For the last year or so, I’ve been planning to take Club Wairua outta town and to this end I placed an offer with Manu Lala of Kakahi, on a plot of flat land at Raetahi and looked at another few options but after these failures, I spent a few months looking at Maori Land at Te Kuiti. At the end of the day though, I found out that my mate didn’t own the land so I purchased a 3.266ha property down in Raetihi. Here’s an update, and an update on the update!
Buying land
In 2019 LINZ sucked me in to a deal that they turned sour on me. Never trust women with power when they have a [religious] snitch!
Five years later in 2024 I started looking around for land as I had to be out of Manunui by the end of the year.
Kakahi was first, but Manu Lala’s promises that things would never change there and that he owned certain land didn’t match council records. Council said, “Buy the land and you can apply for rights” meant that we’d be slipping good money into bad hands. Three times, RDC promised ‘almost’ getting there then, to Manu’s sadness I had to pull out. You don’t own it! Yes I do! The power pole is not on your place! Yes it is! No it’s not – and speak to your lawyer Manu! – So the last interchange went.
Then came a property in Raetihi. Make an offer, she said, So I did. The value was there but anothers’ offer the terms were better, so, “Let him have it!” became my mantra on that one. A few grand in lawyer’s fees later . . .
Then came a few months, chasing the Maori land up in Te Kuiti. No go up there, either.
Then I asked Barbara from Horopito Motors if she knew of anything going on with land for sale down her way. “Yeah this farmer guy is trying to sell up and the Raetihi Bowling Club is also for sale too!”
So the old Raetihi Bowling Club (the clubrooms burned down a while back) is now mine. I’m angling to move in the first week of December 2024 and to bring the tools and containers down throughout December 2024. I will let you all know when it happens.
Bobby Parker & ACC Loses
I got good news and a solution to one of my legal scraps recently. The ACC review I had initiated finally came back with a solution. ACC lost their case and had to review it all. Unless ACC appeals, I’ve either gotten what was fair, or that which I asked for. You can read the entire ruling here if you want but Erika Vogel’s wrapping up seems pretty reasonable to me. Bobby Parker should be ashamed of himself – really! The adjudicator/judge found:
I find that ACC obtained proper assessments of Mr Smith, and it was completed by appropriately qualified assessors. Mr Smith interpreted and relied on some of these reports and pointed to potential flaws in ACC’s interpretation of the assessments.
Yes, the reviewer got this right in that she found that I complained and did it correctly, but her finding that ACC engaged “appropriately qualified assessors” belied the lies that they were fed to the four of them – by ACC of course!
She continued:
In respect of ACC’s interpretation and consideration of the assessment reports, it is my view ACC has not correctly understood or interpreted all the findings and has not taken into account all relevant considerations. On balance I am not satisfied that ACC has considered all aspects of Mr Smith’s rehabilitation and needs causally related to his covered injury.
Naughty, naughty ACC!
I am satisfied that Mr Smith had shown that ACC exercised its discretion incorrectly when it reached its decision. It is therefore my conclusion that ACC’s decision is quashed and referred back, as it had not applied its discretion correctly, taking into account irrelevant considerations and failing to take into account relevant considerations.
In essence, one Gwen Doria from ACC, killed all my claims and did it all based on faulty advice. Her words along the lines that, “Just tell him that nothing applies and pretend that nothing has changed,” was wrong as the adjudicator/judge said. Personally I reckon it’s obvious that she lied to us all but hey, as the judge said, that’s for another hearing and another day.
There are a few things not covered – like the fact that Gwen gossipped about me all over town and country and that she got away with her gossip but at the end of the day, ACC’s dumb ruling was quashed and that was the important thing. Money-wise it was around a grand so it wasn’t a lot. Any appeal from me over a matter of principle will not really succeed now because the courts only care about results, winning and losing and not really details or justice. I can hear the words, “Mr Smith, you won FFS! What do you want now? Blood?”
The rest of the dozen or so cases are all still up in the air awaiting other people and things. I will let you know as things develop. Hopefully a Family Court will order that I can see my grandkids, and those that owe me money cough up, and even those who have said lies and been caught with the evidence are punished appropriately.
UPDATE (12 September 2024):
Yesterday I engaged with a girl from ACC, the poor thing.
There are really only two things that ACC can offer someone in my position – 1) An apology and 2) Money. My ongoing complaint has been that ACC has acted in bad faith. My complaint was handled by Kevin Ericksen who rephrased my complaint to suit his own agenda, and even then found fault with the way the Corporation dealt with me!
My complaint was not even dealt with correctly, so of course, I complained again. This girl was from ACC resolutions and told me that “she cared” despite that fact that it was her job to. “Stop there!” I said. And so ACC coughed up a couple of grand which she said was “her limit”! So I withdrew my complaint. Sure it’s taken ages and has caused me no end of grief for 18 months, but it is nice nonetheless to get agreement on how to go forward anyway. ACC, finally another win for muggins, here.
Beware PGs & Other Legal BS
I caution those of you who engage lawyers as they (as a rule) clearly do not practice what they preach. Yes, true!
Years ago I paid for legal advice which was to never (that mans ‘NOT EVER”) sign a personal guarantee (PG) without a limit of both time and money. This means that you limit any PG you offer – and especially/even to your own lawyer. Just work out what you think they require a personal guarantee for then work out a timeframe and include that timeline (and amount) in the agreement. Simple? Fair? Good business practice? Methinks sure!
What an honest trader will do is to establish if the ‘new’ terms are reasonable, or not then agree to them. If they give you $10k worth of credit and they have a PG of only $5k then they are silly or don’t care about half the money. Lawyers though are generally more self-preservational though and come back to you with this sort of nonsense:
The terms provided to you are standard in the legal industry and are the only terms on which we agree to act for you. If you do not agree to our terms and conditions, then we can no longer act for you.
Yet another lawyer (who doesn’t read the fine print!).
Now this dude has kissed goodbye to substantial income from me. Oh sure, he is some hotshot from outta town who can try make my life hell in my new town but hey, this is the norm here! Let’s get down and dirty. My mother lived into her 80s and my father till his 90s. I’m only in my 60s at the time of writing so it means I’ve probably got a year or two left to affect some positive change, starting in Raetihi on December 2024!
Now this lawyer could have grabbed a couple of my peace offerings but chose not to. That’s his choice. The point here is though, that his terms may be “standard in the legal industry” but it was a lawyer who gave me advice NOT to sign any PG that is unlimited! Really? This dude would ask that his clients all sign up to his unlimited PG – of course to him – then threaten to shoot himself in the foot head if they don’t? Hmmmmm!
So before we even start doing business we have a fight? And over his terms that all he has done is copy and paste without reading them like I do? I know because I really do read and compare the fine print! What a goose! Don’tcha just love how predictable lawyers are? Ten to a dozen they will all try to diss me over this one but that’s lawyers for you. Their word over the facts, eh?
UPDATE (12 September 2024):
Generally lawyers hate and other lawyers and they’ve all got ego issues, so it’s easy to wind them all up. This lawyer though really has a Bee in his Bonnett! Today he tried to escalate the matter (obviously to try to protect himself from potential litigation from me) by arguing with me. His approach was typical legal stuff which totally avoided the big picture . . .
We do not agree with your comment we withdrew from representing you. We indicated to you (in our email of 28 August), that we would only act for you if you agreed with our terms and conditions (as all our other clients do). We did not withdraw from representing you.
I thought, “Oh FFS, mate – will you PLEASE go and get a life will you? Just leave it alone, I’m really not interested in fighting another lawyer!” So I replied thus:
QUOTE
Yes [name withheld], you are technically correct but you ignored one of the two concerns I raised (one being the PG) and you referred purely to my acceptance of your terms, but no, the effect is exactly as I said because you well knew beforehand what my attitude to this situation was.
You were the one who tried to blackmail me over your terms (not me over you) and you were the one who tried and still keep on trying to blame me for not agreeing to your terms (which are apparently ‘standard in the legal industry’ and to which all ‘your other clients accept’).
You said: “The terms provided to you are standard in the legal industry and are the only terms on which we agree to act for you. If you do not agree to our terms and conditions, then we can no longer act for you.”
I put it in writing to [name withheld] before you responded so you very well knew my concerns and it was your choice to ignore them or set them up as non-negotiable. I then said: “I am currently unrepresented as [name withheld] withdrew their representation (I note, after we signed the document that you have which named them as solicitor representing me)”.
So, knowing my attitude and approach toward your terms and your consistent failure to deal with them or address them (that you say are standard in the legal industry and to which your other clients all agree to) the effect is exactly the same as I state – that you unilaterally determined that you would withdraw your services (as I noted) post the signing of the agreement. The reality is that you also agreed to act for me long before you sent me your terms and long before Jo sent you my response to receiving them.
My words summarise the situation 100% accurately.If you had discussed this matter [name withheld], rather than shoot your mouth off I wouldn’t have blogged about it. Let the whole thing go mate – pick your fights and fight with other people not me. I’m simply not worth it.
For the record, I don’t care what the industry or all the rest of your clients say or do, you sent me your terms, I read them and applied the legal advice I have previously received which ended up contrary to your terms. I spoke to you on the phone and trusted you when we agreed that you would email me. You didn’t. I asked your company to invoice me for the 1/2 hour at Jo’s charge out rate more than once in person with [name withheld] , and more later. You didn’t. Please don’t expect me to trust you nor to believe you.
I offered your company a way forward. You ignored my offer and the effect was that you told me to f* off, so I did exactly that.
You screwed up – not me. Please, get over it, and get on with life.
END QUOTE
Now the next part applies to the religious among you. Yes, there are a few of us out there . . . for 1500 years (that is from Christ to Pope Leo) usary – that is the charging of interest on money was immoral. So bad a sin it was considered an immortal sin – straight to hell you went – no hope for ya, and this is also the paying of interest on money – as well as collecting of it. No redemption for you if you participated in usary, as interest at any rate compounded and the making of any money off money was really bad juju!
Pope Leo changed the laws somewhat for the first time as he got into financial trouble and did what the Medici bankers had always been angling for. “Oh just a little”, he said, “And for a good cause too!” Lies, lies and deception for centuries and the charging of interest on money has become normal, for the majority of us anyway. Cut your cloth guys and work around it. I can, I did, and you can too.
Just call me, and I’ll show you how! Many of my books and blogs show this too.
So this lawyer encourages you to pay him interest on overdue monies contrary to biblical teaching and all good signs from nature that show interest to be unnatural, and to sign away your personal assets with an unlimited PG. I say, “Let him go!”
“Let him go”, I say.
I repeat, “Let him go” and then I add, “down’. I’ll prefer to go up.
Leave a Reply