Storm Financial Group

[Solly]

I've had a few questions via twitter re the submissions so I feel it is appropriate to post this here as well.

The performance of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/ASIC

Submissions received by the Committee

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/ASIC/Submissions

Search via Organisation/Individual for submission goodness. Look out for the names of familiar Storm participants in this saga. Be amazed.

S

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

It would appear that nothing has changed or will, in relation to innocent gullible marks, being taken by dodgy Financial Advisers.

The Financial Advice industry has regrouped since Storm.

They now charge fees, and ASIC is a toothless tiger.

It has been reported that I once many years ago allegedly threw an AMP Insurance Jockey in to a creek near Ingham (G'day Ron) to expedite a claim he wa lagging on for me, allegedly saving him from a prehistoric meeting, when I had garnered his signature.

In this day and age, this is no longer possible.

Nonetheless, Financial Advisers here in Townsville again have large carparks and shiny reception areas, sucking retirees in with vague promises, gilded in disclaimers and lawyertalk.

Mugs are mugs, and Financial Advisers are there to scrape em up.

As did Storm Financial.

gg

 

[bunyip]

FOR THE PURPOSE OF LEVERAGING INTO EQUITIES, Storm’s approach to financial planning was conservative and any impression formed otherwise can only have been done by avoiding the case facts.

I extracted the above from EC’s submission.
It’s incredible to see him still claiming that ‘Storm’s approach to financial planning was conservative’.

Since when is it a conservative investment approach for people around retirement age to mortgage their homes to raise investment loans, then combine this borrowed money with their own savings and super etc, and shove the lot into the always risky stockmarket.
Then load up the borrowings even more through the use of double gearing, and by taking out additional loans against increasing asset values, and pile this money into the stockmarket as well??
How on earth can this possibly be conservative??!!

 

[Judd]

bunyip, sometimes things just is. We can wonder How on earth....? but it will not alter anything.

I'd have to agree with GG's implied position in that you can have as many rules and regulations you want but sooner or later, someone is going to get taken to the cleaners. It is a given in my opinion and all we can do is watch in awe followed by a few well chosen plus exclaiming :holysheep:.

Cheers

 

[Solly]

"Storm CEO alleges ASIC-CBA cover-up"

The former chief executive of Storm Financial has accused the corporate regulator and Commonwealth Bank of teaming up to perpetuate a “blame Storm message”.

Source: http://www.ifa.com.au/news/12648-storm-ceo-alleges-asic-cba-cover-up

 

[bunyip]

bunyip, sometimes things just is. We can wonder How on earth....? but it will not alter anything.

I'd have to agree with GG's implied position in that you can have as many rules and regulations you want but sooner or later, someone is going to get taken to the cleaners. It is a given in my opinion and all we can do is watch in awe followed by a few well chosen plus exclaiming :holysheep:.

Cheers

Dead right, and that’s one of the issues that produced spirited debate on this forum over the last year or two. One view put forward vigorously by a particular person was that rules and regulations need to be changed ‘so this can’t happen again’.
But the fact is that it can and will happen again no matter how much new or altered legislation is put in place to stop it.
You simply can’t legislate to stop people from borrowing money for investment, and you can’t legislate to stop them investing that money in a risky venture. A percentage of risky ventures invariably come undone sooner or later.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

bunyip, sometimes things just is. We can wonder How on earth....? but it will not alter anything.

I'd have to agree with GG's implied position in that you can have as many rules and regulations you want but sooner or later, someone is going to get taken to the cleaners. It is a given in my opinion and all we can do is watch in awe followed by a few well chosen plus exclaiming :holysheep:.

Cheers

Dead right, and that’s one of the issues that produced spirited debate on this forum over the last year or two. One view put forward vigorously by a particular person was that rules and regulations need to be changed ‘so this can’t happen again’.
But the fact is that it can and will happen again no matter how much new or altered legislation is put in place to stop it.
You simply can’t legislate to stop people from borrowing money for investment, and you can’t legislate to stop them investing that money in a risky venture. A percentage of risky ventures invariably come undone sooner or later.

Agree Judd and Bunyip.

I do feel sorry for people who believe the system is out to protect them via ASIC, an old boys club, so inefficient as being close to redundancy.

Unfortunately these same people tend to be taken in by Financial Planning spivs, with Gold plated dunnies, duty free aftershave, fresh faced receptionists and obscene meditarranean furniture.

A dose of Oxygen during seminars never goes astray.

After the bust, the Financial Adviser has usually squirreled enough moula away via family and cash, to live a reasonable life.

It is unfair, and why some seem willing to respond with direct action to seek redress. The system however then rolls over, and the mark's money is further diluted by lawyers, public servants and more financial advisers.

I have never used financial advisers, except when I need to use a toilet in a major city, and/or replace a fitting in my gold plated dunny.

gg

 

[bunyip]

Agree Judd and Bunyip.

I do feel sorry for people who believe the system is out to protect them via ASIC, an old boys club, so inefficient as being close to redundancy.

Unfortunately these same people tend to be taken in by Financial Planning spivs, with Gold plated dunnies, duty free aftershave, fresh faced receptionists and obscene meditarranean furniture.

A dose of Oxygen during seminars never goes astray.

After the bust, the Financial Adviser has usually squirreled enough moula away via family and cash, to live a reasonable life.

It is unfair, and why some seem willing to respond with direct action to seek redress. The system however then rolls over, and the mark's money is further diluted by lawyers, public servants and more financial advisers.

I have never used financial advisers, except when I need to use a toilet in a major city, and/or replace a fitting in my gold plated dunny.

gg

If EC cranks up again as a financial planner/adviser under a different name (and I believe it’s quite on the cards that he will sooner or later after a brief ASIC-imposed period in the sin bin) I won't be at all suprised if there's a small hard core of his former Storm clients who will sign on with him again.

 

[Solly]

If EC cranks up again as a financial planner/adviser under a different name (and I believe it’s quite on the cards that he will sooner or later after a brief ASIC-imposed period in the sin bin) I won't be at all suprised if there's a small hard core of his former Storm clients who will sign on with him again.

bunyip

As at this point in time, 5 years post collapse, EC hasn't be found guilty of any crime or even a misdemeanor, it could even be viewed that EC is also a victim of the system that brought the whole house crashing down.

Remember, even revolutionary figures like Che Guevara were ridiculed at some point in time.

S

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

bunyip

As at this point in time, 5 years post collapse, EC hasn't be found guilty of any crime or even a misdemeanor, it could even be viewed that EC is also a victim of the system that brought the whole house crashing down.

Remember, even revolutionary figures like Che Guevara were ridiculed at some point in time.

S

Manny is certainly innocent of any crimes thus far, and should be afforded the presumption of innocence.

I will be in what is left of Lennons for NY Eve and will sachay up Burnett La. to drop a bitcoin in to his collection box.

Poor misunderstood bastard.

I am driven to sing.

"Che sera, sera, whatever shall be shall be, the future's not ours to see, Che sera sera."

gg

 

[Solly]

Manny is certainly innocent of any crimes thus far, and should be afforded the presumption of innocence.

I will be in what is left of Lennons for NY Eve and will sachay up Burnett La. to drop a bitcoin in to his collection box.

Poor misunderstood bastard.

I am driven to sing.

"Che sera, sera, whatever shall be shall be, the future's not ours to see, Che sera sera."

gg

GG

It's been some time since I've ventured north of latitude 23 ° 26' 14.908" on the mainland. It concerns me that you report of the reemergence of large carparks and shiny reception areas. Red flags should immediately be raised if at these said premises it is found that the dunnies are adorned with gold plated taps, imported spring water bum washers and if there is a wafting smell of espresso and oxygen enhanced freshly baked muffins propagating though the joints.

Yes, I cannot believe it has been 5 years, it only seems like yesterday that my Stormer mate was telling me that there's nothing to worry about when I raised concerns in Nov 08. I remember him telling me "Emmanuel knows what he's doing. He owns heaps of places. He owns a jet. They've got degrees. The Comm Bank backs things". This response did sensitise my inquisitive and scrutinising nature. IRL I have come face to face with many scoundrels, many I was happy to see dragged away in manacles and given time to reflect on their antisocial behaviours as a guest of Her Majesty. Given the luxury of time, looking back at events, to me, the list of scoundrels is rather extensive.

This saga still has legs and I believe there is much more to observe. Wheels often turn slowly, pockets need to be deep when seeking the desired outcome. I wish those still seeking a remedy, enduring resilience and persistence.


Yes Lennon's is getting quite a work-over. I often observe the progress while walking down The Lane to have a morning caffè latte and pretzel at the German Sausage Hut. It appears Lennon's new owners are attempting to restore the classic landmark to its former imperial glory. I informally know one of the foreman working on the site, I should ask if the refurbishment does include a mahogany & chesterfield kitted cigar lounge. I'm sure that would impress you.


Yes I agree with the Doris Day sentiments. As I reside in the South East and spend much my time between Pacific Motorway M1 - Exit 54 and George St, for some strange reason I have been playing this Doris Day classic on high rotation on Black Beauty's mp3 player, often while evading Coomera Traffic Branch ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fz8PpSHvBfQ


It's probably because of my close proximity, to legislators, regulators, legal practitioners, prosecutors, enforcers, politicians and those with a shady past

S

 

[Solly]

Former Storm Financial boss blames failure on ASIC manipulation

Former Storm Financial head Emmanuel Cassimatis has alleged the failure of the group was brought about by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) manipulating evidence to achieve a predetermined outcome.

Source: http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/n...r-storm-financial-boss-blames-failure-on-asic

Some interesting reader comments after the article.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Source: http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/n...r-storm-financial-boss-blames-failure-on-asic

Some interesting reader comments after the article.

And the quotes are :

Gerry Lenihan
• 9 hours ago

Oh sure Emmanuel, it was all the fault of ASIC. I totally disagree. As a CFP I helped several poor (in more ways than one) Storm clients when you collapsed. The advice given to them was pathetic. Designed purely to generate maximum income for the adviser. Just because a client signs the SOA and documents, doesn't mean they understand the advice they are getting.
At least be a man and take responsibility for your actions. Your company has heaped misery on both your clients and the industry.

13
•
Reply
•
Share Ӽ

Avatar
Chris
• 8 hours ago

The failure of Storm was due to the Dealer Group's greed and greed alone. Putting clients assets,including pensioners, at massive risk by leveraging many times their investments at what they must have known was the top or close to the top of the market was reckless in the extreme. This has dragged our profession through the mud.and no penalty imposed by ASIC was too extreme.

6
•
Reply
•
Share Ӽ

Avatar
Concerned
• 8 hours ago

I can't believe that you are still playing the hard done by card Emmanuel. Regardless of the Margin Calls and what was or more likely was not done at Margin Call time, the clients should never have been in that position in the first place. One size does not fill all and the advice provided by your company was terrible. Not really sure how you can sleep at night!

5
•
Reply
•
Share Ӽ

Avatar
Jim
• 7 hours ago

Be careful Emmanuel, he who lives in massive glass house should not throw stones. To have ripped money out of clients Superannuation only so you had more money to leverage up on is disgraceful. One of the reasons ASIC has been so snowed under is because of the strain your group put on the financial planning system. One of the clients that we helped out in December of 2008 died from the stress you put her under!

6
•
Reply
•
Share Ӽ

Avatar
Ian Byrne
• 7 hours ago

I agree Gerry. As a fellow CFP I tried to assist over 30 groups of Storm victims who were mostly left devastated. Initially my attitude was that the clients were also partly to blame for greed, but I quickly realised that this dealergroup and advice was basically just short of criminal and employed sales techniques that left the average client clueless but keen due to their false 'assurances'. Numerous clients over age 60 that I saw were advised to withdraw all their super and then double gear along with the home value that had previously been paid off. The worst day of my professional career was when I sat with one couple who despite being on Centrelink disability pension had been advised to do just that, and inform them that there was no way they would be able to pay the upcoming interest repayment of $80k, and to prepare themselves for the bank to repossess their family home. So sure Mannie, be delusional and tell yourself that it was ASIC and not your flawed egomaniac 'strategies' that caused all this financial and mental anguish.

gg

 

[Solly]

And the quotes are :



gg

GG

That article states that Manny is alleging that ASIC manipulated evidence. This is a very serious matter. I wonder if the Senate will refer the matter to be investigated by the Federal authorities to see if any impropriety or criminal activities can be found?

I wonder why he has not previously made a complaint to the Federal Police so that these matters can be investigated? Maybe he has?

Whenever I have any suspicion of a Commonwealth crime, I find this website beneficial.

http://www.afp.gov.au/contact/report-a-crime.aspx


S

 

[bunyip]

Source: http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/n...r-storm-financial-boss-blames-failure-on-asic

Some interesting reader comments after the article.

I can imagine the disgust that Storm investors must feel when they see Cassamatis still blaming others while refusing to admit any failure on his part.

 

[bunyip]

I am also a storm financial client & agree with above comments.
You all must be idiots to believe in your advisers, media etc etc.
If i had a shop that sold milk, why would i send my customers down the road to buy milk off someone else. So the only person to promote storm would be clients & themselves dont you think.
Storm Clients Pay for their own holidays which is another quoted error.
You people are so ill informed that i will not be taking any of your stock pick advice seriously as i now know you believe in unfounded gossip, & chineese whispers that grow & GROW until this sort of **** is written.
Oh yes & only Townsville clients are going through the **** not everyone else. Oh that was another untrue statement by this forum that its soon to be more (redcliff) it was only people with Colonial loan(Commonwealth) which are in Townsville.
But you all kow so much. Infact every statement on here is wrong a lie or miss informed.
I just cant believe how you get on these forums & know so little but sprout you know all the facts.
Be carefull people on this forum getting advice from these blokes that know everything about nothing.

I am a very happy Storm client & would like to say thank you to Storm for being up front and honest with everyone (clients only) We are all having a hard time with the sub prime & i also hope that this year bring all of us at Storm a great year.

I wonder if this person is still 'a very happy Storm client who would like to say thank you to Storm for being so upfront and honest with everyone'.

 

[mrfmad]

I wonder if this person is still 'a very happy Storm client who would like to say thank you to Storm for being so upfront and honest with everyone'.

Still taking everything out of context I see Bunyip. Still have incorrect facts. The fact is that I support that very wrong doings were going on & that you & I would never know true facts about. (perhaps not ALL to do with storm) You still keep arguing on here your point. So valuable is your information YOU SHOULD BE AN ADVISER!

Yes I thanked Storm for being up front & honest with us & telling us that the carpet was ripped from under them & all information & access was ceased to clients because ASIC put a legal hold on all. I have an understanding of the laws they were GAGGED under. But you would know that Bunyip as you know exactly what happened.
They were up front & honest with me. So don't split hairs in something that I cannot write a novel here to explain. Of course I was not happy with what had happened back then to all investors. I just was not going to rub salt into the wounds like you were.

That same governing body ASIC APPROVED this financial institute in fact it was highly recommended financial Planning company by financial planners, the banks, & all with university degrees. Yes of course Bunyip you know that's not true & will come back at we are idiots, greedy, etc We have heard all your facts before. Have you ever heard of compassion? I was trying to show my support for the investors that know they are not greedy & just simply seeking professional advise.

My comment of milk purchase etc is in reference to all having different advice & accountability & that Holden is not going to recommend Ford etc.

If I hire an qualified electrician who is licensed by a Governing body & trade certified at my house & he/she electrocutes someone, or the house burns down. He/she is held accountable for it. I do not go & get another electrician to make sure he did his job properly before I turn the power on. Do I Bunyip? But I'm sure you will have a negative reply comment. There are governing bodies that assure me the electrician is qualified. Just like with Storm. But hey that would be your fault hey Bunyip.

I have been investing for years & with an adviser. My portfolio was now to large for me to look after. So I handed the reins over to a ASIC approved professional Financial service. Like other clients did.
We are all put in the same basket by the forum. Some of us are not retired, & not on a pension, & did not invest our super, or unable to pay our margins etc.

Storm factored margins into the model. Most of us had $50 - $100,000 in offset accounts to account for this crisis. You put all clients in the one group. Miss informed Bunyip. I think so.

The banks were to call margins its on the documents that the BANKS will make the call. They didn't call anyone. They just sold down. How would you like it if someone took your house when you have not missed a payment? Oh that's right Investing in a home is ok? But not shares. The banks also increased our LVR to ensure we lost more money without permission or knowledge to any clients.

I cant believe you would take my quotes out of context that I am happy with the advice. Storm investors had already lost everything & people like you Bunyip have no compassion at all. You just keep arguing & dissing all STORM CLIENTS. You have been very ill informed & I feel for you.

Lets clear the air some more. They paid for our holidays Oh that was another false one hey Bunyip. Storm clients could if they wanted to PAY FOR THEIR OWN holiday & yes the toilets were gold. If you think for a minute that a ****ter would make me invest you are clearly mistaken.

These comments above are to imply to all other forum members that any idiot could see it was a scam etc & how we must be fooled by a gold toilet. Just like your comment here Bunyip is only to antagonize. If it was not why would you be bringing it up after 4 years?

I have no doubt I will get another back lashing or more rubbish from you to promote Debate rather than a discussion on this forum wont I Bunyip? In fact many forum members are tired of your JERK attitude.
Let it go Bunyip it was 4 years ago. Find a new hobby rather than bullying!

The fact that you don't want to have open minded discussions on a forum & know everything tells me you have a hidden agenda? I can't see any good come from what you are doing on here & it couldn't be for any other reason apart from....You only post comments to antagonize storm investors to cause forum fights. Well this speaks volumes of the type of person you are Bunyip.

Oh yeah & the courts. Not Bunyip but the Courts also agree with the wrong doing by the banks to the storm investors. Could it be sour grapes Bunyip? Could you be wrong? For just once?

See courts look at the facts Bunyip & the fact is WRONG DOINGS by banks...I rest my case!!!!

VOTE! 1 BUNYIP He thinks he's the SMARTEST FINANCIAL ADVISER AROUND!

 

[bunyip]

Yes I thanked Storm for being up front & honest with us & telling us that the carpet was ripped from under them & all information & access was ceased to clients because ASIC put a legal hold on all.

And while you were in such an appreciative mood, did you also thank Storm for dudding you? Because dudding you is what they did.
You should direct some of your anger towards Storm.
But anyway, I’m sure Storm were pleased to hear some appreciative comments from ‘a very happy Storm client’ at a time when they were copping heavy criticism from disgruntled clients who felt that Storm had failed them.

 

[bunyip]

The quote tags won't work for me today, so I'll put my comments in bold below each of your points that I wish to address.

I'll start off by saying stating that everything we say on this forum is on public record and can easily be checked. If you’d taken the trouble to check what I’ve said on here, you could have avoided making yourself look silly by attacking me over comments that I didn’t make and views that I don’t hold.

Yes I thanked Storm for being up front & honest with us & telling us that the carpet was ripped from under them & all information & access was ceased to clients because ASIC put a legal hold on all. I have an understanding of the laws they were GAGGED under.

Far from being ‘upfront and honest’, Storm kept their clients in the dark through more than 12 months of bear market by neglecting to advise them of their true positions, assuring them that everything was under control and there was nothing to worry about, telling them they couldn’t lose their homes, and downplaying the risks by putting some of them into further investments even as the market collapsed.
Finally when they could no longer hide the true state of their clients accounts, Storm was given a convenient excuse for keeping clients clients in the dark by informing them that they could say nothing because ASIC had gagged them.
You, in your eagerness to continue to seeing Storm in a good light, came out publicly praised Storm for being upfront and honest, and declared that you were a very happy Storm client. Both statements were absurd and must have caused many people to shake their heads in disbelief when you made them.


That same governing body ASIC APPROVED this financial institute in fact it was highly recommended financial Planning company by financial planners, the banks, & all with university degrees.
For years before the Storm debacle, the papers publicized a long track record of failure and incompetence by ASIC. For the life of me I can’t see why anyone would place their faith in such an organisation.

Yes of course Bunyip you know that's not true & will come back at we are idiots, greedy, etc
I've never said that all Storm clients were greedy idiots.

If I hire an qualified electrician who is licensed by a Governing body & trade certified at my house & he/she electrocutes someone, or the house burns down. He/she is held accountable for it. I do not go & get another electrician to make sure he did his job properly before I turn the power on. Do I Bunyip? But I'm sure you will have a negative reply comment. There are governing bodies that assure me the electrician is qualified. Just like with Storm. But hey that would be your fault hey Bunyip.

I agree – people who have professional qualifications should be held accountable if work they do for you causes you physical or financial harm.
Storm, a qualified financial planning firm, gave advice that was completely inappropriate to many of their clients, resulting in considerable financial loss to those clients. So you should hold Storm accountable, rather than singing their praises by saying how upfront and honest they’ve been, and how you’re ‘a very happy Storm client’.

Talking of professionals, here's something for your to consider....

If an electrician wants to rewire my entire house so he can install a ceiling fan in the lounge room, should I take his advice because of his professional qualifications? Or should I think for myself by evaluating his advice before I tell him to go ahead?

If a dentist wants to crown every tooth in my mouth because I’ve chipped a tooth, should I tell him to go ahead because he’s a professional whose advice should be reliable? Or do I do a bit of thinking to evaluate his advice before I make a decision?

If a doctor tells me nothing can be done about the abnormal growth on my eye that’s causing me considerable discomfort, do I accept his advice because he has a medical degree and should know what he’s talking about? Or do I decide that in this day of medications and surgical procedures, surely I don’t have to put up with an eye that’s burning and watering and giving me hell. (This scenario actually happened to me when I was in my mid twenties. I got a second opinion from another doctor who referred me to an eye specialist, and the growth was removed in a simple surgical procedure a few weeks later. Problem solved.)

The point I’m making here is that regardless of someone’s professional qualifications, it’s prudent to evaluate their advice before deciding whether to act upon it. This is particularly important if the advice involves investing all your money in an investment vehicle with a long track record of extreme volatility and spectacular crashes, mortgaging your house to raise big loans to increase your investment, then double gearing on top of that to secure further loans to sink into the investment. Then taking step after step to increase the borrowing even further as asset values rise.
I don’t care what safety measures Storm told you would be put in place to protect your investment. Anyone highly geared into the stockmarekt via margin loans is going to suffer heavy losses in the event of a severe market fall, even if margin calls are made on time.
The only way you can know this is by evaluating/researching the situation yourself before committing to the investment. The crowd who are trying to sell you the investment proposition are hardly going to warn you off by telling you about the pitfalls, particularly when they’ll cream 7% of every dollar you invest if they can sign you up. I’ve never yet known a salesman who told me the worst features of the product he was trying to sell me.
It shouldn't be like that - in a perfect world everyone would be reliable and honest and competent. But far from living in a perfect world, we live in a dog eat dog world where unfortunately it's a case of 'buyer beware, lest you get done over by some crook who puts his interests in front of your's.


The banks were to call margins its on the documents that the BANKS will make the call. They didn't call anyone. They just sold down.
I've seen margin loan aggreements that clearly stated that it was the client's responsibility to monitor his account and ensure it didn't go into margin call.
IF your margin loan aggreement said it was the banks responsibility to advise you of margin calls, then I'm sure you lawyers would have presented this information in court.
How would you like it if someone took your house when you have not missed a payment? Oh that's right Investing in a home is ok? But not shares.
I've never said real estate investmetn is OK but share investment is not. Sensible share investmet is fine - I did it for years. But there's nothing sensible about Storm's high risk model of risking your home to borrow heavily and then borrow again on top of that, and punt the whole lot on a gamble that the market would keep on rising. That's just plain reckless. It wasn't hard to see the risks if you looked into it briefly, or even if you just thought back to the 1987 crash 20 or so year earlier.
The banks also increased our LVR to ensure we lost more money without permission or knowledge to any clients.
Again, if this information is correct then it will have been presented in court by your lawyers, and will have been taken into account in the final decision.

I cant believe you would take my quotes out of context that I am happy with the advice.
I took nothing out of context. You didn't qualify your statements by explaining why you were 'a very happy Storm client' at a time when just about every other Storm investor felt that Storm had failed them badly.
Nor did you explain why you thought Storm were upfront and honest.

Lets clear the air some more. They paid for our holidays Oh that was another false one hey Bunyip. Storm clients could if they wanted to PAY FOR THEIR OWN holiday & yes the toilets were gold. If you think for a minute that a ****ter would make me invest you are clearly mistaken.

These comments above are to imply to all other forum members that any idiot could see it was a scam etc & how we must be fooled by a gold toilet.

Ah yes, I remember reading those comments about gold toilets, although I think it was gold plated taps in the toilets, rather than gold toilets. I can see why such comments would anger an emotional woman like you. I suggest you direct your anger towards the person/s who made those comments.
As for the holidays, I’ve never mentioned anything about them either.

Oh yeah & the courts. Not Bunyip but the Courts also agree with the wrong doing by the banks to the storm investors. Could it be sour grapes Bunyip? Could you be wrong? For just once?

See courts look at the facts Bunyip & the fact is WRONG DOINGS by banks...I rest my case!!!!

Why people like you keep implying that I think the banks are blameless is beyond me. The view that I’ve expressed on here many times is that if a court of law finds the banks guilty of any illegal activity, then they should be penalized accordingly.
The banks may not be without fault, but nor are they the primary reason for your losses. The primary reason that Storm investors lost so heavily is that they allowed Storm to talk them into a highly risky geared investment strategy that made good money while the market was bullish, but caused horrific losses when the market collapsed.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

If EC cranks up again as a financial planner/adviser under a different name (and I believe it’s quite on the cards that he will sooner or later after a brief ASIC-imposed period in the sin bin) I won't be at all suprised if there's a small hard core of his former Storm clients who will sign on with him again.

bunyip

As at this point in time, 5 years post collapse, EC hasn't be found guilty of any crime or even a misdemeanor, it could even be viewed that EC is also a victim of the system that brought the whole house crashing down.

Remember, even revolutionary figures like Che Guevara were ridiculed at some point in time.

S

bunyip and Solly and mrfmad, all make excellent points in isolation.

I tend towards bunyip's analysis in the end.

As my late departed mate Joh Bjelke-Petersen used say to me.

"Garpal, if it walks like a chook, sounds like a chook and looks like a chook, it is a chook"

Storm Financial on the majority opinion, opinion I respect, was an obscenity, sucking in unsophisticated investors in to highly geared speculation on one index.

Whether the Banks, ASIC or other entity should have protected investors is moot.

It was a crook show from one end of the Golden Dunny on Sturt St. to the Ross Creek where investors money ended.

Storm Investors in the Bull Run were pulling friends and family in to the madness.

There is no single cause for the loss of Investor assets.

The Courts will decide, and they don't decide very well in matters such as this in my opinion.

gg