Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Equititrust?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to new
Re: Class Action

word75 said:
Sadly No Trust I don't believe there is a class action afoot with Piper Alderman.
I'm reliably informed that 39 investors are not enough to get it started but more importantly Piper Aldermsn are not funded to proceed. You may wish to phone them yourself and see if there is a clear assurance. They have not made a definitive announcement in any forum nor have they shown any appetite to bring even the simplest of claims to kick things off...... which could then allow further particulars and claims to be made.
1400 plus investors have lost their life's savings to a man who has publicly announced that he has made $100million dollars lets o the math.

$500million under management now gone he makes $100million and in the space of a year he claims it's all gone and what's beyond belief is that he is bankrupted, filed his "statement of affairs" and again I'm led to believe no Public Examination is planned as his Trustee is unfunded to proceed to court. So in short nobody is even prepared to fund an examination of the bankrupt under oath.

If that's not enough to wilt our hearts then knowing his millions of super, that's his super not the investors super is protected from his creditors. In fact when he gets hold of it he can deal with it as he wishes with no impediment other than the normal constraints pertaining to self managed super funds. Now he has filed his statement of affairs it's feasible he I'll be discharged in 3 years maybe even less if he annuls his bankruptcy using funds from wherever.

Why don't the investors contact Worrals Qld and offer kick the tin, surly it wouldn't take much money to fund an examination. Sadly the big banks look like being repaid in full so they have no interest in funding such a venture.

BDO have no interest in examining him, it's not their job to chase him or the other directors, only sell the assets and wind up the funds so what's left?

Hall Chadwick have one what since Mcivor appointed them, they can examine him but they won't, and claiming $800k plus just rubs salt in the wound.

Maybe investors should contact either Maurice Blackburn, Slater and Gordon or DC Legal and see if either of these successful class action firms wish to take on these crooks
Click to expand...



Have said all along that 39 investors wouldn't be enough to make it worth the funders trouble. Not enough in it for them. Also from the investors point of view would be throwing good money after bad if the funder pulled out half way - as they have to sign contracts they will pay Alderman's costs anyway . Think this is why they only have 39 prepared to take the risk.



Doesn't help to know that really there is no one who has the intestinal fortitude or finances to take on this mob at all. For all that incompetence and ineptitude it will be BUSINESS AS USUAL!

Everyone puts their hand out and everyone else gets the money but us! So what's new?
 
McIvor will not access his super, his good friend Tucker will make sure of that...
 
No Trust said:
McIvor will not access his super, his good friend Tucker will make sure of that...
Click to expand...

SADLY MR TUCKER CAN'T INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME HERE.
Mr Tucker claimed as I understand $25k only as the debt owed personally by Mcivor. You can now add to that his costs to bring the proceedings and to that approx $15-20k for the administrator. Let's say for arguments sake $50k. Ask yourself why Mcivor did not defend the claim........why did Mr Tucker succeed unchallenged unless Mcivor saw the benefit of having certain assets such as his super protected under the Bankruptcy Act. And his super is protected.

Why didn't the Big Banks go after Mcivor, surely there's a reason. Is it that they didn't want to spend the money or is it that once bankrupted Mcivor has slipped through.

The banks need to prove their debt but they not appear to be in a hurry, maybe they are being fully repaid through the sale process or maybe other people are hung up on the guarantees like mum but in any event should no one else come forward with debt incurred personally by Mcivor it's feasible that for something less than $50k Mcivor can annul his bankruptcy. Didn't Bond get his $400mil bankruptcy annuled for $2mil paid by a son,

Mcivor's trustee Worrals will only investigate the bankrupted if they are funded to do so, no funds no examination. A report to the creditors will only provide a shallow picture of the bankrupted persons activities and once circulated that's pretty much it.

Make no mistake Mcivor's strategic move into bankruptcy PROTECTS HIS SUPER. On today's figures 1400 hundred investors will sit by helplessly watching $3.3million leak fom their super funds back into Mcivors and what can David Whyte do about that. There may already be substantially more than that in his Mcivors super fund already, does any one know.

EQUITITRUST LIMITED, sole director and shareholder one Mark Mcivor (in administration) Appointed by Mark Mcivor.
Hall Chadwick have every opportunity and resource and honestly they have the only grounds currently to EXAMINE Mcivor and they won't. Is it money no they supposedly spec'd $800k plus to date so what is another $5k to examine Mcivor. One must surly wonder what's the deal here.

Because no one is examining how Equititrust Limited derived its income and because none of the current administrators care to as its not their job to, then any money Mcivor fed from his company EQUITITRUST LIMITED to his super fund provided that process was legitimate and legal at time of transfer is protected.

One of the greatest Asset Relocation Program's ever undertaken on the Gold Coast has been successfully perpetrated by a master of the simple shell game. Take Millions of retired investors super under this shell move it here move it there and hey presto it turns up in Mcivors protected super fund.

Some one say it isn't so.............and what's Hall Chadwick doing if not protecting Mcivor. At the end of this once the administration of Equititrust is cancelled and this is possible once BDO pays to them the fees they claim, it's feasible that Mcivor can resume control of Equititrust Limited.

Game Set and Match Mcivor.
 
The Plans of Mice and Men

Ah Word75, you've done it again.

It seems that the outcome of Tucker's efforts is to well and truly insulate McIvor from further harrassment by creditors, and by fund members.

If there ever was a case for ASIC to spend a bit of public money to investigate past dealings, this would be such a case - after all, it seems no other entity is going to do it.
 
SUPER FRAUD AND OTHERS MATTERS

the trick will be in this at what stage did McIvor or in fact anyone (Kennedy and Andersen) know that the FUND was insolvent or that any major loan asset was fraud. From what I am hearing there seems to be knowledge of major impairments as far back as late 2008. Now if David WHYTE of BDO can prove this (and you would have to think that he is right onto this aspect) then he and ASIC have a much easier target and any draw downs and or withdrawals from that time is liable to serious and successful attack. Super would not be safe from such an attack either.
 
Re: SUPER FRAUD AND OTHERS MATTERS

kostag said:
the trick will be in this at what stage did McIvor or in fact anyone (Kennedy and Andersen) know that the FUND was insolvent or that any major loan asset was fraud. From what I am hearing there seems to be knowledge of major impairments as far back as late 2008. Now if David WHYTE of BDO can prove this (and you would have to think that he is right onto this aspect) then he and ASIC have a much easier target and any draw downs and or withdrawals from that time is liable to serious and successful attack. Super would not be safe from such an attack either.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the case the there were impairments in a certain fund loan or loans that Equititrust "corrected" by payment directly from Equititrust without disclosing those impairments to investments?
 
Re: SUPER FRAUD AND OTHERS MATTERS

kostag said:
the trick will be in this at what stage did McIvor or in fact anyone (Kennedy and Andersen) know that the FUND was insolvent or that any major loan asset was fraud. From what I am hearing there seems to be knowledge of major impairments as far back as late 2008. Now if David WHYTE of BDO can prove this (and you would have to think that he is right onto this aspect) then he and ASIC have a much easier target and any draw downs and or withdrawals from that time is liable to serious and successful attack. Super would not be safe from such an attack either.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I'm not sure how to post a link maybe someone else on the forum can look this up and post it or all to read. SUPREME COURT OF NSW
EQUITITRUST LTD vs RM WALSH LANDHOLDINGS PTY LTD
(2012) 427

Points 51-54 outline the issues raised by RM WALSH in dealing with the likes of Mcivor and Equititrust. Reference is made to the issues raised by Piper Alderman but what is telling is that in his affidavit Mr Whyte makes it clear that he DOES NOT INTEND TO TAKE ACTION ON BEHALF OF INVESTORS TO ANY OF THE MATTERS OUTLINED.
Unfortunately that covers all the issues you have just outlined.
As efficient as Mr Whyte is his job is simply to sell the assets recover what he can, cover the banks exposure and expense, cover his expenses and return what if any funds are left to the unit holders.
If he was serious about helping unit holders he would subpoena Mcivor to give evidence in the court cases brought against Mcivors Pet Valuers. There would be a free shot at Mvivor in the box even though the bankrupts evidence would be deemed unreliable none the less this wont happen for fear of exposing the conspiracy and fraud. Insurance companies don't pay out on fraud so shhhhhh!

What fraud.... How does a dud block of land worth maybe $10mil get a valuation unimproved that is not one dollar spent on its improvements of $80mil and a loan issued of $73mil.
And in case you are wondering, the receiver on King Cons block is struggling to get $10mil for it even now.
The Mcivor team lent against the asset value, instructing the valuer, a legal process, though flawed and open to abuse where values are attributed to the future value and booked as at today. Banks lend against the contract price or valuation as at today which ever is the lesser. By bank standards a bank may have lent possibly $7mil on this dump, yet on those figures Mcivor would not earn much in fees but a joint venture using $73mil of retiree's super, now that's worth a little dalliance with the F word. There is nexus to be found between the instructions given to the valuer when Mcivor and Equititrust knew the contracted price was so low and the benefit received by all the parties to the transaction. Multiply this by all the dud deals such as Werrina Cove then ask how the investors upper ended up in Mcivors Super Fund
 
Re: SUPER FRAUD AND OTHERS MATTERS

word75 said:
Sorry but I'm not sure how to post a link maybe someone else on the forum can look this up and post it or all to read. SUPREME COURT OF NSW
EQUITITRUST LTD vs RM WALSH LANDHOLDINGS PTY LTD (2012) 427 Points 51-54 outline the issues raised by RM WALSH in dealing with the likes of Mcivor and Equititrust. ...
Click to expand...

http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/action/PJUDG?jgmtid=158320

Sadly the issues raised at 43 - 49 related to matters of law, but there seems no facts with which to apply that law. The judge said (at 50)

"According to the plaintiff, the question for the Court is whether Equititrust has a right of indemnity for any costs order that might be made in these proceedings, which Equititrust has brought on the instructions of a receiver appointed by the Supreme Court of Queensland. I accept that there is no issue of any untoward conduct relating to Mr McIvor (or anyone else) in bringing the proceedings. The plaintiff's argument continues that since there is no suggestion that the bringing of the proceedings involves any gross neglect, deceit or material breach of covenant on the part of the receiver or Equititrust, the exclusion in clause 6.1 of the constitution of the EIF does not arise."

and ordered:

"The Court orders that:

(1)The defendants' notice of motion filed 15 December 2011 is dismissed.
(2)The first to fourth defendants are to pay the plaintiff costs as agreed or assessed.
(3)The first to fourth defendants are to provide the proposed cross claim to the plaintiff and other cross defendants by 5.00 pm on 21 May 2012.
(4)The matter is stood over for a directions hearing at 9.00 am on 28 May 2012 before the Registrar."

Talking about fraud and proving it and indeed two different "kettles of fish".
 
Nice Work McIvor

McIvor creates a disaster and throws innocent retiree investors on the scrap heap then wants his super... What a disgrace...

Maybe there is some justice just around the corner...
 
Re: Nice Work McIvor

No Trust said:
McIvor creates a disaster and throws innocent retiree investors on the scrap heap then wants his super... What a disgrace...

Maybe there is some justice just around the corner...
Click to expand...





Which corner would that be No Trust? We are all sick of waiting for justice! Anything?? Anything??

Anyone?? Mr Whyte?? Piper Alderman??
 
Re: Nice Work McIvor

Mozzi,

I have been watching this site for some time, partly due to morbid curiosity and partly because a few people ask me my views on Equititrust from time to time. It takes something different to the usual drivel that pollutes this site to get me motivated to post and your post earlier today did that.

I sense your frustration but I feel your frustration will continue unless you decide to let it go. I accept that may be very hard, if not impossible. I did not lose money in Equititrust so it is easy for me to say.

Early on I was amazed at the detail and quality of information about Equititrust that was posted. Clearly some posters had a person or persons “inside” to feed them information. The site was useful for investors to obtain information that they would not have otherwise obtained. Sadly the Equititrust specific information seems to have dried up over the last year or so and all that has been posted is various people’s opinions and from what I can gather, a fair degree of misinformation. Whilst I take no issue with people having opinions, they should, in my humble view, be stated as such and not treated as fact. I think this may have led you astray.

David Whyte will not take any action. It is not his job to do so and I don’t even think he is authorised to do so.

I don’t know much about the Piper Alderman action but I make some observations. They first mooted a class action almost two years ago yet have not commenced one. They said a year ago that they would be filing proceedings within weeks but a year has passed and they have not done so. To me that says they do not have a great case. If you have a good case then you don’t take two years to file it. For what it is worth, I do not think that they ever had a decent case. I say this because the prospect of a significant return to investors through litigation was always going to come from a claim against the auditors and Piper Alderman were never going to be able to bring that as such a claim needs to be brought by the company – as silly as it may seem, the auditors do not owe a duty to the investors but rather to the company. I have heard that Piper Alderman have spent almost $1m to date and they are desperate to get that back so maybe something will come of it.

I suspect the only way out for Piper Alderman is to join with the Liquidators to try and bring a claim against the auditors. I have no idea whether that would be successful but that to me seems the best option. Given that Piper Alderman wanted Hall Chadwick removed early on that would be an interesting work dynamic. Remember also that a major difficulty is that investors need to show a loss as a result of the auditor's (or directors’ actions). That may be a stumbling block as the fund was frozen in 2008. Even if everything that Piper Alderman have alleged to date is correct I am not sure the loss can be demonstrated as investors could not have redeemed their investment anyway. This is different to a normal class action against public companies as the investor could have sold their shares if proper disclosure was not made. As I said, anything is possible but I wouldn’t hold your breath.

ASIC may bring proceedings but I am not sure how that would help. They can bring criminal or civil proceedings. Civil proceedings against McIvor are worthless as he is bankrupt. Maybe they could bring against other directors but I do not know the basis upon which they would do that or what assets the other Directors have available (from Hall Chadwick’s report such personal assets are quite limited) – once again there needs to be loss demonstrated which would be a big obstacle after 2008 since the fund was frozen then. You would need to show that the Directors after 2008 were negligent and that caused loss. I don’t recall seeing this allegation made with any veracity (other than on this site). It seems to me that since 2008 it has centred more around disclosure rather than negligence so I am not sure that helps.

ASIC can also bring criminal proceedings. I have no idea what evidence they may have to support such proceedings but what I do know is that the burden of proof is very high. It is not a crime to do something stupid – if it was then surely McIvor (and others) would already be serving time at Her Majesty’s pleasure. It needs to be criminal and then it needs to be proved (beyond reasonable doubt). Unfair, immoral or unjust does not equate to criminal. Only time will tell whether this is pursued but if history is anything to go on then you may be waiting for some time.

Anyway, these are just my views.
 
Re: Nice Work McIvor

Goldie101 said:
... I say this because the prospect of a significant return to investors through litigation was always going to come from a claim against the auditors and Piper Alderman were never going to be able to bring that as such a claim needs to be brought by the company – as silly as it may seem, the auditors do not owe a duty to the investors but rather to the company.
Click to expand...

Goldie, we haven't heard the "fat lady" sing yet, so there may be something in the wings, somewhere.

The only issue I'd like to query is your comment re: an auditor's duty to fund investors, after all, the investors are the owners of the fund being audited. Why do you say that if investors lose as a consequence of an auditor's negligence that only the RE is able to sue for recovery? The RE lost nothing - the fund, and therefore its members lost. The RE should be entitled to sue on behalf of the fund and its members, or a receiver/administrator should be able to sue on behalf of the fund and its members, or members should be entitled to sue in a class action or individually (whatever the case may be).

In relation to the rumoured $1m expense for the lawyers, I'd guess that it's mostly a costing of their own time that they'd like to recover if a class action did get up and going.
 
Re: Nice Work McIvor

Mozzi said:
Which corner would that be No Trust? We are all sick of waiting for justice! Anything?? Anything??

Anyone?? Mr Whyte?? Piper Alderman??
Click to expand...

Mcivor used Equititrust as his own little Piggy Bank, he raised it, fattened it up on retiree's super, then he butchered it taking home all the bacon himself.
In one deal alone the Quinlivan landholding, that's the one BDO are still struggling to sell (for more than $10mil) has lost for the unit holders some $63mil or roughly 25c of what otherwise would have been returned to investors on every unit.

How much of this money found its way back into Euiitrust as fees or joint venture fees. How much of this contributed to Mcivors publicly stated worth of $100mil on his personal balance sheet. Indeed how much of this made its way to his super fund or wife Stacey as one would expect income splitting may have been embraced here. Let's face it..... They are clever.

Knowing who did it, knowing how much was lost or misappropriated even knowing how he/they did it won't make it come back. The obvious apathy shown by so many of the 1400 investors not to pony up and support Piper Alderman all but guarantees the perpetrators of this massive scam will get away with it. 39 sign ups from 1400 investors is not a good roll up.

To be clear BDO are not mandated to pursue Mcivor or his band of thieves. Hall Chadwick won't bite the hand that fed them and Worrals are not funded to even put the bankrupted Mcivor on the stand.

If one looks at the remaining runts in the property basket and then analyses their original purchase prices which won't be achieved in today's market let alone the Puffed up Valuation and subsequent debt..... well there is less than 10c equity left per unit. Oh and doesn't Mcivors super fund have 10 million units. Just a win win or lose lose if your an elderly retiree.

There is one Pet valuer out there whose a partner with a major firm. His evidence could put himself and the major players in the big house. Maybe immunity should be discussed but then the claim aginst the identity insurance policy would need to be dropped. there is no incentive for participants to speak up and no incentive to pursue Mcivor.

It seems the authorities are even more disinclined to throw resources at this otherwise they out be all over the dud valuation scam and all those that played a part in it. Starting with the current claims against the valuers.
 
ASIC and Auditors.

From the ASIC Audit inspection program report for 2011-12, which can be found at:
http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/pdflib.nsf/LookupByFileName/rep317-published-4-December-2012.pdf/$file/rep317-published-4-December-2012.pdf

Under the heading "Enforcement action":

"The objective of our inspections is to work co-operatively with audit firms to improve
and maintain audit quality. We expect audit firms to make changes and to undertake
work in response to our findings. However, there are some cases where findings
are so serious as to warrant enforcement or similar action. We are currently
considering possible enforcement action on concerns arising in the 2011–12 review
period from our inspection of a Smaller firm. Further, as a result of inspections
conducted in the 2009–10 review period and reported on in our previous report, one
auditor from an Other National and Network firm and one auditor from a Smaller
firm have chosen not to continue as registered company auditors."

(The emphasis has been added). Considering the extent of the deficient auditing that ASIC are expressing concerns about, it's remarkable that they are considering action on just '... a Smaller firm'.

No doubt this will improve the behaviour of the crooks out there...
 
Re: SUPER FRAUD AND OTHERS MATTERS

I THINK YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD !!!!!

ASICK said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the case the there were impairments in a certain fund loan or loans that Equititrust "corrected" by payment directly from Equititrust without disclosing those impairments to investments?
Click to expand...
 
Disclosure

kostag said:
I THINK YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD !!!!!
Click to expand...

First, I'll correct my previous posting:
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the case that there were impairments in a certain fund loan or loans that Equititrust "corrected" by payment directly from Equititrust without disclosing those impairments to investors?"

IMO that's a failure to disclose a material fact to investors - at best, not a good look, at worst, ?. Clearly the act of making the payment hid the true state of the loan/s from investors. I would have thought ASIC would have found interest in it - and I often wondered how Equititrust was able to disclose it at a later date as if they'd merely done fund members a good turn.

On the face of it, yes, Equititrust filled a hole, but a hole investors didn't get to find out about at the time.

I don't know whether Equititrust made the payment prior to the closing of the fund (or not), but to my mind, if it was made prior to the closing of the fund then I would think ASIC should look into it, especially if members of the fund might have formed a negative opinion about their respective investments.

Surely it would have been something that should have been picked up in an audit?

Maybe it's the case that the same argument would be raised if the payment was made after the fund was frozen. After all, investors acquiesced to Equititrust's management of the fund without knowing about that impairment, be it before, or after the fund was frozen.
 
Ned Kelly?

http://www.theage.com.au/business/c...etail-ashes-20130201-2dqi8.html#ixzz2JoXlrsUw

"There'll be a fleet of Bentleys for the boys from Bentleys. Let their creditors from MFS drive Matchbox cars.

We are looking at the document Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd, and the pallets of wads of backsheesh ripped out by the liquidators from Bentleys Queensland and their indispensable lawyers, Henry Davis York.

Lest you were wondering how a gang of accountants could possibly take $17 million in fees out of the corpse of Octaviar, nee MFS, in just two years, wonder no more.

It is because they can. There is nobody stopping them. The sky or the state of Octaviar is the limit, whatever comes first.

Back in the day, if Ned Kelly had known about this lurk, this liquidation racket, there is no way he would have gone into bushrangering.

He would have partnered with the banks, rather than robbing them. Instead of riding a horse he could have owned a stable of the finest, held through a tax-effective offshore trust structure subsidiary of his insolvency practice, Edward Kelly & Partners. Kelly was definitely in the wrong game."
 
Re: Ned Kelly?

Look at McIvor's poison pill in appointing Hall Chadwick... Now innocent retiree investors are meant to pay their fees despite promises by Hall Chadwick not to claim fees from the funds...

Inflict more pain and misery on old people whilst enriching themselves for what ? Letting McIvor off the hook... Where was the public examination of the directors and more importantly the main culprit McIvor...

ASICK said:
http://www.theage.com.au/business/c...etail-ashes-20130201-2dqi8.html#ixzz2JoXlrsUw

"There'll be a fleet of Bentleys for the boys from Bentleys. Let their creditors from MFS drive Matchbox cars.

We are looking at the document Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd, and the pallets of wads of backsheesh ripped out by the liquidators from Bentleys Queensland and their indispensable lawyers, Henry Davis York.

Lest you were wondering how a gang of accountants could possibly take $17 million in fees out of the corpse of Octaviar, nee MFS, in just two years, wonder no more.

It is because they can. There is nobody stopping them. The sky or the state of Octaviar is the limit, whatever comes first.

Back in the day, if Ned Kelly had known about this lurk, this liquidation racket, there is no way he would have gone into bushrangering.

He would have partnered with the banks, rather than robbing them. Instead of riding a horse he could have owned a stable of the finest, held through a tax-effective offshore trust structure subsidiary of his insolvency practice, Edward Kelly & Partners. Kelly was definitely in the wrong game."
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top