News

Landmark adviser lawsuit case closed

Friday 7th of October 2011

The case involved retired vet Neil Armitage, who sued Moneyworks adviser Carey Church after his investments in a handful of finance companies lost money.

He was partly successful, with High Court Justice Robert Dobson awarding him over $60,000 out of an original claim for more than $300,000.

The judge ruled Church had recommended too large an exposure to finance companies.

He also found her to be negligent in recommending the ING credit opportunities fund (COF) as a fixed interest component of the investment, ruling that it was not a fixed interest investment, despite documentation to suggest it was.

However, Justice Dobson also ruled that there was only a low probability Armitage would have followed prudent advice, and reduced the award accordingly.

Both sides were unhappy with the judgment and the case was going to an appeal, where Church was to argue her advice met industry standards at the time.

However, she has "decided that to continue with the appeal is personally and professionally counter-productive," she told Good Returns yesterday.

"There has been a confidential settlement and the matter is now closed."

The settlement means there won't be a court test of Justice Dobson's decision, which has been questioned by IFA president Nigel Tate.

"I think the Judge made a determination based on retrospective knowledge of the risks involved in the COF.

"The Judge has applied his current knowledge to a previous situation and said these funds created some problems and now, when I look at them, they actually look more like an equity type fund than a fixed interest fund."

Comments (3)
Steven Barton
There was probably nothing substantial that Church could appeal on. Sure the Credit Opportunities Fund call that it was an equity by the judge was debateable(it was really a debt instrument that behaved with geared equity characteristics), and the quantum was low,relative to the costs of taking an appeal. Quite a lot of the money that went into the COF was via ANZ Advisers. Their clients were sold it as a fixed interest investment.Perhaps the media should follow through and find out how many of the investors were compensated? Perhaps the real issue for advisers should be was it negligence or was it loss of capital. If the judges verdict was around negligence, then PI cover would be useful. If it was really around diminution of capital, PI cover will only pick up a small portion of the tab. OBEKThere are lessons to be learned from this case. Most likely there will not be a repeat, as the days of advisers clipping the ticket on a raft of finance company investments have passed, and there are fewer opportunities of investers and advisers being swayed by a myriad of advertisements offering high returns in the Herald, Dominion and the Press.
0 0
13 years ago

Steven Barton
There was probably nothing substantial that Church could appeal on. Sure the Credit Opportunities Fund call that it was an equity by the judge was debateable(it was really a debt instrument that behaved with geared equity characteristics), and the quantum was low,relative to the costs of taking an appeal. Quite a lot of the money that went into the COF was via ANZ Advisers. Their clients were sold it as a fixed interest investment.Perhaps the media should follow through and find out how many of the investors were compensated? Perhaps the real issue for advisers should be was it negligence or was it loss of capital. If the judges verdict was around negligence, then PI cover would be useful. If it was really around diminution of capital, PI cover will only pick up a small portion of the tab. OBEKThere are lessons to be learned from this case. Most likely there will not be a repeat, as the days of advisers clipping the ticket on a raft of finance company investments have passed, and there are fewer opportunities of investers and advisers being swayed by a myriad of advertisements offering high returns in the Herald, Dominion and the Press.
0 0
13 years ago

alan milton
Would not the adviser's PI insurere have some say in the decision not to appeal?
0 0
13 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.