Find a litigation funder, put the facts before them. If it has a snow balls chance in hell they will fund it for a split of the recovered balance under some very stringent conditions. If it doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell, they will tell you not to waste your money.
I wasn't suggesting the documentation would have been unsigned, but rather that (as I think I read in a post from one Storm client) a bunch of papers was thrust under the client's nose - presumably following a suitable confidence-building sales spiel - and they were told, reassuringly "You don't have to worry about a thing. Just sign each of these pages and we'll take care of all the details for you."If unsigned documentation was accepted by the lead lender, I suspect they might have a problem with those cases.
A 'litigation funder'? Can you elaborate?
I wasn't suggesting the documentation would have been unsigned, but rather that (as I think I read in a post from one Storm client) a bunch of papers was thrust under the client's nose - presumably following a suitable confidence-building sales spiel - and they were told, reassuringly "You don't have to worry about a thing. Just sign each of these pages and we'll take care of all the details for you."
Judging by the naivete and gullibility which many Storm clients have shown, it would have been a piece of cake to have done this.
Subsequent to the signatures, the Storm advisers could very easily have inserted whatever figures they decided.
If this does turn out to be the case, I hope they are charged with fraud and get thrown in the slammer.
It looks like there might be another Storm, this time in Victoria!
http://www.moneymanagement.com.au/article/A-new-Storm-brewing/437840.aspx
In the first half of 2008, when we tried to get out, and sell our portfolios, Storm blocked us.
I don't sense one iota of regret or remorse from that couple. In their mind it is all the bank's fault.
Their sense of fair play is completely absent. Their reasoning that "there is still 5 million in the bank, so why can't I take two million for myself" is completely astounding.
The concept of deception and trading whilst insolvent seems never to have crossed their minds.
Storm Financial was a con and we accept responsibility for being caught. Cassimatis has a delusional approach to planning; maybe he believed the banks would support unsecured loans and gambling business practices. How many times did his businesses go broke before Storm - at least once, quite possibly twice? There was the same strategy for all clients - sell your home and invest in the share market. Or mortgage your houses/business to 80%+ and add on huge margin loans. Debt was viewed as an asset. Storm especially liked those close to retirement/retirees with savings; they would take any accessible super and invest it in shares. When asked, 'advisers' knew nothing about other avenues for investment. The strategy was to increase margin loans and house mortgages; to get more fees. We were told "trust us", "it's safe"; the stress on repeating such phrases, has been confirmed by ex employees who relate the Storm approach to that of a cult - with special secrets to life happiness. We were in because family and friends recommended them and we began doubting lots of things and talked about getting out. In the first half of 2008, when we tried to get out, and sell our portfolios, Storm blocked us. Storm had minimal PI insurance and they have ruined the lives of thousands of people. Storm geared clients to such high levels that we were doomed with even a small drop in the market. Clients were in a dire situation long before the market got to where it has been in 2009 - at approximately 4,800 for us. The lies continued when our "equity was turned into cash" as we were told we were taken out with our portfolio being worth more than our debt; but it wasn't. We were not greedy but the aim was to become self funded retirees; to ensure our financial future. Now we will be homeless (if we clear our debt). I was thinking of posting this on the Cassimatis website: "Can we camp on your lawn in Brisbane Manny, as you still have a house; and since your such a champion of ex-Storm clients?"imp:
Talking of naivety, I'm still shaking my head almost in disbelief at the Stormer interviewed on Four Corners who told of how he borrowed 1.8 million to invest through Storm. His job income was 50k.
The interviewer, clearly curious as to how this bloke thought a 50k income could fund an annual interest bill of well over 100k, asked him how he had intended to meet the commitments on the 1.8 million loan.
His reply was 'Storm told me it would be self-funding'.
The reporter pressed him further by asking 'Did you know how that was going to happen'?
By way of reply he could only offer again 'Storm told me it would be self funding'.
No disrespect intended towards any Stormers who may have done something similar. But it almost beggars belief that someone would not put just the tiniest bit of thought into what he was about to do, by working out that 50k annually can't possibly fund well over 100k annually.
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?