Ross clawback targets more than $25m

THE receiver of Ross Asset Management is ‘‘reluctant’’ to put a number on the millions of dollars it seeks to claw back from former investors.

But the figure is ‘‘certainly’’ more than the previously reported $25 million, and could potentially result in a ‘‘substantial’’ sum.

David Ross was in November 2013 jailed for 10 years and 10 months for operating a fraudulent scheme in which private investors lost about $115m.

His company, Ross Asset Management (Ram), fleeced at least 700 investors through portfolios in which they thought they had more than $380m.

About $3m is currently left for the hundreds of investors swindled by Ross, the man responsible for New Zealand’s singlebiggest fraud.

Receiver PricewaterhouseCoopers is using the Companies Act to go back two years from its appointment to claw back up to $25m from investors who withdrew money from the Ponzi scheme before it collapsed.

It has recently emerged, however, that PwC will also be making claims under the Property Law Act which allows it to go back six years.

The

first

of

three

test

claims against investors – their names have been suppressed – who withdrew fictitious profits will be heard in March.

One of the entities from which $2.3m is being sought lists a highprofile Wellingtonian among its shareholders.

Receiver John Fisk said he was reluctant to put a number on what the new claims might be, but said it would exceed $25m.

A PwC report last week stated: ‘‘The potential sum recoverable from such claims could be substantial.’’

‘‘It’s really looking at withdrawals and deposits over that period of time and what benefit particular investors might have received,’’ Fisk said.

According to early PwC reports, funds withdrawn by investors over the last five years of Ram exceeded contributions by more than $60m.

‘‘We’ve only done some preliminary assessment of what the claims might be,’’ Fisk said.

‘‘To actually come up with a definitive number for a particular investor needs a fair bit of work and analysis of their particular account.’’

Earlier this month, Fisk said the new clawback claims had the potential to ‘‘make a substantial difference to the outcome of the liquidation’’.