An investigation by the corporate regulator found that misleading statements were made in two online advertising campaigns for BT Super, resulting in a penalty of $10,200 for each campaign.
The first campaign “misled consumers by representing that superannuation products issued by BT had generated greater returns than those generated by all industry super funds during the stated period”, said a statement from ASIC.
The second infringement notice was issued due to BT’s inclusion of the words “Industry Super Australia” in the headline of its advertising communication.
“ASIC was concerned that BT misled consumers into believing that BT had an affiliation with Industry Super Australia (ISA), an organisation which manages collective projects on behalf of fifteen industry super funds,” said ASIC.
“BT has never had an affiliation with ISA,” the regulator said.
Lets remind everyone (again) that ISA has copped similar fines, see http://www.ifa.com.au/news/126…
The penalties are set in the legislation, and they are far too low. The main reason they are low is that ASIC can deliver an administrative penalty without getting caught up in tribunals and courts about it.
I rarely recommended BT products but looking up their conventional ‘BT super for life’ product that is offered over the counter at a branch or via their internet banking it has actually outperformed pretty much every super fund from what I can see over the last 5 years…
At least much more truth than industry funds comparing themselves to the old and crappy retail products to say they are much better.
Medcraft is a joke! Penalising a financial organisation and making a big deal over it and yet never a harsh word about the ISA, or as a regulator of Australia’s future wealth in super products, any concerns raised or ASIC investigation about the alleged Union corruption and exorbitant fees paid by industry funds.
Get real Medcraft or get out – preferably the latter.
printing a lie is obviously the way to get caught, $20,400 is a joke but maybe what is set in legislation. Those that told fibs to the senate enquiry- nothing!!! if an adviser done something wrong-drawn -quartered and castrated and sent out of the paddock, justice??????
[quote name=”Anti V-I”]gee i thought i was cynical, finally asic takes action against these people and the trolls say ‘not enough’ or ‘wrong target’. no pleasing some people[/quote]
Actually I think the point here is that there is justice for some, BUT not for ALL
Yet Industry funds can make the most outrageous claims with apparent impunity !
gee i thought i was cynical, finally asic takes action against these people and the trolls say ‘not enough’ or ‘wrong target’. no pleasing some people
Yeah…you go ASIC! That penalty will make a massive dint to Westpac’s bottom line and teach them…(not).
If you want to get really serious about misleading advertising, and stop pulling everyone’s chain, start addressing the rubbish that direct insurers peddle on TV everyday.
How can lapse rates of 40% in the first year and claim decline numbers in the same range do any possible good to consumers confidence in this industry???
What I find interesting here is that had an adviser or a practice done this the penalty would have been far greater either proportionately or actual and had a greater reputational impact. This penalty to Westpac wouldn’t cause a ruffle over their morning coffees and biscuits. The regulator must get far harder on the big institutions and stop bashing the easy target – the adviser.
This is so hypocritical. Why have the Industry Super Funds not been hit with penalties over their Compare the Pair adverts which imply that they have outperformed retail funds over changing time periods to suit their own message.
This again shows ASICs biases under Greg Medcraft’s chairmanship. Time for him to go.
I recall a major, and prolonged campaign by the industry funds where they claimed higher returns, ‘Compare the Pair’! However I cant recall any fines being imposed?
When will ASIC take action against the misleading industry fund advertisements? I see too often the comments that they are better returns than retail funds ALL but do not see any action by ASIC.