Learning her clients wished to change accounting adviser, Wellington-based Sandy Dai bad-mouthed their choice of Auckland chartered accountant Kevin Chiv saying Mr Chiv was banned from working as an accountant, had a record of inappropriate sexual relations with his female clients and needed psychiatric help. All untrue. Ms Dai was ordered to pay Mr Chiv $50,000 for defamation. The Institute of Chartered Accountants struck her off the register of chartered accountants for what was described as unprofessional and at times disgraceful conduct.
The High Court was told a Cambodian couple running a bakery on Auckland’s North Shore looked to change their accounting adviser in early 2021.
They had become dissatisfied with services provided by Ms Dai; both the inconvenience of dealing with a Wellington-based accountant and her increasing fees. Mr Chiv, also known as Khieng Khiv, was preferred. He is a fellow Cambodian speaker.
When asked to forward her client records to Mr Chiv, Ms Dai responded by sending multiple emails to her then client demeaning Mr Chiv.
Her statement that Mr Chiv was ‘banned from trading,’ was untrue, Justice Moore ruled.
In 2019, Mr Chiv had been disciplined by the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants after admitting multiple charges including: providing false and misleading information to the Institute; negligence or incompetence bringing the profession into disrepute; and breach of Institute rules. He was suspended from Institute membership for two years.
Mr Chiv’s suspension did not stop him working as a tax agent or doing accounting services work for clients, Justice Moore said. He was not ‘banned.’
Ms Dai’s allegation that Mr Chiv had sexual relations with female clients came from her misreading of the Institute’s published decision when suspending Mr Chiv. When deciding on an appropriate penalty for Mr Chiv, the Institute made passing reference to a published health sector disciplinary hearing in which a nurse faced professional disciplinary charges for improper sexual relations with clients. This was not a reference to Mr Chiv; it referred to facts in an entirely unrelated health sector disciplinary hearing.
Ms Dai not only defamed Mr Chiv by falsely accusing him of sexual impropriety, but then repeated the defamation in a subsequent email to her client after being warned by Mr Chiv that her comments were defamatory, Justice Moore said.
Ms Dai’s comment that Mr Chiv needed psychiatric help might be dismissed as a commonplace jibe as someone being ‘crazy’ or ‘ridiculous,’ Justice Moore said.
But her comment became defamatory in the context of her added comments that Mr Chiv might be delusional, that consulting with a GP ‘would be a good start,’ and that he needed support from his friends and family.
These additional comments by Ms Dai suggested Mr Chiv genuinely needed psychiatric treatment, Justice Moore said.
Ms Dai was ordered to pay $50,000 damages for defamation.
Her defamatory comments were made to a limited audience; Ms Dai’s former client.
Mr Chiv did not come to court with a stellar professional reputation.
The court was told that not only had Mr Chiv previously faced professional disciplinary action in 2019 by the Institute of Chartered Accountants, but in the same year the Immigration Advisors Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal fined him $7000 and required him to reapply in one year as a licenced provider if he wished to resume acting as an immigration provider.
The court was told Mr Chiv had failed to exercise due care and diligence in filing immigrant visa applications, delegated work to unqualified staff, and had breached client confidentiality.
Chiv v. Dai – High Court (30.09.24)
25.001