Member log in

They want let-off, but Crown wants Lombard Four jailed

Crown prosecutors want the Court of Appeal to quash non-custodial sentences and jail the Lombard Finance Four. 

Former justice ministers Bill Jeffries and Sir Douglas Graham, along with former fellow director Laurie Bryant and former chief executive Michael Reeves were found guilty of misleading investors by signing off on offer documents which omitted material information about Lombard’s liquidity in late 2007.

They all escaped jail when sentenced in March last year to non-custodial sentences.

Just as the four want the Court of Appeal to overturn their convictions and sentences, the Crown wants the non-custodial sentences replaced with imprisonment.

All four were in court today.

Arguing the Lombard Four's case, Queen's counsel Jim Farmer told the court reinvestment rates in Lombard Finance were healthy in the months leading to its collapse, because it was considered a “blue-chip investment." 

“Lombard’s directors were expecting a drop in reinvestment rates, following the collapse earlier in 2007 of Bridgecorp and the stigma which was attached to it. But Bridgecorp was run by someone who was notorious,” Mr Farmer said.

“Obviously Bridgecorp’s stigma didn’t carry over,” Mr Farmer said. "“Lombard was considered a blue-chip investment.”

“That’s perhaps not a wise term to use, given what we now know,” Justice Tony Randerson said.

Mr Farmer said in a year when at least a dozen finance companies, including Capital + Merchant, Nathans and Bridgecorp fell over, liquidity checks were a major issue for Lombard’s directors.

He said there were weekly liquidity updates provided internally and to directors.

Mr Farmer admitted reinvestment rates varied hugely during the second half of 2007 but said it was due in part to all the uncertainty in the finance company sector, delays in developments and delays in repaying loans.

“Lombard’s reinvestment was strong despite the concern. There was a decline, but in fact Lombard did significantly better than others.”

He said reinvestment rates plummeted to just 12% one week but climbed to a high of 47% one week in November and reached 45% in December.

Mr Farmer told Justices Randerson, Christine French and John Wild the Lombard four did not mislead investors.

He said the prospectus had adequately warned of the liquidity risk.

Friends and family turned out to support the four, including Bryant's son and transport minister Gerry Brownlee’s press secretary Nick Bryant and Maori Council lawyer Donna Hall there for Jeffries and Sir Douglas.

Ms Hall says she was not an investor in the collapsed company but wanted to show her support for the two former company directors as they fight their sentences.

Queen's counsel Colin Carruthers appears for the Crown.

He is expected to present his case on Wednesday.

The appeal is proceeding.

bcunningham@nbr.co.nz

More by Blair Cunningham

Comments and questions
20

The arrogance of the "Lombard Four" beggars belief!!!

Agreed, but these characters will wish they had left well alone if they wind up in jail.

I don't think it is arrogance to fight to clear your name. I wish them all the best as there are few in the know who think Justice Dobson got it right.

good luck to them

I am quite certain thay if the Lombard Directors had their trial in Auckland they would have been jailed , the old boys network in Wellington was alive and well on this one, they definitely mislead investors, the reality is they collected Directors fees but none of them really knew what was happening in this company.

Bold claims - I suggest with little proof !

Jail time would reflect the lives of investors damaged because they trusted the Lombard offer documents to be true. The NZ judiciary will probably look after its own and there is little doubt back door deals have been struck and mates putting words in for mates.

With the SCF trial commencing this year this decision may have some bearing on what sentences those directors and officers get for the raft of mistatments and related party lending hidden from offer documents.

SCF different/far more serious charges.

Let's have a Public Referendum!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very hard to stomach these people want an out....what about the poor people they mislead?...they distroyed lifes and the stress on those poor people would contribute to an early grave for most of them...maybe they should be charged with delayed manslaughter charges..as in plural...

Thoughts on Hanover?

Did the investment statements disclose that reinvestment rates varied hugely during material period for reporting? Should they have? Perhaps an own goal by Mr Farmer?

Why am I not surprised that Donna Hall was there supporting Doug Graham.

They should all be jailed so that justice can also be done on the Hanover finance and Strategic Finance directors and Consultant.

The sooner the authorities and Govt make sure all guilty parties from the finance company meltdown are punished, the sooner the finance market can restart and commerce/business can return to some normality in this country

These men need to face the music, for many others they have lost
everything - homes, savings and wellbeing. I still see Mr Bryant in his
Merc going to the local dry cleaners and promoting his wine. I really
believe their own lifestyles have not changed, and now they want us
all to believe it was all because of the GFC!

Voltaire said - "Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres" – "In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." and its about flipping time too. These muck-rackers shysters and scammers pretending to be directors actually deserve the guillotine......

If you had lost thousands, as I did, you would have to agree a prison term of 4-6 years was appropriate.

Shame that all the violent offenders get bail and home detention.
Financial offenders like this should have long home detention and be made to work to pay back their victims.
Victims should be considered first.

It is so freaking obvious to all that people like Sir Doug Graham lend their name to companies like Lombard for the fees and perks they receive in return. What really sucks is that they are very quick to claim credit for anything which is half successful but distant themselves even faster when things turn pear shaped.

It's called having your cake and eating it too. At your expense.

A few weeks' in jail would do them a world of good as a reality check.

Pathetic. Why don't they take their punishment like men rather than wailing about their precious reputations that are long gone. Hopefully, the appeal will backfire and they will get some porridge time.