LM – THE APPALLING OFFSHORE STITCH UP OF EXPAT PENSIONS

11 thoughts on “LM – THE APPALLING OFFSHORE STITCH UP OF EXPAT PENSIONS”

1. Magellan was a well-known name among the expat community, but not necessarily for the interests of their clients. But none were as notorious as Meyer, which was trying to hawk land in Thailand. The ringleader skirted off to Bangkok, not long after this. http://bit.ly/1qxNQec

   . It took some time for the Japanese FSA to crack down as these companies. I still remember LM being a favorite among the consultants' took kits.

2. I don't expect to see any of this discussed in the local press on the News/Financial sections of Thaivisa.

   Well done Andrew. Thailand needs more of you.

3. Don't hold your breath waiting for ASIC to help. Look at the penalty handed down to a recent FA who lost everyone's money. From today's Age newspaper.

   ## A parliamentary inquiry has grilled the corporate regulator's top brass over why a financial planner who caused widespread misery by tipping people into forestry schemes that failed was banned from the industry for just three years.

   During a Parliamentary Joint Committee hearing on Friday morning, Labor Senator Deborah O'Neill said victims of Peter Holt, whose company Holt, Norman, Ashman, Baker was the biggest seller of investments in Timbercorp, had told her his behaviour was more in line with "ten year or permanent banning than the three years that's been applied".

   "They've lost everything, one of the things they want is to prevent this happening to anyone else," she said.

   Liberal MP Tony Smith asked: "What do you have to do to get life?"

   Ms O'Neill also asked why the Australian Securities and Investments Commission was planning to return a $20,000 security bond, lodged under an old regulatory regime, to Mr Holt's firm.

   ASIC chairman Greg Medcraft said ASIC delegates who decide penalties had to operate within case law set by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which currently treats holding a financial services license as "a right, not a privilege".

   "That's part of the issue they have to think about," he said.

   ASIC executive Louise Macaulay told the hearing Mr Holt had been banned in 2012 for giving inappropriate advice "influenced by very high commissions paid on certain agribusiness products".

   Speaking after the morning session, Nationals Senator John Williams, who is also on the committee, said the ban handed out to Mr Holt was "disgusting".

   "Here he is supposed to be bankrupt and according to the 7.30 Report he's living in a big house and driving a flash car."

4. If, as is likely from a Treasury consultative document, the British government proceeds to tax British overseas expats from their first pound of income and abolishes the initial 10,000 pounds personal allowance, we can expect financial fraudsters to be very active indeed. A single expat will be at least 2,000 pounds a year worse off and a married couple 4,000 pounds. It's going to be a happy hunting ground for bottom feeders looking to grab pensions and exploit the vulnerable.

5. The whole offshore investment industry through the tax havens has been a disaster for many expats in Asia. I was fortunate that I was sold a plan by an unregistered IFA in Japan. When the Japan FSA blew the cover, I was able to negotiate with Zurich to release my investment without penalties after 10 years. Actually, they were terrified that the media in Japan was going to pick up on this. Pretty shonky not to check the registration of consultants in a country like Japan.

6. Regulatory Legal Solicitors, the law firm is seeking redress for investors but lets see? as Abbott lobbying isn't interested so far. The company said it is trying to contact investors who may have been sold any of the LM’s now suspended funds over the past few years, and is encouraging them to get in touch. Tobias Haynes, a paralegal at Regulatory Legal is of the opinion the LM range of funds should not have been sold to many investors, as they were high risk, unregulated collective investment schemes (UCIS) suitable only for professional investors. “Typically investors are told of exaggerated returns, low risks and various guarantees, LM is no exception to this rule. Funds in overseas schemes which are unregulated are high-risk, offer no access to redress for investors through regulatory means and are ultimately difficult to verify or value. They are a definite no-go for retail clients.” The first signs of trouble at LMIM was 2009 when it took the decision to close its First Mortgage Income Fund and to sell down the fund’s assets in order to repay credit.
   Problems compounded at the end of 2012 when a company called Trilogy took control of the LM Wholesale First Mortgage Income Fund from it. Drake said: “LM is a diverse multi-fund manager currently managing nine Australian funds with total assets under management with a realisation value of A$3bn.” But 5 months after Drake made this statement, on 18 March 2013, the company filed for administration?? You can guess who the liar is. According to data obtained by IA, over 80 advisers each channelled over A$1m of their client’s money into its flagship Managed Performance Fund, which is now in liquidation, but had around A$400m invested at its peak. These LM advisers are now being looked at!!!!

7. The straw men and empty suits at ASIC are under attack again.

   Timid ASIC under fire over crackdown inconsistencies.

   http://www.theage.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/timid-asic-under-fire-over-crackdown-inconsistencies-20140905-10ct4r.html

   Macquarie Private Wealth: ASIC denies losing Penske File.

   http://www.smh.com.au/business/macquarie-private-wealth-asic-denies-losing-penske-file-20140905-10d2lg.html#ixzz3CVYKw6hN

8. What I find curious is that the S.E. Asia representative of the Adviser's Committee for Investors is not registered with Thailand's SEC and is therefore operating illegally. Why would anyone have any faith in an illegal IFA purporting to try to get you your investment back?

   1. Readers of this site will already know that very few foreign IFAs have registered with Thailands SEC. And one of the few firms which did nominated their IFA to the SEC a man who was banned from the business in the United States

9. From Graeme Smith (by email)

   "Given that some IFAs may be eventually be prosecuted by Regulatory Authorities or those appointed to deal with the aftermath of LM (or Investors) may bring civil actions against such IFAs at some future date it seems quite inexplicable for the Regulatory Authorities to allow any correspondence or representation between an Advisory Committee of IFAs and those now dealing with aftermath of LM. It may both forewarn and prejudice any legal action against such IFAs. Its quite extraordinary that the Regulatory Authorities have allowed this. In the aftermath there is a clear conflict of interest between the Investors and some IFAs who promoted this investment."

10. The names of the ACI organisers are some of the very same IFA conmen who continued for four years pushing their clients into LM's toxic funds. Even if they did not check themselves, Terpilowski warned them of the impending doom, but the IFA commissions were so exorbitant they ignored him. There was a far too chummy relationship between the owners of the IFA firms and Peter Drake. Were they altogether in on the scam from the start?
    We can be sure the formation of ACI was not to save cheated investors, more likely to save their own skins and outstanding commissions. The ACI conmen even had the gall to ask for more money from the same victims to save Drake's MPF fund!! ACI's conflicts of interest are obvious. How did anyone decide ACI could be the representative of scammed investors they created? I'd like to know which authorities have allowed this?
    The most galling aspect of this whole scam is that the same IFA shysters are still swanning around Bangkok and SE Asia. Nobody has touched them and nobody has strung up any of them. Yet…

Comments are closed.