ACCforum: ... - ACCforum

Jump to content

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


#81 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 21 July 2011 - 02:38 PM

CW2 LIMITEDTo maintain this company log on here
View previous names

Last updated on 20 Jul 2011 Certificate of Incorporation All Company Details Print Save Email Company SummaryCompany number: 1916310
Incorporation Date: 26 Mar 2007
Company Status: In Receivership and in Liquidation
View Previous StatusHide Previous Status
In Receivership from 18 Jul 2011 to 18 Jul 2011 Registered from 26 Mar 2007 to 18 Jul 2011


Receivership Details

Receivership (1) from 18 Jul 2011Status: ActiveReceiver: DUNPHY, CHRISTINEOrganisation: SHEPHARD DUNPHY LIMITEDPhone: +64 4 4736747Email: [email protected]: Level 2, Zephyr Building, 82 Willis St, Wellington, 0000, NZAppointed: 18 Jul 2011 Receiver: SHEPHARD, IAINOrganisation: SHEPHARD DUNPHY LIMITEDPhone: +64 4 4736747Email: [email protected]: Level 2, Zephyr Building, 82 Willis St, Wellington, 0000, NZAppointed: 18 Jul 2011 Brief description of property
in receivership: All Present and after acquired personal property of the company secured by the way of General Security Agreement dated 6 may 2011 in favour of Paul Cornel Coffey.Reports: Receiver Six Monthly Report due 12 Mar 2012 Receivers First Report due 16 Sep 2011


Liquidation from 18 Jul 2011
Status: ActiveLiquidator: JORDAN, BARRY PHILLIP Organisation: DELOITTE - AUCKLAND 2Phone: +64 4 4721677Email: [email protected]: Level 18, Deloitte Centre, 80 Queen St, Auckland, 1140, NZAppointed: 18 Jul 2011 Liquidator: VANCE, DAVID STUART Organisation: DELOITTE - AUCKLAND 2Phone: +64 4 4721677Email: [email protected]: Level 18, Deloitte Centre, 80 Queen St, Auckland, 1140, NZAppointed: 18 Jul 2011 Reports Liquidator Six Monthly Report due 06 Feb 2012 Liquidator First Report due 19 Aug 2011


Entity type: NZ Limited Company
Constitution filed: No
AR filing month: September , last filed on 16 Nov 2010
Company Addresses:Registered Office
Bw Chartered Accountants, Level 1, Intech House, 17 Garrett Street, Wellington, 6142 , New Zealand Address for service
Bw Chartered Accountants, Level 1, Intech House, 17 Garrett Street, Wellington, 6142 , New Zealand View all addresses
Directors Showing 1 of 1 directors
Paul Cornel COFFEY 222a Oriental Parade, Wellington, 6011 , New Zealand Directors (1)Full legal name: Paul Cornel COFFEY
Residential Address: 222a Oriental Parade, Wellington, 6011 , New Zealand
Appointment Date: 26 Mar 2007
Consent: View Consent Form

Review And SubmitCW2 LIMITED (1916310)Withdrawal of Pending Director Cancel Submit

AddressesRequired addressesRegistered office address:
Bw Chartered Accountants, Level 1, Intech House, 17 Garrett Street, Wellington, 6142 , New Zealand Address for service:
Bw Chartered Accountants, Level 1, Intech House, 17 Garrett Street, Wellington, 6142 , New Zealand There are no Other Addresses
Historic data for addresses
Hide History
Registered office address: C/-price Waterhouse Coopers, 113-119 The Terrace, Wellington, Attn: Owen Gibson , New Zealand
Effective from: 26 Mar 2007 Effective to: 04 Oct 2010


Address for service: C/-price Waterhouse Coopers, 113-119 The Terrace, Wellington, Attn: Owen Gibson , New Zealand
Effective from: 26 Mar 2007 Effective to: 04 Oct 2010

Shareholdings (2)Total Number of Shares:100 Extensive Shareholding:No
Shareholders in Allocation:

Allocation 1:70 shares

Paul Cornel COFFEY 222a Oriental Parade, Wellington ,

Nigel Warren HUGHES 222a Oriental Parade, Wellington , New Zealand

Allocation 2:30 shares

Mark Alan WALKER
C/-smith Chilcott Bertelsen Harry Ltd, Level 11, Shortland Tower One, 51-53 Shortland Street, Auckland 1010 , New Zealand

Allen Claude BERTELSEN
C/-smith Chilcott Bertelsen Harry Ltd, Level 11, Shortland Tower One, 51-53 Shortland Street, Auckland 1010 , New Zealand Allocation 1 (70.00%)Allocation 2 (30.00%)Share allocations less than 1% are not displayed in the graph above.Documents (15)
Search Date Document Type Size
20 Jul 2011 10:49 Appointment of Liquidator
20 Jul 2011 10:49 Appointment of Liquidator
18 Jul 2011 14:15 Appointment of Receiver
18 Jul 2011 14:15 Appointment of Receiver
18 Jul 2011 13:56 Change of Company Name
Certificate of Incorporation 195kb
16 Nov 2010 12:19 File Annual Return
24 Sep 2010 10:29 Particulars of Company Address
19 Jan 2010 11:32 Online Annual Return
19 Jan 2010 11:29 Online Particulars Of Company Address
14 Nov 2008 13:27 Online Annual Return
13 Aug 2008 10:09 Particulars of Shareholding
01 Jun 2007 16:34 Particulars of Shareholding
26 Mar 2007 16:46 Application To Incorporate A Company
26 Mar 2007 16:46 Consent Of Director
Consent Of Director 0kb
26 Mar 2007 16:46 Consent Of Shareholder
Consent Of Shareholder 0kb

#82 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 22 July 2011 - 01:15 PM

hi Hukildaspida

would i be wrong in thinking 82 willis street, was the offices of Dr fenwicke and B Christian????

do I have the right address?


#83 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 08 September 2011 - 02:58 PM

What skeletons are lurking in the inboxes and outboxes of former and current staff and it's associated agents that could disclose a thing or two?

May we suggest if anyone has any information that may relate to any dishonest practices by former or current staff at or contracted to that it is reported to the authorities.

Press freedom fears as police question Guardian reporter

Case raises concerns about criminalising contact between journalists and off-the-record sources

reddit this Dan Sabbagh, Wednesday 7 September 2011 21.16 BST Article history

Amelia Hill was questioned under caution by police in an inquiry into alleged leaks of information from Operation Weeting. Photograph: Katherine Rose

The National Union of Journalists and a respected media watchdog have criticised the questioning of a Guardian journalist in an inquiry into alleged leaks of information from Operation Weeting, the investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World.

It emerged on Wednesday that Amelia Hill, a reporter involved in a number of the Guardian's key phone-hacking revelations over recent weeks, was questioned under caution several days ago in a case that raises concerns about attempts to criminalise contact between journalists and off-the-record sources.

Last month a 51-year-old detective constable was arrested in connection with alleged leaks from the Scotland Yard phone-hacking investigation. At the time there were reports that the officer had passed information to the Guardian, but the newspaper said it had "no comment to make on the sources of our journalism".

Michelle Stanistreet, the general secretary of the National Union of Journalists, said that there was "a vital journalistic principle at stake here" and that "it is outrageous that an allegation of off-the-record briefings is being treated as a criminal matter".

She added: "There is a clear distinction between legitimate off-the-record interviews and the illegitimate payment of bribes."

Martin Moore, the director of the media watchdog the Media Standards Trust, said that in the light of the phone-hacking scandal it was becoming "increasingly important to sustain and defend journalism in the public interest". He said that it was "not the time to be threatening public interest journalism" by the police moving to question reporters such as Hill.

The Guardian said in a statement: "We can confirm Amelia Hill has been questioned in connection with an investigation into alleged leaks." The newspaper argued that the case could have lasting repercussions for the way journalists deal with police officers. The statement added: "On a broader point, journalists would no doubt be concerned if the police sought to criminalise conversations between off-record sources and reporters."

Although the paper said it would not comment on any specific confidential source, a spokesman said Hill had never paid a police officer for information.

The police investigation into leaks from Operation Weeting has been going on for several weeks.

Meanwhile, Raoul Simons, 35, the deputy football editor of the Times, became the 16th person to be arrested as part of the phone hacking enquiry.

Simons, who had joined the Times from the Evening Standard in August 2009, is understood to have been arrested at 5.55am on suspicion of conspiring to intercept communications. He was released on police bail until a date in October.

He was not arrested by prior appointment. He was taken to a north London police station and questioned on suspicion of conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages, contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977.

Hill's police interview comes amid growing pressure to clamp down on contacts between officers and journalists following the News of the World phone hacking scandal, which has spread out into wider allegations of police corruption.

Emails from News International allegedly imply that journalists on the now closed Sunday tabloid bought copies of Buckingham Palace's private phone directory from a royal protection officer.

Following those revelations, an inquiry by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary is examining "alleged corruption and abuse of power" in police relationships with the media, and Elizabeth Filkin, the former parliamentary commissioner for standards, heads a group drawing up a framework for how police officers handle their relationships with reporters. Both inquiries are considering whether communication between police officers should be officially monitored and recorded by a press officer.

The questioning of Hill has similarities to a case police mounted against Sally Murrer, a reporter on the Milton Keynes Citizen, and a former Thames Valley police detective, Mark Kearney, which was thrown out. Kearney had been accused of leaking information to Murrer. The collapse of the case was widely seen as a victory for journalistic freedom.

It was reported meanwhile that Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World and the prime minister's former personal communications director, is refusing to appear before a Commons select committee that is investigating phone-hacking.

His solicitors have written to the culture, media and sport committee declining an invitation to appear, citing "concerns" about "parallel inquiries and investigations and the publicity generated by them".

He has consistently denied knowing that phone hacking took place but last month a previously unseen letter from Goodman emerged that claimed phone hacking was "widely discussed" at editorial conferences until Coulson banned mentions of it. Goodman's letter also claimed that Coulson had offered to let him keep his job if he agreed not to implicate the paper in hacking when it came to court.

Coulson resigned from the News International paper in 2007 after its former royal editor Clive Goodman was jailed on phone-hacking offences.

It also emerged yesterday that MPs on another committee have been told that News International asked a technology firm, HCL, to delete emails and other documents 13 times since 2009.

Technology company HCL, which provides services under contract to News International, informed the Commons home affairs committee in August that it was aware of the deletion of hundreds of thousands of emails on nine occasions between April 2010 and July 2011, but said it did not know of anything "untoward" behind the requests. Yesterday, HCL's solicitor, Stuart Benson, contacted the committee again to say that a further four requests had come to light - one of which related to the deletion of emails from an inbox of a user who had not accessed his account for eight years.

Hukildaspida says: How many more records of deleted emails will come to light if they keep excavating?

#84 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 13 October 2011 - 09:21 PM

View Posthukildaspida, on 04 June 2010 - 03:57 PM, said:

New UK Laws re Bribery Act 2010 etc that the Authorities in NZ and other countries could learn a thing or two from.


Some light reading relating to The Bribery Act & NHS in UK that is equally as relevant in New Zealand, including those employed at or contracted to


Go Search

HR topics
News & events
Key issues
Shared learning
About us
Your role

You are in: NHS Employers » Employment policy & practice » UK Employment practice

About us
Pay & contracts
Planning your workforce
Recruitment & retention
Employment policy & practice
Equality and diversity
UK Employment practice
Latest news
Government consultation on modern workplaces
Resolving workplace disputes: a consultation
Better training for NHS staff to support victims of violence
Core standards for NHS managers
Resolving disputes
Changes to notice periods for NHS bodies
Support for employers with staff serving in the reserve forces
NHS Staff Passport
Professional regulation
Corporate Manslaughter Act
NHS Leeds v Larner - the relationship between statutory annual leave and long term sick leave
Accrual of statutory annual leave on long term sick leave
Managing industrial disputes
The Bribery Act 2010
Disciplinary procedures
European employment policy
Staff engagement
Social partnership forum
HPMA Awards 2010
Health, work and well-being
NHS reform
Managing the transition

Are you a workforce leader?

The Bribery Act 2010

The Bribery Act 2010 came into force on the 1st July 2011 and in response, the Ministry of Justice has published their final guidance to help organisations understand the new legislation, its implications and to help deal with the risks of bribery.

Manager reading guidance

This page includes information under the following headings:

Background to the Act
Implications for employers
Penalties for the offence
Reporting acts of bribery
Possible defences - six guiding principles
Steps to prevent bribery
Further information

Background to the Act

For the purposes of the Act, bribery is defined as the giving or taking of a reward in return for acting dishonestly and/or in breach of the law.
Under the Bribery Act 2010, there are four possible offences:

Bribing another person (section 1)
Being bribed (section 2)
Bribing a foreign public official (section 6)
Failure to prevent bribery (section 7)

It is a criminal offence for an individual to give or to receive a bribe. It is a corporate offence if a business is found to have failed to prevent bribery.

Your organisation could also be liable where someone who performs services for it (like an employee or agent) pays a bribe specifically to get business, keep business, or gain a business advantage from your organisation. However, if you can show your organisation had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery, you will have a full defence for this particular offence, and can avoid prosecution. Further information can be found in the 'possible defences' section below.

The guidance published by the Ministry of Justice details preventions that can be put in place to protect your organisation from acts of bribery.

Implications for employers

The offence of a commercial organisation failing to prevent bribery by associated persons focuses predominantly on the private sector. However, it remains a grey area as to what functions and activities carried out by a public body could be argued to fall into the definition of ‘carrying on a business.’

The following are indirect implications that employers should be aware of:

Private sector contractors and providers to public sector organisations are covered by the offence, so employers will need to update their contracts to refer to it
Individuals employed by NHS Trusts may still be implicated under the individual offences
‘quasi-public sector’ organisations such as community interest companies, emerging clinical commissioning groups and social enterprises may, for the purposes of the Act, be determined as ‘commercial organisations’ and therefore will be covered by the corporate offence

As a matter of best practice, Trusts are advised to implement appropriate elements of the guidance to reduce the risk of unlawful acts and maintain the reputation of the organisation.
Penalties for the offence

If the ‘corporate offence’ is committed, then both the organisation and its directors can receive a sanction including unlimited fines. The possible sanction for an individual involved in bribery has risen from 7 years in prison to 10 years.
Reporting acts of bribery

The majority of Trusts already have an Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy or equivalent – the reporting of potential acts of bribery should follow the same procedure. It is recommended that Trusts update their whistleblowing policies to cover potential acts of bribery, so employees are aware of what behaviour is unacceptable.

On suspicion of potential acts of bribery, like in instances of suspected fraud or corruption, Trusts should contact their Local Counter Fraud Specialist. In addition, Trusts can also contact their regional NHS Protect Area Anti-Fraud Specialist. For further information about NHS Protect please visit their website or email [email protected]

Alternatively, acts of bribery can be reported using one of the following:

The NHS Fraud and Corruption Reporting line – 0800 028 40 60

Online Fraud Reporting Form - Report NHS Fraud website

Possible defences – six guiding principals

The guidance describes six guiding principles that set out the approach that organisations should take to prevent bribery occurring in their organisation. These are:

Proportionate procedures – designed to prevent bribery by anyone associated with the organisation and should be proportionate to the level of bribery risk to the organisation.
Top level commitment – Senior management teams must show a commitment to preventing bribery, and promote a culture that does not tolerate acts of bribery.
Risk assessment – An assessment of both internal and external risks of bribery to the organisation should be carried out regularly and documented.
Due diligence – There must be effective due diligence procedures in place in respect of those involved in the organisation or carrying services out on behalf of the organisation.
Communication – The organisation’s stance on bribery should be clearly communicated to all employees and all those carrying out services on behalf of the organisation. This should include appropriate training.
Monitoring and review – There should be an ongoing review process that regularly monitors the effectiveness of the procedures in place to prevent bribery.

For some practical next steps in implementing these defences see the 'steps to prevent bribery' section below. For the full details of these defences, see the guidance document.

Steps to prevent bribery

Below is a selection of steps that can be taken to help prevent acts of bribery and implement the guidance:

Involvement of top level management – appoint a senior manager who can lead on the implementation of anti-bribery policies and procedures and produce a statement of commitment to prevent bribery in all parts of the organisation
Know who you are doing business with – for most cases this will be through the procurement process
Update policies and procedures by adding an anti-bribery statement to the organisation’s employee handbook / intranet – this should be adequately communicated to all staff
Amend whistleblowing policies to make specific reference to bribery, and encourage disclosure of bribery offences
Training / a presentation to make employees aware of the strengthened legislation around ‘bribery’, particularly in relation to corporate hospitality and the organisation’s policy on business conduct (or similar)
Update/add a clause on bribery to the employment contract
Ensure all employees are under an express obligation to report any potential acts of bribery, including where an employee has personally committed an act of bribery.
Ensure recruitment checks are robust
Add bribery to the matters covered by a disciplinary policy
Review remuneration structures so that they comply with the new law where applicable

Further information

For further details about the Bribery Act 2010, the implications for your organisation and what steps you can take to prevent acts of bribery, please visit:

The Bribery Act - Quick Start Guide

The Bribery Act 2010 - Guidance Document

[email protected]
See also...
Guidance and resources for employers.
External links...
The Bribery Act 2010 guidance
NHS Protect
The Bribery Act - quick start guide

Share |

Contact us | Help | Media centre | Home | Register | NHS Confederation

#85 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 13 October 2011 - 09:24 PM

Bribery – FSA- fines intermediary

The FSA has fined the insurance company Willis Limited £6.895m for failing in its efforts to prevent bribery and corruption in relation to events between 2005 and 2009. The investigation related to payments of £27 million made to third parties overseas to assist with winning contracts. The FSA fined the broker for failing to:

establish and record adequate commercial reasons for the payments
undertake due diligence on the third parties; and
review the appropriateness of its relationships with those third parties on a regular basis.

This indicates the increasingly aggressive stance of the regulators in relation to this area.

It highlights the importance of companies taking seriously the laws in relation to this area and ensuring they have in place adequate procedures. In relation to bribery and corruption companies are having to make changes to comply with the new UK regime under the Bribery Act 2010 in force on 1 July of this year. This case indicates that this is not something that should be put to the bottom of the Board’s to-do list and if a company hasn’t already it should review its procedures in this area as a priority.


#86 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 13 October 2011 - 09:34 PM

Corporate Liability


#87 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 24 November 2011 - 02:27 PM

Would someone please be able to confirm if one plus one plus seven equals nine?

Perhaps a journalist whom works at the National Business Review or someone whom has good investigative skills would be able to help us get to the bottom of this serious matter.

We would like to know why the investigation into the misappropriation of our funds was not refered to the by ACC's Internal Auditor, at the time, Mr Geoff McRobie whom subsequently was employed by Inland Revenue in it's Risk & Assurance Department.

Does Lauretta Alessi
plus may we assume Jeff Chapman whom was named and the other seven(7) named in the excerpt of the second article below equal nine (9)?

Why haven't the others been offically named in the media like Lauretta Alessi, has been?

All skeletons within should be disclosed as it is the Public's money for people whom have accidents causing injuries, not greedy staff.

It's understood at least two of those mentioned in the article below left under questionable circumstances in recent years.

THE EVENING POST, 13 MAR 1995 , Edition 3, Page 1.

Flowers, liquor on ACC credit cards



An $840 florist's bill, an $1100 chauffeur service, liquor purchases, and tenpin bowling were billed to a former ACC executive's corporate credit card.

Lauretta Alessi
charged a total of $84,293.74 to her ACC-supplied corporate American Express card during an 18-month period at the financially-pressed corporation.

Alessi, former general manager of operations at ACC before leaving in 1993, was one of nine senior executives identified by an internal report as having charged a total of $550,000 to their corporate credit cards between July 1991 and December 1992.

Neither the report nor the records suggest billing of the items breached ACC policy, or that ACC was not reimbursed.

The period was one in which tough new ACC regulations which limited many accident victims to a maximum of $40 a week compensation were being put in place to control the costs of the scheme, and before ACC cracked down on executive spending.

New management at ACC has toughened up internal controls. All personal expenditure on behalf of ACC must be approved by a manager. Spending over $20 has to be accounted for with an invoice or receipts.

The internal report shows Alessi billed an average of $4682 a month to her ACC American Express Card in the 18-month period.

Credit card records obtained by The Post show that among the items billed were:

* $844.71 by Fleur de Lis Floriste, Wellington, and $121.34 by Bunches Florists, Wellington.

* $1134 by the Trinkl Chauffeur Service, Dusseldorf, Germany.

* $246.69 by Halpern Esq, a Canadian clothing shop.

* $258.49 by O'Reilly's Wines and Spirits, Wellington, and $178.76 by Liquor King.

* $200 by Strikeline, a Porirua tenpin bowling centre.

* $34.67 by Pathfinder Books.

* $13,133.31 in overseas hotel bills during September and October 1992.

* $116.72 by Ticketmaster UK, Ltd, a theatre, concert and sports booking office.

FROM front page

* $176.67 by Kirkcaldies and Stains, Wellington.

* $84.44 by Noel Leeming, and $31.11 by Levenes.

* Fifteen Wellington restaurant visits totalling $2266.85 in the six months June-December 1992, including one for $1429.07 from Wellington's Fujiyama Restaurant.

Also billed during June and August 1991 was $448.90 from Market Art, Wellington. All sums exclude GST.

Alessi was one of two former ACC senior executives identified by the report whose spending required further analysis. The report by internal auditor Geoff McRobie found controls on senior executives were so lax they provided opportunities for misappropriating and spending significant sums of ACC money without independent checks.

The Post made frequent attempts to contact Ms Alessi at home and work. She still could not be reached for comment at press time.


The most expensive trips by other staff members in the four months to October 31, 1992, were:

* Gerard McGreevy to a management course at Harvard Business School, $20,944.

* Dr R Griffiths and Dr K Howard to Austria, $26,831.

* L Alessi and B Davis to Kenya, $27,959.

* A Nicholls and S Montgomery to USA and England, $28,568.

* Vince Morel to USA and Canada, $22,789.

Lauretta Alessi is understood to have renovated a home in Fendalton in recent years.

THE PRESS, 8 OCT 2002, Edition 2, Page 6.

Complete renewal

What was once a cold single-storeyed villa has been transformed into a comfortable, two-storeyed family home.

Old villas may have lots of character, but they can be cold and draughty, and their layout may may not suit today's lifestyle.

When Jock Muir, Lauretta Alessi, and their three sons moved into a Fendalton villa, they found it cold, with the kitchen and living areas at the far end of the house and sunshine streaming into the bedrooms.

The solution was clear: renovate. They had plenty of experience, having renovated homes in Dunedin, Invercargill, and Melbourne.

Although the previous owners had partially revamped the home, Lauretta and Jock visualised a total transformation.

"We needed light and space, a warm house, and informal living areas," says Jock.

A draughtsman drew up a plan, and then the builders took over, with the family helping.

By laying black plastic on the ground and silver paper under the floor joists, the ambient temperature of the house was raised three degrees. Double-glazing throughout also helped to retain the heat. "It's lovely and warm," says Lauretta.

Out went the hallway that divided the living areas from the bedrooms. Four fireplaces and chimneys were also removed, and the bricks used for garden walls.

This created a large, open space, which is now a 16m-long open-plan family living and dining room with a central kitchen.

At the southern end bifolding doors open to a deck looking out to the garden and the Wairarapa stream. Further windows look out to the front garden.

The old front door has been retained on the west side, and a bay window forms an attractive casual seating area. Light streams through a central skylight.

Lauretta particularly likes the kitchen with its rimu joinery, some of which was recycled from the hall panelling and fireplace surrounds. It has a central island with a granite top, a large stainless-steel cooker, and a near-silent rangehood.

Wayne Brown, of Creative Joinery,
came up with exactly what she wanted, she says. "The idea was to have a central kitchen with a sink facing into the room, so that I could see what the kids were doing."

Rimu tongue-and-groove floors combine with white walls where Lauretta can display some of her watercolours. Floral and cream, and deep-purple curtains are from Laine Simpson, of Unique Interiors.

On the north side a former bedroom has become a music room with a bay window. A door on the east side opens into the mudroom and laundry with a butler's sink, which is great when the boys come home, says Lauretta.

The old laundry and kitchen have become part of a bedroom and ensuite, and the former dining room is now a study.

One of the biggest changes was cutting away the roof and adding a second storey. Although it is new, it is hard to tell from the outside.

Gold curtains and green striped sofas convey a peaceful mood in the main bedroom. Bifolding windows let in the fresh air.

Another skylight provides even illumination in the bathroom with its huge double shower. Two other bedrooms share a bathroom.

The total renovation job took just four months. Landscaping was done at the same time. The couple expected it to be less stressful than building a new house, but it probably wasn't, because they lived in the house while the work was done.

A harmonious relationship between the contractors and clients is the key to a successful renovation, says Lauretta -- "communication, to get your ideas across and to enable them to understand your vision."



Above. Perfect match: it is hard to tell, but the top storey of this Fendalton house is an addition. Left. Ornate crafting: formerly part of the fireplace surround, this rimu curlicue is now part of the kitchen island. Family at work: Andrew Muir, left,10, Lauretta Alessi, William Muir, two, and Angus Muir, 13, all helped with the renovation. Dining nook: curtains from Unique Interiors frame a window. Jock Muir and Lauretta Alessi: good communication is the key to a successful renovation.

Lauretta Alessi thread

#88 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 24 November 2011 - 02:41 PM

THE EVENING POST, 15 MAR 1995 , Edition 3, Page 1.

Conscience clear over ACC role


ACC's former chairman says he has a clear conscience about his role in auditing of the corporation despite apparent high spending by former ACC executives there.

Colin Beyer, chairman from 1987 to 1992
, was responding to Post reports that detailed heavy billing by senior executives to corporate credit cards during 1991 and 1992 before new management introduced tighter controls.

One former senior executive, Lauretta Alessi, was billed $840 from a Wellington florist, as well as purchases from a tenpin bowling centre, chauffeur services, liquor and clothing shops as part of $84,293.74 to her ACC American Express corporate credit card during the 18-month period.

There was no suggestion that the billing of the items breached ACC policy, or that the money was not reimbursed.

Mr Beyer said the $840 for flowers seemed "a hell of a lot of money. I'm quite suprised at that".

A recent ACC internal report has also found that internal controls on senior executives were so lax they provided opportunities for misappropriation and the spending of significant sums of ACC money without independent checks during 18 months from July 1991.

Mr Beyer said he was unable to comment on that report without having seen it.

"I've got a clear conscience. I think that the audit function probably didn't focus on management. I had someone there that I trusted (former managing director Jeff Chapman) and I must say I'm a bit surprised at the sort of figures that you are talking about. A few other people trusted him too."

Mr Beyer said the running of the scheme under the legislation that prevailed at that stage was the responsibility of the managing director.

He said the board's internal audit committee was focused principally on fraud both within the corporation and by providers and by claimants.

(hukildaspida says: mmmm, fraud within the corporation.. so how many have been prosecuted from within the corporation?)

It did not go line by line through ACC's $1.3 billion annual turnover, instead concentrating on bigger items and ensuring that departments were within budget.

He said under the very thorough internal audit strategy put in place on advice from one of the top six accounting firms in the country, the materiality level was $4 million-$5 million for the statutory audit. "So if items came under that level they certainly would never have been reported to the audit committee."

Mr Beyer said that although travel spending by executives and board members may have seemed high, there were major policy initiatives under way at the time, which required overseas travel.

"It doesn't cost peanuts to travel."

Ms Alessi and Mr Chapman were two senior executives identified in the internal report as warranting further investigation.

ACC spokesman Fred Cockram
said ACC would make no comment on any of the matters relating to the charges against Mr Chapman or the internal audit until Mr Chapman's court case was completed.

#89 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 January 2012 - 03:40 PM

Quentin DOIG is here now..

Was he acting within the State Services Code of Conduct?

It is noted he was employed at both Housing New Zealand & Harcourts Picton Property Centre between January 2010 to April 2010.
We could assume that the role at Harcourts Picton, , was secondary to his role at Housing New Zealand

Isn't this a breach of the said code?

Quentin Doig


at Harcourts Picton Property Centre

New Zealand
Government Administration


Licensed Sales and Marketing Consultant at Harcourts Picton Propety Centre
Licensed Sales and Marketing Consultant at Harcourts Picton Property Centre Limited


Communications and Marketing Director at Housing New Zealand Corporation
National Support Services Manager at Accident Compensation Corporation
National Support Services Manager at ACC


81 connections

Quentin Doig's Experience

Licensed Sales and Marketing Consultant
Harcourts Picton Propety Centre

Privately Held; 5001-10,000 employees; Real Estate industry

January 2010 – Present (2 years 1 month)

Residential and rural sales
Property appraisals
Licensed Sales and Marketing Consultant
Harcourts Picton Property Centre Limited

Privately Held; 5001-10,000 employees; Real Estate industry

January 2010 – Present (2 years 1 month)

Residential and rural sales
Property appraisals
Communications and Marketing Director

Housing New Zealand Corporation

Government Agency; 1001-5000 employees; Government Administration industry

September 2006 – April 2010 (3 years 8 months)

I am primarily responsible for managing the performance of the following services:

• Media strategy development and liaison;
• Brand risk management;
• Loan product marketing;
• Communications planning and strategy development;
• Management of the website team;
• The overall quality and relevance of all external communications whether written or verbal;
• Event management and proactive communication strategy development.

National Support Services Manager
Accident Compensation Corporation

Government Agency; 1001-5000 employees; Insurance industry

2002 – 2006 (4 years)
National Support Services Manager

Government Agency; 1001-5000 employees; Insurance industry

2001 – September 2006 (5 years)

I was primarily responsible for managing the performance of the following services:

• National contracts for products and services including fleet management, cleaning, couriers, travel and stationery including business technology such as computer hardware, software and related services;
• Health contract procurement, management and administration, responsible for establishment of contracts for approximately $1 billion of annual budget for health consumables and associated services;
Property management including building leases, building services and furnishings; and
• Security management including workplace staff safety programmes;

• Health, Safety and Sustainability programmes;
• Corporate support services such as cafeteria, mail rooms, records management and receptions;
• Website information management services; and
• Between 2003 and 2005 I relieved as the General Manager People and Services for periods of five to six weeks each year.
Contact Quentin for:

career opportunities
consulting offers
new ventures
job inquiries
expertise requests
business deals
reference requests
getting back in touch

View Quentin Doig’s full profile to...

See who you and Quentin Doig know in common
Get introduced to Quentin Doig
Contact Quentin Doig directly

And the same Quentin Doig was involved in these cases.

Former detective inspector and head of the Wellington CIB, Quentin Doig and ex-detective sergeant Carl Berryman were reported in The Dominion of 21 February, to be heading for Picton to conduct inquiries on behalf of Mr Watson. Messrs. Doig and Berryman disengaged from the police in 1997 and are principals in Corporate Risks, a private investigation service.

Christine Rankin at WINZ saga
22 July 1999

The Dominion reports that Winz has hired a private investigator - former CIB boss Quentin Doig of Corporate Risks - to investigate the chartering of the aircraft. Christine Rankin has also hired an outside agency, Advanced Dynamics, to provide advice on systems and accountability mechanisms within Winz. She has also hired the public relations firm Busby Ramshaw Grice to help manage "high-level media inquiries" until interest in the affair wanes.

And this

Quentin Doig

Senior Executive

Hello my name is Quentin Doig and I changed my plans for retirement and sought a different occupation. I’m now the communications and marketing director at Housing New Zealand. In my view the plus 55 worker brings a great deal of not only knowledge but they are people that lead by example. In 2006 I was part of a leadership New Zealand programme and one thing really pressed my buttons because one of the speakers spoke about baby boomers that had the three B’s, the bach, the boat and the BMW and of course I pointed out to the panel what were they doing about trying to keep people like me in senior management in employment.

And an interesting snippet about Quentin Doig & Search Warrants..

A bungle he was involved in whilst at Housing New Zealand


#90 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 January 2012 - 04:04 PM

Richard Doig


Are Richard John DOIG who is currently employed at in a Senior Management Role, at Corporate Office since 2003 & Michael Quentin DOIG sons of Quentin Doig(post#92)who was previously employed at

Are employees entitled to have businesses/ companies whilst employed as employees?
Or is this perhaps a possible Conflict of Interest?

If it is their father Quentin Doig (ex Policeman whom was formerly employed at ACC when all the dishonest behaviour was going on at Head Office in regards to Property Management which was investigated by how can we as the public have total confidence that the Public Service Code of Conduct is been adhered to?

Maybe if you know have details in regards to this you should contact the Serious Fraud Office with that information.

It is noted that both Quentin Doig & Richard Doig were both employed at during the same time frame that a considerable amount of dishonest behaviour was going on with Private Investigators and by ACC staff.

Is there still more excavating to be undertaken in regards to these matters?

We have reason to believe there is.

The Companies Office is the government agency responsible for the New Zealand Companies Register. The Companies Register records basic company information about every Limited Liability company in New Zealand.
Use this search to view instant results on the details of registered and previously registered New Zealand companies & companies on the overseas register. To learn more about the New Zealand Companies Office please visit

Certificate of Incorporation
Maintain Company »
Company number: 2455656
Incorporation Date: 14 Apr 2010
Company Status: Registered
Entity type: Limited Liability Company
Constitution filed: No
Annual Return filing month: March, last filed 18 Apr 2011
Previous Statuses
Registered: 14 Apr 2010
Address Details
Registered Office Address: 16 Portland Crescent, Thorndon, Wellington (since 14 Apr 2010)
Address for Service: 16 Portland Crescent, Thorndon, Wellington (since 14 Apr 2010)

Richard John DOIG (since 14 Apr 2010)
173a Muritai Road, Eastbourne, Wellington

Michael Quentin DOIG (since 15 Nov 2011)
143 Richmond Hill Road, Richmond Hill, Christchurch

Share Parcels
1 shares on the register
Allocation 1: 100.00% (1 shares) owned by:
33 Oriel Avenue, Tawa, Wellington 5028

Check if MENTARI TRUSTEES LIMITED has shares in other companies
Documents Registered
6 documents on the register
Particulars of Director (16 Nov 2011 10:59)
Director Consent (16 Nov 2011 10:59)
File Annual Return (18 Apr 2011 14:47)
Consent Of Director (14 Apr 2010 08:08)
Application To Incorporate A Company (14 Apr 2010 08:08)
Consent Of Shareholder (14 Apr 2010 08:08)

And ???

#91 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 January 2012 - 04:30 PM

Re post #90, why did Geoff McRobie , at the time, not do a more thorough investigation into the dishonesty that was going on within in his term at ACC between 1994-1999?

It appears on the surface that the only person whom lost her job, at that time, was Lauretta Alessi,who happens to be a woman.

Why did the males who also breached the terms & conditions of their contracts not get brought to accountability?

It is a known fact that women,at the time, were perhaps not as well treated in areas where males were in dominant roles.

Or were the others involved, who also should have known better, just covering their own tracks?

Why have they not been made more accountable?

Should this behaviour, at the time, have been refered to for investigation?


Geoff McRobie


General Manager Internal Audit at ANZ

New Zealand


General Manager Internal Audit at ANZ


Director at PricewaterhouseCoopers
Manager Risk and Assurance at ACC


University of Canterbury
University of Canterbury


87 connections

Geoff McRobie's Experience
General Manager Internal Audit

Public Company; 10,001+ employees; ANZ; Banking industry

Currently holds this position

Partnership; 10,001+ employees; Accounting industry

1999 – 2003 (4 years)

Manager Risk and Assurance
Government Agency; 1001-5000 employees; Insurance industry

1994 – 1999 (5 years)

Geoff McRobie's Education
University of Canterbury

1982 – 1986

University of Canterbury

1982 – 1985

Geoff McRobie's Additional Information

Groups and Associations:

Chief Audit Executives Group logo
Chief Audit Executives Group
The Institute of Internal Auditors (Official Global Group) logo
The Institute of Internal Auditors (Official Global Group)

#92 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 January 2012 - 08:28 PM

Quentin Doig was also responsible for beefing up Security at when Janet Pike was tragically murdered.

Those whom have read this thread, and have credible sources, will be aware that Paul Coffey who's company Alligator Limited was subseqently found out for "failing to provide a service", amongst other breaches of contract, to to ensure staff & others safety.

Who signed the contract with Alligator Security?
Who followed up, as they should have, at the time that Alligator Limited were fulfilling there contract?

Did anybody employed by do so?
If not, why not?

What steps have been undertaken to make Quentin Doig who was National Security Manager accountable for his role in this unlawful behaviour by Paul Coffey & associates?

We have heard nothing in regards to this.


ACC murder spurs security beef-up

5:00 AM Thursday Aug 17, 2000

Janet Pike

The Accident Compensation Corporation has beefed up security and employed a former detective as security manager in response to the murder of one of its frontline workers.

"We are reacting to a minority of clients to ensure the safety of our staff," new national security manager Quentin Doig said.

ACC worker Janet Pike was stabbed to death last year in her Henderson office by a claimant, Johnny Manu. Manu is serving a life sentence for the offence.

Mr Doig, former head of the Wellington CIB, said work had started on improving safety at branch offices before Mrs Pike's death. However, his appointment was a new role.

He would not say how much was being spent on safety improvements. Security was being tightened so workers were no longer easily accessible to the public.

As well, some staff had personal alarms, police had developed a new training system specifically for ACC, closed-circuit television was being used and secure reception areas were being introduced nationwide.

"Sadly, we still have staff being threatened. We live in a very aggressive society," Mr Doig said.

Workers were being taught not to put up with abuse and how to handle aggressive claimants. All incidents were reported to Mr Doig.

"We make it quite clear to staff they don't come to work to be abused. They tell claimants they will not stand for that abuse. They are reporting to me that claimants are reacting positively."


An interelated thread where Quentin Doig is implicated in: Remote Claims Unit


Things can't be that tight.
432 words
14 October 1997
The Dominion
© 1997 The Dominion, INL .

Constant news reports about officers leaving the force with bucketloads of cash after "perfing",including Wellington CIB boss Quentin Doig, are clearly irritating the Police Association. In a newsletter it points out tartly that "perf" has been mis-translated as Police Emergency Retirement Fund, Preferential Early Retirement Fund and Police Enhanced Retirement Fund. It should, it says, be "Police Employment Rehabilitation Fun". Considering that a perfing cop with 20 years' experience gets about $250,000 from the police's rehabilitation fund super scheme it's not surprising they dropped the "d".

#93 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:42 PM

Quentin DOIG Timeline & info

#94 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 08 February 2012 - 12:18 AM

Post #13 in this thread below relates to some relevant information in this thread about ACC calls in the Serious Fraud Office etc cases.

Some of these matters relating to the SFO investigation are due back in the Criminal Court soon.
It will be observed with great interest how this pans out & who are witnesses for who.

What we, as members of the public and levypayers, would like to know is why did these matters go supposedly unnoticed and unreported for so long?

We find it difficult to believe that with so many former members of the , including those whom have worked in the Police Fraud Squad,who then went on to work either for or on contracts with that they were not aware something unlawful was going on earlier.

Maybe if someone out there knows information about this they would be so kind to report it to the appropriate authorities.

There is Protected Disclosures Act that you are covered by.



It has been researched both Chris O'Flaherty & Quentin Doig worked at in Wellington for a period together.

Where was the position of National Security Manager at advertised?
How many applicants were there when these positions became available both when Mr Doig and then Mr O'Flaherty commenced these roles?

How many of these people were interviewed for these jobs?

Maybe you were one of them.

Who decided who was suitable for the job?

Who signed the contract?

It appears to us on the surface that maybe in it's best interest discloses this information because as an outsider looking in and our own research suggests it may be "Jobs for mates"

We understand that the Public Service has a Code of Conduct which includes:

We must ensure our actions are not affected by our personal interests or relationships


#95 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 February 2012 - 12:18 AM

May we assume that the same applies also to the CEO of in relation to awarding of all Tenders and all contracts.


Order Paper and questions
Questions for written answer
Content provider
House Of Representatives

3 July 2007

11648 (2007). Paula Bennett to the Minister of Labour (03 Jul 2007): Why did the Department of Labour award JR Consulting Group Ltd a contract worth $119,000 without conducting a tender, and who made this decision?
Hon Ruth Dyson (Minister of Labour) replied: The management and awarding of contracts is an operational matter and therefore is the responsibility of the Chief Executive. However the department has advised me that JR consulting Group was employed on a contract originally under $100,000. The contract was subsequently extended which increased the value over $100,000. The contractor had built up specialist knowledge from the earlier phase of work and was deemed best to continue. The Group Manager Workforce Policy made this decision.

#96 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 16 June 2012 - 11:10 PM

Wellington Businessman bribed worker

Businessman in ACC property case sentenced
Last updated 11:05 15/06/2012

A businessman who agreed to an ACC property manager's corrupt plans for the corporation's new Whangarei office has been sentenced to 11 months home detention.

Gregory Alexander Hutt
, 54, gave Malcolm David Mason $160,000 after Mason persuaded his superiors at ACC to shift the Whangarei office into a building Hutt developed at Mason's instigation.

Mason was also sentenced to 11 months home detention last year in Wellington District Court.

In the High Court at Wellington today it was Hutt's turn, after he pleaded guilty recently to a single charge of corruption by agreeing to give a bribe to Mason with intent to influence him in 2007.

Hutt initially denied having any corrupt intent. He told Serious Fraud Office investigators that the payment was "like a finder's fee".

As well as serving the home detention Hutt has forfeited the $205,000 profit he made and agreed to pay just over $100,000 tax after reconsidering his liability arising out of the Whangarei building development.

The court heard Hutt and Mason had several business dealings over the years as Hutt's company successfully tendered for fitting out ACC offices. They became friends.

In April 2010 ACC's then chief executive Dr Jan White complained to the Serious Fraud Office about Mason having received corrupt benefits from suppliers in return for favouring them with ACC work.

Mason was ACC's national property manager and was sacked when the corruption came to light.

- © Fairfax NZ News

#97 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 17 June 2012 - 05:12 PM

Why has Barry Davis, who we understand approved and signed the said contract, not been made accountable for his role in this matter?

Barry Davis
would have had knowledge of what was going on, so why has he come through this unscathed and not brought before the Criminal Courts?


Crooked businessman avoids jail over Whangarei deal

By Imran Ali | Saturday, June 16, 2012 14:00 1 Comment

Updated: Sunday, June 17, 2012 15:16

BRAND NEW: The new ACC building on Walton St at the centre of a fraud investigation.

BRAND NEW: The new ACC building on Walton St at the centre of a fraud investigation.

A businessman who bribed a senior ACC employee with $160,000 in return for constructing and leasing a building to the Government insurer in Whangarei has avoided a prison sentence.

Gregory Alexander Hutt, 54, of Wellington, gave ACC property manager Malcolm David Mason
$160,000 in July 2009, which were part of proceeds from selling the building in central Whangarei for a profit.

Hutt was sentenced by the High Court at Wellington yesterday to 11 months' home detention after pleading guilty to a charge of corruption in May.

Mason also received a similar sentence in March 2011 after pleading guilty to three charges of bribery and corruption.

The Serious Fraud Office, which laid the charge, said as a director of construction company Hi-Tech Commercial Interiors, Hutt paid Mason $160,000 to ensure he gained the opportunity to profit from the construction and leasing of a new ACC branch office in central Whangarei.

Before his offending, Hutt's company was involved in the fit-out of office interiors at other ACC premises. In late 2006, ACC identified a need to replace some of its existing premises and Mason passed details of the corporation's intentions to Hutt.

The information allowed Hutt to purchase the site in Whangarei that Mason subsequently recommended to his superiors as being suitable for their new branch.

Mason's influence at ACC enabled him to develop the new building and once a long-term lease was secured, Hutt sold the premises for a profit and paid Mason $160,000.

Hutt was made to forfeit $205,659 profit he made on the transaction to the Crown. He has paid an additional $101,294 in tax relating to the Whangarei building development. Donald Stevens QC told the court that Mason was under pressure to obtain new premises for the corporation and, with nothing suitable available in Whangarei, decided a new building would be the answer.

Mason approached Hutt, suggesting the merits of obtaining the land and building on it to ACC specifications, thus providing an opportunity for both of them to make some money. Hutt agreed to pay a proportion of the eventual profit to Mason, which amounted to the offence of bribery.

It was "a moment of madness" that had catastrophic effects for Hutt, the lawyer said.

But Justice Young said: "That is not an accurate description of it."

It was not "a moment", but a corrupt bargain that carried on.

Mr Stevens said his client, who had no previous convictions, was known to set high standards for himself and was described as honest, upfront and direct, caring and generous.

The offending had been completely out of character. Hutt was "acutely aware" how much he had let himself and others down, particularly his family and friends. His health had suffered and his business was in jeopardy.

That, said Justice Young, was caused partly by Hutt not pleading guilty earlier: "The toll would have been less if he hadn't chosen to drag it out."

SFO chief executive Adam Feeley said was pleased with the outcome: "It has been a very lengthy and time-consuming case, but which reinforces the commitment that law enforcement agencies in New Zealand have to taking a zero-tolerance approach to any case involving bribery of public officials."

#98 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 15 April 2014 - 05:26 PM

Must be overdue that the Serious Fraud Office were called in again, isn't it?

Gosh collecting information through unlawful means is a very serious breach of Law.

More so when that money is lining pockets of those that have known what they have been doing for such a long time is against the Law.

ACC167 Consent forms.

Start at the Legal Services Department (Mercier/ Barnett/ Tuiqueque/ etc & tackle the Fraud Investigation Unit (Lahman/ Williscroft etc in unison.

We understand some of those named live in very expensive homes & one has never ever paid the mortgage.

It's understood the same person may have recently switched to becoming a "consultant" after 30 years in the Public Service to ensure he got a nice golden handshake because if he carried on as an "employee" he would have got the sack sooner rather than later & he would not be entitled to it.

Current & past staff at must remember it is there right to use

The Protected Disclosures Act


#99 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:48 PM

One & the same Cliff McCord?

Packer's door punch earns ACC:
[3 Edition]

Evening Post [Wellington, New Zealand] 21 May 1998: 11.

A fish packer who punched a steel door during an argument with a workmate has been awarded accident compensation in a decision just released.

Malcolm Wayne Leigh broke his hand when he lashed out at the freezer door after another employee at Big Glory Seafoods teased him about his kickboxing skills.

Big Glory Seafoods spokesman Cliff McCord said the company was extremely disappointed that both the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation (ACC) and the Accident Compensation Appeal Authority had classified the incident a "work injury".

As a result, the company would be stung by a higher accident compensation levy. In the written decision, District Court Judge Martin Beattie said the incident flared 18 months ago at the company's Bluff processing plant when John Roberts teased Mr Leigh about his ability to defend himself.

Judge Beattie said what started out as light-hearted banter between the pair became a heated verbal exchange.

Mr Leigh asked Mr Roberts to go outside so they could sort out their differences.

When Mr Roberts refused, Mr Leigh punched the freezer door, then said to Mr Roberts: "Lucky that wasn't your head." Witnesses said Mr Leigh continued to work but he was obviously in pain.

Judge Beattie ruled that Mr Leigh's clash with the door qualified for accident compensation because - though he had acted stupidly - he did not deliberately set out to injure himself.

But Mr McCord said the company was considering further legal action on the grounds that the injury did not arise out of the act of work.

He said that there also was evidence Mr Leigh had inflicted the injury on himself.

Mr Leigh, who received earnings-related compensation from ACC, no longer worked for the company, Mr McCord said. - NZPA

Supplied by New Zealand Press Association
Word count: 297

Copyright Independent Newspapers, Ltd. May 21, 1998

Home » Publications » International newspapers and newswires » Australian newspapers » New Zealand Herald (Auckland, New Zealand) » May 2008 »

Patti Butters has been appointed as principal case manager at Wellnz Ltd, a third party provider of healthcare, and wellbeing services in New Zeala...
New Zealand Herald (Auckland, New Zealand)

May 3, 2008

Cliff McCord, right, formerly principal case manager, has been appointed general manager, marketing and development with Wellnz. McCord joined Wellnz in 1997 and has had led the case management team through the changes associated with the previous privatised environment, and more recently with the Accredited Employer Programme.

View Posthukildaspida, on 14 May 2010 - 04:47 PM, said:

This may be from the past, however does anyone know whom and what years Philip Roigard worked for as a Senior Investigator?

Philip Roigard was involved in Anthony and Gavin Robins Fraud of ACC in which Anthony Robins declined a voluntary interview in case that went on between 1997 and 1998.


It is also noted that Cliff McCord, now with WellNZ was employed in 1996 as part of ACCs Fraud Investigation Unit

Maybe the Serious Fraud Office should be mindful of these "tactics" some use that have and still do work for ACC.


#100 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 29 August 2014 - 04:35 PM

Anti-corruption 101
Last updated 05:00 21/08/2014

You wouldn’t think there was a down side to being one of the least corrupt countries in the world.

But there kind of is, says Nick Paterson, general manger of fraud and corruption at the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

New Zealand was ranked first equal for freedom from corruption in the latest Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, and has consistently maintained a place near the top of the annual rankings.

‘‘As a result I suspect people don’t see corruption as a major risk for a business, and haven’t seen it as something they need to address,’’ Paterson says.

‘‘Unfortunately that’s not quite true.’’

While it may not be an issue at home, increasingly Kiwi businesses are trading in markets where corrupt practices are commonplace, and awareness of the pitfalls is not high, he says.

It is why the SFO and Transparency International have joined forces with a handful of other agencies and service providers to offer free anti-corruption training courses. The group has set up online training modules which are now available, and later this month businesses will also be able to attend workshops in a number of centres around the country.

Ian Tuke, associate director of forensics at Deloitte in Auckland, helped put the courses together. They introduce business people to the subject of corruption and how international law in the area might apply to them, he says. Then they put forward a number of real life scenarios, alternatives for dealing with the situations, and the possible consequences.

One of the scenarios goes like this: a Kiwi company setting up a new installation in China runs into a problem at the docks, where a union official is demanding a $50,000 contribution to the worker welfare fund before a shipment of goods can be released. Clearly it could be a bribe. What should the Kiwi firm do?

At the very least the company should consult its lawyers, and escalating it to the local New Zealand government representative is also an option, Tuke says. But there is no silver bullet. ‘‘Some tough decisions may have to be made around whether you want to do business in that particular part of that country.’’

If the company makes the payment it could find itself on the wrong side of international regulations which are becoming increasingly tough - particularly in the United Kingdom, where new anti-bribery legislation is among the most stringent in the world, Tuke says.

‘‘You’ve got some global reaching bits of legislation now that are fairly new, but you wouldn’t want to come unstuck and be pursued by the UK SFO for a UK Bribery Act offence that’s maybe taken place in China, just because you have registered operations in the UK,’’ he says.

‘‘We have heard that (the UK SFO) do have a desire to pursue companies outside of the UK for offences.’’

The risk of corruption is something Baiju Lal, general manager of Auckland-based tool distributor Fox and Gunn, wishes he had known more about.

The firm was caught by an email fraud when importing samples from China. The fraudsters intercepted Fox and Gunn’s email to the legitimate supplier and changed the address by just one letter so that the Kiwi firm would not notice. The scammers then sent their own bank account details for payment, and Fox and Gunn ended up losing around $50,000.

‘‘We had to wear that,’’ Lal says.

‘‘Who do you go to? It’s too small for the SFO. The Chinese embassy aren’t interested. Our supplier says, ‘okay, well then fax us the order every time’. Well who does that now?’’

The firm was disappointed that not even its bank could offer any advice. It hasn’t happened again and Fox and Gunn is a lot more vigilant, but Lal knows of other companies which have been hit by the same thing. He thinks the anti-corruption courses are a great idea because, like him, these firms also probably have no idea where to seek help.

Paterson says historically the New Zealand SFO has received few allegations of corruption overseas but in the last two years it has opened a handful of investigations.

He confirms that unfortunately Fox and Gunn’s case would be too small for his office, but says the police may be able to help in such situations.

‘‘It would be important to report it, if nothing else. If we have one company pinged like that and actually there are... 50 companies in New Zealand who are all getting stung in the same way, then we have to do some publicity about it to help prevent it, or we might be able to go to an overseas law enforcement agency...

‘‘From an intel point of view it’s quite important to hear about it somewhere.’’


Unlimited magazine, published by Fairfax Media, is New Zealand's leading digital business magazine dedicated to entrepreneurs, start-ups, leaders and innovators. To subscribe, go to

- Unlimited

View Posthukildaspida, on 15 March 2011 - 02:24 PM, said: media release and case notes.

Serious Fraud Office

* SFO Performance
* 24
* Investigations
* 32
* Prosecutions
* $750m
* Recovered

* Home
* About
* Complainants
* Witnesses
* Cases
* Media Centre
* Contact

Media Centre

* Media Releases
* Annual Reports
* Statement of Intent
* SFO current performance
* SFO performance standards
* Resources

Former ACC Property Manager sentenced to 11 months
Print this page

15 March 2011

Former ACC National Property Manager sentenced to 11 months home detention following SFO corruption charges

Malcolm David Mason
was sentenced today to 11 months home detention in relation to two Crimes Act and one Secret Commissions Act charges brought by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) arising from his activities as National Property Manager for the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC).

Mr Mason had previously admitted corruptly receiving a payment of $160,000 from a property developer in return for using his position at the ACC to ensure the involvement of a developer known to him in the construction and leasing of a new ACC branch office.

Mr Mason also admitted corruptly receiving a gift to the value of $9,000, in the form of a business class trip to the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, from a real estate agent in return for involving him in securing a long term lease for another ACC building.

In addition to receiving the payment and the gift, Mr Mason also admitted passing a confidential document listing all Government Departmental Security Officers to an associate involved in the business of installing security systems.
For further information

Nick Paterson

General Manager – Fraud & Corruption
Serious Fraud Office
Phone: 021 675 647

Note to editors
Case summary

Malcolm David Mason is a 50 year old male who had worked at ACC for a period of 32 years. At the relevant time he was the ACC’s National Property Manager. In that role he had responsibility for the procurement of premises for the use of ACC, tendering for the development of such premises and negotiating lease terms between ACC and the landlords of those premises.

$160,000 payment
In late 2006 ACC identified a need to replace some of its existing premises. As National Property Manager, Mr Mason was responsible for overseeing and controlling the process.

Mr Mason passed details of ACC intentions to a property developer with whom he had a personal friendship. This information allowed the developer to purchase the site that Mr Mason subsequently recommended to his superiors as being suitable for the new ACC branch.

Mr Mason’s influence at ACC ensured that the developer received the opportunity to develop the new building and agree a long term lease with the ACC. Once the lease was secured the developer sold the building for a profit and paid Mr Mason $160,000 from the proceeds.

$9,000 gift
In 2007 Mr Mason was tasked with finding another location for ACC offices. He engaged a real estate agent to assist in identifying a suitable site and negotiate a lease.

In 2008 ACC entered into a lease for a site based upon Mr Mason’s recommendations.

For his part in the process the agent received a commission that was consistent with industry practise. Following receipt of his commission payment, the agent paid for Mr Mason to accompany him to the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

The gift, which included flights and accommodation, was valued at approximately $9,000. Mr Mason neglected to disclose the gift to ACC and later took steps to deceive his supervisor about the true nature of the trip.

Disclosure of Confidential Document
In November 2007 Mr Mason emailed a Government Department Security Office Listing to a personal friend who was in the business of installing and maintaining security systems in buildings.

The document listed the names and contact details of all designated Security Officers within government departments.

The documents is clearly marked “In Confidence”, which is a government level of information security at a lower level than secret.
Role of the SFO

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) was established in 1990 under the Serious Fraud Act in response to the collapse of financial markets in New Zealand at that time.

The SFO operates three investigative teams:

* Fraud Detection & Intelligence;
* Financial Markets & Corporate Fraud; and
* Fraud & Corruption.

The SFO operates under two sets of investigative powers.

Part 1 of the SFO Act provides that it may act where the Director “has reason to suspect that an investigation into the affairs of any person may disclose serious or complex fraud.”

Part 2 of the SFO Act provides the SFO with more extensive powers where: “…the Director has reasonable grounds to believe that an offence involving serious or complex fraud may have been committed…”

The SFO’s Statement of Intent 2010-2012 sets out the SFO’s three year strategic goals and performance standards. It is available online at:

* How do I make a complaint to the SFO?

* Home|
* How do I report a fraud?|
* Know your rights|
* Job Vacancies|
* FAQs|
* SiteMap|
* Accessibility|
* Privacy|
* Disclaimer|
* Copyright |

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO Box 7124, Wellesley Street, Auckland 1141, New Zealand
PHYSICAL ADDRESS: Level 6, 21 Queen Street, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
EMAIL General Enquiries: [email protected] Report a Fraud: [email protected]
PHONE General: +64 (09) 303 0121 Complaints: 0800 109 800 | FAX: +64 (09) 303 0142
© Copyright Serious Fraud Office 2011


Share this topic:

  • 6 Pages +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 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