Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Storm Financial Group

Jump to new
"Little for victims in Storm salvage"

"Nearly half the money raised from selling assets of collapsed adviser Storm Financial has been paid to the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, which is currently negotiating compensation for the advisers' former clients."

Read more in the The Australian Financial Review of 24/8/09 by Duncan Hughes.
 
"ASIC raises alarm over new CFD trade risks"

"The corporate regulator already warns on its consumer protection website that CFDs are ''much riskier than a flutter on the horses or a night at the casino''.

But now the Australian Securities and Investments Commission is focusing on the risks posed by CFD brokers pooling client funds and using the money to offset other clients' trades."

By Lucy Battersby in the Sydney Morning Herald

http://business.smh.com.au/business/asic-raises-alarm-over-new-cfd-trade-risks-20090823-ev1u.html
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Unfortunately the picture doesn't show where we'll be.

It is on the pool level, garden apartments with the jacuzzi.

Its all booked mate.

gg
Click to expand...

That's great gg, it will be a good view of the proceedings from there.

But since they changed the access the entry from Burnett Lane gets a bit tight. If you're unfamiliar I'd recommend that the valet park the Azure as there's a bit of a sharp left to the car park.

It's a pity the Talk of the Town on the 30th floor is gone, it was a great place to chow down. That's where I first learnt it's prudent to keep your ears open around dining pollies and constabulary. :p:
 
"Callinan enters centre of Storm"

"A retired High Court judge has been asked to make an out-of-court ruling about whether a bank continues to have a duty of care to its margin loan borrowers where a financial adviser has recommended the product."

Read more by Duncan Hughes in The Australian Financial Review of 25/08/2009
 
"Devil in the detail"

"A confidential 64-page document has been produced by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia setting out how the complex resolution of potentially 3000 investor claims from Storm Financial clients will be handled."

Read more by Duncan Hughes in The Australian Financial Review of 25/08/2009
 
"CBA lied to Storm inquiry, say ex-staff"

"Commonwealth Bank of Australia lied about its involvement with collapsed investment adviser Storm Financial, according to a submission to the federal government's inquiry into financial services."

Read more by Duncan Hughes in The Australian Financial Review of Wednesday, 26 August 2009
 
Solly said:
"CBA lied to Storm inquiry, say ex-staff"

"Commonwealth Bank of Australia lied about its involvement with collapsed investment adviser Storm Financial, according to a submission to the federal government's inquiry into financial services."

Read more by Duncan Hughes in The Australian Financial Review of Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Click to expand...

Have to be careful about this. If true, Ralph and crew would be very, very silly boys, since misleading a Parliamentary inquiry is, if proven, Contempt of Parliament for which a range of penalties including jail, may be applied by the Supreme Court.

Contempt of Parliament is directly comparable with contempt of court. The Parliamentary Privilege Act 1987 sets out a number of instances of contempt including disobedience to an order for attendance or production of documents by either House or a parliamentary committee; refusing to answer questions put by a House or a committee; threatening or bribing MPs; and creating a disturbance in or near Parliament House. The act does not however intend to limit the powers of Parliament. Section 12 provides:

'Nothing in this Act contained shall be deemed or taken, or held or construed, directly or indirectly, by implication or otherwise, to affect any power or privilege possessed by either House of Parliament before the passing of this Act in any manner whatsoever.'
Click to expand...
 
"...a submission to the parliamentary inquiry into the disaster suggests data relied upon by Commonwealth subsidiary Colonial Geared Investments was inaccurate for almost a month in late 2008."


The sooner the CBA takes responsibility for its role in the Margin Call (or lack there of ) debacle the sooner this can all be rectified. How can investors be expected to make informed decisions about their investments if they do not have access to up to date information. Surely if the banks have sold a product that is in effective defective, and does not work as its customers could have rightly expected it to, then they are liable for the damage it has caused. If the banks were aware of this before selling the product then surely they have deliberately engaged in deceptive practice, and therefore they should have their banking licence revoked. Should Commsec customers be concerned about the effectiveness of its product? If not, then why can it work so effectively yet CGI’s product, also owned by the CBA, not.
 
Judd said:
Have to be careful about this. If true, Ralph and crew would be very, very silly boys, since misleading a Parliamentary inquiry is, if proven, Contempt of Parliament for which a range of penalties including jail, may be applied by the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

I would think that the CBA would have been ultra careful with the wording and content of their submission and would have had the submission prepared by some high paid silks.
To claim that there are untruths is a pretty game position. I have no idea who is right but someone is wrong. I've read many of the submissions and the whole episode is really verging on unbelievable. I still cant see how people could have slept at night with that level of debt and gearing. Somebody was a good salesperson.
I don't wish any ill will towards the stormies and really hope they can come out of this with some money and restore their dignity.
 
abagnale said:
I've read many of the submissions and the whole episode is really verging on unbelievable. I still cant see how people could have slept at night with that level of debt and gearing. Somebody was a good salesperson.
Click to expand...

I know from where you are coming. I rejected a loan against our home to invest in the sharemarket because I felt it was sort of dodgy (but looked very good on the computer screen) so I blew up a margin loan instead. Fortunately, that was with assets unconnected to our home and covered by other assets not associated with the loan. The loss of money hurt but it was no where near as bad as some Stormers. I'd be sweating every night dreaming about that level of debt that needed to be repaid no matter what some talking head said about it being safe and not to worry. I'm a worrier kind of person.

I am coming around to a view that with some people something just clicks in their head to reject a proposal. They may not be able to say at the time why they rejected it but they do. Must be gut instinct and not much more than that.
 
Solly said:
Regarding the Inquiry into Financial Products and Services in Australia,
here is a response to adverse comment submitted by Jo-Anne Bloch from the Financial Planning Association of Australia Limited;

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/submissions/gadvcom1.pdf
Click to expand...


Good one Solly. The Financial Planners association FPA appear to have the wind up.

There are one or two Stormers planning to roll them in to a lawsuit I've been told.

The FPA are quite a funny pack of useless muppets really.

They represent Planners who are paid by the big funds to recommend their investments to unread investors like the Storm victims.

Professional , I doubt it.

gg
 

Similar threads

TiminOz
The dynamics of money and TIME: crimping cashflow for a period
Replies
3
Views
862
TiminOz
TiminOz
BossMan.
The planning of a portfolio
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Value Collector
Value Collector
basilio
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
sptrawler
ducati916
February 2025
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
5K
ducati916
ducati916
Garpal Gumnut
Mayfair 101/Mayfair Platinum
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Top