Search Results

1. RN v QW LCRO 226/2012 (8 September 2016) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...and Mr QW assured him there was no problem. [30] Mr RN referred to a claim he intended to file for his losses and provided a copy of a decision by this Office LCRO 181/2009 in which Mr QW was ordered to pay compensation to a client. Mr QW’s response [31] Mr QW replied on 5 October 2011. He accepted that he had not registered the caveat in 2009, acknowledged acting for both parties but says there was no conflict: the parties came to him with an arrangement for him to document. I...

2. LCRO 176/2016+193/2016 RQ and TS v VU [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...2006, s 294(2)(a). 13 See for example Taylor v R [2010] NZCA 628. 11 [49] In his email of 12 August 2015, Mr VU advised Mrs RQ that he had no record of acting in respect of her late mother’s estate and no details of her will. This was in response to an email from Mrs RQ in which she requested copies of “both wills of [her] parents” and for advice as to what was required of her as executor. [50] The Committee described Mr VU’s explanation (that he assumed Mrs RQ was ref...

3. LA Audit Report 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 [pdf, 401 KB]

   ...6 1 6 2 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 2019-2020 2018-2019 2017-2018 Number of providers re-audited Y e ar r e -a u d it c o n d u ct e d Positive change No change Negative change 6 The auditor is required to take the provider’s response into account before finalising their report. Once the audit report is finalised, the Ministry considers whether remedial action is required. On-site audits were introduced in the 2017-2018 audit programme. Approximately 20% of all...

4. LCRO 382/2013 SC v JT (30 June 2017) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...intent to ensure the maintenance of professional standards, by encouraging Mr JT to comply with his obligations, and to secure redress for his client (return of files). (b) The Standards Committee suggestion as to how he should have phrased his response to Mr JT constituted in his view, an implied threat that a complaint would follow. [17] Mr WR responded on behalf of Mr JT. He submitted that: (a) Mr SC had failed to address the issues under review. (b) His submissions were in...

5. LCRO 220/2016 UT v LE (18 December 2018) [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...did not provide client care and service information, including a letter of engagement, to Mrs LE, he submits his failure or omission to do so was “not wilful”. He says this was “the first complaint of this nature in the past 10 years”. Response [33] In her response, Ms LE largely repeats her complaints made to the Lawyers Complaints Service. She restates her request for an apology from Mr UT, and compensation for her loss. Trust [34] Mrs LE says contrary to Mr UT...

6. [2021] NZIACDT 4 - SL v Mackintosh (4 March 2021) [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...certain issues raised by the government agency. The complainant had continued to work on her interim visitor visa, in accordance with Ms Mackintosh’s advice. She had ceased working when the interim visa expired. Ms Mackintosh admitted her responsibility and apologised. The complainant never intended to breach any law of New Zealand. The letter added that the complainant was a trained dentist who was in the final stages of seeking residence in Canada. [61] Attached to the...

7. Te Kani - Mangatawa No 9B, No3B, No 2B Block (2020) 201 Waikato Maniapoto MB 168 (201 WMN 168)) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...trust order. It should not have been difficult for them to have read and familiarised themselves with it. [47] Assuming for the moment that Mr Kingi was asked to prepare and file trustee appointment applications, the fact remains that ultimate responsibility rests with the trustees. They should have overseen the applications and asked the necessary follow up questions to ensure the applications were completed. The trustees would have known that the process of appointment is not c...

8. Stenhouse v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 403) and Mackay [2018] NZREADT 55 [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...sale. [17] Ms Stenhouse also contended that allegations in her complaint (“the further allegations”), while included in the report by the Authority’s investigator, had not been addressed by the Committee. These were that Mr Mackay had made responses during the course of the investigation that were untrue, that Mr Mackay was patronising and had failed to demonstrate honesty and integrity, and that his actions were inappropriate and he would continue to behave in that manner....

9. IHC New Zealand v Attorney-General (Strike-Out Application) [2020] NZHRRT 47 [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...meeting” with the aim of allowing IHC to explain their claim. Consequently, prior to the commencement of the meeting they made it clear to Ms Walker that they did not see the meeting as a mediation and were not intending the Ministry to provide any response. Nor did they see that the meeting was privileged, confidential or off record. Crown Counsel recorded that those representing IHC at the meeting were in that respect in broad agreement. The file note made by Ms Casey subsequent to...

10. LCRO 104/2018 CJ v MV (28 February 2020) [pdf, 189 KB]

    ...(e), (f), (g), (h) and (o). Those are all financial in nature, and of benefit to Mr CJ. [97] Mr UT for Mr MV submits that a fine of $500 and costs to NZLS of $500 would be appropriate. [98] It is accepted that Mr MV behaved professionally and responsibly after he discovered the notice of claim did not appear on the register. While that does not excuse his conduct, it does help with mitigation. [99] There is nothing in the materials that suggests Mr MV is generally lacking in...