Notebook used by Bovale may detail payments

It was "possible" a small spiral notebook used by Bovale Development contained details of payments which did not go through the…

It was "possible" a small spiral notebook used by Bovale Development contained details of payments which did not go through the company's books, the tribunal heard.

Details of three payments made to Mr James Gogarty by Bovale Developments were contained in the notebook which had a picture of a kitten on the front.

Mr Michael Bailey described it as the "pussy book" and said he believed his brother, Tom, used it to record people's wages.

Counsel for the tribunal, Mr Desmond O'Neill SC, said: "Is it possible this book is a record of payments which were made other than through the books of the company".

READ MORE

Mr Bailey replied: "That may be, but I don't know".

"I am asking you whether or not these payments [included in the book] were made other than through the books of the company," said Mr O'Neill.

"It is possible that they weren't made through the books of the company," Mr Bailey responded.

He added that he had not made any attempts to establish what exactly the payments in the book referred to.

He said he was not aware of the book at the time because he did not deal with wages.

Answering Mr O'Neill, Mr Bailey said on site, his brother Mr Tom Bailey, would agree each individual operative's wages and they would be entered in handwriting in the book.

One for July 26th, 1990, looked like "10 RD3 10K to Gogarty". When asked who wrote it, Mr Bailey said he believed it was Ms Caroline Bailey, Mr Thomas Bailey's wife, who worked on a part-time basis wherever the site office was located.

Mr O'Neill asked if he would see this document as significant.

Mr Bailey said it was significant in that three individual payments were recorded to Mr Gogarty.

Mr O'Neill said was it not the case that before a housing development was completed, houses were referred to by number and road as in number 10 in road three?

Mr Bailey agreed this might be the case.

Therefore, Mr O'Neill said, it could refer to a house site number 10 in road three, in respect of which £10,000 was paid to Mr Gogarty.

Mr Bailey said that might be.

Counsel said that evidence had been that no payment was made by Mr Bailey in respect of any individual site: it was for a finder's fee.

Was Mr Gogarty to be paid in relation to any site on any plot of land?

Mr Bailey said he did not know. He could only read what was in front of him.

He believed that if any money was paid to Mr Gogarty, it was either taken out of the bank or somewhere else. He did not know where it came from.

"I can't remember giving it to him or taking it out," Mr Bailey said.

Asked if he withdrew it from the bank, Mr Bailey replied: "I don't believe I ever withdrew anything from the bank. I don't deal with the bank."

He said the only exception was in connection with the £50,000 cheque on November 23rd, 1991.

Mr O'Neill referred to another entry dated October 11th, 1990, which referred to £15,000 to Gogarty.

Mr Bailey said he did not know how it came to be paid.

He believed it was a true record. He believed Caroline must have put the entries there. He would have discussed it with Tom and he would have told Caroline.

Mr Gogarty got on to him numerous times and he directed him to Tom. Mr Bailey said he would tell Mr Gogarty there was no money at the moment.

He did not know if Tom ever paid him. "I don't believe Tom ever gave Gogarty any money.

"He [Gogarty] would put me under such pressure and was insisting on getting the money he was entitled to and I'd say at the minute I haven't the money and I'd say ring Tom and he'll explain.

"We didn't have the money at the time and Tom would explain the same thing," he said.

Mr O'Neill asked who would have got the money.

Mr Bailey replied it would have been Tom or Caroline.

The third payment in the book was dated June 21st, 1990, and referred to a payment of June 19th, 1990. The note accompanying it read: "£5k to JG via MB. 2 extensions at Swords at 19/6/1990."

Mr Bailey said the reference to JG he understood was a payment to Mr James Gogarty, but he did not know what the reference to extensions meant.

Mr O'Neill asked Mr Bailey had he ever discussed this particular note with Ms Caroline Bailey and he said he had not.