REAA; a very very big mistake; a conspiracy to defeat the course of justice?

In November 2011 Lauda Finem first reported on a very strange case that was before New Zealand’s Real Estate Agents Authority (REAA). The case involved an apparently well connected Auckland Ray White franchisee, Mr Martin Honey, his wife Stephanie and their business partner Mr Rohan Wayne Thompson. Mr Honey had been caught red handed fraudulently operating a Re/Max website causing one of his local competitors serious financial loss.

The victims of the fraud, the genuine Re/Max franchisee had discovered the site whilst investigating the reasons for non exsistant listings and business inquiry generally. Upon its discovery the victims of the fraud were smart enough to have obtained extensive video taped evidence of the fraudulent site in operation and a conversation with Honey’s wife Stephanie admitting to the existence of the site and her role in its maintenance.

Naturally enough the genuine Re/Max franchise sought an explanation and apology from Martin Honey Ray White. Mr Honey however seems to have irrationally adopted a somewhat confrontational attitude. Faced with the fact that he had been caught Honey didn’t feel it necessary to apologise, he couldn’t even offer a plausible explanation, the only excuse he could think of was that the fraudulent site had been a cached copy of a website he had operated some eighteen months earlier when he had in fact been the re/max franchise holder (The REAA’s own forensic IT expert later established that Honey had, during the period that the site was live, in fact updated it to refect Re/Max’s new graphic branding). Of cause Mr Honey’s explanation was false and he knew it!

The victims of the fraud then filed a compliant with New Zealand’s real estate agents regulatory body the REAA. upon recieving notification of the complaint Mr Honey texted one of the victims of his fraud, not with an apology or offer to settle; no, the threatening text simply read “BIG MISTAKE”.

Mr Honey then decided to take an even more threatening and confrontational approach, he filed his own complaint with the REAA, a complaint that was entirely false. Mr Honey did so not realising that his fraud had been well and truly documented. Now this is where Mr Honey’s “BIG MISTAKE” threat begins to take on an ominous meaning.

As we said earlier, it appeared that Mr Martin Honey was well connected, those connections and their behaviour will astound. Needless to say, it had never crossed the minds of the victims just how Mr Honey intended using the “connections” he had to serving members of New Zealand’s Parliament.

The events that followed Martin Honey‘s “BIG MISTAKE” threat will shake the foundations of New Zealand’s real estate industry, its recently founded regulating body, the REAA, and New Zealand’s consumers in general.

The industries regulating body, the REAA, whilst in theory a good idea has since its inception been no stranger to controversy. In a recent post we looked at the saga of the bent cop, Jon Moss, being hired as the REAA’s chief investigator; the result a report designed to cover-up some serious corruption and Moss being handed a $30’000.00 going away pressie as he was lovingly pushed out the back door by Kristy McDonald QC.

Mr Honey’s criminal offending, his subsequent behaviour and that of two (National Party) members of parliament, one a minister of the crown, and the REAA is in our view nothing short of criminal. Events that, here in Australia at least, would be the subject of a full ICAC investigation and hearing.

Mr Honey, prior to making his complaint to the REAA had payed a visit to the list MP Ms Jackie Blue, there appears to be no motive for this other than corrupt dealings. Lauda Finem suspect that Martin Honey Ray White have had past financial dealings with the National Party, party political donors perhaps?

After all Blue was not Martin Honey Ray Whites local MP, she was however, it would appear, known to Honey; a friend on first name terms, that Honey could rely on to pull a few strings so to speak. Within hours of Mr Honey‘s visit to her office Dr Blue had dictated and sent a letter off to her National Party colleague, the associate Minister for Justice Mr Nathan Guy. In that letter Blue repeats Honey’s outrageous and false allegations;

“………enclosed a dossier provided to me by Mr Martin Honey, a Mt Roskill constituent’.

Ms Bluefurther states;

“….. the dossier that makes serious allegations, which if proven to be correct, casts serious concern over the suitability of Mr XXXXXX current occupation as a real estate salesperson.”

She concludes her letter by stating:

“I would be grateful if you could please urgently investigate this with the Real Estate Agents Authority”.

Seems Dr Blue has the ability to circumvent due process and investigation/hearing lists. Part of Nathan Guy’s ministerial portfolio is oversight of the REAA. Ms Blue meanwhile had not bothered to contact the victims of Honey’s fraud, as one might expect of a truly impartial person in public office, instead she had taken Martin Honey’s clearly false allegations and run with the whole kit and kaboodle. Ms Blue’s letter to Nathan Guy is quite extraordinary, a brazen effort to interfere in the determinations of a tribunal, in fact a court of law.

To add insult to injury Dr Blue had also been advised by another National Party colleague and fellow MP,  Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, that there was absolutely nothing to Martin Honey’s false allegations and that she should investigate his complaint further, Dr Blue subsequently refused to do so; that readers at the very least  is known as negligence, we however are more inclined to use the term conspiracy.

Martin Honey’s false complaint to the REAA and that of Nathan Guy’s, apparently politically driven, interference in the prescribed process of a legal proceeding is also quite extraordinary, in fact it may well breach section 27 of New Zealand’s bill of rights.

The audacity of these three co-conspirators, Honey, Blue and Guy verges on the spectacular. Unfortunately for the trio there were, a few complications;  albeit unforeseen problems; Mr Honey had advised Ms Jackie Blue, and additionally later claimed in his REAA documentation, that his falsely alleged tormentors had:

“viciously verbally attacked my wife over the phone making threats he will ruin us.We have perceived the correspondence received from Mr X’s office in regard to the complaint as threatening, with the intention to intimidate us in to doing as he demands”.

This was of course, just like the rest of his complaint, spurious and designed purely to counter and or stave off the genuine complaint made by the victims of Honey’s own serious fraudulent criminal offending.

Mr Honey then make’s another serious mistake, he provides supporting correspondence from his “so called” web designer/IT manager, Mr Hemi Taka. Mr Taka had foolishly provided Mr Honey with a letter attesting to Honey’s claim that his fully functioning fraudulent Re/Max website was simply a cached copy of a website that had existed some 18 months earlier when he had in fact been a Re/Max franchisee.

In Honey’s false complaint to Keith Manch of the REAA he makes yet another critical error, he claims that he has filed a formal complaint with the New Zealand Police , apparently he and his wife had been threatened by the victims. Needless to say no such incident had ever occurred and no complaint had been recorded by police, Honey had again lied, and we certainly have evidence of that fact. Martin Honey, so as to apparently garner credibility with the REAA, then states in his letter to the executive registrar Keith Manch;

“after speaking with my local MP Dr Jackie Blue, who in turn is passing a copy of this on to the Minister of Affairs Justice Nathan Guy“.

And in the same letter he writes;

“Jackie and I are both very concerned that someone like this is in the industry and respectfully ask that you attend to this as a matter of urgency”.

What Mr Martin Honey, Jackie Blue and Nathan Guy had not foreseen was that Martin Honey‘s targets were very experienced in investigation, with a very long history of collecting evidence and proving fraud and various other forms of serious criminal offending.

They had therefore meticulously recorded all dealings with Martin Honey and his wife Stephanie; absolutely every conversation had been electronically recorded and that evidence proves beyond any doubt whatsoever that Martin Honey has repeatedly lied, misrepresented fact and conspired to falsely accuse, and that’s before the issue of his fraudulent Re/max website is factored into the criminal charges he and his associates will likely be facing.

At this juncture the victims were fast beginning to find that something else was not quite right, the inexplicable malfeasance of the REAA, it’s executive registrar Keith Manch, REAA administrative staff and a CAC chairperson by the name of Anna Tierney had become glaringly obvious hurdles; these obstacles were presenting in the willfully obstructive and recalcitrant abuse of process and various other forms of malevolent behavior.

The staff at the REAA, simply put,  had willfully and negligently refused to investigate the legitimate complaint against Martin Honey Ray White for their use of a fraudulent website over a period of more than eighteen months.

As we have already said, chronologically, the victims complaint to the REAA had been filed long before Martin Honey’s false complaint, however to date the REAA has catagorically refused to investigate Martin Honey’s criminal offending, nor have they referred the matter on to police, as should have happened.

Nor for that matter have the  police investigated, despite having recieved a formal complaint from the victims in August 2011.

Lauda finem have obtained an independent report following an investigation into the issues by a highly respected retired police officer with 30 years experience, 17 as a Detective Sergeant. The report is damning of the REAA, Keith Manch, Jackie Blue and Nathan Guy. It calls into serious question the motivations of all those involved with Martin Honey, his criminal offending and the subsequent false allegations against his victims. The reports author notes;

“I make the observation that it appears that Mr Honey has been able to engage the services of politicians in this matter, which can only be for the purposes of boosting the credibility of his complaints against Mr X, and others. He appears to have immediately gained such support from Dr Jackie Blue. This is a matter of concern, considering the fictitious content of the allegations Mr Honey has made to the REAA, which is discussed in more detail later in my report.”

He further states:

“Of further concern is the letter written by Mr Honey, and addressed to the New Zealand Police, in which he makes allegations against Mr X.

………..all enquiries with New Zealand Police indicate that they have no record of receiving this letter of complaint, addressed to them, and nor has any such matter been logged into their system to confirm that they have received any complaint at all from Mr Honey in relation to Mr X. This suggests that Mr Honey has created this letter to misrepresent the fact that he had reported the matter to the Police.”

Then:

“Mr X’s actions in recording this telephone conversation with Mrs Honey were lawful. In my opinion, it is fortuitous for him that it was recorded because it provides an accurate account of the conversation, and of the manner of the conversation, between Mr X and Mrs Honey. I say fortuitous, because the subsequent allegations made against Mr X in relation to this call, are a fabrication. Lies are being told in an attempt to show Mr X in a bad light. This is misleading. These lies have been told by Mr Honey and by inference, are supported by Mrs Honey.“

Then:

“His false allegations, in relation to Mr X’s telephone conversations with his wife, appear to be directly related to his attempts to mislead the REAA, at the time that they would have received and were considering the earlier complaint against him.”

Just one of the report writers many conclusions:

“When considering the criminal liability of Mr Honey, consideration should also be given to the criminal liability of Mrs Honey, and Hemi Taka (and others), as parties (Crimes Act 1961 section 66) to any offences committed by Mr Honey.” (underling is our emphasis)

At the request of the victims we have omitted the reports substantive findings as the report is to be used in planned litigation against the REAA and others involved in the cover-up of Martin Honey’s offending.

At Lauda Finem we like to cover all bases, we have also requested and obtained an additional independent report, that of a computer forensics analyst/expert who is also an internationally trained and independent retired police officer. Based on that reports very succinct findings and conclusions it would appear that Mr Honey’s web manager Mr Hemi Taka may well be, as we crude Australian’s often like to say, in deep shit; knowingly making false claims so as to conceal criminal offending is not a matter to be taken lightly. Of course that’s assuming that Mr Hemi Taka was actually the author of the document and it’s signatory! Just one snip-it from that reports conclusions:

“From the video provided, I confirm it is my expert opinion that the webpage’s of Martin Honey Pure Reality (RE/MAX) was alive and active and it contained live links to the data base(s) of the Ray White website as at 19th of April 2010. It is stated that the website was taken down by a 3rd party; the only way this could have happened was it, the website, was still alive“

Remember, Martin Honey had falsely alleged that the (fraudulent and very much live Re/Max) website was merely a cached copy, check out the video excerpt below and see how Mr Martin Honey of Ray White Real Estate was caught red handed lying.

Note: The video below was disabled by YouTube on  20 April 2012 after someone in power (we suspect via YouTube partner TVNZ) falsely alleged that what amounts to an evidential tape is “somehow” defamatory. It is of course not defamatory, the truth never is, but the video does evidence Mr Honey’s criminal offending and that must be embarrassing for Mr Honey and the REAA.

Lauda Finem have also taken the extraordinary step of closing our YouTube account (in protest) and will be working over the weekend to have the video evidence up and running again, this time under the complete control of www.laudafinem.org so that the likes of Martin Honey and his corrupt national party mates cant touch it………so pop back soon!

Update 7/10/2012 videos now work,

Whilst Dr Jackie Blue and Nathan Guy may well choose to plead ignorance to Martin Honey Ray White’s impossible hypothisis of “cached” exculpation (we’ll be posting more on that “escape route” later) the REAA’s  executive registrar Keith Manch’s behaviour however is in a very different league. Manch had been a serving police officer for over decade and would have been well aware of the criminal ramifications of Martin Honey’s behaviour.

Manch’s temporary replacement (in the hiatus before Kevin Lampen-Smith is scheduled to enter the fray), Dean Winter, had also served in the New Zealand police force for thirteen years, latterly as a Detective. He too would have been well aware that Honey’s actions at the very least should have been referred on to the New Zealand Police’s fraud squad.

So what was it that held these two very experienced ex-police officers back? On the face of  it, based on what we know of their involvement, the fact that they had been given a copy of the evidential video tapes, their knowledge and the REAA correspondence, there is no plausible excuse.

That then only, on the evidence, leaves us with one available conclusion; that they were both parties to an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Nor does the REAA’s CAC Chair, Anna Tierney, escape scrutiny and or culpability. After all she is currently a senior investigator with New Zealand’s Serious Fraud Office (in fact a specialist in forensic accounting) and most certainly she would have known the importance of obtaining a warrant so as to seize Martin Honey Ray White’s computers, hard-drives and any possibly relevant data so as to prevent the loss of valuable evidence for a prosecution.

We here at Lauda Finem would advise Keith Manch’s recently appointed successor, Kevin Lampen-Smith, (when he eventually takes office) to immediately review the complaint against Martin Honey and refer it on to the police, we would also suggest that they commence appropriate action with respect to Mr Martin Honey’s license, and an investigation into all Ray White franchise’s throughout New Zealand.

We will also be advising the victims of Honey’s obvious offending to call for the resignations of Anna Tierney, and those on the REAA board who were a party to this blatant attempt to pervert the course of justice. As the REAA’s cover-up Queen and board chair Kristy McDonald is fond of saying:

Kristy McDonald QC

You are the one responsible when there are problems. Ultimate accountability lies with the chair and the board. It is important to ensure that the board is always kept updated about all issues but this is particularly important when problems arise.

Source: Kristy McDonald QC, Women On Board’s (www.mwa.govt.nz)

Lauda Finem will be making our own inquiries of the other board members so as to ascertain just how much they did in fact know!

We are especially interested in what one board member in particular has to say, consumer affairs Guru Mr David Russell; just what had or hadn’t he been told, after all his reputation also stands to be obliterated by the REAA’s malfeasance and criminality!

The video excerpt below features the conversations that Martin Honey refers to in his false REAA complaint. Remember Mr Honey falsely alleged that his victims had:

“viciously verbally attacked my wife over the phone making threats he will ruin us.We have perceived the correspondence received from Mr X’s office in regard to the complaint as threatening, with the intention to intimidate us in to doing as he demands”.

We remind readers, this is what the very experienced retired police officer, a Detective Sergeant, had concluded in his independent report:

“Mr X’s actions in recording this telephone conversation with Mrs Honey were lawful. In my opinion, it is fortuitous for him that it was recorded because it provides an accurate account of the conversation, and of the manner of the conversation, between Mr X and Mrs Honey. I say fortuitous, because the subsequent allegations made against Mr X in relation to this call, are a fabrication. Lies are being told in an attempt to show Mr X in a bad light. This is misleading. These lies have been told by Mr Honey and by inference, are supported by Mrs Honey.”

Check out the conversations between  Mrs Honey and Mr X for yourself:

Note:we will again be seeking further comment from Ray White’s Australian HQ on Monday

Related articles

• The REAA; lies,delusion, politicians and willful blindness (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• REAA, favouritism, cronyism and conspiracy; the ethical dilemma (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Open letter to New Zealand’s real estate agents (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Keith Manch’s victim writes – Jackie Blue, Martin Honey – The “Big Mistake” Plot (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Jackie “the fixer” Blue (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• The REAA, & the mysterious case of Nathan Guy, Kristy McDonald QC, Crown Law and the Coroner (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• REAA, favouritism, cronyism and conspiracy; the ethical dilema (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Keith Manch corrupt civil servant writes (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Keith Manch, bad cop takes aim at Brian Rowe, iconic justice crusader. (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Yet another ex-cop and corrupt barrister on the inside of the REAA (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• She’s a politician nuf said – Is Jackie “I’ve been belted” Blue a bent pollie? (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Lauda Finem’s response to New Zealand’s Real Estate Agents Authority (laudafinem.wordpress.com)