When bad super advice costs you citizenship

30 March 2016
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

A superannuation fund member living overseas renounced to her Australian citizenship after receiving incorrect advice from her superannuation fund.

The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) has been told that the member had received the incorrect advice as a means of enabling her to gain early access to her super balance to assist her parents still living in Australia.

A recent determination of the SCT has revealed the manner in which the woman, living overseas, had been told by a representative of the superannuation fund that she could obtain payment of her account balance in the Fund if she renounced her Australian citizenship and she, subsequently, made a claim for payment of the benefit under the Departing Australia Superannuation Payment Option.

The advice proved to be wrong and the SCT held that the superannuation fund had been guilty of "negligent misrepresentation" even though the delivery of the misleading advice had been inadvertent.

The Tribunal noted that the superannuation fund had offered to compensate the woman to the tune of $2,000 - something which she had rejected as inadequate to cover the cost of her renouncing her Australian citizenship, reapplying for her Australian citizenship and seeking visas to visit her ailing parents.

The SCT noted that the woman had claimed $85,351 but said some of those expenses such as living expenses and salaries were expenses which would have been incurred irrespective of having received incorrect advice.

"In the view of the Tribunal, the representation made by the Trustee to the Complainant was a representation that she was entitled to reasonably rely on and, in the view of the Tribunal, she relied on it to her detriment by renouncing her Australian citizenship," the SCT determination said.

"The issue that then arises is what detriment did she suffer as a direct result of the representation and for what amount should she be compensated by the Trustee by acting to her detriment?"

The SCT determined that $5,000 represented sufficient compensation to cover the expenses that the complainant would directly incur as a result of the Trustee's misrepresentation.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 1 day ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 1 week ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND