Fumbart.com
A tale of fraud, money laundering, and cover ups within the Sydney legal fraternity
Think it all sounds fanciful? Keep reading to see how the unsavoury saga unfolds.
Terry Goldberg
Lawyer and fraudster
The Turner Freeman partner and not so artful conman who falsifies court documents and uses the courts to his own end to steal money belonging to others.
Michael Jones
The dodgy liquidator and co-conspirator
Acts with his mate Terry to obtain monies by deception and place fraudulently obtained monies into a Trust disguised as a charity.
John McKenzie
The cover-up commissioner
The government appointed overseer who abuses his position as Legal Services Commissioner to facilitate and cover up organised crime.
In an E-mail to the Honourable T F BathurstChief Justice of the Supreme Court of NSW, 4 June 2021
Friday, 4th June 2021
Dear Chief Justice
As an addendum to my communication of earlier today, I write the following.
Lest there be any doubt in relation to the claims as made in my letter to your Honour of 5 May 2021, please find attached copy of Summons of 25 November 2009; transcript of proceedings of 27 November 2009; and Judgment of the Supreme Court of NSW of 27 November 2009; with all of such relating directly to Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001 (then known as 5454/2009 before change in file numbering system).
I also attach the Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs as filed by Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers on 23 June 2010, which names the four plaintiffs (being Turner Freeman’s four clients), as well as the sixth defendant in proceedings 2009/00291458-001, as costs respondents. Of course, Turner Freeman’s naming of a party from the other side as costs respondent is anomalous. The sixth defendant in the matter was not Turner Freeman’s client, nor was there an Order for the sixth defendant to pay another’s costs. Indeed, there was an Order to the contrary.
As we know, and as can be plainly seen, there were four plaintiffs and six defendants in the said proceedings, with the sixth defendant being listed as an unrepresented party. Terence Goldberg’s claim in such Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs that he acted for the sixth defendant in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001 is both false and fraudulent, as are his claims that there were only five defendants.
As is demonstrated in the attached Judgment and transcript of the above proceedings, one Order only was made by her Honour, in that each party was to pay their own costs. Such Judgment also demonstrates that an agreement was reached between the parties, in that the first to fifth defendants would attend a meeting of members (of the sixth defendant, it being an incorporated association) on or about 4 February 2010. However on 4 February 2010, Mr Foez Dewan, then of Turner Freeman (and now principal solicitor at McCabe Curwood), prevented all parties from entering the premises as owned by the sixth defendant, claiming that such parties were to be denied entry by ‘Court Order’. That claim by Mr Dewan was false.
Further, it was Foez Dewan who attended a meeting of creditors at the offices of Jones Partners (liquidator) on 13 April 2011, signing attendance at such, and fraudulently claiming that Turner Freeman was owed $185,802.62 by the aforementioned sixth defendant. Mr Dewan would have carried out such in full knowledge that such claim was not only unlawful, but also in breach of the only Order as made in the above said proceedings.
Foez Dewan had carriage of the matter at hand and would have been fully cognisant that the sixth defendant was not Turner Freeman’s client, and was indeed an opposing party, and further, with that defendant being unrepresented, had accrued no actual costs. You will find Mr Dewan named on the attached Judgment of 27 November 2009 as the person providing same for sealing by the Court. The mal-intent of both Terence Goldberg and Foez Dewan is obvious.
However, and despite the obviousness of the criminal acts and intent of both Messrs Goldberg and Dewan, and also despite the further criminal activities of Mr Terence Goldberg, the Law Society and the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner continue to turn their heads in the opposite direction, making the ridiculous if not risible claim that no wrongdoing has taken place.
As stated in my letter to Michael Tidball of 18 August 2020 (a copy of which was provided to your Honour on 5 February 2021), John McKenzie, the NSW Legal Services Commissioner, was interviewed in the latter part of 2015 by the NSW Police in relation to the illicit activities of both Terence Goldberg and Foez Dewan. No charges ensued in relation to same. Very clearly, Mr McKenzie was not truthful in his interview with law enforcement officials. Mr McKenzie has been repeatedly dishonest regarding the entire matter, both to me and to others.
It is really very simple: What we have here is organised and orchestrated criminality at play, with the perpetrators of same being consciously enabled by their overseers, with the Law Society of NSW and the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner dismissing all complaints as made in relation to the above, and also despite overwhelming evidence as provided and documenting criminal wrongdoing.
Sadly, it must also be said that the cover up culture is extraordinarily embedded within the legal profession. Despite Mr Andrew Lacey, managing principal at McCabe Curwood Lawyers, being repeatedly informed of Foez Dewan’s previous deceptive and unlawful conduct, Mr Dewan remains as a principal of that firm. The same, unfortunately, applies to Turner Freeman Lawyers. It would seem that deceitful and criminal conduct is now a fully accepted norm within the legal arena.
The honourable profession is very far from honourable, with some of those employed within such displaying utter contempt for the rule of law and the processes of the Court, and it has to be added, without any sanction for so doing. The facts of this matter speak for themselves. I refuse to sit back and watch the betrayal and desecration of our time-honoured system, carried out intentionally and without a shred of integrity or remorse.
I copy this E-mail to Kate McClymont, senior investigative journalist at the Sydney Morning Herald, and also to all parties involved.
Yours faithfully
Click here for original pdf version of the above E-mail.
In an E-mail to Christopher Bevan, barrister
8 Wentworth Chambers, 14 December 2020
Monday, 14th December 2020
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Dear Mr Bevan
On 27 November 2009 you appeared on behalf of all four plaintiffs in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001, being Cleary and Ors v Kypri and Ors*. As you know, there were four plaintiffs and six defendants in this matter.
Your instructing solicitor in such was Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers, with, quite obviously, the four plaintiffs being Turner Freeman’s four clients. The first to fifth defendants were represented by Pigott Stinson Lawyers. The sixth defendant, an incorporated association, was unrepresented. As you would know, the said incorporated association was named as the sixth defendant as doing so would bind the association into any decision made by the Court. One Order only was made in those proceedings, being that each party was to pay their own costs. Importantly, the sixth defendant had accrued no costs.
On 23 June 2010, and in relation to the above, Terence Goldberg filed with the Court an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs, and in such Application makes the false claim that there were five plaintiffs and five defendants, while also making the further false claim that Turner Freeman acted for the incorporated association. These claims on the part of Terence Goldberg are fraudulent. Mr Goldberg in that same document also claimed that her Honour made 11 Orders. That claim is also false. Pursuant to same, Terence Goldberg obtained a judgment debt against the sixth defendant in the amount of $124,661.90.
You have been made aware of the above on a large number of occasions and, for reasons known only to yourself, you have declined to bring that same information to the attention of the Court or any other regulatory body or authority.
You are also aware that in the intervening period of the above fraudulent acts, that Terence Goldberg conspired with Michael Jones of Jones Partners and a Mr Jon Lindsay to take by further deceptive and improper means all remaining monies as owned by the above said incorporated association, with Terence Goldberg and Michael Jones clandestinely creating a Trust and separate incorporated association (and registering both as charities) to receive all funds as owned by the original association, being the aforesaid sixth defendant.
While there is no suggestion or evidence you had any part to play in any of the fraudulent activities as laid out above, it is safe to say that you have not fulfilled your overriding duty to the Court to act with independence in the interests of the administration of justice. I am left wondering if your reluctance to bring the said matter to the attention of any authority is because you have a longstanding history with those concerned, being Messrs Goldberg, Jones and Lindsay (as in McCarthy v Murphy (Supreme Court of NSW, SC 1913/1999**), and Ren Nominees Pty Ltd v MS Cognosis Pty Limited (No 1) (Federal Court of Australia, NSD 330 of 2013), among others).
I attach the transcript of Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001 (then known as 5454/2009 before change in Court system), which clearly illustrates not only the parties involved, but also who acted for whom and also the Order made and agreements reached. I further attach copy of the Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs as filed by Terence Goldberg on 23 June 2010 carrying the said fraudulent statements.
I also attach letters to Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers of 4 November 2019 and 12 February 2020, and letter to Michael Jones of Jones Partners of 12 June 2020, which together describe in succinct detail the abovementioned unlawful behaviours, as well as additional criminal activities on the part of Messrs Goldberg and Jones. None of those letters have received any form of acknowledgment or response.
It too is of note that no response has ever been received from yourself in relation to the above information having been brought to your attention; as has been done so on multiple occasions. Given your position, your silence and inaction are difficult if not impossible to comprehend.
Due to your continued silence on the matter, I copy this E-mail to Mr Anthony Cheshire SC, your Head of Chambers.
I await your comment.
Yours faithfully
Footnote: *&** Miranda McCarthy was also both a plaintiff and represented by yourself in the two Supreme Court proceedings Cleary and Ors v Kypri and Ors and McCarthy v Murphy. Miranda McCarthy is also the ex-wife of Jon Lindsay.
Monday, 11th January 2021
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Dear Mr Bevan
It is four weeks since my E-mail to you of 14 December 2020 and you are yet to make comment. Clearly, you have no intention of offering any form of response. Clearly, also, you continue to decline to take any corrective action regarding the criminal behaviours of your acquaintances, being Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers, Michael Jones of Jones Partners (liquidator), and Mr Jon Lindsay.
In relation to the above allegations of criminal conduct and also in relation to the enclosures of my previous E-mail to you, find attached ‘Notification of Final Meeting Convened by Liquidator’ (ASIC form 523) of 6 December 2017. You will note that Michael Jones in such declaration to ASIC states that the sum of $500,000.00 was placed into a Trust of his and Terence Goldberg’s making, whereas, in fact, such Trust received an amount in the region of $985,447.00. As you already know, a sum of $492,307.00 then left the said Trust marked simply as ‘expenses’, leaving behind the figure of $493,140.00.
As can be seen, a rather sizeable excess of funds entered the said Trust, with a near identical sum then leaving such simultaneously. The origin of this excess as well as its ultimate destination are yet to be established. As you would be well aware, the creating of a charitable Trust to use as a pass-through for monies as obtained by fraudulent means is termed as money laundering.
It is also of note that Michael Jones in his declaration to ASIC states that he paid $242,179.10 to unsecured creditors. As you know, the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated (the sixth defendant in proceedings 2009/00291458-001) had one creditor only, being CBC Partners in the amount of $3,514.50, which the church had the means to pay. As can be seen, there is a rather large disparity.
Further, it has been reported to me (on more than one occasion) that you are spreading unfounded and baseless rumours, with you stating to others within the legal fraternity that I am a Comanchero ‘bikie’*. Normally, this sort of conduct would be surprising, however, such is also a similar tactic as used by Terence Goldberg, Michael Jones and Jon Lindsay. Of course, the motives of Terence Goldberg, Michael Jones and Jon Lindsay in attempting to discredit are rather obvious. Yours, however, are a little more oblique.
Your silence as well as your efforts to besmirch my good name are clear attempts to protect the above named individuals. Without question, your condoning of the criminality as laid out before you on numerous occasions undermines the rule of law and does little to fulfil the oath of office that you took when called to the bar.
Despite your best efforts, and also of those close to you, wrongdoing of this magnitude will not be contained.
I copy this E-mail to Ms Jocelyn Sparks, Director of Professional Standards at the Bar Association of NSW.
Yours faithfully
* I am not a member of any organisation involving two wheel vehicles, motorised or otherwise. I cycle to and from work every day, with my bicycle being the only means of transport I use or own.
Monday, 8th February 2021
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Dear Mr Bevan
It is now four weeks since my E-mail to you of 11 January 2021 and eight weeks since my E-mail of 14 December 2020 (both below). You have responded to neither.
As can be seen, there is no question as to the criminal behaviours of your acquaintances, nor is there any question to your protection of same; with such raising serious concerns as to why you are beholden to those carrying out criminal activities.
Further, as a barrister-at-law, you would be more than familiar with section 316(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), and your protection of the said individuals places you in breach of such, with such breach being in itself a criminal offence.
You would no doubt be aware that the above has now been raised with the Australian Federal Police as part of their consideration of the unlawful behaviours of Terence Goldberg, Michael Jones and Jon Lindsay. As you probably know, and given the movement of monies as obtained by fraudulent means on the part of the aforesaid persons, a detailed submission was made to the AFP in 2020. Find attached copy of letter to the Australian Federal Police of 18 January 2021.
In relation to the said movement of monies on the part of Michael Jones and Terence Goldberg, I attach copy of correspondence to Michael Jones of 30 March 2020. Like yourself, both Michael Jones and Terence Goldberg refuse to respond to any communication as sent regarding the wrongdoing that is taking place.
I copy this E-mail to Ms Jocelyn Sparks, Director of Professional Standards at the Bar Association of NSW, among others.
Yours faithfully
In a letter to Michael Jones, liquidator, 12 June 2020
Friday, 12th June 2020
Mr Michael Jones
Managing Principal
Jones Partners Insolvency and Business Recovery
Level 13, 189 Kent Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Jones
Re: Fraud and money laundering
I refer to my correspondences to you of 30th March 2020, 18th May 2020, 19th May 2020, and 28th May 2020. As you know, those correspondences outline detailed allegations of fraud and money laundering. You have so far declined to respond.
On 21st July 2016, you purport to have held in your offices a general meeting of members of the now defunct Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated (“the original entity”). There is clear reason to believe that this meeting did not in fact take place and its minutes fabricated.
Of course, you are aware that I sought a copy of such minutes via a GIPA application, wherein you ensured that the names of the memberships, as well as the names of all supposed creditors were redacted and therefore obscured from public view.
Despite your efforts, we are aware of the supposed membership names of the original entity at that time as they are specified in the constitution of the newly formed Congregation of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated (“the new entity”), with Clause 5.2 providing:
“All those who were Members of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Inc (in liquidation) as at the date that entity entered administration under the Act are taken to be the Members of the Church, whose names appear in schedule 2 to this Constitution, subject to their written authorisation.”
Firstly, that list of 19 names bears little resemblance to the true list of church members at that time, and secondly, most of the names on that list are a figment of someone’s lively imagination. We know this as 18 of the 19 names on the list do not correlate with the electoral roll, with some names not actually appearing on the electoral roll at all.
I attach a copy of the constitution of that new entity known as the Congregation of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated. You will note Turner Freeman’s input into the compiling of this constitution. Such is stated on the front page as well as Turner Freeman’s reference being dotted throughout the document.
Now, the only resolution put forward and carried in the supposed meeting of 21st July 2016 was to place the residual monies as belonging to the original entity into a Trust of your and Terence Goldberg’s making, ie the Congregation of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Foundation Trust.
As stated in the Deed of the abovementioned Trust, its sole object is to provide monies to the new entity (as referred to in paragraph 4 of this letter), with such, again, having been created by yourself and Terence Goldberg.
On 6th December 2017, you declared to ASIC that you transferred $500,000.00, being the supposed residue of the original entity, into the abovementioned Trust. However, in the latter part of 2016, we know that that Trust in fact received an amount in the region of $985,447.00. As can be seen, this is a sizable excess of funds. You have declined to offer any information in relation to this excess, and its origin.
Also, and as you well know, the sum of $492,307.00 vanished from that Trust, marked simply as ‘expenses’ shortly thereafter. You have also declined to offer any information as to where this sum went.
It is also of distinct interest that in your declaration to ASIC, you state that you paid $242,179.10 to unsecured creditors, however, the only true creditor of the original entity at the time of its winding up was to CBC Partners in the amount of $3,514.50, which, by the way, the church had the means to pay.
In that same declaration to ASIC, you claim to have paid the sum of $81,826.35 in legal fees. Given that Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers attended a purported meeting of creditors on 29th May 2014 when not a creditor of the original entity (being the sole attendee at this meeting), and also Turner Freeman’s input into the creation of the constitution of the newly formed incorporated association, it is safe to assume that these legal fees were in fact paid to that firm.
Also, and in clarification of the above paragraph, Turner Freeman Lawyers claimed to be creditor of the original entity in the amount of $188,303.60. As you are well aware, this claim on the part of Turner Freeman was fraudulent, and I am informed that you paid Turner Freeman in full on 12th December 2012.
As you know, it was a long-time acquaintance of Terence Goldberg, while claiming to be a creditor of the original entity in the amount of $85.00, who voted to wind up the original entity in the first instance. It is this same acquaintance who was the registered public officer of the new entity at the time of its inception, with the said new entity being based at this acquaintance’s given home address.
Do you wish to provide comment?
Yours faithfully
In a letter to Michael Jones, liquidator, 19 May 2020
Tuesday, 19th May 2020
Mr Michael Jones
Managing Principal
Jones Partners, Insolvency and Business Recovery
Level 13, 189 Kent Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Jones
Re: Fraud and money laundering
This letter serves as an addendum to my letter of yesterday.
No doubt, you will have had time to reflect on the purported minutes of a general meeting of 21st July 2016, which originated from your office. While the said minutes are redacted, what is clear to see is that there are 19 supposed creditors.
Now, this is most odd. As I was heavily involved with the now defunct entity that you improperly wound up, I can categorically state that there was only one valid creditor of the association at that time, being CBC Partners. Andrew Mitchell of CBC Partners went on to tell me that CBC Partners was paid in full by you sometime shortly after the sale of the church building back in 2011.
Also, NSW Fair Trading informed me that Turner Freeman was paid in full of the (fraudulent) debt it claimed, and was paid on 20th December 2012. So where have the remaining supposed creditors come from?
We see in the minutes of a non-quorate and invalid general meeting of members of 29th May 2014 (wherein Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman was the only attendee), that the list of creditors has swelled somewhat, and also contains the names of people who had in fact already been paid.
It is of pertinent note that there are now two new claims in the list of creditors, as made by Parker Taylor and Quinn Martin Media, both of which were companies headed by the known shyster Frank Monte, with Mr Monte claiming to be owed a total of $14,110.00. Frank Monte had no involvement with our church in any way, shape, or form.
Now, of course, the names of the 19 supposed creditors in the minutes of 21st July 2016 have been redacted, so we have no way of knowing who they are. However, what we do know is that names of members have been falsified, so it leads to the obvious question as to whether the creditors on that said list are equally as fictitious as the names of the non-existent members.
As repeatedly stated, it would strongly appear that Jones Partners has fabricated not only memberships of an organisation, but has also fabricated creditors in order to strip a church and charity of its entire assets. It is difficult to conclude otherwise.
Also, our church building was sold in June 2011 for $965,000.00 and after creditors were paid there should have some $700,000 remaining. However, with creditors springing up out of nowhere that sum would probably have diminished, and yet, a sum in the region of $985k (supposedly the surplus as owned by the now defunct entity) was placed into a Trust of your making.
In relation to that excess, I refer to a letter to John Winter, CEO of ARITA, of 6th April 2020, with such correspondence dealing with a substantial excess of funds making their way into a Trust of your making. No doubt, your fellow principal Bruce Gleeson has provided you with a copy of such letter, however, in case he has not, I attach a copy of such for your reference. Mr Winter is yet to provide any response.
I, of course, attach copies of minutes of meetings as supposedly having taken place in your office of 13th April 2011, 29th May 2014, and 21st July 2016; with all of which containing differing amounts of creditors. It is of note that the number of creditors actually increases over time rather than decreases, which is what the normal course of events would be.
When drafting your response to my letter of 30th March 2020, explanations to the above anomalies should also be included.
I copy this letter to Kate McClymont, senior journalist at the Sydney Morning Herald.
Yours faithfully
In a letter to Michael Jones, liquidator, 18 May 2020
Monday, 18th May 2020
Mr Michael Jones
Managing Principal
Jones Partners, Insolvency and Business Recovery
Level 13, 189 Kent Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Jones
Re: Fraud and money laundering
I refer to the above.
You have not provided any response to my letter of 30th March 2020 (copy attached), however, your providing information to interested parties, I have to say, is not quite your forte.
As you know, my letter to you of 30th March 2020 deals with the topic of fraudulently obtained monies passing through your office (taking five years to do so), with those same monies then being placed into a Trust, and then with a substantial excess of funds seemingly originating from your office also being placed into that same Trust.
Lest you forget, such Trust was co-created by both yourself and Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers.
On 21st July 2016, a purported meeting of the members of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated took place within the confines of Jones Partners, with one sole resolution being made (and passed) in that meeting, ie to provide the surplus monies as owned by that now defunct entity to the Trust as created by both yourself and Terence Goldberg.
Oddly enough, the date of this purported meeting coincides exactly with a letter as written to you by myself seeking information in relation to the location and whereabouts of those same funds.
As you also well know, in the latter part of 2016, a GIPA application was made for access to a copy of the minutes of the said general meeting which supposedly took place on 21st July 2016. On first having consulted with you, the Department of Finance, Services and Innovation obscured the names of the members as mentioned in such minutes, as you claimed that those named in such may come to ‘harm’ if such information were made public.
As we have since seen, the names of members of the church at that time were simply made up (see letter to Terence Goldberg of 12th February 2020), and your stating to the Department of Finance, Services and Innovation that those named may come to ‘harm’ was an obvious ploy to prevent such information becoming public knowledge.
Given that a meeting cannot take place with people who do not actually exist, the minutes of the aforesaid meeting of 21st July 2016 are an obvious concoction.
For obvious reasons, I attach a copy of the abovementioned minutes of 21st July 2016.
Yours faithfully
In a letter to Michael Jones, liquidator, 30 March 2020
Monday, 30th March 2020
Mr Michael Jones
Managing Principal
Jones Partners, Insolvency and Business Recovery
Level 13, 189 Kent Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Jones
Re: Fraud and money laundering
I write to you as an ex-member of the now defunct Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated.
Firstly, I attach copy of correspondences to Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers of 4th November 2019 and 12th February 2020. This letter is to be read in conjunction with such. Mr Goldberg has so far declined to offer any response.
As can be seen in the two aforesaid letters, you appear to have acted in concert with Terence Goldberg in order to strip the above said incorporated association (and charity) of its substantial assets and place those and other funds of an unknown origin into a Trust, with such Trust having been set up by Mr Goldberg, with both your knowledge and sanction.
A sum in the region of $985,447.00 was placed into the said Trust by you in the latter part of 2016, with an amount of $492,307.00 departing that Trust shortly thereafter; leaving behind the sum of $493,140.00 (an almost precise half-half split).
The issue, of course, is that the sum of $985,447.00 far and away exceeds the remaining residue of the said incorporated association, which you liquidated while being fully aware of Terence Goldberg’s fraudulent activities and equally fraudulent claimed debt against our church, and is also evidently double the expected amount.
Given the appearance of a fraud and money laundering operation at play, I seek an explanation from you in relation to the origin of the abovementioned excess of monies and also the separate disappearance of funds.
I copy this letter to various authorities, and I look forward to your prompt response, however, like Mr Goldberg, I expect you will demur to do so.
Yours faithfully
In a letter to Turner Freeman Lawyers, 4 November 2019
Monday, 4th November 2019
Mr Terence Goldberg
Turner Freeman Lawyers
Level 12, 160 Sussex Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Goldberg
Re: Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001
I refer to the Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs as filed with the Court by yourself on 23rd June 2010 in relation to the abovementioned Supreme Court proceedings. In such Application you state on multiple occasions that you acted for the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated.
As you are well aware, the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated was listed as the sixth defendant in the abovementioned Supreme Court proceedings. You are also well aware that the sixth defendant remains on the Court record as an unrepresented party, with no firm of solicitors acting on its behalf.
Given that you acted for the four plaintiffs in such proceedings, and given also that the sixth defendant was unrepresented in same, can you please explain to me your claim that you acted for the Enmore Spiritualist Church in such Application to the Court for assessment of your firm’s professional costs. As can be seen, the situation and your actual statement are distinctly dichotomous, as well as such scenario being a breach of Rule 7.25 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules which states that a law firm cannot act for both and opposing parties in any same Court proceedings.
Further, in that same document, you explicitly state that there were only five defendants, when in fact there were six.
You are also well aware that the premises of 2 London Street, Enmore, was sold in June 2011 for $965,000.00 in order to pay your claimed debt of $124,661.90, although documents state that your firm was in fact paid the sum of $188,303.60 (on 20th December 2012). Given other claimed and disputed debts against our now defunct church, the monies remaining should have been in the region of some $700,000.00.
On perusing the website of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, it is stated that in the financial year of 2016/2017, the remaining monies as belonging to our now defunct church were placed into a Trust, with such Trust having been set up by your firm.
Also, as per the same website, an amount in the region of $985,447.00 entered such Trust in that period. As can be plainly seen, this sum is far in excess of the remaining monies as belonging to the original entity.
Given the appearance of a distinct conflict of interest, are you able to explain your input in the creation of such Trust, and are you also able to explain the origins of the seeming excess of such funds?
At this point it is worthy of mention that your firm was in fact involved in the creation of two separate entities; one of which being the abovementioned Trust. Both of these said entities have been set up as charities with almost identical names, with the sole objective of the said Trust to provide funds to the second created entity. The second entity at this moment in time has no particular function, and holds little funds in its account, and a long-time acquaintance of yours, at the time of the second entity’s inception, was registered as the public officer of such.
The constitution of the original and now defunct entity provides that on the winding up of such that all assets belonging to it be provided to a likewise association or charity. It would appear that Turner Freeman therefore created likewise associations to receive those assets.
It remains pertinent that at the present moment in time, the ACNC website states that the abovementioned Trust now holds the amount of $517,980.00 in its account. The ACNC website also states that the said Trust had expenses of $492,307.00 in the financial year of 2016/2017. The cause of these expenses and where these funds went is presently unknown.
Also, and despite a number of various correspondences to you, the divergent statement that you acted for the sixth defendant (an unrepresented party) in Supreme Court proceedings when you acted for the four plaintiffs remains without any plausible or cogent explanation.
I also attach to this correspondence a previous letter to you of 15th November 2016 which relates directly to the above and which remains without any sort of reply from you or your firm.
Please let me know at your earliest convenience if any of the above is incorrect.
I copy this letter to various authorities, and I look forward to your swift response.
Yours faithfully
Wednesday, 12th February 2020
Mr Terence Goldberg
Equity Partner
Turner Freeman Lawyers
Level 12, 160 Sussex Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr Goldberg
Re: Improper conduct
I write further to and also in relation to my letter to you of 4th November 2019.
This letter is to be read in conjunction with such previous letter, and I attach copy of such for reference. To date, you have not provided any response.
As you know, you and your firm created both a Trust and a separate incorporated association, with both set up as charitable bodies, for the purposes of capturing the substantial residue of the now defunct Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated (“the original entity”).
Of course, we know that you and your firm created such entities as such is stated in the minutes of a ‘meeting of creditors’, which you attended at the offices of Jones Partners (“the Liquidator”) on 29th May 2014; and also, your firm’s name appears on the cover of the Constitution of the newly set up incorporated association, with your personal references dotted throughout the same document, ie “TLG:/125386”. I attach a copy of the said Constitution.
As you would be absolutely aware, the Trust as created with your input has only one objective, ie to provide funds to the newly created incorporated association. To date, the said incorporated association has no apparent function, and no apparent activities.
You are also absolutely aware that the original entity was the sixth defendant in Supreme Court proceedings in which you acted for the four plaintiffs (ie, 2009/00291458-001), and in which the sixth defendant was an unrepresented party, and from whom you improperly sought your clients’ costs.
I will focus on the Constitution of the newly created incorporated association for a moment. As you are no doubt aware, the last three pages of that document contain the names of 19 supposed memberships. However, having verified those names and addresses against the electoral roll, the details of one membership only appears to actually tally with such.
In fact, a number of the names as specified in the said membership list do not actually appear on the electoral roll at all. It is also interesting that the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission received a request, presumably from your firm, to obscure the last three pages of such document in order to prevent public scrutiny of the said membership details.
You are still to explain your attendance at the abovementioned meeting of creditors (with you being the sole attendee) at the offices of the Liquidator on 29th May 2014. As you know, NSW Fair Trading has confirmed that Turner Freeman was paid in full, by the Liquidator, of the debt claimed against the original entity on 20th December 2012.
It is also of note that in the abovementioned meeting of creditors of 29th May 2014, it is minuted that you personally discussed the creation of the abovementioned Trust and incorporated association, with such Trust ultimately being created on 16th December 2016, and the said incorporated association being registered with ASIC on 21st October 2015.
A letter from NSW Fair Trading of 17th October 2016 confirms the movement of the residue of funds as belonging to the original entity, again by the Liquidator, into the Trust you and your firm created. It is of interest as the date of such letter from NSW Fair Trading actually precedes the inception of the said Trust. One of the many anomalies and inconsistencies in this entire matter.
I await your response to this and to my previous correspondence to you.
Yours faithfully
John McKenzie, NSW Legal Services Commissioner, 2 June 2015
Tuesday, 28th November 2017
Mr John McKenzie
Legal Services Commissioner
Office of the Legal Services Commissioner
Level 9, 75 Castlereagh Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr McKenzie
Re: Terence Goldberg – fraud
Given the large number of conflicting statements in various letters received from you which give the appearance of confusion on your part in relation to the conduct of Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers, let me explain the matter to you in a very brief summary.
In February 2009, the financial members of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated (“the Church”), at its annual general meeting, voted and resolved to name eight persons as committee members of the Church.
Those eight persons were Patricia Cleary, Caroline Allen, Matilda Vila, Miranda McCarthy (aka Mandy Miami), Wendy Hemington, Recy Kypri, Chorel Terelinck, and myself. Patricia Cleary retained her long-running position as president, however, lost her 25 year tenure as treasurer to Chorel Terelinck. I was voted in as the vice-president.
On inspection of the Church’s finances, Chorel Terelinck, the new treasurer, discovered that certain anomalies existed. After much turmoil, this resulted in an audit of the Church’s finances and it was discovered that over $45,000.00 had been spent by Patricia Cleary in ‘non-receipted expenditure’ over the years of 2006, 2007 and 2008.
On closer inspection of the Church records, the finances for the years prior to 2006 showed a similar, if not identical, pattern of losses. Patricia Cleary refused to offer any explanation for her ‘non-receipted expenditure’.
As you can imagine, the Church members became quite irate. Various meetings were held, with the culmination of a special general meeting of the financial members on 10th September 2009, and in which it was resolved to dismiss the entire committee. The members of the Church also resolved to remove Patricia Cleary as president of the Church.
The first four people as mentioned above in paragraph 3 of this letter (ie, Cleary, Allen, Vila and McCarthy), with Terence Goldberg as their legal representative, commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW with the main aim of declaring invalid the meeting of the members of the Church which took place on 10th September 2009.
The remaining committee members as mentioned in paragraph 3 above (Hemington, Kypri, Terelinck, and Waters) were named as the first to four defendants. Mr Norm Power, an ordinary member of the Church, was named as the fifth defendant.
As you are already aware, the Church itself was named as the sixth and last defendant. This naming of the Church as a defendant would have the effect of binding the Church into any decision made by the Court.
As you already know, the Church was an unrepresented party in the proceedings.
The said proceedings were heard before the Honourable Justice Bergin, then Chief Judge in Equity on 27th November 2009. Her Honour made one Order only, ie: “Each party is to bear their own costs.”
The Church was not represented by Turner Freeman Lawyers and was therefore clearly and obviously not a client of Turner Freeman Lawyers.
If, as you have previously claimed, that Terence Goldberg acted for the Church and that the four plaintiffs brought about their action on behalf of the Church, the Church would have to have been a plaintiff in the matter.
On 23rd June 2010, Terence Goldberg, filed with the Supreme Court of NSW an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs. In this document, Terence Goldberg makes the claim that he acted for the Church and that there were only five defendants in the proceedings. Both of these claims are false.
Despite the Church having been named as the sixth defendant in the aforementioned proceedings and clearly not being a client of Turner Freeman Lawyers, the Church was named as a Costs Respondent in the said Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs. This naming of the Church as a Costs Respondent is ostensibly fraudulent.
Having not been informed that the Church was in fact a defendant in the above proceedings, Assessor John Bartos, on 27th January 2011, issued a certificate of determination against the Church and Terence Goldberg’s four clients in the amount of $124,661.90.
On 15th February 2011, judgment was entered in the District Court of NSW in favour of Turner Freeman Lawyers and against Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated and Turner Freeman’s four clients.
As you can see from the above, the matter is quite clear. Terence Goldberg misled the Court in order to create a debt which was not owed to his firm. For whatever reason, you consistently deny this to be case, despite the obviousness of the matter.
I also refer to and attach a copy of my letter to you of 27th October 2016. You have refused to provide any response to this letter. My letter to you of 27th October 2016 provided a copy of all Court documentation relating to the above, with that documentation providing unerring evidence that Terence Goldberg did not act for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated.
Despite such, you stated again in correspondence of 7th August 2017 that Terence Goldberg acted for the Church in the said proceedings. That statement as made by you is false.
Also, you are aware that Terence Goldberg attended an unlawful meeting of creditors on 29th May 2014, despite Turner Freeman having been paid in full of the supposed debt owed to it on 20th December 2012. Terence Goldberg’s attendance at such supposed meeting of creditors is clearly improper.
Terence Goldberg discussed the creation of a new entity at this unlawful meeting.
The remaining funds belonging to the Church have since made their way to the address of that new entity, which, coincidentally, is the given home address of two long-time acquaintances of Mr Goldberg.
Multiple frauds have clearly taken place and your office has taken every step necessary in attempting to cover up such. All the above has been personally made known to you on countless different occasions and your unfailing turning of a blind eye to such must be deliberate.
A copy of this letter shall be provided to the Independent Commission Against Corruption, and a copy of such shall also be placed in the public domain.
I look forward to your swift response.
Yours faithfully
From minutes of ‘meeting of creditors’ at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014
Your reference: R53129
Monday, 27th November 2017
Mr John McKenzie
Legal Services Commissioner
Office of the Legal Services Commissioner
Level 9, 75 Castlereagh Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Mr McKenzie
Re: Complaint about Fiona Seaton – request for internal review
I refer to your letter of 17th November 2017. In such correspondence, you state:
“…arising from Mr Goldberg’s representation of the late Reverend Patricia Cleary and other members of the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated in relation to the litigation that concluded in 2009 and subsequent dissolution of the Church.”
It is of note from your above written statement that you appear to have resiled from your previous position, in that you are no longer claiming that Terence Goldberg acted for the sixth Defendant (being the Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated), in the proceedings to which you refer, and you now correctly state that Mr Goldberg acted for a number of individuals.
If so, this is in direct conflict to your statements as made in your letter of 7th August 2017. I attach a copy of that letter (as well as copies of my responses).
You are fully aware of Mr Goldberg’s fraudulent statement in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs, as filed with the Supreme Court of NSW on 23rd June 2010, in that Mr Goldberg wrongly claims that he acted for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated in the said proceedings.
You are aware that Mr Goldberg did not act for the sixth Defendant in such proceedings, as that Defendant was an unrepresented party and remains as such on the Court record.
Given your own varying and contradictory stances in relation to the above, can you please confirm and clarify your exact position.
Given the Order as made by her Honour in the abovementioned proceedings that each party was to pay their own costs, and as Terence Goldberg did not act for the sixth Defendant in such proceedings, please explain to me how Mr Goldberg sued such Defendant to pay his legal costs.
A copy of this letter shall be provided to the Independent Commission Against Corruption and will also be placed into the public domain.
I await your response.
Yours faithfully
In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 31 August 2017
One of Terence Goldberg’s many untrue statements in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs, as filed with the Supreme Court on 23 June 2010
John McKenzie’s untrue statements in his letter of 7 August 2017
In a letter from Michael Jones (Jones Partners, liquidator) to Church member, 7 November 2012
In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 10 August 2017
Terence Goldberg’s untrue statements on oath in the Local Court, Sydney, 26 February 2016
John McKenzie, 7 August 2017
From minutes of non-quorate and unlawful meeting of creditors at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014, in which Terence Goldberg was the sole attendee and not a creditor of the association
In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 27 October 2016 No response was received
