NZ Law Society: Professional Misconduct and Judicial Blindness

The Manufactured Reputation of Highmark Homes: Common Law failings

This article provides evidence of how NZ Law Society members deceive the public cementing themselves in the Common Law by breaching NZ Legal Professional Conduct standards. It documents a profound Judicial Blindness: where the court ignored proof that a defamatory blog was ordered and published before the Court had even indexed the judgment to Google for public access. By leaked-timing this "reputation strike," Counsel ensured their narrative hit the internet before the actual judgment was available to the world, a clear breach of professional standards that effectively rewards deception and their clients.

Highmark Homes Bay of Plenty 2016 Left to right Alan Hulme Sales, Nicola Watkins BDM, Bob Hunt Founder, Amanda Hunt Director, Ryan Hunt MD, Simeon Ashton Quantity Surveyor

They say 'birds of a feather flock together.' This could not be more true in the Watkins v. Highmark case. Pictured above is the Highmark Homes staff. On the far right is Simeon Ashton, the company’s Quantity Surveyor. Despite being a core employee, he and his partner posted a glowing 5-star customer review praising the company’s 'honesty' while we were in the middle of a legal dispute—a clear example of the manufactured reputation this company relies on. Furthermore, Ashton signed a court affidavit denying knowledge of the very remuneration schemes he was actively participating in.

Five year old 5 star Google Review from Simeon and Margaret Ashton written about himself  remains on the Bay Of Plenty Head Licensor listing in March 2026, Highmark Homes own inhouse Quantity Surveyor.

And in the event it is missing from Google by the time you read this review posted to the Highmark Homes Bay of Plenty Google my business listing 5 years ago here is what it says:

I love the staff especially simeon . He is very helpful and his building knowledge is amazing. I recomend highmark homes as a good honest building company

Acts of Bad Faith: An Employee and a Temp Contractor Commit Perjury in Court to Assist Their Employer 

This deception extended into the courtroom. Lawyer Danny Jacobson drafted witness statements for four individuals: Robert Hunt, Ryan Hunt, Simeon Ashton, and Kenneth Goebel. These documents were used to mislead Judge Thomas Ingram in the Tauranga District Court (Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd, [2018] NZDC 18335) by categorically denying the existence of a staff spec-building remuneration scheme.

The reality? While Simeon Ashton was signing an affidavit denying the scheme, he was personally building two houses under that very scheme.

Manipulation of the ERA or was it Bias Member Marija Urlich?

To ensure their narrative was not challenged, Highmark purposefully withheld Simeon Ashton from the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) hearing. They knew he had direct knowledge of the office operations and could be tripped up under cross-examination. Instead, they produced Kenneth Goebel—the temporary hire brought in specifically to architect the reports for my dismissal.

In a staggering display of dishonesty, Kenneth Goebel told ERA member Marija Urlich that he had been brought into the office to give me a rest because I was on a stress holiday. This was a complete fabrication; he was there to construct the evidence used to terminate me, while the company used their manufactured District Court victory as a shield to delay and influence the ERA proceedings.

For 6 years the ERA refused to acknowledge their material errors that led to my bankruptcy and the court costs Highmark Homes reportedly invested reportedly being over $70,000 in order to win.

The System Failure: NZ Police and the Locked Gate to Justice 

The legal system has consistently maintained that my dismissal was justified, a narrative built on the affidavits and reports created by Highmark Homes and their legal team. This "fault" was used to secure court costs against me, which I continue to challenge as being derived by fraud.

Only the Supreme Court can unravel the decisions of the High Court to throw out my defamation claim and order the removal of the Mike Ross blog. 

Court of Appeal Decision regarding removal of a harmful digital communication

The truth of what happened at Highmark Homes is a matter of public record that must not be silenced by Google algorithms or layers of NZ Court Judgements that bury the truth.

Despite the obvious red flags of staff posing as customers and the coordinated nature of the witness statements drafted by Danny Jacobson, the NZ Police have refused to act. They continue to claim the matter is too hard to investigate, even as I present evidence of how David Hayes and Highmark won court costs through fraudulent means.

This blog exists to ensure that while the courts and the Police allow these costs to stand and the "fault" to remain on my record, the public can see exactly how Robert Hunt, Ryan Hunt, Simeon Ashton, and Kenneth Goebel manipulated the system to secure those outcomes.

Defamation:  The Date Mike Ross Blog crafted SEO on the same day as the Court Judgement

This Screenshot of Mike Ross Blog as at 22 March 2026 and published on 12 February 2025 the same day of the Judgement demonstrates the crafting of a defamatory article.  The article titled Bankruptcy: Highmark v. Watkins was published before the High Court's decision was published online for the general public.  Only Counsel for Highmark Homes would have seen the judgement on the date of publishing 12 February 2025.

The "Smoking Gun" Metadata

The digital fingerprints do not lie. Forensic metadata confirms the 'Mike Ross' blog was unleashed on Wednesday, 12 February 2025, at 4:05 PM NZDT. At this time, the judgment was not yet public or indexed by Google. The only people on earth who possessed the written findings required to draft that blog post were the Legal Counsel for Highmark Homes. This proves an "insider leak" was used to coordinate a reputation strike before the judgment was legally available to the general public.

Weaponized SEO and the "Snippet" Trap

The Google snippet was purposefully engineered to act as a permanent digital brand. By omitting the fact that the debt was already paid, it ensures that the first—and often only—thing the public sees is a 'Bankruptcy' label, effectively bypassing the complexities of the actual legal truth:

• The Omission: The snippet hides the fact that the original disputed debt had already been paid.

• The Narrative: It frames the bankruptcy as a financial failure rather than the reality: a self-represented litigant being buried under $70,000+ in court costs manufactured through a series of misleading affidavits.

• The Intent: By dominating the first page of Google with this "crafted" narrative, they ensured that any potential employer or business partner would see "Bankruptcy" before they ever saw the truth about Highmark's conduct.

NZ Law Society Members that assisted Highmark Homes in Bankruptcy: Highmark Homes v. Watkins

• David Hayes – New Zealand Commercial Law Corp (Admitted: 22 May 1987)

• Richard Upton – Richard Upton Barrister (Admitted: 03 June 1994)

• Danny Jacobson – E2Law Limited / Holland Beckett (Admitted: 17 December 1993)

• Brett Martelli – Martelli Yaqub Lawyers (Admitted: 04 June 1999)

• Doug Lyon – Lyon O'Neale Arnold (Admitted: 01 January 1974)

The "Elite" Connection: NZ Law Society 

The Inaugural President’s Dinner on March 13, 2026, was specifically to honor Collins with a "Lifetime Membership" of The Law Association. 

This close-knit relationship between the person overseeing judicial appointments (the Attorney-General) and the heads of the legal profession is exactly why critics have called her upcoming appointment as President of the Law Commission "nakedly political."

When the leadership is this interconnected, it raises a massive question: Who is actually incentivized to investigate when a lawyer or their client manipulates the court system?

Judicial Blindness: A Shield for Court-Awarded Perjury

By dismissively labeling my persistent applications as an "abuse of process," the courts exhibited an arrogance that favored the polished submissions of elite legal counsel over the raw truth presented by a self-represented victim. This label was used as a convenient rug under which they could sweep the evidence of perjury, ensuring my voice was legally suppressed through a bankruptcy that was triggered by those very lies.

The "Mike Ross" blog remains the ultimate proof of this systemic failure. The fact that this "independent" article was live 23 hours before I was even notified of the judgment proves that Highmark’s legal team—including David Hayes, Richard Upton, and Brett Martelli—were using the court's findings as a defamation weapon before the ink was even dry. In a system blinded by its own procedural arrogance, my defense was deemed an "abuse," while their coordinated character assassination was protected as a successful legal strategy.

---

Comparison of Court Judgement Accessibility

Stakeholder	Access to Judgment	Date/Time
Highmark Counsel	Immediate (Insider)	12 Feb 2025 (Morning)
"Mike Ross" Blogger	Immediate (Provided by Counsel)	12 Feb 2025 (4:05 PM)
Nicola Watkins	Official Notification	13 Feb 2025 (3:09 PM)
General Public	Online Databases	14 Feb 2025+

Pro-Bono - Another "Dear John" Letter

As I finalize this blog—I receive yet another "Dear John" email from a King’s Counsel. The response is familiar in its brevity:

“Dear Nicola, I don't have capacity to assist, sorry. Kind regards.”

I am no longer surprised. When the "elite" legal community is so tightly interconnected, finding a voice willing to challenge the status quo is  impossible. While the Law Society and The Law Association—under the leadership of individuals like Frazer Barton and David Campbell—host expensive $280-a-head gala dinners at the Park Hyatt to "venerate" Judith Collins KC, my formal pleas regarding manufactured evidence and court-awarded perjury go unanswered. Article Link: The Law Association’s inaugural President’s Dinner recognises outstanding achievements - LawNews.nz

This is the human cost of judicial blindness and procedural arrogance. The system has made it clear: if you don’t have the funds to buy your way into the room, your evidence of fraud is treated as an "abuse of process." I have exhausted every formal avenue. My emails to the Attorney-General's office remain ignored, leaving me with no choice but to take my chances on this blog. When the gatekeepers of justice are too busy networking with the very people who enabled this deception, what else is there to lose?

A Open Letter Plea to Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann

If the New Zealand justice system is to maintain any semblance of integrity, it cannot allow "Abuse of Process" to be used as a catch-all shield for Highmark Homes and their legal team.  There must be a judicial review ordered from the top of the organisation.

Hon. Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann, I am pointing this article directly to your office. On your watch, and within your courts, a self-represented litigant has been buried by court-awarded perjury and a coordinated defamation campaign that was live on the internet 23 hours before the court's own registry published it for the general public.  The High Court Judges are your responsibility, 

I am respectfully appealing to you to act in good faith and review their decisions on the basis of the evidence I present to you and not on former biased judgements that were derived by way of perjury.  It is within your mandate to "unravel" it.

This is more than a "disgruntled litigant" story; it is a forensic map of how institutional arrogance and judicial blindness allow those with deep pockets to manipulate the law. I ask that your office looks past the "Abuse of Process" decisions and examines the timestamps of the Mike Ross Blog as proof of the true intent of Highmark Homes in a 9-year history of deception documented here. If the Chief Justice’s office cannot or will not "walk the talk" on access to justice and judicial conduct, then the gate to the New Zealand courts is truly locked to everyone but the University Educated elite.