Storm Financial Group

[Garpal Gumnut]

Sometimes no matter how sorry you feel for folk, you realise that some people are going to make the same old mistakes again and again and again.

On the http://sicag.info/ site, the SF Action Group are advising people to seek advice from a member of, wait for it, The Financial Planning Association.

And these are the guys supposed to be helping the poor filched Storm investors.

Jesus wept.

gg

 

[asproboy]

What's happening at cassimatis.com.au ?

It's been 6 days since we've had a "Latest News" update from Wilkinson Media and I noticed that there hasn't been a recent update to the "Recent Questions". Have people run out of questions?

Is it too wicked an idea to suggest we set up askmanny.com.au and have people post their questions to Mr Cassimatis and they are presented with full transparency?

 

[bunyip]

Is it too wicked an idea to suggest we set up askmanny.com.au and have people post their questions to Mr Cassimatis and they are presented with full transparency?

I like that idea. If nothing else, it would make for some interesting reading.
But don't expect him to respond.....he runs and hides when people start asking him confronting questions.

 

[maccka]

Sometimes no matter how sorry you feel for folk, you realise that some people are going to make the same old mistakes again and again and again.

On the http://sicag.info/ site, the SF Action Group are advising people to seek advice from a member of, wait for it, The Financial Planning Association.

gg

GG - Who would YOU suggest they seek advice from?:

 

[Solly]

ABC reports that Damian Scattini says Storm clients have two things that will give them a positive outcome, the have right on their side and Slater and Gordon.....

ABC story is here;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/25/2500801.htm?section=business

What exactly does "positive outcome" really mean ???

 

[Mash]

It means when the banks do something wrong ....they can be made to pay for it!!!! :

 

[Julia]

It means when the banks do something wrong ....they can be made to pay for it!!!! :

So that we may better understand how this positive outcome is going to occur, Mash, could you outline exactly what the banks have done that will be shown to be illegal?

With thanks.

 

[Mash]

as usual you are unable to comprehend what is written... I didn't say illegal.... I said wrong..... but to give you insight into the allegations may prejudice the proceedings and claims....so you will just have to watch this space....let's just say the banks and other institutions are beginning to squirm.... it will take time... but like Damian says .. we have right on our side...

 

[Julia]

as usual you are unable to comprehend what is written..

I'm very sorry for my abject stupidity, Mash.

. I didn't say illegal.... I said wrong..... but to give you insight into the allegations may prejudice the proceedings and claims....so you will just have to watch this space....let's just say the banks and other institutions are beginning to squirm.... it will take time... but like Damian says .. we have right on our side...

I used the word 'illegal' advisedly.

The courts adjudicate on the law, not on moral considerations.

Re Mr Scattini being assured that 'right is on our side', that's undoubtedly correct as far as he is concerned in that the lawyers all round will be the winners, regardless of the outcome for Storm clients.

 

[vincent191]

I am not a lawyer and I don't know the difference between wrong and illegal. All I know is the bank has got the money and trying to get it back from them is harder than extracting teeth !!

 

[pilots]

Julia, The stupid ones are them who believe they can win any thing back from the banks. The lawyers are telling the wood ducks again, we will win this. LOL,LOL.

 

[Solly]

I'm very sorry for my abject stupidity, Mash.



I used the word 'illegal' advisedly.

The courts adjudicate on the law, not on moral considerations.

Re Mr Scattini being assured that 'right is on our side', that's undoubtedly correct as far as he is concerned in that the lawyers all round will be the winners, regardless of the outcome for Storm clients.

If Mr Scattini is so confident about getting a remedy that will result in his clients getting something positive, I would hope that the something positive is going to be monetary amounts at least in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for each client.

I am very interested to see where the banks have been negligent to allow this action to be successful against them. If there is a ruling against them then maybe the Cassimatis' may be entitled to compensation as well.

I had right on my side too once, when wealth was taken from me many years ago....Unfortunately in my case I had to write it off as a bad debt and a hard life learning experience. Every case is different but I am very interested to see what the 'silver bullet' is that the legal team has in this stoush.

 

[basilio]

Silver bullets to get money back for Storm investors? Just can't see the banks or courts wearing this one.

Certainly there will be moral issues, but I just can't remember the last time the public won on a "moral" issue with the banks. I suspect the only justice obtainable will be natural justice rather than legal ones....

 

[Steve Borden]

Silver bullets to get money back for Storm investors? Just can't see the banks or courts wearing this one.

Certainly there will be moral issues, but I just can't remember the last time the public won on a "moral" issue with the banks. I suspect the only justice obtainable will be natural justice rather than legal ones....

It may not be a silver bullet but the provision of a home loan to someone who could only afford the loan based on storm's projections or even a complete falsehood is the Bank's weak point.

The number of people who have obtained a loan when they shouldn't have is astounding, the relevant Ombudsman can't keep up with the complaints.

If you tried to get a loan from the Bank based on made up information it could be considered fraud, what is it called when the Bank makes up the information?

 

[basilio]

If you tried to get a loan from the Bank based on made up information it could be considered fraud, what is it called when the Bank makes up the information?

Clever business.... worth lots of bonuses...

Steve I would be delighted to see the loans set aside and all monies restored to the Storm retirees. But then where would you stop?

I would suggest that in the current financial crisis many tens of thousands of borrowers - housing, personal loan, retail shop loans, would have supplied dodgy information. The various finance brokers and loan salesmen are extremely adept at massaging figures and pushing through loans. In America it became an art form.

This was the root of whole current problem - widely and totally unacceptable loan standards applied to millions of situations. In the end because of the rapidly increasing price of houses it meant that unless you fudged the figures you couldn't get a loan. Storm is a high profile example in an associated field. And all the entities just turned a blind eye..

When the books are written about this unfolding financial disaster the storm issue will be in one of the teacups. (bad pun..)

 

[Trevor_S]

what is it called when the Bank makes up the information?

PROFIT if they make money out of it and LOSS if they don't.

Every P&L issued by a listed company has "made up" amounts on it. The ONLY number I "trust" is the dividend, the rest is ephemeral.

As to those putting your trust in a Lawyer, call me skeptical... remember Storm manged to charm you, don't let your lawyers do the same thing.... not saying don't use them but BE CAREFUL.

 

[bunyip]

It may not be a silver bullet but the provision of a home loan to someone who could only afford the loan based on storm's projections or even a complete falsehood is the Bank's weak point.

The number of people who have obtained a loan when they shouldn't have is astounding, the relevant Ombudsman can't keep up with the complaints.

If you tried to get a loan from the Bank based on made up information it could be considered fraud, what is it called when the Bank makes up the information?

If loan applications contained information that was made up, is the bank likely to be the culprit? Would it be in the best interests of a bank to extend a loan to someone who is clearly going to be hard pressed to service the loan? Surely banks are interested in long term lending relationships with their clients, rather than high risk loans that are likely doomed to failure right from the outset.
Sure the banks can foreclose and get some or perhaps most of their money back, but successful longer term lending relationships are surely more appealing to them.

 

[bunyip]

don't tar us all with the same brush.... I'd like to know who those people are who don't blame storm..maybe those that weren't double leveraged ... and therefore haven't lost everything....makes for a better read but doesn't it...and how quickly you picked up on that one point... der...that's why they put that kind of comment in these stories. i have spoken to hundreds who blame both storm and the banks equally. The banks still have our money and we'll fight to get it back !

Once the borrower signed on the dotted line, he or she then became responsible for that decision, no matter what the outcome, and irrespective of how lousy the advice may have been.

So I'm wondering if any personal responsibility is being shouldered by those hundreds of Storm clients you've spoken to, or are they convinced it was all the fault of Storm and the banks?

And have the banks really got 'your' money, or have they simply got the money they were legally entitled to get by selling your investments to recoup as much of their loans as possible, given that the market meltdown placed them in serious risk of mass loan defaults by Storm clients. Margin loans are, afterall, structured to provide a high degree of protection to the lender if clients default on their loans.

No, I'm not trying to sink the boot in or rub salt in your wounds.....I know how gut-wrenching it can be to lose a substantial amount of money. Some of the stories I've read on this thread from Storm victims are quite distressing.
But really, some sort of balance and reality needs to prevail among those Storm victims who are vigorously pursuing the blame game.

 

[basilio]

If loan applications contained information that was made up, is the bank likely to be the culprit? Would it be in the best interests of a bank to extend a loan to someone who is clearly going to be hard pressed to service the loan? Surely banks are interested in long term lending relationships with their clients, rather than high risk loans that are likely doomed to failure right from the outset.
Sure the banks can foreclose and get some or perhaps most of their money back, but successful longer term lending relationships are surely more appealing to them.

Bitter, bitter, bitter laughs from the gallery, I suggest you ask the thousands of older bank employees who understood and agreed with what you are saying - and watched the entire philosophy get trashed in the last 10 years.

Once upon a time home loans were made carefully to people who had to tell the truth on their applications and who the bank was going to see for the next 20 years. The new order of banking however ditched long term relationships for short term bonuses and the chickens have turned into emus which are going to bash their dunny doors down..

There is a real risk that the over lending by banks on unaffordable housing loans will result in widespread defalcations. At that stage the banks and, by definition, all of us are in trouble. That, by the way, is why I don't see teh law or the banks agreeing to return the loans.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Sometimes no matter how sorry you feel for folk, you realise that some people are going to make the same old mistakes again and again and again.

On the http://sicag.info/ site, the SF Action Group are advising people to seek advice from a member of, wait for it, The Financial Planning Association.

And these are the guys supposed to be helping the poor filched Storm investors.

Jesus wept.

gg

GG - Who would YOU suggest they seek advice from?:

That is a very good question and I'd just make a few points, a Royal Commission may do a better job at recommendations.

1. The present financial planning industry is led by inept ex MLC and AMP salespeople and needs to be abolished.

2. Kickbacks from funds to planners placing people into that investment need to be banned.

3. The Financial Planners Association have the same standing as the Motor Trades association and the League of Dodgy Car Sellers, a workforce paid to sell to, not to ensure success the success of the mugs buying. They need to be abolished.

4. The punters themselves should be given public education on money management, saving and super, from Primary school onwards. Those who make unwise decisions need to be left to drift lower, those who prosper and invest wisely need to be rewarded.

5. Industry and employers need to be encouraged to educate every worker as to investment and saving.

6. The middle men, the planners, the banks and the tipsters, the runnyfunnymoney spruikers need to be watched by an organisation with balls, to quickly pursue and charge errant advice givers and charlatans.

7. ASIC needs to be abolished and replaced with an overarching body with teeth to provide transparent and effective criminal sentences to wrongdoers.

In truth I cannot recommend anyone trustworthy for these poor bastards in Storm to see for advice. They are stuffed, but changes might prevent it happening again to others.

gg