View Full Version : Right to justice. In reality its a myth

25-09-2012, 11:46 PM
Open Letter to:
All Members of Parliament
Telecom Board
To all whom it should rightfully concern.
There are generations before whom paid the ultimate cost for the freedoms and rights bestowed on those in their futures yet to be realised, simple truths embedded in law, their courage is not honoured by disingenuous excuses, ethical side steps, or morality dismissed
Those within the halls of parliament, or the corporate boardrooms, earn the right to our respect, by the clear understanding the expectation of the citizens and shareholders that provide for their positions are due; courage, integrity, and honesty, so pause whilst you stride the edifices of your domain and reflect that neither was built by some grand gesture, but by the tempered bricks of sacrifice mortared by loss, grief , hard labour and a simple belief that this mattered to all , and is reverenced by those exulted by it

Right to justice
Statement of case: Fraud committed by Corporate (Telecom New Zealand Ltd) to effect disciplinary process and thus ultimate resignation
Brief overview: After nearly four decades of service for the major corporate Telecom New Zealand Ltd , disciplinary proceedings were commenced based on a written letter of complaint (from an intellectually handicapped girl).
This letter was not produced during proceedings when requested.
John Rooney from Simpson Grierson (Telecomís lawyer) ultimately confirmed in writing that it had never existed.
I was effectively micromanaged out of employment, resigned due to the pressures of the process on my health , marriage and finances , hence constructively dismissed based on a fraudulent act, reference to a document used for their advantage, which was presented as a reality when it was not.
Extensive Notes: Refer to my blog http://hwyop.blogspot.co.nz
This provides the detail of the actions of those involved verified by their own documentation sourced via the privacy act provisions, with some signed off as ďtrue and correctĒ All documents available on request.
Addenda: http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/right-to-justice
Action Taken thus far:
Documented and raised concerns with (amongst others)
 Employment Relations Authority New Zealand
 Telecom CEO Paul Reynolds
 Telecom CEO Simon Moutter
 Telecom Board
 Minister of Labour
 Minister of Police
 All members of Parliament
 Prime Minister John Key
Responses from thus above:
Have varied:
 Telecom CEO , have ignored me
 Telecom Board have ignored me
 Members of Parliament have referred matters to Police and Labour Ministers whom have acknowledged the fraud as a Police matter (Minister of Labour),Police on receiving it deny jurisdiction as itís an employment matter ( convenient catch 22 or bureaucratic ďping pongĒ)
Critical Importance of this :
Relates to the ability of corporates to utilise such tactics as a means to an end and the manipulation of the employment law process
The lack of accountability of the government agencies
The ability of individuals to redress such fraud when opposed by corporates with deep pockets
The ability of individuals to redress such fraud when government agencies fail to act (these agencies are effectively the citizens employees)
The New Zealand Bill of Rights should hold all to account as per
Section 27
Right to Justice
Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination in respect of that person's rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law.
Salient Points
As Chief Justice of the United States Warren E Burger noted "A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; that people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfil its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets
"Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts or governments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because the existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party in question lacks political favor.
Issues Required to be addressed
 Principles of law
 Ethical considerations
 Accountabilities
Points to consider
 The lengths a corporate goes in terms of perpetuating the fraud by legal means and the cost of that
 The principles of law inherent in the case and the corporate thumbing their nose at legal requirements
 The corporate approach to mediation process and their HRís manipulation of it.
 The impact on employment law should disciplinary actions be required to be verified as truthful and accurate and able to proven and presented as such (should cost prevent justice, and truth)
 The validity of stated corporate ethics, their proponentís responsibilities and adherence to the stated beliefs and values
 The corporate morality exposed by the condoning of swingers sex on work time and work premises, (as no action taken) verses please produce the letter (a simple request) , and involve lawyers , HR to deny and confound
 The time and money spend on ignoring my requests against a simple act of requesting the letter be presented
 Where does the power really rest; with the law, with the government or with the corporate
 The responses of government agencies to the problem, deemed too hard and the disingenuous response of bureaucratic ping pong into a catch 22 situation thus justice is delayed , denied.
 What does the demonstrated values of both the corporate and the government in this case say about their real concern for either their public, their staff or their citizens (by their own words you shall know them)
 Whom displays the integrity: the individual going slowly through the prescribed process, to have his intelligence insulted with patronising responses.
 Whom is really accountable within corporate....is there a deliberate strategy to blur the actions and paths to appropriate resolution
 Who is really accountable within government and their agencies?
 Whom determines when a law is broken and evidence produced whether that is pursued,
 Is the law, the law or those tasked with its enforcement be that government agencies or the police able to determine their jurisprudence which is really the place of the courts
 It follows that if those who want to stop or impede the abuse of power (or those who are charged with this duty) do not have sufficient power (even if it were only moral power), they and their efforts will only serve as a source of amusement to those who abuse it.

The principles of natural justice are clearly apparent in my submissions, but deemed not worthy of enforcement by those charged with this duty....so much for governments being the servants of the people, whom elect and remunerate them as indeed are the board members

26-09-2012, 12:16 AM
This part of the quote hits a particular chord for me: "A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society:.......that people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfil its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes...."

That was the reason why we fled NZ - we no longer felt safe, the courts had clearly demonstrated to us that we could not expect protection from the law.

26-09-2012, 02:03 AM
I was brought up to believe in law, justice, ethics, loyalty, your word was your bond sealed with a handshake, I worked 39years 3 months for one firm telecom New Zealand for what. I was apart from the odd speeding ticket a law abiding citizen for what

Only to find the board and senior executives where corrupt and shallow, pledging allegiance to a code of ethics, they now fail to acknowledge and obey quite frankly they disgust me to the core as do the five participants in my demise
Why haven’t I found a lawyer, telecom is a major corporate in my country reaping billions in profit. They have therefore deep pockets
They have the top lawyers in the country on retainer; basically the only people I can rely on are people, the common working man to alert them to the reality the corrupt underbelly of the corporate beast
My only possible recourse is my petition going global and viral
I thank for your interest and support
I urge you to contact the ceo directly by the email embedded in my post and express you complete disgust, as well as click on the url embedded in the post for my online petition and register you vote pass it on to as many of your contacts as you can muster and ask for assistance in making it go viral
Especially alert your media that parts of our clean green image is tarnished by the cowardly despicable corruption of those that both employ us and lead us
In fact I urge you to copy and paste all the email contacts and express your selves to all the participants directly make them aware that their sin casts a long shadow reaching all points of the world
warm regards

26-09-2012, 10:06 AM
Finding a lawyer is easy , it’s the paying for them that is hard ,telecom hires the best of the best and puts them on retainer .then uses them to abuse the process by pushing the legal envelope as close to the edge as possible .

They run you around and around in circles, going nowhere in reality but using up your resources $100.000.00 is small change to the corporation .but half the price of an average house to the working man

You can continue the fight on principle but the impact on family, relationships your health etc is be taken into consideration it’s devastating

The only remedy I have is the petition, corporations as a rule abhor media attention especially if it is negative .so in effect the only court I can try them in is the court of public opinion
The good thing about the internet is their sin will cast a long shadow into infinity in fact

26-09-2012, 10:51 AM
they are so arrogant they even ignore their own code of ethics which begs the question of their validity into any an all communication or contracts they enter into
by their actions we shall know them

Code of Ethics
The company expects all its employees and directors to maintain the highest ethical standards. Telecom’s Code of Ethics establishes the framework by which Telecom employees (including the CEO and CFO) are expected to conduct their professional lives by facilitating behaviour and decision-making that meets Telecom’s business goals and is also consistent with Telecom’s values, policies and legal obligations.
The Code of Ethics addresses:
Conflicts of interest 
Receipt of gifts
Corporate opportunities 
Expected behaviours (including fair dealing)
The proper use of Telecom’s assets and information, compliance with laws and Telecom policies
Delegated authority
Reporting issues regarding breaches of the Code of Ethics, legal obligations or other Telecom policies.
Telecom also has a Directors’ Code of Ethics which addresses similar topics and establishes the behaviour expected of directors.
Any amendment or waiver to the Code of Ethics and Directors’ Code of Ethics will be posted on Telecom’s website.
Copies of Telecom’s Code of Ethics, Directors’ Code of Ethics and board charter are available on Telecom’s website at: www.telecom.co.nz/abouttelecom/governanceattelecom and are also available free of charge on request to the Group Company Secretary by emailing telecomboard@telecom.co.nz.

26-09-2012, 11:21 AM
For evil to truimph , good men do nothing, corporates run the country by stealth, and the lack of courage by those charged with the jurisprudence of our laws, indeed those whose very roles are sanctioned by the citizens fail in the duty they are sworn to uphold, because they lack the moral strenght or basic work ethics, but continue to be renumerated for non performance.

What silverfox is not sharing with you , is the impact on him personally, (which he has provided permission to myself to share).
He has suffered from bipolar , but has not let that limit him in any way.
He excelled at the position he was exited from, frequently top on site , of 150+ people, and in the top 5 nationally.
He saved Telecom several millions dollars by highlighting a legal error in their marketing (acknowleged by a manager involved)
Just prior to this debacle starting, he suffered a heart attack and was hospitalised...on his return the grateful company commenced the plan to remove him.
They are not people that let ethics and morality get in the way of their policy and process.
They knew that he was a manic depressive, but commenced a statergy of frequent meetings almost daily critiquing his performance with an expectation of it being a 100% right, 100% of the time...emails sourced via the privacy act...show a senior manager advising that her two subordinates , "had a good rhythm going" , they knew that they were stressing him...as there was also a comment.."it takes a couple of days for him to settle back down...
They broke his health, his finances, almost his marriage, and nearly his spirit, as he indicated at one stage he contemplated jumping from the multi storey building he worked in..
On resigning, and regaining his health..he commenced investigations , and the fight back...
He has a compassionate nature, and does this not merely for himself, but for others caught by similar deceits , and being currently unemployed uses the knowledge gained in this struggle to advocate for others at their disciplainary or other hearings at no charge for either the time spend on the research or that in meetings.

Success will come by the support of others, by the incremental spread of the knowledge of the travesty perpetuated by calling those involved to account in the court of public opinion.
Image matters to Telecom,,,

26-09-2012, 11:25 AM
Code of Ethics
The company expects all its employees and directors to maintain the highest ethical standards. Telecomís Code of Ethics establishes the framework by which Telecom employees (including the CEO and CFO) are expected to conduct their professional lives by facilitating behaviour and decision-making that meets Telecomís business goals and is also consistent with Telecomís values, policies and legal obligations.
The Code of Ethics addresses:
Conflicts of interest 
Receipt of gifts
Corporate opportunities 
Expected behaviours (including fair dealing)
The proper use of Telecomís assets and information, compliance with laws and Telecom policies
Delegated authority
Reporting issues regarding breaches of the Code of Ethics, legal obligations or other Telecom policies.
Telecom also has a Directorsí Code of Ethics which addresses similar topics and establishes the behaviour expected of directors.
Any amendment or waiver to the Code of Ethics and Directorsí Code of Ethics will be posted on Telecomís website.
Copies of Telecomís Code of Ethics, Directorsí Code of Ethics and board charter are available on Telecomís website at: www.telecom.co.nz/abouttelecom/governanceattelecom and are also available free of charge on request to the Group Company Secretary by emailing telecomboard@telecom.co.nz.

26-09-2012, 06:51 PM
Thank you for your wise counsel and your support
My efforts to hold them accountable continues still, not only for myself but for others that have shared my experience in some form or another
I am hopeful that my petition goes viral, thus we can effect change
However as each vote comes in, the petition will land in the participants inbox ,triggered by the voters effort not mine,it will serve as a not so subtle reminder of their indiscretions
Currently my next step is seek the assistance of a sitting mp to apply to the police complaints authority to resolve the issues around my complaint File: No. 111129/9892
The police acknowledge it is a crime but the local division refuse to apply any resources to it .which confuses me, as all that is require is a request for the non-existent letter of complaint
Failure to provide validates the fraud, case closed
Another avenue is with the mp, s patronage I will petition the house, my legal right as a citizen I will keep the forum updated as my journey continues
Again many thanks for your interest

26-09-2012, 06:55 PM
thank you to who ever added the avatar i like it and appreciate the effort, it reminds me of the "light at the end of the tunnel" and the profile of a fox coming to get you .very apt considering my efforts to have this issue resolved

26-09-2012, 09:14 PM
Here's one strategy in handling your employment grievance - this is today's Daily Mail:


26-09-2012, 10:28 PM
Thank you for the tip, interesting, I'm going to send my petition to the daily mail to advise them it happens in the antipodes

During one of my performance management meetings I was asked what I considered to be a suitable punishment for my supposed misdemeanours

I replied that seen as one of the site managers was caught with one of the team leader's in flagrante delicto shall we say in the small office on the sixth floor I think a verbal warning will suffice don't you didn’t you
needless to say that didnt go down in the meeting notes

27-09-2012, 02:39 AM

I note with interest the above article.
We in the antipodes are equally robust with similar management styles and sexual appetites.
With swingers sex happening in work time on work premises.
The incident I refer to happened in the Telecom call centre, based in Hamilton New Zealand; the lady in question was a site manager; one of three tasked with overseeing approximately 120 call centre representatives the man in question a team leader looking after one of the weekend teams Both married but not to each other,caught in flagrante delicto they unaware at the time of an audience ;such was the joyous nature of their sexual congress.
The male team leader involved in this tryst ; used the his mobile phone to take a photo of the firmly established connection between them ( if you get my drift) and sportingly showed evidence of his score to the two other team leaders.
Absolutely nothing was done about this incident

I at the time was undergoing a performance review, and when asked what I considered would be a appropriate punishment for my supposed misdemeanours I replied "that as one of the site managers was caught with one of the team leader in flagrante delicto in the small office on the sixth floor I think a verbal warning will suffice don't you "

This response was not mentioned in the meeting notes signed off as true and correct, by those management in attendance, but can be verified that it did happen by contacting those present at the meeting shaun.hoult@telecom.co.nz, Peter Cooper-Davies (Peter.cooper-davies@epmu.org.nz) my union rep, iian.galloway@telecom.co.nz Telecom HR representative and note taker. Perhaps you may contact the ceo for comment

They remained employed; I after 39 years service was exited, based on a complaint letter, that never existed, a clear case of fraud.

Currently I am fighting back to the highest levels of government..a summary of the action can be found on


more detailed information is on my blog


please feel free to publish.....

27-09-2012, 12:16 PM
I am sincerely hoping the daily news will ring the CEO for comment,
After the afore mentioned meeting I found myself presented with a final writing warning which lead to a mediation and a constructive dismissal I was not overly concerned as I had survived numerous restructures as the drove the numbers down form25000 staff to approximately 8000
However after my resignation via the privacy act I sourced all my documents to find two weeks after I resigned my file had been stamped “do not re-employ”

Nearly four decades of loyal service for what

This is the same company that when the share price faltered under CEO Paul Reynolds the solution was to sack 250 middle managers who had loyalty served approximately 20 years of their life for the company to achieve these positions

If you have access to any contacts that would be interested or dismayed to learn what happens in the underbelly of corporate life feel completely free to disseminate the petition
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/right-to-justice and alert the media exposure is one of the few effective weapons I have left

in Alan Gibbes latest book he gloat about the killing he made on the market , it was a killing all right a number who where made redundant took their life life in despair

Bill (of Rights)
27-09-2012, 02:02 PM
Silverfox, no-one from the media is going to call the CEO of Telecom on this. There is no story here.
Let me see if I have this right?
At your annual performance review at age 58, Telecom advised you that your performance was falling? Yes?
And within a short period you resigned after 39 years with Telecom, the last few years with the call centre? Yes?
And after you resigned you claimed for constructive dismissal? Yes?
And your grievance was heard by the Employment Tribunal who politely told you that Telecome did nothing wrong in accepting your resignation? Yes?

Paul, what are you hoping to achieve? Money? Reinstatement? Principle? Please help me with an answer to this in less than 10 words.

Bill (of Rights)
27-09-2012, 02:21 PM
Thanks for your 'thinking' Yoda, but you assume there was abuse. My research indicates otherwise. Can you point to the abuse, or is it just Yoda assumption? Is 'your thinking' merely that Telecom is assumed to be wrong, and that Silverfox is assumed to be correct?
I was hoping to get a reply from the subject of this thread first. He is online as I write this.

Bill (of Rights)
27-09-2012, 04:44 PM
Thanks, as is my usual debating practice, I'll await informed comment from the person concerned.

27-09-2012, 06:18 PM
I disagree with Bill of Rights

Silverfox, no-one from the media is going to call the CEO of Telecom on this. There is no story here.

There is a story in reading all that Silverfox has made available via personal blog etc

in my assessment
Let me see if I have this right?...no you do not appear to have it correct

At your annual performance review ......no was not a performance review but called in to a meeting regarding a written complaint from an intellectual handicap girl....written complaint did not exist
Telecom advised you that your performance was falling? ....Telecom retrospectively looked back over 4 months work and critque it with a view that all had to be 100% right 100% of the time....(ironic really when they commenced everything with a fraudulent accussation )

And within a short period you resigned after 39 years with Telecom, the last few years with the call centre? .....No after 8 months of micomanagement and endless critiques and pressure...with health failing, marriage failing and nil finances yes he resigned.

And after you resigned you claimed for constructive dismissal? Yes....correct based on the non production of the writtten letter complaint when requested via the privacy act provisions and the finial acknowledgement by Telecoms lawyer that it had never existed.

And your grievance was heard by the Employment Tribunal who politely told you that Telecome did nothing wrong in accepting your resignation? Yes?....No ....no hearing by the Employment tribunal addressed the fraud
A coerced resignation by what ever means is a constructive dismissal,

read what is available

27-09-2012, 11:27 PM
What I note from the blog..hwyop,,,is the number of times that Telecom managers are caught in a lie...but they ignore any protest or request around this , and proceed with "the process" it smacks of a predetermined outcome

27-09-2012, 11:47 PM
bill of rights "hold them accountable for the fraud restore my good name"

reasoning: once they are held accountable everything else will flow from there,

swampfox: you have it right almost in, same meeting referred to in above posts re-sexual escapades i lost my temper i had had enough after consultation with national manager health and safety for telecom Bryan Abraham
i informed those telecom employees in the meeting namely Shaun Hoult and iian Golloway in front of my union support person peter cooper -davis that they were in breach of the 2002 health and safety act
i asked them to join the dots ,as they had previously twice admitted to micro-managing,me, so i said micromanagement is work place bullying .work place bullying is a stressor .stress in the work place is a hazard
i then informed them that they as individuals, not telecom where up for a $500.0000.00 and up to three years in jail iain galloway commented are you threatening us?

i replied: no i am just advising you where you stand ,as told to me by the national manager health safety for telecom Bryan Abraham

shortly after this i left the room went to my computer and emailed the information referred to to each participants in box,s , i returned to meeting and informed them of same
at this point thought i had them i was extremely angry remember this is at the conclusion of eights months of crap

so we where at an impasse i offered them a way out ,i offered to shake hands and forget about it as long as my personal files where purged of all this crap
they advised me to take the rest of the day off

With in the next 24 hours i was given a final written warning advised of same by union rep, did not return to work exited from company via constructive dismissal

yoda : yes i should have had a lawyer i was relying on my union supporter for assistance at this point we should have held telecom to account , the union has lawyers

forty years of employment forty years of paying union fees you can imagine my disappointment when details emerged sourced under the privacy act that my union rep was having without prejudice conversations with the National Manager Bridgette Dalzell


28-09-2012, 10:28 AM
Silverfox.....correct me if I am wrong..
Telecom commence proceeding with a fraud....document that doesn't exist
Telecom are caught in lies during the proceedings
Telecom are in breach of the Health and Safety act
Telecom now aware through your advice that they are laible for finaincial penalties for breach
Individual managers are now aware that under the act ,they are also personally liable for financial fines under same act
Union is discussing with Telecom without informing you.
Telecom managers are aware of swingers whom are managers themselves having sex on work premises in work time.
Did they give you verbal warnings as per the process prior to finial written warning or just flick you off.
It appears that a strategic decision was quickly made to isolate you..to avoid the above mentioned consequences....(if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....its a duck)
It appears that Telecom managers are both arrogant and lazy....lazy in that either they are unaware of the processes and laws applicable or / and arrogant that they consider themselves above both...and arrogant in that no one in goverment agencies charged with protecting individuals rights in these circumstances will have the courage and resolve to fight them...
It appears that this arogance has been substantiated.
A policeman friend of mine advised....laws are there only for those that respect them, if you do not respect them they don't mean crap...and if there is no consequence for their breach then its carte blanche.....and actually its anarchy this time dressed in a suit
When anarchy becomes law, resistance becomes mandatory

Bill (of Rights)
28-09-2012, 01:06 PM
Oh dear. Like Telecom give a flying fig about this website.
Oh dear. ".. every telecom store be hit with placards and demonstration".
Oh dear. I can see it. 500 telecom offices all over New Zealand being absolutely bombarded by an army of two (2) people.

Oh dear. What has this site quickly desolved into?

Yoda, stop embarrassing yourself.

28-09-2012, 01:16 PM
swampfox:your policeman friend as hit the nail on the head

another view is:A great equation for corruption is

Corruption = Monopoly + Discretion Ė Accountability

do we tick all the boxes yeap i think we do

28-09-2012, 01:36 PM
bill of rights:
you are entitled to your view however do not mock our efforts if your role is to ridicule ,one can only suspect you are a telecom employee, the writers are well aware of a group within telecoms structure who sole role is the troll thru websites and message boards and impose telecom pr spin into the discussion

Bill (of Rights)
28-09-2012, 02:56 PM
Of course I am a telecom employee. Of course I came to this site just in case you might come along later to bleat here.

You brought your problem to this site, a problem which a tiny amount of research reveals to have been a problem of your own making, and of your own magnification (research which I did with a view to seeing how I could help you). I have as much right to comment on the situation as my research has revealed it to be, as you had to bring the problem here.

That said, I understand what "querulous paranoia" is. I soon realised that anyone and everyone who even so much as asks you a question will instantly become your enemy. And I could predict that within two or three exchanges of postings, I too would be perceived by you to be your enemy.

I will feed your condition no further. Good luck with your campaign.

28-09-2012, 03:02 PM
bill of rights:
you are entitled to your view however do not mock our efforts if your role is to ridicule ,one can only suspect you are a telecom employee, the writers are well aware of a group within telecoms structure who sole role is the troll thru websites and message boards and impose telecom pr spin into the discussion

Rest assured that B.O.R is not a Telecom employee but just another member who has considerable experience at being shafted by the New Zealand justice system and although I often disagree with his views too, I would suggest that its best to focus on the issues and the common goal of sharing our experiences to promote change.

28-09-2012, 03:23 PM
There are Telecom offices all over New Zealand. How about every Telecom store be hit with placards and demonstration? I am sure that Telecom will take notice - at least the media will take notice. The marginalised and voiceless should unite.

I wonder when this website will be forced to close down by Telecom and their cohorts. They may hire some hackers to attack this website. I suppose, we can wait and see when the patient of Telecom and their cohorts wears out.

FYI- there have already been several DNS attacks on this site, mainly from China & Russia and were probably in response to articles featured on the site several months ago. This site is still in its infancy and will grow over time.. its here to do precisely what you envisage..enabling the marginalised and voiceless to unite. Thanks for your input..you now have an army of 3!

28-09-2012, 03:26 PM
As Kim Dotcom's legal team has shown....go to the source, check the legalities, publicise the wrongdoing..get the public annoyed with those overstepping the mark, media exposure does wonders...Telecom cares about its image..
rights are typically not lost in one action unless its a revolution or coup.....rights slip away..through lack of courage, laziness , or unwillingness to confront a wrong....if all continue to take that backward step, they eventually find themselves in a place that they never intended to be saying why me and whom let this happen.
Silverfox has taken up the batton , and thus far bested Telecom and their high priced lawyers...exposed lies and other goings on..so we have a lone voice, with only his intellect and perservance to challenge a corporation backed by numerous people within HR and the Simpson Greison lawyer John Rooney...he has according to his blog all neccessary documentation ....the only thing lacking to complete is to shame various government agencies into doing the job that they are paid by the public purse to do and what the bill of rights entitles him......The world is powered by passionate people, powerful ideas, and fearless action.
One strong belief: Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
I commend Silverfox's perserverance, his persistance and being not willing to to take a step back and not least the reality of the real power of the bill of rights.
B.O.R. makes a comment re whom really pays attention to this site, as a recent recruit I ask if not what does this site exist for, if not to envoke change then what...an exchange of opinions that goes no where. However if the opinions are widely dissiminated , the curiosity and the concern of the public stirs action and the first small step to change gains traction..

28-09-2012, 03:45 PM
B.O.R.....did your research reveal the letter from the Simpson Greison lawyer advising that the complaint letter did not exist
I am interested in your conclusion that a quick bit of research revealed that silverfox's problem was all of his owning making...and what premise substantiated that.
Silverfox is it possible to scan the letter confirming this to this forum.

28-09-2012, 03:57 PM
Reflecting on this , the pharse "orchestrated litany of lies " sprang to mind....this started with a lie...I further reflect that Justice McMahon was a lone voice , expressing an honest belief and maintaining his intergrity...and only recently has his stand been acknowledged when a public apology was given to the families of the flight crew by the CEO of Air New Zealand.

28-09-2012, 04:34 PM
bill of rights : its a pity you have decided to cut and run; you asked what i wanted from this in ten words i provided same however your "perception
after a small amount of research is in error
i will accept the admin advice and welcome your input .yes you have as much right to comment as anybody else and you have my empathy for the trails you faced
however i will acknowledge i have a profound aversion to people mocking the efforts of others whose contributions where trying to help
i will present my bona fides and answer swampfox query as well with the same document as well

Attn Head of C I B

Fraud and Defamation

Paul Evans-McLeod vs. Telecom New Zealand


I have found proof that a fraud was committed, written customer complaints, used in initiating the disciplinary process did not exist, and never had...

Finally getting the admission from Telecom with the help of the privacy commission

Fraud is commonly understood to be dishonesty calculated for advantage i.e. a false representation of a matter of fact whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations or by concealment of what should have been disclosed –that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act on it to his legal injury

Note: Ultimately for myself, it was not only legal injury, but financial hardship, and loss of health..The loss of close to $480.000.the loss of a large redundancy due to a very very old contract payout and a job of 39 3 months years duration.

I am instructed by the Minister of labour Kate Wilkinson in her response to my concerns (letter 3rd oct) that this is a matter for the police

I am further instructed by the local office of department of labour

“Accordingly, in the event that you consider that there are elements of fraud or criminal wrongdoing it is incumbent upon you to lodge a complaint with the Police should you wish to request an investigation?”

On 251011 I visited the Hamilton Central Police Station to attempt to lay a charge of fraud against my previous employer of 39 years 3 months

I spoke with a constable Adam James who after listening intently to my concerns and after speaking with his superior informed me my request was of a rather complex nature could I please set it out in written form so it could be properly dealt with and sent forward thru the system

On Sunday 13 Nov. 11 I again spoke to Adam James who passed me to his senior sergeant named Peter van der Wettering I believe, after a discussion with him he advised me to write a letter of complaint to your office

Hence I am now talking to you I require this to be acted upon

This is what transpired in their words, copies of all can be provided if the decision is made to pursue the charge, telecom will have copies of same signed off as true and correct.

It is the act of fraud, deliberate and to my detriment that is requiring investigation

Participants and Witness

All participants in this protracted fraud are in my view culpable under the law. As it is part of their job requirements to make themselves fully cognisant with all the laws of the land it is an integral part of their job descriptions

Bridgette Dalzell: National Manager Telecom: who had oversight of the process as her role dictates
Michelle Young Site manager 123 Call Centre Hamilton (Bridgette Dalzell is Michelle's manager)
Shaun Hoult my Team Leader (Michelle Young is his manager)
Iain Galloway Site Human Resource Manager
Hannah Sullivan head office Human Resource

Peter Cooper-Davis Engineering, Printing & Manufacturing Union My support person who took copious notes throughout the entire process will be able to attest to the veracity of the information from an independent view point

The Proof

The following are excerpts taken form note of various disciplinary meeting held over the course of approximately 8 months of constant harassment

Each provides a reference to the fraudulent document which doesn’t exist


Escalations – 2 customers laid written complaints regarding your customer service

Escalations throughout the period 02/02/10 and 03/02/10 related to poor tone and manner described by the customer as “condescending and rude”. On call recorded 17/03 you were recorded saying to your customer “will go back to the original premise where you be quiet and you listen, Ok? All I ask of you is yes or no answer and not a story OK?” (Play call in nice) nice is a machine that records all conversations

Points of note
2 written customer complaints affirms there are two complaints
Manner described by the customer as “condescending and rude” described by customer


Written warning 300509Consideration of your explanations

Having carefully considered your explanations we do not accept that your explanations satisfactorily justify your actions for the following reasons;

I do not accept that language that could be construed as patronising or condescending is appropriate in your attempts to control a call or were you deem the customer to be intellectually challenged. All customers have the right to expect a polite and professional service standard.
Points of note

Reference again to patronising or condescending is appropriate
There is no way this intellectually handicapped girl had the intelligence to make a complaint I’m not denigrating her it just a statement of fact her disability just doesn’t allow her thought process’s to work that way

plus many more over a long period of time all document refer to the fraudulent use of /or mention of a complaint letter which does not exist
Copies of all can be produced detailing date, day time, reason for meeting attendees at meeting etc
Unfortunately they fill a least two lever arch files

And so on it went ending up with a final written warning and mediation and me being exited from the company on 20th of Aug 2010

I decided to lodge on my own a complaint with the employment relations authority I did this without the assistance of a employment lawyer as past experience made me fully aware that telecom wins most of it battles with its deep pockets

It employs the usual cooperate tactic of leading you around and around in circles, going nowhere using up time money and resources till you eventually quit again exhausted mentally physically and financially

I persued an investigation on my own via the privacy commission to find the original copy of the written complaint letter describing my actions as condescending and rude

Meeting stiff resistance from telecom alerted me that I was on the right track

Proof from privacy commissioner excerpts taking from letter 25 march 2011

Privacy Act Complaint: Paul Evans-McLeod and Telecom New Zealand Limited (Our Ref: Cr22243)

In particular refer to your email of 24 March 2011. In you email your have advised that you have received further information from Telecom in relation to your request of 26 May 2010. You have asked for a response regarding information which you are still seeking, including details of a written complaint and details regarding access to your email accounts~

As set out in my letter of 12 November 2010 Telecom had provided us with a copy of all of the information it was seeking to withhold from you, along with its submissions regarding why it believed it was entitled to withhold this information under the Privacy Act.

I advised that I was satisfied that Telecom was entitled to withhold the majority of the personal information it was withholding under sections 29(1)(a), 29(lXf) and 29(2)(b), However, I also noted that there were several documents which I was not satisfied that Telecom could withhold.

On this basis it is my preliminary view that Telecom has now provided you with all of the information you are entitled to under the Privacy Act

however before we form our final view regarding your complaint. I would like to give a chance to comment on the information which Telecom has withheld. If you would like to comment please do so by 15 April 2011. If we do not hear from you by this date we will finalise our view on your complaint.

Yours sincerely

My Reply

Subject: urgent questions

Hi Sarah
First thank you very much for your prompt reply, it is appreciated You have indicated Telecom are entitled to withhold information under Clauses 29(1)(a)29(1)(b) 29 (2) (b) of the Privacy act

Can we please provide further details specific to the questions asked, as to which clause of the privacy act referred to which question asked
These answers need to be precise in their detail as I cannot base any answers in rebuttal unless I know the specific clause each specific exemption was based on
Unfortunately an answer of both or all clauses fails to provide the necessary clarity I require
Also as 29 (2) (b) gives two specific reasons please clarify which of the two applies

Specifically I require their response to the request regarding the written complaint supposedly written by the handicapped girl where it was alleged I was ‘condescending and rude ‘ Where is the complaint letter .Under which clause did they gain exemption under which reason applies

Next reply from the privacy commissioner

Dear Paul
thank you for your email.
You have asked for comments regarding the withholding grounds which Telecom has relied on in relation to two specific pieces of information that you have requested.
The first request was for a written complaint. As set out in my letter of 12 November 2010, Telecom advised that, in terms of your request for details of two customer complaints which had been made about you, the information was contained in emails which were included in the documents previously provided to you.

Any additional information is therefore withheld under section 29(2)(b) on the basis that it does not exist.


If you would like to provide any further comments regarding my view that Telecom is entitled to withhold information from you under sections 29(1)(a), 29(1)(f) and 29(2)(b) please do so by 15 April 2011. After this time we will be forming our final view regarding your complaint.


Sarah Thompson

Investigating Officer

Office of the Privacy Commissioner


Thank you for your prompt response, I am unsure from your reply, if you have had further discussions with Telecom, as a result of the last letter.

I have assumed that you have, if not my apologies.
With a skilful selection of words Telecom has provided a disingenuous response in an attempt to deceive you and to obscure the truth

completely correct the first request was for a written complaint they say

“Details of two customer complaints which had been made about you, the information was contained in emails which were included in the documents previously provided to you.”
Details may have been provided, the original letter has not...Thus information has been provided, the specific letter has not.
A written complaint was the basis of the disciplinary action, yet there is no actual letter able to be provided, it calls into question its existence. Its specific existence is important as it was one of the major points used in my dismissal it shows their duplicity right from the start of their dealings with me
Thus they are playing with words
Yes there was information containing in emails referring to “two” customer complaints.

However only one of them was real; the other was never there. It doesn’t exist.

Please refer to the submission to the era I forwarded to you earlier in the year to hold for your own information. (This can be resent if you require)

It contains proof that on Monday June 15th 2010; Shaun Hoult, my team manager admitted no letter existed.

Therefore it is not: “Any additional information is therefore withheld under section 29(2) (b) on the basis that it does not exist.” It is not additional information, it is one half of the two customer complaints they alleged “the information was contained in emails which were included in the documents previously provided to you”.

As to the second they have blatantly lied again (unbelievably so)
I can only assume that Telecom has skilfully worded it to direct you to make the conclusion you made
Sarah, I acknowledge that my approach is becoming somewhat pedantic and appreciate your patience thus far. The 'devil" as they say is in the detail. If the detail requested exists, it is a relatively simple matter to provide it, to the privacy commission.
We have instead, obstrufication, and a less than straight answers from Telecom....why the need???

Warm regards


I finally get the answer in amongst all the other rubbish what follows is the final report from the office of the privacy commissioner in its entirety
the important excerpts relevant to the fraud are highlighted in red

Dear Mr Evans-McLeod

Privacy Act Complaint: Paul Evans-McLeod and Telecom New Zealand Limited (Our Ref:C/22243)

I refer to previous correspondence concerning the Privacy Act complaint you have made about the actions of Telecom New Zealand Limited (“Telecom’).
I have now had a chance to review this file in full and consider the issues raised.

I am satisfied that in this case Telecom has interfered with your privacy by initially withholding some information from you without a proper basis.

However I am also satisfied that you have now been provided with the information you are entitled to. It is also my view that there is no evidence to demonstrate that Telecom has accessed emails which you had sent and received from your work computer while you were still an employee at Telecom. I note that even if Telecom had accessed these emails, I believe it would have been entitled to do so in reliance on its clear computer use policy.
The Privacy Act
There are two main aspects to your complaint. The first is in relation to your request for information from Telecom. The second is in relation to your concerns that Telecom had accessed your personal emails while you were at work.

Issue I — Telecom’s response to your request for informs at/on.

This aspect of your complaint raises issues in terms of principle 6 of the Privacy Act. Principle 6 sets out that an individual is entitled to request access to the personal information which an agency holds about them. However, this is not an absolute right as the agency may withhold the requested information in reliance on one of the withholding grounds set out in sections 27-29 of the Privacy Act. This aspect of your complaint also raises issues in terms of part 6 of the Privacy Act which sets out the procedural requirements on agencies in terms of how they are required to respond to requests for information.
Initial Request to Telecom
As Telecom did not receive your initial request for information due to the fact that your email address had been blocked, I am satisfied it has not breached the Privacy Act by not responding to your initial request.

Request of 26 May 2010
You sent a fresh request for information to Telecom on 26 May 2010 asking for all of the information it held in relation to you.
Telecom provided a number of documents in response to your request, it also withheld information from you under sections 29(1)(a), 29(1)(f) and 29(2)(b). For the reasons set out in Ms Thompson’s letters of 12 November 2010 and 25 March 2011, I am satisfied that Telecom is entitled to rely on these sections to withhold information from you.
I note that on a number of occasions since Telecom provided you with information in relation to your 26 May 2010 request, you have advised us that you believe there are additional documents which Telecom has not provided to you. We have sought comment from you regarding specific documents which you believe were outstanding and have provided you with Telecom’s responses in terms of why it considers it has already provided you with these documents, to the extent that they exist. As previously advised Telecom is entitled to refuse a request for information which does not exist under section 29(2)(b).

My words
Start “there it is the smoking gun “

“this portion refers to the letter that was supposedly written customer complaint by the handicap girl who said I was “condescending and rude” they are therefore admitting fraud in the disciplinary process” end

28-09-2012, 04:34 PM
In response you have sent additional emails again requesting Telecom provide you with further documents which it has already said do not exist. I note your comments and acknowledge that you believe that Telecom should hold further information as you believe it would have been appropriate for them to record and retain this information as part of the employment process.

For the reasons set out above I am satisfied that while Telecom has interfered with your privacy by withholding a small amount of information from you initially without a proper basis
so there you have after a long and deliberately convoluted period of correspondence I finally got information via their lawyer that it did not exist
So they in my opinion are guilty of committing common law fraud which to my understanding has nine elements and they fulfilled the lot

1 a representation of an existing fact 2 is materiality 3 its falsity 4 the speakers knowledge of it falsity 5 the speakers intent that it shall be acted on by the plaintiff (that’s me) 6 the plaintiffs ignorance of its falsity 7 plaintiff reliance on the truth of the representation 8 the plaintiffs right to rely on it and
9 consequent damages suffered by the plaintiff I think they scored 9/9 100%

Fraud in my view is an indictable offense thus again in my view all participants are liable to a term of imprisonment In my view the act of fraud could be established by proof of the following

1 the prohibited act being one of deceit, falsehood or some other fraudulent means and
2 deprivation caused by the prohibited act which may consist of actual loss or the placing of the victim pecuniary interest at risk I lost my job hence my income
Proof of deceit or falsehood is sufficient to establish the actus reus of fraud – no other proof of dishonest action is needed;
the fundamental question in determining the actus reus of “other fraudulent means” is whether the means used to carry out the alleged fraud can be characterized as dishonest
- Dishonesty is determined by applying the standard of a reasonable person – whether a reasonable person would stigmatize what was done as dishonest;
- while dishonesty is difficult to define with precision, it connotes an underhanded design which has the effect, or which engenders the risk, of depriving others of what is theirs – it has, at its heart, the wrongful use of something in which another person has an interest, in such a manner that this other’s interest is extinguished or put at risk;
Use is “wrongful” in this context if it constitutes conduct that reasonable, decent persons would consider dishonest and unscrupulous –
The element of deprivation is satisfied¨ on proof of detriment, prejudice, or risk of prejudice to the economic interests of the victim,
One of my primary objectives in bringing this case to the ERA attention the fact my good name was impugned

If not investigated, and proven to the fullest extent these allegations seriously undermine the integrity of myself and my good name, it reflects directly on my self ,and others perception of myself , built on close to forty years service of being honest and a man of good character within the company
It becomes a pervasive form of defamation indeed published by staff in public arenas such Facebook ‘’that I left under a cloud “This can be substantiated by a witness if required as he rebutted the allegation in my defence I left and the confidentially of the mediation left me no way to explain to my peers the reason

It completely contradicted my own sense of ethical behaviour .I was quite frankly stunned close to forty years service came to this ..Unbelievable
Natural justice would dictate that matters should be addressed on facts in evidence; application of good faith should ensure that.
Disciplining on a document (complaint letter) that is nonexistent taints both the process and the outcome, and prejudices my human rights. As does undisclosed intent as described above,
"deceit which avoids the contract need not be by means of misrepresentations in words it exists where the party who obtains the consent does so by means of concealing or omitting to state material facts, with intent to deceive, by reason of which omission or concealment the other party was induced to give a consent which he would not otherwise have given....

"[I]t is based upon the proposition that, under all the circumstances of the case, it was the duty of the party who obtained the consent, acting in good faith, to have disclosed the facts which he concealed

My personal thoughts are that this matter can be resolved extremely quickly contact each of the participants and ask one simple question

In fact you can resolve it from your desk simply email them all at the following


I am in receipt of a letter of complaint from a Paul Evans-McLeod alleging fraud

Fraud is an indictable offense. All participants are liable to a term of imprisonment

The allegations with the supporting documents appears to satisfy all the elements of fraud

However this can be quickly resolved

Can you produce the complaint letter referred to in numerous notes of the disciplinary meetings performance meetings, outcome meetings, written warning, final writing warnings held with Paul Evans-Mcleod?

Specifically the written complaint letter referred to, is the one held to have been written by the handicapped person describing him as patronising condescending and rude

A simple answer of yes or no will suffice i

If the answer is no

Proceed with charging them

.how far you proceed with that charge I will leave to your discretion How ever i do need them at least held to account for this illegal act

In conclusion
Sir this may seem trivial and small to you compared to what you are required to face in your daily work life, I did not want to waste your time with it .however that it is a police matter as been affirmed as above by various people associated with the Department of labour you are my last resort

But I have 6-7 years of lost wages tied up in this act of fraud

It is no small sum approximately $480.000.00 plus a large redundancy due to my length of service 39years 3months and a very very old contract

My only options left after this the, chief of police, the police minister, the ombudsman and the media

The national business review has been in contact and contact has made with Ian Wishart of investigate magazine

Warm regards

28-09-2012, 04:39 PM
the first response from the police i need to point out to one and all that if my complaint lacks substance why on earth would they waste time filling a compliant

police follow a simple procedure with uncovers the reality of any concern they are facing

A accept nothing
B believe no one
C corroborate everything

Hello Paul

Re : Complaint Case 111129/9892

Your complaint has been received by the Hamilton CIB at Hamilton Police Station.

Before any complaint files are assigned for investigation it is necessary for each file to be individually assessed to determine whether:

1. A criminal offence has occurred.
2. The person responsible can be identified.
3. That there is sufficient legally admissible evidence linking the offender with the crime.

Each formal complaint is prioritised according to the seriousness, complexity, amount of money involved, public interest, physical and emotional impact on the person defrauded, availability of witnesses and the weight of evidence linking the offender to the crime.

This process is time consuming but allows for a structured and consistent approach to complaints. We constantly receive cases of a more serious nature which require an immediate response and intervention, so we regularly have to prioritise and review the cases we work on and how we deal with them.

Police are concerned about the impact that this crime has had on you and we will endeavour to investigate the matter, however, it is important that you are aware of the processes we apply in managing fraud complaints and the need to apply strict criteria to each request for service.

If you have any new information or need to talk to me about this case, please phone me on

Yours sincerely

Andrew BuBear Acting O/C City CIB
Detective Sergeant E769

the issue i currently face is, perhaps because of hidden agendas and political interference ,the police currently refuse to place any resources to it so i m left with a corundum the crime is committed, the guilt acknowledge by telecoms own lawyer and verified by the police compliant but i am prevented by exercising article 27 a right to justice because of a refusal of body designed to protect us refusal to commit resources

there is confusion and buck passing between the minister of labour and the minister of police ,one advises in a letter it is a police issue and advises me to approach the serious fraud office (i have they say it is to minor and to involve the police ).the other has just advised its a employment issue engage a lawyer .have attempted same, t Hey don't want a bar of it .they fair the deep pockets and resources of Telecom
so the petition and the blog is an attempt to try them in the court of public opinion i urge you all therefore to cast a vote in the petition
hope this clears things up a little better

28-09-2012, 08:44 PM
I also am at a loss, I have tried every avenue to resolve it I can think of, I am severely disappointed with the response I have been getting from everybody, played by all betrayed by all I worked with and trusted
the response from agencies tasked with a mandate to assist and I’m just brushed off.

I’m going to keep promoting my story until someone somewhere gets it and passes it onto a media outlet ever print or social media and it goes viral

04-01-2013, 03:46 PM
letter to senior fraud adviser telecom Richard Lowe

Given that my course of action has in part been decided on guidance from Ministers of the Crown, the Police and others whose counsel I trustsome individuals have expressed a firm view as to the impact of employment law of the implications that which has occurred. I was instructed to bring the matter to the attention of police whom have accepted it as a compliant, by a minister of the crown. Thus validating my claims of fraud

So in plain English, the five telecom participants in the successful attempt to exit me from the company are the ones that have committed the fraud .not me. Using a nonexistent complaint (you have just reaffirmed to me its non existence) in a disciplinary process .entering into a mediation conference with the full knowledge that their body of evidence was tainted by it falsity

You as senior fraud advisor, need no further prompting from me to hold them accountable, indeed have them charged ,the breaches inherent within their acts are to numerous to table and will definitely bring Telecoms reputation into disrepute

However I suggest you move extremely quickly, as unless this is resolved, it will, with the support of a Minister of the Crown, a sitting MP will be coming to the attention of the media early in the New Year

We are well involved in the process of organising a petition to parliament requiring questions to be asked in the house around this very issue at the commencement of the next session of parliament mid February I believe

Warm regards

Nb this process leads to a select committee I may well require your attendance
i will be reguiring the attendance of the CEO and the board to explain their actions

17-02-2013, 03:59 PM
I believe Silverfox is correct, if he relies on so called car boot lawyers that New Zealand has a plethora of, an application to the Legal Aid Officer will find him in the hands of yet another incompetent fool, who's pockets are lined by the tax payers, who lives in our better suburbs, who's neighbourly chats are with members of the judiciary, who's daily grind is standing in a court foyer saying "does anyone need a lawyer", who provides a legal service in Kiddy court because all the hard work has been done by a Family Group Conference, and who pockets $200+ an hour, and who drives a Mercedes Benz and is unaccountable to anyone as he wears the label of Officer of the High Court.....and unfortunately appears to be above the law.

01-03-2013, 01:08 PM
Yoda Thomas Edison once said "many of life's failures are people who did not realise how close they were to success when they gave up