In response to the collapse of the Australian property fund and the naming of 11 adviser firms involved, is it not typical of these advisers to try and defend their actions (FA 4 June)?
They knew what they were doing because they were lured by the commission from LM Investment Management to get unsuspecting risk averse people like me to invest.
We were led astray by these advisers because they did not reveal the unregulated nature and true risk of the LMMPF investment. Indeed, I invested after the LMFIF ran into trouble in 2009 and this should have been a clear warning sign for advisers.
Where was their so-called due diligence? I thought that advisers were required to respect the clients’ investment risk profile, which, in my case was not done. Regarding the comments about the Thai Securities and Exchange Commission, to my knowledge, an investment advisory licence is required in Thailand.
None of the advisers the complaint is about had one, so now it is payback time. They misled us unsuspecting investors.
Change and transformation manager/coach,
The Highway of Change,