Controversial liquidator wins battle for career
Insolvency practitioner Damien Grant has won a year-long battle to be allowed to continue his career in liquidation.
As of September 1 last year, a new regulatory regime means all insolvency practitioners must be licensed by an accredited body in order to take new clients.
From September 1 this year, they require accreditation to continue with existing work.
Those who are not chartered accountants, such as Grant, must apply to the Restructuring, Insolvency and Turnaround Association of NZ (Ritanz) to continue practising.
Grant’s first application to be admitted to the association was rejected in June on character grounds because of his historical convictions for fraud. He was jailed for 18 theft, forgery and conspiracy to defraud convictions in 1994, for offences when he was aged between 21 and 27.
The Ritanz board also expressed concern about Grant, who writes a regular column for Stuff, making public criticism of the regulation of insolvency practitioners, a submission he made to a select committee on the proposed new regulation, and a column in which he wrote ‘‘Air New Zealand cares about the environment as much as I worry about ethics.’’
He was granted a review in July, after which he was denied again.
The board said the offending was clearly premeditated and involved careful planning.
He had not repaid his victims.
‘‘We are left with significant doubt about the extent of Mr Grant’s offending, his insight into it and the degree to which he has been open about it. We are therefore not satisfied that Mr Grant can confidently be regarded as a person of good character under the rule.’’
In November, the High Court at Auckland overturned the Ritanz decision and required it to be reconsidered. Justice Muir questioned what more Grant had to do to show he was a person of good character, given his age and the length of time between offending.
‘‘If not now, then when?’’ Justice Muir said. ‘‘People have got to have a second chance. ‘‘What more can he do?’’
Grant was informed on Thursday that the board had decided to admit him.
‘‘Ritanz wishes to acknowledge that the membership admission process has been lengthy and substantial. Thank you for assisting our independent investigator. We now wish to welcome you into our membership,’’ an email from the association said.
‘‘The board initially declined Mr Grant’s application for membership on the grounds of concerns around the impact of criminal offending on the ‘good character’ test required for membership,’’ said chairman John Fisk.
‘‘The High Court overturned that decision but noted other matters may need to be considered. Those further matters have been investigated thoroughly to our satisfaction with the assistance of an independent Queen’s Counsel. We have therefore welcomed Mr Grant into membership. ‘‘Whilst this process has regrettably taken some time, it is consistent with the high standards expected of insolvency practitioners and the need for the board to responsibly carry out inquiries when necessary.’’
As part of the review process, Maria Dew, QC, was appointed to investigate seven complaints about Grant that were made in relation to his application for admission, including that he had inappropriately communicated with creditors, had shown aggressive behaviour in replacing a liquidator in another case and had fraudulently overcharged.
‘‘I run an insolvency practice, there will be people who are grumpy with me … they all came out of the woodwork,’’ Grant said.
There were also allegations he had acted ‘‘unprofessionally’’ on Twitter.
In a draft report, Dew did not find inappropriate or unprofessional conduct.
Grant earlier said the process had cost him about $400,000 in legal and expert witnesses, $100,000 in direct non-legal costs, and $500,000 in fees for work he had missed out on.
He had appointed another insolvency practitioner to work in his business, Waterstone Insolvency, while he was not able to accept new clients.
Grant said he had effectively been forced to beg competitors for the right to practice. The Ritanz board includes a number of insolvency practitioners.
But Grant said the highlighting of his struggle in the media had made some people who had previously been sceptical of him more sympathetic to his plight.
‘‘I appreciate that this process has tested the insolvency regime and that my case was not an easy one for the industry to grapple with,’’ he told Stuff yesterday.
‘‘This has not been a pleasant experience but it has been a remarkable challenge and I am grateful for the wide level of support that myself and Waterstone have received over the past year and we look forward to making a contribution to our industry in the years ahead.’’