NSWTG was instructed to hold the entire contents of Marilyn's home with arrangements made for them to be stored at the home of her brother after she was told that her property would be sold regardless of my offer to provide all funds required to stop the sale. When her belongings never showed up at her brother's place, NSWTG turned around and told her everything had been stolen and that her son and I were responsible. I complained to the Ombudsman but after examining NSWTG's files he concluded there was no evidence of wrong conduct on NSWTG's part and accepted their explanation that a person or persons known to Marilyn and holding keys to her property had been responsible, as there were no signs of a break-in or forced entry. I was denied the opportunity to examine NSWTG's files for myself and NSWTG failed to provide me with a plausible explanation for a large charge made to Marilyn's trust account with them, which was simply shown as a property expense but which I believed had some connection to the theft.
It was not until July 2017, after having NSWTG's files subpoenaed, that I learned what had become of most of Marilyn's belongings. The real estate agent who sold Marilyn's property for NSWTG had ordered a massive council kerbside clearance of Marilyn's personal effects and furniture, which took place on 6/2/14. It included all her beloved personal family photographs, memorabilia and family records collected over a lifetime, and which NSWTG had previously refused allowing being sent to her at the nursing home after she had been accepted as a permanent resident there. The clearance was of such a magnitude that it used up all her 6 council kerbside clearances allowed in a year in one go and took up 12 cubic metres of space.
Not content with this dreadful abuse meted out to an elderly lady who was no longer able to defend what was rightfully hers, NSWTG then went and took $1,100.00 from Marilyn's trust account for the clearance which had already been paid for through her council rates. It was part of an overall charge of $2,950.00, described on her trust account as a property expense, with no other details provided. However, the Ombudsman saw the bogus invoice on which the payment was approved when inspecting NSWTG's files, so was aware of what had actually happened, yet he was still prepared to go along with the pretence that Marilyn's belongings had been stolen by her son and I. Further investigation on my part, revealed that NSWTG had paid Marilyn's funds for the council clearance and related charges into a bank account owned by the real estate agent. Marilyn's most expensive household appliances were not taken in the council clearance and it is still not known what became of them, apart from her clothes dryer which the real estate agent gave away to the new owner of her home.
NSWTG tried to justify their going ahead with the sale by claiming they had already accepted the purchaser's offer by the time I offered to provide the $100,000.00 and that, as a deposit had already been put down, they were unable to go back on the agreement. My solicitor put my offer of the loan formally to NSWTG in a faxed letter sent on 11/2/14. However, NSWTG claimed the purchaser had made her offer on 10/2/14, which NSWTG accepted on 11/2/14, with the purchaser putting down the deposit on acceptance of her offer. The purchaser, for her part, claimed that she inspected Marilyn's property in early March 2014 and made her offer to purchase shortly after. She believed the deposit was put down on 11/3/14 or 12/3/14. It was only in July 2017, after having NSWTG's files subpoenaed, that I obtained documentary evidence establishing that the deposit was put down on 12/3/14, with the contracts exchanged the same day after the purchaser's conveyancer had signed a certificate on 10/3/14 waiving the purchaser's cooling off period.
Marilyn's property was sold for $370,000.00 and she received just under $359,000.00 from the proceeds of the sale after legal fees and the sales commission were deducted. She had paid $370,000.00 for it when NSWTG purchased it on her behalf 3 years earlier in March 2011, yet property prices in the area had increased by an average of nearly 25% between 2011 and 2014. The real estate agent was identified to me following the sale. She acknowledged that the sale price was too low but claimed NSWTG had told her that Marilyn was agreeable to the sale at the low price. Marilyn's property is now valued at $620,000.00 in 2017.
It was not until July 2017, after having NSWTG's files subpoenaed, that I learned what had become of most of Marilyn's belongings. The real estate agent who sold Marilyn's property for NSWTG had ordered a massive council kerbside clearance of Marilyn's personal effects and furniture, which took place on 6/2/14. It included all her beloved personal family photographs, memorabilia and family records collected over a lifetime, and which NSWTG had previously refused allowing being sent to her at the nursing home after she had been accepted as a permanent resident there. The clearance was of such a magnitude that it used up all her 6 council kerbside clearances allowed in a year in one go and took up 12 cubic metres of space.
Not content with this dreadful abuse meted out to an elderly lady who was no longer able to defend what was rightfully hers, NSWTG then went and took $1,100.00 from Marilyn's trust account for the clearance which had already been paid for through her council rates. It was part of an overall charge of $2,950.00, described on her trust account as a property expense, with no other details provided. However, the Ombudsman saw the bogus invoice on which the payment was approved when inspecting NSWTG's files, so was aware of what had actually happened, yet he was still prepared to go along with the pretence that Marilyn's belongings had been stolen by her son and I. Further investigation on my part, revealed that NSWTG had paid Marilyn's funds for the council clearance and related charges into a bank account owned by the real estate agent. Marilyn's most expensive household appliances were not taken in the council clearance and it is still not known what became of them, apart from her clothes dryer which the real estate agent gave away to the new owner of her home.
NSWTG tried to justify their going ahead with the sale by claiming they had already accepted the purchaser's offer by the time I offered to provide the $100,000.00 and that, as a deposit had already been put down, they were unable to go back on the agreement. My solicitor put my offer of the loan formally to NSWTG in a faxed letter sent on 11/2/14. However, NSWTG claimed the purchaser had made her offer on 10/2/14, which NSWTG accepted on 11/2/14, with the purchaser putting down the deposit on acceptance of her offer. The purchaser, for her part, claimed that she inspected Marilyn's property in early March 2014 and made her offer to purchase shortly after. She believed the deposit was put down on 11/3/14 or 12/3/14. It was only in July 2017, after having NSWTG's files subpoenaed, that I obtained documentary evidence establishing that the deposit was put down on 12/3/14, with the contracts exchanged the same day after the purchaser's conveyancer had signed a certificate on 10/3/14 waiving the purchaser's cooling off period.
Marilyn's property was sold for $370,000.00 and she received just under $359,000.00 from the proceeds of the sale after legal fees and the sales commission were deducted. She had paid $370,000.00 for it when NSWTG purchased it on her behalf 3 years earlier in March 2011, yet property prices in the area had increased by an average of nearly 25% between 2011 and 2014. The real estate agent was identified to me following the sale. She acknowledged that the sale price was too low but claimed NSWTG had told her that Marilyn was agreeable to the sale at the low price. Marilyn's property is now valued at $620,000.00 in 2017.