Archive for April 2012

Open letter to Ben ATKINS lawyer of brookfields

From: Grace Haden []
Sent: Thursday, 26 April 2012 2:59 p.m.
To: ‘’
Cc: ‘’; ‘’
Subject: Lawyers using their office for fraud.

Good afternoon Ben

I wish to make you aware that Mr Neutze is currently before the law complaints review  office on my complaint .

I spoke to you  at  court this week and Noted that you had the affidavit  which details how the fraud was perpetrated. As the officer   dealing with the case you  have an obligation to read the affidavit .

The  affidavit should  sufficiently warn you that you are dealing with  gross corruption and fraud.

We are again scheduled to appear in court next week for the liquidation in which you have appeared for  Mr Neutze.

It appears that  Brookfield’s are allowing their offices to be used for fraud and  you are facilitating it  . That is their  choice  as to your involvement  you have a choice too.

Mr Wells in the bankruptcy and   insolvency matters  is taking action  to pervert the course of justice and   for money laundering. I have filed a statement of claim  seeking to rescind the   decision on fraud.

If you  turn up in court next week and  continue to   act  on behalf of  Mr Wells   and not as an officer of the court with  duties and responsibilities to  your statutes and regulations,   I will make a complaint to the law society  .

I have warned you twice now , what you are doing is career limiting, you have to make your  own ethical decisions.

If anyone else from Brookfileds turns up   I will know that they have been instructed by Mr Neutze and will take   action   against him/her as well . Mr Neutze is being vexatious   after all I  have made complaints against his  conduct and he  has good reason to want to see me  liquidated and bankrupted.

I  have  suffered 6 years of  hell because David Neutze did not get the evidence  before he filed a statement of  claim.  Lawyers acting under his direction  produced   no evidence of any form  and   misled the court as to discovery.

Mr wells  in an attempt to exonerate himself and others including  Mr Neutze produced documents to the law society which  proved that the claims were meritless  and  an abuse of process.

I am making submission  next week   so that I can represent  my company  one of the reasons  lawyers are preferred is because they have accountability .. I will ensure that  you have that accountability , had lawyers been accountable to the  rules  from day one  I would not be in the position I am in today.

A reminder of  your rules

As officers of the court  the  barristers have fundamental obligations as set out in section  4 of  the lawyers and conveyancers act  2006  and to the rules of professional conduct ,I refer to  specific rules being Set out as follows :

  1.  chapter 2 Rule of law and administration of justice  2.1 The overriding duty of a lawyer is as an officer of the court.
  1.  2.2 A lawyer must not attempt to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice.
  1.  2.3 A lawyer must use legal processes only for proper purposes. A lawyer must not use, or knowingly assist in using, the law or legal processes for the purpose of causing unnecessary embarrassment, distress, or inconvenience to another person’s reputation, interests, or occupation.
  1. Assisting in fraud or crime   2.4 A lawyer must not advise a client to engage in conduct that the lawyer knows to be fraudulent or criminal, nor assist any person in an activity that the lawyer knows is fraudulent or criminal. A lawyer must not knowingly assist in the concealment of fraud or crime.
  1.  Prevention of crime or fraud  11.4 A lawyer must take all reasonable steps to prevent any person perpetrating a crime or fraud through the lawyer’s practice.

Above all    refer to section  25  Crimes  act 1961

I will be posting this on my Transparency web site   along with the post  , which is a copy of  the open letter I sent to Mr Neutze as to his actions


Grace Haden


Because truth matters

Phone (09) 520 1815
mobile 027 286 8239
visit us at