Storm Financial Group

[Garpal Gumnut]

May I wish all Stormers a good 2010 and a secure future.

gg

 

[sailteam30]

DocK & Julia - thank you for those kind words, however, it was a matter of "sink or swim", I even considered joining my son in Hanoi (Vietnam) as he runs 3 ESL schools there, but I also owe much to the "strength" of my wife who assisted me to set up my business which is in a unique, niche that offers "marine training/education" as this was my professional field for 31 years.

Some observations I have made -

1. I am not a greedy millionaire, I was seeking a secure long term strategy (other than the age pension) and wished to put my superannuation (which has gone now) to work. I know very little about investing, but I do know when I have a toothache I go to the professional (a registered dentist) and it is fixed - when my kids required an education I go to the professional (a registered teacher) and it is fixed - so when I needed advice on investing I went to a the professional (a registered financial planner - who was qualified and had been recommended by several friends and professional colleagues) which was a disaster as he had a smooth confident manner and knew his facts and figures but told lies.

2. I am disappointed that this "financial planner" is still in business (according to talk on this thread) as I feel if he was in any other profession he would be barred from that professional body.

3. I no longer trust anyone, my view of society has changed - I will plan my financial future myself, it may not be as effiecient as someone who "knows all" about finances but at least I will be in control.

 

[DocK]

DocK & Julia - thank you for those kind words, however, it was a matter of "sink or swim", I even considered joining my son in Hanoi (Vietnam) as he runs 3 ESL schools there, but I also owe much to the "strength" of my wife who assisted me to set up my business which is in a unique, niche that offers "marine training/education" as this was my professional field for 31 years.

Some observations I have made -

1. I am not a greedy millionaire, I was seeking a secure long term strategy (other than the age pension) and wished to put my superannuation (which has gone now) to work. I know very little about investing, but I do know when I have a toothache I go to the professional (a registered dentist) and it is fixed - when my kids required an education I go to the professional (a registered teacher) and it is fixed - so when I needed advice on investing I went to a the professional (a registered financial planner - who was qualified and had been recommended by several friends and professional colleagues) which was a disaster as he had a smooth confident manner and knew his facts and figures but told lies.

2. I am disappointed that this "financial planner" is still in business (according to talk on this thread) as I feel if he was in any other profession he would be barred from that professional body.

3. I no longer trust anyone, my view of society has changed - I will plan my financial future myself, it may not be as effiecient as someone who "knows all" about finances but at least I will be in control.

Bloody well done and cheers to you Sailteam30! My husband and I were already running a business, but other than that we could practically be singing from the same choirbook. Your last point is the most telling, I feel, and I'd say the majority of ex-storm clients feel this way. I've adopted a "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" attitude, but do sometimes regret that I've become a cynical, suspicious type who now tends to look for the worst in people. This makes me much more likely to survive the rat-race I suppose, but I don't think it makes a nicer person. Still, to put it in marine terms for you - better to be coated in suspicion and afloat, than wide-open and at the bottom of the deep blue sea

Becoming master of your own finances and investments is a mixed experience, I've found. I tend to be a control freak by nature, so the control aspect both suits me and scares me. On the one hand I trust nobody as much as I trust myself, but then again I don't trust that I yet am qualified to make the right decisions, so spend quite a bit of time agonising over every decision I make, and a fair few restless nights. Self-education is the key, and baby steps... (And, of course, the thing storm lacked - an exit strategy!)

Best of luck to you and your family,

DocK

ps, There is a lovely broadwater where I live, and a lot of under-trained idiots in their lovely boats making it more and more dangerous every year! Having got my boat licence in one day in what I would call a ridiculously easy and almost impossible to fail test, I shudder to think how many of them set out with no real idea of what they're doing. (I was simply the reserve in case my spouse got pulled overboard by that huuuuge fish he dreamt of catching). I do hope you're "training/educating" in my area - as it's sorely needed.

 

[Ironhalo]

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year people!

I have been offline for a little while traveling, but have had a good read of what has transpired to date.

This should raise a smile, my mother went shopping in Redcliffe the other day and who should she bump into at Coles but her old Storm 'advisor', Andrew O'Brien. Despite not being able to look her in the eye, she was actually regaled with his story of woe, 'we nearly lost the house'....'we lost big time', despite the fact that his poor advice, inaction, and inability to answer his calls nearly cost her her own house, not to mention the fact that she will now be working for the next decade to reestablish herself. Luckily, she was one of the test cases with CBA and managed to salvage a rather decent deal. This is the same guy who had the audacity to then ring another relative of mine to try and get trailing commissions on loan interest refunds after it all fell apart.

She told me that despite forcing back the urge to spit in his face, she wished him a prosperous and Happy 2010.

She has better self control then I would!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year people!

I have been offline for a little while traveling, but have had a good read of what has transpired to date.

This should raise a smile, my mother went shopping in Redcliffe the other day and who should she bump into at Coles but her old Storm 'advisor', Andrew O'Brien. Despite not being able to look her in the eye, she was actually regaled with his story of woe, 'we nearly lost the house'....'we lost big time', despite the fact that his poor advice, inaction, and inability to answer his calls nearly cost her her own house, not to mention the fact that she will now be working for the next decade to reestablish herself. Luckily, she was one of the test cases with CBA and managed to salvage a rather decent deal. This is the same guy who had the audacity to then ring another relative of mine to try and get trailing commissions on loan interest refunds after it all fell apart.

She told me that despite forcing back the urge to spit in his face, she wished him a prosperous and Happy 2010.

She has better self control then I would!

And moneyspidercentral sicag.info are still advising punters to seek advice from advisers who charge according to the Storm model.

SICAG should be having some elections soon. Lets hope they can get the old guard out and a renewal of their webpage advice and disclaimers.

gg

 

[Smiley]

SICAG has neer had elections and doubt they will start now - it really was a couple people getting together to see what they could do to help the stormified.

This bit from the 12 Jan Business Spectator is relevant - wonder if the SF directors will be next:

"The corporate watchdog has charged three former directors of collapsed broking firm Opes Prime Stockbroking Ltd (OPSL) with breaching their duties. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) said former directors Julian Smith and Anthony Blumberg had been arrested and granted conditional bail to appear in the Melbourne Magistrates Court on January 29. A third director, Lirim (Laurie) Emini, has been charged on summons to appear in the Melbourne Magistrates Court on the same day.
In a statement, ASIC said the directors allegedly signed financial documentation with ANZ Bank to obtain a term loan for OPSL and Opes Prime Group Ltd (OPGL) shortly before the firm collapsed, with its assets pledged as security to meet the obligations of a third company, Leveraged Capital Pty Ltd. The watchdog has alleged that in doing so, the directors were intentionally dishonest and failed to exercise their powers and discharge their duties in good faith, in the best interests of OPGL and OPSL. ASIC also alleges that Mr Smith, Mr Blumberg and Mr Emini dishonestly used their positions with the intention of directly or indirectly gaining an advantage for themselves or for someone else. Each director has been charged with two offences of breaching their duties as directors of OPSL and two offences of breaching duties as directors of Opes Prime Group Limited (OPGL). The offences each carry a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment. On March 27 2008, OPSL was placed in administration, with receivers and managers subsequently appointed. At the time of its collapse, the stockbroking firm had more than 650 active client accounts, with creditors owed about $630 million. Under their bail conditions, Mr Smith and Mr Blumberg must surrender any passports, are prevented from applying for further passports and must not attend any point of international departure. The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions is prosecuting the matter."

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

SICAG has neer had elections and doubt they will start now - it really was a couple people getting together to see what they could do to help the stormified.

re SICAG

I thought it was an incorporated entity speaking for all Storm victims.

If what you say is true it is quite worrying.

Where will it go to after its remit is achieved, indeed what is its remit??

gg

 

[Smiley]

No GG, SICAG was never supposed to speak for me and others and even if they purported to do so - e.g. re statements about fees, etc it was not so. Many of us just viewed it as a support organisation, though it seemed to grow into something 'more' than that last year.

 

[specialed]

SICAG has neer had elections and doubt they will start now - it really was a couple people getting together to see what they could do to help the stormified.

.

re SICAG

I thought it was an incorporated entity speaking for all Storm victims.

If what you say is true it is quite worrying.

Where will it go to after its remit is achieved, indeed what is its remit??

gg

No GG, SICAG was never supposed to speak for me and others and even if they purported to do so - e.g. re statements about fees, etc it was not so. Many of us just viewed it as a support organisation, though it seemed to grow into something 'more' than that last year.

My understanding is that SICAG did have elections last year at one of the meetings in Redcliffe when the current Chairs etc were elected to the current postions. Therefore, they will again need to have elections etc.

It has never claimed to speak for, or be acting on behalf of "all" storm victims, only its members as far as I'm aware. This is not to say however that anything it achieves for its members may not also benefit non members. i.e the resolution process that anyone can participate in, SICAG member or not.

And yes it did start as a support organisation but as it became evident the large number of victims needing support, it grew rapidly last year. As interest in the situation grew, (involvement of Pollies, Lawyers, media etc) so to has the work done by these "elected" volunteers. One thing I can be sure is that this work, by the volunteers has consisted of longer hours each week than many people would work each month....

Once its members feel it has achieved everything for them that it can, and that they no longer need its support then surely it would wind down its operations to some degree.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

My understanding is that SICAG did have elections last year at one of the meetings in Redcliffe when the current Chairs etc were elected to the current postions. Therefore, they will again need to have elections etc.

It has never claimed to speak for, or be acting on behalf of "all" storm victims, only its members as far as I'm aware. This is not to say however that anything it achieves for its members may not also benefit non members. i.e the resolution process that anyone can participate in, SICAG member or not.

And yes it did start as a support organisation but as it became evident the large number of victims needing support, it grew rapidly last year. As interest in the situation grew, (involvement of Pollies, Lawyers, media etc) so to has the work done by these "elected" volunteers. One thing I can be sure is that this work, by the volunteers has consisted of longer hours each week than many people would work each month....

Once its members feel it has achieved everything for them that it can, and that they no longer need its support then surely it would wind down its operations to some degree.

Thanks specialed.

That is my understanding of SICAG. They may need elections though if they decide to drop the SICAG 2009 Model re Manny et al.

gg

 

[Solly]

"Storm clients unlikely to share CBA profits
SICAG calls fall on deaf ears"

"SICAG has called on the CBA to share part of its forecast $2.9 billion half-year profit with ex-Storm Financial clients."

More by Kate Kachor in Investor Daily here;

http://www.investordaily.com/cps/rde/xchg/id/style/8336.htm

 

[Solly]

"Banks resist Storm settlement call"

"ASIC is lobbying banks involved with collapsed financial adviser Storm Financial to fast-track a settlement for victims by supporting a common compensation scheme."

More in the AFR of January 8 2010 by Duncan Hughes.

http://kiosko.net/au/2010-01-08/np/au_financial_review.html

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

"Storm clients unlikely to share CBA profits
SICAG calls fall on deaf ears"

"SICAG has called on the CBA to share part of its forecast $2.9 billion half-year profit with ex-Storm Financial clients."

More by Kate Kachor in Investor Daily here;

http://www.investordaily.com/cps/rde/xchg/id/style/8336.htm

There is certainly sufficient evidence now that CBA have a moral if not a yet proven legal responsibility to share their largesse with the Storm victims.

SICAG are to be commended for their continued hounding of the CBA through the media.

gg

 

[Solly]

"Storm Financial: Boulevard of broken dreams"

More by Tony Raggatt in the Townsville Bulletin here;

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2009/12/26/103455_news.html

Read some interesting comments at the end of this news article
by Sean McArdle and Ruth Fontaine.

 

[Solly]

There is certainly sufficient evidence now that CBA have a moral if not a yet proven legal responsibility to share their largesse with the Storm victims.

SICAG are to be commended for their continued hounding of the CBA through the media.

gg

gg, I spent some time with a Stormer yesterday. He is really concerned about the perceived lack progress with the resolution scheme. He still displays a rather negative view of the CBA especially after the published reports of their $2.9 billion six monthly profit. He said to me he feels like he's road kill in the scheme of things. That's understandable.

He shared with me his net financial state and he is in a truly challenging position for a person of his age and his wife is not in good health. The dream that they were presented and agreed to buy, which has now turned into this saga has very serious human consequences. I wonder what direction things will take this year.

If ASIC find any breaches and follow through with prosecutions, what will be the benefit to the Stormers ? And this was one of his concerns.
Will he still be left in a financial wasteland?

He said to me that he feels like he's "being punished for a crime he didn't commit". This phase sounded a bit familiar, it's only now I remember where I have heard it before.

If only in reality there was A fiscal fiduciary duty enforcement equivalent of this Team.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0ZmUKBgwqg

Maybe a touch of B.A. Baracus would get things moving......"pity da fool".

 

[Solly]

And now on Wikipedia as part of the Queensland Portal;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_Financial

I'm sure there will be some interesting contributions and subsequent edits.

 

[bunyip]

And now on Wikipedia as part of the Queensland Portal;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_Financial

I'm sure there will be some interesting contributions and subsequent edits.

Inquiry
An inquiry into the collapse produced a joint parliamentary committee report in late November 2009. The report placed the blame for the collapse on the financial services industry and the regulators. Storm Investors Consumer Action Group, which represent victims of the company's collapse, blamed poor banking practices for the collapse and were disappointed that the inquiry did not bring bankers to task for their mismanagement.

Above is an extract from the link provided by the intrepid Solly in relation to the collapse of Storm Financial.

It's interesting to note that the parliamentary inquiry blames the collapse on the financial services industry and the regulators, while SICAG blames poor banking practices, and is disappointed that the inquiry 'didn't bring bankers to task for their mismanagement'.

Meanwhile the real culprit, Cassamatis, doesn't get a mention!

Just to refresh the memory of both SICAG and the parliamentary inquiry.....

Cassamatis is the incompetent who advised his clients to gear to dangerously high levels in the always risky stockmarket.
He's the incompetent who allowed his heavily geared clients to sit through a full 12 months of one of the worst market crashes in history.
He's the incompetent who failed to give balanced investment advice to his clients to spread their risk across a number of investment areas.
He's the incompetent who had no contingency plan in place, preferring to sit on his hands and do nothing while his clients wealth vaporised.
He's the incompetent who, as the market kept plunging, advised new clients to invest heavily, and existing clients to borrow more.
He's the incompetent who tried to be a bull in a bear market.
He's the incompetent who failed to learn the lessons taught by the 1987 crash - that markets can and do collapse every so often, and you'd better have some plans in place to deal with it if you're going to be a stockmarket investor.
He's the incompetent who now hides behind lies and excuses by claiming that the 2008 crash was unprecedented and nobody saw it coming.

And yet when blame is being dished out for the collapse of Storm and the wipeout of their clients, Cassamatis doesn't get a mention!
Does that make sense to any of you?.....it makes no sense to me!

 

[DocK]

Ah Bunyip, consider the source of the information that you've quoted. I doubt many would say the Wikipedia is the most accurate source of info on the 'net. As my kids are taught at school, when using the internet for research it pays to verify any info found from a "reliable" source. I would suggest that it is not possible to sum up the entire Storm Fiasco in as little words as have been used in the linked Wiki source - the acknowledged source of some of the info used in the article was one Sunshine Coast reporter's views, it would seem.

Please - edit away. I gather that most info on Wikipedia is able to be edited - and I've seen "celebrities" state that they've corrected info on themselves on Wiki only to have it edited to something false by someone else. Who is to say that a certain ex-CEO hasn't been contributing to Wikipedia himself?

 

[Harleyquin]

Yes Bunyip that's right Cassimatis was the 'incompetent' responsible for all of the issues that you've raised. He didn't become an incompetent overnight he's always been incompetent and many are only finding out after the event just how incompetent he was.

My question to you is 'Obviously the largest bank in Australia with it's top financial people would also have realised that EC and Storm's advice was highly questionable SO why did they lend them so much money for the company and all of their clients when it's quite obvious to them that storm and it's chief director was a complete incompetent?'

I asked this question once before and was told 'that's what banks do they lend money', well obviously they do irrespective of how incompetent the 'asker' is and irrespective of how fraudulent the lending practices are.

The banks backed this incompetent and his incompetent company with as much money as they could give them. We now know that for a fact. Read the 'Banking Code of Practice' - there's not too many 'rules' in there that they havent broken. So why do the banking fraternity bother with a banking code of practice if they intend to do exactly as they like.

 

[Solly]

"Claim of no mistakes in Storm case"

"ASIC denies it missed the "smoking gun" before the demise of Storm Financial, a Queensland-based financial adviser that collapsed in January last year, with investors losing more than an estimated $3 billion."

Read more in The Australian Financial Review of Jan 27 2010.