ACCforum: hollis v ird in high court - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 7 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

hollis v ird in high court tax law

#61 User is offline   whetu 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 221
  • Joined: 06-May 13

Posted 22 September 2013 - 04:18 PM

View Postjaffa, on 21 September 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

You know all about bullying, Nottingham mick in hee style.


Jaffaspamma and her toxic orange ooze pollutes this forum. Jaffa is a well oiled bully like her mentor Mini the cybertroll granny. I urge forum members not to have anything to do with Jaffa or her alter ego orange-ribbon, failure to heed this advice could be very harmful to your emotional well being.
1

#62 User is offline   Campy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1386
  • Joined: 15-May 10
  • LocationAuckland Regional super city

Posted 22 September 2013 - 11:34 PM

whetu said:

1379823488[/url]' post='168098']
Jaffaspamma and her toxic orange ooze pollutes this forum. Jaffa is a well oiled bully like her mentor Mini the cybertroll granny. I urge forum members not to have anything to do with Jaffa or her alter ego orange-ribbon, failure to heed this advice could be very harmful to your emotional well being.


Stop it. We know who you are. IP.
1

#63 User is offline   whetu 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 221
  • Joined: 06-May 13

Posted 23 September 2013 - 04:34 PM

View PostCampy, on 22 September 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

Stop it. We know who you are. IP.


Campy, trying some of Bludger Blurb the losers tactics eh!!!

Why do you bother to come to Jaffa the Spamma's rescue? Does that make it official, that you are a member of the Wench pack?

Take care your wheelchair doesn't spin out of control when you hit a patch of slimy orange ooze deposited by Jaffa.
0

#64 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 15 January 2015 - 09:01 PM

View Postflowers, on 05 October 2008 - 08:13 PM, said:

high court Hollis vs ird civ 2004 485 883

Attachment Hollis__...omm._IRD.pdf


You been here for a whiLe now as Claire Hollis MINIPosted Image
But YOU Always blame someone else with ya ranting of NOTHINGS

Dave
0

#65 User is offline   RedFox 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 248
  • Joined: 11-March 13
  • LocationNorth of Christchurch

Posted 15 January 2015 - 09:48 PM

View PostDavid Butler, on 15 January 2015 - 09:01 PM, said:

You been here for a whiLe now as Claire Hollis MINIPosted Image
But YOU Always blame someone else with ya ranting of NOTHINGS

Dave

Yep set case law......

ACC & IRD cannot tax back paid ERC/workers compensation at the extra emolument rate.

ACC claimants 2. Mini knockers 0

I know that pisses you off butthead.
0

#66 User is offline   RedFox 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 248
  • Joined: 11-March 13
  • LocationNorth of Christchurch

Posted 15 January 2015 - 09:49 PM

View PostRedFox, on 15 January 2015 - 09:48 PM, said:

Yep set case law......

ACC & IRD cannot tax back paid ERC/workers compensation at the extra emolument rate.

ACC claimants 2. Mini knockers 0

I know that pisses you off butthead.

Oh that's right... You got taxed extra...

Suck it up cupcake.

You weren't bright enough to figure that out.
0

#67 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 16 January 2015 - 03:07 AM

View PostRedFox, on 15 January 2015 - 09:49 PM, said:

Oh that's right... You got taxed extra...

Suck it up cupcake.

You weren't bright enough to figure that out.


Unfortunately for you refukhed it dosent piss me off at all.
It is good that Claire was not bright enough to figure out she was entitled to acc erc compensation otherwise she would never have had to go thru thru the long costly process of doing what she has.
It is good that she has done that to sort out her own ineptness and assist others along the way ,and become publicly known as the Tax lady and enabled others to benefit and know the ins and outs of that issue
As for me I had no need to figure it out ,i was bright enough to know what i was entitled to and receive them without any hassle thus the NO cause in motion to ever fight acc ,as Claire has to for entitlements ,that were always rightfully hers, and i have never said otherwise re her taxation procedures against the acc as being something of a bad issue.
Dave
pp
Claire does not get knocked re the tax issues -Thru her own fault and many postings ,far away from any acc issues at all ,at others of a personal nature of nastyness the thread was bumped to show Claire -contrary to her accusations-HAS publicly made herself known and NOT as she accuses others of doing-something you do not understand or are seemingly bright enough yourself to comprehendo redfuk.
And i doubt that Claire has the necessary ability's in hand to understand thats what shes done either due to her continuing rants of accusations of bollocks.
1

#68 User is offline   Kewl 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: 02-August 15

Posted 14 February 2016 - 01:43 AM

View Postflowers, on 05 October 2008 - 08:13 PM, said:

high court Hollis vs ird civ 2004 485 883

Attachment Hollis__...omm._IRD.pdf


"Flowers" is a colourful character whom i happily spent many hours with.
I would think he only made this post because the document was publicly available,
the last i saw of flowers was in Auckland where he was nearer his family, and at the time was diagnosed with a long term suffering...
Flowers i would think only posted this for the information it contained.\
1

#69 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 14 February 2016 - 06:12 AM

View PostMINI, on 08 October 2008 - 08:37 AM, said:

Blurb

Did I see you go online this morning and threaten suicide.

And you say there are no 'losers' on here.

I or no one else on the site whats you to harm yourself, but neither do I want threatening messages on my PM.

If you think so little of yourself, just try and imagine what it is like to be named, hated and cursed at, by someone who thinks so little of themselves that the would do themself in.

ACC sucks I have asked you on another thread to please not incite Blurb to break the law. Im sure he would hate jail more than he hates ACC.

And thank you one and all for your kind support. You know who you are and will eventually reap your rewards from my success if any.

See I am not so sure as some people, that I will succeed although I think I am right. This is why low profile was the aim for five years. Dont get peoples hopes up when dealing with the very best minds in public service. We are not better than them, and they have more resourses. I forget how many people the lawyer I am up against has, think it is two others and a secretary to boot.

Must go, much to do.

But Blurb if you are still with us:

I had to be here to try and defend my name. With that came lose of concentration and focus, which I have now got back thanks to a lot of deep thinking.

However, how would you know that I was on the computer a lot, unless you were doing the exact same thing!!??

IS THIS THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK??

ok outta here
Mini


Quite correct kewi re flowers ,altho id have to say looking at the old records of that time Flowers was rather pissed at Claire Hollis the way she was treating him-which in her usual style was NOT NICE AT ALL.


Claire's replies to Flowers amongst many other threads were in a similar vein of nasty's as to her one at Fran as above -Which was-Still is the norm for her showing here own mindset of vindictiveness which then set Blurb / Fran Van Helmond out on his crusade of naming members via his many defamatory untrue contents within his Blackmailing techniques against members of this forum,along with Claire ,which created all the hassles in here -which also set Claire and Fran at one another as well re her accusations of threatening PM's which as Fran published in here was a notice of pending legal action against Calire due to her published content about Fran.>Things never change it seemsPosted Image


Blurb -very notable fo his much demented content of nasty defamatory content for many years in here ,i note has been dealt with -apparently Banned from this forum as i understand it from info within posts in here ,yet we still have Claire doing the nastiness towards anyone she decides to have a go at as to issues she left herself open to Yet blames everyone else except herself and that creates more disharmony in here the same as Blurb created.


David
1

#70 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 09:56 AM

View PostDavid Butler, on 14 February 2016 - 06:12 AM, said:

Quite correct kewi re flowers ,altho id have to say looking at the old records of that time Flowers was rather pissed at Claire Hollis the way she was treating him-which in her usual style was NOT NICE AT ALL.


Claire's replies to Flowers amongst many other threads were in a similar vein of nasty's as to her one at Fran as above -Which was-Still is the norm for her showing here own mindset of vindictiveness which then set Blurb / Fran Van Helmond out on his crusade of naming members via his many defamatory untrue contents within his Blackmailing techniques against members of this forum,along with Claire ,which created all the hassles in here -which also set Claire and Fran at one another as well re her accusations of threatening PM's which as Fran published in here was a notice of pending legal action against Calire due to her published content about Fran.>Things never change it seemsPosted Image


Blurb -very notable fo his much demented content of nasty defamatory content for many years in here ,i note has been dealt with -apparently Banned from this forum as i understand it from info within posts in here ,yet we still have Claire doing the nastiness towards anyone she decides to have a go at as to issues she left herself open to Yet blames everyone else except herself and that creates more disharmony in here the same as Blurb created.


David


David


This is a keeper. It shows that the likes of you David Butler will never give up until you are actually banned for life. And the likes of Kewi are wrong. Flowers had put my case up here deliberately to name and defame me, It was taken down very quickly.

Remember it was I that got stuck into alan Thomas for inciting Flowers to go commit suicide with his hammer and pills in his pocket in Wellington. If the truth hurts. You shouldn't bring it up again.....but it is not you it is hurting is it Mr Butler and it is not the first time you have used this document to cause trouble. You used it to give to Nottingham to post up in Lauda Finem and even they and there lawyer get the essence of it wrong and call me a Tax Evader.

None of you understand what a NOPA is? and how you take a tax case to the HIgh Court, so how can you say the post was made for any other reason than to name me!! Both times, by flowers and by LF. But then Luada finem went a bit further and lied about me being a tax evader and a conspirator.

I have the papers which say I am not a tax evader from IRD and Alan Thomas has spend years saying I am a conspirator and yet done nothing about it, so commonsence actually put you in here Mr butler, with the others as shit stirrers and defamers of names. You have done it to many on here, so stop telling lies, you are simply making matters worse for yourself.

Where have I addressed myself as that person on the document?? You still have answered the question that I asked Greg..................where have I said that that is Mini??

Mini
0

#71 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 10:22 AM

View PostKewl, on 14 February 2016 - 01:43 AM, said:

"Flowers" is a colourful character whom i happily spent many hours with.
I would think he only made this post because the document was publicly available,
the last i saw of flowers was in Auckland where he was nearer his family, and at the time was diagnosed with a long term suffering...
Flowers i would think only posted this for the information it contained.\


Kewl

If you know flowers: Luke

You will also know that I stuck up for him when he threatened to commit suicide in Wellington with his hammer and pills In his pocket. I was there for him. To try and stop him from doing such a thing. The same as I was there for Blurb to let him know that none of us wanted him to do such a thing.

So how does this make me such a bad person? These are people who have both harmed me, yet I try to talk them out of hurting themselves. How does that make me bad Kewl?

Flowers did not post that case to do anything except harm Mini. He thought it was a loss to Mini, but it was not. I believe that if this case had not been taken to the High Court, the 2004 year would not have been opened by the commissioner to allow the Judges comments of where too from here to be put into being.

You note the Commissioner has not asked for costs. That's because everyone of us knew that the 2004 was opened by IRD a week or so before going in front of the Justice.

This is what Lauda Finem lawyer and investigator missed so badly when they started slinging the lies when the posted it on Lauda Finem. They now have a real problem with that, as Thomas also has as he has repeated the post in ACCforum.org and attached his own writings to the beinging and end of their lies, using that same document as up here.

The information in it means nothing to anyone other than those doing it as it was only step one of a number of steps that was six years battle. Which if any one wants to pick up and finish to the obvious conclusion that all ACC backpay for unpaid w/c, would be paid in the years it was meant to be paid not all in one year, which would mean the tax would be a lot less for all of us effected and that was a lot.

Seems like no one is willing to take on such an important case with the IRD again.

Weird that when one considers how bright you people try to make yourselves appear, by taking me on, when it comes to legal issues.

You are all bullsdust and rubbard, without a working brain in any of your shapeless characters and inhuman thoughts.

Mini
0

#72 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 14 February 2016 - 10:42 AM

View PostMINI, on 14 February 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

This is a keeper. It shows that the likes of you David Butler will never give up until you are actually banned for life. And the likes of Kewi are wrong. Flowers had put my case up here deliberately to name and defame me, It was taken down very quickly.

Remember it was I that got stuck into alan Thomas for inciting Flowers to go commit suicide with his hammer and pills in his pocket in Wellington. If the truth hurts. You shouldn't bring it up again.....but it is not you it is hurting is it Mr Butler and it is not the first time you have used this document to cause trouble. You used it to give to Nottingham to post up in Lauda Finem and even they and there lawyer get the essence of it wrong and call me a Tax Evader.

None of you understand what a NOPA is? and how you take a tax case to the HIgh Court, so how can you say the post was made for any other reason than to name me!! Both times, by flowers and by LF. But then Luada finem went a bit further and lied about me being a tax evader and a conspirator.

I have the papers which say I am not a tax evader from IRD and Alan Thomas has spend years saying I am a conspirator and yet done nothing about it, so commonsence actually put you in here Mr butler, with the others as shit stirrers and defamers of names. You have done it to many on here, so stop telling lies, you are simply making matters worse for yourself.

Where have I addressed myself as that person on the document?? You still have answered the question that I asked Greg..................where have I said that that is Mini??

Mini


Claire
The simple FACT is that iy was quiet in here until you arrived back and began your crapola AGAIN
if you post at others with false untrue defamatory content then it is something that is/has a right of reply to
You can either modify your behavior or continue to be responded to in the public arena that you abuse others within.
Unlike you allege of me i dont see flowers issues raised within this thread yet like blurb you must have a pot shot with others misfortunes-nasty nasty there Claire
Flowers placed your case in here and there was a thread taken down NOT because of your document but re the state of the threads content of it being abusive.
I never gave laudafinem any documents re you Claire HOLLIS so stop telling LIES.It was is still a publicly available document that has been available on line and within this forum BEFORE i or you even joined the place/when flowers placed it out for more recent viewing by members re the tax issues THAT YOU were promoting in here so others knew what you were on about.
Many understand what you were doing and why Claire so dont be to self righteous that your the only expert here-
What lauda web site wrote is NOT my concern Claire so stop telling lies that i was involved in publication of things about you.
Any issues yo have with my own personal content you are most welcome to debate of take legal action Claire where i would place the factual data in a court to show your the one with all the defamatory made up lies and what others have published you blame on me, well that would cost you quite a lot of money should you p[proceed along those lines.
Im not interested in where you have said anything Claire however yo have stated you p[partaking as that person named in documents being the tax lady which aligned you as MINI SO YOUR PRBLEM THERE -not mine nor others-go public and thats your deed no one else's.
Your content in This thread alone would nail your ass in a court Claire re defamation so dont push your luck to fat with me.
i had a conversation with another about the nasty ones within this forum and you were one i discuss-no privacy breach bollocks you claim as you were a publicly known person and thus quite able to be discussed using you real name and you pen name.What other sites publish you need to deal with them instead of carrying on as you do with absolute bullshit and nasty bollocks.
what happened after that is not my concern but seems they have the same opinions from what i can see
To conclude -You arrived back started at me again and now you cant handle being responded to with the TRUTHS about issues youve LIED abut so if you have problems as you seem to do re lies about you then ask and ill provide the facts about it-You are a worse twister mixer of info t try to make a story look good and a wordsmither than Thomas could ever be Claire-which WONT wash well in a court of law where youll not get away with that tactic at all.Posted Image
Unless you can stop abusing others with the use of lies - then go back on holiday somewhere as it was nice and quite while you were gone

You will not BE ALLOWED -AS YOU ARE DOING -to use this or any other place to run roughsod over me and others publishing false libel defamatory content and be allowed to go un-responded on that without a challenge to your means/reasons of NASTINESS and falsely laid information in here along with your many false claims to authorities [<which come to nothing as they know -like i and others do that you are a demented one ] that you have made already Claire Hollis
David.
pp
you want keepers the carry on as you are and ill give you some more-which would all suit me being in any court of law you chose Claire
0

#73 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 10:50 AM

View PostDavid Butler, on 27 February 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

Sorry Claire
you in here as a public figure quite famous at that
you slag yu easy to identify
moan you nates off.


Flowers-your telling the story there
Spacecadet-now how could we all forget Douglas Weal as Spacecadet
You know Douglas-hes spread your name far and wide Mini
Tomcat-that be the well known publicly person as Kenneth Miller
You know Ken as well
And then MINI as the person within the document
showing you are that person-thanking one and all for the support
Oh I forgot the snowman-another acquaintance of yours i understand Claire.
Your writings quite interesting MINI.
2008-2013 STILL MIXED UP OUT OF CONTEXT -ME ME ME.Posted Image

pp
Blurbs still here hes ok well healthy WEALTHY all cool.


David Butler

Blurb is still not here!! You and a couple of others have managed to get him banned, but I also know that those involved in the banning have also taken down material about him that was defaming, criminal harassment maybe, so they had to apoligise and take it all down. Cowards who cant stand up for what they say in the first place.

I don't think after what you have done to Blurb for years that you will get him on your side against me............I could be wrong, try it??

Mini
0

#74 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 10:58 AM

View PostDavid Butler, on 14 February 2016 - 10:42 AM, said:

Claire
The simple FACT is that iy was quiet in here until you arrived back and began your crapola AGAIN
if you post at others with false untrue defamatory content then it is something that is/has a right of reply to
You can either modify your behavior or continue to be responded to in the public arena that you abuse others within.
Unlike you allege of me i dont see flowers issues raised within this thread yet like blurb you must have a pot shot with others misfortunes-nasty nasty there Claire
Flowers placed your case in here and there was a thread taken down NOT because of your document but re the state of the threads content of it being abusive.
I never gave laudafinem any documents re you Claire HOLLIS so stop telling LIES.It was is still a publicly available document that has been available on line and within this forum BEFORE i or you even joined the place/when flowers placed it out for more recent viewing by members re the tax issues THAT YOU were promoting in here so others knew what you were on about.
Many understand what you were doing and why Claire so dont be to self righteous that your the only expert here-
What lauda web site wrote is NOT my concern Claire so stop telling lies that i was involved in publication of things about you.
Any issues yo have with my own personal content you are most welcome to debate of take legal action Claire where i would place the factual data in a court to show your the one with all the defamatory made up lies and what others have published you blame on me, well that would cost you quite a lot of money should you p[proceed along those lines.
Im not interested in where you have said anything Claire however yo have stated you p[partaking as that person named in documents being the tax lady which aligned you as MINI SO YOUR PRBLEM THERE -not mine nor others-go public and thats your deed no one else's.
Your content in This thread alone would nail your ass in a court Claire re defamation so dont push your luck to fat with me.
i had a conversation with another about the nasty ones within this forum and you were one i discuss-no privacy breach bollocks you claim as you were a publicly known person and thus quite able to be discussed using you real name and you pen name.What other sites publish you need to deal with them instead of carrying on as you do with absolute bullshit and nasty bollocks.
what happened after that is not my concern but seems they have the same opinions from what i can see
To conclude -You arrived back started at me again and now you cant handle being responded to with the TRUTHS about issues youve LIED abut so if you have problems as you seem to do re lies about you then ask and ill provide the facts about it-You are a worse twister mixer of info t try to make a story look good and a wordsmither than Thomas could ever be Claire-which WONT wash well in a court of law where youll not get away with that tactic at all.Posted Image
Unless you can stop abusing others with the use of lies - then go back on holiday somewhere as it was nice and quite while you were gone

You will not BE ALLOWED -AS YOU ARE DOING -to use this or any other place to run roughsod over me and others publishing false libel defamatory content and be allowed to go un-responded on that without a challenge to your means/reasons of NASTINESS and falsely laid information in here along with your many false claims to authorities [<which come to nothing as they know -like i and others do that you are a demented one ] that you have made already Claire Hollis
David.
pp
you want keepers the carry on as you are and ill give you some more-which would all suit me being in any court of law you chose Claire


You want me to take you to court so you don't have to pay of it or do the legal work required eh Butler??

For all my years of so-called nastiness you capitalise, I am surprised you haven't done something about it.

Did Nottingham follow up w
hith your advice as in 'Chrissie has all that stuff' ie Is she also involved in the collection of ACCforum personal lives etc, against forum rules at the time? Did she also pass document to Nottingham and LF?? You can give me that information or I can go other places and find it.

Would be interesting if this has happened.

Mini
0

#75 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 14 February 2016 - 11:55 AM

View PostMINI, on 14 February 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

You want me to take you to court so you don't have to pay of it or do the legal work required eh Butler??

For all my years of so-called nastiness you capitalise, I am surprised you haven't done something about it.

Did Nottingham follow up w
hith your advice as in 'Chrissie has all that stuff' ie Is she also involved in the collection of ACCforum personal lives etc, against forum rules at the time? Did she also pass document to Nottingham and LF?? You can give me that information or I can go other places and find it.

Would be interesting if this has happened.

Mini




Response
Nah why do i need to go to court Thats Best to leave you out here like person that you are showing as

As ive said ask and i will provide however to provide on that lot you will have to provide more clearer information as to what it is about before i can answer these ones. .

Did notty follow up w ?
Please -You will have to be more precise in your query there as ive no idea what your on about


You now accuse another as well as myself of the collection of personal info and of passing stuff to l/f -

Please be more precise as to What and / or whom/s Personal information and Stuff do you refer to??

David
1

#76 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 12:53 PM

View PostDavid Butler, on 14 February 2016 - 11:55 AM, said:

Response
Nah why do i need to go to court Thats Best to leave you out here like person that you are showing as

As ive said ask and i will provide however to provide on that lot you will have to provide more clearer information as to what it is about before i can answer these ones. .

Did notty follow up w ?
Please -You will have to be more precise in your query there as ive no idea what your on about


You now accuse another as well as myself of the collection of personal info and of passing stuff to l/f -

Please be more precise as to What and / or whom/s Personal information and Stuff do you refer to??

David


David Butler

I didn't accuse anyone. You said in the video to Dermot Nottingham that "Chrissie was the one who had all that stuff".

So it was you who accused her, or should I say named her as being a person who had hold of personal records of ACCforum members!!

I am simply asking if what you told D Nottingham is true or not??

After all when we joined this forum, the forum asked nothing personal of us at all.

We have ascertained that one of the cases you and LF and a few class as mine have been put up by Flowers. We have also ascertained that nobody has me agreeing that the case is mini's. including mini herself.

I have told you often enough that the name is not the problem it is the lies told about the person named that is the problem. Don't you understand English.

It is also well known that if one should use documentation meant for other use, than naming and defaming that person or persons is as quilty as the original if the carry the illegal statements on, for nefarious allegations.

I am simply wanting to know who other than Thomas Nottingham and Yourself have been collecting personal details about me so that you may lie about them and make my life a living hell with other AKA's jumping on board with you and yours to threaten my home with distruction, and myself with mental and physical harm.

I ask myself why has the house gone done from Google when the text hasn't.

I now know the answer to that.

I ask myself why as the blog of photos of myself in twenties tucked behind other documentation. All without me doing a thing. All been done in the past 3-6 months.

I now know the answer to that.

It is because my complaints have been taken very seriously and someone is trying to hide, but it is only working to confirm what I know to be true.

Then why did everything of H8ACC_2013 and Whetu go from here. Go into the Profiles, looks like they have made no posts.

good job I got all this information years ago eh?

I am still the same person as I ever was, I detest lies and those who bully just so they can say, look at how well I destroyed her.

Well I say, I may be battered, but I am not beaten and 2016 is my year.

You can argue with me all you like on here. This, plus all the facts that have been mounted to allow action to be taken, and the fact that you do not try to stop me legally, are all pointers that the facts are way to many for you to hide from and they will do what they are meant to, when the time comes.

At this time, I have other things to do, so will away.

Mini
-1

#77 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 14 February 2016 - 02:06 PM

View PostMINI, on 14 February 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

David Butler

I didn't accuse anyone. You said in the video to Dermot Nottingham that "Chrissie was the one who had all that stuff".

So it was you who accused her, or should I say named her as being a person who had hold of personal records of ACCforum members!!

I am simply asking if what you told D Nottingham is true or not??

After all when we joined this forum, the forum asked nothing personal of us at all.

We have ascertained that one of the cases you and LF and a few class as mine have been put up by Flowers. We have also ascertained that nobody has me agreeing that the case is mini's. including mini herself.

I have told you often enough that the name is not the problem it is the lies told about the person named that is the problem. Don't you understand English.

It is also well known that if one should use documentation meant for other use, than naming and defaming that person or persons is as quilty as the original if the carry the illegal statements on, for nefarious allegations.

I am simply wanting to know who other than Thomas Nottingham and Yourself have been collecting personal details about me so that you may lie about them and make my life a living hell with other AKA's jumping on board with you and yours to threaten my home with distruction, and myself with mental and physical harm.

I ask myself why has the house gone done from Google when the text hasn't.

I now know the answer to that.

I ask myself why as the blog of photos of myself in twenties tucked behind other documentation. All without me doing a thing. All been done in the past 3-6 months.

I now know the answer to that.

It is because my complaints have been taken very seriously and someone is trying to hide, but it is only working to confirm what I know to be true.

Then why did everything of H8ACC_2013 and Whetu go from here. Go into the Profiles, looks like they have made no posts.

good job I got all this information years ago eh?

I am still the same person as I ever was, I detest lies and those who bully just so they can say, look at how well I destroyed her.

Well I say, I may be battered, but I am not beaten and 2016 is my year.

You can argue with me all you like on here. This, plus all the facts that have been mounted to allow action to be taken, and the fact that you do not try to stop me legally, are all pointers that the facts are way to many for you to hide from and they will do what they are meant to, when the time comes.

At this time, I have other things to do, so will away.

Mini


You HAVE accused -many times this time against another person that you HAVE Inferred to the public that was involved in what you allege
thus you are leading others to believe what you infer.
As to the stuff that person may have had then you would have to be rather specific in any legal proceedings as to what stuff you are referring to.
You infer that is the collection and Passing of documents to another and there again YOU WILL HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC AS TO YOUR ACCUSATIONS IN A COURT OF LAW.
What i said in the video i know exctly word for word when why contact day dates and what was being discussed at any particular time
You Claire Hollis astoundingly HAVING BEEN INFORMED MANY TIMES YOUR WRONG,are accusing of all things based on what you have lifted from some other web site of which you ADMIT contains wrong information yet you continue to use as threats harass libel defamation etc etc to publish libel defamation content against others based on what you have lifted from another site thus repeating what others have published yet you have NO certainty of the actual factual truthfulness of what you use to accuse libel defame others with.
I would call that as being BLOODY STUPID however you have caused considerable damage and continue to do so against many others basing your accusations of info you CAN NOT FACTUALNESS with correct data as YOU DONT HAVE IT AND CAN NOT HAVE IT.
Using things someone else has said is DUMB DUMB abd DUMBER.
You have asked if what i told was true-Of course it was otherwise id a never said it , based on documents and publications of the likes of yourself-I dont have a problem with what was said- I do have a problem the way you portray information and then accuse falsely apon, from that which someone else has provided different than what it would be when shown in its original format in a court of law
WHICH that then leaves you as this >You are in a position of deep deep shite here Claire and altho im easy going and know your a loop head at times YOU DO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOURD OING OUT HERE thus my patience is running out
i have no wish to destroy or bankrupt you but the way you carry on the choices are becoming very limited there.
There is no agreeing to ascertain that you have not agreed you are not mini and nor that the case is not yours
Quite the contrary there when one reads just this thread alone you most certainly do show who you are and that the case is yours which is also the situation in many other threads in this forum.
What lies have been told about you im not sure having not bothered to chek what is here / out there by others is true or not but what i publish myself you can guarantee i have the back up to what ive said
you speak of using documents
this forum is for such purposes t assist others and your tax issues are of interest to acc claimants so it was placed in here very early on as info for acc claimants/members of this forums use.
AGAIN YOU ACCUSE OUTRIGHTLY re the collecting of personal information and that i have lied about them
Where have i published information about you and also where would it be lies as you accuse of.
akas are not my problem as i use my own name -as you well know
where the threats re home destruction are or where they came from iuf the do indeed exist i havnt a clue so STOP accusing me of that crap.
you house in google
you fotos down
probably as whomever placed then there realizes they may be in the shite so go them and stop going at me for others actions

You say you hate lies but Claire you ARE one of the most publicly known one in here that publishes lies about others
Rather hypocritical one must think there.
im not arguing with you in here ='what im doing is responding to YOUR LIES FASLE ACCUSATIONS YOU MAKE AGAINST ME
Ive told you why i dont legalize at you
you been publicly told to stop desist or i will respond showing you up as Claire Hollis
That i will continue as to me thats the best way to get your attention when some day you may think on just how big a f'k up youve made of yourself.
The day you call me into any court will be th day youll regret as it wil be costly
YOU BEEN WARNED CONTINUE AT YUOUR OWN PERIL Claire
suits me to strategem and let you accuse /turn up and show your wrong than go arguing for years in a court against you
You charge
you prove
i disprove very easily and then your fuked
Now be a good wee girl go away and speak to someone with some brains show them that your a nasty bitch and what your been up to,and take there advice and piss off before you do end up in trouble.
there are questions amongst the above but as usual Claire Hollis WONT respond to them as she is UNABLE TO DO SO AND USUAL FORM WOULD BE ANOTHER ROUND OF HER CRAPOLA ACCUSATIONS THINKING SHE IS MOTHER SUPERIOR
Why you persist in going about things as if they concern you as the one all centre of the universe who would know but a self opinionated better than anyone else would be a starting point for how you act out here so YOUR A NUNce Claire ,thats all a very very silly one at that.
You make up bullshit from bullshit a accuse with that
god help if that is how you were trained to act as a taxation expert to roll the peasants
That makes you NO BETTER [ actually worse as you have absconded yourself in here amongst vulnerable ones when your a nasty old women ]> than the acc staff acting like that where you accuse them of doing the same as you act yourself.

Regards

David Butler .
2

#78 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 14 February 2016 - 03:41 PM

View PostMINI, on 14 February 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

David Butler

Blurb is still not here!! You and a couple of others have managed to get him banned, but I also know that those involved in the banning have also taken down material about him that was defaming, criminal harassment maybe, so they had to apoligise and take it all down. Cowards who cant stand up for what they say in the first place.

I don't think after what you have done to Blurb for years that you will get him on your side against me............I could be wrong, try it??

Mini


NOTHING at all that ive published Claire has been taken down
I do stand behind what i say Claire so whats ya problem
Again you infer with inference based crap about others when your the coward here who wont and is AFRAID TO NAME WHOM YOU INFER thus accuse FASELY ABOUT

And here you now state that i was involved in the banning of Fran
something else you cant prove in a court like the rest of your bullshitPosted Image
Not my web site to do anything like that with Clalrio - More of your making up fairy tales


David
1

#79 User is offline   RedFox 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 248
  • Joined: 11-March 13
  • LocationNorth of Christchurch

Posted 14 February 2016 - 11:51 PM

View PostDavid Butler, on 14 February 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

NOTHING at all that ive published Claire has been taken down
I do stand behind what i say Claire so whats ya problem
Again you infer with inference based crap about others when your the coward here who wont and is AFRAID TO NAME WHOM YOU INFER thus accuse FASELY ABOUT

And here you now state that i was involved in the banning of Fran
something else you cant prove in a court like the rest of your bullshitPosted Image
Not my web site to do anything like that with Clalrio - More of your making up fairy tales


David


May I refresh your memory Mr Butler, you have removed hundreds of your abusive, threatening and defamatory posts from this forum.

Mr Alan Thomas has even stated in his personal story thread that you have removed posts.
2

#80 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 15 February 2016 - 04:59 AM

View PostRedFox, on 14 February 2016 - 11:51 PM, said:

May I refresh your memory Mr Butler, you have removed hundreds of your abusive, threatening and defamatory posts from this forum.

Mr Alan Thomas has even stated in his personal story thread that you have removed posts.


Only an anomaly that you want to create from long long ago That is correct along with four other members at that time 2008 . Hardwired forum member removed posts from ONLY the Thomas Thread many years ago and they were not abusive as you accuse of.
removed simply to tidy up a mess in here back then in a hope of a better forum.
most of the troubles which was created by you Fran and Hollis..
whilst after your blackmailing threats to get your own way ,you did exactly the same re many posts in that time period -it is a pity that you never carried out similar process since 2008 ,and this place would have been far better for that

The current issue i as David Butler have posted on re posts not removed as to do with the many legal threats by Hollis and Fran Van Helmond and you are advised that I HAVE NO LEGAL CONCERNS AT ALL RE MY CONTENT response's to Hollis and Fran Van Helmond to do with my current 2008 onwards content re bomb plot / lauda issues being debated IN THIS THREAD and to do with accusations made by Claire hollis and yourself re posts removed is current re the issues raised by Mini so piss off Fran and stop stirring.
You would be far better off going into the Thomas thread and instead of telling lies-explaining why you wont admit that you were in cahoots /clearly as the documents show to be assisting to pervert the course of justice with Douglas Weal re the Bomb Plot, being Fran something that you have never admitted.
for the record Fran it is only you that considers my content threatening so why is that ? >shows you up and nearer the truth eh Fran.
If you continue to try and have go at me in tandem with HOLLIS YOULL HAVE TO DO FAR BETTER THAN YOUVE DONE TO DATE Frannyboy.Posted Image

David
0

Share this topic:


  • 7 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users