You can help us put a stop to online scams before they grow too big and end-up ruining thousands of lives. A scam is a scam, doesn’t matter if it’s big or small. Now that this is out of the way, let’s get started with the review.
Larry Weltman claims that at Weltman Consulting, he is dedicated to providing the most thorough real estate sales and brokerage consulting services to his clients. What he shows off is that for realtors and brokerages, Weltman Consulting specializes in market consulting and real estate sales. Larry further claims that he provides consulting services to assist clients with the creation and modification of company plans, marketing, brokerage administration, and cash flow management.
What is further claimed and described by Larry Weltman is that when he saw the real estate sales market was going through significant changes—moving toward more independent realtors who shoulder the majority of the business expenditures alone and work independently—he founded Weltman Consulting. Brokerages have had to incur higher costs due to regulatory regulations, and as a result, their commissions have drastically decreased due to greater competition.
To make sure they are fully prepared for the standards and obligations associated with running a real estate sales firm, Weltman Consulting offers consulting services to realtors and real estate brokerages.
Larry Weltman- Convicted for fraud
Following his criminal conviction for fraud in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Larry Harry Weltman, of Thornhill, was found guilty of a charge under Rule 201.1 of failing to uphold the good reputation of the profession and its capacity to serve the public interest. Executive vice president and director of a publicly traded corporation that engaged in a deal to buy a business in the strictly regulated gambling industry, and Mr. Larry Weltman held a control management role.
Even though Mr. Weltman’s company was fully aware that the necessary gaming license of the company to be purchased would be rendered void upon the closing of the purchase transaction, it still went ahead and closed the deal, operating the business without a license and without informing the gaming authority of the purchase. Mr. Weltman was prosecuted with fraud and found guilty when the gaming authorities learned that his company was operating illegally. The Institute fined Mr. Weltman $3,000 and kicked him out.
Larry Weltman- Charges against Larry Weltman
The following allegations are made against Larry Weltman, CA, a member of the Institute, by the Professional Conduct Committee:
- THAT the aforementioned Larry Weltman failed to act in a way that would uphold the profession’s good name and its capacity to serve the public interest when, on or about the 27th day of September 2000, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, found him guilty of a fraud offence in violation of Rule 201.1 of the rules of professional conduct.
Submitted at Toronto on March 5, 2002, day five.
Larry Weltman- Decisions and Orders
Dated on August 15, 2002, LARRY HARRY WELTMAN, CA, a member of the Institute, was accused of violating Rule 201.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Larry Harry Weltman is found guilty of the accusation by the discipline committee after viewing and weighing the available evidence.
Larry Weltman- Order
It is ordered in respect of the charges:
- THAT the hearing’s chair should issue a written reprimand to Mr. Larry Weltman.
- THAT Mr. Weltman be fined the sum of $3,000 and that he is now so ordered. The money must be paid to the Institute within three (3) months of the day this Decision and Order becomes legally binding in accordance with the bylaws.
- THAT Mr. Weltman be ousted from membership in the Institute, which is done hereby.
- THAT notice of this Decision and Order, disclosing Mr. Weltman’s name, be
given after this Decision and Order becomes final under the bylaws, in the form and manner determined by the discipline committee:
- The Public Accountants Council for the Province of Ontario
- The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and The Institute of Chartered Accountants of South Africa
- By Publication in CheckMark
- By Publication in The Globe and M
- THAT Mr. Weltman surrendered his certificate of membership in the Institute to the
discipline committee secretary within ten (10) days from the date this Decision and Order becomes final under the bylaws.
Larry Weltman- Reasons for the Decision and Oder made on August 15, 2002
- On August 15, 2002, this panel of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario’s discipline committee met to hear testimony related to the complaint that Mr. Larry Harry Weltman was facing from the professional conduct committee.
- Barbara Glendinning, the professional conduct committee’s representative, was present. Richard Auger, Mr. Weltman’s attorney, was present at the hearing to represent him.
- The discipline committee’s decision and order were disclosed during the hearing on August 15, 2002, and the official decision and order were signed, dated, and delivered to Mr. Weltman on August 22, 2002. These written reasons, provided in accordance with Bylaw 574, include the charge, the decision, and the order, as well as the committee’s justifications.
Larry Weltman- Decision on the Charge
The following is the charge made against Mr. Weltman by the professional conduct committee on March 5, 2002:
- THAT the aforementioned Larry Weltman failed to act in a way that would uphold the profession’s good name and its capacity to serve the public interest when, on or about the 27th day of September 2000, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, found him guilty of a fraud offense in violation of Rule 201.1 of the rules of professional conduct.
- Mr. Weltman pleaded not guilty to the accusation.
- Ms. Glendinning gave an overview of the professional conduct committee’s case, and filed a document brief that contained the following:
- a certified copy of the Certificate of Conviction of Mr. Weltman in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, for violation of General Business Law Section 352–c, together with a letter from John W. Moscow, Assistant District Attorney for the County of New York, to Barry A. Bohrer, counsel for Mr. Weltman, which sets out the terms of an agreement between the District Attorney and Mr. Weltman
- a certified copy of the indictment against Mr. Weltman
- a copy of General Business Law Section 352–c
- a transcript of the proceedings in the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, on September 27, 2000, before the Honourable Bernard J. Fried, Justice of the Supreme Court, wherein Mr. Weltman pleaded guilty to the criminal indictment, was found guilty and was sentenced by the court.
- Additionally, Ms. Glendinning submitted a document that was meant to be an agreed-upon statement of facts. The parties were attempting to settle some disagreements on this statement when the hearing was not called to order at 10:00 a.m. Mr. Auger objected to certain of the phrases used in the paper, but he did not object to the filing of the document. In light of this, the document, identified as Exhibit 5, was renamed Statement of Allegations Asserted By The Professional Conduct Committee with the consent of both parties.
- With the submission of the document brief and the aforementioned statement of claims, Ms. Glendinning brought her case to a close.
- Mr. Auger omitted to call witnesses. He did not make any representations on Mr. Weltman’s behalf with regard to the charge, other than to make it clear that Mr. Weltman was not making any admissions. While Mr. Auger denied that the documents listed in the document brief were authoritative, he clarified that he wasn’t implying that they weren’t exact copies of the originals.
- Initially known as Laser Friendly Inc., Gaming Lottery Corporation, and lastly GalaxiWorld.com Limited (hence generally referred to as GalaxiWorld), Mr. Weltman served as executive vice president and a director for this publicly traded firm.
- The document brief’s evidence, in particular, the letter from Mr. Moscow to Mr. Bohrer dated September 27, 2000, which was also signed by Mr. Weltman, and the transcript of the criminal proceedings against Mr. Weltman demonstrated that the core of Mr. Weltman’s misconduct was that:
- He worked for GalaxiWorld in a control management position
- GalaxiWorld entered into an agreement to buy Ace Novelty Company’s Specialty Manufacturing division, which operated in the heavily regulated gaming industry and required a license to operate
- He and GalaxiWorld received notice that, upon the final closing of the purchase agreement, the license granted to Ace Novelty for Specialty Manufacturing by the State of Washington would be void.
- Charges were brought against Mr. Weltman in New York when the State of Washington learned that the company was operating without a license. He entered a guilty plea to the aforementioned crime, was found guilty, and was sentenced to five years of unsupervised probation, a $100,000 fine, and $400,000 in restitution to satisfy a civil judgment. Mr. Weltman made the necessary payment of US$500,000.
- In a class action lawsuit filed by shareholders against GalaxiWorld and other parties, including Mr. Weltman, a default judgment that was first secured against GalaxiWorld was reportedly overturned, and Mr. Weltman is now defending the ongoing case. The quantification of the damages incurred by the shareholders was not sufficient for the purposes of this disciplinary action. It is evident from the behavior described above that the conscious choice to disobey the law, notwithstanding the danger, had serious negative effects on the business and its stockholders.
- The committee came to the conclusion that Mr. Weltman was guilty of failing to uphold the profession’s good reputation and its capacity to serve the public interest based on the unambiguous, convincing, and admissible evidence that was presented to it.
- There were no representations made regarding the question of whether the crime for which Mr. Weltman was found guilty fell within Rule 102.1 and thereby gave rise to a rebuttable presumption of guilt under Rule 201.2. The committee felt that the rebuttable presumption applied in this situation, though, and that it had not been refuted.
- However, the rebuttable presumption was not the only basis for the conclusion of professional misconduct. With or without the presumption of guilt afforded by Rule 201.2, in our opinion, the conduct detailed above, culminating in and including the criminal conviction, represented a failure to uphold the profession’s good reputation and its capacity to serve the public interest. Mr. Weltman was therefore adjudged to be guilty of the accusation.
- The hearing resumed when the committee had finished its discussion, and the chair read the committee’s decision into the record.
Larry Weltman- Reprimand
The committee believed that a written reprimand would emphasize to the member the seriousness of his offence and the improperness of his behaviour.
Larry Weltman- Fine
- The committee came to the conclusion that a $3,000 fine was reasonable in this situation.
- Court acknowledged that in most cases, a larger sanction—such as the $10,000 fine imposed in the Rapier case that Ms. Glendinning particularly referred to—would be more appropriate. However, the committee took into account the fact that Mr. Weltman had already paid the New York court US$500,000 and imposed a smaller sentence on that account.
- The committee hopes that the fine will serve as both a general deterrence and a particular deterrent to Mr. Weltman.
Get Justice Suspicious
In conclusion, Mr. Auger’s attempt to downplay Mr. Weltman’s involvement in the incidents leading to his conviction has been rejected outright. The significance of Mr. Weltman’s role in these events cannot be reduced to a mere lapse in judgment.
The letter dated September 27, 2000, signed by Mr. Weltman himself, stands as an undeniable testament to his culpability in the unlawful actions. This document, coupled with his testimony, serves to confirm that he had full awareness of the impending invalidation of the license held by Mr. Larry Weltman’s business, a direct consequence of the acquisition deal closure. Given the regulated nature of the gambling sector, Mr. Larry Weltman’s deliberate disregard for operating his company without a valid license poses grave financial risks to the shareholders.
In light of the committee’s comprehensive review, it is unequivocal that Mr. Larry Weltman’s actions were deliberate violations of the law, rendering them beyond the scope of a momentary lapse in judgment. This calculated conduct eroded the shareholders’ trust and faith in his leadership.
The unanimous consensus of the committee is that expulsion is the only viable course of action. The gravity of Mr. Larry Weltman’s actions and their detrimental impact leave no room for any alternative solution.