To: Martin Elton, Director, Loadtek Instruments Ltd
From: Antony Dean
Date: 16-11-99
Re: Far too little, far too late. (3 pages)

Thank you for finally replying to me, however (as I said in my response last night) what you sent me is total rubbish - every bit of it. As I also said, there are so many factual errors in what you have said that any reply will be too lengthy for an email. Accordingly I will now deal with your entire email paragraph by paragraph (and in a form suitable for eventual publication).


> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:44:37 +1300
> From: Martin Elton <>
> To:
> Subject: LT1

I note your email is dated 13-11-99. For the avoidance of doubt, it arrived on the evening of 15-11-99. I intend to have this traced by both our ISPs in case it is another of your ill-conceived schemes. Sorry, I just can't trust you.


> This is a realistic and constructive way to move forward, if you are
> prepared to listen.

Sorry, but what a crock. I can not see how what you have "offered" can be either realistic or constructive, given that it is totally false. Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate your reply, but you have to be realistic.


> First the facts we all know. Loadtek ceased trading back on the 20th
> June 1999, as agreed by both directors at a meeting of the same date.
> Loadtek has not traded since this date. If you remember, neither of us
> were prepared to put in any more time or money into a Company which was
> going nowhere. Once the stock and plant are gone, I believe that Loadtek
> has very little worth. I can't see anyone paying much for it.

All wrong. Please don't insult me by lying:


> The stock that Loadtek had at that time has been divided up, remember
> that you sent a copy of the agreed split to the accountant.



> I have chased up and secured payment, on behalf of Loadtek, for the load
> shipped to XXX back in Feb this year. Otherwise this payment would still
> be due. I have also arranged for the GST payment and the end of year
> return and put a hold on the Visa payment set up which is saving Loadtek
> $10 per month.

[name of customer XXX withheld as this will be going public - AD]

No, no no. Your intention is so transparent - you are trying to make a lame attempt to prove that you have been the model company director (which is clearly untrue). When you string so much crap together in one paragraph I am tempted to dismiss the lot as "totally false" etc. But to demonstrate what I mean, I will make an example of this paragraph and tear what you have said to complete shreds:


> If you really want to resolve what's left, I propose that I make an
> appointment so that we can go to the accountants and finalise payment
> for the stock both by you and myself. Remember that you haven't actually
> paid for any of the stock that you took home.

I would like to resolve the situation. However you must be aware of the following:


in conclusion

You're not going to back out of it that easy. You have done a seriously evil thing, which has torn my business to shreds. Remember I have little to lose. I have learned that you will renege on any agreement, and what you have said in your email confirms to me that you are still trying to manoeuvre around the facts. You can't change what you've done now - it was stupid, yes, but I did warn you. For what you have done, I am going to hang you out to dry - in front of the whole world - using nothing but the true facts as you are wrong and I welcome the chance to prove that. As I said, you are no longer the issue - the truth is.

If you wish to temper my disgust, you had better come up with a full and total apology for what you have done, and agree to sit down and sort out Loadtek and the associated intellectual property PROPERLY, in other words go back to and start over with the cross-licensing agreement. You actually agreed to it, you just didn't sign it - do you see me trying to hold you to that? Come on!

I personally doubt this will happen. What is more likely is that we can attempt to sort out the (relatively minor) issue of Loadtek's assets, so we can finally be apart. This is a priority for me. The issue of intellectual property would then forever be a sore point as you clearly intend to use it without regard to ownership or payment, and any use of it (past, present and future) is unauthorised and I can sue you whenever this becomes attractive. There is certainly no way you can ever sell your company without paying for it, as it is based on stolen property. This actually puts me in a very good position but I'd still prefer to tidy it up properly.

Antony Dean.

a=?a=?a=?AP(@Lg@Lg@(z#{#|#}#b=?b=?P A@@YC>?=9d    }D?*>?3d#c߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50008d߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50012e߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50019f߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50027g߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50032h߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50033i߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50034j߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50037k߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50039l߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50042m߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50043n߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50045o߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50046p߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50047q߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50049r߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50050s߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50053t߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50054u߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50056v߬x4@*>?*>?d/home/misc/crock/data/doc/50058w߬x