Mackay mum Faye Simpkin’s civil application against son Craig Simpkin dismissed

A court has called a halt to lengthy litigation which followed the death of a family patriarch, costing the family more than a million, including claims of sailboats purchased with company funds.

Seemingly endless litigation that followed the death of a family patriarch has come to an end, after a mother’s claims against her firstborn son were thrown out by a Supreme Court judgment. READ WHY

A mother who sued her son has had the claim thrown out of a Queensland court as a seemingly endless legal battle came to a conclusion.

Simpkin Haulage Company, also known as Gunderlong Mackay or Mackay Ag, was founded by the late Reginald Simpkin and then-wife Faye Simpkin in 1981, but plans for their two sons Craig and Troy to inherit it became complicated.

Craig Simpkin claimed during proceedings he broke up with his wife in 2018, who had been an invested partner in the family business, and their divorce sent company debt spinning out of control.

The situation soon crumbled after Reg’s passing in early 2022 and a fight over assets began.

The family feud first made it to the papers in late 2022 when Craig applied to have the business liquidated, claiming $1.4 million in debts, and was opposed by Faye and Troy.

Faye Simpkin outside Mackay courthouse on July 9, 2024, having sued her son for allegedly misusing company cards to buy various personal purchases including a $105,000 boat. Photo: Zoe Devenport

Now a Supreme Court judgment has brought the latest skirmish to a decisive end after Faye made claims Craig intended to defraud creditors with a lowball valuation on his property.

The situation was made more complicated after the business’ property on Barry Lane in Homebush, also Craig’s residence, was sold by Kimberley Precious Metals in late 2023.

At the civil trial in Mackay Supreme Court in July this year all three Simpkins took the stand to level accusations, including allegations Craig misspent the company’s money on a trip to Cape York and Byron Bay, a $105,000 sailfish boat, and a $77,000 service truck for his own business.

Faye and Gunderlong sued Craig and his newly founded company, CLP Group Australia, for over $1.6m for misuse of company funds and chattels with $1.3m linked to a cache of valuable planting equipment kept in a company shed at the Homebush property.

Craig Norman Simpkin

Yet the judgment reveals this claim was dropped in the process of that trial, with the applicants instead attempting to void the sale contract between Craig and Kimberley Precious Metals.

Justice Graeme Crow wrote that an affidavit from Craig’s wife confirmed she was “desperate to see the land sold so as to terminate any financial relationship she had with her former husband”.

“In Reg Simpkin’s will, he explains why he has not made further provisions for his wife, Mrs Faye Simpkin and his son Troy Simpkin, being that he had separated from Faye Simpkin, she had moved to accommodation and used money from the family company for the purpose of purchasing alternative accommodation and had sworn an affidavit in Family Court proceedings that her net worth was approximately $3.2m,” the judgment states.

Troy Simpkin at Mackay Supreme Court on July 10, 2024, when he testified in his mother's suit against his brother Craig Simpkin. Photo: Zoe Devenport

“Although the value of Mr Simpkin’s estate cannot be calculated, it seems to me given the estimate of the net worth of Mrs Faye Simpkin that it ought to be a significant sum.

“The shutting down of the family businesses and the legal expenses incurred by all members of the Simpkin family, including the company, Gunderlong, I was told

without objection, have exceeded $1m and so the estate may not hold a value anywhere near as Mrs Simpkin’s estimate of her net worth of $3.2 million.”

Justice Crow also presided over the Simpkin’s court dates in 2022 and noted the “many, many” family entities, with attempts involving solicitors and accountants to “unravel the family affairs which have been conducted through numerous companies, partnerships and trusts and all have not succeeded”.

He noted “an important fact” that Craig “did not seek out a purchaser for the property” and accepted evidence from Kimberley Precious Metals that they approached him.

Justice Crow declared Craig did not have any intent to defraud creditors and dismissed the application.