How does a ratbag banned director have a company?

The Herald, with their “decent journalists, trained and skilled” has a fluff piece on serial ratbag and trasher of companies Steve Crow. In it he makes some interesting claims.

With business partner Simon Johnston, he has formed DSS Ecotech, which has been given permission by Waterfront Auckland to trial ultrasonic anti-fouling equipment in the Viaduct Harbour as a measure against Mediterranean fanworm (Sabella spallanzanii).

Mr Crow told the Herald his company held the New Zealand rights to what he considered the most powerful and technically advanced systems of their type in the world, and which had proven effective at killing the pests around the world.

Now this is interesting…Steve Crow is still a disqualified director…there is no possible way that this is “his” company.¬†

Source: Companies Office

Source: Companies Office

The Companies Office records for the company show that it is neither his company nor is he in control…despite his claims to the media. His brother though is involved…again…with the same addresses for all the other companies that Steve Crow says he owns but doesn’t because he is a disqualified director.

I wonder what the Companies Office will think of a man who is disqualified saying something is his company and clearly portraying that he is a principal and operating a company.

Why don’t journalists check out the veracity of the details when ratbags approach them for some free advertising via content and stories?

Source: Jamie Morton¬†@ NZ Herald with additional reporting by Cam Slater, because NZ Herald are just doing fluffy press releases for crims and bankrupts”

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Sidey

    Love the source attribution! They won’t get the sarcasm though.

  • Agent BallSack

    Hah love the byline!

    • Steve Crow

      So do I. I love being a ratbag. Funny.

      • Dave

        That’s really funny Steve, most ethical business people and the Companies office don’t share your weird sense of humor. Ratbag, that’s a bit mild considering history.

      • Agent BallSack

        I appreciate you trade on your name and apologise if you think it was an unnecessary slur. Good luck with your business, Steve – it can be good to be a ratbag occasionally though…Friday nights mostly!

        • Steve Crow

          No worries; I don’t give a toss one way or another about the byline or what is written – as long as it is FACTUALLY ACCURATE AND NOT DEFAMATORY; this site has a big following, yes, but not everyone believes everything that is written on here and those that do… more fool them.

          I stand by who I am and what I do. At least I don’t make a living (paltry though it is) off wrecking other peoples lives and then throwing them to the wolves.

          I wish I was a ratbag on Friday nights, sadly I am usually home having a quiet night. Old age beckons

          • Dave

            Old age, and the ones who have been burnt……. Old age beckons for me too Steve, but my days off and weekends are usually with friends and acquaintances. Never burn mates or bridges.

  • Mr_Blobby

    Steve Crow for Mayor

    • Sir

      He tried that years ago can you believe, no really he did.

  • Guest

    The sleazy factor reaching record levels once again

  • Dominic Dominic

    The sleaze factor reaching record levels once again

    • Steve Crow

      What’s sleazy about trying to solve an environmental problem? Weird comment.

  • Andy C

    The 2nd issue seems nit picking. I regular talk about what *my* company does, but I am not trying to claim I own it.

    • Steve Crow

      As in I am a 33% shareholder, albeit via third parties, I am as much an owner of this company as anyone.

      • Dave

        As per your above statement, Facts People FACTS,. 33% is not “THE” owner, it is in fact a part owner, maybe the majority of shares are owned by you, but 33% is not the outright owner.

        Facts Steve, Facts.

        • Steve Crow

          Just like my statement about our successful treatment of a 40ft Riviera boat somehow got reported as “a 21m launch” – never believe everything you read in the media, they often get some of the facts wrong.

          DSS is my company, and two other peoples.

      • Sir

        33% Shareholder, probably a FREEMASON also, hahahahahaha

  • Dave

    While some think its Trivial, it is bordering on Misleading and deceptive conduct. The Horrid need to be very very careful what they are publishing, and as Cam says, a quick Google search would have revealed all. However, i know times are tough, perhaps the Herald Repeater’s don’t have internet access any longer.

    The local paper here ran a story on our business a few months back, we had to provide them a copy of our business incorporation cert, and sign a statement saying the details provided were correct. Funny this seems standard practice elsewhere, but NOT for Granny Herald.

    Seriously, they could have “repeated” what Crow said, then had a story just as Cam had, “Our investigations also reveal Mr Crow is BANNED……….. But no, they just repeat and provide another reason the publication is so suited as a fish and chip wrapper.

    • Steve Crow

      Steve Crow is banned from being a company director, not from owning a company. Facts people, facts.

      • Dave

        Steve I stand (slightly) corrected on my post – After BANNED, i should have added…… From being a Director of any company in NZ until 16 April 2014.

        Whichever way you dice the facts, it still remains there were some really dodgy dealings, a ban on being a director is not issued from filing a late tax return, its a very very serious offence, I am surprised the owners Licensors of the technology issued you the rights, or did you omit to inform them of you being banned as a director of any company in NZ until 2014. (Keeping it factual there Steve)

        • Steve Crow

          Nonsense Dave. I was banned for liquidating 3 companies in five years. many, many people of liquidated far more and not faced discipline, but then they weren’t in the adult entertainment industry so are afforded much less scrutiny.

          • Toryboy

            Are you intending to pay creditors of those companies? even though there may not be a legal obligation?

          • Steve Crow

            No I am not. That is not how it works sadly. I have been on the receiving end more times than not – indeed when the Truth newspaper was liquidated recently when the venerable Mr Slater was the editor it went under owing me me over $5k, which I will never see. Indeed the Director of that company has liquidated far more companies than I have including previous Truth companies) but has not been prosecuted – he isn’t a controversial high profile target like me.

          • Toryboy

            At least you are honest about it; that is something I suppose!

          • if only he was

          • Gee Steve…what about the loot you got paid in the last two weeks?…I may have been the editor but it was your brother not paying the bills.

          • Sir

            Tell us more Cam, I missed my Truth each week.
            It was starting to feel like a REAL newspaper should again!
            RISE UP! GIVE US THE TRUTH :-)

          • Sir

            You & Cook what a team!, the Scandals I miss much on a Thursday.

          • Mr_Blobby

            The bottom line is that, based on your track record, you should never have anything to do with the ownership or running of a business.

            However if your penis in inversely proportional to the size of your ego, then you do qualify to be Mayor of Auckland.

          • Can he last longer than Len though?

          • Dave

            boo hoo for you. Had you resourced the company, and the changes Cam needed, the publication would likely be alive today Steve. It was a sick sick puppy, shame you didn’t call Cam in sooner! Truth was fucked with the Porn, fucked without it, the turn around almost too much. You wonder why Cam’s blog is doing so well, sure as hell is not your influence, ah….. lets see, its Cams blog, his direction, his team, seems to be going pretty well to me!!

          • Sir

            Your such a special treat Crow, you really are.

          • Sir

            Nor were they probably ratbags either, oh you missed that point didn’t you?

        • Never in the dark…..

          http://bit.ly/16pDkdw

          This
          company is now overdue in its obligation to file an annual return. If
          the annual return is not filed immediately the Registrar will initiate
          action to remove the company from the register.

          The
          Registrar of Companies is satisfied that this company has ceased to
          carry on business and has initiated action to remove the company from
          the register. Public notice has been given and the objection period has lapsed. The Registrar will continue with the removal process.

          Full legal name:

          David Bruce
          CROW

          Residential Address:

          85 Quail Road, Kaukapakapa, 0984
          , New Zealand

          Appointment Date:
          11 Jun 2007

          Consent:

          Link to Consent Form

          Historic data for directors
          Hide History

          Former Directors

          Full legal name:

          Crow
          STEPHEN PETER

          Residential Address:

          37a Walmsley Road, Otahuhu
          ,

          Appointment Date:
          25 Feb 2008

          Ceased date:
          12 Nov 2008

          Consent:

          Link to Consent Form

      • Arran Hunt

        That includes acting as a defacto director.

        • Yeah…. how to prove it.

          • Steve Crow

            Nothing to prove oh, and a search of defacto in the Companies Act 1993 returned:

            ‘defacto appeared 0 times in 0 sections’

            FACTS PEOPLE, FACTS.

          • Arran Hunt

            Steve, sometimes someone can use a word that might not appear in an Act. In this case the courts appear to like using the word de facto more than the Act.

            Though I would love to see someone using “that word does not appear in the Act” as a defence. That would be hilarious.

            You might enjoy reading Delegat v Norman [2012] NZHC 2358.

          • Bunswalla

            Although a search for de facto returned 8 results in 2 sections.

          • Steve Crow

            Ummm, they refer to de facto spouses etc.

            Slight difference.

            Nowhere is de facto director mentioned; not that I am one anyway.

          • Bunswalla

            What does “I am a 33% shareholder, albeit via third parties” mean, exactly?

          • That’s a good question.

          • Bunswalla

            Particularly when the Companies Office lists three shareholders:

            – EZISOFT LIMITED (which has 1 shareholder who is not Steve Crow)
            – HWGA COMPANY LIMITED (which has 2 shareholders, neither of whom is Steve Crow)
            – Simon Hugh JOHNSTON (who is also not Steve Crow)

            So according to the Facts, people, facts, you’re still telling lies to the Herald, who lap them up without doing the 45 seconds due diligence you might expect from a decent journalist, trained and skilled.

            You wouldn’t be disguising your shareholding in a company to defeat creditors would you, Steve? That would be a bit dodgy.

          • Never in the dark…..

            Ezisoft…..obviously the reason he peddles smut.

          • Sir

            Any guess’s what “HWGA” stands for ?

          • I just mean, that by putting someone forward that acts on your instructions but is the person on all legal documents on your behalf is not something that is easy to prove by anyone making such an accusation.

          • Arran Hunt

            A marine biologist and a marine company which he refers to as his company that he founded. I think most of it would prove itself in the light of day.

      • Sir

        Fact, you always seem to have your companies since banned, under your brothers / family / friends name while seeming to be pulling the strings, so easy for anyone so see its a sad joke.

  • Col
    • Steve Crow

      That would be correct Col if I was a bankrupt, which I am not and never have been. I posted a comment on here with the facts, let’s see if it appears r get moderated out (“censored”)

      • tarkwin

        Always give a guy a chance, hope the pest eradication goes well and leave the dodgy stuff to Len.

        • Dave

          Tarkwin…… agree in part, but google the history.

          • tarkwin

            I know what you’re saying Dave, but at least he’s trying and he has the capacity. At least it’s not another phoenix.

      • I’ve seen nothing that comes even close to needing to be moderated (“censored”). 1) don’t lie 2) don’t attack people personally 3) stick to the topic of the post.

        Tick.Tick. Tick.

        As you were Mr Crow.

        • Steve Crow

          Was talking about a detailed and factual comment I posted on here but which has not appeared – so I assume Mr Slater censored it since it corrected his sloppy reporting.

          • Now we have a problem. I see no trace of it in the “Deleted Comments”, there is no audit trail of it being deleted. I’ve asked the others and nobody claims to have deleted a thing. So, as someone once said, don’t attribute to malice what is equally explained by stupidity – for the sake of this situation we’ll call it a glitch.

            If you would like to have another go at it, or email it directly to me (click on the avatar for my email address), then I’ll be most happy to ensure it makes an appearance – given I can still give it three ticks.

            As long as I can give it the three ticks, it goes up.

          • Steve Crow

            Well, I wrote it, I posted it, it is not there but I am sure as hell not writing it again. So go ahead, call me a liar. Whatever, bored with this now.

            Back to selling porn.

          • Dave

            I will just make a mental note, and file it with the erst of your history and proven unreliability.

            Seriously, if it was so important to you, you would re-post it or send it to Pete. Suppose its Put up or SHUT UP.

          • happy to oblige…liar

          • Sir

            Good on you for shining a light on this serial ratbag, keep it up, tick, tick, tick!!! AAA++++

          • longjohn

            Hmm a lying dickhead!

          • Allan

            who the hell pays for porn anymore?

      • History of Violence

        Steve since you are being all upfront , what happened bout those pesky pistol charges? busting caps in the back of the block etc.

  • Toryboy

    God help the creditors, is all I can say. People make mistakes but three companies and unpaid creditors? not impressed.

    • IntrinsicValue

      Three companies and three sets of unpaid creditors spells “fail, fail, fail” in any language. The guy should be banned from owning or operating anything, even an ice cream stall, where other peoples money is involved.

      • Sir

        And the rest one can only guess.

  • Steve R

    As a bankrupt he isint even aloud to work for a friend or family member .

    • Being a banned director of liquidated companies and being declared bankrupt as a person isn’t the same thing. Steve Crow has stated elsewhere he hasn’t been declared bankrupt.

    • Col

      He is not bankrupt, but your comment is correct if you are B/R

  • Never in the dark…..

    Since this device sees to lower lifeforms with some finality I’d also suggest that Crow stay out of the water when it’s in use.

  • Kimbo

    http://www.jaycar.co.nz/productView.asp?ID=KC5498

    Funny, Looked at distributing these but their performance is still under review.

  • John Ripley

    It’s easily done and a common practice, Cameron. The banned director simply registers a company, naming a relative (wife, brother, son) as the sole director. The dummy director takes no active part in the company and the effective management is in the hands of the banned director – even though he is also banned from managing a company. How is the Companies Office going to find out?

52%