Zion Wildlife Gardens Zion re-opens with new name, Kingdom Of Zion

An update has been published via Scribd by Kingdom of Zion overnight. Shania has apparently passed away, no date or circumstances given. She would have been around 18 years old.

Update
 
An application to liquidate Earth Crest Limited, the current operator of Kingdom of Zion, was filed with the High Court in Tauranga on 10 December 2012. The application is scheduled to be heard in Tauranga on 23 April 2013. The application was lodged by Samuel Bailey of Tauranga. Source: Public Notice published in the NZ Herald 28 March 2013.

NZ Herald Classifieds: Public Notices
 
But I thought Sam Bailey was an Ian Stevenson stalwart? Blimey, fell things afoot in the Lala Land of Busch, methinks.
 
Lala land

Hi, companies office shows EISENHUT as sole share holder, and the 24th not the 23rd as court date.

The application is to be heard before the High Court at Tauranga on 24th April 2013 at 10:45 am


2083620 EARTH CREST LIMITED

New Shareholder
Suzanne EISENHUT
C/o Kingdom Of Zion, Gray Road, Kamo, Whangarei, 0185 , New Zealand

Removed Shareholder
M TRUSTEES LIMITED( 3419376 )
89 Fifth Avenue, Tauranga, Tauranga, 3110 , New Zealand


Lala land for sure.
 
Thanks for that, Hardway. I should have read the public notice (as per the link) properly for the date! BTW, Eisenhut has been sole director only since 18 February this year, according to the Companies Office. There's been a few comings and goings on the register since the park's takeover last year.
 
I hope I am not the only one that looks this stuff up. (makes me the only Troll here)
According to the companies office web site,
Kingdom of Zion is directed by Eisenhut, and share holder is Busch Wildlife foundation, who in turn is directed by Mr Busch, and share holders are Eisenhut and Busch.
Would that not mean that Kingdom of Zion is 50% owned by Craig?
 
Those of us who have been following the Busch park saga for a while have also followed the records in the Companies Office, Hardway. I note that Kingdom of Zion Limited is a passive holding company only. All part of the somewhat intricate weave of trusts, companies and other whatnot developed over the years around the same concern.
 
Its nice to know that I'm not the only one interested in how this can continue going on. I have read some of the posts and done a considerable amount of research myself, for personal reason.
I asked about the 50% ownership, because from what I have read, it is either said or implied that Mr Busch has debt mounted up all over the show. And if that where true, why have none of these purported creditors come after Kingdom of Zion for their pound of flesh.
It seems there is the possibility that all the "he owes people money" stories may be incorrect. Or if they are not, the people owed the money have written it off and thus allow it to continue to happen to others by failing to pursue the money.
Obviously just my opinion and belief, it could be the eNDA of the busch saga world if creditors put this together and went after KOZ instead of EC.
 
Hardway said:
I asked about the 50% ownership, because from what I have read, it is either said or implied that Mr Busch has debt mounted up all over the show. And if that where true, why have none of these purported creditors come after Kingdom of Zion for their pound of flesh.
Click to expand...

Because Craig Busch does not currently own Zion, nor run it. Some of the money he owed would have been under previous companies he would have been director of which means he is not personally responsible for paying it back.
 
Basically, the Zion park is no longer Craig Busch's asset, under his own name. Hard to get that blood out of the stone -- when the stone, via accounting processes and a minor labyrinth of trusts, doesn't appear to exist.
 
Trolling

Humour me.

1. they have been an item for over 3 years, equals married or not, she is legally entitled to half etc.

2. its claimed he or companies he directed owed money all over the place but no one ever liquidated the companies or bankrupted him.

3. A director of a company that gets liquidated is not personally liable for debts of the company?


Would it not be the case, that if a director of a company knowingly carried out an act of insolvency would therefore be personally liable for those debts and possibly legally chargeable also.


And as much as one can not get blood out of a stone, it would be nice to stop it doing over other people.
 
Yep, a company director can be done under NZ law for performing in a manner which would be illegal or endanger the interests of the shareholders. But -- when the shareholders are essentially the directors, the second part fairly well goes by the by. As for creditors: once liquidation is in place, they're sorted into secured and unsecured. Even though Patricia Busch had a considerable amount of money formally recognised as owing to her as a secured creditor in the liquidation reports for ZWG, she still got zip. When Craig Busch apparently incurred debts in the middle of last decade, these were paid off by Patricia reportedly using mortgages on her own home as well as on ZWG property. Others that have felt ripped off and have said so on national television just seem to have melted away. Or -- they may be worried about consequences.

As you say, Hardway -- it'd be great if folks just owned up, paid their dues like adults, and acted in good faith in all business dealings. If that happened, this discussion wouldn't be taking place.
 
Dishonesty is a different story, but one of the benefits of registering a business as a company is that the company is responsible for finances, not individuals. Believe me, I have done business class.
 
There are several people in Sth Africa who believe he owes them money, but also bleive there is no point in pursuing him for it. However his name is now mud in the wildlife industry in SA, and his details have been well spread about throughout the country.
However I hear he still visits Africa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top