Abbreviated Westpoint History

The folowing set of Westpoint related information below is drawn from Events by date. It is sufficient in itself to prove the need for a Royal Commission into ASIC's past behaviour. If one requires further proof, the reader should examine the contents of Events by date .

NOTE  The owner of Westpoint Corporation, Norm Carey, The hyperlinked document, Carey countersuit document, was            orignally submitted to the Victorian Court. Codes such as [P9 24] within this document give the page number and            paragraph reference.

Anomalies, and the abbreviated Westpoint history in the table below present sufficient information to prove ASIC failed Westpoint investors from the outset, and continues to do so until this day. It beggars belief ASIC continues to deny the obvious.

1985

Westpoint became a registered company in 1985, and constructed buildings of a much smaller size than those after 2000. It funding these projects using traditional methods (: bank loans, etc.) of funding

1006

Westpoint retained Boston Consulting Groups with the aim of building a business that would, at sometime in the future, list on the stock exchange some time before 2007 [P6 11].

1998

Westpoint retained the Freehills law firm [P7 13]. Subsequently, Freehills designed a fund raising scheme using promissory notes(PNs). This would take scheme outside the Corporations Act [P9 20].

2000

Well-known advocate, Denise Brailey, discussed a proposed Westpoint Information Memorandum with ASIC, and warned of the problems that might arise if ASIC allowed Westpoint to market the product  without a prospectus. ASIC ignored her concerns.

02-06-2000

Freehills issued a letter to ASIC with copies to Bayview and Westpoint Management stating Promissory Notes (PNs) are neither debentures nor interests in an MIS for the reasons listed [P11 24]. Further, Freehills reassured the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in 2000 that each ;investor in Westpoint's Bayview mezzanine fund was "experienced in investing in securities" [2006_07_10_SMH]. By this it is mean Westpoint investors were "sophisticated investors" - which they were not.

07-07-2000

ASIC gave Freehills, the Westpoint lawyers a letter stating it could find nothing wrong with a proposed mezzanine scheme involving the use of promissory notes.
This "no action" letter, became known as the Freehills 2000 letter. It is very important as it implies ASIC must have examined the Scheme very carefully.

ASIC never rescinded the no-action letter.

2001
Denise Brailey stated on Channel Ten's David and Kim of 2007/05/05 she flew to Brisbane in 2001, and met with the ASIC Queensland Commissioner and his senior legal council to discuss the problems of issuing the Westpoint Mezzanine Schemes, issued on Information Memoranda (IM), without a prospectus. Ms. Brailey  claimed ASIC told her Westpoint Mezzanine Schemes were MIS's, and that people would lose their money. This the only occasion in which I can find any record of ASIC admitting the Westpoint Mezzanine Model was a MIS.
2002

Beginning in 2002, the West Australian Government wrote a series of five letters to ASIC and the Treasury concerning Westpoint [Edwards letter]. No action was taken in any of these matters. The contents of these communications have never been disclosed to the public.

2002
"The Reserve Bank contacted APRA about the use of the words Boutique Bank on a Kebbel website. APRA rang Kebbel and spoke to person they believed was Neil Burnard, who told them it had been put there by the web designer. The APRA person then wrote a report to her superior, and the matter seems to have died a natural death. The reason why she was unsure of to whom she had spoken was her notes contained the word "spiel". The judge explained in the pretrial of Neil Burnard that spiel is a commonly used term at the beginning of a telephone conversation within APRA in which unimportant information is not recorded [Neil Burnard Trial Notes].
One can only wonder at how lax procedural matters might be in APRA. It would seem that none of this was passed on to ASIC at the time.
02-01-2003 The Howard Government, in response to Mr. Kobele's communications, replied with the comment, "If required, the Government will consider any recommendations makes to improve consumer protection in this area and the Government will consider any legislative change should ASIC identify any regulatory gap".
01/02/2003 Norton Capital rated Market Street a "BUY".
This was not an uninformed investor - this was an ASIC licenced research house.
2003 Factors in my choosing to invest in Westpoint.
ASIC claims Westpoint investors did not do their homework. It is true that many of them,realising they were not financially literate, sought advice from financial planners. It is equally true that the majority of these planners held an ASIC issued Australian Financial Services licence. ASIC had a clear duty under it's charter to ensure the protection of financial invertors. It it is understood ASIC cannot watch over every individual investor. It can, however, monitor what planners are doing. There is no evidence ASIC ever preemptively attempted attempted to find out what its planners were doing, Instead, it slept in ASIC castle, sure in the knowledge the Government would protect it from all storms.
xx-05-2003
Mr. Kolbeke, the West Australian Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection writes the third of five letters to ASIC and Treasury.
2003
ASIC's Mark Steward says ASIC "cat and moused" with Westpoint lawyers in 2003 for months before they realised Westpoint was stalling for time [2006_05_31_TheAge] This in direct contrast to Jeff Lucy's statement in a Senate Estimates hearing that ASIC did not become concerned about Westpoint until 2004.
Mr. J. Lucy, the Chairperson of ASIC has admitted in parliament ASIC became aware of problems in Westpoint in 2003, yet did not approach Treasury to seek immediate changes to the law. The incident quoted happened in a period of peak investing public of anything that might affect investment..
2003-06 Mr. Kolbeke, the West Australian Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection writes the fourth of five letters to ASIC and Treasury.
xx-07-2003

ASIC commenced second investigation into PNs. Westpoint began negotiations Between July 2003 and 26-02-2004 to move away from PNs[P18 30] [P30 68][31 70].

xx-08-2003 Between July 2003 and 26-02-2004 negotiations between ASIC and Westpoint to move away from Pns. [31 70].
02-09-2003
At the ASIC-Westpoint-Freehills meeting, Freehills confirms PNs legal, and were not interests in an MIS. This was confirmed by extensive research in 1999 by Andrew Sherwood of Freehills (who was present at meeting). [P14 28].  Westpoint warned ASIC of the dangers to themselves and investor if ASIC acted against the previously approved promissory note usage. [The Carey document of 30/07/2007 sent to Tony D'Aloisio and select Senators]
02-04-2004 Westpoint provided ASIC with an understaking to transition away from PNs [P31 71].
2004 Mr. J. Lucy admits he knew there were problems with Westpoint as far back as April 2004.
ASIC has alegislative duty to protect investors. Why didn't ASIC halt the sale of Westpoint products while they investigated? Lucy's statement is in direct contrast to West point's owner, Norm Carey. Carey claims ASIC initiated action against West point in 2003, and West point had given a presentation of West point's plans to ASIC in October of that year at the WA offices of Freehills[Carey Document].
01-04-2004
Bayshore Mezzanine commences action against ASIC seeking declaration that the PN's were not debentures or interest in an MIS.  [ 18  31 ].
13-04-2004

ASIC wrote to Westpoint on 13-04-2004 declaring the letter of undertaking of 26-02-2004 was no longer acceptable, and threatened immediate action unless Westpoint entered into an EU to cease the issue of PNs by 20-04-2008 [P31 72].

NORM CAREY CLAIMS(nor can I find any evidence to the contrary), ASIC AT NO TIME EVER RESCINDED THE "2000 FREEHILLS LETTER".

10-05-2004

Bayshore Mezzanine commences action against ASIC seeking declaration that the PN's debentures or interest in an MIS [18 31]. On 12 May 2004, ASIC commences Supreme Court action against Emu Brewery seeking declaration tha the PN's were debentures or interest in an MIS [18 32].

25-05-2004

In its Court action of 2004, ASIC demanded Westpoint not issue PN's in future offerings [MR 04_157]. There is no record of ASIC issuing a counter document to the "Freehills letter of 2000" before it could make such a demand lawfully [P30 69].
When I asked ASIC's Ms. J Redfern at a meeting between ASIC and 70 Westpoint investors on 23/02/2006 how, given the Freehills letter of 2000, they could legally make such a demand, she replied, "So we could take them to court".

13-05-2004 ASIC declaredWestpoint's agreement to transition away from PN's was no longer acceptable and threatemns to take action unless Westpoint accepts an EU [P31 72].
25-05-2004 ASIC demanded Westpoint not issue PN's in future offerings. [MR 04_157].
This order was in contravention of their stated position on the matter in the "Freehills letter of 2000". Further, Hansard records Mark Steward as stating ASIC went to court with a very weak case.
03-06_2004 ASIC did not issue any document countermanding the "no action letter" of 2000, and took Westpoint to court using Emu Brewery and Bayshore Mezzanine as test cases. One of the claims of ASIC's action was the PNs were debentures. The court directed ASIC write to mezzanine investors and ask them did they want to co-join the case. Despite the two mezzanine companies were test cases for all of the mezzanine companies, ASIC wrote a letter to the 256 investors in Emu Brewery and Bayshore Mezzanine and ignored the other almost 4000 investors. Universally, the recipients didn't understand one word of the document, couched in the legal language of the court. The investors contacted Westpoint, which informed them it was only a minor technical matter, and not one investor contacted ASIC.
ASIC had a clear duty to write to ALL Westpoint Mezzanine Investors and clearly explain to them the full implications of the test cases in simple English easily understood by all investors.
2004 ASIC resolves to commence investigation into the solvency of the Westpoint Group despite external evidence of insolvency. These investigations commence shortly after the initiation of the court proceedings in 2004. [P32 77]
2004 PIR issued research on the Westpoint Income Fund - rated 3 stars.
Lucy decried investors for not doing their homework. Where is ASIC's condemnation of a company it thought
highly enough of it to issue it with a special licence?
15_09_2004
Schiftan resigned as Westpoint Director on 15/09/2004. West point failed to notify investors of Chieftain's resignation, and did not appoint a new director to oversee investor interests.
xx-10-2004
In October of 2004 Mr. Ian Jonstone, the then Acting ASIC Chairman, flew to Mumbai (India) to give a one hour lecture to the Fifth Annual Conference of the Australian Independent Order of Financial Planners AIOFP. Two events significance occurred at that conference.
a).    Mr Richard Beck, posing as Director of the fictional Kebbel investment Bank         gave a lecture to the group within three hours Mr. Johnstone's lecture          [Conference Book].
         Mr. Beck was also the Director of several West point Mezzanine Companies,          and   ASIC had an ongoing Court Case  against Westpoint).
b)     An official AIOFP summary of the meeting thanks Mr. Johnstone for his soft         appoach on regulation and his acceptance of a request to approach         he Minister tohave the onus of SOA's (Statement  of Advice(s) removed from         planners to bring them  into alignment with Stock Exchange requirements         [Conference Overview].
       Not exactly what one expects of someone heading an organisation charged        with protecting financial consumers.
xx-11-2004
In November of 2004 KPMG signed off the Westpoint books on unqualified basis [P32 77].
17-11-2004
Freehills wrote to ASIC’s Mr. Byrne pointing out KPMG’s had signed off the books without reservation, and did not express concern about the solvency of Westpoint as a going concern; realisable value of the assets. Freehills warned of the damage to investors. ASIC did not reply to the letter [P33].
xx-11-2004

The Court Case was finalised with each side winning and losing elements of it. The most important outcome was that it was the Judge who stated the Westpoint Mezzanine Model was a MIS.
ASIC's Mark Steward's statement at the Senate Estimates Committee Hearing of 31/05/2006 [see Hansard] clearly shows ASIC did not believe this was the case when then they put their case together In fact much of the ASIC case was not under the Corporations ACT.

post 11-2004

Despite the Judge's statement in the 2004 case, ASIC took no action against Westpoint. ASIC ignored the obvious fact every Westpoint Investor had put their money in an unregistered Managed Investment Scheme ith ASIC's blessing. The non action on the part of ASIC resulted money continueing to pour into Westpoint in 2005.

19-11-2004
J. Simmonds determines the Supreme Court proceedings [P18  33 ].
Note.   Although not part of either party’s submission, the Judge stated at the end            of the case the Mezzanine Model is an MIS. This is in direct contadiction to            ASIC’s claim the PN’swere debentures.
22-11-2004 2004 Emu Brewery appeals.
2004
Westpoint lists a large number of complaints about the manner, and legality, of ASIC’s 2004 investigations [P32 78].
April 2005 Hansard records Mr. J. Lucy, the ASIC Chairman, as claiming ASIC first became aware of Kebbel Investment Bank in April 2005 [2006_02_20_SMH], and passed the matter over to APRA. In July of that year ASIC visited Kebbel NSW, and on notfinding any signage deemed the matter trivial. APRA told  Kebbel not to do it again. APRA took no punitive action against Kebbel.
Kebbel Investment Bank did not have a licence. It did not even have a registered business name, yet operated under the noses of APRA and ASIC in full public view,with common Internet mention, flyers and stationery, for four years, without detection. Understandably, investors believed it was a genuine bank. It was a prime reason why people invested in Westpoint. The only reason someone falsely represents themselves as a director of bank is the gaining of advantage by pretence. Why did neither ASIC nor APRA not take punitive action when they first learned of Kebbel Bank's "existence"? Why did someone have to make a complaint before ASIC  found out it existed? Four years is a long time.
25-08-2005 Freehills writes to ASIC employees Cooper and Waldron setting out evidence in support of Westpoint solvency. [P33]
25-09-2005 Cooper rings CEO of KPMG and tells him in words to the effect, "give Westpoint an absolute workout when auditing the 2004-2005 accounts" . [P33]
4-11-2005 In the period 4-11 November 2005 5 ASIC officers issued notices requiring the production of over 200 boxes of books and records within 5-8 days. [P33]
05/11/2005 Senate Estimates Committee (5/11/2005) questions ASIC deputy Commissioner Jeremy Cooper on all the negative comments by in the press (over 150), and not one positive comment.
21-11-2005
Freehills writes to Lucy complaining about the intervention of Cooper and the issuing of notices. ASIC never answers the letter. [P33].
Dec 2005
The Judge in York Street Mezzanine hearing learned at least one Westpoint Company (Westpoint Constructions) failed to present signed accounts in 2003 and 2004 [December 2005].
Given Mr. J. Lucy's admission ASIC became concerned about Westpoint in 2003,how could ASIC have not noticed that Westpoint Constructions had not presented audited accounts for two years?
02/12/2005 Westpoint pays KPMG $100,000 for audits on top of $274,167.50 already paid between July 06 and October 06 [ 2006_03_22_WAN ].
09-12-2005 Carey says ASIC tactics will hurt investors.
21_12_2005__INFOCHOICE
Jeffrey Lucy, chair of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, said that investors may have between $3 billion and $5 billion in mezzanine funding vehicles similar to those operated by Westpoint  
At that stage there were 24 companies at risk. Compare the 2005 figures with 2007 when ASIC admitted there were 83 companies and $8 billion at risk.
25_01_2006_SMH The Auditor General criticised ASIC for its failure to implement an AFSL registration scheme. He went on to say that the extensive delays probably forced planners who would normally have become AFSL holders to become unregistered planners [
Registration systems are not rocket science in either computing or management skills. Why did the Treasurer not take action to ensure ASIC was better run?
17_02_2006_AFR  WESTPOINT WOBBLE FOR ASIC 
All very strange for a very short vaguely remembered conversation.
17_02_2006_AFR  Jeremy Cooper withdraws from Westpoint investigation because of possible conflict of interest at Senate Committee of 16-02-2008. at Senate Committee of 16-02-2008.
“Mr Cooper, formerly a partner with Blake Dawson Waldron, said a search of the firm's records after a query by a journalist found Blakes had advised Westpoint founder Norm Carey. Mr Cooper had no recollection the company was a client or of spending 20 minutes discussing a question about a Westpoint prospectus with a colleague from Blake's Perth office in April 2000".

All very strange for a very short vaguely remembered conversation.
20_02_2006_MoneyManagement Labor's criticism of the corporate regulator's inactivity over Westpoint stems from warnings about the corporation provided by the Western Australian Department of Consumer and Employment back in 2002. ASIC admitted to the committee that it had not acted on this information because investors themselves had not lodged any complaints about losing money.
Just another example of how ASIC views regulation: sleep while waiting for someone to come in to report something has happened.
20_02_2006_SMH

Mr Lucy admitted ASIC knew there were problems at Westpoint as far back as April 2004 when it took legal action to determine whether Westpoint's investment schemes fell under its jurisdiction, a case still afoot. However, it was not until late last year that it took action to wind up some Westpoint companies specifically to protect investors".
This is ASIC's admission it put the concerns of the company above that of the investing public. ASIC, with its conflict of interest, continued to ignore investor protection until Westpoint ran out of money.

23-02-2006

ASIC hosted a meeting of 70 Westpoint Investor Group members, and the following took place.
a.    In reference to ASIC Media Release 04-157 I asked how could ASIC demand        Westpoint not issue PN's in future offerings when  their had been no change         in legislation. Jan Redfern replied, "So we could take them to  court!"
       My question went unanswered. However, ASIC's Mark Steward  admitted  at a Senate  Estimate's Committee  hearing 0n 31/05/2006 that   ASIC did not have a strong case.
b.    At this juncture, we didn't know ASIC had written to the 256 investors of        Emu Brewery/Bayshore Mezzanine  as directed by the WA Supreme Court. I        asked Mr. Lucy had ASIC had written to Westpoint as directed by the court.        my question, he replied this was the second time in a week he had been asked        that  question. (Senator Sherry asked him at  the Senate Estimates Committee        on 16/02/2006.
        Mr. Lucy said he knew nothing about it, and took the  question on notice.         Nor could he    answer that question on the  ABC's 7.30 Report that night.
       A judge requesting ASIC write to investors is a most unusual occurrence. That        Jeffrey Lucy did not know about it  when  asked by Sherry is more than        strange. Not kmowing about it a week later shows a decided lack of interest         on what is  happening in the organisation he controls.
c.     In   a question from a member, Ms. Jan Redfern told the meeting the first         time she heard about Kebbel Bank  was  on 22/02/2006 when I told her in a         telephone conversation.
        How could ASIC have not known about an illegal bank that operated in         full public view since 2002? Further, Hansard states ASIC knew about         Kebbel Bank in 2005 and passed the matter over to APRA.
d.      At the end of the meeting Mr. Lucy promised to come back to our group          with answers to our question. I handed him twelve questions to which  our          group wanted formal        answers.
        We are still waiting for Jeff Lucy's answers. Surely it is not unreasonable to         expect the Australian regulator to be setting standards of acceptable         behaviour. If business ran on the ethics and standards ASIC displays, then         Australia would be in dire trouble.

25_02_2006_AAP We are trying to engage with investors to try to help them," Mr Lucy said.
Not one example exists to date of how ASIC has helped a Westpoint investor.
27_02_2006_the_Australian
Consider the following two excerptsfrom the Australian
"I don't think that by itself would have been sufficient. In fairness to Westpoint, promissory notes continue to be a lawful and legitimate way of raising money. While we may not like them and while we may have concerns about them, that's the law ... which is what we appealed. You can't do more than that."
If the PNs were not illegal, how then could ASIC ban Westpoint from issuing them? [ASIC MR 04 ].
27_02_2006-Investor Daily
"A copy of ASIC's allegations regarding the Emu Brewery Mezzanine and Bayshore Mezzanine schemes was sent to each investor in June 2004, Lucy said".
Jeff Lucy failed to mention that it was the judge who ordered ASIC to write to the investors. ASIC complied by writing to Emu Brewery and Bayshore Mezzanine investors, despite the fact the proceedings were test cases for all Westpoint Mezzanine products.
12-03-2006
Jennifer O'Donnell opens her speech to the AIOFP conference in Canberra with "ASIC can't detect fraud in advance."
It would seem they also have difficulty in recognising what will become an unregistered Managed Investment Scheme when presented with the model beforehand.
2006_04_03_SMH Senator Watson said the Westpoint fiasco had revealed problems not only with the regulator detecting and acting on risky promotions but "with the law as it currently operates"
Prior to the Westpoint collapse, Senator Watson had been a strident critic of ASIC performance.
2006_04_19_TheAustralian
The institute, an industry body that includes property valuers, said that about 70 per cent of respondents to its latest six-monthly survey on the property market regarded fringe mortgage backed trusts with "moderate to major concern". Some concerns related to the need to increase the disclosure by financial planners and developer-sponsored funds, and also the need to increase disclosure of the quality of the loans by the funds.
2006_04_26_AFR_2

The headline is, DID ASIC FAIL OVER WESTPOINT. Lucy claims "no one has shown anything to me to suugest we were given information that we could reaonably act on"
It that is the case, then how could ASIC take Westpoint to court in 2004?
The WA Supreme Court determines Westpoint promissory notes and unregistered investment schemes, which gave ASIC the power to act under the orporations Law - Lucy says "we weren't worried. We had audited accounts andsuggestions that everything was OK" [Note at that time, The most recent audited accounts ASIC held were those from 2002. "We didn't have complaints saying people weren't getting paid so what was there to cause us that level of anxiety? Nothing!" [
Jeff Lucy's statement is at odds with the fact ASIC was harrying Westpoint in2003, and Westpoint’s presentation at the Freehills Offices in 2003 outlinethe risk to investors if ASIC did not allow the use of the modified PN's.

2006_04_26_AFR_2
Mark Steward, ASIC Deputy Director Enforcement, says "That would have needed evidence that Westpoint was insolvent" when asked about ASIC winding up Westpoint after the WA supreme Court decision, or that investors weren't able to redeem their funds"
2006
Jeffrey Lucy's claim ASIC could not take action against Westpoint because of the restrictions placed on it by existing legislation is at odds with legal opinion, including that of IMF's Hugh McLernon.
Further, there is no evidence ASIC ever approached the Parliament to have the law changed.
27_01_2007_The_Australian

In January 2007 the Auditor General again castigated ASIC. This time it was over their poor prosecution rate per complaint [].
Again no visible action by the Treasurer.

30_03_2007_InvestorDaily Westpoint spruiker tied to Fincorp. Online Super caught in Fincorp mess.
05_07_2007 The WIG executive  met with ASIC on 05/07/2007, and outlined many ASIC's past failings. At the end of the meting we left the new ASIC Chairman, Mr. Tony D'Aloisio, with a set of formal questions, which he promised to answer at the following meeting. At the following meeting he refused to provide the promised answers. Further, he refused to answer any question relating to ASIC before his appointment as Chairman.
Why would the ASIC Chairman refuse to answer simple, straightforward, questions.
07/05/2007 Tony D'Aloisio reports on Westpoint at Senate Estimates.
21-06_2007 Westpoint spruiker's $18m payout. Neil Burnard received three times as much in commission as ASIC previously thought.
21_06_2007 Senator Coonan contradicted herself on Westpoint in Parliament.
Does this suggest a cover up to protect ASIC and the Government?
27_07_2007_AFR  There are indications the regulator contributed to the Westpoint collapse
By its failure to carry out its duties the regulator has caused needless misery 4000+ investors, most of whom were of senior years.
 Sherry_MacAulay 30-07-2007 Nick Sherry promised a Rudd Labor government would open an inquiry into the financial serices industry.
Perrhaps it wasn't a "core" promise, or was it made with fingers crossed behind his back?
06_11_2007_MR 07_288 ASIC has banned Mr Jason Lowth, of The Vines in Western Australia,from providing financial services for five years. Mr Lowth provided financial planning services through Brighton Hall Securities Pty Ltd (Brighton Hall) between 17 September 2001 and 14 June 2004. During this time he was a proper authority holder and then an authorised representative of Brighton Hall" [ASIC MR 07-288].
It is interesting to note Brighton Hall Winthrop Securities, which was owned by John Whitehead who was banned by ASIC. Brighton Hall, which sold Westpoint products, has now gone into liquidation and many of its members have formed a new company.
ASIC/WIG meeting of 08/11/2007

The Government refuses to answer the fundamental question: why is ASIC not responsible for the losses incurred by Westpoint investors because they failed to recognise the Westpoint Mezzanine Schemes were unregistered Managed Investment Schemes and not debentures.

08_11_2007
The comments on the WIG/ASIC meeting of 08/11/2007 display just how little ASIC understands or wishes to perform its true role of not only regulating the marketplace, but setting the standard of behaviour for the financial industry.
2007
ASIC, FICS, and the Australian Government refuse to answer the fundamental question: why is ASIC not responsible for the losses incurred by Westpoint investors because they failed to recognise the Westpoint Mezzanine Schemes were unregistered Managed Investment Schemes and not debentures.
What a cosy little cosy menage a troi. For proof of my claims see the ASIC/WIG meeting of 08/11/2007, the correspondence with FICS and the Assistant Treasurer,Peter Dutton on this Website.You decide the reason the Government refuses to admit the proven problems with ASIC and FICS exist.

2007_12_03_TheWest

2007_12_05_TheWest

ASIC charged Karen Carey (Norm Carey's sister) with not providing the reports they demanded. Karen Carey's claimed she had no way of providing the reports as ASIC had held the books of the company for two years, and ASIC had not supplied her with copies of the information that would allow her to do so. ASIC charged Karen Carey. The matter went to Court on 04/12/2007, where ASIC withdrew their case hearing, before proceedings commenced. ASIC refused to answer any questions of why they had done so
I'm awaiting an answer from Tony D'Aloisi on on this matter. but in this case it is difficult to see any other reason than to hide another monumental mess of its own making. I intend to write to Tony D'Alosio as to why no reason was given for the withdrawal of the case, and to request how much public money was wasted on the exercise. However, it is not only the loss of money that is troubling. When there is so much to do in cleaning up the problems in the marketplace, caused by ASIC's  woeful past performance, the wastage of valuable resources borders on the criminal.
2007_12_12_MacAulay_DAloisio 
I write to Tony D'Alosio on the Karen Carey Matter.
Although Jan Redfern sends a reply, it does not nswer the questions I asked. I am still waitiong for a full reply.
26_06_2008_WABusinessNews ASIC SETBACK IN $245M WESTPOINT CASE [
04_07_2008_InvestorDaily

FORMER PIS ADVISER BANNED
Amazing how ASIC can ban all of these minor players (as it should) but it can't do anything about any of the principals of Westpoint - even Then the judge in the Burnard case asks if it was the first of a series of cases aganst senior Kebbel Bank peronnel because of the evidence that came out in the Burnard trial.

09_07_2008_InvestorDaily 
ASIC CONTINUES WESTPOINT CLAMPDOWN.
Another three minnows, who deserve to be outed, receive punishement - but why were they not included in the Section 50's? When is ASIC going to take action against Westpoint directors, and other high profile perople involved in the Westpoint disasrter?
 2008_08_09_HeraldSun WESTPOINT CASE TO BE TRIED TOGETHER 
 2008_08_18_08_InvestorDaily ADVISER FAILS TO OUTRUN ASIC.
Another Westpoint minor outlawed.
25_08_2008_InvestorDaily WESTPOINT SENTENCE TOO LENIENT: ASIC. 
Call that a sentence?
26_09_2008_InvestorDaily FORMER PIS ADVISER BANNED OVER WESTPOINT
 You might remember the ASIC pproved PIS research house gave Westpoint a qualified buy.
03_10_2008_MoneyManagement  BURNARD SENTENCE APPEALED
2008_10_10_The West WESTPOINT PROMOTER BANNED FOR LIFE [2008_10_10_InvestorDaily], BURNARD BANNED FOR LIFE   
But he is not serving time yet.
10_10_2008_HeraldSun WESPOINT'S NORM CAREY BLAMES WATCHDOG FOR COMPANY COLLAPSE
 I have come to believe anyting is possible. The court case should be interesting!
13_11_2008_InvestorDaily    KPMG CALLED TO FILE DEFENCE IN WESTPOINT CASE
The opening salvos in the ASIC V KPMG case!
14_11_2008_MoneyManagement    ASIC BANS PERTH-BASED FINANCIAL ADVISER.  
The twentieth Westpoint adviser banned. Onl forty odd to go
.
17_11_2008_InsuranceNews  KPMG DEFENDS ITSELF OVER WESTPOINT CLAIMS  
 Note the words: Will defend itself vigorously.
25_11_2008_AFR JUDGE FINDS FINANCIAL PLANNER NEGLIGENT    
Six Westpoint investors might get their money back - if Brannelly's have the $850,000.
28_I1_2008_InvestorDaily MASU SETTLES WESTPOINT CLASS ACTION   
ASIC finally has a win - and we should all be glad to see it.
03_01_2009 
In the last few days many of us received an eleven-page double-sided document from ASIC offering to supply personal relevant information to Westpoint Investors. I cannot understand why ASIC does not already possess much of the information it requests. Nor can I understand why ASIC demands an investor agreeing to the terms and conditions that he/she indemnifies ASIC. I don't wish to advise anyone on a course of action that may cost them money. However, I have written an email to ASIC's Ms Helen McNally requesting answers to specific questions. I will post her reply when it arrives. My own response to ASIC's offer is dependent on her answers.
2009_01_04_MacAulay_McNally
My document raises questions to the packs sent out by ASIC on 16_12_2009.   I feel ASIC has once again shown its lack of understanding of both systems, and the nature of the average Westpoint Investor
01_09_2009_McNally_MacAulay  
I found her document a typical ASIC reply: verbose and generalised. I stil fail to see what extra information ASIC can supply an investor that cannot be put on the ASIC website until such time ASIC wins the case.
15_01_2009_MacAulay_McNally

My reply to Ms McNally's communication of 09_01_2009.

01_16_01_2009_MacAulay_McNally   It's about time ASIC answered these questions.
03_02_2009_AFR WESTPOINT: GLOBAL MEDIATION FLAGGED   
ASIC fouls up badly, and now wants everone to pay for it. I respectfully point out Westpoint investors already have!
10-02-2009
2009_02_10_SMH, 2009_02_10_BusinessSpectator, and 2009_02_10_BrisbaneTimes   ALL REPORT THE DISMISSAL OF NEIL BURNARD'S APPLICATION FOR THE DISMISSMAL OF HIS CONVICTION - AND THE DISMISSAL OF ASIC'S APPEAL FOR A STIFFER SENTENCE     My own thoughts on the matter.
13_02_2009_SMH    FORMER WESTPOINT BOSS FACES COURT   
It's not ASIC prosecuting Carey.
14_02_2009_QueenslandBusinessReview ASIC BANS BRANNELLYS FROM FINANCIAL ADVICE   
Only six years? The interesting question is will Brannellys apeal and win?
31_03_2009_BrisbaneTimes   WESTPOINT FOUNDER TARGETS JUDGE
07_05_2009_TheAustralian    NICK SHERRY - ASICS LEADERSHIP ROLE   Difficult to understand given Nick's letter to me before the election.
18_05_2009_MoneyManagement   ADELAIDE MAN ON WESTPOINT ADVISER CHARGES   
ASIC is improving its performance - its only three and a half years after ASIC collapsed Wonder why they didn't find out when Westpoint was in business?
19_05_2009_TheAustralian    SPRUIKER IN ASIC PROBE AS WATCHDOG TARGET LINKED TO FALLEN EMPIRE  
It's PIS again.
27_05_2009_TheAge WESTPOINT LINK TO DEBT
Richard Beck loses money?
25_06_2009_AFR   WESTPOINT MEDIATION HAS WAY TO GO  
At this stage, I think the only conclusion one draw is that the meeting has been adjourned to 01/09/2009.
09-07-2009 2009_07_09_MoneyManagement, 2009_07_09_SMH,  2009_07_10_InvestorDaily_2 ALL RELATE TO THE COURT DECISION ON PI INVOLVING WESTPOINT INVESTORS THROUGH QUANTUM
02_09_2009_ABCOnline TRUSTEE SUED AFTER FINCORP COLLAPSE
Sandhurst was also the Market Street Mezzanine trustee
15_09_2009_SMH ASIC STRIKES PAYOUT DEAL OVER WESTPOINT
We will just have to wait and see how this pans out
22_09_2009_SMH

WESTPOINT ASSOCIATE FINCHLEY TO CLOSE
Why has it taken the regulator to act?

23_09_2009_WAToday
KEY WESTPOINT PLAYER TO BE WOUND UP
Given the number of failed companies with which the directors of Kebbel were involved, it is more than difficult to understand fow this matter was alowed to drag on for so long.
07_10_2009_WABusiness ASIC STARTS ANOTHER WESTPOINT ACTION
Most believe Brighton Hall had a lot to answer for.
07_10_2009_ASIC ASIC COMMENCES PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PERTH PERTH FINANCIAL SERVICES BUSINESS
08_10_2009_InvestorDaily ASIC CONTINUES WESTPOINT ACTION
Interesting reading.
2009_11_19_AFR WESTPOINT PAYOUT NO DIRECT HIT FOR PIS
That hit was taken by those who took their advice

2009_11_27_MoneyManagement_2

ASIC SETTLES WITH BONGIORNO ON WESTPOINT
Without admitting any liabiliy.
16_12_16_WABusiness ASIC IN 4TH SETTLMENT
Refers to Victorian Estates
16_12_2009_businessSpectator COURT APPROVES WESTPOINT SETTLEMENT
There are actually two settlements. One with Bobiorno and the other with Victorian Estates,
2010_03_04_BusinessSpectator ASIC REACHES FOURTH WESTPOINT SETTLEMENT
There were a number of papers reporting this matter, which was only a legal formality.
2010_04_14_InvestorDaily
WESTPOINT CHARGES DROPPED
Could that public interest becuse ASIC knew in 2003 the Westpoint Mezzanine model was an unregistered MIS, but did nothing about it?
2010_05_20_TheAustralian KPMG FIGHTS BACK IN WESTPOINT STOUSH
The evidence, and the outcome of the claim, should be interesting reading.
2010_05_24_FourCorners DIRTY MONEY
Another cover-up?
2010_06_09_SMH KPMG DENIES LIABILITY FOR WESTPOINT LOSS
A key point in the article is that ASIC knew the mezzanine model was a MIS.
2010_06_10_ABCNews CAREY GETS HIS LICIENCE BACK
Court finds he is a fit an proper person
2010_06_11_ABCNews WESTPOINT BOSS SAYS HE WILL ETURN TO REAL ESTATE
West Australian real estate regulator loses case.
2010_06_18_WABusines $3.25 WESTPOINT SETTLEMENT
IMF got it back - not ASIC
2010_06_22_SMH_2 WESTPOINT DOCUMENTS IN ThE DARK
Is keeping documents secret a breach of democracy?
10_08_2010_InvestorDaily MF SETTLES QBE, QUANTUM ACTIONS
Undisclosed terms of course.
10_08_2010_WABusinessNews MF COMPLETES ANOTHER WESTPOINT DEAL
The last of the Westpoint cases involving IMF.
11_08_2010_WABusinessNews WESTPOINT MANAGER FACES JAIL TIME
But will ASIC put him in there?
17_08_2010_TheAge

ASIC SET FOR ANOTHER COURT SAVAGING IF WESTPOINT WIND-UP DOCUMENT REVEALED
We live in hope that the document enters the public domain

19_08_2010_AFR
ASIC PUSHED TO END WESTPOINT
The hidden smoking gun is now visible to the world. I wonder if the pollies an continue to resist a Royal Commission into past ASUIC performance.
14_09_2010_SMH INVESTORS TRIED TO REDEEM FUNDS
More on the MFS tragedy.
2010_11_16_ABCOnline
FAILED PROPERTY GROUP DIRECTORS OF WESTPOINT TO FACE TRIAL
Why did it take ASIC five years to make this mve?
2011_02_01_FinancialStandard
2011_02_01_SMH
2011_02_01_WABusinssNews
2011_02_01_ABCNet
2011_02_01_TheAge
2011_02_HeradSun
2011_02_SMH
2011_02_TheAustralian
2011_02_TheAustralian_2
2011_02_02_AFR
All relate to KPMG agreeing to pay $67m to Westpoint investors. It is intersting to note that ASIC were claimng $200m from KPMG, and they now say the hope to see $160-170 resturned to Westpoint investors when the originally set the recovery figure at $538m.
2011_02_11_PerthNow
WESTPOINT REALTY, CAREY MISLEAD CLIENTS
That should read Westpoint Realty
2011_02_12_TheAustralian
NORM CAREY AND HIS FIRM WESTPOINT FOUND GUILTY
Westpoint Realty .Not Westpoint Corporation

2011_06_25_TheAustralian

2011_06_25_TheWest

FORMER DIRECTOR GUILTY OF FALSE STATEMENTS

RUNDLE GUILTY OVER $400m WESTPOINT COLLAPSE

Why arent all of the others, including ASIC, guilty of the sam charge?

2011_06_28_TheWest

CAREY CHARGED OVER WESTPOINT COLLAPSE
Well, he hasn't been charged yet.I am not legal, but I do understand that ASIC failed to provide the Court with any information relating to ASIC's "secret" audit of Westpoint by Deloittes.

ASIC BRING CHARGES AGAINST WESTPOINT DUO
2011_07_01_HeraldSun
WESTPOINT DIRECTORS FACING CHARGES
2011_07_01_ABCOnline
ASIC BRINGS CHARGES AGAINST WESTPOINT FOUNDER
Carey does have a pont about ASIC's non disdclocue of the Deloittes report.
   
2011_07_02_the Australian WESTPOINT FOUNDER FACES CRIMINAL CHARGES