Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #38

[chekoutchik]

[respectfully snipped]

As far as searches reveal, WOTS is owned by just GBC and Allison equally, having 1 share each and that they beneficially own these shares and not on trust. However, the WOTS itself as a legal entity may be the trustee of a trust in which Allison's family members have an interest. That trust hopefully will be properly documented.

Totally agree Actus. As they appear by the search I have seen, your assumption that they own one each is correct. I think we will be seeing a new director appointed soon.

It is my understanding that there are 4 stakeholders in the property: Allison & Gerard, Ashley & his wife:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/in...erard-baden-clay/story-e6frf7jo-1226465935990

 

[chekoutchik]

I hear you too Obs. TM wasn't meeting his every need though if he was cheating on her with other women.

I take your point that she was just as gullible and he may have thought he could continue to run business as usual even moving in with her.

Perhaps she is still being gullible given the recent connection to the Paradise Point property. MOO

 

[Liadan]

As far as Tm I don't think she did know GBC all that well - after all either she hadn't seen for herself or was ignoring the side that he showed to Allison. I think she was deluding herself.

There is no way GBC would have stopped the flings even if he was with TM- he did these little trysts to boost his ego - that isn't about to stop because he has found the one. Its a huge trip for him - women falling at his feet.

Who knows maybe TM and GBC were having an OPEN relationship. One shudders to think but while I think TM did lawyer up early on nd was interviewed three times and probably told a lot of the truth - we don't know how helpful her statements were. The fact that she was interviewed 3x doesn't really tell us if she cooperated??? Maybe she is protected a la Paul Tully's comments.

We have only been privy to BO's emails and he has said 'you have my word I will leave Allisons on this date' - it seemed like she wanted Allison out of the picture any which way but its the next part that gets me. GBC says he has to lay low and explains how to do this. And from the context of that BO text I almost think she was prepared to lie low with him.

My god - if my 'lover' ever said that to me after their wife had been suspiciously murdered I would be camped outside the Police headquarters scared for my life that BO was going to knock me off cause I knew so much.

 

[alioop]

Perhaps and this is just my ponderings, by murdering Allison as alleged by the police, he thought he would sort out a few of his pressing problems.

1. Get rid of the wife who was on to him about TM and was sick of his lies and about to leave him. With her dead he wouldn't have to go through a divorce and the embarrassment to him in the community. He wouldn't have to disclose his real financial situation to her as she may not have known about all his debts and what he may have racked up in her name perhaps without her knowledge.

2. He gets a bit under a million dollars from Allison's life insurance and superannuation. He is her sole executor and beneficiary in her will. He certainly rushed the issue of the death certificate and his dealings with the insurance companies. This is not usual behaviour in all my experience of estate administration. Actually I have never seen this type of behaviour. With this money he can pay all his debts. He may not have had much left over but at least he could start afresh financially and be seen as paying his debts. I think what people think of him is important to his ego. So with his debts paid to people in the real estate industry he could stay in that industry. I think he was already planning on downsizing his business as having the big high profile premises was costing too much.

3. With Allison dead, he can give the excuse to TM that he can't be with her as he has to look after his girls as a sole parent. He has paid her back from the insurance money so doesn't have to keep her sweet any more. He is then free as a single man to do what he wants and hopefully find another hardworking successful attractive woman like Allison when he met her.

Edit add.4. I think that both GBC and ABC were likely headed for bankruptcy so if Allison wasn't murdered, I think that was going to happen as they clearly couldn't pay their combined debts. They owed $45,000 on their credit card, which was over its limit. They were behind in insurance premiums and policies were about to be cancelled. 2 days before Allison died she was in contact with their life insurance advisor about reducing the amount of her life insurance to save money. Their debts were too much for family to help them with. Allison's death and insurance payouts would have avoided bankruptcy for GBC.

Business as usual and he has the sympathy of the community to flatter his ego. Has mum and dad nearby to help with the girls.

 

[alioop]

It is my understanding that there are 4 stakeholders in the property: Allison & Gerard, Ashley & his wife:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/in...erard-baden-clay/story-e6frf7jo-1226465935990

Chekout, I know that the media says they owned in jointly but this must be by some arrangement that is not recorded on the legal title to the property or the company's public records. There may be a trust document or just a verbal family agreement about this. That is why the selling agent was able to take instructions from GBC's representative as when he did his searches on the title and the owner WOTS, no one else's name is on public record other than WOTS as legal owner and GBC as its sole director.

 

[chekoutchik]

Hi
I don't think money in trust accounts earn interest.

I use to manage a trust account. It didn't accrue interest. However, while the balance in the trust account remained, the money was actually invested on the side by the lawyers and was actually a great source of income for the firm. I no longer work for a law firm.

 

[chekoutchik]

Chekout, I know that the media says they owned in jointly but this must be by some arrangement that is not recorded on the legal title to the property or the company's public records. There may be a trust document or just a verbal family agreement about this. That is why the selling agent was able to take instructions from GBC's representative as when he did his searches on the title and the owner WOTS, no one else's name is on public record other than WOTS as legal owner and GBC as its sole director.

Yes, I think there is a trust set-up too. That's why I said earlier that I think the trustees can actually have power against the director in this instance as GBC is only 1 of 4 trustees???

 

[alioop]

I use to manage a trust account. It didn't accrue interest. However, while the balance in the trust account remained, the money was actually invested on the side by the lawyers and was actually a great source of income for the firm. I no longer work for a law firm.

It that was happening at your law firm that was illegal. There is strict legislation on the management of trusts accounts. There are law society audits to check that trust accounts are being properly kept. Any lawyer caught doing this, would be struck off. It does happen, usually with sole practitioners as they don't have business partners to check them.

 

[possumheart]

Alioop. Further to point two, he could not legally finalize Allison's estate as a bankrupt accountant, only as a solvent one as it is the law.

 

[alioop]

Yes, I think there is a trust set-up too. That's why I said earlier that I think the trustees can actually have power against the director in this instance as GBC is only 1 of 4 trustees???

I agree there is probably a trust. The trustee would have to be WOTs as the legal owner of the property and it would hold the property on trust for the beneficiaries as named in the trust document. As sole director of the trustee however, GBC didn't legally ( even though he should have morally I think) need the consent of any of the beneficiaries to sell the property. That is why the sale will likely go through. However the sale proceeds would have to be dealt with in accordance with company law/ tax requirements and the entitlement of the trust beneficiaries.

 

[alioop]

Alioop. Further to point two, he could not legally finalize Allison's estate as a bankrupt accountant, only as a solvent one as it is the law.

Thanks Poss, good point. Bankrupt executors are unable to act as an executor or for that matter as directors of companies, hold real estate licenses etc. Bankruptcy would have severely restricted his ability to do business as usual.

 

[Amee]

Baden-Clay said in court documents lodged in the Supreme Court earlier this year that: "In essence, Allison and I jointly own the property with her brother and his wife."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...om-going-through/story-fndo45r1-1226466805357

what were these court documents lodged earlier in the year and why?

 

[alioop]

Perhaps and this is just my ponderings, by murdering Allison as alleged by the police, he thought he would sort out a few of his pressing problems.

1. Get rid of the wife who was on to him about TM and was sick of his lies and about to leave him. With her dead he wouldn't have to go through a divorce and the embarrassment to him in the community. He wouldn't have to disclose his real financial situation to her as she may not have known about all his debts and what he may have racked up in her name perhaps without her knowledge.

2. He gets a bit under a million dollars from Allison's life insurance and superannuation. He is her sole executor and beneficiary in her will. He certainly rushed the issue of the death certificate and his dealings with the insurance companies. This is not usual behaviour in all my experience of estate administration. Actually I have never seen this type of behaviour. With this money he can pay all his debts. He may not have had much left over but at least he could start afresh financially and be seen as paying his debts. I think what people think of him is important to his ego. So with his debts paid to people in the real estate industry he could stay in that industry. I think he was already planning on downsizing his business as having the big high profile premises was costing too much.

3. With Allison dead, he can give the excuse to TM that he can't be with her as he has to look after his girls as a sole parent. He has paid her back from the insurance money so doesn't have to keep her sweet any more. He is then free as a single man to do what he wants and hopefully find another hardworking successful attractive woman like Allison when he met her.

Edit add.4. I think that both GBC and ABC were likely headed for bankruptcy so if Allison wasn't murdered, I think that was going to happen as they clearly couldn't pay their combined debts. They owed $45,000 on their credit card, which was over its limit. They were behind in insurance premiums and policies were about to be cancelled. 2 days before Allison died she was in contact with their life insurance advisor about reducing the amount of her life insurance to save money. Their debts were too much for family to help them with. Allison's death and insurance payouts would have avoided bankruptcy for GBC.

Business as usual and he has the sympathy of the community to flatter his ego. Has mum and dad nearby to help with the girls.

Sorry to quote my own post, but I have added in a point 4.

 

[Makara]

Gerbil Hunting Season on September 8, 2012 at 9:55 am said....

http://aussiecriminals.com.au/2012/...ptember-24-2012/comment-page-2/#comment-47936

Interesting if this second email is legit. TZ states that he was contacted by a representative of WOTS P/L five weeks ago in regard to selling the Gold Coast property. Five weeks ago! He also states that he was unaware that Allison was a director of WOTS P/L even though he says that he'd conducted a company search with ASIC.

Allison was removed as a director and secretary of WOTS P/L as of 14 August and the documents were lodged with ASIC on 21 August. At the most that is four weeks ago. If TZ had done the ASIC search as he stated, he would have seen that Allison was in fact still a director of WOTS P/L five weeks ago. If he'd done the ASIC search later than he stated, he would have seen that Allison was removed as a director and secretary. Why then does he state that he didn't know that Allison was ever a director of WOTS P/L.

If the WOTS representative contacted TZ to list the Gold Coast property for sale five weeks ago, Allison was legally still a director of WOTS P/L.

Something is very off here!

MOO.

 

[alioop]

Baden-Clay said in court documents lodged in the Supreme Court earlier this year that: "In essence, Allison and I jointly own the property with her brother and his wife."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...om-going-through/story-fndo45r1-1226466805357

what were these court documents lodged earlier in the year and why?

I think that was in an affidavit that GBC filed in support of his bail affidavit. I haven't seen that affidavit but my guess is that he was saying that he has assets by way of an interest in that property, therefore one reason why he would be unlikely to be a fight risk. He would have been trying to counter the prosecution's position that he had huge debts and no means to pay them and therefore a flight risk. It is helpful to any argument by the Dickie's that there was a Dickie family interest in that property as he has admitted it in that affidavit even though that wasn't why he said it there.

 

[alioop]

Gerbil Hunting Season on September 8, 2012 at 9:55 am said....

http://aussiecriminals.com.au/2012/...ptember-24-2012/comment-page-2/#comment-47936

Interesting if this second email is legit. TZ states that he was contacted by a representative of WOTS P/L five weeks ago in regard to selling the Gold Coast property. Five weeks ago! He also states that he was unaware that Allison was a director of WOTS P/L even though he says that he'd conducted a company search with ASIC.

Allison was removed as a director and secretary of WOTS P/L as of 14 August and the documents were lodged with ASIC on 21 August. At the most that is four weeks ago. If TZ had done the ASIC search as he stated, he would have seen that Allison was in fact still a director of WOTS P/L five weeks ago. If he'd done the ASIC search later than he stated, he would have seen that Allison was removed as a director and secretary. Why then does he state that he didn't know that Allison was ever a director of WOTS P/L.

If the WOTS representative contacted TZ to list the Gold Coast property for sale five weeks ago, Allison was legally still a director of WOTS P/L.

Something is very off here!

MOO.

Good pick Makara. Unless he didn't get around to doing a company search for about a week for whatever reason. It would be good if someone could ask TZ what was the actual date he did that search. That would sort out that little technical issue!!

 

[Makara]

Good pick Makara. Unless he didn't get around to doing a company search for about a week for whatever reason.

Yes, but he stated that he had no knowledge that GBC wasn’t always the sole director. ASIC documents state otherwise.

 

[alioop]

Maybe he just did a short version company search that showed only the current directors. Is such a thing available from ASIC? I am not sure. Another thing to ask TZ to explain. He does seem to want to explain himself.

 

[Fuskier]

...

If the WOTS representative contacted TZ to list the Gold Coast property for sale five weeks ago, Allison was legally still a director of WOTS P/L.
Something is very off here! MOO.

Good sleuthing Makara.

 

[Fuskier]

Thanks for your helpful analysis Alioop. Great contribution to the Thread. IMO.