The AWU Scandal - The property purchase - Slater and Gordon fees written off
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
One of the features of Ian Cambridge's affidavit is the inclusion of a couple of letters to Ralph Blewitt about the purchase of 51 Kerr Street Fitzroy.
The notes that Cambridge had were incomplete but included the bill of fees and disbursements. I noted when I first read Cambridge's affidavit and the attachments, the day after I first spoke to Bob Kernohan and before I recorded the interview that 2UE would not allow to be played, that the fee for Slater and Gordon's work had been declined. I thought then that it would have required a partner's authorisation to write off that money.
That's why I wrote to Miss Gillard last year and asked her whether she had authorised the firm doing that work for free. I received no answer.
Now, thanks to Ralph Blewitt's release of this file to me we don't need to write to the PM, we can see in the answer in the complete file. Here it is.
Ok ...so Julia declined a fee for the second lot. She puts two lines in her dollar signs? So who declined the figures above hers. They only put one line through their dollar signs?
Posted by: ????? | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 08:37 PM
Congrats again, terrific evidence.
Shame nothing came up in Parliament, but perhaps more in The Age?\
Hope Bob is safe and you too, please take care.
Posted by: Liz of Vic | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 08:45 PM
Is this what they colloquially refer to as a 'smoking gun'??
Get ready Gillard because Karma is "a-comin'"
The Australian people are waiting for their chance to be judge, jury and executioner all in one.. and not before time.
Heartfelt congratulations to Mike, Bob, EVERYONE else who has not let this story die, and now Ralph for finally making good on his promises.
It is a brave move - very brave - and whatever he had done in his past will not be forgiven by these documents but one must take the first small steps towards redemption and we must thank him for it.
Posted by: Callan Election | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 08:50 PM
It is interesting to me that the internal process followed was ' Authority to write off bad debt'. The term bad debt has both legal and accountancy / tax implications. You can w/off debt for all sorts of reasons, BUT to write off as a bad debt would indicate that collection processes had failed.
Was this "bad debt" claimed as a business expense?
Posted by: steve of glasshouse | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 09:05 PM
At last, I think we really do have the smoking gun. Julia Gillard wrote off the fees that every firm handling conveyancing charges to their clients.
There is definitely something wrong with the way in which this was written off.
Posted by: Maggie1954 | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 09:33 PM
congratulation - this is, if my counting is correct, 100th entry in the "The AWU Scandal" series, almost all of them containing a document of some nature.
If you ever need a copy of any of them, just let me know. Have all of them saved :-)
Posted by: Bob K. | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 10:04 PM
Hey Posted by???????? thats my question also - whose handwriting is on the paper work. also no signature used to sign off on appropriate pages, WHY?? i can wait, just keep it coming...
Posted by: betty | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 10:07 PM
Never known a Lawyer to do anything for nothing.
Posted by: John Greyhair | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 10:14 PM
Liz of Vic........don't get your hopes up about questions asked in parliament. Today the Speaker Anna Burke refused the question regarding the Elect Trades union house purchase to be asked.
Posted by: Bazza | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 10:58 PM
Theft and misaapropriation in Slater & Gordon - someone call the police! The name Julia is all over the specimens.
Posted by: ABC journalists are in denial | Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 11:20 PM
ooops found two more words on two more pages that are similar - Julia and declined, again who is Olly????
Posted by: betty | Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 12:42 AM
Steve has raised a very good point with regard to the write off of the debt.
He is correct that "bad debt" is specific terminology relating to debt where collection procedures have been put in place, and have failed to get a response. Reasons for the bad debt would include a "skip". In normal practice (I am not talking about a law firm) all efforts are made to collect a debt that is outstanding, including the use of a collection agency.
Also, bad debts that have been written off, can be written back into the ledger if the client actually pays the account, or even part pays the account.
This particular debt is being written off because "the fees are declined". This is a very highly unusual reason, and at the very least the accounting department of Slater of Gordon should have been querying that reason for the write off. It was never a bad debt from an accounting point of view.
Posted by: maggie1954 | Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 08:01 AM
If a man today said "smoking gun" he would be accused of sexism and perhaps even of being un-Australian. Maybe we should settle for the 'boomerang is coming back'.
Posted by: John Greyhair | Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 08:08 AM
one would need to have a mind totally in the gutter to consider "smoking gun" as sexist!!... and no "boomerang" does not fit the description.
We are looking for those things that point to the smoking gun evidence. Think murder, not your pants!!
Posted by: maggie1954 | Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 10:17 AM
That is the second time in two days on two different sites, that I have heard the word 'murder' mentioned.
I find it disturbing.
Are some people aware of more than they are saying?Has there really been a murder or a suspected murder?
Posted by: ????? | Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 10:47 AM
Matter raised in the Senate yesterday by Senator George Brandis. I emailed him and thanked him. Asked him to keep pushing to get the truth out there. He replied and said his colleagues will do everything they can to get to the truth. Yippee, a Senator with a conscience and a belief in the truth. How is that for some positive action?
Posted by: Anastasia | Friday, 12 October 2012 at 04:02 PM