Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

[JohnH]

That was very Jennearous of Wellington Capital JohnH, no explanation as to if the gesture was justified. WC haven't shown the same concern at wasting PIF dwindling dollars fighting and delaying other very expensive court action which possibly could have been avoided.

Seamisty

..............ah but that's what happens with family business's Seamisty!!!

 

[marcom]

Life in Trinity yet as it considers its options

Andrew Fraser From: The Australian December 02, 2010 12:00AM


TRINITY has stabilised its debt, cleared its legal backlog and is considering three options for its future over the next few months.

The troubled property group's chairman Brett Heading, who took over Trinity last year after several board divisions, said reports that the company was in full wind-down mode were off the mark.

He told The Australian that while an "orderly redistribution" was a possibility, the company was also looking at possibly acquiring a funds management company or merging with another company.

"We are in the position now where we've resolved all the outstanding issues and we have time to decide the future," he said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ders-its-options/story-e6frg9gx-1225964137585

Bet I know the other funds management company he is talking about. Breaker, I raised this possibility with you last year. Just watch and see what unfolds.

Also in the Brisbane Supreme Court on Monday 6 December: Application to the court RE: OCTAVIAR LIMITED 10:00 AM. Looks like another application by the past or current liquidators.

 

[seamisty]

Bet I know the other funds management company he is talking about. Breaker, I raised this possibility with you last year. Just watch and see what unfolds.

Also in the Brisbane Supreme Court on Monday 6 December: Application to the court RE: OCTAVIAR LIMITED 10:00 AM. Looks like another application by the past or current liquidators.

Marcom would I be right in assuming that WC would have to get unit holder approval in the event that WC ever tried to offload the PIF or 'merge' with another entity? Seamisty

 

[marcom]

Yes Seamisty, the same voting regime that elected the investor advisory committee. This would be a classic "pass the parcel" exercise to transfer responsibility before the liquidator strikes out the Octaviar "sale" of the PIF RE as a preferential deal made during insolvency.

 

[seamisty]

Yes Seamisty, the same voting regime that elected the investor advisory committee. This would be a classic "pass the parcel" exercise to transfer responsibility before the liquidator strikes out the Octaviar "sale" of the PIF RE as a preferential deal made during insolvency.

AHH Yes Marcom!! Only I don't think PIF unitholders are as naive and trusting these days and won't be easily manipulated. Thanks, Seamisty

 

[selciper]

A moderately interesting 10 minute video about Class Actions in the USA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKqNBMhLlao

 

[LTD]

Hi Mary, IMF and the Class Action applicants have now appointed HWL Ebsworth Lawyers to instruct the barristers in relation to future legal proceedings regarding our case. Carney Lawyers no longer act for the Class Action. PIF unitholders who are participating in the Class Action can expect an update from IMF in the coming weeks.

The change from Carney's to Hwl Ebsworth Lawyers was made after careful consideration by all parties to be in the best interest of the class action and no other motive.

Seamisty

I thought that some of you might be interested in this article...re CENTRO class action..
quite different as it involves shareholders but some interesting points,imo.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/court-ruling-forces-switch-in-centro-case-20101201-18gol.html

 

[marcom]

This appeared a couple of days ago:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...rands-not-to-renew-BR6CA?opendocument&src=idp

GEO Property's MD and CEO Guy Farrands not to renew contract
Published 2:37 PM, 2 Dec 2010
Source: News Bites

GEO Property Group says that managing director and CEO Guy Farrands will not seek to renew his contract with the group when it expires on March 31, 2011 because he has to move to Sydney for personal reasons.

The board will immediately commence a search for a replacement for Mr Farrands, who has committed to remain with the group until a suitable replacement is found...

If MFS was insolvent as early as mid 2007, the Liquidator may find that the "sale" of MFS satellite assets were preferential transactions and may seek to recover losses to MFS. Good time to leave may be?

 

[LTD]

Hi Marcom,

How can such things be undone IF preferential, and are there past examples?

and correct me if I'm wrong...please..
but wasnt it this fellow who just returned?a swag of MFS shares... I vaguely remember a news report which was so long ago and now stored in my memory amongst so much info...that I am not at all sure of the details.

I remember being curious and impressed.

 

[seamisty]

Hi Marcom,

How can such things be undone IF preferential, and are there past examples?

and correct me if I'm wrong...please..
but wasnt it this fellow who just returned?a swag of MFS shares... I vaguely remember a news report which was so long ago and now stored in my memory amongst so much info...that I am not at all sure of the details.

I remember being curious and impressed.

Maybe this link LTD::http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...to-start-trading/story-e6frg9gx-1111116340050

 

[LTD]

Thanks Seamisty,
That article doesnt look the same as the one I am picturing but does have a lot of info...on the subject...my accounting skills are negligable and so the 68mil refinancing with non other than "bank of scotland" ie RBOS? etc doesnt add up to the number i get for sales?... there must have been previous debt?
and the transfer of Ferrad shares may not be the same as returning/relinquishing as I interpreted it...just shows how the average person might misinterpret.

Another article also mentioned that a number of executives had been paid with shares instead of cash...
but I cant find the link atm.
I dont mind making mistakes..if you dont mind correcting me.
Cheers.

 

[marcom]

LTD, the liquidator will be looking to see if such deals were done at arms length and are fair and reasonable, otherwise they are preferential and the liquidator can sue for compensation. In our case the Public Trustee has argued that the "sale" of the PIF RE to WC is preferential because JH had inside knowledge as an advisor to the Octaviar Board, paid no consideration for the share purchase and was given $8mill plus as part of the deal. The reason why nothing has been done about this to date is the liquidator is still finalising its report on Octaviar in which it will specify an insolvency date. After the report is delivered to the court and ASIC we may see some action - but this is likely to be into next year.

 

[selciper]

Marcom -In your post 6507 you wrote, "If MFS was insolvent as early as mid 2007, the Liquidator may find that the "sale" of MFS satellite assets were preferential transactions and may seek to recover losses to MFS. Good time to leave may be?" Somewhat worrying to read this, could you explain it a little more, please. Could it be that PIF shouldn't have been "sold" This forum is sometimes a bit jarring for the nerves...

"

 

[seamisty]

PATHETIC!!!! The punishment is hardly a deterent or an example to others to be more diligent!!
Allco auditor fined by ASICPublished 9:11 PM, 6 Dec 2010


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

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/ASICALLCO-story-pd20101206-BV7EC?OpenDocument

By a staff reporter

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has accepted an enforceable undertaking from KPMG Sydney auditor Christopher Whittingham.

The undertaking follows an investigation by ASIC into Mr Whittingham's conduct in his audit of Allco Financial Group Ltd.

ASIC said it was concerned Mr Whittingham failed to adequately perform his duties as an auditor after Allco’s financial report for the 2006/2007 financial year was found to contain a $1.8 billion misclassification of interest bearing loans as a non-current liability rather than a current liability.

Mr Whittington must now pay $10,000 to ASIC to cover its costs, and has undertaken not to act as a registered auditor for a period of nine months. He must also undertake an additional ten hours of continuing professional education on audit related matters during his suspension period.

ASIC said Mr Whittington acted swiftly to notify it after the error came to his attention.

 

[marcom]

Selciper, in the case of the PIF RE 'sale" any recovery would be made against WC and JH and other WC directors and not the fund - the Liquidator has no call over our funds.

If you look at what has come out in the public examinations: JH was an advisor to the MFS/Octaviar Board - Fom Mark Korda's evidence:

"...Ms Hutson was acting as an adviser to the MFS board at that time, raising doubts it was an arms-length transaction.

''At the time of the transaction I don't think they were independent,'' Mr Korda said yesterday."

JH has said that one of the entities she cleared the transaction with was Korda Mentha. Now Mark Korda says the transaction was not arms length.

For more try David Anderson's evidence: http://www.businessday.com.au/busin...nefit-of-inside-knowledge-20100722-10n2x.html

To date WC has not paid any consideration for the purchase of all the shares in the RE.

In the Supreme Court it surfaced that the PIF RE deal came with $5mill in the RE"s account (presumably this was the required liquidity for the Financial Services Licence - WC already had a licence so remove you own $5mill and it is a cunning transfer payment), that Octaviar provided a further $3mill to operate PIF in the short term (WC admitted this to McMurdo in evidence and the Public Trustee didn't seem to know about this) and I think there was another amount that may have been to cover employee entitlements. All for no consideration! And they continue to assert that the transaction was arms length!

Where is the evidence that the Octaviar Board adequately considered other offers for the PIF RE?

 

[selciper]

Marcom - Many thanks for the analysis.

 

[LTD]

Hi Marcom,
I found this old article dated 14th Feb 2008 , during the shakeout which covers the PIF situation and states that CIY were given 'exclusivity' and there being tyrekickers around etc...Note the value?

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...acific-goes-cherry-picking-BT4JW?OpenDocument

I suppose I cant
vouch for all media reports but some you pay more attention to.There must be many old reports about this.
Perhaps avoiding CIY advances..and this wasnt the first, was on the boards mind or rather was 333 advising.

2.
I got sidetracked the other day and found myself reading a Deloittes creditors report which included an estimate of only $9 to 79mil ? being possibly recoverable if preferntials were found... but directors would be
' OK 'as acting under advise.. That last point has been discovered in legal links about corporations, hasnt it?
I have taken this info out of context and it was written a while ago...excuse excuse...ie DYOR. and please dont rely on my ltd knowledge.

 

[LTD]

I just had another jump to a conclusion thought...

If MFS was ready to bid for Centro assets/debt? or whatevers? back in 2008...
not exactly sure of the timing but it surprised,imo....
Was there some sort of connection?...ie property development/ownership/debt
..personell/director/advisor anything which gave them the confidence
or knowledge to think about that amazing bid/offer?
I am not familiar with Centros case at all ..

Marcom...I think that often there is a' human' connection...thats how/why they have confidence/knowledge/availablity etc to take on things others wouldnt look at,imo.
I do see this from a great distance and others might be closer?

 

[Duped]

LTD, the liquidator will be looking to see if such deals were done at arms length and are fair and reasonable, otherwise they are preferential and the liquidator can sue for compensation. In our case the Public Trustee has argued that the "sale" of the PIF RE to WC is preferential because JH had inside knowledge as an advisor to the Octaviar Board, paid no consideration for the share purchase and was given $8mill plus as part of the deal. The reason why nothing has been done about this to date is the liquidator is still finalising its report on Octaviar in which it will specify an insolvency date. After the report is delivered to the court and ASIC we may see some action - but this is likely to be into next year.

And Ltd. IMLO, the longer WC drag out paying itself, the stronger WC's argument that it hasn't benefited from the deal. This would weaken PTQ's case that the deal was 'preferential'. How could it be so if there is little or no benefit? It could look more like WC was doing PIF a favour. This puts an incentive on WC to simply mothball PIF. Whether WC has acted on these incentives is a different question.

 

[Duped]

PATHETIC!!!! The punishment is hardly a deterent or an example to others to be more diligent!!
Allco auditor fined by ASICPublished 9:11 PM, 6 Dec 2010

Certainly is a deterent. Deters me from putting any real consideration on the value of auditing services. ASIC has spoken. There's little incentive for auditors to be accurate. In fact the incentive to rush through audits to get onto the next job outweighs the incentive to be accurate.