Jackson, Russell, Tunks & West

Simon Grant Lockhart

Solicitor

Charles Fredrick Jenkins

Senior Partner

&

Chairman

Anglican Children’s Trust

Lockhart File - Jackson Russell Tunks & West

TRUST BETRAYED

Go to Trust Betrayed

Farmer Betrayed by These Lawyers

Go to (1) – Gillanders Summary

Summery

1964, George Hamilton Gillanders purchased a 1030 acres at Kawa Kawa Bay.

The neighbours to this seaside property were an Anglican Church Trust. Known as The Anglican Children’s Trust.

So he could concentrate on commercial fishing , Gillanders decided to sell the back parts of the farm , he put Tekawakawa number 2 and Orere and Taupo blocks on the market.

He eventually sold these blocks which did leave him with the 124 acres,

Go to Kawa Kawa Bay 4, a very manageable small farm This left him with the front 124 acres and a $10,000 mortgage.

This left him more time for commercial fishing. He did very well with the trawler Whetu and he was thinking of purchasing a second boat.

This had to be stalled for a while as the mortgage on the remaining 124 acres was due for repayment; he had received a calling up notice from Greirson, Jackson and partners of Pukekohe.

At this time (1967)Peter Williams was Gillanders lawyer and had been for some time.

This is where Timothy William Robertson came into the picture. Gillanders was leaving Peter Williams office on one occasion and ran into this Robertson.

He had seen him there previously; Robertson portrayed himself to be a successful businessman, property developer.

On this occasion Gillanders asked this man if he knew of where he might obtain finance for his mortgage.

It was to be his downfall, as this Robertson was nothing more than an undercharged bankrupt, a very good confidence trickster.

Robertson told Gillanders to leave it to him about the finance and they made arrangements to meet later on that week.

He turned up at Kawakawa Bay the next day, stating he had finance of $24000 at 18%, this was the start of Gillanders troubles.

This money didn't eventuate.

It turned out that Robertson was a front, for a lawyer by the name of Simon Grant Lockhart of the law firm Jackson, Russell, Tunks, & West. Senior partners in that firm included Charles Fredrick Jenkins; he was at that time, chairman of The Anglican Children’s Trust.

This is where it starts to get interesting; Robertson was a front for Lockhart, reporting to him on where he had Gillanders.

Lockhart in turn would report to Jenkins, who as you will see was doing his very best along with Lockhart to obtain Gillanders farm for the Anglican Church.

To do this they sent Gillanders bankrupt and obtained his farm for $31000 at the mortgagee sale, for which they were totally responsible,

or was it $41000,

Go to a letter forced out of Jenkins by a threat of Law Society action will explain this.

NOTE JENKINS STATES THAT A PAYMENT WAS MADE TO US( Jackson, Russell, Tunks, & West - Charles Fredrick Jenkins) By(Anglican Childrens Trust - Chairman Charles Fredrick Jenkins)

AND (Chairman Charles Fredrick Jenkins accounted for this sum $10,000 to Robertson O'Neil.

Gillanders didn't even know Jenkins and Lockhart were involved until the police picked up the file which revealed the extent to which Robertson, Lockhart & Jenkins did go.

It would be difficult for anyone reading this to comprehend the overpowering nature of this Robertson, a sharp talker and very believable. This wasn't the first time he had taken anybody in.

The list of creditors in his two previous bankruptcies is incredible, for Lockhart not to have known this is very unlikely.

After selling off the back blocks of the farm Gillanders decided to survey two ten acre blocks on a flat area across from the beach.

This had been carried out before Robertson came on the scene.

Go to - Gillanders Notes

Go to – Clause 16

Go to – Back page of Agreement

NOTE - Lockharts signature along with Robertson's on this agrement - When Lockhart persistantly denies taking any part in the sale of the farm

The surveyor was Barry Curtis of the firm Hrtich, Curtis, Simmons and Associates, the over all cost was $1100 which was reasonable to Gillanders considering what the two ten acre blocks were worth.

The account from Curtis is just what Robertson needed. He took this to Lockhart, who did his utmost to avoid paying, taking Gillanders to the brink of bankruptcy.

This is how they did it.

Robertson stated he had finance of $24000 at 10% from Marac finance. He asked for $500 as procreation fee which Gillanders paid, this finance fell through.

Robertson said don’t worry I have other finance arranged. He said to Gillanders that he owned land in New Plymouth, 62 acres approximately; he stated half this land was residential and half industrial zoned.

It is then he suggested forming a company, by bringing the land at New Plymouth and Kawa Kawa Bay together and selling off sections (Robertson didn’t own this land.) Gillanders went to New Plymouth and inspected this land with him.

He spoke to his brother in law in New Plymouth afterwards, and along with Robertson asked him to be resident agent in selling sections from this property, he agreed.

On returning to Auckland they discussed forming this company, calling it The Kawa Kawa Bay Development Company.

Robertson being a bankrupt at the time could not have anything to do with running a company and so to keep Gillanders in the dark about this, he had the company papers drawn up by Augusta Wallace Solicitor of Papatoetoe.

She carried these instructions out but the company remained unregistered, unknown to Gillanders.

He thought every thing was alright and carried on as if the company had been registered, loans company formation etc. This is how Robertson avoided the official assignee.

Robertson opened a bank account in the companies’ name for which Gillanders agreed. He then started drawing cheques from the account and overdrew by $500.

The bank manager turned up at Kawa Kawa Bay and informed Gillanders. He paid the overdraft and stopped Robertson drawing cheques.

When they meet again in Auckland Robertson was furious, Gillanders was furious as well as up until then he had cost him $1800 with nothing eventuating, he said to Robertson I want nothing more to do with you.

He calmed down very quickly and said George another loan is on the way I had to write those cheques for expenses. In business it does cost a lot get started.

Nothing was heard from Robertson for a week or so, then he phoned and Gillanders meet him in Auckland. He said I have a loan off a man by the name of Reg Harrop $24000 at 18 %.

At this time April 1968 Gillanders got a call from a Delgety land agent from Auckland, he said he had the job of selling the farm at auction through the mortgagor, as the finance hadn’t come through on time, Robertson had told Gillanders he had seen the mortgagors solicitors and there was nothing to worry about.

Gillanders had to accept the loan off Reg Harrop at 18 % to avert the sale of the farm.

The Marac finance was let go on purpose at 10%, Gillanders was desperate so signed for the 18% loan, just what Lockhart, Robertson, and Jenkins wanted.

While this was going on the account from Curtis became overdue and a court bailiff arrived with a default summons as Gillanders was out of ready cash he took this to Robertson who said leave this to me. This is when he went straight to Lockhart and as you will see Lockhart manipulated this by taking it through the courts. As can be seen on file

He started procedures to defend in court (without Gillanders knowledge or consent).

Robertson meet Gillanders a week later and said congratulations George I’ve got Curtis beat , he didn’t have your written consent to do the survey.

Gillanders couldn’t believe what he was hearing as he had given consent, Robertson had him so wrapped up by then that he had to go along with him, to try and get out of some of the trouble he was in.

He said to Gillanders just to be on the safe side sign these defence notices and if anything comes of this well be ready.

Next thing Lockhart filed an affidavit of George Hamilton Gillanders to defend

Go to(2) - + (3) – Memo’s Lockhart

Go to(4) Default Summons

Go to(5) Hand Written Notes Re – P. A. Williams note pinned to Defense Notice

Go toSee Note Williams Hand Writing

Go to(5) – A – Defense Notice

Then Richard Hawk filed an application to set aside judgment (7) - and as you can see Lockhart has written the out come of that application, an order

setting aside judgment

Lockhart really started getting into it then, exchanging letters with Curtis lawyers with Robertson feeding him all the information he needed.

They used the Bankruptcy Act for extortion of the farm– They played it out as far as they could to get the farm at there price and to keep the Official Assignee out of it.

Go to(6) Lockhart setting aside judgment

Go to(7) - Lockhart setting aside judgment

Go to(8) – Lockhart hand writing at bottom of page will become relevant later

Robertson would string Gillanders along as the next letter states the survey was done contrary to instructions and against his approval (9).

Go to(9) – Robertson feeding Lockhart this information

Lockhart, Jenkins, and Robertson were trying to bankrupt Gillanders and doing everything they could to do it.

Go toNext an affidavit from Barry Curtis was filed (10), his firm had issued a bankruptcy notice against Gillanders. Paragraph 2 states that he was not aware of the circumstances which caused the non appearance of the defendant.

Lockhart and Robertson kept Gillanders away, as a result a judgment was entered by default costs $40 to plaintiff. (11)

No one in their right mind would have let this carry on when they new they owed the money. Lockhart and Robertson were doing all they could behind Gillanders back to bankrupt him. Lockhart’s efforts were working, with Robertson manipulating Gillanders re finance, which didn’t eventuate, causing as Curtis affidavit states. (10) Paragraph 6 Kawa Kawa Bay farm had been advertised for sale by the mortgagee.

Go to(10) – Lockhart judgment set aside 31/10/68

That didn’t happen as Harrop’s finance at 18 % came through. Lockhart, Robertson, and Jenkins didn’t quite want that sale yet as Gillanders still had assets that could cover him and in order to get the farm at their price they had to clean him out fully.

There were numerous letters between Lockhart and Curtis lawyers, and as a court registrar said ‘’ the number of times that case was set aside became a joke of the court.

(11) Lockhart pays Curtis solicitors a trust account cheque for $40 as a result of judgment.

(12) Curtis solicitor wanting a date for hearing.

Go to(11)

Go to(12)

Go toCurtis statement of claim. (13)

(13) –Lockhart hand writing – Robertson’s address Flat 6 Delphi Flats 169 Jervois Rd Ponsonby

Correspondence between Lockhart and Metcalf and Jones. (14) (15)

Go to(14)

Go to(15)

Go toStatement of defense filed was by Lockhart. (18)

Go to(16) –Letter on Lockhart file – See Defense Notice – This is Robertson’s hand writing

Summary by Gillanders Also

Go to(17) – Original letter

Go to(18) – Paragraph 3 parts of Robertson’s letter appeared in the Defense Notice

Go to(18) A - Rodger Allen re complaint to Auckland District Law Society -By then Lockhart President

Copy sent to Metcalfe & Jones. (19)

Go to(19) Letter re Statement of Defense

Metcalf & Jones are asking again for application for special fixture. (20)

Go to(20) Application for Fixture

Request for special fixture signed not by Gillanders. (21)

Go to(21) - Request for Special Fixture

( 22 ) ( 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , ) various letters and an order for discovery of documents.

Go to (22) - Statement of Defense Filed in Court

Go to (23) – Order for Discovery of Documents

Go to (24) – Payment from Lockhart

Go to (25) - Lockhart Requesting Payment Confirmation

Go to (26)

Go to (27)

Go to (28) – Lockhart Applying for Adjournment

Affidavit and orders for discovery. (29, 30,)

Go to(29) - Order for Discovery against Plaintiff

Go to(30) - Affidavit of Documents

Curtis lawyers sent a mortgage document to Lockhart which would have settled the matter. Lockhart did nothing with it, if he had of then the court action would have stopped.

Go toCrimes Act 1961 Document Concealment. [258Altering, concealing, destroying, or reproducing documents with intent to deceive

Go to (31) – Letter Curtis lawyer preparing to settle

Go to (32) – Mortgage Document – Lockhart let this go – Result Final Judgment -Go to (34)

As Lockhart let this go the next document is a request for issue of bankruptcy notice (33) with a copy of final judgment (34).

Go to (33) - Request for Issue of Bankruptcy Notice

At this time the farm was looking untidy Gillanders had sent stock into the sales at Robertson’s request to pay the interest on Harrop's loan.

He never paid the interest, as a result Harrop called for a mortgagee sale action on the 9 May 1969.

Gillanders had moved from Kawa Kawa Bay by this time to rented accommodation Howick where a court bailiff served on him a bankruptcy notice from Curtis

See (35)

Go to (35) – Bankruptcy Notice

(37) Is the petition to have debtor adjudicated bankrupt As can be seen (37) –A

(37) –A - Lockhart's hand writing on back of file compiling Gillanders assets Mr. McCracken owed him $1500 which was quite an amount of money back then, as well as Gillanders 1962 Ford Zephyr.

(39) Copies on Lockhart's file

Go to (36) – Affidavit of Service Bankruptcy Notice

Go to (37) – Petition to have a Debtor Adjudicated Bankrupt

Go to (37)-A

Go to (38) – Affidavit in Support of Petition to have a Debtor Adjudicated Bankrupt

Go to (39) – Summons To Debtor

Go to (40) Affidavit of George Hamilton Gillanders again sworn, clearly not Gillanders signature, false oath.

(40) – Affidavit by George Hamilton Gillanders Done by L. J Vercoe – struck off for malpractice – Also reference to fake Doctors Cert

(41) Affidavit of service of bankruptcy petition, then - (42) the court hearing. Lockhart didn't appear himself as he instructed Yolland & Romaniuk Solicitors to appear. Distancing himself from proceedings.

Go to (41) - Affidavit of Service Bankruptcy Notice

Go to (42) – Bankruptcy Hearing 27 June 1969

(43) Oral judgment a few interesting points in this as well underlined, and on page 4 speaks for itself. See (48)

Go to (43) – Oral Judgment by Richmond J Page 3 costs incurred by solicitor Lockhart Malpractice

Go to (44) – Lockhart had instructed Yolland & Ramanuik – obtained adjournment 25/7/69 – . . .No doubt you will endeavor to settle this claim

Go to (45) – Judgment for $1050.92 – There were in fact two Bankruptcy Proceedings - Lockhart moved to have judgment set aside

Go to (45) A - Mr. Lockhart we trust you have this matter in hand

Go to (46) – Application to set aside judgment

Go to (47) – Lockhart had no Idea that the matter would be so troublesome

Gillanders didn’t go bankrupt then as they didn’t want Official Assignee involved yet– Gillanders had no money to pay account

Go to (48) – The proceedings ceased then – You see why – part report Confidential Investigations where Eb Leary paid account–

This debit was settled by Eb Leary out of Peter Williams’s office, was done without Gillanders knowledge and was found out by a private investigator years later when they had interviewed Barry Curtis.

Go to (48) A – Statement from Gillanders to Confidential Investigations - Page 5 first time he saw Lockhart – Didn’t know he was acting behind his back until years later

Bottom of Page 8 re Lockhart

Summary re Sale & Purchase Agreements

Go to (49) – Sale & Purchase Agreement Valueless as Robertson an Undischarged Bankrupt and a sham company, makes the option invalid –

Go to Gillanders Summary

Go toClause 16

Go toSale & Purchase Agreement between Robertson O’Neil & Anglican Church where the Anglican Church were naming themselves The Vendor when G.H.Gillanders still owned the farm

INSOLVENCY ACT 1967 PART 6 - CONTROL OVER PERSON AND PROPERTY OF DEBTOR

[62. Prohibition of bankrupt entering business
[62.Prohibition of bankrupt entering business— (1)An undischarged bankrupt must not, without the consent of the Assignee or the Court either directly or indirectly,— (a) enter into, carry on, or take part in the management or control of, any business: (b) be employed by a relative of the bankrupt or by any company, trust, trustee, or incorporated society, that is managed or controlled by a relative of the bankrupt. (2)Nothing in this section restricts section 151 of the Companies Act 1993.]

The farm had been put up for mortgagee sale on the 9 may 1969, Jackson, Russell , Tunks & West filed a cavit to stop any other buyers, as Robertson had a sale and purchase agreement with Gillanders Go tosale and purchase agreement

He did this by telling Gillanders that he had a sale to the Anglican Children’s Trust for $50,000, and by signing an option to him they would keep two ten acre blocks back from the sale to the Church, which he said would stop him going bankrupt.

So Gillanders signed this thinking it would get him out of all his trouble. He was very worried as he was in so much financial difficulties, he became sick with worry.

When Robertson came to him with a way out he felt relieved, Robertson then took this sale & purchase agreement to Lockhart.

They both then drew up a second sale & purchase agreement (49). In this agreement the Anglican Church were naming themselves vendors of Gillanders property when he still owned it {see clause 16}. The first sale & purchase agreement was with Robertson's company Robertson O' Neill ltd.

Being a bankrupt he shouldn't have had anything to do with running a company.

He signed the farm over to the Church, enabled the Anglican Church to put a caveat stopping the mortgagee sale.

This was how they extracted the farm off Gillanders, the only time he saw Lockhart is when he signed the farm over to the Church, thinking he had been saved from bankruptcy with the two ten acre blocks being kept back.

He made the mistake of trusting Lockhart as a lawyer when he signed, as he was on the brink of bankruptcy.

As he put it '' I had a gun to my head when I signed that document'' being so close to becoming bankrupt and losing the farm at the mortgagee sale

Lockhart stated that there had been a mistake and the purchase price was not $50,000 but $31,000 as the two ten acre blocks will be kept back.

This was a sham as the two sale & purchase agreements were not legal documents, only used to entice Gillanders to sign over to the Church.

See back of Go to where they paid Robertson $10,000 when they cancelled the forgoing sale & purchase agreement.

A letter prised out of Charles Jenkins years later with the threat of law society action. He stated that they paid Robertson $10,000 for his option. As a private detective put it, clearly a bribe, as Robertson had no option.

Go to(50) – Settlement Statement – No mention of $10,000 payment

They had the gall to charge him for being ripped off - $142.50 - They charged a fee to The Anglican Childrens Trust $213.50

Conflict of Interest

Go to(51) – $10,000 Payment to Robertson O’Neill Rodger Allen threatened Law Society Action to get this

Go to(52) – Letters – Gillanders never instructed him to act

Go to(53) – Dan Thomson Private Investigator Report

Go to(54) - Caveats Lodged- - Signed by the above named Anglican Children’s Trust by its Authorized Agent Charles Fredrick Jenkins. On the day the Mortgagee sale was supposed to take place

Go to(55) –Memorandum of Transfer – Lockhart’s Signature + Gillanders – the only time he saw Lockhart - Lockhart & Jenkins worked very well together here -

Go to(56) - Statutory Declaration when The Anglican Trust sold the farm

Go to(57) -Farm sold by Trust 1987 for $390,000

The Anglican Trust for Woman & Children made a huge profit on the sale of the Farm – (57) - they didn’t care that they had Bankrupted a man and left him, his wife and four children with nothing.

For a religious Institution to do such a thing – taking a man to financial ruin and leaving him with nothing – it would have been better if he had been Murdered - then he wouldn’t have had to live with the fact that they had cleaned him out.

The worry and stress over the next twenty five years took there toll –

He went to the Police Barry Matthews Head of the Auckland District fraud Squad.

He rubbished his claim of fraud stating there was no documentary evidence when clearly the evidence was there to see – all I can say about him is he was inadequate – he didn’t have a clue what to do about –more about him later

Greed on their part was the motivating factor – what did Simon Grant Lockhart – Charles Fredrick Jenkins receive from the sale of the farm. We know what Timothy William Robertson got out of it - $10,000 for a job well done
Second Part

This is the second Bankruptcy that was going on as well as the Bankruptcy proceedings with Barry Curtis.

So you can see that Robertson and Lockhart had Gillanders in turmoil sick with worry – they financially ruined him – They had a gun to his head so to speak he signed the farm over to them thinking he would not go Bankrupt as the two ten acre blocks would be kept back from the sale for him.

Gillanders trusted Lockhart as a Lawyer – trust that was misplaced - like walking on rotten planks leading him to disaster.

Distress Warrants – Bankruptcy Petitions – Summons – They set aside Judgments over and over again to buy time and to keep the Official Assignee out of it until they had cleaned him out fully

Go to(1)– Distress Warrant – Caused by Lockhart – Dills Garage

Go to(2) - Dills Bankruptcy Petition

Go to(3) – Summons to Debtor

Go to(4) – G. H. Gillanders Summary

Go to(5) – Lockhart at work in the back round Setting Aside Judgment

Go to(6) - Affidavit opposing setting aside Judgment Dills Garage

Go to(7) - Notice of Application to have Judgment set aside - Dills

Go to(8) – Affidavit in Support Application declined no Valid Defense

Go to(9) – (10) - Lockhart again - Notice of Application to set aside Judgment and re hearing

Go to(11) – Processing Bankruptcy

Lockhart was instructing Yolland and Romaniuk who where in turn instructing KW Reid – Go to (11)

Go to(12) – Various letters between Yolland Romaniuk

They were endeavoring to have monies pay in and account settled (12) Lockhart had no intention of paying anything – Lockhart was about to get a result for his hard work - Order of Adjudication

Processing Bankruptcy behind Gillanders back – resulted in Gillanders being sent Bankrupt 19th December 1969 - Order of Adjudication

Go to(13) – Order of Adjudication

Go to(14) - Robertson & Leary – Receipts paying account

The Latest from The Anglican Church

This is the latest correspondence that we have been having with the Anglican Church in regard to past senior Church leaders.

Go toFirst of all we wrote to the Bishop of Auckland The Rt Rev John C Paterson,

Go toThis is the response we received from Bishop The Rt Rev John C Paterson,

Go toThen this lawyer’s letter from The Church lawyer

Go toAnother letter to them

Go toA further letter from The Church lawyer

Go toLetter The Rt Rev John C Paterson

I have deep concern at the manner in which the Anglican Diocese of Auckland has covered-up corruption and scandal. Anglican Church though you wouldn’t think it has a huge influence, able to keep things quiet We are appalled by the huge cover-up that has taken place, covered up its dirty secrets, swept under the carpet while projecting an image of moral respectability. From the church leadership and the church it self there was never any expression of concern, a web of silence has been woven, they are frauds. This is a scandal that will embroil the Anglican Church when the truth comes out. Where is the Anglican Church’s respect for human rights, the Anglican Church will suffer embarrassment through this, if it can be exposed. Anglican Leaders have acted inappropriately; they have protected their reputation, to protect the church from adverse publicity and the church's good name.

Simon Lockhart This lawyer was acting in George Gillanders Affairs without his consent or knowledge with Robertson an undischarged bankrupt. For Lockhart not to have known what Robertson was at that time (Undischarged Bankrupt associated with his wife’s shell company) Highly Unlikely Wouldn’t this be a crime when a lawyer acting without authority acts in any legal proceedings that affect any person? So why didn’t the police act on this?

Anglican Church Embarrassment will cause them to speak out about the situation; 1967 - Charles Fredrick Jenkins being Chairman of The Anglican Trust for Woman & Children; 1967 - Charles Fredrick Jenkins was a Senior Partner in the Law firm Jackson, Russell, Tunks & West.

1967 - Simon Lockhart Solicitor in the Law Firm Jackson, Russell, Tunks & West
Main instigator in the sale of the farm to Charles Fredrick Jenkins Senior Partner in the Law firm Jackson, Russell