Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: Right to justice. In reality its a myth

  1. #31
    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.
    Conclusion

    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 satisfiedČ 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

    Bridgette.dalzell@telecom.co.nz
    Hannah.sullivan@telecom.co.nz
    Shaun.hoult@telecom.co.nz
    Iain.galloway@telecom.co.nz
    Michelle.young@telecom.co.nz



    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
    Paul

  2. #32
    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
    07-8586322.


    Yours sincerely


    Andrew BuBear Acting O/C City CIB
    Detective Sergeant E769
    Case Manager CIB HAMILTON
    Andrew.bubear@police.govt.nz

    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
    cheers
    Last edited by silverfox; 28-09-2012 at 08:45 PM.

  3. #33
    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
    Last edited by silverfox; 28-09-2012 at 09:15 PM.

  4. #34
    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
    Paul

    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

  5. #35
    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.

  6. #36
    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

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •