Blue Chip related stuff here, please.

[Perry]

MODERATOR COMMENT

This thread has been locked/closed.

I.e. no new posts can be made, but
the entire thread can still be viewed.

Certain statements have been made
that have resulted in an apology and
retraction, here. It is important that
any new viewers read to the end of the
thread, to gain a fuller understanding.

The essential part is:

I deeply apologise and will be asking the
monitors to remove this thread.

For the time being, it is the moderator's
view that the thread should remain for
a period of time that will allow people
to view the apology and the posts which
lead up to it.

Viewers may benefit from having a look
at an associated thread:
Anyone out there taken legal action against Blue Chip?

Although it seems the Blue Chip saga is
far from over and will prompt many more
posts, please keep them 'seemly.' If in
doubt about anything that is about to be
posted, read the PT Forum Rules - especially
the parts relating to defamatory comments
and making negative comments.

Times are tough for many of the people
involved and it's understandable that some
may lash out in frustration. There can never
be an action brought against someone for
saying/posting the facts/truth. Implication
and innuendo are not so safe!

The moderators do appreciate the action
taken in this thread - voluntarily - that
resulted in remorse being expressed and
the apology and retraction. It speaks well
of the poster involved and adds to the
reputation of PropertyTalk as a community
of integrity.

Y'all be nice to one another, now, y'hear?

[snap]

Bryers and other ways to stop BC

There must be at least a half dozen people that have proof of the company trading insolvent for the last 2 years.

[Eric01]

There must be at least a half dozen of the Bryers inner circle that participated in the KamGate affair but denied it during the internal BC investigation. He screwed you to so its now time for you all to come forward and put Bryers where he belongs

See my other posts for details

There must also be at least a half dozen people that have proof of the company trading insolvent for the last 2 years.

Snap - as per my posting on other thread -I am definately not one of those from the inner circle - but have been totally screwed financially by Bryers - I suggest Kam comes forward and assists here - I have an email from RF stating that Kam "signed" the S & P's - hopefully RF has gone to authorities as I am with the email...and Bryers also had a person(s) forge Mr Bangerters signature as well on same development just to get the sales up...BB didn't know until he was sent a demand for settling! Rest assured BAngerter is volunteering all possible info he can to assist all authorities which will in time clear his name. And who were the developers for Maddison - Paxton Group by any chance?

[Inves5tor]

Hi this is Kam. I have no idea how my name has been dragged into this. I never was part of Bryers’ inner circle and I have no respect for the man for what he has done to so many people, including myself. I was never head of legal either – I was the Settlements and Legal Manager for a little while. My primary role at BC was to facilitate settlements and I generally dealt with solicitors and Keith Mellor (the financial controller). There was always money issues at BC and it was often a juggling act as to which property would settle when. Which property settled when was determined by Keith and Mark. I was there for just over a year and wasn’t involved in the purchase or investment side of things, so seeing my name being dragged into this is deeply concerning. Snap/Eric – please send me a copy of the email from Rik you have where he suggests my name as I believe this is grounds for defamation. I believe these people are using my name to shift blame from themselves.

I left BC in the middle of 2006 because of the stress of working 18hr days and explaining to investor’s solicitors why their client’s property could not settle on a particular day. I too was a fool and invested in the product and have lost alot of money too and am on the brink of financial ruin, and under extreme stress at the moment.

I can assist in whatever way I can in any moves to understand and unravel the BC situation but my role was very specific in the limited time I was there. That was the way they worked - dont think anyone apart from Bryers knew what was happening across the organisation. I would really appreciate it if you guys could stop dragging me personally into this as it is seriously affecting me. Thanks.

[Green Fish]

I have to agree. However much the general public might like to lambast lawyers, the fact is that every lawyer works for a client, whether they be in private practice or 'in-house'. Just because an in-house lawyer completed a particular settlement does not mean that the lawyer was 'in on it'. It would make a similar amount of sense to blame Mr Bryer's doctor for the way things went.

[captaincrab]

"the fact is that every lawyer works for a client,"

Exactly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiduciary_duty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care

Check these definitions out. In my view the solicitors should never have allowed the Deposits to be released to the Developer. I remember several years ago having an arguement with a law firm in Alexandra. They acted for both vendor and buyer and allowed the deposits to be released to the vendor.
I argued this was unsafe and said "what if Titles are not issued? " He said "but they always are" I said "what if they dont?" This went back and forth and he could just not see the risk. The conversation ended when I said "well there are two words for you if they dont" He said "what?" I replied 'Law Society"

[Inves5tor]

I worked there and even I thought all investors deposits were kept in BlueChips solicitors Trust account. The syphoning off obviously occured at the very top end with us drones not knowing anything about it.

[Green Fish]

But the example you have outlined is one where the solicitor is acting for both parties, which is often fraught with difficulties.

Getting back to the fiduciary aspect: where the lawyer acts for just one party, the lawyer's fiduciary obligation is owed to his client - even if his client is bent. Crooks and con-artists have a right to legal representation, don't they? Let's assume that X sells a property to a gullible vendor with the assistance of numerous lies and a couple of bent valuations. An agreement is signed, and X sends it off to his lawyer for completion. Why should the lawyer be blamed for settling the transaction in accordance with his client's instructions? It would make as much sense to blame the crook's bank for clearing the settlement proceeds.

[captaincrab]

Lets get the criminal example out of the way. If the lawyer has been told by the client he did it, then the lawyer "should " report that to the Court. Lawyers are Officers of the Court and have a duty to the Court. Usually they resign from the client though.

I understand that some lawyers acted for both BC and the client. But even if they didnt they should know that releasing the Deposit was a risk and advised the client against it.Or at the very least that is was a risk. That is their Duty.
Do some research on the way Financial Advisors who recommended clients invest in Bridgecorp are now settling with their clients and paying their funds back to avoid Court action for this very reason.
Professional Advisors ALL have a Duty of Care to help their clients avoid risk. If they dont, they are open to complaint to their Regulatory Body and claims against their Professional Indemnity Insurers.

[captaincrab]

Here , took two minutes

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/12/story.cfm?c_id=12&objectid=10491755

And another

http://stuff.co.nz/4448842a22981.html

[BTDT]

Hi this is Kam. I have no idea how my name has been dragged into this. I never was part of Bryers’ inner circle and I have no respect for the man for what he has done to so many people, including myself. I was never head of legal either – I was the Settlements and Legal Manager for a little while. My primary role at BC was to facilitate settlements and I generally dealt with solicitors and Keith Mellor (the financial controller). There was always money issues at BC and it was often a juggling act as to which property would settle when. Which property settled when was determined by Keith and Mark. I was there for just over a year and wasn’t involved in the purchase or investment side of things, so seeing my name being dragged into this is deeply concerning. Snap/Eric – please send me a copy of the email from Rik you have where he suggests my name as I believe this is grounds for defamation. I believe these people are using my name to shift blame from themselves.

I left BC in the middle of 2006 because of the stress of working 18hr days and explaining to investor’s solicitors why their client’s property could not settle on a particular day. I too was a fool and invested in the product and have lost alot of money too and am on the brink of financial ruin, and under extreme stress at the moment.

I can assist in whatever way I can in any moves to understand and unravel the BC situation but my role was very specific in the limited time I was there. That was the way they worked - dont think anyone apart from Bryers knew what was happening across the organisation. I would really appreciate it if you guys could stop dragging me personally into this as it is seriously affecting me. Thanks.

Thank you for coming forward, but there is one question remaining, were you a party to the "signing" of sale and purchase agreements?

Contacts from within the company stated that you left/were asked to leave because this was uncovered and you were implicated?

To balance this, despite what other posts have said that hundreds of sale and purchase agreements were forged, it was my contacts understanding that this was an isolated case, or two, that you were caught up in.

Can you please clarify your position on this. Don't get me wrong I don't wish to criticise you, however an easier way to clarify whether Bryers was involved would be to state that he was/was not behind the signing of these sale and purchase agreements rather than implicating yourself.

[Green Fish]

Any lawyer who jumped up and said "My client told me he done the murder, Milud." would be struck off straight away. The client might be a psychopathic axe-wielding mass-murderer, but he has paid the lawyer for legal representation, and he is entitled to get what he has paid for (just like when he goes to his doctor to get his tonsils seen to.) A lawyer can defend a person who has told the lawyer than 'he done it', as long as the client doesn't give evidence.

Why should the lawyer acting for Blue Chip tell anyone that their deposit was at risk? The lawyer is acting for Blue Chip, so isn't the opposite true? Isn't the lawyer obliged to say nothing on that subject?

[Inves5tor]

Hi BTDT
Sorry, I was not clear in my first post. I never was part of this.

I had left around the same time for other reasons. I was looking to get out of BC because of the very stressfull working environment and left as soon as I received another offer.

Thanks

[captaincrab]

"Any lawyer who jumped up and said "My client told me he done the murder, Milud." would be struck off straight away"

That is why they resign from acting for the client. So they are not put in that situation.

When the lawyer is talking to the buyer they are acting for the buyer NOT Bc. Afterall the buyer pays the fee not BC.This is exactly why it is dangerous for the lawyer to act for both.

"A lawyer can defend a person who has told the lawyer than 'he done it', as long as the client doesn't give evidence."
No he cant.A lawyer cannot plead a "not guilty" plea if the client has admitted guilt to them. You are confusing a defendants right not to go on the witness stand with admission of guilt to the lawyer and then telling the lawyer youre pleading not guilty.

[Green Fish]

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing: Assume I'm a lawyer. A guy comes in off the street, charged with drink-driving. He tells me that he was completely pissed, off his face, driving his car, and that he's as guilty as sin - but he wants me to try and get him off on some sort of technicality.

Can I enter a plea of not guilty on his behalf, and then put the prosecution to the proof? 'Course I can. 100% on this. It's a non-issue.