Edmonds Judd

Latest news

When your livestock are grazing away from your property, your legal obligations as their owner under the Animal Welfare Act don’t go on holiday. It’s your duty to ensure their care meets the required standards, and that means staying actively involved in their well-being.

Here’s why regular checks and oversight are non-negotiable:

  1. Weighing and Monitoring
    Insist that the grazier regularly weighs your animals and provides detailed reports. But don’t just rely on the numbers—attend these weighing sessions periodically to verify the accuracy of the data and get a firsthand look at your animals’ condition.
  2. Feed and Water
    Livestock require enough feed to maintain good health and condition. Check that they have consistent access to high-quality, clean water to prevent dehydration and support overall well-being.
  3. Safe Surroundings
    Ensure the grazing environment is safe, free from hazards, and appropriate for the type of stock being grazed. Unsafe conditions can lead to injuries, poor health, and stress for your animals.
  4. Signs of Illness or Injury
    Early detection is key to preventing long-term issues. Look for signs of lameness or other health concerns. Timely treatment can make the difference between a full recovery and chronic problems like susceptibility to bone damage or ongoing mobility issues.
  5. Correct Handling
    Observe how your animals are being handled. Poor handling practices can lead to stress, injuries, or behavioural issues. It’s your responsibility to ensure they’re treated with care and respect.
  6. Accountability
    Don’t take a “set and forget” approach to sending livestock out for grazing. Visit them regularly to ensure the care described by the grazier matches the reality. This keeps the grazier accountable and ensures you’re meeting your obligations as an owner.
  7. Development of Young Stock
    For young stock, this period is critical to their growth and development. Regular monitoring ensures they’re meeting weight targets, growing at a healthy pace, and building the foundation for a productive future.

Ultimately, livestock owners must remain hands-on, even when animals are in someone else’s care. Regular checks safeguard their well-being and ensure you’re compliant with the Animal Welfare Act. After all, your animals rely on you to advocate for their welfare, wherever they are.


If you’re buying a beach house with friends or family, things can go brilliantly well. But sometimes things can go very badly! Protect yourself and those close relationships by taking these points into consideration:

 

  1. Think carefully about the ownership structure. Are you all going to own the property in your personal names? Is anyone in business and needing to protect their assets – their share of the property could be vulnerable to a claim from creditors, so you might want to consider using a trust? What if the worst happens and one of your co-owners dies – how will you feel about their children inheriting their share of the house? Is it going to be held in a partnership?
  2. Enter a property sharing agreement. If things don’t go according to plan, it is useful to have a contract that clearly sets out what is to happen if you don’t want to co-own that house anymore. This might be because you are no longer getting along, or you need to get your money back out of the house, or you’ve broken up with your significant other and need to sort out relationship property issues, or any number of other reasons. The property sharing agreement should also include when/how the co-owners can use the property, whether their friends or family can use the property, and how the expenses relating to the property are to be shared and paid.
  3. Get tax advice. Get along to your accountant, there could be some unexpected tax complications.

 

 

We’re open again from 6th January to help you with your property purchases and conveyancing needs. We can also help you with ownership structures, negotiating property sharing agreements, succession planning, and any disputes that might arise.

 

Wishing you all the best for the Summer holidays.

Joanne Dickson


If you think you might succumb to temptation and buy a holiday house at your favourite beach this holiday season, here’s some points to consider when entering a sale and purchase agreement.

 

Your best option is to talk to a lawyer before you enter a contract to buy that beach bach. But, they might be on holiday too. So, if you can’t get to your lawyer, make sure your sale and purchase agreement has some conditions in there to offer you a level of protection. There are the usual LIM, building inspection, and finance conditions. But, you might want to also consider having these conditions too:

 

  1. Due diligence condition: this condition allows you to do some investigations before the contract becomes unconditional. If the property doesn’t stack up, you can cancel the contract, usually without providing a reason. This clause can potentially save you thousands of dollars!
  2. Subject to solicitor’s approval condition: this condition can be sued to cancel the contract on the grounds of conveyancing aspects of the purchase. So, not as broad a protection as the due diligence clause, but still a “good to have”.
  3. Insurance condition: given the changing nature of insurance in New Zealand and the impact that natural disasters can have, it is worth adding a condition that provides you are able to obtain insurance for the property.

 

Don’t get caught up in the hype. There’s always “someone else” interested in the same property. Take your time and make sure it is the right purchase for you.

 

Finally, make sure you get some accounting advice, there could be some unexpected tax complications.

 

We’re open again from 6th January to help you with your property purchases and conveyancing needs. We can also help you with ownership structures, negotiating property sharing agreements, succession planning, and any disputes that might arise

 

Wishing you all the best for the Summer holidays.

Joanne Dickson


Postscript

Feedback about NZ Post’s service obligations

No doubt you have heard that the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) is seeking feedback from the public on how changes to NZ Post’s minimum service obligations could impact New Zealanders who still need to be able to send and receive mail. NZ Post’s obligations are set out in a Deed of Understanding, last updated in 2013.

 

With mail volumes continuing to decline significantly (one billion mail items were sent in 2014 and around 220 million sent in 2023-24), NZ Post estimates volumes will continue to decrease to about 120 million items by 2028. It is seeking a more financially sustainable mail service model.

 

Proposed changes include reducing minimum delivery frequency, reducing the minimum number of postal outlets and proposing mail items are delivered to clusters rather than individual mail boxes.

 

If you want to give feedback, submissions are open until 5pm on Tuesday, 10 December. To make a submission, go to www.mbie.govt.nz and click on ‘Have your say.’

 

Beware of scammers in the coming Christmas season

With the hustle and bustle of Christmas coming up and the demands of the end of year activities, it is easy to let our vigilance slip in terms of scams – whether they be through emails, phone calls or text messages.

 

In Fineprint’s Winter 2024 edition (page 5) we offered some tips to help protect yourself and your money this holiday season.

 

 

 

Merry Christmas and a happy New Year

 

As this edition of Fineprint is the final issue for 2024, we wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a happy, safe and healthy 2025.

 

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Fineprint is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Fineprint may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Eligible investor exemption

In light of the Du Val insolvency

The recent interim receivership and subsequent statutory management of the Du Val Group has brought the use of, and reliance on, ‘eligible investor’ certifications under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA) back into the public spotlight. In this article we discuss this exemption and provide insights to market participants on best practice.

 

The FMCA

The FMCA is the legislative mechanism for the regulation of New Zealand’s financial markets. It prescribes a comprehensive disclosure regime in relation to offers of financial products. Financial products include, but are not limited to, debt and equity securities, and managed investment products.

 

Wholesale investors

An investor may be classified as a retail investor or a wholesale investor. While there is an extensive list within the wholesale investor exemptions, relevant examples include:

  • Participants who invest a minimum of $750,000 into a single investment
  • Those who are considered ‘large’, as in they hold net assets or have consolidated turnover of at least $5 million
  • Government agencies, and
  • Investors who meet certain investment activity criteria, for example, they own a financial products portfolio of at least $1 million in value.

 

Wholesale investors have access to a broader range of investment opportunities than those available to the general public. Public offers are subject to significant disclosure requirements, statutory oversight and compliance costs. To counter this, fewer consumer protections exist for wholesale investors.

 

The ‘eligible investor’ exemption

Under the umbrella of wholesale investors is the ‘eligible investor’ subset; this allows experienced investors who possess the skill and judgement necessary to assess the merits of a transaction, without full statutory disclosure, to be deemed a wholesale investor.

 

This rationale is reflected in the criteria used to determine who qualifies as an eligible investor. An investor may be eligible where their prior experience allows them to assess a transaction’s merits, their own information needs and the adequacy of any information provided.

 

If an investor has the expertise to assess the criteria, they may self-certify that they are an eligible investor. As part of this process, an appropriately qualified financial adviser, accountant or lawyer must confirm the investor has been adequately advised of the consequences of certification. The relevant professional must confirm they have no cause to doubt the certification.

 

The Du Val Group situation

In October 2022, the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) warned two entities within the Du Val Group that certain investor certificates it was relying upon were incomplete. The FMA cautioned that, within the certificates, the relevant grounds investors were giving ‘did not refer to any previous experience in acquiring or disposing of financial products and so are not capable of supporting the certification and should be disregarded.’

 

In addition to those 2022 findings, recent media reports have suggested that the Du Val Group continued to market their financial products to retail investors and encouraged them to use the eligible investor category. The report suggested they were not sufficiently experienced or high-net worth individuals for whom the exemption is intended. At the time of writing, it appears these investors are unlikely to receive their investments back in full.

 

Who should exercise caution?

The Du Val insolvency process is a reminder of the risks involved with financial markets and financial products. Market participants should be fully aware of the risks associated with using the eligible investor exemption:

  • Investors must understand fewer regulatory protections are afforded to them within this class. It is, therefore, particularly important that eligible investors are appropriately experienced to allow them to properly assess investment opportunities and associated risks
  • Financial advisers, accountants and lawyers must exercise caution when giving certifications, particularly for investors with whom they have had no previous dealings. The assessment as to whether an investor is sufficiently equipped to transact without the default protections of the FMCA is not an exercise that should be taken lightly, and
  • Issuers and offerors relying on eligible investors to raise capital must be careful to correctly classify investors. Encouraging inexperienced investors to proceed as eligible investors does not support an informed or balanced decision and may result in significant penalties.

 

For more advice on eligible investor status, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Fineprint is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Fineprint may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Budget 2024

What was in it for the rural sector?

On 30 May 2024, the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, presented her first Budget. The government is focussed on rebuilding the economy, easing the cost of living, delivering better health and education services, and restoring law and order.

Of course, within all those subsections, there is an underlying reliance on agriculture, the highest contributing sector to our economy. So, what did the Budget provide for the rural sector, and is there anything that farmers can look forward to over the next three years?

 

Drilling down to detail

After the Budget was presented, the Minister of Agriculture, Todd McClay said, “[It] places our trust back in farmers and growers by cutting public spending and reducing red tape, while also driving the efficiencies required to increase value and place the sector’s success at the forefront of New Zealand’s economic recovery.”

 

Practically speaking, the government intends to do that by:

  • Doubling exports by delivering strong frontline services, cutting red tape and reducing regulatory costs
  • Minimising the administrative burden on farmers caused by duplication, red tape and regulatory blocks on things such as irrigation, water storage, flood protection schemes and stock exclusion rules
  • Replacing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (Three Waters) and delivering better resource management legislation for the primary sector
  • Taking an independent review of agricultural biogenic methane science by providing clear advice on New Zealand’s domestic 2050 methane targets
  • Committing $27 million for the removal of woody debris in Tairawhiti that will restore and help prevent further damage to vital infrastructure in local communities in the region
  • Committing $36 million over four years to catchment groups that back farmers’ efforts to improve land management practices, and
  • Driving innovation that will ensure farmers and growers remain global leaders in challenges, including reducing on-farm emissions.

 

The government considers its Budget will back the sector’s continued growth by providing support and professional resources to the frontline, and boosting research and innovation.

 

Should we be optimistic?

No one would expect the rural community to feel particularly inspired by this Budget and its overuse of words ‘innovation’ and ‘growth’ that do not necessarily translate to practical implementation.

The Budget is clearly focusing more on the bigger election promises such as infrastructure, education, and law and order. Although the Budget was more or less neutral on agriculture, the sector will nonetheless be pleased to see a focus on legislative repeal that was going to create a suffocating amount of red tape and make farming financially unviable (for some) in the near future.

It was a tight Budget that intends to put New Zealand’s books back into the black. The deficit is forecast to continue through to 2025 with a surplus expected to be reached in 2027–28. The government will continue to rely on revenue from the rural sector, but it seems unlikely that those at the farm gate will notice any positive economic changes for several years.

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.


Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2021.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Live animal exports

Government intends to lift the ban

In April 2023, following intense pressure from animal welfare organisations, the Labour government banned live animal exports. The basis of the ban was centred on an independent review that New Zealand’s international reputation was being damaged by its live animal export programme because of animal welfare standards being breached.

The government’s plan

With the ongoing pressure from SAFE (Save Animals From Exploitation) and other animal welfare organisations, the government is proceeding with caution. It intends to introduce amendments to the Animal Welfare Act 1999 that will impose strict regulations and ensure a ‘gold standard’ of care. This includes fit-for-purpose live export ships and certification regimes for the livestock and their destination country. The government believes these regulations will protect animal welfare and safety.

The government has not indicated the timing for these proposed legislative changes.

 

The good . . .

The answer is obvious – revenue. In 2022, before the ban on live animal exports, revenue of $524 million was generated for the farming sector. Reports say the ban resulted in a loss of between $50,000– $116,000/year per farm[1] that, in the current economic climate, is significant to those who have lost this source of revenue. The return of live animal exports may bring some financial relief to farmers. With the level of red tape involved, the actual benefit of live animal exports is unclear.

 

The bad . . .

No animal, except of course those of the aquatic variety, is designed to sustain long journeys by sea. Exporting live animals to China, for example, can take anywhere between 15–40 days and, during that time, the animals have endured rough seas, long periods of standing in their own excrement, heat stress and injuries. The conditions during the journey are aggravated further because once the ship docks, there are no assurances of continuing animal welfare and safety on land. Many importing countries lack the minimum welfare standards that New Zealand enforces.

And the ugly

While petitions have been submitted and lobbyists are in full force in New Zealand, elsewhere in the world live animal exporting continues to be practised. Earlier this year, 2,000 cattle and 14,000 sheep spent two weeks enroute from Perth to the Middle East, only to be turned around and returned to port at Fremantle where they remained on the ship for almost six weeks while the exporter attempted to obtain a new export permit. The Australian government is now under immense pressure to follow through with its own election promise to ban live animal exports.

Will our government follow through on lifting the ban?

That remains unknown. Each side of the argument will continue to pressure the government to make what that side believes is the right decision.

There remains a strong belief that live animal export represents such a small share of agricultural revenue (0.2%)[2] since 2015 that the damage to New Zealand’s ‘clean’ reputation is far worse than the benefit of the export receipts.

What farmers can certainly expect is that if the live animal export ban is overturned, there will be stricter regulation and more red tape, and the costs associated with those increased regulations may be onerous. Farmers can expect an update to this process this year.

[1] Livestock Export New Zealand.

[2] Ibid.

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Suspended while government overhauls RMA

Associate Minister for the Environment, Andrew Hoggard, announced on 14 March 2024 that the government will suspend the Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) requirements while it overhauls the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). It comes as a timely announcement after the Greater Wellington Regional Council’s (GWRC) unsuccessful prosecutions[1] of two rural landowners due to the council having wrongly identified wetlands on private farmland.

So what are SNAs, how do they currently affect our rural landowners and how will they be addressed in the future?

Defining an SNA

SNAs are areas containing ‘significant indigenous vegetation’ and ‘significant habitats of indigenous fauna’ that must be protected to ensure ongoing biodiversity. The basis for defining and identifying SNAs is in section 6 of the RMA:

‘6 Matters of national importance

In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall recognise and provide [our emphasis] for the following matters of national importance:

. . .

(c) the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna: . . . ’

 

While the RMA is nearly 33 years old, it was only in August 2023, when the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity came into force, that a mandatory standardised approach and criteria were introduced to protect SNAs under s6. In practical terms, the Policy Statement required regional councils to identify and map SNAs within their territory (including on private land) and include them in their district plans by August 2028.

 

Implications for rural landowners

Once an SNA has been identified, it means that the area is noted on the council’s records. The use to which that land can then be put is more controlled. That doesn’t necessarily mean that existing uses of that land will be stopped – although it could. It does mean, however, that generally speaking existing activities are unlikely to be able to be intensified and new activities are likely to be subject to tighter controls – if permitted at all.

There is no direct government compensation for a landowner who has an SNA identified on their land. The SNA identification process has been somewhat controversial. This is partly because the RMA does not define ‘significant’ and, as a result, it has been left to each council to interpret this, largely using case law and ecological guidance.

Regional councils’ interpretation and identification of areas to protect under the RMA has recently been highlighted by the GWRC’s two unsuccessful prosecutions of rural landowners, one of which has been labeled by the Court of Appeal as a ‘miscarriage of justice.’

In both cases, the GWRC was found to have incorrectly identified wetlands on private farmland. Although the GWRC’s prosecutions were unsuccessful in both cases, they illustrate how severe the penalties can be under the RMA. In one case, Mrs Crosbie was fined $118,742 as the owner of the property, and Mr Page was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment (which he had already served prior to the Court of Appeal hearing).

The future of SNAs

The message from this government has been very clear – stop mapping and imposing SNAs for three years while it reviews the RMA. Mr Hoggard has said that quickly suspending the SNA requirements was to ensure councils did not waste resources and efforts on requirements that were likely to change. He has also asked officials to review existing SNAs.

The suspension, however, will not change the need for councils to protect areas of national importance under s6 of the RMA. Arguably, regional councils could still identify areas on private land to protect, and they may impose restrictions on private landowners on the use of such land. Nevertheless, with the clear message from the government to not waste resources in this area, it is unlikely that we will see regional councils identifying new areas to protect until the government provides further guidance to those councils or new resource management laws are passed.

[1] Page v Greater Wellington Regional Council [2024] NZCA 51 and Greater Wellington Regional Council v Adams [2022] NZEnvc 025.

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Postscript

Holidays Act 2003 to be overhauled

 

Both employers and employees will be relieved that the government is prioritising overhauling this legislation.

“Change has been a long time coming, and I know there are many who are frustrated with the Holidays Act. We need an Act that businesses can implement, and that makes it easy for workers to understand their entitlements,” said the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, Brooke van Velden.

 

The government will develop an exposure draft of the new legislation for consultation. It has indicated that the previous government’s decision to double sick leave entitlements for all eligible workers has caused difficulties to some businesses and increased the disparity between part-time and full-time workers. As well, employers have long struggled with apportioning annual leave; an accrual system is mooted, rather than the current entitlements system.

 

It is expected that the exposure draft of the Holidays Bill will be released for targeted consultation in September. “I believe it is important to hear from small businesses in particular, given small businesses will adopt a range of working arrangements and often do not have the same payroll infrastructure as larger organisations,” the Minister added.

 

Although registration for targeted consultation closed on 8 July, we will keep you up-to-date with how this new legislation progresses.

 

Roadside drug testing to be rolled out

 

In May, the Minister of Transport, Simeon Brown, indicated the government will introduce legislation that will enable roadside drug testing to improve road safety.

 

“Alcohol and drugs are the number one contributing factor in fatal road crashes in New Zealand. In 2022, alcohol and drugs contributed to 200 fatal crashes on our roads. Despite this, only 26% of drivers think they are likely to be caught drug driving,” said the Minister.

The legislation is likely to be introduced mid-2024 and passed towards the end of the year.

 

 

 

Visual artists will receive royalties when work on-sold

Long-awaited legislation that comes into force on 1 December 2024 will allow New Zealand’s visual artists to receive royalties when their work is sold on the secondary market.

 

Passed in August last year, the Resale Right for Visual Artists Act 2023 will enable the collection of a 5% royalty each time an eligible artist’s work is sold on the secondary art market. The scheme is for artworks that sell for $1,000 or more. The collection agency, Copyright Licensing New Zealand, will deduct a percentage of the royalty as an administrative fee.

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Fineprint is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Fineprint may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650


Avoiding scams

Tips to protect yourself

Every year thousands of people fall victim to scams through emails, phone calls and text messages. Scams are fraudulent schemes designed to deceive you and steal your money or personal information.

 

The danger of scams lies in their ability to look and sound genuine – at least until it’s too late. Scammers are becoming more cunning, often using technology and psychological manipulation to trick you. Fortunately, there are a few easy steps that can help you.

 

 

Phone scams

Scammers often try calling and pretending to be from your bank. They usually create a sense of urgency, claiming there are issues with your bank account such as unusual account activity or overdue fees; scammers will make you think that the matter needs immediate attention.

 

To spot a phone scam, be wary of unexpected calls that ask for personal information such as your account details or your passwords. Most organisations do not request sensitive information over the phone. An easy way to verify if the call is genuine is to hang up and call back using the official number.

 

 

Text message scams

Text scams are when you receive messages designed to trick you into providing personal information or clicking on malicious links. These messages might say they’re from your bank, a courier company or even your insurer. They often contain urgent requests to verify your account, claim a prize or resolve a problem.

 

To protect yourself from text scams, never click links or respond to messages from unknown numbers. If you receive a message claiming to be from an organisation, call them directly and check.

 

 

Email scams

Email scams, or ‘phishing’ emails, are a common way scammers try to steal personal information. These emails, similar to texts, appear to be from your bank, a courier or even a shop. Like many scams, they are often ‘urgent’ and ask you to update your account information, reset your password or review suspicious activity.

 

Don’t click on links or download attachments from unknown or suspicious emails, especially if you’ve never heard from them before. Organisations will never ask (or should not ask) for sensitive information by email.

 

 

Key points

We are exposed to scams more and more in today’s world. To keep yourself safe:

  • Be suspicious – who is contacting you and why?
  • Don’t trust any unexpected contact
  • Resist the urge to act immediately, despite what the message says
  • Never open attachments or links if you’re not sure where they’ve come from, and
  • Trust your instinct! If something doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t.

 

Staying vigilant and informed is crucial in protecting yourself from scams.

If you think you’ve received a text or email that you think is a scam, you can report it to the Department of Internal Affairs, following the instructions on its website (www.dia.govt.nz).

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Fineprint is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Fineprint may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650