DCPLH v Caernarvon Cherry Pty Ltd – service agreement

Biteroit - Caernarvon Cherry

DCPLH is currently undertaking a statement of claim (as at 6 November 2019) in pursuit of an alleged debt owed by Caernarvon Cherry Pty Ltd to it, as assignee.

The claim seeks damages of upto $621,000 plus legal costs.

The matter is in the NSW District Court.

DCPLH has filed this statement of claim in late September 2019 with a defence due by the late November 2019.

DCPLH is also assisting a group of local fruit growers from the Orange District of NSW with preparations for a class-action against Caernarvon.  To view our class-action page – click here.

To view our main Caernarvon Cherry page – click here.

To view our main Hall family page – click here.

For more information – chat with us live using our instant chat tools (bottom corners), book an appointment or call now on 1300-327123 (till late).

To contact us with any tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:

 

Updated: 6 November 2019.

Craig Matthew Adams – former proprietor of Golden Arrow, Mikara Developments, Bargo Developments, Key Asset Management and more

craig adams

revised in part on 15 and 16 December 2020 by Mark Smith

Craig Matthew Adams (“Craig”), who lists his occupation as “investor”, is a former company director.

Craig came to DCPLH’s attention related to several insolvent companies liquidated in mid to late 2018.  The group of companies includes:

  1. Golden Arrow International Pty Ltd
  2. Bargo Developments Pty Ltd
  3. Mikara Developments Pty Ltd
  4. Mikara Investments Pty Ltd
  5. Greenviews Castle Hill Pty Ltd

Craig is personally bankrupt.  A copy of the sequestration order is viewable here.

Craig was personally liable for a debt of $4m (plus interest) from Mohan KumarDCPLH is the assignee of Mohan Kumar for the fruit of that debt – an assignment entered into by Ralph as Kumar’s POADCPLH was also the assignee of Reliance Leasing for a small debt owed by Craig and Bargo at the time of Craig’s bankruptcy.

Craig was made bankrupt on 13 December 2018 by a debt owed to Australasian Property Group Pte Ltd (“Australasian”).  Craig trustee in bankruptcy is Andy Scott of PWC.

Presently, Craig’s debt to Australasian is $2,059,753.46 (as at 31 May 2019).  Australasian are yet to recover the alleged debt (as at 31 May 2019) according to published documents.

Craig’s creditor’s report is available for inspection here.

For more information – chat with us live using our instant chat tools (bottom corners), book an appointment or call now on 1300-327123 (till late).

To contact us with any tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:

Hakan Kutup – former proprietor of Century 21 Ultimate Wollongong

Hakan Kutup

Hakan Kutup (“Hakan”) is the former proprietor of HKJS Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation).

HKJS previously trading as Century 21 Ultimate Real Estate in Wollongong.

Hakan now appears to work for another ‘entity’ named Ultimate Real Estate (despite the below).

His profile suggests he is involved in “residential sales” and the provision of ‘advice’?

Hakan may or may not be well positioned to provide ‘advice’?

On 2 April 2019, Hakan was declared bankrupt.

A copy of Hakan’s sequestration order is available here.

According to the sequestration order, Hakan’s trustee in bankruptcy is Bruce Gleeson.

We have been engaged to recover money from Hakan’s estate in bankruptcy.

It is now believed that Hakan is an unlicensed real estate agent (if a certified real estate agent at all?).

Hakan is listed as having an expired real estate practising certificate*.

Anyone thinking of engaging Hakan in any real estate matter should consider reviewing the official licensing website to check whether Hakan holds a current licence at the time of any transaction contemplated?

 

Source:  https://www.onegov.nsw.gov.au/publicregister/#/publicregister/result  (search dated 2 June 2019).

DCPLH v Bargo Developments Pty Ltd (in liquidation), Craig Matthew Adams and others

632 old northern rd dural photo

revised in part on 15 and 16 December 2020 by Mark Smith

Bargo was the one-time owner of 632 Old Northern Rd, Dural NSW purchased from Mohan Kumar (under POA, executed by Ralph Paligaru).

DCPLH is the assignee of the secured debts of Mohan Kumar, Reliance Leasing, and Ralph & Amreeta Paligaru (owners of Dural Alliances Pty Ltd).

Together DCPLH is owed some $6,000,000+ as assignee of these debts (i.e. the Kumar assigned debt and the Paligaru/Dural Alliances assigned debt).

To discuss this project, litigation funding, Bargo, Craig Adams, Australasian, Ralph Paligaru or others – call anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, case notes or otherwise, follow the following category links and tags below.

For more information – chat with us live using our instant chat tools (bottom corners), book an appointment or call now on 1300-327123 (till late).

To contact us with any tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:

POE v HKJS Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) – receivership

Hakan Kutup

Since our last blog post, this matter has moved along somewhat.

HKJS Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (“HKJS”).

HKJS formerly traded as Century 21 Ultimate (Wollongong).

Its director at the time was:  Hakan Kutup (see separate page).

In or about mid 2018, Century 21 removed HKJS of their C21 franchise.  HKJS’s creditor’s report suggests it owed Century 21 $85,362 in total – perhaps unpaid franchise fees?

The same report suggests HKJS owed the ATO a further $187,590.

In or about 2 April 2019 Hakan was declared bankrupt and a sequestration order issued over his estate.  A copy of the sequestration order may be viewed clicking this link.  It is unknown whether Hakan presently holds a current real estate practising certificate (as at time of writing – 2 June 2019)?  According to his real estate profile – Hakan is a real estate agent engaged in residential sales.

Anyone who’d like to discuss Hakan or HKJS can call us anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, case notes or otherwise, follow the following category links and tags below.

DCPLH v Golden Arrow International Pty Ltd (in liquidation)

golden arrow 3

revised in part on 15 and 16 December 2020 by Mark Smith

Golden Arrow International Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (“Golden Arrow”) is a creditor to DCPLH (as the assignee of Ralph Ignatius Paligaru, Amreeta Paligaru and Dural Alliances Pty Ltd, together “the Paligaru’s“).

Craig Adams was the director of Golden Arrow and other companies placed into liquidation in mid to late 2018 as a result of a windup application initiated by DCP Litigation Holdings arising from the assignment by Ralph and Dural Alliances to DCP Litigation Holdings.

Golden Arrow was the owner of a large development site at Warriewood sold for $16,700,000.

DCPLH is the assignee of the Paligaru’s debt where it seems, an unsecured creditor, Australasian Property Group Pte Ltd may have been paid a preference payment (in preference to the Paligaru’s, our assignors) or the payment to APG and security it received may be voidable?

These alleged facts may become the subject of litigation before the NSW Supreme Court in the coming months?

Anyone interested to discuss Golden Arrow, Craig Adams, Australasian or the Paligaru’s can call us anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, case notes or otherwise, follow the following category links and tags below.

For more information – chat with us live using our instant chat tools (bottom corners), book an appointment or call now on 1300-327123 (till late).

To contact us with any tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (i.e. the ATO) v GSFPA

(Work in progress, more details to follow on this page).

Call our hotline anytime if you’ve received a creditors statutory demand, have a debt to the ATO or need corporate structuring advice – on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, case notes or otherwise, follow the following category links and tags below.

DCPLH v the Estate of Elias Azzam

(Work in progress, more details to follow on this page).

  • DCPLH v the Estate of Elias Azzam (2 matters).
  • Matter 1, involves a potential insolvent trading claim.
  • Matter 2, as assignee, DCPLH is seeking equitable contribution from the estate of the co-surety pursuant to various mortgages and the obligations of the deceased.

To discuss the Estate of Elias Azzam, litigation funding or otherwise – please call us anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, case notes or otherwise, follow the following category links and tags below.

What is a creditors statutory demand?

The Corporations Act 2001 (“the Act”) provides for the conducting of business by a corporation in Australia.

Section 459E of the Act provides that a corporation may be served a statutory demand by a creditor (i.e. a creditor’s statutory demand) relating to (subsection 1):

                     (a)  a single debt that the company owes to the person, that is due and payable and whose amount is at least the statutory minimum; or

                     (b)  2 or more debts that the company owes to the person, that are due and payable and whose amounts total at least the statutory minimum.

 

Once served with such a demand, a company cannot ignore the demand.  The most serious of possible consequences for the company are now rolling out.  There are no friendly rules or casual arrangements, strict compliance with the demand is necessary by law.

Requirements

 

There are further other requirements such as:

             (2)  The demand:

                     (a)  if it relates to a single debt–must specify the debt and its amount; and

                     (b)  if it relates to 2 or more debts–must specify the total of the amounts of the debts; and

                     (c)  must require the company to pay the amount of the debt, or the total of the amounts of the debts, or to secure or compound for that amount or total to the creditor’s reasonable satisfaction, within 21 days after the demand is served on the company; and

                     (d)  must be in writing; and

                     (e)  must be in the prescribed form (if any); and

                      (f)  must be signed by or on behalf of the creditor.

             (3)  Unless the debt, or each of the debts, is a judgment debt, the demand must be accompanied by an affidavit that:

                     (a)  verifies that the debt, or the total of the amounts of the debts, is due and payable by the company; and

                     (b)  complies with the rules.

 

The key words above in each of the subsections are the words Must and AND.

The above requirements of the Act’s provisions are cumulative.  Skip any of the requirements and the consequences for the creditor’s demand is that it is potentially defective.

What happens next

Once a creditor’s statutory demand has been served upon a company, several things can happen:

  1. the recipient company pays the debt in full
  2. the company contacts the creditor and they negotiate a settlement
  3. the company applies to have the demand set aside – for instance if there has been a genuine disputing of the debt.
  4. the company does not respond, and the creditor applies to have it wound up

 

Next steps

If your company has received a creditor’s statutory demand, you have no time to waste.  Go straight to our “what to do next blog for further next steps – click here to book a consultation.

 

 

Call anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, follow the following category links and tags below.

 

Good debt practices

There are a number of healthy things a company can do in the conduct of its affairs.  Some obvious, some not so obvious.

Below is a short checklist of good practice suggestions (in no particular order).

Checklist

 

  1. Not incur debts in the first instance.
  2. Checking invoices and ATO tax office statements carefully – ensuring there are no additional, unapproved items.  Particularly in relation to taxation matters, it is critical that you check these thoroughly!
  3. Disputing unapproved items quickly.  Ideally in writing.  Particularly concerning alleged taxation debts, directors tend to do the opposite.  And, a director under pressure already, often fails to fully read a tax notice of assessment.  (Sometimes they are just plain depressing).  A director must resist the urge to bury the document and should immediately dispute any tax ruling or assessment that they believe is incorrect.  Failing to dispute assessments can have huge consequences later when and if a creditor’s statutory demand has been issued – options become vastly more limited.
  4. Putting everything in writing.  i.e. using email particularly when entering contractual arrangements.  This can provide an important record of the exact agreement.
  5. Confirming discussions in writing by email after discussing things with the other party.  i.e. if one side has made concessions about the debt, the time when due or payable or similar, send an email immediately afterwards confirming what was discussed.  It’s much easier to remember at the time than 2 months later.
  6. Keeping documents and records.  Ideally electronically in an inbox.
  7. Backing up and saving documents and records.  There are many good free or low-cost cloud solutions for storing emails and documents.

If your company needs help arranging its file, contract and legal documentation, or if your company needs to dispute a tax notice of assessment or director’s penalty notice call us for a free consultation or request a quote.

 

Call anytime on 1300-327123.

To view related blogs, follow the following category links and tags below.