As iNO reported back in July, Hall Chadwick partners Richard Albarran and Richard Lawrence are determined to be paid for the work they did on the tempestuous Tauro Capital administration before creditors replaced them in October 2020.
At the time iNO speculated that some creditors at least might be just as determined to deny them.
We can now report that that speculation has been confirmed.
In response to an originating process filed on Albarran and Lawrence’s behalf in the Supreme Court of Victoria by SLF Lawyers, two ordinary unsecured creditors and the ATO have flagged their intention to oppose the orders sought, which seek to have the Hall Chadwick duo’s oft criticised fees in the job confirmed.
Foremost among them the creditors opposing payment is Tauro’s landlord, 456 Lonsdale Street Pty Ltd, an entity controlled by Peachtree Capital’s Graham Nicholson.
Nicholson’s owed in the vicinity of $200,000. It advised Albarran and Lawrence’s lawyers Ben Skinner and Amy Weiner of its intention to object on August 9.
Also intent on preventing Albarran and Lawrence from seeing a cent is Businest Pty Ltd founder and Tauro creditor Rhondalynn Korolak who notified Skinner and Weinbter of her intention to object through the same lawyers on the same day.
Among the grounds for objection being offered by Nicholson and Korolak are that the work was not performed with an adequate degree of competence, that the work was not allocated appropriately; that it was not sufficiently complex to justify the degree of costs incurred, that the fees being claimed are not proportionate to the work performed and that insufficient detail’s been provided to allow creditors to make a proper assessment.
Later in August Skinner and Weiner received another objection, this time from the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (DCoT), which said that commentary on time sheets provided failed to allow creditors to assess the reasonableness or necessity of the work undertaken; that work had been undertaken at an inappropriate level of seniority; that excessive time appeared to have been spent on certain tasks and that in the DCoT’s view there had been duplication by the liquidators and their staff.
No doubt Albarran Lawrence will be able to assuage the concerns when the mater is due to return to court on November 14. iNO understands that ASIC has requested information but has not at the time of writing indicated whether or not it intends to object.
Further reading:
Hall Chadwick Duo Preparing Hail Mary Fee Application
Brawl Abrewin’ As Ex-Liquidators Covet Funds In Trust
Be the first to comment on "ATO among creditors objecting to ex-liquidators’ fees"