Klub Kruise’s landlord hits back at Ray Mackereth’s “lies” as years of wages underpayments emerge
Self-proclaimed man of the community Ray Mackereth’s integrity has been further brought into question in his formal response to Federal Circuit Court proceedings, where he blamed his landlord for Klub Kruise’s failure, with the landlord hitting back in an Affidavit of Josef Senisin’s 2012 lease dealings with Ray Mackereth.
After reading Mr Mackereth’s required Response to the Federal Circuit Court Ray Mackereth responds to Larcombe Lawsuit blaming Landlord, Josef Senisin added yesterday that Mr Mackereth implicating him in his business failings was “lies” and he added that he and his business partner were financially harmed when Klub Kruise allegedly unlawfully damaged his building and breached the lease, resulting in a criminal complaint to Queensland Police.
The revelations have arisen as part of a Federal Circuit Court action that accuses Mr Mackereth of being an accessory to serious offences of “core provisions” of the Fair Work Act, which threatens to engulf his separate publishing business Q News, with documents made under oath claim he breached his director’s duties and misappropriated employee entitlements and even that he may be involved in tax evasion.
Senisin claims under oath, and if false he risks a lengthy prison term, that three times Mr Mackereth was offered an agreement to lease, and that despite him and his business partner agreeing to concessions requested by Mr Mackereth, and Mr Mackereth agreeing to two deals verbally, he never signed the required documents.
Emails attached to Senisin’s affidavit appear to support his version of events, including Mr Mackereth crying poor and seeking a market-review increase in rent to be waived, to have the effect that the new lease term would be less than the current rent Klub Kruise was paying by nearly 15 per cent.
It is unclear how Mr Mackereth can blame his landlord for his failure to find alternate premises, while his cash strapped company owed $189,000, that was immediately due and payable if not under a special payment arrangement with the creditors. This is especially so as his Klub Kruise’s second largest creditor was Mr Larcombe, who expected his money, in full, which was over $41,000 according to the company’s accounting records.
In any event, Mr Mackereth’s response to the Federal Circuit Court is in-keeping with a post in the publication he owns 100 per cent of, Q News, by an anonymous author, on 24 August 2012.
The story included the following:
“Brisbane lost a venue last week after the quick closure of Klub Kruise. Sadly, after 10 years serving Brisbane’s gay and bi men, as well as many other visitors and travellers, the club was forced to close its doors after the landlords refused to renew the lease.”
“No reason was offered by the landlord as to why they would not renew the lease to those renting after 10 years, having never missed a payment.”
The “quick closure” of Klub Kruise is also quizzical given it had traded one month past its lease, which Mr Senisin claims in his statement was a gesture of goodwill by him and his partner to raise additional funds for unpaid employee entitlements and superannuation. Senisin also complains that despite him going out of his way, the employees got nothing because of how Mr Mackereth acted.
Mr Senisin referred to the Q News story and the reply to the court more bluntly, simply saying “bullshit”.
Meanwhile Mr Mackereth originally sought to liquidate the company on 22 June 2012 but later changed his mind, according to ASIC documents filed with the court.
An exhibit to Mr Senisin’s affidavit also suggest that Mr Mackereth may not have been ensuring Klub Kruise complied with the correct modern award, likely to be the Amusement, Events and Recreation Award 2010 based on transitional requirements during the award modernisation process.
Mr Senisin attaches an email to his statement where he swears under an oath it is true, that shows Mr Mackereth attempting to get a rent reduction on a new lease. Mr Mackereth lamented paying his casual employees “$23.00 per hour and more to come”, when in fact the Sunday rate was closer to $35.00, meaning he may face further action from all former staff who have six years to claim against him personally, just as Mr Larcombe is.
It is also claimed by Mr Larcombe that employees worked in shifts longer than five hours without a break, which under the award entitled them to time and a half which was never paid by Klub Kruise, and that Mr Mackereth admits in Federal Circuit Court documents that he was solely responsible for the corporate behaviour of Klub Kruise.
Have you worked at Klub Kruise between September 2008 until it closed? You may be entitled to claim against Ray Mackereth personally even though the company has closed. With fines, you could come out with more than you were originally owed. Fill in the form and we will connect you with the help you need.
Coming up Next: Toys. Prams. Floor. An insight into how employees coped with the Ray Mackereth tantrums.