News from other web sites
Update No 5 24th July 2008
The ALDODA group is still up to its old tricks and it is evident that they will go to great lengths to shamelessly hi-jack any event for their own agenda without any regard for what is in the best interest of the industry.
It is painfully obvious that they are only interested in their own importance; the blatant and callous disregard for the process that I have been pursuing will see this industry lose an opportunity to head off reforms that would have given some hope to everyone.
Forum Contacts
Mick Pattel QLD Mob 0429-413161 Ph 0747413161
kevp...@bigpond.net.au
Leo Fardell NSW Ph 0268844433 Mob 0429844433
Darryl Brown VIC Ph 0354353589 Mob 0408322868 darr...@bigpond.com
Russell Borchard VIC Ph 0350243247 Mob 0419007815 russ...@bigpond.com
Media Adviser QLD Clare Mildren Mob 0427787567
0741651405
Update No 4 21th July 2008
Hi all
We are rapidly approaching the shutdown and still the support is growing I have engaged the services of a media adviser Clare Mildren, Clare will push our message to the general public, the last few days should see greater exposure for the shutdown
Update Report No 2 17/07/2008
Hi all,
On Saturday 19th July I will be travelling to Brisbane to meet with the State Transport Minister John Mickel, at 10.30am to discuss the shutdown and the changes the Government needs to address to avert this action.
I will then be meeting at 1pm with TWU Secretary Hughie Williams to find a way to work together for the good of the industry.
I will report on the outcome on my return
REPORT FROM DARRYL BROWN VIC Delegate
DELEGATES CONTACTS
Mick Pattel QLD Mob 0429-413161 Ph 0747413161
kevp...@bigpond.net.au
Leo Fardell NSW Ph 0268844433 Mob 0429844433
Darryl Brown VIC Ph 0354353589 Mob 0408322868 darr...@bigpond.com
Russell Borchard VIC Ph 0350243247 Mob 0419007815 russ...@bigpond.com
Wyong Meeting
Hi all,
The meeting in Wyong also endorsed and added to the list of demands, number 20 is in keeping with the house keeping rules, and does not require the Government to lose ground, simply to maintain the Status Quo, which is in keeping with the intent of the demands.
A motion to support the concept of an industry shutdown was again unanimously passed.
The issue of whether or not Toll and Linfox are on board is a constant inquiry, the simple answer is no, however there is good reason to believe that many of their drivers are shutting down by taking holidays or resigning.
ATTENTION: MEMBERS OF ELEQUITY
NSF’s Codex Commission Report
Progress Report 1/07/2008
Hi Everyone,
The meeting in Dubbo was well attended and very constructive.
The motion to support the shutdown was carried unanimously.
The motion to endorse the list of demands was carried with five against, they felt the list was too long.
It was explained that the list addressed the new transport reforms and the rest was 'housekeeping' which did not place unrealistic expectations on the Government.
Leo Fardell was elected as the delegate for NSW and will be part of the shutdown process when we meet with Government to put our case.
National Road Transport Forum 2008
On the 28/07/2008 all modes of road transport will cease to offer any freight services until the Government meets the demands from the forums held around the country.
This shutdown is designed to have 'Minimum impact on the community with Maximum effect on Government'.
WITHOUT TRUCKS AUSTRALIA STOPS
National Transport Industry Shutdown
28 July 2008 - Australia wide...
List of Demands from the Road Transport Forum 2008
Not Negotiable
- Disbanding of the National Transport Commission immediately.
- No electronic recording systems, or work dairies.
- No changes in the present log book format.
- No demerit points on log books, or driving hours regulations.
- Recoupment of demerit points for professional drivers who earn their living from their licence to be reduced to 12 months not the existing 36 months.
National Road Transport Forum 2008 - Bendigo, VIC
National Road Transport Forum 2008 - Bendigo, VIC
A meeting will be held in Bendigo at the RSL from 10am until 3pm Sunday 6th of July 2008.
73-75 Havilah Road
Near Bendigo show grounds.
To discuss an organized transport industry SHUTDOWN set to start on Monday the 28th of July 2008
Set by the Toowoomba meeting.
This shutdown is to pressure the Government to reverse the new National Transport Reforms passed by the Federal Parliament recently and to meet the list of demands from the industry meetings around Australia.
National Road Transport Forum 2008 - Wyong, NSW
National Road Transport Forum 2008
A meeting will be held at the Mingarra Recreational Club Wyong Rd Tumbi Wyong at 10am until 3pm Sunday 13th July 2008.
To discuss and plan an organized transport industry SHUTDOWN
Queensland / National Road Transport Forum
Subject: Queensland / National Road Transport Forum
To whom it may concern
The links below will give you the information you need to know about the new driving laws and registration increases about to be introduced; I believe that transport operators and the rural sector will feel the impact of these new regulations very quickly as we will need to change the way we do business at the moment.
Add to this the new registration charges and fuel excise increases and being ‘On the land’ will become too expensive for many small to medium Graziers and Farmers.
Convicted sex predator 'defends' himself on Forum SA
Convicted sex predator hris Niehus http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23728960-5006301,00.html has joined our forum to try and 'defend' his crimes.
This is the only forum in the world that Chris has joined/is posting on, so if you want to see what he has to say - check it out at: http://www.forumsa.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2069&t=9102&start=0
Brief History of The Cristian Family NSW Supreme Court Case and Theft of Family Home By Macquarie Bank
We are the Cristian family, Fiona, Arthur, Jasmin, Emma, Frances and baby Xanthe. In 2001 we bought a beach house on the northern tip of Jervis Bay, in a village called Currarong on the South Coast of New South Wales, Australia. Fiona now owns the house.
We lived in the house for around 18 months before Jasmin started school and have spent other extended periods there. We moved away from the area due to schooling concerns and, since then, we have rented the house out on a short-term holiday rental basis.
Fiona is not liable for any capital gains tax or land tax and her home is not an investment property. Neither Fiona nor Arthur own or have any interest in any other property, private or commercial.
During the course of 2005, we decided to renovate the downstairs part of the beach house to extend the holiday rental possibilities and to have somewhere we could live in the future, while still renting out upstairs. Through a broker, we investigated various refinancing options before settling on a Line Of Credit from Macquarie Mortgages (part of Macquarie Bank). From July to August 25th we received three line of credit (LOC) approval documents from the bank and these confirmations encouraged us to sign the loan contract with the experienced Macquarie Mortgages broker as witness. The day we received and signed the loan contract was the first time we became aware that the actual lender was Perpetual Limited and not Macquarie Mortgages. Note: A man with two hats James Angus, was employed by both Macquarie Mortgages and Perpetual Limited at the same time. James Angus created, signed and mailed the Macquarie Mortgages LOC approval documents and the loan contract for Perpetual Limited.
Bank staff, knowing we had seven weeks to complete renovations, caused two unexpected delayed settlements, the first for unknown reasons and the second due to house valuation expiring. Settlement finally occurred on 19th September 2005. Delayed settlements made it impossible to pay local trades-people on time causing loss of manpower and setting back the completion date by three weeks. Knowing we could not complete renovations on time, we tidied up outside of beach house and vacated the job-site. We incurred huge losses.
It wasn’t until our first interest payment was due in November 2005 that we found a problem; the bank had issued us with the wrong product/contract, exchanging the line of credit agreed upon for a principal and interest home loan, a completely different product that we had previously rejected. James Angus was responsible for this switch. The bank tried to withdraw over $6000 from Fiona's ANZ bank account. This was $1500 to $2000 more than we expected to pay per calender month. We did not have extra money to cover these charges.
We contacted bank staff, which admitted the problem and agreed to fix it. Over a period of 6 months we kept telling the bank that we would not pay them any money to avoid validating this fraudulent contract and will only start paying them when we received the correct loan contract (product) they agreed to supply. We kept contacting bank staff who kept admitting there was a problem but continued to do nothing about it for six months, bar offering twice to amend the contract to an interest only home loan at our request (we made no such request as we still wanted a line of credit). They then organised private contractors to change the locks on the house without prior warning, as their solicitors sent a letter to an address we had not resided at for nearly five months, even though we had been receiving other bank correspondence at our new address. Holiday tenants were left locked out, forcing us to find and pay for alternative accomodation for them, late in the evening.
With help from contacts outraged by the actions of the bank, we reclaimed the house four weeks later, by changing the locks. Less than two weeks later, one of our helpers, Joe Bryant, a well-known anti-bank campaigner, was shot through the hip and tortured for one and a half hours in his home by two masked men. He and his wife, both in their seventies, were hog-tied, gagged and left helpless. The culprits have still not been found. This event upset us greatly but left us more determined to fight for justice.
After being served a Statement of Claim for Possession in the Common Law Court by Perpetual Limited in July 2005, we have ended up in the Supreme Court of NSW, fighting for our house, which we seem set to loose through no fault of our own.
Our journey through the courts has been a huge learning experience, as we became self-litigants after our legal representation condoned fraud on the part of the banks and refused to act according to our best interests.
To précis a long series of court visits up to 29.01.07, following are the main events: on
15/11/06, Justice Hidden ignored unarguable evidence of fraud and ordered a writ of possession without determining the family’s cross claim (that the contract was invalid and void) and saying the case was still continuing (interlocutory).
05/12/06, Registrar Howe ignored two notices of motion for a stay on the writ of possession and on the 14.12.06 he dismissed them, despite Arthur (acting as Power of Attorney for Fiona) insisting repeatedly that he had evidence to prove that the bank had conducted fraud and that the matter needed to go before a judge. Registrar Howe refused.
22/12/06, Justice Beasley, of the Court of Appeal, admitted there was a problem with bank’s contract, and then made an offer of inducement, a conditional stay on the writ if all outstanding interest were paid. Arthur accused her of blackmail and refused the offer, which would only validate the contract, protect the bank and establish a precedent.
21/12/06, Justice Simpson and again on 19/01/07, Justice McDougal, ignored all evidence, bulldozed ahead and refused to issue stays on the writ.
The Supreme Court issued the writ on 08.01.07 and the Sheriffs have been instructed to take possession of the family’s home from 29.01.07, after the writ has been sitting in their office for 21 days.
Along the way bewildered by the rapid escalation of a seemingly simple problem with a seemingly simple solution (issue a new contract), we have been learning about the financial system, the legal system, and the way Australia is governed. We have discovered private corporations run Australia and that these private corporations will protect one another to the detriment of justice, fairness, equality and freedom for all citizens.
We thought our problem would be easy to fix but the bank wouldn’t sort it out. We thought the courts would sort it out but we discovered that they are a private corporation only interested in protecting another private corporation. We thought barristers and lawyers would sort it out but we discovered that many of them are private corporations too, and not interested in taking on a bank.
5th March 2007, We filed Court of Appeal documents in the Supreme Court and have begun a national email campaign to send three documents to all Australian Federal and State Government ministers, senators and representatives, all private corporations as well. We have also emailed the documents to the Governments of Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Vanuatu, Indonesia, Solomon Islands and Malaysia. We consider some of the information we filed in the court of appeal are like atomic bombs to the Judiciary, Politicians and Internationalised Banksters. We are withholding from uploading these particular documents in our website until the appropriate time. However, some of the information can be found in the Latest Updates/Diary/News section in this website. Our next hearing is on Monday 2nd April 2007 in the NSW Supreme Court of Appeal. We are determined to stop the bank from selling our home and to reclaim it.
2nd April 2007
Below is a copy of the 2nd April 2007 court of appeal judgment transcript. Arthur went before President Mason and Justice Handley. We will get a copy of the court/hearing transcript ASAP and post it in this website. They rejected our leave to appeal and the bank now has the clear-way to sell Fiona's family home. When permission is granted we will post all the Judeo-Judaic documents we filed in the court of appeal white folder 1. Summary of Claimants Argument 2. Claimants Reply.
The judges decision was scripted/decided before our hearing. They had their law book already marked out with a precedent (see judgment transcript below) to validate their scripted decision. They were only interested in sussing out what we know and allowed Arthur to talk well beyond the rules of 20 minutes. Arthur knew this and was happy to accommodate. Arthur talked for nearly 1 hour.
The Arrogance of the Judeo-Judaic Law is what we keep coming up against. They can't afford to admit or concede that there is a fault with their Law. The slightest crack in their wall and the whole wall will collapse. Even with the failure of the 8 points of contract law which determines a valid contract, the Judges ignored our legal rights. I went over the Credit River case, how Australia was bankrupted and the gold standard was removed, how we had unarguable proof how banks create money (legal tender-fiat) out of thin air-on their books etc etc. This is what they did not want to see happen/reactivated in the common law court with our case. They now know we can argue against their best barristers and beat them.
They were offering an olive leaf inducement by suggesting we could claim damages. In the meantime they are determined to sell Fiona's home and an Auction sign for May 2007 has been erected outside the house. Well, now we are off to the High Court while we launch the Psychic Reign Music and begin to market it.
Note: All outstanding court, legal and bank costs have been constantly awarded against us by many judges condoning the fraud, and when you add the interest payments (for money/credit-creation that came out of thin air), we are facing a bill that is enormous for us but is trifling for a multi billion dollar corporation. We can't pay this bill and our many years of working to build equity in this home, have come to nothing. At the end of the line, Fiona stands to be bankrupted by the bank as well.
JUDGMENT TRANSCRIPT - 2nd APRIL 2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40839/06
MASON P
HANDLEY AJA
Monday 2 April 2007
FIONA CAROLINE CRISTIAN v PERPETUAL LIMITED, FORMERLY KNOWN AS PERPETUAL TRUSTEE AUSTRALIA LIMITED, (ACN 000431827)
JUDGMENT
1 MASON P: We have heard fuller than usual argument in support of an application for leave to appeal. The argument has been presented in written form and through the oral submissions of Mr Cristian, who is the husband of the claimant and has spoken on her behalf.
2 The matter before the court today is whether to grant leave to appeal against the orders pronounced by Hidden J on 15 November 2006. His Honour ordered that the defendant give the plaintiff possession of certain land and that the plaintiff have leave to issue a writ of possession. He made an order for costs. He directed that the matter be listed for further directions before the Registrar for the outstanding matters that were to be addressed in the proceedings.
3 In his reasons Hidden J stated that,
“The simple fact is that a loan contract was entered into for a certain amount of principal at a certain interest rate. The mortgage was signed consistent with that loan contract and to secure repayment of the loan with interest. It is common ground that there has been default in that no payment has ever been made, and in those circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment for possession.”
4 It was clear to his Honour, as it is clear to me, that the claimant wants to agitate a wide ranging set of issues against the opponent and, it would appear, third parties, including the broker/agent who was involved in the transaction.
5 Mr Cristian has made allegations of fraud, unconscionable dealing and misrepresentation. Some of these appear to be foreshadowed in the document called, First Cross-Claim Cross-Summons, dated 30 October 2006 that was before Hidden J. Other matters were foreshadowed in affidavits that were read before his Honour and no doubt in the submissions put to his Honour.
6 It is not disputed that a mortgage was signed and registered. It is not disputed that various formalities under the Conveyancing Act 1919 concerning the exercise of the mortgagee’s rights were complied with. It is not disputed that the mortgagee paid money and arranged for the discharge of an existing mortgage over the subject property.
7 In Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1972) 126 CLR 161 at 164-5, Walsh J gave a judgment which received the approval of the High Court on appeal (see 126 CLR at 168-9). His Honour said this:
“In my opinion, the authorities which I have been able to examine establish that for the purpose of the application of the general rule to which I have referred, nothing short of actual payment is regarded as sufficient to extinguish a mortgage debt. If the debt has not been actually paid, the Court will not, at any rate as a general rule, interfere to deprive the mortgagee of the benefit of his security, except upon terms that an equivalent safeguard is provided to him, by means of the plaintiff bringing in an amount sufficient to meet what is claimed by the mortgagee to be due.
The benefit of having a security for a debt would be greatly diminished if the fact that a debtor has raised claims for damages against the mortgagee were allowed to prevent any enforcement of the security until after the litigation of those claims had been completed.”
8 Mr Justice Walsh did not state an absolute rule and one cannot overlook that fact. Nevertheless, I see nothing on what has been put to us today or was put before Hidden J to take the case outside of the general principle.
9 Mr Cristian has indicated that various claims are intended to be brought, presumably in what remains of the present proceedings in the Common Law Division. The order and judgment of Hidden J does not prevent those matters being litigated in the Supreme Court.
10 In my view, his Honour would have been in error if he had not granted summary judgment for possession in the circumstances here prevailing.
11 The dispute that is foreshadowed as to the possible misunderstanding or possible misrepresentation - I stress possible - as to the full effect of the loan contract cannot remove the fact that the document was signed and registered and became the basis of the relationship between the parties.
12 If a claim based on misrepresentation or fraud or unconscientious dealing is to be litigated then so be it. But the law, as I understand it, is clear that a party that succeeds on such a claim will be required to give counter-restitution and to repay any benefit that was received in consequence of the transaction that he or she seeks to impugn. The rule stated by Walsh J is in one sense an aspect of that more fundamental principle.
13 Mr Cristian foreshadowed arguments based upon the nature of legal tender in this country. I do not consider those arguments have any merit. They certainly raise nothing relevant to the matter that is before this Court.
14 I propose that leave to appeal against the orders of Hidden J made on 15 November 2006 be refused and that the summons before this court be dismissed with costs.
15 HANDLEY AJA: I agree.
16 MASON P: That is the order of the court.
You can now support the Love for Life Campaign
This work is licensed by Fiona Cristian under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License.
