Former director of Investment Intelligence Corporation (IIC), Senen Pousa, was banned after engaging in unlicensed financial advice, ASIC said in a statement.
It said that, through IIC, Mr Pousa had advised clients to invest in financial products via online webinars and a website, charging clients between $3,000 and $5,000 for access to his product recommendation.
Neither IIC nor Mr Pousa held an Australian Financial Services Licence or any other authorisation to operate a financial services business.
ASIC said the financial product that Mr Pousa was recommending resulted in significant losses to investors and criminal charges are being pursued against two individuals in the Netherlands by the Dutch Fiscal Police.
In addition, it had taken earlier criminal and civil action against Mr Pousa and IIC.
“In April 2018, after pleading guilty to one charge of aiding and abetting his company, IIC, to carry on a financial services business without holding an AFS licence, Mr Pousa was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, suspended on the condition that he be of good behaviour for five years,” ASIC said.
“In July 2012, ASIC froze more than $3 million in funds held by IIC as part of its investigation and also obtained orders preventing Mr Pousa from leaving the country. ASIC subsequently obtained orders to wind up IIC on just and equitable grounds.”
ASIC said Mr Pousa has the right to seek review of its banning decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
Will IFA run a story about about Cardinal George Pell, Financial Controller with the Vatican and call it “Financial Adviser makes court appearance”. You’ve hit a new low IFA.
and the irony is ASIC allow an appeal against their decision. To do what – to keep providing unlicensed “advice”. Hit me again with that feather please.
How can ASIC ban someone not registered? Also, what benefit does it do as he’s not even registered so banning has no real detriment???
It appears from a bit of research that the company IIC and Pousa may possibly have been in operation since around 2003 !!…if this is the case, then it seems like 9 years or so until the company funds were frozen (only those funds that were known about ) and another 6 years to receive a permanent ban.
In the past, many of these companies selling online webinars and investment systems designed to educate the investor on how to make millions are effectively providing advice based on promises.
I have also read that there may have even been a rating provided by a research house on this particular company….if this is the case, then where does the responsibility rest in this instance.?
How long BEFORE July, 2012 was this individual and IIC operating ?
[quote=Werner Watzdorf CFP]How do you ban an unlicensed adviser? Someone help me out, please.[/quote]
Firstly, you would have to have him complete a degree ( but we are not sure which one to recommend at this stage because it may not be relevant soon), then have him sit a 4 hour close book exam with no
available study notes on the sections of the Corporations Act that he breached…he can have 3 cracks at that, then we have to get him authorised through an AFSL that would accept his application and then he can receive a permanent ban from providing financial services.
Good response, looks like this guy found a shortcut. Far out, and calling him an adviser is just plain insulting.
So in July 2012, there was more than $3 Million of funds frozen in an organisation that had no AFSL.
Significant investor losses, no authorisation to operate a financial services business and links to international operators being charged by Dutch Police.
Nearly 6 years later, this individual is permanently banned from providing financial services!!
Has this individual been providing any form of coercion, advice or accepting monies for investment in the last 6 year period ?
When is someone in the media going to print the good stuff us “licenced” advisers do..like the number of claims I have intervened in and got refusals overturned..and the client hasn’t had to pay some damned solicitor thousands of dollars from their claim because I get paid a trail commission…(shock horror), to look after my clients!
Unlicensed advice is exactly where the industry needs to go. Get rid of onerous compliance and regulations. Make advice cheaper by evolving a new regime, a new service where no product is sold but great advice given on strategy and guidance. Ensure every adviser under this new regime is qualified and has experience. Rid the advice industry of its heavy baggage, ridiculous SOA rubbish and massive compliance cost. Clients only need strategy, they can execute whatever product they need within that strategy. It removes the crazy cost to everyone. No more FPA needed. Advisers could ditch the current madness and start proving real advice to all within a two hour long meeting instead of the pathetic red tape meetings and sign offs clients expertise today for thousands of dollars and the fee for service rubbish you all know is a con.
Advice without litigation, without commission, without trailing service fees and without 40 page soa’s no one reads or needs.
Cue the dinosaurs who can’t let go of fee for service and see everyone would be better off.
Hi Steven.
Steven, I’m all for reducing red tape and compliance. Question is how we do it? I believe self regulation is the answer.
I haven’t got a degree in Journalism…but I am pretty adept at writing…so now that being a Financial Adviser is becoming more difficult by the day….I am heading off into a career as an Unlicensed Journalist.
One asks why he wasn’t jailed for 5 years . Don’t ASIC understand its a slap on the wrist .
Good to see ASIC taking action against unlicensed financial advice. That’s one more down, and about 100,000 accountants, real estate agents, and union fund spruikers to go.
Not too sure how ASIC will be recovering their annual fees for this service they will be providing to these unlicensed “advisers” or even how do they know who they are…ah yes, the licensed well behaved advisers will be paying these fees but getting no service…I’m so confused…LOL!
Weren’t all those bank tellers giving unlicenced advice? And being paid for it – just like their bosses.
This ridiculous…you cant BE an adviser if you do not hold an AFSL or you are not an Authorised Representative of an AFSL. This scammer had no authorisation to operate a financial services business and so the media should refrain referring to these criminals as ADVISERS or UNLICENSED ADVISERS.
You cant be an ADVISER OR AN UNLICENSED ADVISER if you are not licensed to be one !!!
You don’t refer to an unlicensed Journalist or unlicensed Doctor or Lawyer because they aren’t one if they are not qualified or are unlicensed.
It seems that IFA want to subliminally damage the reputation of licensed Financial Advisers and the very people they claim to represent (INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL ADVISERS).
Dear Adrian Flores.
Please don’t refer to everyone and everyone as “advisers”. It’s hard enough encouraging clients to seek advice letting alone using alarmist headlines such as the one used here. We’re an easy target as it is and over regulated. A part (small) is the media calling everyone and anyone “adviser”
Seems like there are two types of advisers. Those that are licensed and those unlicensed advisers. I thought there was only one.
Funny what a royal commission does ASIC is now active
How do you ban an unlicensed adviser? Someone help me out, please.
You cant. They just keep providing unlicensed advice without repercussion while ASIC thinks they have made a difference.