Watkins vs Highmark Homes: The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth
Highmark Homes v. Watkins : Why I Got Fired
The Rt Hon Dame Helen Winkelmann : Not Interested
I learnt FREE Gemini AI to analyze data and use the FREE blogger.com to replicate how The Mike Ross Blog defamed me. The Court Of Appeal refused to acknowledge how that targeted page one defamation was crafted. Self directed learning helped me identify judicial errors, and highlight within a few hours what the NZ Court Judiciary could no
https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicolawatkinsnz/
After a year of emotional
A Blog was produced by “Mike Ross” which the page was pre-indexed with google about me and the SEO was targeting me so that everyone would find out I had been made “Bankrupt” by Highmark Homes. The blogger is a fake persona yet the Court of Appeal refuses to order the removal of the blog. This prompted me to create this blog using the same site Blogger.com to demonstrate the manual process used to defame and discredit me by Highmark Homes so that their lies in court could be buried forever.
Highmark Homes admitted to the ERA the staff house building scheme I got involved in had been in existence for years and years stating they had “helped many staff” to make profit from house building through their office using their trading discount. This scheme was in lieu of market wages and they did not declare the scheme and paid no fringe benefit tax on it.
As a result of the neglect of management to support me in the house build the same way I was supporting their office managing 18 builds at once, they threw me under the bus because I complained about pornographic emails that would not stop coming through the work server, and as an act of spite they stood me down in the school holidays, and while I was working from home which Ryan Hunt had authorised but his wife Amanda then stated I had to “fill in leave forms” a formality she had never employed in three and a half years of my time working for Highmark.
- Highmark Homes unjustifiably took my laptop off me,
- Cut my email off,
- Started writing to a HR consultant constructing my dismissal over a weekend which they accidentally copied me into, then told me they were disappointed I was seeking legal advice
- Amanda Hunt harassed me online 10pm at night pretending to be a worker in the Phillipines which Ryan Hunt admitted to in his lawyers office at my “disciplinary hearing”,
- Told the other staff I was on holiday,
- Withdrew mortgage payments promised as part of my remuneration review correspondence to get the spec house sold without bank foreclosure then they constructed my dismissal with the assistance of a “temp contractor” who they named a “forensic accountant”.
- Highmark Homes took the employment case to the Disputes Tribunal
- Highmark Homes delayed the ERA hearings
- Highmark Homes wrote false affidavits for the District Court
- Refused appearance for cross examination in High Court
- Employment Court Judge Beck used the Disputes Tribunal Decision as an excuse not to hear my case denovo against the rules of the Employment Act
- The High Court threw out my defamation proceeding as am “abuse of process”
- High Court Judge Brittain said my request to know if Convicted Vexatious Litigant David Hayes was bankrupting me to pay his fines was “none of my business’
- Police refused to investigate my reports of Highmark Committing Perjury in Court from 2020 while I am telling them they are trying to bankrupt me TWICE and I ended up paying Highmark $24K for the privilege of them lying in court only to be bankrupted over David Hayes bogus legal fees
- David Hayes is a convicted vexatious litigant, has been involved in the Du Val Colllapse yet the High Court protected and supported him and subsequently shut my family businesses down after 8 years of fighting them, going through Covid, recession and all because they don’t want anyone to know the truth about their lies and their dishonest business culture and practices.
Synopsis of Systemic Failure
Case Theme: Jurisdictional Drift, Human Rights Breaches, and the weaponization of Bankruptcy to silence an employee.
Core Conflict: The use of an unauthorized Disputes Tribunal decision to override the exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment Rela
tions Authority (Section 161, ERA 2000). Human Rights Impact: Erosion of "Access to Justice" via prohibitive filing fees ($1,482 Supreme Court barrier), formal education barriers for self-litigants, and bankruptcy derived from documented perjury.
1. The
Section 161 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 is unambiguous: the ERA has exclusive jurisdiction over employment matters. This statutory protection was completely ignored by the High Court and Employment Court. It appears the syst
2. The ERA’s Statutory Breach: Six Years of "Legal Jargon"
The ERA's statutory duty to conclude cases in three months extended to six years in my case.
The "Without Prejudice" Shield: Internal emails reveal the ERA used "duty member" Larmer to rule critical evidence inadmissible in June 2022. Member Urlich then used circular logic to exclude evidence of fraud.
Gatekeeping: Staff acted as a defensive block, refusing to escalate formal complaints to
the Chief Justice.
3. Jurisdictional Hijacking and Perjury
Highmark Homes initiated an employment-related "debt" claim in the Disputes Tribunal—a forum with no mandate for such matters.
Documented Perjury: Directors Ryan Hunt and Robert (Bob) Hunt provided assertions known to be false (Section 108 Crimes Act
). Bankrupted after second attempt by a Convicted VEXATIOUS litigant I was bankrupted over a legal fees award of $16
,000 in High Court costs. This was the trophy Highmark used to ensure my silence. They did not pick that I would use the same free blogger platform used to defame me to show them up.
4. Judge Beck and the "Pay to Play" Wall
Judge Kathryn Beck of the NZ Employment Court demanded a $10,000 "security for costs" bond before my evidence could be heard. She prioritized financial protection for the defendants over my right to a hearing. Notably, she refused to recuse herself despite connectio
Court of Appeal Decision regarding removal of a harmful digital communication
5. Police Failure: Natalie Flowerdew-Brown
The Western Bay of Plenty CIB (Detective Senior Sergeant Flowerdew-Brown) dismissed my perjury complaint as "civil in nature," citing "dead babies and murders" to justify binning a report of corporate crime.
6. The "Vexatious" Counsel & The Lyon Connection
David Hayes & Brett Martelli: Hayes in “Lepionka” ordered to pay $35,000 for vexatious proceedings, was handed a win against me to facilitate my bankruptcy. The relationship between Martelli and Hayes acting together against me was NOT DISCLOSED to the High Court. Judge Britain may have assumed I was thick the day of my bankruptcy hearing when Martelli entered the room and he asked “what are you here for” then immediately said “well no I don’t need to hear from you” which conveniently avoided any cross examination questions from me to expose Hayes and Martelli had tag teamed me for 2 years, both of their clients lied in their affidavits and both of their clients NEVER ONCE APPEARED BEFORE A JUDGE. THEY REFUSED TO REPLY TO NOTICE TO FACTS. LOOPHOLES.
Doug Lyon: A business partner to the Hunts (Lyon O’Neale Arnold), signed the bankruptcy petition. Despite being a witness to the remuneration scheme, he remained si
lent, and Judge Beck refused to join him to the proceedings.
7. The Final Barrier: $1,482 Supreme Court Fee - THIS IS THE FINAL STRAW
The Supreme Court (UR 33/2025) now demands a $1,482 filing fee. For a bankrupted citizen, this is an absolute wall. Access to Justice is a lie when bankruptcy is achieved through FRAUD.
MY EVIDENCE SHOWS
| Witness & Statement Para | Sworn Claim (Feb 2021) | The Documentary Reality (2017) | Evidence Source |
| Ryan Hunt (Para 4) | Claims working from home was "unauthorized." | Ryan texted: "It's fine... no problem." | HMH00.PDF (30 Sept 2017) |
| Robert Hunt (Para 3b) | Swears suspension was due to "deletion o | IT logs show the server was "throttled" by a spam attack. | Acre PC Logs (Oct 2017) |
| Kenneth Goebel (Para 21e) | Claims he had to "reconstruct records" due to deletion. | I reported Highmark software QS data import failures and Server and email indexing issues and the IT company was hired to delete files on a schedule, the directors and BDO Accountants had all of my logins. The IT contractor himself wrote and said what Highmark did to me was “fucked”. The court refused to acknowledge the evidence that Highmark threatened him if he wrote any documents to support my case he would “never work in Tauranga again”. | Police Report OR-1094459N |
| Robert Hunt (Para 17) | Characterizes you as "narcissistic/vindictive." | You were fixing 3 months of MYOB errors they missed. | 10 Oct Email to BDO |
| Kenneth Goebel (Para 22) | Providing testimony "free of cost." | Supports the claim of a corroborated conspiracy. Goebel was painted as a “forensic accountant” by Highmark to the court yet he admitted in his affidavit he went there to do “data entry” and had no idea why he was there but was then recruited to build a case for Highmark accusing me of embezzlement and fraud. None of which I committed or was ever found guilty of. Simeon Ashton the QS of Highmark NEVER attended the ERA hearing for fear of cross examination because they would have been caught out in their lies about my work role, the staff remuneration scheme which he was involved in and priced all the staff remuneration houses, and because he would have had to admit he had lied in his affidavits to the court. So he just didn’t show up. | Signed Statement of K. Goebel |
NOTHING HAS COME FROM MY SUBMISSION TO THE TRIENNIAL REVIEW COMMITTEE - I received another limp wristed letter from our government fobbing me off.
Read 2026 Triennial review on Legal Aid Submission to Hon Minister Goldsmith
Official Judicial Record & Case Citations
This matter is documented across the following official New Zealand judicial proceedings. These citations represent the primary legal record of the Watkins vs Highmark Homes litigation:
Employment Relations Authority: Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2022] NZERA 641 (and associated interlocutory shifts).
Employment Court of New Zealand: Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2023] NZEmpC 203; [2024] NZEmpC 161 (Judge Kathryn Beck).
High Court of New Zealand: Highmark Homes Ltd v Watkins [2023] NZHC 2185 (Relating to the bankruptcy petition and costs).
Court of Appeal of New Zealand: Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2024] NZCA (Procedural reviews regarding security for costs).
Supreme Court of New Zealand: Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2025] NZSC (Current application regarding fee waivers and institutional failure).
Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand: Highmark Homes Ltd v Watkins (2018) - The original jurisdictional breach.
Read about David Hayes’s convicted vexatious litigant here:
https://thelawassociation.nz/counsel-ordered-to-pay-costs-in-failed-private-prosecution/
NZ Judiciary Court of Appeal Whata and French : Another Fail
Mike Ross Blogex: NZ Public Report on Google Guidelines Breach and Judicial Ignorance
CA685/2024 [2025] NZCA 281 and CA855/2024
https://watkinsvshighmarkhomes-nzjustice.blogspot.com/2026/03/mike-ross-blogex-nz-public-report.html
The Role of Digital Defamation and Deceptive SEO in New Zealand Litigation
https://watkinsvshighmarkhomes-nzjustice.blogspot.com/2026/03/mike-ross-blogex-nz-public-report.html
