A Rotorua emergency housing security company and its sole director have been found guilty of misconduct by a licensing authority.
It follows an investigation by TVNZ's Sunday last year into the grim conditions for some of our most vulnerable on Fenton Street.
The authority's investigation began in March last year, before the Sunday exposé aired.
Tigers Express Security (formerly Visions Security) and Raymond 'Tiny' Deane, the security company's sole director, were accused of employing security workers that didn't have the required certificates to work.
Deane knowingly employed two security guards with gang affiliations for months, the investigation found.
The Complaints Investigation and Prosecution Unit (CIPU) also investigated whether Deane was suitable to be a certificate and licence holder, with the investigation coming after a complaint from a member of the public.
The authority has put off its final decision on an appropriate penalty.
However, the authority "can indicate" Tigers Express's license will likely be suspended or cancelled in late August, unless Deane can provide evidence that certain conditions have been met.
He has to prove that Tigers Express has arranged for "an experienced and competent security company officer or licence holder" to manage the company's security work and guards.
He must also prove he is no longer involved in the management of the company's security work.
The Housing Minister has been approached for comment.
The investigation
CIPU "concluded that much of the information in relation to the behaviour or conduct of individual security guards was third hand and hard to substantiate", other than incidents that Tigers Security had already followed up with "appropriate disciplinary action".
However, other issues were uncovered.
The investigation found that some of the guards had been employed without the proper certificate of approval (COA) — and some of them "continued to be employed after their applications for a COA were declined".
"Tigers Express did not employ the security workers," the authority's decision explains.
"[But] there is evidence their employer, Visions of a Helping Hand Charitable Trust (Visions), subsequently relied on Tigers Express's licence to continue to employ security guards who had been declined a COA."
Deane is both the chief executive of Visions and the sole director of Tigers Express.
He argued that "when Visions first started employing security guards he understood they were in-house security and therefore Visions did not need a licence". Deane said he incorporated Tigers Security and applied for a licence as soon as he was advised of the requirement.
"He advises Tigers Express was set up as an arm of Visions and therefore he thought it was appropriate for Visions to continue to employ the security guards even though the licence was held by Tigers Express," the decision reads.
He later separated the security company from Visions and changed its name to Tigers Express Security Limited.
Now, all of the security workers are employed by Tigers Express.
The investigation also found that Tigers Express traded as Tiger Security for months, between May 2022 and late September that year.
The Rotorua security company isn't connected in any way to Tiger Security based in Waimauku, Auckland.
"Deane accepts that Tigers Express traded as Tiger Security in contravention of the Act but advises that this was not a deliberate breach and he stopped trading as Tiger Security as soon as it was brought to his attention," the decision states.
"He says this and any other breaches of the Act were not intentional or deliberate."
The charitable trust
The decision noted that "many of the issues raised in the CIPU report relate more to Visions than to Tigers Express".
"As Visions is not a licence holder while CIPU can prosecute them, I have no authority to take any disciplinary action against them," private security personnel licensing authority Trish McConnell said.
"In addition, as outlined at the hearing, I accept Visions' board was largely acting on advice they were given.
"Therefore CIPU have concluded that no further action will be taken against Visions for any past actions or inactions."
However, as Deane is both the CEO of Visions and the managing director of Tigers Express, his responsibility for potential breaches by Visions was also taken into account in the complaint against him.
The decision
The authority ruled that Tigers Express and Deane contravened the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010.
One of the breaches related to the company operating under the wrong name.
"A separate and unrelated security company called Tiger Security Limited came under unwanted attention after Tigers Express, trading as Tiger Security, attracted negative media attention," the decision read.
"As a result, Tiger Security Limited received abuse over social media and had to contact all its clients to assure them they were not the same company and were no way related to the Rotorua based company trading as Tiger Security."
While the breach may not have been intentional, it raised questions about Deane's suitability as director.
Read more: Undercover report: Rotorua's emergency housing crisis exposed
And Deane accepted that he employed two guards knowing that they had gang affiliations.
The pair started working for Visions despite convictions disqualifying them from receiving the appropriate certification, and they continued working for Visions "for several months" after their full certificates of approval were declined.
"Deane advised the CIPU investigators that both Security Guards A and B no longer worked in security after their COAs were declined. This was clearly incorrect," the decision read.
"I therefore conclude that Deane intentionally breached the Act by engaging Security Guards A and B on behalf of Visions.
"Deane is also a party to Visions running a security business without holding a security licence and by wrongly advising Visions they could rely on Tigers Express's security licence to run a security business."
Despite Deane's lawyer arguing "lack of deliberate intention" meant he wasn't guilty of misconduct, the authority disagreed, concluding he "either intentionally or negligently contravened the Act and most likely breached the contract Visions had with HUD".
SHARE ME