to the legal boundary at their discretion. This measure not only upheld property rights but also served to prevent unlawful construction and future boundary disputes.
In July 2023, the Myers’ fence was repositioned in full alignment with HM Land Registry title plans. Its placement was legally confirmed at a court hearing in October 2023, where the boundary was upheld by the Judge and Rosa and Murray Bell did not contest their ineligibility to apply for adverse possession.
Facts Behind The Tabloid Smears
Ownership and Fence Removal
CLAIM: Rosa and Murray Bell allege 'garden theft'.
FACT: In May 2023, Rosa and Murray Bell were issued a criminal damage report by Police for destroying the Myers' fence and garden. Additionally, Rosa Bell received a racial hate crime report by the Police for screaming out racial abuse to the fencing contractors.
This occurred despite their own solicitor having confirmed, weeks earlier and in writing to all parties, that Rosa and Murray Bell were ineligible to apply for adverse possession. They therefore had no legal claim to the strip of land owned by the Myers.
Following this, the Police advised the Myers' that they were legally entitled to remove Rosa Bell's unlawful fence installation and reinstate the fence along the correct legal boundary.
Advance Notification
CLAIM: Rosa Bell alleges that everything was done while they were abroad
FACT: Prior to any boundary-related works, the Myers provided written notice to Rosa and Murray Bell. These notices were either hand-delivered or sent via email, offering between several days to several months’ advance warning of the planned activity.
The Myers received written responses and acknowledgements from Rosa and Murray Bell, their adult sons, Daniel and Philip Bell (who were residing at the property at the time). In addition, Rosa and Murray Bell’s solicitors provided written confirmation that the notices had been duly received and reviewed.
Construction works
CLAIM: Rosa Bell alleges that contractors worked on their garden
FACT: All construction took place strictly within the Myers’ legal boundary. At the pinch point adjacent to the Myers’ garage, verbal permission was obtained by the Police from Rosa Bell to access the narrow gap between the two properties. This permission was relayed directly to the Myers’ contractors by two attending officers.
After receiving formal notice of the upcoming fence work, Rosa and Murray Bell deliberately placed obstructions on titled land that their own solicitor had previously confirmed belonged to the Myers. The judge later deemed these obstructions to be unlawful trespass and confirmed they could be removed.
When Rosa and Murray Bell’s garden shed was relocated, two police officers were present and confirmed that no damage had occurred. Two additional witnesses, a man and a woman, identified as friends or relatives of Rosa Bell were also present and able to verify the same.
Prior to the fence installation, the Myers issued multiple written notices requesting the removal of trespassing items from the boundary. These notices were ignored and refused by Rosa, Murray, Daniel and Philip Bell, all of whom were residing at the property at the time.
Shared Access Permission
CLAIM: Rosa Bell alleges there was 'no Permission' for access
FACT: During the fence construction, Rosa Bell had called the police to the property. However, after speaking with them, she agreed to grant permission to the two attending officers for the Myers’ contractors to access the narrow space between the two houses in order to complete their work. The officers relayed this permission directly to the contractors on site, and this exchange was witnessed.
Boundary Dispute Protocol (BDP), Mediation Offers and the Three-Month Resolution Period
Contrary to claims that no effort was made to resolve matters amicably:
The Myers initiated mediation as early as November 2020, with multiple follow-up offers across 2021–2023. They offered it again in 2025, following further physically aggressive conduct directed at Mrs Myers by Murray Bell, including an incident in which he trespassed onto the Myers’ property, forcibly removed a fence panel from Mrs Myers’ hands, and retained it without consent.
In April 2021, the Myers invited Rosa and Murray Bell to participate in the Boundary Dispute Protocol (BDP). After initial resistance, Rosa and Murray Bell accepted. By July 2021, Rosa and Murray Bell conceded that they would need to apply for adverse possession to pursue their claim over the Myers' strip of land. However, they were, and remain, ineligible under UK property law.
In February 2023, following an incident where Murray Bell engaged in physically aggressive conduct directed at Mrs Myers, including swinging a branch toward her and striking the patio with force, the Myers offered a formal three-month stand-down period, and presented Rosa and Murray Bell with three clear options:
to mediate,
to apply for adverse possession,
or to seek a court ruling on the boundary.
Rosa and Murray Bell declined both mediation and a formal court determination. During this period, Rosa and Murray Bell's solicitor repeatedly confirmed to all parties that they remained ineligible to apply for adverse possession.
Despite subsequently engaging multiple solicitors in an attempt to proceed, Rosa and Murray Bell have consistently been advised that they do not meet the legal criteria for adverse possession and have therefore failed to alter the boundary status.
If Rosa and Murray Bell wish to challenge the Myers’ fence placement, they must first succeed in an adverse possession claim. Their continued refusal to accept the legal boundary does not change the fact that it remains clearly defined, professionally validated, and upheld by both HM Land Registry and the courts.
False claim: 'Awaiting a ruling'
There is no pending ruling. This matter has been conclusively resolved for over two years.
Since July 2023, the boundary has been fully aligned with HM Land Registry’s title, and all construction has remained within the Myers’ legal ownership.
Rosa and Murray Bell's decision to sell a fabricated story to the tabloids appears targeted and forms part of an ongoing racial harassment campaign against the Myers. The disproportionate focus on Victoria suggests a deliberate attempt to undermine her professional reputation.
Rosa and Murray Bell’s continued attempts to apply for adverse possession has not been supported by any solicitor or upheld in court. They remain ineligible to meet the criteria for adverse possession and have repeatedly declined offers of mediation or any formal legal resolution.
Editorial Misconduct
CLAIM: Tabloids claimed that Victoria declined to comment.
FACT: No article draft was ever shared for review. No interview was requested, and no questions were issued. Victoria was given no opportunity to respond to a copy of the article prior to its publication. An omission that violates standard professional practice.
The result was a defamatory narrative, published without integrity or accountability, and a disregard for the truth.
Harassment, Police Reports & Ongoing Misrepresentation
Rosa and Murray Bell’s conduct has led to multiple police reports, including incidents of criminal damage and racial abuse, directed both at the Myers’ contractors and at Mr and Mrs Myers themselves.
Despite the seriousness of these events, they remain entirely absent from media coverage, including reports published by SWNS and the Daily Mail. This omission has contributed to a distorted public narrative, ignoring the documented impact on those targeted.
Ongoing Harrassment and Legal Reality
Despite the formal resolution of the boundary matter, Rosa and Murray Bell continue to dispute the outcome, relying on speculative historical maps and personal interpretations.
However, these claims:
Do not override the legally registered title held by the Myers
Do not entitle Rosa and Murray Bell to alter, obstruct, or encroach upon the established boundary
Have been consistently rejected through all formal legal channels
The legal boundary remains clearly defined, professionally validated, and upheld by both HM Land Registry and the courts.
Our Commitment to Professional Integrity
While the reputational impact of this false narrative has been significant, our standards remain unwavering.
At Ice Phoenix Consulting Engineers, we continue to uphold:
Ethical practice
Technical excellence
Respectful collaboration
We extend our sincere thanks to those who have offered their support. To learn more about our work or to explore future engineering partnerships, please visit:
© 2025 www.TruthinContext.co.uk. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means. This includes, but is not limited to, copying, sharing, screenshotting, or publishing without prior written permission from Truth in Context.
This site presents factual clarifications and contextual information in response to publicly available narratives. The material is based on documented evidence, official correspondence, and publicly accessible records. It is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create any legal relationship. Note in tabloids victoria huyeng myers has been shown as huy eng myers. www.Truthincontext.co.uk
#DailyMail #MailOnline #TheSun #TheMirror #MetroUK #EveningStandard #TheIndependent #TheGuardian #YahooNews #MSN #9News #SurreyLive #WalesOnline #BristolLive #KentLive #UKNews #BoundaryDispute #MediaAccountability #SWNS #SWNSMediaGroup #dailyrecord #express #manchestereveningnews #vtnews #newslibrary #dailynewsonline #dailymailonline #VictoriaHuyengMyers #BoundaryDisputeUK #EngineeringIntegrity #PropertyLawUK #VictoriaHuyEngMyers #DefamationLawUK #ReputationMatters #DailyMail #MailOnline #MediaAccountability #DailyMailAustralia #VictoriaHuyEngMyersStatement #DailyMailUS #DailyUSTimes #TheMirror #SurreyLive #ExpressUK #MSNNews #YahooUK #VictoriaHuyengMyersStatement #DailyMailAustralia #DailyMailUS #MailOnline #DailyMailCanada #DailyMailSouthAfrica #DailyMailItaly #TheTimes #TheSundayTimes #PoliticsTamed #nestia
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason
Revealed: The real reason