Of mice and men (and much, much, money)
Lombard Finance was one of fortynine finance companies that’ve collapsed since 2006. An estimated $8.5 billion of investor’s funds was affected. Many of the directors of companies such as Lombard, Hanover, Dominion Finance Group, Bridgecorp, etc, have appeared in Courts on various charges – usually centering around making untrue statements in their respective investment prospectuses.
Of those who lost money, many were the real “mum & dad” investors whom John Key invokes when his Party talks of privatisation of state owned assets.
Many of these “mum & dad” and “grandma & grandpa” investors have lost their life savings due to the actions of finance companies.
Those who are ultimately responsible are the directors. There is no one “above” them in terms of accountability.
As a certain US president once stated,
Quite simply, if Directors are not responsible – then who is? And why – if Directors are not responsible – are they signing prospectus and being paid generous directors’ fees?
According to Stephen Franks – ex ACT Member of Parliament and unsuccessful National Party candidate – the Directors of Lombard and other companies should not have been prosecuted under the Crimes Act. In an interview on Radio New Zealand’s Morning Report, with Geoff Robinson today, Franks said,
RNZ: “… so was it appropriate to have a criminal case?”
Franks: “No, I think it’s very wrong that the criminal law gets in here because it leads even someone as experienced as you [Robinson] to say something that’s false. They weren’t convicted of making false statements, they were convicted of making untrue statements. But quite reasonably you’re treating it as false. Untrue because the thing didn’t require any conscious intention or even knowledge. If it wasn’t true it was untrue, but we usually use the term false meaning someone’s, you know, deliberately -”
Franks: “… knowingly made an untrue statement. But because this has become a criminal law matter, people feel, not unfairly, that they should be able to use the more extravagant language of wrong-doing, wickedness, thief, theft.
If you look at the blogs you’ll see people are foaming and I don’t blame them. I think the criminal law should deal with bad people. But the problem is it’s got involved in an area where as the judge clearly said, this was just a mis-judgement…”
“… I’m not condoning poor judgement, I think the law should be easier to enforce as a civil action, but I don’t like seeing the criminal law misused against people who aren’t dishonest.”
There are several aspects to Stephen Franks’ comments which require a response.
Whilst I am not a lawyer, criminal law takes into account negligence as well as dis-honesty.
- A driver who causes a crash, with injury or loss of life, can be charged and tried under the Crimes Act. The driver was not dis-honest in any manner – but their negligence was seen as criminal because of consequences that affected others.
- Negligence can have severe consequences, as much as a deliberate act such as selling drugs or robbing a bank.
- The investors in failed finance companies can indeed take civil action against former Directors of failed finance companies. But to what end? Often the assets of Directors is buried away in family trusts – as were some of the Lombard Four. So no compensation is possible.
- Civil action is a costly process, with the legal bills being met by the plaintiff. Even legal aid is not the “blank cheque” that is commonly believed by the public. Legal Aid is a loan, not a grant, and the State may demand it be repaid, in full, or in part, at the earliest opportunity.
Stephen Franks may be on solid ground when he splits legal hairs by defining the difference between “untrue” and “false”.
But I doubt if the “mums/dads” and “grandma/grandpas” will appreciate the finer points between the two terms.
It astounds me that Stephen Franks could suggest that company directors not be prosecuted under the Crimes Act, and that creditors be forced to resort to private civil prosecutions. Many of the creditors are no longer in any financial position or even fit mental state to pursue errant directors through the Courts.
An elderly person who has lost his/her life savings to the dodgy dealings of finance companies is most likely a broke person – both financially and emotionally. Franks wants the victims of these companies to take on more responsibilies to pursure justice?
In what possible manner is that even remotely fair???
I am reminded of Stephen Franks’ original political ‘home’, the ACT Party,
ACT and other right wing parties and their adherents make a Big Thing about responsibility.
It appears that this concept of responsibility may not apply to company directors, responsible for flushing approximately $8 billion in other peoples’ money down the proverbial toilet? Responsibility for some, but not for others?
By comparison, if I robbed someone of $20, that would be Strike One against me, and time spent in jail . The Three Strikes law – courtesy of the ACT Party.
I have no wish to see the Lombard Four or other failed finance company directors end up in jail. Wasting $90,000 p.a. to throw middle aged or elderly men behind bars, who are otherwise no threat to society, seems pointless.
But at the very least, the “mums/dads” and “grandma/grandpas” who lost their savings should know that those responsible are held to account.
* * *
NZ Herald: Finance Company Collapses (and court cases)
= fs =
For a better New Zealand…
~ Cleaner rivers
~ No deep-sea oil drilling
~ Less on Roads - more on Rail
~ A Living wage at $18.40/hr
~ Marriage equality - Yay! Got that one!
~ Strong, effective Unions
~ No secret free-trade deals
~ Breakfast/lunches in our schools
~ Introducing Civics into our school curriculum
~ Cut back on the liquor industry
~ A fairer, progressive tax system
~ Fully funded, free healthcare
~ Ditto for education, including Tertiary
~ Fund Pharmac for Pompe's Disease medication & other 'orphan' drugs
~ No state asset sales!
~ Rebuild public TV broadcasting!
~ Keeping farms in local ownership
~ Reduce poverty, like we reduced the toll for road-fatalities
~ Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
~ Being nice to each other
- Letter to the Editor: Should Key attend Mandela’s funeral?
- Farewell, Nelson Mandela…
- I’ve voted – have you?
- John on John…
- A letter to the editor…
- Bring in the clowns…
- Radio NZ: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams – 2 December 2013
- The ChCh by-election – a letter to the editor…
- Another “satisfied” WINZ client…
- Full access for everyone!
- Geoff Robinson – an era ends.
- Radio NZ: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams – 25 November 2013
- Radio NZ: Focus on Politics for 22 November 2013
- 2013 – Ongoing jobless talley
- One Dunedinite’s response to the passing of the GCSB Bill…
- Random Thoughts on Random Things #5…
- Random Thoughts on Random Things #4…
- Random Thoughts on Random Things #3…
- Random Thoughts on Random Things #2…
- Random Thoughts on Random Things #1…
- Another good poll for a LabourGreen government
- Radio NZ: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams – 30 September 2013
- Endorsing Celia for Mayor
- How To Guide: Voting in Auckland
- Guest Author: Dunedin election – my guide to who’s left and who’s not
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011