Executive: A ‘messenger boy’ who signed cheques

A SENIOR executive with Cork-based property developer Owen O’Callaghan’s company Riga Ltd told the Mahon Tribunal yesterday it was “quite normal” to sign cheques without knowing why they were being paid.

During his evidence Aidan Lucey described himself as “merely a messenger boy” who signed cheques at Mr O’Callaghan’s bidding.

He said he had worked with Mr O’Callaghan’s companies for the past 35 years. Having started as a storeman, he took over the book-keeping when the accountant was killed in an accident.

Mr Lucey admitted he did not have any professional accountancy or book-keeping qualifications. He said he was a co-signatory of cheques with Mr O’Callaghan, whom he called “the boss”.

Tribunal lawyer Patricia Dillon SC asked if it was unusual for him to be asked to sign cheques for substantial amounts without knowing their purpose.

Mr Lucey said: “If Owen wanted them paid, it would be quite normal.”

In a statement to the tribunal in December 2004, he said he was company secretary of Riga Ltd and of 32 other companies. He was a director of approximately 18 companies.

In that statement, Mr Lucey said he never had any dealings with lobbyist Frank Dunlop, or his company, Frank Dunlop & Associates. “I have never had any dealings with any member or official of Dublin County Council,” he also said.

When Ms Dillon asked him about this last reference, Mr Lucey said he wanted to amend it. He had no dealings with councillors as councillors but as business people, he said, and referred to a business-related payment to Councillor Colm McGrath.

Asked about a number of invoices and cheques relating to Riga Ltd, Mr Lucey pointed out these events dated back 18 years.

One invoice from Mr Dunlop’s company Shefran Ltd was not stamped “paid”, Ms Dillon noted.

Mr Dunlop was employed by Mr O’Callaghan to promote the Quarryvale development in west Dublin in the early 1990s.

Mr Lucey said he wrote out the cheque to Shefran for £25,000 on May 16, 1991, on Mr O’Callaghan’s instruction.

Questioned whether he had in fact been provided with any invoice when he wrote the cheque, Mr Lucey replied: “I may or may not have had it at the time. I may have had it after.”

When Ms Dillon pressed him to explain a number of recorded transactions, Mr Lucey replied: “Basically there is no way I can memorise the whole of the documentation ... there is so much paperwork.”

Questioned about cheques made payable to Shefran, Mr Lucey said he did know the purpose of the payments when he signed the cheques.

After she put a series of questions to Mr Lucey, who seemed unable to explain the purpose behind a number of transactions, Ms Dillon wondered if they had the right witness — or whether somebody else could assist the tribunal.

Tribunal chairman Judge Alan Mahon said: “At the end of the day we will have to deal with the witness as best we can.”