The response from ASIC came in relation to a question on notice from Liberal senator Slade Brockman around when the regulator was first made aware of problems surrounding the Sydney businesswoman, who is missing, presumed dead and allegedly perpetrated a fraud of more than $20 million against her former clients.
“With respect to the high profile case of Melissa Caddick, can you please advise when ASIC was first made aware of issues with respect to her, either through a complaint or another form of feedback and what ASIC did as a result of this notice?” Senator Brockman asked.
The regulator conceded it was first made aware of a complaint against Ms Caddick in November 2019, nearly a year before it acted to freeze her assets in the Federal Court.
“ASIC first received a report from an anonymous source regarding Melissa Caddick on 26 November 2019,” the regulator said.
“ASIC receives hundreds of complaints each month. The report on 26 November did not allege there had been a financial loss.”
ASIC said it did not begin investigating Ms Caddick until more than six months later, when a second complaint was received in early June 2020.
“Following an investigation, ASIC successfully applied to the court on 10 November 2020 for asset freezing and other orders and executed a search warrant with the assistance of the [Federal Police] on 11 November 2020,” the regulator said.
Ms Caddick went missing from her home in Sydney’s eastern suburbs shortly after the police raid took place, and her partial remains were found in February this year. ASIC is still pursuing the wind-up of her company Maliver in the courts with a view to returning any available funds to investors.
They’re just waiting for CSOLR to kick in so they can bill us
It seems like a trend with these people. Which is probably half truth of what they say
Their lead time has improved. I think it was over 2 years it took them to investigate cba whistle-blower complaints from jeff Morris.
Obviously, they’re Too busy trying to send you out of business with defective Fee Disclosure Statements, trying to find evidence that you promised 4 newsletters and you only delivered 3.
“ASIC receives hundreds of complaints each month. The report on 26 November did not allege there had been a financial loss.”
Chance of being caught by ASIC for providing unlicensed Advice is clearly very very small.
Why be licensed?
Well done ASIC….asleep at the wheel again!!
Because they are incompetent, but to be fair it might have also been above their pay grade. Either way no accountability.
ASIC is too busy trying to go after licensed financial advisers to be bothered with unlicensed advice. Unlicensed advice is rife on social media and they never seem to do anything about it, even when it’s reported to them.
ASIC took 12 months because their priorities are up sh#t creek and always have been.
Spot on Giggity,
ASIC are more concerned with total Strangulation of Real Advisers for the most minor admin breaches.
ASIC are more concerned raising Adviser levies.
ASIC are more concerned finding & paying highly conflicted so called academics to write corrupted FARSEA submissions.
ASIC are more concerned trying to help Industry Super by making totally inflated & utterly False SMSF costs sheets.
ASIC are more concerned selecting a tiny sample of well know Life Insurance churn advisers to try to prove need for LIF.
ASIC and Ms Above My Pay Grade Press are a disgusting, self inflated, corrupt bureaucratic shambles & bumbling buffoons.
Clean the ASIC swap NOW !!!!
ASIC are more interested in raising revenues from the banks via fines (with no penalties nor restrictions to operations) and banning Advisers for administrative errors than actually protecting consumers – that would be too much hard work. What’s the old saying – if you want a job done poorly, give it to public servants.
ASIC has the register of licensed financial advisers a quick check would show Caddick was not licensed yet no initial enquiry – you are kidding ASIC-!!!
Seems to me that the Commonwealth needs to charge ASIC and its commissioners with negligence. By not investigating this matter earlier, ASIC has failed to meet its key mandate under the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (ASIC Act).
How long until a lawyer acting for the people that lost money jump onto this.
Will ASIC’s legal costs for this belated & messy clean up job for an unlicensed individual spruiker also be charged to the Licensed Financial Advisers remaining in the industry?? This seems to be more like old Keystone Cops B&W cartoons of yesteryear.
OF course it will
I wonder if ASIC will put their hand up and pay out of pocket for all the losses incurred due to their incompetency to act in a timely manner. maybe even kick in some money for the ASIC adviser levy too. 🙄
That would be right, ASIC only ever been interested in destroying hardworking, honest, loyal advisors, toxic disgusting organisation.
This could be true or very evasive, depending on the exact initial complaint. The complaint may not have alleged that money was lost but that the adviser was not registered. That should have been a gigantic red flag.
From my experience if you record that you have not lost money they generally don’t investigate further. Basically you have to be stupid enough to not do a google search and have lost money for ASIC to investigate because they also can’t search the financial planner register they control.
We missed her by this much…. So the fact she was not on any register of ASIC meant they ignored it.. this the story of ASIC always arrive after the horse has bolted..
Agreed – how was that question NOT asked. Asic receives a tip that a person masquerading as an adviser is operating as a ‘licenced’ adviser – but because there was no loss infered they didnt feel the need to investigate…something isnt adding up!
I take it advisers will have to foot the bill for ASIC’s defence if someone sues ASIC for investing through Melissa Caddick after 26 November 2019.
Foot the bill!!! LOL
…plus we were dealing with the more serious matters of banning licensed financial advisers who were found to have sent out FSG’s with creased corners on a few pages and some who we discovered had issued advice documents in 2010 that didn’t meet the new criteria we brought out in 2020.
Seems about right….but you forgot to mention how engrossed they were with Barefoots book and the suggestion to discuss recovery budgets over regular evenings of Wine and Wagyu?