Ironhalo, I feel for you as much as everyone else involved in this mess. I suppose I just see little point in criticising what SICAG does or does not have on its website when it is glaringly obvious what they have already managed to achieve for their members. Which I realise you HAVE acknowledged.
If at the end of this mess, SICAG offer their support behind Manny and co, if and when they face charges then some questions will need to be asked. In the meantime, keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It would be litigation suicide to criticise or go after storm while they still might hold information useful in holding the banks to account. Would you provide information and support to someone who was at the same time trying to go after you. The banks obviously are the only institution that is able to provide financial restitution to so many storm investors. No matter how much money Manny is purported to have hidden away, it will not go anywhere close to helping all the storm investors who are currently trying to keep a house over their heads. One fight at a time surely.
And what purpose is served by issuing statements regarding the deficits of the Storm model on the SICAG website. I’m sure the investors are all well aware, as are contributors to this forum of the result of the storm model as they face financial devastation. I don’t see what good will be served by reminding them of it on the SICAG website. There will be plenty of time, and plenty people who will be well informed to do this, following the three current inquires. Remember, SICAG was set up to support its members. If you don’t agree with their modus operandi, then you don’t become a member, its simple. The fruits of their labour will be available to members and non members alike. In the meantime the intellectual capacity of the contributors to this forum may be put to better use in petitioning the banks to explain to its shareholders why the their CEO’s continue to get pay rises in the face of what have been appalling banking practices rather than worrying about what SICAG is doing or not doing. I do think it will be a shame if the only people to face charges at the end of this are EC and co, when it is becoming obvious that a number of the banks have engaged in quite deceptive practices. I draw your attention to the differences in CBA and BOQ submissions compared to the evidence they have been forced to give at the inquiry.
Ironhalo, you've made many excellent posts throughout this thread, and this is yet another example of your providing the questions that so need to be asked.Specialed, trust me mate, I was a Storm 'victim', as well as most of my family. I place blame on my own shoulders, the banks for giving me a margin loan and then selling it at rock bottom three and a half weeks later, but mostly to the schmucks at Storm who ignored my phone-calls when I was trying to find out what was going on; and to Emmanuel/Julie Cassimatis for forcing their staff not to sell anyone's positions up, when some of the Storm advisers were doing the very same with their own investments.
As it was said in the parliamentary hearing, thousands of people around Australia were getting margin calls in the thick of the GFC. Why was it that it seemed only Storm clients were the ones who were only getting told by their advisers they were in margin call when they were 20-30% into negative equity? It the banks were solely to blame, then we would be hearing about the other thousands of non-Storm customers who were screwed by the CBA/Colonial/BoQ/Mac Bank. You know why we haven't? Because they all had advisers who did the job they were paid and entrusted with, which was monitoring THEIR client's investments. Sure they may have lost some money when they converted to cash, but I can guarantee a fair majority of them would be back in the market, and not many of them would have had their houses sold from under them.
What really offends me, is that the perpetrators of this neglect are sitting in a palatial mansion barely over the other side of Moreton Bay in Brisbane, and yet no one seems to begrudge this. What is wrong with you people? Of course Manny took your money! He's probably online right now, checking his Swiss/Cayman Island balance and breathing a sigh of relief that he was able to offload it all offshore before it all hit the fan! And yet they both talk of 'seeking justice for their clients'. Here's the calibre of the people who were the architects of your downfall:
- They depleted a company that was managing billions of dollars worth of investments of over $20+ million dollars in the space of a few months. No one knows where this money went to this day, and yet the fact a company so large can go under due to a bank asking for about $20 million to be repaid is truly laughable. But it's the banks fault that Storm were insolvent due to the Cassimatis' addiction to extracting the majority of the company's revenue into their own personal bank accounts, obviously.
- They bullied clients who tried to forcibly sell out and told them to 'stick with their plan'.
- They gave 'private loans' to some customers....who knows, did this money recycle its way back in to their hands a few months later?
- When it all went downhill they fired their 110-120+ staff without pay or entitlements....but not before trying to backdoor another $3+ million into their own coffers by signing a family member to their now depleted board.
- It appears they had inadequate insurance.
- They made no submission to parliament to explain their actions.
- When asked to explain what went wrong in person, they throw sickies.
- They try and admit evidence to a parliamentary hearing so that they can't be held accountable for the same evidence in a legal setting.
The SICAG website says 'we're angry as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!'. You bloody well should be. No one expects SICAG to do detective work to bring Manny down for his crimes and neglect. But it would be sure as hell nice to see a little bit of responsibility thrown on the Cassimatis shoulders on the website. Why is it that the name Cassimatis has not been used in vain ONCE on that website? I understand going after the banks for compensation, hell take what you can get, power to you. But would it hurt to blame Storm too? Apparently, that's a no go area, and no one can tell us why. Does a child in Ethiopia die if the name 'Cassimatis' appears on the SICAG site in the form of some news update? I am sure there are a lot of SICAG members who are wondering the same thing. Tell me, were these members contacted by Redcliffe ex-Storm personnel like my family were; pompously seeking trail commissions on the pre-paid interest refunds from the failed margin loans these same people marketed so fiercely?
And yet you hardcore SICAG members wonder why some people looking at this objectively and with a small sense of renewed pessimism/caution, may wonder what the underlying SICAG agenda is; or more accurately, why some SICAG affiliates/relatives are swooping over the vulnerable SICAG congregation like carrion birds? But no, don't ask questions, because like the US Patriot Act, 'you're either with us, or against us.' You refer to our comments as 'idiotic', 'un-informed' and goad us to renounce our views using your fanatical, chest-beating zealotry.
Seriously, some of you need to wake up. It's that same blind faith that got you into this situation.
Specialed, You are of course under no obligation to explain anything to us, but I'm interested to know your own involvement in this? Are you yourself a Storm investor who has experienced significant losses?Something tells me Ironhalo will not show up. The fear of being shown exactly how ridiculous and uninformed so many of the contributions to this forum have been will be enough to keep those who continue to espouse ridiculous conspiracy theories away...but they do make entertaining reading, I have never been so interested in reading fiction.
Exactly.The CBA didn't actually say what you claim but putting that aside I would appreciate your view on these aspects:
Was the data only inaccurate when the market was sinking or was it always inaccurate from say 2002?
If the data being supplied to Storm was inaccurate during the market downturn, especially over the period October-November, why was it sufficiently accurate enough for the other 7,000 dealer groups with CGI margin loans to be able to deal effectively with their client's funds?
To put it another way, why couldn't Storm do the same as the other dealer groups in managing their clients funds when they were, presumably, receiving the same inaccurate information as Storm was?
Does this mean that this TV broadcast is your sole means of accessing market information?That is an interesting proposition. If they were indeed recieving the same inaccurate data that it appears (or is proposed) that storm clients were able to access, then maybe they should also be asking of their advisors, "Was the data accurate".
I see Commsec on TV every night,
You seem to rather be missing the point of the question.and if the CBA they couldn't ensure that the CGI data was always acurate, how can i be sure about other CBA owned entities. And secondly, were the other dealer groups, all 7000, dealing with a specific "Storm badged or branded" fund that was sold up, after clients were pushed significantly beyond the LVR that they had agreed, or thought they had, with the CBA. Who i might add the CBA had a contractual agreement with.....
You, and others on this thread, don't seem to perceive the immorality implied in focusing purely on the banks just on the basis they are the ones which obviously have the money. The banks should be required to provide compensation directly in accordance with what they may have done wrong, no more and no less.Ironhalo, I feel for you as much as everyone else involved in this mess. I suppose I just see little point in criticising what SICAG does or does not have on its website when it is glaringly obvious what they have already managed to achieve for their members. Which I realise you HAVE acknowledged.
If at the end of this mess, SICAG offer their support behind Manny and co, if and when they face charges then some questions will need to be asked. In the meantime, keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It would be litigation suicide to criticise or go after storm while they still might hold information useful in holding the banks to account. Would you provide information and support to someone who was at the same time trying to go after you. The banks obviously are the only institution that is able to provide financial restitution to so many storm investors.
That does not remove the need for clarity and fairness in the attribution of blame to be properly stated.No matter how much money Manny is purported to have hidden away, it will not go anywhere close to helping all the storm investors who are currently trying to keep a house over their heads. One fight at a time surely.
For the reason offered above.And what purpose is served by issuing statements regarding the deficits of the Storm model on the SICAG website. I’m sure the investors are all well aware, as are contributors to this forum of the result of the storm model as they face financial devastation. I don’t see what good will be served by reminding them of it on the SICAG website.
Hi Rainbow,
If you don't mind me asking - did you receive any communication from either Macquarie or your "adviser" prior to the margin call at 137% lvr? I find it absolutely amazing that the lvr was permitted to deteriorate to such a ridiculous level before any action was taken???? Do you know why you weren't sold out earlier? I'm assuming you weren't aware of the situation yourself?
Sorry to hear you're now stuck with your kids (joking) but it's extremely fortunate for you that Macquarie aren't going to pursue you for the outstanding loan amount - is it because they stuffed up perhaps?
Specialed, trust me mate, I was a Storm 'victim', as well as most of my family. I place blame on my own shoulders, the banks for giving me a margin loan and then selling it at rock bottom three and a half weeks later, but mostly to the schmucks at Storm who ignored my phone-calls when I was trying to find out what was going on; and to Emmanuel/Julie Cassimatis for forcing their staff not to sell anyone's positions up, when some of the Storm advisers were doing the very same with their own investments.
As it was said in the parliamentary hearing, thousands of people around Australia were getting margin calls in the thick of the GFC. Why was it that it seemed only Storm clients were the ones who were only getting told by their advisers they were in margin call when they were 20-30% into negative equity? It the banks were solely to blame, then we would be hearing about the other thousands of non-Storm customers who were screwed by the CBA/Colonial/BoQ/Mac Bank. You know why we haven't? Because they all had advisers who did the job they were paid and entrusted with, which was monitoring THEIR client's investments. Sure they may have lost some money when they converted to cash, but I can guarantee a fair majority of them would be back in the market, and not many of them would have had their houses sold from under them.
What really offends me, is that the perpetrators of this neglect are sitting in a palatial mansion barely over the other side of Moreton Bay in Brisbane, and yet no one seems to begrudge this. What is wrong with you people? Of course Manny took your money! He's probably online right now, checking his Swiss/Cayman Island balance and breathing a sigh of relief that he was able to offload it all offshore before it all hit the fan! And yet they both talk of 'seeking justice for their clients'. Here's the calibre of the people who were the architects of your downfall:
- They depleted a company that was managing billions of dollars worth of investments of over $20+ million dollars in the space of a few months. No one knows where this money went to this day, and yet the fact a company so large can go under due to a bank asking for about $20 million to be repaid is truly laughable. But it's the banks fault that Storm were insolvent due to the Cassimatis' addiction to extracting the majority of the company's revenue into their own personal bank accounts, obviously.
- They bullied clients who tried to forcibly sell out and told them to 'stick with their plan'.
- They gave 'private loans' to some customers....who knows, did this money recycle its way back in to their hands a few months later?
- When it all went downhill they fired their 110-120+ staff without pay or entitlements....but not before trying to backdoor another $3+ million into their own coffers by signing a family member to their now depleted board.
- It appears they had inadequate insurance.
- They made no submission to parliament to explain their actions.
- When asked to explain what went wrong in person, they throw sickies.
- They try and admit evidence to a parliamentary hearing so that they can't be held accountable for the same evidence in a legal setting.
The SICAG website says 'we're angry as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!'. You bloody well should be. No one expects SICAG to do detective work to bring Manny down for his crimes and neglect. But it would be sure as hell nice to see a little bit of responsibility thrown on the Cassimatis shoulders on the website. Why is it that the name Cassimatis has not been used in vain ONCE on that website? I understand going after the banks for compensation, hell take what you can get, power to you. But would it hurt to blame Storm too? Apparently, that's a no go area, and no one can tell us why. Does a child in Ethiopia die if the name 'Cassimatis' appears on the SICAG site in the form of some news update? I am sure there are a lot of SICAG members who are wondering the same thing. Tell me, were these members contacted by Redcliffe ex-Storm personnel like my family were; pompously seeking trail commissions on the pre-paid interest refunds from the failed margin loans these same people marketed so fiercely?
And yet you hardcore SICAG members wonder why some people looking at this objectively and with a small sense of renewed pessimism/caution, may wonder what the underlying SICAG agenda is; or more accurately, why some SICAG affiliates/relatives are swooping over the vulnerable SICAG congregation like carrion birds? But no, don't ask questions, because like the US Patriot Act, 'you're either with us, or against us.' You refer to our comments as 'idiotic', 'un-informed' and goad us to renounce our views using your fanatical, chest-beating zealotry.
Seriously, some of you need to wake up. It's that same blind faith that got you into this situation.
Specialed let me provide an informed view on how this will turn out. Where a bank has questionable lending practices in relation to a home equity loan a settlement will be reached - the victim will be unhappy. There may in some cases also be some limited compensation on the portfolio where negative equity and buffers were breached on margin loans (but this is still uncertain). Rest assured that at the end of the day the victims will be better off than they were in January but lets face it they will still be unhappy and wiped out as a result of Manny and the Storm Advisers. These people need to be held accountable.
The reality is Storm and their advisors have done nothing to help their victims and the enquiry transcripts show this. If anything these advisers have helped the banks in terms of the home equity loans by saying no-one did anything wrong. Yes Jelich has said a few things but the others have all been trying to save their wretched skin.
In speaking with many of the victims the one thing they want to see above all else is that Storm and their advisers are bought to justice so other people in the future dont find themselves in the horrible position they are in.
Many of these advisers are now working back in the industry, some are even contacting victims trying to get business from them. Here are just a few of these advisors i looked at recently:
Trevor BENSON- INFOCUS SECURITIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD. ASIC Authorised Representatives # 242673
Wally FULLERTON SMITH- INFOCUS SECURITIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD- ASIC Authorised Representatives 242814
Andrew O'BRIEN INFOCUS SECURITIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD. ASIC Authorised Representatives # 237913
Robert JONES- INFOCUS SECURITIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD- ASIC Authorised Representatives # 284593
Other advisors are with - DOVER FINANCIAL ADVISERS PTY LTD
Stuart DRUMMOND- DRUMMOND FINANCIAL PLANNING PTY LTD Authorised Representatives # 335440- DOVER FINANCIAL ADVISERS PTY LTD Licensee # 307248 –
David MCCULLOCH- MCCULLOCH FINANCIAL PLANNING PTY LTD- Authorised Representatives # 334559- DOVER FINANCIAL ADVISERS PTY LTD Licensee # 307248 –
Terry WEBB- TERRY WEBB FINANCIAL SERVICES PTY LTD- Authorised Representatives # 335439 DOVER FINANCIAL ADVISERS PTY LTD Licensee # 307248
So yes it is very important to stand up and protect new people from falling victims. I think it is very important that everyone, including SICAG, stand up and be counted and make sure that old tricks and flawed models are not being used again.
I remember hearing during my time with Storm that one of the aviation-keen advisers was using the jet to help get a pilot's licence. Can't remember who told me that, but it was always a rumour that gave me a laugh.
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?