Sue Tierney - what's the latest?

[k1w1]

And was obviously tongue-in-cheek.

[WBuffett]

essence - why did you hack my post? I think you'll find the word ******* was in total context, is in the English language, and is not offensive in that context.

I was offended.

[Propoholic]

Its interesting to note that Mortgages by Design has changed its name to Sue Tierney Mortgages.

http://www.mortgagesbydesign.com/index.php/ps_pagename/people/pi_profileid/1

[WBuffett]

Its interesting to note that Mortgages by Design has changed its name to Sue Tierney Mortgages.
http://www.mortgagesbydesign.com/ind...pi_profileid/1

A great idea, its a much better name than the old one, and it dosent have the negative inferences of the old name, not to mention she is a talented and attractive woman and showing her as the driving force behind it by putting her name on the company can only be a good thing.

[k1w1]

What? Now you're deleting posts where I ask why it was censored. Given that there's a copy of my post in Warren's post, don't you think that makes a mockery of the deletion? If there's one thing I hate more than censorship, it's stupid censorship.

[WBuffett]

What? Now you're deleting posts where I ask why it was censored. Given that there's a copy of my post in Warren's post, don't you think that makes a mockery of the deletion? If there's one thing I hate more than censorship, it's stupid censorship.

Your mockery of the censors of this channel is such that I believe you have crossed the line, they do their best under trying circumstances, I believe they are hard working and dedicated and as such will volenteer myself to become a channel censor.

[k1w1]

I only mock deserving stupid people, Warren. But I second your wish to become a moderator. Add him to the list, chaps.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Still standing up for Sue Tierney

It sure would be good to hear Peter's position now. I hope his loyalty and trust wasn't misplaced. From his arguments it doesn't sound like he was privileged to the full details of the case or maybe he did after all he spoke to the lady earlier on.

Elsewhere Victor you recently suggested that I did a back flip on this thread and went into hiding faster than you could blink.

With respect, I didn’t ‘back flip’, nor did I go into hiding (check out my posts since I was last in this thread), nor did anything ‘turn out’ about Sue to cause me to review my opinion of her, as you suggest. (You’re entitled to your opinion, naturally, and to express it.)

The truth is as Perry indicated (based on this blog post -- I hope it’s OK to link to it) that I withdrew from the discussion ... after Tricky pointed out (thanks mate) that my participation was provoking others to repeatedly have go at Sue, and the APIA volunteers.

For the record, my ‘position’ (since you request it) has not changed. I stand by Sue.
I feel I know the quality of her character and I still absolutely support her.

I also think it’s unfair to castigate her, especially given limited knowledge of the matter, for the hard decisions she took under qualified professional advice. As I said early on, I know something of the stresses and unpalatable compromises involved in bruising, drawn-out litigation and associated issues.

My view: Sue Tierney is a good person who was in a tough situation, just as Matthew Gilligan said:

This is a storm in a Teacup.
I feel sorry for Sue. She has got caught up in a problem, and doing her best.

No hard feelings on my part Victor. I’m sorry that you filled the vacuum with dark thoughts about me, and just wanted to let you know where I stand. (I don't intend to re-litigate the issues.)

regards, Peter Aranyi

[muppet]

Tierney called to answer
By GREG NINNESS and ROB O'NEILL - Sunday Star Times Last updated 05:00 13/06/2010
THE MINISTRY of Economic Development is to prosecute high-profile mortgage broker Sue Tierney for an alleged breach of the Companies Act.
The decision to prosecute follows a four-month investigation by the Companies Office's National Enforcement Unit into Tierney's involvement as a director in the liquidation of a company previously called Mortgages By Design.
The case is just the second under new rules governing the use of "phoenix companies", a company that rises from the ashes within five years of the start of the liquidation of a failed company, and is known by the same or a similar name to a failed company.
When Tierney's company lost a court battle with a former broker, Natalie Penn, over unpaid commissions, its name was changed to Pin Ltd and it was then put into liquidation, leaving little likelihood of Penn receiving any money.
Tierney then formed a new company called Mortgages By Design which carried on in business, free of any obligations to Penn.
If convicted, Tierney, who is also president of the Auckland Property Investors' Association, could face maximum penalties of a fine of up to $200,000, or a prison term of up to five years.
Last month, Mortgages by Design underwent another change when Tierney sold the company and resigned as a director.
She now operates her business as Sue Tierney Mortgages Ltd.
In the meantime, Penn is continuing with legal action to recover money she is owed from the original court decision, which her lawyer, Steve Barter, estimates has climbed to around $180,000 due to accumulating interest. Barter said he was investigating the possibility of suing Tierney personally for the money.
Last week, Tierney was attending a course in Australia and said she did not know about the pending prosecution until contacted by the Sunday Star-Times.
She said she would take appropriate legal advice when she returned home later this week, but could not comment further because she was unaware of the situation.
That pending prosecution comes on the heels of the first conviction under the two-year-old law.
After failing to have his case dismissed, Michael Paul Donovan, of Napier, sought an indication of sentence from the judge. On April 20, a day before a scheduled hearing, he appeared in the Napier District Court on one charge of managing a phoenix company, pleaded guilty and was convicted and discharged. Donovan is now prohibited from being a director, promoter of, or take part in the management of a company for five years, unless he obtains the leave of the court.
Two other individuals are now being investigated over managing phoenix companies, the Ministry of Economic Development said. The National Enforcement Unit of the Companies Office is reviewing another four complaints and has looked at, and dismissed, another half-dozen allegations since the law took effect in late 2007.
Phil Day, manager of the enforcement unit, says the law is not as straightforward as it seems, as there are a number of defences. "You need a solid case, and need to be satisfied you can prove your case beyond reasonable doubt," he said.
Offences can be technical or committed in ignorance, Day said. While ignorance is no defence, all factors have to be considered to ensure prosecution is in the public interest.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-t...lled-to-answer

[Keys]

If convicted, Tierney, who is also president of the Auckland Property Investors' Association, could face maximum penalties of a fine of up to $200,000, or a prison term of up to five years.

One would ask why?

[Viking]

Because the answer to everything kiwi is to put someone in jail. Socialists think jail is the answer to everything.
Socialists should all go to jail and leave the rest of us be.

[Keys]

She should go to jail if she deserves it. However, she should resign and let the membership re elect her if they wish to. Her defence, as noted in this thread, would make me wonder if I wanted her representing me.

[CJ]

I dont think jail is the right answer in this situation but will let the courts decide.

For APIA though, I agree with Keys recommendation. This has been brought up again and tarnishes the APIA name. Members should have had the right to support her or not.

Did anyone go to the last APIA meeting. Wasn't it an AGM? Was this mentioned or did they sweep it under the carpet in the back rooms months ago?

[drelly]

I suspect that they decided to let the courts decide the rights and wrongs of it rather than have their own (possibly kangaroo) court.

[Xav]

The court has already decided the wrong of it so far as her liability to the former broker goes, which funnily enough wasn't enough for Tierney's supporters in this thread.

I am glad to hear the Companies Office is prosecuting. There certainly appears to be a case to answer. I think calling for jail time is going much too far, but hopefully she will be held personally liable for the company's debts.