ASIC makes fourth fee-for-no-service banning

ASIC has banned a former AFSL director after he failed to adequately address fees-for-no-service conduct by one of his firm’s representatives. 

Brendan Rodwell was a director at Crown Wealth Group, but ASIC said it had reason to believe he was not adequately trained or competent to perform functions in, or control, a financial services business after failing to adequately address fees-for-no-service (FFNS) conduct by Lighthouse Partners, one of Crown Wealth’s representatives.

Lighthouse Partners was a corporate authorised representative of Crown Wealth Group between 16 August 2018 and 4 April 2023. On 13 March 2024, ASIC cancelled Crown Wealth Group’s AFSL after it was placed into voluntary administration.

ASIC said it was satisfied that Rodwell’s conduct was the “result of carelessness and inadvertence rather than a deliberate course of action to conceal or disregard the FFNS conduct”.

He has been banned from performing any function involved in carrying on a financial services business, and from controlling an entity that carries on a financial services business, for two years.

VIEW ALL

View all

More specifically, ASIC found that Rodwell, as a director of Crown Wealth:

• Failed to take proactive steps to ensure Crown Wealth complied with its obligation to report the FFNS conduct to ASIC as a reportable situation within 30 days after becoming aware of it. Crown Wealth did not lodge a reportable situation with ASIC until six months after becoming aware of the FFNS conduct.
• Did not take adequate steps to confirm that the FFNS conduct was properly investigated, and affected clients were properly remediated.
• Took a misguided approach that he could remain within his perceived operational responsibilities (which did not involve direct client contact or the provision of financial advice) rather than involve himself in the compliance and reporting obligations of Crown Wealth, and that his inaction and inattentiveness to these obligations were a serious lapse in judgement.
• Demonstrated a lack of professionalism and competence, and a failure to act with the diligence expected of a director of a financial services licensee.

The banning took effect from 23 October 2025 and has been recorded on ASIC’s banned and disqualified register.

He has the right to appeal to the Administrative Review Tribunal for a review of ASIC’s decision.

This is the fourth individual action taken in regard to Crown Wealth and Lighthouse Partners. In July, Lighthouse Partner director Kiriley Roper was banned for 10 years ,followed by fellow director Timothy Archibald, who was banned for 10 years in October.

In July, former Crown Wealth director Andrew Moore was banned for three years for failing to report the fees-for-no-service misconduct.

In response, Rodwell provided a statement to Money Management: "I strongly reject ASIC’s decision and the basis upon which the banning order has been made. Our company, Crown AFSL, spent hundreds of thousand dollars  in legal fees defending what was, at its core, a technical breach reporting issue . The actual banning was a  technical and administrative matter involving 14 clients out of a total of around 15,000 served through our network of 50 advisers. Importantly, no clients suffered any financial loss.

"What makes this decision even harder to accept is the stark contrast in ASIC’s priorities. While the regulator aggressively pursued a technical issue against Crown AFSL, large-scale investment fund failures such as the First Guardian Master Fund (approximately $590 million lost by around 6,000 investors) and the Shield Master Fund (over $480 million in losses affecting around 5,800 investors) have caused widespread financial harm to Australians — yet appear to have attracted little visible accountability or regulatory consequence.

"Despite our track record of integrity and compliance, ASIC deployed what appeared to be three to four times the legal and barrister resources we could afford — likely spending well over ten times what we did in taxpayer and industry-funded costs — to pursue a matter that had no client detriment and that we worked transparently to resolve. The cynic in me would say ASIC had to meet some political KPI’s . This disproportionate response has had devastating personal and professional consequences for me and others involved.

"Every adviser who worked under Crown AFSL can attest that we maintained a strong culture of compliance, integrity, and client care. We were the “good guys” — operating within the rules, protecting clients, and setting high professional standards.

"This experience highlights the urgent need for greater transparency, accountability, and fairness in how ASIC exercises its powers. Regulators must focus on genuine misconduct and systemic risk — not technicalities that destroy reputations and livelihoods without protecting a single investor."