Storm Financial Group

[cuttlefish]

Manny had a meeting with ex-clients eh?

I cannot believe that some of them are still so gullible.

Ironhalo - it actually say's ex-investors not ex-clients (though its quite possible some were both). Its also possible some were ex-advisors given that quite a few advisors as I understand it were also investors in Storm.

 

[SJG1974]

"Storm founder and investors hold secret meeting"

"Emmanuel Cassimatis, founder and ex-chief executive of Storm Financial, is believed to be seeking support from former investors in his collapsed company to bring a legal action against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia."

Read more by Duncan Hughes in The Australian Financial Review of Sept 10, 2009.

So it seems Manny's crusade for justice rolls on, despite the lack of publicity via his now defunct website.

Surely there aren't still former clients out there who think this guy has and has had their best interests at heart?

If anyone needs a reminder, go to his mansion and see what your 7% up front fees and ongoing commissions for investing in an index fund paid for, while his clients struggle to make ends meet.

Sickening.

 

[Ironhalo]

Cheers cuttlefish, still, it makes me sick.

Why the secrecy?

 

[bunyip]

"NAB in the eye of the Storm over loan"

"THE National Australia Bank has been dragged into the events around the collapse of Townsville-based Storm Financial with allegations that a NAB loan to a Townsville man organised through Storm did not contain correct information."

More by Andrew Fraser in The Australian here;


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,26050846-643,00.html

The Australian has sighted correspondence between the NAB and a Townsville client of Storm who had an existing loan with Westpac. But after discussions with Storm he chose to have this refinanced and in December 2006 Storm chose to put the loan through NAB.

According to the documents, his application to NAB to increase his loan from $150,000 to $300,000 left out the fact he had a margin loan of almost $270,000 with Colonial Geared Investments, a branch of CBA.

The man had three dependants at the time of the application, but no dependants are noted on the application.

Consequently, he was given a loan with repayments of $2200 a month at a time when his gross income was $3828 a month, leaving him about $200 a week to support a wife and four children.

"In summary, the omission of the margin loan and the failure to include our dependants has enabled me to get a loan I could never afford," a letter to the NAB from the man states.

The man said he had never had direct dealings with the NAB and all contact was through Storm, which supposedly had a better knowledge of his financial dealings.

He admitted that although he had signed the loan application, the content was completed by a Storm adviser with no input from himself.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Above is an extract from the story in one of the links provided by Solly.

Here we have yet another example of a person foolishly signing a loan application, then allowing someone else to fill in the content.
Then when he's offered a loan that he has no hope of servicing, he takes it anyway!
It almost beggars belief - what are people thinking when they do things like this??

 

[Steve Borden]

Ironhalo - it actually say's ex-investors not ex-clients (though its quite possible some were both). Its also possible some were ex-advisors given that quite a few advisors as I understand it were also investors in Storm.

They were ex-clients of Storm.

 

[Solly]

They were ex-clients of Storm.

Steve, Duncan Hughes reports in the article,
that the meeting was attended by, EC, his lawyer Stephen Russell and approx 20 "invited former investors". The meeting set out grounds for legal action and was strictly confidential.

 

[Steve Borden]

Steve, Duncan Hughes reports in the article,
that the meeting was attended by, EC, his lawyer Stephen Russell and approx 20 "invited former investors". The meeting set out grounds for legal action and was strictly confidential.

Solly

Duncan Hughes uses the term investor, as in investor with Storm, interchangeable with client (of Storm).

 

[Solly]

Solly

Duncan Hughes uses the term investor, as in investor with Storm, interchangeable with client (of Storm).

Steve, the word 'invited' is interesting.

 

[Steve Borden]

Steve, the word 'invited' is interesting.

Solly

Might be the only ones with any money left?

 

[DocK]

I daresay the "invited" were the diehard loyal followers who still won't hear a word against the great messiah! You can be sure they've been hand-picked in order to further Manny & Julie in their quest against the CBA.

 

[Solly]

"Storm saga continues for Peninsula investors"

"REDCLIFFE:
MORE damning information has come to light about the collapse of Storm Financial during the parliamentary inquiry, set to be completed on November 23."

More by Katie Duncan in the Redcliffe and Bayside Herald;

http://redcliffe-and-bayside-herald.whereilive.com.au/news/story/storm-saga-continues-for-peninsula-investors/

 

[Solly]

"Storm receiver under fire over client treatment"

"The Storm Investors Consumer Action Group says its members are angry about the way they have been treated by Storm Financial's receiver."

More on the ABC here;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/10/2681779.htm

 

[Monario]

"Storm Financial victims hit again by bank cash grab"

"DEVASTATED Storm Financial victims have been stung all over again by the bank at the heart of the disaster.

Up to 10,000 investors who lost millions in the collapse of the Townsville-based advisory firm have since been slugged "adviser service fees" by a company acting on behalf of the Commonwealth Bank."

More by AnthonyMarx in The Courier Mail here;

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26051539-952,00.html

My goodness, its hard to belive all that has happened and still more comes out, and continues to go on!!

These Banks, and companies, executives, board sitters etc. need to be taught a lesson!! I just wonder who will have the Kahunas to do it..

If every Aussie drew there funds out of Banks for just 1 week, I would like to see how they would scramble to find out why and make any ammends needed. Once a Bastard always a Bastard!!

 

[Solly]

Solly

Might be the only ones with any money left?

I believe the quote from EC's website earlier this year was;

"My crusade is to find justice for all affected Storm Financial clients. I will not rest in this." EC 2009.

Should I be disappointed ? Or maybe we don't have the full story yet.

Maybe Duncan will get further clarification for us.

 

[Judd]

My goodness, its hard to belive all that has happened and still more comes out, and continues to go on!!

These Banks, and companies, executives, board sitters etc. need to be taught a lesson!! I just wonder who will have the Kahunas to do it..

If every Aussie drew there funds out of Banks for just 1 week, I would like to see how they would scramble to find out why and make any ammends needed. Once a Bastard always a Bastard!!

Monario, I can understand your anger but please bear this in mind: Storm is minor, a mere nothing to the majority of Australians. In a business sense, it is really small fry as well. Outside of Queensland, and even in that State, they probably don't even know about Storm and care even less. Nor will they in anyway disadvantage themselves just to see you or any other ex-Storm client receive some sort of retributive justice.

 

[cuttlefish]

If every Aussie drew there funds out of Banks for just 1 week, I would like to see how they would scramble to find out why and make any ammends needed. Once a Bastard always a Bastard!!

Thats called a bank run - if every aussie did it to the major banks then they firstly they wouldn't have the available cash to actually pay everyone out (banks don't have much of your cash at hand, the bulk of it is on loans to people). In order to meet the cash calls and to maintain adequate capital adequacy ratios they'd have to sell down assets (which means calling in loans - i.e. foreclosures and forced home selldowns even if people are not in default).
This would cause a complete freeze in the economy and lead to another great depression scenario.

 

[Judd]

Thats called a bank run - if every aussie did it to the major banks then they firstly they wouldn't have the available cash to actually pay everyone out (banks don't have much of your cash at hand, the bulk of it is on loans to people). In order to meet the cash calls and to maintain adequate capital adequacy ratios they'd have to sell down assets (which means calling in loans - i.e. foreclosures and forced home selldowns even if people are not in default).
This would cause a complete freeze in the economy and lead to another great depression scenario.

Alternatively, besides just closing the doors of the banks, simply by using softwear changes, they wind back your ATM/debit card daily limit to $50.00 and reduce your credit card limit to $500 and call in the rest.

 

[cuttlefish]

And for what its worth - its not actually in the banks interest to lend money to people that don't have adequate assets and also can't afford to repay the loans either - thats not good banking businees. So the banks will look into this situation regardless because they ultimately lose money when somebody borrows more than they can afford to repay.

Who's at fault?

* Are all CBA, BOQ and Maquarie clients bankrupt?
* Are less than 1% of CBA, BOQ and Macquarie clients bankrupt?
* Are any ex Storm investors bankrupt?
* Are greater than 10% of ex-Storm investors bankrupt?
* How many completed and signed loan application forms that contained incorrect or misleading information did the banks receive from non-Storm clients?
* How many completed and signed application forms that contained incorrect or misleading information did the banks receve from Storm clients?
* How many clients of other financial advice firms went broke or lost the majority of their wealth?
* How many clients of other financial advice firms applied for finance using completed loan application forms that contained false or misleading information?

Whats the common denominator?

 

[Landyman]

Just had a squizz at the SICAG page.

gg there is still a lone money spider on patrol.

The main commentary appears to be about the munificence of the CBA towards storm "victims".

CBA is reportedly paying the legal fees of "the solicitors" who are representing the "interests" of storm "victims".

"The Solicitors", despite being paid by CBA are working only in the interests of the storm "victims".

Yeaah right.

So SICAG now appears to be infiltrated by both ex Storm and now CBA operatives.

Hey Stormies do ya recognise a pattern here!!! Have you been here before?

Landy

 

[Julia]

He admitted that although he had signed the loan application, the content was completed by a Storm adviser with no input from himself.[/I]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Above is an extract from the story in one of the links provided by Solly.

Here we have yet another example of a person foolishly signing a loan application, then allowing someone else to fill in the content.
Then when he's offered a loan that he has no hope of servicing, he takes it anyway!
It almost beggars belief - what are people thinking when they do things like this??

Yes, this story has been repeated over and over and it's the bit I simply can't get over.

"Storm receiver under fire over client treatment"

"The Storm Investors Consumer Action Group says its members are angry about the way they have been treated by Storm Financial's receiver."

More on the ABC here;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/10/2681779.htm

This refers to Korda Mentha receiving ongoing payments from Storm clients' funds.
For those feeling outraged about this, how do you expect Korda Mentha to be paid for their time and expertise?
i.e. who do you think should pay them?

Thats called a bank run - if every aussie did it to the major banks then they firstly they wouldn't have the available cash to actually pay everyone out (banks don't have much of your cash at hand, the bulk of it is on loans to people). In order to meet the cash calls and to maintain adequate capital adequacy ratios they'd have to sell down assets (which means calling in loans - i.e. foreclosures and forced home selldowns even if people are not in default).
This would cause a complete freeze in the economy and lead to another great depression scenario.

Which is why the government stepped in to guarantee deposits when they did. And no doubt why they will be reluctant to withdraw said guarantees.

And for what its worth - its not actually in the banks interest to lend money to people that don't have adequate assets and also can't afford to repay the loans either - thats not good banking businees. So the banks will look into this situation regardless because they ultimately lose money when somebody borrows more than they can afford to repay.

Who's at fault?

* Are all CBA, BOQ and Maquarie clients bankrupt?
* Are less than 1% of CBA, BOQ and Macquarie clients bankrupt?
* Are any ex Storm investors bankrupt?
* Are greater than 10% of ex-Storm investors bankrupt?
* How many completed and signed loan application forms that contained incorrect or misleading information did the banks receive from non-Storm clients?
* How many completed and signed application forms that contained incorrect or misleading information did the banks receve from Storm clients?
* How many clients of other financial advice firms went broke or lost the majority of their wealth?
* How many clients of other financial advice firms applied for finance using completed loan application forms that contained false or misleading information?

Whats the common denominator?

Puts it all rather into perspective, Cuttlefish. Well summarised.