How can Darnley face a charge for the explosion and have that charge disappear before his hearing?

They didn't put Darnley and I on the same hearing because we faced the same charge....a charge for the explosion.

I believe this was done because it would prevent us from questioning Darnley at a common hearing, but then when this segregation tactic had served its purpose Darnley's charge for the explosion was dropped....poof gone in a puff of smoke....see first attachment.

Now look at the letters to the Dept of Labour, add to this correspondence the large body of evidence pointing to Darnley too.......how on earth does this guy, mentioned lots of times in the correspondence not face a charge,

By the PGDB's own reckoning he handed out carbon copies of the cert for the last work at the site of the explosion but didn't register the original copy with the PGDB, which is bollox because there is a copy on the PGDB electronic cert register......this is the same cert actually mentioned in the DOL complaint, cert 345138......

8 years the PGDB have ignored blatant evidence of who caused the explosion.....

Dodgy cert 345138 mentioned by number in the complaint from DOL.....

From: Melanie Phillips [mailto:melanie@pgdb.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 May 2011 4:13 p.m.
To: Paul & Emma Gee
Cc: Wal Gordon
Subject: RE: Paul Gee 
Hi Paul
Please see attached Belinda’s file note of her request to John Darnley for a copy of certificate 345138.  This occurred after she was contacted by lawyers acting for the owner on 17 April 2009 requesting copies of all gas certificates relating to 136 Milton Street.   
Also attached is a copy of the certificate received which, as you will see, is of quite poor quality.
Please let me know if you need any more information. 
Regards
Mel
 
From: Melanie Phillips[mailto:melanie@pgdb.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 May 2011 3:22p.m.
To: Paul & Emma Gee; WalGordon
Subject: RE: Paul Gee
Hi Paul
I have just gone back through the file and can confirm that the Board never received a pink copy of certificate345138.  The only copy the Board has is a photocopy of the certifier’s copy, which you produced as exhibit PG007 together with a copy of the gas suppliers copy.
I see notes from Belinda Greer on the file that the Board copy of certificate 345138 was received after the explosion in 2009, I think from the Department of Labour.
I’m sorry I can’t help you further.
Regards
Mel
 



Look at the inquiry to be convened by PGDB.......Milton St explosion didn't even make the inquiry in July 2010, but he faced a charge.......how does that work?



And guess who nearly burnt down a house in Nelson in Dec 2007......

Date: 27/12/2007
Location: Nelson

Equipment: Water heater

Accident type: Fire

Losses: A house was rendered uninhabitable due to fire and smoke damage. A water heater was destroyed.

Summary of events: Pipework in a gas installation had been pressure tested but appliances had not been commissioned.

The owner received permission from the installer to turn on the gas and use it (the installer was to commission the next day). Due to a leaking fitting, fire ignited in an external instantaneous water heater mounted in a recess box. Heat from the gas fire ignited the soffit above and the fire spread into the ceiling space.

Suspected causes and significant factors:

The appliance had not been commissioned and gas leaked from a loose fitting. Gas built up in the recess box and was ignited, probably from use
of the water heater.

What a muppet........







.




.

Don't believe they can't find lots of certs....you know those pieces of paper that WE are held to, believe me on this, you most definitely held to these legal documents.....

Have a look at their own letters one before I photographed the gas suppliers copies at the gas company and then poof they reappeared....magic.

You know the investigation into this shocking cert fiasco by Hazel.....well they can't find that either.....


The Ombudsman......well he is totally happy with this......why are tradesman treated like shit?




.

Cert 299760 can't be found.....I asked back in 2003.....couldn't find it then.....6 years before an explosion......



Imagine if they had looked into it back then?

Dear Ombudsman,

 

 

 

Please see attached the most recent reply from the PGDB, sent in reply to my OIA request for the PGDB response to my lawyer’s letter dated 18th May 2010, also attached. I would complain that the excuse of “it’s too hard to find” is not sufficient and smacks of a cover up.

 

 

Of Note my Lawyer’s letter states that the actual DOL complainant, a Lance Windleburn, told my lawyer that my gasfitting work was of no concern, he did this well before the PGDB targeted me, and the PGDB were in receipt of this letter dated 18th May 2010. This is almost exactly mid way between the explosion of April 2009 and my biased hearing of May 2011.

 

 

I would ask you to examine this letter from my lawyer.

 

Received before my hearing, this is the hearing overseen (and conveniently shut down by) by the “impartial” investigators long term colleague ……do you think this is fair?...... that the actual person who wrote the DOL complaint, the DOL complaint being the only reason for the investigation into me, that he told my lawyer ( and the PGDB were aware of this before they decided to ruin my reputation, business and life)…..that my work was of no concern. Is this fair?

 

Is it fair the PGDB can’t find this correspondence…..its too hard to find. Is this a valid excuse for not producing…..I would complain about this also.

 

The Ombudsman has relied up to now on the PGDB’s own partial hollow unfounded excuses and reports to excuse their behaviour, this is not fair. It ignores undeniable proof of the witch hunt that wrecked my life, business, reputation and terrorised my wife.

 

Add to this that most if not all the evidence points to John Darnley, the same person who I had spent the previous 6 years before the explosion complaining about to the PGDB.

 

The same Darnley who faced a charge for the explosion but it disappeared BEFORE HIS HEARING.

 

The same Darnley gifted his full craftsman gas certifying license by Tony Hammond some 15 years before the explosion.

 

This is the same Hammond who was later appointed by the PGDB as the “impartial” investigator, against my protests of his partiality and his massive conflicts of interest.

 

 

Of note Darnley being of only 10 people awarded a license in this way, at the time of this issuing……..there has been others since……Hammond being one of them to allow him to be appointed as investigator, impartial he is not and has never been.

 

 

This is the same Hammond who claims to have seen the actual handwritten original top copy of cert 345138, see attached in his report.

 

 

Hammond makes this claim even though the PGDB claim to have never received this cert 345138 the year before, the PGDB made this claim of non receipt of cert 345138 while the blast victim lay in a drug induced coma, see attached…… but cert 345138 actually appears in the DOL complaint, also attached. Any of this fair so far?

 

 

This is the same Hammond who withheld over 100 photos and investigation notes during the whole period of investigation. The photos became available from the police forensic expert at the hearing, the notes are withheld under legal privilege, which is another wrong doing, until this day. Legal privilege is between a lawyer and his/her own client…….there is no client with an impartially appointed investigator, unless Darnley is his “client”? Still struggling to see any fairness……

 

This is the same Hammond who amended my 44 trumped up charges just before the hearing and is the same Hammond who was a long term colleague of the PGDB appointed Chair, a Stephen Parker, at my hearing, again appointed against my protests of a conflict of interest. Nah…..just not seeing any hint of fairness….

 

This is the same Parker who shut down my hearing just as I was going to prove my 100% innocence. 42 out of 44 charges answered, with the last charge broadcasted to the public by the PGDB as a major failing by me, for ironically not showing the trade its due respect and the importance of the cert system.

 

 

 

Of note this last one remaining charge of mine out of the trumped up 44 charges laid ( I say one because the other charge was for signing this last charge off, hence it disappears if the primary charge disappears) …….and this last charge was not for the explosion (which no one has been held accountable for to this day) ………well the sole basis for the cause of concern for this last charge was then ignored by the PGDB in another case AFTER my hearing…..telling an elderly couple to “just shut the window” when they use the appliance. These poor people I am told were on anti stress medication because of this, they are the “Highgates” of my previous complaints made to your office.

 

 

Now this same conflicted Tony Hammond believes that all changes to an installation should be recorded with a certificate, please see below in blue taken from the March 2009 PGDB newsletter. Tony Hammond had this to say….the actual month before the explosion of April 2009.

 

 

 

Before reading Hammond’s recommendations, please bear in mind that after I left Allgas….Darnley or someone at Allgas ( of which Darnley was the Manager and the only certifying gasfitter that worked there ) -

 

·          Altered the gas supply LPG cylinder station at the beginning of the installation at the chip shop.

·          Extended the gas supply to a pizza oven in the middle of the gas installation at the chip shop (this is the actual work covered by cert 345138 which is all in Darnley’s name).

·          Lowered the pipework thereafter that led to the fryers at the chip shop (as shown by the sloping pipe and original screw holes in the withheld photos, proving what I had maintained from day one, but was ignored by the PGDB).

·          Added the 2 x fryers to my initial pipe out. My only “piping out” of the installation is what I had maintained from day one, please see DOL complaint where the DOL say I state this.

·          Replaced the supply hose to the fryer (because it had split not long after its initial install, due to the lowering of the pipe work) this is the cause of the explosion.

 

 

These five bullet points above are known to the PGDB and were at (and before) my biased hearing and I can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt none of this was attributable to me.

 

 

 

Written by Tony Hammond

 

The Gas Regulations (REG 24) define, amongst others, that the following require certification:

 

Extensions, additions and replacements to existing gas installations.

 

Alterations that result in repositioning of pipework or changes to the operation of the installation.

 

It is worth noting that an installation is defined in the Gas Act as “including a gas appliance”.

 

Therefore, replacement of one appliance by another, even if very similar, requires certification.

 

Further weight is added to the argument when one considers that even a “like for like” replacement needs to be adjusted to ensure gas pressure and aeration are set appropriately, the connections are gastightness and the safety devices operate at the right levels; that is, the appliance needs to be commissioned in accordance with clause 1.6.7 of NZS 5261.



 

 

 

Think of this opinion above of Hammond’s when you know that Darnley faced a charge for the explosion but it disappeared before his hearing, add that to the third hose replaced “like for like” sold to the chipshop by Allgas months after I left Allgas, also see attached the dated receipt and compare to my period of employment. Of note……THIS IS THE BLOODY HOSE THAT CAUSED THE EXPLOSION.

 

Please compare the date of this receipt for the hose that caused the explosion, to my period of employment and the date of a letter sent acting in my name with out my knowledge, attached.

 

 

I have three questions….

 

1. If Darnley was issuing carbon copies of the certs to the customer but not registering the cert with the PGDB, why wasn’t he charged (or even questioned about it), how did Darnley face a charge for the explosion, but it disappeared before his hearing?

 

2. If cert 345138  was never received by the PGDB…. how did the investigator see a copy of its original?

 

3. If cert 345138  was never received by the PGDB…..how can the PGDB electronic register show a copy of it, same cert number, same appliance,, same address, same names, same signatory…… same missing gas leak test

 

I had spent the previous 6 years to the explosion trying to get dodgy certs covering altered, dangerous gas fitting work before the explosion. Fair……Yeah Right……a cold Tui anyone?

 

 

 

The PGDB claim not to have received multiple certs (it is not just for the site of this explosion). These missing certs showed up after my investigation….these missing certs also lacked the recording of the testing for gas leaks, these certs also claimed by the PGDB to be missing……. These certs also have fox-pro entry dates and are present on their electronic website…..well these “missing” certs magically reappear after I photographed the carbon copies at the gas suppliers building……also see attached PGDB letters and examples of these carbon copies. Still not seeing any fairness…..

 

 

 

Of Note…..We have now lost this carbon copy honesty mechanism, we now have an ANYONE can print off all you like system, open to anyone with a printer and an internet connection, no handwriting, no carbon copies……with all “new” installs classed as “low” risk and not needed to be registered in any independent govt register,  apparently in a shoe box in the garage will suffice……all done in a housing shortage of 60,000 homes…..this is total madness by a disconnected bureaucracy looking to protect it’s self and not the public.

 

 

Even according to the previous sacked CEO Routhan of the PGDB there are over 4000 dangerous certificates….NATIONWIDE. The PGDB must or at least should be aware of this, as should the minister.

 

 

 

Your office is charged with ensuring “Fairness for All”…….please can you point out to me in any of the above information (and I have much more available upon request to anyone)… where I (or the blast victim or NZ public for that matter)  has been shown even a hint of a shade of an iota of fairness. You can not.

 

 

 

This was all done and is still done to this day at a very real risk to the NZ public’s safety; it is done with full knowledge of the Minister responsible, some of it in his own constituency…i.e. Nick Smith in Nelson copied in. It is an endemic problem country wide, dodgy certs covering dangerous work. A system mal-administered by the PGDB with lashings of cronyism.

 

 

Deregulation was lobbied for by GANZ and by Tony Hammond in particular (Stephen Parker, chair of my hearing heavily involved in GANZ also, just Google it), this resulted in the loss of independent inspectors with those financially gaining from installing the gas work being their own self certifying overseers of their own work…. in charge of adhering to regulation and quality control, this has now devolved ever further to the “anyone can print off a cert with no govt register for any new work” system….in a housing shortage of 60,000 homes……this is sheer madness.

 

 

 

Nick Smith….. I recently saw you talk of investing in regulation……I put it to you that it isn’t regulation……but re-regulation……we had heaps of effective and well proven regulation,  but it was, in my opinion,  thrown away to enable profiteering. Also Nick my previous offer to you Nick to take you to a home that is of a huge risk is still there, these are your constituents….the people who empowered you to represent them……really?

 

Perhaps any of you copied in can ask Nick for an Official Information Act request for all my emails to him……you have my full permission to do this and I do not regard my privacy impinged or affected in any way, just a simple……. Please Nick can I get all correspondence you have received and sent in reply to Paul Gee by means of an OIA request…..just copy and paste it from here if you like, you have my full permission.

 

 

 

Mr Ombudsman while I have your ear…..

 

 

 

I would like to complain again about the sending child sexual abuse case notes sent to my home unmarked of their vile content and read by my wife just before we lost our home. Mr Ombudsman this is not fair nor even civil nor decent, especially in a gasfitting disciplinary context. I came home to find my wife hysterical, we later lost our home and my girl had to live in a caravan while I worked away collecting drinking water and emptying a chemical toilet a the local i-site in front of the town I live in….whilst I worked away for that winter…..my lads were 3 and 5…..is this fair Mr Ombudsman? No it is not.

 

Also…..

 

I would complain about the letters sent to the sites of all my charges that claimed I was issuing illegal certificates in the North Island in places I have never visited, which even by the PGDB’s own reckoning could have given the recipients of these letters the impression that I was capable of acting illegally. The one sent to the local high school in the main centre of my business caused the most damage.

 

 

 

This most recent reply from the PGDB was again, against my many previous requests, childishly sent by snail mail, I would like to complain about this too.

 

 

 

I have lots of ready made USB sticks, each full of the evidence, photos, transcripts, testimonies, affidavits, with well over 300 documents, to prove that there is a cover up done at a risk to the NZ Public Nationwide, not just in Nelson. To ignore this is reprehensible.

 

 

I am happy to share with any of you copied in and I say to those with the power to change or reveal this and do nothing…..then shame is most definitely on you.

 

 

Most of you copied in claim to have the NZ publics best interests foremost in your intentions……I just am not seeing this and I ask you where do we go when the Ombudsman’s office acts this way…..its our last bastion of fairness for all.

 

 

Please Mr Ombudsman show me where in this fiasco and premeditated, slanted and biased witch-hunt was I shown any fairness, or the blast victim or the NZ public for that matter. You have ignored me to date, for years now, using the PGDB’s own biased, unfounded and hollow weak excuses, why is this?

 

 

Awhile ago Christopher Littlewood rang me (it’s the only time and out of context of the form of correspondence we have both used, i.e. email)…… to tell me…… after I waited for over two years for a reply from the Ombudsman, that your office doesn’t normally deal with these types of things, I request that he explains this to me while referencing the Ombudsman Oath and Act. I don’t believe he can.

 

 

Please can you justify any of this to me and those copied in……just use the  “reply to all” button in your reply email…..again I have no problem with this and do not consider my privacy impinged.

 

 

I am complaining about all of this, I am complaining to the main Ombudsman about the Ombudsman’s actions to date….I believe that this complaint to the Ombudsman about the Ombudsman means that the main representative of the Ombudsman should review it, please can you clarify this ?

 

 

 

I hope your “Office of Fairness” isn’t the equivalent of Orwell’s Ministry of Love, where any “love” was definitely absent, a title given to it to allow acceptance by the populace.

 

 

THIS EFFECTS THE WHOLE OF NEW ZEALAND, i.e. previous dodgy certificates covering dangerous work in their homes with insufficient systems to cover any future work….in a bloody housing shortage of 60,000 homes.

 

Does that sound fair to you?

 

 

I welcome feed back and am prepared to front up to anyone to present my point. Preferably with all those concerned to be present.

 

 

Yours With Integrity Paul Gee

 

I fail to see how the government expects every plumber,gas fitter or drainlayer to protect the nz public when it is plain to see that they will only protect their wallets and themselves .
these people need to front up so paul and his family can clear their name and move on

It seems to me that the present system will be followed by well meaning people, these law abiders ( the majority ) will do due diligence and keep all their records......so if there is an incident they can produce them.....and open a world of shit on themselves......

What do you do if someone changes your work, how do you prove it wasn't you.....in a system that has acted in this way to protect it's self......

The cowboys.....( hopefully the minority )......well they can do what they like, no one will know until there is an incident......and it is going to be bloody hard to prove anything.

Think about this.....


The PGDB have now blanked out our license numbers on their website......why?.....because dodgy people were using our numbers with out our knowledge on building consents so I am told...........why? because there are dodgy people out there......


These dodgy people ( and they are obviously about ) must be having a field day with the present system.......in a housing shortage......lots of money to be had........the lure of dodgy bastards since time immemorial.....


Our systems should protect us tradesman and the NZ public, not absolve the authorities from responsibility.....the authorities should police this system not distance its self and portion the responsibility on to the trades......


When the PGDB lost control of the cert system......( and lets not forget the income of the sale of the certs at 25 bucks a piece, it would not easily nor willingly relinquished )......it was an admission that they made such a mess of it.....and deregulation is a huge mistake......

But is ok.....especially for the sellers of gas......because now you guys are wearing ALL the responsibility......they can sell gas with about as much comeback and liability after the gas meter/LPG cylinder station as the selling of a happy meal......

This " empowerment " is a way of putting the responsibility on you, you are now running most of the cert system for them, with very little comeback for those making the big bucks nor our govt......

You could complain to the Ombudsman.........he don't care though......

I believe that we have been had, totally hoodwinked, taking the dangled carrot of being our own boss/certifier......you should probably do a law course too, be your own lawyer too......or be able to afford a good one.....


My lawyer took well over 10k off me (think it was 16k from memory).....only to tell me to plead guilty to the 44 charges that (after I ceased to use his services) me and Wal proved that even in a slanted and biased hearing 42 of the charges were bollox, and so is the last one.....


But we lost everything.....


.

hi guys, Jax you are correct in what you say but whatever system is in place the problem is not gasfitters as they know what they are doing, but the unqualified D.I.Y.ers that will never be stopped. The system in place just makes sure that the qualified (us) pay for the prosecutions of those who are caught and not the Government, cheers