Former Bridgecorp directors Rod Pretrevic and Rod Roest.
A Bridgecorp auditor unhappy with the accuracy of the company's prospectus alerted management to his concerns, a court heard yesterday.
Kulasingam Indrakumar, who was an internal audit and risk manager, said he was not satisfied with aspects of the disclosure in the prospectus.
He was giving evidence in the Auckland
District Court on the second day of a depositions hearing to determine if Bridgecorp directors Rod Petricevic and Rob Roest, chairman Bruce Davidson and non-executive director Gary Urwin will stand trial.
The Crown alleges they lied to prospective investors in Bridgecorp's term investments prospectus, registered in December 2006, in an investment statement and advertisements.
It is alleged that Bridgecorp said it would lend only in accordance with good commercial practice and that it had never missed an interest payment.
A fifth man, Peter Steigard, has conceded there is a case to answer.
Asked by Petricevic's lawyer, Paul Davison, QC, if he ever saw the final version of the prospectus, Mr Indrakumar said he had not.
He said Roest informed him a legal opinion had been obtained for the final version. He still "wasn't entirely convinced" but found it acceptable because he had been told there had been professional opinions given.
"On that basis I took it as being acceptable," he told the court.
Mr Indrakumar said he thought some of the concerns he raised had resulted in changes but he was not sure if every one of them had.
When Bridgecorp collapsed it owed $459 million to 14,500 debenture holders.
