InterPrac’s lawsuit against the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) is just one of the many twists and turns that have emerged since the collapse of Shield and First Guardian, with the firm claiming to the Federal Court they were treated unfairly.
In words of InterPrac parent company Sequoia chief executive Garry Crole, the lawsuit was motivated by AFCA not following their own rules.
“They’re not prepared to consider all the parties that are relevant to the loss,” Crole told ifa at the time of the lawsuit’s announcement.
“So, we actually think we’re acting in the best interest of the members, as we did when we called out Netwealth and Macquarie to make compensation under ORFR.
“We’re of the belief that members will be best served if all parties can be part of the solution, rather than what AFCA is attempting to do, and that is put everything against the adviser and nothing against any other party, which basically sends everything to the CSLR and is bad for the industry.”
The latest hearing on this case, according to Shield and First Guardian victim and advocate Melinda Kee, dealt largely with the timing of the case.
Specifically, Justice Jonathan Beach questioned the need for “lengthy delays” in the case, noting proceedings commenced in February of this year and that it needed to be dealt with efficiently, given the broader implications this matter has for the impacted investors.
This is likely in reference to the fact that the hearing has put complaints payments on hold.
The Judge determined the deadline for proceedings would be as follows:
- AFCA to have its defence filed by 24 July 2026
- InterPrac to have its evidence filed by 21 August 2026
- AFCA to have its evidence filed 4 September 2026
- InterPrac to have any reply evidence filed by 18 September
Kee also highlighted that the Judge “made it clear” he wanted the matter heard before the end of the year, the current expectation being for a 19-20 October hearing.
“No findings were made on the merits of the case,” Kee reported.
“The hearing was procedural only, but it resulted in a clear pathway toward a final hearing and avoided further fragmentation of the proceedings.”
Kee herself has been drawn into the InterPrac lawsuit as a witness for the financial firm, a move she said will likely retraumatise victims all over again.
ASIC has also flagged potential further regulatory action, with the case holding up AFCA’s ability to process claims.
While it will continue to accept complaints regarding InterPrac, as well as working on existing cases, AFCA said it won’t be issuing any formal decisions. This means complainants will have to wait until the court proceedings conclude to find out if their case will be impacted and then to receive any due payment.
The only thing the wider Adviser profession could agree with from InterCrap.
It should not be “contentious” at all for AFCA to have to apply the law of Proportionate Liability.
The case is extremely important to stop the obscene Advisers blamed for everything, persecution from Canberra.
And MIS for 25 years are frozen, failed and frauded for over $40 Billion and somehow MIS remain unaccountable.
Corrupt Canberra must be changed.