Forex Capital sued for unconscionable conduct and conflicted remuneration

17 July 2020
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

The corporate watchdog has commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia against over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives trader Forex Capital Trading and its sole director, Shlomo Yoshai.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) allege the firm engaged in a system of unconscionable conduct that was aided by Yoshai.

The alleged conduct would attract a maximum penalty of $420,000 for an individual and $2,100,000 for a body corporate.

This alleged conduct included:

  • Using high pressure sales tactics, such as offering incentives (credits and rebates) to encourage clients to transfer more money to Forex CT;
  • Recommending trading strategies that were inappropriate to clients;
  • Making false or misleading statements to clients;
  • Implementing and encouraging a trading floor culture that was directed towards maximising trading volume and client deposits rather than promoting a culture of compliance with applicable legal requirements;
  • Establishing and implementing incentives for clients to deposit funds and disincentives for clients to withdraw funds from their trading accounts; and
  • Failing to ensure compliance with financial services laws.

ASIC also alleged that the firm contravened a ban on conflicted remuneration under the Corporations Act by paying account manager bonuses primarily on client “net deposits” and failed to act in the best interests of clients when giving personal advice.

These contraventions could attract a maximum penalty of up to $1,000,000 for a body corporate.

ASIC also alleged that Yoshai failed to exercise his powers and discharge his duties as a director and this could attract a maximum penalty of $200,000.

“ASIC seeks declarations that Forex CT engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and, as the holder of an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence, contravened its obligations under s912A of the Corporations Act,” ASIC said.

“This includes failing to do all things necessary to ensure that the financial services covered by the AFS licence were provided efficiently, honestly and fairly.”

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...

6 days 23 hours 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 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 1 week ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND