Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[breaker1]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Info Submitted by an AG member:
SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION
an investor in the City Pacific First Mortgage Fund
and the City Pacific Income Fund
Inquiry into Financial Products and Services in Australia
Parliamentary Joint Committee
on Corporations & Financial Services
Department of the Senate
Parliament House - Room SG - 64
“I BLAME THE MANAGER, I DO NOT BLAME THE MARKET”

See:http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/corporations_ctte/fps/submissions/supsub182b.pdf
Some all to painful similarities between the City Pacific mess and that with PIF/Octaviar

PIF part page 24 to 27 in Particular "What some observers struggled with, however, was the extent of related party dealing which made it hard to keep track of assets and liabilities as they were shuffled around the group."

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

In the Aust Financial Review today:

Adams goes global, is wanted local
12:00AM | Lisa Allen | The Australian Financial Review

The co-founder of the failed MFS property group, Phil Adams, has started an investment banking advisory firm in Dubai. But this was news to his Brisbane liquidators yesterday - they are still trying to track down the former Gold Coast high-flyer.

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

In the Aust Financial Review today:

Adams goes global, is wanted local
12:00AM | Lisa Allen | The Australian Financial Review

The co-founder of the failed MFS property group, Phil Adams, has started an investment banking advisory firm in Dubai. But this was news to his Brisbane liquidators yesterday - they are still trying to track down the former Gold Coast high-flyer.

I have often wondered if Agilis Global was the original MFS International and is included in the OCV asset pool Marcom.

Company Register


Agilis Global Holdings (Dubai ) Limited

Names Agilis Global Holdings (Dubai ) Limited
Registered Offices Unit 3, Level 1, The Gate Building 1, DIFC, P.O. Box 506704, Dubai, UAE
Registered Number 0395
Type of Entity Company Limited by Shares
Company Secretary Kerrie-Ann Achilles
Type of License Non-Regulated
Trading Names Agilis Global Holdings (Dubai ) Limited

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of Incorporation 14 May 2007
Commercial License Number CL0395
Commercial License Validity Date 14.05.2009 - 13.05.2010
Amount of Authorised Share Capital USD 5,000,000
Amount of Paid Up Share Capital USD 323,661
Number of Issued Shares 323,661
Class of Issued Shares Ordinary
Nominal Value of One Share USD 1
Financial Year End 30th June
Directors Philip William Adams
Stuart Robertson Price
Shareholders Agilis Global Holdings Limited (Cayman)
Majority Shareholders Agilis Global Holdings Limited (Cayman)
Business Activities Proprietary Investments

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Former Properties
Names MFS International Investments Limited 2007-05-14 to 2008-03-25

Company 395 Limited 2008-03-25 to 2008-05-18

Registered Offices Office 51, Level 15, DIFC The gate building P O Box 125118 Dubai UAE to 2008-08-22

Directors Michael Christodoulou King to 2008-01-21

Paul Philip Tuckey to 2008-10-13

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

This from yesterday. Will be appreciated by our grandchildren.

Regulator's backflip
John Collett SMH
August 26, 2009

Advisory industry overhaul

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has finally awakened from its long hibernation and presented the Government with a blueprint to protect investors from bad financial advice.

It's taken the loss of billions of dollars of investors' money through negligent financial advice, the biggest downturn in markets in 70 years and a very effective advertising campaign by the not-for-profit industry funds to rouse the regulator into action on the policy front.

ASIC's submission to the parliamentary inquiry to end sales-based commissions and put planners under a legal obligation to act in their clients' best interests comes as regulators in the US and Britain are already well advanced down the same track.

Even Australia's financial institutions appear to have moved ahead of the regulator by calling for more to be done. The industry could see the writing on the wall for commission payments and produced a plan to head off the wholesale changes that now look inevitable. Its plan to wean itself off commissions was going to take too long.

Under the industry's road map, commissions would only be able to be switched off by members of new super accounts, leaving hundreds of millions of dollars a year in commissions coming out of existing accounts for years to come. Although members are free to switch funds, many funds that charge commissions also have exit fees. Commissions have really been on the nose since the industry funds started an advertising campaign raising awareness of how they can distort advice.

ASIC's submission, if recommended by the parliamentary inquiry and accepted by the Government, would go a long way to bringing financial planning standards closer to those of other professions. Given the industry has grown out of the sales culture of life insurance, it is a very big step.

The global financial crisis has discredited, once and for all, the "self executing" regulatory regime of tick-box compliance. ASIC's performance since the Financial Services Reform Act came into effect in 2004 has been found wanting. While planners have been banned, these actions have only come after investors' money was well and truly lost and lives ruined.

Some people say ASIC is culpable for not using its already-considerable powers to better protect investors and there is truth in that.

The regulator has never fully tested the limits of its power, which is more considerable than it lets on. In time, when a full account is made of how billions of dollars were lost and the lives of many thousands of retirees devastated, ASIC will be judged in a harsher light than today.

For more than a decade, it has been testing planners with shadow shops, where people posing as investors are sent out to seek advice from planners.

It has known better than anyone else that unsuspecting investors were being exposed to unscrupulous planners. Those giving negligent, shoddy and conflicted advice, were, by and large, allowed to continue to operate under the licensing regime administered by the regulator.

Investors were none the wiser. They were told that as long as they used a licensed adviser, they could be reasonably assured of receiving, if not good advice then at least advice that was reasonable and appropriate to their personal circumstances. But the regulator knew that investors could have no such assurance. ASIC preferred to coach the miscreants and their employers in the hope they would reform themselves.

It chose to remain mute on policy improvements, even though it has been clear to even the most casual observer that the system in place was flawed and failing investors.

ASIC deflects blame in its submission for its lack of action by saying it can only use the cards dealt it by Government. Section 945A of the Corporations Act says a planner must have a reasonable basis for the advice. But it had no meaning and no deterrent value because what constituted reasonable advice was never tested properly in the courts.

Let's hope the proposals contained in the submission are reflective of a genuine change of heart and a much greater willingness to tilt the balance of the industry towards protecting investors.

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Hello Seamisty, no, the current Agilis Global Limited was formerly known as Company 415 Limited according to the Dubai International Finance Centre - 415 was the registration certificate number when the company was registered on 12 June 2007.

However, Agilis Global Holdings (Dubai ) Limited according to your info shares the same registration number (03950) as MFS International Investments Limited 2007-05-14 to 2008-03-25. Company 395 Limited 2008-03-25 to 2008-05-18

Of interest in your info is major shareholders of Agilis being:
Shareholders Agilis Global Holdings Limited (Cayman)
Majority Shareholders Agilis Global Holdings Limited (Cayman).

MARCOM

 

[selciper]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Reading daily that Afghan election results are very slow to come through, I'm reminded that there is an even slower process that bogs down PIF-investor communications. The delay by WC in announcing the results of the Investor Advisory Committee ballot results is beyond belief. That promised teleconference is urgently required.

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Full marks for persistence! This is the third time in two months!

In the Brisbane Supreme Court tomorrow -
LATITUDE AT MACKAY PTY LTD -V- WELLINGTON INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED & others Application to be heard 10:00 AM.

And this is the second time for for this one:
OPI PACIFIC FINANCE LIMITED -V- REEF COVE RESORT LIMITED & others at 10:00 AM

Selciper, no wonder we don't hear anything from her - she's always in court! (Well it sounds like a good excuse anyway).

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Hi all,

Just spoke with WC re PIF update and was told the financials are completed as are the tax statements and will be signed off by JH either today or Monday then sent to the mailhouse to be collated and mailed to PIF investors. The Investor Advisory Committee results will be included in the update. As soon as it has been signed off and sent the contents will be put on www.newpiff.com.au so it will be available to investors before the mailed out copy is received by most.
Regards,
Seamisty

 

[simgrund]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Hi all,

Just spoke with WC re PIF update and was told the financials are completed as are the tax statements and will be signed off by JH either today or Monday then sent to the mailhouse to be collated and mailed to PIF investors. The Investor Advisory Committee results will be included in the update. As soon as it has been signed off and sent the contents will be put on www.newpiff.com.au so it will be available to investors before the mailed out copy is received by most.
Regards,
Seamisty

THIS IS WELCOME NEWS, SEAMISTY. After all this anxiety, we were heard.
For those who want to get into PIF site, delete one "f" to get in.
Regards,

 

[The Owls]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Hi all,

Just spoke with WC re PIF update and was told the financials are completed as are the tax statements and will be signed off by JH either today or Monday then sent to the mailhouse to be collated and mailed to PIF investors. The Investor Advisory Committee results will be included in the update. As soon as it has been signed off and sent the contents will be put on www.newpiff.com.au so it will be available to investors before the mailed out copy is received by most.
Regards,
Seamisty

Hello
Your link to look at the report has one to many fs should be www.newpif.com.au

 

[seamisty]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thanks Simgrund and TheOwls, was in a rush and then had trouble getting back into AussieStockForums!!! www.newpif.com.au I presume the update and financials will get posted on the NSX also. Seamisty

 

[breaker1]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Full marks for persistence! This is the third time in two months!

Selciper, no wonder we don't hear anything from her - she's always in court! (Well it sounds like a good excuse anyway).

I would say that if JH is representing us in court she would likely be getting paid for that representation from PIF assets! If so, I would like to know how much JH has been paid to date?

 

[lawry1dog]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I am with Breaker.
How much money has been paid to WC for what has seemed a waste of time going to court. I have not seen any positive result in WC favour yet. Also what other money has been paid to WC for there call centre and CEO.

Not expecting anything great from WC financial report, probably a sad story of how times are difficult and no one buying or banks are not giving credit to
developers. And of course the 3c distribution will not be paid and not in the foreseeable future.

I still stick to my scenerio of WC borrowing money to pay us the 3c distribution and then selling all assets over the next year.
We then get the balance of money owing to us from the Class Action.

But of course there is the Bond Street case, which may involve a payment of millions out of our fund early next year.

Anyway I hope things will improve next year, but does not help existing unit holder doing it tough now.

Can anybody, Please tell me I am horrible in my sentiments, which of course they are, if there is any hope in getting our money back?
Is there anything we can do now! What our our options?

From desperate unit holder

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Breaker, I agree particularly in the light of the comments in J McMurdo's costs judgement:

At clause 3 - "in the circumstance where Wellington also made extensive submissions against these applications, which went far beyond the transactions in which Wellington had been involved".

In whose interests was she acting?

At clause 7 - "in this case each of these parties (OPI and PIF) had another reason to oppose the termination of the deed, which was that it would be likely to be subject to a liquidator’s investigation. In other words its interest was not purely as a creditor in the proper application of the available funds"

And it's not just her costs that will be billed to our fund here is the legal team for the many days in the Supreme Court.

Barrister - P P McQuade for Wellington Capital Ltd as responsible
entity of the Premium Income Fund

Solicitors - McCullough Robertson for Wellington Capital Ltd as
responsible entity of the Premium Income Fund

Breaker this would be a good question for the AG to ask of JH - ie will the amount be divided between representation of purely PIF issues and other issues to do with Wellington, which should not be billed to the fund.

 

[selciper]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

The objective to stabilise and consolidate the PIF has not been realised. All those cheery forecasts have proved to be virtually worthless. The only positives I see are the Octaviar liquidation process and the class action. Both forums will provide masses of information for us to consider in the future. I hope that the successful Investor Advisory Committee candidates spring into action the moment their names are announced - they must ask hard questions on behalf of us marooned members - with no punches pulled. Information must be sought about PIF lawyers' costs.

 

[marcom]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Results of the Federal Court Directions hearing on the Class Action:

ORDER

JUDGE:
Justice Perram
DATE OF ORDER:
31 August 2009
WHERE MADE:
Sydney


THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The time for the applicants to serve on the respondents a proposed draft amended statement of claim be extended to Friday 25 September 2009.
2. The matter be stood over for further directions at 9:309am on Tuesday 6 October 2009.
3. Liberty to apply on 3 days’ notice.
4. Costs reserved.

Next hearing date 6 October.

 

[charles36]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Breaker and others, a good point, what has it cost us to have JH as the RE. Breaker you should ask her how much to date and what of the future costs for litigation? As the leader of the PIF Action Group I believe you are entitled to know on behalf of the unit holders you represent I have been waiting since April for replies to my inquiries and have not had the courtesy of any sort of reply. I wish you well and hope you can get some reaction from the Responsible Entity. I know many others in the same boat as myself.

 

[waleroo]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I am with Breaker.
How much money has been paid to WC for what has seemed a waste of time going to court. I have not seen any positive result in WC favour yet. Also what other money has been paid to WC for there call centre and CEO.

Not expecting anything great from WC financial report, probably a sad story of how times are difficult and no one buying or banks are not giving credit to
developers. And of course the 3c distribution will not be paid and not in the foreseeable future.

I still stick to my scenerio of WC borrowing money to pay us the 3c distribution and then selling all assets over the next year.
We then get the balance of money owing to us from the Class Action.

But of course there is the Bond Street case, which may involve a payment of millions out of our fund early next year.

Anyway I hope things will improve next year, but does not help existing unit holder doing it tough now.

Can anybody, Please tell me I am horrible in my sentiments, which of course they are, if there is any hope in getting our money back?
Is there anything we can do now! What our our options?

From desperate unit holder

The shareholders of Cty Pacific Got rid of them is it not time we started to do something along similar lines WC have done nothing and should be dismissed

 

[erniel]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I would suggest that we wait for the year end financials of the PIF before we start a campaign to replace wellington as the RE.
We are fortunate as to having the list of the 10 000 investors now.
Should we replace Wellington as the RE we have not had anyone come forward to replace them as Balmain trilogy did for the first Mortgage fund of city pacific.
I must again say that JH spin about a distribution of 3 c before Christmas and 1.5 cents every quarter therafter has turned out to be deceitful in my opinion and I feel that wellington should relinquish the Re of the PIF.

 

[k.smith]

Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

The shareholders of Cty Pacific Got rid of them is it not time we started to do something along similar lines WC have done nothing and should be dismissed

Being a "victim" of both MFS and City Pacific I am very cynical of the motives of any new RE. They are doing what they do to make money from our money...and yet we have to resort to begging and pleading for snippets of infomation about our own investments. There should be mandatory updates on their websites on a weekly basis, transparency about all aspects of the loan arrangements between the fund and the borrowers, and full disclosure about any financial facility arrangments that are or have been in place.