Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Wellington Capital PIF/Octaviar (MFS) PIF

Joined
25 January 2008
Posts
39
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

If a prominent Brisbane law firm indicates that there are breaches of the Corporations Act. then where in heaven's
name is ASIC?

Hi selciper and Other Unit Holders,
I am haven't checked if anyone else has mentioned this earlier however, I have just received a reply to my complaint from ASIC, I assume that mine was similar to the others. All double speak aside,they are basically saying that they do not propose to take any further action in relation to the matters raised (as far as I am aware they haven't taken any action anyway!!). However they will continue to monitor the position of the PIF and W.I.M Limited?????
Furthermore, they suggest to consider contacting a financial counselling service if we are experiencing financial difficulties??????????
About as useless as t.ts on a bull !!! what a joke.......
I intend to ask further questions but don't hold out much hope !!!!

I honestly feel that if we are going to get anywhere, we need to do it ourselves as a group.
 
Joined
14 August 2008
Posts
33
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Message to Newwwtrader. The preference shares are totally different and also wouldn't work for WC. City Pac units are deemed to be worth $1 per unit...it is simply a way of redeeming sooner than the 360 days. (which has 180 ish to go)...or staying for the long haul of 10 years with 3% above Reserve Bank interest rate. CP unit holders will be able to redeem after 360 days, at this point in time...but risk their interest being suspended or lessened in the meantime...where as if they take CPS.s the interest is cumulative. Totally unsutable for us.

I understand that the preference share issue is totally different to what has been proposed for PIF holders.

I merely mentioned it, as first it is a similar fund. The other (and main reason) is because it just shows that certain journalists and media outlets are in fact interested in these types of stories.

So if there is now a united group, maybe they could approach such an outlet, with the possibility of there opinions being spread to a greater audience than exist in this forum or in the various actions groups around Australia.

Many, many, many investors in this, are not members of such groups, and the media, would be the best way to approach them.

And you never know, if the action groups approach a journalist, air the grievances, the journalist may just wish to take up the story.

Its gotta be worth the effort.
 
Joined
18 June 2008
Posts
94
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

This in today's Australian:

-------------
Wellington accused of restrictions on Octaviar

by Anthony Klan | September 05, 2008

THE Brisbane finance company that snared control of the failed $750 million Octaviar Premium Income Fund is attempting to alter the fund's constitution in a move that would hand it millions of dollars, if it was removed as manager.

An independent report by Hicksons Lawyers partner Kalinda Cobby has warned that Wellington Investment Management was attempting to impose "onerous" restrictions on the PIF that "fetter" the ability of investors to remove Wellington as manager.

In an offer to investors allegedly riddled with errors, Wellington -- controlled by former Gold Coast financier Jenny Hutson -- was also attempting to alter the voting procedure required to remove Wellington as manager.

Ms Hutson told The Australian that proposed changes would make it more difficult for PIF's 10,000-plus investors to remove Wellington, but claimed it was a move to help investors who "wanted to ensure we were there for the long-run".

Under the proposed severance fee -- of 2 per cent of "gross assets" -- Wellington would receive a fee of more than $8 million if PIF investors voted to replace it as manager.

Ms Cobby, who is also the vice-president of the Commercial Law Association of Australia, was employed to undertake the review of Wellington's offer by a group of angered PIF investors.

Those investors, who have formed a body named the PIF Initiative, were angered by claims from Wellington that they would recover only 14c in the dollar unless investors approved the proposed changes to PIF's constitution.

"Claims from (Ms Hutson) that if we don't agree to the proposal there will be a fire sale of assets and we'll only get back 14c in the dollar are just not correct," said PIF Initiative spokesman Dennis Chapman.

"This has been confirmed by the solicitor's letter."

Retiree Mr Chapman, 61, suffering from emphysema, said he had about $1.25 million invested in the failed Octaviar group, with about $200,000 of that in the Octaviar PIF.

Octaviar was known as MFS until the empire -- which held about $5.4 billion of investors' funds -- suffered a meltdown in January and later changed its name to Octaviar. Ms Hutson created waves in May when Octaviar announced it had sold PIF to Wellington because Ms Hutson is a close business associate of Octaviar's executive director Chris Scott.

The pair built up a Gold Coast company known as S8, which bought the letting rights to predominantly Gold Coast apartments -- and Mr Scott had owned part of Wellington.

Ms Hudson and Wellington contracted to buy PIF in May, but it is not required to make any payment for the company until the middle of next year.

Ms Hutson said Octaviar had given Wellington $750,000 to manage PIF, but that Wellington was expected to pay Octaviar a fee -- based on performance of the fund -- of "between $15 million and $20 million".

She defended Wellington's push to implement a severance fee into PIF's constitution.

"We've done the hard yards (and) if we're to be removed that would be some compensation for the work we have done," Ms Hutson said.

Wellington is proposing to float PIF on minor trading platform the National Stock Exchange to provide "liquidity" for investors.

Ms Hutson said that under corporations law PIF would face liquidation by January, because by that time its redemption facility would have been frozen for 12 months.

However, PIF's members have argued that investors have not been properly informed of all the options open to them -- such as appointing a new manager -- and that claims of a fire sale are unrealistic.

PIF members claim the fund could face an "orderly wind-up" -- similar to those undertaken by the failed Fincorp and Westpoint property empires -- if receivers were appointed.

Ms Hutson said the vast majority of investors that Wellington had been in contact with supported its proposal.

Ms Cobby's report said Wellington's 80-page "explanatory memorandum" was "complex" and contained more than a dozen errors.

Investors will vote on Wellington's proposal on September 18.

------------end of article-------------
direct link: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24295338-643,00.html
 
Joined
27 May 2008
Posts
1,793
Reactions
2
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

PIF investors back restructure plans:::::Nick Nichols

September 5th, 2008

THE tide appears to be running against an angry band of Premium Income Fund investors after it was revealed yesterday that about 3000 unit-holders have backed Wellington Capital's restructure plans.

Wellington's executive director Jenny Hutson said more than 97 per cent of proxies received from investors have approved the investment bank's plan to consolidate control of the fund and list its units on the National Stock Exchange (NSX).

This comes despite rumblings from the PIF Initiative, an action group headed by Dennis Chapman, that investors are being 'bullied' into backing the proposals.

A meeting to be held at Broadbeach on September 18 will decide whether to wind up the Premium Income Fund (PIF) or back Wellington's proposals -- which are aimed at restoring full value to investors over the next three to five years.

Ms Hutson has said a wind-up would deliver only 14c in the dollar for investors who poured $770 million into the fund.

She said Korda Mentha had estimated it would be worth 45c in the dollar as a going concern.

The PIF Initiative has questioned the validity of those figures and said an 'orderly realisation' of assets would deliver the best immediate outcome for investors, many of whom are elderly and would be chained to the fund unnecessarily for years.

The NSX listing has been criticised by one investor, who declined to be named.

"All it does is lock everyone's money in so that those that are desperately in need of even a partial redemption of funds are at the mercy of the market," she said.

Estimates are that units will be priced between 10c and 20c when they list, sparking claims that Ms Hutson or her associates could scoop up units at a fraction of their real value.

But Ms Hutson yesterday denied this.

"We will not be purchaser of units," she said. "We would have to declare that if we were."

Wellington Capital also was criticised over a 0.25 per cent 'incentive' fee being paid to financial advisers to promote the 'yes' vote for Wellington.

Mr Hutson said the fee was 'conventional' and 'modest' and designed to cover expenses for investment advisers.

She also defended the transparency of the votes which are being forwarded to Wellington's Brisbane office before being passed on to share registry group Computershare.

Ms Hutson said the vote was being conducted in an 'auditable' fashion.

Among the proposals is a 45c buyback for 5 per cent of the fund, a move criticised by PIF Initiative's Mr Chapman.

He said it was designed to 'remove a considerable number of investors with small investments', with each unit-holder entitled to be paid about $1600.

Ms Hutson said it was not a 'perfect situation'.

"We've got people for whom a couple of thousand dollars will change their lives right now."

She said despite the overwhelming vote backing her proposals so far, it was 'too early to call'.

Ms Hutson said PIF's debt stood at $9.4 million, down from $100 million earlier this year.

PIF, the former flagship fund of Octaviar (formerly MFS), is planning to resume distributions to investors next month and hopes to pay a total of 3c per unit before Christmas.

Ms Hutson also has defended the timing of this month's meeting before a payout deal by Octaviar which is offering about $44 million for the $197.5 million it owes the fund.

"What we're trying to do is drive and keep alive a Gold Coast institution and if we wait we run the risk of missing opportunities."

Ms Hutson said she was negotiating on one of PIF's largest exposures, although she declined to name it.

"We can take a six-month or a three-year horizon (with this project). But we can achieve an outcome that is twice as good if we can take a three-year view."
 
Joined
5 June 2008
Posts
21
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I still think there is some connection with the PIF and Dubai.

I hope it is not a case of big money going out of the PIF to Adams in Dubai,
who I think is still there.

Please, JH can you inform us if this is true.

Or can anybody enlighten us?

And of course if JH cannot recover the PIF in this booming economy, than she
should resign. A 2 year old could make money from money these days.
 
Joined
18 June 2008
Posts
94
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Good morning folks Please read the BIG story in the AFR today Good reading Cheers / Dane //

Look forward to reading it. Can only read the intro online which says :
Unit holders told to pull plug on PIF

Friday, 05 September 2008 | The Australian Financial Review | Lisa Allen

Thousands of unit holders in the stricken Premium Income Fund have been advised to reject a proposal to allow the $413 million fund to continue operating. PIF's managers, Wellington Capital, will meet with fund investors on September 18 to ask them to consider the proposals.

(The full afr.com article is available to subscribers only.)
 
Joined
11 July 2008
Posts
263
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Look forward to reading it. Can only read the intro online which says :
Unit holders told to pull plug on PIF

Friday, 05 September 2008 | The Australian Financial Review | Lisa Allen

Thousands of unit holders in the stricken Premium Income Fund have been advised to reject a proposal to allow the $413 million fund to continue operating. PIF's managers, Wellington Capital, will meet with fund investors on September 18 to ask them to consider the proposals.

(The full afr.com article is available to subscribers only.)
Race out & buy your self a hard copy from the Newsagent Money well spent / Dane //
 
Joined
30 July 2008
Posts
39
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Being abroad, we have no hard copy of the Proxy form sent to investors but hv downloaded same fm web.
Amongst other things, to make it valid an SRN is required which of course does not appear on the download.
I made contact with WC and was advised to send form in anyway and they would intercept our proxy and insert SRN. {I had originally asked for the number by email but tt was declined for 'security' reasons}.
I am sceptical tt in the 'rush' to get votes in and processed by the deadline this will happen and it will merely end up in the spoilt vote pile.
Would someone out there, perhaps SEAMISTY reading this, please advise if the SRN is one and the same number as MFS' investor ID number tt appeared in the past on bumph MFS/Perpetual nominees sent out fm time to time.
Tks
 
Joined
9 July 2008
Posts
69
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I still think there is some connection with the PIF and Dubai.

I hope it is not a case of big money going out of the PIF to Adams in Dubai,
who I think is still there.

Please, JH can you inform us if this is true.

Or can anybody enlighten us?

And of course if JH cannot recover the PIF in this booming economy, than she
should resign. A 2 year old could make money from money these days.

Hi akernest,
GENERAL OBSERVATION ONLY:
The US appears to be in trouble. Their bank share prices are falling. The Dow Jones fell 3% yesterday. England and the rest of Europe appear to be in decline. China, India, Brazil?
The Australian share market could be in free fall if it breaks the recently formed support levels. If you are short you are making money but if you are long you are probably losing money, unless you are regularly selling/trading. The property market especially the residential property in Melbourne appears to be over priced. The Reserve Bank has finally started to decrease interest rates because they are concerned. Australia could easily go either way. This is not the time to be aggressive or make a statement - "booming economy".
Regards, RickH:couch
 
Joined
12 June 2008
Posts
24
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Would someone out there, perhaps SEAMISTY reading this, please advise if the SRN is one and the same number as MFS' investor ID number tt appeared in the past on bumph MFS/Perpetual nominees sent out fm time to time.
Tks
BABIHUTAN - your SRN is different to your MFS number. I'd ring computershare. Their website is www.computershare.com.au
Cheers PIFHolder
 
Joined
9 July 2008
Posts
69
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Race out & buy your self a hard copy from the Newsagent Money well spent / Dane //
Hi Great Dame,
Interesting article where one solicitor says on thing and a different solicitor says another. That happens all the time. Ever tried to create a pre nuptial agreement or a Will to protect your assets from unwelcomed claims.
Ask a solicitor to guarantee what they are saying. There answer will be no because it is only their opinion - there are never any guarantees.
Regards, RickH:couch
 
Joined
5 June 2008
Posts
257
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Rick

In any event regardless of your personal opinion and advice i hope you realise that as a Financial Advisor you are legally obliged to show that opinion to your clients ?
 
Joined
12 June 2008
Posts
24
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Rick

In any event regardless of your personal opinion and advice i hope you realise that as a Financial Advisor you are legally obliged to show that opinion to your clients ?


Rick - I agree. Pay any lawyer money and they'll find errors.

Jadel - clients should be shown an opinion. Aren't all uintholders clients. How does a unitholder know that the PIF initiative is actually for all unitholders and isn't just driving another agenda? Why weren't all unitholders written to? Why do I need to read about it in the press just because I'm not in the top 3000. Does that make me less important because I didn't have enough money to invest to get into it?

Sorry for the vent - a group splintering off and getting legal advice that they aren't sharing with all unitholders is just as bad as misinformation IMO.:banghead: I thought we were all in this togehter?

PIFHolder
 
Joined
4 May 2008
Posts
288
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Will any of the PIF Initiative confirm that you solicited the article under and if any of your mob did, by whose authority did you do it on behalf of the PIF Action Group???
Abstracted from The Australian Financial Review

"The Premium Income Fund action group urged the fund's top 3,000 investors to reject a rescue plan on 4 September 2008. The action group said investors would benefit from the sale of the fund's assets more than a listing on the National Stock Exchange"


Distributed by News Bites. Copyright 2008 LexisNexis Australia. All Rights Reserved
 
Joined
5 June 2008
Posts
257
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I will state categorically in all correspondence i have had with the media

that i refered to our group as the PIFI .

Now i will repeat this post as many times as you refer to this issue

LET’S MAKE THIS AS PLAIN AS DAY

THERE NEVER HAS BEEN A STRUCTURED ORGANIZED GROUP OF INVESTORS WITH ANY LEGAL AUTHORTITY OR INDEMNITY FOR MEMBERS UNTIL THE PIFI WAS CREATED.

Personally I can’t think of many things lower (maybe murder or rape comes to mind) than intimidating investors 95% who are over the age of 65 with liquidating their assets arbitrarily and senselessly) to make a dollar.

We consider that this is morally ethically indefensible .and that other alternatives should have been made available for investors to consider.

We can now inform everybody on this site that we have an eight page legal document from Hicksons lawyers that supports that opinion and indicates breaches of the Corporations Act

This document will be made available to all who would like to join the PIFI

I do not intend to engage in any personal arguments and hold no animosity to those who have different opinions (in fact I have a friend on this site who I hold in high regard that supports JH.)


Every investor’s circumstance are unique and ultimately people will vote for what is in their best interests.
 
Joined
4 May 2008
Posts
288
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

I will state categorically in all correspondence i have had with the media

that i refered to our group as the PIFI .

Now i will repeat this post as many times as you refer to this issue

LET’S MAKE THIS AS PLAIN AS DAY

THERE NEVER HAS BEEN A STRUCTURED ORGANIZED GROUP OF INVESTORS WITH ANY LEGAL AUTHORTITY OR INDEMNITY FOR MEMBERS UNTIL THE PIFI WAS CREATED.

Personally I can’t think of many things lower (maybe murder or rape comes to mind) than intimidating investors 95% who are over the age of 65 with liquidating their assets arbitrarily and senselessly) to make a dollar.

We consider that this is morally ethically indefensible .and that other alternatives should have been made available for investors to consider.

We can now inform everybody on this site that we have an eight page legal document from Hicksons lawyers that supports that opinion and indicates breaches of the Corporations Act

This document will be made available to all who would like to join the PIFI

I do not intend to engage in any personal arguments and hold no animosity to those who have different opinions (in fact I have a friend on this site who I hold in high regard that supports JH.)


Every investor’s circumstance are unique and ultimately people will vote for what is in their best interests.

Is your PIFI group responsible for atributing the AFR article recommending PIF investors:

"reject the plan (from WC)..."

and "The Action Group is instead pushing for the fund...to conduct an orderly sale of assets.."

and "that all 3000 investors contacted by the PIF Action Group reject Ms Hutsons proposals, it could be enough to liquidate the fund..."


to the PIF Action Group - Yes! OR NO! ???
 
Joined
12 June 2008
Posts
24
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

This document will be made available to all who would like to join the PIFI

Jadel,

The group is certainly organised - I'm not questioning that.
But I've heard that it costs money to join? Isn't that isolating the little people who can barely afford to buy their groceries, let alone pay out more money? Does PIFI just represent the top 3000 unitholders?
What I want to know is if I follow the Initiative's instructions and vote no - what is the alternative? Will I get a distribution before Christmas?

:confused:I just need to understand -
If I vote yes - I get Wellington, with all of its bumps and lumps
If I vote no - PIFI says PIF won't lqiuidate. If PIFI is right, then what do I get as the PIFI atlernative, and what if PIFI legal advise is wrong?

PIFHolder
 
Joined
30 July 2008
Posts
39
Reactions
0
Re: Octaviar MFS Premium Income Fund PIF

Thanks PIFholder. Unitholders Securityholder Reference Number (SRN) can be found on the upper right hand side of the Issuer Sponsered Holding Statement sent by Wellington. Regards, Seamisty

Quote:
Originally Posted by PIFholder
BABIHUTAN - your SRN is different to your MFS number. I'd ring computershare. Their website is www.computershare.com.au
Cheers PIFHolder

:banghead:Tks to you both - seems getting nowhere as tt SRN is just tt n cannot be transmitted by phone/ email. Placing the form on the web wud appear to hv been an exercise in futility - w/out an SRN the proxy is invalid, simple as tt!!
We will nevertheless give it a go, mailing an invalid proxy to WC and hope as offered in an email tt the staff member concerned intercepts our form & inserts the correct SRN b4 passing on to Computershare. :banghead:
 
Top