Territory Stories

Letter from Jane Hartwig Senior Investigation Officer for the Ombudsman of the Northern Territory regarding Complaint against Senior Constable Westra van Holthe and Mr Michael Rowley and sale of Toyota Troop Carrier dated 14 February 2004

Details:

Title

Letter from Jane Hartwig Senior Investigation Officer for the Ombudsman of the Northern Territory regarding Complaint against Senior Constable Westra van Holthe and Mr Michael Rowley and sale of Toyota Troop Carrier dated 14 February 2004

Other title

Tabled paper 1286

Collection

Tabled papers for 11th Assembly 2008 - 2012; Tabled papers; ParliamentNT

Date

2011-05-03

Description

Tabled By Christopher Burns

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.

Language

English

Subject

Tabled papers

File type

application/pdf

Use

Copyright

Copyright owner

See publication

License

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00042

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/281226

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/415089

Page content

2. S/Constable Westra Van Holthe could transfer the registration of the vehicle into his own name. In February 2003 you spoke to S/Constable Westra Van Holthe by phone because he had not paid the full deposit and instalment payments as agreed. You say you indicated to S/Constable Westra Van Holthe that he could get out of the deal by selling the vehicle at Lajamanu when the next royalty payments were issued, on condition that he split any profit he received over $14,000 equally with you. You were told by S/Constable Westra Van Holthe that he had no intention of on-selling the vehicle and that you would continue to receive your payments. The agreement and variations were not recorded in writing. You later learnt that the vehicle had since been on-sold at Lajamanu on 4th March 2003. The purchaser was Mr Michael Rockman and the sale price was $17,000. You are aware that S/Constable Westra Van Holthe could not have been at Lajamanu on this date and you question the legitimacy of the sale and MVR sale/transfer documents purported to have been signed by him on that date. You also allege that the stamp duty declaration form has been falsely filled out to indicate that the vehicle was on-sold by S/Constable Westra Van Holthe in the value of $14,000 when it was actually sold for $17,000. You allege that Brevet Sergeant Wenn, Officer In Charge of Lajamanu Police Station, must have illegally acted as an agent for S/Constable Westra Van Holthe in the actual sale and transfer of the vehicle that day. You say that in all your dealings with S/Constable Westra Van Holthe, he was in police uniform and apparently on duty. He used his position to gain your confidence and trust and to influence the commercial transaction between you to his advantage. You further complain that a police officer has unlawfully provided a MVR print-out of your personal information to Mr Rockman in relation to the sale of the vehicle. The relevant document is an MVR screen and provides your personal details including your full name, date of birth, home phone, residential address, drivers licence details as well as full details of the vehicle being sold. The JRC notes that there was substantial dispute over the actual terms of the agreement for sale and purchase between yourself and S/Const Westra Van Holthe. However, this was not relevant to the PRC investigation. Indeed, you have since taken S/Constable Westra Van Holthe to court claiming $14,000 plus half of the $3,000 received over that sum in the sale to Mr Rockman, less the $3,000 you had already been paid by S/Const Westra Van Holthe. The JRC understands that S/Constable Westra Van Holthe agreed in an out of court settlement, to pay you a further $8,000 from the sale of the vehicle, making the total amount of monies received by you $11,000. This meant that S/Constable Westra Van Holthe effectively received a total of $9,000 from the sale transaction (a clear profit of $6,000 - considering that he had already paid you $3,000). You have both had to pay for the services of a lawyer. The Investigation The following evidence has been considered:


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.