Good day selciper,
Is it possible that such results could be listed outside WC records management as maybe required by, say, "Public disclosure" group that we may not be aware of?
For example, I was astonished to see on GOOGLE my Table Tennis competition results from way back. Alas, keyed in "IAC" and no joy.
Regards
Hi, Simgrund -
Somebody has to have those IAC ballot numbers. Who was auditing the ballot? Why isn't the scrutinier insisting that WC release the vital information? Every folder in WC seems to be labeled SECRET, CONFIDENTIAL, UMBRA, SENSITIVE, CLASSIFIED or FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. That policy had better change very soon.
Perhaps the matter should be drawn to the attention of a Qeensland local member by a Queensland PIF investor.
Simgrund I am sure we would have at least more than one PIF AG investor in Brisbane who could possibly make an appointment with WC to discuss the results of the IAG and ongoing PIF strategies. Hey, I actually made a special appointment (from WA) with WC to meet Jenny Hutson and make myself known and offer my support initially. I met with Jenny Hutson and Caroline Snow in 2008 and was assured the PIF was in good hands with their team of experts with a strategy in place to deliver on promises made by WC. ( why I was given personal business cards from both remains a mystery because the contact details are not exactly a foot in the door!!! ) OK, so now we are in a worse situation financially, investors are basically being ignored, unit value has diminished, legal cooperation with Class Action is questionable etc etc. We have not even had the courtesy from Wellington Capital and Jenny Hutson to deliver a 2009 Dec update as indicated. WC are obviously reluctant to provide any PIF relevant information or are deliberately avoiding the promised update I ask you all why? SeamistyThis could be the path to take. Queenslanders; please volunteer!!!
And who was the SCRUTINEER?.
Is it too much to hope it was and is a person with impeccable neutrality and integrity?.
It's all history now, but this article from the Australian dated Oct. 08 is interesting to read.
Ms Hutson said Wellington envisaged restoring 45c in the dollar to unitholders in three to five years.
Under a liquidation scenario, unitholders would have received 14c, she said.
Make that 10 cents glendaw, a small parcel of 2,500 just went through at TEN CENTS!!!! Shame Shame Shame that some investors are so desperate for money they have to sacrifice their investment for such a pittance!! It is a total disgrace. SeamistyThe units are currently trading on the NSX @ 14c.
We are so much better off with Ms Hutson at the helm aren't we! (sarcasm intended)
Make that 10 cents glendaw, a small parcel of 2,500 just went through at TEN CENTS!!!! Shame Shame Shame that some investors are so desperate for money they have to sacrifice their investment for such a pittance!! It is a total disgrace. Seamisty
The units are currently trading on the NSX @ 14c.
We are so much better off with Ms Hutson at the helm aren't we! (sarcasm intended)
I just hope JH is not as slow to pay her insurance premiums as she is to get investor updates out Marcom!!! SeamistyDon't get angry...get litigious:
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 - SECT 601MA
Civil liability of responsible entity to members
(1) A member of a registered scheme who suffers loss or damage because of conduct of the scheme's responsible entity that contravenes a provision of this Chapter may recover the amount of the loss or damage by action against the responsible entity whether or not the responsible entity has been convicted of an offence, or has had a civil penalty order made against it, in respect of the contravention.
(2) An action under subsection (1) must be begun within 6 years after the cause of action arises.
(3) This section does not affect any liability that a person has under other provisions of this Act or under other laws.
I'm hoping that JH does not manage to worm out of the class action as this could be used to mount a S601MA claim. I bet she will be pushing the "substantial compliance" argument at the directions hearing on 18 February. If you look at the lengths WIM has gone to resist the discovery of documents in the Bond Street Custodians case, it is clear that there was never an intention to fully support the class action with access to WC files and financial records.
Don't get angry...get litigious:
...
I'm hoping that JH does not manage to worm out of the class action as this could be used to mount a S601MA claim. I bet she will be pushing the "substantial compliance" argument at the directions hearing on 18 February. If you look at the lengths WIM has gone to resist the discovery of documents in the Bond Street Custodians case, it is clear that there was never an intention to fully support the class action with access to WC files and financial records.
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?