SMSFs have plenty of compensation options: SPAA

smsf trustees self-managed super fund SPAA SMSFs australian prudential regulation authority parliamentary joint committee SMSF superannuation industry australian securities and investments commission chief executive

13 June 2012
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

The Self-Managed Super Fund Professionals' Association (SPAA) has moved to correct the "misconception" that SMSF trustees have no legal options ahead of them in the event of fraud or theft.

In the wake of the Parliamentary Joint Committee inquiry into the collapse of Trio Capital, it has been widely purported that SMSFs have "nowhere to go" because they are not APRA-regulated and therefore do not have access to Part 23A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act, said SPAA chief executive Andrea Slattery.

"Even some comments by those who gave evidence at the hearing gave the impression that SMSF investors had no prospect of compensation in the event of fraud or theft," said Slattery.

Slattery pointed to a recent court settlement in which an elderly woman was compensated nearly 100 per cent of her $1 million life savings that was lost in the Trio/Astarra fraud.

SPAA technical manager Peter Burgess said SMSFs could also take legal action against an adviser for losses under section 55(3) of the SIS Act, or alternatively under Corporations Law.

Part 23A of the Act gives the Minister discretion to order compensation for members of APRA-regulated funds who have suffered losses due to theft or fraud.

But Part 23A is not always enacted to compensate members of APRA-regulated funds, said Slattery.

"There was a postal fraud a couple of years ago, and an overseas Mafia theft of monies out of bank accounts that were from super funds. None of those were instigated under Part 23A, and they're having to find other avenues," she said.

Burgess said the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority are clamouring for alerts and disclaimers for SMSFs, and for SMSF trustees to be required to sign a declaration saying they are aware they are not covered under Part 23A.

"We think it's important you get that wording right. Yes it's true they're not covered under Part 23, but they potentially have other options available to them," Burgess said.

"APRA-regulated funds also have a role to play here in disclosing the limitations of Part 23 to their members," he added.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

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

3 weeks 5 days ago

This verdict highlights something deeply wrong and rotten at the heart of the FSCP. We are witnessing a heavy-handed, op...

1 month ago

Interesting. Would be good to know the details of the StrategyOne deal....

1 month ago

Insignia Financial has confirmed it is considering a preliminary non-binding proposal received from a US private equity giant to acquire the firm. ...

1 week 4 days ago

Six of the seven listed financial advice licensees have reported positive share price growth in 2024, with AMP and Insignia successfully reversing earlier losses. ...

6 days 17 hours ago

Specialist wealth platform provider Mason Stevens has become the latest target of an acquisition as it enters a binding agreement with a leading Sydney-based private equi...

5 days 21 hours ago