BULLYING AUCKLAND COUNCIL
Penny Bright .. why we need a lot more people like her
It is exactly 12 years ago today when I met Penny , I remember the date well , because it was her birthday. We are the most unlikely mates, I am the ex cop and she the activist . In the spring bock tour we were on opposite sides of the fence , she had an opinion but my uniform prevented me from having one.
Since leaving the Police and Becoming a Private investigator I stumbled onto corruption. I thought it would be a simple task to bring the lack of existence of a Law enforcement body to the notice of the government, but I was wrong and encountered a cover up of gigantic and unbelievable proportion that has apparently called for a 12 year character assassination of me which continues to this day . Heaven forbid that some one should believe me or look at the evidence, then some very prominent people would be taking up beds in our prisons .
With Penny’s activism and union background and my police prosecution and investigative Background we formed a very close relationship of mutual support trust and respect.
Penny and I are on the same page with corruption, we do not always agree on everything but the good part is that when we talk about our different views we often find that there is yet another angle ,one neither of us anticipated.
I have learned heaps from Penny , having been in Government service you come out rather blinkered and Penny helped me see beyond the things that public service blind you to .
In return helped Penny with my prosecution skills ,I remember her coming to me because she had been thrown out of the town hall and arrested for trespass , I said whoa that is a public place you can’t be trespassed from a public place , there is specific legislation with regards to removal from council meetings and so Penny learned from me and won some 22 cases of trespass .
We took on projects individually and worked on others together one day we ended up in Rodney Hide’s office and together learned from him of the magic of the privacy act. So obvious once you know .
It is hard to believe that when we met in 2006 that the internet was still pretty much in its infancy , all sorts of things were being loaded on line , like the companies register and those who had been hiding their business connections in the files of the companies office suddenly found their business exposed . we unraveled the committee for auckland and saw how the tail was wagging the dog, this was he start of the super city and it was all about $$$$.
I started to blog and we soon found that transparency was not welcome . What it did however was to bring people together and we built a network of people who needed help on the way, a network of mutual support and information sharing .
Penny rang me one day about the Tamaki redevelopment company limited and together we worked through the quagmire of trading names, domain names and fake names which facilitate the transfer of a massive government housing stock to a company other than the one where it was intended to go . We cared bt apparently no one else did , but that is something that one day will become obvious .
We have made headway on corruption, the corruption we saw occurs through using fake identities , false names and fictional trusts. it is not on a person identity thing but using fake entities . the banks are now checking the validity of companies and the directors and shareholders, but you can still register a company and have a liquidation through a liquidator who is totally fictional and hopefully soon the questions will be asked about the tamaki redevelopment company Limited, Tamaki regeneration limited and the fictional tamaki regeneration company limited which , to add to the confusion is is referred to as TRC
see also Corruption Alert ..Tamaki Regeneration limited and Crown Entities , Fictional entities and making things up as they go
I knew that fictional organisations existed after questioning the existence of the animal welfare institute of New Zealand which was in reality nothing more than a trading name used by Neil Wells. Wells was the barrister who drafted and was adviser to the select committee on the animal welfare bill which, when passed facilitated the granting of coercive law enforcement powers . Wells made a fraudulent application to the minister and subsequently obtained this law enforcement power for his fictional organisation this was covered up by his associates in court action against me to re write history. despite many requests this has been covered up
Penny came to court with me and stood beside me more times than I can mention , no other friend has stood beside me like she has .
The state of corruption : New Zealand Questioning corruption is not for the faint hearted especially in New Zealand , because we are repeatedly told that there is no corruption , we must be delusional, ignoring corruption is liek ignoring cancer while penny was fighting corruption she did not notice the tumours in her own body .
Penny You are going to have to get better we still need you , I have had plenty of friends at deaths door and they are here today , You are a fighter your work is not done .
Get better girl and Onward and upward there is much more work to be done
Hugs
Grace
Auckland council rates – Are you being ripped off ? Part 1
On the one hand we have a sculpture of a house now scaled down to cost a mere $1.5 million, a mere ornament which the council intends to buy
On the Other hand we have a real house , a home to at least three people and two cats worth less than $700,000.Which the council is going to forcibly sell .
Then there is a rates bill of some 13,000 which was not paid out of protest to a very one sided contract where by Council was not keeping up their end of the agreement where by they were to engage in open transparent and democratically accountable governance.
While the council are prepared to pay over the top for one they are willing to sell the other because a pittance is owed. Ironically this is exactly why Penny withheld her rates.
Penny Bright withheld her rates until the books were opened just as Auckland transport has managed to do see here
So the $13,000 in arrears rates have attracted over $20,000 in penalties. this prompted us to have a closer look at what is going on with our rates and it appears that Auckland rate payers are held accountable to rate penalties in a very strict manner , pay a day late on any instalment and you pay 10% more ,On the other hand Auckland council is manipulating the law and in other instances being totally non compliant.
In going through the law and the detail we have discovered a number of things which are worthy of question , especially when the houses which we once bought for tens of thousands are now worth hundreds of thousands and wages have remained static.
Let us you through it , this is the way we see it .
The applicable legislation is the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 and the ability to include penalties comes from a two step process by council .
- There needs to be a decision by council , this may be delegated but has to me made before the rates are set
- The decision made must comply with the law and
- Must not exceed 10% of the amount of unpaid rates on the date when the penalty is added
- may be of the types of penalties as set out in section 58 being
-
a) a penalty on rates assessed in the financial year for which the resolution is made and that are unpaid after the due date for payment (or after a later date if so specified):
-
(b) a further penalty on rates assessed in any financial year and that are unpaid on whichever day is the later of—
-
(i) the first day of the financial year for which the resolution is made; or
-
(ii) 5 working days after the date on which the resolution is made:
-
-
(c) a further penalty on rates to which a penalty has been added under paragraph (b), if the rates are unpaid 6 months after that penalty was added.
-
The way that we interpret this is that these options are available and are the only legal options available IF it is contained in the decision by council.
We went in search of the decision which Auckland council had made and found it in the 2014-15 annual Plan Volume 1 – Our Plan for 2014/2015 for ease we have isolated the pages concerned they are found here rates related policies
Penalties on rates not paid by the due date
The council will apply a penalty of 10 per cent of the amount of rates assessed under each instalment in the 2014/2015 financial year that are unpaid after the due date of each instalment. Any penalty will be applied to unpaid rates on the day following the due date of the instalment.A further 10 per cent penalty calculated on former years’ rate arrears will be added on the first business day of the new financial year (or five days after the rates resolution is adopted, whichever is the later) and then again six months later.
Spot the difference ?
Auckland council imposes penalties on each installment where as the act applies it to the rates assessed in the financial year and does not speak of penalties for parts of rates .
The rates are set for a financial year in this case being 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 in the rate assessment which we have before us is for $4510.81.
There is an ability to pay it by instalment , or pay the lump sum which gives a saving of a whole 1.1% . $4461.18. a saving of a whopping $46.63
Relevant here is Section 24 Due date or dates for payment, in the interpretation section due date, is defined as : in relation to a rate or part of a rate, means the last day for payment of the rate, or part of the rate, that is set out in the rates assessment
The question has to be : can “ a penalty on rates assessed in the financial year for which the resolution is made and that are unpaid after the due date for payment” be interpreted to mean a part rate ?
The assessment notice reads total rates payable 2014/2015 is $4510.81 to us this means that by 30 June 2015, $4510.81 needs to have been paid being the financial year as determined by 45 (1) (j). and most importantly 45 (1) (k) which states “the total amount of rates payable on the rating unit for the financial year”
while Auckland council asks for the payments to be made by four equal installments , the overall obligation is to clear the rates due in that financial year .
The regime should be more in line with retail being
- the price which is due on the due date .. in this case $4510.81 by 30 June 2015
- the discounted price if paid in its entirety early, this is usually heavily discounted
- The price if paid by installments which should be equal to or as an incentive less than the demanded price
At all times the right to pay the full rates demand by the 30th June in one payment should remain an option as that way you are payign your entire rates in the year that it is due.
If you were to pay it in a lump sum under the Auckland council regime , and still be complying with legislation you would incur penalties of $338.10 ( being as stated on the notice $122.70 per installment ). Compare the extra penalties for being complaint with the law to the savings for paying early one gives you a penalty of $33.10 the other a saving of just $46.63 a difference of $291.47, so why is the money in Auckland councils pocket worth more than in yur pocket.. should it not be at least equal ?
more in part 2 the juiciest is yet to come.
- Open letter to CEO for RNZSPCA will the spca become more transparent and accountable to the public ?
- Time to review the RNZSPCA approved status
- Open letter to David Parker Attorney General
- Request to Acting Crown Solicitor to correct a miscarriage of justice
- Privacy act request To Gareth Kayes Acting Crown Solicitor
- Farndon Park Domain should the public have to pay to have access to it ?
- Why an urgent investigation into the RNZSPCA is required
- Why the identity of a prosecuting body matters
- Open letter to News Hub TV3
- Open letter to Luke Radich of Kayes Fletcher Walker
- RNZPCA copy cat of the events in Australia
- How the RNZSPCA totally disregards the rule of law and the bill of rights and common decency
- Open letter to the Minister request to revoke the approved status of the RNZSPCA
- Corruption in the SPCA in Australia and here in New Zealand
- Animal Welfare institute of New Zealand & MPI contracting to fictional entities
- accountability
- AWINZ
- BULLYING AUCKLAND COUNCIL
- companies register
- corruption
- Equity law
- identity
- identity concealment
- judiciary
- law society
- muse eatery
- muse on allen
- OECD and United Nations action against corruption
- scams
- suicide
- Super city
- transparency International
- trusts and societies
- Uncategorized
- volkerson
- September 2022
- July 2022
- April 2022
- January 2022
- October 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- March 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- December 2019
- September 2019
- January 2019
- September 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- December 2017
- October 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- November 2016
- August 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- Accountability in Auckland Council
- Animal scams exposed
- Anti corruption blog
- anticorruption NZ
- auckland council issues
- disclosure whose truth do you buy?
- kiwis first
- No Accountability – No Justice
- Society for Promotion of Community Standards
- The Investigator
- The Watchdog
- Turitea wind farm
- Verisure Investigations
- walks in auckland