In an update on 25 September, the organisation said United Global Capital’s (UGC) membership will now be in place until 31 March 2026.
This will allow affected consumers to continue to make complaints and potentially receive compensation from the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR).
UGC’s membership had previously ceased in 31 May 2025, which meant it was unable to accept new complaints.
AFCA also listed a number of investment platform providers and superannuation trustees as having connections to the Shield Master Fund and First Guardian Master Fund.
The firms, who are all active members of AFCA, are:
-
YourChoice Super (investment platform provider), Diversa Trustees Limited (superannuation trustee)
-
Australian Practical Superannuation (investment platform provider), Diversa Trustees Limited (superannuation trustee)
-
Praemium Super (investment platform provider), Diversa Trustees Limited (superannuation trustee)
-
Netwealth Superannuation (investment platform provider), Netwealth Superannuation Services Pty Ltd (superannuation trustee)
-
NQ Super/Freedom of Choice (investment platform provider), Equity Trustees Superannuation Limited (superannuation trustee)
-
Macquarie Wrap (investment platform provider), Macquarie Investment Management Ltd (superannuation trustee)
-
Super Simplifier (investment platform provider), Equity Trustees Superannuation Limited (superannuation trustee)
In June 2024, ASIC obtained interim asset-freezing orders against UGC and related property development investment company Global Capital Property Fund Limited in the Federal Court.
On 31 July 2024, ASIC announced that it had cancelled UGC’s Australian Financial Services Licence, as well as banning director Joel Hewish for 10 years. In cancelling UGC’s licence, ASIC required it to remain a member of the AFCA scheme until at least 31 May 2025.
The problem with AFCA doing this is that it’s completely arbitrary – an unprincipled, arbitrary move that sets a dangerous precedent.
AFCA is making rules up as it goes, all under the rubric of “compassion for victims.” But if that’s the justification, why have any cutoff date at all? Why not just mandate forever membership? That way anyone at any time who “discovers” they’ve lost money can be made whole, regardless of when the misconduct occurred or when the firm collapsed.
Let’s call this what it is: AFCA has just materially increased the CSLR load in an unprincipled way. The membership was supposed to end in May 2025 – that was the rule. Now suddenly it’s March 2026? What happens when March 2026 rolls around and there are still complainants? Another extension?
This isn’t about lacking sympathy for Shield victims – they deserve compensation. But there are proper channels and processes that should be followed. When AFCA starts rewriting its own rules on the fly, it undermines the entire regulatory framework.
AFCA is getting too big for its boots and needs its wings clipped. It’s meant to be an ombudsman service, not a quasi-regulator making up membership rules as it sees fit. This kind of regulatory overreach helps no one in the long run – it just creates uncertainty and encourages firms to view AFCA’s rules as suggestions rather than requirements.
The road to regulatory chaos is paved with good intentions and arbitrary exceptions.
Afca trying to intentionally kill independent advice profession
This is absurd. It just means more complaints which will lead to more CSLR claims against Advisers who are doing the right thing!!
The whole system is BROKEN and trying to send us to the wall with CSLR.
I highly doubt UGC did the right thing.