FMF [First Mortgage Fund]

[Mary Lynch]

Actually, Mellifuous, Craig Gore is no longer a director at WPS, he resigned on 19th June 2009. His shares and John Atkinson's shares were purchased by Propel Consolidated Holdings P/L (Propel) whose subsidiary Companies trade in Oz as WPS Financial Group. They are now the sole shareholders and owner of the Manager. Propel is 100% owned by Mayfair Ltd, a company registered in Belize. They have eliminated all WP's bad debts.

In answer to your question, I have only received a copy of their annual report (up to June 2009), and interim financial report(to 31st Dec. 2008 (must mean 2009 surely).

They are still paying distributions, despite freezing redemptions when CP froze their cash flow. In fact they reduced us to 6%, and have just raised us to 6.25%, with another rise anticipated next month. Units are worth 88c-94c depending on the return we get from BT. CP is solely responsible for them NOT being $1.

 

[mellifuous]

Actually, Mellifuous, Craig Gore is no longer a director at WPS, he resigned on 19th June 2009. His shares and John Atkinson's shares were purchased by Propel Consolidated Holdings P/L (Propel) whose subsidiary Companies trade in Oz as WPS Financial Group. They are now the sole shareholders and owner of the Manager. Propel is 100% owned by Mayfair Ltd, a company registered in Belize. They have eliminated all WP's bad debts.

In answer to your question, I have only received a copy of their annual report (up to June 2009), and interim financial report(to 31st Dec. 2008 (must mean 2009 surely).

They are still paying distributions, despite freezing redemptions when CP froze their cash flow. In fact they reduced us to 6%, and have just raised us to 6.25%, with another rise anticipated next month. Units are worth 88c-94c depending on the return we get from BT. CP is solely responsible for them NOT being $1.

Sounds like you've got two reports, the mid-term to 31 December 2008, and the full-term to 30 June 2009.

Ok Mary, thanks for your posting. Please amend my posting to be in line with your information, deleting Gore.

Well, it seems you're paying tax on income in that fund which is impaired too.. especially if your fund doesn't get its money from the PFMF. Doesn't your fund provide for the manager to put distributions to capital? It doesn't matter to me, but it might to you.

Me, I don't trust managed funds anymore. With valuations that can be out by 20%, how can any investor ever feel safe? A managed fund is one of the few places that a movie facade can be made to look like a solid building.

Once burnt, twice shy.

 

[mellifuous]

 

[mellifuous]

I don't think this committee will do anything more than be a mouthpiece for the manager. What could the manager tell the committee that it couldn't tell us? In my view, nothing. What could we tell the committee that we couldn't tell the manager? In my view, nothing.

What could the committee tell us that the manager couldn't? In my view, nothing.

There is a real danger that investors might see the committee as a conduit to the manager - members should realize that the manager is liable to all of us, both in the collective and as individuals.

The inclusion of an Investors' Committee is not a substitute for direct bi-directional communication between the manager and investors - IMO it is an unnecessary inclusion into the operation of the fund.

Just keep in mind the promises made by this manager, including the one to be transparent - keep them to their promises.

 

[mellifuous]

Got a letter you've sent to the manager?

Got a complaint you've sent to ASIC?

We're starting to put some complaints and letters together on moneymagik.com.

For complaints to ASIC:-
http://www.moneymagik.com/complaints.php


For letters:-
http://www.moneymagik.com/letters.php

 

[caroljace]

Thank you once again Mellifous for doing something constructive and having the knowledge and expertise to draft these complaints and letters. They say what we all want to say but don't have the ability to take action. Do you think it would be advantageous for us to all put our names to your complaints or to communicate with ASIC separately stating that we go along with all the points you have raised. Keep up the good work Carol

 

[mellifuous]

Thank you once again Mellifous for doing something constructive and having the knowledge and expertise to draft these complaints and letters. They say what we all want to say but don't have the ability to take action. Do you think it would be advantageous for us to all put our names to your complaints or to communicate with ASIC separately stating that we go along with all the points you have raised. Keep up the good work Carol

Thanks for your kind words Carol. You (and anyone else) is welcome to copy any of the complaints on my site and sent same to ASIC as their own.

I caution that anyone who wishes to do so should verify the facts for themselves.

You will need to seek appropriate professional advice if you wish to republish any complaint, however if you intend only to make a private complaint to ASIC then there is no need to seek that advice.

I understand that many people like to keep to their stage names, and so simply copying a complaint (if the contents are agreed to, and the facts checked) and sending it to ASIC is the next best thing - in that way their real names are protected and they are contributing in a positive way.

Thanks for posting here - it helps to take that monkey of being one of the few posters here off my back.

 

[mellifuous]

a draft copy of a complaint to ASIC with respect to unit price
is located at:-

http://www.moneymagik.com/complaint_ag_unit_price.pdf

Thanks.

 

[k.smith]

How safe are we....??

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2009/12/08/166945_gold-coast-business.html

".....BALMAIN NB Corporation, the lead partner controlling the former City Pacific First Mortgage Fund, slumped to a $1 million loss last financial year.

The result represents a $1.3 million reversal of fortune for the Sydney-based company, which manages the formerly Gold Coast-based fund in partnership with Trilogy Funds Management........

..........Trilogy Funds Management has yet to reveal its results for 2009, after posting a $103,320 profit in the 2008 financial year............"

 

[mellifuous]

http://www.moneymagik.com/huh.php

The link is self-explanatory.

 

[mellifuous]

Philg wants you to receive your capital back as taxable income.

Does such a payment breach Corporations Act s. 601FC(1)(d)?
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/s601fc.html

 

[mellifuous]

http://www.moneymagik.com/new_proposal.php

Anyone care to comment?

 

[k.smith]

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/esearc...36/09&Court=Supreme&Location=BRISB&print=true

There seems to be a lot of litigation happening at the moment...I wonder who pays for all this ?:

 

[mellifuous]

The unit holder's creed:-

http://www.moneymagik.com/the_reason.php

http://www.moneymagik.com/utopia.php

Rodger's Bakery
http://www.moneymagik.com/bakery.php

Rodger The Dodger - comics
Click on each comic to see the next one
http://moneymagik.com/rodger_1.php

Andrew Graffiti - cartoon
[to be upgraded soon]
http://moneymagik.com/graffiti.php

 

[mellifuous]

Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.


http://moneymagik.com/index.php

http://moneymagik.com/fact_sheet.php

:band:

:bier:

 

[mellifuous]

http://www.moneymagik.com/question_time.php

No doubt you're all aware by now that the FMF has a a preselected ICC.

A couple of us are creating some questions for the ICC.

The questions are being completed at this time and will be sent to the ICC tomorrow. Any answers received will also be posted on that link.

The email address of the ICC is :: investorcommittee@pfmf.com.au

Thanks.

 

[Mary Lynch]

Just trying to get a New Year status on the potential for some return.

Are we likely to gain anything from ASIC's investigations, or does BT follow their findings up with a long drawn out court case?

Is there any move being made towards a class action say along the lines of the MFS CA?

Does the fund fund the IMDM legal claim,(if they lose) or does that fall on the shoulders of BT management?

 

[mellifuous]

Just trying to get a New Year status on the potential for some return.

Are we likely to gain anything from ASIC's investigations, or does BT follow their findings up with a long drawn out court case?

Is there any move being made towards a class action say along the lines of the MFS CA?

Does the fund fund the IMDM legal claim,(if they lose) or does that fall on the shoulders of BT management?

1. ASIC is in a world of its own - I would guess that the FMF has escaped ASIC's notice while it's been chasing Jodie Rich, Fortescue et al - my guess is that ASIC is not a real consideration - a total waste of taxpayers' money.

2. No class actions - investor apathy will cause us to wallow until some bright/greedy law firms approach us.

3. The FMF will fund all legal actions against the FMF and the manager of the fund, that is, City or b/t providing such entities are sued as 'manager of the FMF'.

Sadly, too many of our investors are in walking frames or unable to understand this newfangled invention, the internet. If we rely on the wider investor base, then we are doomed.

 

[mellifuous]

Taxation

Today I had an interesting conversation with an employee of ASIC. I asked the employee why wasn't ASIC doing anything about members of various group encouraging member of the FMF to vote in support of distributions from the FMF.

I complained why didn't ASIC make the manager retract its statements about possible future distributions.

The employee said she wouldn't comment - I was disappointed. I said (words to the effect of) "well, if I went to a bank and invested $1000, and then the bank lost $500, but in a week's time contacted me and said 'We've found $100 of the missing $500 but were going to pay you as interest', what would you expect would happen?'

I said (words to the effect of) that no one would accept that - getting one's own money back as an interest payment and having it taxable is just a nonsense.

I then said the FMF was like that and with all its debt, losses, and impairments, the fund would not be capable of deriving an income and so could not pay distributions.

She would not comment and said it was not a matter for ASIC. I was stunned, if the payment of capital from a fund as distributions is not a matter for ASIC, then what was a matter for ASIC?

She suggested I phone the tax office.

I phoned the tax office and the officer told me that ASIC should have dealt with the issue. The officer further advised me that there was nothing I could do until such a payment was made, and then I would be able to make a complaint to the ATO about the payment. That was good news.

It was also good news that the ATO would accept a complaint from an investor if that investor believed that he/she had paid tax on distributions from a managed fund in the event that managed fund had done no more than return capital as distributions - that investor may be entitled to a tax refund.

It seems that today was a day of enlightenment, ASIC failed to act, but the ATO was ready to act - impressive thought - I'm not normally happy about the ATO but I confess I was today.

For whatever reason, completely isolated from my experiences, this afternoon the manager of the FMF issued this statement by email to a member of the FMF Coffee Club:-

"... Good afternoon Ian,

It is a delightfully short answer for you: We are acutely aware of the tax consequences of different types of potential “payments” (our preferred choice of word) to Unitholders and would seek professional advice regarding the best interests of Unitholders before proceeding with any payment. My further comments are that in its present form there is no way I can see in the foreseeable future that the Fund could generate “accounting net income” which could be “distributable” to Unitholders and thus taxable in their hands. Conventional redemptions are not currently possible due to the $1 per unit fixed redemption price (stuff-up by CPL) in the Constitution. Hence any potential payment from the Fund to Unitholders would be in the character of a “return of capital”.

Regards, Rodger Bacon......" (emphasis added)

httphttp://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/FMF_coffee_club/join

If the manager wants to change the 'form' of the FMF, then let's see the meeting, and at that meeting it will be the manager that has to jump the 75% hurdle.

Even introducing a VUP will not allow for distributions, but the manager is free to dream as managers do.

We have been battling this issue for a long time - there have been far too many trading on the needs of investors by promising them something that cannot be delivered.

I live in sincere hope that there will be no more false promises about distributions from the FMF.

Damn those who live to deceive.

No thanks to ASIC - thanks to the ATO for giving me a backstop to my beliefs.

 

[mellifuous]

Are you interested in joining the PFMF READY RESERVE?

Things move so quickly these days in the corporate world - one never knows when the need arises to support a proposal by unit holders to protect their interests.

The FMF Coffee Club forum has started to become proactive in order to reactive more quickly to moves by the manager of the PFMF which we may not agree with.

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/FMF_coffee_club/join

It is of great concern to a number of us that the manager has taken had a focus on amending the constitutionally set value of the unit. To date, the manager has been unsuccessful.

Further, the manager has made representations about 'distributions' - however, the manager now concedes that distributions cannot be paid because of the 'form' of the PFMF.

The manager believes (as I understand it) that redemptions cannot be paid because of the $1.00. That is the manager's belief, it is certainly not mine.

A member of the steering group has posted that he believes the manager is considering calling a meeting of the PFMF over certain matters.

We have decided that we would like to be in a position (at short notice) to be able to put a proposal to any meeting called by the manager.

There is no particular proposal in mind and if one arises, it will be determined by the actions of the manager.

Joining the list merely lets us know that you're willing to consider a proposal, there is no obligation to support any particular proposal that might be put forward.

There are attempts to channel the ICC into a 'united front'.

There are storm clouds brewing, and our sky is darkening.

Protect your interests - get involved.

Join here:-

http://moneymagik.com/action_list.pdf


Thanks.