Lawyer who allegedly took $150,000 from imprisoned client a no-show at disciplinary hearing

Wellington lawyer Alwyn O'Connor was due to attend a Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal hearing to face misconduct charges. Photo / LinkedIn

A lawyer accused of withdrawing $150,000 from his jailed client’s bank account failed to appear on charges of misconduct before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal today.

Alwyn O’Connor’s lawyer produced an unsigned medical certificate for the tribunal this morning stating the Wellington barrister would be unavailable due to an unnamed condition, from May 1 to 3, the same days the hearing is set down for.

It comes after the Herald, which has been following complaints against O’Connor since last year, was granted permission to photograph him at the hearing.

A complaint by Wayne Coles, that O’Connor took almost $150,000 from his bank while he was in jail, formed the basis of the charge of misconduct. The money was eventually returned to Coles by O’Connor.

The tribunal heard from another complainant that the $50,000 she loaned O’Connor in 2017 was eventually repaid in $1000 instalments on the same dates money was withdrawn from Coles’ account.

The Law Society Standards Committee prosecuting O’Connor described this as a “money-go-round” where he allegedly used one client’s bank account to pay off his debts to another.

“He took control of Mr Coles’ bank account, borrowed money from Mr Coles, and proceeded to use his account as if it was his own personal credit facility,” Nikki Pender said in her opening submissions to the tribunal.

The Standards Committee also alleged O’Connor was the only person with access to Coles’ bank account and Eftpos card while he was in prison, and that there was a further $22,000 missing from Coles’ account that wasn’t repaid.

Coles remembered signing a loan agreement from behind bars where he agreed to lend O’Connor $25,000 and that hand-written note was presented to the tribunal.

At one point his bank balance dropped to just $2000 but in the days leading up to Coles’ release from prison O’Connor deposited $70,000.

A Law Society inspector told the tribunal that police investigated the money taken from Coles’ account and concluded that because most of it had been put back, no theft had occurred. They referred the matter to the Law Society.

The charges against O’Connor relate to borrowing money from Coles without a trust account, documenting it or ensuring he had external legal advice, using the bank account without permission, failing to keep a record of the money he took, and procuring gifts from a client.

O’Connor did not co-operate with the Law Society’s investigator and neglected to provide his own bank records to explain the unauthorised withdrawals, the tribunal heard.

The tribunal described O’Connor’s unsigned medical certificate excusing his appearance at today’s hearing as “flimsy at best”.

“Maybe he miraculously recovers after the hearing finishes,” said tribunal chairman Dr John Adams.

Wayne Coles discovered money had been withdrawn from his account when he presented his bank details to the Porirua Community Law Centre to aid in a court dispute to get his dog back. Photo / Jeremy Wilkinson

When Coles was released from prison in 2018 the person he’d been paying to look after his dog, Storm, didn’t want to give the pet back so he went to the Disputes Tribunal.

The Porirua Community Law Centre helped him with the case where he had to prove he’d been paying for Storm’s care.

It was lawyers there who asked questions about the $150,000 withdrawals made by someone called “Alwyn O’Connor”, the tribunal heard.

Coles said he’d hired O’Connor in 2015 to settle a family trust dispute involving his inheritance after his father died.

O’Connor then represented him in the following years when he spiralled out of control and was convicted of methamphetamine possession and domestic violence charges before being sent to prison for two years in 2016.

It was while he was behind bars and in the throes of meth withdrawal that Coles claims O’Connor asked to borrow $25,000.

“When I was released from prison I didn’t want to look at the numbers. I was just happy to be free,” Coles said.

“Initially I was very confused with the numbers and what they all meant and I knew something was amiss - there were red flags, but there was just too many things going on for me to understand it all.”

A screenshot of the woman's bank records provided to the Herald.

O’Connor’s lawyer, Gordon Paine, questioned how accurate Coles’ memory was given his recent history of substance abuse and also raised several complaints Coles had made to his bank about fraudulent withdrawals before he and O’Connor had met in 2015.

“Clearly someone else had access to your account and PIN numbers,” Paine said.

He suggested the $22,000 of withdrawals in question could have been made by anyone with access to Coles’ Eftpos card.

However, Coles said the only person he trusted with his card and his PIN number was O’Connor.

Paine said his client claimed it was Coles who offered to lend O’Connor money so he could progress a planned property development and that the lawyer advised him to seek further independent legal advice to avoid a conflict of interest.

The Standards Committee claimed the opposite was true.

Another former client gave evidence that she loaned O’Connor $50,000 after he came to her “hat in hand” on the day she settled her divorce.

The Standards Committee alleged O’Connor withdrew funds from Coles’ account without permission and used it to pay the woman back in $1000 instalments.

Paine objected to the woman’s evidence being heard because she had lodged her own complaint which was still being investigated by the Law Society.

The tribunal rejected Paine’s objection and said O’Connor should have disclosed the surrounding circumstances of his financial comings and goings but instead had provided the Law Society inspector only with heavily redacted bank records.

Paine said that after the woman lent O’Connor the money there was simply no way to prove what he did with it and that all she would have seen was it being deposited back into her account.

The hearing continues tomorrow and the tribunal ordered O’Connor to appear for cross-examination.

The tribunal will hear from another former client who claimed his severance package was bungled by O’Connor.