Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

WDC - Westfield Group

Jump to new
We thought you may be interested in this litigation against Westfield:

Grieving woman with PTSD requests unpaid leave, instead put in psych lock-down by employer Westfield Holdings

LOS ANGELES-Kay Morris-Robertson, a British national and former executive with Westfield Holdings, began to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after her husband died suddenly of a heart attack right in front of her, as they were sailing off the coast of Southern California. She was in an executive position in Los Angeles at Westfield Holdings, part of the Westfield Group (ASX:WDC), known as the $62 billion operator of 119 shopping centers in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. As a result of her experience, she asked her supervisor for unpaid leave. He gave her more work instead.

When Morris Robertson wrote a despairing email about her feelings, her supervisor called the police and provided them with false information that led to her being taken away in handcuffs and held against her will in a psychological detention unit.

That's just part of the shocking story outlined in a lawsuit filed on Morris-Robertson's behalf by The Gillam Law Firm.

Among other allegations, the complaint charges that despite notifying her Westfield supervisor that she had been diagnosed with PTSD in November 2008, Morris-Robertson was never informed of her rights under the Family Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act. When she asked for unpaid leave to attend therapy sessions in order to cope with her disability, she was threatened with termination by her Westfield supervisor. Her first visit to a PTSD therapist which she had located on her own was prevented when Westfield supervisors interceded and had her detained by police, even though she was not on their premises and had taken the day off to seek medical treatment. She was placed in a psychological detention unit against her will and held for several days with no opportunity to notify her family of her whereabouts, exacerbating her PTSD condition.

Morris-Robertson's complaint lists a litany of alleged charges against her Westfield employers, including Failure to Accommodate Disability; Failure to Engage in Interactive Process; Disability Discrimination; Violation of California Family Rights Act; Retaliation in Violation of California Family Rights Act; Wrongful Constructive Termination in Violation of Public Policy; Harassment; Negligence; False Imprisonment; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Invasion of Privacy; Internationally Giving False Information; and Gender Discrimination.

If you do a Google search you will find more information on this complaint.
 
Has anyone compared WSF to WDC as their historical charts are vastly different, any explanations would be greatly appreciated.
 
OK2 said:
Has anyone compared WSF to WDC as their historical charts are vastly different, any explanations would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Not strictly comparable as WSF was only the property development part of the business.

All other things being equal I would suspect that WSF would show a higher volatility and a greater average capital growth than WDC as the latter includes the malls from the merger of WSF with WFT and WFA.
 
GillamLaw said:
We thought you may be interested in this litigation against Westfield:

Grieving woman with PTSD requests unpaid leave, instead put in psych lock-down by employer Westfield Holdings

LOS ANGELES-Kay Morris-Robertson, a British national and former executive with Westfield Holdings, began to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after her husband died suddenly of a heart attack right in front of her, as they were sailing off the coast of Southern California. She was in an executive position in Los Angeles at Westfield Holdings, part of the Westfield Group (ASX:WDC), known as the $62 billion operator of 119 shopping centers in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. As a result of her experience, she asked her supervisor for unpaid leave. He gave her more work instead.

When Morris Robertson wrote a despairing email about her feelings, her supervisor called the police and provided them with false information that led to her being taken away in handcuffs and held against her will in a psychological detention unit.

That's just part of the shocking story outlined in a lawsuit filed on Morris-Robertson's behalf by The Gillam Law Firm.

Among other allegations, the complaint charges that despite notifying her Westfield supervisor that she had been diagnosed with PTSD in November 2008, Morris-Robertson was never informed of her rights under the Family Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act. When she asked for unpaid leave to attend therapy sessions in order to cope with her disability, she was threatened with termination by her Westfield supervisor. Her first visit to a PTSD therapist which she had located on her own was prevented when Westfield supervisors interceded and had her detained by police, even though she was not on their premises and had taken the day off to seek medical treatment. She was placed in a psychological detention unit against her will and held for several days with no opportunity to notify her family of her whereabouts, exacerbating her PTSD condition.

Morris-Robertson's complaint lists a litany of alleged charges against her Westfield employers, including Failure to Accommodate Disability; Failure to Engage in Interactive Process; Disability Discrimination; Violation of California Family Rights Act; Retaliation in Violation of California Family Rights Act; Wrongful Constructive Termination in Violation of Public Policy; Harassment; Negligence; False Imprisonment; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Invasion of Privacy; Internationally Giving False Information; and Gender Discrimination.

If you do a Google search you will find more information on this complaint.
Click to expand...

I personally think this post is pathetic. You represent yourself an employee or pinciple of the law firm in the US, Gillam Law Firm. You are posting information in respect of a matter that you would have us believe is presently before the courts in a subjective rather than objective manner, trying to discredit the Corporation WDC, while the matter is still subjudice.

You are trying to discredit the corporation when it has not been established before the court whether in fact any of your allegations have substance. It is yet to be proven that the corporation was even aware of the allegations of your client let alone condoned the actions of the alleged supervisor and has a case to answer.

Personally I think you should pull your head in and wait until there is an outcome of the alleged court case.
 
I respect your perspective, but invite Aussie Stock Forum members to visit our blog and judge for themselves. We were very transparent about who we are, but the case against Westfield IS a matter of public record and wasn't previously reported here. It would seem that discussion of any public company should include the bad with the good.
 
GillamLaw said:
I respect your perspective, but invite Aussie Stock Forum members to visit our blog and judge for themselves. We were very transparent about who we are, but the case against Westfield IS a matter of public record and wasn't previously reported here. It would seem that discussion of any public company should include the bad with the good.
Click to expand...

It is not the role of forum members to pass judgement on WDC in respect of a matter you allege is before the courts. It is the role of the court.

In the event the matter is before the courts and a ruling is handed down against wdc, then it would be appropriate that the matter be raised in a forum for public awareness.

In my opinion your posting of this information on the web is little more than a scurrilous attempt to discredit wdc ahead of any alleged hearing and in my opinion borders on blackmail.
 
It's also a case that makes me think the verdict should be to harden the phark up.

I am sure opportunistic litigations like this happen all the time in the states.
 
If this actually affected the company in any way wouldn't there be a company announcement on the issue. Unless i've missed it I haven't seen one which would mean this is unlikely to effect the company materially.

Which would suggest (as someone else has said) your simply trying to discredit the company rather then offer public insight that is likely to effect our investment view of westfield. If you did want to make us aware of this you would have been better served not posting under the GillamLaw name as it just looks like your posting bias information to tug at our heart strings.
 
kermit345 said:
If this actually affected the company in any way wouldn't there be a company announcement on the issue. Unless i've missed it I haven't seen one which would mean this is unlikely to effect the company materially.

Which would suggest (as someone else has said) your simply trying to discredit the company rather then offer public insight that is likely to effect our investment view of westfield. If you did want to make us aware of this you would have been better served not posting under the GillamLaw name as it just looks like your posting bias information to tug at our heart strings.
Click to expand...

Which, in my opinion, by extension, could reasonably be interpreted as meaning the party raising this as yet unsubstantiated allegation is a tugger, tosser, wanker, however you call it. :)
 
GillamLaw said:
We thought you may be interested in this litigation against Westfield:

Grieving woman with PTSD requests unpaid leave, instead put in psych lock-down by employer Westfield Holdings

LOS ANGELES-Kay Morris-Robertson, a British national and former executive with Westfield Holdings, began to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after her husband died suddenly of a heart attack right in front of her, as they were sailing off the coast of Southern California. She was in an executive position in Los Angeles at Westfield Holdings, part of the Westfield Group (ASX:WDC), known as the $62 billion operator of 119 shopping centers in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. As a result of her experience, she asked her supervisor for unpaid leave. He gave her more work instead.

When Morris Robertson wrote a despairing email about her feelings, her supervisor called the police and provided them with false information that led to her being taken away in handcuffs and held against her will in a psychological detention unit.

That's just part of the shocking story outlined in a lawsuit filed on Morris-Robertson's behalf by The Gillam Law Firm.

Among other allegations, the complaint charges that despite notifying her Westfield supervisor that she had been diagnosed with PTSD in November 2008, Morris-Robertson was never informed of her rights under the Family Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act. When she asked for unpaid leave to attend therapy sessions in order to cope with her disability, she was threatened with termination by her Westfield supervisor. Her first visit to a PTSD therapist which she had located on her own was prevented when Westfield supervisors interceded and had her detained by police, even though she was not on their premises and had taken the day off to seek medical treatment. She was placed in a psychological detention unit against her will and held for several days with no opportunity to notify her family of her whereabouts, exacerbating her PTSD condition.

Morris-Robertson's complaint lists a litany of alleged charges against her Westfield employers, including Failure to Accommodate Disability; Failure to Engage in Interactive Process; Disability Discrimination; Violation of California Family Rights Act; Retaliation in Violation of California Family Rights Act; Wrongful Constructive Termination in Violation of Public Policy; Harassment; Negligence; False Imprisonment; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Invasion of Privacy; Internationally Giving False Information; and Gender Discrimination.

If you do a Google search you will find more information on this complaint.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info mate, where would all the funnymentalists be without inside information like this.

A site for you to click on mate.

http://www.the-injury-lawyer-directory.com/ridiculous_lawsuits.html

California is the home of ridiculous litigation. Now I do not know whether yours is ridiculous, but the fact that you have bothered to post it on an Australian Stock Forum, makes me kind of suspicious.

This unfortunate lady lost her husband, saw him die, so have millions over the last 50 to 100,000 years. Unfortunately or fortunately they did not work for Westfield or have you as a lawyer.

It would be interesting to hear Westfield's take on what happened, she sounds as if she was very distressed and maybe needed some help.

And no, I'm not really interested, so why don't you bugger off and chase an Ambulance or two and let us get on with discussing stocks you miserable bloody lawyer.

gg
 
I also think that this law suit rubbish sounds like a dash for cash, But even if she did have a win in court it would not touch westfield in terms of earnings, So would not affect my investment choices.
 
nulla nulla said:
Which, in my opinion, by extension, could reasonably be interpreted as meaning the party raising this as yet unsubstantiated allegation is a tugger, tosser, wanker, however you call it. :)
Click to expand...

All 3 of those descriptions seem adequate. On a serious note, what are people's actual thoughts / outlooks on Westfield.

Given their australian portfolio is strong with minimal vacancies, as the US slowly recovers do you see their share price heading north in line with a US recovery?
 
kermit345 said:
All 3 of those descriptions seem adequate. On a serious note, what are people's actual thoughts / outlooks on Westfield.

Given their australian portfolio is strong with minimal vacancies, as the US slowly recovers do you see their share price heading north in line with a US recovery?
Click to expand...

When evidence of an increase in consumer spending in the US starts to filter through along with improvement in their housing and joblees numbers, i expect wdc to go back to $14+. Problem is I expect there will be a lot of side ways ups and downs before the ups get the upper hand.
 
Yes I agree, although thats more of a market-wide trend as well. Hopefully the current situation in europe with greece's high debt which may cause problems for the euro doesn't hurt westfields european assets. Although I doubt it would as westfield generally holds high quality assets with long-term contracts and minimal vaccancies.

I just think that for anyone looking for buy and hold style stocks, westfield ticks most of the boxes. To myself it seems to be a good core stock to cover the property sector with which you can build around with your speccies.
 
kermit345 said:
Yes I agree, although thats more of a market-wide trend as well. Hopefully the current situation in europe with greece's high debt which may cause problems for the euro doesn't hurt westfields european assets. Although I doubt it would as westfield generally holds high quality assets with long-term contracts and minimal vaccancies.

I just think that for anyone looking for buy and hold style stocks, westfield ticks most of the boxes. To myself it seems to be a good core stock to cover the property sector with which you can build around with your speccies.
Click to expand...

If it falls much lower, in my opinion, it will become an accumulate and hold proposition. With an annual dividend of $1.04 representing a return of between 8.5% to 9.0% on the current share price, it is providing a better rate of return than bank interest. Anyone buying in now (looking for capital growth and an increase in dividends as the global economies recover in the next few years) could literaly park their money and sit back and watch it grow.
The only issue I see is that it fell yesterday, possibly on wdc's exposure to Europe and may test lower before it stabilises.
 
nulla nulla said:
If it falls much lower, in my opinion, it will become an accumulate and hold proposition. With an annual dividend of $1.04 representing a return of between 8.5% to 9.0% on the current share price, it is providing a better rate of return than bank interest. Anyone buying in now (looking for capital growth and an increase in dividends as the global economies recover in the next few years) could literaly park their money and sit back and watch it grow.
The only issue I see is that it fell yesterday, possibly on wdc's exposure to Europe and may test lower before it stabilises.
Click to expand...

Current full year dividend is 94c - are you assuming a big increase next year to $1.04?

Mind you, I always gross up for franking, so grossed up is $1.34 which is 11.2% on the current share price. Which is very nice.....

I hold
 
I'm assuming he meant to put 94c rather then $1.04.

Either way, whether you gross up for franking or use the nominal amount, it is still a high yeidl in a respectable long-term company whom has performed reasonably well in the past and has good management.

I know history is history and doesn't reflect the future, but with a core parcel of assets that have performed well through thick and thin, you have to take historical performance into consideration.

I hold westfield, was disapointed with suspension of DRP as I liked to think of it as compounding interest (which is great considering the high yield of the company). Although the upside is that my holding doesn't get diluted anymore so greater SP growth may occur. Thats what i'm hopeful of anyway.
 
Westfield has announced an estomated distribution of $0.47 payable at the end of Feb. The stock is now trading ex-distribution so anyone who buys now will not get it.

Future distributions will be lower given a change in payout ratio from 100% of operating income + associated hedging to around 70-75%. Expect future half yearly distributions of around $0.35.
 
kermit345 said:
I'm assuming he meant to put 94c rather then $1.04.

Either way, whether you gross up for franking or use the nominal amount, it is still a high yeidl in a respectable long-term company whom has performed reasonably well in the past and has good management.

I know history is history and doesn't reflect the future, but with a core parcel of assets that have performed well through thick and thin, you have to take historical performance into consideration.

I hold westfield, was disapointed with suspension of DRP as I liked to think of it as compounding interest (which is great considering the high yield of the company). Although the upside is that my holding doesn't get diluted anymore so greater SP growth may occur. Thats what i'm hopeful of anyway.
Click to expand...

Quite right. I added an extra 10c in there unintentionaly. Dividend should be $0.47 representing an annual return of $0.94. Still a good rate of return with the franking component. However as mentioned above, future distributions will be lower given a change in payout ratio from 100% of operating income + associated hedging to around 70-75%. Future distributions will be slightly lower, however I would expect them to increase as wdc benefits from a recovery in global economies.
 
Top