The Killara Trust


  1. Alexis Conway says:

    Hi Chris

    I have been spending the last few days doing a summary of the evidence on your website for my Killara Trust lawyers review of the position. The Delay, Deny, Defend pages are right to the point, well done.

    It may be of interest to your readers to know an outline of the legal actions that they are considering.

    As you realise there are issues, a simple civil case would be met with challenges based on the Statute of Limitation and on Security for costs. The McKinsey’s ‘Delay, Deny Defend’ technique recommends that the insurers lawyers claim that all prosecutions are ‘Frivolous’ and bank on the fact that many of the actions against insurance companies are actually in that category, metaphorically IAG will hide a solid tree in a forest of frivolous trees and the Court usually believes a major insurer.

    However, the actions that IAG and the investigators they employed amounted to ‘Conspiring to bring false accusation’ which is a serious criminal act under section 115 of the Crimes Act 1961. I copy the section below:-

    115 Conspiring to bring false accusation

    Every one who conspires to prosecute any person for any alleged offence, knowing that person to be innocent thereof, is liable—

    (a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years if that person might, on conviction of the alleged offence, be sentenced to preventive detention, or to imprisonment for a term of 3 years or more:
    (b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years if that person might, on conviction of the alleged offence, be sentenced to imprisonment for a term less than 3 years.

    In our case, IAG conspired to get you convicted of Arson which the investigators actions undoubtedly show they knew you were innocent. Arson carries a tariff of up to 7 years so Paragraph(a) applies.

    The Killara Trust is looking at proceeding with a Private Criminal Prosecution against IAG, the statute of limitations applicable in a civil case does not apply.

    ‘Conspiring to bring false accusation’ is a Category 3 offence, Section 25, 2(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 applies so we have plenty of time to file a charging document, but it must include all the evidence required to justify a trial.

    Such a case would proceed in 6 to 9 months and take a few days in Court, it is an effective process, the evidence is copious, very simple and well supported by documents mostly originating from IAG’s investigators and therefore hard to dispute. A successful prosecution would open claims for damages and leave IAG executives and investigators facing serious terms of imprisonment.

    IAG would attempt to claim this action is an abuse of process if we do not get the evidence well defined and clearly supported. The website provides the outline and refers to the base documents and photographs hence me spending the time researching it. It will take some time to gets everything sorted but I will update you personally.

    Alexis Conway
    The Killara Trust

  2. cjrob224 says:

    Thanks Alan

    I have published the letter and their LACK of replies, shaming them but they don’t really care.
    See the new Home page and Delay, Deny, Defend in Action pages to see what is really going on here!

    Chris R

  3. Alan Smithers says:

    This post is really funny in its implications!

    It seems IAG’s people are totally stupid, I guess that is down to the quality of the lawyers who chased you, persecuted you, jailed and bankrupted you, following their Delay, Deny, Defend company policy. All of their actions were hits at the wrong target!

    It wasn’t your property at all, they should have attacked the Trust but clearly they didn’t even register it, you were a simple target and that was all they saw.

    I did exactly the same when I insured my family house here in Ireland, it is also owned by our family trust. I told the rep on the phone what I was doing and they just said that was fine. They noted the interest of the trust and all has been well but we haven’t had a big claim thankfully. I called them earlier today and they confirmed that in their view I was the agent of the trust and the policy was to the benefit of the Trust. I even asked if I was bankrupted would it invalidate the policy but no, it wouldn’t be my asset so it wouldn’t be affected if I was made bankrupt.

    I guess IAG will try to ignore the position, get the trustees to write to them asking when they will meet the claim. Then publish the letter and their replies or lack of them. They will look very crooked if they don’t reply and that will be seriously damaging to their image and credibility!

    You should write this Stevens lawyer a big thank you for highlighting it so clearly for you.

    I will watch with great interest as they squirm with endless excuses – good luck.

  4. Kerry Sharp says:

    I love Trust and I guess you love lying lawyers.

    Don’t they get in a mess, new lawyer in case iffy research on previous events and in they dive, massive ego and no brain just a massive ability to tell lies. Trouble is the new lawyers lies never match the pile of previous lies and the whole pile begins to stink.

    Keep going, great website, a really well documented example of delay deny defend in action – it will kill them!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.