Originally Posted by
Enumerate
Ok - lets break it down:
1) You allege a number of transactions.
2) You do not detail the time or context of these transactions
3) SCF was a very large financial services organisation
4) Allan Hubbard was not an operational manager in the recent days of SCF, prior to the collapse
5) Allan Hubbard was one of number of Directors of SCF and was "President for Life" in the days prior to the collapse
To prove your point, you need to show that Allan Hubbard had operational responsibility to conduct the transaction, proceeded to execute the transaction with authority and acted in a defined context of the transaction at a particular time.
You have provided none of these details.
Further, you report that the basis for your allegation is Internet scuttle-rumour "on another web-site". Maybe someone's brother-in-law tweeted about this conversation he overheard between the friend of someone who worked with a mate who had it on good authority that a person close to the action thought ...
Please don't tell me you have been following David Hillary on interest.co.nz ...
(There is also the small point that taxpayers money was not involved in SCF until the receivership event - at which point Allan Hubbard, in Statutory Management, certainly had no ability to execute any transactions at SCF in any way shape or form).