Anticorruptionnz's Blog



Filed under: Uncategorized — anticorruptionnz @ 6:13 pm

In the King Country  opposite the Te Kuiti  airport  at 1308 state highway 3  lives  a barrister  who knows a great deal about animal  law matters.

He appropriately calls his business Animal law matters and will no doubt  be opening for   business in  the king county area soon.

The reason Mr Neil Wells  of Animal law matters is so well versed on animal law  is because he  played a very large role in the  current animal welfare  act. He wrote the no 1 bill  and was independent adviser to the select committee.he has even published a book entitled ANIMAL LAW IN NEW ZEALAND

Mr Wells a former  RNZSPCA president  left the  SPCA in the late  1970′s in circumstances  detailed in  the press  , his  current wife   and then Christine   was with him at the time .read article  dec78,

In 1979 there was a split of the SPCA  following the  decision to have  the societies paid officers supervise work by the  animal action group which  Mr Wells Headed.. split in SPCA .  Mr Wells at the time was also the  president of the Royal  federation of new Zealand societies  for the protection of cruelty to animals.   this federation was to   eventually fold on 7 December 2000.

In 1989 Neil Wells was   the director  of world society  for protection of animals see  9 apr 89 wspc

It is believed that the RNZSPCA paid for his law degree  and in 1993   he was a legal consultant to the RNZSPCA   when he  quit  over an issue with  the Kaimanawa wild horses .

Mr Wells had been a close friend of Bob Harvey and together had worked in advertising   and saw the kirk government into power in 1974. . In 1994  this relationship was to  reformed  when Mr Wells became an animal welfare consultant to Waitakere city council ne wells 27 july 1994.

He worked with  the manager  dog and stock control   at the council Tom Didovich    who is now a piano player in Henderson .

In January 1996 Neil Wells shared his  business plan for a Teritorial authority Animal welfare services   with Tom  as can be seen the    trading name  was  a division of the trading name which Mr Wells was using at the time  and the charge out rates  clearly show  that this was a money making venture.This was  to form the basis of the new legislation and the  concept for Mr Wells perfect fraud.

Mr Wells produced a poster  stating there is profit in animals … indeed there was.

With the good people of Waitakere  paying for their dog control officers to be trained by Mr Wells to be animal welfare officers  , Mr Wells sets up a pilot program    which is entirely his own initiative. The complication is that there was no legislation in place   so  he volunteers to write it.  see article  how to write legislation for your own business plan .

Not only did Mr Wells write the No 1 bill he was also independent  advisor to the select committee,  with no record of  his declaration of conflict of interest to  found.

What was significant about the legislation which came out , was that it provided for approved organizations , the  criteria are set out in section 122   and MAF had their own selection criteria for approved organisationson top of this as well .This enables the setting up of organizations other then the SPCA to be  animal welfare law enforcement  authorities

Stringent selection processes were  required as the approved organization  was  able to make  money from fines  due to  section 171 of the act  which returns  all proceeds of prosecution back to the   approved organization wiht fines up to $250,000 this   is   what was going to make Mr Wells Rich .  IT was a license to print money.

As soon as the  act became law Mr Wells made an application to the minister for approved organization status using  a pseudonym  Animal welfare Institute of New Zealand .( AWINZ) he claimed the organization  existed  when  in reality it did not and had never existed except in his mind.

Mr Wells is well known and trusted by MAF  and  despite being asked a number of times to produce a trust deed, Mr Wells avoids this but gives MAF and the minister  assurances that  the trust exists and  will be registered.  However no one else is ever  seen to be involved with the approved organsiation.  Open letter to MAF

The ” organization ” was to run from  Waitakere city council premises  for  $1 per year using the council staff resources and infrastructure  all “ volunteered to  the Fictional AWINZ  which was  even to  use the council logos as its own .In all it was so seamless that no one knew if AWINZ was part of local government , part of government   or a private enterprise.   It was a private enterprise  a trading name for Neil Wells  who acted in circumstances  which internationally recognized as corruption  being State capture  and the use of public office  for private gain.

When a diligent MAF officer  seeks to  oppose the  application Mr Wells writes to  his mates in MAF 18 aug 2000  and generally  tells him what he wants, then after a brief meeting with his mate Bob Harvey the  then president of the labour party   the AWINZ application  goes to the newly elected labour  party minister  and is approved.

AWINZ a non existent  organization   became a private law enforcement authority .. and no one    at Waitakere city council  or in Maf ever   had  communications or sought confirmation from any of the other alleged trustees … but it gets better…

In 2005  Tom Didovich  who had written to the minister  on behalf of not one but two councils Didovich for waitakere  and Didovich for north shore had to leave  Waitakere dog control  due to a personal relationship issue , Neil Wells applied for and got the job.

The game plan was simple   and I  have documentary evidence for every  step

  • Neil Wells manager  dog and stock control   and  CEO of the mythical  AWINZ ( which is actually no more than a trading name for himself)  uses the Waitakere and north shore dog and stock control officers to prioritize  animal welfare work over   council work.
  • when an animal welfare incident is reported   to  Mr wells council manager by the  dog control officer  he passed it to
  • Mr Wells CEO of AWINZ    who approved it for prosecution  and passed this to AWINZ barrister  Mr wells  who offered Diversion .
  • the funds are paid into  bank account  to  which only Mr Wells had   access, the account   was in the name  of AWINZ when no such organization existed.The national bank where the account was held  had no  trust deeds associated with the  account

In 2006  was approached by a dog control officer  who  thought things were  quite wrong, with  two others we proved that   the animal welfare institute of New Zealand had no  legal existence by incorporating a identically named trust incorporated trust on 27 April 2006.

Once Mr Wells became aware of this  he   had a need to   create an organization   and got his mate Wyn Hoadley , former mayor of North shore and  fellow animal welfare worker  to become a trustee. At a meeting on 10 may 2006  Wyn Hoadley was appointed trustee pursuant to a section which was not present in the deed  and  a deed which was missing on that occasion  , there is no written record of her becoming a trustee apart from a manufactured  document.

To prove the existence of an organization   a trust deed materialized  in June 2006, this deed was dated 1.3.2000, the trustees  had never met or adhered to the   deed of trust, the  deedby its own terms had expired.

Even more incredibly the minutes which showed ms Hoadleys appointment  was missing in 2008 when  AWINZ was audited by MAF but some how a fresh copy re appeared for the law society in 2011 ,( open the document  and right click on  it and select properties  you can see when  this document was created.)

The  three alleged  trustees,   without any evidence of being trustees filed a Statement of Claim , the objective was to  force us to give up the name and the web site which drew attention to the short comings of AWINZ.  Mr Wells threw in  defamation  as a good measure, we have yet to see any evidence of the allegation he  made ( no evidence was ever produced )  and interestingly enough what was attributed to me was proved to be  true by the audit report which Mr Wells then fought long and hard for to have withheld.

In the mean time AWINZ commenced fund raising   using the logo  which was emblazoned on the  council premises suitably adapted to  create confusion


   see  the    donation request

the funds raised were banked in to the bank account which Mr Wells was the sole   signatory of  .

In December  2006  a new trust deed was signed  this  one included the litigants and Tom Didovich the former manager  who had had a finger in the pie. The purpose was to obtain charitable status    which was attained so that  the charitable funds of this new trust could be used to pay  for the litigation, see How to get your litigation funded through the public purse . while public  funds were used to pursue them  Mr Wells is now claiming  the   money as his own  through a statutory demand  served on my company.  ( isn’t that money laundering???)

As a  side line Mr Wells used the mythical AWINZ  to monitor animals in the movies such as Lord of the rings  and saw to  it that a false end title was attributed  to the movie   documents   are  as follows AHA  6 dec 2000 lotr others who tried to speak up were silenced . His wife Christine  has been performing these duties through the charity.. what a great way to  avoid tax !

In the mean time I have had a  six year battle through court, I  have been denied  my defense of truth and honest opinion  because Mr Wells saw to it that my defense was   struck out all   because I could not find $20,000 in  two weeks.

Mr Wells is good,  he never lets lack of evidence stand in his  way  in fact he won the case against me through manipulating the court ,telling lies   and  not producing any evidence,  the   most spectacular bit is that he even managed to  avoid the  trial all together and we jumped straight to sentencing without  me ever having been found guilty of defamation. In the end we had  about 5  separate  AWINZ groups being represented to the court  as if they were  the one and the same and a legal entity. Only one was the approved organization  and it was never definded   who  comprised that.

Wells committed what I believe  was perjury  and I have the evidence to prove it  but he persuade the court that the new evidence I had was not relevant and denied me the right to appeal. It transpires the law is  not about evidence  and truth at all   as a former  Police prosecutor   I still cannot believe  that the civil jurisdiction can operate without  facts.

In October I filed new   evidence before the court , being the audit    and  the  documents  which  Wells sent to the law society  attempting to prove that  Hoadley was a trustee . What is significant is that  Hoadley ,Wells and Coutts  claimed that  the  legal entity AWINZ which I was part of  had passed themselves off as them and had breached  the fair trading act , with our organization coming into leal existence on 27 th  April  2006  how can three people  who rely on  retrospectively created documents  claim   passing off and breach of fair trade when they claim that they  became  an organization  three weeks later ?

It was the costs  for these claims which struck out my defense of truth and honest opinion. Defamation has NEVER been proved  and everything  attributed to being statements by me have been proved True. Truth is never defamatory.

Wells has  now   had the  judgements sealed  and has  gone straight for  the jugular   serving a statutory demand on my business and I expect that  bankruptcy proceedings will be served any day. Even in  serving the statutory  demand  he could not get his facts straight.. if near enough is good enough   for a lawyer  then Mr Wells and Mr Neutze of brookfields  are  your men.   Open letter to David Neutze of Brookfields

So if you think animal law matters  you need   to read my other  blogs    you will find the searching the key words Neil Wells, AWINZ . I  am of the belief  that this was to have been the perfect fraud  using   council premises to run a private law enforcement authority, mr wells was on a winner  he could not lose until I asked a few  questions  and unsuspectingly became a whistleblower.

I expect  the new evidence   to change things this year, whistle blowers  should never be punished like I have been , My crime  was to say  excuse me  but why does this law enforcement authority not exist.

Beware farmers  and  pet owners of the King country  Mr Wells is out to make  money  should  you   be prosecuted by  him  please contact me  and  I will  happily assist you  and guide you through the   tactics which I have experienced at his hand.

Grace Haden  Verisure Investigations Ltd


Blog at

%d bloggers like this: