Supreme Court hearing: ‘You Cannot Trust the Public Trustee’

This is to let you know that there is a hearing in the new Brisbane Supreme Court tomorrow (Wednesday, 12 Sept 2012) at 10 am about the Public Trustee’s handling of financial affairs at AHIMSA house. Importantly it is about saving an elderly person’s family home that the public trustee wants to give to an accountant under a deed of arrangement.

The Supreme Court is to hear an application by the Public Trustee that poses the question:

“Should (the Public Trustee) institute further proceedings as against Brian Laver and/or Will Marcus and/or Challenger Bank in relation their dealings with ….?” (it is an offence to publish the name of the person in this application).

The application seeks to absolve the Public Trustee from any blame associated with its administration of the elderly person.
During its administration the Public Trustee sent a letter to a doctor posing the following question:

”Please advise whether xxxx’s life expectancy is other than normal for a person of his age.”

The application also includes this picture as an exhibit in an attempt to discredit people who attempted to defend AHIMSA house.

It is an open court and you are welcome to attend. Friends of AHIMSA house were only given notice of this hearing last Friday. We wish to raise matters of fraud and unconscionable behavior by the bank but it is unlikely that the judge will permit us to be heard or will find some way of sweeping this under the carpet. There was an offer to purchase AHIMSA house made by the Indigenous Land Corporation which was never followed up by the Public Trustee.

This case is one of many that the Public Trustee has mismanaged.

I know that the hearing clashes with the union demonstration against the job cuts but it is important nonetheless.

The New Supreme Court is on the corner of George and Herschel streets. Please let others know.

Ian Curr
11 Sept 2012

7 thoughts on “Supreme Court hearing: ‘You Cannot Trust the Public Trustee’

  1. Best wishes for Ahimsa House

  2. Verdict - Will we learn? says:

    The court accepted the public trustee’s advice and rejected submissions made by friends of the adult person.

    The judge gave orders that the adult person loses his family home to his former accountants; has permission to stay in the house for the rest of his life; will be paid $250 per week rent if he has to move to a nursing home; the Public Trustee need not expend any further funds pursuing the fraudsters.

    The people who advocated for the adult person at the Supreme Court are prohibited from disclosing the Public Trustee’s advice to the court under law of contempt.

  3. paul wildman says:

    Oh no this sounds a crappy decision – what do others think please?

  4. Bernie Neville says:

    Life for the adult person* really is lonely nasty and brutish, Brian Laver and Will Marcus made sure of this when over a very short period of time every last cent belonging to Ross had found it’s way into the pockets of these two scumbags.

    The law is aware of amount taken from the adult person* (2 million dollars)

    And what does the justice system do for the adult person?–nothing.

    We really would be better in a return to the Law of nature because the State Justice system does nothing for the likes of the adult person.

    If you want justice you have to be able to buy it.


    [* under Qld law it is an offence to name the adult person.
    Guardianship and Administration Act 2000
    s114A Publication about proceeding that discloses adult’s identity

    (2) However, a person must not, without reasonable excuse, publish information about a guardianship proceeding to the public, or a section of the public, if the publication is likely to lead to the identification of the relevant adult by a member of the public, or by a member of the section of the public to whom the information is published.
    Maximum penalty — 200 penalty units.
    relevant adult means the adult concerned in the matter, whether or not the court or tribunal decides the adult is an adult with impaired capacity.

  5. There seems to be a lesson about revolutionary anarchist organisation as well as wishy washy liberal community development practice in all of this. I would assume that the basic principle of community control is something that most political activists would understand but in Ahimsa House for some reason it was considered irrelevant. The consequences were worse than even the most cynical anarchist could have predicted.

    A poem –

    There once was a man who had a plan
    He lead the crowd and his plan began
    Some other people did like the plan
    And did all they could to lend a hand

    The man with the plan said leave the details to me
    and the people lending a hand waited to see
    what the details of the man’s plan would eventually be
    But on the good vibe of the man’s plan, they all did agree

    The man and his comrades did pontificate on this and on that
    they printed papers and pamphlets for political combat
    They denounced and debated and engaged in chit-chat
    But what about the details of the plan? They didn’t discuss that

    As it turns out the mans plan didn’t work
    His spending and borrowing just went berserk
    bankers and speculators began to lurk
    and the mans plan was drowned in financial murk

    A story like this would not be so bad
    If the man did what he did with money that he himself had
    But the thing that makes this story so sad
    Is the debt was in the name of a vulnerable old comrade

    Some comrades who at first did not care about the details
    later launched a campaign with pickets, petitions and emails
    They drew attention to the morality of the property sale
    And blamed the man for the mysterious money trails

    But the question I ask to all who who were involved
    At what point in the plan did the man’s deception evolve?
    It seems to me the problems would be easy to solve
    If from the beginning, the man’s sole control had been dissolved

  6. 'Carne or Can't' says:

    Will Marcus stole $168,032 from the benefactor of AHIMSA house. He admitted the money was not his. Yet never returned it.

    His company Argo camped rent free ($2,000 pw) at AHIMSA house from 2003 till 2011. Yet Marcus never re-paid the debt to AHIMSA or its owner. He borrowed another $30,000 personally from Ross that he never re-paid. All this is in the accounts given to the Public Trustee. Peter Carne chose never to act on any of this information except to oppose Marcus’s claim on the building. A forensic audit was never performed, yet Carne claims that he spent $300,000 in obtaining legal opinions (a lie).

    At the same time Marcus was receiving water grants from Federal ($50K) and State Labor governments ($5M).

    The park’s architect Will Marcus, of Argo Projects, said:

    “The park has attracted nearly $5 million from the State Government as part of funding for lasting projects to celebrate Queensland’s 150th birthday in June, 2009.”

    See Recycled Water

    Labor appointee, Peter Carne,together with his lawyers and accountants at the Public Trustee’s Office (Mark Crofton, Ian Campbell, Greg Chapell) gave Will Marcus full clearance after an interview was conducted about the theft of the money and failure to pay rent for 8 years. This theft has been reported to Dutton Park Police. Marcus went to the Supreme Court to claim 1/6th of the building at 26 Horan Street West End and lost because both the Public Trustee and Challenger Bank opposed his claim know he was a crook but careful of his Labor Party affiliations with his local member, Anna Bligh and her staffer Angus Sutherland.

    Ian Curr
    15 October 2013

  7. Drunk guy at the pub says:

    Can anyone provide meaningful comment / feedback on the entity known as QPILCH which claims to be an independent ‘free’ legal advice organization that shares some office space with QCAT ?? To date I’ve found QPILCH lawyers appear quite helpful however I can’t help wondering about the legitimacy of any operation close to QCAT. As others have correctly stated, the ‘legal’ system generally is a minefield with the amount of justice available depending on the thickness of ones wallet. Community legal services certainly go part of the way to addressing that situation although those of us with nasty suspicious minds are inclined to have thoughts about whats really going on behind the scenes.

Leave a Reply to 'Carne or Can't' Cancel reply