Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

ASIC bans director for failure to pay AFCA determinations

AFCA/ASIC/advice/

11 October 2022
| By Laura Dew |
image
image image
expand image

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has banned a Sydney director for three years with his two firms having previously received complaints regarding inappropriate financial advice.

Peter Godfrey Gribble of Sydney, NSW was banned from controlling an entity that carries on a financial services business and performing any function as an officer of an entity carrying on a financial services business for three years.

Two companies of which he was director, Qsmart Securties and Quantum Funds Management, refused or failed to give effect to determinations by the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA).

In 2020, AFCA made a total of seven determinations against Qsmart and Quantum in response to complaints relating to unauthorised trading and disclosure failures, as well as inappropriate financial advice and other misrepresentations provided by credit representatives.

These determinations directed those entities to pay consumers a total amount of approximately $2.5 million.

ASIC deputy chair, Sarah Court, said: ‘Directors of AFS licensees must ensure that their firms comply with AFCA determinations. This is a fundamental obligation of AFS licensees, and crucial in ensuring that Australia’s financial dispute resolution system remains efficient and effective.’

ASIC found that Gribble, as director of Qsmart and Quantum, approached AFCA determinations as if they were open to negotiation, including in some circumstances seeking to persuade complainants to accept less than the determination amounts.

“AFCA determinations are not opportunities for negotiation. Directors of AFS licensees must make sure that their firms comply with AFCA determinations within the time specified. If directors try to avoid this obligation, we will take steps to remove them from the financial sector.”

Mr Gribble’s banning order took effect from 6 October, 2022 and did not prevent him from seeking to be authorised to provide financial advice

He had the right to seek a review of ASIC’s decision at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

6 days 13 hours ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 1 week ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

1 week 2 days ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

2 weeks 2 days ago

While the profession continues to see consolidation at the top, Adviser Ratings has compared the business models of Insignia and Entireti and how they are shaping the pro...

2 weeks 4 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND