- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,649
- Reactions
- 24,553
This is a big, BIG problem, red flag for sure. If I had an account with any super fund that thinks they can restrict my cash withdrawals (above and beyond government restrictions) during my retirement then I would flick them in a minutes flash. This is so wrong on all levels. Sending the WRONG message in my opinion. This reset will test them all.Maybe a tip of the iceberg moment unfolding?
"The trustee may suspend or restrict applications, switches, redemptions and withdrawal requests for all or a particular investment option at its absolute discretion. In such circumstances, transactions may not be processed or may be processed with significant delay," the updated clause on page 62 of the 215 fund's product disclosure document said.
When we discussed the LRB borrowing by SMSF on this thread, when it first was introduced to pump the property bubble in about 2010, we said it was a recipe for disaster.There's an article about some SMSFs calling out "What about me?".. along the lines of (only) having properties in their fund and now tenants can't pay the rent.. Suddenly retirement income has evaporated.
What do we have here? A lack of a diversified income stream comes back to bite; all's great until it's not.. Poor risk management. (And even worse if there was LRB borrowing)
Absolutely Bill and as we have always been saying, no one looks after your money better than you, they don't have any skin in the game.This is a big, BIG problem, red flag for sure. If I had an account with any super fund that thinks they can restrict my cash withdrawals (above and beyond government restrictions) during my retirement then I would flick them in a minutes flash. This is so wrong on all levels. Sending the WRONG message in my opinion. This reset will test them all.
Article is here:When we discussed the LRB borrowing by SMSF on this thread, when it first was introduced to pump the property bubble in about 2010, we said it was a recipe for disaster.
It was diabolical to let SMSF's borrow to buy rental property, let alone encourage it, this was always going to happen IMO.
The issue is bigger than that (nasty as LRB was, is and increasingly will be)It was diabolical to let SMSF's borrow to buy rental property, let alone encourage it, this was always going to happen IMO.
I run the SMSF, as if it is the only income that I will ever get, that is why it is conservative.The issue is bigger than that (nasty as LRB was, is and increasingly will be)
A good Risk Profile and attentive Investment Strategy addressing liquidity, cash flow, ability to meet uncertain future events is essential. Sadly, it can be glibly 'flick-passed' by finding a compliant auditor and advisor (if so utilised). Chickens are coming home to roost.
Diversification is the only free lunch. And mark-to-market may be your long-term friend.
I imagine certain section of the work force may draw on their super more than others
Like hospitality more so than construction but then it depends on how deep this $hitstorm goes[/QUOTE
Here is another reason I started my own SMSF, it is o.k for political parties to try and force you into retail or industry funds, but that doesn't make it right. This article shows, it isn't really your money, you just think it is IMO. Well worth reading the whole article IMO.
Maybe a look into the infra structure exposure and why the high exposure, is warranted? Maybe a tip of the iceberg moment unfolding?
https://www.smh.com.au/business/ban...suspend-cash-withdrawals-20200407-p54hqc.html
From the article:
The $44 billion superannuation fund representing the hospitality industry has updated its product disclosure statement to highlight its "absolute discretion" to "suspend or restrict" applications for cash withdrawals, despite defending its ability to pay out the government's emergency early access scheme.
Hostplus has altered a clause in its PDS that will be relevant to a large portion of its members without any warning. Previously, the clause had told members they can switch between investment options and it would be processed within two days. The amended clause reveals the fund has total power to halt payouts at its discretion.
"The trustee may suspend or restrict applications, switches, redemptions and withdrawal requests for all or a particular investment option at its absolute discretion. In such circumstances, transactions may not be processed or may be processed with significant delay," the updated clause on page 62 of the 215 fund's product disclosure document said.
"The trustee may also decide to process a transaction request for a particular type of benefit from a suspended, restricted or closed option on a case by case basis. Any decision about whether to process transactions from such an option will be made in the best interests of investors as a whole.
"All impacted transaction requests will be processed using the effective unit price applicable on the date the suspension is lifted, or the date special approval is granted if earlier."
Hostplus says the trust deed – a legal document setting out the terms and conditions for managing a trust – had always enabled the fund to suspend redemptions.
Hostplus is the industry superannuation fund for employees in hospitality, tourism, recreation and sport. Join now and get super informed.
Who would you recommend?From memory it wasn’t hard to change funds
Might be a good time to
It seems to me the fund in question can meet its cash obligations - but blatantly refuses to pay.IMO the super funds that can't meet their cash obligations, are no better than the Banks and financial institutions that were done for charging when no service was provided, the trustee's are there to ensure that the worst case scenario is covered.
They aren't there just to pull a cosy pay cheque, for rubber stamping and outsourcing all their responsibilities, then when it falls in a hole say well tough $hit we aren't accountable.
Just my opinion.
in this day and age, with high volatility, days of 10%+ swings in the share markets, somewhat non functioning bond and credit markets, I'd be wary of switching. Get out on a bad day, and miss the up day (can U guarantee same day processing? <answer is NO, by the way>) and there could easily be a large dollar deficit in the investment balance....
it wasn’t hard to change funds ...
Might be a good time to
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, most people would have thought this hickup with their jobs will last a month or two then it is all back to normal, when it keeps going on people are going to start demanding answers of their super funds.It seems to me the fund in question can meet its cash obligations - but blatantly refuses to pay.
They should be prosecuted, have members' money transferred elsewhere, and then deregistered.
Most of the funds don't report daily, from my understanding, monthly at best.in this day and age, with high volatility, days of 10%+ swings in the share markets, somewhat non functioning bond and credit markets, I'd be wary of switching. Get out on a bad day, and miss the up day (can U guarantee same day processing? <answer is NO, by the way>) and there could easily be a large dollar deficit in the investment balance.
I imagine certain section of the work force may draw on their super more than others
Like hospitality more so than construction but then it depends on how deep this $hitstorm goes
Congratulations one right.As I said Friday
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?