Storm Financial Group

[Quincy]

Also as stated in this article : -


These "findings" don't bode well for the prospects of any ASIC action that may be taken against the Banks.

See View attachment CRC%2001_2010.pdf - for the the Financial Planning Association "findings" regarding Emmanuel Cassimatis

 

[Ironhalo]

Nothing to do with SICAG or Cassamatis - never want to either. I'm only after my money back.

Not being harsh, but don't hold your breath mate.

 

[Attitude]

I don't know how you are involved in Storm or where you are from, however once the evidence is tabled in the Courts then and only then will the associated parties be seen in the true light.

 

[Defender]

Paul, I don't know if you have revisited this forum but I believe that you have made a comment of considerable significance.

If your statement is in fact correct that Phormula was scoped to actually provide correctly reported client positions, this to me appears to be at odds with what was stated at the Hearing before Deputy Registrar Baldwin.

Have you given the details of this information to ASIC ?

When the Golden Greek said at the hearing that their system was not accurate, he was probably right...but only to the degree that the market was moving by the second (as it does). Any system will have some degree of lag, and that what he was referring to, I believe. It could have (would have) been out by a fly poo or two, and that's what he based his comments on. He was correct in what he said, but deceiving...and successfully so!

Make no mistake, the system gave them a very good understanding of where everyone was. It was a useful working tool & did not let them down in any way. Unfortunately, the learned panel, to my frustration, did not pursue questioning as to the degree of accuracy of the system...rather black & white...is it 100% accurate or not. So 99.99% accuracy would have given a determination of "not accurate"! All my opinions as an ex-client (not employee).

 

[Solly]

"Storm Financial client's bank manager hits back at claims he was responsible for her losses"

"THE former bank manager of Storm Financial client Helen Rubin has hit back at claims he was responsible for the loss of her life savings when the firm collapsed in late 2008."

More by Mitch Gaynor in The Courier-Mail here;

http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/storm-financial-clients-bank-manager-hits-back-at-claims-he-was-responsible-for-her-losses/story-e6freqmx-1225967204066

 

[Solly]

"Ruling with a soft fist"

"Almost two years after ASIC began investigating the collapse of Storm Financial, the corporate regulator has finally ruled with its fist."

More by Kate Kachor in Investor Daily here;

http://www.investordaily.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/id/style/10693.htm

 

[SJG1974]

See View attachment 39910 - for the the Financial Planning Association "findings" regarding Emmanuel Cassimatis

I had a read through this. The one thing that stood out to me was that these people paid Storm Financial an upfront fee of $198,000 to effectively have Storm sell down their assets, get them into debt and invest in index funds.

$198,000!!! That is unbelievable.

These people had sufficient assets to live the lifestyle they wanted without taking big risks, yet they paid Storm $198,000 to undertake this high risk strategy.

God Manny must have been a good salesman. Alarm bells should have been ringing for these folk as soon as that figure was mentioned.

 

[Solly]

"Power to act"

"The chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), Tony D'Aloisio, has come out in defence of the regulator for failing to move earlier against those who it believes have engaged in wrongdoing."

More by John Collett in the SMH;

http://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-funds/power-to-act-20101207-18ngn.html

 

[Quincy]

"Power to act"

"The chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), Tony D'Aloisio, has come out in defence of the regulator for failing to move earlier against those who it believes have engaged in wrongdoing."

More by John Collett in the SMH;

http://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-funds/power-to-act-20101207-18ngn.html

As stated by D'Aloisio in the above-referenced article : -

D'Aloisio says that Storm investors would not have reacted well to ASIC trying to close down Storm at a time when they were making such good money. He also argues that ASIC did not have the power to close down Storm.

. . . . but hang on . . . .

9.56 Mr Cassimatis defended the Storm investment model by claiming that the model was not unique to Storm, that many financial planning firms used gearing strategies as a common strategy in financial planning, that the FPA had known about the model for over a decade, had conducted audits and had made various visits to Storm, as had the Regulator, but nobody had advised that it was an unsuitable or inappropriate strategy for clients up to the point of the Storm collapse.

http://203.210.122.153/fpa//media/FPA/Website files/Pub_/CRC 01_2010.pdf

and . . .

10-250MR ASIC announces intention to commence legal action

Friday 26 November 2010

Proceedings against CBA, BoQ and MBL – unregistered managed investment scheme

ASIC will allege that the conduct of the Storm Model amounted to the operation of a managed investment scheme that was required to be registered under the Corporations Act and was not registered. It will be alleged that CBA, BoQ and MBL participated in the operation of that scheme.

http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.ns...tention to commence legal action?opendocument

So Tony is saying that : -

1. He didn't have the power to close down Storm
2. He did have the power to close down Storm

Which one is it Tony ?

 

[Solly]

"ASIC BLOWS HOT AND COLD ON STORM"

"The global financial crisis may have thrown up considerable challenges for the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) but it also threw up considerable benefits in the form of increased powers and increased funding"

More by Mike Taylor from Money Management here;

http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/news/asic-blows-hot-and-cold-on-storm

 

[pedroelpedro]

When the Golden Greek said at the hearing that their system was not accurate, he was probably right...but only to the degree that the market was moving by the second (as it does). Any system will have some degree of lag, and that what he was referring to, I believe. It could have (would have) been out by a fly poo or two, and that's what he based his comments on. He was correct in what he said, but deceiving...and successfully so!

Make no mistake, the system gave them a very good understanding of where everyone was. It was a useful working tool & did not let them down in any way. Unfortunately, the learned panel, to my frustration, did not pursue questioning as to the degree of accuracy of the system...rather black & white...is it 100% accurate or not. So 99.99% accuracy would have given a determination of "not accurate"! All my opinions as an ex-client (not employee).

The statement "the system was not accurate" is exactly right, especially in the last quarter of 2008. The accuracy in fact was nowhere near even 50%. For a significant period during that time, any clients with a Colonial Margin Loan did not have correctly LVRs, either in Storm's software or in CBA's software. It was in fact impossible to determine a client's actual position. Colonial Margin Loans are just one (significant) reason why client positions could not be quantified. There were many, MANY other issues around the data that was loaded into Phormula.

The Phormula software was shown to all clients, everyone saw what it was capable of, therefore this should not be a significant revelation to anyone. Phormula was specifically designed to monitor and track client positions daily, but as previously stated, only if the data going into it was correct and was well maintained.

Regards,
Paul

 

[Quincy]

"ASIC BLOWS HOT AND COLD ON STORM"

http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/news/asic-blows-hot-and-cold-on-storm

As stated in the above-referenced article : -

Notwithstanding the increased funding and the increased powers, ASIC’s chairman, Tony D’Aloisio, has made clear that, confronted by another Storm Financial, the regulator would not do things any differently. It would not close the company down and it would not seek to warn the investors. . . .

Not only is D’Aloisio comfortable with admitting that ASIC could not and would not act on Storm. He appears entirely comfortable with ensuring nothing happens to alter that situation.

However as per my previous post : -

10-250MR ASIC announces intention to commence legal action

Friday 26 November 2010

Proceedings against CBA, BoQ and MBL – unregistered managed investment scheme

ASIC will allege that the conduct of the Storm Model amounted to the operation of a managed investment scheme that was required to be registered under the Corporations Act and was not registered. It will be alleged that CBA, BoQ and MBL participated in the operation of that scheme.

http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf...n?opendocument

In conjunction with a statement made previously by ASIC’s Executive Director of Enforcement at the time : -

"Managed investment schemes must be registered with ASIC, and those operating such schemes should hold a licence. ASIC will take action to close down schemes that are run in breach of the Corporations Act so as to protect the interests of investors", ASIC’s Executive Director of Enforcement, Ms Jan Redfern said.

http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.ns...nvestment+schemes+to+be+wound+up?openDocument

As stated in Solly's posted article : -

"It is common knowledge that a number of senior figures within the financial planning industry urged ASIC officers to examine the activities of Storm Financial before it collapsed, and recent documentation released by a law firm suggest ASIC was well aware of the strategies pursued by Storm and the risks those strategies entailed.

If ASIC's claim is in fact a valid one (that the Storm Model amounted to the operation of a managed investment scheme), then with reference to all of the above, to suggest that ASIC did not have the power to close down Storm, is (IMO) simply not true.

 

[SJG1974]

I still go and have a look at the Storm financial website every now and then just to remind myself of the big statements and claims they made on there.

I like this one:

"Why Storm:
Our desire is for people to embrace the analogy of the storm. Storms are the harbingers of growth. They return life to parched land and create new and fresh beginnings.

We also think the name signifies the dynamic process we go through with our clients. Initially our clients can feel disturbed by stormy waters, and we are alongside them to navigate them through that. The storm's replenishing rains bring the promise of renewal and growth.

In keeping with the storm analogy, Storm Financial is refreshing and invigorating for clients…they know to 'expect the unexpected!"

If only the clients had known to expect the unexpected they would not be in the current mess.

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720070059/www.stormfinancial.com.au/ins_abo.php

 

[mattryanshares]

My parents lost virtually everything with storm, and i very nearly invested with them as well.

I'll never forget what the adviser said to me when trying to get me to take out a 700k loan on shares.

I said but i cant afford to loose that, i can afford to loose and recover from a 100k loan but 700k would sink me.

He said it will never happen. its impossible for you too loose everything, if that happened your house, the australian dollar every major instituition would be worth nothing. The world would be kaos!!!!

he said the same thing to my parents!!!

Storm and all there partners should be hung drawn and quartered!

 

[Attitude]

Yes my adviser said the exact same thing. Funny so did my bank. One thing I know for sure is that I know the Comm Bank are trying to tempt me with small offers, but it won't cut it. I am rebuilding and have already spent a significant amount of money collating evidence which will demonstrate the disgraceful behavior from all connected with this scam.

 

[Judd]

Yes my adviser said the exact same thing. Funny so did my bank. One thing I know for sure is that I know the Comm Bank are trying to tempt me with small offers, but it won't cut it. I am rebuilding and have already spent a significant amount of money collating evidence which will demonstrate the disgraceful behavior from all connected with this scam.

This "Funny so did my bank" is something I have never been really able to understand. Was it the Commonwealth Bank proper which said those sort of things or was it individuals of a particular CBA branch, who were probably also caught up with the Storm euphoria, who gave this information?

Obviously, it is only curiosity on my part since I did not sign up for the Storm song and dance act as you did. Equally, I don't give a rats if you do or do not get your money back although it would be nice for you if that happened and, if so, all good fortune to you.

Slight correction: "you' was used in the Royal sense and not in the personal one.

 

[Attitude]

It is very complicated but two banks are involved which I've settled with one. Only one to go so i'm being forced to roll the dice! The banks are just stalling and just trying to wear people down so they give in. Big banks with big pockets V the little man! Will be interesting start to 2011!

 

[Solly]

"Commonwealth Bank owed an extra $7 million after Storm Financial's collapse"

"AS a deadline expires for three banks to cut a compensation deal over Storm Financial, new court documents reveal the Commonwealth Bank copped a separate $7 million sting in the collapse of the financial advisory business."

More by Liam Walsh in The Courier-Mail here;

http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/commonwealth-bank-owed-an-extra-7-million-after-storm-financials-collapse/story-e6freqmx-1225972956621

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

My parents lost virtually everything with storm, and i very nearly invested with them as well.

I'll never forget what the adviser said to me when trying to get me to take out a 700k loan on shares.

I said but i cant afford to loose that, i can afford to loose and recover from a 100k loan but 700k would sink me.

He said it will never happen. its impossible for you too loose everything, if that happened your house, the australian dollar every major instituition would be worth nothing. The world would be kaos!!!!

he said the same thing to my parents!!!

Storm and all there partners should be hung drawn and quartered!

Mate, you need to let ASIC know of these conversations.

A diary note from the day would be useful.

You do need to let ASIC know.

gg

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

"Commonwealth Bank owed an extra $7 million after Storm Financial's collapse"

"AS a deadline expires for three banks to cut a compensation deal over Storm Financial, new court documents reveal the Commonwealth Bank copped a separate $7 million sting in the collapse of the financial advisory business."

More by Liam Walsh in The Courier-Mail here;

http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/commonwealth-bank-owed-an-extra-7-million-after-storm-financials-collapse/story-e6freqmx-1225972956621

Solly mate,

I sailed my aging Cat from Maggie to the Watermark for a meeting with an SC over a a misunderstanding with the ATO on Friday.

After the meat he mentioned Storm Financial, and indicated that the Ripoll inquiry would in law vindicate Manny and Storm.

I'm no lawyer so don't understand it, but it sounds to me that the Financial Planners and the Government are ganging up on the little guys, to gloss this over, and leave the poor Storm bastards penniless.

gg