Melbourne AFSL receives interim orders from Federal Court
ASIC has obtained interim orders from the Federal Court to freeze the assets of an advice licensee.
The interim orders freeze the assets of financial advice licensee United Global Capital Pty Ltd (UGC) and related property investment company Global Capital Property Fund Limited (GCPF), an authorised representative of UGC since 2020.
Melbourne-based UGC describes itself as offering private wealth advice, securities, real estate opportunities, asset management and self-managed superannuation funds.
ASIC sought the orders to protect investor funds while an investigation is continuing.
On 20 June, Justice O’Callaghan ordered that UGC and GCPF be restrained from:
- removing property from Australia,
- selling, charging, mortgaging, dealing with or disposing of property,
- incurring new liabilities, or
- withdrawing, transferring, disposing of, or dealing with money held in bank accounts or with a financial institution (subject to limited exceptions).
At a subsequent hearing on 25 June, the Federal Court extended the time for compliance with some of the disclosure orders that had been made and adjourned the matter for further hearing at 10:15am on 11 July 2024.
AUTHOR
Laura Dew
Recommended for you
The FSCP has announced its latest verdict, suspending an adviser’s registration for failing to comply with his obligations when providing advice to three clients.
Having sold Madison to Infocus earlier this year, Clime has now set up a new financial advice licensee with eight advisers.
With licensees such as Insignia looking to AI for advice efficiencies, they are being urged to write clear AI policies as soon as possible to prevent a “Wild West” of providers being used by their practices.
Iress has revealed the number of clients per adviser that top advice firms serve, as well as how many client meetings they conduct each week.
There should be a release of additional information regarding the reasons ASIC has taken action against UGC. As a past client of UGC I think this information should be made available. The fact that neither ASIC nor the administrator appointed by ASIC will respond to requests for this information suggests not all is above board. For ASIC to create a situation where hundreds of clients are left without administration of their SMSF without any warning demonstrates ASIC does not consider the interests of the public.