Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Storm Financial Group

Jump to new
Solly said:
"The Storm nightmare continues"

"December 10, 2008 will be a day forever etched into the minds of thousands of Storm Financial investors and their families"

Mitch Gaynor's article on page 72 of The Sunday Mail today gives an overview of the affects that the collapse has had on some of those involved.
Click to expand...

The Stormers have lost millions.

The lawyers and liquidators will make the most out of it all, and the perpetrators will be back giving the same financial advice, if they are not already doing so, in two years time.

gg
 
The punters from Storm should get in to bed with the Firepower people here in Perth, both have been taken to the cleaners big time.
 
Hey GG,

Can I suggest you DONT track dont the transcript of Senator Williams speech to the Parliament last week regarding STORM. Given your concerted attempts at SICAG bashing it would probably be enough to have you slit your wrists.
 
Solly said:
gg, thanks for the heads-up on this, I eagerly await more.

I wonder if it has anything to do with Section 184.

I wonder what information Worrells have been able to give to ASIC.

I just hope that what ever direction this saga meanders I really hope that there will be some beneficial outcomes for the poor battered Stormers.
Click to expand...

What Statute Solly? My C.C. has 184 repealed. Do you mean 193 or 194?
 
Have any ex-stormers heard anything from the S&G/CBA resolution process? I was hoping to have some feedback by now.....
 
Grey Ghost said:
Hang in there people and could you post once you find out anything. I think there are a lot of people who would be interested.
Click to expand...

We are all hanging in there, very patiently, but it's been a very long year for all of us.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean regarding "find out anything".

Find out anything about what? If we have been 'interviewed' by CBA the next step is supposed to be that they profer an 'offer' to our lawyer. We are not allowed to discuss this with anyone, let alone post about it on a forum.

What is it that you think people would be interested in?

MS
 
My contacts tell me that the wait will be worth it.

CBA are arguing that their reputational damage needs to be minimised, a few hundred mil here or there will not affect their bottom line.

They are, like Scattini after blood, the blood of the perpetrators of the whole stupid model.

And the deal will reflect this.

So just hang in there.

There are bigger issues than you Stormers, unfortunately for you, being played out, which is distressing for the Stormers.

ASIC and the Liquidators are circling as well, and the Regulators need to ensure it will not happen again and that any criminality is punished with long sentences.

The banks reputation with Stormers may be in tatters but you are not a huge number in the big game.

From what I hear you will be "looked after" but won't be able to afford to indulge in harebrained schemes like this ever again, as a result of the settlement.

gg
 
Mindstorm said:
We are all hanging in there, very patiently, but it's been a very long year for all of us.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean regarding "find out anything".

Find out anything about what? If we have been 'interviewed' by CBA the next step is supposed to be that they profer an 'offer' to our lawyer. We are not allowed to discuss this with anyone, let alone post about it on a forum.

What is it that you think people would be interested in?

MS
Click to expand...

I meant about any settlement the bank is prepared to offer.
For some time now the CBA have said they will 'right the wrongs' they have done in relation to their part in this whole saga. There are more than a few of us who are interested in just exactly what this means in practice.
I should have guessed though that any offers they make to you will be conditional on the details remaining confidential. I am certainly not suggesting you do anything which would put this at risk although I know from past experience confidentiality clauses are usually to protect the bank and not the customer.
Good luck with this and I hope you get a satisfactory outcome.

Garpal Gumnut said:
CBA are arguing that their reputational damage needs to be minimised, a few hundred mil here or there will not affect their bottom line.

From what I hear you will be "looked after" but won't be able to afford to indulge in harebrained schemes like this ever again, as a result of the settlement.

gg
Click to expand...

GG as usual you appear to have some inside knowledge on this.
Are you in a position to elaborate?
 
GG we may only be a small number in some eyes but there were reportedly 14000 people affected by the collapse of storm and although some are not affected as badly as others, they are also aware of the fallout over this. Everyone of those 14000 former investors has perhaps 12 relatives and 12 friends and acquaintances who they can relate this message to and all of a sudden you've got thousands of people who will never go near the people responsible for this disaster. They will never go near a 'professional' financial person again. It's very easy to bring up the subject at your local Christmas barbeque and all of a sudden the message gets out there to another twenty. Don't underestimate the power of these small numbers of people involved. Even this forum is getting the message out there.

The media have reported heavily on this collapse and the general public are becoming more aware of the shortcomings in the financial industry and all of the players who have contributed to this disaster. This hasn't been a black swan event as many of you have already pointed out. The market analyists reported this financial downturn at least twelve months before and yet the financial planners and the banks continued on their merry way totally ignoring what was happening to the market.

Everyone is edgy when it comes to trusting someone else with their own money,especially in light of this collapse and many others, and it doesn't take much to convince someone else that they are better off educating themselves and deciding how to invest for themselves than to trust someone who couldn't care less and is prepared to charge you a fortune to do nothing. How many others on this forum won't trust a 'professional' financial person, you can go back through the posts on this forum and find a number of supposedly clever investors who don't want to know about a so called professional financial person. They will prefer to look after their own money in their own way This disaster has proved to all that there is no such thing as a 'professional' in the financial planning industry. They can cover themselves legally with their Statements of Advice and they are untouchable.

This has destroyed the financial lives of so many, their health is suffering, their ability to work is suffering, you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. Whole communities have been devastated financially and emotionally. Twelve months after the event there are thousands of ex stormies on antidepressants desperately trying to continue to work and live in rented accommodation knowing that at the end of the day it's all for nothing. They have all been thrown to the financial scrapheap.
 
Not to detract from the valid points made in Harleyquin's post but the financial planning group which "bought" Storm's book advised that the actual number of active clients was around 5,000 not the reported 14,000. The remainder were former clients who bought life insurance policies and the like but never had any further involvement in Storm's song and dance act.

The impact on those 5,000 would likely be as per Harleyquin's views. I recall reading an article where in a small rural town the Storm money machine was the talk of the town, in the pub and how "You'd be mad not to get into it." The devastating impact has apparently almost totaled that community including those who were never involved, eg small business, retailers, due to the now lack of money in the area. Bad news indeed.
 
Harleyquin,

I agree with your comments on the power of even a small number. I do wonder how much quicker the CBA, ASIC and both state and federal government as well as the FPA would have sought to support storm victims had all of the 120000 people you talk about ( 5000 victims times 24 friends and relatives) written letters of protests etc to the relevant agencies. I imagine the CBA in particular might have acted a little quicker if 100000 people all turn up tomorrow to close their accounts in protest.

Unfortunately when it comes to actually doing something, support often turns to apathy. It not that people don’t care, its just that actually doing something takes too much effort for some. Particularly when your talking about support for a group of people who were trying to fund their own retirement. We've all read the uninformed views of some, even in this forum who believe storm investors were just greedy risk takers looking for a quick win. Of course this is not true, they were mum and dad, and in many case grandma and grandpa investors who paid for advice in order to secure a comfortable retirement for themselves. Let tall poppy syndrome rule.

However, it is not all still doom and gloom. The CBA is in damage minimisation mode. Next time you speak to those 24 people, ask them to pop into their local CBA and express their disgust.

Something tells me in the end this is probably all we can hope for. Call me a sceptic, but given ASIC's recent troubles does anyone believe they are actually going to be willing to go after anyone who is in a position to fight back.
 
specialed said:
....Of course this is not true, they were mum and dad, and in many case grandma and grandpa investors who paid for advice in order to secure a comfortable retirement for themselves.....
Click to expand...

Of course it is not true but what is true is believing that simply paying for advice abrogated their responsibility in all matters. It didn't and it doesn't. The funds were not entrusted to Storm in any way, shape or form and there was the opportunity to direct and take the necessary action to ensure success. Unfortunately, quite a number rolled over when challenged by the cad's who ripped off the 7% up front fee.
 
Judd said:
Of course it is not true but what is true is believing that simply paying for advice abrogated their responsibility in all matters. It didn't and it doesn't. The funds were not entrusted to Storm in any way, shape or form and there was the opportunity to direct and take the necessary action to ensure success. Unfortunately, quite a number rolled over when challenged by the cad's who ripped off the 7% up front fee.
Click to expand...

I think one thing that the senate inquiry HAS shown is that the relationship between storm and the cba (perceived or otherwise) severely hindered most investors opportunity "to direct and take the necessary action".

The failure to be contacted by either party in a timely manner, and the admission that the information (portfolio values) coming from cba was at times inaccurate put investors in a very precarious position. Many believe they HAD taken direct action by previously organising for a margin call to be made at a designated time and value. I believe for many this was at 80% lvr. I dont know how many had instructed storm or cba to wait and sell up at 137% LVR.....One thing the GFC has shown us is that many institutions were not equiped, and did not have the resources or capacity to monitor or react to the sharp downturn in a timely manner.

I dont think many feel they had abrogated their responsibility by paying for advice, but infact many feel that during the crucial moments they had little control over what was happening. It will be interesting to see where ASIC feel responsibility lay or where they are willing to publicly state it lies. Many insitutions will be fighting very hard to maintain their public image....
 
adrian1 said:
Should I sell my BOQ shares before the CBA/ S and G deal is announced?:confused:
Click to expand...

Make you own decision. Then you will not be in a position of trying to blame everyone else under the sun should your decision be the wrong one or even the correct one.

specialed, read the Hansard transcript of 4 September. Read it very, very carefully and then:

  • take note of how many dealer groups, including Storm, actioned margin calls during the period in question;
  • ask yourself, how could action be taken to settle a margin call if the data supplied by CBA/CGI was inaccurate to any relevant degree;
  • why did Storm action margin calls by way of redemption to the extent of $575M in October alone if it was based on inaccurate data; and
  • be thankful that EC's son emailed the CBA on 15 October that Storm's systems were so good, it knew its clients' positions as accurately as any fund manager. (Obviously, it was this accurate data which enabled the necessary action on margin calls - which were never made apparently.)
 

Similar threads

TiminOz
The dynamics of money and TIME: crimping cashflow for a period
Replies
3
Views
867
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
63
Views
6K
qldfrog
qldfrog
Garpal Gumnut
Mayfair 101/Mayfair Platinum
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Top