This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

TMR - Tamaya Resources

Sounds very dodgy. I am reading the post by the way. Thsnks for the research. being a shareholder of TMR

 
No response from neither ASIC nor E&Y? - happy to support you on this as should as many former TMR shareholders as possible - "the wheel that does the squeaking is the one that gets the grease" !!!
 
Hi,

Ex-shareholder as well. StevoB, to whom in ASIC did you post your letter to? Am happy to support as well.

Thanks.
 
As a concerned previous shareholderof TMR, I am concerned that there has been no information forthcoming on the status, and the efforts to liquidate the assets of TMR (especially the Iberian Resources Assets).
It's all over mate. I made the capital loss last financial year. The liquidators are under no obligation to get the best price for any asset hence a "fire sale" is how the assets are sold. The financial "system" screws people over legally but what gets me is the rapid departure and disappearance of big talking Hugh Callaghan. Bad manager. Gold is at US$1300 and the Lichvaz (Armenia) and Montemor (Portugal) mines would have done well.

Asset wise, the Montemor (Portugal) assets were sold to Australian Iron Ore PLC. While Lichvaz has a connection with Calder Resources and BacTech Mining Corporation.

Note the "unprecedented collapse of copper prices" was for all of about 6 to 8 months. What a pi$$ poor excuse and not the real reason.



This is the delisted stocks site and it has a link to the declaration of no investor reimbursement. I wonder if Callaghan off-loaded his shares beforehand??????
 
The above isn't entirely true.
The Liquidator is a fiduciary of the company and owes fiduciary duties to the company, its creditors and members.
The Liquidator has a duty to act honestly (s.181 of the Corporations Act), act in good faith and avoid a conflict of interest. Notably the Liquidator cannot profit from their position, directly or indirectly, other than remuneration for work done (Re Timberland Ltd (1979) 4 ACLR 259). This is also supported by s.182 of the Corporations Act. You might have a case through the above, although it may have to be initiated by ASIC (I'm not law expert) under S.536.

My two cents, I'm not a shareholder.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...