Stuff Digital Edition

The Paralympian and the money trail

Rachel Hughes had a story that tugged not only on the heartstrings, but also the purse strings

Paralympian Rachel Hughes is, according to the woman she defrauded, a plausible, likeable, helpful and bright person. Hughes uses that charm, her many other accusers say, to take large sums of money from people who are only trying to help her. Dana Johannsen and Dylan Cleaver investigate.

To the small, committed and affluent equestrian set, Rachel Hughes had a story that tugged not only on the heartstrings, but also the purse strings. It didn’t matter if she was Rachel Hughes, Rachel Stock, or Rachel Holm, the name under which she appeared in court for sentencing in February, the story was broadly the same: the talented dressage rider facing near insurmountable odds to mount inspiring Paralympic campaigns.

Others have a different story to tell about Hughes: a story of her taking their money and making them jump through hoops to get it back.

That’s the story Kaye Maxwell tells. How she employed ‘‘the plausible and likeable’’ Hughes, then discovered that she had made unauthorised transactions totalling over $30,000 from her business to Hughes’ own account, to the point where Maxwell nearly lost her small golf and hospitality business.

She reported Hughes to the police, which led to dishonesty charges. If that was where the matter stopped it would be a short story, but it was what the dressage rider did while facing charges and what Equestrian Sport New Zealand (ESNZ) didn’t do that has angered many in the equestrian community.

There is resentment that Hughes was green-lit by ESNZ to travel to Australia to compete, even though these charges were hanging over her head. Hughes then left a string of unpaid bills across the Tasman, resulting in censure from the national body.

There is angst in the equestrian community that the situation could have been avoided. There is also dismay that more people have been exposed to Rachel Hughes’ dishonesty due to the response chosen by ESNZ.

Now convicted of fraud, Hughes remains a registered member of ESNZ, and continues to compete.

The Sunday Star-Times has spoken to 20 people closely tied to the small but well-connected sport – competitors, administrators and sponsors – and most are incredulous that Hughes has not been banned or at least suspended from competing.

Many agreed to speak only on the condition of anonymity for fear of jeopardising their own place in the sport, but several have opted to tell their stories on the record because they have become disillusioned by ESNZ’s response.

To her accusers, Hughes has left a trail of deception across New Zealand’s equestrian scene, leaving some tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket.

Hughes, in turn, believes gossip and innuendo has ruined her life and her standing on the dressage circuit. She would only address specific allegations against her in written statements, provided to the Star-Times off the record.

On the record, she said: ‘‘I strongly deny any suggestion that I have a history of dishonesty to benefit myself in a way that unfairly deprives other equestrians of opportunities. I have dedicated my life to equestrian sport, and have worked hard to support others in it.’’

What is indisputable is that equestrian is a prohibitively expensive sport to compete in, one which requires either a large personal bankroll or the largesse of sponsors. Hughes was highly effective in convincing people she was a rider worth backing.

When Kaye Maxwell noticed money had gone missing from the small business she ran, the toll was more than financial. She lost confidence, came close to losing the hospitality business she had put her ‘‘heart and soul’’ into and became unwell due to the stress, at one point worrying she was having a heart attack.

Her trust in other people, she says, was challenged.

Police could prove that Hughes stole more than $32,000 from the company credit cards, but Maxwell says when you factored in cash and other items it was much higher. Hughes disputes this.

In sentencing, Judge Gerard Winter said Maxwell’s Golf – a boutique nine-hole course and events centre south of Auckland – was ‘‘on the way to making a first small profit’’ when the fraud was uncovered in June 2019.

‘‘This was a personal blow to the victim, especially since [Maxwell] completely trusted you with her financial affairs. The stress was immense and sufficient for the victim to be taken to hospital with severe chest pains to receive a diagnosis that she was so unwell because of the fraudulent events that you put upon her, her family trust and the company.’’

Judge Winter noted there were aggravating features to the offending.

‘‘The fact that you were trusted no doubt because of your own representation of the country in your Paralympian sport.’’

Hughes pleaded guilty to the charges and says she accepts responsibility for the offending.

‘‘I deeply regret what I did, and the impact that had on those affected. I am truly sorry. I have fully repaid all money involved, and have served my sentence. My feelings of guilt and regret will be with me always.’’

But it was not the fraud charges that earned an official rebuke from ESNZ. That happened only after, in the words of former chief executive Dana Kirkpatrick, Hughes had left a number of unpaid bills in Australia when competing there in 2020 in a bid to qualify for the Tokyo Paralympics.

‘‘Bloody ESNZ,’’ said one of the sport’s biggest sponsors and benefactors under the condition of anonymity. ‘‘They endorsed that trip. It’s so wrong.’’

For their part, ESNZ says it didn’t endorse Hughes because she was competing as an individual, not a member of a New Zealand team. But Kirkpatrick does acknowledge she signed off the letter that allowed her to travel and enter events.

‘‘She was not selected to go there. She went of her own volition,’’ Kirkpatrick told Stuff in late 2020. ‘‘ESNZ has to provide a letter to allow riders to compete overseas. The letter was provided to Hughes.’’

It was a trip that left ESNZ in an embarrassing position.

‘‘We received complaints that there were unpaid accounts left behind. We tried to get hold of [Hughes] but it proved very difficult,’’ Kirkpatrick said. ‘‘We took the complaint very seriously.’’

In lieu of being able to talk to Hughes, ESNZ set in train a process where an independent complaints review officer determined that the offence was worthy of being put in front of the sports judicial committee.

‘‘While that process was ongoing, all of the accounts were paid in full.’’

Kirkpatrick said the upshot of the judicial hearing was that Hughes ‘‘was given an official warning in the form of a letter’’.

That letter, she says, means it is ‘‘very unlikely’’ Hughes will ever be able to compete overseas again.

Hughes did not respond to questions about the Australia trip or the reasons for leaving unpaid debts.

There are those in the community who query why ESNZ didn’t publicise the hearing or the outcome.

‘‘We don’t generally publicise judicial findings,’’ said Kirkpatrick.

An industry source, however, disputes this, and forwarded several links to stories on the ESNZ website that prominently displayed the results of judicial findings against other riders.

A prominently displayed story could have acted as a red flag to others, the source said.

Kirkpatrick, who was speaking when she was still in the role, said she knew there was a groundswell that wanted Hughes out of the sport, but as administrators they are duty bound to follow a dispassionate process.

Kirkpatrick has been succeeded by Julian Bowden, who would only respond to requests for an interview in writing. Bowden acknowledged his organisation was aware of the charges against Hughes when she travelled to Australia last year, but were ‘‘waiting on an outcome’’.

‘‘ESNZ would have concerns about any members who abuse trust. We would deal with this on a caseby-case basis,’’ he said.

He was not aware of any current complaints about Hughes. It appears, however, that concerns have been raised for the best part of a decade, stretching back to her London Paralympic campaign.

If ESNZ had talked to the Addises, they would have heard a story about a couple filled with regret. ‘‘I’m not a complete sucker,’’ Brent Addis says. When his wife Phillippa, Pip, came to him with Hughes’ story ahead of London 2012, he was happy to offer what financial support they could afford as long as there were some tightly secured strings attached. A syndicate agreement – which also included Hughes’ mother – was drawn up to purchase a horse to compete with, Rimini Park Emmerich, which Hughes called by its stable name Ricki.

A further agreement was drawn up that would have the Addises offering financial support for Hughes’ build-up to the Paralympics in the form of loans that they believed would be repaid on the sale of the horse following the Games.

‘‘She was shown the agreement,’’ said Brent Addis, ‘‘was about to sign them but for one reason or another they never got signed before she left. That’s when I should have started to panic.’’

The Star-Times has seen a copy of the loan agreement, which in part states: ‘‘Collateral to secure these funds will be in the form of ownership or shares in [the horse] and also security of Rachels [sic] horse truck rego ILOVGG.’’

Interest on the loans was agreed at 8 per cent per annum, the Addises claim. This agreement was separate to a previous loan of $10,000 in January 2012.

Hughes was given the opportunity to respond to all the Addises allegations, some of which she claims are ‘‘categorically untrue’’.

She says she repaid all her debts to them except for the interest payments, which she says were never part of the deal. She also said the syndicate agreement gave her no authority to sell the horse in Europe following the Games.

She did not respond to other questions, though

her lawyers offered the following:

‘‘Ms Hughes has repaid all sums borrowed from the Addis family. The Addis family improperly sought to claim interest on those sums. That claim was rejected by the Disputes Tribunal.

‘‘It was never a term of the arrangement between Ms Hughes and the Addis family that Ms Hughes would sell a horse in Germany. Ms Hughes had no authority to sell the relevant horse. It was owned by a syndicate. Ms Hughes was not a member of the syndicate. Members of the Addis family were.’’

The Addises claim this is dissembling. The only thing missing from the contractual agreement was Hughes’ signature, but they say there remained a verbal agreement.

It also, they say, does nothing to alter the fact that Hughes abused their trust by running up huge costs on the credit card they gave her to use for necessities in the build-up to the Games.

Account information shows that between March 22, 2012, and September 27, Hughes incurred costs of $106,248.16. While some of this was for animal feed, training and veterinarian bills, more than $30,000 was coded as ‘‘living money’’.

They claimed to have later learned that Hughes had spent more than $14,000 on creating a walk-up song to enter the arena in London.

‘‘When I discovered that, that’s when I really started to panic,’’ Brent says.

Hughes has denied this allegation, though emails seen by the Star-Times suggest she did arrange for German composer Arnim Bartetzky to produce music on a large scale for the event.

‘‘... go for it and get it done properly,’’ Hughes wrote to Bartetzky, ‘‘full orchestra please. No point having regrets, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity.’’

The Addises claim that ‘‘living money’’ was being spent in large part at Schockemohle Sports, an exclusive equestrian outfitters based in Germany. They were alerted to this, they say, by both Hughes’ trainer in Germany, Hayley Beresford, and chef d’equipe of the New Zealand Paralympic equestrian team Warrick Allan.

When contacted, Beresford said: ‘‘Rachel spent a lot of money on her horse and horse equipment. I just assumed she had plenty of support.’’

Beresford also claims she was left out of pocket by Hughes. When asked what bills were left outstanding, she was brief: ‘‘Training.’’ She would not elaborate on how much she was owed. Hughes did not respond to that accusation, though in emails provided to the Star-Times it is apparent that Beresford was distressed to be left with a bill for car rental.

When she returned to New Zealand after her campaign, Hughes had a container with close to $60,000 worth of equipment including, the Addises discovered, 13 pairs of riding breeches valued at $3900 and nine riding whips ($800), countering, they believe, any argument they were personal items only.

‘‘What really got me was when she got back she rang me to ask if I could pay the duty on the container,’’ Brent claims.

Hughes did not respond to queries about the reasons for the purchase of the equipment, including whether it was bought with the intention of resale in New Zealand.

By now, the Addises were suspicious of Hughes and feared they would never recoup their money. The horse they thought was being sold in Europe to pay off her debts instead came back to New Zealand at great cost.

Pip Addis says on a personal level this was devastating. She was Hughes’ biggest supporter, shaping arguments to counter her husband’s increasing cynicism. Addis would share with Hughes her inner-most thoughts and fears; Hughes, she says, would reciprocate, telling her of the history of abuse she had been through.

Addis says she thought of Hughes as her ‘‘sister’’ at one point.

‘‘She was going to be with me at the birth of my child. When she was selected for the Olympics I was genuinely thrilled for her. I thought, ‘It couldn’t have happened to a better person’.’’

The relationship soured after she bought a new Bates saddle at an auction held to support Hughes’ London campaign. When she later rang the supplier to collect it, he informed her Hughes had already claimed the ‘‘prize’’.

That was the last straw for her husband.

‘‘I rang her and told her to get her a… out of my wife’s saddle,’’ Brent says. ‘‘She did return it, but it wasn’t new by then, was it?’’

Pip says she went through a long period of introspection and embarrassment. The marriage suffered for some time.

‘‘I’ve never felt so stupid in my life… it has been heartbreaking,’’ Pip says, while Brent says it ‘‘wiped out a big chunk’’ of their life savings.

Without the financial resources to launch a civil action against Hughes, the Addises went through the Disputes Tribunal. They managed to get back enough to make the loss manageable.

In response, Hughes said the Addises were fully repaid. The only dispute that remained was over interest payments, which she says were never part of the deal and that was ruled in her favour during the disputes process. However, court records indicate the Disputes Tribunal awarded Brent Addis the full amount claimed of $11,176.93 relating to the January 2012 loan.

It appears the Addises were repaid with money from another couple, Brett Kendall and Rosemary Carter. Kendall and Carter don’t live far from the Addises, but were unaware of their plight when they became seduced by the prospect of getting behind a local disabled woman trying to fulfil her Paralympic dream.

The couple loaned Hughes $11,000 before the London Paralympics and committed to helping her ultimately unsuccessful Rio de Janeiro campaign.

‘‘I thought she was a talented rider and she was very friendly,’’ Carter says. ‘‘She was also struggling financially so I thought we could make her life a bit easier.’’

When Hughes returned from London she told Carter she was not in a position to repay the money as she had to repay all her sponsors.

She also told them, Carter says, that she was ‘‘suffering from cancer of the spine’’, a devastating diagnosis. Another source has told the Star-Times that around this same time Hughes claimed to have been diagnosed with throat cancer.

Kendall admits he was suspicious about Hughes from the start, but decided to put faith in Carter’s judgement of character.

‘‘It was [Hughes’] over-dramatic re-telling of her situation that made me think twice,’’ he says. ‘‘She would say things like, ‘I don’t know how I’m going to feed my daughters tonight.’

‘‘It was all about how cruel the others were to her and how they were doing the dirty on her.’’

The ‘‘others’’, it turned out, were the Addises. Carter, however, was moved enough by her plight to come up with an alternate plan. They would buy Hughes’ horse truck off her and loan it back to her.

‘‘We paid for it and maintained it for her. All she had to do was pay for the diesel and the road user costs.’’

Hughes was given use of the truck through to the end of her 2016 Rio qualifying campaign.

‘‘Brett started to pick up that she might be dishonest. She seemed to be accumulating all these horses, which are not cheap to keep. We started getting a bunch of different stories from her about her situation so we decided to give her notice that we would be taking the truck back.

‘‘We offered to sell it to her but she couldn’t afford it. We lost a lot of money on it but were glad to be rid of it to be honest.’’

Carter and Kendall assess their relationship with Hughes ended up costing them a six-figure sum. They have a large Karaka property and have had success in the business world so ‘‘it wasn’t a lifechanging amount’’ but it was the little things that hurt.

‘‘We got the truck back and discovered $1000 of road user charges that hadn’t been paid and she also let the insurance expire,’’ Carter says.

A‘‘It was [Hughes’] over-dramatic re-telling of her situation that made me think twice... It was all about how cruel the others were to her and how they were doing the dirty on her.’’ Brett Kendall

s Kendall, Carter and the Addises began to tell others of their stories, they were staggered by how many people had similar experiences. The Star-Times has spoken to some of them off the record, others have declined due to what they loosely described as confidentiality agreements. The StarTimes’ reporting appears to have had an immediate effect, with Equilines Horse Coach’s Laurence Bertram saying a $2000 bill that was unpaid for years was recently ‘‘paid in full’’.

One source who did not want to be named said Hughes was leased an exceptional horse in 2014 but it was recalled when she failed to pay the insurance as per the lease agreement.

The source said the horse was returned in extremely poor condition and that it was obvious it had not received due care for a considerable period.

While some in the equestrian world feel Hughes has got away with dishonest behaviour, the courts did sentence her for obtaining by deception from Maxwell.

She was sentenced to 250 hours community service and a $10,000 fine to be paid back to Maxwell. In his sentencing notes, Judge Winter made it clear that absent Hughes’ physical disability, a community detention sentence would have been imposed. Hughes told the court that her health relied on her ability to swim frequently.

Maxwell is disappointed with how everything has played out. Financially, she would have been better off if she had settled out of court. She doesn’t, however, regret involving the police. ‘‘I knew if I took that [settlement] money, she would be down the road doing the same thing to someone else. She is so plausible, likeable, helpful and a bright girl. She is very clever, so it is easy to get conned by her.’’

Front Page

en-nz

2022-01-23T08:00:00.0000000Z

2022-01-23T08:00:00.0000000Z

https://stuff.pressreader.com/article/281840057046154

Stuff Limited