被客户投诉将多达$362万的客户款转给自己和家人，安省律师协会暂停华人律师郝大为的执照

安省律师协会收到多起针对安大略省41岁律师郝大为提出的投诉，指控其严重的违背职业操守之行为。这些行为包括诚信违背、与客户不当商业关系、行为不正以及专业失职等问题。这些严重的指控促使安大略省律师协会对投诉进行调查并最终做出暂停或限制其执法许可的决定。

Multiple complaints have been filed against David Hao, a 41-year-old lawyer practising in Ontario, citing serious allegations of professional misconduct. These complaints outline concerns including breaches of integrity, improper business relations, engagement in dishonest activities, and failures to meet professional responsibilities. These serious allegations prompted the Law Society of Ontario to take action towards suspending or restricting his licence to practise law.

安省律师协会公布的由法庭审计师Karen Gordon对投诉进行调查后做出的证词报告。该报告详细揭露了涉及郝大为、其母和其姻亲的一系列严重金融和操守违规行为，显示郝及其家人未能按合约归还欠款，或兑现将贷款以房地产为担保进行注册的约定。投诉人总共向郝及其家族支付约3,362,800加元款项，凸显这些贷款涉及金额重大。

The Law Society has disclosed a detailed affidavit by forensic auditor Karen Gordon, who led the investigations into these allegations. Gordon's affidavit reveals a troubling pattern of alleged financial misconduct involving David Hao, his mother, and his in-laws. It highlights how loans, which were meant to be repaid or secured against real property, were either not honored as agreed or were mismanaged. These dealings, involving significant sums, have led claimants to report a total disbursement of approximately $3,362,800 to Hao and his family.

具体来说:
Specific complaints detailed in the affidavit include:

- 投诉人A： 提供$65万元借款（通过还款保证书），未能按承诺偿还贷款或对其进行相应的房产抵押。

•    Complainant A: Provided $650,000 through a promissory note, which was neither repaid nor secured against the promised properties as outlined in the note’s terms.

- 投诉人B：郝办公室的前台接待员，提供借款$15万元。同样，借款即也没得到偿还，也没进行房产抵押。

•    Complainant B: A former receptionist at Hao's office, extended $150,000 to Hao and his family under a promissory note. The funds were not repaid, nor was the note secured as had been agreed, leading to grievances similar to those of other complainants.

- 投诉人C：借款$20万，分两笔进行，两笔均未偿还或注册相应房产抵押。

•    Complainant C: Extended a total of $200,000 in two instances, documented through promissory notes, which were neither repaid nor secured according to the agreed terms within those notes.

- 投诉人D：郝的表亲，提供了$100万元借款，贷款既没有被偿还，也没有进行房产注册抵押，违反了还款协议的条款。

•     Complainant D: Hao's cousin, issued a promissory note for a loan of $1,000,000, which was neither repaid nor registered against the agreed-upon property, violating the terms of the promissory note.

- 投诉人E：借款60万元，借款既没有按时偿还，也没有按照协议规定获得房产注册抵押。

•    Complainant E: Issued a $600,000 loan, formalized through a promissory note, encountering issues as the funds were neither repaid on time nor secured as stipulated in the agreement within the note.

- 投诉人F：在一个可能由郝及其家人管理或拥有的联合抵押贷款中投资了$45万元。这项投资不仅在抵押贷款的管理上极不正规，即未按期偿还也未能根据承诺进行抵押担保。

•    Complainant F invested $450,000 in a syndicated mortgage, potentially associated with a real estate project managed or owned by David Hao and/or his family members. This substantial investment encountered several issues, notably the mismanagement of the mortgage and the failure to ensure the mortgage's security as initially guaranteed.

- 投诉人G向Grieco提供了$312,800元的贷款，Grieco是一家与郝一家有密切关联的公司，很可能涉及他的妻子和/或他的姻亲。投诉人未能按时收到还款，或按照协议获得抵押。

•    Complainant G extended $312,800 in loans to Grieco, a company closely associated with David Hao's family, likely involving his wife and/or his in-laws. The complainant encountered significant issues with the repayment of these loans and the failure to secure them as had been initially agreed upon.

证词报告中还提到，有些投诉人已针对郝及其相关被告发起了民事诉讼，并获得了临时冻结郝的资产的临时禁令。证词还提及郝在调查中拒绝合作的指控，并指其缺乏诚信、欺诈、利益冲突、沟通失败和放弃法律职责等。

The affidavit also mentions civil proceedings initiated by some complainants against Hao and associated defendants, including obtaining Mareva injunctions to freeze Hao's assets temporarily. The document reveals Hao's alleged reluctance to cooperate with the investigations, suggesting potential dishonesty, fraud, conflicts of interest, failures to communicate, and abandonment of legal practice.

2024年3月11日，安省律师协会审庭聆讯处举行了听证会。郝大为没有到场，他的律师代表他出席听证会但没有为郝辩护。

On March 11, 2024, the Law Society Tribunal held a hearing. Hao Dawei was not present. His lawyer attended the hearing on his behalf but did not defend Hao.

听证会计划用三天时间来听取律师协会的指控和郝大为的辩护，结果听证会只用了30分钟就决定暂停郝大为的律师执照，且决定立即生效。包括郝大为的代表律师在内的各方都同意这一决定。

The hearing was planned to take three days to hear the arguments from the Law Society and David Hao. The hearing only took 30 minutes to order to suspend Hao's lawyer licence, and the order took effect immediately. All parties, including Hao Dawei’s attorney, agreed with the order.