24 September 2015

Deceit: Peng v. Li

Angered by a handshake deal that went sour, an Auckland property developer threatened his business associate with an axe.  Civil action in the courts is the better way to settle disputes said Justice Fogarty, awarding $507,000 damages against the business associate for deceit.
The High Court was told property developer Tom Peng flew into a rage after losing money advanced to associate Richard Li for a property development planned for the Auckland suburb of Epsom.  Mr Li claimed the payment was agreed compensation for his failed investment in a fitness centre.  Mr Peng denied there was any such deal for compensation. 
The two men had a history of business dealings having co-operated on a series of Auckland property developments between 2010 and 2012.  The projects turned a profit.  Deals were done on a handshake; there were no written agreements.  According to Mr Peng, another project was suggested by Mr Li in April 2012.  Mr Li’s Epsom neighbour was recently widowed and looking to sell.  If Mr Peng were to put up $507,000 cash to buy out the neighbour Mr Li said he would put his adjoining property into the pot and the two sites could be amalgamated and redeveloped.
Evidence was given that Mr Peng handed over $507,000 borrowed from Kookmin Bank, thinking this gave him a 35 per cent stake in the Epsom redevelopment.  Learning later that Mr Li had no intention of proceeding, Mr Peng armed himself with an axe purchased from the Warehouse and threatened his business associate in an attempt to get a written acknowledgement that the $507,000 paid was a debt due.  A brawl followed with Mr Li left bruised and bleeding.
In the High Court, Mr Li said the $507,000 payment had nothing to do with an Epsom property redevelopment; it was payment to buy out his interest in a business called Harbour Fitness.  Mr Li had put in $400,000 and was promised a 24 per cent return, the same as promised earlier to Mr Peng.  Mr Peng lost $900,000 when Harbour Fitness failed.  Mr Li alleged that Mr Peng had agreed to compensate him for his $400,000 lost.
It was to come out in evidence that Mr Li’s Harbour Fitness investment was funded in large part by his brother then living in China.  His brother emigrated to Canada during 2012 and the $507,000 received by Mr Li from Mr Peng was used to repay the brother and help pay the cost of setting up in Canada.
Justice Fogarty ruled there was an agreement to develop the Epsom properties and the $507,000 paid by Mr Peng was part of this project.  While Mr Li initially may have intended to proceed with the project, he was liable for deceit in later diverting the funds and denying any existence of the prior agreement, His Honour said.
Peng v. Li – High Court (24.09.15)

15.108