Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Jump to new
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Has anyone heard if any of the 11 properties marketed over the past few months through Jones LaSalle have had any interest or if any went to auction?
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Hi everyone. Didn't think I'd ever need you all again after selling my units.
However , its a bit like"coming home"...a lot of bonding goes on in a crisis, even when most of us haven't even met. But there you go,somehow I have been "touched" by many of you.

Any of you know the whereabouts of Great Dame?

A few questions re the class action...help me please:

1.Outside us unitholders, who are the other applicants?

2. Why are/were we suing WCIM.

3.Having withdrawn from suing WMIC...is this why JH is co-operating?

4. And has she released the unitholder's register yet?
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Hello Mary, I will try and answer your questions. 1.Outside us unitholders, who are the other applicants?

At this point in time there is the original 8 applicants who instigated the case. All other eligible unitholders have the choice to participate or 'opt out' but will have to register to do so.

2. Why are/were we suing WCIM.

WCIM was originally included to enable Carney Lawyers access to legal documents and other relevant material ie the register through the court if necessary.

3.Having withdrawn from suing WMIC...is this why JH is co-operating?

JH met with Carney Lawyers and agreed to provide access to all necessary documents and has offered her assistance .


4. And has she released the unitholder's register yet?

We have full use of the Client Register for the purpose of contacting Unit Holders regarding the Class Action.

Some of the applicants (and hopefully Arthur Carney) will be meeting with John Walker from IMF at 9.00am tomorrow to discuss the IMF Funding Proposal.
Regards, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

CVC private equity completely takes over Stella
Thursday, 2 July 2009 Source ;; Travel Blackboard



After acquiring a majority share of Stella group from MFS Limited early last year, CVC Asia Pacific has performed a fait accompli and snapped up all remaining shares left in a bold move yesterday.

By making the disappearance of the court case part and parcel of the sell-off, Octaviar now had one less problem to take care of.
It is currently unknown how much the remaining 35% stake was sold for, only that it too was a “Share and Loan Note Sale Agreement”.




The link to the whole article is :::http://www.etravelblackboard.com/showarticle.asp?id=94200&nav=98
I guess there goes one of the few remaining assets we were relying on for recouping a small portion of what is owed to PIF from Octaviar.
Regards, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Thanks Seamisty.

We ex unitholders mustn't be forgotten out, floating around out in the wide world. Someone said to me that there would be no way that I would have any status in the class action, having sold my units. But not so. However there may be others out there who think that they are in eligible. Is there a way of contacting them?

When and how do we register?
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Hi Mary, You can register by contacting ::::George Hoddle
Solicitor

Carneys Lawyers
Level 5
70 Castlereagh St
SYDNEY NSW 2000

DX 998 Sydney
P: (02) 8226 5555
F: (02) 8226 5556
E: ghoddle@carneys.com.au

As soon as Funding has been finalised I would imagine that the Funders will contact every elligible applicant/Unit Holder from information contained in the Client Register.
Cheers, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

I think I misunderstood Seamisty. I thought you said only the original 8 applicants were registered.

I am sure I must already be registered...as I have made a contribution to Carney's and the mailout.
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

No Mary, The 8 original applicants were needed to instigate the claim and are instrumental in the preliminary decision making process. Anyone who has contacted Carney's and given their details will be included.Also by registering with Carney's I think they may keep investors informed. I imagine every investor will have to officially sign a form from the Funder stating whether they wish to participate in the Class Action or opt out. Also previously when we did not have official permission to use the register Carney was keen to contact as many investors as possible. Cheers, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

seamisty said:
CVC paid the staggering sum of $3.2mill for the remaining 35% of Stella. Not bad, they aquired an asset that reportedly cost $2.4billion for just over $500mill. (plus $900 mill debt)

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2009/07/03/94551_gold-coast-business.html
Click to expand...

That should read just over $400mill plus the debt, so 100% of Stella was sold for less than half the original cost. I know these figures are not exact but it is not looking good for the rest of the OCV creditors. Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Hello ..

Seamisty,
Can you try to explain the part that Fortress took in MFS?
And why the court re-classed Fortress as an unsecured creditor?
It is great to have this forum open again.
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

k.smith said:
Hello ..

Seamisty,
Can you try to explain the part that Fortress took in MFS?
And why the court re-classed Fortress as an unsecured creditor?
It is great to have this forum open again.
Click to expand...

Hi K.Smith, http://www.lavanlegal.com.au/go/pub...td-re-octaviar-administration-p/l-2009-qsc-37 ::: http://www.aar.com.au/pubs/baf/fobafmar09.htm :::here is a couple of links with some information in relation to the fortress loan.
Regards, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

For those investors patiently waiting for news/correspondence in relation to the PIF Class Action, the applicants in Premium Income Fund unit holder action against partners of KPMG and directors of the Responsible Entity are currently negotiating with IMF Litigation Funders to achieve the best possible terms. Once these negotiations are finalised it is anticipated every elligible PIF Unit Holder will be contacted regarding the Class Action. Regards, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

k.smith said:
Hello ..

Seamisty,
Can you try to explain the part that Fortress took in MFS?
And why the court re-classed Fortress as an unsecured creditor?
It is great to have this forum open again.
Click to expand...

I regard myself as a lay, mug investor so don't take any of this as true and correct.

Can you try to explain the part that Fortress took in MFS?
Fortress is one creditors that lent money to the Octaviar thicket of companies. Including the likes of PIF investors, OCV shareholders, PTQ's note holders, OPI Pacific, NAB and Challenger.

It seems to me that Fortress was one of, if not the last, big bundles of cash OCV could get their hands on. After that, OCV had to resort to more desparate measures like raid PIF. Fortress were demanding their money back. Other probably too, including the ATO. Finally, instead of going into voluntary administration, King and Peacock went to the market and asked for another $550M to recapitalise, price crashed and ASX trade was permanently suspended on 23 Jan 08.

And why the court re-classed Fortress as an unsecured creditor?
Octaviar guaranteed (by an instrument dated 25 May 2007) a loan agreement (dated 31 May 2007) whereby Fortress lent money to Young Village Estates Pty Ltd (YVE). Octaviar/YVE DIDN't provide security to Fortress. Lets call this the OCV/YVE loan.

The next day (1 June 2007) Octaviar (through a subsidiary called Castle) entered into a "cash advance facility" agreement with Fortress for borrowing up to $250m. This time Octaviar/Castle provided security. Lets call this the OCV/Castle loan. The limit for the OCV/Castle loan was reduced from $250m to $100m some time in late 2007 and at least prior to 22 January 2008.

The OCV/Castle loan was repaid in full on or about 29 February 2008.

The OCV/Castle loan has an ambitious clause (clause 2.1) in it that, given the flap the decision has caused amongst lawyers, appears to be common in the industry. This clause allowed Fortress to get Octaviar to agree that the security from the OCV/Castle loan now applies to the OCV/YVE loan. Octaviar and Fortress agreed to this on 22 Jan 08 which was AFTER the share price plunged and a day before ASX halted trade. Lets call this the Post Crash Agreement.

McMurdo held that the Post Crash agreement was legit. But is voided for other reasons - a notice wasn't lodged.

Say you lend a $100M to a company knowing that it has 3 other unsecured creditors and one secured creditor that have also each chipped in a $100M. If the company goes belly up, you know that the secured creditor is going to get all his $ back and you'd split the rest 4 ways with the other 3 unsecured creditors. Now say the secured creditor gets his $100M back but also agrees with the company that one of the other 3 unsecured $100M loans is now covered by the secured $100M loan agreement. There's now $100M less for you to share with the other 2 remaining unsecured creditors. This is pretty much well what happened with OCV.

As an unsecured creditor you'd think it only fair that you should at least be told that one of the other unsecured $100M parcels was now secured.

The Corporations Act requires that a notice of a "variation" that "has the effect of increasing the amount of debt or increasing the liabilities" be lodged within 45 days.

Fortress, with the behemoth Deloitte falling into line behind them, went to court believing that the 22Jan08 Post Crash Agreement couldn't be regarded as a variation because they didn't change a word of the OCV/Castle agreement and didn't increase the $ amount.

Sensibly, McMuordo rejected this legal mischief stating "That is unlikely to have been an intended consequence of the scheme of registration of charges prescribed by Chapter 2K." It's a pretty straight forward decision with McMurdo going back to first 'principles' in para [33] "whatever the form of the transaction, the owner of the property retains an equity of redemption to have the property restored to him when the liability has been discharged".

So for my example above, Fortress, Deloitte and cohorts believed that the creditor could have their $100K secured debt (i.e. 1/5th) stretched to cover the whole $200K in two $100K mouthfulls (i.e. 2/5ths) without having to file a notice.

McMurdo disagreed with Fortress, Deloitte and cohorts. Seeing that such a notice hadn't been lodged in time (not even 45 days after Deloitte took over let alone from the date it was signed) and that OCV is now in administration, the 22 January 2008 Post Crash Agreement is void and the OCV/YVE loan remains unsecured.

So it looks like the court and legislators are doing their job. It's the lawyers and administrators that aren't doing their jobs very well. Deloitte sounds like they were tripping themselves up over the issue during the proceedings. See para [35] "The administrators’ argument appears to accept that this would represent an increase in the liabilities secured by the charge in the relevant sense, if it came from a variation in the terms of the charge."

Fortress were wrong. Deloitte were wrong. And the legal militia aren't happy because they have to advise their pay masters to repair the armaments at their masters expense, armaments that the militia were paid to design, build and maintain in the first place. IMLO
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

I urge everyone who was ever misled by OCV PIF to make a submission and tell their story to the following inquiry. Only 3 weeks left.
There has been a combined effort made by the Storm Action group to draw attention to their plight with this inquiry
Unfortunately only two submissions made by PIF investors thus far . I am certain that there are a great many PIF investors who have suffered greatly from the cynical deceit and dishonesty that has resulted in the ruin of our fund.
A link is: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/submissions/sublist.htm
or click here

You can withhold your name, & if you specify 'in confidence', then no details at all will be publicly revealed.
Otherwise, the submission is freely available to be read, as you can see from the link.

Why submit to this inquiry?
· 1 - Submissions can be made public, to be on the record for anyone to see & be warned .· 2 - Journalists can use these inquiry submissions (even when made in confidence) to report on the story. Parliamentary privilege comes into play. that could be very useful for many people..
· 3 - Privacy of identity of the submittor is assured, if required.
· 4 - The 'failure' or shortfalls of ASIC/ASX cannot be reiterated enough by as many people as possible. This inquiry has oversight of ASIC.
People need to SPEAK UP & here is an opportunity.
Run with it!


Link Provided: www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/corporations_ctte/...
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Jadel,

Wouldn't collective efforts create more impact ?
If say, 1000+ investors were to sign a comprehensive letter which detailed a collected precis of unitholders complaints,and this was written by one of the eloquent writers on this forum....(thank you for your eloquent answer to my inquiy re the Fortress loan, Duped!)...
Most of us would share many similar grievances regarding our investments in MFS, there is a wealth of info on the ASF OCV thread. Perhaps lack of confidence in literary skills holds a lot of people back ,especially in these circumstances where one is addressing Government bodies. I also imagine these Government bodies reading 1000+letters...the time involved....
perhaps one letter with 1000+ signatures would have more impact.
Just a thought, anyway.
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

I believe Federal Court Application and Statement of Claim were served on Guy Hutchings today. Regards, Seamisty
 
Re: Wellington Premium Income Fund

Hi Jadel,
Would it be pertinent to write in about the sumptuous morning teas that they had at top hotels shortly before they froze all our funds? Do you remember those? The whole line up of directors, and entourage, must have been 20 I would think in all, swanned from state to state blowing their horns about how WELLLL they were going....unstoppable....INVEST MORE OF YOUR DOLLARS WITH US!!!

Does anybody remember the dates of any of those meetings, so that I can have detailed evidence; I think it was around October 2007.

Also would I mention that they offered me a bonus to stay with them when I put in my redemption form to pay for the house I had just contracted to buy? (They froze 2 days before I redeemed!)

Is this the kind of thing that you are suggesting we write about?
 

Similar threads

System
MA1 - MA Credit Income Trust
Replies
3
Views
486
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
System
DGT - DigiCo Infrastructure REIT
Replies
8
Views
1K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Garpal Gumnut
Coolabah Capital
Replies
5
Views
1K
divs4ever
divs4ever
Sean K
VBTC - VanEck Bitcoin ETF
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
Garpal Gumnut
Garpal Gumnut
ducati916
November 2024 DDD
2 3
Replies
53
Views
6K
ducati916
ducati916
Top