ASIC has commenced civil penalty proceedings against Asgard Capital Management in the Federal Court after finding it charged fees for no service to 404 customers and failed to act “efficiently, honestly and fairly”.
ASIC alleges that from September 2014 to August 2017 Asgard charged customers around $130,006 for financial advice after requests were made for customers’ financial advisers to be removed from their product accounts and after the advisers ceased providing advice, as well as issuing account statements for an investor directed portfolio service which appeared to show that adviser fees were no longer being charged. The wrongly charged fees were retained by Asgard as revenue.
The regulator alleged that Asgard’s conduct contravened its overarching obligations as an AFS licence holder.
ASIC also commenced proceedings against BT for issuing account statements that appeared to show that adviser fees were no longer being charged while the ‘adviser fee’ line item was removed from the account statement, with an amount equal to that fee added to the administration fee amount. The conduct was in relation to superannuation products for which BT is trustee.
“Today, ASIC has commenced a ‘fees for no service’ case against BT and Asgard as well as commencing a ‘fees for no service’ case against StatePlus Super,” said ASIC deputy chair Daniel Crennan QC. “Both cases, which relate to superannuation, were subject to cases studies in the royal commission, were investigated by ASIC’s Office of Enforcement and have been brought by ASIC to the Federal Court for determination.”
I’m sure back in those days it was call ASR (Adviser Service Revenue) not Advice Fee. ASIC was well aware of this but only in the last few years crapped on about it. You cant apply what was applicable and accepted 10, 8, 6 years ago to whats accepted today. If so people in their 50’s and older would be charged for sexual harassment at Xmas parties. It’s because ACIS got hammered at the RC. They think we have forgotten.
This whole thing is stupid. That fee was never for advice, even though it was called an advice fee – everyone knew it was commission, including ASIC. Of course they kept charging it when the agent was removed, otherwise everyone would go direct. There was never intended to be any advice – the fee was the fee – if there was an agent involved, part of the fee was paid as commission – that’s the way it worked.
I’m starting to feel sorry for Dover. Seems like the little guy is an easy target. In the case of Stateplus I think they’ll file it under “marketing expenses” .
Though ASIC is still encouraging Industry Funds to do the same thing? Well done Liberals.
BULLSHIT ASIC! What about INTRA FUND ADVICE fees charged to ALL members in industry super???????
Y’all corrupt!
Industry funds are obviously immune to ASIC and any one else that wants to check into their behaviour !! Rod m
Just what you’d expect from Westpac
ASIC is like the cross between ambulance chasers and vultures!
It always turns up after the accident and then leaves a carcass to be devoured.
They know what has occurred AFTER the fact so they mosey on down to start taking everyone to court, they have a winning case every time, they seek large monetary fines imposed, and then they stand gleefully proud of their achievement of attending after the accident to declare themselves the saviour.
Yet they continue to allow others who have quite blatantly breached the law to roam about freely without concern.
It seems that ASIC is intent on demonising private sector businesses to crash and burn and even dragging them under the bus!
Easy picking I guess. Don’t fight the bully boys!
Industry Funds are untouchable in this country, should be an RC into there corrupt tainted history
The Reponsible Managers on these AFSLs should be named and shamed. When will ASIC introduce a Responsible Manager register where the people responsible for ‘Monitoring and Supervision’ are listed along with their relevant qualifications and experience just like the Advice Register?
And Industry Funds get a free pass….