Diocesan School for Girls refused to refund ‘tainted’ $50,000 in tuition to scam victim

It told the victim that while its position “may be frustrating for you, I am sure you will understand that we are a school and we also have responsibilities and obligations”.

Disgraced lawyer Rohineet Sharma faces up to seven years in prison if convicted of laundering the proceeds of a complex investment fraud that siphoned off $400,000 Far North luxury yacht skipper Tim Michalick in January last year.

Police say the money ended up with Sharma Kiwibank business account before it was immediately transferred to pay contractors working on his family’s luxury home in St Heliers, or sent to other bank accounts under his control.

$50,000 was also allegedly used to pay his daughter’s college tuition.

Sharma will defend the charges in a judge-only trial next year.

He was arrested in May 2023, according to court documents showing where police believed Michalick’s stolen money was spent.

In August last year, Michalick wrote a letter to the school, explaining how he had been defrauded and telling staff that Sharma had allegedly used the stolen money to pay tuition fees.

The letter advised that Sharma was now in court on money laundering charges relating to two separate victims and that Kiwibank had removed Sharma as a client and prevented him from opening another New Zealand bank account.

“I am a family man with two young daughters whose life has been turned upside down by the actions of this individual,” Michalick wrote.

“He (allegedly) stole our entire life savings and to this day my family and I have only gotten about half of the money back.”

Michalick told the school he had tried every possible way to get the outstanding money back.

“I would now kindly ask you to take moral action and return the stolen money you received to its rightful owner.

“I appreciate your understanding and… I am sure you will agree that this man is not an ideal client for the Diocesan School.”

Commenting the next day, director Heather McRae said she regretted Michalick’s situation “which must be a nightmare”.

“It is good to know that you have contacted the banks involved and they will no doubt have the capacity through the courts and legal measures to ensure that the other half of your money is returned.

“We wish you all the best in pursuing this and we hope based on what you have described that Mr. Sharma receives appropriate consequence from the legal process.

“Unfortunately, we are not involved in this process and cannot assist you with information or support. While this may be frustrating for you, I am sure you will understand that we are a school and we have responsibilities and obligations.”

Michalick wrote back to express his disappointment.

‘I had hoped that the diocesan school, which had a certain reputation, would take the time to help a victim get his life back… but I was clearly mistaken.

“Personally, I don’t see how withholding stolen money is any different than not returning stolen property, for example a stolen vehicle. But for some reason you see it differently.”

He warned that the story would eventually become public, including the school’s refusal to help.

Michalick told Herald he believed that the school’s position was cynical and hypocritical, especially given the values ​​the school encouraged students to pursue, including involvement in “moral and ethical social issues”.

“The school has a moral obligation to at least treat my case seriously rather than simply dismiss it.”

Retired University of Auckland law professor Bill Hodge said the school was not aware of any “taint” on the funds at the time they accepted the money.

So there was no legal obligation to repay the money.

It then became a moral question whether the school should return the money knowing where it came from, especially given the values ​​the school promoted to the community.

“I am not an expert on morality.

“I just don’t see any moral guilt at the school because, in retrospect, one of the parents was (allegedly) a questionable source of the money.”

Hodge said courts had the power under the Sentencing Act to order compensation for victims of crime, although offenders were often left with little money after paying for their defence.

The other option was for victims to file a costly civil suit in the Supreme Court.

The chairman of the Diocesan Council, Jenny Spillane, said: “We sympathize with those affected, but the school cannot comment on the allegations due to ongoing legal proceedings in which the school is not involved.”

Lane Nichols is Deputy Head of News and senior journalist for the New Zealand Herald with more than twenty years of industry experience.

Subscribe to The Daily Ha free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.