Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
E mail between myself and Penny tong re Meek Probate and Estate She won't answer our questions Why is she so evasive?
Citation preview
1
E MAILS from former co-trustee BANK OF HAWAII regarding previous Meek Probate and Trust litigations (only e mails in October and November 2010)
From: [email protected] Sent: 11/8/2010 5:26:56 p.m. Pacific Standard TimeTo: [email protected]: Re: Arkansas property
Dear Nanci Meek,
As I have mentioned before, by Court Order, Bank of Hawaii was released and discharged for its administration as a co-trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust created under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust. That same Order approved the payments to the Goodsill and McCutcheon firms. I am not aware of any fees being paid to Bank of Hawaii as co-trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust, and you will note that there is no payment of fees to Bank of Hawaii contained in the Order. I encourage you to obtain counsel who can advise you of the significance of this Court AOrder. Once you obtain counsel, kindly route your questions through him or her.
In response to your other e-mail of November 6, 2010, I am confirming that I am in-house counsel for Bank of Hawaii.
Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected]
From: Nanci Meek [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 6:18 AMTo: Tong, PennySubject: Re: Arkansas property
If that is the case then why did the bank of hawaii paericipate in more than one real estate transaction, the IRS audit and receive compensation for acting as trustee also if the bank of hawaii was not acting as trustee or responsible for the estate what role did the bank of hawaii play. And why did the estate compensate the attorney law firms in hawaii and california acting on behalf of bank of hawaii and elvin meek trust. Thank you
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
From: "Tong, Penny" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 20:57:00 -1000
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Arkansas property
Dear Nanci Meek,
2
Bank of Hawaii never received any assets as a co-trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust set forth under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust. Therefore, Bank of Hawaii was not responsible for the Arkansas property nor was it responsible for any assets owned by the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust or Elvin R. Meek individually.
Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected]
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:30 PMTo: Tong, PennySubject: Arkansas property
Dear Penny:
The Arkansas property? I have documentation reflecting several conversationswith Todd Hoch and David Louie regarding the sale of the Arkansas property. If you recall the property was sold by Robert Grigger Jones and Elizabeth and half of the proeprty belonged to my great aunt Mary. A judgment was issued and just this week after 6 years and the threat of a bench warrant, elizaabeth paid part of the debt incurred from the Judgment.
So what was the Bank of Hawaii's role if any with the sale of that property in 2006 Thank you
Re: FW: Letter from Bank of HawaiiDate: 11/1/2010 6:00:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight TimeFrom: [email protected]: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Hello Penny: I will certainly pass your response to those within the IRS who are handling the matter. Sorry you are reluctant to answer our questions. The attorneys involved on behalf of the Bank of Hawaii were certainly not reluctant a few years ago when it came time to billing the estate for services rendered. Nor was the Bank of Hawaii reluctant to appear in front of Judge Hirai requesting the money from the sale of the property at Waipuna in Honolulu be released to pay the fees for Bingham McCutcheon and Goodsill Anderson. You may want to reconsider speaking with me either in person or on the phone prior to my taking this to the next level. Have a good day. Nanci Meek(760) 413-5660
3
Cc: Peter Ho, President Bank of Hawaii David Louie Bank of Hawaii
Subject: RE: FW: Letter from Bank of HawaiiDate: 11/1/2010 5:52:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight TimeFrom: [email protected]: [email protected]
Dear Ms. Meek,
As I have informed you before, Bank of Hawaii was never appointed as a trustee of the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust. Although the Court appointed Bank of Hawaii as a co-trustee of the QDOT, no assets were ever transferred to Bank of Hawaii from the trustee of the Elvin R. Meek Family trust to fund the QDOT. Funding of any trust created under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust would have to be done by the trustee of the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, as that trustee would have held all such assets.
Your questions regarding the Court proceedings have already been resolved by Order of each respective Judge. Furthermore, may I remind you once again that by court Order Bank of Hawaii was released and discharged for its administration as co-trustee of the QDOT.
Our involvement in this matter has concluded.
Penny
Have a wonderful day! Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected] to provide outstanding service.
Subject: RE: FW: Letter from Bank of HawaiiDate: 11/1/2010 4:39:38 a.m. Pacific Daylight TimeFrom: [email protected] To: Tong, Penelope [email protected]: [email protected], [email protected], Subject: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Ms. Tong: Upon careful review of the income tax forms filed during the audit on my father's estate in 2007, several entries were observed on the form 706 specifically detailing accounts in the bank of Hawaii specifically in the amount of $250,000 as well as $117.064. These are the income tax returns filed after the tax audit performed on the estate. It is my understanding the accountant Michael Gould took over 4 years to file the tax returns and only after being prompted by the IRS with an audit. We have never received from Mr. Gould an explanation as to why the filing took over 4 years. Most important the Exemption trust was never funded and yet the returns reflect that it was. This as you know knocks the estate down from 3.7 million (a figure we feel Attorney Robert Jones achieved by listing our father's properties undervalue) to 2.7 million. As no doubt you are aware in 2007 an estate UNDER 3.0 million pays ZERO tax. We need to discuss these entries as well as the failure of the Bank of Hawaii to fund the Exemption Trust. While Rhonda Griswold and James Ashford, Elizabeth Meek's counsel with the law firm of Cades Shutte has confirmed in recent e mails that the exemption trust was never funded due to the ongoing litigation, it does not relieve the Bank of Hawaii of its fiduciary
4
responsibility. There are severe discrepancies in the return, namely Elizabeth meek is listed as still being a Palauan citizen in 2007, the judgment against the estate for the wrongful sale of property in Arkansas which did not belong to the estate. These are important issues we need to have clarified and I would appreciate your immediate attention. No doubt you are aware we are still litigating the contest on the 1st Amendment fraud by Attorney Jones, but in the interim and until which time Elizabeth Meek is removed as the trustee, my brother and myself are beneficiaries and would appreciate your attention. To refresh your memory it was the law firm of Bingham McCutcheon with Attorney Jane Peebles (she was the designated Power of Attorney during the IRS audit) in Los Angeles who acted as counsel for Bank of Hawaii on the mainland. Also while you are reviewing the file please prepare to answer my questions regarding the attempt by counsel for Bank of Hawaii to move the matter back to California in April of 2007. This was before you asked the court in Hawaii to excuse Bank of Hawaii as co-trustee. I await your reply Thank you. Have a wonderful day!
Nanci MeekPrivate Investigator(760) 413-5660 cell
Subject: RE: FW: Letter from Bank of HawaiiDate: 10/15/2010 7:34:48 p.m. Pacific Daylight TimeFrom: Tong, Penelope [email protected]: [email protected]
Dear Nanci,
The questions contained in your e-mail message have either already been answered or resolved through the Courts.
Bank of Hawaii never received any assets as a Co-trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust, and was never appointed as a Co-Trustee (the Court accepted our withdrawal of acceptance as co-trustee prior to any appointment taking place) of any trust created under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, therefore, there are no bank accounts “held by” Bank of Hawaii as Co-Trustee. There is a difference between (1) a trust account for which Bank of Hawaii is trustee of a trust, and (2) a trust account for which Bank of Hawaii is not a trustee of a trust, but which is “held by” a trustee of a trust in a deposit account “at” Bank of Hawaii. The accounts you describe in your e-mail are of the latter type. To the extent there are any trust deposit accounts for any trust created under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, “at” Bank of Hawaii, as I stated in my February 20, 2009 letter to you, only the trustee of the trust would have access to the account and any information regarding the account.
The Federal Estate Tax return for your father’s estate has been accepted as filed, and there are no further issues regarding the filing of the return.
The remaining questions you ask were resolved in the Court proceeding in which you were represented by Richard Diehl. By Order Granting Petition for Approval of Resignation of Trustee and Instructions Regarding Distribution of Assets held in Escrow, filed on February 11, 2008, the Court, among other things: (1) approved the resignation of Bank of Hawaii as Co-Trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust; (2) acknowledged the withdrawal of Bank of Hawaii’s acceptances as the trustee of any of the related trusts; (3) released and discharged Bank of Hawaii for its administration as Co-Trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust; (4) approved and ordered the payment out of escrow funds of (i) $40,836.90 in fees and tax and $1,210.00 in costs to Goodsill Anderson Quinn & Stifel, and (ii) $36,853.00 in fees and tax and $1,533.78 in costs to Bingham McCutchen LLP. I’m sure Mr. Diehl, who was representing you at the time explained to you the effect of this Order upon the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, any trusts created thereunder, and the parties involved. Bank of Hawaii’s involvement in this matter has concluded.
5
I have nothing further to add and respectfully decline your invitation to participate in a conference call.
Penny
Have a wonderful day! Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected] Striving to provide outstanding service.
Subject: RE: FW: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Date: 10/15/2010 9:00:38 a.m. Pacific Daylight TimeFrom: '[email protected] To: Tong, Penelope [email protected]: [email protected], [email protected], Subject: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Dear Penelope: I will pass your e mail along to any future and interested parties. Attached is the Acceptance by Bank of Hawaii as co-trustee. With all due respect your response is in direct conflict with the two accountings received by my brother and myself prepared by Francis Lui Kwa at East West Wealth management. Those aforementioned Accountings reflect the $ 2.7 million in accounts held by the Bank of Hawaii. No other banking institution is named. The Exemption Trust in the amount of $1 million was never funded and yet according to the IRS tax returns covering 4 years and prepared after the audit was initiated it was reflected as funded thereby relieving the estate of paying income tax. Since discovering it was never funded this has become a grave concern for myself and my brother. If you recall Jane Peebles who at the time was with Bingham and McCucheon was the attorney of record for Bank of Hawaii handling the tax audit. They were acting on behalf of the Bank of Hawaii yet the Elvin R Meek Trust paid for the attorney's fees. Could you clarify that for me? In other words is that your procedure? The Bank of Hawaii accepts trusteeship over an estate however the attorney's fees from any conflicts during the administration are paid directly by the estate? According accountings and billing statements obtained, Bingham and McCucheon in California were paid over $45,000 from a check written by Elizabeth meek paid from monies held in the Bank of Hawaii on behalf of the estate. Also Judge Hirai granted a motion to reimburse them from money garnished from the sale of one of Dad's condos in Honolulu. That condo was sold AFTER Judge Hirai denied Elizabeth Meek's request to move forward with the selling of any property This was a motion denied in November of 2005. That is why the monies were held up by New Republic. I need some clarification on that as well, along with documentation reflecting how the money from the Escrow of the property sold was distributed to the attorneys acting on behalf of Bank of Hawaii. Just so we are clear both Judy Lee's firm in Honolulu as well as the aforementioned firm in California were at different times acting on behalf of the Bank of Hawaii as co-trustee. I am concerned there may have been "double billing" on behalf of the attorneys. When you have a moment you should probably review the tax returns resulting from the audit. In the past I have asked the accountant, Michael Gould, Attorney Grigger Jones, along with Attorney Jim Ashford and Rhonda Griswold the following: Why did it take 4 years for the estate tax returns to be filed? The tax returns were not prepared until the IRS began the audit on the
6
estate. It also took over 4 years for the beneficiaries to receive the accounting. We still don't have an accounting for 2008 and 2009. It has been confirmed that Elizabeth Meek filed for her citizenship in July of 2004. According to recent court transcripts taken from the Evidentiary hearing in July of 2010, Mrs. Meek by her admission became a citizen in August of 2005. That being said, why did the Bank of Hawaii hang on as co-trustee for another two years? I would suggest a teleconference in the next few days to clarify these matters. I am sure you can read the urgency with respect to these e mails. This I assure you is brought on by the recent revelation that our stepmother Mrs.Meek and her daughter Lola Reklai have publicly made statements they are intending to dissolve our father's estate, withdraw all the monies therein and retreat to their homeland of Palau. I am grateful for your kind attention and patience.
Nanci Meek (760) 413-5660
7
Subject: RE: FW: Letter from Bank of HawaiiDate: 10/14/2010 7:57:25 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time
8
From: Tong, Penelope [email protected]: '[email protected]'Subject: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Dear Nanci,
I apologize for not making it clear that Bank of Hawaii does not have outside counsel representation on this matter. Goodsill represented Bank of Hawaii up until Bank of Hawaii was released and discharged by the Court. I am the attorney dealing with this matter on behalf of Bank of Hawaii.
As I have previously advised, Bank of Hawaii was only appointed as Co-Trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust (Marital Trust), which was created under the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust. The Court never appointed Bank of Hawaii as a trustee of the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, nor the Exemption Trust created thereunder, and subsequently accepted Bank of Hawaii’s withdrawal of acceptances as trustee of any related Trusts. Since Bank of Hawaii was not a trustee of the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust, it was not involved in the funding of any trust created under thereunder. As Co-Trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust Bank of Hawaii never received any assets from the Elvin R. Meek Family Trust.
With regards to the Federal Estate Tax Return for your father’s estate, we were copied on an e-mail from Jane Peebles to Elizabeth Meek advising that the IRS issued a closing letter accepting the return as filed.
In its Order, a copy of which was included with the e-mail I sent to you yesterday, the Court released and discharged Bank of Hawaii as Co-Trustee of the Qualified Domestic Trust and acknowledged Bank of Hawaii’s withdrawal of acceptance as trustee of any of the related Trusts. As such, Bank of Hawaii’s involvement in this matter has concluded.
Have a wonderful day! Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected] Striving to provide outstanding service.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 5:52 PMTo: Tong, PennyCc: Ho, Peter; [email protected]; [email protected]: Re: FW: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Hi Penny: Not to sound like I am beating a dead horse but we really need to know which law firm you are utilizing currently to handle your litigations. I would appreciate your providing some clarification relative to the following: : Tax returns reflect the Exemption trust in the amount of 1 million was funded. And yet the accountings do not reflect it was. Please clarify. As I had mentioned previously I am periodically meeting with representatives from the IRS and these questions have arisen. The accountant Michael Gould will not answer our questions, might be due to his connection with the attorney Robert Grigger Jones who is facing criminal charges based on the forgery he is accused of committing. Our stepmother Elizabeth Meek during her testimony admitted the signatures on the 1st Amendment which named her the trustee are not her signature or my father's. If the Bank of Hawaii was as you indicate the co-trustee as early as March of 2005 then why did it take 4 years to file the Tax return? Would that be the responsibility of the Bank of Hawaii as co-trustee? The accounting reflects the law firm of Bingham
9
and McCutcheon was acting on behalf of the Bank of Hawaii and their legal fees amounting to over $45,000 were paid by my father's estate . You might want to review the Meek case and the Bank of Hawaii's responsibility as the co-trustee When were you made aware that Elizabeth Meek was already an American Citizen and did not need the Bank of Hawaii as a co-trustee? I am also attaching two letters recently forwarded to my contacts at the Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco. The trust at the time of our father's death was valued at 4.2 million however the attorney Grigger Jones undervalued the estate and created the $1 million exemption trust to keep the estate below the $3 million mark. I am sure you are aware if an estate is under $3 million there is no tax. Have a good day and I await your reply. Nanci MeekPrivate Investigator(760) 413-5660 cell In a message dated 10/13/2010 8:19:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
Dear Nanci,
I am forwarding you an e-mail (including the attachment) that I sent to you last year which states our role in your father’s trust. Based on the Court Order our actions in this matter were approved and our involvement is now concluded.
Have a wonderful day!
Penelope Wat Tong Vice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846Tel: (808) 694-8946 Fax: (808) 694-4346e-mail: [email protected] Striving to provide outstanding service.
From: Tong, Penelope Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:08 AMTo: '[email protected]'Subject: Letter from Bank of Hawaii
Dear Ms. Meek
By way of introduction, I am the attorney that Judy Lee referred your inquiry to. Attached is a letter that was sent to you on Friday, February 20, 2009 in response to your e-mails to her and your call to Al Landon. I hope that it addresses the questions you have.
Have a wonderful day. All the best in 2009!
Penelope Wat TongVice President & Deputy Legal Division ManagerBank of Hawaii Law Department #252P.O. Box 2900Honolulu, HI 96846(888) 643-3888 (808) 694-8946
