SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

The Vegan Society of Aotearoa – an unincorporated “charitable trust” fails to file annual charity return

by Leave a Comment

The Vegan Society of Aotearoa was registered as a charity with the Charities Commission on 15 September 2010 (Reg. No. CC 45333). Like The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand (AWINZ), it is an unincorporated “charitable trust”. Its Annual Return for the financial year ending 31 March 2011 that was due on 29 September 2011, has yet to be filed.  It is almost one year overdue. The Commission has a statutory duty to send out reminder letters to charities that have failed to meet their obligations under the Charities Act 2005.  No doubt the Vegan Society Trustees (see below) have received repeated reminder notices from the Commission over the last year over their Trust’s failures to file.

Significant and persistent failures  by Trustees to fulfil their obligation under section 41 of the Act, have by now, no doubt, led to the Commission sending the Trust a “Notice of Intention to Remove” it from the Register of Charities, under section 32(1)(b) of the Charities Act.

Trustees listed on the Charities website for The Vegan Society of Aotearoa are: Alice Leonard and Amanda Sorrenson, both appointed on 15 September 2010, as well as Hannah Lessells and Johanna Vroegop, who were both appointed in March 2011. Amanda Sorrenson is Promotions Manager for another registered charity – the “animal rights” lobby group Save Animals from Exploitation (SAFE) which is active in political advocacy. Alice Leonard runs the Auckland-based vegan business Angel Food (www.angelfood.co.nz) – dealing with dairy-free and vegan products.

The Vegan Society filed its annual return for the 11 months ending 31 March 2010, and uploaded it onto the Charities website on 6 October 2011. Because it was registered as a charity on 15/09/10, these financial statements were not required to be filed and their presence on the website has served only as a smokescreen to hide the fact that the 2011 annual return has not been filed.

On 6 December 2010 the charity ChildSafeNZ.Org was deregistered by the Charities Commission for failing to file its Annual Return as required by s. 41 of the Act. The Electronic Media Foundation Aotearoa New Zealand Trust was registered with the Charities Commission on 29 January 2009 and failed to file its annual returns that were due on 30/09/10 and 30/09/11. The Trust was consequently deregistered as a charity on 11/01/12

References:

Click to access Disqualification-Order-DecisionSmyth.pdf

The Vegan Society of Aotearoa – a registered charity serving the “public good”

by 2 Comments

“The Vegan Society of Aotearoa” was registered as a charity with the Charities Commission on 15 September 2010 (Charity Reg. No. CC45333). However, there has never been any legally incorporated entity by this name in New Zealand (e.g. incorporated charitable trust or incorporated Society etc.). “The Vegan Society of Aotearoa” is an unincorporated “Trust” with its “Trust Deed” dated 1 May 2010 specifying three trustees on its “Board”, available on the Charities website (www.charities.govt.nz). Two of the founding trustees are still current officers for “the Trust”, two two new trustees were appointed in 2011.

Under section 15 of the Charities Act 2005, if the Commission is to register any legally constituted entity as a charity, it must only do so under the applicant’s full and correct legal name (see Appendix I below).

It is important to understand that “Veganz the Vegan Society of New Zealand Charitable Trust“, a Charitable Trust (Reg. No. 1230157) incorporated on 31 July 2002, is legally distinct from “The Vegan Society of Aotearoa“- an unincorporated “Trust”. The former is NOT registered with the Charities Commission.

One must wonder whether the Charities Commission Registration Team ever accessed the “Search Other Registers” on the Companies Office website (www.companies.govt.nz) to determine whether or not The Vegan Society of Aotearoa was a registered incorporated legal entity. It is not.

“The Vegan Society of Aotearoa” was granted “charitable status” under charity law in 2010 and was assessed by the Charities Registration Team as “benefiting the public, or a section of the public”, in a manner that was “identifiable”, “clear”. and “related to its charitable aims”. Its Purpose is set out under s. 3 of its “Trust Deed” dated 1 May 2010:

“The purpose of the Trust will be to promote veganism as an environmentally friendly, healthy and compassionate way of life. In particular the Trust will….”

3.1 further the knowledge and interest in sound nutrition and veganism, and in vegan methods of agriculture and food production as a means of increasing the agricultural potential of Aotearoa, to the physical, economic and moral benefit of all living beings.

3.2 provide a means of  social contact and exchange of information for new and existing vegans by way of regional social support and provision of resources.

3.3 develop and maintain positive relationships with organisations sharing similar aims.

3.4 encourage the research, study and use of alternatives to all products derived wholly or partly from animals.

3.5 take any action consistent with this charitable purpose.

After a thorough inquiry into the activities, ‘doctrines’ and objects of  this [unincorporated] “Trust”, the Charities Commission accepted that the exclusive primary “beneficiaries” of this charity were “vegens”, who are all required to pay membership fees.

According to section 2 of the registered Trust Deed dated 17 July 2002 of  Veganz the Vegan Society of New Zealand Charitable Trust (an incorporated entity which is not a registered charity):

“A Vegan is a person who knowingly chooses not to consume, use or wear any products produced from animals or which contain animal by products; and avoids products that have been tested on animals or involves cruelty or abuse of animals in their research or production stages. Veganism stands for respect and compassion for animals (including the human animal).”

The Vegan Society of Aotearoa provides a list of all the animal items prohibited for vegans: “meat (fish, shellfish, livestock or poultry) eggs, dairy products, honey, gelatine or use of leather belts, fur silk, wool, cosmetics or soaps derived from animal products.” (Source: www.vegansociety.co.nz)

The Charities Commission has graciously granted The Vegan Society of Aotearoa permission to vastly extend the official public record of the “beneficiaries” to their Society’s “charitable activities” to effectively include: all animals used as a source of meat and/or other food product by man, and all those used as a source of health products and/or clothing materials. Many of these animals are indeed true “beneficiaries” of the charity as they owe their very lives to the charitable work of Vegans, who actively persuade fellow New Zealanders to desist and abstain from their “moral crimes” against the Animal Kingdom (e.g. eating animals and using their by products), and jump on board the Vegan lifestyle bus to help green the planet and save its bio-diversity.

The Vegan Society of Aotearoa promotes “protection of animals”, “conservation” and “the environment” according to the Charities Commission website. Such broad activities have been ruled by the Commission to be “charitable purposes”.

In a sense, all its “charitable activities” can be viewed as detrimental to much of our New Zealand farming industry that forms the backbone of our export trade. Urging people to desist and abstain from eating meat and all other animal products would be viewed by most New Zealanders as detrimental economically to the “public good”.

Most ordinary and reasonable New Zealanders would reject the view that providing vege recipes and information of Vegan food outlets on a website to Vegans and sponsoring vegetarian family fun-days where vegan charity members and friends can delight themselves in the  partaking of vege food, constitute “charitable activities”. They would see no “public benefit” in allowing paid up members of  to pursue their own private lifestyle choices.

Everyone has the right to pursue a vegan lifestyle, or for that matter naturalism, as a lifestyle choice, or  any indeed other private hobby. Both vegans and naturalists claim to offer health rewards to those who embrace their respective lifestyle choices. Both claim a vast body of research evidence supporting the superiority of their respective  lifestyles compared to normal lifestyles (eating meat and wearing clothes).

Both have followers that actively expose themselves to the public to win over public empathy and support and recruit new members to the ‘faith’. There are many vegans who are “animal rights activists” and take part in protests ‘baring all’. Yes nudity is regularly their favoured tool to win recruits and lobby for their political views. Who can forget those grim animal rights promotional photos of nude men and women hunched over in foetal positions confined within battery hen cages?

The six million dollar question is:

Should groups of naturalists and/or vegans be granted “charitable status” based on their claims that their lifestyle choices positively impact society or a group within society, to such a significant extent that they provide “public benefit” and “the moral benefit of all living beings”?

The Charities Commission has clearly given a positive answer to this question, ruling that the purposes of The Vegan Society of Aotearoa are “charitable” and come under one of “the four charity heads” (e.g. presumably “advancement of education”).

The Vegans website states:

“The society is a friendly, informative and professional organisation. It offers resources, information, event notifications, product advice, vegan role models,  recipes and support systems. We put out a quarterly magazine and advise on many things via the website.”

Its homepage mouth-watering articles include: …. “OUR TOP PICK: Navigating the ethically treacherous waters of chocolate.” and “Veg-Yummy Places .. [re] vegetarian-friendly or vegan restaurants.”

http://www.vegetarians.co.nz/vegetarian-info/vegan-society-of-aotearoa/

The 20010/2011  financial accounts of The Vegan Society of Aotearoa that were required to be filed with the Charities Commission no later than 30 September 2011, have yet to be filed and are now almost twelve months overdue. And yet Despite this very serious breach of the Charities Act 2005, this unincorporated Society has not been deregistered or removed from the Charities Register.

The former Chief Executive of the now disestablished Charities Commission, Mr Trevor Garrett, was recently reported by The Hutt News as saying

“… charitable organisations registered with it [the Commission] that had not filed returns six months after the end of their financial year were sent a reminder letter. They get a more “strongly worded” reminder a month or two later and at around three months overdue – which is where HMCT is – “we get to the stage where we look at de-registering. That’s how seriously we take it.”

Mr Garrett had been asked for comment by the paper’s editor, Mr Simon Edwards, on whether or not “The Hutt Mana Charitable Trust’s persistent late filing of financial returns risks it being struck off by the Charities Commission, losing its tax exemption status.”

Dr Carolyn Corderoy, a senior lecturer in Victoria University’s School of Accounting and Commercial Law, who has been engaged in a detailed research investigation into the compliance failures of charities being ‘monitored’ by the Charities Commission with respect to their financial returns, and who was referred to in The Hutt News; has concluded that the levels of non-compliance by charities in New Zealand raises serious concerns.

According to the Charities website (www.charities.govt.nz), The Vegan Society of Aotearoa last filed its financial accounts with the Charities Commission for its financial year ended 31 March 2010. These accounts, uploaded onto the Charities website on 6 October 2011, reveal that its total gross income was $2,950 – sourced from $935 donations and $2,015 from membership fees. Its total expenditure in the year was $306 and the net surplus was $2,644.

It is run with the services of five voluntary staff involving an average about 20 hours of combined work from them, on average each week. There are no paid workers or employees.

It appears that the Charities Commission Registration Team have seen fit to grant The Vegan Society of Aotearoa charitable status under the “third head” [“Advancement of education”] of Lord Macnaghten’s four heads of charity.  It recognises its primary charitable contribution is to be “Community Development” in the specialist roles of “education/training/research”).

Vegan recipes have niche and no-doubt financially lucrative markets on a global scale. Animal activism and vegan charities go hand in paw.

Vegan education is advancing thanks to the Charities Commission, fostered and nurtured via the promulgation of vegan lifestyle teachings and practices.

The “public benefit” gained from New Zealanders embracing the doctrines, teachings and lifestyle patterns of vegans or coming under their influence has been positively grasped in full by the Charities Commission. The uptake  by true believers of the vegan lifestyle will undoubtedly issue in a more holistic, green and animal friendly planet… surely a truly charitable goal for any charity registered by the Charities Commission.

References:

1. Charitable Trust late again with returns, agm

The Hutt News. 3 April 2012. By Simon Edwards

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/hutt-news/6682643/Charitable-trust-late-again-with-returns-agm

“Dr Carolyn Cordery, of Victoria University’s School of Accounting and Commercial Law, took a quick look at HMCT’s trust deed last week and said to be four months’ overdue on filing and holding an annual meeting was “poor”. ”

2. Trust Deed of VEGANZ: The Vegan Society of New Zealand Charitable Trust dated 14 December 2004.

3. Application For Incorporation Of A Society As A Board. Dated 17 July 2002. Received from VEGANZ by National Processing Centre 31 July 2002.

4. Trust Deed of VEGANZ dated 17 July 2002

5, www.vegansociety.co.nz

6. www.vegetarians.co.nz

7. www.charities.govt.nz

8. www.companies.govt.nz

APPENDIX I

15 Name of entity

The name of an entity complies with this section if—

  • (d) the entity is established, or constituted, by an Act under that name; or

  • (e) in any other case, in the opinion of the Board, the name is not—

    • (i) offensive; or

    • (ii) liable to mislead the public.

Section 15(e): amended, on 1 July 2012, by section 16(1) of the Charities Amendment Act (No 2) 2012 (2012 No 43)

“The Vegan Society of Aotearoa” – a “charitable trust” that is NOT incorporated

by Leave a Comment

On 15 September 2010 the Charities Commission granted registered charity status (Reg. No. CC. 45333) to “The Vegan Society of Aotearoa“, which is not an incorporated entity. Its “Trust” Deed dated 1 May 2010, lodged on the Charities website, states: “The parties to the Deed wish to establish a charitable trust” and have the three trustees “incorporated as a Board under the provisions of the Charitable Trusts Act 1957.” This application for incorporation signed by a Justice of the Peace on 1 May 2010 was never submitted to the Companies Office, so the entity has never been incorporated under the Act.

At the time the entity’s application for charity status was before the Charities Commission, the latter’s Registration Team should have known that The Vegan Society of Aotearoa had never been incorporated and therefore its name had not been “established or constituted by any Act”. In such cases s. 15(e) of The Charities Act 2005 requires the Commission to ensure that its “name is not liable to mislead the public“.

“The name of an entity [seeking charity status] complies with this section [S. 15] if … (e) in the opinion of the Board, the name is not offensive; or liable to mislead the public.” [Emphasis added]

The public are entitled to accountability from any entity registered as a “charity” with Charities Commission. However, the 20010/2011  financial accounts of The Vegan Society of Aotearoa that were required to be filed with the Charities Commission no later than 30 September 2011, have yet to be filed and are now almost twelve months overdue. And yet Despite this very serious breach of the Charities Act 2005, this unincorporated “charitable trust” has NOT been deregistered and removed from the Charities Register.

The granting of charity status in 2010 to “The Vegan Society of Aotearoa “- by the Charities Commission, and its acceptance of that entity’s name –  might well be of concern to some; given the fact that an incorporated charitable trust with effectively the same name has been in existence since 2002 – The Vegan Society of New Zealand Charitable Trust. Only the latter is a charitable trust incorporated under The Charitable Trusts Act 1957.  Both Trusts have used the country name New Zealand-Aotearoa/Aotearoa-New Zealand in their respective names. But they are NOT the same charitable entity.

There has been, and there remains, a very real potential for the public to be misled by The Vegan Society of Aotearoa – as to its real status. It has not been incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957.

Appendix

Name of entity

  • The name of an entity complies with this section if—

    • (d) the entity is established, or constituted, by an Act under that name; or

    • (e) in any other case, in the opinion of the Board, the name is not—

      • (i) offensive; or

      • (ii) liable to mislead the public.

    Section 15(e): amended, on 1 July 2012, by section 16(1) of the Charities Amendment Act (No 2) 2012 (2012 No 43).

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2005/0039/latest/DLM345025.html

AWINZ – registered charity – loses “approved organisation” status. Trust Deed subject of fraud allegations

by Leave a Comment

The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand (“AWINZ”), an allegedly fictitious organisation which had vast  law enforcement  authority, had its status as an “Approved Organisation” under s. 121 of the Animal Welfare Act 1999 revoked on 13 January 2011. The Revocation of the Declaration of  its “Approved Organisation” was signed by the Hon. David Carter, Minister of Agriculture, and was gazetted on 16 December 2010 (Notice No. 9586). The revocation was formally requested by AWINZ trustees, who wrote to the Minister on the 7th of October 2009  stating:

“The Trustees have not taken the decision to seek revocation lightly, but we are no longer willing to be subjected to the intrusion which MAF Assurance and Risk Directorate has subjected AWINZ over the past 16 months or so, nor are we able or willing to meet the standards that MAF Assurance and Risk  now seek to impose 10 years after we came into existence. Furthermore, we are not prepared to continue to provide information to MAF on our operations only to find that MAF will readily hand that information to Grace Haden.…” [Emphasis added]

See:

Click to access trustees-letter.pdf

But what exactly was it that the four trustees claimed in October 2009 had “came into existence .. ten years ago”? Why were they so averse to being held accountable by MAF and those such such as Ms Haden (who sought information from MAF under the Official Information Act) concerned about the operation of their alleged  “charitable trust”, allegedly established on 1 March 2000 and subsequently registered as a charity with the Charities Commission in 2007?

Since 2006 Mrs Haden, a former NZ Police prosecutor turned registered private investigator, has been alleging that AWINZ is a fictitious organisation engaging in fraud and that it has never been constituted as an incorporated charitable trust under the Charitable Trust Act 1957, despite firm assurances given in writing by the Trust Deed’s “Settlor”, Auckland barrister Neil Edward Wells, to MAF and two successive Ministers of Agriculture, that this would be done.

Mr Neil Wells has alleged in a sworn affidavit that the “original trust deed” upon which AWINZ was “established” was executed on 1 March 2000″, and this claim is also made in the AWINZ “Deed of Trust and Revocation” dated 5 December 2006, available on the Charities Commission website.

However, this 2006 deed differs significantly in content from the copy of the unsigned AWINZ Trust Deed supplied to the Minister of Agriculture the Hon. John Luxton on 21 November 1999 when Mr Wells, who signed himself as AWINZ “Trustee”, made an application for “Approved Organisation” status. For example, section 14 (pages 10-11) , in the signed 2000 deed, dealing “Private Pecuniary Profit … and Exceptions”  – ss. 14(a) to 14 (d) – is very different from that supplied to the Minister in 1999 (“Appendix V – Charitable Deed”)

Wells wrote to the MAF Biosecurity Authority on 22 August 1999 regarding “approved organisation” for AWINZ, enclosing a “Notice of Intent” dated 20 August 1999 from the four AWINZ Trustsees, in which he wrote:

“Function of the Institute: A charitable trust has[past tense]  been formed by Deed of Trust as the “Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand” (AWINZ). It is being registered under Part II of the Charitable Trusts Act 1957. [Emphasis added] The founding members are:

Nuala Grove

Sarah Giltrap

Graeme Coutts

Neil Wells

The Purpose of the Trust is to promote the welfare of animals …

So how could the four trustees claim on 20 August 1999 that their trust “has been formed” when the 2006 AWINZ deed states:

“On the 1st day of March 2000 the Settlor [Neil Edward Wells] established a trust for charitable purposes by creating the Trust provided for in this deed…… The deed revokes the deed executed on 1st March 2000 and substitutes this deed in its place. Despite the revocation of the  deed dated 1st March 2000 it is declared that the trust established on that date is continued by this deed.” [Emphasis added].

It is clear that the AWINZ “Deed of Trust and Revocation” dated 5 December 2006 on the Charities website is a fraud in the sense that it cannot be as claimed, a substitute for the deed that was allegedly executed on 1st March 2000, as the latter cannot be established as authentic.

Proof that the 1st March 2000 deed has been fabricated can be found in the AWINZ Board Minutes of 10th May 2006, attended by three of the “original” trustees Neil Wells, Nuala Grove and Graeme Coutts (apologies were received for the fourth trustee Sarah Giltrap).

At that meeting Wyn Hoadley was appointed trustee despite the fact that: (1) it was noted in the minutes “that the original signed deed [allegedly dated 1 March 2000] had been misfiled [i.e. lost]” (2)  Neither sections 7.2, or s. 7.2(a) or s. 7.2(b) in terms of numbering, quoted in the minutes as the basis as authorisation for the appointment of Hoadley, appear in the signed 1 March 2000 Trust Deed. The latter only has a section 7 with no  numbering divisions. The unsigned trust deed sent by AWINZ “Trustee” Neil Wells to the Hon. John Luxton on 21 November 1999 as part of the application for “Approved Organisation” status has sections 7.2(1) and 7.2(2).

Perhaps these may appear to be pedantic points, however, what is glaringly obvious is that the 1 March 2000 trust deed has its first six pages (sections 1-10) without any numbered subsections and then under s. 11 on page 7 it jumps to an erratic subsection numbering system through to page 9 before reverting to the absence of subsections. Furthermore the 1 March 200o Trust Deed lodged with MAF differs significantly from that supplied by AWINZ solicitors to the defendant (Grace Haden).

It is noteworthy that the unsigned copy of the AWINZ Minutes dated 10 May 2006, record that “Deed needs to be finalised in the next four weeks” and “Neil and with Wyn will work on a revision of the deed”.

The revised deed that Neil and Wyn produced was the one that appears on the Charities website dated 5th December 2006. It purports, as noted, to be linked back to the 1 March 2000 deed, but clearly it is a new trust deed.

Grace Haden alleges that the Trust Deed dated 1 March 2000, signed by founding “trustees” Wells, Grove, Gitrap and Coutts, is a fraud. It differs significantly from the copy of the trust deed of the same date submitted to MAF in terms of section 7.1 to 7.5; 11.1 to 11.11; 12.1 to 12.3; 13.1 to 13.4; 14.1, 14.4; 15.1 to 15.2; and in terms of the definitions of “Secretary”, “Treasurer” and “Trust”.

Following the 10 May 2006 Board Meeting, Wyn Hoadley and Neil Wells, stitched together a new AWINZ trust deed allegedly executed on 5 December 2006 and allegedly based it on the “original trust deed” dated 1 March 2000. Two new trustees had been added by 14 August 2006: Wyn Hoadley, allegedly appointed 10 May 2006 and Thomas Stanley Didovich, added 14 August 2006.

Remarkably, the minutes of the AWINZ Board meeting dated 14 August 2006, record:

“Neil [Wells] advised that the original signed deed had been located in a file held in a security safe.

Even more remarkable was the decision of the “trustees” to remove from the Trust Deed all references to the Common Seal, present in: s. 17 of both the signed 2000 Trust Deed and the copy of it supplied by AWINZ to the MAF, as well as recorded in s. 19 of the Trust Deed supplied to the Minister in November 1999.

The absence of a Seal on the “Deed of Trust and Revocation” dated 5 December 2006, proves that this Trust Deed has not been executed in compliance with the original deed of trust, allegedly dated 1 March 2000. Any changes to an existing trust must comply with all the requirements set out in the executed deed of trust.

At best The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand (AWINZ) constituted an entity in the minds of its creators. There is no evidence that its Deed of Trust was ever executed as claimed on 1 March 2000.

The gazetted notice granting the unincorporated charitable trust AWINZ “approved status” (Notice No. 1703) was dated 18 January 2001 and took effect 28 days later. On the 8 March the letters “Inc” used in the application form, were removed from the title, when Wells alerted the  minister to the fact that  this was a charitable trust not an incorporated society and therefore could not use the words “Inc”. Wells however did not  disclose to the minister that  despite his repeated assurances to register under the Charitable Trust Act it had not been registered (incorporated) under this Act.  Had this been an oversight as claimed by Wells in court at a later date  this would have been  a great time to have reminded him of the lack of registration of this law enforcement authority.

Reference:

New developments in animal welfare. 19 January 2001

New Zealand Government Media Release

http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/news/new-developments-in-animal-welfare

AWINZ – The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand – an unincorporated “charitable trust” under investigation

by Leave a Comment

How did The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand (AWINZ), an unincorporated “charitable trust”, manage to gain charity status with the Charities Commission on 28 September 2007?

The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) which became part of the Ministry of Primary Industries on 30 April 2012 published a booklet entitled “Animal Welfare in New Zealand” in 2009 (available on-line) which states on page 17:

“MAF enforces the animal welfare legislation and audits the activities of the approved organisations (RNZSPCA and the AWINZ) which assist it in the role. MAF and these organisations investigate complaints made about possible non-compliance with the legislation. While the vast majority of such complaints are dealt with through consultation and education, successful prosecutions against persistent or blatant offenders are undertaken routinely. A number of private sector organisations have signed Memoranda of Understanding with a commitment to collaborate on animal welfare issues, including situations where an animal welfare complaint has been made.”

AWINZ (The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand) was first notified by the Hon. Jim Sutton that it had been granted “approved organisation” status under section 121(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 1999, in a letter dated 19 December 1999, before the Act came into effect on 1 January 2000. This decision  was first gazetted on 18 January 2001, almost one year after the AWINZ Deed of Trust had been allegedly duly executed on 1 March 2000. Sutton made it clear is his letter of 19 December 1999, that his granting of “approved organisation” status to AWINZ was conditional on it fulfilling certain requirements and the Trust until 30 March 2001 to fulfil these.

AWINZ had no legal status at that time it applied for “approved organisation” status in 1999 as it was at best just a “trading name” at that time. used by an Auckland barrister, Neil Edward Wells, [photo: to right] who rendered services to the Waitakere District Council relating to animal control.

According to its Settlor, Neil Edward Wells, the “charitable trust” named Trust “The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand” (AWINZ) – , was first established with the creation of a Deed of Trust on 1st of March 2000. That founding Deed of Trust dated 1st of March 2000 is referred to in the AWINZ “Deed of Trust and Revocation” dated 5th December 2006, first registered on the Charity Commission’s website on 3 November 2007.

“Approved organisation” status under the Animal Welfare Act 1999, was therefore granted to “AWINZ”  by the minister  based on an application which had been made on 21 November 1999, over four months prior to the trust allegedly being formed. On 1st March 2000 the “charitable trust” AWINZ was established, but it had no legal identity separate from  its trustees.

AWINZ has never been incorporated as a charitable trust under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 and has never had any legal status in its own right and could therefore not sue or be sued in its own name.

So then how did Neil Edward Wells gain “approved organisation” status for AWINZ in 2000?

He achieved this by writing to Ministers of the Crown, John Luxton and Jim Sutton, as well as MAF officials, and persuaded them that AWINZ was an actual organisation – a “charitable trust” that was in the process of applying for incorporation with “The Ministry of Commerce” [sic]. When challenged by officials to produce evidence that AWINZ had been incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957, Wells misled officials by pretending that the process of application for incorporation was well underway or that documentation proving incorporation had been mis-filed (lost).

On 28 September 2007 the Charities Commission granted AWINZ charitable status. The “Deed of Trust and Revocation” dated 5th December 2006 remains the only ‘documentation’ available on the Charities website, as ‘evidence’ that the Trust was ever established as a “charitable trust”. At various points the 2006 Deed refers misleadingly to the Charitable Trusts Act 1957, and the Trustees’ obligation to comply with this legislation. However, AWINZ has never been incorporated under this Act.

In 2011 AWINZ lost its “approved status” with MAF. All four Trustees (Graham John Coutts, Neil Edward Wells, Wyn Hoadley [Chair] and Tom Didovish) wrote to the Hon. David Carter, Minister of Agriculture on 7th October 2009 stating:

We write to formally request that you, as responsible Minister, revoke the accreditation of The Animal Welfare Trust of New Zealand as an approved organisaton under section 123 of the Animal Welfare Act 1999.

The Trustees have not taken the decision to seek revocation lightly, but we are no longer willing to be subjected to the intrusion to which MAF Assurances and Risk Directorate has subjected AWINZ over the past 16 months or so, nor are we willing to meet the standards that MAF Assurance and Risk now seek to impose ten years after we came into existence.

The Notice of Revocation of AWINZ as an “approved organisation”, issued by Hon. David Carter, was published in the NZ Gazette dated 16 December 2010 (No. 173, p. 4250) and took effect 28 days after this date.

It is clear that this revocation was requested in part because the Trustees of AWINZ did not wish to be subject to the level of scrutiny and accountability of their accounts etc. that they were receiving from the MAF officials and in particular an Auckland private investigator who had for some years accused the Settlor of the Trust of fraud. As an “approved organisation” AWINZ was required to demonstrate a level of transparency and accountability which did not fit well with the Trustees.

AWINZ, a registered charity, continues to submit its unaudited Financial Statements to the Charities Commission. It is not at all clear how its activities could in any way be regarded as charitable and of public benefit.

References

Click to access letter-from-trustees-2.pdf

The AWINZ/Ndeil Wells application for “approved organisation” status  was  dated 21 November 1999 ,  The approved status was confirmed when it was gazetted on 18 January 2001 http://www.dia.govt.nz/MSOS118/On-Line/NZGazette.nsf/0/d17d9eba142be79ccc256d26003f878f?OpenDocument

Approval from the Minister as attached on the recommendation of MAF http://www.anticorruption.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/18-december-2000.pdf

New developments in animal welfare. New Zealand Government Media 19 January 2001

http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/news/new-developments-in-animal-welfare