Found Deceased Australia - Melissa Caddick, 49, Sydney, NSW, 12 Nov 2020 #6

[Trooper]

It seems to me that the family were victims too.

And how terrifying at the parents age to find that after selling your house for what I think is a good price, they seem to now be left with nothing.

Or do some people think they should be punished for what their daughter did, or made the brunt of unfeeling, cruel jokes.



Just my opinon.

It is terrible what Melissa did to them. That does not mean that the investors should cop their sad circumstances.. A lot of those investors would now be finding their own circumstances horrible.

They should not be rewarded.. That would be a travesty of justice. What should happen will be a weighing up of who is owed the money, and who isn't and who has to pay back stuff and who doesn't and and that will be an end to it. At this point, and rightly so, the parents, the son and the brother and husband are merely one number in the queue.. they get no special boost over the queue.,

 

[Trooper]

The investors have to prove to the Receiver that they did, indeed transfer money to Melissa, in the belief that she was investing that money for them, and they were issued with documents backing that belief up. That the documents were false is not the fault of the investors, yet they will, and have, paid dearly for that transaction. They become creditors on that basis.

The parents have the same burden in law, ,to prove that they gave the money that was part of the deposit for the Edgecliff place to Melissa, and she used that particular money for that purpose, even though their names are not on the title. That is the basis for their belief that they are creditors of Melissa's estate also.

That one aspect alone will nullify any claim at all, and it will be a most arcane and twiddly barrister who can fiddle that iron wall of logic to his client's advantage. .

 

[minime9]

What seems obvious to me is this.. they don't have any written back up for their claim, which is why they have decided to fight for it. If they had written backup, the Receiver would accommodate the circumstance as they would then be creditors of Melissa's estate. But they are not any such of a thing which is why they say they are taking it right up to the courts. .

Which could be a bluff hoping to bring the Receiver round to their way of thinking, but he/they can't be doing with that kind of flim flam themselves, their job is to wind up all known debts, and credits, and apportion the funds to whomsoever is owed money by Melissa, and that has to be backed up with genuine paper trail that is impervious to argument.

Agreed & the receiver doesn’t have any power to award them without it being challenged.

I understand why the mortgage was structured the way it was & why the parents were tenants. I believe they all knew that part & parents probably knew they’d be dead before the mortgage paid off anyway. I’m sure the parents would have updated their will accordingly before the move or shortly afterwards which may help them in a court challenge. Maybe.

As far as AG goes the court fees for him being POA came out of the an allowance the courts allowed from Melissa’s accounts which is standard. Personally I think AG stopped paying because he didn’t want to waste his own money on being MC power of attorney & tbh there is little reason for him to do that. He moved back awhile ago, not sure of his job / money situation.

Maybe Anthony Caddick knows someone that can help the parents?

 

[SLouTh]

Agreed & the receiver doesn’t have any power to award them without it being challenged.

I understand why the mortgage was structured the way it was & why the parents were tenants. I believe they all knew that part & parents probably knew they’d be dead before the mortgage paid off anyway. I’m sure the parents would have updated their will accordingly before the move or shortly afterwards which may help them in a court challenge. Maybe.

As far as AG goes the court fees for him being POA came out of the an allowance the courts allowed from Melissa’s accounts which is standard. Personally I think AG stopped paying because he didn’t want to waste his own money on being MC power of attorney & tbh there is little reason for him to do that. He moved back awhile ago, not sure of his job / money situation.

Maybe Anthony Caddick knows someone that can help the parents?

Also re AG no longer defending Melissa, as she is now presumed deceased, the EPOA is null and void, its up to the executors to now negotiate with the receivers.....
AFAIK no information on who the executors are, has been released....

 

[Estelle]

If the parents gave MC the money from their house to put towards the apartment, how was brother ever going to get his part of the inheritance if it was all in MC’s name?

I suspect that is why MC stated in her Will that AG would receive her Aspen apartment investment to appease him. But being older than MC, it would be more likely that AG would die before MC did.

 

[HelloJohnny]

It actually wasn't paid as their deposit or they would be on the title. They've given Melissa money, got no security for it, and so the money has gone into the mix with all the rest. If they thought they had equity in the property, Melissa deceived them the same as she did all the others. I can't see why they'd get back more than the general rate, 25% of original capital has been mentioned. If they didn't think they had equity but gave Melissa the money to use at Melissa's discretion because they trusted her or were scared of her, perhaps they're not entitled to anything back at all.

Maybe if there is a legal practitioner reading this they can provide some clarification?

In terms of both the apartment and the invested funds, They could be regarded the same in the sense that they have both been used to obtain financial advantage or property by deception. This is a criminal act. Property in this regard can apply to monies, or any other tangible or intangible property. So I can see how they could be regarded as the same.

Although, Real Property is a whole another piece of legislation. It covers interests in land and fixtures or structures upon the land ( buildings). So in that respect, they are different. Possession and ownership is also tricky, in terms of Real Property, and you just have to consider things like squatters rights (not applicable to this situation) to realise that the RP legalisation may not always appear fair.
Furthermore, case law also sets a precedence. So if there has been a similar situation ruled on before, by the Courts it’s regarded as case law.

I wonder what type of interest the parents have recorded in the title?

 

[JLZ]

Another way of looking at it is that before there can be any division, the liquidators need to identify what is Melissa's and Maliver's property. I wonder if there's any precedent for determining that somebody has part ownership of real estate although that's not reflected in the title. If so there's a chance the parents can take out their own in full as not being part of the liquidation assets.

 

[minime9]

Maybe if there is a legal practitioner reading this they can provide some clarification?

In terms of both the apartment and the invested funds, They could be regarded the same in the sense that they have both been used to obtain financial advantage or property by deception. This is a criminal act. Property in this regard can apply to monies, or any other tangible or intangible property. So I can see how they could be regarded as the same.

Although, Real Property is a whole another piece of legislation. It covers interests in land and fixtures or structures upon the land ( buildings). So in that respect, they are different. Possession and ownership is also tricky, in terms of Real Property, and you just have to consider things like squatters rights (not applicable to this situation) to realise that the RP legalisation may not always appear fair.
Furthermore, case law also sets a precedence. So if there has been a similar situation ruled on before, by the Courts it’s regarded as case law.

I wonder what type of interest the parents have recorded in the title?

Parents aren’t on the title.

Mortgage on apartment taken out before parents received settlement in Lugarno place. MC had to cover mortgage anyway as there was a shortfall. MC decided to claw back some of that amount by having the parents as tenants, however parents state they paid a significant deposit to MC to pay towards the property. At least 1 million.

Negative gearing wouldn’t be possible if the parents were on the title. However, parents are paying the price for this arrangement.

 

[Brissie Sleuth]

I did a transaction recently for just over $10K. One financial institution to another. Am I on some list now? What's going to happen to me? An organization must be very busy if they're checking up on everyone who moves what's not so very much money after all.

its to be able to have a digital trail so illegal activity can be hunted down.if you deposit $1 million into a bank acct in colombia and someome gets caught later trying to smuggle drugs back to your associated address... etc

 

[HelloJohnny]

This web site cites some case law in relation to “Equitable Claims Against Registered Interests” (about half way down the page)

IMO, I still would not rule out the parents being awarded a stake in the apartment, relative to the monies given to MC.

Source: Corey and Lind Lawyers, corneyandlind.com.au

 

[OwlHeart]

Yes, all in the previous deleted threads.... sadly....

I see.

Sooo, recap?

Was Australia's sweetheart into the betting? Did you guys rule out any organised crime association?

I don't altogether follow. I think my attention's expired for the day. But was it his money? What's wrong with sending it to himself in China?

Forex business made a small appearance from stage left.. she did have some contact indirectly with some kind of world currency gambling thingy.. one can lose a hell of a lot of money between breakfast and morning tea, without really trying at all at that little caper.. and she was a committed risktaker. ...

Very interesting Troops.

We may call you Troops, right?

 

[HelloJohnny]

Next time just do $9,999 and you'll be fine.

It’s cumulative
So as long as you don’t pay an extra $0.1 to the same payee, you’ll be fine!
I should also note, this is not just a requirement of banks. Other organisations too (as defined as a designated service) e.g in relation to gambling and winnings etc

Reporting multiple cash transactions
If you provide multiple services to a customer that add up to A$10,000 or more (or the foreign currency equivalent) when combined, you must decide whether to treat these services as a single reportable transaction or separate transactions. Generally, if the services are similar transactions that happen in quick succession they should be considered a single transaction. This might include cash withdrawals or account deposits.

Designated service
Designated services include a range of business activities in the financial services, bullion, gambling and digital currency exchange sectors. Entities that provide any of these services are reporting entities. Reporting entities have obligations under the AML/CTF Act.
See AML/CTF Act 2006 section 6, tables 1–3

 

[Estelle]

This web site cites some case law in relation to “Equitable Claims Against Registered Interests” (about half way down the page)

IMO, I still would not rule out the parents being awarded a stake in the apartment, relative to the monies given to MC.

Source: Corey and Lind Lawyers, corneyandlind.com.au

But they would have to move out of Edgecliff in any case and buy or rent another property surely?

 

[Estelle]

The bottom line of what they will be left with now:
Are MC's Family and AK are going to be left homeless and destitute?
NOTE: I am no expert on pensions or what they are called these days.

AK - nothing in bank - Audi gone - needs to get a job and rent a room after he undergoes counselling - goes on the pension in the meantime - too ashamed to return to his parents - no superannuation? - MC's life insurance policy is left to him but that was being paid for by the proceeds of crime so he will not get it - does AK now have custody of OC? - if so, he could rent a 2 bedroom apartment and apply for Single Parents' Pension.

AG - no Aspen apartment - possibly paid MC the "rent" money to invest and has nothing much left in his bank account having probably lost his job in Singapore due to Covid lockdown - lost his 1% in Dover Heights house - bank account frozen? - has been supporting parents and may have to continue to do so - Probably does not own his own real estate as men usually rent in Asia - needs to sell more Isagenix or find a job here - or go on the pension - find a place to rent with 2 bedrooms for himself and the parents - no superannuation? - could get a higher pension rate as Carer for parents and could get rental assistance.

BG and TG - unlikely they will be able to continue living at Edgecliff - need to go on the pension and get rent assistance - at best could get back the money from their Connell's Point house sale if they can prove anything - move to 2 bedroom apartment with AG - no superannuation? - should have insisted on the apartment being in their name but they sold their house in 2017 after MC bought the Edgecliff apartment in 2016 so they could only be tenants.

OC - it seems that he will get nothing - has to leave Cranbrook (unless father pays) and attend public school - needs counselling - surprised that he has continued to live with AK - needs to return to his father who should regain custody and support him financially - if that is not possible, AK could apply for a higher rate of pension as a supporting parent and rent a 2 bedroom apartment with rent assistance.

 

[minime9]

But they would have to move out of Edgecliff in any case and buy or rent another property surely?

Yeah, unless someone like AG can come up with the funds. If not and they get none of their deposit back then they’re probably going to have to move out of Sydney...

 

[minime9]

The bottom line of what they will be left with now is:
Are MC's Family and AK are going to be left homeless and destitute?
I am no expert on pensions or what they are called these days.

AK - nothing in bank - Audi gone - needs to get a job and rent a room after he undergoes counselling - goes on the pension in the meantime - too ashamed to return to his parents - no superannuation? - MC's life insurance policy is left to him but that was being paid for by the proceeds of crime so he will not get it - does AK now have custody of OC? - if so, he could rent a 2 bedroom apartment and apply for Single Parents' Pension.

AG - no Aspen apartment - possibly paid MC the "rent" money to invest and has nothing much left in his bank account having probably lost his job in Singapore due to Covid lockdown - lost his 1% in Dover Heights house - bank account frozen? - has been supporting parents and may have to continue to do so - Probably does not own his own real estate as men usually rent in Asia - needs to sell more Isagenix or find a job here - or go on the pension - find a place to rent with 2 bedrooms for himself and the parents - no superannuation? - could get a higher pension rate as Carer for parents and could get rental assistance.

BG and TG - unlikely they will be able to continue living at Edgecliff - need to go on the pension and get rent assistance - at best could get back the money from their Connell's Point house sale if they can prove anything - move to 2 bedroom apartment with AG - no superannuation? - should have insisted on the apartment being in their name but they sold their house in 2017 after MC bought the Edgecliff apartment in 2016 so they could only be tenants.

OC - it seems that he will get nothing - has to leave Cranbrook (unless father pays) and attend public school - needs counselling - surprised that he has continued to live with AK - needs to return to his father who should regain custody and support him financially - if that is not possible, AK could apply for a higher rate of pension as a supporting parent and rent a 2 bedroom apartment with rent assistance.

I’m not entirely sure that OC is living with AK still. I’m guessing at least not all of the time. Hopefully AC still has his job & his career reputation hasn’t been tarnished by some of MC’s misdeeds.

 

[Snooper Dooper]

Sharemarkets / Forex & possibly crypto = Yes

Casino, Pokies & Horseracing = Probably not.

IMO - Think there's a very strong horseracing or horseracing syndicate/gambling link. Although not 100% confirmed as MC, this February 2018 photograph looks a lot like MC at the super luxurious Inglis Warwick Farm Racecourse Hotel in Western Sydney. The same month and year as the grand opening of the new hotel occurred and the onsite Classic Yearling Sale. MC & AK also 100% confirmed as guests at this hotel after attending horse-related Wagering event. Repost.

Observe right foot tucked under left knee.

https://edge.alluremedia.com.au/uploads/businessinsider/2018/02/pool-bar.jpg

All publicly available information & photographs.

 

[BlueViolet]

Maybe if there is a legal practitioner reading this they can provide some clarification?

In terms of both the apartment and the invested funds, They could be regarded the same in the sense that they have both been used to obtain financial advantage or property by deception. This is a criminal act. Property in this regard can apply to monies, or any other tangible or intangible property. So I can see how they could be regarded as the same.

Although, Real Property is a whole another piece of legislation. It covers interests in land and fixtures or structures upon the land ( buildings). So in that respect, they are different. Possession and ownership is also tricky, in terms of Real Property, and you just have to consider things like squatters rights (not applicable to this situation) to realise that the RP legalisation may not always appear fair.
Furthermore, case law also sets a precedence. So if there has been a similar situation ruled on before, by the Courts it’s regarded as case law.

I wonder what type of interest the parents have recorded in the title?

If they weren’t on title, they might have been able to still collect the pension?

 

[Mr Murphy]

The bottom line of what they will be left with now:
Are MC's Family and AK are going to be left homeless and destitute?
NOTE: I am no expert on pensions or what they are called these days.

AK - nothing in bank - Audi gone - needs to get a job and rent a room after he undergoes counselling - goes on the pension in the meantime - too ashamed to return to his parents - no superannuation? - MC's life insurance policy is left to him but that was being paid for by the proceeds of crime so he will not get it - does AK now have custody of OC? - if so, he could rent a 2 bedroom apartment and apply for Single Parents' Pension.

AG - no Aspen apartment - possibly paid MC the "rent" money to invest and has nothing much left in his bank account having probably lost his job in Singapore due to Covid lockdown - lost his 1% in Dover Heights house - bank account frozen? - has been supporting parents and may have to continue to do so - Probably does not own his own real estate as men usually rent in Asia - needs to sell more Isagenix or find a job here - or go on the pension - find a place to rent with 2 bedrooms for himself and the parents - no superannuation? - could get a higher pension rate as Carer for parents and could get rental assistance.

BG and TG - unlikely they will be able to continue living at Edgecliff - need to go on the pension and get rent assistance - at best could get back the money from their Connell's Point house sale if they can prove anything - move to 2 bedroom apartment with AG - no superannuation? - should have insisted on the apartment being in their name but they sold their house in 2017 after MC bought the Edgecliff apartment in 2016 so they could only be tenants.

OC - it seems that he will get nothing - has to leave Cranbrook (unless father pays) and attend public school - needs counselling - surprised that he has continued to live with AK - needs to return to his father who should regain custody and support him financially - if that is not possible, AK could apply for a higher rate of pension as a supporting parent and rent a 2 bedroom apartment with rent assistance.

Estelle... let’s not forget how much people want answers... the first one to sit down and sell the story will be able to make some money. Who will it be????

 

[Mr Murphy]

I wonder if the prawn tanks were inspected in the raid... uncut diamonds make for great gravel...