Dear Buller District Council,
I am wanting to know why principle 8 of the Privacy Act was not adhered to by our ceo and mayor Jamie cleine? Are you not supposed to ensure the nz post delivery docket was in fact correct, especially seeing as we complained about that via an affidavit. Yet you chose to not. Why is principle 8 of the Privacy Act there? Now as Kim laughnan bdc building inspector stuck his middle finger in the air at the court twice, when you breached a sale and purchase agreement in the first instance and then took us to court over that breach. Then you breached the court order , forcing us to have to file for an enforcement of a work order. Then during this police served a trespass notice. Now legislation states the words "likely to trespass " please define that in your reasoning for serving two trespass notices, one after the ceo Sharon Mason have her notice to leave. Now the last time I was in council was and Dale bublitz and Kim laughnan both dealt with me after the breach of the sale and purchase agreement. Nothing happened from that meeting and I had not been into council since. Even now when I am legally allowed to enter council as Sharon Mason took the last trespass notice with her, I still don't intend on entering council office, why was it likely to trespass? Now unless a high court rules otherwise we are legally liable for the costs order that nz post courier signed lisas name as lisa and wrote notes to that affect. You have stated in writing that you never got this wrong. If we never received court documents from your lawyer and there are two different stories from the courier whom operates our of your office, what story is correct? So you have declined the courts order where they stated the onus is in council to ensure our council built fence is compliant, correct? Now as you are aware that your friends the Alexander's nz post reefton have picked on someone who has a government assessed in of 62, if you don't understand what that means perhaps Google may help. Now lisa has done a lot for reefton, these people are paramedic and they won't even volunteer their time to a shortage where we only have one. Lisa, on the other hand for free runs the youth center and helped the church Diane griffin in her last year's of her life for free and Paula cutbush mother die gracefully in her last years for free too. Now if you need character references try Tony fortune, justice of the Peace, or Colleen Hogarth, justice of the Peace. Three justice of the Peace are prepared to stand up for lisa. Now as there are dangerous goods on their way and we have no way to retrieve them due to your nz post Alexander's now is about to be storing that until a resolution is made. I don't think your insurance covers dangerous goods.

Now as you people all started on me and when you realized that I was not fun , you people changed to Lisa. Now Tony fortune advised to keep going , so that is exactly what we are doing. There will be in due course 4 high court proceeding. 100k in legal costs per hearing. Juducial review. All this over a fence that does not even conform to the building act. Now as judge hunt used fraudulent documents to make his ruling, as signing someone name as them without their knowledge nor consent and I am sure if I signed your name on say a sale and purchase agreement, you would be not happy either. Now as we have the Alexander's signing one of your employees names as her also while she was at work, she too can't claim for loss if it states personally delivered, she had to buy product twice as a result. This is directly affecting your staff also, yes I have the delivery docket from that event. Yes it went missing. Roger Mackay our previous mail person not one loss in his time. Yes I personally know Roger and we have no issues. So as of now Sean judd ex council and nz police and each and every other person involved, we for court purposes are needing names of and addresses for service. If you decline, I expect minimum of a 1 page response detailing the reasons why you think these people are exempt from a legal process as witnesses of course. If refusing, then I can't get a fair hearing and then we are off to high court and we can get orders for said names. Just remember here winz review social security appeal is essentially district court, so I think it would be better to deal with it here as I have no risk in this process, so can file in the high court and no costs.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Duncan