The hefty cost of not complying with an ASIC EU
Failure to comply with a Court Enforceable Undertaking has seen a Gold Coast accountant and former authorised representative forced to pay the court costs of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to the tune of $16,529.78.
The accountant, Jenan Oslem Thorne, has also been forced to write to all of her clients declaring that she is prevented from providing financial services for a period of three years and noting that they are receiving the letter because they are people to whom she provided personal advice an authorised representative of SMSF Advice Pty Limited.
ASIC announced on 12 March that Thorne was compelled by the Federal Court orders to comply with the terms of the court enforceable undertaking first entered into in February 2019 following an investigation which found she failed to act in her clients’ best interests and that she prioritised her own interests above those of her clients.
Commenting on the Federal Court’s decision, ASIC Commissioner Danielle Press said, “ASIC first took action in this matter because the law requires that financial advisers act in their clients’ best interests. Those providing financial services must not prioritise their own interests or simply implement client instructions.
“Individuals and organisations entering into court enforceable undertakings with ASIC have binding obligations that must be met to ensure compliance. ASIC will not hesitate to take action against those who don’t comply with their obligations.”
It had earlier been found that Thorne had recommended clients establish an SMSF despite inadequate evidence to suggest the strategies would provide increased retirement benefits and had then suggested they use her accountancy firm to prepare the annual accounts and tax returns of those SMSFs.
Recommended for you
Government has introduced a bill to Parliament to legislate the first stream of the QAR reforms.
ASIC now has a 1:1 ratio when it comes to court success in the enforcement of crypto activities and more action is expected as Treasury seeks to introduce a regulatory framework.
A leading governance body has hit out at “specialist interest groups proposing ad hoc law reform” when it comes to reforms of financial services legislation and believes an independent body is needed.
The release of ALRC’s final report into financial services legislation has highlighted financial advice as a “significant” focus as it seeks to reduce costs and help advisers understand their obligations, alongside the Quality of Advice Review.
