IN the case of Cooper Engineering the State of South Australia is accused of engaging in tortious interference, stealing personal property, closing down small family-owned and operated businesses and seizing private assets by stealth, using well-rehearsed tactics of obstruction, deception and lies.
A trial on the matter is due to begin in Adelaide today (Monday).
Cooper Engineering (“Coop Eng”) has manufactured and repaired large steel chassis, chaser bins, air seeders, tippers, dollys, stone rollers, road trains and related components for farming and industrial use since 1983.
As with most small businesses, COVID lockdowns had a huge impact on the small family operation, including supply chain disruption for timely delivery of steel & other supplies, as well as massive increased costs for the supply of parts & components needed to keep the engineering business viable. Concurrently with this, farmers were suffering huge crop losses due to frost. Despite these challenges, Coop Eng was able to sustain a viable business.
Between June 2020 & October 2021, five customers approached Coop Eng to purchase custom-made Bins to order.5 The customers included Glenlea Partners (Peter Williams), Chapman Family Farms (Christopher Mark, Fiona & Bryce Chapman), L & M Farms (Locky & Melissa Wilson), P & L Webster Pastoral Company (Peter & Leigh Webster) & Springbank Farms (Ben & Paul Light). By October 2021, Coop Eng was obligated to manufacture over $624,249 worth of product on a combined deposit of just $340,119.
In September 2019, FJ & JF Edwards (Jay Edwards) ordered a bin valued at $85,700, with a deposit of $25,000. Edwards’ Chase Bin build commenced in June 2020 and ready for collection in October 2020, however, Edwards never responded to Cooper’s engagement to collect the Chase bin.
Cooper eventually advised he would have to sell the bin to recover costs and in May 2021 advertised the Chase Bin for $116,000 (tyres and wheels excluded). Tyres and wheels for it were already on back-order when Christopher Mark Chapman responded to the ad on 17/6/21.
Chapman arrived at Coopers property to inspect the completed Chase Bin on 19/6/21 and wanted a $20k discount but got a discount of $10k on condition that full payment would be made by 28/6/21. Chapman then requested an additional $50k worth of modifications, to which Cooper agreed. Chapman paid $53,000 for the modifications on 21/6/21 but did not pay the remaining $106,000 for full payment, as agreed, thus forfeiting his discount, and owing $116,000.
Back-ordered tyres and wheels were extra once landing price was known, and he agreed to cover unknown expenses on account of covid supply issues in regard to the extras. (Back-ordered wheels and tyres did not arrive until April 2023. Cost: $36,700 landed.)
At 6.44am on 9/10/21,Christopher Chapman, with his wife & son, allegedly broke into Cooper Engineering yard, cutting open a rear fence. Cooper was away working. On 10/10/21, at 6.50am they again allegedly entered the yard and spray painted their farm name on a Chaser Bin.
At 6.44am on 11/10/21 they returned again with a tractor to allegedly steal the chaser bin and many other steel components for the production of bins and trailers, lifting huge gates off hinges with tractor forks. Chapman and his family were at the property all day for three days straight. The alleged theft and beak-ins were caught on CCTV.
Cooper’s wife Xiaoqing Sun was in Adelaide and could see on CCTV people in the yard but was unable to contact Cooper. When she eventually did, Cooper phoned the police, who attended and made the Chapman family return the Chase bin. Cooper wanted Chapman and his wife and son charged for unlawfully entering his property.
Police at the time said they’d never seen anything like it as Chapman allegedly twice offered a bribe of an extra $20k to Cooper in front of police not to press charges, and claimed that officer Geraghty gave authorization for the unlawful entry which was caught on police recordings.
Cooper says he tried for months to have the Chapmans charged but police would not take a statement. Cooper even tried to drop the statement on the front seat of a police car after police failed to keep appointments. He even staked the police station out until he found someone there. At that time, the policeman in the car informed Cooper that the matter was finalised and no charges would be laid. All this without taking a statement from Cooper or his wife.
From this time onwards, Chapman allegedly colluded with four other Coop Eng customers (Webster, Wilson, Light & Williams), who had already entered into legally-binding contracts with Cooper for the supply of chassis bins and Chase bins, in order to defraud Coop Eng.1
Chapman is accused of systematically orchestrating a web of lies by deceitful and criminal conduct, starting with Chapman making a fraudulent claim via his bank to Cooper’s five days after the break-ins on 16/10/21. It is not known how much earlier he had lodged it with his bank. He said he had “made a payment in error, mistakenly made payment to a wrong account” and requested a refund.
On or about the same time, the four others made the same allegedly fraudulent claims repeatedly, resulting in Coop Eng’s bank account being frozen from 4th November 2021. None contacted Coop Eng directly. They allegedly only made false certificates via their banks, thus voiding their own contracts.
Coop Eng and their supporters have listed other alleged deceitful and criminal conduct including that:
1) Christopher Chapman took Richard Cooper to Court allegedly in order to retrospectively cover up his alleged break-in, theft and trespass.
2) In a sworn Affidavit dated 25/10/21, Chapman tendered into evidence at the Adelaide Magistrates Court an allegedly forged document – a tax Invoice – changing the terms and conditions of the contractual arrangement put before Magistrate Kate White. She is accused of holding secret hearings, ex-parte and denying Cooper any right to a defence or fair trial. On 28th Oct 2021, Magistrate White initially refused to issue possession Orders without a trial but by 17th Dec 2021 made Orders without a trial anyway.
3) A Department of Consumer & Business Services (CBS) summons dated 7th Nov 2022, charging Coop Eng partners, clearly states that Chapman paid Cooper Engineering (A FIRM) – not Richard Cooper. This proves Magistrate White grievously erred at law. Chapmans lawyer, Justin Courtney, claimed before White that Cooper had an intentional tort of “conversion”, whereas it is Chapman who is liable for the tort of conversion, without lawful justification dealing with a chattel in a manner inconsistent with Coop Eng’s terms, conditions & immediate rights of possession. Meanwhile, White never issued an Order against Xiaoqing Sun’s property in complete violation of Contract Law.
4) In a subsequent claim of damages by Chapman, Magistrate Panagiotidis made multiple adjournments and allegedly refused to inform Coop Eng of dates and times of hearings or permit Cooper the right to lodge interlocutory applications and counterclaims to defend himself or Coop Eng.
5) Magistrate Panagiotidis erred in returning the money to Chapman, which in effect gave him a free chase bin, and never should have given the money to the alleged Trustee as the chase bin was constructed by (the new) Cooper Engineering partnership after the alleged bankruptcy.
6) In an unsworn statement to the CBS, Chapman falsely claimed that he had entered into a contract with Coop Eng in June 2020 when the 19th June 2021 was the first ever contact with Chapman and his son. CBS accepted this claim by Chapman and leveraged it for legal action against Coop Eng, in collusion with Chapman. Coop Eng business and Cooper’s personal bank accounts had been frozen for months as a result of Chapman’s actions and he and CBS convinced other customers to do the same in sync, impeding Coop Eng from fulfilling customers’ orders, which formed the basis of the CBS action against Coop Eng.
7) CBS allegedly engaged in tortious interference with the Coop Eng business and even instructed customers not to pay Coop Eng for orders completed. CBS Katherine Brown & Christopher Chapman’s instruction to Ryan Hewett was to “take the Chassis Bin but do not pay Cooper Engineering”.
8) Cooper’s wife called Cooper to inform him of the initial break-in and police were called. The officer claimed Chapman was offering to pay $112,000. They were informed Chapman was in default and that over $120,520 was outstanding (plus interest), not including labour for the extra equipment. Further, components were awaiting delivery from overseas.
9) Despite repeated attempts by Cooper to make a formal police report of theft, police denied him even the opportunity of making a police report and claim of theft and trespass on the record for prosecution. Officer Dennis Geraghty is given a USB with CCTV footage, but refused to act further on the criminal trespass and break-in, while Chapman claimed officer Dennis Geraghty gave him permission for unlawful entry.
10) Within 6 months of commencing the manufacture of orders made by each plaintiff, between 15/10/21 and 28/10/21, Chapman in conjunction with CBS allegedly coordinated for Webster, Wilson, Light & Williams to communicate with Cooper’s bank in order to have his account frozen from early Nov 2021, by seeking a refund of their deposits on the false claim that, in an extraordinary series of “coincidences”, all five applicants had wrongfully made deposits into Cooper’s account and then seeking the reversal of those funds transfers, retrospectively.
11) All these attempts by the five applicants to reverse the transactions occurred within five days of each other from 15/10/21, with more than 15 attempts by the various parties to reverse the transactions. Each attempt at reversal would reset an “investigation”, thereby delaying any resolution for Cooper to have his account unfrozen. Consequently, Cooper could not access the necessary funds needed to continue fulfilling orders for his customers or any of the applicants. Chapman allegedly carefully coordinated the plaintiff’s approaches to Bank SA, in tandem, up to the very last day of every fortnight, in order to keep Cooper’s account perpetually frozen. This sinister plot was subsequently used by Chapman and CBS to enable CBS to commence menacing Cooper.
12) All five applicants also claimed never to have met or known of Richard Cooper or Coop Eng, despite having put the number of their respective tax Invoices within the record of the bank deposit slips, corresponding exactly to the reference numbers as shown on the tax invoices issued in their names.35
13) On 16th January, 2023, the CBS Commissioner issued Coop Eng a summons for failing to deliver bins which, with the exception of Williams*, were not paid for by any of the customers named in the summons. The summons was issued for allegedly not producing the bins on time for the five allegedly colluding customers who had each technically voided their contracts by claiming they had no contract with Coop Eng when stating they had “mistakenly” paid a deposit to the wrong accounts & despite there being no time or date stated on the contract for completion, as supply of components cannot be assured. *Williams was invoiced for half, but chose to pay 100%, as the government had an offer of a $150,000 instant tax write-off at that time, which customers would have been aware of and keen to take advantage of. They would have also got the GST credited immediately. Chapman would have received a GST refund and a tax write-off on the “extras payment” plus the money he put into the court, which he ultimately got back.
14) At the time of the CBS summons, Chapman already had possession of a bin 10 months before. However, in the summons, Chapman claims never receiving the bin or a refund. CBS Senior Investigators Katherine Brown, Robyn Heckers & Nathan Jeanes all knew this to be a lie by Chapman, but proceeded to frustrate the other contracts to cause maximum damage to Coop Eng and made no effort to mitigate Coop Eng losses or to assist Coop Eng with providing a remedy that would make completion and delivery of all bins and other orders possible by its continued collusion with Chapman et al. This is in clear contravention of CBS’s mandate & charter to keep businesses viable and legally compliant to all its customers. Instead, CBS premeditated a sequence of events which would serve to entrap Coop Eng in a Catch 22 (e.g., make Coop Eng a target; stitch up Coop Eng with a crime, falsely claim unlawful conduct, freeze accounts, publicly defame Coop Eng to cause reputational damage, prevent Coop Eng from trading & manufacturing goods for customers, damage Coop Eng ability to stay financially viable, then prosecute for the failure & incapacity to manufacture & deliver goods).
15) On 11/1/22, the State of South Australia aided & abetted the commission of crimes by Chapman when he again turned up with 14 other persons – not identified to Richard Cooper – to illegally take possession of a Chaser Bin without payment & without a proper Court Order produced to Cooper at the time.37 This act caused over $5000 damage to the property. Chapman and CBS brought to the property 5 other complainants, including Ryan & Shane Hewett, along with 7 police officers.
When asking police for names and ranks, five officers left immediately. The remaining two officers (Stephen Rodell (#108052) & Brett Siddell (#74547)) failed to arrest the Chapmans and complainants when notified of the robbery which was taking place right in front of them. If they had the orders and warrant (not produced) they could see that they were different. The warrant was not as per the order, and there were no tyres and wheels listed. Cooper only received a copy of the warrant after a lot of calls and letters on 10/3/22.
16) The first Order for possession was dated 17/12/21, therefore, Chapman’s alleged October 2021 break-in and theft were illegal. The order reads: “It is ordered that: “2. Legal title in and ownership of Chaser Bin 1200, serial number 4-525-2021, and as described in invoice 525 dated 19 June 2021 along with parts described in Proforma Invoice 100961 is now vested in the applicant.”
It is, therefore, clear that Chapman allegedly stole more than $90k worth of goods over and above items listed on the Court Order, and over and above other items stolen in October 2021; all under the watchful eye of the Sheriff & police. Nor did the Order give anyone else the lawful right to enter Cooper’s property, as claimed by the Sheriff and Police. When Cooper refused entry to persons not named on an order, and asked if Chapman was allowed to steal $35k worth of tyres belonging to a third party, the Sheriff allegedly said he could “take what he liked”.
17) CBS appointed an “expert witness” to compile a report for court, after three other more highly qualified experts declined doing so on behalf of CBS. Problems with the “expert” report include:
· The “expert” report is just over six pages, with images lifted from Coop Eng website. A professional report should have consisted of many more pages of detail, including specifics of components, diagrams & cost breakdowns.
· The report does not refer to specific Bins of the type, size & design of those ordered by the customers for custom manufacturing by Coop Eng.
· No Chassis Bins are quoted in the report & no evidence exists to show that the expert has ever manufactured a Chassis Bin.47
· The report does not give costings for the manufacture of specific products.
· No materials are listed.
· No drawings are included to be able to make the above.
· No breakdown of manufacturing procedure.
· The “expert” completed a short TAFE Course in a Diploma of Advanced Mechanical Engineering and works on his family’s farm during harvest and seeding for the last five years.
· Would not fit the criteria for a court-appointed/recognised expert to offer an opinion.
Magistrate Panagiotidis made orders in December 2023 that Chapman’s $80,000 (held in the court as security for a Possession Order for Cooper Partnership) be given back to Chapman, and shared with the alleged trustee. This effectively gave Chapman a free Chase Bin. The replacement cost of this 400 bag Chase Bin with the same specifications is $211,870 plus GST. Magisttrate Panagiotidis actions erred on several points:
(a) Giving back Chapman $52,000 and an alleged trustee in bankruptcy $28,000 for a Chase Bin manufactured by the (new) Cooper Engineering Partnership of which he, Greg Dudley, was never a party to these proceedings. However, Mag. Panagiotidis had ex parte discussions and admitted him as an interested party. She erred as this Chase Bin was manufactured by the Cooper Engineering Partnership (a different partnership, i.e. different partners) well after the alleged bankruptcy and it is quarantined money of the (new) partnership. Even in the case of the bankruptcy being legitimate (there was no personal service and the account had been paid), the Trustee has no place or claim on this partnership.
(b) Australian Financial Securities Authority (AFSA) web site clearly states that if a one party in a partnership is in trouble, the property is automatically distributed to the other partners.
(c) The property of a Partnership does NOT vest in a Trustee in Bankruptcy. S5C Bankruptcy Act 1966 and the Partnership Act 1891 (South Australia) s20 (2) makes this absolutely clear. The Partnership property in the land, does not vest in the Trustee in Bankruptcy and nor does any income derived from its use.
South Australia Partnership Act 1891 – s20 — Partnership property of firms other than incorporated limited partnerships:
1) All property and rights and interests in property originally brought into the partnership stock, or acquired, whether by purchase or otherwise, on account of the firm, or for the purposes and in the course of the partnership business, are called in this Act partnership property, & must be held & applied by the partners exclusively for the purposes of the partnership & in accordance with the Partnership agreement.
Coop Eng supporters say it appears that the Rule of law means nothing in the Magistrates court, or worse, it is a two-tiered legal system. Cooper sent Show Cause demands to the complainants on the 24th January, 2024, to flush out the snakes into the Magistrates Court and it worked.
“CBS is the rat since these investigators instructed the customers to make applications to their banks falsely claiming to have mistakenly paid to the wrong account (as if “in error”) to frustrate the manufacturing and fulfillment of the contracts. They were all directed to the banks by the CBS. The CBS then sent the Show Causes to the Crown Solicitor. Now the Crown is aware of the crimes committed by CBS & the co-opted complainants in the conspiracy to defraud Coop Eng.
“Now, the Crown needs to act! To do nothing, the Crown becomes complicit in the crimes against Cooper Engineering.”
