Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Equititrust?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to new
No Trust said:
Hall Chadwick should not be paid...
Click to expand...

They should not be paid!!! But they already have been paid. The corporate Conivor engaged them even though it's said they had previously been associated with the company in other matters. Where from and how much was paid to commence this windup and why does it smell like a setup.

Let's try and not be sceptical here as hard as it maybe but how many less than scrupulous directors ENGAGE THEIR OWN FRIENDLY TO THEIR CAUSE corporate insolvency firms JUST AHEAD OF SOME OTHER CREDITORS APPLICATION. A friendly is less likely to go after the directors who appointed them or bring them to account. Less likely to make referrals to the authorities because let's face it they are in for say.....ONE MILLION DOLLARS...and this will come out of everyone's super except the Big Mac's.

Now a court appointed trustee would go up and down each and every orifice and feel no pain in naming snd shaming yet here is a previously shamed operator displaying all the deft shepherding skills of a infant school soccer cheat. Now who is being protected either by negligence or design. Now what has HC done to earn the fees they are now claiming, I think plenty but here is one thing worth considering. ASIC have a nifty little on line complaint thing.. where you can go and MAKE A COMPLAINT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT INSOLVENCY FIRMS AND THEIR ACTIONS JUST LIKE THESE.

Sorry I don't know how to post it but I'm sure No Trust can find it.

So go on line and Dob the bastards in and lets see if that gets them to bite the hand that feeds them. Who's sceptical now.
 
Word75, you are obviously a very angry little vegemite. I have no idea whether your anger is justified or not but a lot of what you say does not appear to be right.

How do you say that Hall Chadwick have already been paid? Their last report says that they are unfunded and as such haven’t been paid. BDO’s last report says they are trying to get their costs from them and are going to court about it this month. I think you are wrong here.

You then say that Hall Chadwick had previous dealings with Equititrust and as such are a friendly firm who will not chase the Directors. Section 4 of Hall Chadwick’s 12 April 2012 report says they had no previous dealings with the company or Directors. If they lied in this report they should be reported. Do you have any evidence to back up what you say?

You then talk about a Court appointed trustee. Isn’t BDO the court appointed trustee who was appointed by the court to look after investor interests? Do you want another one? You also seem to ignore that creditors were given the option of changing Hall Chadwick on two occasions but the investors voted to keep them.

The Liquidators cannot just take their fees. The fees need to be approved by creditors or the court and then they need to have the money to pay them (which they say they do not have). I’d suggest if a creditor has a complaint to make about the fees then they should contact Hall Chadwick directly. This would be the usual course when one has a complaint about professional fees. The fees seem very high for what has been achieved to date but I do not know what work they have done.

Accusing HC of being cheats, negligent and/or crooked without any apparent basis for saying so and to then call them bastards does not reflect well upon you. They are a reputable and professional firm of accountants and should be afforded the common courtesy of being treated as such unless and until there is evidence to the contrary.
 
Hall Chadwick complain about them to ASIC

Wow, what a defense of Hall Chadwick !!! Yet no mention of the fact that on two occasions they have promised not to take fees from the funds... Yet now are seeking to inflict further damage on innocent retiree investors... Where does that place a firm of "accountants" in the credibility and honesty scale...

My advice is to make direct and multiple complaints to ASIC which in a free and democratic country every Australian is entitled to do... Why on earth would any investor contact Hall Chadwick directly rather than make a complaint to ASIC. THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO PUBLICLY EXAMINE MCIVOR YET WERE SO COMPLICIT AND OR INTENTIONALY INCOMPETENT TO OBTAIN HIS STATEMENT OF FINACIAL AFFAIRS. By not obtaining this basic information they should have been sacked on the spot there and then. Information in regard to their actions has been provided to both ASIC and I believe David Whyte who I believe will oppose their application for fees to be paid from the funds...

Investors can make an email complaint as well as phone ASIC directly, all details are on the ASIC WEBSITE.



Goldie101 said:
Word75, you are obviously a very angry little vegemite. I have no idea whether your anger is justified or not but a lot of what you say does not appear to be right.

How do you say that Hall Chadwick have already been paid? Their last report says that they are unfunded and as such haven’t been paid. BDO’s last report says they are trying to get their costs from them and are going to court about it this month. I think you are wrong here.

You then say that Hall Chadwick had previous dealings with Equititrust and as such are a friendly firm who will not chase the Directors. Section 4 of Hall Chadwick’s 12 April 2012 report says they had no previous dealings with the company or Directors. If they lied in this report they should be reported. Do you have any evidence to back up what you say?

You then talk about a Court appointed trustee. Isn’t BDO the court appointed trustee who was appointed by the court to look after investor interests? Do you want another one? You also seem to ignore that creditors were given the option of changing Hall Chadwick on two occasions but the investors voted to keep them.

The Liquidators cannot just take their fees. The fees need to be approved by creditors or the court and then they need to have the money to pay them (which they say they do not have). I’d suggest if a creditor has a complaint to make about the fees then they should contact Hall Chadwick directly. This would be the usual course when one has a complaint about professional fees. The fees seem very high for what has been achieved to date but I do not know what work they have done.

Accusing HC of being cheats, negligent and/or crooked without any apparent basis for saying so and to then call them bastards does not reflect well upon you. They are a reputable and professional firm of accountants and should be afforded the common courtesy of being treated as such unless and until there is evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...
 
ASIC COMPLAINT LINK

Link to ASIC complaints below... It's time investors fought back against Hall Chadwick... Appointed by McIvor and still protecting him and their back pocket...

ASIC needs to step in to the proceedings and oppose any fees being paid from the funds... The media will be shining a spotlight on this little shell game being inflicted on investors...

We have exposed Equititrust and McIvor before, Hall Chadwick now need to answer Publicly for their actions in lying to investors... It's always the weak, elderly and defensless that are targeted... Sorry financial vampires not this time...


http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/Where+ASIC+can+help?OpenDocument=&ExpandSection=7
 
David Whytes's Take on Hall Chadwick's Spurious Claim for fees

READ para 2.3 the basis for David Whytes's objection to Hall Chadwick's duplicity...

Also a very solid basis for a complaint to ASIC. I would include this PDF Link and David Whyte's rational in para 2.3 in any complaint to ASIC as its hard hitting, succinct and undeniable...

David Whyte is doing a good job and was independently appointed by the Supreme Court of QLD, his objections to Hall Chadiwicks claim should be backed by ASIC by direct intervention in the proceedings. In addition Hall Chadwick should be hauled before the regulator as soon as possible. Any lack of intervention by ASIC in this glaring instance of duplicity and corporate GREED will cement their reputation as being a toothless tiger...


http://www.equititrust.com.au/Pdfs/...rts - 20130104 - 10th Report to Investors.pdf
 
Goldie101 said:
Word75, you are obviously a very angry little vegemite. I have no idea whether your anger is justified or not but a lot of what you say does not appear to be right.

How do you say that Hall Chadwick have already been paid? Their last report says that they are unfunded and as such haven’t been paid. BDO’s last report says they are trying to get their costs from them and are going to court about it this month. I think you are wrong here.

You then say that Hall Chadwick had previous dealings with Equititrust and as such are a friendly firm who will not chase the Directors. Section 4 of Hall Chadwick’s 12 April 2012 report says they had no previous dealings with the company or Directors. If they lied in this report they should be reported. Do you have any evidence to back up what you say?

You then talk about a Court appointed trustee. Isn’t BDO the court appointed trustee who was appointed by the court to look after investor interests? Do you want another one? You also seem to ignore that creditors were given the option of changing Hall Chadwick on two occasions but the investors voted to keep them.

The Liquidators cannot just take their fees. The fees need to be approved by creditors or the court and then they need to have the money to pay them (which they say they do not have). I’d suggest if a creditor has a complaint to make about the fees then they should contact Hall Chadwick directly. This would be the usual course when one has a complaint about professional fees. The fees seem very high for what has been achieved to date but I do not know what work they have done.

Accusing HC of being cheats, negligent and/or crooked without any apparent basis for saying so and to then call them bastards does not reflect well upon you. They are a reputable and professional firm of accountants and should be afforded the common courtesy of being treated as such unless and until there is evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...



I too want to be a believer and maybe Equititrust is just another episode of the GC X FILES but here is something to consider in her pursuit of the truth.

SAMSTAY PTY LTD a company owned by failed GC developer Cameron Davis went down owing Equititrust over $17mil and as a matter of public record the company engaged a Insolvency firm as their appointed trustee. ANY GUESSES HERE!!! Also a matter of record Equititrust and the Big Mac forgave the $17mil debt allowing for a scheme of arrangement.....Now that's $17mil of investors super gone in one hit and a free pass for Cameron.

Cameron of course went on to be a retained consultant with EL and a trusted lieutenant along with Mr Honey Pot. As identified by Mr Whyte these cronies tried to wrest control of the funds for themselves in a new vehicle all the while paying Cmeron $15k a month to help manage the windup of the funds. Mr Whyte put a stop to this.

Who do you think recommended HC and with the decision being made about the fate of EL which firms name came up as the Right People For The Job.

Now Google Richard Allbaran and make your own assessment as to the calibre and cut of their jibe. Maybe phone for yourself and see who at the firm acted on the Sanstay matter.

I make no disparanging comments in relation to any of the sharks swimming in the ocean just the ones frenzy feeding in the pool of investors super funds.

Ps: court appointed receivers almost always take on their administrations with NO CASH in the bank at the start but they have first call on any funds recovered.
Self appointed administrators ALMOST ALWAYS NEVER ACCEPT INSTRUCTIONS TO ACT AS ADMINISTRATORS IN A COMPANY THAT MAYBE INSOLVENT UNLESS THEY HAVE $$$$$ IN THEIR ACCOUNT TO KICK IT OFF.

You may wish to phone and confirm this as well.

I too want to believe !!
 
You are spot on and complaints to ASIC will be made...


word75 said:
I too want to be a believer and maybe Equititrust is just another episode of the GC X FILES but here is something to consider in her pursuit of the truth.

SAMSTAY PTY LTD a company owned by failed GC developer Cameron Davis went down owing Equititrust over $17mil and as a matter of public record the company engaged a Insolvency firm as their appointed trustee. ANY GUESSES HERE!!! Also a matter of record Equititrust and the Big Mac forgave the $17mil debt allowing for a scheme of arrangement.....Now that's $17mil of investors super gone in one hit and a free pass for Cameron.

Cameron of course went on to be a retained consultant with EL and a trusted lieutenant along with Mr Honey Pot. As identified by Mr Whyte these cronies tried to wrest control of the funds for themselves in a new vehicle all the while paying Cmeron $15k a month to help manage the windup of the funds. Mr Whyte put a stop to this.

Who do you think recommended HC and with the decision being made about the fate of EL which firms name came up as the Right People For The Job.

Now Google Richard Allbaran and make your own assessment as to the calibre and cut of their jibe. Maybe phone for yourself and see who at the firm acted on the Sanstay matter.

I make no disparanging comments in relation to any of the sharks swimming in the ocean just the ones frenzy feeding in the pool of investors super funds.

Ps: court appointed receivers almost always take on their administrations with NO CASH in the bank at the start but they have first call on any funds recovered.
Self appointed administrators ALMOST ALWAYS NEVER ACCEPT INSTRUCTIONS TO ACT AS ADMINISTRATORS IN A COMPANY THAT MAYBE INSOLVENT UNLESS THEY HAVE $$$$$ IN THEIR ACCOUNT TO KICK IT OFF.

You may wish to phone and confirm this as well.

I too want to believe !!
Click to expand...
 
Ha ha ha, diversion diversion diversion... :)

Question again ???

Goldie 101 - have you ever worked for Hall Chadwick ???
 
Goldie 101 - Have you ever done someone elses bidding ???

No comment from your side on the issue of promises to not seek payment from the funds...

Many have come and gone on this thread and have been discovered to be doing the bidding for someone else... Remember Buffetman etc... There has been name calling, accusations, etc etc, water off a ducks back as far as I am concerned... Call me what you want, say what you want but the critical question remains why is HALL (pass) CHADWICK now claiming fees from the funds that they promised (on 2 occassions) they would not...

Where is the honesty in that ?
 
No Trust - I have never worked for Hall Chadwick. I have often done others bidding for them - what's unusual about that? You are doing the same on this site.

Now that I have answered your two questions, let's get back to the simple question I asked first - have you ever been bankrupt? It's not name calling - just trying to establish your credentials.
 
Thanks for that, little diversion, which all started around the issue of HALL CHADWICK promising on 2 occassions not to seek fees from the innocent retiree investor's funds... This is undeniable...

When that hot potato was thrown at you, all we got was have you ever been bankrupt??? Is that the best you've got??? I will give you enough rope to hang yourself with if you want. Make the accusation if you dare... In fact put your money where your mouth is... Thats my answer...

Goldie101 said:
No Trust - I have never worked for Hall Chadwick. I have often done others bidding for them - what's unusual about that? You are doing the same on this site.

Now that I have answered your two questions, let's get back to the simple question I asked first - have you ever been bankrupt? It's not name calling - just trying to establish your credentials.
Click to expand...
 
I agree that HC fees look high and need to be investigated. I have no idea whether they are justified or not as I do not know what work they have undertaken and what progress they have made. I am not sure how anyone can say they are unjustified on the basis of quantum alone.

I was questioning the process being suggested by some (i.e. a complaint direct to ASIC). I would not be at all surprised if ASIC were to ask whether an complainant had raised the issue with HC first - this is afterall ordinary practice.

No Trust I have not accused you of anything. I was asking a simple question. I am not sure why you are so offended by it. It is a pretty simple question to answer (unless of course you do not like the answer).
 
Avoid Avoid avoid

I again raise the issue WHY DID HALL CHADWICK SAY THEY WERE NOT GOING TO CLAIM FEES FROM THE INNOCENT ELDERLY INVESTORS VIA THE ALREADY RAVAGED FUNDS ???

No answer to that... Instead spurious slurs thrown around when cornered and can't give an answer... What, did Hall Chadwick's PR Department give instructions not to answer this undeniable fact...

What were Hall Chadwick lying when they said that they were not going to claim fees from the funds ??? This is an outrage of epic proportions from a useless organisation that did not even get the statement of financial affairs from McIvor or the other directors...

It’s very simple when Hall Chadwick blatantly lie to investors and do not do their job by giving McIvor a free pass it’s time to hit them where it hurts and report them to ASIC… They don’t like this unwanted attention where their unscrupulous actions are publicly exposed…

I believe David Whyte will vigorously oppose their application for fees… What’s next will they then send out a posse and accuse BDO of being a bunch of bankrupts, oh hang on that’s right wasn’t it one of Hall Chadwick’s partners that was hauled before the Federal Court on a matter of insolvency…

Here are some more references from ASIC on this stellar firm of bean counters...


https://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/08-08+Sydney+liquidator+suspended?openDocument
 
Goldie101 said:
I agree that HC fees look high and need to be investigated. I have no idea whether they are justified or not as I do not know what work they have undertaken and what progress they have made. I am not sure how anyone can say they are unjustified on the basis of quantum alone.

I was questioning the process being suggested by some (i.e. a complaint direct to ASIC). I would not be at all surprised if ASIC were to ask whether an complainant had raised the issue with HC first - this is afterall ordinary practice.

No Trust I have not accused you of anything. I was asking a simple question. I am not sure why you are so offended by it. It is a pretty simple question to answer (unless of course you do not like the answer).
Click to expand...

Goldie 101 I think your line of questioning is a little inappropriate given the climate some 1400 retiree's are currently experiencing. It would be safe to assume most investors have been hard working folk having done the right thing through their working life and now possibly facing bankruptcy themselves due to having come into contact with the contagious disease that is Cleptomcivor.

Even worse than bankruptcy how many of our numbers a not here today to see these (read bad words) brought to account.

I can't see how casting dispersions on No Trust is going to make any difference to the matters at hand. In any event If you want to discuss bankruptcy look no further than the expert in this field Mr Conivor, a true master, it's just ashame that all the oldies that are likely to join him soon by no choice of their own won't be able to come out of their bankruptcy with Millions $$$ to play with..some victims here might just be lucky enough to come out ALIVE.

Now for HC.....given the previous complaints made to ASIC about this firm that appear to be valid, I'm sure any new complaints will be dealt with as all other complaints made before and valid ones prosecuted. Mr Google has many pages on this FIRM for you to review showing you the outcome with them. In the meantime you might like to see for yourself where a request for an explanation of the work done to date by HC on the EL matter gets you and whilst your at it make a compaint. I will bet you my last $10 Mcivor will be out of Bankruptacy an rebirthed in a new venture ripping off a brand new bunch of gullible oldies before you get an answer.

And I like my Vegemite
 
Re: Avoid Avoid avoid

One can only be amused by the effluent that you emit No Trust.

Let me say once and for all that I have no relationship whatsoever with HC (nor do I know anybody working at HC or for them) so directing questions to me about their fees is pretty pointless. I am concerned only about due process and your repeated attempts on this site to state your opinion as if it were fact and then try to bully and berate anybody that does not agree with you.

If you want an answer to the question you ask about HC's fees (such question being perfectly reasonable in my opinion) then I would have thought that the best person to ask would be HC. Have you done this? if the answer is no then why not (given this is "an outrage of epic proportions")? Is it because you don't want to know the answer or because you have no standing to ask the question of them or some other reason?

For someone who has handed out accusations (mostly unsubstantiated I should add) like candy, you sure don't seem to know what one is. Nobody has ever accused you of being a bankrupt - merely asked you several times if you have ever been bankrupt which you have not answered - I suspect your tactic (to use your own words) is to "avoid avoid avoid" answering the question. How can a question be "a spurious slur"? Time to pull out the old dictionary No Trust and brush up on your English. The first thing you should look up (after accusation, spurious and slur) is hypocrite.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top