Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,975
Wouldn't you or whoever was the client have received all the documentation when the loan was made?
It would also be interesting to know, if any of you investors can explain this, what you actually received from Storm in terms of documentation.
e.g. was there a written investment strategy, detailing level of risk?
That would be the most basic expectation I'd have if consulting any financial adviser.
What sort of risk assessment did they do in interview to determine appropriate level of risk?
How did they determine your aspirations/what you wanted the plan to do for you?
Agreed. My questions above were designed to discover how professional the approach from Storm was, in that all the above should have been undertaken before any investment was made. They were not meant to underline the naivete of the investors. I'm trying to work out what liability Storm may have. My understanding (which could be wrong) is that to carry out a proper risk assessment and provide an investment strategy is mandatory.Julia, from reading the stories on this thread, it looks a bit like Storm may have taken advantage of people with very little knowledge of investment or risk.
I realise that. I wasn't suggesting they should have instigated the risk profile, investment strategy etc., but was simply asking if this had happened. The question does not reflect on the clents, but on Storm.They acknowledge that they knew nothing and that's why they went for help. Would be doubtful if they would have known the right questions to ask.
Thank you, AWG. This is what I was getting at in my questions earlier.its almost academic now
but reputable FP have you answer a questionare that profiles your risk profile.
I was of the belief it was mandatory.
From that, your profile can be deduced, ie conservative,neutral, assertive aggressive etc.
Then they place you in a diversified range of cash, fixed interest, bonds, equity, property, to suit.
leveraged equity would be reserved for the highest risk profile only!
I still have my original plan, even though am no longer with FP.
I repeat all investors should have copies of their original documentation
You may wish to check with FPA about this
Thanks, Temjin. Further confirmation of what I was thinking.No, a risk assessment, or rather a risk profile is to look at the current life stage the client is in and his/her sensitive to risk. It's definitely mandatory and subject to audits.
A rule of thumb (based on study materials) is younger people with few debt will be able to take on more risk than those who are in retirement already. Of course, this rule may not necessary apply if the client's personal risk adversity is too low to accept the standard level of risk that he/she should take. i.e. he is young, can take a bigger risk, but refuse to do so because he prefer things to be safe, thus, take a balanced portfolio instead of full 100% share on margin. Or of course, it can go the other way. The retiree is asking to take on more risk against the advisor's advices.
To your last question, it's not. They completely violate every rules in the financial planner's book when it comes to risk assessment. Storm is only in it to maximum the amount of money one can put into their branded investment products. Or probably in denial that a black swan event will never happen to them.
I'd have hoped this was already a mandatory requirement.This is a good explanation. In my view what the financial planning industry needs to do is make these risk assessments mandatory and have standardised 'risk levels' (e.g. minimum risk, low risk, medium risk, high risk, kamikaze) with an accepted, industry wide description of what each risk level means. They then should get both the adviser and client to sign the risk assessment with the adviser incidating that they acknowledge the clients desired risk level and the client acknowledging they've accepted that risk level. It should be a standard form in large bold font - a bit like some of the documents used in real estate - and include an independant witness signing it.
Exactly. A properly executed risk assessment, investment strategy, should provide protection for both adviser and client.That way regardless of any 'rhetoric' they spout about everything being safe - when the cr*p hits the fan the client will have a document to fall back on. Alternately if the client comes in hungry to bet it all on red but then turns around and complains about the risks they were put into the adviser also has a document to fall back on.
Who would they sue though? It doesn't sound likely that there would be any money left in Storm after secured creditors are paid out.
I guess they'd have to try to sue someone for professional indemnity (who though - the company? the individuals?) and hope that the indemnity insurance covered it. I guess the indemnity insurance should still stand if it was paid up at the time that the professional misconduct occurred - even if the company doesn't exist any more.
Gee Whiz, Solly. It's all so damn easy isn't it, to just "get going and stop feeling sorry for yourself" , well, when you're not affected, that is!
I have no idea how retirees in, say, their 70's are going to 'get started again' if they have lost everything they've worked all their lives to acquire.
Ever tried living on a government benefit?
Julia,
No I'm not affected by this but I have been affected by something much bigger than this, and I'm still here.
There are only two options...
You either give in and die or fight to survive.
The choice is yours.
I made the active choice to choose to survive.
Was it easy...no.
Did it happen overnight...no.
Was it hard...you bet it was.
What did it feel like when I beat my challenges....
Like winning 10 gold medals at the Olympics.
Somebody offered me a little advice about how to eat an elephant.
Of course it's one bite at a time.
We all have our own challenges or "elephants to eat".
Sometimes it is better to remind ourselves to "eat" them one
bite at a time.
I avoided negative people & influences.
I met people that were also facing huge challenges in their life as well.
And I met those who had survived the most unbelievable things you could imagine. To put it in perspective living on welfare would have been a luxury to them. Most of them survived, some you will see even see in the media today, some you may pass in the steet and have no knowledge of what they experienced.
You say you have no idea how people will start again in there 70's, then I suggest you ask them, or maybe offer to help them.
If you are in your 70's and believe you are finished because of the Storm experience, then you ARE finished.
There are always choices....always alternatives.....as long as you are breathing there is always another way out. But you must NEVER lose the momentum or the will to change your circumstances and seek a way to better your position.
There are no excuses....there are only choices.
Julia,
No I'm not affected by this but I have been affected by something much bigger than this, and I'm still here.
There are only two options...
You either give in and die or fight to survive.
The choice is yours.
I made the active choice to choose to survive.
Was it easy...no.
Did it happen overnight...no.
Was it hard...you bet it was.
What did it feel like when I beat my challenges....
Like winning 10 gold medals at the Olympics.
Somebody offered me a little advice about how to eat an elephant.
Of course it's one bite at a time.
We all have our own challenges or "elephants to eat".
Sometimes it is better to remind ourselves to "eat" them one
bite at a time.
I avoided negative people & influences.
I met people that were also facing huge challenges in their life as well.
And I met those who had survived the most unbelievable things you could imagine. To put it in perspective living on welfare would have been a luxury to them. Most of them survived, some you will see even see in the media today, some you may pass in the steet and have no knowledge of what they experienced.
You say you have no idea how people will start again in there 70's, then I suggest you ask them, or maybe offer to help them.
If you are in your 70's and believe you are finished because of the Storm experience, then you ARE finished.
There are always choices....always alternatives.....as long as you are breathing there is always another way out. But you must NEVER lose the momentum or the will to change your circumstances and seek a way to better your position.
There are no excuses....there are only choices.
I agree, I agree I agree -I spent yesterday working through my choices had a list worked out of what I could possibly do in my 60's - widow, retired 5 years ago. Currently I have exactly $4000 to my name a mtge payment of $3000 due today, some how I have to hang on to my house (current thinking). Yesterday I was all fired up with I won't let this beat me. I woke this morning at 4.00am a little less confident but after reading your mantra for life I feel a lot like Rocky can hear that tune in my ears and will fight another day. So out with my trusty excel sheet and more calculations.
Thank you
There was a news on our local channel tonight (Qld) that the administrators are setting up something on their website for investors help. Also said letters are going out in 2/3 days.
Thanks for that Jayan, I have no expectations of getting fees back, however I would like to strongly pass on my displeasure to the Storm people how they took people on and invested only days before they went under.
Don't get me wrong I know some are really hurting badly, some may be in a very bad way. ( Call Life Line or Beyond Blue...Talk to someone, any one).
I'd have thought the options were a bit less dramatic than that, i.e. don't see that dying is the alternative.Julia,
No I'm not affected by this but I have been affected by something much bigger than this, and I'm still here.
There are only two options...
You either give in and die or fight to survive.
to all those interested, please follow this link to an exposure list I have begun.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14074
Agreed. My questions above were designed to discover how professional the approach from Storm was, in that all the above should have been undertaken before any investment was made. They were not meant to underline the naivete of the investors. I'm trying to work out what liability Storm may have. My understanding (which could be wrong) is that to carry out a proper risk assessment and provide an investment strategy is mandatory.
I realise that. I wasn't suggesting they should have instigated the risk profile, investment strategy etc., but was simply asking if this had happened. The question does not reflect on the clents, but on Storm.
Apologies if I misinterpreted your thoughts, Julia - I tend to skim through a bit
I agree, it does raise a lot of questions regarding Storm.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?