Blue Chip investors lose out in landmark case against GE
30 Sep 09A Whangarei couple has lost its bid to have its Blue Chip related mortgage struck out, but will keep fighting the finance company controlling the mortgage, GE Custodians.
Retirees Bruce and Dorothy Bartle claimed their mortgage, arranged after the couple invested with failed company Blue Chip, was approved because of fraudulent documents.
But in the judgment obtained by NBR today Justice Tony Randerson struck out the claims against GE and Tasman Mortgages.
"There is no evidence to support the allegation originally made that descriptions of the Bartles as 'retired' were altered to read 'self-employed investors'," he wrote.
"It is true that in some documents they were so described, but the Bartles themselves acknowledged that they may have signed documents in which they were described in that fashion."
Lawyer for the Bartles Paul Dale said the case would "almost definitely go to appeal".
"The issues are too important to be left at this instance - no disrespect to the judge. [The judgment] will have a dramatic affect on a lot of cases."
Mr Dale confirmed he would be pushing ahead with similar such cases despite the setback.
He had told NBR previously there were about 250 questionable mortgages approved by GE for Blue Chip investors.
There was some comfort in today's judgment, he said, in that Justice Randerson decided in the Bartles' favour in their claim against their former lawyer, Jonathan Mathias.
Justice Randerson found Mr Mathias had acted negligently towards the Bartles and was liable for damages.
Mr Dale thought they would be about $300,000-400,000.
"They will be covered if the lawyer has the money" he said.
Retirees Bruce and Dorothy Bartle claimed their mortgage, arranged after the couple invested with failed company Blue Chip, was approved because of fraudulent documents.
But in the judgment obtained by NBR today Justice Tony Randerson struck out the claims against GE and Tasman Mortgages.
"There is no evidence to support the allegation originally made that descriptions of the Bartles as 'retired' were altered to read 'self-employed investors'," he wrote.
"It is true that in some documents they were so described, but the Bartles themselves acknowledged that they may have signed documents in which they were described in that fashion."
Lawyer for the Bartles Paul Dale said the case would "almost definitely go to appeal".
"The issues are too important to be left at this instance - no disrespect to the judge. [The judgment] will have a dramatic affect on a lot of cases."
Mr Dale confirmed he would be pushing ahead with similar such cases despite the setback.
He had told NBR previously there were about 250 questionable mortgages approved by GE for Blue Chip investors.
There was some comfort in today's judgment, he said, in that Justice Randerson decided in the Bartles' favour in their claim against their former lawyer, Jonathan Mathias.
Justice Randerson found Mr Mathias had acted negligently towards the Bartles and was liable for damages.
Mr Dale thought they would be about $300,000-400,000.
"They will be covered if the lawyer has the money" he said.
Source: The National Business Review
