Member for Throsby Stephen Jones has announced a last resort compensation scheme for self-managed superannuation investors, which will protect them against future losses to fraud. This has sparked more outrage from Trio Capital victims who are still waiting for some form of compensation from their losses almost three years ago.
The investors formed a protest outside Jones’ offices last week, organised by lobby group Victims of Financial Fraud Inc. (VOFF). In local newspaper coverage, Jones blamed the financial advisers of the Trio Capital victims for their huge losses.
"The reason these people lost their money is because they followed some very poor financial advice. What sort of financial advisor in their right mind would encourage someone to put their entire life savings into a single asset?" Jones said to the Illawarra Mercury.
He said he will continue to do everything he can to ensure they “have every access open to them, every avenue open to them, to try and find a way to get some compensation”.
VOFF Secretary John Telford has slammed Jones’ claims that he continues to advocate for Trio Capital victims. Telford said Jones failed to attend any VOFF Inc meetings, despite being asked to do so, and said Jones had not arranged any meetings between VOFF and Finance Minister Bill Shorten, despite implying he had done so in a recent WIN news bulletin.
“We have held only one meeting with Minister Shorten, and it was arranged by VOFF Inc and the Ministers office directly. Jones chose not to attend that meeting or the follow up meetings with the Ministers staff.”
VOFF has called for Jones to be ousted and replaced with an independent at the next election.
Swan refuses to rule out raids on super
Opportunity for planners in SMSF sector
Demand for UMAs skyrocketing
GAB on 18 Feb 2013 11:07 AM
Not sure what you mean there Pat...adviser's have copped most the fallout from the GFC as if they caused it. Whereas many many fund managers failed miserably and yet walk away and start another fund under another name. The research houses merely change their model portfolios as if the pre GFC one never existed. Can't really comment on Trio specifically as i never knew it existed until it went belly up. But i can assure you, while there is alot of talk about Trio...there must be many a fund manager and trustee who is sweating under their collar knowing they helped cause massive loss of investor wealth and yet walk away unscathed.
Let's get real on 19 Feb 2013 12:12 AM
GAB I think the mistake you are making is that you assume they are sweating at all.....or care. Seem to recall Basis Capital sitting on a research house model portfolio only to be quickly removed and never spoken of again. Advisers would be wise to never forget who's there to back you when the proverbial hits the fan ......and adjust your recommendations accordingly from the outset.
Pat on 19 Feb 2013 08:41 AM
Let's get real: alternatively, or at least in combination, don't recommend products when you do not know how they operate and in which markets they may catastrophically fail. It is one thing to have a product on your APL, it is another to recommend it without clear knowledge and understanding of it.
Pat on 20 Feb 2013 09:06 AM
GAB, what I am getting it is that there are certain people who frequently comment on this site who effectively say that the loss of client monies from failed products is in no way the responsibility of the adviser, given the research houses and APLs. Granted, the likes of Basis Capital were catastrophic failures, but I am sure many advisers did not know how the fund worked and simply relied upon past returns and the "Recommended" status by the research houses and dealer groups.
Let's get real on 21 Feb 2013 05:53 PM
Pat, I think if you re-read what I said you will find its the same as what your getting at. Don't rely on anyone else. Come to your own educated conclusions ....... There won't be anyone there to back you regardless. Still doesn't mean what has happened in the industry in relation to researchers etc is ok either though, it's not. Disclosure- I have not recommended failed schemes so am not going down that angle if thats what you thought.