Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Duped · 21 March 2011

ASICK said:
We're probably speaking to the same thing. As I see it, a right of set-off has to exist BEFORE the order. If there is such a right, then the order is not effective against it (to the extent of the amount of set-off).

NAB is a Fortress creditor. But for what? That's the scary question.
PTQ sought to have the escrow account moved to another bank. McMurdo wouldn't issue such an order.

Is the right of set-off limited to the amount owed under the NAB facility as at the date of the order? Or does the right of set-off extend to the full amount available under the facility whether or not some of that amount is drawn after the date of the order?

ASICK · 21 March 2011

Duped said:
NAB is a Fortress creditor. But for what? That's the scary question.
PTQ sought to have the escrow account moved to another bank. McMurdo wouldn't issue such an order.

Is the right of set-off limited to the amount owed under the NAB facility as at the date of the order? Or does the right of set-off extend to the full amount available under the facility whether or not some of that amount is drawn after the date of the order?

I'm just opining - I have no idea of the law and the facts relating to the case.

For example, if assets are encumbered by way of fixed or floating charges for example, maybe the set-off would only be exercised if the security assets fell short of satisfying any part of the drawn down facility up to the date and time of the order.

On the other hand it might be that the bank is able to simply apply a set-off without regard to the security assets.

If I had to guess, I'd guess the former of these two options.

seamisty · 22 March 2011

So Pif investors, it is over a year since I accepted the offer of periodic discussions offered between myself and the Companys Managing Director of WC. Wellington Capital still decline to honour that committment offered to me personally by Caroline Snow on behalf of Jennuy Hutson. WHY? And WC continue to ignore requests to folllow up on that offer. Why?? Did Wellington Capital think it was an offer which would flatter me because they thought it would shut me up re my continued enquiries re the IAC voting results? Or did they recognise the fact that refusing to make public the IAC voting results it would draw adverse attention to the fact that it was strongly suspected that the whole IAC was possibly a sham?? Sham is right I strongly suspect, Rrght from day one and I sincerely apologise to those that I paid out on this forum who were way ahead of me in recognising that WC would never be able to 'put the money where their mouth was'. I still hold the duly appointed IAC reps accountable for NOT representing the PIF unit holders who probablly did not elect them anyway. How would we ever know?? PS, I have had much support from other PIF investors thanking me for my efforts, can the duly appointed WC IAC reps say the same? Well I guess we will never know because not one of them has ever had the integrity to liaise or communicate with PIF investors in any way to my knowledge, not forgetting that PIF investors would be charged for their periodic WC gag fests!! Cynical, why wouldn't every PIF investor be?

Seamisty

lawry1dog · 22 March 2011

I agree with seamisty, WC must now resign immediately.

On an optimistic note, I think the following may happen (I hope)
. WC resign or liquidate and give us some of our money back.
. The Class Action will then give us the balance back.
. Plus I want all the interest I have missed out over the last 3 years (at 9%).

Does anyone agree with this scenario?

I will never give up on getting my money back.

seamisty · 22 March 2011

ASIC's governance failure rolls on March 22, 2011 - 11:26AM

http://www.smh.com.au/business/asics-governance-failure-rolls-on-20110322-1c4ff.html

Janiss · 22 March 2011

seamisty said:
So Pif investors, it is over a year since I accepted the offer of periodic discussions offered between myself and the Companys Managing Director of WC. Wellington Capital still decline to honour that committment offered to me personally by Caroline Snow on behalf of Jennuy Hutson. WHY? And WC continue to ignore requests to folllow up on that offer. Why?? Did Wellington Capital think it was an offer which would flatter me because they thought it would shut me up re my continued enquiries re the IAC voting results? Or did they recognise the fact that refusing to make public the IAC voting results it would draw adverse attention to the fact that it was strongly suspected that the whole IAC was possibly a sham?? Sham is right I strongly suspect, Rrght from day one and I sincerely apologise to those that I paid out on this forum who were way ahead of me in recognising that WC would never be able to 'put the money where their mouth was'. I still hold the duly appointed IAC reps accountable for NOT representing the PIF unit holders who probablly did not elect them anyway. How would we ever know?? PS, I have had much support from other PIF investors thanking me for my efforts, can the duly appointed WC IAC reps say the same? Well I guess we will never know because not one of them has ever had the integrity to liaise or communicate with PIF investors in any way to my knowledge, not forgetting that PIF investors would be charged for their periodic WC gag fests!! Cynical, why wouldn't every PIF investor be?

Seamisty

Do we know if the 3 elected representatives really exist or are they just fictitious names? Does anyone on this Forum know if they are actual unitholders?

seamisty · 22 March 2011

Janiss said:
Do we know if the 3 elected representatives really exist or are they just fictitious names? Does anyone on this Forum know if they are actual unitholders?

Janiss I understand Andrejic is, not sure about Woodford or Mangan.

Seamisty

seamisty · 22 March 2011

HMNN, Appears the voting power of WC in relation to the units in the Wholesale Premium Income Fund continue to diminish while investors choose to sell on the NSX and possibly buy back in.

http://www.nsxa.com.au/ftp/news/021723819.PDF

I am sure I would not like Wellington Capital to continue to have control of my voting power after their pathetic performance!! We still do not know if WC used their approximate 11% voting power of the PIF units to duly appoint their preferred IAC reps because Wellington Capital refuse to divulge that information!! Not that anyone would be surprised considering the lack of transparencey we have all endured.
Seamisty

seamisty · 23 March 2011

Another PIF investor has asked me to post the following article because it 'might give some people hope that people are being held accountable'

Fincorp deal done

Ben Butler

March 23, 2011

LAWYERS for investors in property group Fincorp, which collapsed in 2007 owing noteholders about $200 million, have struck a settlement deal over its failure.

The deal between Slater & Gordon and Sandhurst Trustees, which was trustee for the noteholders, has to be approved by the Federal Court.

No dollar value was put on the settlement at a Federal Court hearing yesterday. Slater & Gordon had been seeking up to $100 million.

Under the proposed deal, which also requires investor approval, Slater & Gordon's legal costs are to be paid out of the settlement pool before the proceeds are distributed to investors.

Justice Michelle Gordon said yesterday she would review the proposed scheme with a view to making orders today.

seamisty · 23 March 2011

Geelong conman Hoy jailed

Bring it on!! Plenty more deserve the same if not more time in jail for similar crimes.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/geelong-conman-hoy-jailed-20110323-1c6sv.html

simgrund · 24 March 2011

seamisty said:
Janiss I understand Andrejic is, not sure about Woodford or Mangan.

Seamisty

I feel so exposed and unprotected by this IAC anonymity.
Can we instigate a "Freedom of Information" request?
Regards,

Duped · 24 March 2011

This could explain why our Port Mac and Gong properties haven't been finalised and our nesteggs returned to us.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/executive-lifestyle/no-shore-thing/story-fn6njxlr-1226018349673

The Economist is bagging our property prices to the world. Lets wrap this thing up WC. Before we get hit again. We gave you a 5 year time frame. Not a 10 to 20 year time frame. You're already 1/2 way to the 5 years.

Duped · 24 March 2011

simgrund said:
I feel so exposed and unprotected by this IAC anonymity.
Can we instigate a "Freedom of Information" request?
Regards,

I'm pretty sure that FOI doesn't apply for us. I believe it's limited to info held by government and it's institutions. But I could be wrong.

selciper · 24 March 2011

seamisty said:
Geelong conman Hoy jailed

Bring it on!! Plenty more deserve the same if not more time in jail for similar crimes.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/geelong-conman-hoy-jailed-20110323-1c6sv.html

It is noticeable in the Hoy sentencing that the judge mentions the word "deception" several times.

selciper · 24 March 2011

simgrund said:
I feel so exposed and unprotected by this IAC anonymity.
Can we instigate a "Freedom of Information" request?
Regards,

I think that FOI can be used only when seeking to obtain documents from government agencies.

ASICK · 24 March 2011

selciper said:
I think that FOI can be used only when seeking to obtain documents from government agencies.

How about a mask, a pair of latex gloves, crowbar, some night vision glasses, and a camera? and, of course, nerves of steel. but, if you were like me, after you went and acquired all those things, you'd probably want to take a rest!

but other avenue do you have open?

seamisty · 24 March 2011

Well today was 'D' day for for each of the respondants in the ASIC v KING & others-Supreme Court Hearings to file a defence and tomorrow is listed for ' Supcase Review'

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/esearc...eNumber=12122/09&Court=Supreme&Location=BRISB

Seamisty

simgrund · 25 March 2011

selciper said:
I think that FOI can be used only when seeking to obtain documents from government agencies.

I may have meant "FOI" type of request somewhere.
Thanks for showing me the depths of my desperation.
Have a good weekend all,

selciper · 25 March 2011

simgrund said:
I may have meant "FOI" type of request somewhere.
Thanks for showing me the depths of my desperation.
Have a good weekend all,

One possibility of tackling the IAC election process would be to have a motion put at an EGM to the effect that all documentation regarding the matter be tabled and circulated.

BootsnAll · 26 March 2011

Any comments?
View attachment 42076

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency