Fraud lawyer's victims gutted

David Watt

The victims of a lawyer jailed for fraud are disappointed he has been granted home detention without their knowledge.

David James Watt, who charged an estate $160,000 when his only real duties were the sale of a Piha home and purchase of a property in Picton, was granted home detention in July after serving three months of a 15-month jail sentence.

Watt, 53, was sentenced in April in the High Court at Auckland and, after offering to pay reparation of $60,000, was given leave to apply for home detention.

His first application was declined after a hearing at which one of his victims, Greg Hall, spoke.

He was granted a subsequent hearing that Mr Hall and his family were unaware of.

Mr Hall said he was disappointed not to have been informed.

Parole Board spokeswoman Sonja de Friez said the board's practice was to notify those who were registered as victims. It was the task of the police to offer victims a registration form. It appeared Watt's victims were not registered.

Ms de Friez said the board would have taken into account the views of Watt's victims expressed at the first hearing but its main concern was whether the person posed a risk to society if allowed home detention.

At the time of the first hearing, Watt retained his practising certificate and was eager to begin work as a lawyer, which the board decided showed his lack of insight and posed a risk of further offending on home detention. (He has since given it up voluntarily.)

Watt's appeal against his conviction and sentence was rejected by the Court of Appeal this week and he now faces being struck off the register of barristers and solicitors.

As trustee of the estate of the late Leonard Hoare, Watt gained access to $100,000 and found ways to claim the lot in legal fees. When the money ran out, he took out a mortgage against the home of Valda Hoare, Len's second wife, and continued to pay himself.

Throughout, he kept the beneficiaries - Valda Hoare and Len's five sons from his first marriage - in the dark.

Watt's claim that he had to take advice from other lawyers and do additional work because the sons intended to sue him was rejected by the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

The Appeal Court found that High Court judge Roderick Joyce was justified in his finding that Watt had acted dishonestly and created an artifice in an attempt to justify his fraudulent charges.

Justice Joyce said in his judgment: "I ultimately came to the view that it became so important to Mr Watt to take as much money as he could from the estate that he descended to levels of artfulness which included endeavours to create a paper picture of a legitimate entitlement to do as he did."

Greg Hall said the fraud, which began 10 years ago, and his subsequent fight for justice had left him "cynical".

"At sentencing [Watt's] mouth was saying he was remorseful and then 10 minutes later he's filing an appeal."