No Trust
JUSTICE IS COMING...
- Joined
- 22 November 2010
- Posts
- 4,495
- Reactions
- 3,566
NO FEES ARE PAYABLE
The behaviour by Hall Chadwick as set out by David Whyte is totally unethical and nothing more than a money grab at the expense of innocent retiree investors...
All may not be as it seems....HC may have eyes on a different prize. After all its my understanding that EL as RE and the holder of the licence had no assets or liabilities in its name. It was purely there as Conivors private piggy bank and repository of his proceeds of ....... whatever. This is where he parked the bucks and the vehicle he used for some of his joint ventures. Likely more bucks skimmed off the projects.. anyway I digress.
HC were almost definitely put into funds at the time the LEADER appointed them, but from where, well between $600-800k has not been accounted for says HC, I'm not implying. The issue of duplication has been well covered but what if the real prize HC are after is the $2.8mil of deferred fees that maybe due to EL. This was raised by Mr Whyte earlier in his administration. Technically speaking if HC got their hands on this then maybe the argument can be made that it came from EL and not the funds..again I'm not implying just saying where the dots appear to join up.
Now that might be worth a punt, stay in and run up a huge bill throw some money at a legal challenge and get those bucks. Again I'm not implying. As administrators/liquidators they can reverse transactions done up to 2 years prior to their appointment sometimes longer. Then one might ask where any balance of funds might go after they pay themselves.... The Big Mack has got to be a fair bet. Might be his get out of jail card so to speak. I'm not implying but you have to wonder, after all whats left to do but wonder?
I still think the truth is out there.
No Trust, do you think about what you say before you type or does it just flow out?
You say Whyte has done an exemplary job. I am not sure how you know this but this statement is directly contrary to your own ramblings that investor returns will be zero. How can Whyte be doing an exemplary job if investors get nothing back?
Word75, your attack on me is not only ill-informed but it demonstrates gross naivety on your part (the very same things you accuse me of).
My participation on this site has (from the very beginning) been about promoting a balanced and accurate view and discouraging others from bullying or defaming people without adequate evidence.
I did not say that Whyte was not doing a good job nor did I say that he was doing a bad one. I don't know enough about what he is doing to make such a call and I suspect neither do you or No Trust. How did you possibly take what I wrote to be a criticism of how Whyte is doing his job? It was nothing of the sort.
The point of my post (and the only point) was to highlight the inconsistency in what No Trust was peddling. On the one hand he says Whyte is doing an exemplary job and on the other he says investors will get nothing. If success is not measured by return to investors how do you measure it? Simple arithmetic shows that it is almost impossible for investors to get a zero return as No Trust (and now you) appear to be peddling. An examination of Whyte's last report makes that pretty plain for one of even average intelligence to see. The question is not whether investors will get a return but rather how much of one they will get.
You comment that I fail to appreciate Whyte is not responsible for the quality of the assets he inherited or that you don't see me flaying comments in McIvors direction. Before making such comments surely you should at least read what I have said previously. For example, a previous post of mine (14 Nov 12) says "McIvor's conduct and shenanigans have cost investors tens (if not hundreds) of millions of dollars - when will he be stopped? Is he ever going to stop blaming everybody other than himself for Equititrust's demise. If he wants to know what caused Equititrust to fail then surely he need look no further than his closest mirror".
Who exactly is it that is ill-informed now?
Unfortunately you. I stand by my comments and offer this in addition. Mr Whyte has examined every asset remaining in the tainted portfolio prudently engaging appropriately qualified experts to report on them, reposition them where necessary and market them to achieve the best result. You would know this if you followed the progress of the individual assets through the marketing campaigns. So many other firms in this field would not have been as diligent or professional. The exemplary results referred to are as a direct result of his guidance. The point being that his measure of success is in the disposal of all assets and the successful winding up of the funds. Whether the return to the investors is 0c or 10c the result is still exemplary in these extreme circumstances.
I suggest you read up, do a little more digging behind the scenes make some calls, then you might be better informed.
Unfortunately you. I stand by my comments and offer this in addition. Mr Whyte has examined every asset remaining in the tainted portfolio prudently engaging appropriately qualified experts to report on them, reposition them where necessary and market them to achieve the best result. You would know this if you followed the progress of the individual assets through the marketing campaigns. So many other firms in this field would not have been as diligent or professional. The exemplary results referred to are as a direct result of his guidance. The point being that his measure of success is in the disposal of all assets and the successful winding up of the funds. Whether the return to the investors is 0c or 10c the result is still exemplary in these extreme circumstances.
I suggest you read up, do a little more digging behind the scenes make some calls, then you might be better informed.
Word 75 your absolutely right, what our confused friend here fails to grasp is that David Whyte is doing a good job with the dogs he's been given. Any intelligent person who reads Goldie 's post can see that he is confused... The differential is that David Whyte is doing a job mandated by the court and is ensuring that Hall Chadwick do not charge the retiree investors for fees that they promised on 2 occasions not to charge. His job as a receiver is being executed properly as opposed to the smoke and mirrors being deployed by Hall Chadwick... In addition I believe that David Whyte has never been suspended by ASIC. The fact that Goldie does not want to face is the 2 statements made by "All Bran" about the fees. Look at his posts he runs like hell from this one and pretends it never happened.
Given the rate and amounts at which these assets are being sold, I am sorry to say that the return will be zero. Kostag and I predicted this and unfortunately if firms like Hall Chadwick don't butt out and stop duplicating costs our prediction will come to fruition...
Mr Whyte's ears must have been hurting! His report is online now!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?