MORE EXAMPLES OF FALSE REPRESENTATION
BY THE SECOND LAWYER (#2)
(Mr Kevin Phillips of Queenstown)

More examples of shoddy and false representation:

A)
In February 1988 Lawyer #2  had a meeting with Lawyer #1 while I was in Invercargill getting my home painted in preparation for an urgent sale.
He came to me firstly with an offer of $3000, then a second offer of $10,000  -  expecting me to sign a document stating that this would provide a full discharge in respect of any liabilities arising from the matter!!

B)
In  a letter (June 1988) Lawyer #2 wrote to an accountant I hired to work out my losses for Court, (whom was put off as Lawyer #2 wrote telling me he was proceeding to complete proceedings for Court. I believed him. That became another whole scenario and just one of a number of letters like such over the years) ….he had written with regards to my mortgages to that accountant: "penalty interest charged by United Building Society for late payment, say $300.00" (hundred that is- when it was in fact $8915.00 on the Queens Drive home alone. I should not have had a mortgage at all on that, or Arrowtown, let alone penalty interest on both, as the money was there to pay that and the  Arrowtown mortgage in FULL, in 1985. This is just ONE example of a number of untruths in that very important letter (I had not read until sometime in 1992 )by this Lawyer who had had before him my TRUE losses since mid-1986. 

C)
One example of Lawyer #2 knowing what I was being put through in 1986, was in a letter written by him to Inland Revenue on September 28 concerning the Estate Tax Account, about which I could do nothing at that time because of the legal problems and hold-ups with the Lawyers concerned., quote:
"
Mrs Trevathan came to see the writer in June of 1986. She at that time had been attempting to have her late husband's estate cleaned up by solicitors who were domiciled in Invercargill. Because of serious errors made in the administration of the estate, it had not been finalized as at June 1986 and the writer was then instructed to take over the matter.

"We wish to advise that Mrs Trevathan has not furnished her return because of matters totally outside her control…………..She has had a most upsetting two-year period in relation to the Estate of her late husband.  A prosecution from your Department would, or could, be the final straw for her…."

Yet knowing such, I was put through another 5 years of legal procrastination, then a sham of a Trial - devastating to me, and a further 13 years from then on while seeking Justice and Legal redress - to no avail.

D)
1986 Mr Phillips said he would lodge a complaint with the Southland District Law Society concerning Mr Galt, that a lawyer does that, on behalf of their client.

By October 1986 I went to another lawyer in Christchurch because of the delays with Mr Phillips. Mr Phillips wrote to him saying regarding the complaint to SDLS, that he thought I wished to take the matter no further. (That is not what he understood) he wrote to me asking that I make an appointment to see him. I did, in short, he assured me he would be acting for me.

November 21 1986 Mr Phillips wrote to Mr Galt, including a copy of his letter to the SDLS. To mr Galt he said: "Mrs Trevathan's instructions were given to the writer some time ago and he thought perhaps after giving careful consideration to the matter, Mrs Trevathan may have changed her mind. However she has not" (this letter I did not see until 1993). Knowing what my losses were because of Mr Galt, how I was living, and that I was waiting to hear what the SDLS would do to help me, Mr Phillips had not put in the complaint, and only did so after I had gone to another lawyer!

The letter of November 21 1986 Mr Phillips wrote to the SDLS consisted of two pages. What he sent to me, that I believed was a copy of the letter he had sent to the SDLS, was a six page letter with far more data concerning the complaint, than he had given SDLS. Again, 18 May 1987, he wrote a letter, two pages, in response to SDLS. What he sent to me, that he lead me to believe was a copy of the one he sent to SDLS, was a five page letter, with far more data than he had given SDLS. False pretences, he was not telling them what he was leading me to believe he was! The copies of the letters he sent to SDLS I did not receive until 1993, then were filed with other documents I did not keep with me, so I did not read them until earlier this year, 2005)

October 9 1989 Mr Phillips wrote to the Otago District Law Society, to whom I had written regarding Mr Phillips not doing what he was saying he had to do, to get my case to court (when he was the one who said "We will take this to court" 1988) Regarding Mr Galt, he said :"The solicitor concerned, Mr Galt of Messrs Hewat Galt, did experience difficulties, and delays did occur." Further on he says: "The writer then received instructions to take action against Mr Galt for negligence. Later there were further instructions from Mrs Trevathan not to do anything further." Again, what he told the Christchurch Lawyer 1986, when not true! March 20 1992 he wrote to me in response to a letter I had written to SDLS and left a copy at his office for him to read. He said to me in that letter: "The writer believes you should question the opinion of the SDLS that the delay was not of "sufficient gravity" to warrant the making of a charge. It appears that they give the reason the delays were "explainable" and mention 'assets which were more difficult to administer than the usual, and other circumstances' "

"We agree with Mrs Trevathan's views that we do not see any assets which were more 'difficult to administer' than usual, and we fail to see other circumstances that would give reason for such delays. We believe that is where the heart to the complaint lies"
(yet he wrote what he did to ODLS October 9 1989)

There is much more of shocking deceit that I was put through over many years by Mr Phillips. Not only does he still practise, but he has prosecuted others, on behalf of the Crown, for much less than he has done himself, which leaves me feeling quite ill.

E)
One example of a number - both Lawyers involved knew what my husband had wanted and had expected:
Lawyer #1, in a letter to the Southland District Law Society in 1987 quote:

"Mr Trevathan had during his long terminal illness endeavored to have his affairs in order, to the extent that Mrs Trevathan would not have out-goings and should have some sort of reasonable income."

What a sad and angry man he would be if he could speak today!
Still, I wait for
accountability - and with it, my funds and my life back!

April 3rd 2006:
Still none of my serious allegations concerning Mr Phillips (all of which I have considerable proof of) - have been addressed by they with the power and duty., to address, yet Mr Phillips was appointed to the position of District Court Judge, and sworn in to be such, for Invercargill - Queenstown, 21st February 2006.

A person cannot be a policeman or policewoman with the same blemish on their record (which is I have been told) - Embezzlement - Perverting the course of Justice, but you can be a Judge?

Mr Phillips can now send other people to Jail for far less than he has done himself, and so far not been held accountable for!!


Return to Home Page                                            More...