pilots, get your head out of the clouds. How could you justify a bank lending $1million to a 70-year-old illiterate German migrant who was on a $30K-a-year pension? Wait till you see the hundreds of dodgy loan applications that were sexed up to get loans over the line - ASIC will tell us who was responsible for this creativity. What about the CBA's desktop property valuation software that trawled through CBA/Storm client databases looking for assets that could be valued upwards, sight unseen!!! There is a tonne of evidence that Storm and CBA were joined at the hip in shovelling loan money out to Storm clients who were either naive, blinkered, greedy or a combination of all three.
Storm Financial Group
- Thread starter Garpal Gumnut
- Start date
pilots, get your head out of the clouds. How could you justify a bank lending $1million to a 70-year-old illiterate German migrant who was on a $30K-a-year pension? Wait till you see the hundreds of dodgy loan applications that were sexed up to get loans over the line - ASIC will tell us who was responsible for this creativity. What about the CBA's desktop property valuation software that trawled through CBA/Storm client databases looking for assets that could be valued upwards, sight unseen!!! There is a tonne of evidence that Storm and CBA were joined at the hip in shovelling loan money out to Storm clients who were either naive, blinkered, greedy or a combination of all three.
Some of the SICAG committee is comprised of former Storm salesmen, pals of EC, and relatives of former Storm salesmen.
It's understandable that some Storm victims refuse to join SICAG because they see the obvious conflict of interest in having these people on the SICAG committee.
- Joined
- 4 August 2008
- Posts
- 362
- Reactions
- 0
I think that last bit will be the most interesting outcome. If it wasn't CBA, regardless who it was - Storm or the investor, then I hardly think the bank is at fault, except as victim of their own lack of due diligence.
It reminds me of all the "Why did the bank let me borrow so much?" questions that was being asked on www.news.com.au when interest rates hit 9%. The bank does not, and in my opinion, should not care about the serviceability of an *investment* loan, as long as the underlying security has a high likelihood of covering debt in the case of default.
- Joined
- 20 January 2009
- Posts
- 151
- Reactions
- 0
Big Max....
Whether history is kind to SICAG remains to be seen, once the ASIC/Worrell's inquiry starts throwing names around. I don't know if you have been reading my posts, but I fully ENDORSE and APPLAUD the support SICAG have given to the mum and dad investors in terms of people to talk to etc etc...
What I categorically abhor is the fact that ex-Storm employees and pals of EC are on the committee, and are blocking any outcry against Storm. Trust me mate, Colonial Lending sold me down when I wasn't in margin call without notification (making someone in the bank a nice profit), so I am out for the bank's blood as much as the next man and SICAG member.
But the fact remains, is that Storm (and its SICAG flag waving ex-employees) were undeniably complicit in this treachery. I have no doubt in my mind who was 'filling in the blanks' on clients loan docs and I suspect it was Storm.
The amount of people who were told at their Storm meetings 'oh just leave that blank, we'll fill it out for you' seems to be a little too dodgy if you ask me. My adviser even noticably got cranky when my g/f and I filled out everything on our initial loan doc (with initials beside it), as if we'd taken away his ability to earn a commission or something. It was quite odd, and I for one should have seen it as a warning sign.
Notwithstanding your attempts to discredit my theory that Manny ordered his staff not to sell anyone down when they should have, I got it from the direct mouth of a Storm employee who was there when the crap hit the fan, and BOTH Storm and the CBA sat on their hands and did nothing.
And as for terming people on this forum 'ignorant', maybe your superiors on the SICAG committee might like to remind Manny at their next campfire singalong that my family (and the people you decry on this forum) that his inaction and greed cost us collective millions.
Until I see SICAG admit that the banks AND Storm/Manny & Julie were to blame, we'll continue drawing our own conclusions as to where SICAG's true loyalties lie. My mother got a six-figure sum from the CBA as a result of the pressure by Slater and Gordon and all involved. Well done there.
What I want to know is, when will SICAG seek justice on the Cassimatis', financial or otherwise?
Whether history is kind to SICAG remains to be seen, once the ASIC/Worrell's inquiry starts throwing names around. I don't know if you have been reading my posts, but I fully ENDORSE and APPLAUD the support SICAG have given to the mum and dad investors in terms of people to talk to etc etc...
What I categorically abhor is the fact that ex-Storm employees and pals of EC are on the committee, and are blocking any outcry against Storm. Trust me mate, Colonial Lending sold me down when I wasn't in margin call without notification (making someone in the bank a nice profit), so I am out for the bank's blood as much as the next man and SICAG member.
But the fact remains, is that Storm (and its SICAG flag waving ex-employees) were undeniably complicit in this treachery. I have no doubt in my mind who was 'filling in the blanks' on clients loan docs and I suspect it was Storm.
The amount of people who were told at their Storm meetings 'oh just leave that blank, we'll fill it out for you' seems to be a little too dodgy if you ask me. My adviser even noticably got cranky when my g/f and I filled out everything on our initial loan doc (with initials beside it), as if we'd taken away his ability to earn a commission or something. It was quite odd, and I for one should have seen it as a warning sign.
Notwithstanding your attempts to discredit my theory that Manny ordered his staff not to sell anyone down when they should have, I got it from the direct mouth of a Storm employee who was there when the crap hit the fan, and BOTH Storm and the CBA sat on their hands and did nothing.
And as for terming people on this forum 'ignorant', maybe your superiors on the SICAG committee might like to remind Manny at their next campfire singalong that my family (and the people you decry on this forum) that his inaction and greed cost us collective millions.
Until I see SICAG admit that the banks AND Storm/Manny & Julie were to blame, we'll continue drawing our own conclusions as to where SICAG's true loyalties lie. My mother got a six-figure sum from the CBA as a result of the pressure by Slater and Gordon and all involved. Well done there.
What I want to know is, when will SICAG seek justice on the Cassimatis', financial or otherwise?
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
"Storm inquiry attracts late submissions rush"
"A rush of last minute submissions to the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of Storm Financial has left committee staff struggling to sort through all the documents."
More by Murray Cornish from the ABC;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/03/2643921.htm
"A rush of last minute submissions to the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of Storm Financial has left committee staff struggling to sort through all the documents."
More by Murray Cornish from the ABC;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/03/2643921.htm
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,611
- Reactions
- 10,093
And Max, mate, if what Ironhalo says , can be proven in court, then Moneyspidercentral's gambit of not exposing Manny, of not getting more submissions criticising the "Storm Model" , will backfire, and may give the banks an out.
The poor Storm victims are the ones who will suffer.
gg
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,611
- Reactions
- 10,093
Monario,
I do hate putting the boot into people who are suffering but I will make an exception with you.
Most posters on this thread and on asf in general are well informed. They also weren't wiped out by a shonky financial Advisor who charged upfront fees of 7%.
If you think any institution with deep pockets is going to stand up and say "we screwed up", then you really are living in la la land.
the banks will parley and use all legal means to minimise their losses in this. and so they should. Blind Freddie could see that. They are not charities.
The court room is the place for litigation.
The confessional for heartfelt pleas for forgiveness.
ASF is neither of those. It is a forum for folk who have lost and won, who when they lose don't blame others, but learn from it and dust themselves off and get into the game again.
gg
Gosh Big Max, who on earth could have possibly "sexed up" the loan docs?
Surely the evil banks didnt do "hundreds"? You dont think anyone from Storm may have had a hand in this "sexing up"?
"Sexing up" really is an interesting choice of words by the way to describe the word falsifying.
Speaking of words, Monario - you really need to learn how to spell the word ignorant lest you are thought of as ignorant yourself.
Surely the evil banks didnt do "hundreds"? You dont think anyone from Storm may have had a hand in this "sexing up"?
"Sexing up" really is an interesting choice of words by the way to describe the word falsifying.
Speaking of words, Monario - you really need to learn how to spell the word ignorant lest you are thought of as ignorant yourself.
- Joined
- 20 January 2009
- Posts
- 151
- Reactions
- 0
Which is exactly why SICAG don't want any more 'inquiries' cropping up.
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,611
- Reactions
- 10,093
GG, I appreciate your comments, and as I have stated I have learnt from my mistakes, the biggest lesson is I can run my own investments with minimal overheads, 100% control over my money, and more effeciency than a FA. however answer me this...
If an individual makes a mistake when dealing with a bank, and inturn owes the bank money, or defaults on a loan.. There are penalties payable!!!
Why then when a bank makes a mistake should we QUOTE when they lose don't blame others, but learn from it and dust themselves off and get into the game again..
I am after the same justice the banks would seek....
I wish to only recoup the losses the banks incurred me, I do not want compensation for a bad investment choice...
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,611
- Reactions
- 10,093
doctorj
Hatchet Moderator
- Joined
- 3 January 2005
- Posts
- 3,271
- Reactions
- 8
Folks, please remember to keep one eye on the ASF T&C and codes of conduct when making posts.
I know there are posters to this thread that have lost a lot of money and emotions are high, but this thread can only go on as long as Joe is satisfied people will continue to behave appropriately.
I know there are posters to this thread that have lost a lot of money and emotions are high, but this thread can only go on as long as Joe is satisfied people will continue to behave appropriately.
- Joined
- 21 January 2009
- Posts
- 58
- Reactions
- 0
I for one welcome the Worrells investigation and believe it is money well spent by ASIC. In making this point i believe SICAG's Mark Weir (referring to his media comments) does not fully understand how the Worrells action fits in.
Why? Firstly the Worrells action will provide a forensic investigation into how storm operated and will no doubt focus on the last year and what went wrong especially the issues of margin calls, the large ex gratia dividend payment and the role of directors in the last 3 months. Secondly, it will be timely with Storm directors and advisers in Federal Court in September this year while things are still fresh in their mind!! It really makes them start to answer the tough questions and put their fingers on the sticky paper. I think ASIC will find this very useful to supplement any action they may choose to make down the track. The Worrells action is also needed to fulfill their liquidation role as they may not have been getting the full co-operation of Storm diretors and staff in answering key questions about the collapse of the company. I believe every storm investor wants to know what, how, when and why Storm collapsed with the information give under oath.
We have to remember that the terms of reference for the parliamentary enquiry really do focus on what needs to be changed in the industry and what we can learn from the collapse of Storm. It is not as rigid nor adversarial in questioning and investigation as the Worrells or ASIC actions because it is not a court room!!
The real action will come from any ASIC legal action as this will be the full blown knock em down stoush where the storm directors, storm advisers and bank officials future (think potential custodial sentences and large fines) is very much on the line.
I hope this provides some perspective.
Why? Firstly the Worrells action will provide a forensic investigation into how storm operated and will no doubt focus on the last year and what went wrong especially the issues of margin calls, the large ex gratia dividend payment and the role of directors in the last 3 months. Secondly, it will be timely with Storm directors and advisers in Federal Court in September this year while things are still fresh in their mind!! It really makes them start to answer the tough questions and put their fingers on the sticky paper. I think ASIC will find this very useful to supplement any action they may choose to make down the track. The Worrells action is also needed to fulfill their liquidation role as they may not have been getting the full co-operation of Storm diretors and staff in answering key questions about the collapse of the company. I believe every storm investor wants to know what, how, when and why Storm collapsed with the information give under oath.
We have to remember that the terms of reference for the parliamentary enquiry really do focus on what needs to be changed in the industry and what we can learn from the collapse of Storm. It is not as rigid nor adversarial in questioning and investigation as the Worrells or ASIC actions because it is not a court room!!
The real action will come from any ASIC legal action as this will be the full blown knock em down stoush where the storm directors, storm advisers and bank officials future (think potential custodial sentences and large fines) is very much on the line.
I hope this provides some perspective.
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
"Cassimatis Silence 'Cowardly and Scandalous"
"Storm Financial founder, chairman and joint chief executive Emmanuel Cassimatis has caused outrage by failing to make a submission to the federal parliamentary inquiry investigating its collapse"
As reported by Duncan Hughes on page 48 of The Australian Financial Review of Tuesday, 04 August 2009.
"Storm Financial founder, chairman and joint chief executive Emmanuel Cassimatis has caused outrage by failing to make a submission to the federal parliamentary inquiry investigating its collapse"
As reported by Duncan Hughes on page 48 of The Australian Financial Review of Tuesday, 04 August 2009.
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
"Storm lender on a $10m buying spree"
"The owner-manager of a top-performing Bank of Queensland branch linked to adviser Storm Financial went on a buying spree, amassing about $10 million of industrial land, flats and houses until just weeks before Storm's collapse."
See more by Duncan Hughes on page 48 in The Australian Financial Review of Tuesday, 04 August 2009.
"The owner-manager of a top-performing Bank of Queensland branch linked to adviser Storm Financial went on a buying spree, amassing about $10 million of industrial land, flats and houses until just weeks before Storm's collapse."
See more by Duncan Hughes on page 48 in The Australian Financial Review of Tuesday, 04 August 2009.
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
"More Storm questions for CBA staff"
"Past and current Commonwealth Bank of Australia staff who were involved with handling Storm Financial accounts are being subpoenaed for a new round of questioning about the collapsed adviser by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission."
See more by Duncan Hughes on page 44 in The Australian Financial Review of 3/8/09.
"Past and current Commonwealth Bank of Australia staff who were involved with handling Storm Financial accounts are being subpoenaed for a new round of questioning about the collapsed adviser by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission."
See more by Duncan Hughes on page 44 in The Australian Financial Review of 3/8/09.
