Lawyers or Grave Robbers? Make Australian Inheritance Law Reform Work For Families

Lawyers or Grave Robbers?
Make Australian Inheritance Law Reform Work For Families

We received these documents by email 1st April 2013

Hello Arthur.
I am sending you some information that may be useful to you, The legal system has its own set of rules for dealing with complaints against lawyers which are different to Australian Consumer Law. As these barbarians are the agents of the bankers it is no wonder there are also different consumer rules for our money lenders. The push is to get the legal industry compliant with Australian Consumer law by first making them accountable when dealing with inheritance matters.
Best regards
Diarmuid, Lawyers or Grave Robbers?
Make Australian inheritance law reform work for families

Australian Consumer Laws for Lawyers

Submission To The Victorian Law Reform Commission
On Inheritance Law


By Diarmuid Hannigan

14th of August 2012

I regret having to write what I have had to write but I do not regret a single word I have written for it is the truth. I have written this submission so as no other family is devastated by the legal profession in the same way as my mother`s family was after her death. I have presented you with a symbol which encompasses our social structure in regards to inheritance. Each word in symbolic to the way our society functions and is influenced by the way we shape our inheritance laws.

Since the reforms carried out in Victoria and N S W to our inheritance laws will have a major bearing upon the way inheritance is dealt with within all Australian jurisdictions for many years to come.

I felt it essential to clearly reveal that the current succession laws of Australia are working against the interests of Australian families; as they have been shaped by the legal profession over many centuries. These laws favour the profession over families, as can be seen by reading my story.

These laws:

· are very expensive to administer

· take a long time to implement

· benefit the income of the legal profession

· erode the value of family inheritance.

The problems I have identified are not addressed in the current Inheritance Acts of Victoria or N S W, as they relate to the actions of the legal profession whilst carrying out their work in succession law and are not

currently covered by the respective acts. These acts were created in a time before the reality of Alvin Toffler’s Future Shock became a reality. In a time when lawyers were part of communities and went to church on Sundays, a time when greed was still contained, unfortunately the world has changed and the financial demands upon the legal profession can be onerous and lead to the exploitation of vulnerable Australian

families by unaccountable self-serving lawyers.

Since Inheritance has a significant impact upon family development within Australia, I have specified the current failings within the law and have recommended solutions to address those failings.

Submission To The Victorian Law Reform Commission On Inheritance Law by Diarmuid Hannigan 14th of August 20...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Us
About the book: Lawyers or Grave Robbers?

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=2

Lawyers or Grave Robbers? Is a book that poses an important question about our legal profession when administering deceased estates and inheritance issues? The book asks the reader to consider whether or not some lawyers are behaving as grave robbers rather than as lawyers. The book exposes the failings of a law firm Russell Kennedy and a senior partner of Russell Kennedy (Ian Bult) in managing my late mother`s estate.

Call for probate overhaul
Lawyers or Grave Robbers? Gives an accurate and blow by blow description of how a lawyer as an executor and a law firm can plunder a families inheritance. The book describes the efforts of the family to prevent this plunder and exposes the inability of the legal regulators that is the Law Institute of Victoria, The Legal Services Ombudsman, The Legal Services Commissioner and the Attorney Generals to intervene.


Nail-in-coffin-for-greedy-lawyers

Lawyers or Grave Robbers? Is an informative book and an educational tool for anyone who will have to deal with the legal profession in regards to Family Inheritance Law as it details the methods used by Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy to plunder a deceased estate and destroy an Australian family, methods such as creating disputes through their own dishonesty in order to ensure more written correspondence between lawyers.
Lawyers or Grave Robbers? Proposes some essential reforms that are desperately required to Australian family inheritance law so as to stop this plunder of Australian family inheritance by our legal profession and enhance our beautiful and youthful nation.

The Introduction. The grizzly truth

Describes the origins of today’s family inheritance law within Australia and why it has left Australian families exposed to the plunder of their inheritance by greedy and unaccountable lawyers and law firms like Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy.

The lawyer sets the trap

Describes how a lawyer when writing a will for a client can set an inheritance trap. If the will is written ambiguously without supporting documentation of the deceased`s intentions that can be accessed by all of the deceased`s children it gives a lawyer who is also an executor the ability to spring the trap after the client is dead.

The lawyer robs the grave

This chapter shows how Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy were able to create a dispute that did not exist and through that dispute were able to charge the estate an exorbitant sum of money in unnecessary legal fees.

The Impotent Regulators

The exposure on how legal regulators do not regulate unaccountable self-serving lawyers like Ian Bult and his law firm Russell Kennedy.

The government spectators

This chapter illustrates the ambivalence shown by our government towards Australian families who are seeing their rightful inheritance being plundered by lawyers, who are working in a broken system that does not respect the well-being of these families.

The way forward. Quality control for lawyers

Proposes the changes that are needed to our family inheritance law which would ensure Australian families Inheritance was protected during the transfer phase from self-serving and unaccountable lawyers.

Those with power win

Gives 26 examples of how Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy used their legal power as lawyers to brutalise my mother’s estate and her family’s inheritance rights.

A legal system out of touch out of time

Our adversarial legal system has originated from William the Conqueror. Its origins are from barbarism and not from community. The laws emanate from a principal of ‘rule over’, rather than one of being generated by community. This is very clear when the actions of Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy, executors of my mother’s estate are seen for what they are. Laws, which Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy have applied over the requests, by a living and functional family, to benefit Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy through increased fees and charges. Laws condoned, by the regulators of the legal profession. They are laws emanating from barbarism; laws that support the destruction of productive harmonious communities made up of families. Laws that condone “grave robbing”.

Commentary from The United States of America

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/01/28/lawyers-or-grave-robbers/

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/02/11/farash-perspective-continued/

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/03/06/justice-delays-justice-denied/

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/01/28/australian-laws-to-target-greed...

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/02/09/more-on-todays-grave-robbers/

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2011/06/04/probate-abuse-case-exposes-need...

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/01/28/australian-probate-disputes/

http://www.estateofdenial.com/2009/01/28/todays-grave-robbers-exploit-th...

Click Here to Buy The Book or contact me at charada@mira.net

http://www.amazon.com/Lawyers-Grave-Robbers-Diarmuid-Hannigan/dp/1453701...

About the web site: www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com

www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com is a web site that also possesses the same question. Are lawyers who are acting as executors behaving as lawyers or are they behaving as grave robbers? But a far more poignant question arises. Is the legal profession honouring its duty to our community with regards to family inheritance law in Australia or is it dishonouring that duty in the interests of its own financial gain?
When one quantifies the dishonesty, waste and inefficiency created by Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy that is detailed in Lawyers or Grave Robbers? and expand that problem throughout the inheritance industry one becomes aware of the magnitude of wealth that is being plundered from Australian families by an out-dated inefficient and expensive legal process. It is a legal process developed, administered and run by lawyers whose own interests are best served by maintaining the status quo.
The web site www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com will provide more information to our community about the issues pertaining to family inheritance law. It is an opportunity to bring together all parts of our society who are concerned with the lack of progress in this important area of law reform, to create public awareness of how the current system supports a self-serving elite, and to address this inequality in order that our governments become responsible to Australian families and stop lawyers from plundering our family inheritance.

Lawyers or Grave Robbers? contains a series of correspondence between myself and The State and Federal Attorney Generals, The Victorian Ombudsman, and the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. Through this correspondence the reader realises the indifference shown by these government structures to the importance of preserving family inheritance in favour of the family. It exposes a serious flaw that currently exists in family inheritance law that permits a lawyer such as, Ian Bult and a law firm Russell Kennedy to obtain power over a family inheritance by lying about and concealing specific information relating to their mothers wishes from the children of the deceased.
It illustrates how these legally dominated government structures are ignoring the significance of family, and the power of living family members to determine and resolve their own inheritance disagreements. It exposes the refusal by these government structures to alter the current power imbalance between a lawyer, executor and a family which is currently lawyer dominated. In other words there is no balance, there is only the lawyer.
It exposes how these lawyer run government structures support unaccountable self-serving dishonest lawyers by failing to act through legislation so as to curb their plunder of Australian`s family inheritance.
It exposes how the legal services profession is in serious conflict with the Trade Practices Act in regards to misleading and deceptive conduct because lawyers who are nominated by their clients are presumed at the time to be lawyers. When under the law when they become executives they are no longer lawyers and are not bound by the Legal Professional act of the jurisdiction that they act in.

Succession Law Reform in Australia, progress or lack thereof?

About twenty years ago the governments of Australia got together and decided it would be a good idea to unify the Australian Succession Laws.

After a great deal of procrastination a report was finally submitted to the standing committee of attorney generals in 2009.

QLRC Report 65 Volume 1

QLRC Report 65 Volume 2

QLRC Report 65 Volume 3

QLRC Report 65 Volume 4

The members of the reform committee were lawyers and the majority of the submissions came from lawyer represented organisations. Hence there was minimal work done to address the accountability of the legal profession to families when dealing with inheritance matters. In fact there was no emphasis on the fact that Australian Families matter when it comes to Inheritance Law Reform.

Currently both New South Wales and Victoria are reviewing their inheritance acts, unless the public and the media get involved these laws will be shaped by lawyers and in the interests of lawyers instead of in the interests of Australian Families and the development of their nation.

Review of the N S W Succession Act 2006

http://www.lpclrd.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lpclrd/lpclrd_consultation/lpclrd_s...

Review of the Victorian Succession Act

http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/projects/succession-law-terms-reference

http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/Succession%20law%20T...

Submission by Diarmuid Hannigan 14th of August 2012

The review of Victoria’s succession laws

What to do.

When reforming inheritance law the interests of Australian Family development are put to the forefront by providing the appropriate funding to family interest groups. This will ensure a dominance of family representation over the legal profession’s representation during the law reform process.

Investigate the implementation of a cheaper, faster and more accurate truth seeking system to service the needs of families who are caught up in inheritance disagreements and set up low cost tribunals.

Cap the legal costs on an inheritance dispute to no more than 5% of the value of the estate and ensure the legal costs represent value for money to Australian families.

Ensure that lawyers who are acting as executors no longer engage in misleading and deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act of 1974 by altering the anomaly within the Legal Professional Act 2004 and make lawyers, when they are acting as executors, accountable under the Act.

Make lawyers who are working in inheritance law work to a set of standards that are written with the purpose of ensuring that the lawyer or lawyers are always acting in the best interests of Australian families.

Legislate so as lawyers who are working in inheritance law have to complete a minimum amount of mandatory training in the impact of inheritance upon families and their intergenerational development.

Make all lawyers and the judiciaries who are working in inheritance matters observe the International Charter of Human Rights with respect to family development so as a persons right to inherit is honoured as a human right under Australian law.

If there are corporate discrepancies within the business dealings of the deceased make sure the corporate regulator ASIC has the legal power and resources to investigate and obtain any relevant information for the family of the deceased without having to resort to the expensive civil process of litigation. In other words make sure that the beneficiaries can call on the services of a policeman instead of having to rely on a lawyer at $500 per hour.

Create a transparent system for the process of inheritance so as lawyers and lawyer executors are not permitted to hide any information that will assist Australian families to determine the wishes of a relative who has died. Mandate an open and transparent system where information is freely exchanged in order to overcome any disagreements. Make it a criminal offence when any person whether it is a lawyer who is an executor or any other executor that is paid hides any document that will assist a family in determining the wishes of the dead and give the police powers to investigate and issue criminal proceedings if required.

Create laws so as a lawyer and their law firm who is an executor cannot empower themselves over a family by legal thuggery as was the case with my mother`s estate by Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy.

When lawyers who are executors engage in dishonest conduct ensure:

The regulator: The Victorian Legal Service Commissioner has the power to investigate any allegations and that those investigations are carried out in an open and transparent manner so as that all parties can view the correspondence.

If the regulator discovers any impropriety bring in legislation so as criminal prosecution can occur.

Make lawyers who are executors who cause any financial loss to beneficiaries through mismanagement and dishonest conduct such as lying, pay the beneficiaries for those losses with an extra amount for psychological pain and suffering included.

Ensure that lawyers who are performing the role of executors carry compulsory insurance so as any financial damage they cause to the inheritance of the beneficiaries is paid for and that they cannot obfuscate their responsibilities to their victims as has occurred in N S W by Russell Keddie and his action of declaring himself bankrupt to avoid repaying his victims who were claimants of personal injury and who he grossly overcharged.

Make sure that the Regulator of lawyers who are acting as executors or who are acting in inheritance matters is an independent regulator, unlike the current legal regulator who is a self-regulator for the legal profession.

Introduction

I regret having to write what I have had to write but I do not regret a single word I have written for it is the truth. I have written this submission so as no other family is devastated by the legal profession in the same way as my mother`s family was after her death. I have presented you with a symbol which encompasses our social structure in regards to inheritance. Each word in symbolic to the way our society functions and is influenced by the way we shape our inheritance laws.

Since the reforms carried out in Victoria and N S W to our inheritance laws will have a major bearing upon the way inheritance is dealt with within all Australian jurisdictions for many years to come.

I felt it essential to clearly reveal that the current succession laws of Australia are working against the interests of Australian families; as they have been shaped by the legal profession over many centuries. These laws favour the profession over families, as can be seen by reading my story.

These laws:

are very expensive to administer
take a long time to implement
benefit the income of the legal profession
erode the value of family inheritance.

The problems I have identified are not addressed in the current Inheritance Acts of Victoria or N S W, as they relate to the actions of the legal profession whilst carrying out their work in succession law and are not currently covered by the respective acts. These acts were created in a time before the reality of Alvin Toffler’s Future Shock became a reality. In a time when lawyers were part of communities and went to church on Sundays, a time when greed was still contained, unfortunately the world has changed and the financial demands upon the legal profession can be onerous and lead to the exploitation of vulnerable Australian families by unaccountable self-serving lawyers.

Since Inheritance has a significant impact upon family development within Australia, I have specified the current failings within the law and have recommended solutions to address those failings.

Review Inheritance Laws: Summary.

The review of our Inheritance Laws will be very important for all Australian families and will have significant implications on how our laws are administered and practiced in the future. This review will benchmark other reviews of inheritance law in every state and territory within Australia.

The current process of Inheritance law within Australia has serious flaws.

The cost of the legal process is excessive and the process used by the Supreme Courts is one of the most expensive in the land.
The lawyers who are administering and practicing in this area of law are unaccountable to Australian families through inadequacies in the Legal Professional Act of 2004.

The lawyers who are administering and practicing in this area of law are unaccountable to Australian families because the current system of regulating lawyers within Victoria through the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is for all intensive-purposes a system of self-regulation. That is lawyers regulating lawyers, in the area of inheritance; it is essential that lawyers are no longer allowed to self-regulate and must be regulated by a body that is independent of The Law Institute of Victoria.

There is no mandatory training for lawyers who practice in inheritance law with an emphasis in the importance of cross generational family cohesion and its impact upon family development.

No quality standards have been written for lawyers who practice inheritance law so as to insure the interests of the family of the testator are even considered let alone given priority over lawyers’ fees.

Lawyers who are in private practice are not required to respect the human rights, inheritance rights or family rights of the dead when administering a deceased estate.

Lawyers who are nominated as executors are not bound by the Legal Professional Act 2004 as they are not deemed to be acting as lawyers when they are executors.

Lawyers who are acting as executors can empower themselves over bereaved families by hiding crucial information about the wishes of the dead from their children under the guise of legal client privilege.

These lawyers are also allowed to lie to the children of the dead about what is contained in this information and even when the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is provided with evidence that proves they have lied, this office will not act to discipline them.

Lawyers who represent these lawyer executors are also immune from disciplinary action by The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. When they attend meetings where both a family member executor is present and the lawyer/executor is present and the lawyer executor tells lies to the family nominated executor, even though the lawyer is representing two clients at the same time and is obligated to inform each client if he becomes aware that one or the other is lying our legal regulator does nothing.

When there are issues involving corporate relationships between the person who has died and business partners; it is almost impossible to obtain documents that will reveal the true assets of the deceased if the business partner does not want to cooperate.

The cheaper, quicker and more accurate, truth seeking system that is used in Europe as detailed by Annett Marfording is not even being considered by the legal profession as an appropriate system with which to deal with inheritance law.

The vested interests of the legal profession currently dominate the direction of law reform in this important area at the financial expense of all Australian Families and are impeding the development of our nation as a whole.

Recommendations.

Ensure that when reforming inheritance law the interests of Australian Family development are put to the forefront by providing the appropriate funding to family interest groups so as to ensure a dominance of family representation over the legal profession’s representation at the law reform process.

Investigate the implementation of a cheaper, faster and more accurate truth seeking system to service the needs of families who are caught up in inheritance disagreements and set up low cost tribunals.

Cap the legal costs on an inheritance dispute to no more than 5% of the value of the estate and ensure the legal costs represent value for money to Australian families.

Ensure that lawyers who are acting as executors no longer engage in misleading and deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act 1974 by altering the anomaly within the Legal Professional Act 2004 and make them lawyers when they are acting as executors.

Make lawyers who are working in inheritance law work to a set of standards that are written with the purpose of ensuring that the lawyer or lawyers are always acting in the best interests of Australian families.

Legislate so as lawyers who are working in inheritance law have to complete a minimum amount of mandatory training in the impact of inheritance upon families and their intergenerational development.

Make all lawyers and the judiciaries who are working in inheritance matters observe the International Charter of Human

Rights with respect to family development.

If there are corporate discrepancies within the business dealings of the deceased make sure the corporate regulator ASIC has the legal power and resources to investigate and obtain any relevant information for the family of the deceased without having to resort to the expensive civil process of litigation. In other words make sure that the beneficiaries can call on the services of a policeman instead of having to rely on a lawyer at $500 per hour.

Create a transparent system for the process of inheritance so as lawyers and lawyer executors are not permitted to hide any information that will assist Australian families to determine the wishes of a relative who has died. Create a system that mandates an open and transparent system where information is freely exchanged in order to overcome any disagreements.

Create laws so as a lawyer and their law firm who is an executor cannot empower themselves over a family by legal thuggery as was the case with my mother`s estate by Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy.
When lawyers who are executors engage in dishonest conduct ensure:

The regulator The Legal Service Commissioner has the power to investigate any allegations and that those investigations are carried out in an open and transparent manner so as that all parties can view the correspondence.

If the regulator discovers any impropriety bring in legislation so as criminal prosecution can occur.

Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044

charada@mira,net

Sunday 9th of September 2012

To The Honourable P D Cummings

Chair

The Victorian Law Commission

Dear Philip
Thank you for responding to my submission on Inheritance Law Reform dated 14th August 2012.

In your response you refer to a number of issues that I have raised, which you interpret to be outside of the terms of reference given by the Attorney General.

You state these issues to be:

Extending to the regulation of legal practitioners generally
The breadth of human rights legislation
The operation of the adversarial system of law.
I have no doubt that you and your associates, who make up the Victorian Law Reform Commission, are fully aware of the significance of our Inheritance Laws upon the wider workings of our community and also the significant revenue base this work provides to the legal industry.

From my own assessment I would estimate that approximately 50,000 Victorians die every year leaving an asset base of approximately $500,000 each. This amounts to a grand sum of $25 billion dollars per year.

The legal costs of processing this asset base are in the order of $1.5 billion per year, which is about 20% of the Victorian legal industries revenue base. I would suggest that two thirds of that sum, is currently being wasted through an inefficient and unaccountable system that serves the revenue base of the legal profession, at the expense of Victorian families. The cumulative cost of this waste over a ten year period is about $20,000 to $40,000 per Victorian family. This amount of money is significant to most Victorian families who are not on high incomes, unlike the incomes that the legal fraternity are accustomed to. This amount of money, when used in a crisis, whilst bringing up a child in an average Victorian family, can be the difference between lifelong dysfunctionality or a happy and fruitful life.

Considering the long term significance law reform on Inheritance can have on Victorian families I would like to draw your attention to the “make war on 1034 campaign” that was developed in the 1970s and its similarities to the reform of our Inheritance Laws.

In the 1970s we had a motor car system that was killing and injuring a large number of Victorians. We as a community decided to address the problem on a whole of system basis.

We redesigned the internal workings of the motor cars, by introducing seat belts, internal padding, and better brakes and tyres.
We changed our approach to how we treated the driver of the car. Through education and legislation we reduced the number of testosterone alcohol fuelled drivers upon our roads.
We gave our regulators more tools so as to combat the road toll. Country speed limits were reduced, .05 testing of drivers and tools to catch speeding drivers were invented.
These approaches have worked, they have made our roads safer and have significantly reduced the number of Victorians who have died or who have been injured upon our roads. The results have made Victoria a world leader in road safety development and have contributed to making Melbourne one of the world’s most liveable cities in the world. By reducing road trauma we improved the wellbeing of all Victorian Families and saved ourselves a lot of money that is redistributed back into our communities.

Now let me return to Inheritance law reform.

Currently we have a situation in Victoria where everybody at some time encounters inheritance law, simply because we all at some stage will die or we will know a person who is close to us who will die and somewhere along the line the majority of us will inherit something. Most of us will either be a beneficiary or in the end a testator, some of us will be nominated as executors. One can compare testators and beneficiaries to motor car passengers for the purpose of this analogy and nonprofessional executors as learner drivers of what can be a very expensive motor vehicle driving along a dangerous road. The real drivers of the motor car are the professionals whether they are lawyers, accountants of professional trustees.

The journey this vehicle takes us upon is the journey of life, as inheritance when confined to the family, which is where the bulk of it remains, will affect the trajectory of the family for eternity. As it impacts not only upon the family`s material wealth but also upon the state of internal health between family members.

The way the inheritance vehicle is driven, the road and the road laws that guide the vehicle and the regulators that control the way the vehicle is driven will all have a bearing upon the final outcome for the vast majority of Australian families.

The breadth of human rights legislation

Hence if the driver of the Inheritance Vehicle is a lawyer, which in a large number of cases it is and if not, a lawyer will most likely be a trainer of the driver (executor). We need a lawyer who respects and understands the essence of human rights and can encompass the charter of human rights so as it has a bearing upon the trajectory of the inheritance vehicle. Therefore it is critical that lawyers who are in private practice are bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights when working in the area of inheritance as they are the drivers of the inheritance vehicle.

Extending to the regulation of legal practitioners generally

The review of inheritance law and tinkering with the Inheritance Act can only redesign the vehicle by adding safeguards, but unless the driver is responsible and accountable and is aware that a regulator has the tools to ensure he or she follows the rules, any change to the design of the vehicle will have very little impact upon the journey. The regulator must be independent of the driver (legal profession) and must not have a vested interest in protecting the driver, if the driver does not follow the rules. Hence the independence of the regulator (Legal Services Commissioner) is important because it is only human nature for some of us to break the rules and an independent regulator is far more difficult to corrupt than a self-regulator.

The operation of the adversarial system of law.

The way the vehicle is driven will have a significant bearing upon the state and condition of the inheritance vehicle at the end of the journey. The perfect outcome is to have the vehicle begin its journey in good shape and condition and to have it finish its journey in a similar state and condition. If the inheritance vehicle is driven using the adversarial system as against the inquisitorial system it will take longer to reach its destination it will cost more and it will more often than not get to a wrong destination. This process inevitably can lead to a significant devaluation of the inheritance that is available to the beneficiaries, more often than not the children of Australian families.

Please refer to Annett Marfording`s report. Civil Litigation in New South Wales:

Empirical and Analytical Comparisons with Germany Annette Marfording Ann Eyland.

Link to http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1223&context=unswwps

As I said at the beginning of the letter in response to your letter, it is your interpretation of the terms of reference that excludes three significant components of my submission which if excluded will not ensure that Victorian law operates justly, and in accordance with community expectations in relation to the way property is dealt with after a person dies.

As a Victorian who has experienced the failing of our Inheritance law system, I maintain I am in a special position and a qualified person who can comment upon the importance to develop a system that will give Victorians the guarantee that the Victorian law operates justly, and in accordance with community expectations in relation to the way property is dealt with after a person dies.

I would at this stage take the liberty of describing my own families experience of Victoria`s Inheritance system, so as you can appreciate how I have formed my perspective of our legal system and its relationship to family inheritance, as it gives good cause for the Commission to adapt its interpretation of the terms of reference, so as to create an inheritance vehicle for all Australian families that is keeping with their needs and expectations.

In my own families situation my mother nominated my sister and the members of Russell Kennedy (at the time of her death) to be executors of her estate. Prior to probate being granted my mother’s family met with Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy to discuss the terms of my mother’s will.

Most significantly: The meeting occurred on the 19th of August 2004 at the offices of Russell Kennedy. Mr Ian Bult attended that meeting along with Arthur Bolkas, Russell Kennedy`s wills and estates expert, my brother Tim Hannigan, my sister Siobhan and her husband Paul Hammond both practising psychologists and my sister Grainne Darrer, the family nominated executor and her husband Des Darrer a medical practitioner. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss how the estate could be distributed equally amongst my mother’s four children who were all in agreement as to this being my mother’s final wish and that this would be in the long term interests of our families’.

At this point in time as far as I can ascertain Grainne Darrer was the only nominated executor to the will, along with all of the members of Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother`s death, as probate had not yet been granted and the actual member from Russell Kennedy who was to take up the role of executor, had not yet been decided. Ian Bult happened to be at that meeting because he had been involved in writing my mother’s will and had been the lawyer from Russell Kennedy to who my mother communicated with.

The facts are, that a meeting at the offices of Russell Kennedy Solicitors, at which one family member executor attends and one lawyer (Ian Bult) who is representing another 20 lawyers, one of whom could become the other executor and a lawyer Arthur Bolkas, employed by the law firm Russell Kennedy attends. The lawyer Ian Bult states that he has a letter in his possession written by my mother that he says, states that he cannot divide the estate equally between her four children, as it would be contrary to her wishes. This statement was not true and was a misrepresentation of the contents of the letter (which only came to light after six years). The lawyer Arthur Bolkas who was charging the estate for his presence at that meeting had at least two clients, one being my sister and another 20 clients that is the members of Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother’s death, who are referred to in the will and the probate documents. That lawyer (Arthur Bolkas) had a duty of care to my sister Grainne Darrer, to tell her that his other client (a representative of Russell Kennedy Ian Bult), was misleading her during the meeting.

Instead, when my sister requested a copy of the letter, Mr Ian Bult said he had possession of: stating to him. “My mother would never have wanted her children to be treated in an unequal manner after her death.” Mr Arthur Bolkus advised Mr Bult that he could not let Grainne see that letter as it was a privileged document.

Mr Gleeson the current lawyer who is dealing with this matter at Russell Kennedy has been asked who was representing who at this meeting on 19th August 2004. He has stated that Arthur Bolkas was primarily representing Ian Bult and that it had been adverted to Grainne Darrer prior to this meeting that she required independent legal advice. Upon checking with Grainne Darrer it has been found that Paul Gleeson is not telling the truth. At no time prior to the meeting of 19th August 2004 had she been informed by any member of Russell Kennedy that she required independent legal advice at that meeting. This means that Arthur Bolkas was representing Grainne Darrer as the family nominated executor of the estate and the other 21 members of the law firm Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother’s death as stated in her final will.

The Attorney General Robert Clark in his letter to my brother (Tim Hannigan) dated 27th of June 2012 which states; “The Commissioner can also investigate serious misconduct that occurs outside of legal practice that would justify a finding that the practitioner is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice or that would be reasonably regarded as disgraceful or dishonourable to the profession.”

The point of me telling you this story is as follows.

Mr Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy were able to hide the truth of my mother`s wishes for seven years, by claiming the letter whose contents Ian Bult misrepresented, was bound by legal client privilege.
This misrepresentation of the contents of the letter by Ian Bult led to my sister, the family nominated executor and the person who I maintain was the only real executor prior to the granting of probate to have a disagreement with Ian Bult.
Mr Bult then used the threat of exorbitant legal fees to sort out the problem. Stating it would cost the estate in excess of $200,000 in legal fees. He then wrote a letter to my sister strongly recommending that she not partake in probate. As a result of the bullying, intimidating and dishonest tactics used by Ian Bult without intervention by Arthur Bolkas the paid employee of Russell Kennedy along with the other 20 members of Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother`s death, my sister who also cares for a special needs child had a nervous breakdown and left the running of the estate to the members of Russell Kennedy.
Ian Bult became the executor.
I received 50% of my inheritance and Ian Bult invested the rest on the stock market where he lost about $80,000 during the G F C when accrued interest is taken into account.
Russell Kennedy were able to amount $75,000 in legal fees against the estate. There were more fees for running a trust that they set up that was based upon a lie.
The result of the actions by Russell Kennedy have destroyed the inter family relationships because of the uneven distribution of the inheritance between my mother’s children.
Despite three complaints to the Legal Services Commissioner and a complaint to The Victorian Ombudsman which were well documented and have provided conclusive evidence that Ian Bult and Arthur Bolkus and the members of Russell Kennedy behaved in a disgraceful manner that involved:
Lying
Working for their own financial gain
Abusing the Inheritance, family and human rights of my mother’s family
Mismanaging the estate whilst in control of it.
There has never been a proper investigation carried out by the regulator about this matter.

The Legal Services Commissioner has continually stated that Mr Ian Bult was acting as an executor and not a lawyer and that the matters that I am concerned about are a matter for the Supreme Court. I find this to be very surprising particularly when you become aware of a case of professional misconduct that is currently being bought against a Mr Harold James Johnson by Mr Michael McGarvie – The Legal Services Commissioner. VCAT Ref J124/2011

Mr Johnson is charged with writing intemperate language in three affidavits to the courts whilst he was acting as a self-represented non litigant in a family law matter. In this case the legal services commissioner is prepared to go all out against Mr Johnson on the basis that even though he was not acting as a lawyer in his self-representing role he had communicated in a way that lawyers are not permitted to do and in so doing had behaved in a disgraceful manner and should be barred from practicing law for five years. None of what Mr Johnson has stated in his affidavit material has been disproved.

And yet we have about 300 complaints arriving at the Legal Services Commissioners desk many involving lawyer who are acting as executors whom the legal services commissioner does not see fit to investigate and refers the complaint back to the complainant often suggesting that they take the matter to the supreme court so as they can incur more legal fees and charges.

We have at least one case that I know of where a lawyer who may or may not have been an executor who clearly behaved in a dishonest manner to gain control of my mother’s deceased estate whose behaviour is disgraceful, is not investigated by the Legal Services Commissioner. Hence the issue pertaining to extending the regulation of legal practitioners generally.
Despite frank and forthright communication to Mr Paul Gleeson and all of the members of Russell Kennedy who are still at Russell Kennedy my mother’s family have been refused permission to examine the estate file. A file that has been fully paid for by my mother`s estate and which I maintain is the property of my mother`s family.

I can assure you that none of the above indicates that Victorian law operates justly, and in accordance with community expectations in relation to the way property is dealt with after a person dies and all of which indicates that to shift the Victorian law to a position than ensures that Victorian law operates justly, and in accordance with community expectations in relation to the way property is dealt with after a person dies will require the law reform commission to consider and incorporate

Extending to the regulation of legal practitioners generally
The breadth of human rights legislation
The operation of the adversarial system of law.
in to its interpretation of the terms of reference so as to achieve the desired outcome. An outcome that would reduce the cost of running the Inheritance transfer system by one billion dollars per year which would then be redistributed back to Victorian families. As with the flow on benefits Victoria has gained by its war upon 1034 we can use the same method to impart a positive contribution when we reform our Inheritance Laws.

I welcome commission`s practice of publishing submissions and have no objections to you publishing my submission. I can understand the need to remove any names from submissions as to not do so would create an unworkable environment. I am saddened to hear you will not be publishing my book (Lawyers or Grave Robbers?) on your web site, but I did not send you a copy of Lawyers or Grave Robbers? so as it would appear on your web site, however I did send you a copy of Lawyers or Grave Robbers? for a reason, as there is information contained within the book that will assist the commission and a documented story that is true. The perspective of a person who is outside of the legal profession will shed a different light upon a subject that although not in the forefront of day to day events at this point in time it will have a beneficial impact upon the workings of most of the people who live in Victoria.

I trust that you will take my comments on board and I live in anticipation of seeing fairer and more equitable Inheritance Laws and a system that administers them emanating from the Victorian Law Reform Commission`s review of these laws.

If I can be of any further assistance please contact me.

Yours Faithfully

Diarmuid Hannigan.

Things you can do today.

Please contact your local members of parliaments. You will have three or four depending on which state you live in and tell them you want lawyers who act in inheritance matters to be accountable to Australian Families.

Submissions can be made by: Online form: www.lawreform.vic.gov.au Email: law.reform@lawreform.vic.gov.au Mail: GPO Box 4637, Melbourne Vic 3001 Fax: (03) 8608 7888 Phone: (03) 8608 7800, 1300 666 557 (TTY) or 1300 666 555 (cost of a local call)

Please could you send us a comment? We would very much like to hear from you.

And last but not least please send the web address of this site to all of your contacts and ask them to do the same.

Your help and involvement are greatly appreciated.

These are the links to your local parliamentary representative`s email address

Parliament of Victoria

Members of the Legislative Council

Members of the Legislative Assembly

Parliament of N S W

Members of the Legislative Assembly

Members of the Legislative Council

Parliament of Australia

Senators

Members

Please could you send us a comment? We would very much like to hear from you.

And last but not least please send the web address of this site to all of your contacts and ask them to do the same.

Your help and involvement are greatly appreciated

<

to other Informative web sites without who`s help, support, encouragement and contribution over the years none of this would have been created. If I have missed you please email me so as I can include you.

Australia – organisations and websites

FLAC For Legally Abused Citizens

The Truth Injustice Campaign

The Evan Whitton Home Page

Transcript of Evan Whitton interviewed on Radio National’s ‘Counterpoint’:

Dr Robert N. Moles’ Networked Knowledge (miscarriages of justice):

Domenic Greco, Victims of Crime Counselling Services:

The Innocence Project WA:

Garth Eaton’s Australian Justice Tribunal:

Shane Dowling’s Kangaroo Court of Australia:

John Hatton on the adversarial system (click on ‘Legal & Justice System’ and watch short video):

Real Justice -

Glenn Thompson’s Courts on Trial:

‘Brothers In Law: The Moe Hotel Fraud Case’ by former Fraud Squad Detective Lorne Campbell:

Safety for Parents and Kids:

Justice for Children:

National Council for Children Post Separation:

Victims of Crime Assistance League NSW (VOCAL):

‘The Evil Deeds of The Ratbag Profession in The Criminal Justice System’ by reformed lawyer Brett Dawson:

http://flac.htmlplanet.com/news/books03oct04.htm

Peter Hall’s Unjust Justice:

Corruption Exposed:

Justice Action:

Marlene Marinkovic’s ‘Who Judges the Judges?’:

Paul Sharpless’ Corrupt Judges blog:

Raymond Hoser/smuggled.com (corruption):

John Wilson’s Rights and Wrong (Banks and Judges, trial by jury, common law):

Vesna’s site re corruption:

Basic Fraud (re the legality of judicial system/courts and governments, with a focus on Australia but including Britain and other of its colonies):

Phonelaw:

Merlin David Beck’s CustomGuides.net site re NSW LSC Steve Marks:

NSW Lawyers Suck – Evidence and Case Studies:

The Roseanne Beckett website:

legalTELLall.com :

Australia – papers and media articles

‘Post-conviction reviews – Stretegies for change’ by Bibi Sangha and Bob Moles:

http://netk.net.au/CrimJustice/DirectLink2.pdf

‘The law on non-disclosure in Australia: All rights, no remedies?’ by Bob Moles:

http://netk.net.au/CrimJustice/DirectLink1.pdf

Criminal Cases Review Commission – Today Tonight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnNQ_8s5fS4&NR=1

The Case of Henry Keogh – Today Tonight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZdaTAb4Onw

2012 news.com.au article ‘Mum loses custody to her child’s alleged abuser’:

http://www.news.com.au/national/mum-loses-custody-to-alleged-abuser/stor...

2011 ABC News article ‘Collapsed sex abuse case sparks call for reform’ re charges being dropped against a paedophile who preys upon disabled children:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-21/collapsed-sex-abuse-case-sparks-ca...

2011 Independent Australia article ‘The Victorian injustice system’:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/human-rights-2/the-victorian-in...

2011 SMH article ‘She once escaped a killer – under today’s laws she would still be trapped’:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/she-once-escaped-a-killer–under-todays-laws-she-would-still-be-trapped-20110406-1d4ko.html

2012 SMH article ‘Convicted solicitors still allowed to practise’ by Geesche Jacobsen:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/convicted-solicitors-still-allowed-to-practise...

2011 SMH article ‘Laws hinder the search for missing millions’ by Geesche Jacobsen:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/laws-hinder-the-search-for-missing-millions-20...

2011 thewest.com.au article ‘Ex-cop helped mum fight law:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/12381145/ex-cop-helped-mum...

2011 The Age article ‘Lawyers Act to be reviewed after hit-run’:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/lawyers-act-to-be-reviewed-after-hitru...

2011 SMH article ‘Appeals spark concern over use of scientific evidence:

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/appeals-spark-concern-over-use...

2011 Independent Australia article ‘Jordan and Jennifer Nash against the Queensland government:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/discrimination-2/jordan-and-jen...

2009 ‘ON LINE opinion’ article by former academic lawyer Trevor Hoffman, ‘Victoria’s judges are effectively unaccountable’:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8687&page=0

2006 SMH article ‘Last bastion of the incompetent barrister’:

http://newsstore.smh.com.au/apps/viewDocument.ac?page=1&sy=smh&kw=incomp...

2010 The Age article ‘Judges’ miscarriages of justice’:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/judges-miscarriages-of-justice-2010121...

2010 The Age article ‘Judge appeals on criticism”:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/judge-appeals-on-criticism-20100505-ua...

2010 The Age article ‘Lawyer knocks court complaints method”:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/lawyer-knocks-court-complaints-method-...

2009 Herald-Sun article ‘Lawyers face trial probe’:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/lawyers-face-trial-probe/story...

2011 The Australian article by Bob Moles & Bibi Sangha ‘Non-disclosure of the facts at trial could threaten the integrity of our entire system of law and justice’:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/non-disclosure-of...

2011 The Australian article ‘Quigley hits out over naming of undercover police officer’:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/quigley-hits-out-over-naming-underc...

2011 The Australian article ‘Junk forensic science soiling courtroom evidence’:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/junk-forensic-sci...

2011 The Australian article by Bob Moles & Bibi Sangha ‘Australia lags in junk forensics remedies’:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/australia-lags-in...

2011 The Telegraph article ‘Law too close to home for MP Stephen Bromhead’:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/law-too-close-to-home-f...

The Age April 2011 ‘Policing the lawyers: the balance between procedure and fairness’::

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/policing-the-lawyers-the-balance-betwe...

SMH articles 8th July 2011 re corrupt lawyers”

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/i-would-never-have-dreamt-they-would-do-what-t...

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/watchdog-bares-teeth-in-battle-to-discipline-d...

Phil Herd’s draft submission to the Law Reform Taskforce 2010:

http://www.ema.gov.au/www/agd/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/%289A5D88DBA63D32A661E6369859739356%29~232+Phil+Herd.PDF/$file/232+Phil+Herd.PDF

2010 mtr article ‘A child failed: how 120 men got away with the sexual violation of a 12 year old girl’:

http://melindatankardreist.com/2010/10/a-child-failed-how-120-men-got-aw...

2006 ABC Radio National Law Report – ‘The immoral court – what’s wrong with the legal system’:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/latenightlive/stories/2006/1730008.htm

20011 ABC Radio National Law Report – ‘Should expert witnesses and barristers be safe from being sued?’:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/lawreport/stories/2011/3209941.htm

2006 article in The Age ‘Evil and dumb : attack on Victoria’s lawyers’:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/evil-and-dumb-attack-on-victorias...

2010 Daily Telegraph article ‘MP’s bid to free notorious former Kings Cross drug dealer Bill Bayeh’ about lawyer-cum-politician Victor Dominello:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/mps-bid-to-free-drig-deale...

Australia: the concealed colony (1999 submission to UN for freedom from continuing subjugation under British colonial law):

http://www.members.westnet.com.au/unrealneil/

‘Australia’s barbaric judicial and political system’ by David Donovan:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/democracy/australias-barbaric-j...

Australia – twitters

Fix NSW Legal (corrupt lawyers and more):

http://twitter.com/fixnswlegal

Paul Sharpless (corrupt judges):

http://twitter.com/PaulSharpless

‘Deep Thought’ (corrupt system):

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/748ms2

International

Remembering the Birmingham Six, the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven – ABC Radio National’s ‘Law Report’:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/lawreport/stories/2011/3161626.htm

The Miscarriages of Justice Organisation (MOJO, UK):

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/

http://www.mojoscotland.com/

Wrongly Accused Person (UK):

http://www.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/

Judicial Watch (US):

http://www.judicialwatch.org/

Professional responsibility blog (US):

http://bernabepr.blogspot.com/2011/12/spectacular-incompetence.html

Presenting a case (United Against Injustice):

http://www.unitedagainstinjustice.org.uk/advice/presentation.html

Miscarriage of justice campaign leaflet:

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/justice/Campaign%20leaflett.pdf

Lawyer-Client Relationship Abuse; the ‘Power Wheel’:

http://home.earthlink.net/~numeraire/Lawyers/PowerControlWheelLawyerClie...

Innocence Projects Worldwide:

http://forejustice.org/wc/wrongful_conviction_websites.htm

The National Federation of Miscarriage of Justice and Support Organisations (UK):

http://www.innocent.org.uk/links.html

Inside Doubt – Campaign against miscarriages of justice (UK):

http://www.insidedoubt.co.uk/

Force 4 Justice (UK):

http://www.force4justice.co.uk/ABOUT.htm

Truth in Justice (US):

http://truthinjustice.org/

Forejustice (US):

http://www.forejustice.org/

Citizens for Judicial Accountability (US):

http://www.judicialaccountability.org/

Integrity in the Courts (US):

http://www.integrityinthecourts.com/

Expose Corrupt Courts (US):

http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/

New York Court Corruption:

http://newyorkcourtcorruption.blogspot.com/2009_12_01_archive.html

Probate Shark (US):

http://probateshark.blogspot.com/

Justice for Emma/ Emma Bates is Innocent (UK):

http://emmabatesisinnocent.co.uk/

Susan May is Innocent (UK):

http://www.susanmay.co.uk/

Clare Barstow (UK):

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/eddie/cb.html

Anthony Wood (UK):

http://freeanthonywoodnow.com/

Jordan Towers (UK):

http://caseblog.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/justice4jordan/article-sandr...

The Freddie Andrews story (Northern Ireland):

http://www.justbelfast.com/index.html

Libel Reform Campaign (UK):

http://libelreform.org/

http://www.libelreform.org/news

Estate of Denial (US):

http://www.estateofdenial.com/

Victims Unite (UK):

http://victims-unite.net/

Lawful Rebellion (UK):

http://www.lawfulrebellion.org.uk/

Shirley McKie (UK):

http://shirleymckie.com/index.htm

Barbara’s Journey Towards Justice (US):

http://barbarasblogspot.blogspot.com/

Oct 2010 article ‘Judge at Centre of Perjured Evidence Scandal’ (UK):

http://loveforlife.com.au/content/10/07/10/judge-centre-perjured-evidenc...

Sue Cameron’s book ‘The Cheating Classes: How Britain’s Elite Abuse Their Power:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1125505/

Karin Huffer’s book on Legal Abuse Syndrome:

http://www.legalabusesyndrome.com/

L.A. Naylor’s ‘Judge for Yourself: How Many are Innocent’:

http://www.writesite.org.uk/

Judge arrested for treason (UK):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMRUBlaS_qk&feature=player_embedded

File-Sharers An Easy Prey To Anti-Piracy Lawyers:

http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharers-an-easy-prey-to-anti-piracy-lawyers...

18 THOUGHTS ON “ABOUT US”
Heather E. Nelson on April 5, 2012 at 3:04 pm said:
Thanks for the informative article, it was a good read and I hope its ok that I share this with some facebook friends. Thanks.
http://www.businesstraveltours.com is my blog.

Reply ↓
Paul Sharpless on April 16, 2012 at 6:42 am said:
Parasites in the legal profession from become immune to all the commentary on their criminal activity. Now their behaviour is sanctioned and has the blessing of senior judges. I started on my journey many years ago to see what was actually happening. The results have been most evil.

It is humanity at it’s most cruel. It is impossible to fathom the extent of the deeds most fowl. LAW in Australia and especially NSW is seen as non existent overseas.

Reply ↓
Exaltación Brito Reynoso on April 21, 2012 at 4:30 am said:
Thank you for sharing. Not to many people in your position are so gracious. Your article was very poignant and understandable. It helped me to understand very clearly. Thank you for your help.

Reply ↓
get website traffic on May 15, 2012 at 4:39 pm said:
It is truly a great and useful piece of info. I am happy that you shared this helpful information with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

Reply ↓
click on May 25, 2012 at 5:29 pm said:
This really answered my problem, thank you!

Reply ↓
source on May 28, 2012 at 1:52 am said:
An interesting post right there mate ! Cheers for posting .

Reply ↓
cat turd on October 7, 2012 at 2:35 am said:
Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Reply ↓
Share your interests! on October 10, 2012 at 5:05 am said:
Thanks on your marvelous posting! I genuinely enjoyed reading it,
you could be a great author. I will make sure to bookmark your blog and will come
back at some point. I want to encourage continue your great work, have
a nice afternoon!

Reply ↓
tech news on October 30, 2012 at 8:55 am said:
Wonderful work! This is the type of information that are meant to be shared across the internet. Disgrace on the seek engines for not positioning this submit upper! Come on over and talk over with my web site . Thank you =)

Reply ↓
water heat pump on November 12, 2012 at 6:45 am said:
Magnificent post, very informative. I’m wondering why the opposite specialists of this sector do not notice this. You must continue your writing. I am confident, you have a great readers’ base already!|What’s Taking place i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have found It positively useful and it has helped me out loads. I hope to contribute & help different users like its aided me. Great job.

Reply ↓
Perlengkapan Bayi Murah on December 2, 2012 at 7:37 pm said:
Thanks like your About Us | Lawyers or Grave Robbers?

Reply ↓
how to overcome shyness on December 3, 2012 at 6:59 am said:
I have read so many articles or reviews about the blogger lovers but this article is in fact a
nice post, keep it up.

Reply ↓
moncler discount,moncler on December 3, 2012 at 8:52 am said:
Magnificent goods from you, man. I’ve bear in mind your stuff previous to and you are just extremely excellent. I actually like what you have got here, really like what you are saying and the way in which by which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you continue to care for to keep it sensible. I cant wait to learn far more from you. This is actually a tremendous web site.

Reply ↓
how to overcome shyness on December 6, 2012 at 2:07 am said:
Hi my loved one! I want to say that this post is
awesome, nice written and include approximately all important infos.
I’d like to see extra posts like this .

Reply ↓
Blake on December 6, 2012 at 9:34 am said:
This is one of the most extraordinary blogs Ive read in a very lengthy time. The amount of details in here is stunning, like you practically wrote the book on the subject. Your blog is excellent for anybody who wants to recognize this subject more. Fantastic stuff; please keep it up!

Reply ↓
Aiden on December 21, 2012 at 10:58 am said:
I dont know what to say. This is undoubtedly among the greater blogs Ive read. Youre so insightful, have so considerably actual stuff to bring to the table. I hope that far more folks read this and get what I got from it: chills. Great job and excellent weblog. I cant wait to read a lot more, maintain em comin!

Reply ↓
Contracting Info on December 25, 2012 at 3:28 pm said:
Wonderful items from you, man. I’ve be aware your stuff previous to and you are just too wonderful. I really like what you have obtained here, certainly like what you’re stating and the way in which during which you say it. You are making it enjoyable and you continue to care for to stay it wise. I cant wait to learn much more from you. This is really a tremendous web site.

Reply ↓
rwztzqfwh on April 25, 2013 at 5:55 am said:
toms shoes michael kors outlet louboutin outlet Do you want to bring your career on the next level http://www.cheapghdsshop.co.uk/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russell Kennedy Solicitors
A true story about the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult.

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=220

My own involvement with family inheritance law commenced soon after my mother`s death.

In my own families situation we encountered a lawyer Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy, who were assisted by Russell Kennedy`s resident wills and probate specialist Arthur Bolkas.

Problems occurred from the outset in relation to communication.

My mother in her will had appointed one of my sisters and the members of the law firm at the time of her death to be executors. Her estate was to be split into four equal shares amongst her four children. One share that is my own share was placed into a discretionary trust a trust that could at the discretion of the trustees distribute all or part of the capital and all or part of the interest to any member of my own family including myself. The trust was set up upon the advice of Ian Bult in order to protect my share of the estate from my trustees in bankruptcy. At no time was I ever a bankrupt or put into a position where I would be made bankrupt.

Since my share of the estate was not under any threat my sister along with my other brother and sister all agreed that the best course of action for my mother’s family was to use her discretion as trustee and grant me all of the capital and all of the interest in the discretionary trust and hence split the estate equally as per the will.

The lawyer Ian Bult and the law firm Russell Kennedy disagreed with the family and the family member executor on the interpretation of the will. Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy stated he had in his possession a letter written to him by our mother six years prior to her death that supported his and the members of Russell Kennedy’s interpretation of my mother’s will. Ian Bult stated there were other reasons apart from financial reasons as to why he would not release all of the capital and all of the interest from my share of the estate to me. When requested by the family and the family member executor for evidence Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy stated the letter was privileged and withheld it from the family. After six years the letter has finally been revealed to the family by Paul Gleeson of Russell Kennedy because Ian Bult had retired and Paul Gleeson was appointed as the new trustee.

As there were no other reasons stated by my mother in the contents of the letter, and Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy have specified the letter as the evidence they hold for the interpretation of my mother’s will, one has to conclude that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy lied about or misconstrued its contents to the children of my mother and used that lie or misconstruction to bully and intimidate the family member executor not to join in the probate of the will. My mother specifically stated to Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy in her letter that they as lawyers act in conjunction with her daughter, my youngest sister, as none of her children had experience in wills or taxation law and that she understood that it can be a mine field.

Instead Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy set up a dispute with my sister (the family nominated executor) that was based upon a lie or a misconstruction created by them which they knew could not be verified. My sister refused to agree with their fabrication but Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy then intimidated a grieving daughter with a fully loaded commitment to her own family into a position of submission, a position that bought about a nervous breakdown that prevented her from carrying out her role as executor of my mother`s estate. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy in fact betrayed the trust bestowed upon them as lawyers by my mother and broke her will. The result was catastrophic for the internal family relationships and severely eroded the value of the estate available for the beneficiaries to the amount of at least $180,000 in excess fees and financial waste.

I initially questioned the Law Institute of Victoria and The Legal Services Commissioner about the right of the members of Russell Kennedy to withhold the crucial letter and was informed that they were acting within the law. I then raised this matter with both the state and federal Attorney Generals without success. I asked the Attorney Generals what gave a lawyer, Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy, the right to impose his will and interpretation of my mother’s wishes over that of all of her children without providing the evidence he held. Again I was met with explanations that did not extract the evidence.

I wrote a submission to the Queensland Law Reform Commission on Australian Uniform Ascendancy Laws suggesting a need to totally overhaul our process regarding inheritance laws.

I suggested:

The power imbalance under the current law, between a lawyer (Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy) who is the executor and the family of the deceased needed to be changed so as to place the family in a dominant position.
That the implementation of quality standards for lawyers who are acting as executors as was the case of Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy was an essential requirement to prevent the plundering of family inheritance by lawyers.
The need for compulsory training of lawyers who are acting as executors in matters of mediation and alternative dispute resolution so as to insure that untrained lawyers like Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy are prevented from damaging innocent Australian families in pursuit of a dollar.
A cheaper and simpler way of sorting out inheritance matters with the use of non-lawyer run tribunals, instead of lawyers like Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy who charged the estate $450 per hour plus G S T and was represented by Arthur Bolkas an employee of Russell Kennedy who charged $350 per hour. A total cost of $900 dollars per hour to the estate when they had a conversation with one another about problems Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult had created through their own dishonest acts.
After writing so much I then wrote the book “Lawyers or Grave Robbers?” which poses the question. Are lawyers who act as executors acting as lawyers or are they just grave robbing? Hence the origin of this web site.

I then returned to The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and informed her of the inheritance rights, family rights and human rights abuses that my mother’s family had endured through the actions of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult.

I was informed that lawyers who act as executors are not bound by the Victorian Legal Professional Act 2004, and those lawyers in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and that she was not going to investigate Ian Bult or the law firm Russell Kennedy.

This is despite the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult perpetuating the following inheritance rights family rights abuses upon me, my own family and my mother’s family.

Abuse of The Victorian Charter of Human Rights by Ian Bult and the law firm Russell Kennedy.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Section 8: Recognition and equality before the law.

(1) Every person has the right to recognition as a person before the law.

(2) Every person has the right to enjoy his or her human rights without discrimination.

(3) Every person is equal before the law and is entitled to the equal protection of the law without discrimination and has the right to equal and effective protection against discrimination.

(4) Measures taken for the purpose of assisting or advancing persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination do not constitute discrimination.

In this case Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy discriminated against my mother`s children by not sharing the information they had with them, including her nominated family representative. Their sentiment goes as follows: I am a lawyer thus I have a right that empowers me over you because of my position as a lawyer.

In our families case, Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy disagreed with the family and were permitted to further empower themselves over the family and break the contract of trust imparted to them with our late mother through her will by bullying and intimidating the family member executor to not participate in probate whilst perpetuating a lie or a misconstruction, thus discriminating against the whole of the family. Discrimination occurs when one group in the culture is far more powerful than the group it exploits, as the whites in Africa exploited and discriminated against the blacks. Discrimination and empowerment of a privileged cartel are the twin sisters of racism.

It is universally knowledge that inheritance inequity is one of the main drivers of discrimination between family members which leads to the destruction of extended family networks. This process impedes upon those families development in Australia, and will impact upon migrant families more severely than the established population due to their paucity in extended family networks who are supportive at times of death in their home nations but have often been replaced by lawyers in Australia.

Because the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is aware of this discrimination against a less powerful group within Victoria that are prone to discrimination by lawyers like Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy who act as executors or deal in deceased estates matters the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is bound to act upon the problem so as these human rights abuses stop.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 13: Privacy and reputation

A person has the right not to have his or her —

(a) privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with; and

(b) reputation unlawfully attacked.

Reputation is founded upon inter family relationships, the way inheritance is distributed between a parent and child will go to the core of an individual’s reputation. Reputation is affected both internally and externally. Our reputation is how we see ourselves and how others see us; our reputation is formed through an accumulation of our historical actions. How children’s reputations are created begins with their relationships within their families. Within my own mother`s family through its understanding of its relationships, made a decision on how our mother`s will should be interpreted, based upon their recognition of each and every bodies understanding of their reputation and that of our family. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy after being told how their actions would adversely impact upon that reputation of the family and of the individuals who make up the family, still chose to ignore the requests from all members of my mother`s family or provide the evidence that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy stated they had to support their actions. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy did not allow for the family to interpret the information or to discuss an equitable resolution. Instead Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy recommended the removal of the family member executor, thus breaking the contract of the will.

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner`s failure to act on his knowledge of the above events unlawfully supports an attack on my own reputation and that of our family.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 15: Freedom of expression

(1) Every person has the right to hold an opinion without interference.

(2) Every person has the right to freedom of expression which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, whether within or outside Victoria and whether—

(a) orally; or

(b) in writing; or

(c) in print; or

(d) by way of art; or

(e) in another medium chosen by him or her.

(3) Special duties and responsibilities are attached to the right of freedom of expression and the right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary—

(a) to respect the rights and reputation of other persons; or

(b) for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality.

The relevant section is “the right to hold an opinion without interference”. To hold an opinion requires information in order to substantiate ones position. The ability to have an opinion and how the opinion is formed begins before birth and transcends to death. Opinions are formed in the beginning through inter family interaction. So to hold an opinion about a family matter goes to the core of one’s development.

The members of the law firm Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult have denied a family, information that was openly assessable when my mother was alive, to allow her children to form an opinion of what her last wishes were. The actions of the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult have denied my family to hold an opinion about one of the closest elements that families have, the transfer of inheritance from one generation to the next; the transfer of inheritance incorporates the life time history of a family unit. It displays the trust between parent and child and the trust between the children and that parent. When those trusts are interfered with by an outside member of the family without reasonable explanation and the equality of inheritance distribution is changed, the fine balance of trust can be shattered, as is the case with my mother`s family.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 17: Protection of families and children

(1) Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State.

(2) Every child has the right, without discrimination, to such protection as is in his or her best interests and is needed by him or her by reason of being a child.

Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State [refer to the above points under sections 8, 13 and 15].

Considering the following points of fact:

The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult failed to show evidence of their position when asked.
After six years with a change of trustees from Ian Bult to Paul Gleeson, the members of Russell Kennedy finally produced the evidence that should have been forthcoming when my sister, the family nominated executor requested it.
This evidence proves that Ian Bult lied to or deceived the children of their dead mother about her final wishes and was supported by the law firm Russell Kennedy.
The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult bullied and intimidated the family member executor to resign based upon the lie.
The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult were told by all members of the family, one a medical practitioner and the other a trained psychologist that their actions would damage the family and the value of the inheritance at their own financial gain.
The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult broke the fiduciary trust bestowed upon them by my mother when they misconstrued important information to my sister and my mother`s children regarding their mother`s wishes and refused to work in conjunction with my sister and my mother`s children as my mother had requested of them in the letter..
By doing so the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult broke contract of the will.
The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult destroyed the interpersonal relations between my mother’s children.
The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult through poor administration and unnecessary legal fees denied my mother’s children at least $180,000 in the value of their inheritance.
This is a true example of an inheritance rights abuse by an Australian lawyer Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy. It is also a family rights abuse and a human rights abuse by an Australian lawyer Ian Bult and the members of law firm Russell Kennedy.

The lawyer Ian Bult who assumed the role of executor from the members of Russell Kennedy has not provided any proof that he has taken part in any up to date training in conflict resolution.

An employee of the law firm Russell Kennedy, Daniel Kelliher openly admitted during a telephone conversation that as lawyers they did not work with quality standards when dealing with deceased estates.

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner has not implemented mandatory training for lawyers who act as executors or implemented mandatory standards by which they operate incorporating section 17 of The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Due to the fact that the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is aware of many instances within Victoria involving the legal profession and the human rights abuses of families by them when dealing with deceased estates and has not acted to incorporate section 17 of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights to guide their activities, this lack of action is itself an abuse of Victorians Human Rights, particularly when you consider the amount of money that is currently available for exploitation by unaccountable self-serving lawyers.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 19: Cultural rights

(1) All persons with a particular cultural, religious, racial or linguistic background must not be denied the right, in community with other persons of that background, to enjoy his or her culture, to declare and practise his or her religion and to use his or her language.

(2) Aboriginal persons hold distinct cultural rights and must not be denied the right, with other members of their community—

(a) to enjoy their identity and culture; and

(b) to maintain and use their language; and

(c) to maintain their kinship ties; and

(d) to maintain their distinctive spiritual, material and economic relationship with the land and waters and other resources with which they have a connection under traditional laws and customs.

The relevant section is ‘cultural rights to maintain their kinship ties’. The Charter states that this section is only applicable to Aboriginal people. I suggest that from an ethical perspective the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner should act on behalf of every ethnicity in our multicultural society and are bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights in my case as with many migrant Victorians who although not aboriginal, understand the imperative of kinship, each family arriving in Australia being limited in kin to their immediate family. Destruction of those kinships through adversarial legal tactics that only benefit self-serving unaccountable lawyers when dealing with deceased estates is an abuse of those families’ kinship rights.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 20: Property rights.

A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law.

Again I state that The Victorian legal Services Commissioner is bound to act in my case as with many other Victorians who are introduced to an expensive, often unaccountable and lengthy legal process when encountering a deceased estate, a process that directs large amount of property away from the people who are entitled to it and into the hands of a powerful and select group within our state.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 24: Fair hearing

A person charged with a criminal offence or a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing.

What fairer hearing than to have all of one`s children decide the destiny of your family Instead of lawyers such as the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult who have broken the trust bestowed upon them by lying to the children of their dead mother about her final wishes.

The members of Russell Kennedy are:

The persons named as executors named In the Supreme Court of Victoria Probate Jurisdiction, in the will of Elizabeth Moira Hannigan are:

Ian Fraser Bult of Russell Kennedy named as executor with leave being reserved to (my sister) and the following members of Russell Kennedy. Michael Douglas Main, Bruce Wayne Kent, John Mathew James Corcoran, Michael William Gorton, Ross Fraser Hodges, Paul Gerard Gleeson, Wai Hwoon Low, Damian Thomas Neylon, Victor Anthony Harcourt, Robert Anthony Ewing, Colin Robert Taylor, Andrew James Sherman, Leslie Andrew Fox, Andrew Bruce Van Ingen, Julie Callea-Smyth, Leonard Adrian Warren, Sebastian John Michael Saccuzzo, Rohan David Harris and Rosemary Barbara South Gate.

By Mark Russell
September 25, 2005

WHEN a senior Melbourne magistrate heard the case of how the frustrated son of a deceased dentist had attacked the solicitor who drew up his father’s will, he called on the State Government to change the laws for disputed wills. But that was five years ago and magistrate Robert Tuppen, who retired from the bench on Tuesday, is still waiting for authorities to act.

Mr Tuppen raised his concerns when told the estate of dentist David Austin White had been estimated at $550,000, until a family dispute over the will ended up before the Supreme Court. White’s son, Mark, his two siblings and their mother had become embroiled in the dispute, which included her $300,000 winning Tattslotto ticket.

The subsequent legal fees spent trying to resolve the issue reduced the estate’s value to just $90,000, and tensions boiled over during a mediation hearing. An angry and disillusioned Mark White pushed the solicitor, Keswick Steel, into a wall and then bloodied his head and nose in a scuffle. White pleaded guilty to recklessly causing injury and was fined $750. At the end of the case, Mr Tuppen called for changes to allow some will disputes to be heard in lesser jurisdictions so people were not “deprived of everything”.

The law in Victoria currently requires any disputes involving deceased estates valued at more than $15,000 to be heard in the Supreme Court, with cases often costing tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. A bipartisan parliamentary committee headed by Labor MP Rob Hudson was set up two years ago to investigate the issue but was put on hold while attempts were made to set up a uniform national model to administer deceased estates, wills, family provisions and intestacy.

The national review, initiated by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, is being co-ordinated by the Law Reform Commission of Queensland, but critics claim it is taking too long. The Victorian Parliament Law Reform Committee’s executive officer, Merrin Mason, said the national review was expected to be completed some years ago but the two final reports on deceased estates and the distribution of property when a person dies intestate would not be released until the end of the year.

“It’s just one of those situations where it wouldn’t be sensible to start developing a state system when we know there’s all of this work being done to try and get consistency across jurisdictions,” Ms Mason told The Sunday Age.

A spokeswoman for state Attorney-General Rob Hulls said the Administration and Probate Act dated back to 1958 and needed to be updated. Victorian Legal Ombudsman Kate Hammond said the number of complaints against lawyers over wills, estates and probate was the third highest behind family and de facto issues and conveyancing.

Ms Hammond said her office had received 526 complaints against lawyers over family and de facto issues in 2004-05, 333 over conveyancing and 249 over wills, estates and probate. When the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into wills and deceased estates finally begins sometime next year, it will examine:

■The desirability of new legislation and procedures to deal with the administration of a deceased estate.

■Whether the Administration and Probate Act should be amended to provide alternative mechanisms for the resolution of disputes that involve small estates.

■Whether the Magistrates Court and County Court should also be given jurisdiction to deal with grants of probate and administration, and deal with disputes relating to wills.

■And whether amendments are necessary in relation to the charges and commissions of lawyers who also act as executors.

One critic who believes the system is in urgent need of an overhaul is Collingwood businessman Diarmuid Hannigan, who has been involved in a dispute with lawyer Ian Bult, from law firm Russell Kennedy, over his mother’s estate. He claims Mr Bult, the co-executor of Elizabeth Hannigan’s estate, is unfairly withholding his inheritance. Mr Bult has denied the claim.

Complaints by Mr Hannigan to the Legal Ombudsman, Attorney-General and the Victorian Law Institute’s professional standards body have proved futile.

Institute lawyer Penny Antonov said Mr Hannigan had no legal rights to file a financial loss claim against Mr Bult because he was not Mr Hannigan’s lawyer, so there was no solicitor-client relationship.

CHARGING UP, IN MINUTE DETAIL Ian Bult, a senior partner with the Melbourne law firm Russell Kennedy, charges $425 an hour for his services, plus GST. His senior associate, Arthur Bolkas, charges $330 an hour. They billed the estate of Elizabeth Hannigan, who died last year, more than $32,000 in legal fees following a dispute with her eldest son, Diarmuid, over the will. The list of charges includes:

■$99 for 18 minutes perusing and checking holding statements (Bolkas).

■$99 for 18 minutes working on file note (Bolkas).

■$42.50 for six-minute phone call.

■$66 for 12 minutes reviewing file (Bolkas)

■$255 for 36 minutes drafting two letters (Bult).

■$264 for 48 minutes preparing statements to beneficiaries (Bolkas).

■$340 for 48 minutes briefing counsel (Bult).

■$127.50 for 18 minutes working on letter (Bult).

■$382.50 for 54 minutes perusing medical records (Bult).

■$429 for one hour and 18 minutes on letter to beneficiaries (Bolkas).

The list of charges to the estate goes on. And on …

Lawyers free to say ‘no’ at will

By Mark Russell
September 25, 2005

COLLINGWOOD cake shop owner Diarmuid Hannigan’s mother, Elizabeth, was 74 when she died on June 21 last year.

She left an estate valued at more than $750,000 to be divided equally between her four grieving children. But while the three youngest siblings each received an initial $100,000 payout, Diarmuid was stunned when told by the co-executor of the estate, lawyer Ian Bult, that he would only be getting $50,000.

Mr Bult, a senior partner with law firm Russell Kennedy, said he had a letter from Mrs Hannigan directing him to place the remaining $50,000 of Diarmuid’s inheritance into a testamentary trust. The money can be paid out of the trust at the discretion of the executor.

Mr Bult has refused to give Mr Hannigan a copy of the letter, citing client confidentiality. Mr Hannigan, a father of four, believes his mother wanted to protect his money from creditors after one of his businesses had failed in 1996, not knowing he had cleared his debts.

He has since spent at least $10,000 hiring a lawyer to try to access the trust funds. The dispute has also cost the estate more than $32,000 in legal fees billed by Mr Bult. Mr Hannigan claims another $260,000 from the estate remains in dispute, as well as funds from the pending sale of Mrs Hannigan’s retirement unit at Northcote.

“There appears to be very little in the way of consumer protection for any family who may be beneficiaries of estates,” Mr Hannigan said.

Mr Bult refused to comment, but in a letter to Mr Hannigan he rejected the claim that his firm was prolonging the administration of the estate for its own personal benefit.

2 THOUGHTS ON “RUSSELL KENNEDY SOLICITORS”
matasari on January 26, 2013 at 9:10 am said:
Hey there, You’ve performed an incredible job. I’ll definitely digg it and for my part suggest to my friends. I’m sure they will be benefited from this web site.

Reply ↓
rbecker on March 28, 2013 at 2:53 am said:
A friend of mine had similar experiences – the estate was in Qld but they live in NSW and hired Fraser Legal. Fraser Legal is a one man band operated by Mark Fozzard. He and his buddie some guy also works for himself (name I can’t remember) worked up a bill for 6 weeks work for $80,000. I saw the bill myself and can tell you – in one instance he charged for 23 hours work in one day and for speaking to this other guy getting advice from this other guy and just doing everything that they could to up the bill – its seems like its just usual practice for these solicitors.
My friend sacked them after 6 weeks because they claimed for both to go to Qld and interview several witnesses of the deceased and didn’t do anything – but they charged the estate some $5,000. These guys were so cocky they submitted their bill all $80,000 of it to the Supreme Court to be cost assessed.

Well, by luck my friend got a decent person to examine the file and the cost assessor reduced the bill to $46,000.!! and said there was a “modus operendi” happening between the first solicitor Mark Fozzard and the other guy. The cost assessor said it was unnecessary for two solicitors of such seniority to go to Qld. She also said there was no evidence the second guy did any work!! Since then my friend has found out the first solicitor Mark Fozzard didnt do much work either. She sought and got the only affidavit Mark Fozzard wrote in the Supreme Court and it was 2 pages. For that he charged several thousands of dollars. There are other issues she has discovered as well that make Mark Fozzard well less than ….. I mean any business that overcharges their client by a whopping 45% isn’t exactly ….?*?

But the law society and the OLSC in NSW favor the solicitors. That is something Mark Fozzard told my friend as a warning not to even bother but he was tripped up with the Cost assessor whom I believe he must thought would be on his side. And if so, how bad was his bill for the cost assessor to reduce it by that much.

Lawyers should be named for how they handle clients and their money by the public as there is no protection from the authorities. That way we then all know not to go to them – cause all the promises of Govt and “interest groups” saying they are trying to fix this problem just doesn’t work for the people – it is the people who are paying the price for the lifestyles of these lawyers – Keddies comes to mind and there are so many more. The OLSC receives over 3000 complaints and only one or two ever get to being reprimanded. Its a joke perpetuated on the people and its time the people stood up and counted.

Good luck with the exposure to your story – get it on youtube and twitter too. I’m posting this one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Law

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=11

Family inheritance law has been with humanity from the time we took our first steps on the planet. It is the fundamental root of all law. Its values and the way we administer it is a reflection upon our values as a society and how our society expects us to treat one another. It is bound up in moral and spiritual codes that bind us together as the human race.
Since Family Inheritance Law sits at the base of law, as people living in a contemporary democratic society we would expect the legal profession who are creating, practicing and administering these laws to be accountable to the families who are engaged in the law. We would expect the legal profession to develop, practice and administer these laws so as to preserve the value of inheritance in order that it can be preserved by future generations of families to utilise. We would not expect the legal profession to develop, practice and administer these laws in their own self-interest so as to enhance their own financial gain at the expense of future and present members of our families. We would expect the regulator of the legal profession (The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner) to act swiftly and decisively to eliminate any self-interested, unaccountable and untrustworthy behaviour by members of the legal profession.

Law Reform

Our English adversarial system was spored from one of these acts of barbarism when William the Conqueror invaded Briton and defeated Harold at Hastings in 1066. From that time onward the laws of England favoured the conqueror above the families who had lived in the land. An adversarial legal system has a winner and a looser; it is not a system that seeks the truth, instead it is a system where two sides beat one another up with legal gobbledygook. The one with the most money and influence is normally declared the winner. The one without the influence and money loses. The adversarial system of law is practiced in The United States the United Kingdom and in Australia. It is a legal system that shapes every aspect of our lives including the way we think as individuals. More often than not it impedes our ability to resolve problems collectively by dividing people and preventing them from coming up with a collaborative solution.
The people who run this system are lawyers. They create and shape the laws they interpret and administer the laws and they earn their livelihoods by practicing in the laws. Due to the barbaric heritage of the adversarial legal system and its sociological influence upon our society the lawyers never form, interpret or practice the laws in such a way as to diminish their own power and influence over our communities. In fact due to the nature of our adversarial system only those lawyers who are inclined towards barbaric acts succeed in the system and have influence in any law reform programmes. The progression of generational decline of our adversarial legal system in regards to its ability to service our community needs above the pockets of lawyers is now evident throughout the adversarial world. Our Attorney Generals who themselves must be lawyers continually tell us that they will improve access to justice for the general community.
The access the community wants and needs is a cheaper, more efficient and accurate system as is outlined in Annett Marfording`s study which supports a truth seeking collaborative approach to our legal system instead of our current English adversarial system.
Civil Litigation in New South Wales:
Empirical and Analytical Comparisons with Germany Annette Marfording Ann Eyland.
Review of the Marfording Report. Link: marforfing 2a

Year after year and decade after decade we see lawyers’ fees rise and access to justice by the general community being further denied.
Why is there no law reform in this direction?
Answer. Simply because lawyers would make less money.
In other words our successive governments head lawyers have continued to allow a predatory gang of which they are members to continue to plunder in ever increasing amounts our communities our families and our children for their own greedy benefit.
The times when most of us encounter a lawyer are when we get into trouble, trouble with our marriage trouble with a car accident trouble with an injury trouble in business trouble with the police trouble with government regulation. We also require the services of a lawyer when if we buy a house, when we write a will and to be involved in probating a deceased estate.
Since the majority of us have realised that to lead a healthy and happy life, trouble is one thing we all know to avoid and with trouble comes a lawyer and with a lawyer comes expense and angst, both of which will diminish our experience of life and hurt our own family.
If we are lucky and avoid trouble we will encounter a lawyer when we purchase a home, sell a home, when we make a will or when a close relative dies. The problem with this model is that most people rarely see a lawyer and when encountering a lawyer assume they are all of good character and to be held in the highest of trusts because they are lawyers. Fortunately the majority of lawyers do work hard for their clients and do the best for their clients considering the limitations of our adversarial legal system. To work and survive within this system a lawyer must develop skills of combat, knowing, the greater the conflict and the longer the conflict the greater the cost to the parties funding the battle, the lawyers only objective being to win.
Funny about that I thought the law was their so as to avoid conflict and a lawyer was there to help formulate a resolution to the disagreement.
So I ask you would you entrust your life and the future destiny of your family into the hands of an individual who gets paid more and more money by inflating an existing conflict and by doing so makes you worse off and in doing so hurts your family.
Even an idiot would say no, and yet again and again like lambs to the slaughter individuals walk through those court doors with the destiny of their lives and the lives of their family at stake trusting lawyers, to the point where many older and more vulnerable people who have not had much to do with lawyers go ahead when writing their wills and bestow the ultimate trust in lawyers by making them executors of their estate when they die. In so doing and quite often without realising it they are placing the future of their families’ destiny into the lawyer’s hands.
Why does this happen. Because people trust lawyers, if lawyers were untrustworthy our government would do something about it and because our government has not done anything about untrustworthy lawyers and we are assured that lawyers are trustworthy.

Our multicultural society and the impact of family inheritance law in Australia upon its development.

Our multicultural society has evolved as a result of worldwide events. These events have resulted in a large number of overseas families deciding that Australia is a good place to re-establish their families after social disruption including war, revolution and the breakdown of law and order within their countries of origin. These people often arrived in Australia with nothing apart from their lives and some of their family members. They then spend the remainder of their lives working hard in order to help their children establish their families in Australia. These families apart from overcoming language and cultural barriers are thrown in at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Inheritance within those family structures plays a major role in their intergenerational development as it plays a major part in determining the schools we attend, the suburbs we live in, the ability of our family to pay for critical intervention services during our lives, and the holidays we spend together with our family. It influences the lives of our children our grandchildren and our offspring for eternity.
These families are particularly vulnerable to inheritance abuse by our current legal processing of inheritance matters.
• They are more likely to appoint a lawyer as an executor because they are deprived of an extended family network through the act of migration.
• They are less likely to have access to a permanent and trusted family lawyer.
• They will be unfamiliar with how the inheritance laws work within Australia and that because they have been constructed by lawyers in a nation that invented terra nullius are devoid of family input and fail to recognise the importance of healthy intergenerational family development through inheritance.
The inability of our legal regulators to tackle this issue is simply a disgrace. One has to ask why this is so. Particularly when we have all recognised that we are a nation of families many of whom have recently migrated to this land.
To see the problem one has to analyse the socioeconomic background of the legal profession. The majority of lawyers attend private schools which mean their families sit at the higher end of the social spectrum. The families have more money are better educated and because they are educated and speak English their children inevitably have a greater chance of getting the marks that will allow them to become lawyers. The exercise is self-perpetuating and is an intergenerational transfer of legal power from one generation to the next within a confined social group. Due to the historical structure of this group of people who make up the majority of the legal profession, vested interest often dominates over social need when it comes to reforming our laws. The group itself can exert influence upon who will be given positions of influence and who will be excluded.
The legal profession currently has a serious conflict of interest by failing to develop a low cost efficient ,timely and truth seeking process to deal with inheritance matters and through its inactions impeding the intergenerational development of migrant families who have given up so much of their lives so as to re-establish their families in Australia.

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is the entity that regulates the legal profession in Victoria.
Mr Michael McGarvie is the Chief Executive Officer of the legal services board.
Michael was appointed as CEO of the Board in December 2009. Prior to this, Michael was the CEO of the Supreme Court of Victoria for three years. Michael practised as a solicitor in a private firm for 23 years, where he primarily specialised in civil litigation and dispute resolution. The Board is the peak regulator of the legal profession in Victoria and is responsible for issuing and renewing practising certificates and maintaining the register of legal practitioners and register of disciplinary action.

The legal services board: Links http://www.lsb.vic.gov.au/
Let me tell you a little story about Victoria’s lawyers. There are 12,000 registered lawyers in Victoria. Half of these lawyers at least work in areas of the law where they cannot get into trouble with consumers of their services because they do not service the public. At least half if not 75% of the remaining lawyers say 4,500 are good hard working lawyers who provide a quality albeit expensive service. This leaves us with 1500 lawyers who in some way could cause concern to a consumer of their services. The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner receives 2,000 complaints per year and dismisses 1700 of these complaints, only disciplining the lawyers involved in 300 of these complaints. In other words the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner believes that on the whole lawyers are trustworthy and that 85% of complaints bought against lawyers by the public are without basis and that the public in regards to these complaints has no cause for concern. If the legal services commissioner is receiving his complaints from the public about the 1500 underperforming lawyers then that averages one complaint a year per lawyer. Remember for every complaint there are at least another three dissatisfied consumers who are either incapable of making a complaint due to language or educational barriers. There are consumers of their services who may feel dissatisfied but think this par for the course and there are other consumers who either cannot be bothered or who do not want to create a dispute with a lawyer who has done work for them because it is not in the long term interests of their relationship that they have with their lawyer.
So if you are lucky and well informed you most likely have a 90% chance of avoiding a bad lawyer but if you are just a general punter which means you take pot luck on the yellow pages you will discover that a large percentage of the good lawyers are too busy to deal with you so you are left with approximately 50% of the good lawyers and 100% of the bad lawyers. The chances of ending up with a bad lawyer are increased to 40%. Remember when you need a lawyer the destiny of your life and that of your family are most likely at stake, particularly when it comes to inheritance and you are no longer there to ensure the lawyer can be trusted.
Older people who have migrated to Australia are particularly vulnerable as they do not have access to an extended family network from whom they can obtain advice on who are the lawyers to employ and who are the lawyers to avoid.
Unfortunately the situation gets even worse, for three reasons.
The first being.
Lawyers who are acting as executors are deemed by the lawyer run regulator The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner Michael McGarvie, to be not acting as lawyers when acting as an executor of a deceased estate. Thus they are not bound by the legal professional act of 2004, and you thought you were making a lawyer an executor of your estate. Yes they were lawyers when sitting across the table from you when you were alive, but now that your dead and they have absolute control of your assets they are no longer lawyers, they are now executors and if they misbehave because they are not lawyers, the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner cannot discipline them. Personally I would say that this is one of the most severe and systemic examples of misleading and deceptive conduct under The Trade Practices Act that I have ever encountered but who would bring it to a court, where one of the lawyer gang (a judge) makes the final decision. Even bugs bunny has more survival skills than to enter this den of slaughter. A court were if the judge who is a lawyer sees his compatriot on the ropes has the power to tilt the ring in the lawyers favour and even pour oil beneath your feet in order to give his lawyer friend a helping hand.
If all else fails the Judge has the ability to adjourn proceedings so as to give the lawyer and the legal industry as a whole, time to arm up and increase the odds in their favour either by tilting the ring even further, pouring different lubricants under your feet or by bringing in an army of wigged and grounded experts with funny letters after their names like Q C or Special Council.
The second being:
That lawyers who are in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights or for that matter any charter of human rights anywhere in the world.
What? They are not bound by a charter of human rights. Who are their clients? Dogs and cats! Not really they are human beings who are all joined to families which are made up of wives, children and relatives. All human beings, all who believe in their human rights and all who want and expect those rights to be respected and honoured by the law and those that create, administer and practice it, that is lawyers.

Currrent developments in international law appear to support the theory that lawyers who are in private practise should be bound by The International Charter of Human Rights.
The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner has conducted a round table discussion with members representing the legal profession and three other groups to discuss Victoria`s Succession laws. The report can be read in full by connecting to the following link: (Legal Services Commissioner Round Table Discussion on Succession Law) LSC_SuccessionLawSummary[1]
By reading this document it is plain to see that the lawyer dominated legal system has every intention of maintaining the inheritance laws as they currently exist that favour the plunder of family inheritance by the legal profession.

Please refer to the National legal proffessonal reform -Response to taskforce discussion paper on national legal services ombudsman.

Response+to+Taskforce+discussion+paper+on+Ombudsman++13+Jan+10

The third being:
That even when the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is provided with the evidence to substantiate a complaint the commissioner has the power not to investigate the complaint. Refer letter from LSC. Pg 29
Similar issues are occurring between consumers of legal services in N S W and the New South Wales Legal Services Commissioner,

The continuing saga of Keddies Lawyers

Submission by Diarmuid Hannigan 3rd of March 2012 to the Review of Succession Act 2006 N S W

Introduction

I regret having to write what I have had to write but I do not regret a single word I have written for it is the truth. I have written this submission so as no other family is devastated by the legal profession in the same way as my mother`s family was after her death. I have presented you with a symbol which encompasses our social structure in regards to inheritance. Each word in symbolic to the way our society functions and is influenced by the way we shape our inheritance laws.
Since the reforms carried out in N S W to The Succession Act of 2006 will have a major bearing upon the way inheritance is dealt with within all Australian jurisdictions for many years to come, I felt it essential to clearly reveal how the succession laws of Australia are not working in the interests of Australian families; as they have been shaped by the legal profession. These laws favour the profession over families, as can be seen by reading my story. These laws are very expensive to administer take a long time to implement, benefit the income of the legal profession and erode the value of family inheritance.
The problems I have identified are not addressed in the current Succession Act of 2006, as they relate to the actions of the legal profession whilst carrying out their work in succession law and are currently not mentioned in the act.
Since Inheritance has a significant impact upon family development within Australia, I have specified the current failings within the law and have recommended solutions to address those failings.
Review of Succession Act 2006: Summary.
The review of the succession act will be very important for all Australian families and will have significant implications on how our laws are administered and practiced in the future. This review will benchmark other reviews of inheritance law in every state and territory within Australia.
The current process of Inheritance law within Australia has serious flaws.
1. The cost of the legal process is excessive and the process used by the supreme courts is one of the most expensive in the land..
2. The lawyers who are administering and practicing in this area of law are unaccountable to Australian families through inadequacies in the legal professional act.
3. There is no mandatory training for lawyers who practice in inheritance law with an emphasis in the importance of cross generational family cohesion and its impact upon family development.
4. No standards have been written for lawyers who practice inheritance law so as to insure the interests of the family of the testator are even considered let alone given priority over lawyers’ fees.
5. Lawyers who are in private practice are not required to respect the human rights, inheritance rights or family rights of the dead when administering a deceased estate.
6. Lawyers who are nominated as executors are not bound by the legal professional act as they are not deemed to be acting as lawyers when they are executors.
7. Lawyers who are acting as executors can empower themselves over bereaved families by hiding crucial information about the wishes of the dead from their children under the guise of legal client privilege.
8. These lawyers are also allowed to lie to the children of the dead about what is contained in this information and even when the legal services commissioner is provided with evidence that proves they have lied will not act.
9. When there are issues involving corporate relationships between the person who has died and business partners it is almost impossible to obtain documents that will reveal the true assets of the deceased if the business partner does not want to cooperate.
10. The cheaper, quicker and more accurate, truth seeking system that is used in Europe as detailed by Annett Marfording is not even being considered by the legal profession as an appropriate system with which to deal with inheritance law.
11. The vested interests of the legal profession currently dominate the direction of law reform in this important area to the detriment of all Australian Families and the direction of the nation as a whole.
Recommendations.
1. Ensure that when reforming inheritance law the interests of Australian Family development are put to the forefront by providing the appropriate funding to family interest groups so as to ensure a dominance of family representation over the legal profession’s representation at the law reform process.
2. Investigate the implantation of a cheaper, faster and more accurate truth seeking system to service the needs of families who are caught up in inheritance disagreements and set up low cost tribunals.
3. Cap the legal costs on an inheritance dispute to no more than 5% of the value of the estate and ensure the legal costs represent value for money to Australian families.
4. Ensure that lawyers who are acting as executors no longer engage in misleading and deceptive conduct under the trade practices act by altering the anomaly within the legal professional act and make them lawyers when they are acting as executors.
5. Make lawyers who are working in inheritance law work to a set of standards that are written with the purpose of ensuring that the lawyer or lawyers are always acting in the best interests of Australian families.
6. Legislate so as lawyers who are working in inheritance law have to complete a minimum amount of mandatory training in the impact of inheritance upon families and their intergenerational development.
7. Make all lawyers and the judiciaries who are working in inheritance matters observe the international charter of human rights with respect to family development.
8. If there are corporate discrepancies within the business dealings of the deceased make sure the corporate regulator ASSIC has the legal power and resources to investigate and obtain any relevant information for the family of the deceased without having to resort to the expensive civil process of litigation.
9. Create a transparent system for the process of inheritance so as lawyers and lawyer executors are not permitted to hide any information that will assist Australian families to determine the wishes of a relative who has died. Create a system that mandates an open and transparent system where information is freely exchanged in order to overcome any disagreements.
10. Create laws so as a lawyer and their law firm who is an executor cannot empower themselves over a family by legal thuggery as was the case with my mother`s estate by Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy.
11. When lawyers who are executors engage in dishonest conduct ensure:
• The regulator The Legal Service Commissioner has the power to investigate any allegations and that those investigations are carried out in an open and transparent manner so as that all parties can view the correspondence.
• If the regulator discovers any impropriety bring in legislation so as criminal prosecution can occur.

A true story about the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult.

Lawyers free to say no at will

My own involvement with family inheritance law commenced soon after my mother`s death. In my own families situation we encountered a lawyer Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy, who were assisted by Russell Kennedy`s resident wills and probate specialist Arthur Bolkas. Problems occurred from the outset in relation to communication.
My mother in her will had appointed one of my sisters and the members of the law firm at the time of her death to be executors. Her estate was to be split into four equal shares amongst her four children. One share that is my own share was placed into a discretionary trust a trust that could at the discretion of the trustees distribute all or part of the capital and all or part of the interest to any member of my own family including myself. The trust was set up upon the advice of Ian Bult in order to protect my share of the estate from my trustees in bankruptcy. At no time was I ever a bankrupt or put into a position where I would be made bankrupt.
Since my share of the estate was not under any threat my sister along with my other brother and sister all agreed that the best course of action for my mother’s family was to use her discretion as trustee and grant me all of the capital and all of the interest in the discretionary trust and hence split the estate equally as per the will.
The lawyer Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy disagreed with the family and the family member executor on the interpretation of the will. Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy stated he had in his possession a letter written to him by our mother six years prior to her death that supported his and the members of Russell Kennedy’s interpretation of my mother’s will. Ian Bult stated there were other reasons apart from financial reasons as to why he would not release all of the capital and all of the interest from my share of the estate to me. When requested by the family and the family member executor for evidence Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy stated the letter was privileged and withheld it from the family. After six years the letter has finally been revealed to the family by Paul Gleeson of Russell Kennedy because Ian Bult had retired and Paul Gleeson was appointed as the new trustee.
As there were no other reasons stated by my mother in the contents of the letter, and Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy have specified the letter as the evidence they hold for the interpretation of my mother’s will, one has to conclude that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy lied about or misconstrued its contents to the children of my mother and used that lie or misconstruction to bully and intimidate the family member executor not to join in the probate of the will. My mother specifically stated to Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy in her letter that they as lawyers act in conjunction with her daughter, my youngest sister, as none of her children had experience in wills or taxation law and that she understood that it can be a mine field.
Instead Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy set up a dispute with my sister (the family nominated executor) that was based upon a lie or a misconstruction created by them which they knew could not be verified. My sister refused to agree with their fabrication but Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy then intimidated a grieving daughter with a fully loaded commitment to her own family into a position of submission, a position that bought about a nervous breakdown that prevented her from carrying out her role as executor of my mother`s estate. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy in fact betrayed the trust bestowed upon them as lawyers by my mother and broke her will. The result was catastrophic for the internal family relationships and severely eroded the value of the estate available for the beneficiaries to the amount of at least $180,000 in excess fees and financial waste.
I initially questioned the Law Institute of Victoria and The Legal Services Commissioner about the right of the members of Russell Kennedy to withhold the crucial letter and was informed that they were acting within the law. I then raised this matter with both the state and federal Attorney Generals without success. I asked the Attorney Generals what gave a lawyer the right to impose his will and interpretation of my mother’s wishes over that of all of her children without providing the evidence he held. Again I was met with explanations that did not extract the evidence.

I wrote a submission to the Queensland Law Reform Commission on Australian Uniform Ascendancy Laws suggesting a need to totally overhaul our process regarding inheritance laws.
I suggested:
• the power imbalance between a lawyer, executor and the family of the deceased needed to be changed so as to place the family in a dominant position.
• That the implementation of quality standards for lawyers who are acting as executors as was the case of Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy was an essential requirement to prevent the plundering of family inheritance by lawyers.
• the need for compulsory training of lawyers who are acting as executors in matters of mediation and alternative dispute resolution.
• a cheaper and simpler way of sorting out inheritance matters with the use of non-lawyer run tribunals.

After writing so much I then wrote the book “Lawyers or Grave Robbers?” which poses the question. Are lawyers who act as executors acting as lawyers or are they just grave robbing? Hence the origin of this web site.
I then returned to The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and informed her of the inheritance rights, family rights and human rights abuses that my mother’s family had endured through the actions of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult.
I was informed that lawyers who act as executors are not bound by the Victorian Legal Professional Act 2004, and those lawyers in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights.
This is despite the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult perpetuating the following inheritance rights family rights abuses upon me, my own family and my mother’s family.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Section 8:Recognition and equality before the law.

(1) Every person has the right to recognition as a person before the law.
(2) Every person has the right to enjoy his or her human rights without discrimination.
(3) Every person is equal before the law and is entitled to the equal protection of the law without discrimination and has the right to equal and effective protection against discrimination.
(4) Measures taken for the purpose of assisting or advancing persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination do not constitute discrimination.

In this case Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy discriminated against my mother`s children by not sharing the information they had with them, including her nominated family representative. Their sentiment goes as follows: I am a lawyer thus I have a right that empowers me over you because of my position as a lawyer.
In our families case, Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy disagreed with the family and were permitted to further empower themselves over the family and break the contract of trust imparted to them with our late mother through her will by bullying and intimidating the family member executor to not participate in probate whilst perpetuating a lie or a misconstruction, thus discriminating against the whole of the family. Discrimination occurs when one group in the culture is far more powerful than the group it exploits, as the whites in Africa exploited and discriminated against the blacks. Discrimination and empowerment of a privileged cartel are the twin sisters of racism.
It is universally knowledge that inheritance inequity is one of the main drivers of discrimination between family members which leads to the destruction of extended family networks. This process impedes upon those families development in Australia, and will impact upon migrant families more severely than the established population due to their paucity in extended family networks who are supportive at times of death in their home nations but have often been replaced by lawyers in Australia.
Because the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is aware of this discrimination against a less powerful group within Victoria that are prone to discrimination by lawyers like Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy who act as executors or deal in deceased estates matters the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is bound to act upon the problem so as these human rights abuses stop.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 13: Privacy and reputation

A person has the right not to have his or her —
(a) privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with; and
(b) reputation unlawfully attacked.

Reputation is founded upon inter family relationships, the way inheritance is distributed between a parent and child will go to the core of an individual’s reputation. Reputation is affected both internally and externally. Our reputation is how we see ourselves and how others see us; our reputation is formed through an accumulation of our historical actions. How children’s reputations are created begins with their relationships within their families. Within my own mother`s family through its understanding of its relationships, made a decision on how our mother`s will should be interpreted, based upon their recognition of each and every bodies understanding of their reputation and that of our family. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy after being told how their actions would adversely impact upon that reputation of the family and of the individuals who make up the family, still chose to ignore the requests from all members of my mother`s family or provide the evidence that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy stated they had to support their actions. Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy did not allow for the family to interpret the information or to discuss an equitable resolution. Instead Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy recommended the removal of the family member executor, thus breaking the contract of the will.
The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner`s failure to act on his knowledge of the above events unlawfully supports an attack on my own reputation and that of our family.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 15: Freedom of expression

(1) Every person has the right to hold an opinion without interference.
(2) Every person has the right to freedom of expression which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, whether within or outside Victoria and whether—
(a) orally; or
(b) in writing; or
(c) in print; or
(d) by way of art; or
(e) in another medium chosen by him or her.
(3) Special duties and responsibilities are attached to the right of freedom of expression and the right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary—
(a) to respect the rights and reputation of other persons; or
(b) for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality.

The relevant section is “the right to hold an opinion without interference”. To hold an opinion requires information in order to substantiate ones position. The ability to have an opinion and how the opinion is formed begins before birth and transcends to death. Opinions are formed in the beginning through inter family interaction. So to hold an opinion about a family matter goes to the core of one’s development.
The members of the law firm Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult have denied a family, information that was openly assessable when my mother was alive, to allow her children to form an opinion of what her last wishes were. The actions of the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult have denied my family to hold an opinion about one of the closest elements that families have, the transfer of inheritance from one generation to the next; the transfer of inheritance incorporates the life time history of a family unit. It displays the trust between parent and child and the trust between the children and that parent. When those trusts are interfered with by an outside member of the family without reasonable explanation and the equality of inheritance distribution is changed, the fine balance of trust can be shattered, as is the case with my mother`s family.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 17: Protection of families and children

(1) Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State.
(2) Every child has the right, without discrimination, to such protection as is in his or her best interests and is needed by him or her by reason of being a child.
Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State [refer to the above points under sections 8, 13 and 15].
Considering the following points of fact:
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult failed to show evidence of their position when asked.
• After six years with a change of trustees from Ian Bult to Paul Gleeson, the members of Russell Kennedy finally produced the evidence that should have been forthcoming when my sister, the family nominated executor requested it.
• This evidence proves that Ian Bult lied to or deceived the children of their dead mother about her final wishes and was supported by the law firm Russell Kennedy.
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult bullied and intimidated the family member executor to resign based upon the lie.
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult were told by all members of the family, one a medical practitioner and the other a trained psychologist that their actions would damage the family and the value of the inheritance at their own financial gain.
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult broke the fiduciary trust bestowed upon them by my mother when they misconstrued important information to my sister and my mother`s children regarding their mother`s wishes and refused to work in conjunction with my sister and my mother`s children as my mother had requested of them in the letter..
• By doing so the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult broke contract of the will.
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult destroyed the interpersonal relations between my mother’s children.
• The members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult through poor administration and unnecessary legal fees denied my mother’s children at least $180,000 in the value of their inheritance.

This is a true example of an inheritance rights abuse by an Australian lawyer Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy. It is also a family rights abuse and a human rights abuse by an Australian lawyer Ian Bult and the members of law firm Russell Kennedy.
The lawyer Ian Bult who assumed the role of executor from the members of Russell Kennedy has not provided any proof that he has taken part in any up to date training in conflict resolution.
An employee of the law firm Russell Kennedy, Daniel Kelliher openly admitted during a telephone conversation that as lawyers they did not work with quality standards when dealing with deceased estates.
The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner has not implemented mandatory training for lawyers who act as executors or implemented mandatory standards by which they operate incorporating section 17 of The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Due to the fact that the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is aware of many instances within Victoria involving the legal profession and the human rights abuses of families by them when dealing with deceased estates and has not acted to incorporate section 17 of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights to guide their activities, this lack of action is itself an abuse of Victorians Human Rights, particularly when you consider the amount of money that is currently available for exploitation by unaccountable self-serving lawyers.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 19: Cultural rights

(1) All persons with a particular cultural, religious, racial or linguistic background must not be denied the right, in community with other persons of that background, to enjoy his or her culture, to declare and practise his or her religion and to use his or her language.
(2) Aboriginal persons hold distinct cultural rights and must not be denied the right, with other members of their community—
(a) to enjoy their identity and culture; and
(b) to maintain and use their language; and
(c) to maintain their kinship ties; and
(d) to maintain their distinctive spiritual, material and economic relationship with the land and waters and other resources with which they have a connection under traditional laws and customs.

The relevant section is ‘cultural rights to maintain their kinship ties’. The Charter states that this section is only applicable to Aboriginal people. I suggest that from an ethical perspective the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner should act on behalf of every ethnicity in our multicultural society and are bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights in my case as with many migrant Victorians who although not aboriginal, understand the imperative of kinship, each family arriving in Australia being limited in kin to their immediate family. Destruction of those kinships through adversarial legal tactics that only benefit self-serving unaccountable lawyers when dealing with deceased estates is an abuse of those families’ kinship rights.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 20: Property rights.

A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law.

Again I state that The Victorian legal Services Commissioner is bound to act in my case as with many other Victorians who are introduced to an expensive, often unaccountable and lengthy legal process when encountering a deceased estate, a process that directs large amount of property away from the people who are entitled to it and into the hands of a powerful and select group within our state.
The Victorian Charter of Human Rights. 24: Fair hearing
A person charged with a criminal offence or a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing.

What fairer hearing than to have all of one`s children decide the destiny of your family Instead of lawyers such as the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult who have broken the trust bestowed upon them by lying to the children of their dead mother about her final wishes.
The members of Russell Kennedy are:
The persons named as executors named In the Supreme Court of Victoria Probate Jurisdiction, in the will of Elizabeth Moira Hannigan are:
Ian Fraser Bult of Russell Kennedy named as executor with leave being reserved to (my sister) and the following members of Russell Kennedy. Michael Douglas Main, Bruce Wayne Kent, John Mathew James Corcoran, Michael William Gorton, Ross Fraser Hodges, Paul Gerard Gleeson, Wai Hwoon Low, Damian Thomas Neylon, Victor Anthony Harcourt, Robert Anthony Ewing, Colin Robert Taylor, Andrew James Sherman, Leslie Andrew Fox, Andrew Bruce Van Ingen, Julie Callea-Smyth, Leonard Adrian Warren, Sebastian John Michael Saccuzzo, Rohan David Harris and Rosemary Barbara South Gate.

The evidence

.
My response to Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 26 02 2012
Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after my response. Dated 20 02 2012

My response to Letter received from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. Dated 25 01 2012.

Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 25 01 2012
Response from the Victorian Attorney General to Our Society must protect the wishes of the dead.
Dated 14 12 2011

Our government must protect the wishes of the dead Part one and two, an open letter to every member of the Victorian Parliament. Dated 01 04 2011
Letter received from The Victorian Ombudsman after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and the members of the law firm Russell Kennedy lied to or misconstrued important information to the children of my dead mother about her wishes. Dated 19 10 11
Submission to the Victorian Governments review on The Victorian Charter of Human Rights concerning lawyers in private practice not been bound by this charter. Dated 05 05 2011
Link: http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_...

Working Families, Denied Natural Justice is an open letter that responds to the legal services commissioner`s statement that lawyers in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and is available on the following link . Dated 16 05 2010
2http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_review/submissions/09_Attach_A_23.5.2011_.pdf

Letter from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner stating that lawyers who are in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Dated 14 January 2011

Letter from The Victorian Ombudsman in response to a request for his copy of a report he carried out on The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. Dated 23 02 2010

Letter to the Victorian Ombudsman requesting a copy of his report on the legal services commissioner. Dated 16 02 2010.

Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner 30 03 2012

Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner 30 03 2012

THE VICTORIAN LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

My response to Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 29 01 2012

Diarmuid Hannigan

236 Smith Street

Collingwood. Victoria 3066

03 94195044

charada@mira,net

Sunday26th February 2012

To Mr Michael McGarvie Your reference No LSC /09/2054

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner

Dear Michael

In response to your letter 20th February 2012

Re: Complaint against Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother`s death and Arthur Bolkas who was employed by Russell Kennedy.

The Members of Russell Kennedy at the time of my mother`s death as specified in the probate documents submitted to the supreme court of Victoria were: Ian Fraser Bult, Michael Douglas Main, Bruce Wayne Kent, John Mathew James Corcoran, Michael William Gorton, Ross Fraser Hodges, Paul Gerard Gleeson, Wai Hwoon Low, Damian Thomas Neylon, Victor Anthony Harcourt, Robert Anthony Ewing, Colin Robert Taylor, Andrew James Sherman, Leslie Andrew Fox, Andrew Bruce Van Ingen, Julie Callea-Smyth, Leonard Adrian Warren, Michael John Redfern, Sebastian John Michael Saccuzzo, Rohan David Harris and Rosemary Barbara South Gate.

Please note my complaint is against both the members of Russell Kennedy and also Arthur Bolkas who was employed by Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult not just Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy.

You have stated that The Legal Services Commissioner can only investigate individual lawyers not law firms. So I have given you the names of the individual lawyers. I apologise for my inadvertent error.

In my letter to you dated 01 01 2012 pg 4 and 5 I indicate to you where Ian Bult, the members of Russell Kennedy and Arthur Bolkas have a problem with regards to your office and breaching of the Legal Professional Act of 2004.

It appears as if we have a failure in communication mainly because your office has not as yet provided the facility of a face to face meeting and all communication has been carried out in writing.

I will attempt to re communicate so as you may be able to understand where the problems lie.

Part one.

A meeting was held between Ian Bult, my sister , her husband , my other sister, her husband and my brother also attended by Arthur Bolkas an employee of Russell Kennedy at the offices of Russell Kennedy to discuss my share of the estate.
At that time my sister was the family nominated executor.
At that time the members of Russell Kennedy were the other possible nominated executors.
At that time Ian Bult was representing the nominated executors of Russell Kennedy and Arthur Bolkas the employee of Russell Kennedy was representing all of the executors of the will including my sister and also the estate.
An issue occurred when Ian Bult referred to the contents contained within a letter my mother had written to him whilst he was my mother’s lawyer which set him against the family. He stated that there were other reasons as to why he could not treat my inheritance in the same way as my brothers and sisters because of the information contained in the letter. When the letter finally came to light (The new evidence) it clearly shows that the only reason I should be treated differently pertained to my death, whereby my share of the estate was to go to my children. Since I am not dead this means that Ian Bult`s behaviour raises issues of breach of duty and misrepresentation.

Arthur Bolkas as Ian Bult’s, the members of Russell Kennedy and my sister the other executor`s legal representative should have alerted all of the executors to the issues of breach of duty and misrepresentation, at that point in time since they were all of his clients. He did not notify Grainne Darrer of the issues of breach of duty, deceit, misrepresentation, and false and misleading conduct made by Ian Bult.

Arthus Bolkas is an individual lawyer who was acting as a lawyer and was employed by the law firm Russell Kennedy. This means that the partners of Russell Kennedy are vicariously liable for Arthur Bolkas’s failure to notify his other client my sister of Ian Bult`s of breach of duty, and misrepresentation. Since the partners of Russell Kennedy were all named as executors to my mother’s will their failure to ensure that one of their employees acted within the guidelines of the legal professional act of 2004 is a breach of their fiduciary duty to my mother and to her estate, in other words her family.

My sister requested a copy of the letter that Ian Bult maintained he had in his possession but was refused on the grounds of legal client privilege. I gather that if she had taken up her position as executor after the granting of probate Ian Bult would have been obligated to provide her with a copy of the letter. This means that although she was the family nominated executor who had stepped into the shoes of my mother she was denied access to the information by the other executor on the grounds that she had not yet achieved the position of executor. Following that argument it would also mean that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy had also not achieved the position of executor and were therefore not executors. If they were not executors at that time because, my sister was not an executor then they must have been lawyers.
The letter that my sister requested from Ian Bult was in fact not privileged because when Paul Gleeson became the new trustee he released the letter or did he just make another error. The error of releasing privileged information without authority from the court.

Part 2

You state: “that you do not agree that the evidence proves what you suggest.”

Please can you state the reasons as to why you do not agree that the evidence and the facts I have provided do not prove:

that Ian Bult`s behaviour created issues of breach of duty and misrepresentation.
that Arthur Bolkas did not investigate the issues of breach of duty and misrepresentation on behalf of his other clients including my sister the family nominaed executor. Particularly when Arthur Bolkas was fully aware of the damage an unequal distribution of inheritance would do to the fabric of my mother’s estate and to the relationships between her children. I do not know if Arthur Bolkas had access to the letter but since it became an important issue in determining the direction of the estate as the lawyer acting in the interests of the estate I would have thought that if he were competent in his duties as a lawyer to the estate he would have at least read the letter. Since I am not privy to Russell Kennedy`s file I do not know what Arthur Bolkas did or did not do and that is the reason we have investigators as per your office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner so as we can discover whether or not lawyers are doing their jobs properly.
that Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy made a disastrous mistake in allowing Ian Bult to hide an important piece of information that would have helped to determine my mother’s wishes from her children under the pretext of legal client privilege, when in fact it was not privileged information.
Part 3

You have failed to address and explain the following as communicated to you in my letter of 29 01 2012 and as a member of the public I would appreciate a professionally composed response that addresses the issue of the evidence not the issue of law firms or lawyers who are acting as executors are not bound by the legal professional act. This question asks you why you have rejected the evidence.

In response to your letter of 25 01 2012. You state.

“In this case, I note that you have provided me with a copy of your late mother’s letter to Mr Bult dated 30 October 1998. Whilst the letter itself is a document that I have not previously had an opportunity to consider, the contents of same do not provide me with any new information which would allow me to re-open the complaint.”

Could you please explain to me why the contents of the letter which prove Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy engaged in issues of breach of duty and misrepresentation to the children of the deceased including my mother’s nominated executor and therefore acted in a dishonest manner and breached their fiduciary duty is insufficient reason for you to investigate my complaint in a transparent and thorough manner?

I look forward to you reply.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan

Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 25 01 2012

THE VICTORIAN LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

Your ref: 9/330 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000
GPO Box 492 Melbourne Vic 3001 DX 185 Melbourne
Our ref: LSC/09/2054 t 1300 796 344 (local call) t 03 9679 8001 f 03 9679 8101
Russell Daily www.lsc.vic.gov.au ABN 66 489 344 310
20 February 2012 Private and Confidential

Mr Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street COLLINGWOOD VIC 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan
Complaint about Mr Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy
Thank you for your letter dated 29 January 2012, the contents of which are noted.
Under the Legal Profession Act 2004, I can only investigate individual lawyers, not law firms.
This matter has been the subject of review already and having been dealt with, the issues cannot be debated any further and the complaint cannot be reopened. I do not agree that the evidence proves what you suggest.
As I mentioned in my letter of 25 January 2012, if you are not satisfied with this decision, you are entitled to take the issue up further with the Victorian Ombudsman. This office will cooperate with Ombudsman Victoria but cannot assist you further. Any further material from you may not be specifically responded to by this office.
Yours’ sincerely

Delegate of the -
Legal Services Commissioner

My response to Letter received from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner 25 01 2012.

Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044
charada@mira,net
Sunday 29th January 2012

To Mr Michael McGarvie Your reference No LSC /09/2054
The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner

Dear Michael

Re: Complaint against Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy. Please note my complaint is against both Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult not Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy. Your error in this statement clearly shows that you have not considered the matter of the new evidence in light of the actions of the law firm Russell Kennedy and have missed the implications of this new evidence in relation to the law firm Russell Kennedy`s actions in this matter.
In response to your letter of 25 01 2012. You state.
“In this case, I note that you have provided me with a copy of your late mother’s letter to Mr Bult dated 30 October 1998. Whilst the letter itself is a document that I have not previously had an opportunity to consider, the contents of same do not provide me with any new information which would allow me to re-open the complaint.”
Could you please explain to me why the contents of the letter which prove Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of the deceased including my mother’s nominated executor and therefore acted in a dishonest manner and breached their fiduciary duty is insufficient reason for you to investigate my complaint in a transparent and thorough manner.
Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan

Letter received from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and the members Russell Kennedy misconstrued important information or lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 25 01 2012

THE VICTORIAN LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

Your ref: 9/330 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000
GPO Box 492 Melbourne Vic 3001 DX 185 Melbourne
Our ref: LSC/09/2054 t 1300 796 344 (local call) t 03 9679 8001 f 03 9679 8101
Russell Daily www.Isc.vic.gov.au ABN 66 489 344 310
25 January 2012
Private and Confidential

Mr Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street COLLINGWOOD VIC 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan
Complaint about Mr Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy
Thank you for your letter dated 1 January 2012, along with annexures. I have now had an opportunity to consider its contents. You have sought to provide me with new evidence in relation to the above complaint and have asked that the file be reviewed on the basis of this.
As stated in my letter to you dated 14 January 2010, the Legal Profession Act 2004 does not provide for any review of my decision. As a result, in most cases, once I have made a decision on a complaint, it is final. The exception is where I have acted beyond my powers or failed to meet a requirement, or new evidence is brought to my attention.
In this case, I note that you have provided me with a copy of your late mother’s letter to Mr Bult dated 30 October 1998. Whilst the letter itself is a document that I have not previously had an opportunity to consider, the contents of same do not provide me with any new information which would allow me to re-open the complaint.
If you believe that Mr Bult and Russell Kennedy have engaged in criminal activity, I would suggest that you contact Victoria Police, as I am unable to deal with such matters.
If you are not satisfied with any aspect of our investigation into your complaint and the decision you are entitled to take the issue up further with the Victorian Ombudsman. The office of the Ombudsman can be contacted in the following way:
Ombudsman Victoria
Level 9, 459 Collins Street (North Tower) Melbourne Victoria 3000
Telephone 03 9613 6222
Toll Free 1800 806 314 (regional only)
Fax 03 9614 0246
Email ombudviclaDombudsman.vic.gov.au
Website www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au

Legal Services Commissioner

Response from the Victorian Attorney General to Our Society must protect the wishes of the dead.
Dated 14 12 2011

Mr Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street COLLINGWOOD VIC 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan

Legal practitioners acting as executors

I am writing in relation to your letter to Victorian Members of Parliament regarding your concerns about legal practitioners acting as executors of deceased estates. A number of Members of Parliament have also referred your letter to me for consideration.

You have raised a number of issues in your correspondence about the conduct of legal practitioners and the operation of the bodies that regulate the legal profession. From the details you have provided, I appreciate that this has been a difficult matter for you and has had a lasting impact on your family. However, it would not be appropriate for me to intervene in the particular circumstances of your complaint, which has been considered and reviewed by the Legal Services Commissioner (the Commissioner) and the Ombudsman, both independent statutory bodies.

I do note, however, that your letter suggests that you now have further information that goes to your complaint of professional misconduct by the legal practitioner executor of your mother’s estate. It appears that you have provided this new information to the Ombudsman but may not have raised it with the Commissioner. The Commissioner has a discretion to consider a complaint made outside of the legislative six year time limit. In the case of new evidence, it is my understanding that any new information would need to be compelling and have not been considered in any previous investigation.

I would also like to respond to some more general issues raised in your letter. You are concerned that a legal practitioner who is acting in the role of executor is not bound by the Legal Profession Act 2004. This is because the legislation makes a distinction between a legal practitioner who is doing legal work and a legal practitioner who is carrying out the role of an executor under a will.

An executor’s role is to carry out the terms of the will. Through the probate and administration process, executors, whether legal practitioners or not, are supervised by the Supreme Court. Where an executor engages a legal practitioner to assist with the administration of an estate, the legal practitioner’s main responsibilities are to the executor whose instructions he or she must follow
provided they are in accordance with the will. Where a legal practitioner has been appointed as an executor, he or she may also do the legal work associated with administration.

Legal practitioners are regulated by the Legal Profession Act in relation to their legal work and their professional conduct more generally. Under the Act, the Commissioner is able to investigate the conduct of legal practitioner executors where the conduct relates to their legal work. Conduct that may constitute unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct includes charging excessive costs or contravening professional conduct rules. The Commissioner can also investigate serious misconduct that occurs outside of legal practice that would justify a finding that the practitioner is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice or that would be reasonably regarded as disgraceful or dishonorable to the profession. Further, beneficiaries under a will can complain to the Commissioner about legal costs (not exceeding $25,000) charged for legal services relating to the will.

The Commissioner also has a mandated role to educate the legal profession about issues of concern to the profession and to consumers of legal services, and to educate the community about legal issues and the rights and obligations that flow from the client-practitioner relationship. I understand that over the past 12 months, the Commissioner has conducted a number of seminars and workshops with the profession regarding client and practitioner problems in the area of succession law. In that same time, the Law Institute of Victoria, the peak professional association for solicitors in Victoria, has also taken active steps to educate the profession about acting as an executor and charging commission.

You have also made a number of suggestions for ensuring greater `quality control’ of legal practitioners acting as executors.

In relation to legal profession regulation, the Government has decided to implement the Legal Profession National Law. The National Law will regulate the profession across participating jurisdictions and will replace existing State and Territory legislation, including the Legal Profession Act in Victoria. The National Law will establish the National Legal Services Board and National Legal Services Commissioner (National Commissioner) and is expected to commence in 2013. The National Law will continue to allow complaints to be made to the State and Territory representatives of the National Commissioner about unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct. State and Territory representatives of the National Commissioner will also be empowered to deal with broader consumer matters and service disputes that do not warrant disciplinary attention.

In relation to succession law reform, the Government is currently considering the recommendations arising out of the National Succession Laws Project, sponsored by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, which has reviewed laws across Australia relating to wills, family provision, intestacy and the administration of deceased estates. While the Government is currently focused on implementing the commitments it made as part of the 2010 State election, consideration will be given to including Victoria’s succession laws as part of the Government’s future reform program. Your comments and experiences are therefore appreciated and will be considered as part of any future reform of succession laws in Victoria.
Yours, sincerely
ROBERT CLARK MP Attorney-General

Our government must protect the wishes of the dead Part one and two, an open letter to every member of the Victorian Parliament. Dated 01 04 2011
OUR GOVERNMENT MUST PROTECT THE WISHES OF THE DEAD (Part two)

Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044
charada@mira,net
Tuesday 1st April 2011

Dear Member

Thank you for receiving my letter headed “Our society must protect the wishes of the dead”.

I am forwarding you a copy of The Victorian Ombudsman`s response to concerns I raised with him concerning the inaction of The Legal Services Commissioner to deal with complaints I have raised regarding the way Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult have managed my late mothers estate.

In my response to the Ombudsman I included new evidence. A letter from my mother to Ian Bult the lawyer executor which proves he lied to my dead mothers children about her wishes. This letter was denied to my mother’s family by Ian Bult her former solicitor and the executor on the grounds of legal client privilege.

Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied about the contents of the letter to my sister the family member executor and to her other children. This lie resulted in Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy getting full control of the estate.
The consequences of this dishonest action by Ian Bult and Russel Kennedy were financially and emotionally disastrous for the beneficiaries of the estate, a total of 14 innocent Victorians comprising of three independent families.

In my response to the Victorian Ombudsman I included a copy of the letter and a detailed document based submission showing where Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult had lied in writing on at least three occasions. I also included three statutory declarations from three of the beneficiaries who had met directly with Ian Bult and representatives of Russell Kennedy showing that they had been lied to regarding the contents of the letter.

The Ombudsman`s response is based upon an investigation into my original correspondence with his office which did not include the new evidence, since I had not come by it.

The response by the Ombudsman`s office does not take into consideration the new evidence and the fact that if The Legal Services Commissioner had the jurisdiction to investigate lawyers who act as executors, as lawyers he would have discovered the lie conceived by Ian Bult and concealed to my mother’s children by Russell Kennedy.

In my response to The Victorian Ombudsman I requested that his office approach The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner on my behalf and based upon the new evidence request his office to re- investigate my complaint against Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy.

When considering the context of the Victorian Ombudsman`s reply and the suggestion by the Ombudsman that I should contact a lawyer and pursue the matter through the Supreme Court it appears as if he has failed to consider this request.

The failure by The Victorian Ombudsman to acknowledge this request is a matter for concern. Concern due to the weight of evidence placed in front of the Victorian Ombudsman and concern due to the gravity of the situation, as is explained in my previous letter (Our society must protect the wishes of the dead). The option put forward by the Victorian Ombudsman to utilise the Supreme Court is an entirely different form of dealing with the matter instead of a proper investigation by the regulator.

If the matter were dealt with by the Supreme Court it would be conducted within the adversarial legal system. Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult would defend the fact that they had behaved in a dishonest manner and with the use of legal skulduggery and their superior resources would exhaust their opponent’s resources. In other words the truth and my dead mother’s wishes would be abandoned in a battle between a legal philistine (Russell Kennedy) and me. It would in fact be an exercise in futility bordering upon madness.

If the matter were investigated by the Legal Services Commissioner and the investigation was carried out in an open and transparent manner with all parties being privy to the information then Russell Kennedy would have to explain their support of the lie and the executor Ian Bult would have to explain why he lied.

The investigation by the Legal Services Commissioner from the public perspective is in the interests of consumers of legal services whereas the Supreme Court alternative is, grossly and unfairly in favour of the lawyers.

Considering the serious issues at stake for our community development and it`s need to have ultimate trust in the legal profession when dealing with succession law, an investigative approach to these types of problems, would be more favourable in enhancing, positive community development. An investigative approach would identify the reasons for the dishonest behaviour by Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy. By identifying the cause of the behaviour the regulator would then be able to work with the legal profession so as to build systems that would prevent this type of behaviour from reoccurring. These actions by the Victorian legal Services Commissioner would lead to an improvement of services provided by lawyers to the community when dealing with inheritance and would reduce the chances of the legal profession being bought into disrepute by the dishonest actions of some lawyers.

As a person who with just cause has every right to be cynical when it comes to matters pertaining to our legal industry. I would suggest that the investigative process of complaints relating to inheritance matters regarding lawyers is influenced by the immense revenue streams that emanate from inheritance for the legal profession.

Approximately 50,000 people die each year in Victoria with an average estate worth $500,000, approximately $25 billion per annum.
• The legal profession obtains about 20% of its revenue stream from this source, between one and two billion dollars per year within the state of Victoria.
• With the minimum cost of probating an estate being about $10,000 and costs ranging upwards of $100,000 for contested estates that do not go to trial. A full trial starting at $200,000 to any bodies guess.
I`d have at a guess that the revenue stream to the legal profession from succession law in the state of Victoria would be in the region of $1.5 billion per annum.

If this segment of the industry were to be reformed so as to service the needs of Victorian families by incorporating:
1. Legislation which prevented lawyers who are appointed as executors from empowering themselves over families.
2. Legislation ensuring that lawyers who are appointed as executors are trained in this area of law and are required to adhere to a set of standards whilst dealing with inheritance matters.
3. Legislation that adopted a European truth seeking system for the resolution of inheritance disputes utilising commissioners rather than our current adversarial system that utilises Supreme Court judges.

I would assume the revenue stream to the legal profession if these and other reforms were implemented this cost of $1.5 billion to the citizens of Victoria could be reduced by $1 billion dollars per annum.
Ref Annett Marfording Civil litigation in New South Wales Empirical and Analytical Comparison with Germany

This change would result in:
1. The savings thus being transferred from lawyers back to the rightful owners, the friends and family of the deceased.
2. Families being able to resolve their inheritance issues at a far lower cost in a shorter time and utilising facts to determine the truth, which would reduce the psychological damage to family members and enhance family cohesion which in turn develops community cohesion. I would estimate that for each dollar the legal profession wastes of a families inheritance by furthering disputes which destroys family cohesion, creates a further cost in collateral damage of four times its value to the individual family members, in loss of wages, loss of opportunity and the loss gained from working together as a cohesive family unit in our modern day society.

The $1 billion of pain to the legal profession would be magnified to a fivefold gain for our families and ultimately our community. The cumulative cost to our state when measured over a ten year period is by no means trivial and would sit between $50 to $100 billion dollars, an average of somewhere between $25,000 and $50,000 per family unit.
The issues I have raised with the Victorian Ombudsman and the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner are very important for the development of our country and identify the importance in recognising the family as the fundamental structural component for the evolvement of our society.

They also identify the importance of having a positive relationship between families and the legal profession, the expectation of families being that they can and should be able to have ultimate trust in the legal profession. Lawyers on the other hand must participate in the relationship by behaving honestly and in a transparent manner. The regulators of the profession must ensure they do behave, especially when they are anointed to a position fiduciary trust, as is a lawyer who becomes an executor of a deceased person’s estate. When these trusts are eroded by dishonest actions of the legal profession and the regulator does not intervene, one can hardly be surprised that the legal profession is bought into disrepute in the eyes of the community. There relevance trust to the structure of the relationship between the citizens of the state and the legal profession who are the administrators of the rule of law is fundamental.
The issues also identify the critical nature of ensuring that the regulators of the legal profession maintain this special relationship between the citizens of the state and the legal profession in order that it is not bought into disrepute and the rule of law is not damaged.

These points are basic and essential creeds but unfortunately the Australian Legal Profession have become so entrenched and powerful that their influence is capable of not only stunting the development of our nation through its plunder of grieving families but also it prohibits the regulators who have been set up by democratically elected governments from working in the best interests of Australian families.

It beggars belief that whilst the rest of Australia was being reformed by the legal profession that they themselves avoided it and their services have never been scrutinised. The inheritance industry is such an obvious and simple one to reform and yet it`s reformation is being resisted by the legal profession. The only tangible reason for the delay must be the legal profession`s own self-interest, at the expense of our nations development. For a contemporary democratic state to even consider this possibility of favouring one powerful group`s interests at the expense of national development is absurd and yet nothing has been or is been done to rectify a real situation that has and will continue to damage our nation and the families who make us a nation.

I again urge you to pursue the matters I have raised and work hard in this area so as to give Victorian Families a fair go by confronting the self-interest of a lawyer dominated status quo that have been able to remain unaccountable to the consumers of their services with regards to inheritance law.

If you require any further information to assist in developing these issues please contact me as I will be only too happy to assist.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan.

OUR GOVERNMENT MUST PROTECT THE WISHES OF THE DEAD (Part one)

Dear Member.
I write to you regarding a situation I have encountered pertaining to the way Russell Kennedy, a large, well respected and influential law firm managed my late mother`s estate. The situation is indicative of the failure by the legal profession to protect the Inheritance rights, family rights and human rights of family members in its administration of these estates and is impacting in a negative and destructive manner upon many Australian citizens. The experience my family, along with many other families have endured is an erosion of a fundamental principal of Australian Society.
The Victorian Charter of Human Rights article 17 states.
17 Protection of families and children
(1) Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State.

The passing of inheritance from generation to generation is one of the actions overseen by government through various acts of parliament. Our society recognises the importance of this process and relies upon it to maintain family cohesion and development. Our legal profession and other professions such as professional trustees are available to assist families through this transition. These professions by the very nature of what they do, are highly regarded by our community and when acting for individuals in a fiduciary role as an executor are bestowed with the highest level of trust a person can give, because the person giving that trust knows they will be dead when the trust is enacted.
It is essential that our wider community regards our legal profession with respect and has faith in the people who work within it for the trust to work and for our society, guided by the rule of law, to function. If at any time individuals within this profession break this trust they also break the trust their profession has with the community, therefore bringing the profession into disrepute.
One of the main tenants of government is to appoint regulators in key positions to ensure that dishonest behaviour, empowerment and financial exploitation by individuals and organisations over others are prevented. If this does not occur we see the erosion of the principals of the rule of law. One such regulator is the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner whose job it is to regulate the behaviour of Victorian lawyers as defined by The Legal Professional Act 2004.
The Legal Services Commissioner has stated in response to my complaint that:
• He does not have the power to investigate complaints against lawyers who are acting as executors as they are executors and not lawyers.
• Lawyers who are in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights.
The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner in his round table discussion on ascendency laws stated he had received over 1000 complaints about lawyers in this area of law over a three year period.
Just recently State Trustees had a problem with one of its own employees who misappropriated funds of $175,000 from 33 estates over a three year period. State Trustees is a government owned company and is the largest organisation in Victoria that administers deceased estates, who should have had systems in place to prevent such systemic abuse of the dead.
In my own family`s situation we encountered a lawyer Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy who were assisted by Russell Kennedy`s resident wills and probate specialist Arthur Bolkas. Problems occurred from the outset in relation to communication. The lawyer Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy disagreed with the family and the family member executor on the interpretation of the will. Ian Bult stated he had in his possession a letter written to him by our mother six years prior to her death that supported his and Russell Kennedy’s interpretation of my mother’s will. When requested by the family and the family member executor for evidence he stated the letter was privileged and withheld it from the family. After six years the letter has finally been revealed to the family by Russell Kennedy. The contents of the letter prove that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied about its contents to the children of my mother and used that lie to persuade the family member executor not to join in the probate of the will. They in fact betrayed the trust bestowed upon them by my mother and broke her will. The result was catastrophic for the internal family relationships and severely eroded the value of the estate available for the beneficiaries to the amount of at least $220,000 in excess fees and financial waste.
Despite appealing to the Ethics Committee, the Law Institute of Victoria, the Legal Services Ombudsman. the Legal Services Commissioner, the State and Federal Attorney Generals and the Victorian Ombudsman about the concerns the whole family had regarding Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy’s actions, no Investigations were carried out.
It was obvious to even the simplest minded person that there was a serious problem. When all four children of a deceased parent including the family nominated executor disagree with an interpretation placed upon their own mother`s will by a stranger who will not divulge his source, as was the case with Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult the red flags should have gone up and the alarm bells should have rung loud enough for the regulator to act. If the regulator had investigated the concerns put to them by the children of the deceased at the outset the dishonest behaviour of Ian Bult, Russell Kennedy and Arthur Bolkas would have been discovered and my mother’s family would have avoided the ensuing train wreck.
When it is found that a well-respected and prestigious law firm such as Russell Kennedy have failed to implement management systems that prevent senior partners and other members of the firm from behaving dishonestly when they appoint them as their representative executor of a deceased estate, then the firm has been negligent in their duty of care to; their clients and to the legal profession as a whole.
When a senior partner such as Ian Bult acting as a fiduciary is found to be lying to the children of their deceased mother in regards to her will, it not only brings the individual into disrepute, but the firm Russell Kennedy and the legal profession as a whole.
The regulators of the legal profession including the Attorney Generals are also brought into disrepute when they do not act, as the wider community expects our government to protect its fundamental values and principles.
One very basic principal is: Do not lie to the children of their deceased mother about her wishes.
The lie by Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy exposes a serious flaw within our laws as interpreted by the Legal Services Commissioner and the Law Institute of Victoria, in that lawyers who act as executors are not bound by the Legal Professional Act of 2004 because they are executors. This interpretation may contravene the Trade Practices Act and the Legal Services Commission through his interpretation of the law may well be assisting lawyers who act as executors in carrying out misleading and deceptive conduct.
The behaviour is misleading and deceptive because lawyers who offer their services as executors are perceived as lawyers by the consumer of their services. Many of these consumers believe that because they are lawyers they would have to comply with the laws governing their profession and apply the principles of their profession in the actions they carry out as executors.
In my book Lawyers or Grave Robbers I have written a chapter called Quality Control for Lawyers, A Legal System out of Touch out of Time. (See attached) In this chapter (I wrote the book prior to the letter being revealed). I take a scientific approach to the prevention of the problem of abuse of deceased estates by lawyers and utilise technological concepts based upon what engineers call quality standards. These standards create the checks and balances in operating procedure so as to minimise errors. Unfortunately due to the self-regulating nature of the legal profession this valuable technology is ignored and there are no standards in place for lawyers who act as executors, which allow them to remain unaccountable for their actions.
I made three suggestions relating to the quality control of services provided by lawyers who are acting as executors.
1. Lawyers who are acting as executors not be allowed to empower themselves over a whole family and must disclose any information they have even if they claim privilege over it when it is relevant to determining the wishes of a deceased families parent.
2. The need for mandatory training and for standards to be written and enforced for lawyers who act as executors.
3. The need for a more informal method of resolving issues pertaining to deceased estates utilising tribunals and commissioners based upon the European truth seeking system of justice rather than our current adversarial system.
All of these suggestions, if implemented would prevent lawyers like Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy from being dishonest by lying to the children of their deceased mother which destroyed her family and has cost her estate at least $220,000 in primary loses. The cumulative cost is in the millions when loss of opportunity, physiological damage, and time wasted in legal communications and break down in interfamily cooperation are included. This cumulative cost will impact in a negative way upon my mother’s family for eternity. Overall Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy have disadvantaged the lives of fourteen people who are the immediate members of my mother`s family through their dishonest communications.
I am aware of many other families who have been adversely affected by the costly and inefficient and unaccountable process of succession law. This problem has been verified by the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner in his round table discussion on Succession Law 2010. Unfortunately his recommendations will not solve the problems, as they do not address the internal practices of the legal profession when operating in succession law. There is no mention of Quality Standards or lawyers who act as executors being bound by the Legal Professional Act of 2004 or that they are bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights (Refer Submission to The Review of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Why lawyers who are in private practice should be bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights when dealing with inheritance issues).
Links http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_...
http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_...
Fortunately we live in a democratic society where we elect people from our communities to represent our needs in parliament. The parliament has the power to address these issues and is in fact obligated to do so as it is in the community’s interest to ensure that prestigious law firms such as Russell Kennedy and a senior partner (Ian Bult) of that law firm never again can act in such a dishonest manner and destroy another Australian family.
I urge you to consider the importance of ensuring the families of deceased parents can trust our legal profession in managing the estate and act to implement the necessary changes to the law so as it assured.
If you would like any further information on this issue please do not hesitate to contact me as I am happy to oblige your requests.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan

Letter received from The Victorian Ombudsman after submitting evidence that Ian Bult and Russell Kennedy lied to the children of my dead mother. Dated 19 10 11

OFFICE OF THE VICTORIAN OMBUDSMAN

19 October 2011 File No: R/11/39
Mr Diarmuid Hannigan 236 Smith Street Collingwood 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan

In refer to your letters of 10 April and 18 September 2011 which were received at this office on 28 September 2011 and advise that your complaint has been referred to me to review.

My primary task in relation to your complaint is to review this Office’s handling of your complaint. Having reviewed the material I am unable to detect any errors in the manner in which your complaint has been handled by the Victorian Ombudsman other than a typographical error in the letter of 23 June 2011, from Ms Dana Lee, Investigations Officer, in which she referred to a letter from The Commissioner as being dated 14 January 2011, instead of 14 January 2010. That letter, Ms Lee wrote to you advising that this office does not intend to take any further action in relation to your complaint, noting that you have not provided any material indicating any procedural irregularity or administrative error in the way The Commissioner handled your complaint, or any material indicating that particular Charter rights had been breached. I note that in your subsequent letters you do not take those issues further, although you make a number of general allegations of illegality by the solicitor, Mr Bult.

While you have not identified any specific administrative error that the Commissioner made, it seems that your position is that the actions of the lawyers involved were, on their face, clearly wrong and/or illegal and, accordingly, the Commissioner was wrong to have failed to investigate those actions.

To examine that position, I have also examined the manner in which The Commissioner handled your complaint. In that regard I note that your complaint was examined by the current Legal Services Commissioner (see letter of 14 January 2010) and his predecessor (letter of 4 September 2009). And I understand a complaint containing some of the elements of the current complaint was also considered by the former Legal Ombudsman. On each occasion your complaints were dismissed. The former Legal Services Commissioner’s letter of September 2009 provided a very detailed response to your complaint, particularizing her response in relation to the various parts of your complaint. She dismissed your complaint under section 4.2.10(b) – which was explained by her successor as meaning that your complaint was “misconceived”. He also advised you that your complaint could also have been dismissed on number of other grounds, namely, sections 4.2.10(c) (subject of a previous complaint), (e) (the Commissioner has no power to deal with the complaint) and (f) (requiring no further investigation). In that letter, the Commissioner also referred to your complaint about breach of the Charter of Human Rights by the solicitors and advised that the Charter has no application to the private sector, advice which I consider to be correct.

By “misconceived” the Commissioner appears to have considered that the complaint was made under the misapprehension that the Commissioner could discipline the solicitors in relation to the matters complained of, which was not correct as, in the Commissioner’s view, many of the parts of your complaint were not considered within jurisdiction. As to those which were considered within jurisdiction, no error had been made by the solicitors. I should add that I do not consider the Commissioner as saying that your complaint against Ian Bult has no jurisdiction in a broader sense; but not in the sense that it was one that the Commissioner was empowered to handle. It appears that this is also the reason why the Commissioner made the point that many of your complaints were matters that only the Supreme Court could deal with and recommended that you seek your own legal advice. Having reviewed the material, I consider that the Commissioner’s decision was one that was open to her and was reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I find no error in the handling of your complaint by the Victorian Ombudsman.

I would, however, repeat the advice provided by Commissioner Marles in her letter of 4 September 2009; for you to seek independent legal advice as to what avenues of address are available to you in the Supreme Court.

I do not believe, therefore, that this office can be of any further assistance to you and this matter will be concluded and further correspondence on these issues will be noted but not responded to.

Yours sincerely

Ian Killey PSM General Counsel

Submission to the Victorian Governments review on The Victorian Charter of Human Rights concerning lawyers in private practice not been bound by this charter. Dated 05 05 2011

Link: http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_...

Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044
charada@mira,net
Sunday 05th of May 2011

“Lawyers in private practice are not bound by
The Victorian Charter of Human Rights”

To Mr Edward Odonohue
Scrutiny of Acts and Regulation (Chair)
Inquiry into The Victorian Charter of Human Rights

Dear Mr Odonohue
I am forwarding you correspondence I have received from the Federal Attorney General and the previous Victorian Attorney General regarding the fact that lawyers who are in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights.
I would ask your committee of review to consider this matter when reviewing The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and its impact on human rights jurisprudence within the state of Victoria.
I draw your attention to the following articles contained within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Article 16 (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group/unit of our society and is entitled to protection by the society and the state.
Article 17 (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their property.
Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it is independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
The State Attorney General and the Federal Attorney General are avoiding the main points of my two letters which deals with:
• The power relationship between family and a lawyer.
• The human rights ramifications of the current power imbalance on every day Australians who have to consume the services of the legal profession.
• The legal industries human rights obligations to the clients and the community it should serve.
They fail to address and answer my concerns, concerns that identify a serious fault within our legal system, a fault that goes to the core and foundation of our civilised society. A fault that if not addressed and addressed immediately, will internally and externally rot our nation.
The principals by which we create our laws result in real outcomes, if we do not acknowledge the importance of the power dichotomy between lawyer and a family as inherent to right and wrong. (The family being disempowered being wrong and the lawyer being empowered within their relationship being wrong. Then one would presume the family being empowered and the lawyer being disempowered would be right.)

If this principal does not exist how can we hope to heal the internal wrongs within our society? We have said sorry to our indigenous population for the stolen generation tragedy and yet the very lack of principal that allowed us to create such pain by the rule of law is not addressed.

We are viewed externally as a party to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan under the auspices of “the rule of law” but if we allow plunder of our own families by a privileged lawyer elite under “the rule of law” how can we not be surprised at the cynicism of the invaded and their claims of plunder. Hypocrisy is a very dangerous road to hoe; eventually it is always defeated by the truth.

The future of human rights jurisprudence for Australians must not be controlled by the privileged legal elite who remain outside of any Human Rights Charters, as they have always shown they act for their own financial gain rather than for the nation as a whole when forming, practicing and administering our legal system.

In Victoria the Attorney General has made a determination that lawyers in private practice are not bound by The Victoria Charter of Human Rights. I assume that the clients of lawyers who are in private practice are human. I assume that lawyers who are in private practice devote a large proportion of their activities to matters involving families although lawyers do not have to take family law as a subject to gain a law degree. I assume, that considering the important function lawyers who are in private practise perform, it would be an imperative of a responsible government, to ensure they recognise the importance of their role in making sure families remain healthy, financially viable and together, because this permits our society to develop in a healthy manner. Since families are composed of human beings both adults and children I would assume they would be protected from human rights abuses by lawyers under The Victorian Charter of Human Rights.
If it is as our former attorney general Robert Hulls infers, one realises that during the years a lawyer works in private practice he is not indoctrinated into the development of human rights jurisprudence as he is not bound by this ethos. Since many become members of the judiciary, parliament or hold influential positions in government, for the benefit of the development of human rights jurisprudence, an ethos of human rights within the profession is fundamental.
Bringing lawyers into the Victorian Charter of Human Rights will ensure our laws are created, practiced and administered by people who are considerate of the human rights consequences of their actions and other members of their legal fraternity.
I would hope that the outcomes would:
• Prevent a lawyer from empowering themselves over a family when dealing with a deceased estate or any other family matter, by utilisation techniques of legal thuggery to advantage his and his firms finances.
• Guarantee that any lawyer performing functions that involve family’s` (where all parties are of the one family) in a paid capacity, would respect the inheritance rights of individuals, and the long term health of relationships between family members as basic human rights.
• Ensure that any lawyer acting in these family matters was trained in mediation and alternative dispute resolution and utilised these mechanisms to resolve any issues within the family and not use combatative tactics to feather their own nests.
• Ensure that any lawyer acts in accordance with any quality systems and mandatory training programs legislated so as to ensure the Victorian Charter of Human rights is adhered to and that human rights and financial abuse by a lawyer can be easily identifiable.
• Ensure that there is a cheaper more efficient way of dealing with deceased dispute disagreements in order to protect the inheritance rights thus human rights of every day Australians from the abuse of self-serving unaccountable lawyers. I am sure that the majority of issues pertaining to deceased estates could be resolved by well-trained commissioners without expense and the trappings of our supreme courts.
• Ensure that the government acknowledges that paid lawyers are performing an essential public duty under statutory regulation when probating a deceased estate. Even though they are paid out of the estate they are performing a role that would otherwise have to be performed by the government in order for our society to function.

Thus, if as we all do, we recognise that common sense will always prevail in the end. Then lawyers who are in private practice when dealing with internal family matters must be bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights.

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights is failing us at an even higher level. From the public’s perspective The Office of the Victoria Ombudsman and the Office of The Legal Services Commissioner perform an important role in determining the direction of human rights jurisprudence for Victorian citizens.

After receiving 92 complaints from the public on the operation of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner in 2009 the Victorian Ombudsman carried out a report on this office. The Victorian Ombudsman can neither confirm nor deny it exists, despite the fact that the Victorian Ombudsman mentions the report in his 2009 annual report and the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner refers to the same report which contains 28 recommendations in his 2010 annual report. The report has not been tabled in parliament which prevents it from becoming public knowledge. I can only assume this has occurred because of pressure from the legal industry as its release would lead to greater accountability of the profession. This type of pressure is undemocratic and impedes human rights jurisprudence.

Considering the importance of the role the Legal Services Commissioner plays in determining how our legal profession formulates, practices and administers our laws having in mind the development of a human rights ethos within the profession to its customer base I am perplexed as to the reasons the Attorney General had for failing to table this report in parliament and allowing the citizens of Victoria to contribute to the jurisprudence of our human rights.

The failure by the previous Victorian Attorney General (Robert Hulls) to table the report of The Victorian Ombudsman on the Office of The Legal Services Commissioner to parliament has effectively hidden its contents from the public and prevented the report from becoming public property; by doing so it can be perceived as a mechanism for aiding and abetting lawyers who are currently abusing human rights in Victoria. It appears as if the Law Institute of Victoria has pressured the Victorian Attorney General into withholding the report.

Does one therefore assume that the Attorney Generals Department, the agency that proposed the Victorian Charter of Human Rights is so dominated by the influence of the legal industry that it is prepared to sacrifice its human rights principals and make a mockery of its own creation and is this democratic?
I ask you to ponder this question.
What would happen if there were no probate laws in our society?
Answer: Anarchy!
The state has formed its rule of law through the cohesion of families via organised law pertaining to inheritance. The probate laws enacted by the state ensure the estate bears the cost of probate. Instead of taxing or using the common purse the legislature has by the rule of law made the estate pay because it is the most efficient way and it does not charge for small estates. Probate is thus a public function funded through private means under government statute because it is the most sensible way to go about it. Common sense emanates from family cohesion over the long term as a means for survival of the family gene.
The access to Justice Report does not contain any mention of.
• Practicing lawyer’s human rights obligations to their customer base and to the wider community.
• Accountability for lawyers to consumers regarding the quality of their workmanship or in justifying the paths they have taken during their relationship with a particular dispute and their fees.

Its frame work does not identify the fundamental power relationships that exist within our construct of a human civilised society that are governed by the rule of law. It does not state that the family unit is the construct from which the law arose and by which our society continues to exist. Thus it does not restrict self-interested unaccountable lawyers from exploiting vulnerable families, abusing their human rights and stripping them of their assets to feed their never ending lust for material wealth.

The failure to define the very principals by which we live in order to protect a legal elite prevents us from identifying the basis and purpose for the term “the rule of law”.
The task force of the access to Justice reform body is dominated by the legal industry not the bodies that consume its services. In developing a policy to enhance access to justice and the jurisprudence of human rights within Australia you may as well appoint Genghis Kahn to further the cause as a replacement for a Lawyer dominated strategic task force. The problem is not the person it is how they have been programmed through their educational and social experience that is the issue. Lawyers are taught partisan tactics due to the adversarial system that they have to operate in. This skill is not one that would assist in improving access to justice for the majority of Australians.

“Access to justice is central to “the rule of law” and integral to the enjoyment of basic human rights. It is an essential precondition to social inclusion and a critical element of a well-functioning democracy”
(Robert McClelland ATTORNEY- GENERAL)

This said the question is how to achieve the outcome.
We must define the objective.

To define the objective we must ask what are the founding principles upon which our legal system is formed, does it currently serve its purpose and if not, how do we restructure it or rebuild it so as it can serve the purpose demanded from it by a contemporary democratic society?

We want a legal system that;

• is affordable,
• respects the values and frame works that make us a human civilised society i.e. respects our human rights, observes that legal professionals are also human and therefore are equal to their clients and are not permitted to empower themselves over clients.
• Provides consumers of its services with predictable outcomes where the professionals are accountable for the work they do and the decisions they make to the wider society and to the consumers of their services.
• Ensures that quality standards are incorporated into the day to day running of the industry.
• Ensures that the wider community has a majority representation on any law reform task forces in order that the communities’ interests are protected from exploitation by the legal elite.

I trust you appreciate the importance to our development in having a synergy between our human rights and how laws are practiced by lawyers and you will ensure that those who form our legal industry are bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights, even lawyers who are in private practice when performing duties relating to deceased estates.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan.

Working Families, Denied Natural Justice is an open letter that responds to the legal services commissioner`s statement that lawyers in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and is available on the following link . Dated 16 05 2010

2http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/sarc/charter_review/submissions/09_Attach_A_23.5.2011_.pdf
Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044
charada@mira,net
Sunday 16th May 2010

Working Families, Denied Natural Justice

Dear Good Person.

I am writing to you to express my concerns in regards to three letters I have received.

One is from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner (Letter 1) in which Mr McGarvie states:
“The Victorian Charter of Human Rights only applies to Public
Authorities. A legal practitioner in private practice does not have
to comply.”

This letter is in response to a complaint that I raised with the commissioner regarding the decision by Russell Kennedy/Ian Bult to withhold a letter from my late mother written six years prior to her death, which is being used by the lawyer to justify his decisions regarding my family’s inheritance. My mother’s children and grandchildren do not agree with the lawyer’s interpretation of her will and have on many occasions requested a copy of this letter. The non-disclosure of this letter allows the law firm Russell Kennedy and the lawyer Ian Bult to remain unaccountable to my family and my mother’s family. The exercise has split my mother’s family and has cost the estate at least $100,000, the majority of which has been appropriated by Russell Kennedy in fees and charges. Through their actions they have been able to exploit our families and have eroded the value of our inheritance, whilst simultaneously destroying a well-balanced family.

The second is from the Victorian Ombudsman (Letter2) in response to a request for a copy of his report on the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner which he mentions in his 2009 annual report.
“I confirm that as the Ombudsman conducts his investigations
in private, pursuant to section 17(2) of the Ombudsman Act
1973, this office is unable to confirm or deny the existence of
Ombudsman’s reports that are not publicly available.”

I have requested this report as it contains 28 recommendations on ways to improve the operations of The Legal Services Commissioner in satisfying consumer needs. The reason I have requested this report is so I can analyse the process used to investigate my complaint and ensure that the complaint was handled in a proper manner. Thus ensuring that the work done by The Legal Services Commissioner on my complaint was carried out in a professional manner. The act of denying me access to this report effectively sends a message that The Office of The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and the office of the Victorian Attorney General choose to be unaccountable to a consumer such as myself.

The third is from The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner (Letter 3) in response to a freedom of information request in which the Office of The Legal Services Commissioner chooses to withhold 16 of eighteen documents that I have requested. The concealment of these documents illustrates how unaccountable the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is to the Victorian public.

The actions by the law firm, coupled with their unaccountability, have damaged the destiny of my family and have abused our family rights and our human rights.

This would not be such an issue if it were only a one off case, but systemic abuse by lawyers, combined with an antiquated, unaccountable and costly legal processes is damaging many families on a daily basis within Australia. This damage is particularly severe in Family Law proceedings and with regards to deceased estates.

When one becomes aware of the damage that is being wreaked upon families who are entering our judicial process and the financial and social waste to our society, one would expect a responsible government operating in a contemporary liberal democratic state to create a legal process that by its very structure, aimed to assist and help people, who need to resolve their problems via the consumption of its services. One would expect a government would ensure this process and the professionals who work within it, are accountable to their customer base, who are predominately Australian families.

The financial waste caused by our current legal process of family law and deceased estates could well amount to $50 billion per year. The greater part of this wealth is extracted from the capital base of families. The resulting loss of wealth to these families can have no positive outcomes for their future but the wealth does end up with the legal fraternity. This denies working families’ natural justice.

Approximately 150,000 Australians die each year leaving an average estate worth $500,000. Approximately 75 billion per year. Legal costs amount to about 7 billion and a further 12.5 billion is diverted into trusts by the legal profession.

Annually 50,000 families are processed by The Federal Family Courts at an estimated cost of $30 Billion. (Legal fees of approximately $15 billion and $15 billion is lost through asset redistribution). There is a significant increase in the suicide rate amongst this group when compared with the general population: They are men women and children. A proportion of this rate increase must be attributed to the methodical process of asset stripping of families by the legal profession in its unaccountable pursuit of resolution.

The role of government in our contemporary state is to work towards a fair and just society. It stands above hegemony and works in the interests of our community as a whole. Through its evolution it has abolished slavery, evolved a society of universal suffrage and acknowledged the existence of human rights.

Australia was settled as a penal colony; the power imbalance between the convict and other members of the society was absolute. The jailer held the power and the prisoner had no option but to yield to it. The convict was a slave without a commercial value entombed in a prison created by the state. Through our isolation and our need to survive, we realised the importance of understanding our natural environment and the role of common sense. This realisation shaped the relationship between the convict and the jailer and incorporated common sense into our way of life and governance. This incorporation of common sense into the fabric of our society has made our nation the country it is today.

It would make common sense in my family’s case for the lawyer Ian Bult to fax us a copy of our mother’s letter to him so as he could be accountable to us for his actions.

The initial competing interests in Australian colonial society were between the convicts and those who ran the colony. This society had little room for the evolution of family rights and the roots of many modern day peoples` distain for our legal system, lie here.

Fortunately as time passed and our nation invited migrants to these shores our values developed and the role of family as in any stable society became dominant. Being a Christian society our church bought these families together under the sphere of god and common sense. Our values of family, and our religion intertwined and were embedded in our constitution upon Federation. The connectedness with family has always been the mainstay of this wonderful nation that we live in and is what gives us our strength and our ability to be a tolerant and fair society.

The disregard for mindless authority devoid of common sense is embedded into Australian culture and showed itself during the two world wars in which Australians fought. This ability of the Australian Corps to utilise common sense in the face of mindless orders and rules gave them an edge which produced a superior fighting unit capable of responding appropriately to the real challenges of their travails.

One of Government’s main functions is to work towards reducing the exploitation of a powerful and privileged group in this instance; (The legal profession), over a weaker poorly resourced group; (The people who make up our communities).

Our government has been given this power through democratic elections and represents all competing groups without having a bias or a vested interest. Its purpose is to evaluate and act upon situations that work in the best interests of the community. Unfortunately it appears as if our current government which is well endowed with members of the legal profession, appears to have a bias towards the profession.

This is all too apparent when one realises how law reform is carried out within Australia. A committee comprising mainly of lawyer interest groups is formed to investigate matters pertaining to law reform. The vested interests of the legal profession lobby to ensure its interests are protected. This has created an industry that does not use standards, is not accountable to consumers of its products and continues to maintain its reliance on self-regulation.

When you ask
• Why has the Victorian Attorney General Mr Hulls suppressed the Report on The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner by The Victorian Ombudsman?
• Why won’t the Legal Services Commissioner demand that Russell Kennedy produce the said letter?
• Why is it that lawyers in private practice who are court appointed and practice the laws proclaimed through acts of parliament in Victoria are not bound by The Victorian Charter of Human Rights?
• Why is The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner denying full access to his investigatory files in relation to consumer complaints?

Yes in deed, you may well ask. It does make one wonder why the legal profession seems to be above accountability: At present the Zeitgeist demands an end to hegemony as demonstrated by the current global legislative momentum to bring accountability to our financial profession, so as to prevent another Global Financial Crisis. The most influential office on the planet headed by President Barack Obama is demanding accountability from wayward Wall Street Bankers.

However now it’s accepted that no group should be without proper governance and answerability for due diligence in the discharge of the duties they are paid to perform least society at large bear the brunt of the irresponsibility.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Edmund Burke
Irish orator, philosopher, & politician (1729 – 1797)

In your position as a person of influence I urge you to ascertain through the Parliament

(1) Is Mr McGarvie`s statement re lawyers in private practice and The Victorian Charter of Human Rights true or is just an interpretation made by and on behalf of our legal elite?

(2) Why is our Attorney General Mr Robert Hulls concealing the Victorian
Ombudsman’s Report from the people of Victoria particularly when the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is fundamental in identifying and addressing systemic abuse by the legal profession?

I believe that our legal profession is obligated to observe our human rights above their own self-interest of gathering fees at the expense of family equity. The role of common sense and our Christian values are entwined within our constitution so as to place that caveat on those who practice law within Australia. This is an unwritten and assumed component of our constitution, which should prevent lawyers from empowering themselves over families.

It is the responsibility of our elected parliament, who appoint this profession and whose Acts they abide by, to work with them to provide a system where:
• we all have affordable and timely access to justice.
• The relationship between the legal profession and the consumer has accountability.

The claim by Mr McGarvie that lawyers in private practice do not have to abide by The Victorian Charter of Human Rights is preposterous, especially when one considers, they are dealing in many instances, with peoples and families destinies. The way these matters are handled impacts upon the well being of our communities and our nation for time immemorial

The refusal by The Victorian Ombudsman to release his report on The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner to the public is a retrograde step which will retard our social development. It will prevent public comment on the performance of our legal profession from the consumer perspective which will raise the issue of the legal professions need to be accountable to all Australians. The attempts to keep this report secret smacks of legal nepotism.

Mr Hulls replaced The Victorian Legal Ombudsman Kate Hammond with the office of The Legal Services Commissioner because her office and the legal profession had irreconcilable differences of opinion. He promised us this move would improve our legal system. The office receives about 2500 complaints a year and only ever acts on about 150 of them. The other 2350 are dismissed. One wonders how many other complaints there were from people who could either not be bothered, were so gutted by the legal process that they had not the energy or fortitude to peruse it and people who through their lack of education or circumstances where not even aware that they had grounds for a complaint. I gather 80% of customers of the legal profession are dissatisfied.

Australian 31/10/2008 Reported:
The Victorian Department of Public Prosecutions Jeremy Ranke QC says: “Something very serious is amiss with the manner in which criminal trails are conducted” and Rob Hulls the Victorian first law officer had said that: “lawyers need to abandon many of their adversarial traditions and join him in a cultural revolution based on an active, problem solving judiciary”.

When you combine this information with the statement by The Victorian
Legal Services Commissioner and the refusal by The Victorian Ombudsman to release his report, I trust you appreciate these serious inconsistencies and will act as a good person to restore the balance of power between the legal profession and working families so as to give all Australians access to natural justice.

I eagerly anticipate your response and am most willing to assist.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan

(Author) Lawyers or Grave Robbers

Ref www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com

Appendices

1) Letter from Legal Services Commissioner to Mr Diarmuid Hannigan 14 02 2010
Referred to as (Letter1)
2) Letter to the Victorian Ombudsman from Mr Diarmuid Hannigan 18 02 2010
requesting a copy of his report on the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner.
3) Copy of extract from The Victorian Ombudsman’s annual report regarding his report
on the Legal Services Ombudsman..
4) Letter from The Victorian Government Ombudsman 23 02 2010 responding to my
letter requesting his report on the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner, Referred to
as (Letter 2).
5) Letter from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner responding to my Freedom of
Information Request.

Letter from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner stating that lawyers who are in private practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Dated 14 January 2011

Appendix 1

THE VICTORIAN LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

Your ref: 9/330 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000
GPO Box 492 Melbourne Vic 3001 DX 185 Melbourne
Our ref: LSC/09/2054 t 1300 796 344 (local call) t 03 9679 8001 f 03 9679 8101
Russell Daily www.Isc.vic.gov.au ABN 66 489 344 310
14 January 2011
Private and Confidential

Mr Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street COLLINGWOOD VIC 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan
Complaint against Mr Ian Bult of Russell Kennedy

I refer to your letter dated 14 September 2009 and the acknowledgement to you dated 22 September 2009. You have expressed dissatisfaction with the decisions made about your above complaint and asked that the file be reviewed.

The Legal professional Act 2004 does not provide for any review of my decision whether by an independent person or internally. As a result, in most cases, once I have made a decision on a complaint it is final. The exception is where I have acted beyond my powers or failed to meet a requirement. This has not occurred here so I cannot now reopen the matter. I am also satisfied that the action taken on your file has been appropriate and in accordance with the complaint handling standards and with our policies and procedures.

You also seek a copy of the Legal Services Commissioner (“LSC”) file relevant to your complaint. Due to the confidentiality and secrecy provisions of the Legal Professional Act (“The Act”). I am unable to provide you with the relevant LSC file. However I can give you copies of any material provided by you to the LSC. Of course you may also request such information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 upon payment of the relevant fee of $23.40. The release of any such information will be dealt with having regard for the provisions of the legislation.

Further you sought clarification as to which specific part of section 4.2.10(1)(b) of the act applied to the decision to summarily dismiss your complaint. A number of the sub sections in section 4.2.10(1) of the Act could have applied in your case as the basis for my earlier decision to dismiss your complaint summarily. These include not requiring further investigation (sub-section 4.2.10(1)(f)): may not have been previously looked at (sub-section 4.2.10(1)(c)) or where I have no power (sub-section 4.2.10(1)(e)). Overall your complaint was summarily dismissed as misconceived for the various reasons given in my letter to you dated 4 September 2009. You can see more details regarding my summary dismissal guidelines on my website at

http://www.lsc.vic.gov.au/documents/LSC_SummaryDismissalGuidelines.pdf

You complain that decisions were made in accordance with the relevant legislation rather than in accordance with your asserted human rights to inherit property and to be a family. With regard to any alleged breach of your human rights by the practitioner, the Victorian Charter of Human Rights only applies to public authorities. A legal practitioner in private practice is not required to comply with the Charter.

For further information about the Charter you might like to contact the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission. Addresses provided.

Yours Sincerely

.

Letter from The Victorian Ombudsman in response to a request for his copy of a report he carried out on The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. Dated 23 02 2010

Appendix 4

THE OFFICE OF THE VICTORIAN OMBUDSMAN

23 February 2010 File No: C/10/101
Mr Diarmuid Hannigan 236 Smith Street Collingwood 3066

Dear Mr Hannigan

Your correspondence to Ombudsman Victoria

I refer to your correspondence 16 February 2010 in which you request a copy of an Ombudsman’s report regarding the Legal Services Commissioner of Victoria. I also refer to my telephone call to you on 23 February 2010.
I note you contacted this office on 5 January, 2010 and you were advised that the only ombudsman’s reports available to the public are those tabled in Parliament. All public Ombudsman reports are available on the Ombudsman`s website at www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au
I confirm that as the Ombudsman conducts his investigations in private, pursuant to section 17(2) of the Ombudsman Act 1973, this office is unable to, confirm or deny the existence of Ombudsman reports that are not publicly available.

I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Linna He

Enquiries Officer

Letter to the Victorian Ombudsman requesting a copy of his report on the legal services commissioner. Dated 16 02 2010.

Appendix 2

Diarmuid Hannigan
236 Smith Street
Collingwood. Victoria 3066
03 94195044
charada@mira,net
Thursday 18th February 2010

The Victorian Ombudsman
Mr George Brouwer

Dear Mr Brouwer.

I am writing to request a copy of your report on the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. I understand this report contains 28 recommendations pertaining to the operation of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner.

This report will assist me in responding to The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and a submission to The Council of Australian Governments involvement in the reform of regulation affecting the legal profession in relation to the management of deceased estates by legal professionals.

My own dilemma although appearing trivial, goes to the core of how we as a society treat each others within a legal framework and the obligations we have to in order to avoid the abuse of human rights, family rights and inheritance rights.

The reason I have been led into this legal maize has been caused by a lawyer who along with my sister were appointed executors of my late mother’s estate. Prior to probate being granted a disagreement had occurred between the beneficiaries of the estate (My mother’s children) and the lawyer. My sister, the co executor requested a copy of a letter written to him by my mother six years prior to her death that the lawyer said he had in his possession. He refused to show her the letter and has refused all other requests to show the letter claiming legal client privilege. His claim has no rational basis whatsoever apart from the power he holds in his position as executor and is clearly positioned to advantage his financial interests.

As a result of the lawyers treatment of my sister and her fragile state she did not take up her position as Executor which has left the family in a powerless position. The fact that the family has not been allowed to interpret their mother’s wishes (letter) has led to a prolonged and painful experience.

I have approached The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner regarding my concerns and as yet I have been unable to obtain a copy of this letter. I have no desire to begin litigation as it will further the abuse that has already been wrought upon my mother’s estate by the lawyer and his firm. I believe that it is an inheritance right and therefore a family right to have access to information that determines ones destiny and that of ones family. It is a fundamental human right and is an integral component of a civilised society governed by the rule of law. Inheritance rights and their relationship to law are the reason law was founded.

I have enclosed a copy of a letter I have received from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and raise my concerns to you regarding Paragraph five. A legal practitioner in private practice is not required to comply with the charter. (The Victorian Charter of Human Rights).

There appears to be a major dislocation between public perception and reality in regards to this issue. I ask the question. How does the government ever hope to instil a philosophy of human rights respect throughout our community if the people (lawyers) who are working the legal system are exempt? Particularly when these people are highly paid professionals who are dealing with the destinies of families.

I look forward to your response and to the opportunity of reading your report. I am aware the report has not been tabled in parliament but since the role of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner is a fundamental instrument in shaping our Legal services industry so as it becomes cost efficient affordable and of benefit to our community the public interest becomes a more important factor.

Yours Sincerely

Diarmuid Hannigan.

Appendix 3

THE VICTORIAN LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

The Legal Profession Act 2004 established the office of the Legal Services Commissioner and lists its objectives, one of which is: to ensure that complaints against Australian legal practitioners and
disputes between law practices or Australian legal practitioners and clients are dealt with in a timely and effective manner.6
The role of the Legal Services Commissioner is to protect both consumers of legal services and the public interest in the proper administration of justice. The Legal Services Commissioner has the power to address complaints made against Victorian legal practitioners to ensure that they acted within the confines of the law, with appropriate ethical standards and with deference to their professional position.
The Legal Services Commissioner can receive complaints which relate to disputes about legal costs, claims of up to $25,000, or disciplinary matters. The legal system can be financially costly and the law can be complex, with intricacies which many members of the public find difficult to navigate and understand. This can leave the public vulnerable to unscrupulous, negligent
or unprofessional practices of legal practitioners.
Over the past year I received 95 complaints about the Legal Services Commissioner, which replaced the former Legal Ombudsman in December 2005. There were recurring themes in the complaints which pointed to a systemic failure by the Legal Services Commissioner to adequately
undertake its statutory role.
For example, complainants alleged that:
• complaints were inadequately investigated or not investigated at all
• there were significant delays – sometimes in excess of three years – in finalising complaints
• documentation practices were poor and failed to provide complainants with information about
the Legal Services Commissioner’s internal review process and external review mechanisms
• investigations lacked procedural fairness.
The following case study highlights that the lack of appropriate review powers in place for the Legal Services Commissioner is still the case. It illustrates how this can result in injustice to complainants and allow practitioners to avoid detection and/or prosecution as a consequence of the current legislative
6 Section 6.3.2.
www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au
22 ombudsman victoria annual report 09
I recommended that the Attorney- General consider amending the Legal Profession Act 2004 to enable the Legal Services Commissioner to review its merits based
Decisions where there have been deficiencies in its investigations or errors in its
decisions.
framework. I recommended that the Attorney-General consider amending the Legal Profession Act 2004 to enable the Legal Services Commissioner to review its merits-based decisions where there have been deficiencies in its investigations or errors in its decisions.
I understand that this is being considered as part of a national reform of the Australian legal profession announced by the Council of Australian Governments.

Email: charada@mira.net

19 THOUGHTS ON “LAW”
colin on May 14, 2012 at 12:02 pm said:
We too have been abused by a lawyer acting as an executor, we have tryed all the usual avenues that are supposed to be available to regulate lawyers acting as executors, to no avail. A better idea would be if lawyers and judicaries were banned from working in inheritance matters all together, as they have shown they are not trust worthy. The proof of this is when you try to get the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner or the Victorian Ombudsman or the Probate office to do what they are supposed to do when presented with proof that misconduct is happening with lawyers acting as executors and then hiding behind the very bodies that are supposed to be regulating them. Our experiences are such that we have no faith in the judicaries in this country what so ever, they are the lowest of the low.

Reply ↓
Caron Moudy on May 22, 2012 at 3:22 pm said:
Great site, thanks for share this article with us

Reply ↓
web design company on June 15, 2012 at 7:27 pm said:
Thanks for this amazing opinion! I found it extremely accurate. The strength of the web today is truly a crucial tool for both businesses and individuals.

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 19, 2012 at 12:23 am said:
[Nelson Mandela.

"In Law and Philosophy, one asks,

'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?'

(Who will guard the guardians themselves?)

If the prefect does not obey the rules, how can the students be expected to obey?

In effect the prefect was above the law because he was the law and one prefect was not supposed to report another."

(page 47, Long Walk to Freedom, By Nelson Mandella, 1994). ]

From reading the extensive correspondence by Diarmuid in an attempt to have ‘accountability, etc’ with regards to the so-called ‘Legal Professions’ the above quote by Nelson Mandella is perhaps appropriate, as ‘the Lawyers are above the Law because they are the Law’. Just a thought, J.F.

Reply ↓
meet a latina on June 20, 2012 at 2:32 pm said:
thanks ur parents for having you

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris on June 21, 2012 at 1:03 am said:
Solicitors hit with judgments of €71.8m The Irish Times – Tuesday, June 19, 2012. by MARY CAROLAN

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0619/1224318194516.html

[NAMA HAS secured summary judgment for more than €58 million against one solicitor and for €13.8 million against a second arising from loans advanced mainly for property developments in the Munster area, including shopping centres and residential developments.

The agency is also pursuing a number of businessmen and companies at the Commercial Court for sums ranging from €2.3 million to €50 million relating to the same loans.

In four different sets of proceedings yesterday, Mr Justice Peter Kelly granted summary judgment orders sought by Bernard Dunleavy, for Nama, against Paul O’Brien, Sunbury, Courtbrack Avenue, South Circular Road, Limerick, totalling just over €58 million. In one case, he granted summary judgment for €13.8 million against another solicitor, Denis McMahon, Beechurst, North Circular Road.

Arising from the need to address interest and other issues, the judge adjourned to Thursday Nama’s claim for summary judgment orders against other businessmen and companies.

The claims arose from 32 separate loans, 24 separate guarantees and indemnities and 79 separate security documents relating to 87 loans transferred from AIB to Nama in December 2010.]
PS. Could it be argued,

‘NAMA HAS secured summary judgment for more than €58 million against one solicitor and for €13.8 million against a second’

is just another example of ‘Irish Lawyer’s with a Brief Case can steal more than a hundred men with Guns’

as quoted by Mr. Justice Michael Peart in the article below? J.F.

Mediation Solutions North West: Paper presented by Mr Justice Michael Peart on 24th February 2012 “Mediation – Alternative Dispute Resolution – the Future?”

‘But the profession has to try and shake off its greedy ambulance-chasing image which led Marion Puzo, the author of The Godfather say that

“a lawyer with his briefcase can steal more than a hundred men with guns”!

I am sure lawyers make money out of mediation too, and they deserve to, but perhaps in a manner and in amounts that do not attract such adverse attention as in the past.’

http://www.mediationsolutionsnw.com/wp-content/uploads/Mr.-Justice-Micha... date accessed Thursday 21st June 2012.

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 26, 2012 at 12:23 am said:
Serial Liars Extract Page 11 of PDF below:-

http://www.lsa.net.au/wcb-content/uploads/lsa/files/Serial-Liars_Ebook.p... date accessed Tuesday 26th June 2012.

[Dickens said: ‘The one great principle of the English law is to make business for itself.’

The common law has been a business since paid lawyers and judges first appeared late in the 12th century in a culture of trickle-down extortion in the public sector, and formed a cartel to maximise profits and protect their interests.

European countries which, along with England, had used an anti-truth accusatorial (Prove it!) system from the Dark Ages, changed to a pro-truth investigative (What happened?) system early in the 13th century, but the cartel persisted with the anti-truth system, either through bottomless stupidity or because corruption is easier if truth is not required.

The adversary system is a variation of the Prove it! system. Possibly
for reasons no more sinister than sloth, judges began to allow lawyers to take control of the evidence - and hence of the process, and hence of the money - about 1460.

The model for Dickens’ Jarndyce v Jarndyce began in the perennially corrupt Chancery Court in the 18th century and did not end until lawyers had ‘devoured’ the entire estate in the 20th. A civil case in France takes a total of about a day.]

PS. I have just spent Friday 22nd June 2012 & Monday 25th June 2012 listening to the ‘Gobbledegook’ of both Lawyers & Judges. Help and relief was at hand by reading through a few chapters of Serial Liars, By Evan Whitton. J.F.

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 26, 2012 at 12:37 am said:
Woe Unto You Lawyers, By Fred Rodell, extract from page 4 of PDF below:-

http://www.fredrodell.com/pdf/Woe_Unto_You_Lawyers.pdf date accessed Tuesday 26th June 2012.

[CHAPTER I MODERN MEDICINE-MEN

“The law is a sort of hocus-pocus science.” Charles Macklin

In TRIBAL TIMES, there were the medicine-men. In the Middle Ages, there were the priests. Today there are the lawyers.

For every age, a group of bright boys, learned in their trade and jealous of their learning, who blend technical competence with plain and fancy hocus-pocus to make themselves masters of their fellow men.

For every age, a pseudo-intellectual autocracy, guarding the tricks of its trade from the uninitiated, and running, after its own pattern, the civilization of its day.

It is the lawyers who run our civilization for us – our governments, our
business, our private lives. Most legislators are lawyers; they make our laws.

Most presidents, governors, commissioners, along with their advisers and brain-trusters are lawyers; they administer our laws.

All the judges are lawyers; they interpret and enforce our laws.

There is no separation of powers where the lawyers are concerned.

There is only a concentration of all government power – in the lawyers. As the schoolboy put it, ours is “a government of lawyers, not of men.”

It is not the businessmen, no matter how big, who run our economic world.

Again it is the lawyers, the lawyers who “advise” and direct every time a company is formed, every time a bond or a share of stock is issued, almost every time material is to be bought or goods to be sold, every time a deal is made.

The whole elaborate structure of industry and finance is a lawyer-made house.

We all live in it, but the lawyers run it.

And in our private lives, we cannot buy a home or rent an apartment, we cannot get married or try to get divorced, we cannot die and leave our property to our children without calling on the lawyers to guide us.

To guide us, incidentally, through a maze of confusing gestures and formalities that lawyers have created.]

PS. Woe Unto You Lawyers, written in 1939 by Fred Rodell, Professor of Law, provides and incredible insight into the ‘word-magic’ of Lawyers & Judges. J.F.

Reply ↓
rog shop on June 29, 2012 at 2:09 pm said:
Good day! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a team of volunteers and starting a new initiative in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us valuable information to work on. You have done a outstanding job!

Reply ↓
diseño web,servicios web,diseño web argentina on July 22, 2012 at 11:36 pm said:
Excellent post, very informative. I ponder why the opposite specialists of this sector don’t realize this. You must continue your writing. I am sure, you have a huge readers’ base already!|What’s Taking place i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have discovered It absolutely useful and it has helped me out loads. I hope to contribute & assist different customers like its helped me. Great job.

Reply ↓

SilentOps
on November 23, 2012 at 10:14 am said:
In Suffolk County. Lawyers are prt of a crime ring. They pre plan not only your fueral. Butbyour death too.Francis McInerny Jr.made out a will for very dear firneds of mine. Many years ago.When they passed away. He replaced their original Will with a phony. Naming Straw People as beneficiaries. Divied up the proceeds btw himself, Judge Weber, Clerk Cippilino, Mike Figat (countys top fraudster).Dr. Timm.HSBC VP Kim. Who gave them access to eceased safe deposit box prior to their death.I would be afraid to die in Suffolk.I think people should think seriously about. Gifting their estates prior to death.

Reply ↓
child custody lawyers on July 25, 2012 at 6:18 pm said:
I am sure this piece of writing has touched all the internet visitors, its
really pleasant. Gracias

Reply ↓
All About Music on December 7, 2012 at 4:33 am said:
Woah this blog is excellent i like studying your articles. Keep up the great work! You know, lots of people are searching around for this information, you can aid them greatly.

Reply ↓
effective weight loss on December 14, 2012 at 7:59 am said:
When someone writes an piece of writing
he/she keeps the idea of a user in his/her mind that how a user can know it.
Thus that’s why this post is perfect. Thanks!

Reply ↓
Gaming on December 20, 2012 at 12:52 am said:
It’s really a nice and helpful piece of information. I’m satisfied that you shared this useful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.

Reply ↓
home based business ideas on December 20, 2012 at 1:15 pm said:
You could certainly see your skills within the work you write. The sector hopes for more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to say how they believe. Always follow your heart.

Reply ↓
Earth 4 Energy Review on December 21, 2012 at 5:34 am said:
Hello there! This article couldn’t be written much better! Reading through this article reminds me of my previous roommate! He constantly kept preaching about this. I will forward this information to him. Fairly certain he will have a great read. Many thanks for sharing!

Reply ↓
film posters film festivals comedy films james bond films kids films film site film news best comedy films best films ever film director horror film new hindi movies new films 2011 independent film 2010 film robin williams films film database internationa on December 24, 2012 at 8:30 am said:
Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is a really
well written article. I will be sure to bookmark it and come back to read
more of your useful information. Thanks for the post. I’ll definitely return.

Reply ↓
samedifference on January 14, 2013 at 1:49 am said:
An intriguing discussion is definitely worth comment. I believe that you need to publish more on this topic, it may not be a taboo subject but usually people don’t discuss these subjects. To the next! All the best!!

-----------------------------------------------------------

Birth

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=15

That miraculous moment of our own conception dictates our birth, our live and our death. It is an instant in time so critical to our being and statistically impossible when one considers the chances of the event even occurring and yet the truth is that we exist. Our life our family and our inheritance are all matters of extraordinary chance that has resulted from those infinitesimal events that stretch back thousands if not millions of years in time. If our forbearers did not do what they did at an exact point in time multiplied from generation to generation and each particular situation in each of their lives, we would never have been born, would never have lived and would never have died. We would never have been part of a family, received inheritance, or needed a lawyer or any laws. From the moment we are born our lives are influenced by the law.
The socio economic status of our parents has a determining influence upon our lives, it affects our health, our education and how we live our lives. Inheritance passed down through the ages from our family forbearers is a key determinate of the socio economic environment into which we are be born.

Family inheritance law

Family inheritance law has a critical influence upon how family inheritance is managed. When family inheritance is abused by the practitioners of family inheritance law, the value of the inheritance can be substantially reduced. This has had a major impact upon many of us as it is a predetermination for our socio economic setting in life.
The value of family inheritance will determine the schools we attend, the suburbs we live in, the ability of our family to pay for critical intervention services during our lives, and the holidays we spend together with our family. It influences the lives of our children our grandchildren and our offspring for eternity.
Please link to this article published in the Age 20 01 12
Wrong side of the tracks has identified the reality of class division in Australia and its real impact upon Australian Families, http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/wrong-side-of-the-tracks-in-...

Family Matters

Refer to Family Matters No. 88, 2011
http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2011/fm88/fm88a.html
“The wellbeing of Australian families is affected by the resources they have available at present and anticipate will be available in the future (Saunders & Zhu, 2009). Part of that anticipation consists of expectations about what may be left to them by their parents. Those expectations matter. They make a difference to economic planning and to family harmony. They provide young generations with additional assets. They often bring out strong family feelings. In particular, expectations about appropriate and inappropriate inheritance arrangements can lead to misunderstanding, conflict and disharmony in the family.
People’s expectations are important also to researchers of family relations and values and to professionals who help people deal with their inheritance arrangements. Lawyers, counselors, public trustees, for instance, all are involved in helping people make appropriate decisions about bequests. The courts often become the final destination of conflicts that tear families apart, sometimes for several generations.”
Inheritance abuse is one of the drivers of this class division. The failure of our legal profession and a succession of liberal, labour, and conglomerate governments, both state and federal to address this abuse by the legal profession through tighter regulation of inheritance practitioners and nominated executors has and will continue to drive this class division of Australian Families.

------------------------------------------------------------

Family

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=9

Family

We are all members of a family. The evolution of our laws which originated out of family has led to article 17 of The Victorian Charter of Human Rights being written.
The article states:

Protection of families and children

(1) Families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State.
(2) Every child has the right, without discrimination, to such protection as is in his or her best interests and is needed by him or her by reason of being a child.

In Australian law there is a fundamental disconnect between family and the shaping of law. The problem can be identified in the power sharing arrangement between our federal and state governments which does not extend to the citizens of Australia (except at voting times) who are all members of family units. The current proposed changes to our constitution by recognising the aboriginal people as the first citizens of this land needs to extend into a power sharing arrangement between the citizens of Australia and their respective governments. This shift in power would make governments accountable to the families of Australian citizens. Our laws would then be formed by families in collaboration with the legal profession and would therefore work in the interests of Australian families instead of a self-serving legal profession who remain unaccountable to Australian families. The legal profession obtains approximately 50% of its revenue through its work with families. Divorces, death and debt are its feeding ground. The current legal process that is based upon the English adversarial system is expensive, time consuming, emotionally damaging for all of the paying participants (Men women and children) and has a greater error rate when compared to the European truth seeking system. If our current legal system were to be overhauled so as to work in the interests of families approximately 60% of the legal costs that are currently being bled from vulnerable Australian families by our legal industry would remain in the hands of Australian families.
Considering the significance of inheritance upon a family’s development and the role lawyers play in its transfer from the living to the dead one would assume that lawyers who are nominated as executors would be viewed as lawyers by the law and would be regulated under the legal professional services act.
Lawyers who are acting as executors are not deemed to be lawyers by The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and complaints about their activities by beneficiaries are not investigated by The Legal Services Commissioner because they are not acting as lawyers.
Ref to letter Pg 54 Victorian Legal Services Commissioner 14 01 2011.
“You complain that decisions were made in accordance with the relevant legislation rather than in accordance with your asserted human rights to inherit property and to be a family. With regard to any alleged breach of your human rights by the practitioner, the Victorian Charter of Human Rights only applies to public authorities. A legal practitioner in private practice is not required to comply with the Charter.”

Considering that lawyers generate about 25% of their income from wills and inheritance issues which directly influence family trajectory, families being comprised of human beings, one would have assumed that lawyers in private practice who are acting as executors would be bound by our human rights charter.
Inheritance law reform in Australia is occurring at a snail’s pace, is dominated by lawyer interest groups and does not involve family lobby groups. Where they do exist they are poorly informed, outnumbered by lawyers and starved of financial and intellectual resources.
Australian families when confronted with an inheritance issue are subjected to an antiquated adversarial process that is expensive, time consuming, inaccurate and favours lawyers prolonging disputes in order to benefit their own pockets in the form of horrendously high hourly fees of $500 per hour, well over ten times the rate of an average person’s hourly rate of pay.
It can be succinctly described as plunder of family or more bluntly put as grave robbing. Hence this web site and the book Lawyers of Grave Robbers?.
Our inheritance laws are so draconian that a lawyer executor Ian Bult and the members of his law firm Russell Kennedy were able to withhold a letter written by a deceased mother six years prior to her death, from her children, for a further six years, under the guise of legal client privilege. They stated that the contents of this letter allowed them to distribute her estate unequally amongst her children. Upon the family receiving the letter it revealed that Ian Bult, supported by his law firm Russell Kennedy and its members, lied about its contents.
The word “lie” being used to describe conduct that gives rise to issues of breach of duty, deceit, misrepresentation, and false and misleading conduct.

This whole saga was carried out under the noses of the Law Institute of Victoria, The Legal Services Ombudsman, the State and Federal Attorney Generals, the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and the Victorian Ombudsman. All that was asked of these bodies was to give my mother`s family a fair go by getting Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy to give my mother`s family a copy of the letter so as we as her children had the power to interpret our own mothers wishes. These bodies denied my mother’s children that right and allowed a terrible breach of duty, deceit, misrepresentation, and false and misleading conduct to be perpetuated upon them by an unaccountable lawyer Ian Bult and the members of his law firm Russell Kennedy.
One would only find such oppression of family within the walls of a prison. A prison established in a place where family ties no longer existed. A prison situated on the other side of the planet in a time where aeroplanes did not exist, the telephone and radio had not been invented and the only means of communication was through the written word by a population of which 90% could neither read nor write. A prison situated on a land deemed by its masters as terra nullius there by even denying its original family residents, the aboriginal people a right to the recognition under the law of their family existence.

Our multicultural society and the impact of Family inheritance Law in Australia upon its development

Our multicultural society has evolved as a result of worldwide events. These events have resulted in a large number of overseas families deciding that Australia is a good place to re-establish their families after social disruption including war, revolution and the breakdown of law and order within their countries of origin. These people often arrived in Australia with nothing apart from their lives and some of their family members. They then spend the remainder of their lives working hard in order to help their children establish their families in Australia. These families apart from overcoming language and cultural barriers are thrown in at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Inheritance within those family structures plays a major role in their intergenerational development as it plays a major part in determining the schools we attend, the suburbs we live in, the ability of our family to pay for critical intervention services during our lives, and the holidays we spend together with our family. It influences the lives of our children our grandchildren and our offspring for eternity.
These families are particularly vulnerable to inheritance abuse by our current legal processing of inheritance matters.
• They are more likely to appoint a lawyer as an executor because they are deprived of an extended family network through the act of migration.
• They are less likely to have access to a permanent and trusted family lawyer.
• They will be unfamiliar with how the inheritance laws work within Australia and that because they have been constructed by lawyers in a nation that invented terra nullius are devoid of family input and fail to recognise the importance of healthy intergenerational family development through inheritance.
The inability of our legal regulators to tackle this issue is simply a disgrace. One has to ask why this is so. Particularly when we have all recognised that we are a nation of families many of whom have recently migrated to this land.
To see the problem one has to analyse the socioeconomic background of the legal profession. The majority of lawyers attend private schools which mean their families sit at the higher end of the social spectrum. The families have more money are better educated and because they are educated and speak English their children inevitably have a greater chance of getting the marks that will allow them to become lawyers. The exercise is self-perpetuating and is an intergenerational transfer of legal power from one generation to the next within a confined social group. Due to the historical structure of this group of people who make up the majority of the legal profession, vested interest often dominates over social need when it comes to reforming our laws. The group itself can exert influence upon who will be given positions of influence and who will be excluded.
The legal profession currently has a serious conflict of interest by failing to develop a low cost efficient ,timely and truth seeking process to deal with inheritance matters and through its inactions impeding the intergenerational development of migrant families who have given up so much of their lives so as to re-establish their families in Australia.

Email: charada@mira.net

3 THOUGHTS ON “FAMILY”
colin on May 14, 2012 at 11:36 am said:
we know how you feel, its about time these cowboys were pulled into line, we connot be asked to abide by laws that protect the ones abusing the laws

Reply ↓
lista de emails on June 5, 2012 at 4:05 am said:
Quero agradecer a você pelo prazer de ler este ótimo post.
___________________________________________
http://www.maladiretasegmentada.com.br

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 10, 2012 at 12:30 am said:
I fully

I fully agree and can identify with Diarmuid’s analysis that ‘Lawyers are Grave Robbers’. I supported my late father Charles Ferris (deceased 9th October 2005) in the last 19 years of his life in what he described on the day before his death as ’19 years of Living Hell, created by so-called Solicitors in Omagh, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland, who were like a nest of rats’.

My late father was deprived of his legal rights, by Solicitor James Montague and Solicitor Christine Meyler both with so-called Legal Practices in Omagh, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland.

The central fraud was processed by Solicitor Christine Meyler, in May 1994, in an ‘Affidavit’ in which it was testified that my Great Grandmother, Anne Ferris, (deceased 5th September 1925) had 8 children, all of whom are now deceased..’ the FRAUD was the following words, ‘ her only net of kin, and without Grandchild or other descendant, the issue of a pre-deceased child her surviving’ THIS last section is 100% false as my late father was one of 33 Grandchildren of Anne Ferris deceased 5th September 1925.

I only discovered the ‘False Affidavit’ in December 2006 and because this caused ‘a defective devolution of the legal estate’ I could not sign a ‘Contract for Sale’ of my late father’s property and at this time the ‘Contract for Sale was for £8.4 million pounds sterling.

When the matter came before the Lord Chief Justice, for Northern Ireland, at this time (2007) Lord Chief Justice, Sir Brian Kerr, he described the ‘False Fraudulent Affidavit’ as ‘”A Silly Stupid Fraud So Silly And Stupid A Fraud It Is Not A Fraud.”

In February 2009, two barristers for Solicitor Christine Meyler, Conceded in writing that from November 1945 from the death of his father, my late father Charles Ferris, was ‘Legally entitled to ownership of his ancesteral home’ signed. Mr. Dermot Fee QC & Mr. Gary McHugh BL. 25th February 2009.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Death

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=17

Death eventually comes to us all with a surety like no other; it is a place where the soul can finally rest in peace. Death is the final event of our lives and with it we leave behind our possessions, our friends and our families. As with birth and our transition through life we cannot escape the law. The law will officially pronounce us dead. It will determine how your body will be treated and through your will it can even determine the destiny of your soul. Our laws have been developed to protect families as they and their development are recognised by all governments as the structures that create healthy societies. The writing of legal wills probate courts and ascendancy laws all work to allow an orderly transfer of the possessions of the dead back to the living.

Approximately 50,000 people die each year in Victoria with an average estate worth $500,000, approximately $25 billion per annum.
• The legal profession obtains about 20% of its revenue stream from this source, between one and two billion dollars per year within the state of Victoria.
• With the minimum cost of probating an estate being about $10,000 and costs ranging upwards of $100,000 for contested estates that do not go to trial. A full trial starting at $200,000 to any bodies guess.
I`d have at a guess that the revenue stream to the legal profession and its affiliates from family inheritance in the state of Victoria would be in the region of $1.5 billion per annum. Over a ten year period 500,000 Victorians who have died will contribute approximately 22 billion dollars of their estates if interest is included to Victoria’s 16,000 lawyers, which equates to about $20,000 for each Victorian family or $1.3 million per lawyer.

N S W Stats for legal costs of deceased estates going to trail.

Victorian Stats for legal costs of deceased estates going to trail.

A large proportion of this cost is derived by an inefficient time consuming and antiquated process which is devoid of any standards, mandatory training, and a mechanism to systematically analyse and compare the costs of each particular case with one another. This allows unaccountable lawyers and law firms to further abuse a process that has already operates in their own financial favour.
Hence that saying “Hurt the living Exploit the dead.”

Night of the Living Dead Includes Zombie Movie.

Email: charada@mira.net

ONE THOUGHT ON “DEATH”
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 19, 2012 at 12:49 am said:
Serial Liars, By Evan Whitton

http://www.lsa.net.au/wcb-content/uploads/lsa/files/Serial-Liars_Ebook.p... date accessed Monday 18th June 2012.

The record spin-out, Jennens v Jennens, began in the anciently corrupt Chancery Court in 1798, four years after the water lawyer was caught near Workington.

Jennens concerned the estate of a loan shark named William Jennens, whose grandfather, Robert, had married twice and called boys from each marriage Robert.

William Jennens plied his trade in London’s gambling dens. He was the richest commoner in England, worth £5 million, about £500 million today.

Jennens, 98, unmarried, went to a solicitor to make a will, but forgot to take his spectacles, and the solicitor’s did not fit.

He died a few days later, on Tuesday, June 19, 1798, the unsigned will still in his pocket, and £20,000 (about $A6 million today) in cash in the house.

Lawyers for alleged relatives flooded into the Chancery Court.

Jennens v Jennens was still going when Dickens was born in 1812, when he worked as a law clerk at Ellis & Blackmore in 1827-28, when he used it as the model for Jarndyce v Jarndyce in Bleak House in 1852-53, and when he died in 1870.

It ended in 1915, 117 years after it began, but only because generations of water lawyers had ‘devoured’ the entire estate.

Jennens v Jennens had thus been on foot for 55 years when Dickens observed that the law exists to make business for lawyers.]

PS. In Ireland there is a famous Country & Western Singer called ‘Big Tom McBride’ who sings a very popular song called:-

“You Are Going Out The Same Way You Came In”

the following words are also included in the song:-

“The Lawyers Get The Best And The Kinfolk Get The Rest’

similar to Jarndyce –v- Jarndyce as quoted above by Evan Whitton in his masterpiece ‘Serial Liars’. Regards J.F.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Inheritance

Inheritance

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=13

Definition: The right of an heir to succeed to property after the death of an ancestor.
To manage this transfer of ownership from life to death we created inheritance laws so as our families would not be racked with dispute upon our deaths. Family inheritance law is one of the foundation blocks upon which human civilisation has been created. It has been formed by family in the interests of positive family development and survival.
When a lawyer from outside of the family group comes into a power conflict with the family, as is the case between my mother’s family and the members of Russell Kennedy and Ian Bult, the law must act in the interests of the family and not in the financial interest of the lawyers (Ian Bult and the members of Russell Kennedy). Inheritance distribution within a family unit after a parent has died is a process based upon trust and is the outcome of all of the events and relationships between the parent and their children throughout their lives. It is the final act of love that a parent bestows upon their children when they leave this world, knowing that they will no longer be there to help and protect them. This final act of love is bestowed to their offspring and others they loved by the deceased in the form of a legal document known as a will. A will is a legally binding contract that states the wishes of the dead in regards to how their possessions should be distributed to the living. It is a sacred document enshrined in law that has evolved over thousands of years of human development. The person writing their will assumes it is protected by law, and assumes that all persons participating in their will, shall not abuse those laws by behaving in a dishonest manner to serve their own interests. Particularly lawyers placed in a position of fiduciary trust as executors by the deceased. The deceased person believes those lawyers will tell the truth, be accommodating to the needs of their family and will not abuse their position of power, a power vested in them by the deceased in the form of trust. If these people do abuse this trust by serving their own interests they abuse the inheritance rights, the family rights and the human rights of the deceased`s family members. They also abuse a system of law that has been built on thousands of years of wisdom that has evolved with human civilisation, and the realisation that families are the fundamental group unit of society and are entitled to be protected by society and the State.

A Will (Wills)

A will is a contract between the living and the dead. It is the bridge between life and death. A will describes in law who will inherit their possessions after their death. It is a reflection upon how the deceased person felt towards the beneficiaries of their estate, particularly their own children. A will, will have a lasting benefit upon the people who inherit and their families. A will, will nominate an executor or executors who are in an absolute position of trust so as their wishes regarding their estate may be carried out after they have died.
Quite frequently people nominate their lawyer as the executor to their estate in their will, after all they go to a lawyer to get their will written and in the process they make the lawyer the executor. Our multicultural, society and the large influx of migrants to Australia after World War 11 who have few extended family networks has led to a greater dependency by our population on lawyers becoming executors.
When people nominate a lawyer as the executor they are not aware that:

A lawyer who is an executor can make a decision based on information he or she has that can be claimed to be privileged. This means that this information can be withheld from family members, even a family member who has been nominated by the deceased as an executor, even when the family member and the lawyer executor disagree upon the wishes of the deceased.

The lawyer executor is not accountable for the decisions he or she makes under the Victorian Legal Professional Act 2004 because they are acting as an executor and not a lawyer. They can claim that the information they hold that allows them to hold their view of the deceased wishes is privileged, and should not be available to the family member executor.

This situation puts the lawyer executor in a more powerful position than the family member executor when determining the wishes of the deceased.

If we concur that the family unit is the foundation block of the formation of our civilised society, thus the point from which our laws emanate then why is it that the legal professional who is acting as an executor of a deceased estate can be allowed to hold vital information from the family member executor which can assist in determining the wishes of the deceased?

In attempting to make a decision of the wishes of a person who is no longer alive one would have thought that the interpretation of any information disclosed to any party including a lawyer should be available to the family representative in order that the family representative may also have an interpretation of that information. Particularly when one considers that the family representative would in most instances have been in contact on regular occasions with the deceased before they died and would be familiar with their wishes.
The law even allows the lawyer executor to engage in acts of, breach of duty, deceit, misrepresentation, and false and misleading conduct. In other words lie about or misconstrue the contents of this so called privileged information to the children of the deceased and when our legal services commissioner is provided with the evidence of the lie he states: Ref pg 29 Letter written by Victorian Legal Services Commissioner 20 02 2012
“In this case, I note that you have provided me with a copy of your late mother’s letter to Mr Bult dated 30 October 1998. Whilst the letter itself is a document that I have not previously had an opportunity to consider, the contents of same do not provide me with any new information which would allow me to re-open the complaint.”
Appointing an executor to your estate will be the greatest acts of trust you will ever commit to because when you’re dead you have no say. The executor does.
A lawyer is appointed as an executor by the deceased as a complete act of their faith in the trustworthiness of the law and the legal profession and yet in most instances the lawyer who is appointed as executor will not tell the testator that when they act as an executor they will no longer be acting as a lawyer and will not be bound by the legal professional act and will not be accountable to the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner.
This concealment by the lawyer of the true nature of the relationship the testator is entering into with the lawyer contravenes the Trade Practices Act and is an act of misleading and deceptive conduct which breaks relationship of trust between the lawyer and the testator from the outset unless of course he had the decency to inform the testator of the true state of the new relationship.

A lawyer would need as an absolute minimum (so as to not be engaging in false and misleading conduct, by misrepresenting himself and the legal profession, along with its perception of public trust to the person nominating the lawyer as an executor):
To introduce a clause within the will stating:
I the testator nominate Joe Blogs “Lawyer”, and I am fully aware that when Joe Blogs becomes my executor Joe will no longer be a lawyer and I am now hiring him as an executor and he will no longer be bound by the Legal Professional Act of 2004 and that The Legal Services Commissioner will therefore not have the power to investigate any complaints bought against him by the beneficiaries of the estate.

A far more effective solution would be for the legal professional act to bind lawyers who are acting as executors to it, by stating that even though they are executors they are deemed to be lawyers.

Australia`s conflicting and complex inheritance laws

Email: charada@mira.net

22 THOUGHTS ON “INHERITANCE”
colin on May 14, 2012 at 12:28 pm said:
Our lawyer acting as executor thinks he is acting as a lawyer, has even threatened my wife with legal action if she continues to talk to other lawyers about his misconduct and abuse. He even states that he will not charge the estate for legal work as renumeration has already been provided for in the will as he gets a percentage. So if he thinks he is acting as a lawyer, the person who made the will thought he would be acting as a lawyer, it would seem that he is in fact a lawyer and executor in this case.The only people who think he is not a lawyer are the LSC, the Ombudsman.The probate office when requested to audit letter of administration just say its not their duty, what the hell are they there for? Then when requested access to the next letter of administration which was not lodged correctly, say because of our complaint, it not avaliable because its under investigation.. How much moe oppression do our families have to endureh from these judicaries, before they just loose all respect.

Reply ↓
Temple Byland on May 22, 2012 at 10:36 am said:
Keep functioning ,impressive job!

Reply ↓
Leanna Plathe on May 24, 2012 at 9:48 pm said:
Keep functioning ,remarkable job!

Reply ↓
Cherri Barcroft on May 25, 2012 at 12:45 pm said:
Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wished to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. In any case I will be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again very soon!

Reply ↓
Tinisha Hulbert on May 25, 2012 at 1:58 pm said:
Definitely, what a fantastic website and informative posts, I definitely will bookmark your blog.Have an awsome day!

Reply ↓
Issac Maez on June 5, 2012 at 12:47 pm said:
Hi there, just became aware of your blog through Google, and found that it is truly informative. I am going to watch out for brussels. I’ll be grateful if you continue this in future. A lot of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris Northern Ireland on June 10, 2012 at 1:04 am said:
[Sheena Grattan (2000) Testamentary Negligence SLS Legal Publications (NI). Has an interesting article on page 19.

'During the course of his judgement Harman J also made the following observations about will-drafting within the legal profession:

"Clients are apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for the drawing of a will... (They are) therefore apprehensive about the fees that will be charged for drawing a will.

He said clients are quite pleasantly relieved about the low rate of fees charged because as (one of the solicitors who gave evidence as an expert witness) frankly said to me, solicitors tend to regard instructions for a will as what I, I hope politely, called seed-corn for the future, and he slightly more harshly described as a sprat to catch a mackerel – the mackerel being the administration of the estate which is a notoriously fee-generating occupation...]

Unbelievably after spending a full day in court and hearing the ‘lies’ of Solicitor James Montague in March 2007. My brother and I attended a public meeting in Saint Joseph’s Hall, Omagh (organised by the Lady’s group) and the topic was ‘Wills and Probate’ and the expert legal person was, you guessed correctly, Solicitor James Montague. After an hour or more of ‘dry discussion’ covering ‘Wills and Probate’ a sceptical farmer in the audience, mentioned that he was not sure that leaving property in a will was the best thing to do especially with regard to big issues such as ‘No Official Records regarding the Will’ etc. This farmer then asked the following specific question:- “Mr. Montague, what is the best and wisest thing a person should do with their land and money, etc?” Solicitor James Montague, did not even hesitate for a second and replied:- “The Wise Man Leaves Nothing?” This sobering statement is similar to the above quote from Senior Lecturer in Law Sheena Grattan.
Regards Joe.

Reply ↓
Back Pain on June 13, 2012 at 9:28 pm said:
Merely wanna remark on few general things, The website design is perfect, the subject material is real superb. “The sun sets without thy assistance.” by The Talmud.

Reply ↓
rozwod warszawa on June 16, 2012 at 6:34 am said:
Can I simply say what a relief to find someone who really is aware of what they are talking about on the internet. You undoubtedly know easy methods to deliver a problem to light and make it important. More individuals need to learn this and understand this side of the story. I can`t believe your`e no more fashionable since you definitely have the gift.

Reply ↓
sms loans on June 16, 2012 at 5:54 pm said:
We’re a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community. Your web site provided us with valuable information to work on. You’ve done a formidable job and our entire community will be grateful to you.

Reply ↓
Elisha Serves on June 16, 2012 at 10:18 pm said:
It’s a shame you don’t have a donate button! I’d certainly donate to this outstanding blog! I guess for now i’ll settle for bookmarking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account. I look forward to new updates and will talk about this blog with my Facebook group. Chat soon!

Reply ↓
Rainone on June 20, 2012 at 10:59 pm said:
Fantastic publish, very informative. I wonder why the opposite experts of this sector do not notice this. You must proceed your writing. I am confident, you have a great readers’ base already!|What’s Taking place i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have found It absolutely helpful and it has helped me out loads. I hope to contribute & assist different users like its aided me. Good job.

Reply ↓
viagra on June 20, 2012 at 11:24 pm said:
I wish to show some thanks to this writer just for bailing me out of such a instance. After searching throughout the the web and finding principles that were not productive, I was thinking my life was well over. Existing without the solutions to the issues you have resolved as a result of your main short article is a critical case, as well as the kind that might have badly damaged my entire career if I hadn’t discovered your web page. Your own personal understanding and kindness in maneuvering every item was vital. I don’t know what I would’ve done if I had not encountered such a thing like this. I’m able to at this point relish my future. Thanks a lot so much for this skilled and results-oriented guide. I won’t hesitate to recommend your blog post to anyone who desires guidance on this situation.

Reply ↓
Joe Ferris on June 21, 2012 at 12:26 am said:
Brendan Loughrey from Strabane, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland, deprived of his lawful inheritance by so-called Irish Lawyers & so-called Irish Judges.

[A brief outline of the involvement of The High Court, The Four Courts, Inns Quay, Dublin 7, Republic of Ireland and the ‘LEGAL ROBBERY’ of:-

Mr Brendan Loughrey, 34 Eden Terrace, Strabane, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland, BT82 8EN.

Re: Record No. 2005218SP initially before Justice Laffoy.

It took 3 Donegal Solicitors:- Cathleen Dolan; Seamus Gunn & Dorrian Solicitors. AND 3 Barristers, namely, Barrister Murphy; Barrister McGrath & Barrister Dorrian. AND 6 court appearances, even before Master Honohan AND using up to €140,000 of the beneficiaries money to find out the difference between a first cousin and a second cousin.

But simply by reading the Succession Act 1965 Section 27 (4) taking 60 minutes, the Solicitors, Barristers & Judges involved should have read on to Section 71 of the Succession Act together with Form PA2 Succession Act 1965 Section 71 (1)

[The person or persons who, at the date of death of the intestate, stand nearest in blood relationship to him shall be taken as his next of kin.]

Probate practice direction section B10 it is obvious that first cousins rank higher than others such as second cousins.

Mr. Justice Clarke 1st court appearance on 24/4/06 took 10 minutes to know the difference between a ‘first cousin’ and a ‘second cousin’ he must have read and abided by the books such as ‘The Succession act 1965, Probate Practice direction B10, unlike the other Judges before him.

Laffoy was not one of these Judges, but would that have made any difference as she was going to make the beneficiaries pay? My case didn’t come to court before Judge Laffoy until 10th July 2006.

I, Brendan Loughrey told Judge Laffoy on two occasions in court what Solicitor Cathleen Dolan, Donegal Town, County Donegal was doing, namely the 31st July 2007 and 14th July 2008.

Judge Laffoy should have reported Solicitor Cathleen Dolan to the Law Society.

Judge Laffoy should have been concerned that approximately 10 farms belonging to (my deceased 1st cousin) Michael Campbell and on 14/7/2008 I told Judge Laffoy that Solicitor Cathleen Dolan had stole these 10 farms from the beneficiaries, valued at more than €600,000 from the beneficiaries.

Solicitor Cathleen Dolan, has lied and sworn false affidavits to the court, lied to the Probate office and lied to the revenue.
It became apparent that she did not have any regard to the true beneficiaries of the estate.

Despite only obtaining letters of administration (by deceit) for my 1st cousin Michael Campbell’s estate, Solicitor Cathleen Dolan disregarded the Probate practice directive wherein it states:-

[(iv) When a person dies leaving a house and/or land in his/her sole name it will be necessary to apply for Probate in order to sell or transfer the property to another person.] This is also the requirement of The Succession Act 1965 section 55 no 3, 12.

Judge Laffoy stated that the beneficiaries should pay the costs after we won our case against the Plaintiff Solicitor Cathleen Dolan.

We have never before witnessed in any case that ‘LOSERS’ of that case actually ‘be paid’ and were beneficiaries have to pay the costs.

The two Campbells and myself Brendan Loughrey were ordered to do exactly this as beneficiaries and to pay all costs to Solicitor Cathleen Dolan, Solicitor Seamus Gunn, Dorrian Solicitors & M.M. Mulrine Solicitors, on the order of Judge Laffoy. The two Campbells and I were the lawful first cousins of Michael Campbell deceased.

Judge Laffoy was providing a ‘Financial Feeding Trough’ for the named Solicitors & Barristers costing us the beneficiaries in this case €140,000 after our 1st cousin Michael Campbell died. 10+ years after Michael Campbell died, Solicitor Cathleen Dolan is still ‘FEEDING’ out of the trough.

Judge Laffoy and Betty McGuigan, after 8 court appearance before Judge Laffoy, both of them, didn’t even get my name as Brendan Loughrey correct on 31st July 2007 and called me instead Hugh Loughrey, committing an entail irreparable or serious mischief.

Anyone who is ‘aiding & abetting’ with Judge Laffoy and taking money off the beneficiaries is/are equally guilty.

Solicitor Cathleen Dolan should have advertised a month after Michael Campbell’s death to look for ‘next of kin’ as per Sections 27(4) and 71 of The Succession Act 1965 and Probate Practice direction PA2.

For the past twenty months Solicitor Cathleen Dolan has not answered any of my phone calls or letters in regard to my request for information on my deceased 1st cousin Michael Campbell’s Bank Statements, Land Registry Folios & Maps.

Justice was not done for me Mr Brendan Loughrey in Judge Laffoy’s court on 31st July 2007 and 14th July 2008. Yours Sincerely, signed Brendan Loughrey.]

NB. Typed from information provided in writing by Mr Brendan Loughrey at the Victims of the Legal Profession Society Demonstration in Support of Ms Aileen Doherty at her home 1 Conneyburrow Road, Lifford, County Donegal, on Wednesday 20th June 2012.

Mr. Brendan Loughrey has provided express permission and direction to ‘post’ the contents on the internet to expose the injustice he has suffered by Irish Solicitors, Irish Barristers & Irish Judges and he continues to suffer this injustice in June 2012. Regards J.F.

Reply ↓
community on June 24, 2012 at 2:14 pm said:
Thanks for the marvelous posting! I really enjoyed reading it, you could be a great author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog and will often come back later on. I want to encourage you continue your great job, have a nice weekend!

Reply ↓
Katheryn Fileds on October 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm said:
We would like to thank you all over again for the gorgeous ideas you gave Jeremy when preparing her own post-graduate research as well as, most importantly, pertaining to providing many of the ideas in one blog post. Provided that we had known of your blog a year ago, we will have been rescued from the needless measures we were participating in. Thank you very much.

Reply ↓
cosmetic dentistry on October 7, 2012 at 4:32 am said:
beatles here comes the sun lyrics

Reply ↓

admin
on October 7, 2012 at 8:20 am said:
It would sound good on the home page. Backed up with set the controls to the heart of the sun. Pink floyd

Reply ↓
lv bags outlet on November 10, 2012 at 10:45 pm said:
I was looking at some of your content on this site and I believe this web site is very informative! Keep on posting.

Reply ↓
Geoffrey Schonhardt on November 12, 2012 at 11:06 pm said:
I wanted to thank you a lot much more for this incredible web-site you have designed here. It truly is full of helpful guidelines for those that are genuinely interested in this subject, specifically this extremely post. Your all in fact sweet plus thoughtful of other people as nicely as reading your internet site posts can be a fantastic delight in my experience. And what a generous reward! Mary and I will definitely have fun creating use of your guidelines in what we ought to do in some weeks. Our checklist is a mile long which means that your ideas may well be put to great use.

Reply ↓
Lacresha Dominquez on November 16, 2012 at 11:57 am said:
You need to join in a contest 1st with the greatest blogs on the web. I will recommend this internet website!

Reply ↓
gclub on December 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm said:
Well I definitely enjoyed reading it. This article provided by you is very effective for accurate planning.

------------------------------------------------------------

Life

Link: http://www.lawyersorgraverobbers.com/web/?page_id=23

Our conception and the gift of life, given to us by our family is so unique it is sacred to every person and every family group who have lived upon our planet, it is where trust and the natural bonds between people are born. Our love for our mothers and fathers is a natural love, as is the love they give to their children, the appreciation of the creation of a living child and the gift of being born being naturally shared between parent and child. This love between a child and a parent was given since time began and will continue into eternity. Grandparents, uncles, brothers, sisters, in laws, cousins, nieces and nephews all share in this love of the creation of life and their family.

The natural love shared between family member’s forms within us through our lives to shape our personalities. As we develop into children we engage with other people who are also members of families, we share a common history and common values in regards to what is right and what is wrong hence we are able to adapt to and enjoy the new people whom we meet. We make friends, fall in love and produce more children who love and thus the cycle of life continues. This process of living allows us as human beings to understand and develop the concept of trust. Trust allows us to love one another and to form the friendships we find so important in life. The concept of trust entwines itself into the fabric of our laws, and the trust between people and the legal profession in the life blood of the principle of the rule of law.

This love of each other and our need to care for one another bought us together as communities. These communities initially comprised of small tribes of hunter gatherers that evolved into groups of cultivators and eventually into the civilizations we now inhabit. Throughout this transition of human history we have made laws for ourselves. These laws allow us to live together in groups; they are the transfer of wisdom passed down from one generation to the next. Our laws, the rules that we have learned to live by come from the past are moulded in our life times and passed to future generations so as to service the survival of the human race.

Through these transitions we began to create laws so as we could benefit from each other’s sharing of resources. We very quickly realised that the ever progressing cycle of birth life and death followed a natural sequence of the passing of the days the transition of the seasons, and the accumulation of time through the years of our lives. We became to know that for our families to remain secure after our own life time, whatever we had managed to accumulate during our lives must be left to them so as to perpetuate our creation that is our own family.

We all know that wealthier people live longer and have happier lives on average. That is why so many of us work hard to earn more money so as we can become wealthier. Another component of wealth stems from inheritance. The wealthier the family heritage the wealthier generally are the offspring, provided factors impacting adversely upon that inherited wealth include war and acts of barbarism or theft are not enacted upon the family.

These events have normally occurred during periods of invasion, where one group has occupied another community’s territory and imposed their laws upon that territory, those laws being different from the invaded population’s laws and favouring the occupying population. The new laws are not shaped by the families of the occupied nation and do not evolve through the notion of trust, having been imposed by the dominant invader through acts of war and barbarism.

These laws permit the invader to plunder and exploit the families of the defeated and have very little to do with trust.
In our contemporary democratic and multicultural nation Australia we are educated to believe that we can trust lawyers. We know that when we hire a lawyer we are normally dealing with issues of life changing significance either for ourselves or for our family, in such an important consumer relationship we have to be assured that we can trust lawyers. The laws regulating lawyers bind them to their clients though the relationship of trust.

So important and fundamental is this trust between the public and the legal profession to the rule of law that our government finances the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner to ensure us that any lawyers who are untrustworthy will be disciplined so as we can be assured that we can trust our lawyer.

Did you know that if you appoint a lawyer as an executor to your estate that when they become the executor they are no longer bound by the legal professional act and are not deemed to be acting as a lawyer by the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner?

Email: charada@mira.net

ONE THOUGHT ON “LIFE”
anefrake on October 18, 2012 at 6:13 am said:
view replica chanel with low price rbZcmckx http://replicachanelbags.tsublog.tsukaeru.net/

Support The Love For Life Campaign, Kindom & The Cristian Family

Supporting The Love For Life Website, The Cristian Family and The Living Dream Of Kindom (Creation Of Do No Harm Communities) - The Love for Life website is produced for free without a fee (no contract or conditions attached) as a gift of love for the benefit of others. If you feel you have gained something from visiting it, feel inspired, and would like to reciprocate as an equal exchange in substance and support (value), you are most welcome to make a gift of love to keep it and the dream of Kindom going. As always, we thank you for your gifts of love.

Additional Options

Bank:
Account name:
BSB:
Account number:
SWIFT BIC Code:
Australia New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ)
Fiona Caroline Cristian
012 547
5576 81376
ANZBAU3M

PAY PAL

Go To Your Pay Pal Account To Send Gifts To action @ loveforlife.com.au
Additional Options

 

The Cristian Family November 2006

We Stand For NO SYSTEM

Kindom (Do No Harm Communities) is the dream for freedom, but it is the dream for the freedom of those around us who also live the dream of freedom, because it is in living for the freedom of others that we get our freedom. When we live for the dreams of Kindom of those around us, we live life as a gift because we live for (dedicate our lives to) their dream of freedom, truth, peace, joy, abundance, etc, just as they live for our Kindom dreams too. This is true co-creation (cooperation) with no attack on the uniqueness of each of us. When we live this way, we have no need for any man-made system - everything/everyone has already been taken care of by our love for life.

Just as we do not have to jump 10 feet across the room to grab our next breath, neither do we have to worry about food, water and shelter because it has all been taken care of as we each co-create Kindoms/Kin-Domains for everyone. Now everybody and everything of the dream of life that is Kindom/Paradise is free (has been set free once again). The issue is greed and selfishness, power and control trips, arrogance, ignorance, being fed many many lies and being traumatised. The issue is not overpopulation - there is more than enough land available for every family to have a hectare (2.5 acres Kin-Domain) to care for. The land of Australia can provide a Kin-Domain for every family across Earth, each with a food forest, clean fresh drinking water and plenty of space for building natural do no harm habitats and with plenty of land left over.

Everyone must have the freedom to take full-responsibility for their lives, for the water they drink, the food they eat and for their shelter. Currently, "The System" forces everyone to give up taking full-responsibility so that we become grown up children accustomed to sucking on the nipples of "The System" corporations for everything, having to use money to get by and to follow the rules of money because we are not co-creating freedom, peace, truth, joy and abundance for each other. Money only leads to haves and have nots and all the abuse, manipulation and distractions that we are subjected to as slaves to money.

When we give up living for other's Kindom dreams, we start creating hell ("The System") all around us because we become self-centred - now it's all about "my freedom","my money", "my land", "my belief", "my saviour", "mine", "mine","mine", "i","i", "i", "own", "own", "own", etc. To protect what we claim we own requires a man-made system with FORCE to protect those self-centred claims. This is ALL trauma based and all story-telling (brainwashing/braindirtying).

NO SYSTEM = KINDOM/DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES
NO SYSTEM = KINDOM/DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES photo Kindom_zpsa6d24e8a.jpg

Our true freedom comes when we set our thoughts of freedom into motion so that we live freedom rather than just talking and thinking about it while we still slave for "The System". Kindom will not happen while we meditate for hours in the bush or do yoga retreats or wait for Jesus or follow the processes of the OPPT (One People's Public Trust now called One People). This is not freedom because we are not living freedom because we are living the story-telling of Jesus or Zeitgeist or The Secret or Thrive or One Earth/Consciousness/People.

Living Kindom is very, very hard work as we set about repairing the damage to MAN/Earth/Nature that we are ALL responsible for but the burden becomes lighter the more of us put our life-energy into the dream of returning Earth to Paradise. Day-after-day, we all have to work our arses off until Kindom is all around us (MAN) once again. This is the price we pay to set each other free on a piece of land (Kin-Domain), so that no one is under the image-power (education/brainwashing/story-telling) of another MAN anymore and so that everyone can have their space of love to create and live their unique, do no harm dreams. This only happens once we have the Kindoms set up so that everyone is provided for.

Once we re-create the food forests, whether on land or in the suburbs, we can re-claim our freedom, breaking the strangle-hold of "The System" because we are no longer reliant on its services and benefits and no longer turning each other into slaves of "The System", cogs in the wheels of "The System" machine. If we don't put the effort in to set everyone and everything free all around us then we still live in HELL ("The System"). The key is to live for everyone else's freedom so that we can have it too.

From Bare Dirt To Abundance
A Year In The Life Of The
Love For Life Food Forest

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
8th February 2013
51 Minutes 46 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sJCcCvZ97A

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two A
5th November 2014
http://youtu.be/TPTPn8tgcPI
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8545

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two B
Coming Shortly

We live for NO SYSTEM. We do not lose anything by not having a man-made system and, in fact, we gain. We gain our freedom and we gain abundance. Let go of the fear.

The Cristian Family November 2006

A Collection Of Various Love For Life Posts
Providing The Big Picture We See

Sequential Order

We ask you to NOT believe anything we say/share and instead use scrutiny like an intense blow torch and go where the logic of truth/sense takes you. This is very, very important. Put everything you believe up to the test of scrutiny to see how it stacks up. If you are true to your heart/senses and go where the logic of truth/sense takes you will find that NO belief, etc, will stand up to the test of scrutiny. They just do not stack up because they are lies/fraud.

After you have watched and read all the material and any questions are left unanswered, send us your landline number and we will use the internet phone as a free unlimited call. We are on Sydney NSW Australia time. Best times for us to chat are between 11.00am and 6.00pm.

It is critical that you fully comprehend Image Power, "Spelling", Trauma, Reaction To Trauma, Curses, Processing Curses, Full-Responsibility/Liability, Limited Liability/Responsibility (passing-the-back), Slavery, Senses/Sense vs Non-Sense/Senses, Re-Presenting Intellectual Property such as but not limited to "Name", Storytelling/Storytellers, Duality, Black-Magic, Belief, Lies, "i", All Seeing "i" (eye), etc..... These themes and others are covered over and over and over again.

If you do not comprehend these insights and are unable to use your senses to sense your way through all the non-sense/non-sensory-images that enslave MAN under their image power (darkness = "The System" = Hell), men and women will remain deeply trapped under a terrible state of trauma. Our intention is to inspire you to remedy by showing you how to move away from reacting to trauma in all its nefarious and devious forms.

IMAGE POWER
Superb Diamond Range Interviewing
Arthur & Fiona Cristian 4th February 2014
http://youtu.be/qFnuuw3kLog
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8501

His-Story/Her-Story (History)
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
2005-2007 - Re-posted July 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8529

The Dream Of Life Part 6
Under The Spell Of Intellectual Property

Arthur Cristian - 51 Minutes 52 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMK7CkU1ih8

Trauma Induced Fantasy
July 2013 Interview With
Jeanice Barcelo And Arthur & Fiona Cristian
http://youtu.be/CZVj-ddUoZw
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8500

The Dark Side Of The Moon
The Background To "The System"

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Interviewed By
Jahnick Leaunier, The Tru-Mon Show
24th August 2016
Love For Life - 142 Minutes
https://youtu.be/C5TViw1NLr4

Eric Dubay's Flat Earth Is A Cult
The Background To The System Part Two

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 31st August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8585
154 Minutes
https://youtu.be/rCPWgEQg-2M

Eclipse Of The Sun - Video (Arthur swears in this video)
The Background To The System Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 25th October 2016
https://youtu.be/FMOsOi1kNRc

The "Name" Is The Mark Of The Beast
The Strawman Identifying
Your Slave Status In "The System"

By Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
5th February 2012 - 56 Minutes 25 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdOag66v7uo

The Satanic Craft Of Inculcation In Practice
Fiona's ACT Supreme Court Affidavit Explaining Inculcation & Illumination
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
4th March 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8578

The Spinning Top
Full Bloom Inculcation

Arthur And Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
Facebook Discussions Between The
8th December 2016
And
26th January 2017
Link: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/16/03/04/satanic-craft-inculcation-pra...

The Shit Of Death
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
28th January 2017
Link: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/16/03/04/satanic-craft-inculcation-pra...

The Selfie Of Freakenstein
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
17th March 2017
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8588

Three Sets Of Fiona Cristian Documents Filed With ACAT
Merged Into One Document For Downloading
https://www.scribd.com/document/327370355/Fiona-Cristian-Affidavit-ACT-S...

Fiona Cristian Affidavit
ACT Supreme Court / Court Of Appeal

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316218306/Three-Sets-of-Fiona-Cristian-Docume...

Dancing With Magic (Lies)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Videos, Articles, Comments
And Pending E-Book
Love Fort Life
September 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8575

Dancing With Magic Part One
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
5th September 2015
https://youtu.be/hx7qJ7r2OS4

Dancing With Magic Part Two
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
12th September 2015
https://youtu.be/b_KuEFdKmnA

Dancing With Magic Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
13th September 2015
https://youtu.be/9pJc1NfnAcI

Dancing With Magic (Lies) Part Four:
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
16th September 2015
https://youtu.be/kSVURGwm1Go

Introduction To Kindom Video
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
6th March 2015
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo

To Be Educated Is To Have No Soul
The System Is Soul Destroying

Frederick Malouf & Michael Tellinger's
Contrived Gifting
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
1st September 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8586

Illumination IS Definition
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th to 29th January 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8577

IMAGE POWER
The Nefarious Tactics Used
To Disguise Truth And Distract Us
From Remedy

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
24th January 2014
This post contains many recent Facebook comments
and email replies which collectively provides a big picture
into exposing the deception behind IMAGE POWER.
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8496

The Pull Of E-Motion
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
8th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8499

Processing Curses
A Lie Is A Curse
Liars Process Curses

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8503

How The System Is Really Constructed
Bouncing Back Curses Upon Curse Makers
To Stop Harm Forevermore

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
27th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8504

Slave To A Name
Parts One, Two, Three, Four,
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd to 6th March 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8505

Educated Slaves
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
20th March 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8506

The Only Path To Freedom
Beware The False Steps

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 2nd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8508

Free-Dumb For All
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 5th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8510

Revoking The Ego
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 8th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8511

How MAN Commits Spiritual Suicide
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life - 3rd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8509

How To Detect Intel Operatives Working
For The New World Order Agenda
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 10th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8512

How The Psyop Program & Intel Networks
Are Messing With Your Head +
His-Story/Her-Story

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8513

Godzilla Through The Looking Glass
Destroyed By Name"

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 20th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

What It's Going To Take
To Co-Create Freedom Forevermore

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

Falling For Fairy Stories
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 24th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

A Disassociation From The Work
Of Kate of Gaia

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 17th May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8517

Separating The Wheat From The Chaff
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8516

Revolution Or Revolution
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 25th May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8520

Routing Out Psyop Programs
Routs Out Intel Operatives
Exposing Max Igan's Psyop Program

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 31st May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8524

The Psyop Program Scam
Behind Religion Belief Faith
& Associated Opinion

Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
11th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8525

Another Delusion
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
11th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8526

A World Of Words Is A World Of Lies
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
13th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8527

E-MAN
The Name Of The Beast Is MAN

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 9th May 2014
Includes Mountain MAN Arrested
Facebook Discussion About "Name"
Uploaded 25th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8528

E-Motion
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 13th August 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8537

Discussion With Brother Gregory
Clearly Demonstrating Christianity
Is Part Of The Problem
And Not The Solution

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
Between the 12th May 2014 and 30th August 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8542

The Psyop Program Behind Free Food
And Permaculture

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
29th October 2014
Facebook Discussion With Unconditional Love Moon
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8544

Head So Strong
Music and Vocals Arthur Cristian
Backing Vocals and Vocal Effects Arthur Cristian & Hannah Wood
Lyrics Fiona and Arthur Cristian
Written during our spare time between Aug & Oct 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG4UQCTsqwU

The Time Of Trauma That Destroys Us
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
9th November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8547

The Most Powerful Video On Spirituality
And Happiness FOR SLAVES
Or
How To Accept Slavery And Be Happy About It

Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
6th August 2014
Facebook Discussion About The Work Of Eckhart Tolle
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8548

What Can We Do What Can We See
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
A series of Arthur Cristian Facebook
posts and discussions
between 17th and 21st November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8552

The Misuse Of Love By Intel Networks
To Create Doubt And Uncertainty
With The Intention To Destroy Love
And Therefore Destroy MAN
(True Freedom, Peace, Joy, Abundance And Truth
For Everyone)

By Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
26th November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8554

The Void Of E-GO That Is Spiritual Suicide
The Justification Of Laziness
That Perpetuates System Creature Comforts
Ensuring Our Fall

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
13th December 2014
Massive Update Occurred 14th Dec 2014 3.10pm Sydney Aust time
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8556

Darkness Visible Part One A, B, C, D
The Freemasonic World In Plain Sight
Decoding George Washington Lithographs

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
14th December 2014
Part One A http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8557
Part One B http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8567
Part One C http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8568
Part One D http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8569

Darkness Visible Part Two
Yin And Yang, Duality, Spiritual Suicide
And Frank O'Collins UCADIA / One Heaven

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
14th December 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8558

Darkness Visible Part Three
How The Word Sausage
Re-Presents The New World Order
Boiling Point & Out To Get Us

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
27th December 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8560

Darkness Visible Part Four
Aleister Crowley - Thelema - OTO
And The Black Magic Psychedelia Of The Intellect

Facebook Discussion
4th to 10th January 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8561

Darkness Visible Part Five
Living MAN Fiona Cristian's Standing
+ Decoding Judeo/Judaism

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
24th January 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8562

Darkness Visible Part Six
The Many Fingers Of The Hidden Hand Appearing
YouTube Community Flagged A Video
Posted To The ArthurLoveForLife YouTube Channel
As Being "Hate Speech"

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
4th February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8563

Darkness Visible Part Seven
The Full Responsibility For Setting
True Freedom For All Into Motion
In Present-Sense Forevermore

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
10th February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8564

Who We Really Are Does Not End
At The Surface Of Our Skin

Arthur Cristian & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8565

Introduction To Kindom Video
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
6th March 2015
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo

The Rot Parts One, Two, Three
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
5th June 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8571

"The Good Guys" And The "Bad Guys"
Working Together To Bring In
The New World Order

Arthur Cristian - 18th July 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8572

Can You Spot The Ego?
Where's Wally? Part One

Compilation of Facebook & Youtube
Insight Posts During Aug/Sept 2015
By Arthur Cristian
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8573

Can You Spot The Ego?
Where's Wally? Part Two

Compilation of Facebook & Youtube
Insight Posts During Aug/Sept 2015
By Arthur Cristian
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8576

Dancing With Magic (Lies)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Videos, Articles, Comments
And Pending E-Book
Love Fort Life
September 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8575

Dancing With Magic Part One
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
5th September 2015
https://youtu.be/hx7qJ7r2OS4

Dancing With Magic Part Two
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
12th September 2015
https://youtu.be/b_KuEFdKmnA

Dancing With Magic Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
13th September 2015
https://youtu.be/9pJc1NfnAcI

Dancing With Magic (Lies) Part Four:
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
16th September 2015
https://youtu.be/kSVURGwm1Go

Illumination IS Definition
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th to 29th January 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8577

The Satanic Craft Of Inculcation In Practice
Fiona's ACT Supreme Court Affidavit Explaining Inculcation & Illumination
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
4th March 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8578

The Dark Side Of The Moon
The Background To "The System" Part One

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 24th August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8583

Eric Dubay's Flat Earth Is A Cult
The Background To The System Part Two

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 31st August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8585

To Be Educated Is To Have No Soul
The System Is Soul Destroying
Frederick Malouf & Michael Tellinger's
Contrived Gifting

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
1st September 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8586

New Love For Life Kindom Facebook Group
Started March 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1434747556816918
Includes 63 Minute
Introduction To Kindom Video
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian
and
Facebook Kindom Group Guidelines
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8566
The Love For Life website home-page provides
the bigger-picture background to the themes
touched on in this video: http://loveforlife.com.au

Crop Circles Are A Massive Hoax
Facebook Discussion On Simon Kawai's Wall
Involving Arthur & Fiona Cristian
31st August 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8470

OPPT & Slavery Through Intellectual Conscription By Deceit
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
27th February 2013 onwards...
Part One: http://youtu.be/Qjp_9nlrBao
Part Two: http://youtu.be/tbybeOWZ-Bc
Part Three: http://youtu.be/yOWoxH-HbVw

Water Is The Life Of MANS Consciousness (Breath)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life - 8th February 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8350
Part One: http://youtu.be/4ze66_33wxM - 70 Minutes 5 Seconds
Part Two: http://youtu.be/43gIi-sjxJc - 81 Minutes 13 Seconds
Part Three: http://youtu.be/oooY6W63K-M - 70 Minutes 18 Seconds

What Do You Believe On Origins?
Who Said There Was A Beginning?
Who's Truth Do You Accept?
Belief Is A Strange Idea.

Discussion Lyndell, Scott and Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Between March and April 2013
Posted 29th October 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8487

So You Want The Good Bits Of "The System"
But Not The Bad Bits?

By Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 12th August 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8468

Turning Away From The Reflection
Of MANS Looking Glass

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
30th April 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8404

REMEDY

From Bare Dirt To Abundance
A Year In The Life Of The
Love For Life Food Forest

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
8th February 2013
51 Minutes 46 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sJCcCvZ97A

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two
5th November 2014
http://youtu.be/TPTPn8tgcPI
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8545

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Three
7th March 2016
60 Minutes
https://youtu.be/SH9i8ZStzWI

Love For Life Food Forest & Native Garden March 2016
Extension Of The Love For Life Food Forest And Establishment
Of A New Native Garden At The Front Of The Rental Property
In East Bowral - 24th October 2015 to Mid February 2016.
15 Minutes
https://youtu.be/y-Uz8HmnSIM

Control The Land
And You Control MAN On The Land
Displace MAN From Land
And You Turn MAN Into Slaves

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
April 2011 (Updated 14th September 2011)
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8237

The Divine Spark
Facebook Discussion With Raymond Karczewski
Arthur & Fiona Cristian & Others
2nd October 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8483

Capturing Another MANS Uniqueness
A Facebook Debate With
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
And Raymond Karczewski
Starting 13th May 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8414

The Spell Is Broken
Taking The Land To Create Kindom

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd March 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8365

The Steps Of Kindom
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life 2006/2007
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8304

To explore these themes in greater detail go here where you can find links to all our Love For Life comments, articles, debates, discussions, videos, podcasts, etc: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385

All the best
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

Website: http://loveforlife.com.au
Email : action@loveforlife.com.au
Mobile : 0011 61 418 203204 - (0418 203204)
Snail Mail: PO Box 1320 Bowral 2576 NSW Australia
Facebook Arthur Cristian : http://www.facebook.com/arthurcristian
YouTube Arthur Cristian : http://www.youtube.com/ArthurLoveForLife

Register To The Love For Life Mailing List: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list

Facebook Group Why Aren't We Free Discussion : http://www.facebook.com/164918753537287
Facebook Group Kindom/Do No Harm Community Discussion : http://www.facebook.com/151811728195925

Links below will kick in when the professionally recorded Love For Life music is released.

SoundCloud : http://soundcloud.com/loveforlife
Nimbit Music : http://www.nimbitmusic.com/loveforlife
Twitter : https://twitter.com/loveforlifemusi
Facebook Music : http://www.facebook.com/loveforlifemusic
YouTube Love For Life Music : http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
MySpace : http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
Google + Fiona Cristian : https://plus.google.com/100490175160871610090

Peaceful Transition Through Sacrifice And Service

We feel there is an essential peaceful do no harm transition required to get all of MAN back to standing on MANS feet without reliance upon another MAN for water, food, shelter. As it stands everyone in "The System" are highly dependent and reliant on the "group mind-set" that forms "The System" of slaves providing services and benefits for the emotionally addicted slaves to "The System" (and you can put us in the same basket too). The transition is to get MAN back to relying ONLY on nature without 3rd party interlopers, intermeddlers, interceders getting in the way. The transition is a team effort with the foresight for setting all of MAN free down-the-line so that MAN is no longer dependent on slaves and masters providing services, benefits, privileges and exclusivity while being bound to contracts, rituals, procedures, conditions, rules & regulations which compromises MAN severely.

This transition is all about shifting from limited liability/responsibility to full liability/responsibility. This full responsibility is all about caring for our health, nature all around us, clean uncorrupted (pure) water and food, partner/co-creator, children, shelter, animal-friends in partnership, etc. In "The System", we are already together destroying each other - we have to come together to create peace together so that we can all have peace. We cannot live peacefully when we are islands, not taking full responsibility for the lives of those around us until EVERYONE can take full responsibility for their life, which means that EVERYONE is healed of system trauma. In "The System", we all come together to make slaves of each other - now is the moment to come together to set each other free, to live for each other's freedom, peace, joy and abundance. Once we have set each other free, we are free.

Control The Land
And You Control MAN On The Land
Displace MAN From Land
And You Turn MAN Into Slaves

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
April 2011 (Updated 14th September 2011)
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8237

The Spell Is Broken
Taking The Land To Create Kindom

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd March 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8365

"The Steps Of Kindom"
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8304

---------

Once we fix these issues, we or our children or our descendants to come, can start focusing on the even bigger picture of getting back to where our ancestors were, as breatharyan's, before they fell into non-sense images to be enslaved by them.

All the best to you and your family
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

The Cristian Family November 2006

The Cristian Family Declaration

The Cristian family and The Love for Life Campaign are apolitical, non-religious, non-violent, anti weapons, anti drugs (both pharmaceutical and recreational) and anti any ideology that denies the existence of Do No Harm Communities (Kindoms) and suppresses the uniqueness and freedom of all men, women and children.

The Cristian family and our Love For Life work is unaligned to any big business corporation, intelligence agency, government body, "system" law, "system" think tanks, "system" green or environmental movements, religion, cult, sect, society (fraternity, brotherhood, sisterhood, order, club, etc,) secret or not, hidden agenda, law or sovereignty group, occult, esoteric, New Age or Old Age.

The Cristian family supports and promotes the remedy that brings an everlasting peace, freedom, truth, joy, abundance and do no harm for all of life without causing loss of uniqueness or the need for having slaves and rulers. We are not into following the one in front or being shepherds for sheeple. Most importantly, we take full-responsibility for everything we think, feel and do.

The Cristian family are not Christians.

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

December 2006

The Cristian Family November 2006

THE CRISTIAN FAMILY PLEDGE

Being of clear brain, heart and intention, we each declare the following to be true:

• We have no intention of ending our own lives.

• We will not tolerate suppression of truth, ideas, freedom, or our work. We stand for freedom of speech.

• We stand together to support others in the expression of truths and freedom to speak out no matter how radical those ideas may seem.

• Standing for freedom takes courage; together we shall be strong in the face of all odds.

• If it is ever claimed that we have committed suicide, encountered an unfortunate accident, died of sickness/disease, disappeared, been institutionalized, or sold out financially or in any other way to self-interested factions, we declare those claims false and fabricated.

• We testify, assert and affirm without reservation, on behalf of all those who have dedicated their lives to the ending of secrecy and the promotion of freedom of thought, ideas and expression that we shall prevail.

• We Do Not Have Multiple Personality Disorders

Arthur Cristian
Fiona Cristian
Jasmin Lily Cristian
Emma Rose Cristian
Frances Hannah Cristian
Xanthe Jane Cristian

15th December 2006 (Edited/Updated 18th September 2011)

The Cristian Family November 2006

Update Regarding The Love For Life
Home Page And Quick User Guide

We are turning the Love for Life Quick User Guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 into a blog of all the main insights of our work since March 2005, whether through articles, videos, podcasts or discussions/debates.

As we do not have the time to compile everything we have written into a book, as many have suggested we do, compiling all our most important work into one area of the website is a way of providing easy access to this work so those interested are able to fully comprehend the big picture.

Instead of having to find our different articles, videos, etc, in various parts of the website, it will all be accessible here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385.

Love For Life Videos

As amateurs and posted in the Quick User Guide below the Facebook links, we're currently creating and posting a series of videos called "The Dream Of Life" which covers the ground of all the Love For Life insights. We plan to have the videos completed by December 31st 2012. Once this is behind us, our intention is to create a 2 hour or so video covering the body of this work. All videos are embedded in the quick user guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 and uploaded in Arthur's YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ArthurLoveForLife.

Love For Life Music

We have started recording songs, with others, that express the themes of Love For Life. They are now being posted on Arthur's YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ArthurLoveForLife and are embedded in the quick user guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608. We have over 100 songs to record. A few rough demos have already been used as the soundtrack on the first "Dream of Life" video.

About Us - Love For Life & The Cristian Family

Also, everything we, the Cristian family, have gone through, from bank fraud and the theft of the family home to death threats and attempts on Arthur's life, is documented in the Quick User Guide too. If you, the reader, are prepared to put the effort in, you will comprehend the extent to which we have all been tricked into becoming slaves, giving up our uniqueness and our full-responsibility for life and destroying everything of life to the point where life is in danger of dying out completely. You will also comprehend the remedy to all this chaos; a remedy that requires only love for life and the determination to do what needs to be done. Though our focus is very strongly on the remedy that creates a world of freedom, truth, peace, joy, abundance and Do No Harm for all of life without loss of uniqueness or the need for slaves and rulers, we realise that it is vital to comprehend how to get there and what stops us from getting there. This is why there is so much information on the hows and whys of everything going wrong in the world today. We are not into peddling conspiracy theories, we are into routing out all forms of organised crime.

Saturday 26th November 2011

Arthur and Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

Website: http://loveforlife.com.au
Email: action@loveforlife.com.au
Mobile: 0011 61 418 203204 - (0418 203204)
Facebook Arthur Cristian: http://www.facebook.com/arthurcristian
YouTube Arthur Cristian: http://www.youtube.com/ArthurLoveForLife
SoundCloud: http://soundcloud.com/loveforlife
Nimbit Music: http://www.nimbitmusic.com/loveforlife
Twitter: https://twitter.com/loveforlifemusi
Facebook Music: http://www.facebook.com/loveforlifemusic
Facebook Why Aren't We Free Discussion: http://www.facebook.com/164918753537287
Facebook Do No Harm Community: http://www.facebook.com/151811728195925
YouTube Love For Life Music: http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
Google + Fiona Cristian: https://plus.google.com/100490175160871610090
Register To The Love For Life Mailing List: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list

1. For The Body Of The Love For Life Work by Arthur and Fiona Cristian

Which Unravels The Reasons For The Chaos, Mayhem and Confusion Being Experienced In The World Today, Explains The Need For "Community Immunity" and Responsibility, and Focuses On The Creation Of Kindoms - Do No Harm, Life-Sustainable Communities (As The Remedy That Heals All Mans Woes) - And How We Can Co-Create Them. For Comments, Articles And Discussions, Go Here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385 - Also Go Here To See Podcasts And Videos Posted by Arthur & Fiona Cristian: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7309 - The Information Shared Comes From Inspiration, Intuition, Heartfelt-Logic And Information Gathered From Nature And Many Amazing Men And Women Along The Way. It Is Not Found In Any Books Or Channellings, Or Talked About By "Experts". Go Here To Read A Brief Synopsis Of Why We Started Love For Life: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8182

2. For Information About The Ringing Cedars of Russia Series

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1125 and for more on Eco Homes, Villages, Organic and Permaculture Gardening and Life-Sustainability, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3641 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1985 and Mikhail Petrovich Shchetinin - Kin's School - Lycee School at Tekos: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5173

3. For How To Eat A Raw, Living Food Diet,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5068 - LIFE is information. When we distort LIFE and then eat, drink, absorb, think, feel, hear, see, touch, taste, smell and perform these distortions, the information of LIFE, your LIFE, our LIFE, our children's lives, everyone's LIFE, is distorted.

4. To Find A Menu For The Extensive Research Library (over 8,000 items posted embodying over 11,000 documents, pdf's, videos, podcasts, etc)

Which Covers Topics From Health to Chemtrails/Haarp to Brain Control to Archaeology to Astronomy Geocentricity Heliocentricity to Pandemics Bird Flu Swine Flu to Fluoride to Cancer to Free Energy to Global Warming, 9/11, Bali Bombings, Aspartame, MSG, Vaccinations, Aids/HIV, Mercury, New World Order, Satanism, Religions, Cults, Sects, Symbolism, etc, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/82

5. If You Would Like To Read About The Cristian Family NSW Supreme Court Case

(Macquarie Bank/Perpetual Limited Bank Fraud Condoned By Judges, Registrars, Barristers, Lawyers, Politicians, Public Servants, Bureaucrats, Big Business and Media Representatives - A Crime Syndicate/Terrorist Organisation) Which Prompted The Creation Of This Love For Life Website December 2006, And The Shooting And Torture Of Supporters Who Assisted Us In Reclaiming The Family Home, Joe Bryant And His Wife, Both In Their Late 70's, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5 And Read Some Of Our Email Correspondence With Lawyer Paul Kean - Macedone Christie Willis Solari Partners - Miranda Sydney May 17th-June 27th 2006: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7300

6. For The Stories Of Other Victims Of The System,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/australian_stories (If you have a story you would like us to put up, we would love to here from you:
action @ loveforlife.com.au)

7. For Documentation Of Harm Done By The Powers-That-Be And Their Representatives,

Evidence Revealing How Victims Did Not Break The Peace, Caused No Crime or Harm, There Were No Injured Parties. Documenting Incontrovertible Evidence Demonstrating How The Powers That Be (PTB) And Their Lackeys Will Break All The Laws They Are Supposed To Uphold. They Will Kidnap, Intimidate, Terrorise, Rape, Pillage, Plunder And Lie And Take Responsibility For None Of It. All Part Of Their Tactics Of Using Fear And Trauma To Keep Us In Our Place. Relatives Of Those Under Their Radar Are Also Not Safe From Attack And Intimidation. All Starting From A $25 Fine For Not Voting And A $65 Fine For Not Changing A Dog Registration. We Do Not Have Freedom And Can Only Appear To Have Freedom If We Comply. Regardless How Small The Matter The PTB Throw Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars Away To Enforce Their Will.... Go Here:
Fiona Cristian Reply To State Debt Recovery Office - Part One to Part Ten - From 17th October 2008 And Still Continuing:
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6319 or
Fiona Cristian Reply To State Debt Recovery Office
Part One: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5742 - From 17th October 2008
Part Two: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6135 - From 18th December 2008
Part Three: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6295 - From 9th January 2009
Part Four: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6296 - From 14th January 2009
Part Five: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6375 - The Sick Puppy - From 20th February 2009
Part Six: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6390 - Police Officers, Sheriff’s Officers, Tow Truck Driver and State Debt Recovery Office Blatantly Ignore the Law To Rape, Pillage and Plunder The Private Property Of Fiona Cristian - From 11th March 2009
Part Seven: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6445 - Affidavit Of Truth - Letter To The Queen + Australia: Fascism is Corporatism - From 30th March 2009
Part Eight: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6652 - The Pirates Auction And The Ghost Of VSL386 - From 4th April 2009
Part Nine: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7073 - Arthur Cristian's Letter To Pru Goward MP - From 15th December 2009
Part Ten: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7500 - Should We Be In Fear Of Those Who Claim To Protect Us? "Roman Cult" Canon Law - Ecclesiastical Deed Poll - The Work Of Frank O'Collins - From 13th October 2010

8. If You Are Interested In Information On Freedom From Statutes, Rule-Of-Law, Free Man/Free Woman, Strawman, "Person" and Admiralty Law (The Law Of Commerce),

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/895 - For Common Law, Democracy, Constitution, Trial By Jury, Fee Simple, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/category/main/law-articles-documents

9. If You Are Interested In Banking and Money Created (Fiat/Credit/Debt/Mortgage/Loan/Overdraft etc) Out-Of-Thin-Air, How Banks Counterfeit Money,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/banks

10. For A List Of All The Latest Posts In The Love For Life Website,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/tracker

11. For Links To Many Hundreds Of Videos, DVDs And Podcasts

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/video_dvd

12. To See The Cristian Family Pledge, Legal and other Disclaimers

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/06/12/05/love-life-legal-disclaimer

13. To Read About How A Representative Of The NSW Jewish Board Of Deputies Had Threatened To Shut Down The Love For Life Website

go here: Part One: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6616 Part Two: THE STEVE JOHNSON REPORT AND VIDEO: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6665 and Part Three: Latest Update On James Von Brunn: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6673

Conscious Love Always
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
action @ loveforlife.com.au
www.loveforlife.com.au
0418 203204 (int: 0011 61 418 203204)
PO Box 1320 Bowral 2576 NSW Australia

Arthur Cristian

Create Your Badge

Love For Life Discussions - Why Aren't We Free? How Can We Be Free?

Promote your Page too

The Cristian Family November 2006

Love For Life Legal Disclaimer

The information contained on this world wide web site (the web site and all information herein shall be collectively referred to as "Web Site Information"), under the registered url name, loveforlife.com.au, resides on a host server environment in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15203, United States of America.

The Web Site Information has been prepared to provide general information only and is not intended to constitute or be construed as providing substantive professional advice or opinion on any facts or circumstances. Transmission of the information is not intended to create, nor does its receipt give rise to, a professional-client relationship between 'Love for Life' and the receiver.

While every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information prepared and/or reported on this site, 'Love for Life' is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the Web Site Information not being up to date. The Web Site Information may not reflect the most current developments.

The impact of the law, policy and/or procedure for any particular situation depends on a variety of factors; therefore, readers should not act upon any Web Site Information without seeking professional advice. 'Love for Life' is not responsible for any action taken in reliance on any Web Site Information herein.

'Love for Life' is not responsible for any action you or others take which relies on information in this website and/or responses thereto. 'Love for Life' disclaim all responsibility and liability for loss or damage suffered by any person relying, directly or indirectly, on the Web Site Information, including in relation to negligence or any other default.

'Love for Life' does not warrant, represent or hold out that any Web Site Information will not cause damage, or is free from any computer virus, defect(s) or error(s). 'Love for Life' is not liable to users for any loss or damage however caused resulting from the use of material found on its web site.

'Love for Life' does not necessarily endorse or approve of any Web Site Information linked to and contained on other web sites linked herein and makes no warranties or representations regarding the merchantability or fitness for purpose, accuracy and quality, of any such information.

The sending of information by you, and the receipt of it by 'Love for Life', is not intended to, and does not, create a professional-client relationship.

All Web Site Information is considered correct at the time of the web site's most recent revision.

ADDITIONAL DISCLAIMER

THE CRISTIAN FAMILY SUPPORTS
FREEDOM OF SPEECH - FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

The Cristian Family November 2006

Posted Wednesday 17th June 2009
Updated September 2011

NSW Jewish Board Of Deputies
Has Threatened To Shut Down
The Love For Life Website

No Freedom Of Speech - No Freedom Of Thought

Love For Life does not support harm doing in any shape or form. However, we are supporters of free speech and post articles, documentaries, etc, that represent a wide cross section of ideas. See the Love For Life extensive research library where over 6000 documents, articles and videos are posted: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/82. We clearly see the evidence of the destruction to MAN and the earth that has been caused by ALL religions over the centuries and are therefore not supporters of religions, cults, sects or any group that demands conformity of thought, speech or action, or has rules, regulations or rituals that must be followed. Religions, nationalities and cultural "identities" are formed as a result of the brainwashing we receive from childhood. They are part of the tactics the Establishment uses to keep us all divided from one another and fighting one another.

All religions promote discrimination and division, leading to hatred and even violence and murder. None of them have yet to produce a remedy to all the suffering, poverty, unhappiness and discrimination in the world. If any religion truly had the remedy to all the suffering on earth, there would no longer be any suffering. What have Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, atheism and the New Age done to end the suffering in the world?

Since December 2006, there have been many attempts to take down the Love For Life website. Any attempts have been thwarted by Love For Life supporters inundating the harm-doers with emails, etc, objecting to them taking down the website for a variety of reasons. The trouble makers usually back off when they realise that they can post all their views, arguments, beliefs, etc, in the Love For Life website without censorship or restriction imposed. They get to see that even the Queen, Pope, Prime Minister, President of America, etc, can post all their views without hindrance or sabotage and that we support freedom of speech/thought which means we support the right of all sides to express their views.

Of note, there is a vast amount of information posted in the Love For Life website which we do not agree with but we leave it all up because we refuse to be biased, opinionated or self-centered/self-serving. Of the many thousands of comments posted over the years we have only removed posts containing secret links to commercial advertisements, terrible foul language, threats of violence and death, etc, and attacks on other people's characters that avoid the subject/debate at hand. Besides links to advertisements, we have taken down less than six comments due to the above. We usually leave everything up, all warts and all, even those posts threatening to do terrible things to Fiona, our children, our dogs, our friends, family & supporters, etc.

The Love For Life website has information from all sides on many subjects, whether about Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Law, health, psychology, mind control, vaccination, aspartame, MSG, Chemtrails etc. There are over 11,000 articles, documentaries etc on the website and they are so diverse that we are sure that everyone would be able to find something they loved and something they hated, if they took the time to search. If we removed all the articles hated by everyone, there would probably be nothing left! We are not anti anyone but freedom of speech is freedom of speech and no one should condemn the work of another without taking the time to research the subject themselves. Yes, there are articles by those who have a less-than-rosy-viewpoint of Judaism, but there are also articles on the dark side of Tibetan Buddhism (and it is very dark) for those who are interested in the truth: Tibet - Buddhism - Dalai Lama: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6271 Should the authors of these articles be abused and imprisoned for daring to challenge the widely conceived reputation of Buddhism as being the religion of peace and love and that of the Dalai Lama as a saint, or should those interested be allowed to study the work and come to their own conclusions? The same applies to all the articles, documentaries, etc, about Christianity, Islam, Freemasonry, New World Order, etc.

The Love for Life website also shows how the Rule of Law, the Bar, the Government, the Monarchy, the system of commerce, the local, national and multi/trans-national private corporations, all the courses and careers on offer from our universities, all the educators, scientists, academics and experts, the aristocrats and the Establishment bloodlines have also done NOTHING to end the suffering in the world. The website maps the insanity of a world where there is no help for those in need, just as there was no help available for us when we were victims of terrible bank fraud: "NSW Supreme Court Case - Macquarie Bank/Perpetual Limited vs Fiona Cristian - Victims Of Bank Fraud Condoned By Judges" http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5 (orchestrated, condoned and protected by an international crime syndicate/terrorist organisation of judges, barristers, registrars, lawyers, politicians, banksters, big business representatives, media moguls and other lackeys who, all together, put up a wall of silence despite our trying many, many avenues. After the family home was stolen and business destroyed we were left close to poverty and destitution caring for 4 young daughters. Three years later not much has changed regardless of all our efforts. Where were all the followers of all the religions to help us? Or do we have to be members of those religions to receive help from others involved in them?

The New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies accused us of being anti - Jewish, see: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6616 and http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6665 because we had posted an excerpt from James von Brun's book: Kill the Best Gentiles: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6054 in which he blames Jews for the problems of the world. Obviously this is not our view because of what we have stated above. We do not hate anyone, whatever religion they follow. We are always open to talk to any religious leader or politician and meet with any judge, member of the Bar, experts, academics, educators etc to share the remedy we offer that heals all the divisions between MAN and MAN, and MAN and the EARTH.

Today, a representative of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies is threatening to close the website down, because they have decided it is anti - Jewish and that we promote racism. What has the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies done to end the suffering in the world? Can they show that they are concerned with the suffering of ALL men, women and children AND ARE SEEN TO BE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT or are they only concerned with Jewish affairs? If so, they, along with all the other religions that only care for their own, are part of the problem, not part of the solution. The man who rang Arthur today was only concerned with Jewish affairs; he was not interested in our intentions or in anybody else, just as most Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Catholics, etc, are only interested in their own. While we separate ourselves into groups, dividing ourselves from others with rules, regulations, rituals, procedures and conditions, we will never solve our problems.

No matter what we in the Western World Civilisation of Commerce have been promised by our politicians, religious leaders, scientists, educators, philosophers, etc, for the past two hundred years, all we have seen is ever-increasing destruction of men, women and children and the earth. None of the so-called experts and leaders we have been taught to rely on are coming up with a solution and none of them are taking full-responsibility for the fact that they can't handle the problem. All religious books talk about end times full of destruction and suffering but why do we have to follow this program when there is an alternative to hatred, mayhem and death? Why are our leaders following the program of destruction and death rather than exploring the alternatives? It seems that any mainstream politician, priest or academic are only interested in supporting the RULES OF THE DIVIDE, that maintain the haves and the have nots. For 200+ years, 99% of the world population have been so trained to pass on their responsibility for themselves, others and the earth, that the 1% of the population that make up the leaders of the rest of us are making all the decisions leading to the destruction of all of us and the earth. Let's not forget the education system that brainwashes the 99% of the population that we are free and have equal rights while, in fact, we are feathering the nests of those at the top.

At the root of all our problems is self-centredness, an unwillingness nurtured by the Establishment that keeps us concerned only with our own needs rather than the needs of others around us and the Earth. Instead of creating and releasing acts of love for those around us as gifts to benefit them and the earth, we take, take and take, until there is nothing left. The whole point of the Love for Life website is to show people the root of all our problems and to share the remedy. The extensive research library is there to attract browsers and to provide access to information not available through mainstream channels. If the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies can, after careful examination of our work, prove that anything we are saying is wrong, we will be happy to accept their proof. If they cannot, and they are still insistent on closing the website down, they will be showing themselves to be traitors to MAN because they are not interested in pursuing any avenue that can end the suffering in the world.

All religions, corporations and organisations that support and maintain the Western World Civilisation of Commerce are part of the problem because our civilisation is a world of haves and have nots, racism, violence, hatred, poverty, sickness, discrimination, abuse, starvation, homelessness, corruption, collusion, vindictiveness, social unrest, arrogance, ignorance, fear, war and chaos. While we support civilisation, we support death and destruction because ALL civilisations that have ever existed are apocalyptic by design.

If we truly want peace on earth and freedom for all, we have to let go of all that which keeps us divided, and come together as MAN, conscious living co-creators of creation. The Love For Life website offers a remedy to the problems we all face in the form of DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3641 For more details see here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6511 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385 - We also highly recommend that everyone read the brilliant Russian books called The Ringing Cedars: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1125 - The Love For Life Website Homepage also provides lots of inspiring remedy based information: http://loveforlife.com.au - If you want to be kept up to date with our work please register to the Love For Life Mailing List here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list. We usually send two postings per month. Presently (September 2011) there are over 7000 registrations reaching over 500,000 readers across Earth. The website now (September 2011) receives up to 12 million hits per month. Since December 2006, over 100 million people have visited the Love For Life website.

Conscious Love Always
Arthur and Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
17th June 2009

The Cristian Family November 2006

Clarification Regarding Our Intentions
Behind The Use Of Donations

The Love For Life website is offered for free without a fee and without any conditions attached. If people are inspired to donate money, then we accept their gift and have provided an avenue for them to support the work we do through Fiona's Paypal or ANZ bank account http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8515. There is no obligation whatsoever to donate and all are equally welcome to our work and to our "time", whether they donate or not. Over the last 9 years, all the Love For Life work has been put out for free and it has often been donations from supporters that have enabled us to renew the domain name, etc, to keep the website going. While some complain that we have an avenue for donations, others complained when we didn't! Either use it or don't - the choice is yours.

Since Love For Life started March 2005 and website December 2006, Arthur has worked 16 hours a day, 7 days a week unpaid for much of this period, putting together the website and sharing insights to wake people up to what has been done to them, whether through the 11,500+ individual articles, videos, podcasts, debates, discussions, pdf's, research documents, etc, found amongst the 8,500+ posts, as well as helping many, many men and women over the phone, and through email, website correspondence, Facebook and YouTube, and creating the Love For Life food forest vege garden and Love For Life music recording studio. This is our life is a gift commitment to serve MAN/Nature/Earth but we are still severely compromised by "The System" and still have to give to Caesar what is claimed to belong to Caesar, which is where the donations help us.

Fiona & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
21st July 2014