Paying for what you get or backing a roughie?

3 November 2017
| By Outsider |
image
image
expand image

Call Outsider an old cynic and he will not disagree but news that the Federal Court had delivered a judgement upholding the appeals of the defendants in the so-called Prime Trust case makes this old journo feel vindicated.

You see, part of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC’s) case for pursuing an industry funding model was its ability to fund litigation and Outsider reckons that represents going down an extremely slippery slope littered with rapacious lawyers.

ASIC has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars pursuing the Prime Trust case and seems not to have won anything approaching a victory so Outsider questions whether planners should be asked to fund such projects.

Outsider doesn’t mind a flutter, but he has been following ASIC’s legal form for some time and regards it as a long-odds “roughie”.

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

3 weeks 1 day ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

3 weeks 5 days ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

2 months 4 weeks ago

ASIC has taken action against a Queensland adviser who was sentenced last May for misappropriating $1.8 million from his clients....

2 weeks 4 days ago

AMP is to launch a digital advice service to provide retirement advice to members of its AMP Super Fund, in partnership with Bravura Solutions. ...

2 weeks 4 days ago

A former Insignia Financial C-suite exec has taken on a leadership role at MUFG Retirement Solutions as it announces chief executive Dee McGrath will depart after six yea...

2 weeks 5 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS