Plumbers NZ is New Zealand's largest online plumbing, gas and drainage resource. Plumbing exam help, plumbing news, directory and free quotes.
-
Please see an email sent to the Board and MP'S, I warn each and every one of you to read the email first, the attachments are sick, but done with the full knowledge of the Board, it investigatior and his lawyer( who put it all together) >:D >:D >:D >:D
Hi Iain,
Please can you explain the relevance of child sexual abuse to make an argument in a court of law or at a tribunal…..and at what point do you show common decency and moral fibre. I am sure you could find other historic cases in NZ to make a point without using the suffering of innocents, unless you have no common decency.
The Board’s lawyer has seen it fit to use these sick and depraved actions of people whom I believe waste air by breathing it, just and solely to make his point for his argument.
I apologise to all copied in and warn you that if sexual acts against minors offensive please do not open the attachments, but consider this I came home to my wife absolutely distraught and to be blunt hysterical and sobbing, we had lost our business, home and I was due to go up in front of the people responsible for writing and referencing this base and sick material.
This was referenced not once but twice. Twice on two very separate occasions once at the impartiality hearing and once at the actual hearing.
My wife is totally innocent of any wrong doing by a long shot, I want to lay a formal complaint and ask the Board for its reasoning and justification for the use of such sickness.
Would you Iain stoop to such lows to persecute someone??
I whole heartedly apologise to each and every one of you copied in, but this is what Mr Laurenson and Mr Hammond has seen fit to email to my wife with no warning, she still cries when she thinks of it or talks about it………..I ask each and every one of you…….. IT THIS ACCEPTABLE????????
Both are copied straight out of the Board’s “impartial” investigators papers to push his argument and totally known to the Board (or should be), it is nothing short of perverted. The attachments speak for them selves. Please see the Plumber’s forum also.
I demand a full unreserved written apology to my wife. I assure you I will pursue this after my appeal. The ironic thing is I received a warning from Kern Uren for using crass language in a text with in days, let’s see how long it takes to apologise to my wife.
Yours Sincerely Paul Gee
-
and the other one, see attached.
My old boss, who was given his ticket by Hammond, his nick nmae was "porn dad", all totally true....I await the defamation lawyers letters.
-
sick sick sick >:D >:D >:D >:D
-
lets have it out in the open and I haven't had a beer since new year, I am just pissed off not pissed up
-
please put in a official information act request to see the context of these comments, quote me that I have no problem with the release and that I give full permission for its release, ask for Mr Laurenson's arguments and past presidents for historic legal decisions, once at my "impartiallity" hearing and once for my "actual" hearing .......each one has an under age girl being abused by a family member..........perhaps a past president for some one ???????????
Would any "mere" plumbers stoop so low???
-
My wife and I have carried this for many months now and until I talked to an old friend yesterday who said to me " well if its good enough for them to put you through it, then go public with it".
I was tamping
This is a bloody plumbers tribunal, NOT A WAR CRIME TRIAL AT THE HAIG, who are these people....do it give them kicks or titillate them.....it is nothing short of sick and you have to ask yourself who do you want overseeing and regulating and representing our industry???
-
you have my sympathies Paul - its disgusting what has happened to you and your wife, this board and the system that we are forced to operate under is despicable, a disgrace and an utter sham
did you cc in the minister and media? I would - its disgusting, the public has a right to know what is ACTUALLY happening in our industry...
keep strong mate - thoughts are with ya
-
I'm sorry, what is the relevance of these documents? I must be missing something?
-
This is what the prosecution used as past president case studies on two separate occasions to push their argument.... once on probabilities for my hearing and the other for the impartiality hearing, and my wife read one of them as it was unmarked as perverted filth, it really upset her.
What relevance this filth has in a work tribunal god only knows, but all the Board members and Secretariat allowed them to use it to bolster the investigators argument, even if they weren't aware of it before it was presented they allowed it to be submitted and have continued to do so since, my wife read it months ago. That is unless they didn't read it at all which is pretty messed up too, allowing a case to continue with out considering all the info, I asked for an apology at the hearing so they did know.
If some one put this under my nose to push a point I would tell them to go away and get some decorum, decency and morals.....but the Board allowed it.
Both hearings this shit was used and each time there was about 3 to 4 case studies..... so both times their argument consisted of 25% to 30% of child sexual abuse...........and the M.O. IS THE SAME FOR BOTH, perhaps we should get the police to impound their lap tops and check out the content.
You tell me TS where this all fits in and we'll both know. If anyone spoke to my wife like that in front of me I would paint the floor with them, that still might be on the cards.
-
Integrated....I did...... 3 government ministers and a close up reporter and the Master Plumbers............lets see the moral fiber of them all.
-
And Allan Bickers, Sue Inneson Board members and the CEO Max Pederson, please I know you read this site lets have your explanation all of you.
Cracks me up you call Fiona Gravel names on here and you get a lawyer straight on to it, Wheres my lawyer I'm a Master Plumber, past president at that and I have nothing but threats from them, gutless.
Please call me on this, bullies tend to wind me right up.
How would any of you feel to see your wife crying because you got to sell your home, loose your business then read this sort of shit, it is sick.
-
"This is what the prosecution used as past president case studies on two separate occasions to push their argument".
What exactly was there argument that they were trying to push Badger?.
Its very confusing to see unrelated material like this at a hearing, obviousley it was a ploy to emotionaly enrage you and knock you off your centre a sort of shock and awe tactic...it obvious that they had no real argument with real substance so in order to make your case seem bad they have attempeted to connect you with this FILTH and disgust anyone reading this document in order to detract from the week case that they had presented.
This is a filthy ploy by what seems to be filthy minded people.
I dont know how the goverment of new zealand could allow its self to be connected with low life gutter minded people such as this!
-
Its just sick and has no place at a plumbers hearing, if it does then I stand corrected and welcome an explanation from them responsible...........yes you the spineless ones reading this but not having the guts to post a reply, no morals or spine and you lead us? step down and let someone with some mettle have a go.
Like I said a few months ago, vampires the lot of them......blood suckers that in the full light of day go up in a puff of dust. Lets have it out in public. Sun light is the best disinfectant......a public inquiry please.
-
how about I print off a few copies and send them to their partners and families for comment??
-
hi guys/Badger, i still do not understand what has happened here the posts and replys are fragmented, if all this type of talk came out in a hearing against me i would walked out/got a shotgun/do something so what did you do? Wal was there what did he think of it the whole scene seems crazy!!! can you explain what exactly went on, cheers
-
Hi Robbo, its was used by the investigators lawyer to prove his point about probabilities, that you are more likely to have done the least serious offence.
For example (and this wasn't any part of my hearings) if you were accused of stealing a car to rob a bank, then it is more probable that you stole the car only. The examples that they used are sick and I am sure there were plenty of un-perverted examples to use, but they went with this sickness.
The other one was an example on impartiality and Industry Boards. They are examples of past rulings passed by a judge to give an example of what has happened before in a similar situation(how the f**** this has any bearing is totally beyond me) and the outcome, it gives the Board a direction to take on allowing a prosecution and how they pass judgement. BOTH TIMES THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THIS OUT THERE, THEY DID, AND BOTH TIMES IT WAS FOR A FAMILY MEMBER BREAKING THE MOST SACRED OF TRUSTS AND JUST PLAIN SICKNESS.
If I didn't value my family as much as I do, if I was single and not a father I would have done as you have said.
Here's an idea contact the Board and get them to explain it to you, because once I got over the shock of it( and it took months, my wife still hasn't) I am as confused as you are, I have asked for an explanation and laid a formal complaint....all of which I will copy and paste on here.
Everyone on here should lay a complaint, it could have been your wife reading this shit if the Board ever has or had a go at you.
-
hi guys/Badger, i cannot see the relevance of the examples used the hearing should have been stopped, i would have stopped it, i would probably have been arrested and been in prison by now, absolutely ridiculous this sort of thing has got to stop what do they think they are doing. Can`t think of what will happen now but i guess the case is done with not much room for recourse, i can only hope you can move on, all the best for now,cheers
-
My missis has been nothing short of terrorised and traumatised......all very passive aggressively..... with a very polite smile on their faces, they did this on top of making us have to sell our mortgage free home and loose our business, mate believe me I have come close many many times, but what good am I to my wife and kids doing time? >:
I'll get on with my life when I get my life back, spinless cowards they are.
-
Yes Robbo, I agree when all the presiding Board members read this shit they should have said "get out of my sight you filthy little f****" ( which is what I would have said)but no they didn't even bat an eyelid, most of them Master Plumbers.
NOT ONCE BUT 3 TIMES, JUST NOTICED ANOTHER ONE FOR SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
Is there such a thing as discretion anymore, or taste....let alone common decency. Just shows the level of these people, each and everyone who let it ride.
COME ON FIONA GRAVEL, LETS HEAR IT OR MARK WHITEHEAD THE PRESIDING CHAIR AT THE VERY HEARING THIS WAS AIRED AT.
Whats your thoughts on this Master Plumbers hierarchy, lets have them out in the open. Because I'll tell you this for nothing if you think this is public you haven't seen f**** all yet. >:D lets see your spin on this
-
This just went public on bebo and facebook.....like I said lets have it in public.
Have a nice day :-*
-
The reply/admission from the Board stating what I already knew and apparently all acceptable.....no disgust or distaste OR AN APPOLOGY
It shows the mind set, inhuman, arrogant, self opinionated, self important- what is the trade we would call tossers, please see below
Dear Mr Gee
I refer to your email dated 13 January 2012.
Your email appears to have been two cases referred to by David Laurenson, counsel for the investigator, in his submissions at your recent disciplinary hearing and the preceding hearing that dealt with your application to stay proceedings.
At the disciplinary hearing Mr Laurenson referred to Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, a leading case on the standard of proof at professional disciplinary hearings and quoted a paragraph from that case where the Supreme Court referred to a case involving the alleged sexual abuse of a minor. The Supreme Court used this case to discuss the sort of evidence that will be required to prove a charge on the balance of probabilities and how what is required may vary depending on the seriousness of the allegations.
At the earlier hearing of your application to stay proceedings Mr Laurenson referred to L v Dentists Disciplinary Tribunal, which was a case where the appellant successfully appealed a decision of the disciplinary tribunal not to stay proceedings relating to charges against him concerning sexual relations with a former patient.
As you are currently appealing the Board’s disciplinary decision, it is not appropriate for me to comment on this matter. However, I have referred your email to Mr Laurenson, who is acting for the investigator on the relevant appeal.
Yours sincerely
Iain McLachlan
Solicitor
THEY JUST DON'T GET IT DO THEY....ITS A F#CKING PLUMBERS WORK TRIBUNAL, they will stoop to any level. SICK!!
-
If you can tell mw what this has to do with gasfitting then we will all know.
There wasn't any other case studies to reference??
-
Child abuse is a very sensitive subject especially when no one really knows who is affected and what it can do to a person many years later. This sort of information shouldn't be used in this manner so freely to start with but that's a different subject isn't it.
What I don't understand is why they didn't use something relevant to your industry to prove a point, nothing there? I admit I don't know all the details and wont comment to much but I understand how this can be upsetting to you and agree that it's tactless, the letter should have been at least sent in a way that only you could open it. :-[ You have been through so much, I take my hat off to you and your wife mate. Keep your chin up!
-
My sentiments exactly, there has to be other case histories to reference to make a point.
Not one of the Board, the lawyer or the investigator batted an eye lid.
Thank you Plumber for your understanding.
-
Did they actually quote the pieces you have put up or did they just make reference to the case as is normal when using case law as an example?
-
Those disgusting pieces are taken verbatim, photo copied from their actual submissions, submitted and accepted by the Board with a women member present ( with out so much as a flinch).
These are part of the actual pages copied that my wife read and thought what the hell are they doing to us now, I found her sobbing saying why, why. She had been crying all afternoon but didn't want to bother me because I was under enough strain. That's the mettle of my wife, the people who allow this sort of sh#t, utter scum.
Scum references, about scum people, by scum.
I am still waiting to hear the relevance to plumbing, anyone got anything...........Any one from the Board or Master Plumbers, quick enough to react to name calling, utter spineless tossers.
-
I think their actions and accusations speak louder about them selves than anything.Not one person has said to me that they find this acceptable, not one.....except the Board.
For example the comment that they quoted me saying about my self being a "mere plumber", they still to date can't show me where I said that in context. Which to me reflects their attitude to plumbers in general.
They have lied about me, sending out letters stating that I was issuing dodgy certs in Northland (never been their), one sent to the only high school in my main center of business.
Kerny, the spinless, phoning me up and "warning" me over the phone, same guy taken to court recently for bulling an office lady.
All paid trip(financed by us "mere" plumbers) to Melbourne.
Acting illegally in the face of the best practice rules laid out by the NZ Law Commission.
Etc, etc......
If any of us had done a tenth of this we would be sued back to the stone age and / or incarcerated.......and we live in a democracy?????????????
-
The reality is case law is case law. There may have been other examples they could have used however this doesn't change anything. The case law used may have been the best examples of the particular use of the law and as such they would be acting unethically if they didn't use it I'm afraid. Sad but true.
-
TS as usual you are talking out of your sphincter it has no place at a plumbers tribunal.
It cracks me up when "professionals" think they know better.......it is plain sick and has no place in my life, now f**** off
-
Haha badger he does come across as a bit of a stuck up toss pot sometimes doesnt he...
There must have been a million and one other case law history examples to choose from...for example it is more proabable that he pissed his pants than pissed on someone in this case it is more proabible that he did the lesser of the crimes yada yada yada...
They had no need to use this foul filth as case law and i think you TS realise that there will be many many more fine examples of case law to draw from that would have presented an equal strength argument to there case rather than use this filth.
It was a calucated move by them to cause disruption to badger and his family cus they would have a pretty good idea of the proabilities of badgers wife reading this shocking filth...and they achieved exactly what i suspect they set out to do...if you cant get at your enemy then you go for those that support your enemy.
No insult intended TS this is just my view.
-
No offence taken guys. Badger, your totally up against it. Who are you going to take this to? No media will highlight this as it seriously isn't an issue, similar things have happened and will continue. They've broken no laws. I doubt they read all this out in the hearing anyway and can't help but think you've skewed things slightly? Can you provide the transcripts or have they doctored them?
The more this goes on the more I've been hearing about some errors made by the board which actually led to you getting off ;)
-
I was found 95% innocent in their own hearing and I am pretty sure we got a strong argument for the appeal, they pressed charges and then investigated it, all the while lying about me and stacking it all.
My hands are tied until the appeal, but after, win or loose I want answers
-
TS - you are right when you say Badger is up against it. The thread is a bit confusing - it would have perhaps been a bit easier to understand the context if all the information was given in one go - but I can understand that Badger is very stressed and more than a little angry at what has transpired, and perhaps also unable to release all the information until the appeal hearing. I've never had a lot of time for lawyers - but they are a necessary evil. They are bottom feeders - and cases to them are like battles - they will use whatever weapons they have at their disposal. TS is correct in that case law is case law - it stands alone and is what it is. Although very unpleasant reading, and certainly I could understand upsetting for your wife - they are not likening you to any of the people mentioned in the case law, just using it to illustrate a point - and who knows, maybe knock you off your game at the same time.
The sooner the high court hearing is over and you can tell the full, unedited story - the sooner every tradesman in NZ will feel a shiver go down their spine and wonder "what if that was me". It will be quite an eye opener if the whole transcript of the original hearing were available. One thing I am sure of - the investigation does not appear to have been well carried out - in fact I have heard and read enough to say it was, in my opinion, inept. I know the Board have no choice but to proceed with a hearing if the investigator says - so without wanting to defend them one could say they did right by you in finding you innocent of 42 of the 44 particulars. You have the opportunity to clear yourself on the final two at the High Court Hearing in March. Then you can open the Pandoras box for all to read and see.
-
I thought lawyers studied ethics as well. Jax your trying to see good in people, which is a quality(not taking the mick), but these people the Board included(including the new replacements) were privy to all my warnings dated back to 2003, 6 years before the explosion and it was them that appointed the investigator and had the opportunity to stay proceedings at the impartiality hearing(which was when they put some of this filth out there), I showed them photos of the investigator, with my ex boss and Board members, they had plenty of opportunity to make the right decision.
I was acquitted on 42 out of 44 charges because, even in there own biased court, it was blatant that I had done no wrong and it was trumped up, but they still decided to hold on to one last charge to go me again in the papers.
You are giving them way too much credit, if someone gets accused of something and is proven innocent does he then owe the accusers anything, especially when it was a definite fit up from the start.
It amazes me that my hands are tied until after the appeal, but they can misquote me and say that there were serious concerns with my abilities before the appeal, but not list any.
I will write down all that happened and release it publically, just waiting on the final chapter.
The very basic thing is, I had complained about all this for 6 years trying to warn about what happened, then when it did happen they had the choice of ruining my credability or answering why they hadn't acted on my warnings, they chose the latter. You really are giving them too much credit mate, they had plenty of opportunities to do the right thing, but put them selves first.
-
Badger - I unreservedly apologise if you think I am giving them any credit - believe me I do not mean to. However, I do understand the process they must work under - which is unweldly and slow. I have watched this case with great interest - as I believe it illustrates to every gasfitter in NZ just how vulnerable they are against a machine who has a virtual endless supply of money and a parcel of lawyers at their disposal. It shows that justice is hard to get - and it also illustrates the fact that I am convinced that numbers of practitioners in the past have pleaded guilty to charges simply to get them to disappear. Your case provided a robust defence - and this defence showed some huge holes in the investigation - which leads me to believe that investigations have not been well carried out and therefore the industry not served well by this process. I accept and fully believe that you have been trying to get people to listen to you about gas certificates purchased in your name without your knowledge and then subsequently filled in. To me this is fraud - plain and simple and I wonder if you would get more support from the NZ Police than you are getting from MP's and the Board when you make these statements.
Lawyers do study ethics - but I'm pretty sure most of them leave that at the door when they set up practice! There's a reason why they don't feature highly in the NZ trusted positions of employment! I wish you all the very best at your appeal hearing and eagerly await the outcome. It would be great if an investigative reporter could take an interest in this case - 20/20 or Sunday - then the whole of NZ could hear about it.
-
All good Jax, I am definitely going to take this further after the appeal.
As I see it you don't take action and you cover up obvious flaws and possible fraud then you are compliant after the fact, and need looking at....I can hear the shredders going now.
-
Just read all of these posts and put the general story together about what our mighty "board"..laugh,laugh,cough,cough has been up to here with badgers story.
Just told my partner and shes been reading these posts too...
Basically this industry sickens us,if these are some of there tactics to help there cause in any way to a few quilty verdicts...anyone involved with this attempt to pull paul down with this crap is in our opinion is the typical well paid board member scum or scum associate. Gang members in suits...
-
hi guys, yes and you can`t get justice even when you are right,cheers
-
Have a look at the entry under Paul Gee History, on this section ;)
-
just put British Regs on there too, have a gander