BusinessDesk: Feltex liquidator McDonald Vague issues proceedings against auditor Ernst and Young

BusinessDesk: Feltex liquidator McDonald Vague issues proceedings against auditor Ernst and Young

The liquidators for Feltex have issued proceedings against auditor Ernst & Young (E&Y), according to their latest report on the failed carpet maker.

McDonald Vague’s Iain McLennan and Peri Finnigan said their claim against Feltex directors Tim Saunders, John Feeney, Peter David Hunter, John Hagen and Peter Thomas was “significantly impacted” by the incorrect December 31, 2005 financial statement prepared by E&Y.

That prompted the liquidator to pursue the accounting firm. “E&Y have failed to engage in any dialogue towards a resolution of the claim and have instructed solicitors,” McLennan and Finnigan said in their latest report. “Proceedings were issue in early December 2011 against E&Y” in New Zealand and in Australia, where Stuart Painter was the lead adviser to Feltex.

In 2010, then E&Y audit partner Gordon Fulton was found guilty of accounting breaches in the 2005 first-half financial review, which failed to disclose Feltex’s debt with lender ANZ. Fulton was ordered to pay $150,000 in costs towards the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountant’s disciplinary tribunal hearing and the professional conduct committee’s investigation. He avoided censure due to his previously unblemished record and because the review was mostly performed by E&Y Australia partner Painter.

The liquidator settled with the five Feltex directors after the Registrar of Companies failed to prove claims the board knowingly signed off on incorrect financial statements.

McLennan and Finnigan said they don’t expect any surplus funds from the receivership, leaving $13.9 million owed to unsecured creditors hanging in the balance. The liquidator also received $6.3 million in claims from 166 shareholders relating to stock purchased in the initial public offering.

Some 2,500 Feltex shareholders are pursuing separate legal action against Feltex’s directors at the time of the float, Credit Suisse First Boston Asian Merchant Partners, which offered Feltex for sale, Credit Suisse Private Equity and joint lead float managers, First New Zealand Capital and Forsyth Barr.

(Update adds link to liquidator's report).

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

4 Comments

Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

wasn't ANZ also the promotor and the main benefactor? did they disclose this interest?

ANZ was the bank that pulled the plug on Feltex, justifiably in my view, triggering the receivership in 2006. More background here - http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/53458/opinion-why-feltex-debacle-must-...

correct but had they done it b4 shareholders had pumped in the $xm under the defunct ipo ANZ losses would have been massive. My question is did ANZ have sum influence over the Feltex Board to pursue the float?   

I've not heard that suggested before Kane. Seems the big beneficiaries from the IPO were the Credit Suisse private equity owners. They sold 100% at what, in my opinion, was a very high price.