Nice detective work GG.
Like Ron Jelich, these Redcliffe based Storm employees somehow now suddenly feel outraged that their clients (whom had they been doing their job properly wouldn't have let them get themselves into this level of risk) have been dealt the hand of 'injustice' from the banks.
I have some admiration for Ron Jelich (albeit small) in that he pretty much repented his sins in his submission stating 'I should have spoken up....I will carry this to my grave', but it doesn't negate the fact that these people DIDN'T speak up, and ultimately were happy to earn the big bucks and enjoy cavorting in the Cassmatis's court; yet when it went pear-shaped, they are now the 'voice of reason' to the banks. The very institutions that although responsible for shouldering some of the blame, were in a symbiotic, profit-making relationship with Storm, and vicariously, their employees.. And don't tell me 'we never saw any of that!', my advisor loved telling me about Manny shouting most of the employees on the world trip in 08....Mediterranean wasn't it?
Verily, the hypocrisy offends me. I will hand it to SICAG, your moral support for victims has been commendable, and I am sure you have talked people back from the edge. But these are desperate people who should never have been pushed to the edge to begin with.
51 page submissions from the media head of SICAG that completely fail to address the glaring failures of Storm to show any sense of responsibility, professionalism or competance in Oct-Dec last year leave me shaking my head in disbelief.
My mother, brother and sister (all Redcliffe locals), who were loyal clients of Jelich-Jones before they sold out refuse to attend any SICAG meetings for this very hypocrisy.
It's harsh, sure, but it's reality. Or at least a perception....and we all know that old saying...
Heheh thanks dark, don't get me wrong though, by stating I had some admiration, that level of admiration hovers somewhere between admiration towards my morning bowel movements, and a Japanese war criminal on ANZAC Day.
So SICAG are going to 'choose' who they want to go before the probe eh?
None of their members who are against Manny or anti-Storm I would hazard a guess?
The SICAG executive, which is comprised of a former Storm employee, the father of an adviser who should rightly be facing ASIC investigation and several close friends of Emmanuel & Julie, will decide how this is played out. More like a cheer squad for Storm.
Who are they representing, the group, themselves or others?
They have ingratiated themselves into the CBA dispute resolution process when Slater & Gordon is clearly more able to look after the interests of the litigants.
This extract from their website is telling:
"SICAG was formed out of a need to seek justice (and restitution) from a banking and financial services industry that has been able to get away with murder!
Hundreds if not thousands of mum and dad investors have lost their life savings and any possibility of a reasonable future in retirement as a direct result of poor banking industry practices and perhaps poor financial advice."
Yep, the Bank's fault and maybe, just maybe a little bit of poor advice.
Until they acknowledge what everyone else knows, that the advice was rubbish and that E&J and the advisers started this road to misery, they need to be treated with absolute suspicion as to their motivation and agenda.
Of course they won't because they can't as this would harm themselves, their families and their special friends.
"God brought you to me"
"A financial planner who has interviewed dozens of former Storm Financial clients has revealed some of the strange practices employed by former Storm agents to get sales across the line."
More here by Lucinda Beaman in Money Management;
http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/article/God-brought-you-to-me/492413.aspx
"God brought you to me"
"A financial planner who has interviewed dozens of former Storm Financial clients has revealed some of the strange practices employed by former Storm agents to get sales across the line."
More here by Lucinda Beaman in Money Management;
http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/article/God-brought-you-to-me/492413.aspx
"God brought you to me"
"A financial planner who has interviewed dozens of former Storm Financial clients has revealed some of the strange practices employed by former Storm agents to get sales across the line."
More here by Lucinda Beaman in Money Management;
http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/article/God-brought-you-to-me/492413.aspx
30 July 2009 | by Lucinda Beaman
Print this article Comments
David Price
A financial planner who has interviewed dozens of former Storm Financial clients has revealed some of the strange practices employed by former Storm agents to get sales across the line.
David Price is the managing director of fee-for-service group Strategy First Financial Planning. In a submission to the joint committee inquiry into financial services, Price said he and his business partners have met with at least 25 former Storm Financial clients to offer pro-bono advice. The Sydney-based group has also been in contact with two former Storm Financial employees.
Price pointed to a culture of greed within the group as one of its fundamental flaws. He pointed to what he called a bias within the Storm model to encourage clients to invest as much as possible, a strategy that “maximised fees for Storm and its advisers and maximised risk for their clients”.
“In the case of one particular Storm Financial office, we have consistent anecdotal evidence that suggests the financial planner there would say almost anything to clients get them to sign,” Price’s submission states.
“One such example involved the financial planner telling a priest that ‘God brought you to me’.”
Price is yet another member of the financial services industry to criticise the structure of the financial services industry in a submission to the Rippoll inquiry, saying “the nature of remuneration through commissions and third-party payments has, regrettably, created an industry that is built on a structurally corrupt foundation”
I have read most of the submissions (thanks, Solly, for the excellent links) and while a lot of them bring tears to my eyes, I do find the "how could the bank have possibly lent me this much money on my income" line to be hard to swallow. I knew what my income was when I accepted my loans, and so would every other storm client. Regardless of whether the bank in question was acting on accurate information, and/or applying standard loan evaluation criteria or not (and that's a whole other can of worms) the person accepting an offer of finance knows what their own financial situation is and surely knows that loans have to be repaid one way or another.
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?