He was arraigned on 13 charges, including using a document, obtaining by deception and knowingly being a party to a company with intent to defraud creditors. The victims range from members of the public to Genesis and Telecom for unpaid bills and occurred in Hamilton and Auckland between 2011 and 2013.
A sentencing date of August was put forward by Crown prosecutor Louella Dunn as there was a dispute over the quantum of loss suffered by the victims.
She said the figure sat at around $200,000, down from an earlier $270,000 figure.
If a figure couldn't be agreed between counsel, a disputed facts hearing would have to be held.
Barron-Afeake, who told the judge he was relatively new to the case, said he and his client needed the approximate four months as he had a forensic accountant and private investigator going through the victims' monetary claims.
"We are looking at least 10 to 12 of the current complainants and it's really about the validity of the figures they have put forward . In a nutshell we're saying that some of them are trumped up and pumped up and we want to know how much of those losses are actually acceptable in the eyes of the court."
But Judge Cocurullo wasn't interested in waiting so long for sentencing to take place, stating he had dealt with Young's delay tactics in the past.
"You have been timely in all respects but I don't dismiss that on previous occasions I have levelled significant delay against Mr Young and his former counsel ... I am simply not prepared to leave today without a timetabling focus."
Barron-Afeake responded that there was goodwill being offered by himself and Young.
"There's no time delay tactics here sir, from counsel, at all. I just want some reasonable time."
The judge responded that he wasn't suggesting counsel was causing the delays, rather Young had a history of doing that.
"I'm struggling to understand that given the length of time that this matter has been before the court that the forensic accounting and the analysis of loss is going to take the amount of time that Mr Young is seeking.
"Mr Young comes with a history here of arguing the inarguable, with an end effect that repeatedly I have levelled against him the responsibility for significant delay. That is the history."
A judge also has the option of remanding an offender in custody if there is the possibility of prison. However, as the quantum of loss is unclear, he remanded Young on bail.
To keep a tight rein on developments, he remanded the matter for two weeks to allow counsel to redefine the amount of loss suffered and confirm a summary of facts.
He also confirmed a sentencing date of June 9.
"I intend to continue Mr Young's bail with the rider that his bail under Section 13 [of the Bail Act] is still to be dealt with. Remanding him on bail is not an indication of what I may do on May 12."
The remaining eight charges faced by Young will be withdrawn by the Crown at sentencing.
