Storm Financial Group

[Garpal Gumnut]

Bunyip,

I've come back again and again to respond to your post,and deleted every response till now. Why? Because I am frightened that I will be seen as breaking the 'non-disclosure' clause in our offer from CBA.

Please don't believe everything you read in the media. Just because it's in black and white it doesn't mean that it's the truth.

MW has not been 'fully' quoted, so what you've posted is not quite what he said. As always, the media have artistic license.

Please note also that the media rely heavily on advertising fees. Not that I would make any disparaging remarks about media correspondents, but their bread and butter is in advertising, is it not?

How many web pages do you open up that don't have an advertisement for one bank or another?

Again, from what you've read, you form an opinion on how many clients are accepting offers. If over half the clients have accepted offers how can I know of so many who haven't? I only know one client who has accepted. They accepted because they could not afford, health-wise, mental well-being wise, or financially, to continue. They were not happy with their offer. They just couldn't go on any longer.

For now, only CBA clients are tied by their 'secrecy clause'. We can't discuss our dealings with the bank with our families let alone anyone else. Can you please ask yourself why, if the banks are being so magnanimous, so generous, that they are gagging us from disclosing their offers?

Going to court will allow the truth to finally come out. There are many clients who will be very happy to go to court to do just that. The truth, the whole truth, under oath.

I would love to be able to be totally truthful with you and the forum right now, but unfortunately I've been gagged, bound to secrecy, by a bank that promised 'transparency' in their resolution scheme.

Mate, this a full of it post.

As many posters on this thread sussed from the beginning ,SICAG has been close to and involved with and in what is left of "Storm" as a concept and with its former advisers.

Their agenda is in some way to resurrect Storm as a going concern and restore all funds to the poor unfortunate bastards who lost their money through the Storm spin that markets only go up, and that leverage is without risk.

You sound like Mossad, James Bond or perhaps Maxwell Smart, in relation to secrecy. Every man and his dog at the Ross Island Hotel knows the terms of the CBA agreement with the clients who have decided to call it quits and get on with their life.

It is related daily by victims to their families and friends.

So don't go on with this line of so called secrecy obliterating debate.

gg

Garpal,

Your opinion in regard to SICAG is well known and I suppose the great thing about this forum is you are free to continue bashing it. But the comment above is so ridiculous it beggars belief that anyone could come up with this one and feel comfortable publicly stating it.

I believe there is another forum on this site for conspiracy theories, this comment may be better there I believe.

Could you please offer some support for this claim. Could you please also elaborate on what evidence you have discovered that indicates anyone within SICAG or any of its members want storm resurrected. Further, how this could be achieved.

I eagerly await your answers.

Specialed mate this has all been gone over before but for you and you alone, let us step into the cone of silence, just you and me . Now please listen.

The sicag webpage prominently states that it is not associated with the Cassimatis but in the lower left hand corner prominently lauds the fee model of theirs, as compared to present best practice fee charging by Financial Planners. Btw, I think all FP’s are muppets, but you guys don’t , so I guess that is my first piece of evidence.

Nowhere on the sicag site is there even one, not one tiny, tiny, criticism of Manny, the Storm model or the Cassimatis. This in spite of criticism of them and the model by the following
A Parliamentary Inquiry
A Liquidators Report
By the major litigating firm involved with sicag members.
The majority of ex clients I’ve spoken to in Townsville.
Ex staff of Storm
All the major financial commentators from the Murdoch, Fairfax and ABC Financial Press offices

Some of the top sicag identities are either senior ex Storm employees or held quite high positions in Storm. One at least to my knowledge is related to an ex Storm adviser.

In relation to the ressurection of the Storm model, this is for the future, I of course have no proof, it is a surmise made from rational examination of the facts and knowledge of previous scams and the guilty but not punished survivors of those scams. They start selling again.. They do what comes naturally to salesmen.



Now I couldn’t give a monkeys whether you accept this or not, most people I read and speak to do.

People suffering delusions when they’ve been done over by charismatic salesmen often suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, where they identify with the perpetrator to protect their mind from further injury.

I’ve never been to Stockholm, but I hear it’s a good place to get a root.

And you’ve been rooted good and proper by Storm, so I guess anything I say from the viewpoint of a reasonable person is not going to change your opinion.


gg

 

[specialed]

Specialed mate this has all been gone over before but for you and you alone, let us step into the cone of silence, just you and me . Now please listen.

The sicag webpage prominently states that it is not associated with the Cassimatis but in the lower left hand corner prominently lauds the fee model of theirs, as compared to present best practice fee charging by Financial Planners. Btw, I think all FP’s are muppets, but you guys don’t , so I guess that is my first piece of evidence.

Nowhere on the sicag site is there even one, not one tiny, tiny, criticism of Manny, the Storm model or the Cassimatis. This in spite of criticism of them and the model by the following
A Parliamentary Inquiry
A Liquidators Report
By the major litigating firm involved with sicag members.
The majority of ex clients I’ve spoken to in Townsville.
Ex staff of Storm
All the major financial commentators from the Murdoch, Fairfax and ABC Financial Press offices

Some of the top sicag identities are either senior ex Storm employees or held quite high positions in Storm. One at least to my knowledge is related to an ex Storm adviser.

In relation to the ressurection of the Storm model, this is for the future, I of course have no proof, it is a surmise made from rational examination of the facts and knowledge of previous scams and the guilty but not punished survivors of those scams. They start selling again.. They do what comes naturally to salesmen.



Now I couldn’t give a monkeys whether you accept this or not, most people I read and speak to do.

People suffering delusions when they’ve been done over by charismatic salesmen often suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, where they identify with the perpetrator to protect their mind from further injury.

I’ve never been to Stockholm, but I hear it’s a good place to get a root.

And you’ve been rooted good and proper by Storm, so I guess anything I say from the viewpoint of a reasonable person is not going to change your opinion.


gg

This rambling offers evidence (or sorts) that SICAG is yet to critisise Storm financial via their website. It does not however answer my two questions. AGAIN, can you please offer the evidence you possess as to why SICAG or anyone would want to resurrect STORM, and how this would be acheived. While your at it you can explain how ASIC, FPA, etc etc would enable this to happen, what this would acheive. I actually agree with your opinion of FP's however with regard to the rest, there is very little that is rational about it.....

 

[specialed]

Garpal,

I'm sure I have asked this before but don’t recall getting an answer.

Can you please explain to me why you show such vigour in your pursuit of SICAG. It obviously extends beyond just a cursory interest in the public good, yet to the best of my knowledge (and please correct me if I’m wrong) your efforts to point out its failing, and its hidden agenda remain stuck in this forum. I am wondering what this group actually did in the first place to cause you such distress.

What efforts have you made in the public arena to discredit what you seem to feel so strongly is such a hideous organisation, and have you done this without the shade of anonymity that this forum provides you. You mention the majority of ex clients you speak to. Is this the majority of ex clients, or just the majority of those you speak to. If you only speak with three, then yes two would form a majority. I am guessing that the number you speak to falls well short of the current membership of SICAG otherwise, they , along with yourself could have finished off with SICAG some time ago.

You highlight how most people you speak to accept your opinion. Can I suggest with the greatest of respect that you probably are not speaking to many, and certainly not many outside of this forum. Again, the many you refer to appear all but silent in their opposition to SICAG, and even more silent in the attempts to also rid the world of this support group.

I actually have no problem with your opposition to their volunteer organisation, but would like to know what exactly causes the agenda you have, there is obviously something that has happened. Do you care to share ?

By the way, As stated so many times, I have never, will never invest with storm. Have never, will never, as you so nicely put it "been rooted by storm"....I would actually like to have a few minutes alone with MANNY....

 

[DocK]

I have 3 family members who have accepted the CBA's offer with relish, and one serving ADF member mate of mine who has also done that same thing.

My personal argument with the CBA is that they sold my 2-month old investment out at the bottom of the market without ANY confirmation/phonecall, and now claim that they owe me nothing as we weren't in a margin call position when this all went down. My counter claim to that is, if we weren't in margin call, then why were we sold down in the first place? We had plenty of cash to cover any contingency, yet we were sold out at a $16k loss at the bottom of the market, for no reason. A long story short, Colonial decided to repay our margin loan when we weren't in margin call with our investment, without authorisation, and left us the pittance and loss that was left....with not even a statement received in Oct-Nov 08 to show what had happened.

Now what really gets up my goat is that there seems to be a portion of the Storm customer base who aren't satisfied with what they have been offered, and seem to be under the impression that the bank (or the Australian taxpayer) must return them to square one as if the GFC never happened. That's just bollocks. People need to take some responsibility for this themselves.

Now let's use some common sense, when you start signing documents in triplicate for 1 million dollar margin loans, you must realise that some basic due diligence is in order. But no, the same people that are no moaning about how cut throat the banks are, are the same ones who were sported all over the Storm brochures gushing about their profits in 2007 and the overseas trips Storm was inviting them on. I didn't see any of these people raising questions when they were rolling in profits for FY 2007/08 no?

I'm not one for kicking people while they are down (I've been in the situation) but some people really need a reality check. It's irresponsible of SICAG to keep pushing this 'we must be fully compensated!' line. It's not going to happen.

Top post Ironhalo - I agree with your sentiments. I also accepted the offer made by CBA as I considered it to be reasonable, given my set of circumstances. I had/have some reservations about the way the scheme is structured, but felt that it provided the best outcome I was likely to achieve in the short term, and emotionally I felt the need to have the whole saga resolved. I can understand that some people feel the need to pursue other options, and one of the complications with any resolution process is that not everyone's situation is identical, however when someone emailed me the link to the petition to the Govt with a plea to add my signature I was tempted to reply that they should "get a grip".

 

[Solly]

Just some quotes from the petition at

http://www.petitiononline.com/vfahmg/petition.html

We only wanted to provide a comfortable living for our retirement. Now, we have to exist on Centrelink Payments

What we all had in anticipation for retirement has gone, with all of us left with only debts to be paid

This individual further disclosed that their patner is severly psychologically affected by these events and is sucidial and emotional unstable. I feel shocked

disappointed that their is a potential for this couple and thousands of others voice to go unherd.


all their life superanuation and anything they had saved has gone up in smoke and couldnt come at a worse time as xxxxx has Parkinsons and cannot work anymore

people are the salt of the earth they provided for themselves so they would not be a burden on society but now shamfully they will have to take a handout as they dont have anything left


We were continuously told about the Storm safety nets that would always work 'no matter what'. We could never ever lose our home - they said! We were also told Storm

had ASIC approval for all they did. Storm's final advice to us was - just go home and sell everything!


Sold our farm, bought house in suburb, had spare cash, set up to retire. Invested with storm , now have huge debt, gardening to keep food on the table.


Victims is the right word. Asic were asleep at the wheel and dont even start me with the banks.


banks involved with Storm understated liabilities, and overstated assets on housing loans, falsified people's "income" and altered ratios on margin loans without

informing their customers. In my book that is criminal behaviour


Victims is the right word. Asic were asleep at the wheel and dont even start me with the banks.


we are astounded that at 60 and 62 a bank could lend us such a large amount of money!


All we wanted was to be self funded retirees.We trusted the 'Professionals" who failed us miserably.


Four years to retirement and a twenty five year home loan ... for a house I once owned??


This company lost control of investors money and failed to preserve the wealth of their investors in any way.


So we trusted An ASIC endorsed company to diversify. Now we have nothing. Thanks to the Govt and their best friends "Banks"


please help us


We have been self employed in our own business for 35 years.We have no home and no hope for our future,--------- PLEASE HELP US.

They told me that I would be protected by the corporations act if I followed their advice and things went wrong. I took confidence from the fact that they were regulated by ASIC, which doesn't appear to have made sure that their obligations were met, insurance or otherwise. I'm shattered.


We have been financially ruined and emotionally devasted by this.

We believed we were dealing with ethical organisations and were repeatedly told we were fully protected under Australian law. We have lost all our super and lifetime of savings. 18 months on we have not been approached by anyone to offer help, let alone even $1 in compensation.

forced me to live out my retirement in a caravan in the backyard of my children. I am 70 with failing health.

I have been left destitute with no superannuation no income axcept that I have to work for the rest of my life as i have a house loan of 1.4 million dollars and am approaching 70 years of age .

Better regulation for geared lending to seniors.

After working for 37 years and owning my home unencumbered for 15 years... My Government/My Bank/My Financial Advisor and ASIC have now officially made me a dependant on the system of financial wellfare

The plan was to be a self-funded retiree - that plan no longer exists. Checked with ASIC before investing in Storm just to be on the safe side!

 

[Julia]

. I had/have some reservations about the way the scheme is structured, but felt that it provided the best outcome I was likely to achieve in the short term, and emotionally I felt the need to have the whole saga resolved.

Dock, now that you've made that choice, can you say if it has allowed you to, if not 'put it behind you', start to move on? Emotionally and psychologically it sounds so much more sensible than living with the stress of the unknown any longer than necessary.
I suppose it depends somewhat on your nature: for me the ongoing anxiety and indecision would be worse than accepting what's possibly a lesser settlement.

Ironhalo: great post. Much admire your attitude and Dock's.

 

[Anastasia]

Hi Everyone,
I have been taking a back seat for the past few months.....well... letting my emotions have a holiday anyway. But I just had to join the land of the living again when I learnt today that Bank of Queensland/ CEO David Liddy/ Two Townsville branches (Kirwan and North Ward) will be taken to task over their relationship/ involvement with Storm Financial this Sunday night on 60 Minutes. Apparently it is a very revealing, very informative piece of investigative journalism. Uhmmm....

Reckless
Reporter: Ellen Fanning
Producers: Jonathan Harley

It's amazing they got away with it for so long. Bankers bending the rules, ignoring the risks and making a motza in the process.

Here in Australia we like to think we avoided the worst of the Global Financial Crisis.

But we had our share of rogues in this country too and the misery they've inflicted on hundreds of Aussie battlers is as cruel as anything perpetrated by Wall Street.

It all started when the Bank of Queensland got into bed with a reckless outfit called Storm Financial.

It was a time of easy money, dodgy loans and monumental greed. And presiding over it all was a fast-talking CEO who won't admit his bank was wrong.​

 

[Solly]

Hi Everyone,
I have been taking a back seat for the past few months.....well... letting my emotions have a holiday anyway. But I just had to join the land of the living again when I learnt today that Bank of Queensland/ CEO David Liddy/ Two Townsville branches (Kirwan and North Ward) will be taken to task over their relationship/ involvement with Storm Financial this Sunday night on 60 Minutes. Apparently it is a very revealing, very informative piece of investigative journalism. Uhmmm....

Reckless
Reporter: Ellen Fanning
Producers: Jonathan Harley

It's amazing they got away with it for so long. Bankers bending the rules, ignoring the risks and making a motza in the process.

Here in Australia we like to think we avoided the worst of the Global Financial Crisis.

But we had our share of rogues in this country too and the misery they've inflicted on hundreds of Aussie battlers is as cruel as anything perpetrated by Wall Street.

It all started when the Bank of Queensland got into bed with a reckless outfit called Storm Financial.

It was a time of easy money, dodgy loans and monumental greed. And presiding over it all was a fast-talking CEO who won't admit his bank was wrong.​

Anastasia,
It indeed will be interesting to so see this report. I wonder if there will be an appearance by Matthew Buchanan, he did give some quite interesting responses to questions at the Inquiry at Harry's.

Mr Liddy has previously given positive accolades to the North Ward branch.

“North Ward’s two Owner-Managers, Declan Carnes and Matthew Buchanan, represent the Bank’s five core values – passion, achievement, courage, integrity and team work – and this is reflected both in their growing customer base and their branch’s amazing financial performance,” Mr Liddy said.

The above quote is from,
http://www.boq.com.au/aboutus_media_20061027.

I believe Ellen's report will be very informative.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Specialed mate this has all been gone over before but for you and you alone, let us step into the cone of silence, just you and me . Now please listen.

The sicag webpage prominently states that it is not associated with the Cassimatis but in the lower left hand corner prominently lauds the fee model of theirs, as compared to present best practice fee charging by Financial Planners. Btw, I think all FP’s are muppets, but you guys don’t , so I guess that is my first piece of evidence.

Nowhere on the sicag site is there even one, not one tiny, tiny, criticism of Manny, the Storm model or the Cassimatis. This in spite of criticism of them and the model by the following
A Parliamentary Inquiry
A Liquidators Report
By the major litigating firm involved with sicag members.
The majority of ex clients I’ve spoken to in Townsville.
Ex staff of Storm
All the major financial commentators from the Murdoch, Fairfax and ABC Financial Press offices

Some of the top sicag identities are either senior ex Storm employees or held quite high positions in Storm. One at least to my knowledge is related to an ex Storm adviser.

In relation to the ressurection of the Storm model, this is for the future, I of course have no proof, it is a surmise made from rational examination of the facts and knowledge of previous scams and the guilty but not punished survivors of those scams. They start selling again.. They do what comes naturally to salesmen.



Now I couldn’t give a monkeys whether you accept this or not, most people I read and speak to do.

People suffering delusions when they’ve been done over by charismatic salesmen often suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, where they identify with the perpetrator to protect their mind from further injury.

I’ve never been to Stockholm, but I hear it’s a good place to get a root.

And you’ve been rooted good and proper by Storm, so I guess anything I say from the viewpoint of a reasonable person is not going to change your opinion.


gg

This rambling offers evidence (or sorts) that SICAG is yet to critisise Storm financial via their website. It does not however answer my two questions. AGAIN, can you please offer the evidence you possess as to why SICAG or anyone would want to resurrect STORM, and how this would be acheived. While your at it you can explain how ASIC, FPA, etc etc would enable this to happen, what this would acheive. I actually agree with your opinion of FP's however with regard to the rest, there is very little that is rational about it.....

Garpal,

I'm sure I have asked this before but don’t recall getting an answer.

Can you please explain to me why you show such vigour in your pursuit of SICAG. It obviously extends beyond just a cursory interest in the public good, yet to the best of my knowledge (and please correct me if I’m wrong) your efforts to point out its failing, and its hidden agenda remain stuck in this forum. I am wondering what this group actually did in the first place to cause you such distress.

What efforts have you made in the public arena to discredit what you seem to feel so strongly is such a hideous organisation, and have you done this without the shade of anonymity that this forum provides you. You mention the majority of ex clients you speak to. Is this the majority of ex clients, or just the majority of those you speak to. If you only speak with three, then yes two would form a majority. I am guessing that the number you speak to falls well short of the current membership of SICAG otherwise, they , along with yourself could have finished off with SICAG some time ago.

You highlight how most people you speak to accept your opinion. Can I suggest with the greatest of respect that you probably are not speaking to many, and certainly not many outside of this forum. Again, the many you refer to appear all but silent in their opposition to SICAG, and even more silent in the attempts to also rid the world of this support group.

I actually have no problem with your opposition to their volunteer organisation, but would like to know what exactly causes the agenda you have, there is obviously something that has happened. Do you care to share ?

By the way, As stated so many times, I have never, will never invest with storm. Have never, will never, as you so nicely put it "been rooted by storm"....I would actually like to have a few minutes alone with MANNY....

specialed, we seem to be two persons on either side of a boat shouting out in to the wind and not hearing each other, let alone listening. On reflection I am as guilty as you.

You feel I am not answering your questions, and I likewise about you.

I am glad you were not stung my Manny and that you see the Storm model for what it was.

Likewise I can assure you that apart from attempting to buy banks when the price is low, and selling when high or taken over, that is my only relation with them.

I did, many years ago, lose a (then) significant amount of money in a scam and an amateurish mob got up like sicag and generally stuffed about and the head crook did a few months in gaol and to my knowledge lived in luxury thereafter. His family continued to sell other dubious products, thus continuing his lifework. A pittance was returned to investors.

The only other point I would make is that S and G now feel some in sicag are too close to Manny, as I have all along, and I and they feel this is wrong.

http://www.investordaily.com.au/archive/9260.xml


On a lighter note I have had communication from Solly that he was enlightened by my reference to the sexual proclivities of the young ladies of Stockholm, so if you haven't been rooted by Storm, it may be a an idea to visit there anyway.

So I will call a halt to this dialogue of the deaf. Solly is forced to go deaf when away from his Lady Pen, so you may see him trying to cure his problem in Stockholm as well.

gg

 

[Solly]

specialed, we seem to be two persons on either side of a boat shouting out in to the wind and not hearing each other, let alone listening. On reflection I am as guilty as you.

You feel I am not answering your questions, and I likewise about you.

I am glad you were not stung my Manny and that you see the Storm model for what it was.

Likewise I can assure you that apart from attempting to buy banks when the price is low, and selling when high or taken over, that is my only relation with them.

I did, many years ago, lose a (then) significant amount of money in a scam and an amateurish mob got up like sicag and generally stuffed about and the head crook did a few months in gaol and to my knowledge lived in luxury thereafter. His family continued to sell other dubious products, thus continuing his lifework. A pittance was returned to investors.

The only other point I would make is that S and G now feel some in sicag are too close to Manny, as I have all along, and I and they feel this is wrong.

http://www.investordaily.com.au/archive/9260.xml


On a lighter note I have had communication from Solly that he was enlightened by my reference to the sexual proclivities of the young ladies of Stockholm, so if you haven't been rooted by Storm, it may be a an idea to visit there anyway.

So I will call a halt to this dialogue of the deaf. Solly is forced to go deaf when away from his Lady Pen, so you may see him trying to cure his problem in Stockholm as well.

gg

gg, I thought those pics of my evening at the Pelikan Beer Hall in Södermalm had all been deleted from Facebook, I'll have to poke Zuckerberg again. But an evening of husmanskost and schnapps can sometimes tend to blur one's judgement.

 

[Solly]

Hi Everyone,
I have been taking a back seat for the past few months.....well... letting my emotions have a holiday anyway. But I just had to join the land of the living again when I learnt today that Bank of Queensland/ CEO David Liddy/ Two Townsville branches (Kirwan and North Ward) will be taken to task over their relationship/ involvement with Storm Financial this Sunday night on 60 Minutes. Apparently it is a very revealing, very informative piece of investigative journalism. Uhmmm....

Reckless
Reporter: Ellen Fanning
Producers: Jonathan Harley

It's amazing they got away with it for so long. Bankers bending the rules, ignoring the risks and making a motza in the process.

Here in Australia we like to think we avoided the worst of the Global Financial Crisis.

But we had our share of rogues in this country too and the misery they've inflicted on hundreds of Aussie battlers is as cruel as anything perpetrated by Wall Street.

It all started when the Bank of Queensland got into bed with a reckless outfit called Storm Financial.

It was a time of easy money, dodgy loans and monumental greed. And presiding over it all was a fast-talking CEO who won't admit his bank was wrong.​

Read the transcript here;
"BOQ docs show problems with Storm loans"

http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/1064746/boq-docs-show-problems-with-storm-loans

 

[Julia]

Any comments about the "60 Minutes" programme?

 

[shibby]

Any comments about the "60 Minutes" programme?

What are your comments Julia?

 

[Smiley]

I have seen numerous BoQ loan docs re storm and most clients shocked at data included - inaccuracy of it that is and not what they had told storm or BQ - some met with managers - so very suspect tht they did not record what they were told by clients as to income, debts, etc.

 

[DocK]

I noticed that Liddy stated that borrowers were being dealt with on an individual basis, and not as a group - can anyone confirm whether any BOQ borrowers have received any offer of compensation?

I do hope that last night's programme adds to the pressure to compensate anyone who has been unfairly dealt with by BOQ.

 

[bunyip]

I noticed that Liddy stated that borrowers were being dealt with on an individual basis, and not as a group - can anyone confirm whether any BOQ borrowers have received any offer of compensation?

I do hope that last night's programme adds to the pressure to compensate anyone who has been unfairly dealt with by BOQ.

Me too, but only if the compensation is paid by the bank, not by the Australian taxpayers. And only if the people being compensated have enough integrity and reality about them to realise and admit that since they themselves, not just the banks, bear some responsibility for their situation, the compensation cannot and should not be 100% of what they lost.

 

[zzz]

Re: BOQ.....Where fraudulent activity is proven and it will be, with physical evidence, loans should be rendered null and void. The offending bank staff should be removed/ and or prosecuted and David Liddy should be forced to step aside. It may be deemed to be the customers responsibility, however, when an employee joins the bank in a lending capacity, they are trained to process material within the parameters of the Trade Practices Act, the Banking Code of Practice and the Bank's individual policy and procedure. They will have been taught the correct and honest way, when to approve and when to reject certain loans based on information provided and are made aware of the penalties in approving incorrect material. Thus, at the end of the day the originator of the contract (being the bank) must take responsibility for rectifying fraudulent loans in order to salvage any scrap of professionalism remaining.

 

[Smiley]

BoQ is offering to freeze repayment on loans but interest is still accruing - so after 2 years there will be even a bigger amount to repay.
In the audit mentioned on TV, 60% of the loans were described as "should not have been granted".
They have revealed only the tip of the iceberg in regards to this branch and its managers practices - let's just say creative loan applications submitted to central office and not with data clients signed off on - yes changed by managers and not even by storm in some cases.
Quite a few of the stormified - like the people mentioned on the program, have sold their homes or refinanced.
The local BQ manager told someone in my family - in Dec 2008 - you will have to pay out that loan immediately if you were with storm. Very short on compassion that statement and all we have heard from BoQ. . . .
They were indeed in bed with storm and should be held to account - a
My post is an explanation and a long way of saying - they are not offering compensation at all or to cancel loans . . .
banghead:

 

[shibby]

Re: BOQ.....Where fraudulent activity is proven and it will be, with physical evidence, loans should be rendered null and void. The offending bank staff should be removed/ and or prosecuted and David Liddy should be forced to step aside. It may be deemed to be the customers responsibility, however, when an employee joins the bank in a lending capacity, they are trained to process material within the parameters of the Trade Practices Act, the Banking Code of Practice and the Bank's individual policy and procedure. They will have been taught the correct and honest way, when to approve and when to reject certain loans based on information provided and are made aware of the penalties in approving incorrect material. Thus, at the end of the day the originator of the contract (being the bank) must take responsibility for rectifying fraudulent loans in order to salvage any scrap of professionalism remaining.

I would like to remind people that there other banks as well not just CBA and BofQ. This is not my terminology but I have been told by two sources that there was a cell operating in the ANZ Bank Nambour who were churning out inappropriate bank loans.

 

[Julia]

What are your comments Julia?

To be honest, I didn't really feel much enlightened by the program which was typical "60 Minutes" stuff, including Ms Fanning chasing Mr Liddy into lifts, around car parks etc in real tabloid journalism style.

Unless I'm being obtuse, there was an implication, rather than proof, that it was BOQ who had misrepresented figures on the loan applications, not Storm.
Maybe it was definitely BOQ, but I was disappointed at how absolutely Cassimatis was left out when it came to doling out responsibility for the clients' failed positions.
Also, there was not a mention of any responsibility to be attributed to the clients in borrowing amounts they could not hope to service. Imo both these factors make the program unbalanced.

Does the fact that BOQ branches are individually owned make any difference in the Head Office's reluctance to take responsibility for at least some of what went wrong? What has happened to the Branch Managers concerned?
Are they still in their jobs? If so, then that's clearly poor judgement on the part of BOQ management.

What would be interesting (but will never happen) would be a panel discussion, chaired by e.g. Kerry O'Brien with Manny and the variously implicated bank personnel.

The lady featured in the program was a great choice - hard working typical Australian who didn't question the financial 'advice' given by Manny.