Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

I don't believe JH has mentioned anything about this law suit against the Premium Income Fund on the NSX nor in Investor Updates. In the NSX release about Sales Strategies the Forest Resort is mentioned but no mention of legal action of $168 million against the fund. There are certainly huge holes in information we unit holders are being drip fed by WC. What else haven't we been told?

"Family in fight to save resort dream
Nick McKenzie, Eric Johnston
April 2, 2011

Sticking together are, from left, Marcus Walsh, Rebecca Ebbels, Jim Walsh, Joan Walsh, Justin Walsh and Melissa Boak. The resort is in the background. Photo: Simon O'Dwyer

EACH day, Jim and Joan Walsh walk out their front door and see their biggest dream, their biggest failure - and the biggest fight of their lives.

The Walshes are not typical property developers. They sank all they had financially and emotionally into what they called ''their child'' - the Forest Resort development, boasting a 144-room hotel and an upmarket golf course surrounded by houses. Now, every time they go outside and look around, their resolve to fight hardens. Which is helpful, because the Walshes have picked one hell of a battle."

Click on link below for full story...and what a story!

http://www.watoday.com.au/victoria/family-in-fight-to-save-resort-dream-20110402-1cskj.html
Cookie, I have personally contacted Caroline Snow, complaints officer and systems manager of Wellington Capital Premium Income Fund, Jenny Hutson managing director of Wellington Capital, PIF investor relations staff at WC and the members of the duly appointed Wellington Capital PIF Investor Advisory Committee members on numerous occassions as far back as May 2010 regarding the Forest Resort pending legal claim and how it should be disclosed on the NSX.
I notified the Misconduct & Breach Reporting
Stakeholder Services Australian Securities & Investments Commission in May 2010 on this matter and received the usual generic response.
I also sent the following to Ian Craig at the NSX on the 5th May 2010 who was not at all concerned.
'It has come to my attention that there has been an alleged serious breach of the Corporation Act in respect to non-disclosure by Wellington Capital of a current legal action against the PIF while units are actively trading on the NSX? In the event this legal action is successful it will have a huge detrimental impact on our Fund. '


I also contacted the Australian Shareholders' Association with the same information. Nothing was ever done:banghead:

I have kept a record of all correspondence because I think investors in the Wellington Capital Premium Income Fund have been seriously let down by the current PIF Responsible Entity and all the mentioned so called regulatory bodies by failing to follow up on this issue.

I also sent the following to the PIF IAC on the 3rd of Feb 2011 to this date have never once responded or acknowledged any of my communictions!!

To the PIF IAC,

You would most probably not be aware of the legal action involving the PIF asset Novatel Forest Resort in Creswick where the owners have instigated legal proceedings against Perpetual where it is alleged Korda Mentha were prematurely appointed as Receiver & Managers by our current RE.

I understand the costs involved are approx: $284,845.00 in legal fees incurred to date (including drafting an amended reply). The form 524’s lodged with ASIC by Korda Mentha list payments to them for fees of $565,225 for the first 12 months as Receiver & Managers (Note: another 6 months fee paid to KM to be disclosed in next reporting period.)

This means $248,845.00 + $565,225.00 + $250,000.00 (Estimate KM 6 months)=$1,064,70.00 plus provision for legal fees to trial ($1,200,000.00).


Would it not be reasonable to assume the RE to have a statutory responsibility to its unit holders to disclose expenditure of $2.2 million + with the further risk exposure to Damages being awarded of possibly $155 million to the developer in compensation should it be proved Korda Mentha should not have been appointed?

Slater and Gordon Group leader as an agent of the court swore an affidavit that this case has merit and was in the public interest to be heard. Where does the PIF stand legally if it is proved that this was not simply a case of a disgruntled defaulting borrower but rather a developer who did not receive the whole amount of his loan from Octaviar/MFS after it collapsed (Perpetual was noted in the loan agreements as Lender and Custodian)

As these proceedings have never been disclosed to the NSX and any possible subsequent consequences to our Fund I would appreciate it if in your capacity as duly appointed PIF IAC reps you can discuss this issue with our current RE and comment on this issue in our next PIF investor update.


What does it take to get the message through?? Seamisty
 
Company imploded after spending spree Eric Johnston
April 3, 2011

FOUNDED in 1999 by two criminal lawyers, MFS ranks as one of the most spectacular of Australia's recent debt-funded corporate implosions.

Using the well-worn strategy of over-paying for assets on a debt-fuelled spending spree, Gold Coast-based MFS made countless acquisitions, including Harvey World Travel, Gullivers Travel Group and Let's Go Travel, and then extended into hotels. It also created a range of listed and unlisted property trusts and mortgage schemes.


Full article:
http://www.theage.com.au/business/company-imploded-after-spending-spree-20110402-1cskq.html
 
Thanks, Seamisty, for informing us 'mushrooms' (definition: those kept in the dark and fed bull**** by WC) of your many attempts to elicit support from the various authorities that are supposed to be regulators and watch dogs on our behalf and your many efforts to communicate with WC and the IAC (which seems to exist in name only) about your concerns. Certainly legal action of this magnitude must be disclosed to the NSX and unit holders.

If the developers of the Forest Resort are successful and are awarded damages of the magnitude indicated, where would that leave us? I assume the legal fees are currently coming out of the PIF???

Cookie1
 
Marcom or someone, what do you make of this from the Federal Court of Australia website (a Google alert I received today)? I don't understand all the legalese.:banghead:

http://www.commercialcourt.com.au/Lists/News/DispForm.aspx?ID=1366

and the link within the article

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2011/294.html

Thanks, Cookie1

Like the recent Fortress application, Liz Ailwood the Brisbane based KPMG representative selected to face a right grilling by by two sets of liquidators - Bentleys for Octaviar and Ferrier Hodgeson for Octaviar Investment Notes and Investment Bonds - applied to the Federal Court to have the summons terminated. It seems the Federal Court was selected because of the different (NSW and QLD) State Supreme Court jurisdictions in which the examinations have taken place. Most of Bentley's examinations have been in the NSW Supreme Court with the OIN legal team getting to mull over the examinees remains afterwards. The OIN liquidators have also grilled some examinees in the Brisbane Magistrates Court. In Liz Ailwoods case she was scheduled to face the OIN legal team in Brisbane on 16 & 17 March, then the Bentley's Legal team in Sydney at a later date. She thought this was "oppressive or an abuse of process". Justice Logan disagreed and dismissed the application with costs save for one minor provision of the summons in relation to producing certain documents. An issue also arose concerning the time it takes to produce a transcript of Ailwood's first examination before the later Sydney grilling - thats nice to have a transcript so the you don't give contradictory answers in the different examinations.

It seems that both the Fortress and KPMG reps tried every legal move to avoid being examined because at a liquidators examination the examinee is required by law and under oath to answer the liquidators questions.

I can understand Ailwood's reluctance to submit for examination. In the Octaviar Investment Notes and Bonds case the entire sum that was raised by prospectus was within a few weeks spent by MFS on everything but the stated investments in prospectus - and KPMG do not seem to have picked up the discrepancy in an audit.

I have not seen any reports on Liz Ailwood's examinations so I am not sure if they have already taken place.
 
Thanks for the above post Marcom. Can anyone please tell me if the PIF assets are indemnified from successful litigation in the event it is proved incorrect decisions were made by a Responsible Entity, prior or existing and if the directors themselves are held responsible? Seamisty
 
So, not really much reaction from PIF investors re the media article (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/f...-resort-dream-20110402-1cskj.html?from=age_sb) in relation to one of our major PIF assets? I refer to Wellington Capitals recent NSX announcement http://www.wellcap.com.au/assets/pif/updates/2011/nsx release - sales strategy - 30 march 2011.pdf in relation to the Forest Resort, Creswick:

"The sale of this property will be actively pursued by the Fund’s appointed agents during 2011."

I do not profess to being any sort of a 'sophisticated investor', but surely if a property is subject to a substantial legal claim in the Supreme Court, would there not be some sort of Caveat over that property relating to a sales campaign while the actual ownership is in dispute?

I wonder whatever happened to the luxuary 4 wheel drive vehicle which was removed from Forest Resort in 2009 which was used by the resort as a courtesy car and promotional vehicle and was taken under David Bourke’s instructions? The registration was under Victorian registration TFR-02 2007 Land Rover discovery DSE.
Last reported at Kooralbyn Resort approx Oct 2009 when a fire was reported at the Kooralbyn resort. Good to have all this information in my opinion while there appears to be some interest in the media re the Wellington Capital PIF.
Seamisty
 
According to the NSW Supreme Court lists Philip Hoser and Liz Ailwood were examined before Associate Registrar Equity Musgrove on Wednesday 30 and Thursday 31 March.
 
http://digitalproducer.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=1429013-0
ALF GROUP HOLDINGS AG ALF Subsidiary Receives AUD $5M In Equity and Takeover Bid for Australian Premium Income Fund Update
(April 04, 2011) ALF GROUP HOLDINGS AG ALF Subsidiary Receives AUD $5M In Equity and Takeover Bid for Australian Premium Income Fund Update

Zurich Monday 4 April 2011 The Directors of ALF Group Holdings AG (ALF) wish to advise that ALF Group Pty Ltd (100% owned by ALF), the Australian parent company, has drawn down AUD$5M under its facility with Kingsley Finance Co Limited (Kingsley), ALFs largest shareholder.

The purpose of the drawdown is to enable ALF Group Pty Ltd to subscribe for 5m $1.00 shares in ALF PIF Finance Limited, which is currently 90% owned by ALF.

This equity investment further underlines ALFs commitment to the takeover bid and should add considerably to the prospects of success of the ALF PIF bid for the current takeover offer for all the units in the Premium Income Fund (PIF).


PIF is an Australian mortgage fund with stated net assets of AUD$265m that ALF PIF have an existing interest in and are seeking to take over the remaining units.

ALF PIF will now post to over 10,500 unitholders a new and revised document from the Board of ALF PIF explaining the benefits of the ALF PIF offer and point out the appalling track record and recent releases by the takeover targets board that amplify the claims we have made regarding their mismanagement and why the unit holders must act now and accept this offer.

We have privately recieved substantial support from many unit holders who have simply lost complete confidence in the existing management.

Further, to add to the prospects of the success of the bid, Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of ALF, has agreed to take over and fund all recovery action, all unit/ shareholder class action claims against the existing manager and all recovery action against third parties who may have a liability owing to PIF.

The offer from Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd provides existing unit holders of PIF with the comfort that the PIF capital will not be dissipated by expensive and time consuming litigation and that Australian Litigation Funders Pty Ltd will work on a no win/no fee basis and take a fixed percentage of 33% from all recoveries (plus legal costs).

ALF believes that there is potentially over AUD $140,000,000 in potential claims, suits and recoveries. This means that there is the potential to deliver fees of approximately AUD $46m to ALF from litigation recoveries alone.
 
Another Gold Coast Fund bites the dust. I believe David Anderson(ex MFS) is CEO of Equititrust and David Kennedy(ex MFS and KPMG) is a director. Not that their previous association with MFS is mentioned on the Equititrust website.

Property woes hit distributions plan
Tracey McBean | April 6th, 2011

GOLD Coast fund manager Equititrust Capital has suspended monthly distributions from two of its flagship investment funds blaming the city's lacklustre property market.

Equititrust Capital managing director Mark McIvor said the move was prompted by ongoing market uncertainty which had delayed settlement of the sale of several assets, totalling more than $15 million alone in the Equititrust Income Fund.
Full story::http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2011/04/06/305725_gold-coast-business.html
 
BLAH BLAH BLAH, G8 spin doctor hard at it? http://www.brisbanebusinessnews.com...FIDENT OF MAJOR SINGAPOREAN ACQUISITION .html

'At today’s AGM, G8 chairperson Jenny Hutson (pictured) told shareholders the chances of Cherie Hearts winning the dispute were ‘beyond remote’


A bit similar to “ Walshes’ case is baseless. We think there ‘s no substance at all that is and remains our position on it.” from this media article:http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/f...-resort-dream-20110402-1cskj.html?from=age_sb

Whats the William Shakespeare quote? “Me thinks he doth protest too much.”

Seamisty
 
Despite having been told in the past by a couple of Wellington work horses over the "help" line that this forum is no longer read by WC staff, I think that our words are being perused daily. Just a feeling...
 
Despite having been told in the past by a couple of Wellington work horses over the "help" line that this forum is no longer read by WC staff, I think that our words are being perused daily. Just a feeling...

selciper your feeling could be right ha.just incase j.h sorrey to hear u have had hard times just like all us working hard bring up our kid through major sickness wifes & husbands near death[[[[ but we had no one to make glossy storeyso we got on with makeing our nestegg..... binggo....MFS...P.I.F WOW NOW WE CAN SIT BACK IN OUR NEW HOUSE GOOD INCOME GREAT ....... O NO .NOW NO INCOME SELL HOUSE GO ON ROAD J H ..U HAVE STORY HA HA BUT U DONT READ THIS DO U HA HA
 
selciper your feeling could be right ha.just incase j.h sorrey to hear u have had hard times just like all us working hard bring up our kid through major sickness wifes & husbands near death[[[[ but we had no one to make glossy storeyso we got on with makeing our nestegg..... binggo....MFS...P.I.F WOW NOW WE CAN SIT BACK IN OUR NEW HOUSE GOOD INCOME GREAT ....... O NO .NOW NO INCOME SELL HOUSE GO ON ROAD J H ..U HAVE STORY HA HA BUT U DONT READ THIS DO U HA HA
NOR thank you for making the effort to post on this thread. I was asked earlier today by another active fellow PIF investor to post some PIF info and I said NO because I felt I had bored/compromised and worn out other PIF investors etc. Just for the PIF record, of which I take extremely serious about for keeping future reference, I was contacted by WC today regarding some of my previous enquiries/concerns on behalf of PIF investors in relation to the on going litigation between Forest Resort developers and the former RE of our Fund (which I understand are also the same directors as our current RE). While our current RE assures me that we do not have anything to worry about re this litigation as it is 'unsubstantive' I remain extremely concerned, because I understand that the RE is indemnified, former or current, from any legal claims against our Fund. Any successfull litigation/compensation ruled against the PIF IS PAID from our assets!!!

Sorry if I continue to be a nuisance but I probablly will not go away!! Seamisty
 
Top