This post is a public reply to a multi-faceted communication from an idiot businessman by the name of Yusufa (Tom) Faye, one that a mate of mine has been suing for an unpaid business debt, quite successfully too it seems! It’s a lesson in what NOT to do when you’re in a hole in business. Hint: Stop digging! It also highlights what is called “the Streisand Effect” where unwelcome exposure is increased by trying to stop exposure. Curiosity gains more attention to an otherwise seemingly harmless matter which gathers into a real firestorm. Professional a***holes like me would never bait fools would they? Umm … would they? I also share how officialdom requires specifics to act and throwing a paddy really doesn’t get you anywhere.
I recently provided assistance to a client and mate of mine who needed help to chase up a recalcitrant debtor, Tom Faye. I did a bit of research on this crook and then we served this dude with what we in the industry call a “Section 289” (aka a s289 Statutory Demand). I’ve shared more about this dude before more than once. I’ve variously called him a crook, an idiot, immature, inexperienced in business and a fool because he clearly is – all of this and more. He might be a wonderful lover and a great drinking partner but he’s not to be trusted to pay his bills in business nor to honour his contracts.
No good? Be careful . . . No good!
His biggest mistake though was to piss off my mate and refuse to pay him the money he owed by telling him to get f***ed – so to speak. Naughty Tom, Naughty! Remember now that you were the one who started “it” all!
I thought that I’d pinged this loser enough but no, apparently Tom (as he now calls himself) wants
more to up the anti with complaints sent yesterday to everybody he can find to listen, so here it is. Tom has graciously spread the good work that Writing the Wrong has gotten up to, getting my mate’s story out there, so here it is, now spread far and wide.
The Streisand Effect is so called because in the years of the Internet Barbara tried to muzzle a photo of her cliff-top mansion on an anemic coast photography website. It backfired with curiosity turning into an early viral sensation. The days have changed now where the rich and famous can no longer hide, well not in the same way as they used to with citizen journalism (like this website) taking hold anyway. So a big thank you is due to Tom for the additional exposure!
Tom has sent variants of this complaint to Netsafe, Metaname, the PSPLA, NZIPI, ComCom and ‘God only knows’ who else. As far as I work out he can send them to the moon or Mars as far as I can see for all the good that it will do him. Maybe somebody may listen to this fool and buy his story. Who knows?
Victory Group Holdings Limited
9 Byron Avenue
This is the companies Address for Service. It’s actually the Spencer on Byron and Tom supposedly lives upstairs in a rental unit but don’t let him know that I know this please. He doesn’t want it getting out that his company has the registered office at a hotel and that he’s actually a pretender!
To Whom it may concern
Oh great! A personalised complaint always gets the attention doesn’t it Tom? In New Zealand Tom, we view documents that are addressed to “TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN” akin to testimonials from a previous employer given out of necessity – you know, the sort of thing that failed real estate salesmen would get when they leave their employment when the acid came on them to perform, you know, actually sell something more than one in a year? Are you still there? Tom? Yusufa? I’m talking to you brudda? Does the cap fit?
Re: Harmful Digital Communications and breach of Privacy: King Country Roofing Limited and Dennis A Smith of Taumaranui.
Umm . . . WTF?
It has come to my immediate attention that
Yup here we go . . . all the big words! So Tom, tell me please, how does something come to your “immediate attention” that’s been online for months? Perhaps you meant to say that it’s been up there for yonks and your girlfriend only just found out about it and told you?
Dennis A. Smith of 2a Para Street, Taumarunui, Taumarunui, 3920 and Peter Cribb of King Country Roofing Limited both of 10 Victoria Road New Plymouth 4310 have made intentional, malicious, false statements about myself and my business in the digital space.
Oh Diddums Tom . . . get over it FFS! I called you an idiot and a fool. I told the world that you’re a loser and inexperienced in business. You text and email me, Peter and others ad infinitum so that you can get your way. Have I already said, “Diddums”? Oh I have? Well I’ll say it again, Diddums. Get over it. The correct process in all of this Tom is to come back to the publisher (that’s me) and be very specific about what is factually incorrect and what you want them to change so that it reads accurately. And you’ve done that? Why not Tom? Is it that it’s all, umm . . . true? Oops – snap!
These statements were published online to the public and as a result my reputation has been severely damaged.
BS. Nobody reads these blog posts and not even you found them until someone alerted you to it. Your own vanity surfing failed to even find them although they have all been indexed in Google within the hour of publication. Tom you have all of two followers on Facebook; four on Youtube which you haven’t updated since your online marketing efforts crumbled years ago. Personally if your reputation has suffered I’d be stunned, unless of course it was your girlfriend who has seen them and she knows how hard you try to present your good-self as a rip-roaring business success.
These people falsely accused me and my business of committing a crime, being unfit for my business and lowered me as a reputable business person in the eyes of members of society.
Really? So have you paid the full amount specified in the s289? Do you have other people around town that you owe money to that you cannot pay? In NZ Tom we call that trading while insolvent and that sir IS not good – very “not good”!
They are trying to expose me to hatred, contempt and ridicule. These false statements were allegedly suggesting fraud, dishonesty and incompetence – specifically trading while insolvent which is against the Companies Act 1993; without any evidence to this at all just baseless assumptions.
False assumptions based on fact? Sue me Tom! Please sue me! Please? It’s called “Defamation” Tom. Now let’s be VERY clear about this Tom, and anybody else interested, there is no “allegedly” anything here. I state as FACT that your company has been served with a s289 notice; that as a result of not paying the amount in full on the due date that one of your creditors has instructed his lawyer to take you out by way of liquidation of your company and that the lawyer has indeed been paid what was due to do the needful. I know this for a fact because I have been told this is true by someone I trust. I don’t know whether you or your company have been served with the actual date of hearing in the Auckland High Court yet but I do know that you owe an undisputed amount and have not paid it. You will though, in full, in due course or the company will be liquidated. That I also know as close to fact as possible. I do not need to show the world my evidence, because unlike they do with you brudda, most people trust me to speak it like it is!
The damages that the action cause is a loss of business relationships, interference with current and future contractual relationships, adverse employment consequences which altogether cause monetary loss. Not to mention the emotional and mental harm of the constant references to my country of birth, Kenya and ridiculing me based on my ethnicity.
“Oh Mommy he called me ‘fatty’ and that’s not fair!”
“Well you are a little over weight, son, aren’t you?”
“But that’s not the point Mommy, he can’t be mean to me? Can he?”
“Mommy, speak to me please Mommy! Can he?”
Tom, Yusufa or whatever you or your mother or anybody else wants to call you, I don’t give two hoots whether you’re black, white, brown, yellow or a Pigmy FFS . . . if you’re an idiot and you owe my mate money and then if you fail to respond to all reasonable efforts to get you to pay your bills in full then I would encourage anybody to take you out. Our liquidation proceedings will ensure that you pay up in full or you will no longer have a company to hide behind. You know how this all works, or you should do!
With regards to my privacy, my information of commercial value has been exposed to the public by these people namely Dennis A. Smith of 2a Para Street, Taumarunui, Taumarunui, 3920, NZ and Peter Cribb of King Country Roofing Limited both of 10 Victoria Road New Plymouth 4310.
Nope! I personally have published more than 2.5 million words and I stand behind every single one of them too. Any requests for a Right of Reply are honoured in full as you well know and I can assure the world that you have published the half naked photos of yourself on the Otago marketing website – not me; not anybody else Tom! You!
My understanding is that these two are in a business relationship together and have exposed private information such as private correspondence, a private contractual agreement, my residential address, my company bank accounts that were supplied in confidence as a screenshot as part of payment of service; these are all right now in the public domain. This is a direct breach of the Privacy Act 2020 where information supplied to businesses must not be publicly displayed without the prior consent.
Nonsense! You sir entered into a commercial arrangement with a business owned by a client of ours and a mate of mine. You signed for your agreement to their terms of trade and thus when you breached the contract with your failure to pay them as that contract required you to do, they enforced their rights that you gave them in that contract. Have I said, “Diddums already? If you have any other beef you know the process Tom – be specific; communicate your wishes and then engage constructively!
Furthermore there is a significant breach of the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 with regards to 3 articles written about myself and my company without me ever knowing about it or having a chance to comment. This amounts to 1) cyberbullying 2) a criminal offence by posting harmful digital content that is purely designed to and, has caused me serious emotional distress.
I admit it . . . I love the sound of my own voice. I get it, I am a bully because I stand up to people like you on behalf of the people that are too nice to do this horrible job. But I’ll tell you what Tom, when you pay your bills or go bust over not paying them what you owe them, those little people will jump for joy and call me, shouting from the rooftops that yes, there is justice in the world. Have I already told you to grow up and get over it?
6(1) Principles of Act states “ A digital communication should not disclose sensitive facts about an individual’ these two people have gone on to take it a step further and disclose information that has nothing to do with the contract in place – for example the purchasing of a Toyota Hilux vehicle in 2020.
Did you buy a Hilux in 2020? Yes. Is this private information? No. Anyone can simply pay $2.30 to the PPSR and bingo, there it is! That’s what I did, Tom. It’s called research and people pay me to do this. Got a problem with it? Speak to the PPSR or the Finance company who loaded the debt onto the PPSR once you had agreed that they could of course! I’m not really sure what you moan about “these two people”. Please focus your hatred towards me, personally as it was me who did the research.
I fail to see how that correlates to the disputed agreement that has been settled in full and additionally my supposed inability to purchase property in New Plymouth which has absolutely no bearing on the supposed topic or purpose of these articles.
Confused yet, everybody? I am! WTF this has to do with the price of fish today is beyond me but I’m sure that Comcom or similar will work it all out!
To be clear I had been in constant contact with Peter Cribb of King Country Roofing Limited with regard to the payment of the final 50% of the agreement.
Ummmm really? I doubt it Harry. You told my mate that you were going to pay him on a certain day and you didn’t. You told him that you were getting refinanced and were having a few problems. He asked for proof and you told him to F*** off and never to grace your presence with his as long as you lived among other ‘nice’ words I might add. Then you got your finance and didn’t even have the courtesy of telling him that you could now pay his account. So we slapped you with a s289 which you ignored. This all doesn’t really match with your bitch-sheet here to me!
Peter said to me there would be no further collection costs incurred.
No, not that I can see. The TXT message shown here to the right which you have provided to all and sundry says that there would be “no interest charges” which was IMHO extraordinarily generous and actually quite wise. He also told you that if you didn’t pay then he would send the account to Debt Collection, which he did. Problem? Easy, just pay your bills brudda!
The final invoice was dated 7th July 2021 and the payment including all extras agreed to in the contract was paid for in full on 28th August 2021.
Nope! A lot of money is owing brudda. Speak to the lawyer and wake up to smell the roses Tom! Cough up and go away or let your company get liquidated, because that’s my mate’s instructions to his lawyer. He’s gonna get his lawyer to take you out for sure! OK So maybe I might have encouraged him to stand up to your sleaseball ‘don’t pay him’ tactics, maybe! Now did Pete’s lawyer make a communication to you on Friday 3 September 2021 by any chance about money still owing? And do I see a promise to pay from you on Wednesday 21 July 2021 “tonight” and a reply from Pete the next afternoon saying, “nothing showing in my account yet”? And did you send this screenshot to all and sundry by any chance? Tom, sir, you are a hypocrite, fraud and a fool.
In between this time, 3 articles were published on the internet with all my details, including on the date the payment was made when Peter sent my screenshot of payment to his business colleague who then posted it online – again I have never had a phone call, email, text or social media message from his private investigator.
Umm so? Have I already said, … ?
This goes beyond freedom of expression on their part as this is not proportionate between the matter and the expectation of privacy.
Who is “their”? This is my blog Tom, mine. My name is Dennis and people across the globe love reading my words because I take on the crooks, crims and the crazies of this world – just like you and I tell them all about it, in realtime too! Get over it.
My claim: Compensatory damages and injunction to stop further publication from these people, with regards to me and my companies.
Then you need to speak to me Tom, as I have told you directly. You have to man up to the scary dude down there in Taumarunui and you get serious. You have to pay your bills as you contracted to do, you stop trying to shout about others who are supposedly out to get you because you’re a big shot businessman, or a Kenyan or because you are a nice guy or whatever tickles your fancy and you do the honourable thing. Easy eh?
I also want a correction, retraction and an apology on top of monetary compensation amounting to the total value of the disputed contract.
There is no dispute Tom! No corrections; no retractions and no apologies.
Yusufa Tsanar Faye (Tom)
Victory Group Holdings Limited
It’s “faithfully” in business Tom. “Sincerely” in a personal communication. Yes I know, I know the teacher in me is coming out and that nobody taught you properly – I know! I know!
Buying a Fight
Tom Faye is a fool. I keep saying it because it is true.
One of the first rules of engagement is to suss out the opposition. A wise man will assess them (or in this case him (me)) BEFORE getting into the poo. Tom hasn’t. I know this because he has told me that he hasn’t, and in writing. Waiting until until after you start a war to do due diligence is just dopey, but many of my exposees do exactly this. So that you can see the quality of my advice, and so you can assess my integity I share a couple of communications with you here, both sent Sunday morning, the first one to my mate and the second one to Tom (note) before he sent his “complaint” off to all and sundry.
Yusufa (Tom) Faye:
> Hi just to make it very clear I have not received any notice from anyone regarding any form of extra payment towards you.
Not true. His company received a s289 notice, undefended. In due course his company will be liquidated as a result unless he pays you or your lawyer in full or does a deal with your lawyer or yourself (if you dare to deal with him!).
Yusufa (Tom) Faye:
> as for meeting at my place [address redacted] please do not entre the above address at any time I serve this as a tresspass notice.
Good words but you should have mentioned a clear from date and the two year period. Too late to do anything about it now. Best left.
Yusufa (Tom) Faye:
> You would need to go to the police to serve a trespass notice
Yes and no.
A trespass can be verbal, i.e. “Get off my f***ing property you jerk!” is fine. Even indicating your clear intent by hands behind a window is a trespass as long as the intent is clear. A two year trespass needs to be spoken or writte, and to make it an official trespass notice you will need to supply the Police with notice that on xxx date xxx was trespassed for a period of 2 years and I recommend that you do exactly that. It is a simple easy form to download, fill out and deliver. If I publish that document online (which I will if you send it to me) then this will make life even more uncomfortable for Tom. In trespass law it is the intent (to trespass someone or to ignore a trespass instruction) that is used, not so much the process.
This is very different in commercial law where the process is vital for the protection of all parties which is why the correct service of a s289 and onwards is so important.
Yusufa (Tom) Faye:
> and you would need to present evidence of why it is being served Peter,
No. Tom is wrong here.
> something that would work against you.
This is utterly irrelevant. You do not need a reason to trespass someone if you have title, and you certainly do not need to inform the trespassed person of any reason. You have trespassed him – period. This BTW would be a very good justification for another blog post if/when you do supply the document to the Police. Make sure you send it to me before the Police please and let me know when you have taken it to them. “Loser, crook makes things worse for himself AGAIN!” sort of thing.
As you can see I decided to do this post after having sent Tom the second email and it is me alone that determines what I post about, the angle of the story and the timing.
Yusufa (Tom) Faye:
> As for collection costs I have never been approached by a debt collection service
Yes he has. His company was served with a s289 which detailed collection costs (mine) and [your lawyer] should have detailed the legal costs he added when he sent his liquidation notice. Ignore it all Pete.
> and as the bill was not aged past 60 days you have no grounds.
Your terms state otherwise and Tom signed it thus a contract was offered, entered into (accepted) and then enforced. No further action from you is now required. It should be between Tom and your lawyer. Pretty simple really!
My understanding is that my mate’s lawyer has indeed sent the documents to the Auckland High Court to wind up Tom’s company Victory Group Holdings Ltd and that he has already spoken to Tom about it. When the HC allocates a date (lock downs have delayed things a bit) then it’s all official. Tom will pay up in full or it’s bye, bye Tom! Hey Tom, do you get that “Oh shit these guys are really serious” feeling yet?
> I’m proceeding with court action against your company for defamation, we will most likely meet in the district court.
Both things are totally impossible! Tom will be told in no uncertain terms by ANY lawyer that he is dreaming on multiple counts so numerous it’s not worth starting to mention them all. Your company had nothing to do with defaming him. Your company engaged a debt collector, incurred costs and undertook action based on that advice. He contracted to your company to pay for those costs and his company failed to dispute them in time thus they are due. Recommend that you do nothing. Say nothing more. Do not engage and threaten him with harassment the instant he tries to email or contact you.
> Complete waste of resources as you’ve been paid and as I said I want nothing more than to forget about you but you’ve forced my hand.
Methinks the feeling is mutual between the two of you but watch this space! I love a good ding dong and this may only be the beginning. Fools tend to dig themselves into the grave rather than fess up and do the honourable thing.
Not only that but I predicted that this goon would try to create a dispute out of nothing. Idiots and losers always do!
The second communication I wish to share here is an email I sent to Tom at 11:56am yesterday before Tom sent off his gazillion complaints TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. It reveals proof of my integrity and willingness to honour my word as well as taking an exposee’s concerns seriously, even though we all know he is just a loser trying to wriggle out of paying what he owes. Note:
Hi Tom (cc Peter)
I am just now in receipt of your texts of last night in which you draw my attention my publication of your bank account details online. I have now updated the image in question to blank out your bank details as you have requested. The old image previously located at: https://www.dennis.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/tom-faye-crook-fool.jpg has now been deleted and the new one replaced on the post is located at: https://www.dennis.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/tom-faye-crook-fool.jpg. I agree that you have every right to expect confidentiality of this information and accordingly I have cc’d Peter this email update and I have explained to him in person by phone that this was indeed a mistake on my part which I have now corrected. Thank you for this request and notice. Hopefully the world is a better place now as a result.
In terms of commercial arrangements between your company and Peter’s company may I suggest that you refer to his lawyer who as I understand it has commenced liquidation proceedings against your company, and likewise with me if it relates to matters between Peter’s company and mine if you seek something more than what I say here. I believe, but do not yet know, that you have been served with documents that will deal with issues of monies owing, service and so on.
In terms of meeting you, discussing, dispute resolution, trespass and so on it has been our advice not to engage with you and to trespass you from Peter’s home and business premises. I believe that he has already done that and that the formal Trespass Notice will be provided to the Police next week. For the record the trespass that Peter issued to you lasts for two years from the date of issue, whenever Pete told you to keep out.
I am aware that you have re-engaged with Peter following a previous request for him to butt out of your life, and that you have attempted to characterise any outstanding matters as a dispute, or disputed. If this is the case then you have a very straight forward legal remedy – you simply present this dispute through your lawyer to the presiding judge at your company’s liquidation proceedings. If the judge believes that it has merit, he/she will rule accordingly. Personally I think that attempting to resolve a matter after the service of a s289 Notice then commencement of proceedings (with an assumed) notice properly served may be pushing it uphill a little but hey, I’m not a lawyer. That is for your legal team to resolve for you – certainly not Peter.
Tom tried to force his way onto Peter’s land, making a big scene about meeting him at Tom’s preselected time and place to resolve a so-called “dispute”. This was the reason Tom was trespassed. Seeing as there has never been any dispute and Tom acknowledged the debt was owing and seeing as he never disputed the s289 notice then only responded with the “dispute” after he knew that his company was going to get taken out, the whole dispute thing can be understood for what it truly is, a distraction so as he can try to save face by telling all his gazillions of fans that he is a “good guy”, trustworthy, good for it and so on. He just had a dispute with a creditor who was “not fair” to him.
Our advice to Peter is to file the formal trespass notice with the Police in due course and to have you arrested the moment that you step onto the property that you have been trespassed from. We have also suggested that he warn you that communications of any sort other than through his lawyer (to do with accounting matters) or with me (if it has to do with any other matters) will be considered harassment. In this regard we have also advised him to ignore and not to respond to any communication with you.
For the record Peter’s company previously engaged my company Writing the Wrong Ltd for various services and again recently for advice on how to deal with the matters you have recently raised with him. Essentially Peter asks me for help. We give it to him, bill him for our time and services. That’s it. My personal blog is mine, personally. While there is at times cross-over in terms of information shared they are two entirely separate operations in theory and in practice. I do this so that at any stage the company can be sold free from any personal blogging encumbrances. I have more than one company. My bio says the following about this company and its operations: “On my return to New Zealand I established Writing the Wrong, with the aim of giving a voice to the people.”
Tom had previously sent me half a dozen text messages variously complaining, sharing personal stuff and religious conversation.
In terms of the other issues/claims that you wish to sort out, may I please draw your attention to my terms which guarantee you a fair Right of Reply (this is available from a link at the bottom of every page or post) and I will be happy to publish your story in a fair and timely manner should you choose to exercise this right.
In summary I assess your core issues to be that of potential defamation but only one specific example given or implied other than [I think from a small phone screen] concerns with the words, as an example, “Nope! Nothing like it in my book – looks like just a generic template. More top achieving nonsense and wild claims from a lying Kenyan lowlife loser! “
As I said I am happy to engage with you at any time or place of your choosing and to provide an update or correction in a timely and meaningful manner. Just send me proof or even just your claims to the contrary if you cannot provide proof and I’ll look at it constructively.
If I am correct and this is what you are concerned about or if there is any other factual error in the above-mentioned phrase (or elsewhere) please address your concerns in writing and I will respond appropriately. IMHO what you have provided to date online does look like a generic template and as I said in the post it certainly looks to me like “More top achieving nonsense and wild claims” although as I put it, “in my book”, this analysis is indeed subjective.
I note that there was some other personal stuff or questions relating to me being “busted”, a man of God, and so on but I’m not really interested in going down that path unless you want to.
When you’re in a hole, stop digging for goodness sake! Tom has made some mistakes, in business and personally. Everyone can make a mistake. Yes even me too, but the best way to fix our problems is to fess up, do the honourable thing and then get on with life.
When you’ve got a beef and you want to get a correct authority figure to sort it out for you, be specific. Be as direct as you can. It’s no good telling Mommy that your little sister is being mean to you. She already knows that you’re the tittle-tale and that she’s only being mean to you because you’re going to run to Mommy to get her to growl at her on your behalf! Tell the judge or the other party what your beef is and what you want them to do for you.
Until you engage brain and use it, like I’ve suggested here, it’s all noise Tom! All noise.
Now defamation is way more than just, “It’s not fair. He’s said mean things about me!” Way more. It requires man-sized balls to tackle it and you’ve got to have deep pockets and a specialised litigation lawyer on board to have any show of winning, and that’s even with a strong case. Tom has none of these four requirements – no balls, no money, no lawyer and no case.
Do you like the picture with the spoiled little brat above?
I think it’s appropriate.
Your upset creditor has asked me what to do with all this dopey escalation of a simple bad debt collection – emails, txts complaints and his getting dragged into blogging that he has had nothing to do with. My company charges my time out at $90.00 per hour and I’ve spent more than two hours reading all your BS and answering his questions. You agreed to paying his collection costs. He has asked me to bill him the $180.00 so I’m sure that he will be asking his lawyer to whack it onto the legal bill for when the judge will issue the liquidation order.
Feeling sick yet Tom?
Pay up and go away or don’t pay up and the HC judge will make you go away.
To the rest of you listening and watching this saga play out:
- If you ever get in a hole in business stop digging. Do not be rude and arrogant to a creditor to whom you owe money, especially if I am around;
- Do the honourable thing. Speak to them and do a deal. Get your facts right. Play it straight and ask for their help and do what you can to keep the peace. Most people are perfectly reasonable when you get down to tin tacks and out of the poofy ego-driven world of make-believe. Donnybrooks like this serve no good purpose other than as an example to the rest of the world on what NOT to do.
- Get with it. Grow up and toughen up, especially if you are in business. Nobody gets it right all the time but only an idiot would try to muscle it out when you’ve got nothing. As Kenny Rogers says, “You gotta know when to fold ’em”!
- Ignore the God thing in a conflict situation unless they want to force it. Too many times crooks try to use the religious guilt trip on me. Screw ’em if they deserve it and if they’re godly people they won’t even have gotten into that pickle in the first place.
- Lastly always be ready to kiss and makeup. If God will accept anyone that truly turns to Him how the heck can we ever claim to have done the honourable thing if we don’t or can’t let some loser apologise, kiss and make up? They never do, but hey we’ve got to keep on being ready for if/when they do.
Chin up team! There’s the rant to start off this week, now ‘Go for it!!”
UPDATE 14:51 6 September 2021: Trespass warning today to Police
Yesterday at 8:09am my friend and client Peter Cribb trespassed you from his home and property. You replied with a four line email 11 minutes later. Today the Police have noted this trespass and this applies until 8.09 5 September 2023. For the record the Trespass Act 1080 requires only that you be served orally. Digital communication did not widely exist in 1980. Case law since supports the contention that if your reasonable knowledge exists that you know that you are ‘not welcome’ then you have been given notice. Thus with your proven receipt of Peter’s wishes should you be found on or near the property that you have been trespassed from I have advised him to call the Police immediately and have you arrested and charged with trespass. This offence carries a maximum penalty of $1,000.00 and three months in jail. Don’t do it brother. You do not have a dispute and if you do you have legal remedies available to you; you have been contacted by the lawyer acting and he has commenced the liquidation proceedings against your company in the normal manner. You have made a lot of mistakes, so I hope you learn from this unsavoury experience. Pay up, or it will only get worse for you – a lot worse – and that’s not a threat, it is a promise.
Leave a Reply