Frank Hynes denies deliberately withholding money due to creditors

Wexford jeweller Frank Hynes who, along with his businessman cousin Alan Hynes, is subject of proceedings for alleged fraudulent and reckless trading has denied before the High Court that he deliberately withheld money due to creditors.

Frank Hynes rejected claims that transfers of large sums of money from his company’s accounts to the personal joint account of himself and his wife Martina Hynes were done to hide it from creditors and to pay for personal debts, including nursing home charges for his late mother.

He said some €800,000 transferred between the two accounts was paid back and neither he nor his wife personally benefited from any of the transactions. He said the personal account was used to save paying hefty bank charges on the company account.

He was under cross-examination by David Whelan BL, for liquidator Myles Kirby, who is seeking to make Alan Hynes liable for €4.8 million debts of the companies Mr Kirby has wound up and Frank Hynes liable for some €1.5 million.

Alan Hynes was due to be cross-examined via video link on Wednesday afternoon but the court heard he had not rejoined the link in the afternoon.

Mr Justice Michael Quinn said he was prepared to make the “umpteenth allowance” for Alan Hynes because he is not legally represented and allowed him to attend via video link for cross-examination on Thursday morning.

Mr Kirby is liquidator of Tuskar Property Holdings, of which Alan Hynes was a director until 2009 when it became wholly owned by Alan Hynes's brother-in-law, Cambridge based Dr Adrian O'Reilly.

He is also liquidator of Hynes Jewellers Wexford Ltd and JW Fashions Ltd. Hynes Jewellers lost its premises in 2016 over rent arrears.

JW Fashions, which also operated as a jewellers, was then established in another premises up the street from the old HJW premises in Main Street, Wexford. The liquidator says JW Fashions was a “phoenix-like entity” used to ensure the jewellery business could continue but without having to meet the debts of Hynes Jewellers.

Frank Hynes, who was a director of Hynes Jewellers, and his wife Martina Hynes, and a company called Tuskar Investment Group Ltd which is 100 per cent owned by Dr O'Reilly, are also respondents in the case along with Alan and Dr O'Reilly.

Denied claims

The three personal Hynes defendants, who are representing themselves, have denied the liquidator’s claims. Dr O’Reilly, who has not participated in the hearing, previously denied any wrongdoing in a written defence.

Alan Hynes had earlier on Wednesday cross-examined Mr Kirby during which Mr Hynes repeatedly denied he had done anything with the intention of defraud creditors.

He said he found the figure of €4.8 million for which the liquidator was seeking to make him liable was “shocking” and disputed that he could be made liable for certain elements of it.

Mr Kirby told him the claims against him were being made on the basis of fraudulent and reckless trading, acting as a shadow director when he was disqualified or restricted, failing to keep proper accounts, and of trying to put funds beyond the reach of creditors.

Mr Kirby also said Alan Hynes had signed a number of blank cheques which Alan Hynes now claimed were filled in by others. These included one for €150,000 which was fraudulently transferred to the personal account of Frank and Martina Hynes, Mr Kirby told the court.

Mr Hynes said he often handed signed blank cheques to his cousins to fill in so they could run their business. He did not believe, because of who he gave them to, that this was reckless or done fraudulently.

Supplement evidence

Frank Hynes, who was allowed to supplement evidence he gave last week, said monies paid from the Hynes Jewellers account to the personal account of himself and his wife were all paid back and more. All in all, he said some €800,000 – €11,000 more than had been taken out of the company account – was paid back to Hynes Jewellers, he said.

He apologised for not having provided further evidence to back up bank statement figures showing the payments but said he had asked for them from his bank and hoped to have them by Friday.

At one stage, when asked by Mr Whelan, why he had not complied with a July 2020 court order for full disclosure of all evidence related to these accounts, he said he would not answer counsel’s question “because I don’t like the way you are badgering me”.

He accepted that using Hynes Jewellers monies to fund the new JW Fashions venture was careless and reckless.

The case continues.