Many R’s Podcast – S1E8

0:01 Introduction

0:23 outline of the episode

0:36 person – mark’s heart attack

4:15 blog on holidays

5:00 the many r’s: where R they now?

5:12 hakan kutup

5:30 131MVR

7:49 Craig Adams, Bargo Developments, Ralph Paligaru, Dural Alliances (in liquidation), Mohan Kumar, John Mahony

8:29 Ralph Paligaru, John Mahony v Garry Steinberg, Reliance Leasing, Tim Horne, Horne Legal

8:50 Ralph Paligaru, John Mahony v Garry Steinberg, Reliance Leasing, Tim Horne, Horne Legal – exploration of potentially fake law suit?

14:27 review of the summons Paligaru v Reliance Leasing

14:45 review of the summons Paligaru v Reliance Leasing – declarations sought, borrower seeking declarations against lender.

16:22 parties to previous deed and parties to loan

16:50 unsigned summons

17:30 consent judgment

18:45 review of loan 1899 (assigned in 1/9/2017) and notice of assignment

21:17 review of ralph’s sworn affidavit of 2/3/2021

21:40 overview of alleged representations from Garry Steinberg to Ralph Paligaru

26:39 look ahead to Season 2

27:54 initial look at Westpac scandal

29:00 court submission “no individual” knew.

30:45 bank statement quick review

33:00 season 2 – coming up Steinberg: NAB v Craig Smith case, Signature problems

33:28 season 2 – coming up Mahony: OLSC v John Mahony, Signature problems

34:51 season 2 – coming up Andrew Gartrell: Signature problems

35:30 closing message

36:18 credits

Leave a Reply – nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Transcript

rogues rascals receivables rorts rip-offs receivers real estate agents and much much more this is the many r's podcast season 1 episode 8 our final episode for season 1 my name is mark smith from dc partner solutions give us a call 1-300-327-123 or contact us chat with us online or use our instant chat tools www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast

well in this episode we're having a review of 2021 we're going to see how many R and where R they now for some of them some of the special R's we're also gonna have a look ahead at season 2 so what is 'round the corner

well where do we start a recap let's start with me personally been a little gap between season 1 episode 7.5 and season 1 episode 8 which is today and i've had quite an adventure our last episode was on the 15th of september and on the 1st of october i had a huge huge awakening moment and let's just have a look this photo is a photo of my heart contrary to popular belief there is a heart in there and this is what your this is what a blocked artery looks like and we're just gonna go and have a look now at an unblocked one and wow this is a stand i actually had a heart attack on the 1st of october and that this missing tree trunk here this very faint line is called my left anterior descending artery and you can see just the tiniest bit of blood sort of getting through and that was quite a crisis so i've been i finished my studies in june on my sister's birthday 16th of june 2021 we moved house on the 28th of june 28th maybe 27th and and took up residence covid the shutdown sydney went into six months of shutdown more or less or five months or however long and i graduated i i elected to graduate in in absentia on the 6th of september for my juris doctor and on the 1st of october i get a very nasty dose of reflux i thought and i can assure you mylanta and those sorts of things did absolutely nothing i i truly thought i did not know i was having a heart attack i thought i had an ulcer or a a dose of reflex or something but turns out no there was a a blocked artery and a very important artery left anterior descending it's called the widowmaker so i i was gonna drive myself to hospital and good thing well i got my my what i really thought it was just reflux so none of the pains in your in your shoulder so for anyone that's watching this just you know apparently it felt like a burning reflux right where my where most people's heart is so i i took myself off to a hospital and within a very very very short period of time i'm talking 20 minutes they're putting a stent into me so restoring the blood flow and i i would like to i'll just show you right here that little dot there that's that's a scar no no big chest openings they go in through this tiny tiny tiny tiny opening there and i i do have bruises everywhere now unfortunately i i'm on thinners and all sorts of stuff so i i bruise terribly now but i'm alive and i'm very extremely grateful to wonderful doctors who put a stent into me very very quickly and i spent 5 days in hospital so where are they now well sorry where's our year in review well our blog has actually been on holidays so i had several days in hospital no visitors due to covid and not even my darling wife so i i have great sympathy for those that have been isolated or doing it hard and i feel like i've i feel much better since the heart attack i do feel better we've this blog has been actually on something of a holiday and well we have decided to at least wrap up season 1 and give you a look at we've had plenty of time to think so not everyone has been pleasant to deal with in the aftermath and we're going to talk about some of that and in this particular episode we're going to look at where R they now so that's a wrap on the personal so a number of people said well where's our blog gone? well come the 1st of october all the nasty letters i had some of our some some of R'S even texting me on holiday i'm texting me in hospital on the very day i'm having my my heart attack they're texting me and oh dear so anyway we decided to give our blog a bit of a rest for a couple months well you can be sure that not not very many of these opponents have have seen the LIGHT let's put it that way so some of the blogs will be reintroduced and well here we are here's our farewell to season 1 so we're we're still thinking about all the issues the Blog's been on holidays but many people have asked well where R they now so um

i i won't touch on COVID but it has been obviously a very difficult period for many australians and a lot of people that i know as well i can't cut it i i can't go past christmas 2021 without saying well i think i think i might i think i'll make hakan's his visit with in her majesty's company i think it's actually over i think he's out of jail so i mean that's that's where R they now. 131MVR that stands for 131 mona road st ives. and that where where is it now it's in liquidation and look i'm hearing that there's there's big moves a'foot ... the liquidator i know i continue to be owed thousands of dollars by that project and well i i and i appointed the liquidator with the assistance of the supreme court of victoria a man called gavin moss and chifley advisory was appointed liquidator well i'm i'm hearing that the liquidator we held public examinations on of the directors of that corporation back in about february or march of 2020. well look i'm hearing that the liquidator has found that the directors and macarthur projects let's put it this way the director sorry the liquidator wants something like between 7 and 12 million dollars of the company's money back so the liquidator is looking to the directors and to a company called macarthur projects now i was there i was actually there in the court in the supreme court of new south wales it was actually in the federal court i think i think it was in front of a registrar and you know two days were set aside for public examinations and i was there and one of the questions was okay so you owed a latrobe 7 million dollars is that correct yes that's right and you repaid that you did yes that's that's correct how much did you borrow to repay back the 7 million and these are words the effect and this is all in the public arena so in open court it's fine for me to discuss it how much did you borrow to pay back the 7 million 12 12. you borrowed 12 to pay back seven yes why'd you do that well i'm just paraphrasing here this is not why did you do that i don't remember what did you do with the other five don't recall i mean these are the sorts of these are sorts of questions that we're at so i mean the liquidators the liquidator has been sitting on this transcript for 12 months or 18 months or whatever and he's now calling that in well you didn't need the 12 you only need 7 you borrowed the the company went down the toilet the project 131 mona vale road st ives. did not get finished now exactly whose fault that is i'm not saying whose fault it is but that's where are they now on 131MVR now let's have a talk about our other this this whole collective of mates craig adams bargo developments now they're they're both in liquidation craig's in bankruptcy ralph paligaru oh dear one of his companies is in liquidation i put that down that was called dural alliances well mohan kumar he recently had a brush with the torrens assurance fund and lost justice darke we talked about that extensively in episode season 1 episode 7.5 john mahony was his lawyer and unfortunately shot down shot down now let's let's have a look at a few files so for the rest of them where are they now well let's have a look ralph paligaru he's suing garry steinberg ralph suing garry steinberg and reliance leasing in the supreme court of new south wales now this is the most interesting case because it's gone precisely absolutely nowhere nowhere so is it a fake lawsuit i mean

you tell me let's just explore this just a tiny bit more the question is this a fake lawsuit like is this a good question let's have a look at let's have a look one of the basic requirements of a lawsuit is the solicitor they've got to sign it they've got to sign it okay and john mahony is a lawyer he's been a lawyer for 40 45 50 years i don't know long long time john money hasn't signed this document and john only actually has to the any lawyer whoever acts has to sign this signature of legal representative look i mean it's right there in front of you signature plaintiff plaintiff's solicitor i certified that under clause whatever that another there are reasonable grounds for believing on the basis of provable facts and a reasonably arguable view of the law that the claim for damages in these proceedings has reasonable prospects of success

that is why john mahony needs to sign this to say okay we're not here to waste the court's time well he was the court's time i and john mahony putting his signature on a piece of paper to say we're not wasting the court's time okay well that that signature didn't happen on the 2nd of march last year now i think that's that's coming up to 10 months is that right 10 months 10 months it hasn't been signed 10 months have gone by and what's happened with this case well i'll tell you nothing nothing has happened so this is some correspondence now this is this is a court document this is a court order this is all public on the 7th of december the court ordered the court ordered order this matter is listed for directions on the 10th of february so so much so much has occurred since since it was listed on the second of march that we need a break i mean we're just so productive so we're gonna we're gonna push it out to 11 months there so 10th of february is more than 11 months since it was filed and what's happened nothing nothing nothing nothing so and and why has nothing happened now who are the parties let's just remind ourselves who are the parties so we've got ralph and reliance leasing parties ralph ignatius paligaru plaintiff, defendant reliance leasing so they're the parties and and the disputes between them so you would think that that has to be resolved between them but no i don't know so these aren't my words these are the words of john mahony and tim horne was my lawyer okay just let's just refresh tim horne signed this consent judgement on behalf capacity solicitor defendant consents yeah defender consents ralph and amreeta consent consent judge that's why it's called a consent judgment it's judgment by consent yeah we all agree we're consenting

yet i'm not even a party so why does tim horne say and and john mahony agree what do they agree this is on the 7th of september december 7th of december requests submitted by tim horne for four for me nope no no four reliance leasing the case paligaru versus reliance leasing the request the request is that the matter be listed for directions in february reasons reasons ah the intended settlement of this matter has got nothing to do with me i'm not even a party has been frustrated by a third party

by a third party who's going to get nothing out of it absolutely nothing the third party's frustrated this so remind ourselves this authority was to pay to pay me no no no so my company gets positioned at the loan on the first of september 2017 there's this elaborate pea and thimble trick whatever you want to call it maybe it's not a trick maybe it is there's going to be a dispersal from reliance back into the why do why does reliance have to take money out of this pocket and stick it in that one why do they even have to do that well because we've got i mean we've got a deed here we've got a deed of settlement all the fights they're now over and we've solemnly sat down we've resolved their differences yet mark smith is now frustrating things how's mark smith frustrating this not even a party we're instructed that there remains a possibility that this that this will be resolved shortly and in light of this so i'm just telling you it's christmas eve if someone wants to resolve this well you know well they're probably going to have to do something about this that's you know if you want to p if you if you owned a piece of property and called this debt and reliance leasing is proposing how about we pay you nothing yet yet tim horne tim horn's a very intelligent man he can go off to the court and say it's mark smith's fault because he's frustrating things i would say that there is well he's we are instructed there remains a possibility that this will be resolved shortly yeah pigs might fly unless unless a hundred and five thousand dollars it lands up in my pocket plus the interest or you know whatever then the court's time has just been completely wasted by these two very intelligent people called tim horne and the other party to this is john money they're both lawyers and and their clients pigs might fly we're instructed that there that there is a possibility this will be resolved shortly

so that that's addressing whether this loan is real now we'll go back and we'll look some more into this john mahony great lawyer okay he's handling this he's running the show he's he's the plaintiff's solicitor and we've got ralph ignatius paligaru suing reliance leasing so let's have a look at this summons and this is where are they now i'm just saying this is where they are i'm not making any judgments i'm just saying this is where they are relief claimed a declaration that the loan agreement of the 26th of may is valid and enforceable so john mahony is after declarations what is the loan agreement of the 26th of may well i'm glad you asked here's a copy and this is

this is a document to

effectively recycle money so john mahony is after a declaration that this piece of paper is actually valid i mean when you when you start with the assumption that if we sign this piece of paper it's valid so why would it be invalid

is it is it a mirage i don't know so the supreme court of new south wales is its time is being taken up and vast money is being spent to determine if this is some sort of scam or mirage or if it's a declaration that that it's valid and enforceable ah so the borrower wants a once a declaration from the supreme court that this loan is enforceable but hang on that's the borrower saying that the it's a loan and it's an enforceable loan against the lender well hang on it's usually the reverse it's usually the the the lender saying oh hang on we want a declaration that ralph is the money but no no no no this is and so we're after a declaration that it ought to be specifically performed an order that the defendants specifically perform a carry into effect the loan ah so give us the money give us the money

so okay this is interesting isn't it so we've got this i won't go into the details because it's confidential but there is a deed and all the parties on the 11th of march 11th march yes two and a half months before this date they've had a big dispute and they agreed to sell okay fine but so hang on the parties dcp litigation reliance ralph and his wife okay well that's interesting so let's have a look at the parties on this the summons who are the parties oh well there's only ralph and reliance

now this is interesting this is normally something that you normally you file something you normally have to sign it you put it in the supreme court where's the signature i mean can you see it there anyone so it's an unsigned document who are the parties okay this is ralph and reliance so on the 11th of march all the parties agreed to settle okay right and then on the 26th of may

there's this agreement to recycle money but hang on didn't we just settle i mean it gets it gets you know stranger so eleventh march we have this agreement and it and eleventh of march oh i got john mahony 's signature on this document for ralph and everybody so everyone agrees if we don't do what what's what was agreed to be settled well you can go and get it you can go and get a judgment so this is a consent judgment we consent that if we're going to do all these things that we agree in may hey march and if we don't then you can go and file this and and they give us the consent judgment upfront signed by john mahony and later it's it's it's signed by the same people tim horne reliance leasing now he happened to be my lawyers as well and it's so we jim signs this he was authorised to do so and he was instructed he was given a written instruction by reliance leasing on the third of july let's go ahead and get this consent judgment because this deed it hasn't worked out but hang on ralph is seeking specific performance of a loan that you must lend me money but i'm in great of this but you must lend me a hundred and five and a half thousand dollars and what to do is ralph want to get these hundred five thousand dollars no no no no no no here's the authority just take that from one pocket and stick it in the other i'm in i'm going to the supreme court to force you to take money out of this pocket and put into that pocket wow i mean are you confused what's the point of all this yeah like it does seem like a bit like smoke and mirrors so it's it's a very i mean this is a loan by the way loan 1899

now let's let's go back in time to the first of september 2017. one eight double nine oh there you go 1899 so this is a loan that he doesn't even that ralph wants a order that reliance specifically for form to take it from this pocket and stick it in that pocket but on the first of september 2017 here off reliance leasing this is first of september dear ralph reliance leasing hereby gives you notice that they no longer own the debt ah so where are they now that's this is a this is some sort of elaborate pea and thimble ... something maybe i don't know reliance leasing gives you notice that they no longer own the debt and that all of it all absolutely you know all all its rights title and interest under the loan agreement guarantees securities it's giving to my company absolutely absolutely oh there's the magic words and it's the loan agreement of the 18th of july and Ralphs got a copy this because i sent a process server in september 2017 i've got an affidavit of service that ralph was served this document it's only two pages but ralph neglected to acknowledge it but ralph was served and he's now saying well in in may of 2020 26th of may 2020 a debt that was the subject of this settlement dude that involves the replacement it's called the assignee ralph is now seeking declarations not against me that the reliance leasing must take their own money out of their own pocket and shove it in the other pocket and not give any of it to the to the actual owner so if you were the if you've spent four years from 2017 through to 2021 pursuing a hundred thousand dollars and then you sign these deeds and you don't actually know about this this is this happens all behind your back and then on the 17th of july your lawyer who happens to be reliance's lawyer yeah they agree well none of these things that were supposed to happen under this debate happen so let's go and enforce our judgment it's it's it must be it must sound very puzzling must sound extremely strange so that's that's where ralph is he's not suing me he's suing Garry steinberg he's suing reliance and he's saying you must you must lend us this these aren't my words these are ralph's words we can have a look ralph is sworn   an affidavit so that's sworn on the second of march and this is all these are all his words um

long story long story but maybe what ralph is saying is that during the there was a meeting that i wasn't that i didn't attend but i didn't even know about during the meeting i ralph had a conversation with mr steinberg to the effect ralph this this is a loan agreement which will refinance the original loan well hang on the original loan oh this one that you you signed over to me yeah yeah that 1899? yeah 1899. the affidavit and this is ralph sworn i wasn't there i don't know this is what ralph squares has occurred ralph this is the origin this is a loan agreement which will refinance your original loan i'm prepared to agree to refinance that loan in full in the sof a hundred and five thousand five hundred dollars that's all you need to pay off the loan say to me paid to Garry steinberg reliance ralph oh so despite smith having taken over the line yeah yeah that's right smith took it over when did you take that over let's just refresh yourself first of september 2017. this is what ralph swears so despite smith taking over the loan he will arrange for smith to take no action under the deed that signed in large such that once i signed this agreement all previous agreements relating to the original loan will have been replaced by this agreement now this is a two-party apparently this is a two-party agreement i'm not one of the parties and i think what he's i think what ralph's getting at here is Garry saying well he's my agent really nice to know that wouldn't it so you know if i've got anger and with someone and you know where's that anger now well maybe it's it'd be like if you went into westpac and said hey my line with the commonwealth bank can you just make it go away i wish i could say you're an idiot get out i'll call call the nutshops anyway ralph's having this conversation with Garry steinberg apparently this is what ralph says the conversation went by so all previous arrangements relating to the original loan will be replaced is that what's going to happen Garry yeah yeah that is that is right yes that is right i mean that's fairly clear yes that is right leave it to me i will take care of smith

really i will take okay how's that going to work i will take care of smith i will take care of smith so in the first of on the first of october when i'm lying there in hospital the tubes hanging at me and stents and you know having a heart attack wow i was being taken care of i'm actually getting text messages by this pair by ralph and Garry oh you know taking care of me I got a i get a christmas wish today today's the 24th of december i wish you you know i wish you well from Garry he's taking care with words no no we want we want Garry to take care with money you know cash Garry to ralph this is on the 26th of may also you only need to pay me what you can afford hang on you pay me to pay off the loan to smith and i'll take care of smith but you only need to pay me what you can afford

minimum 000 so even if you can't afford a thousand you pay it to me and i'll take care of smith ralph yes one thousand is about as much as i can pay and i agree that that will be the repayment no i wasn't there but this is what they swear what this is what ralph says also as you have no income other than the mill in fiji you won't have to commence payment under this loan until you start making money like this in the middle of covid two years go by and gary's making giving undertakings apparently for me

and then the timber mill suddenly blows over in a cyclone very very tragic a lot of destruction so you know i think what gary's saying here is you don't have to worry about making any payments i'll take care of smith yes Garry i agree i will commence payments as soon as the mill starts making money from me and of course the mill's destroyed so so ralph is forever led off this agreement apparently and i wasn't even there i wasn't there and i agreed somehow through Garry steinberg my agent that's that's apparently how it all goes so ralph is seeking declarations that this is valid that Garry must remove money from this pocket and stick it in that pocket and that makes mark smith go away despite that so this is on the 25th of 26th of may but in july of the same year last year Garry tells his and my lawyer tim Horne yep sign now this is what an election looks like when you sign something like this and then you file it in the court you have elected you're never going back on it so are you getting the gist of what i think of Garry steinberg what i think of

what i think of and how i now view these notices of assignment and it's and how i feel about being taken care of in this way i i hope that tells you where they R now okay we're going to deep dive in season 2 deep dive and when i say deep like it may be a series of dives we may i actually think that there's a lot here so we're not going to get into this in huge detail today but we're just going to quickly have a look at westpac we're going to have a look at a couple of more things to do with Garry reliance mahony that whole mess

we may come back to 131mvr as that progresses depending on what the liquidator does and so on we are interested and we're a creditor and this is a fair game andrew gartrell

very long story adam tilly now this is a guy that loaned money to craig adams and then subsequently loaned money to ralph paligaru and that's not a crime but well we're going to look at him in season two as well adam tilly now pacific 8 kesinda oh justin hatfield now justin hatfield's fingerprints were on lots and lots of these documents that were given to adam tilly and look we we we may need to come back and have a look at aqua law i'm very very disappointed with with them and so we'll just have a look at it now moving on to westpac well what's we've touched on westpac and there are a few things on our blog already there's a westpac who why a where and how but just in the very briefest of terms how what. what what is westpac about um

there is quite a lot to this there really actually is quite a lot to westpac and we'll start with these submissions and these are submissions that were given to the supreme court of new south wales i am certainly not accusing the barristers of any wrongdoing but i am saying that someone misled the barristers and so that is the scandal it's mr ollis had this seemingly magic cheque book that he could write out to checks for two hundred thousand fifty thousand for four hundred thousand and they would just magically magically put money in his account every day and well that's bad enough but the real scandal and mr ollis did not go to jail so he was not convicted of any fraud he wasn't even charged with any fraud

so no one's accusing him of anything although he did write cheques if we go now to let's have a look at this individual this word individual only appears once in this document and it appears in paragraph 38 and it says that it is clear and this is what i'm saying the scandal is it is clear on the evidence so this is what the barristers are writing is clear on the on the evidence or at least the evidence that the barristers have seen so if they haven't seen it well they're not misleading anyone but if they were not shown it that's what i'm saying may well be the scandal it is clear on the evidence that the bank made these payments well they certainly made payments and we're going to show you the bank's statements in a moment and that and that no individual so that's fairly clear no individual within the bank knew so maybe the computer knew but they're saying these barristers in their submissions to the supreme court say that no individual ah within the bank okay so was that someone outside the bank that knew this is well that's interesting no individual within the bank so that does not mean that individuals outside the bank didn't know but this is the evidence they're saying the evidence is that no individuals within the bank knew until so the first individual in the bank knew on the 12th of january 2006 and i am saying that that is false now i'm not accusing the barristers of anything they may well have been kept in the dark or maybe it was an individual outside the bank that knew very interesting no individual  well sorry i keep saying new things until the 12th of january of the drawings being made by alice on his business account so let's have a look at this business account and see what were those drawings and you be the judge like this this is only a shallow dive we're going to say i'm saying people inside the bank actually knew

these bank statements are 72 pages long on every single page is his stuff but um

This word invalid now the submission was until the 12th of january 2006. well i'm saying here's the bank statement seven months early on the 17th of june and i'm saying that an individual in the bank wrote the word invalid and that is knowledge they knew on that day they knew that this was there was an invalidity now that's not what the the submissions say they say no one knew of the drawings so we're kind of splitting hairs here but someone knew that there was this invalid replenishment authority and at this point on the 17th of june he was writing checks for forty thousand dollars and there was replenishments happening at forty thousand and eighteen dollars on that day now let's go let's march on to page say sixty and i have absolutely so much the the credits there's 10.3 million dollars going in and out of the account i mean wow i wonder if that was normal and i wonder if anyone was watching this i'm going to say no so this this bloke would come to work every morning and there'd be zero dollars in the account and then by december this is four and a half million dollars just turns up in his bank account in the morning wow that's a good day 4.1 million dollars he'd write on the 1st of december he wrote a check for 400 000. now if we go back to the the previous one on the 17th of june he's only writing checks for 40 000 and in six months he's gotten bolder and he's now writing checks for four hundred thousand dollars and they're still being honoured but the evidence the submissions were that no individual within the bank knew until the 12th of january and i'm calling that BS and if we go into the next page yeah this time instead of writing word invalid someone's written their pco status these are these are bits of evidence of knowledge so again we'll get we'll do a deep dive and we'll get into this in more detail

now let's go and have a further look at some of the things that we're going to look at in season 2 and i mentioned steinberg we're going to have a look at this seemingly innocuous case a national australia bank v smith now i'm not making any of this up and by the way that's not me that's someone else by that name this is a case that was heard in 2013 and you know this is this is a public document and ghs that's that's a related company of reliance they were part of it we're going to we're going to go into this case so that's something we're going to have a good dive at

we're also going to have a look at mr mahony and mr mahony is a is a borrower of of of reliance so Garry steinberg one of his borrowers is reliance and Garry gets a mention in this as well and reliance leasing so this is again this is real this is something that anyone can go to caselaw.nsw.gov.au and put in the name mahony and and the council of the law society took on mr mahony and what did they take him on for well let's have a look at this they they took an objection to the complaint the solicitor falsely witnessed the signature of this particular person and and who should be there but mr steinberg mr steinberg's here as well so mr steinberg gets around and it's it's i was unaware of some of these things but mr steinberg goes back further with people and the if we jump to this this account this matter of nab v smith well that's also involves mr steinberg and there's problems with the signature on documents there as well so these are not my opinions this is not these are factual findings the supreme court or the civil administrative tribunal in the case of the mahony and mr steinberg seems to find his way into you know these situations all the time

andrew gartrell has a problem with the signature as well and Andrew gartrell, i i he knows Garry steinberg as well and adam tilly well adam tilly i don't know how well he knows mr steinberg although they do know each other and ben and tim horne though well they know mr steinberg mahony knows mr steinberg mohan kumar he's met mr steinberg and ralph paligaru well the only people here that don't know each other steinberg knows 131mvr and he's a creditor of that as well this is you know very troubling

so these are some of the things that we're going to look at in season 2 there's going to be plenty more so stay tuned and i'll come back and we'll wrap up now

we'll look in closing thank you so much for joining us in 2021 and 2020 and hopefully you're joining us again in 2022 we appreciate your efforts we appreciate the messages of support we appreciate the instant chat tools if you have any questions if you have any questions give us a call 1-300-327-123 or come and visit us in the bottom right hand corner of our website www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast

and you can instant chat with us there in the bottom right hand corner if you've got any questions at all you want to talk to us you want to send us an email whatever you can call us again as i said 1300 327123 my name is mark smith i'd love to talk to you i'm i'm very keen i'm very willing to talk to anyone anytime about anything so give us a call happy christmas happy new year i hope it's a great 2022 and thank you again see you soon

Leave a Reply - nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Many R’s Podcast – S1E7.5

The Many R’s Podcast – S1E7.5 Mohan Kumar (Chhota Rajan) v Registrar General Land & Property Information NSW, i.e. the Torrens Assurance Fund.

0:01 Introduction

0:32 Welcome

1:22 Judgment – Kumar v Registrar General / NSW Torrens Assurance Fund

1:41 review of judgment starts

1:00:28 Credits

Leave a Reply – nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Transcript

rogues rascals reviewables rorts rip-offs receivers real estate agents and much much more the many rs podcast season 1 episode 7.5 - 7.5 we can't get all the way to 8 we have to go to 7.5 and we have absolutely breaking news from the new south wales supreme court about our one of our favorite r's - ralph so stand by welcome to season 1 episode 7.5 if you've got any questions give us a call on 1300 327 123 that's until late or hook up with us on www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast … use the chat tools in the bottom right hand corner thank you 

well welcome this is an unusual set of circumstances this is episode 7.5 this is a follow-on episode from our last one where we talked extensively at the end there about our very good mate ralph paligaru and we happened to run into ralph recently and here's some some updated photos on on ralph for you but this particular episode is about well a judgment of the new south wales supreme court has literally just come down and it is still hot it is still warm so we're going to have a look at ralph paligaru john mahony that's the lawyer or is it mahony i no one has ever explained that to me we've got mohan kumar who is sometimes known as Chhota Rajan and we're going to have a look at he's a resident of tihar prison in in delhi in india and we're going to have a look at the supreme court judgment in the matter of mohan kumar and shs well and the registrar general the torrens assurance fund so we can this is a public document and in fact this this has just come out unbeknownst to us we don't watch these things day and night but someone brought it to our attention that the judgment had just come down on it had come down before we'd actually put out episode seven so we felt it was only right that we updated the record so let's get on and we'll have a look at the judgment okay so this is the judgment of the new south wales supreme court and anyone that wants to google this can go to a site called caselaw.nsw.gov.au and just google that and it's a set of proceedings 2021 proceedings it was heard by justice darke who i have to say i've got i'll make some comments as i go through i think he's got it absolutely substantially correct he he wouldn't know some of the very tiny minor facts but but still it's it's well worth having a look but look the whole gist of it is the claim for compensation a claim from mohan kumar for compensation from the torrens assurance fund is refused so that's the decision so we can go through and have a quick look well we can have a long look but anyway it's a it's a very extensive document it's i'm just gonna highlight some of the relevant bits there's quite a lot and i'll publish the entire document up on our website www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast i'll i'll include some text so you know what to look for but anyway the registrar general of the torrens assurance fund or the landed property in new south wales titles are kept for land and that those titles are kept in a central register called the torrens title register so and when a person loses an interest in land if it's either by fraud or by some error made by the torrents of by the land and property by the people that keep the titles then that person that suffers loss is entitled to compensation and every time there's a dealing every time that there's a transaction involving land okay the registration of a mortgage the transfer when you pay stamp duty and all of that a very small sis collected and it goes into this fund called the torrens assurance fund just in case anything goes wrong so i can say that the trans assurance fund or the registrar general was represented by someone called patricia lane who happened to be one of my lecturers at sydney uni and you can see here the whoa

says here okay well pardon me the plaintiff was represented by patricia lane wow how very very interesting and mr mr mahony was there as well so i'm sorry i got that around the wrong way very very very interesting patricia lane nothing but absolute respect she was a fabulous teacher and unbelievably knowledgeable i might have got that the wrong way around i anyway i assume that this is correct so these proceedings are bought by mohan kumar there has there was obviously no discussions about who mohan kumar is in fine detail but he certainly was the registered proprietor of land at old northern road at dural number 632 old northern road dural and that was if you like the word sold it was sold in may of 2016 by his power of attorney ralph paligaru to a company called bargo developments proprietary limited and i'm just going to sort of these these are public and we'll just you know talk about these so mankind has claimed an interest in the land as what's called an unpaid vendor's lien and i absolutely i met ralph on about the 27th of march in 2017 and he was introduced to me by mr steinberg from reliance leasing and ralph complained he couldn't sleep at night because he was worried that about worried sick about whether he was going to get paid so when i say this property was sold it wasn't paid so it was a property piece of land worth 5.5 million dollars which they received only 1.5 million dollars so craig adams is walking around with the title to a $5.5m piece of land having been out of pocket virtually nothing and we'll have a look we'll have a look and the money he received he didn't pay it all to he mortgaged the property and did not pay at all to mohan kumar so as i said in episode 7 that is apparently the fault of the torren's assurance fund and justice darke did not agree with mahony lawyers and the claim was refused so it's it's

we'll just touch on some of the highlighted points and if you're really that interested you can download this and read this in in fine detail but it's justice darke finds at certain times the interest was protected by caveat so the very first thing that that i did i was asked by mr how do i put it i can't sleep and i said why don't you just put a caveat on it? so we went and put a caveat on and that was put on about the 27th of march 2017 and that's how i know when i met ralph paligaru so there it was protected by this caveat some times however during other periods there was no caveat and at that time mr kumar was under the care of john mahony and ralph paligaru so you know precisely why they took them off we don't know other than what's in this judgment so we're just reporting the facts we've absolutely there's no criticisms whatsoever of justice darke or the decision he made and none of this is a you know is a massive surprise but anyway look there was various different mortgages at various different times craig adams the argument is that what the argument was it which didn't work was that craig adams made use of a withdrawal of caveat form that had been executed on behalf of mr kumar by his attorney mr paligaru ralph paligaru so

and look ultimately craig didn't pay his mortgage the property was sold by kesinda this is a fact and then there was a huge argument about who got what and i was there so i know it in the proceedings were resolved by way of consent orders on made in july 2019. now i i did actually put up the consent orders in episode 7 and showing exactly who got what and i've put here now this is not a criticism of justice darke but i'm just saying the the plaintiff received a total of $527 000 out of 2 million so he was ... and he received 500 and this is saying well he actually received 26% of the available funds but that's not with no disrespect to justice darke that is probably not exactly correct kumar actually received two lots he received 26% but on top of that he received another 9% and who did he give that to he gave that to one of my companies and why did he do that so in fact when you look at these arguments that justice darke talks about and says well hang on i've done my calculations to work out whether you lost money or you didn't and then he talks about causation and who's to blame in other words who's to blame for mohan kumar not getting four million dollars or you know two million of the two million and look kumar actually did receive 35 of the available funds so there was two million in something available but he chose to pay he chose to honor an agreement he had with me that where he he actually assigned ralph paligaru actually assigned all of mohan kumar's interest the whole lot to me and and i had an arrangement where i was going to pay successfully and it turns out that actually the success is 26 of what was available and my cut was nine so when you look at these arguments as we go further down into the document it this is no disrespect to justice darke but he did in fact received more than 26 percent he just gave away nine percent so it was 35 of the available so again absolutely no disrespect the so the plaintiff and so in these circumstances so in these circumstances where he actually got 35 the plaintiff alleges that he has suffered loss or damage resulting from the operation the act and justice darke didn't didn't go for that so you know and then it gets into some very long analysis the the loss yeah anyway they're saying suffered loss by consequence of the registration of the consent casino mortgage so it is true that and i've numbered all of these so let's maybe have a look at these salient facts and these are facts found by a supreme court judge and nothing nothing nothing but respect so absolute fact the the plaintiff mr kumar resides in india well it doesn't talk about where but or even who he is and actually later on there's a very curious remark saying well for some reason the plaintiff didn't appear he didn't come and give evidence and there you go well the reason he couldn't give evidence is because he's in jail so it doesn't seem that that fact was shared publicly but look here are the here are the passport photos and photos of the arrested person and you tell me if they're the same person i'm not an expert and i don't i've never been to india i've never been to any jails i've never met mr kumar it's just it's an open secret that's who he is and no one bothered to share that with justice darke so look the piece of land was as i said 632 old northern road dural and there's its title particulars ralph sold it i've showed you the front page of the contract in episode seven for 5.5 but in fact they received 1.5 was put down and there was a series of arrangements that craig adams was to pay 500 there and a million here and another two and a half and time is of the essence and again this all fits into the argument that mahony lawyers put forward that this is all the fault the fact that there was money lost that's the fault of the torrens assurance fund and really the taxpayer should be should be coughing up to compensate mr kumar and as i said that was not accepted so the purchase price there number number one two three so let's just have a look and these are some of the this is under the heading salient facts again not my not my facts these are facts that justice darke the honourable justice darke found so we know on the 31st of may the contract price was 5.5 million only 1.5 was put down but the property was used as a credit card i suppose and a mortgage secured the sum of 2.275 million dollars so 1.5 the fact is the plaintiff received 1.5 million on settlement and whether the other three quarters of a million dollars go well the director of bargo was craig adams so we'd have to ask craig adams but we know that only 1.5 million was ever paid to mr kumar and that's that so and this is the fact that was the only money that was ever ever paid out of a 5.5 million sale price only ever 1.5 was ever paid so we know that time was of the essence there it is time was at the essence and 1.5 was on on settlement there was after four weeks another half a million dollars was required time of the essence six months later another million dollars and none of this was this contract wasn't enforced and not only that the salient facts that in may 2016 there was it was hot to the tune of 2.275 but a further a further that's the kit that i put on there you go i put that on i went into the counter and paid the money and on on or about the 27th of march and ralph could sleep at night then you know so so we know that six months later he mr adams and bargo hocked the the property again there was the initial mortgage was to ar mortgages and then along came in and him now the very first thing i went and did was wrote to him in a name and said stop lending money and stop lending any more money and making mr kumar's position any worse so literally from that day in march of 2017 they were on notice and they did not and i've got copies of the the correspondence i went around that night and you know before six o'clock the next morning in march of 2017 saying oh i i have a habit of dropping the s-bomb sometimes but uh

number one three-quarters of a million went to craig adams's pocket or somewhere you know and then another four hundred thousand this is still not going into mr kumar's pocket despite their being a contract despite mr kumar having ralph paligaru on the ground is his power of attorney and on top of that well there's there's even more money being borrowed so another 350 000 was was borrowed in august 17 a very interesting date on the third of and then even more so it just goes on and on and on and on and on more and more hocking of this land and again i put in a name on notice of that anyway long long story but there's more and more hocking of this property going on and in august of 17 even more money was borrowed and you know here's a full list and i mean i find this extremely interesting there was seven caveats so craig adams obviously well there's some very harsh findings here about craig adams but there was mr paligaru deposes this is his evidence there were seven caveats in the end seven so seven lots of hocking of money against mr kumar's interest and mr mr paligaru for whatever reason he had from the day i put the caveat on for mr kumar mr kumar was protected from that point in an m had noticed do not lend any more money he's in default to mr kumar he has four million dollars and he's in default and another six yes i think that's correct another 6k bits on top of the the kb i put on was ripped off and another six were put on so craig is just borrowed and borrowed and buried and borrowed and borrowed and in the end someone said well this is the torrens assurance fund's fault

justice i didn't agree with that so i'm with justice darke by the way so ralph further deposes that he was concerned he was concerned i was concerned that there was six more lots of hocking of money and in 2017 now this is after ralph has lifted the cable that i put on mr manny writes to mr adams oh we're not very very happy here and so you can read this for yourself but this is something i find very interesting paragraph 19. this demanding writes on the 6th of november 2017 i have i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india of mohan kumar

i i find that very interesting the representatives in india in india so i i i'm curious whether that's true that's what it says that's what the email says i'm curious if it's true i don't know i have no idea i've never talked to mr kumar ever but apparently some representatives called well i i he says mahony writes i have now been contacted as you're aware there's vendor finance as you're aware you're in default and you know it goes on now all all along here no response there was no response craig got the email and just ignored it ralph went to fiji some of these things aren't really relevant but i i am dubious about some of this not of what yeah i'm dubious about the evidence that was given in cross examination mr paligaru agreed that so how did how did mr feligaru sorry how did mr kumar miss out well a cave it was lifted and mr peligaru gave evidence that in november 2017 he gives evidence adam's according to this email adams knew that the withdrawal form was located in the bottom drawer so of the parker office it's a long story and you'd have to read it and we'll send you to sleep if we if we talked about it but paligara gives evidence that before he departed from australia he handed it withdrawal of caveat form in the bottom draw of the desk i used from time to time so craig sorry ralph and craig sometimes shared an office

now credit to ralph justice darke actually says he accepts ralph's version okay but still rules against them he accepts that this actually happens justice darke accepted that he was told orally on or about the 15th of november you're only to use this in certain circumstances craig went ahead and used it anyway but i'll cut to the end let's

before i get there this is the evidence of of mr mister i'm putting this this is what he says i am putting this which is the withdrawal of kv i'm putting this in this draw do not use it until i have full details of any proposed finance or equity position to be taken to be taken by any prospective partner by any prospective partner or joint venturer with us joint venturer with us

until i have full details of any proposed finance or equity position to be taken by any proposed joint a partner or joint venturer with us so with us so it's to be there's an us these are ralph's own words there is an us and again somewhere in this lengthy document it's 27 pages long somewhere in this lengthy document justice darke ponders why it was that ralph gave a withdrawal of caveat when

in fact there wasn't a cave on on the title at that time it was in december and ralph's evidence is that on the 15th of november he gave he handed craig the withdrawal of caveat but there actually wasn't a caveat on the title on the 15th of november it was in december so and craig used so craig used that

to remove the december cave it but there was no cave in november so i'm my handwriting here says dubious i'm dubious uh

oh here you go if mr a lie now that really should say question mark if mr paligaru is evidence concerning the signing of the withdrawal of cavity is accepted if it's accepted the form was signed at a time when the plaintiff had no caviar now justice darke found i mean he accepted ralph's evidence that it was the honor of that date he did hand craig the withdrawal the plaintiff lodged another one on the 4th of december so precisely why ralph gave this is dubious or curious or it is very puzzling but it is very puzzling but he gave on about the 15th of december the withdrawal of acadia for occasion that hadn't actually been lodged until the fourth of december three weeks later very curious more correspondence it's it's franklin the easy gets mentioned any refinance is also to result in the discharge of the second mortgage over the peligaro home in favor of franklin using holdings anything that you do must be referred to us there's ian jordan comes in now wonderful friend from australasian property group who are being sued by the liquidator bargo now who appointed the liberator that'd be me the liquidator bargo so when all of this turned to custard i appointed a liquidator and i swore that there was a debt of very close to six million dollars owed to me it once upon a time was owed to mr kumar but courtesy of ralph alegaro on not one but two occasions ralph assigned that collection to me and the six million dollars and that was in july of 2018 and he went ahead and amended that deed on the 13th of november 2018. so precisely again this is this is why i was absolutely certain that this would fail this this argument that it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that mr kumar lost all this money it's his fault it's the tourist assurance fund's fault well no it was never even remotely possible that it was their fault because ralph assigned the collection to me and and here he's on the debt i went to the supreme court of victoria and said hey my company is owed six million dollars by fargo developments and they're they've failed to pay back in in accordance with the terms now we had a look up above let's just go up above it says he here's the payment schedule well so time was of the essence so i gave him 21 days and said at a certain point i wrote and said hey you owe us six million dollars by that point with you know or whatever the figure was it was over five and here's a copy of the here's a copy of the demand that was was put on fargo they never paid enough thomas of the essence and so they were deemed to be insolvent and so how was it ever possible that mr kumar lost money because of the fault that was caused by the fault of the torrens assurance fund no no the right they didn't even have standing to go to court mr mr kumar had no standing his his entire loss was given to me into my company to pursue and then mr caligaro obviously thought better of it at some point later and decided oh well that doesn't suit me to have mark smith collect the money even though he paid me nine percent of the funds which you can work out nine percent of two million dollars about 180 000 so it's it's just very puzzling so it's a long long story and jordan gets a mention ebm now these are craig's accountants his accounts were a firm at called dbw in um

in north sydney i've been to their office late one night the b in dbw was a man called bardela and max mardella and max maximilia maximilio bardella and he he loaned money to he was one of the six people that advanced money his company ebm as distinct from dbw dbw helped with all sorts of manner of wonderful documents in support and all up look there was there's a long long list of of people that were doubted but i withdraw that there's a long long list of people that get a mention so there's as i said there were six caves there's a there's a very huge gap this is this i found extremely interesting paragraph 37 three further caveats were lodged on or about the 29th of january 2018. one of these was lodged on behalf of reliance leasing mr steinberg so that's that's that's a steinbeck there and on about the 22nd of february 2018 mahony appears to have become aware of the refinancing so again this is this is something that i do find very very interesting on about the 22nd of february now this is the this is what was put to justice darke manny appears to become aware and he writes manny writes a letter to craig adams now i will say oh we should go and have a look at paragraph 16. this is really very very interesting paragraph 16 it is there is evidence that later in august 2017 mr money was acting for the plaintiff so that's mr kumar in relation to the proposed development and was also acting for craig evans

so he's acting for multiple parties and i have in previous episodes i said he's mr mahony how he was able to manage these and juggle these conflicts or not so much the conflicts but the conflicting interests surely mr kumar has one interest hey i want to be paid and craig adams hey i like this getting free money stuff and i can just use this as my credit card i can keep three quarters of a million then another 400 for me and do whatever the hell he likes so it's it's a it's a really really really stunning thing so 22nd of february mahony writes to adams i enclose a copy of a letter to rely of a letter to reliance from the solicitors for the new first mortgage the existence is of syria the existence so that was considered the existence of a new first mortgage is a serious concern to my client my client's worried sick he's in jail in in india doesn't say that but as as my client has a beneficial interest in the whole of the dural land four million bucks but you just keep adding what he's saying what he's trying to say is you just keep adding and adding currently there are nine caveats on the property now

this is this is kind of stunning

on the 9th of march casinda's lawyers bransgroves kate cooper and name is the senior partner there one such one such document was a withdrawal of kv form that had been signed by mr palgary so according to mr peligaro and the judge believes him okay so according to mr palgary mr palgary who handed craig adams we had a look a little bit a few minutes ago mr peligaro handed craig adams a withdrawal of caveat at a time in the middle of november at a time when there was no cavity on the on the land in in the name of kumar and in paragraph 41 here it's saying well the mid november 2017 withdrawal of caveat was handed it was used by it was handed up by craig adams on the 25th of january 2018 to to your firm brands groves and and that that form states yes it's the december this number here is the december cave it so as the withdrawal was signed on the 15th of november for a caveat that hadn't been put on and ralph had only gone overseas for one week from about the 17th to the 24th of november so for whatever reason ralph never took that caveat withdrawal of kv back and justice darke is critical of that later on and he's also critical and says well why didn't you just leave the withdrawal of kavit you went you're going to feed you why didn't you just give it to john marty so one must wonder whether john mahony got the entire story i'm finding myself i'm finding myself going to bat for john manny here i'm just wondering so look it's it's it's really quite remarkable he and jordan casinda casinda as on the 9th of march writes a letter cassinder writes a letter to apg to ian jordan and they say well hang on i don't think you want to i don't think you want to be behind mr kumar so this is the whole issue about lifting cavities when when caved is lifted we understand from the receiver mr kumar claims an unpaid vendor's interest in the vicinity of 6 million bucks no doubt these these are the words of brans grabs no doubt your client would prefer not to be behind that claim for a piece of land that's only worth five or five and a half and and there's already there's close to three million dollars already hopped you don't want to be behind some of the zones six because there's no equity look this is this is a stunning stunning document here you go this this is one of the curious findings i note in passing that mr paligara gave evidence to the effect that at no time between his leaving the withdrawal in the desk at bargo's office and march did he receive any communications

about any refinancing he did not receive any communications from mr pelleck from mr adams at no time between march at no time between he's leaving the withdrawal of kbit form in the desk and in the bargo office and march 18. did he receive any communications from craig arms about any refinancing of the documents that's the evidence now i i'm going to say justice darke is smart enough to be able to read a transcript of the evidence and that's what he's saying he's saying i wasn't there okay i certainly was not there and i don't know i didn't listen to the evidence that mr paligaru gave but justice darke i know him passing that mr paligaru who gave evidence to the to the effect to the effect so he didn't actually give direct evidence that at no time between between leaving the withdrawal of caveat and march 18 did he receive any communication so i'm just going to pause it here and we're going to see we're just going to have a look at some things all right so at no time at no time between leaving the withdrawal of caveat did he receive any communications from mr adam about the refinancing the dual property at no time up until march so i'll just jump down to something else that i've seen offline curiously on the same day so on the same day another cave it was lodged by the plaintiff so what are we talking about here this was third of april mr mahony sent an email to mr craig adams and keep in mind this is all in the context that mr mahony is saying well it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that mr kumar lost money it's their fault

third of april on the third of april so this refinancing happened on the 25th of january on the third of april justice darke notes on the same day on the same day the third of april another caveat was lodged on by mr kumar so that went on on the third of april and that was recorded that's this is all public you can anyone can google this egg look up this purchase a copy of that by this caveat the plaintiff again claimed to be the unpaid vendor under this 26th of may sorry 2016 may contract curiously curiously the caveat was apparently signed by mr peligaro as the plaintiff's attorney on the 30th of january so it's this continual delay delay delay from the 30th of january to the 3rd of april it's months here months there in action letting giving craig all this this road so i think you can see where this is sort of coming unstuck but let's just go back to this other

noted passing that mr paligaru gave evidence to the to the effect that at no time so let's let's test this here's an email now at no time did he receive any communications well that's different to sending it but did he receive any communications about any refinancing

well here's an email and we'll see who sent me this and how did i get it 10th of january now that's that's between december and march 10th january john mary wrote craig kumar is not happy with the delay in warriewood settling have you issued a notice to complete do you need do you need my help if your lawyer can't do it i'll i'll just act for you and i'll keep acting for mr kumar but i can manage all this this is what he's saying this is ridiculous delay that needs to be sorted mohan kumar reserves all right but hang on he can but if you need a lawyer no command reserves all rights but if you need a lawyer i'm your man do you need a lawyer john john ah 3 54 a.m something's keeping craig away john please come to the city tomorrow and i'll reassign property and loan to you

please tell me what time you're available and i'll have adam tilley meet us and workout guarantees so all you've got to do is guarantee it and i'll resign so the evidence was at no time palgary gave her the effect of no time between he's leaving the withdrawal in march did he receive any communications from craig about any refinancing so what's this adam tilley who's adam tilley adam tilley will meet you to work out financing guarantees on financing

later that day craig is not my [ __ ] as you put it mr kumar's rights you know and you keep mortgaging his property ah nine k bits later before you paid for it you keep ralph has signed the transfer transferring [ __ ] so ralph actually had the right to transfer the shares in bargo and and transfer the ownership of the company to mr kumar

therefore he's in your interest to work to solve the problem now the problem is for you is that not only will you have lost the development value you're in default of the loans which are secured we're giving you until 4 pm today the current payout tell us the current payout if you can't get those figures kumar will will by next monday become the owner and serve lapsing notices

so i don't know if this is well eleventh mate mate i tried to call you this is going to go pear shape so this is from ralph to justin hatfield who's justin hatfield oh that's he wouldn't be talking about refinancing because just justice darke found at no time was there any evidence he gave it ralph gave evidence to the effect of no time did he receive any communications from mr adams well i suppose this one to to justin hatfield is probably not from but anyway i'm stuck in the middle an asset line who are they they're money lenders justin hatfield as soon as craig settles warriewood has has to happen in the next 10 days one lender you know cross-collateralize this and that whatever 13.5 million

the current payout figure is 2.7 million dollars to winchester o'rourke that's tilley uh

at no point at no time the evidence was at no time was there any discussion about refinancing after ralph has those figures kumar will be in a position to refinance general without putting you in default of your loans secured over your property over 88 perfection avenue cross-collateralization is in breach of the sales contracts so a few choice words here the point is he's he was going to refinance with tilley adam tilley no news warriewood who knows it's almost a ponzi scheme

and mr hadfield you have facilitated a lot of it

it's easily resolved once warriewood settles what's happening with at no point was there any discussion about refinancing ralph ralph wrote what's happening with tilley refi refinancing it's fully approved it's fully approved so the evidence did he receive any communications about any refinancing of the general property

i i'm just not sure whether justice darke saw these communications but they're there interesting not good enough john mahony's still on the 11th not good enough client has been waiting months for the mythical warriewood settlement time is up kumar will now register the share transfer well even in april still hasn't happened also what is the secret about telling us how much people take to free dural of the various blisters kumar will not accept any more delays well apparently he will justin hatfield lumley finance and loans now if this wasn't about refinancing if this wasn't about refinancing then you know so it goes on and on and on and on the solicitor is the vendor's worst nightmare this all comes to craig not communicating and swearing another so there's craig will lose his family asset liner ruthless mahoney acted for paid on exchange acted against paid on exchange and wants payments so but ralph is organizing the logistics of his daughter's engagement so let's see what else there is here's another email this is to do with maybe not to do with refinancing but this is certainly from craig we're trying to we're trying to get as mentioned i have warriewood projects setting on the 29th yet so on the 30th according to justice darke ralph signs a new caveat which he doesn't put on until the third of april and again all of this is the fault of the torres assurance fund let's have a look at this one all of these are sent to me by ralph by the way so let's ralph from ralph to mark that's me from ralph to mark from ralph to mark 22nd tomorrow tomorrow so this property settled on the sorry the the use of the caveat occurred on the 25th of january and there was communications between

at no point did he receive any communications from mr adams about any refinancing of the general poverty well i'm going to say i'm sorry that on the 25th of january there's another communication but tomorrow so tomorrow is the 23rd of january this is before before the cave it is used gents mr lalich this is another one the evidence was there's no communication about refinancing from craig well mr lalich is one of craig's lawyers

you know so they're they're meeting up on ralph is meeting with justin hatfield and justin hatfield this wouldn't be anything to do with a refinancing would it lumley finance and loans accredited finance broker well i'm you know i am i've said i'm dubious about that evidence that ralph has has given to the effect that there was at no time did he receive any communications yet you know this is not a communication about refinancing from justin hatfield who's a mortgage broker craig adams you know so this is here see you there see you there so as you can see there's quite a lot to this particular judgment and we're only up to page six of 27 and it really does go on but i'm just highlighting a few key bits i'll just return now to this other thing and i've said that i am dubious about i'm not calling saying that people are outright lying but i am highly dubious about some of the aspects of what was put in front of justice darke and i'll take you back to this one paragraph 19 mr mahony on the 6th of november now this is at a time when there was no yes there was no caveat on the land according to ralph's evidence on the 15th of november ralph then went and put went and handed craig adams a withdrawal of the cave yet that wasn't on and then in december one was put on so in the evidence this is mr manny wrote to craig adams on 6th of november when there was no caveat and he says and we've talked about this just before i have i this is what manny writes now this is important because he says it's true and i'll show you i'll show you something else so this is on the 6th of november 2017. now i'm going to show you something in 2018 that causes me to be dubious i mr money i have now been in contact directly oh sorry i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india of mr kumar so someone in india has contacted mr kumar as you're aware kumar is the vendor there's a vendor finance you're in default and in december 17 he's mahony is writing and why why are we saying this well money's been paid he owes the duty of care to mr kumar and according to his his correspondence he's in contact with him so he must if you believe what he's writing he must accept that he did over duty of care and so as a matter of urgency as a matter of urgency well there's no caveat so it the kv doesn't actually go on for another month and is subsequently withdrawn using a withdrawal behavior that ralph did not give to mr manny he left it in a drawer according to ralph he left it in a drawer in bargo's office as a matter of urgency as the basis of you know the encumbrances a copy of this certificate of title a copy of the five caveats we've we have we have been instructed so did someone in india according to i've been contacted directly by representatives in india we have now been we have been instructed to determine whether all can be removed through lapsing notice or through litigation so at this point well at this point

at this point the mortgagee is the first monkey is in the name properties and they're on notice because of my letter there are notice of this interest so we've told them i told them absolutely do not lend any more money and subsequent to this more money was lent and but again the argument that money law is using is that this is all the fault of the torrents assurance fund it's all their fault all of this you know as a matter of urgency we've been instructed to you know start laughing things can we lapse them can we can we have media litigation and there's no response so there's no response this is the 6th of november and academia does go on in december and is subsequently withdrawn using a withdrawal academia date of the 15th of november of their abouts so we asked to find out the current balance on the n m nine he says he's been contacted by people in india directly that's now directly in his email of november 2017. the ralph please provide me the contact details for the indians so he doesn't even know who his client is he's only dealing with this is a year later he's either lost the phone number let's be generous and say he's lost the phone number please provide me contact details he doesn't know he doesn't know the name he doesn't know the phone number according to this this is the way i'd read it please provide contact details not just the phone number person phone number emails you know what their relationship as you are unable to do anything to further this matter i need to speak with the indians to have you replaced whoa to have you replaced as their attorney

why did i donate why did it take until october 18 the land's been sold by that point but yet a year before he's saying in november the year before he's saying i was a man of urgency we need to find out and start lapsing things

i'm saying look let's let's have a look now there is a i'm just going to throw it up on the screen here we've got signed by ralph peligaru in july and november 2018 twice ralph has assigned a claim that mr mahony sorry that mr kumar would have against mr manny for professional negligence now i don't know if that's i don't know if that claim has legs or not but mr mahony is being employed and sending out bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars 90 to 100 000 or thereabouts two mr kumar so he must have owed he he must feel that he owes a duty of care it took him until october to 2018 after the property sold after the property has been had nine caveats go on it's it's really interesting but yet the argument is it's all the fault forget all of this stuff it's all the torrents assurances fund's fault they're to blame the state government has to has to cough up money i still don't understand why you don't want to save your house ralph i'm still here to help i'm still here to help well wow that's fantastic now let's go back to we'll go back to this i have now been contacted directly by representatives in india well i've been in contact with them myself you know for several years let's have a look at some of the stuff that's being said

here's what i wrote i'm not going to give you the person's details did mr manny ever speak with any family members of mr kumar in november 2017. paragraph 19 says he did hi mark no he or ralph has never spoken to any family member only you were the first to approach us the first this poor bastard's sitting over in jail in india now i'm this is not mr kumar this is a representative but this poor bastard is sitting in jail he's had his four million dollars plundered and i am the first to contact them

first that's pretty clear okay then i go on in in the court judgment manny gives evidence he has described he has had discussions with someone in india in india not just ralph someone in india

the reply who is that someone there has to be a name i believe him i do believe this man

by sayings just by just saying someone in court it doesn't make any sense he has to give details and here's specifically what i did send to the contact i have now been in contact directly i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india in india

no name paragraph 16. he's just making it up he's just making it up

wow now things aren't i'm just repeating this i'm personally speaking for myself i am dubious like i actually am dubious that this is true i have now been contacted directly but this is what a lawyer with 40 years experience his writing in 6th of november could he have saved that last 400 grand could he have i don't know

at this point in november 17 none of this none of this claim has been assigned to me so he could have saved maybe four hundred thousand to he could have saved two million dollars maybe and he in his own words he's saying well we've been we have been instructed now if this is correct if he has been contacted directly well he's in the same email he's saying we've been instructed to determine whether any of the caveats can be removed through lapsing notices or why didn't he do that he's been instructed hang on you're a lawyer you're instructed why don't you do it

so again we're only up to page six it's it's it's a staggering staggering document and full credit to full credit to justice he does i think a very good job with the material he's been presented now he's been presented things saying well he's had contacts with people in india justice darke clearly has absolutely no idea and absolutely no no criticism he doesn't know he makes the observation we haven't seen mr we haven't seen mr kumar record he didn't he didn't come and give evidence well okay reason good reason for that he can't he's locked up apparently i don't know so look let's skip right to the end now and i will say this i will say this this is a very long well it's not overly long but it's a lot lengthy and it's well considered it is well considered third of april manny sent a letter to mr adams mr adams unfortunately unfortunately however our clients our clients have come to no other conclusion than that you have fraudulently also delivered to the solicitor casino the withdrawal of cavity fraud it's very big if you're going to say fraud it's the bar is very very high in all the circumstances in april of 2018 in all the circumstances man is writing in all circumstances we have been instructed again he's got an instruction to report your actions to the new south wales police for fraud so what did he do with that instruction third of april he's got the instructions to report you for for fraud and third of april same day they re-lodged the caveat but he'd been sitting on that caveat from since the 30th of january now would it have made any difference i don't know i don't know if he'd lodged the cave on the 30th of january it may or may not have made any difference but all i do know is they sat on it they sat on it mr mr mahony or mr paligari where the evidence is the finding the finding of justice darke is that curiously the caveat was apparently signed by the power of attorney mr kunma oh sorry mr palgar on the 30th of january when the plaintiff's second the second favorite remained on the title so the withdrawal of cave it had been handed over but it still remained so casino actually had the withdrawal um

at the time beligari signed another one on the 30th he must have known that the withdrawal of it had been used yet on the third of april they're writing letters saying oh we've just discovered it and there was a previous finding on the 22nd on the 22nd i said i'll talk about this gap paragraph 3738 i talk about this gap three further cavetts were lodged on the 29th now this this whole this and one of these i was involved with in some way the reliance leasing one this was lodged on the 29th of january and that stopped putting it on stopped the cinder having theirs properly registered their mortgage i probably registered and the removal of n m and apg's and there was this obviously this giant clog now ralph apparently signs the the next caveat on the 30th but at this point reliance got theirs on apg got this on slightly behind the one that i was involved in reliance and then lumley that's that's the finance broker they got theirs on as well and then on the 30th ralph must have known so he goes and signs another one but claims they don't know until the 22nd of february 2018 mr mr money appears to have become aware of the refinancing transaction appears so that's interesting very interesting and right the existence of the new mortgage is of serious concern to my client yet ralph has signed another caveat on the 30th and it's of such a serious concern he didn't did nothing with it from the 30th of january until the 3rd of april it's it's that it's there are some questions here so

we then move on the total claim that was made by kumar against the torrens assurance fund is one point called 1.9 million dollars

paragraph 59 is submitted that there are good and now the registrar general says there's good reasons to doubt the evidence of obviously allegory the registrar general says that there was good reason to doubt the evidence of mr palgary

now we look at the determination what did the court find paragraph 68 i have reservations so just justice star can only deal with the material that's before him he he he doesn't do his absolute credit i think he's done a brilliant job okay but he may not have had all the material put in front of him either by rob calgary or by the torrens assurance fund they may simply not have known as paragraph 68 i have reservations about aspects you find some of it implausible

paragraph 69 despite my reservations i've ultimately come to the conclusion mr paligara's evidence should be accepted so that's pretty good but it doesn't change the result the result is how many

paragraph 61 i further find mr adams in making use he was acting making useful withdrawal of cave it was acting contrary to the instructions

on the material that was put before justice darke and i don't know if that included those emails well i do know that i'll put it up again peligaro said that at no time was there a correspondence about the refinance but coming back to paragraph 7172 paragraph 71 i accept mr paligara's evidence to the effect that neither he nor the plaintiff himself had any knowledge of the transaction that's about the refinancing now again i do not know whether the emails the one tomorrow with lalich and hatfield and there's a series of them that i put up i do not know whether they've been put up to justice darke and considered but on what was can what was put before him he says he accepts mr palgary's evidence okay i'm prepared to conclude that mr pelic that mr adams acted dishonestly in this really in this respect

paragraph 72 for the above reason i'm prepared to find that mr adam acted this acted fraudulently and making use of the withdrawal of k-bits but okay so that's to get money on the turns assurance fund there has to be dishonesty or fraud or a mistake by the current assurance fund the registrar general's department and on top of that you have to prove that it led to loss now that was that's the whole thing that i've always said well hang on i think you've postponed yourself ralph by handing this over and look i i'll just show we'll go through these other pages there's lots and lots and lots here okay lots of analysis but the plaintiff submitted that the equity he could have mr kumar could have been four hundred thousand dollars better off and now on top of that there's interest okay so we're talking still a lot of money here a lot of money and it was as i said there was a two million dollar kitty apg received out of that fund 725 thousand dollars that's three quarters of a million dollars and ralph and ian jordan the director of apg have a company together i don't know precisely i was in the mediation in july 2019 but i didn't go and shut the door and chat with ian jordan i didn't and so apg work out with a lot of money now the liquidator is now chasing that and saying well that was a preference and we'll see where that all goes as i said there's a whole lot of analysis here and it's it's going to be impossible to just go through them all but i'll put this up on our website let's have a look at these last two pages in my opinion in my opinion the whole of the loss or damage should be regarded as the consequences of the acts or omissions of the plaintiff the conduct of mr pelago as the plaintiff's agent in relation to the withdrawal of the caveat the very means by which mr adams was able to perpetrate his fraud that's to blame so i think as i said earlier justice did find that there was fraudulent conduct but you've got to say that okay that that fraud led to the loss and there's pages and pages of analysis the bottom line is justin darke did not find did not find that it really would have made any difference whether whether there was fraud or not the the post-painting conduct and the arming and all of that it was really the conduct of mr palgary was in in my view plainly negligent he failed to take reasonable care for the interest of the plaintiff that is particularly the case in circumstances from november 17 mr paligara was not only aware of fargo's breaches so they failed to pay they had to pay 1.5 which they did on this 5.5 million dollar transaction and they had to pay 500 000 within four weeks and another one and a half million or two million or something after that and then another two and a half million so he was aware that they'd missed all of those it was incredible i said third of november 2017 we've got the email from mr mahony who says he's been contacted directly by representatives in india as a matter of urgency and yet justice darke says in particular this is particularly the case in circumstances where from november 2017 mr paligara was not only aware of the breaches under the contract but also had concerns about mr adams's dealing that he's hocking the property and he knew he must have known that

he must have known that's what justice darke thoughts to make the signed withdrawal of caveat form available to mr adams in those circumstances strikes me as contacted contract conduct that is very negligent if not reckless

mr adam utilized the means that were available to him to carry out the fraud applying a common sense approach the conduct of mr palgary should should be regarded as the cause of the claimed loss four million dollars just down the toilet of mr kumar's money four million dollars down the toilet to my mind it is it is a cause of the loss as much as the conduct of mr adams himself it is a case where there are truly successive causes of the loss it is it is thus it can't be concluded that the loss or damage was as a consequence of the axial or remission of the sorry that it was a consequence of the acts or omissions of the plaintiff and thus no entitlement it wasn't the fault of the torrens assurance fund and just to rub it in just a tiny bit more paragraph 22 122 the plaintiff will be dismissed the statement claims dismissed the court will order the court will further order that the plaintiff pay the registrar general's costs so there you have it a a terrible terrible tale we'll come back and wrap up in a minute

well how is that for an incredible defeat justice darke as has really nailed that i think and well you would think that that's the end of it but apparently ralph and john mahony are off thinking thinking about thinking about an appeal can you can you believe it thinking about an appeal on top of that there is another case which i've just put up the details about ralph is also personally suing the torrens assurance fund with his wife henrika and a very similar thing around the same time as all of this happened with mr kumar at a very similar time ralph borrowed money at six percent a month and five hundred forty thousand dollars six percent a month from a company called franklin yeezy and for better or worse for better or worse it also the well mr for whatever reason we talked about delays incredibly there was a a delay between about august 2017 and december 2017 very similar periods where ralph failed to put a caveat for neglected to put a caveat on land at warriewood owned by golden arrow international and other craigslist companies and subsequently he missed out on 540 thousand dollars and kept on paying six percent interest a month and in case you can't work it out that's like thirty something thousand in the first month and when you don't pay it just balloons and balloons and like literally i did some sums at one stage it was like fifty four thousand dollars a month interest it was up to so but the trouble is i i think i haven't seen the judgment and if even when i do get a copy of the judgment or if it's being dismissed or whatever i'll make sure if i get the documents we'll post them and because they're public documents and um

very similar facts you know i imagine i can't see how he could possibly win where he he's going to claim well it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that that craig in this instance i think they were just slack and i didn't put either mahony or paligaru was slack i don't know who so i'm not portioning blame there but what i do know is there's a period of four months and there was no caveat on this warriewood land and in the meantime you saw how many caveats craig adams put on bargo he put justice many on maybe justice many he put enough there was lots of occasions put on warriewood as well and ralph missed out and it goes on to pay 30000 a month interest and that's clearly not sustainable so you would think so where's this all going time will tell time really will tell but you know to the best of my knowledge ralph's insolvent we've got a we have mike i personally have a consent judgment against ralph $106551 we filed a creditor's petition and ralph is trying to have it set aside one that he consented to so it's going to be very interesting he's managed to get that adjourn until april so in the meantime if there's any uh

if there's anyone out there that also has owed money and a lot of money you're very welcome to come and join the party join the action join the creditors petition for your supporting creditor and it wouldn't surprise me who you are so again if you're owed money come and join the action if you've got any questions if you know any facts if you've got any thoughts we'd love to hear from you www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast or give us a call 1-300-327-123 if you do go to our website check out the link in the bottom right hand corner there's into the message chat tool we'd love to hear from you and you know thank you very much thanks for tuning in bye

rogues rascals reviewables rorts rip-offs receivers real estate agents and much much more the many rs podcast season 1 episode 7.5 - 7.5 we can't get all the way to 8 we have to go to 7.5 and we have absolutely breaking news from the new south wales supreme court about our one of our favorite r's - ralph so stand by welcome to season 1 episode 7.5 if you've got any questions give us a call on 1300 327 123 that's until late or hook up with us on www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast … use the chat tools in the bottom right hand corner thank you 

well welcome this is an unusual set of circumstances this is episode 7.5 this is a follow-on episode from our last one where we talked extensively at the end there about our very good mate ralph paligaru and we happened to run into ralph recently and here's some some updated photos on on ralph for you but this particular episode is about well a judgment of the new south wales supreme court has literally just come down and it is still hot it is still warm so we're going to have a look at ralph paligaru john mahony that's the lawyer or is it mahony i no one has ever explained that to me we've got mohan kumar who is sometimes known as Chhota Rajan and we're going to have a look at he's a resident of tihar prison in in delhi in india and we're going to have a look at the supreme court judgment in the matter of mohan kumar and shs well and the registrar general the torrens assurance fund so we can this is a public document and in fact this this has just come out unbeknownst to us we don't watch these things day and night but someone brought it to our attention that the judgment had just come down on it had come down before we'd actually put out episode seven so we felt it was only right that we updated the record so let's get on and we'll have a look at the judgment okay so this is the judgment of the new south wales supreme court and anyone that wants to google this can go to a site called caselaw.nsw.gov.au and just google that and it's a set of proceedings 2021 proceedings it was heard by justice darke who i have to say i've got i'll make some comments as i go through i think he's got it absolutely substantially correct he he wouldn't know some of the very tiny minor facts but but still it's it's well worth having a look but look the whole gist of it is the claim for compensation a claim from mohan kumar for compensation from the torrens assurance fund is refused so that's the decision so we can go through and have a quick look well we can have a long look but anyway it's a it's a very extensive document it's i'm just gonna highlight some of the relevant bits there's quite a lot and i'll publish the entire document up on our website www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast i'll i'll include some text so you know what to look for but anyway the registrar general of the torrens assurance fund or the landed property in new south wales titles are kept for land and that those titles are kept in a central register called the torrens title register so and when a person loses an interest in land if it's either by fraud or by some error made by the torrents of by the land and property by the people that keep the titles then that person that suffers loss is entitled to compensation and every time there's a dealing every time that there's a transaction involving land okay the registration of a mortgage the transfer when you pay stamp duty and all of that a very small sis collected and it goes into this fund called the torrens assurance fund just in case anything goes wrong so i can say that the trans assurance fund or the registrar general was represented by someone called patricia lane who happened to be one of my lecturers at sydney uni and you can see here the whoa

says here okay well pardon me the plaintiff was represented by patricia lane wow how very very interesting and mr mr mahony was there as well so i'm sorry i got that around the wrong way very very very interesting patricia lane nothing but absolute respect she was a fabulous teacher and unbelievably knowledgeable i might have got that the wrong way around i anyway i assume that this is correct so these proceedings are bought by mohan kumar there has there was obviously no discussions about who mohan kumar is in fine detail but he certainly was the registered proprietor of land at old northern road at dural number 632 old northern road dural and that was if you like the word sold it was sold in may of 2016 by his power of attorney ralph paligaru to a company called bargo developments proprietary limited and i'm just going to sort of these these are public and we'll just you know talk about these so mankind has claimed an interest in the land as what's called an unpaid vendor's lien and i absolutely i met ralph on about the 27th of march in 2017 and he was introduced to me by mr steinberg from reliance leasing and ralph complained he couldn't sleep at night because he was worried that about worried sick about whether he was going to get paid so when i say this property was sold it wasn't paid so it was a property piece of land worth 5.5 million dollars which they received only 1.5 million dollars so craig adams is walking around with the title to a $5.5m piece of land having been out of pocket virtually nothing and we'll have a look we'll have a look and the money he received he didn't pay it all to he mortgaged the property and did not pay at all to mohan kumar so as i said in episode 7 that is apparently the fault of the torren's assurance fund and justice darke did not agree with mahony lawyers and the claim was refused so it's it's

we'll just touch on some of the highlighted points and if you're really that interested you can download this and read this in in fine detail but it's justice darke finds at certain times the interest was protected by caveat so the very first thing that that i did i was asked by mr how do i put it i can't sleep and i said why don't you just put a caveat on it? so we went and put a caveat on and that was put on about the 27th of march 2017 and that's how i know when i met ralph paligaru so there it was protected by this caveat some times however during other periods there was no caveat and at that time mr kumar was under the care of john mahony and ralph paligaru so you know precisely why they took them off we don't know other than what's in this judgment so we're just reporting the facts we've absolutely there's no criticisms whatsoever of justice darke or the decision he made and none of this is a you know is a massive surprise but anyway look there was various different mortgages at various different times craig adams the argument is that what the argument was it which didn't work was that craig adams made use of a withdrawal of caveat form that had been executed on behalf of mr kumar by his attorney mr paligaru ralph paligaru so

and look ultimately craig didn't pay his mortgage the property was sold by kesinda this is a fact and then there was a huge argument about who got what and i was there so i know it in the proceedings were resolved by way of consent orders on made in july 2019. now i i did actually put up the consent orders in episode 7 and showing exactly who got what and i've put here now this is not a criticism of justice darke but i'm just saying the the plaintiff received a total of $527 000 out of 2 million so he was ... and he received 500 and this is saying well he actually received 26% of the available funds but that's not with no disrespect to justice darke that is probably not exactly correct kumar actually received two lots he received 26% but on top of that he received another 9% and who did he give that to he gave that to one of my companies and why did he do that so in fact when you look at these arguments that justice darke talks about and says well hang on i've done my calculations to work out whether you lost money or you didn't and then he talks about causation and who's to blame in other words who's to blame for mohan kumar not getting four million dollars or you know two million of the two million and look kumar actually did receive 35 of the available funds so there was two million in something available but he chose to pay he chose to honor an agreement he had with me that where he he actually assigned ralph paligaru actually assigned all of mohan kumar's interest the whole lot to me and and i had an arrangement where i was going to pay successfully and it turns out that actually the success is 26 of what was available and my cut was nine so when you look at these arguments as we go further down into the document it this is no disrespect to justice darke but he did in fact received more than 26 percent he just gave away nine percent so it was 35 of the available so again absolutely no disrespect the so the plaintiff and so in these circumstances so in these circumstances where he actually got 35 the plaintiff alleges that he has suffered loss or damage resulting from the operation the act and justice darke didn't didn't go for that so you know and then it gets into some very long analysis the the loss yeah anyway they're saying suffered loss by consequence of the registration of the consent casino mortgage so it is true that and i've numbered all of these so let's maybe have a look at these salient facts and these are facts found by a supreme court judge and nothing nothing nothing but respect so absolute fact the the plaintiff mr kumar resides in india well it doesn't talk about where but or even who he is and actually later on there's a very curious remark saying well for some reason the plaintiff didn't appear he didn't come and give evidence and there you go well the reason he couldn't give evidence is because he's in jail so it doesn't seem that that fact was shared publicly but look here are the here are the passport photos and photos of the arrested person and you tell me if they're the same person i'm not an expert and i don't i've never been to india i've never been to any jails i've never met mr kumar it's just it's an open secret that's who he is and no one bothered to share that with justice darke so look the piece of land was as i said 632 old northern road dural and there's its title particulars ralph sold it i've showed you the front page of the contract in episode seven for 5.5 but in fact they received 1.5 was put down and there was a series of arrangements that craig adams was to pay 500 there and a million here and another two and a half and time is of the essence and again this all fits into the argument that mahony lawyers put forward that this is all the fault the fact that there was money lost that's the fault of the torrens assurance fund and really the taxpayer should be should be coughing up to compensate mr kumar and as i said that was not accepted so the purchase price there number number one two three so let's just have a look and these are some of the this is under the heading salient facts again not my not my facts these are facts that justice darke the honourable justice darke found so we know on the 31st of may the contract price was 5.5 million only 1.5 was put down but the property was used as a credit card i suppose and a mortgage secured the sum of 2.275 million dollars so 1.5 the fact is the plaintiff received 1.5 million on settlement and whether the other three quarters of a million dollars go well the director of bargo was craig adams so we'd have to ask craig adams but we know that only 1.5 million was ever paid to mr kumar and that's that so and this is the fact that was the only money that was ever ever paid out of a 5.5 million sale price only ever 1.5 was ever paid so we know that time was of the essence there it is time was at the essence and 1.5 was on on settlement there was after four weeks another half a million dollars was required time of the essence six months later another million dollars and none of this was this contract wasn't enforced and not only that the salient facts that in may 2016 there was it was hot to the tune of 2.275 but a further a further that's the kit that i put on there you go i put that on i went into the counter and paid the money and on on or about the 27th of march and ralph could sleep at night then you know so so we know that six months later he mr adams and bargo hocked the the property again there was the initial mortgage was to ar mortgages and then along came in and him now the very first thing i went and did was wrote to him in a name and said stop lending money and stop lending any more money and making mr kumar's position any worse so literally from that day in march of 2017 they were on notice and they did not and i've got copies of the the correspondence i went around that night and you know before six o'clock the next morning in march of 2017 saying oh i i have a habit of dropping the s-bomb sometimes but uh

number one three-quarters of a million went to craig adams's pocket or somewhere you know and then another four hundred thousand this is still not going into mr kumar's pocket despite their being a contract despite mr kumar having ralph paligaru on the ground is his power of attorney and on top of that well there's there's even more money being borrowed so another 350 000 was was borrowed in august 17 a very interesting date on the third of and then even more so it just goes on and on and on and on and on more and more hocking of this land and again i put in a name on notice of that anyway long long story but there's more and more hocking of this property going on and in august of 17 even more money was borrowed and you know here's a full list and i mean i find this extremely interesting there was seven caveats so craig adams obviously well there's some very harsh findings here about craig adams but there was mr paligaru deposes this is his evidence there were seven caveats in the end seven so seven lots of hocking of money against mr kumar's interest and mr mr paligaru for whatever reason he had from the day i put the caveat on for mr kumar mr kumar was protected from that point in an m had noticed do not lend any more money he's in default to mr kumar he has four million dollars and he's in default and another six yes i think that's correct another 6k bits on top of the the kb i put on was ripped off and another six were put on so craig is just borrowed and borrowed and buried and borrowed and borrowed and in the end someone said well this is the torrens assurance fund's fault

justice i didn't agree with that so i'm with justice darke by the way so ralph further deposes that he was concerned he was concerned i was concerned that there was six more lots of hocking of money and in 2017 now this is after ralph has lifted the cable that i put on mr manny writes to mr adams oh we're not very very happy here and so you can read this for yourself but this is something i find very interesting paragraph 19. this demanding writes on the 6th of november 2017 i have i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india of mohan kumar

i i find that very interesting the representatives in india in india so i i i'm curious whether that's true that's what it says that's what the email says i'm curious if it's true i don't know i have no idea i've never talked to mr kumar ever but apparently some representatives called well i i he says mahony writes i have now been contacted as you're aware there's vendor finance as you're aware you're in default and you know it goes on now all all along here no response there was no response craig got the email and just ignored it ralph went to fiji some of these things aren't really relevant but i i am dubious about some of this not of what yeah i'm dubious about the evidence that was given in cross examination mr paligaru agreed that so how did how did mr feligaru sorry how did mr kumar miss out well a cave it was lifted and mr peligaru gave evidence that in november 2017 he gives evidence adam's according to this email adams knew that the withdrawal form was located in the bottom drawer so of the parker office it's a long story and you'd have to read it and we'll send you to sleep if we if we talked about it but paligara gives evidence that before he departed from australia he handed it withdrawal of caveat form in the bottom draw of the desk i used from time to time so craig sorry ralph and craig sometimes shared an office

now credit to ralph justice darke actually says he accepts ralph's version okay but still rules against them he accepts that this actually happens justice darke accepted that he was told orally on or about the 15th of november you're only to use this in certain circumstances craig went ahead and used it anyway but i'll cut to the end let's

before i get there this is the evidence of of mr mister i'm putting this this is what he says i am putting this which is the withdrawal of kv i'm putting this in this draw do not use it until i have full details of any proposed finance or equity position to be taken to be taken by any prospective partner by any prospective partner or joint venturer with us joint venturer with us

until i have full details of any proposed finance or equity position to be taken by any proposed joint a partner or joint venturer with us so with us so it's to be there's an us these are ralph's own words there is an us and again somewhere in this lengthy document it's 27 pages long somewhere in this lengthy document justice darke ponders why it was that ralph gave a withdrawal of caveat when

in fact there wasn't a cave on on the title at that time it was in december and ralph's evidence is that on the 15th of november he gave he handed craig the withdrawal of caveat but there actually wasn't a caveat on the title on the 15th of november it was in december so and craig used so craig used that

to remove the december cave it but there was no cave in november so i'm my handwriting here says dubious i'm dubious uh

oh here you go if mr a lie now that really should say question mark if mr paligaru is evidence concerning the signing of the withdrawal of cavity is accepted if it's accepted the form was signed at a time when the plaintiff had no caviar now justice darke found i mean he accepted ralph's evidence that it was the honor of that date he did hand craig the withdrawal the plaintiff lodged another one on the 4th of december so precisely why ralph gave this is dubious or curious or it is very puzzling but it is very puzzling but he gave on about the 15th of december the withdrawal of acadia for occasion that hadn't actually been lodged until the fourth of december three weeks later very curious more correspondence it's it's franklin the easy gets mentioned any refinance is also to result in the discharge of the second mortgage over the peligaro home in favor of franklin using holdings anything that you do must be referred to us there's ian jordan comes in now wonderful friend from australasian property group who are being sued by the liquidator bargo now who appointed the liberator that'd be me the liquidator bargo so when all of this turned to custard i appointed a liquidator and i swore that there was a debt of very close to six million dollars owed to me it once upon a time was owed to mr kumar but courtesy of ralph alegaro on not one but two occasions ralph assigned that collection to me and the six million dollars and that was in july of 2018 and he went ahead and amended that deed on the 13th of november 2018. so precisely again this is this is why i was absolutely certain that this would fail this this argument that it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that mr kumar lost all this money it's his fault it's the tourist assurance fund's fault well no it was never even remotely possible that it was their fault because ralph assigned the collection to me and and here he's on the debt i went to the supreme court of victoria and said hey my company is owed six million dollars by fargo developments and they're they've failed to pay back in in accordance with the terms now we had a look up above let's just go up above it says he here's the payment schedule well so time was of the essence so i gave him 21 days and said at a certain point i wrote and said hey you owe us six million dollars by that point with you know or whatever the figure was it was over five and here's a copy of the here's a copy of the demand that was was put on fargo they never paid enough thomas of the essence and so they were deemed to be insolvent and so how was it ever possible that mr kumar lost money because of the fault that was caused by the fault of the torrens assurance fund no no the right they didn't even have standing to go to court mr mr kumar had no standing his his entire loss was given to me into my company to pursue and then mr caligaro obviously thought better of it at some point later and decided oh well that doesn't suit me to have mark smith collect the money even though he paid me nine percent of the funds which you can work out nine percent of two million dollars about 180 000 so it's it's just very puzzling so it's a long long story and jordan gets a mention ebm now these are craig's accountants his accounts were a firm at called dbw in um

in north sydney i've been to their office late one night the b in dbw was a man called bardela and max mardella and max maximilia maximilio bardella and he he loaned money to he was one of the six people that advanced money his company ebm as distinct from dbw dbw helped with all sorts of manner of wonderful documents in support and all up look there was there's a long long list of of people that were doubted but i withdraw that there's a long long list of people that get a mention so there's as i said there were six caves there's a there's a very huge gap this is this i found extremely interesting paragraph 37 three further caveats were lodged on or about the 29th of january 2018. one of these was lodged on behalf of reliance leasing mr steinberg so that's that's that's a steinbeck there and on about the 22nd of february 2018 mahony appears to have become aware of the refinancing so again this is this is something that i do find very very interesting on about the 22nd of february now this is the this is what was put to justice darke manny appears to become aware and he writes manny writes a letter to craig adams now i will say oh we should go and have a look at paragraph 16. this is really very very interesting paragraph 16 it is there is evidence that later in august 2017 mr money was acting for the plaintiff so that's mr kumar in relation to the proposed development and was also acting for craig evans

so he's acting for multiple parties and i have in previous episodes i said he's mr mahony how he was able to manage these and juggle these conflicts or not so much the conflicts but the conflicting interests surely mr kumar has one interest hey i want to be paid and craig adams hey i like this getting free money stuff and i can just use this as my credit card i can keep three quarters of a million then another 400 for me and do whatever the hell he likes so it's it's a it's a really really really stunning thing so 22nd of february mahony writes to adams i enclose a copy of a letter to rely of a letter to reliance from the solicitors for the new first mortgage the existence is of syria the existence so that was considered the existence of a new first mortgage is a serious concern to my client my client's worried sick he's in jail in in india doesn't say that but as as my client has a beneficial interest in the whole of the dural land four million bucks but you just keep adding what he's saying what he's trying to say is you just keep adding and adding currently there are nine caveats on the property now

this is this is kind of stunning

on the 9th of march casinda's lawyers bransgroves kate cooper and name is the senior partner there one such one such document was a withdrawal of kv form that had been signed by mr palgary so according to mr peligaro and the judge believes him okay so according to mr palgary mr palgary who handed craig adams we had a look a little bit a few minutes ago mr peligaro handed craig adams a withdrawal of caveat at a time in the middle of november at a time when there was no cavity on the on the land in in the name of kumar and in paragraph 41 here it's saying well the mid november 2017 withdrawal of caveat was handed it was used by it was handed up by craig adams on the 25th of january 2018 to to your firm brands groves and and that that form states yes it's the december this number here is the december cave it so as the withdrawal was signed on the 15th of november for a caveat that hadn't been put on and ralph had only gone overseas for one week from about the 17th to the 24th of november so for whatever reason ralph never took that caveat withdrawal of kv back and justice darke is critical of that later on and he's also critical and says well why didn't you just leave the withdrawal of kavit you went you're going to feed you why didn't you just give it to john marty so one must wonder whether john mahony got the entire story i'm finding myself i'm finding myself going to bat for john manny here i'm just wondering so look it's it's it's really quite remarkable he and jordan casinda casinda as on the 9th of march writes a letter cassinder writes a letter to apg to ian jordan and they say well hang on i don't think you want to i don't think you want to be behind mr kumar so this is the whole issue about lifting cavities when when caved is lifted we understand from the receiver mr kumar claims an unpaid vendor's interest in the vicinity of 6 million bucks no doubt these these are the words of brans grabs no doubt your client would prefer not to be behind that claim for a piece of land that's only worth five or five and a half and and there's already there's close to three million dollars already hopped you don't want to be behind some of the zones six because there's no equity look this is this is a stunning stunning document here you go this this is one of the curious findings i note in passing that mr paligara gave evidence to the effect that at no time between his leaving the withdrawal in the desk at bargo's office and march did he receive any communications

about any refinancing he did not receive any communications from mr pelleck from mr adams at no time between march at no time between he's leaving the withdrawal of kbit form in the desk and in the bargo office and march 18. did he receive any communications from craig arms about any refinancing of the documents that's the evidence now i i'm going to say justice darke is smart enough to be able to read a transcript of the evidence and that's what he's saying he's saying i wasn't there okay i certainly was not there and i don't know i didn't listen to the evidence that mr paligaru gave but justice darke i know him passing that mr paligaru who gave evidence to the to the effect to the effect so he didn't actually give direct evidence that at no time between between leaving the withdrawal of caveat and march 18 did he receive any communication so i'm just going to pause it here and we're going to see we're just going to have a look at some things all right so at no time at no time between leaving the withdrawal of caveat did he receive any communications from mr adam about the refinancing the dual property at no time up until march so i'll just jump down to something else that i've seen offline curiously on the same day so on the same day another cave it was lodged by the plaintiff so what are we talking about here this was third of april mr mahony sent an email to mr craig adams and keep in mind this is all in the context that mr mahony is saying well it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that mr kumar lost money it's their fault

third of april on the third of april so this refinancing happened on the 25th of january on the third of april justice darke notes on the same day on the same day the third of april another caveat was lodged on by mr kumar so that went on on the third of april and that was recorded that's this is all public you can anyone can google this egg look up this purchase a copy of that by this caveat the plaintiff again claimed to be the unpaid vendor under this 26th of may sorry 2016 may contract curiously curiously the caveat was apparently signed by mr peligaro as the plaintiff's attorney on the 30th of january so it's this continual delay delay delay from the 30th of january to the 3rd of april it's months here months there in action letting giving craig all this this road so i think you can see where this is sort of coming unstuck but let's just go back to this other

noted passing that mr paligaru gave evidence to the to the effect that at no time so let's let's test this here's an email now at no time did he receive any communications well that's different to sending it but did he receive any communications about any refinancing

well here's an email and we'll see who sent me this and how did i get it 10th of january now that's that's between december and march 10th january john mary wrote craig kumar is not happy with the delay in warriewood settling have you issued a notice to complete do you need do you need my help if your lawyer can't do it i'll i'll just act for you and i'll keep acting for mr kumar but i can manage all this this is what he's saying this is ridiculous delay that needs to be sorted mohan kumar reserves all right but hang on he can but if you need a lawyer no command reserves all rights but if you need a lawyer i'm your man do you need a lawyer john john ah 3 54 a.m something's keeping craig away john please come to the city tomorrow and i'll reassign property and loan to you

please tell me what time you're available and i'll have adam tilley meet us and workout guarantees so all you've got to do is guarantee it and i'll resign so the evidence was at no time palgary gave her the effect of no time between he's leaving the withdrawal in march did he receive any communications from craig about any refinancing so what's this adam tilley who's adam tilley adam tilley will meet you to work out financing guarantees on financing

later that day craig is not my [ __ ] as you put it mr kumar's rights you know and you keep mortgaging his property ah nine k bits later before you paid for it you keep ralph has signed the transfer transferring [ __ ] so ralph actually had the right to transfer the shares in bargo and and transfer the ownership of the company to mr kumar

therefore he's in your interest to work to solve the problem now the problem is for you is that not only will you have lost the development value you're in default of the loans which are secured we're giving you until 4 pm today the current payout tell us the current payout if you can't get those figures kumar will will by next monday become the owner and serve lapsing notices

so i don't know if this is well eleventh mate mate i tried to call you this is going to go pear shape so this is from ralph to justin hatfield who's justin hatfield oh that's he wouldn't be talking about refinancing because just justice darke found at no time was there any evidence he gave it ralph gave evidence to the effect of no time did he receive any communications from mr adams well i suppose this one to to justin hatfield is probably not from but anyway i'm stuck in the middle an asset line who are they they're money lenders justin hatfield as soon as craig settles warriewood has has to happen in the next 10 days one lender you know cross-collateralize this and that whatever 13.5 million

the current payout figure is 2.7 million dollars to winchester o'rourke that's tilley uh

at no point at no time the evidence was at no time was there any discussion about refinancing after ralph has those figures kumar will be in a position to refinance general without putting you in default of your loans secured over your property over 88 perfection avenue cross-collateralization is in breach of the sales contracts so a few choice words here the point is he's he was going to refinance with tilley adam tilley no news warriewood who knows it's almost a ponzi scheme

and mr hadfield you have facilitated a lot of it

it's easily resolved once warriewood settles what's happening with at no point was there any discussion about refinancing ralph ralph wrote what's happening with tilley refi refinancing it's fully approved it's fully approved so the evidence did he receive any communications about any refinancing of the general property

i i'm just not sure whether justice darke saw these communications but they're there interesting not good enough john mahony's still on the 11th not good enough client has been waiting months for the mythical warriewood settlement time is up kumar will now register the share transfer well even in april still hasn't happened also what is the secret about telling us how much people take to free dural of the various blisters kumar will not accept any more delays well apparently he will justin hatfield lumley finance and loans now if this wasn't about refinancing if this wasn't about refinancing then you know so it goes on and on and on and on the solicitor is the vendor's worst nightmare this all comes to craig not communicating and swearing another so there's craig will lose his family asset liner ruthless mahoney acted for paid on exchange acted against paid on exchange and wants payments so but ralph is organizing the logistics of his daughter's engagement so let's see what else there is here's another email this is to do with maybe not to do with refinancing but this is certainly from craig we're trying to we're trying to get as mentioned i have warriewood projects setting on the 29th yet so on the 30th according to justice darke ralph signs a new caveat which he doesn't put on until the third of april and again all of this is the fault of the torres assurance fund let's have a look at this one all of these are sent to me by ralph by the way so let's ralph from ralph to mark that's me from ralph to mark from ralph to mark 22nd tomorrow tomorrow so this property settled on the sorry the the use of the caveat occurred on the 25th of january and there was communications between

at no point did he receive any communications from mr adams about any refinancing of the general poverty well i'm going to say i'm sorry that on the 25th of january there's another communication but tomorrow so tomorrow is the 23rd of january this is before before the cave it is used gents mr lalich this is another one the evidence was there's no communication about refinancing from craig well mr lalich is one of craig's lawyers

you know so they're they're meeting up on ralph is meeting with justin hatfield and justin hatfield this wouldn't be anything to do with a refinancing would it lumley finance and loans accredited finance broker well i'm you know i am i've said i'm dubious about that evidence that ralph has has given to the effect that there was at no time did he receive any communications yet you know this is not a communication about refinancing from justin hatfield who's a mortgage broker craig adams you know so this is here see you there see you there so as you can see there's quite a lot to this particular judgment and we're only up to page six of 27 and it really does go on but i'm just highlighting a few key bits i'll just return now to this other thing and i've said that i am dubious about i'm not calling saying that people are outright lying but i am highly dubious about some of the aspects of what was put in front of justice darke and i'll take you back to this one paragraph 19 mr mahony on the 6th of november now this is at a time when there was no yes there was no caveat on the land according to ralph's evidence on the 15th of november ralph then went and put went and handed craig adams a withdrawal of the cave yet that wasn't on and then in december one was put on so in the evidence this is mr manny wrote to craig adams on 6th of november when there was no caveat and he says and we've talked about this just before i have i this is what manny writes now this is important because he says it's true and i'll show you i'll show you something else so this is on the 6th of november 2017. now i'm going to show you something in 2018 that causes me to be dubious i mr money i have now been in contact directly oh sorry i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india of mr kumar so someone in india has contacted mr kumar as you're aware kumar is the vendor there's a vendor finance you're in default and in december 17 he's mahony is writing and why why are we saying this well money's been paid he owes the duty of care to mr kumar and according to his his correspondence he's in contact with him so he must if you believe what he's writing he must accept that he did over duty of care and so as a matter of urgency as a matter of urgency well there's no caveat so it the kv doesn't actually go on for another month and is subsequently withdrawn using a withdrawal behavior that ralph did not give to mr manny he left it in a drawer according to ralph he left it in a drawer in bargo's office as a matter of urgency as the basis of you know the encumbrances a copy of this certificate of title a copy of the five caveats we've we have we have been instructed so did someone in india according to i've been contacted directly by representatives in india we have now been we have been instructed to determine whether all can be removed through lapsing notice or through litigation so at this point well at this point

at this point the mortgagee is the first monkey is in the name properties and they're on notice because of my letter there are notice of this interest so we've told them i told them absolutely do not lend any more money and subsequent to this more money was lent and but again the argument that money law is using is that this is all the fault of the torrents assurance fund it's all their fault all of this you know as a matter of urgency we've been instructed to you know start laughing things can we lapse them can we can we have media litigation and there's no response so there's no response this is the 6th of november and academia does go on in december and is subsequently withdrawn using a withdrawal academia date of the 15th of november of their abouts so we asked to find out the current balance on the n m nine he says he's been contacted by people in india directly that's now directly in his email of november 2017. the ralph please provide me the contact details for the indians so he doesn't even know who his client is he's only dealing with this is a year later he's either lost the phone number let's be generous and say he's lost the phone number please provide me contact details he doesn't know he doesn't know the name he doesn't know the phone number according to this this is the way i'd read it please provide contact details not just the phone number person phone number emails you know what their relationship as you are unable to do anything to further this matter i need to speak with the indians to have you replaced whoa to have you replaced as their attorney

why did i donate why did it take until october 18 the land's been sold by that point but yet a year before he's saying in november the year before he's saying i was a man of urgency we need to find out and start lapsing things

i'm saying look let's let's have a look now there is a i'm just going to throw it up on the screen here we've got signed by ralph peligaru in july and november 2018 twice ralph has assigned a claim that mr mahony sorry that mr kumar would have against mr manny for professional negligence now i don't know if that's i don't know if that claim has legs or not but mr mahony is being employed and sending out bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars 90 to 100 000 or thereabouts two mr kumar so he must have owed he he must feel that he owes a duty of care it took him until october to 2018 after the property sold after the property has been had nine caveats go on it's it's really interesting but yet the argument is it's all the fault forget all of this stuff it's all the torrents assurances fund's fault they're to blame the state government has to has to cough up money i still don't understand why you don't want to save your house ralph i'm still here to help i'm still here to help well wow that's fantastic now let's go back to we'll go back to this i have now been contacted directly by representatives in india well i've been in contact with them myself you know for several years let's have a look at some of the stuff that's being said

here's what i wrote i'm not going to give you the person's details did mr manny ever speak with any family members of mr kumar in november 2017. paragraph 19 says he did hi mark no he or ralph has never spoken to any family member only you were the first to approach us the first this poor bastard's sitting over in jail in india now i'm this is not mr kumar this is a representative but this poor bastard is sitting in jail he's had his four million dollars plundered and i am the first to contact them

first that's pretty clear okay then i go on in in the court judgment manny gives evidence he has described he has had discussions with someone in india in india not just ralph someone in india

the reply who is that someone there has to be a name i believe him i do believe this man

by sayings just by just saying someone in court it doesn't make any sense he has to give details and here's specifically what i did send to the contact i have now been in contact directly i have now been contacted directly by the representatives in india in india

no name paragraph 16. he's just making it up he's just making it up

wow now things aren't i'm just repeating this i'm personally speaking for myself i am dubious like i actually am dubious that this is true i have now been contacted directly but this is what a lawyer with 40 years experience his writing in 6th of november could he have saved that last 400 grand could he have i don't know

at this point in november 17 none of this none of this claim has been assigned to me so he could have saved maybe four hundred thousand to he could have saved two million dollars maybe and he in his own words he's saying well we've been we have been instructed now if this is correct if he has been contacted directly well he's in the same email he's saying we've been instructed to determine whether any of the caveats can be removed through lapsing notices or why didn't he do that he's been instructed hang on you're a lawyer you're instructed why don't you do it

so again we're only up to page six it's it's it's a staggering staggering document and full credit to full credit to justice he does i think a very good job with the material he's been presented now he's been presented things saying well he's had contacts with people in india justice darke clearly has absolutely no idea and absolutely no no criticism he doesn't know he makes the observation we haven't seen mr we haven't seen mr kumar record he didn't he didn't come and give evidence well okay reason good reason for that he can't he's locked up apparently i don't know so look let's skip right to the end now and i will say this i will say this this is a very long well it's not overly long but it's a lot lengthy and it's well considered it is well considered third of april manny sent a letter to mr adams mr adams unfortunately unfortunately however our clients our clients have come to no other conclusion than that you have fraudulently also delivered to the solicitor casino the withdrawal of cavity fraud it's very big if you're going to say fraud it's the bar is very very high in all the circumstances in april of 2018 in all the circumstances man is writing in all circumstances we have been instructed again he's got an instruction to report your actions to the new south wales police for fraud so what did he do with that instruction third of april he's got the instructions to report you for for fraud and third of april same day they re-lodged the caveat but he'd been sitting on that caveat from since the 30th of january now would it have made any difference i don't know i don't know if he'd lodged the cave on the 30th of january it may or may not have made any difference but all i do know is they sat on it they sat on it mr mr mahony or mr paligari where the evidence is the finding the finding of justice darke is that curiously the caveat was apparently signed by the power of attorney mr kunma oh sorry mr palgar on the 30th of january when the plaintiff's second the second favorite remained on the title so the withdrawal of cave it had been handed over but it still remained so casino actually had the withdrawal um

at the time beligari signed another one on the 30th he must have known that the withdrawal of it had been used yet on the third of april they're writing letters saying oh we've just discovered it and there was a previous finding on the 22nd on the 22nd i said i'll talk about this gap paragraph 3738 i talk about this gap three further cavetts were lodged on the 29th now this this whole this and one of these i was involved with in some way the reliance leasing one this was lodged on the 29th of january and that stopped putting it on stopped the cinder having theirs properly registered their mortgage i probably registered and the removal of n m and apg's and there was this obviously this giant clog now ralph apparently signs the the next caveat on the 30th but at this point reliance got theirs on apg got this on slightly behind the one that i was involved in reliance and then lumley that's that's the finance broker they got theirs on as well and then on the 30th ralph must have known so he goes and signs another one but claims they don't know until the 22nd of february 2018 mr mr money appears to have become aware of the refinancing transaction appears so that's interesting very interesting and right the existence of the new mortgage is of serious concern to my client yet ralph has signed another caveat on the 30th and it's of such a serious concern he didn't did nothing with it from the 30th of january until the 3rd of april it's it's that it's there are some questions here so

we then move on the total claim that was made by kumar against the torrens assurance fund is one point called 1.9 million dollars

paragraph 59 is submitted that there are good and now the registrar general says there's good reasons to doubt the evidence of obviously allegory the registrar general says that there was good reason to doubt the evidence of mr palgary

now we look at the determination what did the court find paragraph 68 i have reservations so just justice star can only deal with the material that's before him he he he doesn't do his absolute credit i think he's done a brilliant job okay but he may not have had all the material put in front of him either by rob calgary or by the torrens assurance fund they may simply not have known as paragraph 68 i have reservations about aspects you find some of it implausible

paragraph 69 despite my reservations i've ultimately come to the conclusion mr paligara's evidence should be accepted so that's pretty good but it doesn't change the result the result is how many

paragraph 61 i further find mr adams in making use he was acting making useful withdrawal of cave it was acting contrary to the instructions

on the material that was put before justice darke and i don't know if that included those emails well i do know that i'll put it up again peligaro said that at no time was there a correspondence about the refinance but coming back to paragraph 7172 paragraph 71 i accept mr paligara's evidence to the effect that neither he nor the plaintiff himself had any knowledge of the transaction that's about the refinancing now again i do not know whether the emails the one tomorrow with lalich and hatfield and there's a series of them that i put up i do not know whether they've been put up to justice darke and considered but on what was can what was put before him he says he accepts mr palgary's evidence okay i'm prepared to conclude that mr pelic that mr adams acted dishonestly in this really in this respect

paragraph 72 for the above reason i'm prepared to find that mr adam acted this acted fraudulently and making use of the withdrawal of k-bits but okay so that's to get money on the turns assurance fund there has to be dishonesty or fraud or a mistake by the current assurance fund the registrar general's department and on top of that you have to prove that it led to loss now that was that's the whole thing that i've always said well hang on i think you've postponed yourself ralph by handing this over and look i i'll just show we'll go through these other pages there's lots and lots and lots here okay lots of analysis but the plaintiff submitted that the equity he could have mr kumar could have been four hundred thousand dollars better off and now on top of that there's interest okay so we're talking still a lot of money here a lot of money and it was as i said there was a two million dollar kitty apg received out of that fund 725 thousand dollars that's three quarters of a million dollars and ralph and ian jordan the director of apg have a company together i don't know precisely i was in the mediation in july 2019 but i didn't go and shut the door and chat with ian jordan i didn't and so apg work out with a lot of money now the liquidator is now chasing that and saying well that was a preference and we'll see where that all goes as i said there's a whole lot of analysis here and it's it's going to be impossible to just go through them all but i'll put this up on our website let's have a look at these last two pages in my opinion in my opinion the whole of the loss or damage should be regarded as the consequences of the acts or omissions of the plaintiff the conduct of mr pelago as the plaintiff's agent in relation to the withdrawal of the caveat the very means by which mr adams was able to perpetrate his fraud that's to blame so i think as i said earlier justice did find that there was fraudulent conduct but you've got to say that okay that that fraud led to the loss and there's pages and pages of analysis the bottom line is justin darke did not find did not find that it really would have made any difference whether whether there was fraud or not the the post-painting conduct and the arming and all of that it was really the conduct of mr palgary was in in my view plainly negligent he failed to take reasonable care for the interest of the plaintiff that is particularly the case in circumstances from november 17 mr paligara was not only aware of fargo's breaches so they failed to pay they had to pay 1.5 which they did on this 5.5 million dollar transaction and they had to pay 500 000 within four weeks and another one and a half million or two million or something after that and then another two and a half million so he was aware that they'd missed all of those it was incredible i said third of november 2017 we've got the email from mr mahony who says he's been contacted directly by representatives in india as a matter of urgency and yet justice darke says in particular this is particularly the case in circumstances where from november 2017 mr paligara was not only aware of the breaches under the contract but also had concerns about mr adams's dealing that he's hocking the property and he knew he must have known that

he must have known that's what justice darke thoughts to make the signed withdrawal of caveat form available to mr adams in those circumstances strikes me as contacted contract conduct that is very negligent if not reckless

mr adam utilized the means that were available to him to carry out the fraud applying a common sense approach the conduct of mr palgary should should be regarded as the cause of the claimed loss four million dollars just down the toilet of mr kumar's money four million dollars down the toilet to my mind it is it is a cause of the loss as much as the conduct of mr adams himself it is a case where there are truly successive causes of the loss it is it is thus it can't be concluded that the loss or damage was as a consequence of the axial or remission of the sorry that it was a consequence of the acts or omissions of the plaintiff and thus no entitlement it wasn't the fault of the torrens assurance fund and just to rub it in just a tiny bit more paragraph 22 122 the plaintiff will be dismissed the statement claims dismissed the court will order the court will further order that the plaintiff pay the registrar general's costs so there you have it a a terrible terrible tale we'll come back and wrap up in a minute

well how is that for an incredible defeat justice darke as has really nailed that i think and well you would think that that's the end of it but apparently ralph and john mahony are off thinking thinking about thinking about an appeal can you can you believe it thinking about an appeal on top of that there is another case which i've just put up the details about ralph is also personally suing the torrens assurance fund with his wife henrika and a very similar thing around the same time as all of this happened with mr kumar at a very similar time ralph borrowed money at six percent a month and five hundred forty thousand dollars six percent a month from a company called franklin yeezy and for better or worse for better or worse it also the well mr for whatever reason we talked about delays incredibly there was a a delay between about august 2017 and december 2017 very similar periods where ralph failed to put a caveat for neglected to put a caveat on land at warriewood owned by golden arrow international and other craigslist companies and subsequently he missed out on 540 thousand dollars and kept on paying six percent interest a month and in case you can't work it out that's like thirty something thousand in the first month and when you don't pay it just balloons and balloons and like literally i did some sums at one stage it was like fifty four thousand dollars a month interest it was up to so but the trouble is i i think i haven't seen the judgment and if even when i do get a copy of the judgment or if it's being dismissed or whatever i'll make sure if i get the documents we'll post them and because they're public documents and um

very similar facts you know i imagine i can't see how he could possibly win where he he's going to claim well it's the torrens assurance fund's fault that that craig in this instance i think they were just slack and i didn't put either mahony or paligaru was slack i don't know who so i'm not portioning blame there but what i do know is there's a period of four months and there was no caveat on this warriewood land and in the meantime you saw how many caveats craig adams put on bargo he put justice many on maybe justice many he put enough there was lots of occasions put on warriewood as well and ralph missed out and it goes on to pay 30000 a month interest and that's clearly not sustainable so you would think so where's this all going time will tell time really will tell but you know to the best of my knowledge ralph's insolvent we've got a we have mike i personally have a consent judgment against ralph $106551 we filed a creditor's petition and ralph is trying to have it set aside one that he consented to so it's going to be very interesting he's managed to get that adjourn until april so in the meantime if there's any uh

if there's anyone out there that also has owed money and a lot of money you're very welcome to come and join the party join the action join the creditors petition for your supporting creditor and it wouldn't surprise me who you are so again if you're owed money come and join the action if you've got any questions if you know any facts if you've got any thoughts we'd love to hear from you www.dcpartners.solutions/podcast or give us a call 1-300-327-123 if you do go to our website check out the link in the bottom right hand corner there's into the message chat tool we'd love to hear from you and you know thank you very much thanks for tuning in bye

Leave a Reply - nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Amreeta Paligaru – profile

amreeta paligaru

Amreeta Paligaru is the wife of Ralph Paligaru, the former employee of Mohan Kumar aka Chhota Rajan aka Rajendra Sadashiv Nikalje.

Amreeta is the 50% shareholder in Dural Alliances Pty Ltd (in liquidation).

Amreeta‘s lawyer is John Mahony of Mahony Law – also the lawyer for Craig Adams, Bargo Developments, Mohan Kumar and possibly others?

Amreeta is the brother of Davendar Deodiscussed elsewhere on this blog.

Amreeta, Ralph and their company Dural Alliances borrowed the sum of $540,000 from Franklin Yeezy Holdings Pty Ltd to loan to Craig Adams. Amreeta entered later entered into a document entitled Deed of Forbearance – click here to view.

Fact Check

… I have nothing to do with Mr. Kumar, Dural etc. I don’t understand why we are on your blogs?

Amreeta Paligaru, 16 February 2021, WhatsApp, 10.06pm.

Amreeta messaged me a number of times this evening (16/2/2021) through Whatsapp, Facebook and on other platforms, amongst other things writing:

… I have nothing to do with Mr. Kumar, Dural etc. I don’t understand why we are on your blogs.

Is this true?

According to clause 5 of the Schedule, Ralph Paligaru warrants that effectively he and Amreeta borrowed $540,000 against their own family home ….

so as to benefit Mohan Kumar as his principal.

Amreeta must have known that she either did or did not enter into the Franklin Yeezy borrowings “to benefit Mohan Kumar”?

Ultimately, Amreeta (and Ralph) received $500,000 of Mr. Kumar’s money in the Kesinda proceedings which they applied toward’s legal expenses from the Kesinda proceedings with a sum in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (of Mr. Kumar’s funds) used to reduce Ralph & Amreeta‘s own mortgage.

The writer finds this puzzling?

Puzzling?

Why does Amreeta (and Ralph) need to borrow $540,000 (at 6% a month) just to benefit Mohan Kumar?

Mohan Kumar was the unpaid vendor of the property at 632 Old Northern Rd, Dural – owed $4m by Craig Adams.

Why if Amreeta (and Ralph) wanted to benefit Mohan Kumar didn’t they just work to get Craig Adams to pay the $4m of unpaid vendor money?

If Amreeta (and Ralph) wanted to benefit Mohan Kumar, why didn’t they just enter a JV in Mohan Kumar‘s own name with Craig Adams for the proposed private hospital?

Did Ralph hold the Heads of Agreement between himself and Craig Adams on trust for the benefit of Mohan Kumar?

Mr. Kumar is and was at the time a foreigner.

According to the warranty above, Ralph says he (and presumably Amreeta) entered the arrangements with Craig Adams to borrow $540,000 from Franklin Yeezy using their own house as security

… “so as to benefit Mohan Kumar ...”?

Does this seem believable to anyone? Let us know below your thoughts?

But again – Amreeta writes:

… I have nothing to do with Mr. Kumar, Dural etc. I don’t understand why we are on your blogs?

What next?

How would you rate your experiences with Amreeta Paligaru?

Would you like to tell us confidentially about your experiences?

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 confidential tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:

Leave a Reply – nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

The Many R’s Podcast – S01E02

Podcast Mark Smith

5R Podcast – S01E02

Rogues, Rascals, Rorts, Rip-offs & Reviewables

for more information and indepth villain profiles – visit our webpage

https://www.dcpartners.solutions/products-services/blog/podcast/

To share this video: https://youtu.be/DxkTVAXIUNQ

In this series Mark Smith of DC Partners (Solutions) Pty Ltd sets the scene and discusses those villains or possible villains that we’ll be discussing throughout the remainder of the Season and subsequent seasons.

Season 2 will focus on:

Season 1, Episode 2

(Chapter 1) discusses the following:

Travel ripoff

Corporate rip-offs

Real estate including agents and developers

Andrew Saunders of Saunders & Staniforth Pty Ltd, Valuers and Town Planners (and legal advisors) of Orange, NSW.

Corporate rip-offs

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).

#5r #5rpodcast #marksmith

Leave a Reply – nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Transcript:

rogues rascals reviewables routes and rip-offs in fact a whole bunch of ours season one episode two my name is mark smith of dc partner solutions i'd love you to check in at our website

www.dcpartners.solutions slash podcast you can ring us anytime 1-300-327-123 or instant message chat with us in our web page bottom right hand corner use the tools well just to recap in season one episode one we set the scene and we discussed a range of sectors and uh different parties that we might be interested in chatting about and some of the sectors uh our villains and our themes uh these sectors that we looked at included real estate property developers um corporate villains uh travel rip-offs a a real favorite and we've got some huge news on that this week we talked about malfeasance which is wrongdoing by government personnel we didn't really touch on them but iffy lawyers and we'll see whether we've got uh time this week to uh to to touch on a couple of iffy lawyers uh miscellaneous shysters insurance racketeers banks and receivers well this week we've had a very significant win um on behalf of a class action before we even filed the class action so we managed to um well i won't go into the tactics uh specifically but um it was surprising that uh it was surprising in some ways that uh it was unsurprising in others but it was surprising and pleasant that um we got a very good outcome for a group tour i cannot name the tour operator involved nor can i name the class members but it was a group it was a group of 61 and they uh the entire class had virtually the the same claim against the tour operator so that would be the defendant um and for roughly the same amounts of money for the same what's called cause of action so to run a class action uh it's necessary that at least seven people have uh the same or substantially the same cause of action against a at least one defendant so we had a we had a terrific outcome there uh we're still very interested to help people that um have been ripped off um and uh look we keep reading newspapers all the time we've got scenic tours charging people 20 40 50 50 000 59 000 um cancellation fees for trips of lifetimes and uh no post payments uh travel credits that sort of thing there's some real heartbreaking stories out there and uh we're terribly terribly uh sorry but uh interested and willing to help help people and uh we we we read these articles about people with these horrendous uh travel uh cancellation fees through no fault of the um through through no fault of the traveler really so um we're very keen to pursue some of those flight center qantas airways jetstar uh people that are sitting on thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars i think the latest wrought and it's an absolute scam uh qantas airways uh flights in october are clearly not traveling uh the commonwealth government has imposed travel bans until at least the middle of december and qantas airways is refuse is refusing to uh to cancel the flights i mean they're just um thieving bastards if i can put it like that um thieving bastards taking people's money and um you know many months ago they've taken people's money uh i was uh i think i read an example of someone i think they were going to chicago or somewhere like that booked a business class ticket twelve thousand dollars per head or thereabouts and uh clearly the flight's not um not departing but uh qantas refusing to

refund sorry refusing to cancel and then when eventually they will cancel then well you can expect a 10 week 10 week weight for the uh poor traveler to uh to get their own money back and uh it's just not good enough qantas youth thieving bastards so um we're very keen to uh to help people the victims of qantas uh flight center where we're not hearing uh wonderful things there we are hearing that people eventually get their their refunds but um uh it's um you know uh people are not banks and uh if cash cash flows particularly tight for flight center well really that's that is a flight center problem uh so uh there's still hearing occasionally uh of great difficulty getting through to call centers of booking.com expedia web jet what if and and what have you so very very keen to pursue some of these travel villains um and uh specifically very keen on uh group tour class actions we're talking about the insurance racketeers and uh this particular racket uh that's another are rackets very close to wroughts and rip-offs but this particular one is an absolute racket and it's it's plain out now theft how it works is uh the travel not the travel on pubmed the insurance companies sell you a policy and look in some i've i've seen a range of different policies but certainly policies up uh that were i haven't seen one that renewed before the end of 2019 i'm not saying they're not out there but i haven't seen one that renewed before the end of 2019 that had the correct wording and and it's wording under what's called business interruption insurance and uh typically how business interruption insurance works let's say you run a 10-pin bowling uh alley and it burns down and well you'd get you'd get business interruption you'd get fire insurance so the building would be insured but you can actually insure your losses as well and um uh you might let's say you you are you own this 10 pin bowling alley and this doesn't just apply to 10 pin bowling it certainly applies to all sorts of professionals it might apply to doctors it could apply to dentists candlestick makers bakers you name it uh if you've uh if you have a policy that covers business interruption insurance then i strongly encourage you to look up your policy now if you're at all unsure whether you're covered um by all means send us a copy of your policy at solutions at dc partners dot solutions uh just email us a copy of your insurance policy solutions at a at solutions at dc partners dot solutions and how it's supposed to work is um you have a policy that covers your losses in the event your business is interrupted and there's some absolutely gigantic claims going through um and this case has gone through in england and they're doing test cases here star casino

now unsurprisingly star casino has had their business interrupted but interestingly they they claim that their businesses have been interrupted not by the pandemic but by government policy and

there are a number of ways to claim but when i was talking just a moment ago about policies that renewed before the end of 2019 uh there was an exclusion clause in there that said if uh your business is interrupted uh by virtue of a epidemic or a health emergency or they don't necessarily use the word pandemic

and they also refer to something called the quarantine act of i think it's 1914 and they say well look if your business has been interrupted by a pandemic declared under the quarantine act of 1914 it's a commonwealth act uh well that's an ex an event that's excluded well the the stuff up is that and we talked about iffy lawyers whoever the iffy lawyer is that acted for these insurance companies really has a lot to answer for and uh the quarantine act of 1914 was actually um however you put it they buy the quarantine act of 1916 or whatever the year was uh was repealed it was repealed and so all the insurance policies however none of them were updated and they continued to address an exclusion for pandemics declared under the quarantine act which had been repealed in 2016 and here we are in 29 to 2020 and along comes the

along comes the corona virus and of course there has been no pandemic declared under the quarantine act of 1914 or 1916 or whatever the year was because in fact the uh quarantine act of 1914 was repealed in 2016. so there will never be a um a pandemic declared under that particular act because it was repealed it's gone and so uh this iffy lawyer whoever it is he or she uh whichever firm has um has left a

has left some sort of gap uh and it would appear to be the size of the grand canyon and uh you it would appear you can fly a plane sideways through it and uh it could be that thousands and thousands and thousands of businesses out there have business interruption insurance and so this is a space that we're uh tremendously interested in if you have uh business interruption insurance or if you don't know if you've got a policy and you think you might have business interruption insurance uh would depend on the business and clearly business interruption insurance requires that your business is a business and it is indeed interrupted so look there's still some fine print but we'd be very keen to talk to you at solutions at dc partners dot solutions or come to our website uh bottom bottom corner here use the chat tool alternatively give us a call 1-300-327-123 or send us a copy of your insurance policy solutions at dc partners dot solutions okay in the villains uh real estate and developer kind of villains uh area we're talking about we're giving you an update from uh episode one about our friend ralph ignatius palagario and uh we'd indicated that we'd obtained a consent judgment in the supreme court of new south wales none of this is private it was all on court lists and anyone in the world could have sat in the back of the court well mr paligaru we have a judgment of the supreme court of new south wales and uh in the last 10 days or so we've gone and obtained a bankruptcy notice and we've had that served on ralph ignatius palagaru so our friend mr paligaru the clock is ticking and six under six months from now we'll we'll be back and um uh will uh be applying for the sequestration of that particular man's uh affairs uh he's the director of a company he's yes he's the director of a company called dural alliances proprietary limited in liquidation i appointed the liquidator there a man called daniel friskin of i think the company name is o'brien palmer insolvency uh a good bloke and uh doing a good job oh our friend mr palagar who find fifty thousand dollars uh not um by asic um has not uh has not complied with his obligations not even in in liquidation a uh a director of a company is required to cooperate uh he's required to keep books and records but he's also required to cooperate with the uh with the liquidator so um mr palagaru fifty thousand dollar fine by asic um let's see whether his lawyer his lawyer is a fellow called john marney sometimes called mahoney m-a-h-o-n-y john mahoney of mahoney law at balkan hills in new south wales or norway west business park let's see whether uh mahoney can get our friend uh mr peligaru out of that asic fine so um we've had uh some very interesting correspondence with our friend mr mani now uh ralph paligaru friend business partner silent partner joint venture partner received

refinanced his house to give craig adams money um to advance money to a company called golden arrow international proprietary limited also in liquidation advance that uh that chap uh mr craig adams 540 thousand dollars uh this is all on the public record uh uh logitech aviate um advanced the money in august 2017 but mr mani uh did not mr mani prepared a deed for mr palagara mr and mrs palagaro in august 2017 but uh the record shows that mr mani um did not lodge a caveat and uh a period of uh from august to november 2017 uh went by and mr mani um in about november 2017 subsequently lodged this uh caveat on these uh properties in worrywood belonging to golden arrow international proprietary limited but in the meantime uh our good friends uh ian jordan and maya i can't pronounce this and i may are beginning with p you'll see the transcript here of australasian property group private limited singapore uh look they did a personal loan a personal loan from uh ian jordan and maya of the company australasian property group private limited now i understand uh that australasian pro australasian property group private limited have uh is it merrill lynch or kkr kolberg cravis roberts as uh as investors uh i i i reckon they'd be uh absolutely um furious if they'd known if these investors of australasian property group private limited uh gave unsecured loans to craig matthew adams now um somehow and uh this watch this space i that's all i'm going to say um australasian property group managed to get uh and and this company is in liquidation so uh watch this space but uh australasian property group managed to weasel out of uh golden arrow international sometime between august 2017 and november 2017 they managed to

wangle wrought if you like charges on the real property of golden arrow international now there are offences there are avoidable transactions and um watch this space uh if you um if you obtain an unfair preference in someone's bankruptcy uh that's something that a bankruptcy trustee can do something about so uh craig matthew adams uh craig matthew adams uh happens to know john francis mahoney of mahoney law balcom hills and interestingly uh ralph peligaro advanced 540 000 to the company of craig matthew adams called golden arrow international and the invoice uh for from john francis mahoney of mahoney law did not go to uh ralph ignatius palagaro or if it did it was actually paid for by craig matthew adams it gets murkier and murkier ralph ignatius paligaru borrowed this 540 000 from a company called uh franklin yeezy proprietary limited it had a an interest rate on it sit down six percent per month in default and so the the problem is you you've got to have an exit plan if you're borrowing money at six percent per month um i don't know how your maths is but let's say one percent of 540 000 per month is 5400 so if you're um in default for uh five hundred and forty thousand at six percent a month you're talking thirty thousand dollars per month of interest in default and so that's a real problem for ralph ignatius palagaro if you borrow 540 000 and come november of 2017 you discover that uh your interest if you've got one your interest in land at uh if you've got one because john francis mahoney uh prepared a deed for you uh giving you this interest in this this equitable interest in this land at worrywood uh then you want to hope like hell that uh john francis mahoney has lodged to have it and it turned out that um the circumstances will be investigated it's unknown the reasons for the delay and i'm not accusing john francis mahoney of any anything uh it's just uh he must have known that it was uh the exit plan was the exit plan for mr peligari to get his 540 000 back and noting that mr palagara would be in default if he didn't get the money back um six percent per month so it's rather important it's interesting for mr mahoney to have done his job so uh if craig matthew adams paid the bill it's also interesting who was the client was the client craig matthew adams was the client ralph ignatius peligaro and the mind boggles so that's our our good friends there australasian property group ian mayer craig matthew adams personal loans personal loans converting to company loans for no consideration uh potentially um postponing conduct on caveats uh we've got unfair preferences in greg matthew adams's bankruptcy trustee and on and on and on it goes okay quick update on our friend tony dager from uh vogue construction group proprietary limited in liquidation and our great mate max pricey of tracy yap realty uh max pricey of tracy ray yap realty is the the bloke that blocked me in the driveway at 26a hillmont crescent thornley and told me that i couldn't attend a public auction um i turned up there at about quarter past two on the particular day for a 2 30 public auction maybe it was 20 past maybe it was 25 past i don't remember but public auctions usually you know involve the public and um our great mate uh max pricey well according to realestate.com.iu as at this evening 27th of september uh 26 a hillmont is unsolved and uh you know i don't uh recall the exact date of the auction but our mate max pricey stopped me now who else did he stop from coming there's a covered 19 limitation of 20 people attending auctions so if you usually i would think if you've got 20 people attending an auction someone's going to buy it they can't all be 29 well i guess they could all be 20 neighbors but they're all pre-registered so they're really really organized like her neighbors so uh our mate what we did know max price he rings triple o he doesn't want me there so um some things uh something's seriously um bizarre is the word that i used in episode one well we've now got another villain to introduce you to this is our other mate dennis acrylic that's spelled k-r-i-l-i-c of oakville he's a electrician uh license number 193 pardon me one nine six nine seven three c new south wales uh fair trading dennis krillick uh just happens to also uh own a whole bunch of real estate in port macquarie and uh funnily enough that's that's where our mate craig adams is uh

he's got lots of connections who knows where where craig lives these days where he's residing who knows but uh unrelated person dennis acrylic uh watch this space he's a uh emerging villain and uh we'll be uh we'll be sharing some more bits and pieces now andrew saunders of saunders and staniforth a wonderful town planner valuer of uh of the town of orange uh does a whole bunch of work for the commonwealth bank uh even is good enough to give legal advice i don't know whether he's qualified i i'd love to see cv i've subpoenaed his cv uh we're in litigation with uh our friend andrew saunders he gives legal advice to people letting them know things he couldn't possibly know about existing use rights and well another week or month or however long has gone by and we still don't know whether andrew saunders has any qualifications to give legal advice so if you're a client of andrew saunders you've got any stories um about town planning mishaps uh we would love to hear from you if you know dennis krillick of um you've invested money with dennis krillick in some property development we'd we'd love to know about that vogue constructions um in liquidation apparently uh uh leave behind a trial of destruction ralph kaligaru ian jordan maya p australasian property group and that's our update on real estate and uh developer villains okay in in the corporate villains section today we're going to touch on in a little bit more detail our good friends at bike ride operations proprietary limited otherwise known as and it was previously known as a company called carnarvon cherry proprietary limited and the directors of that we did discuss them briefly last week bernard and fiona hall now we're looking at doing two class actions um in the you know in regards to bite right operations proprietary limited and uh carnavan cherry bite right happened to sell apples and cherries and they happened to sell those apples to woolworths and harris farm so you may you know if next time you pick up a pink lady apple uh check if it's a bite right apple and you know you might want to choke on that but if you don't

it's it's really something that uh you know we think has got a lot of merit so we're looking at these two uh class actions involving bike ride operations proprietary limited and carnarvon cherry uh as i mentioned the first of those is an employee class action and we came across this uh case uh involving a guy called daniel usher and that's spelled u double s h e r daniel usher and uh we noticed this in the federal circuit court of australia you know a couple of months ago and i spoke to daniel usher and daniel usher had worked some huge number of hours for carnarvon cherry now canarvan cherry seems to it's just a perception but they seem to wanting to vanish off the corporate radar and um look uh if i was being unkind i'd say that they were phoenixing into this uh company called bite right operations so um carnavan cherry has a has an interesting history and it is currently being sued by uh one of our associates called dcp litigation holdings for something like six hundred thousand dollars so i think when that case is over it's going to be very interesting to see if there's any assets left in bite right sorry in carnarvon cherry proprietary limited or if they've all been phoenixed into bite right operations proprietary limited anyway it seems that bite right operations is um now the phoenix entity and we're also looking at a glow at a grower class action and uh there's a mail out going out this week to a number of growers is about 20 or 30. we've got a lot more growers than that on our database but we think uh well it seems that they currently have something like 20 or 30 uh growers that are supplying apples and cherries into their packing shed and

one of the companies i was a director of i was only sorry i was an associate director not a director but an associate director called homeward bound holdings proprietary limited now that that company i won't tell you everything about it but that company did grow cherries and it had arrangements previously with carnarvon cherry proprietary limited bernard and fiona hall as i said are the directors of that and we say that seems to seems to be phoenixing into this company called bite right operations proprietary limited i'm going to put up a lot more information on our website about bike ride operations proprietary limited but there is a great deal of grey areas let's put it that way gray areas about bite right operations proprietary limited i will put up a uh sbs dateline transcript and i'll put up the links to the sbs dateline program and that was sometime in june and uh this company bite ride operations it must be um well let's go into murky waters let's put it that way it is according to the director fiona hall uh now she uh on sbs dateline amongst other things she admitted that this company that grows fruit uh ran out of water um at one of its orchards so i i don't know uh oh and there's a drought and there was bushfires so and there was you know record heat waves so um i also i will put up a link and i'll provide the transcript fiona blamed the drought um in an interview with uh i think they were called central west uh regional development and i'll put up the link it's uh it's on youtube you can uh you're gonna look at it and you can be the judge yourself but uh fiona didn't seem to um take the take the blame she's a allegedly a nuffield scholar fiona hall and uh fiona wasn't that keen to accept the blame for running out of water but it turns out when you're going to grow fruit you've got to start pumping sufficiently early out of your bores and you know fill your dams and all the rest so there's some questions in my mind whether she's a genuine nuffield scholar and i happen to know um and i'll put up the links fiona asked me to write the um to write the application for her nuffield scholarship i didn't i wouldn't but i do know who did write it and uh she was successful and the person that wrote it it was not fiona hall so there's some questions there about the real bona fides there i think of bernard and fiona hall bite right operations and canarvan cherry so grow a class action if you want to join our grower class action there's a link and uh if you've been growing fruit in the past uh this is maybe and i i think from the documents that i've seen and that the documents that i've assembled uh concerning homewood-bound holdings proprietary limited uh we we have questions um we fiona in sbs dateline uh claimed that her staff were paid eighty dollars a day now that seems an extraordinarily an extraordinary or seventy dollars a day seems to me to be an extraordinarily low figure what is confusing and why we think that there is scope for a growing class action is

the bills that went to the the um growers work for considerably more considerably more than 80 a day for staff in fact we've got one staff member um who has no date of birth no name sorry he has a name um i won't say his name but i might publish some details uh in fact i probably will i will publish the invoice there you go i will publish the invoice and the invoice has the person's name on it the particular person in mind uh we did some searches and this person has no date of birth according to canaan cherry it has no date of birth that person no date of birth he worked 180 something hours in the week now there only is 168 hours in the week so even if he worked every hour in the week we got billed a week being homeward bound holdings proprietary limited got billed for in excess of 24 hours a day seven days a week for this particular block so if he exists he does not have a tax file number he uh does have a tax file number exemption for being under 18 and his um so this under 18 worked more than 24 hours a day and we got a bill homewood bound holdings for 4 thousand more in excess of four thousand dollars for one week when um according to fiona on the sbs dateline they pay their stuff something like 80 a day so you go figure that out i say that there is scope for this grower class action and for those growers that want to join us and want to get want to be charged a fair sum and don't want the assets of carnarvon cherry to end up phoenixed into bite right operations proprietary limited now's the time to contact us

and we are putting together this class action as i mentioned now uh we have been talking about this for some months and uh the reason it hasn't proceeded until now was because of there was a public inquiry i'll put the links uh the uh federal government the treasurer uh ran through the commonwealth uh parliament a public inquiry into litigation funding and class actions and there was considerable unknown areas so if you're one of the uh growers to carnavan cherry proprietary limited we think we know who you are we are going to write to you you will get our emails and you will get an invitation you can also you can join up as as a as a grower and we have a very interesting um person to be the lead plaintiff so you can't be the lead plaintiff but you can be a class action member and uh we do have this afsl we've got the details of our afsl on their website

www.dcpartners.solutions and search in the afsl and you'll find the particulars of our afsl so here we are we're almost the end of another episode of season one episode two of the five hours pop podcast rogues rascals rorts rip-offs and reviewables and uh there was another r that we added today i can't remember what it was but racketeers i think that might have been it so look uh there's an endless stream of asses and we're here to shine the light on them and discuss them and

answer your questions and look through our afsl if we can help people like you to obtain a just uh outcome uh we'd be super keen to do that so uh at the end you'll see uh some contact details for us 1-300-327-123 uh you can always email us at solutions at dcpartners.solutions or talk to us in the bottom uh corner of the screen there's an instant chat there on our website www.dcpartners.solutions love to hear from you love to receive your emails if you've got any feedback on any of our horror stories if you happen to know one of our villains if you've got documents about them or anything you want to shed some light on you maybe you used to work there you want to clear your conscience however it is uh by all means come and make contact with us and we'd love to hear from you and uh we'll be seeing you very soon we've got uh oodles endless oodles of uh uh juicy tidbits for uh uh for our viewers and uh thank you very much for the uh incredible response we've had lots and lots of uh interest in the podcast so we'll look forward to producing episode three for you in the very near future thank

you

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

Leave a Reply - nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.

Dural Alliances Pty Ltd (in liquidation) – profile

Ralph Paligaru

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

Below are the personal opinions (unless stated otherwise) of Mark Smith.

Public interest

Dural’s director is Ralph Ignatius Paligaru. Ralph purports to have connections to people in extremely high public offices in Fiji – Cabinet Ministers some having, he claims, attended a Marist College as a Schoolboy in Fiji where he has said that he formed relationships with persons later coming to occupy, as I mentioned, high public offices in Fiji. It is believed that some of these connections include to persons within the Reserve Bank of Fiji, Fiji Hardwood Corporation and a number of Government Departments and elsewhere. It is believed some of the below may be of public interest to those trading with persons and dealing with government officials, in some instances, in Fiji as well as interest to foreign persons providing aid or other support to Fiji or otherwise. It may also be of interest to Australians & Chinese – Australia contributes a substantial sum of aid to Fiji (China is also reported to provide aid to Fiji), so naturally have an interest in the good governance of the Country of Fiji – one of Australia’s regional neighbours together with an interest in efficient and proper utilisation of the Aid provided by our nation to Fiji. Regrettably, Fiji, it is reported, has corruption problems as do other countries within the region. The below may also be in the public interest of persons from or interested in India. The public interest of Australia may also be involved – Ralph and his employer (discussed throughout this blog, a man named Mohan Kumar) lobbied and received Visa’s and had other legitimate dealings with officials and public office holders in Australia. The solvency of corporations in Australia, their proper or improper registration of companies or otherwise, to provision of finance guaranteed by “mums and dads”, the rates of interest charged (in this case compounding at 6% PER MONTH IN DEFAULT, e.g. >72% per annum) and other factors are also believed to be of public interest.

About the company and its director

Ralph is the public officer of a company named Mills Management Fiji Pte Ltd – company search available here. The search records the registered address of Mills Management as Dreketi, Labasa, Fiji. The asset – Mill – that Mills Management Fiji Pte Ltd runs – is the Dreketi Mill, Dreketi, Labasa, Fiji.

As mentioned, Ralph is also a former director of Dural Alliances Pty Ltd (in liquidation).

Dural Alliances Pty Ltd was incorporated on 28 July 2017 with Ralph’s as its director and secretary. Craig Adams was, according to Ralph, involved in the registration of this company later obtaining the consent of Ralph. Later Ralph gave sworn evidence to the NSW Supreme Court, in part stating the followings:

This statement raises issues of public policy – people becoming shadow directors amongst other things.

Dural Alliances was placed into liquidation by order of the Federal Court of Australia – click here to view court order. The Plaintiff in the windup was DCP Litigation Holdings Pty Ltd.

Particulars of the debt and proof owed by Dural to DCP Litigation can be found here (the debt was not disputed, the windup was not opposed).

Dural, Ralph caused funds to be borrowed of $540,000 using their family home at 88 Perfection Ave, Stanhope Gardens as security for the loan advanced by Franklin Yeezy Holdings Pty Ltd.

A mortgage (variations sought by John Mahony of Mahony Law) and a deed (the deed preparation appears to have been witnessed by the Paligaru’s solicitor John Mahony of Mahony Law) and the Deed purports to have been entered in August 2017, a couple of days before the Franklin Yeezy advance. The mortgage of Franklin Yeezy was prepared, to the best of my knowledge by David Lalic of Strategic Legal. Ralph gave sworn evidence that Mahony Law was paid for their services as follows:

Pursuant to the deed, Dural, Ralph apparently received a charge over land belonging to Craig Adam’s company Golden Arrow International Pty Ltd as security, being land in Warriewood in return for the sum of $540,000. The deed was entered on or about 4 August 2017 – apparently in front of his solicitor John Mahony of Mahony Law, however a caveat was not registered until about 6 December 2017 – some 4 months laterclick here to view the caveat.

Precisely what would motivate Ralph to mortgage their house (where the default interest rate was compounding at 6% PER MONTH, i.e. >72% pa?)

Prior to entry into the Franklin Yeezy mortgage, Ralph entered Heads of Agreement (discussed in the Profile of Ralph Paligaru – click here to view) – which appears to have been signed around 24 April 2016. Ralph was Power of Attorney for Mohan Kumar and in the following weeks (May 2016) Ralph used his Power of Attorney for Mohan Kumar to execute a contract of sale to sell Kumar’s Dural Land to Craig’s companyBargoASIC search available here. The writer does not suggest the election to sell was not the legitimate wish of Kumar.

It is clear from the ASIC search that neither Ralph nor Mohan Kumar were ever the registered owner of any shares in Bargo although the vendor terms / mortgage between Mohan Kumar and Bargo entitled the vendor to accept shares in Bargo under certain circumstances (e.g. if Bargo was in default) – see mortgage.

Moreover, Craig Adams provided to Ralph (POA for Kumar) all the shares in Bargo as security for a vendor loan (if Bargo was in default under the $4m vendor loan?).

To the best information of the writer, neither Mohan Kumar nor Ralph elected to transfer or accept shares (or transfer the Bargo shares despite holding a signed transfer available to transfer the shares to whoever they’d like under the vendor mortgage / terms.

It is unknown what happened to the Heads of Agreement – it is unknown or unclear from the Heads of Agreement if Craig (or Ralph) held any shares ‘on trust’ for another person or persons – e.g. Mohan Kumar?

Ralph made written and then oral admissions to me in mid 2017 that the Heads of Agreement was “my deal” – click here to view the email containing this admission.

But this still does not explain why Ralph mortgaged their house and provided $540,000 to Craig or for the benefit of Craig? The precise benefit (if any) that Ralph thought they would receive is unknown? The writer supposes that the email from Ralph to myself dated 8 June 2017 may provide clues where it states the following:

Dural Alliance’s demise

Ralph Paligaru, the sole director of the company, had notice of the winding up of Dural Alliances but did not attend court nor contest or defend the alleged debt owed to my company in any way. Accordingly, the court, by issuing the windup order was, I believe, satisfied that Dural Alliances owed the sum alleged to the Plaintiff – DCP Litigation Holdings Pty Ltd (or at the very least owed in excess of the statutory minimum sum required to order the windup of a corporation AND that there was no dispute at all that the sum, or at least the minimum required sum, was owed to the applicant company, DCP Litigation Holdings Pty Ltd).

What is known is Bargo is now in liquidation, Craig is bankrupt. Dural Alliances was placed in liquidation in February 2020 in the Federal Court of Australia by my company, DCP Litigation Holdings Pty Ltdsee the attached court order – click here. DCP Litigation Holdings proved a debt owed to it by Dural Alliances in the amount of $179,999.82the same source of debt alleged in order to windup that company – court order obtained here.

A copy of the report to creditors of Dural Alliances can be viewed by clicking here.

A copy of the originating process for the windup include:

Creditors statutory demand

Affidavit of service

Originating process to Federal Court

Court listing particulars

Affidavit of debt

Windup order

Other matters / co-incidences?

In around April 2020, Ralph sold 88 Perfection Ave, Stanhope Gardens to satisfy some of the mortgages or charges however a 3rd charge to my company was not discharged and the caveat protecting that charge was withdrawn.

Coincidentally, the first mortgagee that was paid (as is usual) from the sale of 88 Perfection Ave, Stanhope Gardens was also linked to the mortgagor of the Dural land through lender Pacific8 – whose director is a man named Adam Tilley – a person infamously (so it is reported) being victim of a firebombing involving convicted murderer Ron Medich and his victim, Michael McGuirk. The writer is not suggesting Mr. Tilley is other than Mr. Paligaru (and Craig Adam’s) lender.

In or about February 2020, Pacific8 (the holder of an AFSL) loaned money under a 1st mortgage to Ralph. Pacific8 (is the holder of an AFSL). Pacific8 also loaned money to Craig’s company Bargo through a series of controlled companies, e.g. N&M and Kesinda. These loans to both Craig and Ralph are most likely just a coincidence, the writer does not suggest any wrongdoing by Adam Tilley’s Pacific8 (the holder of an AFSL)?

A further coincidence is that Adam Tilley’s Pacific8 (the holder of an AFSL) and Franklin Yeezy share the same lawyer – Summer Lawyers a firm who does specialise and act for a large number of Sydney based private lenders (such as Pacific 8).

The writer is only opining that “its a small world” and does not suggest or imply any wrongdoing.

The writer also notes that Mr. Tilley is not associated with Franklin Yeezy Holdings Pty Ltd.

A copy of the report to creditors of Dural Alliances can be viewed by clicking 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 about any person mentioned on this page – please use the instant chat tools – bottom right corner or the contact/tipoff form below:

Leave a Reply – nothing defamatory will be permitted, all comments moderated. Spam will not be approved.