# OCV - Octaviar Limited



## sideshowbob (4 May 2008)

Does anyone know what's happened to MFS. I know they have changed their name to Octaviar, but I havent heard of any news regarding a return to the ASX. Will this ever happen? or have they disappeared (with my shares).

Does anyone know whether there will ever be a chance to return any of the shares?




*Admin Note:* Octaviar (OCV) was previously known as MFS Limited. For information on MFS Limited please see the MFS thread here: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1174


----------



## vishalt (4 May 2008)

*Re: OCV - whats happened to MFS*

They are aiming to have the shares resume trading when the company reports... which is god knows when as they keep shuffling the dates around.


----------



## breaker1 (4 May 2008)

sideshowbob said:


> Does anyone know what's happened to MFS. I know they have changed their name to Octaviar, but I havent heard of any news regarding a return to the ASX. Will this ever happen? or have they disappeared (with my shares).
> 
> Does anyone know whether there will ever be a chance to return any of the shares?
> 
> ...




Read this, it an update, hope its helpfull:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23611905-3122,00.html
EMBATTLED Gold Coast finance and tourism group Octaviar has acknowledged that it may collapse because of $838 million owed to six of its biggest unsecured creditors.

The company, which changed its name from MFS last month, released a long-delayed half-year report yesterday which revealed debt had been reduced by $1.125 billion since late December but only $203 million cash remains in the bank.

As an internal review of operations continues, Octaviar said it will have to "reach accommodation" with its biggest creditors, which include a trustee for listed note holders, Challenger Managed Investments, OPI Pacific Finance, National Australia Bank and the Australian Taxation Office.

Former staff rake Roamfree online"The timing remains uncertain. Accordingly, there is material uncertainty as to the group continuing as a going concern," the company said. 
 Octaviar provided no indication when a share trading suspension may be lifted and it is understood the ASX will not allow a resumption until the company's future becomes clearer. The trading halt was put in place in January after the stock plunged nearly 70 per cent in one day to 99 ¢ in reaction to a failed scheme to borrow $550 million to restructure the company.

A freeze on redemptions in the firm's $755 million Premium Income Fund also remains in place, leaving more than 10,300 investors uncertain if it will be lifted mid-year as expected.

Major shareholder Chris Scott, who secured a place on the board last month along with two colleagues, predicted two weeks ago that the company's ability to survive would become clear by the end of July. Octaviar revealed that it lost $221 million in the half year to December and net operating cash flow was a negative $46 million.

Since then, it has written off $1 billion and embarked on a fire sale of assets. The most significant deal was the $1.3 billion sale of two-thirds of its holding in the Stella Group, which includes the BreakFree hotel chain, Peppers resorts and Harvey World Travel stores.

Critics such as Mr Scott said the Stella sale significantly undervalued the assets and Octaviar confirmed yesterday that it had lost $590 million on the deal.

Octaviar also admitted to a $118 million loss in its deal with Gersh Investment Partners, an $86 million loss in Vestar Financial Planning and $52 million from the forced sale of margin-called securities.

Challenger has launched legal proceedings over alleged breaches related to $100 million in bonds that Octaviar must pay by November 2011.

Octaviar is defending the action but confirmed that it may have to pay the money back immediately if it loses the case. The company's biggest creditor is the trustee for $349 million in stapled securities which are due in December 2011.


----------



## sideshowbob (4 May 2008)

Can I swear on this forum.

Basically it means I have lost all of it. Zip.. nothing... not a dime left.

:bigun2::kebab


----------



## rub92me (4 May 2008)

sideshowbob said:


> Can I swear on this forum.
> 
> Basically it means I have lost all of it. Zip.. nothing... not a dime left.
> 
> :bigun2::kebab



Nothing is lost yet. The CEO has resigned and Chris Scott now runs the show. Chris has significant holdings so will likely do what he can to retain some value. I can't judge the merits of the Challenger claim, but _if_ they become payable immediately then there's of course trouble. That hasn't happened yet though.


----------



## breaker1 (15 May 2008)

*If anyone is interested in the Octaviar MFS :
* Premium Income Fund (PIF)
* Wholesale Premium Income Fund (WPIF)
* Cash Enhanced Fund
* Dynamic Growth Equity
Then see my new thread on ASF at (link):
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10937

Lets get organised investors!!

Breaker1

PS Thanks Sideshowbob *


----------



## vida (15 May 2008)

Expletives!!! all of them at OCV. I only bought in about two days before they crashed and were suspended : which is very evil thing to happen to me. It is a CGT deduction I guess and that's the only good thing about it, otherwise it sux huge massive tremendous amount. I will never invest in property stocks ever again, nothing involving reckless greedy wheelers and dealers - irresponsible greedy gamblers, lots of shonky empire building types only to be found in these businesses always heading for a crash at the end of the day as too much deception and delusional dealing going on...


----------



## breaker1 (15 May 2008)

Vida,
Did you invest in the share OCV side of MFS or the premium income fund or did you lose in both?


----------



## vida (21 May 2008)

I only invested/lost in buying MFS (OCV) pretty much the day before it crashed, not in the premium income fund at all. I wasn't watching the market as it happened so was gifted with a rude shock when I checked and found it spiralled so fast down, if I had been watching that day I would have got out but by the time i saw it happen it was already in trading halt mode... ugghhh



breaker1 said:


> Vida,
> Did you invest in the share OCV side of MFS or the premium income fund or did you lose in both?


----------



## breaker1 (21 May 2008)

Sorry about that Vida. Hope you haven't lost too much?

I'm in the OCV PIF and have $tens of thousands locked up, not knowing how many cents we will get back in the dollar. 

The problem with OCV PIF and no doubt MFS (OCV shares) is Octaviar is so slow in coming forward with their plans. At least in the NZ they have voted on a moratorium for 3-4 years (98% of investors) with some prospect of a return at minimum 30c in $ with the hope of $ for $ with some interest if thinks work out perfectly in the sale of assets. If things don't work out with the moratorium, Provident will put it into liquidation for the 30c-40c in the $.


----------



## selciper (24 May 2008)

Breaker1 -
PIF seem to be in a daze. The longer oy goes on the more I am concerned. Will Wellington Capital be a help?


----------



## The Mint Man (26 June 2008)

Anyone notice that 1 trade went through today? Or thats atleast what is showing up on my comsec.
It was for 123,500 shares... heres a pic:-




Please explain???

By the way any general news on this dog?

Cheers


----------



## banska bystrica (29 June 2008)

Someone exercised a PUT OPTION at $4.75 so someone was forced to buy 26,000 OCV at $4.75 per share. This market is taking no prisoners.


----------



## vida (30 June 2008)

Is there any hope for OCV at all now? I seem to feel not but I dont' understand what is going on really. I have in my mind written off my investment (loss) and have emotionally just moved on. It wasn't too much money in the big scheme of things. However I would have to work several weeks to save that same amount so its not an easy loss, but I can live with it and it looks like I have no choice. This bear market is not going to continue forever, nothing ever does not even life. I will have to trust that in the future things will be better and profits will be made again even if OCV goes down. Does anyone have any real information about prospects for OCV recovery?


----------



## vida (30 June 2008)

Breaker One! Sorry about your situation with MFS/OCV shares too.  Its just bad luck all around that this credit crunch occurred and we were not warned that the debts these guys were accumulating were excessive and untenable. Its something no one expected to happen, the credit crap crunch but maybe they did but were in denial with greed and ambition. All we can do is live & learn and be more wary next time. Invest in companies with little or no debt.


----------



## robert toms (30 June 2008)

Where did I read the story on the weekend...cannot remember...too much info...but the article said that the secured investors ,they estimated,would get between ten to twenty cents in the dollar...and shareholders zilch.
That is if Octaviar is wound up at the moment.
However if it is allowed by the creditors to trade for a period of time,two years I think,there might be some trading value out of the 35 percent of Stella that was left with Octaviar...all estimates and guesswork.
The estimate was then maybe forty cents in the dollar for secured creditors.
I hope that I remembered the figures accurately...no joy for shareholders and little for secured creditors.


----------



## vida (30 June 2008)

Why don't they know yet if they are going to be wound up or not. This is ridiculous, its been too many months in limbo and something should be resolve by now I would think.  What the hell are they doing with our money. Yes i do hope they can continue to trade on what they own of Stella which is a good asset and build on that again. Its not impossible if only it happens.


----------



## mfsperth (12 July 2008)

*MFS Octaviar PIF*

1.I am a Perth MFS investor. How many others are in WA, which missed out on actually attending the update meetings?

My original request to MFS to set up an investors liaison group was made on 31st January this year.
I was told someone would ring me back. 
When I didn’t hear back, I sent a reminder to Guy Hutchings on 4th February.
Needless to say, the offer wasn’t taken up by MFS.

2.Here is the URL to watch the Wellington Capital presentation on plans for the MFS PIF:
http://www.newpif.com.au/investorforumjuly.html

3.I approached Tony D’Aloisio head of ASIC on 1st April asking him to help to facilitate the formation of a small investors’ consultative group to work alongside the responsible entity while the PIF problems were resolved. If the fund had gone into administration, a Creditors Committee of Reference would be set up by members’ vote.

4. If there is about 41c in value in a PIF share by continuing, then if it goes on the NSX, there has to be a total ban on short selling. Market manipulation only becomes apparent when it is too late, after the event, and if there’s 41c to be had by forcing down the price and frightening PIF members into selling out, there’ll be some people trying.

5.
When I first asked Octaviar for the members register as any member is entitled to do by Corporations Law, Octaviar told me Perpetual Nominees, the trustee, wanted $14000. (The cost by law is supposed to be what it costs to download to a CD).

 After further discussion and ASIC (Neale Paterson) intervention it came down to $200. Then Wellington took over so I didn’t pursue it.

 There have been a number of strange goings on – 

A loan from a Scottish bank for $180m which ranked ahead of us as members for repayment. 

The $147.5 m in unsecured loans (ie. ca. 20% of the fund) to seven entities in November December according to the AFR. (see AFR 16 April and 25 June). 

A Lonsec (ratings agency) thumbs up for the fund sent to us in early November. 

The disappearance from the Octaviar website of the PDS (even though Guy Hutchings sent me a hard copy on Feb 16, 2008). 

Also the related party transactions (loans to other bodies within the MFS umbrella) were supposed to be on the website. 

The NZ MFS Pacific fund went down late last year, and I believe our fund had some money in MFS Pacific. 

There were supposed to be two committees with independent members- the Compliance Committee (ie. does the fund operate as stated) and the Related Party Transactions Committee (loans to other Octaviar entities). Perhaps someone knows who was on those.

Also how much did the auditor know as at 30 June 2007?

 Maurice Blackburn, the law firm,  is taking a class action for some Octaviar shareholders (not PIF fund members) against Octaviar Ltd, so they are looking for money we are also looking for.

For those who want to do a bit of research  look at Pt.2G.4 of the Corporations Act, and also at S.252E(2)(b) – any member can get a court order for a meeting of the fund. If you want to look go to: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/

 There’s S.197 re the trustee, S252C re official scheme meetings (S.252E(2)(b) gives any member the right to get a court order for an official meeting of the fund), S. 208 re approval for a related party benefit,  S.283A (trustee for debentures which some of PIF activity was), S 209(3) re dishonesty, 601JG ( compliance committee and liability of its members, as well as possible professional indemnity  insurance for them), S601JC(1)(c) ( compliance committee report to ASIC), 601 A re removing the responsible entity, 601HG (auditor), 601FD(1)(c), and Pt 9.4B which deals with prosecutions for breach of the Act.  

 Some people who might have some idea of what went on are Andrew Peacock, Phil Adams, Michael King, Marshall Vann, Stuart Donaldson, Craig White, Guy Hutchings, and Chris Gavras-Moffatt (corporate lawyer Business Legal for Octaviar Ltd.) Octaviar's co. secretary is David Anderson.

 6.
Looking at the late 2007 loans made by our MFS PIF, can anyone confirm that these are the companies they were made to?

 SPV Pty Ltd registered as a company 17.12.07 ACN 128 946 494. Reg office Adelaide.
OR
SPV Co Pty Ltd ACN 127 289 098 registered 29.8.07 Reg office Pt Macquarie. 

Ray Group ACN 057 883 511registered 26.10.92 Reg Office Robina Qld.

Investment Enterprises Pty Ltd ACN 070 041 413 reg’d 26.6.95 Reg office Sth Yarra

Southport Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 009 224 275 reg’d 18.3.87 Reg office West Perth

Young Village Estates ACN 124 564 772 reg’d 22.3.07 Reg office Southport.

 Perhaps someone who has full access to ASIC co. info can find out who the directors are.

 7.

Interestingly says the AFR, ABN Amro Morgans, UBS and Macquarie Research all gave MFS a thumbs-up for fund managers. Opis Capital also liked them.

8.

According to the AFR on April 16, $100m was lent by the PIF to MFS Living and Leisure, at 14% interest. The PIF put $17m into the water fund. However the PIF owes MFS Living and Leisure $67m.

 9.

As at 30 June 2007, the PIF was, according to Property Investment Research, 31% mortgages (if only they’d stuck to what they knew), 22% in managed investment schemes, 21% in asset-backed investments, 13% in fixed interest, and 13% in cash, with about 11,000 investors.

 10.
My original request to MFS to set up an investors liaison group was made on 31st January this year.
I was told someone would ring me back. 
When I didn’t hear back, I sent a reminder to Guy Hutchings on 4th February.
Needless to say, the offer wasn’t taken up by MFS.

11.
Here is the URL to watch the Wellington Capital presentation on plans for the MFS PIF:
http://www.newpif.com.au/investorforumjuly.html

12. There is an action group for exchange of info at PIFActionGroup@yahoogroups.com


----------



## keld (14 July 2008)

Lots of good info there MFSPerth. Did you get to attend one of the meetings? I went to the Melb one. The Wellington woman seems like a good person to be running the show, if there's ever to be a chance of getting any more than 14c in the dollar. (By the way between my mother, sister and ex-wife we have almost $500,000 invested in PIF).

Back in March just after all this **** hit the fan and the media, I met with my local Federal member to discuss options for government involvement, perhaps even a bail out along similar lines to the UK Gov bail out of Newcastle Coop Society to protect investors savings. I suggested the Fed gov should do similar to protect life savings of thousands of 'ordinary mums and dads'. I also asked for information on what ASIC was doing. I have had two reports back from him - nothing substantial.

I plan to see him again to request that the Aus Taxation Office waive the Octaviar debt, but on condition that the money be credited to PIF to pay back part of the $190+ million they owe PIF. This could be something that other PIF investors may like to do - let's start a campaign to lobby ATO to waive the tax debt (but only if it comes to PIF). There are benefits for the ATO and govt in this:
1. if Octaviar goes udner, then they will get nothing anyway
2. it may save many self-funded retirees needing to get on the pension because their savings are lost. 

Must be others if we all think about it.

So see your local member; write to the ATO.


----------



## seamisty (15 July 2008)

keld said:


> Lots of good info there MFSPerth. Did you get to attend one of the meetings? I went to the Melb one. The Wellington woman seems like a good person to be running the show, if there's ever to be a chance of getting any more than 14c in the dollar. (By the way between my mother, sister and ex-wife we have almost $500,000 invested in PIF).
> 
> Back in March just after all this **** hit the fan and the media, I met with my local Federal member to discuss options for government involvement, perhaps even a bail out along similar lines to the UK Gov bail out of Newcastle Coop Society to protect investors savings. I suggested the Fed gov should do similar to protect life savings of thousands of 'ordinary mums and dads'. I also asked for information on what ASIC was doing. I have had two reports back from him - nothing substantial.
> 
> ...



Hi Keld, You have a very strong point regarding the fact that with diminished distributions not only will there be thousands eligible to top up existing centrelink pension payments, there will also be many self funded retirees not previously receiving govt payments who will now qualify for part or full pensions.I know of numerous investors in the PIF (including myself) who have written to Nick Sherry, ASIC and others for months. At least Centrelink has finally agreed to recognise the lesser value of units in the PIF and have adjusted their payments accordingly. Waiving the outstanding tax dut to be paid from OCV and crediting it to the PIF would be great but in these circumstances does it ever happen? If the Govt depts concerned are as snappy in their actions as ASIC has been if and when it happens it will be too late for most. As you say, just keep making a noise on a consistant basis. Regards, Seamisty


----------



## alpha (16 July 2008)

ITS ABOUT TIME ALL INVESTORS STOP THEIR BABBLINGS AND ACCEPT THE FACTS NOW THAT THE NATIONAL WELLINGTON INVESTMENTS ROADSHOW PRESENTATION HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

--THE FUNDS FINANCIAL STATUS IS AS PRESENTED IN ITS VARIOUS THREE MODES AS ALSO CONFIRMED BY THE INDEPENDANT VALUATIONS BY PRICE WATERHOUSE.
--- WELLINGTON CAPITALS PRESENTATION WAS EXTREMELY TRANSPARENT, EXEPTIONALLY SO,AND IF PIF INVESTORS HAD BEEN TO OR EXPERIENCED OTHER SIMILAR FUND/CORPORATE FORUMS THEN YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND THE QUALITY OF WILLINGNESS TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE TO ALL ATTENDEES.
-- WELLINGTON CAPITAL, PRIOR TO TAKING OVER AS THE PIF MANAGER WAS AND IS A VERY RESPECTED AND SUCCESSFUL FUND MANAGER.
   FOR J.H TO TAKE ON THIS FUND PUTS HER OVERALL CREDIBILITY, CONSIDERING HER FAITH IN MAXIMISING AND RESURECTING THE PIF AT CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC EXPOSURE AS PRINCIPAL OF THE ENTIRE WELLINGTON CAPITAL OPERATIONS.
-- NO OTHER PARTIES HAVE COME FOREWARD AND I DOUBT IF THEY DID WOULD SHOW SUCH PERSONAL COMPASSION FOR INVESTORS WOES--
-- THE FACTS ARE THAT THIS IS A 3--5 YEAR REBUILDING PROCESS, MAYBE LONGER FOR THE FUNDS RECOVERY TO WHAT OPTIMUM LEVEL WOULD BE CRYSTAL BALL FORECASTING, BUT IT WILL GO FOREWARD !!!
---FACTORS TO CONSIDER ARE:
    THE OVERALL STATE OF THE INVESTMENT MARKETS IN ALL SECTORS OF WHICH THE MANAGER HAS NO CONTROL.
    TIME AS HISTORY DICTATES WILL SEE MARKETS IMPROVE ALONG WITH GOOD FUND MANAGEMENT TO MAXIMISE OPPORTUNITES.
    THE FUND IN ITS CURRENT STATUS HAS LIMITED CASH FLOW AND MUST BE ALLOWED TO GROW FROM ITS CURRENT ASSET BASE.
    IT IS NO LONGER AN INCOME FUND AND MUST BE ALLOWED TO STABILISE, WITH THE PRIORITY OF REDUCING DEBT.
   DISTRIBUTIONS AND REDEMPTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN AS A BONUS INITIALLY AND PATIENCE PRACTICED FOR THE FUND TO GROW ITS WEALTH.
   I APPRECIATE THAT THERE ARE INVESTORS WHO ARE HURTING AND REQUIRE FUNDS TO EXIST, BUT TO GIVE PREFERENCE WITH REDEMEMPTIONS WILL ONLY SLOW THE FUNDS RECOVERY AND BE INEQUITABLE TO ALL UNIT HOLDERS.
   COMMENT HAS BEEN MADE ON THE NSX LISTING.
   AGREED THIS IS A SECONDARY EXCHANGE, BUT THE FACTS ARE AGAIN THAT THE FUNDS POSITION WILL ATTRACT LITTLE ATTENTION IN THE MARKET IN THE SHORT TERM. INVESTORS SHOULD UNDERSTAND THE MARKET BY DEMAND AND ASSESMENT WILL DICTATE THE FUND MARKET PRICE.
  IF YOU WANT TO SELL THEN USE IT, BUT IT HAS TO BE AT AN OPPORTUNITY PRICE TO BUYERS??
 LISTING WITH THE ASX WILL GIVE NO ADVANTAGES IN THE FUNDS CURRENT  FINANCIAL POSITION.
   AS THE FUND GROWS THE STRUCTURE WILL / CAN BE REVISED TO BE POSITIONED TO BE MAXIMISED AND VALUE ADDED TO UNIT HOLDERS.

  THERE HAS BEEN COMMENTS ON VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION OF THE FUND!!
  THIS QUITE FRANKLY WOULD BE FINANCIAL SUICIDE AND BE ASSURED IN TODAYS MARKET AND THE FUND FINANCIAL STATUS WOULD CERTAINLY REALISE AT BEST THE ESTIMATES OF WELLINGTONS 14 CENTS PER UNIT.
 IN CONCLUSION REGARDLESS OF YOUR SITUATION HAVE CONTROLLED AND ACCOUNTABLE CONFIDENCE IN WELLINGTON CAPITAL AS IT IS YOUR ONLY OPTION TO MAXIMISE YOUR INVESTMENTS.


----------



## mfsperth (17 July 2008)

!.

Presumably legal oversight and advice to the MFS PIF came from its legal advisers Mallesons Stephen Jaques in Brisbane. This would include one imagines what the controlling entity could and couldn’t do.



2.

Here is a list of those were on the Compliance Committee of MFS PIF. A compliance committee ensures that the fund operates in accordance with the Constitution and PDS.



Andy Esteban, Chairman, external member, resigned?

Ray Kellerman, external member, resigned?

David Kennedy, internal member, 13 Feb to 7 Mar 2008.

Mike Skepper, Compliance Mgr, left day unknown

Phil Colley, Sr. Compliance Officer left 16 April 2008



By invitation: 

Craig White

Guy Hutchings

John Whateley, independent non-executive director

Guy Farrands, CEO of MFS Diversified, now called GEO Property

Craig McIntosh, CEO MFS Alternative Asset Mgt, left 7 March 2008



Here is a list of those on the MFS Related Party and Conflicts [of interest] Committee;



Jack Diamond, non-executive director, resigned 2 May 2008

Deborah Beale, non-executive director, resigned 18 Feb 2008

John Whateley, non-executive director, resigned 2 May 2008



By invitation:

Guy Hutchings, resigned 4 July

Kim Kercher, company secretary, resigned 22 Feb 2008

Tasso Corolis, resigned 12 Feb 2008, head of risk and compliance


----------



## mfsperth (18 July 2008)

*Re: OCV - Octaviar PIF (was MFS PIF)*

Some rights of members:

1.
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 - SECT 247A 
Order for inspection of books of company or registered managed investment scheme 

             (1)  On application by a member of a company or registered managed investment scheme, the Court may make an order: 

                     (a)  authorising the applicant to inspect books of the company or scheme; or 

                     (b)  authorising another person (whether a member or not) to inspect books of the company or scheme on the applicant's behalf. 

The Court may only make the order if it is satisfied that the applicant is acting in good faith and that the inspection is to be made for a proper purpose. 

             (2)  A person authorised to inspect books may make copies of the books unless the Court orders otherwise. 

             (3)  A person who: 

                     (a)  is granted leave under section 237; or 

                     (b)  applies for leave under that section; or 

                     (c)  is eligible to apply for leave under that section; 

may apply to the Court for an order under this section. 

             (4)  On application, the Court may make an order authorising: 

                     (a)  the applicant to inspect books of the company; or 

                     (b)  another person to inspect books of the company on the applicant's behalf. 

             (5)  The Court may make the order only if it is satisfied that: 

                     (a)  the applicant is acting in good faith; and 

                     (b)  the inspection is to be made for a purpose connected with: 

                              (i)  applying for leave under section 237; or 

                             (ii)  bringing or intervening in proceedings with leave under that section. 

(6)    A person authorised to inspect books may make copies of the books unless the Court orders otherwise. 



2.
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 - SECT 601JD 
Duties of members 

             (1)  A member of a scheme's compliance committee must: 

                     (a)  act honestly; and 

                     (b)  exercise the degree of care and diligence that a reasonable person would exercise if they were in the member's position; and 

                     (c)  not make use of information acquired through being a member of the committee in order to: 

                              (i)  gain an improper advantage for the member or another person; or 

                             (ii)  cause detriment to the members of the scheme; and 

                     (d)  not make improper use of their position as a member of the committee to gain, directly or indirectly, an advantage for themselves or for any other person or to cause detriment to the members of the scheme. 

             (2)  A member of the compliance committee is to take all reasonable steps to assist ASIC in carrying out a check under subsection 601FF(1). 

             (3)  A person who contravenes, or is involved in a contravention of, subsection (1) contravenes this subsection. 

Note 1:       Section 79 defines involved . 

Note 2:       Subsection (3) is a civil penalty provision (see section 1317E). 

             (4)  A person must not intentionally or recklessly contravene, or be involved in a contravention of, subsection (1). 

3.



Civil liability of responsible entity to members 

             (1)  A member of a registered scheme who suffers loss or damage because of conduct of the scheme's responsible entity that contravenes a provision of this Chapter may recover the amount of the loss or damage by action against the responsible entity whether or not the responsible entity has been convicted of an offence, or has had a civil penalty order made against it, in respect of the contravention. 

             (2)  An action under subsection (1) must be begun within 6 years after the cause of action arises. 

             (3)  This section does not affect any liability that a person has under other provisions of this Act or under other laws.


----------



## The Mint Man (26 August 2008)

Hi people,
This popped up in the news section in comsec yesterday, however it is quite vague.... can anyone shead a bit more light on this one???



> * Octaviar feels the heat from lawyers *
> 
> Date: 25/8/2008
> Author: Ben Wilmot
> ...




who is leading the class action???

Cheers


----------



## rub92me (26 August 2008)

The Mint Man said:


> Hi people,
> This popped up in the news section in comsec yesterday, however it is quite vague.... can anyone shead a bit more light on this one???
> who is leading the class action???
> Cheers



The same was mentioned in their last announcement released 22/08; former and current shareholders have allegedly initiated the class action. No names, no details. Probably talking about the IMF initiative that was announced in March.


----------



## Juan Mortyme (9 September 2008)

See following link from the Australian
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24314985-30538,00.html

-------article start-----------------------

When fund managers turn predators


SHAREHOLDER: Stuart Wilson | September 09, 2008

HAPLESS investors in the Octaviar Premium Income Fund have a gun pointed squarely at their heads by the funds manager, Jenny Hutson's Wellington Capital.

This sick property fund is a remnant of the MFS implosion earlier this year, and has more than 10,000 small, income-seeking investors. It is circling the drain, with investors locked in limbo and distributions no longer flowing. Yet Wellington is using every tricky tactic in the book to wring out its fees.

Investors have few options. The proposal put forward by Wellington is to list the fund on the National Stock Exchange. This means that instead of redeeming their units for cash, investors will have to sell them on-market.

But as the number of sellers will likely heavily outweigh buyers, and with unitholders' dwindling trust in Wellington, the price at which PIF units trade is virtually guaranteed to be below the $0.45 value quoted in the documentation sent to investors.

If buyers have been scared off after experiencing Wellington's bullying tactics designed to lock itself in as manager, the market price could easily wallow under the somewhat rubbery $0.14 per unit investors are told they could receive on liquidation.

Wellington has some legitimate reasons for seeking changes to the funds constitution to effect the fund's listing on the NSX. To emerge as a listed vehicle, the whole structure of the fund would need to be overhauled to work properly.

In particular, the fund would need to become close ended, which means units would no longer be issued or redeemed. Rather, units would be purchased or sold on-market, and the price struck would be based on supply and demand rather the net asset value of the unit.

Unfortunately for the proposed new model, demand seems to be in short supply.

In addition, the existing constitution proclaims that the manager is entitled to any surplus income after unitholders have been paid. This clearly does not sit well with Wellington Capital, which has proposed a more traditional asset-based fee. The fee is steep and would provide greater certainty for Wellington. The benefit of this proposed change to investors is not entirely clear.

The most abominable, oppressive element of the Wellington proposal is that in addition to proposing changes necessary to ensure the NSX listing works, they have attempted to slip in a few clauses for their own benefit. In particular, in the event that Wellington was removed as manager -- even for poor performance -- it would be entitled to a massive termination payment, currently about $8 million.

It would be difficult to turf out Wellington anyway, as a separate proposed change to the way the fund's meetings are structured will effectively entrench Wellington as manager until there is nothing left to gouge.

One hopes that investors finally declare they will not be treated as fee-generating fodder any more. Although an orderly sell-off of assets and winding up of the fund is the simplest and most certain of available options, some investors may wish to take the risk of monetising additional value through an NSX listing.

If that is the case, they should propose alternative changes to the constitution (without the clauses that only benefit the Wellington mob), either before or after voting down the current scheme.

Stuart Wilson is CEO of the Australian Shareholders Association

---------------end of article-------------------


----------



## Juan Mortyme (10 September 2008)

Today's Financial Review:

Octaviar creditors opt for administration

Wednesday, 10 September 2008 | The Australian Financial Review | Lisa Allen

Gold Coast financial services company Octaviar was on the brink of collapse last night after its major creditors, owed about $1 billion, finally agreed to appoint a voluntary administrator.


----------



## Ken (10 September 2008)

does this mean its curtains...

shareholders lose everything??

   this will get drawn out for some time i would have thought


----------



## matt1987 (10 September 2008)

if only it had gone head up before 30 June - i could have used the losses ..... instead it has been in a trading halt for over six months, so as well as being worth nothing, people havent even been able to use the losses against the very few gains that were made in the 30 June 08 financial year.


----------



## robert toms (11 September 2008)

We can only hope that it is finalised by the end of next financial year...not that I am confident of any gains to offset my OCV losses.
Too late for me for the last financial year...have to disclose some modest gains...very modest!


----------

