We need an Independent regulator for the law profession..please sign the petition

The exposure of police practices through the recent IPCA investigation has only scratched the surface of the problems in our halls of power .

It appears that those charged with enforcing the law are not held accountable to it .

This is particularly true of the legal profession . The legal profession are at the highest level of power overseeing and advising government bodies and creating legislation .

Very few people are aware of the incestuous nature of the legal fraternity and how it functions without independent oversight .

There is a massive conflict in that the NZLS has two statutory functions Regulatory functions and Representative functions it is both the provider, educator an industry association and the disciplinary body .

My own example of why we need an independent regulator stems from an incident in 2018 where the manager Regulatory NZLS issued two letters see here for a member to be used in a tribunal .

As a result I lost my private investigators licence ( I am ex police ) as I chose to retire rather than fight the false documents ,which the law society defended .

The documents were then used for a defamation claim and subsequently a harassment claim when I pointed out that letters were false and that the legal action was malicious .

In December 2018 the Manager regulatory wrote to the lawyer and advised that the letters were ” incorrect ” this is months after advising the lawyer “The New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) assumed control over the regulatory records of the ADLS in February of See s379 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006.
As we have previously advised, pre 2009 records are historical and were created by the ADLS. As the ADLS is a separate entity the NZLS is unable to verify or guarantee accuracy.

This raises the question as to how the January 2018 letters were created in the first place and how the ” due dilligence was carried out “

NZLS has refused to act or investigate , my complaint went to the standards committee who reported “The Committee considers Mrs Haden’s complaints relate to matters which are, will be or have
been, before the Court. It will therefore exercise its discretion to take no further action.

The December 2018 email was concealed from the proceedings , the law society provided a almost fully redacted copy to satisfy my privacy act request . In March 2020 I obtained a unredacted copy . Without any apparent application to the court the judge immediately issued a restraining order , this was later overturned as it was issued without jurisdiction

This basically means that a lawyer who is committing crime only needs to take their accuser to court and they can get away with it , no one investigates and the NZLS is willing to cover up even going to the extent of creating false documents ( forgery )

I took the perjury complaint to the police and they refused to deal with it despite the fact that the lawyers own affirmation proves the perjury. Again the legal advisers to the police are members of the NZLS .

I am now a pensioner and am paying a lawyer $75,000 out of my pension because I was made out to be a liar through the creation of false documents which were created to negate the corroborative evidence I relied on for the truth , which was that in June 2006 the lawyer did not have a practicing certificate .

The matter went to the court of appeal , they identified errors made by the lower courts but decided that it is not in the public interest to pursue . Guess it is in the public interst for me to pay $75,000 for free speech and speaking the truth.

Effectively the law society and the court are condoning corruption and there appears to be no avenue to have this investigated . If this happened to me who else is it happening to ?

Lawyers have accountability to the rule of law but no one holds them accountable hence my petiton which I believe is timely .

the petition is located here

Petition request

That the House of Representatives establish an independent statutory authority to carry out all the regulatory functions currently assigned to the New Zealand Law Society.

Petition reason

The New Zealand Law Society has both regulatory and representative functions, which I think is a massive conflict of interest. I believe that the public have no protection from wrongdoing by the Law Society or its members. In my view, Independent Police Complaints Authority (IPCA) oversight of the police proves how essential independent oversight is.

sign petition

Misleading and unenforceable’: Parking ticket quashed after Disputes Tribunal challenge

this court decison is important as it proved that there is no contract between the vehicle owner and the car park enforcer

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/misleading-and-unenforceable-parking-ticket-quashed-after-disputes-tribunal-challenge/4ZQPVCEEGBFF7LFVWZI3PZV7NQ/

the owner has no obligation to a private company to advise them who the driver was

step 1. remove your ownership details Revoke authorised access to my personal details 

https://transact.nzta.govt.nz/transactions/PersonalInfoAccess/entry

step 2 if you get a tricket dispute it and ask them to prove every thing

do not tell them anything get information from them .

they cannot send it to a debt collector as long as you write to them that you dispute the debt and want them to prove it

a photo of your car is not proof of anything see previous posts on this site

Parking enforcement services what you have to know and READ

This week we received yet another disputes tribunal  application  from some one  disputing their parking ticket

The ticket they received was deceptive , it used the name Parking enforcement services, this is not the   legal name of the  company issuing the ticket, it is however our legal name  and we do not  issue tickets .

The name is relevant as only legal persons  can enter into contracts,  its a bit like entering into a contract with a cat or a bike.. you simply cant do it

Both sides have obligations to a contract and if you cannot identify who the other party is then   no contract can exist

We have complained to the commerce commission several time and have been fobbed off and its back to business s usual with millions going off shore in so called penalties  at time even for parking on property  which could not possibly have a contract to a third party for parking.

The company which runs  the scam  parking enforcement services  is  Wilson parking new zealand limited  you can see their details here 

It has only one new zealand director, he is a professional director married to  the former councilor Victoria  Carter.Victoria Carter is involved in many  entities as shown on the companies register , she is also the first  female president of the northern club  so any complaint against her husband  will  probably be dealt with   behind  closed doors . her linked in profile is here  She is the daughter of journalists Valerie Davies and stepfather Pat Booth

Norman John CARTER
1/2 Renown Avenue, Greenlane, Auckland, 1051 , New Zealand

The company is entirely owned by a singaporean company  and an  ultimate  holding company  Genuine Result Limited in the  British Virgin Islands.

How much  Tax  Wison pays or even GST depends on  the fees that they pay  for  associated  franchises to their associated companies . the amount of GST paid is also Unknown .

But what is known is that vehicles  emblazoned with the name of our company  are passing themselves off as being legit ,

People who are registered by the private security licencing authority   are condoned in  executing this fraud.

The constitution of Wilson parking states   how it can enter into contracts  the constitution is found here 

the relevant section is   

Therefore Wilson parking can’t enter into a contract by erecting a bill board  and most certainly a contract  by a fictitious name cannot be enforced

we have lots of information on the site as to  dealing with the issue,  disputing your  claim  with  wilson only gets a response from a computer .  simply tell them repeatedly that you dispute it and you want them to prove it .. do not pay them  , report the scam to the police  and to the commerce commission   we need lots of voices to make this change

Please read the what to do  on http://www.civiljustice.co.nz/parking-enforcement-services-2/ 

there is also alternative advice on https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/77bz67/how_to_defend_a_65_wilsons_parking_ticket/

Please don’t phone us  and please don’t waste your time and money  sending us disputes tribunal documents.

do write to  Norm Carter  include him as director  in any court action

also contact your local Mp .

Why is this corruption being condoned   why are millions of dollars being   stripped from New Zealanders ,Probably tax free and GST free and sent overseas.

 

 

Rogue parking companies .. what to do

Headlines in today’s paper Shoppers’ fury at private parking warden’s aggressive clamping in West Auckland

The company involved ELITE PARKING SERVICES LIMITED is part owned by the bankrupt Gordon Harold WARD see details below

it appears that he has  a long history of being involved in  parking   see Wheel clamping company issues penalty of $450

South Auckland wheel clamping called ‘threatening’ and ‘over the top’

West Aucklanders clamped while using car park ‘legitimately’

Wheel clamp ‘bullies’ in liquidation – NZ Herald

Clamped and fined $200 after parking two minutes

Shoppers warned to beware of fine print after clamping complaints 

 

there is  a very easy solution  .  Unless the owners of the property have given consent for their car park to be patrolled and monitored   then there is no delegated authority and no one can make a demand of you

The parking company representative has to show   delegated authority from a real  or legal person  who owns the land  and unless he does so  he cannot  enforce any ” contract “for  land which is not his .

Also no sign is valid  as  contracting  has to follow the constitution of the company and so often as is the case above  there is no identifiable person who is claiming  that a contract exists .  the fact that these companies use the car park means that it has been made open to the public .

How many times have you gone to a shop  and found they don’t have what you want , well  if that happens you won’t have a  receipt .

We then come to the trespass act   and it is our opinion that at best you can be warned for trespass   that in itself will stop you from ever shopping there again .

The simplest action is for  a boycott of the shops who  support this type of enforcement .

There is no obligation on you to prove anything to any one who has no  proof of his/her  right to make demands of you. it has nothing to do with uniforms,  it has everything to do with delegated authority.

If you are shown delegated authority  get your phone out take a photo of it and of the person presenting it  .

you can then dispute the  matter in the disputes tribunal and or lay a complaint with the police for extortion standover tactics ( but they probably wont take the complaint despite the fact that is really is extortion  )  .

Remember  there is no obligation  for any one to say who the driver is   the law only provides for this information to be passed by the owner to the police of council  enforcement  , not private  companies who are  enforcing a civil contract.

As it stands now  all you need is a sign  , an outfit that looks like a uniform , a note pad and a wheel clamp any you are in business  supported with nothing but BS

 

Bankruptcy details WARD, Gordon Harold Leslie

Estate Details
Insolvency Type   Adjudicated bankrupt on debtor’s application under S.47
Estate Number   874234
Name   WARD, Gordon Harold Leslie
Month & Year of Birth   April 1963
Supplied Address   13 Church Road, Mangere Bridge, Auckland, New Zealand
Insolvency Status   Current Bankrupt
Adjudication Date/Time   15-Jul-2015 12:18
Court   Auckland High Court
Occupation at Adjudication   Client Service Representative
Multiple Insolvencies   No
Petition Type   Debtor Petition
Office for Enquiries   Auckland
Case Officer   Please contact Insolvency Office
Email Officer

THE SEVERE DEFICIT IN THE GOVERNANCE – NEW ZEALAND REQUIRES INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION

The following is an email from Tatsuhiko Koyama    we  believe it is worth sharing

From: Tatsuhiko Koyama [mailto:tatsuhiko.koyama@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 22 February 2018 9:05 a.m.
To: Rt. Hon Jacinda Ardern <Jacinda.Ardern@parliament.govt.nz>

Subject: THE SEVERE DEFICIT IN THE GOVERNANCE – NEW ZEALAND REQUIRES INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION

22 February 2018

Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern

Prime Minister of New Zealand

Dear Prime Minister

I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.

This email follows my email, dated 15 February 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND CORRUPTION – Interconnected networks of criminal syndicates, using state power for their illegal purposes, protected by the law enforcement.”

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGJkYjdkYmQ4MGRkNjIyZQ

In my previous email, dated 15 February 2018, I wrote, “The heart of New Zealand corruption is the interconnected networks of criminal syndicates, which are working inside and outside of the government and Courts, to do all kinds of crimes, with impunity, protected by the law enforcement.”

IN NEW ZEALAND, ORGANISED CRIMES ARE FREELY AND FRAGRANTLY USING THE COURTS AS THEIR INSTRUMENTS OF CRIME, WITH IMPUNITY, PROTECTED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT; BASICALLY, NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SYSTEM IS A “SCAM.”

The level and extent of corruption in New Zealand Justice System is unprecedented in any developed nation.

You can find out the endemic nature of the corruption in the justice system by going through the FALSE, FORGED, documents, issued by New Zealand Courts on the CONFIRMED BANKRUPTCY FRAUD.

(1) Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 25 September 2015

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6N2U3NjgxNzU0NDA2OTc3Zg

* “Judgment Dated: 28 May 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED document of the High Court of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

(2) FALSE DOCUMENT – “ORDER OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF A BANKRUPTCY NOTICE,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 25 September 2015)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6N2U3NjgxNzU0NDA2OTc3Zg

(3) FALSE DOCUMENT – “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE as to substituted service of Bankruptcy Notice,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Dunedin High Court on 1 October 2015)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmYwNjIzOTkwMTVlM2EzZA

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTViMzBmZTExYTU1YWRkYQ

(4) FALSE DOCUMENT – “ORDER OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF A BANKRUPTCY NOTICE,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Dunedin High Court on 1 October 2015)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzBjZWM4NGFhNmQxNTE2Yw

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTViMzBmZTExYTU1YWRkYQ

* The signature on the document, dated 18 September 2015, is a computer-generated image, pasted on the document. There is NO practice in the High Court of New Zealand to put an digital image on the original court document.

(5) FALSE DOCUMENT – “INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR,” dated 10 September 2015, (sent by Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High Court, on 2 October 2015)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6YzU1NGNhZTIwY2VkYjU5

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MTI2OGU5Y2I0YWVkZmJmMA

 

(6) FALSE DOCUMENT – “AFFIDAVIT OF MARY ELIZABETH OLLIVIER IN SUPPORT OF INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR,” dated 9 September 2015, (sent by Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High Court, on 2 October 2015)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6YzU1NGNhZTIwY2VkYjU5

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MTI2OGU5Y2I0YWVkZmJmMA

 

(7) Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 28 January 2016

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw

* “DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON COSTS APPLICATION BY DEFENDANT,” dated 28 May 2013, is an interim decision of the Human Rights Review Tribunal, issued before the deadline for the parties to make their submissions.

* “Order of the Court (Costs) Dated: 4/6/2013” is a FALSE, FORGED document of the High Court of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

* “Judgment of the Court,” dated 8 November 2013 is a FALSE, FORGED document of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

* “Judgment Dated: 28 May 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED document of the High Court of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

* “Judgment dated 14 October 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED document of the High Court of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

* “Judgment of the Court,” dated 20 October 2014, is a FALSE, FORGED document of the Supreme Court of New Zealand.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

(8) FALSE DOCUMENT – “FURTHER ORDERS OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF SUMMONS TO DEBTOR AND CREDITOR’S APPLICATION,” dated 26 January 2016, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 28 January 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw

(9) FALSE DOCUMENT – “SUMMONS TO DEBTOR,” dated 21 January 2016, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 28 January 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw

(10) FALSE DOCUMENT – Handwritten minute of Associate Judge Osborne, dated 26 January 2016, (sent by Rebecca Fahey, Civil Caseflow Manager, Christchurch High Court, on 18 February 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MzBhMjViOGUxMGJlOTk1Yg

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MTcwYmI2N2EwYTQxYTVmYw

(11) FALSE DOCUMENT – “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE upon review of Deputy Registrar’s decision,” dated 1 March 2016, (sent by Keroli Smith, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 1 March 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NTI4YzlhYjcwNzI0MzEwOA

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6ZWM1NzNiM2QwNDQwOTVi

(12) FAKE HEARING IN DUNEDIN HIGH COURT on 3 March 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1nzidjU7Qo

* Associate Judge Matthews was NOT at the hearing; someone impersonated the judge at the hearing.

(13) FALSE DOCUMENT – “ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 3 March 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 March 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGFjYjdjMWY3NTlhODk3NQ

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmYyZTcwY2M2ZjdkNmU

(14) Letter of Hayley McKee, Senior Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 9 March 2016

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MWE0ZjU2MTJhZDAwZjc0Nw

(15) FALSE DOCUMENT – ”ORDER ADJUDICATING DEBTOR BANKRUPT,” dated 8 March 2016, (send by Hayley McKee on or around 9 March 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MWE0ZjU2MTJhZDAwZjc0Nw

(16) FALSE DOCUMENT – “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTVkYWIyYzIyZWYzM2E5OA

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWUxMTNiMmVhODJhN2M2ZQ

(17) FALSE DOCUMENT – “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDdiZTY0NzcwNTY2Yzk4Mw

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWUxMTNiMmVhODJhN2M2ZQ

(18) FALSE DOCUMENT – Signed “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NDliZmJmMzE3OTIyNWEwMA

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzcyZjg0MzBjMWZkNTQ1Ng

(19) FALSE DOCUMENT – Singed “ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 3 March 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NTdlMWE3YzAyOTE0Y2Y3Mg

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY2NzI1ZWNiZDM1ODNmOA

(20) FALSE DOCUMENT –  Minute of Associate Judge Matthews, dated 13 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2EyYTJkZmQ5NjY5Y2QyNg

(21) FALSE DOCUMENT – Handwritten minute of Associate Judge Matthews, dated 13 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MTZkZTU4NDEzNzI1NWE5NA

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2JkMmYyOTI4NGY4MzYx

(22) FALSE DOCUMENT – Signed “MINUTE OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 17 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 June 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NzNiN2ZiZmI4MDhhZmUyYg

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjVjZWUyYWJmYTM1NTUwNQ

Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, in his email, dated 12 December 2016, wrote: “I would be grateful if you could refer it to Associate Judge Osborne and let me know in due course if my appearance on Thursday 15 December is excused.”

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3YzZkMmVkYTM1ZjhlNDUy

Memorandum of Grant Slevin, dated 12 December 2016, states, “the counsel submits the hearing scheduled for 15 December should be vacated and a date in January 2017 allocated for a determination on the papers or, if the need arises, a case management conference by way of telephone conference.”

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3Mjg4YWE3MDMyNTQxMzU5

(23) FALSE DOCUMENT – Minute of Associate Judge Osborne, dated 5 December 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court ONLY to Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, Ministry of Innovation and Employment of New Zealand Government, while Tatsuhiko Koyama WAS NOT in New Zealand, on 5 December 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo2MGNiZmI4ZDk2NDNhOGIz

(24) FALSE DOCUMENT – “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE annulling adjudication,” dated 13 December 2016, (send by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, BEFORE the scheduled hearing on 15 December 2015, while Tatsuhiko Koyama WAS NOT in New Zealand, on 13 December 2016)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo1MmQyZmUwZWM3NzgwMjc3

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MmUxODFlOWFmMDI0YWI2OQ

(25) FALSE DOCUMENT – Signed “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE annulling adjudication,” dated 13 December 2016, (Sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 January 2017)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjFhNzA4MzVkZWFhNjk1NQ

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTYxN2RiNmVlMDQ0OTIxOQ

* The signature on the document, dated 13 December 2016, is a computer-generated image, pasted on the document. There is NO practice in the High Court of New Zealand to put an digital image on the original court document.

(26) FALSE DOCUMENT – “ORDER ANNULLING AN ADJUDICATION,” dated 13 December 2016, (Sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 January 2017)

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjRmMDY5Y2ExZjgwYmZm

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTYxN2RiNmVlMDQ0OTIxOQ

 

These FALSE, FORGED, documents are part of the collection of FALSE, FORGED documents, issued by New Zealand Courts.

https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts

 

The situation is absolutely endemic, everywhere and at every level of the Judiciary, including the Supreme Court of New Zealand.

New Zealand requires international intervention, due to the severe, pervasive, entrenched, corruption in the justice system, which is freely and fragrantly used by organised crimes to use state power for illicit purposes, in violation of domestic laws of New Zealand and international treaties for which the state of New Zealand is a signatory.

It is my wish that you will allow the international community to intervene on this matter, as many people in New Zealand are seeking such an action.

Yours truly

Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc

Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand

17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010, New Zealand

TEL: +64-3-473-7810

 

Of God and lawyers Judith Collins v The POPE

god and lawyersJustice system or legal system

It is said that True law is inseparable from Justice, then why is it that our minister of Justice Judith Collins refers to our courts as courts of law not courts of justice.

It is a sad day indeed that our ministry of justice has no way of delivering justice

The quote above is direct from the Vatican and given the churches traditional role in law you have to wonder when the two started to drift part.

It certainly makes you wonder if God is still defending New Zealand or if we have in fact sold our souls to the devil.But on reflection and in turning to the bible Ecc 3:16 I see that this is nothing new

In the place of judgment—wickedness was there,
in the place of justice—wickedness was there.

So in 2000 years nothing has changed and I often wonder if God hasn’t been miffed by being trumped by lawyers.The bible Ecc 3:16

“God will bring into judgment
both the righteous and the wicked,
for there will be a time for every activity,
a time to judge every deed.”

I can only guess that this is the reason why so many lawyers associate themselves with the church, so many of them have good cause to ask for forgiveness or is it their perception of righteousness which brings them clients.

This brings us to the question does God sit higher than a lawyer, do they sit equal or do lawyers trump God.

Q. What’s the difference between God and a lawyer?
A. God does not think he is a lawyer.

Many may think that this is a joke but I have a very real story which confirms that there are Lawyers who believe they trump God.

I was married in St Georges Anglican Church in 1985, our vows sworn before God and the congregation were that that we would share everything. My husband and I became one and I distinctly remember the vicar saying Mark 10:9

“What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Fraser Powrie a Lawyer on the vestry of St Georges at the time and a Vicars Warden had been our neighbour for many years. His wife Elaine and I had shared the kindy run for my youngest child and her middle child.

When I was sued for asking the simple questions “Why does this law enforcement authority not exist” and “ why is a council manager contracting the council resources out to this same fictitious organisation “ my then husband went to see Fraser Powrie and was billed $33,000 despite the years of cost effective services my husband had provided to the Powries as a neighbour helping out a neighbour.

I had been taken to court for defamation and my defence of truth and honest opinion had been struck out through legal manoeuvring, Basically I had 2 weeks in which to find $12,000 and because I was a married woman I had no independent access to funds.

When my defence was struck out we also skipped the formal proof stage and the matter went to court as though I had been found guilty of defamation. The matter went straight to quantum and I was fined $57,500 plus $41,000 cost for speaking the truth.

Fraser Powrie came up with a solution for my husband and that was that 23 years into our marriage we were going to re write the marriage vows and introduce the concept of separate Debts into our marriage.
I was told that I had to sign the documents which Powrie had drafted which was effectively a consent to a matrimonial property split. To encourage me into this action all the bank accounts were frozen and I was penniless.

I suggested to my then husband that this would bring about an end to our marriage and I was told that I was black mailing. I however saw it as someone willfully re writing my marriage vows and breaking my marriage contract.

Fraser Powrie motivated my husband in to this course of action by introducing fear into him. My husband believed that my honesty and truth would eventually cause us to lose everything and so he paid Fraser the $33,000 for the advice and the strategy which would ensure that I had no alternative but to sign the document but it also brought about the end to my marriage .

I have asked the Anglican church if they could enlighten me to the order of things, how sacred is my vow , when a lawyer can force me to “ contract out” so to speak of those vows nearly quarter of a century later . Who sits higher God or the lawyer on the vestry? That was six years ago I have yet to receive a reply.
While this example proves that a lawyer can re write marriage vows and force change 23 years into a relationship the same is not applicable to contracts which lawyers write up and claim to be final and unchallengeable even when persons are forced into signing under duress.

Back to Judith Coliins.

Judith Collins is a lawyer her statement that we have a legal system and not a justice system conflicts with the statement made by the Pope that “True law is inseparable from Justice “

My experience and observations have has proved that criminals can use our legal system to pervert the course of justice, the one with the money wins. That is neither law nor justice.

Going to Court without a Lawyer? Research Project on Self-Represented Litigants

civil courtGoing to Court without a Lawyer? Research Project on Self-Represented Litigants

If you are currently representing yourself in the Family, District or High Court in Auckland or Waikato you may be eligible to participate in a research project on self-representation in the New Zealand civil courts. Have your say on how the system could be improved to better serve the needs of self-represented litigants. For more information see www.selfrepresented.org.nz.

Self-represented litigants are  also called Lay litigants  and  in  some countries  pro se  litigants