NZ justice system once again looking after its rich mates

[willytheekid]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/6755429/Prison-for-Bridgecorp-director

Steal a loaf of bread to feed ya family...3-5yrs!

BUT!...Steal $490 MILLION DOLLARS from 14,500 investors...2yrs jail or 9 months home D and community service. :facepalm:

YUP!...pritty much sums up the justice system perfectly! (the judge practically appologized to them for handing these joke sentances FFS)
"She said the scale of the offending - in which 14,500 investors lost $490m - was too great" ...to just allow her rich mates to walk off laughing as usual!

Its really no wonder New Zealand had gone from one of the most equitable societies – in terms of income distribution – to one of the worst.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6753740/Poverty-our-biggest-growth-industry-academic

The super rich can do what the fuck they like in this country (well...MOST countrys actually), rip everyone off....get caught, recieve slap on wrist...try again!



Right Honourable judge's...Pffft YEAH RIGHT!

[ellipsis]

....nuthin's changed then...

[Scuba_Steve]

....nuthin's changed then...

what are ya talking bout???

2yrs jail or 9 months home D and community service.

There was actually a sentence passed... that's progress!
It's a step up from the old steal 490mil, get fined 100k "you keep the rest"

[Zedder]

what are ya talking bout???

2yrs jail or 9 months home D and community service.

There was actually a sentence passed... that's progress!
It's a step up from the old steal 490mil, get fined 100k "you keep the rest"

Hopefully his sentence will be added to by other inmates keen to "invest" their time in his rehabilitation.

[oneofsix]

Hopefully his sentence will be added to by other inmates keen to "invest" their time in his rehabilitation.

Like they will get a chance. Kept in separate protected unit if they don't get paroled for time served or some other lame excuse or medical condition

[FJRider]

If those "Investors" put their money in the bank in a Term deposit ... they would stiil have it. They were greedy ... and so they gambled ... AND LOST.

Nobody forced them to hand over their money. They probably boasted to their friends how clever they were with their investments .... and how much money they were going to get. They have no sympathy from me.

Those "Investors" should take the issue up with those that advised them to "Invest" with these people. Those advisors probably get a cut from it.

[avgas]

If those "Investors" put their money in the bank in a Term deposit ... they would stiil have it. They were greedy ... and so they gambled ... AND LOST.

Nobody forced them to hand over their money. They probably boasted to their friends how clever they were with their investments .... and how much money they were going to get. They have no sympathy from me.

Those "Investors" should take the issue up with those that advised them to "Invest" with these people. Those advisors probably get a cut from it.
I partially agree with this. And the sad fact of the matter is my poor old nana got sucked in.
She had her money invested with Wrightsons........who invested in Bridgecorp.

Aint it funny when you hear "Young people don't know how to save", or "Young people are greedy want now generation".

Seems it wasn't young people who lost and gained when this was happening.
Kinda sad really.

[Zedder]

Like they will get a chance. Kept in separate protected unit if they don't get paroled for time served or some other lame excuse or medical condition

I did write "hopefully", however this crime doesn't warrant a protective unit by right. They can request it but they can be turned down.

It takes a while for a request to be granted too, meanwhile they remain part of the general prison population and being a Government department things do go wrong.

[oneofsix]

I did write "hopefully", however this crime doesn't warrant a protective unit by right. They can request it but they can be turned down.

It takes a while for a request to be granted too, meanwhile they remain part of the general prison population and being a Government department things do go wrong.

but this is about protecting their rich mates

[Bald Eagle]

:Offtopic: and another example of good use of public money by greedy investors :rofl: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/6753899/Iwi-loses-most-of-Treaty-payout

[oneofsix]

:Offtopic: and another example of good use of public money by greedy investors :rofl: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/6753899/Iwi-loses-most-of-Treaty-payout

to split hairs on that, by the time they lost it it was no longer public money. :violin:

[Zedder]

but this is about protecting their rich mates

That's only the title of the thread and Scuba Steve put paid to that.

[oneofsix]

That's only the title of the thread and Scuba Steve put paid to that.

Disagree, the diver only pointed out that they at least got some sentence, they are still being protected. If you walked into a bank and took a fraction of that amount you would get more of a sentence but these scums have stolen much more and ruined multiple peoples lives and get sweet F all.

[wharekura]

How about this - govt cuts the upper tax rate by 6% and pays for it by borrowing the money from the Chinese.

[Zedder]

Disagree, the diver only pointed out that they at least got some sentence, they are still being protected. If you walked into a bank and took a fraction of that amount you would get more of a sentence but these scums have stolen much more and ruined multiple peoples lives and get sweet F all.

Nice try (yawn) but read it again.

[Usarka]

Guilty until proven wealthy

[Oscar]

Steal a loaf of bread to feed ya family...3-5yrs!

Sez who?
Any examples?

[Paul in NZ]

Disagree, the diver only pointed out that they at least got some sentence, they are still being protected. If you walked into a bank and took a fraction of that amount you would get more of a sentence but these scums have stolen much more and ruined multiple peoples lives and get sweet F all.

Unfortunately there has to be a balance which tips in favour of business here (although you can argue this is too much). There are laws protecting business owners from failures which are designed to encourage people to start new businesses (risky thing starting a new venture)

It comes unstuck with this kind of malarky though. Proving these guys set out to defraud is one thing, simply being bad business operators is another. However IMHO these guys were out and out crooks

[oneofsix]

Unfortunately there has to be a balance which tips in favour of business here (although you can argue this is too much). There are laws protecting business owners from failures which are designed to encourage people to start new businesses (risky thing starting a new venture)

It comes unstuck with this kind of malarky though. Proving these guys set out to defraud is one thing, simply being bad business operators is another. However IMHO these guys were out and out crooks

I understand your point and do admit to not having studied their case in depth but it does appear they were proved to be crooks but because the law is still emerging from an era where this sort of financial fiddling was seen as part of the game they get off lightly. A bit like smiler saying you just have to accept corruption if you are to do business with certain countries. Not too bad if you know this going in but a lot of these investors, and NZers as a whole, are told we have laws and you are protected until the shit hits the fan and then the judge and powers that be don't want to punish the people he played gin or golf or what ever with (his 'class' of people)

[Oscar]

Bridgecorp, Blue Chip et al all had fantastic rates, well above the average for the times. Additionally companies like Bridgecorp had some dodgy lending products (80% finance package for property developers, anyone?).

Even at the time I remember saying to someone “..if it looks too good to be true, it probably is..”. A lot of greedy, silly people were ripped off by these bastids…

[FJRider]

I did write "hopefully", however this crime doesn't warrant a protective unit by right. They can request it but they can be turned down.

It takes a while for a request to be granted too, meanwhile they remain part of the general prison population and being a Government department things do go wrong.

Or they just get sent straight to a low security prision. Within a year ... on parole and back in the office.

All their houses/vehicles/money tied up in a trust fund ... and collecting the interest.

[Zedder]

Or they just get sent straight to a low security prision. Within a year ... on parole and back in the office.

All their houses/vehicles/money tied up in a trust fund ... and collecting the interest.

Let's see what happens regarding prison time but from what I understand FJR, the Police and Financial Markets Authority are going to seek recovery of money in any Bridgecorp directors trust funds under the Proceeds of Crimes Act.

[oldrider]

Amazing ... Doug Graham still doesn't get it ... responsibility and consequence go together! :shifty:

He still wants to be Sir and behaves like a Cur. :mellow:

All those lying bastards should go to jail .... "real jail" .... for a very long time IMHO! (and "no" I didn't lose a dime through them either)

[mashman]

If they're in jail, they can't spend that hard earned tax break that the govt gave them, let alone any money :weird:... and it isn;t as though ripping people off doesn't take any energy, smarts and balls... I'm ashamed of you all for bagging the rich folk... they're hard working decent honest tax payers just like you or I.

[Mully]

Bridgecorp, Blue Chip et al all had fantastic rates, well above the average for the times. Additionally companies like Bridgecorp had some dodgy lending products (80% finance package for property developers, anyone?).

Even at the time I remember saying to someone “..if it looks too good to be true, it probably is..”. A lot of greedy, silly people were ripped off by these bastids…

Dead right. I looked at their rates and ran for the hills.

Had I realised South Canterbury was Government guaranteed though..... Fuckitall.

[Winston001]

Bridgecorp, Blue Chip et al all had fantastic rates, well above the average for the times.

Mmmm not really - Blue Chip perhaps but they were a property investor not a finance company.

I remember Gareth Morgan in about 2004 asking why NZ finance companies were offering such low rates for investment? Banks were paying 7% and finance cos 9.5%, barely above industrial and local authority bonds despite being much higher risk entities.

You might recall in the 1980s finance companies paid 5-9% above the bank rate which was far more realistic.

Which reminds me - this finance co debacle - we've been here before. A whole heap of them collapsed in the late 1980s. Petrecivic (scum) was involved - Euronational Corporation. Now he had Bridgecorp. A filthy selfish amoral little man.

[FJRider]

Let's see what happens regarding prison time but from what I understand FJR, the Police and Financial Markets Authority are going to seek recovery of money in any Bridgecorp directors trust funds under the Proceeds of Crimes Act.

On one news tonight ... they stated that although he was sentenced to two years ... he will be released automaticly after one.

If the possesions and property was aquired when he was making money legally ... the proceeds of crime act may not apply. Especially if he lost more than he made.

The old chap on the news that lost $400,000 wasn't too happy with his "advisor" ... who in my opinion ... is just as guilty as the accused.

[FJRider]

to split hairs on that, by the time they lost it it was no longer public money. :violin:

And one of their own tribe that lost it for them on the promise of getting rich(er) faster ... The tribe approved his actions at the time.

[Oscar]

Mmmm not really - Blue Chip perhaps but they were a property investor not a finance company.



Blue Chip offered debenture secured term investments.

[Zedder]

On one news tonight ... they stated that although he was sentenced to two years ... he will be released automaticly after one.

If the possesions and property was aquired when he was making money legally ... the proceeds of crime act may not apply. Especially if he lost more than he made.

The old chap on the news that lost $400,000 wasn't too happy with his "advisor" ... who in my opinion ... is just as guilty as the accused.

Thanks for the news update. Yep, it goes without saying regarding the crime act and if the advisor was knowingly involved in illegal dealings they should be held accountable.

[FJRider]

... and if the advisor was knowingly involved in illegal dealings they should be held accountable.

Most "Financial Advisors" aren't actually involved in the dealings of the investment firms as such. Just get paid by investers for their advice (not that cheap either) But they may have had investments themselves in those companies ... (current or past) and I DO hope a few "Advisors" around the country have lost money too.

The old rule of "You never fly higher than you want to fall" may apply in regards to "investments" ...

Along with "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"

But all said and done ... more effort is being put into the control of slot machines .... than the gambling practices of those that have more than spare change to invest.

[oldrider]

Mmmm not really - Blue Chip perhaps but they were a property investor not a finance company.

I remember Gareth Morgan in about 2004 asking why NZ finance companies were offering such low rates for investment? Banks were paying 7% and finance cos 9.5%, barely above industrial and local authority bonds despite being much higher risk entities.

You might recall in the 1980s finance companies paid 5-9% above the bank rate which was far more realistic.

Which reminds me - this finance co debacle - we've been here before. A whole heap of them collapsed in the late 1980s. Petrecivic (scum) was involved - Euronational Corporation. Now he had Bridgecorp. A filthy selfish amoral little man.

True! And Doug Graeme used his political reputation and Knighthood to promote Petrecivic and his company to fool the unwary! ... Consequence?

Yeah ... but only for the unwary investor that believed in him! ... Go to jail and renounce your Knighthood Dougie, it's the least you can do! :spanking:

Even worse, if Sir stupid didn't know the state of the company ... why was he endorsing it? ... Surely not for monetary reward? :no:

"I did nothing wrong" ... cries "Sir Douglas" on TV ... Yeah right Dougie, we hear you ........ :killingme

[Oscar]

True! And Doug Graeme used his political reputation and Knighthood to promote Petrecivic and his company to fool the unwary! ... Consequence?

Yeah ... but only for the unwary investor that believed in him! ... Go to jail and renounce your Knighthood Dougie, it's the least you can do! :spanking:

Even worse, if Sir stupid didn't know the state of the company ... why was he endorsing it? ... Surely not for monetary reward? :no:

"I did nothing wrong" ... cries "Sir Douglas" on TV ... Yeah right Dougie, we hear you ........ :killingme

You got most of the right, but I'd would replace "unwary investor" with "stupid greedy investor".

caveat emptor

[scumdog]

You got most of the right, but I'd would replace "unwary investor" with "stupid greedy investor".

caveat emptor

True.

"I'll give you some money and you'll turn it into lots and lots of money for me without me having to do anything"

Wow, big expectation eh...

[Oscar]

True.

"I'll give you some money and you'll turn it into lots and lots of money for me without me having to do anything"

Wow, big expectation eh...

Also most of the busted arse finance companies were offering margins waaay in excess of what the Banks were doing.
If it looks too good to be true...

[FJRider]

True.

"I'll give you some money and you'll turn it into lots and lots of money for me without me having to do anything"

Wow, big expectation eh...

I love a good plan too ... even more if it actually works ... :yes:

And if things go wrong ... what is there to lose ... ??? OH WAIT ... !!! :eek:

But if things go RIGHT :devil2: ... :wait:

I can pat myself on the back, and tell myself how clever and I am ... :second:

[Zedder]

Most "Financial Advisors" aren't actually involved in the dealings of the investment firms as such. Just get paid by investers for their advice (not that cheap either) But they may have had investments themselves in those companies ... (current or past) and I DO hope a few "Advisors" around the country have lost money too.

The old rule of "You never fly higher than you want to fall" may apply in regards to "investments" ...

Along with "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"

But all said and done ... more effort is being put into the control of slot machines .... than the gambling practices of those that have more than spare change to invest.

The financial advisors in this case were paid brokerage/commission by the ratbags which at times was double and more of the usual rates.

Also, a recent case in NZ (2009) has set the precedent for advisors to be liable for their actions. They have a "duty of care" to their clients and must investigate companies in depth, not rely on published statements and must query investment rates etc.

[Winston001]

True! And Doug Graeme used his political reputation and Knighthood to promote Petrecivic and his company to fool the unwary!



Actually no. Graham was a director of Lombard Finance.


Petricovic was a director (and the main man) of Bridgecorp.


Completely unrelated companies.


There is a theory that a high percentage of corporate businessmen have psychopathic personalities. IMHO Petricovic proves this. Scum.

[Andy67]

Also most of the busted arse finance companies were offering margins waaay in excess of what the Banks were doing.
If it looks too good to be true...

Not exactly right mate, not for the risks involved. I remember one in particular touted S&P B rating. At the time that was loosely equivalent to Solomon Islands sovereign credit risk, ie just above default and so far below investment grade it's unfunny. 150bpts above what a typical trading bank was offering at the time. Problem is financial literacy, it's non existent for most. Shame. As I said in another thread these guys are the real crooks.

[mashman]

Not exactly right mate, not for the risks involved. I remember one in particular touted S&P B rating. At the time that was loosely equivalent to Solomon Islands sovereign credit risk, ie just above default and so far below investment grade it's unfunny. 150bpts above what a typical trading bank was offering at the time. Problem is financial literacy, it's non existent for most. Shame. As I said in another thread these guys are the real crooks.

Funny that so many people don't want to make easy money... and those who do believe that they are a cut above :yes:.. where in reality they have nothing more than a little bit of kNOWledge that's no great shakes off of betting on the GG's. Of course there's no gamble involved in investing.

[Oscar]

Not exactly right mate, not for the risks involved. I remember one in particular touted S&P B rating. At the time that was loosely equivalent to Solomon Islands sovereign credit risk, ie just above default and so far below investment grade it's unfunny. 150bpts above what a typical trading bank was offering at the time. Problem is financial literacy, it's non existent for most. Shame. As I said in another thread these guys are the real crooks.

I agree in terms of risk v. reward.
But I am sick to death of seeing greedy and/or stupid people in the media whining about being ripped off.
There are some genuine case of bad advice from intermediaries (including one I saw where a broker invested in three dodgy, and ultimately failed, finance companies for a trust fund for an under 18 year old), but $2m in Blue Chip? Why are they on TV exposing their stupidity to the world:no:

[oldrider]

You got most of the right, but I'd would replace "unwary investor" with "stupid greedy investor".

caveat emptor

True! ... I'll buy that! :niceone:

[Andy67]

I agree in terms of risk v. reward.
But I am sick to death of seeing greedy and/or stupid people in the media whining about being ripped off.
There are some genuine case of bad advice from intermediaries (including one I saw where a broker invested in three dodgy, and ultimately failed, finance companies for a trust fund for an under 18 year old), but $2m in Blue Chip? Why are they on TV exposing their stupidity to the world:no:

Yep I think we all are and each one a lesson to us all....

Brokers should divulge their commission rates, if they appear out of odds with market rates for particular trades then there is probably a reason and for that reason alone, the individual concerned is less likely to give impartial and/or sound advice.

[superman]

The justice system isn't about looking after 'rich mates'.

The amount of sentence given should reflect how much of a menace they were and how much of a future threat they are to society. He'll never be able to work in a finance company again so the future threat is low. The sentence is purely punishment based.

While if a man held up a store for a few hundred dollars while wielding a knife, the monetary value isn't the big issue. His sentence is to do with rehabilitation and punishment. It's the fact he's willing to threaten members of society with physical harm that puts the most years on the sentence.

Swipe a few hundred dollars out of your kids bank account on the other hand and getting a sentence would be unlikely, more like a fine with monetary reparation to your child.

[mashman]

The justice system isn't about looking after 'rich mates'.

The amount of sentence given should reflect how much of a menace they were and how much of a future threat they are to society. He'll never be able to work in a finance company again so the future threat is low. The sentence is purely punishment based.


He could become a cuntsultant though :bleh:

[superman]

He could become a cuntsultant though :bleh:

People who take consultants literally probably spend their free time going to see psychics... <_<

[mashman]

People who take consultants literally probably spend their free time going to see psychics... <_<

or get paid hundreds of thousands of $$$ a year (for 3 weeks work) to advise boards of companies?