Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[simgrund]

Rather than face the wrath of Simgrund and his whipping boy, Mr. Joseph Blow, I'll post comments from time to time on http://www.moneymagik.com/pif.php.

What's the matter Malodorous One; wouldn't you rather write the BOOK of TECHNICALITIES and see how many copies it sells?

Did you know from among the wealth of your "KNOWLEDGE" that it is not permitted to promote commercial material on this site????

Quickly, put on the veil!

Under the willow tree,
chirping with bugs

 

[seamisty]

Huh?????? That's news to me? When where we told ANY proceeds of a succesful class action be put back into the fund? I signed up for any proceeds to be given directly to the participants of the class action who held units at the mentioned qualifying date in 2008 (??) What you are saying can't be correct as the class action only benefits the unit holders of the fund in that 2008 and prior timeframe , irrespective of whether those units may have now been sold, the class action in NO WAY benefits people that purchased or acquired shares after that date.

Hi Javier, FYI:

Class Action – Federal Court Proceedings NSD 324/009
Wellington Capital Limited in its capacity as Responsible Entity for the Premium Income Fund has entered into a funding agreement with IMF (Australia) Limited (ASX:IMF) in relation to Federal Court Proceedings NSD 324/009. The consequence is that Wellington Capital will become an applicant in the claim in its capacity as responsible entity of the Premium Income Fund.
Jenny Hutson Managing Director said
‘As advised on 30 March 2011 Wellington Capital remains focussed on ensuring that every legal action which has the potential for positive recovery to Unitholders is vigorously pursued. Our aim has always been to understand the time cost and benefit of potential litigation and to position the Premium Income Fund and our Unitholders to ensure the best potential outcome’.
‘The legal representation and strategy for class action members changed in November 2010. Wellington Capital as responsible entity for the Premium Income Fund has been in discussions with IMF and HWL Ebsworth to reach this agreed way forward.’
Application of any proceeds from NSD 324/009
Wellington Capital has entered into the agreement with IMF on behalf of the Premium Income Fund. It has agreed in that capacity that it will as responsible entity convene a Unitholders meeting of the Premium Income Fund within 30 days of receipt of proceeds in finalisation or settlement of the claim. The purpose of the meeting of Unitholders will be to enable the Unitholders in general meeting to consider an amendment to the Constitution of the Premium Income Fund, so that those Unitholders who were members of the Premium Income Fund on 15 October 2008, and remain members at the time of the finalisation or settlement of the claim, are pro-rata the beneficiaries of the proceeds.
Premium Income Fund
NSX Release: 2 June 2011 http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021724067.PDF
A complete turn around from when our lawyers approached Ms Hutson to help us re the class action when were struggling for support and Ms Hutson declined???? I still have that original communication somewhere. Seamisty

 

[Joe Blow]

This thread is being reopened this morning after a brief closure.

Any troublemakers or those determined to provoke others in this thread will have their ASF accounts suspended. Warnings and/or instructions issued by myself or ASF's moderators are expected to be taken seriously.

This thread is beginning to cause management problems again, and it was closed a few years ago for this reason. I will not hesitate to close it once more should it again become difficult to manage.

 

[Jadel]

Huh?????? That's news to me? When where we told ANY proceeds of a succesful class action be put back into the fund? I signed up for any proceeds to be given directly to the participants of the class action who held units at the mentioned qualifying date in 2008 (??) What you are saying can't be correct as the class action only benefits the unit holders of the fund in that 2008 and prior timeframe , irrespective of whether those units may have now been sold, the class action in NO WAY benefits people that purchased or acquired shares after that date.

Javier

There are approximately now an extra 75 million units in the fund as result of the placement to unknown so called sophisticated investors

In exactly the same way as Judus Iscariot betrayed Jesus the people who took up this offer would have demanded their 30 pieces of silver in payment prior to the deal being struck

The article printed by Seamisty gives details of that agreement .

 

[selciper]

ASIC at work in the Centro case. SMH today.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/asic-argues-for-tough-centro-penalties-20110801-1i87n.html

 

[charles36]

This thread is being reopened this morning after a brief closure.

Any troublemakers or those determined to provoke others in this thread will have their ASF accounts suspended. Warnings and/or instructions issued by myself or ASF's moderators are expected to be taken seriously.

This thread is beginning to cause management problems again, and it was closed a few years ago for this reason. I will not hesitate to close it once more should it again become difficult to manage.

Thank you Joe Blow, Your generosity is very much appreciated by all sensible users of the thread. I would like on behalf of the PIFAG to say to all users, please respect each other, we all have our own agendas but we must pull together if we are serious about bringing some stability back into the PIF. Interlopers may have something to offer but if they wish to wander off on some other cause it is best for all concerned to not become involved with useless banter. It has caused problems in the past and just recently. I know there are many people who do not post on the forum but do rely on the genuine posters for some solace and information. Turn our thoughts and energies to the real problem. Please take my comments in the spirit it is given.

 

[Joe Blow]

A reminder to everyone on this thread to please ensure that you close your quote tags when quoting another post. I will be removing all posts that make incorrect use of the quote tags as a mater of course.

When posts without closed quote tags are subsequently requoted, it becomes almost impossible to determine who is saying what, and it can appear that statements are being attributed to persons who did not post them.

Please take a couple of minutes (and that's all it will take) to learn how the quote tags work by reviewing this thread: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2737

The last two posts on this thread were removed for this reason.

 

[Jadel]

Thank you Joe Blow, Your generosity is very much appreciated by all sensible users of the thread. I would like on behalf of the PIFAG to say to all users, please respect each other, we all have our own agendas but we must pull together if we are serious about bringing some stability back into the PIF. Interlopers may have something to offer but if they wish to wander off on some other cause it is best for all concerned to not become involved with useless banter. It has caused problems in the past and just recently. I know there are many people who do not post on the forum but do rely on the genuine posters for some solace and information. Turn our thoughts and energies to the real problem. Please take my comments in the spirit it is given.

We all have to remain objective and dispassionate in our current disagreeable circumstances.

The last thing we want to do is bother the Mod unnecessarily.

God Forbid that we turn into a society like China were ever internet discussion is censored

 

[Wayne Wheeler]

It's interesting to visit here from time to time to check on how the whole PIF story gets worse & worse for you unitholders. What a difference a few months can make.

As you would all know, our ALF PIF Finance bid was "knocked out" by the TakeOver Panel on a technicality to do with mail-out details - not our fault. We all know who raised the matter and complicated the issue - the same entity that had your EGM knocked out on a similar technicality - not your fault. There were even complaints made to your moderators to stop my posts, which were really nothing more than observations. It seems that the system can be manipulated by those who know how, and that all of our regulatory authorities will (at best) sit on their hands or (at worst) are seen to be complicit in the manoeuvrings (how do you spell that?).

Anyway, despite wasting heaps of our own money on the bid, we're still interested in trying to work a deal with you guys. We're wondering if a new bid which included a cash component would attract significant and further interest? As an aside, we had already raised enough acceptances to give us a serious hand in the game when we were estopped, and all acceptances returned under instruction. Looks like things have spiralled downward even further since then.

We have significant group experience in dealing with "distressed" properties and projects, and can offer an alternative to the strategy of attrition being inflicted here. I think I read the term malodorous used here somewhere - Indeed!

Maybe we're wasting our time - again, but I would welcome any constructive suggestions, comments or criticisms.

WW

 

[breaker1]

You ARE wasting your time - we want nothing to do with ALF PIF

 

[seamisty]

Maybe we're wasting our time - again, but I would welcome any constructive suggestions, comments or criticisms.
WW

My contructive criticism is that ALF PIF directors were content to sit back and watch the PIF AG get slagged off in two smear mailouts which contained misleading, dishonest and inflamatory comments relating to some PIF AG members being part of a 'secret deal' for their own financial gain with Jim Byrnes. This could not have been further from the truth but ALF PIF did not once came on this thread at that time to deny those allegations or any association with the PIF AG what so ever. ALF PIF never once contacted the media to correct or refute these allegations. Did ALF PIF or Jim Byrnes ever lodge an official complaint with Wellington Capital and ASIC about the misuse of the PIF register knowing it had been used to contact PIF unitholders with fliers containing false information relating to Jim Byrnes and some PIF AG members? Seamisty

 

[Sutho81]

What I want is probably different to what others want.

The one thing I want and others want is our money back!

I am not interested in shares, units, or any fund set up to manage this and have some sort of share in it.

I personally would like to see the whole fund liquidated in a time frame that gives us the maximum amount of cash back.

Units in the PIF were $1.00 per unit with monthly interest of 9.5% for some people. I am certainly not going to support ALF PIF when it is clear that they get a majority stake in our fund.

I want to see Wellington to be sacked for missmanagement, failure to deliver on promises, deceptive behaviour and being dishonest.

Had Wellington followed through on their promise with the buy back at 45c per unit I probably would have cut my losses and accepted.

As it stands now I am not going to sell my units for anything less than the above 45c, so it looks like I just hang onto them and stick with everyone else.

 

[simgrund]

It's interesting to visit here from time to time to check on how the whole PIF story gets worse & worse for you unitholders. What a difference a few months can make.

As you would all know, our ALF PIF Finance bid was "knocked out" by the TakeOver Panel on a technicality to do with mail-out details - not our fault. We all know who raised the matter and complicated the issue - the same entity that had your EGM knocked out on a similar technicality - not your fault. There were even complaints made to your moderators to stop my posts, which were really nothing more than observations. It seems that the system can be manipulated by those who know how, and that all of our regulatory authorities will (at best) sit on their hands or (at worst) are seen to be complicit in the manoeuvrings (how do you spell that?).

Anyway, despite wasting heaps of our own money on the bid, we're still interested in trying to work a deal with you guys. We're wondering if a new bid which included a cash component would attract significant and further interest? As an aside, we had already raised enough acceptances to give us a serious hand in the game when we were estopped, and all acceptances returned under instruction. Looks like things have spiralled downward even further since then.

We have significant group experience in dealing with "distressed" properties and projects, and can offer an alternative to the strategy of attrition being inflicted here. I think I read the term malodorous used here somewhere - Indeed!

Maybe we're wasting our time - again, but I would welcome any constructive suggestions, comments or criticisms.

WW

Really Mr WW; you should be talking deals with Jenny Hutson.
And she is not participating in this thread.
We are grateful for returned acceptances.
Cheers,

 

[Wayne Wheeler]

OK - a couple of quick responses. Many thanks, and a couple of quick notes before I head out.

Breaker1 - Fair enough. Interesting that you don't know anything about us except what you may have read about Jim Byrnes, and yet you still dismiss our legitimate interest without discussion or consideration.
Jim's certainly able to defend himself and I won't bother to do that here, except to say that his area of special expertise is in corporate insolvency, bankruptcies and companies that are in administration/liquidation etc. Suffice to say that there's not many happy people in these situations, and Jim is very good at what he does. He has sometimes succeeded in cases where high-powered (and expensive) law firms have failed. Accordingly, he has often been unfairly treated in the media because of guilt by association in these matters. As a brief summary, I would much rather have him on my side of the table in any negotiation rather than be on an opposing side. I'd love to see him go head to head with JH.

Seamisty - Thanks for your honest appraisal. The simple truth is that we were firmly ordered by the Takeover Panel to not have any public comment or discourse on this matter whatsoever. As I've said above, there was even an attempt to have us silenced on this forum. It wasn't that we "sat back" and did nothing - we were forcibly muzzled under threat of enormous fines, whilst others were seemingly free to enact duplicitous dealings with impunity. Breathtaking!!
I'm pleased that you have managed to elicit the truth in the outrageously deceptive circumstances of the whole, sorry PIFAG and the further attempts to smear ALFPIF and Jim Byrnes. Let's be clear, we (ALF PIF Finance P/L) had no part in any of those communications and have had no dealings whatsoever with WC.

Sutho81 - We too currently think that the whole fund should probably liquidated as quickly as a strategy for maximum returns can be formulated, agreed with you all & implemented. However, as you guys know it's very difficult to develop a finite strategy or place a pre-determined value on units when the exact makeup of the assets is clouded in secret/shady dealings, associated interests, unknown litigation exposure, endless snouts in the trough etc. Notwithstanding what you have paid and/or lost to date, do you know exactly what your units are worth currently (and realistically?)?
We believe that we have the expertise, financial backing and the resolve to come up with a mutually beneficial arrangement. Sadly, I think the events of the last few months (and seemingly ongoing) are certainly going to deter many from your cause as this bleak situation continues to deteriorate.

WW

 

[zixo]

Hi Wayne,

As mentioned on earlier post no-one that I know of will ever want any association with the ALF anymore.

If the ALF were at all genuinely serious about investors concerns it should of put the matters regarding its association to CAS CAP at rest and made a statement. You could of gained some traction and honour.

Instead it seems you sat back and said nothing.
Even one simple post on the ASF verifying whatever misinformations was spread by the fictitious reaction group was false, you had ample oppourtuunity to set the truth straight - YOU DIDNT.

It make me wonder if in fact the link between ALF and wellington is closer than anyone is led to believe, but its all part of wcs plan of destabailisation.

Sorry but ALF blew any chance for even a glimmer of respectability with me the moment the smear campaign started & its far worse now.

 

[charles36]

OK - a couple of quick responses. Many thanks, and a couple of quick notes before I head out.

Breaker1 - Fair enough. Interesting that you don't know anything about us except what you may have read about Jim Byrnes, and yet you still dismiss our legitimate interest without discussion or consideration.
Jim's certainly able to defend himself and I won't bother to do that here, except to say that his area of special expertise is in corporate insolvency, bankruptcies and companies that are in administration/liquidation etc. Suffice to say that there's not many happy people in these situations, and Jim is very good at what he does. He has sometimes succeeded in cases where high-powered (and expensive) law firms have failed. Accordingly, he has often been unfairly treated in the media because of guilt by association in these matters. As a brief summary, I would much rather have him on my side of the table in any negotiation rather than be on an opposing side. I'd love to see him go head to head with JH.

Seamisty - Thanks for your honest appraisal. The simple truth is that we were firmly ordered by the Takeover Panel to not have any public comment or discourse on this matter whatsoever. As I've said above, there was even an attempt to have us silenced on this forum. It wasn't that we "sat back" and did nothing - we were forcibly muzzled under threat of enormous fines, whilst others were seemingly free to enact duplicitous dealings with impunity. Breathtaking!!
I'm pleased that you have managed to elicit the truth in the outrageously deceptive circumstances of the whole, sorry PIFAG and the further attempts to smear ALFPIF and Jim Byrnes. Let's be clear, we (ALF PIF Finance P/L) had no part in any of those communications and have had no dealings whatsoever with WC.

Sutho81 - We too currently think that the whole fund should probably liquidated as quickly as a strategy for maximum returns can be formulated, agreed with you all & implemented. However, as you guys know it's very difficult to develop a finite strategy or place a pre-determined value on units when the exact makeup of the assets is clouded in secret/shady dealings, associated interests, unknown litigation exposure, endless snouts in the trough etc. Notwithstanding what you have paid and/or lost to date, do you know exactly what your units are worth currently (and realistically?)?
We believe that we have the expertise, financial backing and the resolve to come up with a mutually beneficial arrangement. Sadly, I think the events of the last few months (and seemingly ongoing) are certainly going to deter many from your cause as this bleak situation continues to deteriorate.

WW

Mr. Wheeler, I notice you advocate liquidation but you agree in as many words that you do not know what assets and value of such assets are. I find that odd. You have made some comments re shady dealings, snouts in trough etc., which of course to the untaught mind would suggest improper practices on behalf of our RE. Your credibility would be seriously enhanced if you took yourself and your evidence to ASIC. By adopting this suggestion you would be demonstrating that you are a good citizen doing your duty and reporting a crime. I will watch for developments.

 

[Sutho81]

The other thing I havent mentioned is that I wish the fund was not on the NSX. That gives Wellington the opportunity to purchase units at cheap prices.

For me personally the loss of my investment was a great hit to my budget and savings and future. If I had the opportunity to get half of that back (ie the 45c buy back) it would have made a difference.

I know that many others do not support liquidation - I do and the money could help.

For me the take over by Castlereagh offered a real glimmer of hope for the fund. Wellington failed to deliver on their promises (we all saw them in their true colours as of late). The fact Castlereagh offered to do something and were prepared to work on the fund gave me hope and they got my support.

I did not support the ALF PIF as it was clear that the investment would be in their favour with very little/nothing for us.

For many investors the loss we suffered is too great to just write off with minimal in return. For me to sell my units on the NSX I would not sell for under 45c - and I know that wont happen.

 

[selciper]

The other thing I havent mentioned is that I wish the fund was not on the NSX. That gives Wellington the opportunity to purchase units at cheap prices.

For me personally the loss of my investment was a great hit to my budget and savings and future. If I had the opportunity to get half of that back (ie the 45c buy back) it would have made a difference.

I know that many others do not support liquidation - I do and the money could help.

For me the take over by Castlereagh offered a real glimmer of hope for the fund. Wellington failed to deliver on their promises (we all saw them in their true colours as of late). The fact Castlereagh offered to do something and were prepared to work on the fund gave me hope and they got my support.

I did not support the ALF PIF as it was clear that the investment would be in their favour with very little/nothing for us.

For many investors the loss we suffered is too great to just write off with minimal in return. For me to sell my units on the NSX I would not sell for under 45c - and I know that wont happen.

Sutho81 - I notice that in references to Castlereagh you use the past tense which is significant for any of us who hope that CasCap are maintaining an interest in PIF. We are certainly in need of some morale-boosting news.

 

[BABIHUTAN]

Huh?????? That's news to me? When where we told ANY proceeds of a successful class action be put back into the fund? I signed up for any proceeds to be given directly to the participants of the class action who held units at the mentioned qualifying date in 2008 (??) What you are saying can't be correct as the class action only benefits the unit holders of the fund in that 2008 and prior timeframe , irrespective of whether those units may have now been sold, the class action in NO WAY benefits people that purchased or acquired shares after that date.

Jadel, Javier , Seamisty & other posters on this theme - tt too is my understanding of what many Investors signed up for in 2008. There was a specific cutoff date tt was subequently extended by IMF by a few months - no quarrel there, provided it did not allow Johnny come lately investors who saw an opportunity to make money as a result of our misfortunes - $1 tt we pd against 0.06 - 0.09 tt they wud hv come in at in order to reap the same rewards of the CA if successful. No one in their right mind would consider buying for appreciation in the forseeable future.
The criteria to participate pro-rata in the CA recoveries is linked directly the holdings those signed up Investors held on tt second cut off date.
IMF made very clear tt if, for whatever reason, an Investor subsequently needed to sell part or all of their holdings after tt 2nd cutoff date their pro-rated CA recovery (if any) would not be compromised. IMF took this litigation on, on a no cure no pay basis.
If the CA is ultimately successful those qualifying Investors would share pro-rata in any recoveries and likewise they wud share the fee tt Investors agreed to pay IMF by the same ratio.
I cannot see how WC can come into the equation other than if WC was [if it is in fact legal for an RE to hv a pecuniary interest in a fund tt it manages] an Investor in its own right on the cut off date. WC wud then hv the same rights as all of us pre cut off date. IMO WC as RE has nothing to do with the CA except to piggyback with us if qualified.

We, as a group of investors hv got to where we are today entirely thru the selfless efforts of those dedicated members of the PIFAG. WC as RE has had & nothing to do with the success of findng someone take on the case, rather as I recall went out of their way in frustrating appoaches made by the PIFAG, IMF and their former lawyers for legitimate assistance.
My wife & I invested with Mclaughlins FS fm its early days and after serveral years with good but not excessive returns started rolling over distributions and never drewdown on capital, paying tax on years of distribution monies we are unlikely to ever see - so much for the power of compounding - BAH!

 

[zeva]

Sutho 81 I agree with you, I personally believe that WC aim is to strip the PIF assets with no or little return to the investor and when there is nothing else left JH will hand over the empty shell of the PIF back to us (the investors)