© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2011] VSC 95
Supreme Court of Victoria
2011-03-23
T FORREST J
Original judgment source is linked above.
CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Fraud -Continuing criminal enterprise - General deterrence - Good rehabilitation prospects - Age - Health
1 In May 2002 Rau Enterprises changed its name to Chartwell Enterprises Pty. Ltd. Prior to this time it was owned by Mr Ian Rau. You, Mr Hoy, took a half share at this time through your family company Black Swan Pty. Ltd., and you also became the sole director of Chartwell. Mr Rau continued as the company secretary.
2 Before May 2002 both you and Ian Rau had conducted share trading activities on your own behalves. Neither you, nor Mr Rau, had had any formal training in the running of business or in the handling and investing of other people's money.
3 Chartwell conducted a financial services business in Geelong. You assumed the role of attracting investors and Rau was generally responsible for trading. The business of Chartwell generally involved the receipt of funds from investors who were told that their funds would be pooled with other funds and then invested in financial markets with a view to generating substantial profits.
4 You have pleaded guilty to 34 charges of obtaining a financial advantage by deception (s.82(1) Crimes Act 1958 Vic), 10 charges of obtaining property by deception (s.81(1) Crimes Act 1958 Vic), carrying on a financial services business without a licence (s.911A(1) Corporations Act 2001 C'th), engaging in dishonest conduct in carrying on a financial services business (s.1041G(1) Corporations Act 2001 C'th) and dishonestly making improper use of your position as a director with an intent to gain an advantage s.184(2)(a) Corporations Act 2001.
5 The period over which these offences occurred extended from January 2007 until April 2008. All State charges except charges 8 and 44 of the Crimes Act charges are continuing criminal enterprise offences for the purposes of Part 2B of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). Charges 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 19, 20, 26, 30, 38 and 41 are rolled up charges involving more than one dishonest receipt of monies with the offending being expressed as having occurred between two nominated dates. As a continuing criminal enterprise offender you are liable to a maximum term of imprisonment of twice the maximum term prescribed for those charges. That is charges 1 - 7 and 9 - 43. The maximum term is potentially doubled to 20 years for each of these offences.
6 I have been assisted by an agreed statement of facts which sets out the circumstances of your offending in considerably more detail than will be found in these reasons for sentence. I shall annex that document to these reasons.
7 The bald figures that can be calculated from your offending are breathtaking. Over a period of 15 months the deceptions you practised upon the public garnered Chartwell nearly $16m of investor funds. During that period, and also as a result of your dishonesty, you procured for Chartwell credit from the Commonwealth Bank in the sum of $5.83m. Those figures alone give some indication as to the scale of your dishonest conduct but say little about the lives that you have diminished in the process.
8 The deception you practised on investors is sometimes known as a Ponzi scheme, named after the notorious criminal Charles Ponzi who operated an early example of it in the 1920's. In the agreed statement of facts it is so described at paragraph 9. You attracted money from investors by offering extraordinarily high interest rates. During the offending period the money was not used for investment at all. Some of it was used to make payments to existing investors of what was called 'interest' on their investments. Some of it was used to prop up the facade of Chartwell's prosperity and some of it was used to fund your lavish lifestyle. In the 15 month offending period Chartwell received nearly $22m from investors who were led by you to believe their money would be pooled and invested on financial markets. In reality only $429,130 was so invested. Ninety-eight percent of the funds Chartwell received were simply stolen from investors, and you, by your pleas admit responsibility for dishonestly dealing with nearly $16m of those funds.
9 It is apparent from the various witness statements that victims of your conduct were small family investors either attracted directly to the inflated returns offered or who were introduced to Chartwell through Syndicate Leaders who were so attracted. Typically a Syndicate Leader would be advised by you of even higher returns available if a really large sum were invested. He or she would then approach friends or family and their funds would be pooled in order for the investment to be made.
10 I have referred earlier to the returns that Chartwell offered. In cases where a fixed return was offered it was never less than 20% p.a.; more often 30% p.a. or more, and on several occasions 50% p.a. or above. These fantastic returns were given some verisimilitude by the outward signs of prosperity that Chartwell exhibited. The wages bill for a company that was not trading was enormous. During the offending period you employed approximately 40 market analysts who studied trends and made predictions. Charts were displayed on the walls. The room was alive with apparent activity. Prospective investors were shown through the trading room and they were told of the Chartwell system - that it was based on the methodology of W D Gann and that profits were high and assured regardless of market trends. In many cases investors were told that sophisticated risk management systems were in place. You made most of these representations. By your pleas you admit the falsity of the representations particularised in the indictment. I consider your conduct in this respect quite disgraceful.
11 I do not propose to set out the circumstances that surround each transaction or set of transactions. They are contained in the Agreed Statement of Facts. Throughout the offending period you knew that Chartwell was, in fact, not trading and yet your pursuit of new investment was relentless. To every new or return investor you made one core misrepresentation - the funds would be used for trading. To that core lie you would add, depending on the occasion, various other lies and inducements, not least of which were the astronomical returns available upon investment.
12 Mr Morrissey SC put on your behalf that throughout the offending period you encouraged investment in the hope that the company could trade its way back to profitability. This is an explanation that you also provided to your psychologist Dr Ball:
"Mr Hoy said that when he realised the parlous state of Chartwell's financial affairs he fell into a state of panic and set about deceiving investors in the hope of being able to trade Chartwell out of its financial crisis."
The financial crisis that you were referring to is mentioned at paragraph 8 of the Agreed Statement of Facts:
"In mid 2006 Rau placed a number of large trades which were unsuccessful. From August 2006 there was little money left in the trading accounts and consequently monies received from investors to be used for trading were instead largely used to pay purported interest payments, as well as to pay business expenses and personal expenses of Hoy and Rau."
13 The Administrators Report dated 20 May 2008 is behind Volume 1, Tab 6 of the materials supplied to the court by the Crown. At page 4 of that report (page 9 of the depositions) under the heading Trading Performance the administrator observes that the company had never prepared formal financial statements or lodged income tax returns. From incomplete management accounts that had been set up for 2004, 2005 and 2006 the company's performance was summarised as follows:
14 Whilst I accept that management accounts have their limitations, particularly incomplete ones, it is apparent that the company had incurred continuing operating losses and large net asset deficiencies well before 2006. I am prepared to act on the basis that Rau's unsuccessful trading in 2006 may have brought to a head the company's underperformance. I am unable to accept, however, that you held out any genuine hope in 2007 and 2008 that the company could trade out of difficulty. The company simply did not trade in any meaningful way during that period. Perhaps you may have hoped to raise by dishonest means sufficient investor funds so that you could attempt to trade the company out of trouble, but that is hardly a mitigating factor. The fact remains that you must have known of the company's hopeless financial state throughout 2007 and into 2008 and yet you continued to deceive investors, not just at the point of investment, but also when they enquired about their funds. You were present and complicit with Rau at the Riviera on Yarra dinner in December 2007 where concerned investors were told "the future looks great", Chartwell had a "disciplined approach to highly leveraged trading platforms" and a "consistent trade record of company growth." At this stage the company had not traded for at least 11 months and, if the management accounts are to be believed, had a net asset deficiency of over $28m. You assured an investor in January 2008 that things were fine and her funds were safe and intact and you assured other investors on 5 April 2008 (only days before the inevitable collapse) that their money was 'still very safe.'
15 As I have said, the victims of your offending were largely small investors, often investing their superannuation. In addition to their witness statements, five Victim Impact Statements have been tendered. They make for depressing reading. One man, Mr E, still with young children to bring up, has been all but bankrupted; his wife has been bankrupted. Their friends whom they introduced to Chartwell are gone. His marriage is under "huge stress". You explained to him how he could achieve a better interest rate if his investment were larger and his erstwhile friends pooled their money with him.
16 Another, Mr H, describes how at 71 he now is compelled to work for at least another four years. He and his wife trusted their savings with you and lost them all. The retirement that they looked forward to is no longer a reality. They will spend the rest of their days in reduced circumstances as a direct result of your dishonesty.
17 Mr M is a retired academic. Like the previous witness/victim he too looked forward to retirement only to lose it. You showed him around the trading room, put compelling arguments as to why he should invest with you, befriended him, discussed health issues and then took his money.
18 Mr S underwent a liver transplant in October 2005. His recovery was delayed and he was compelled to sell his house. He netted $80,000. He explained to you his circumstances, including his health problems. On 31 May 2007 he transferred his money to you. You had assured him his money was safe and that he should place his trust in you. In the days following your receipt of his money for investment in the share market, you disbursed approximately $68,000 of it, none of it whatsoever in the way you had promised.
19 It is unnecessary to recite the current or past circumstances of all the people you preyed upon. You have diminished the lives of all of them. You have stolen from them and you have humiliated them, and for that you must be held to account.
20 Your dealings with the Commonwealth Bank in 2007/8 display a similar quality of dishonesty. In September 2007 the Commonwealth Bank approved a business loan to Black Swan Pty. Ltd. (a company you part-owned and controlled) in the amount of $3.68m. The bank required, inter alia, Chartwell's financial statements for 30 June 2006 before it would approve the loan. You caused to be supplied to the bank a false Chartwell Unit Trust Balance Sheet which claimed total assets of $19.05m and net assets of $100.00. The Chartwell Enterprises Balance Sheet claimed falsely net assets of $3.176m. The Profit and Loss account claimed again falsely an operating profit after tax of $2m approximately. The true position in July 2006 was one that I have referred to earlier. Chartwell Enterprises Pty Ltd had a net asset deficiency of over $28m and its net operating loss for that year was $2.754m. $3.68m was procured from the bank by this deception.
21 In January 2008, unbelievably, the Commonwealth Bank extended you further funds in the form of an increased overdraft to Black Swan. This time the false Chartwell accounts had been updated to purport to represent the 30 June 2007 position. You supplied to your accountants information that again vastly overstated the net asset position and told of a $2.3m operating profit when in fact the true picture was of an operating loss of $2.9m. The Commonwealth Bank extended your overdraft by a further $2.150m after being provided with these lies.
22 Within the very large context of your offending, a relatively small percentage of the funds dishonestly obtained can be directly traced to a lavish lifestyle. At the time that the Administrator reported, your loan account with Chartwell had a book value of $522,000 which simply means that that was the accumulated balance of monies you had borrowed from Chartwell. This debt accrued over 27 months up to October 2007 and was mostly the result of relatively small withdrawals. It is impossible to say whether any of these monies advanced by Chartwell to you came from funds received from one or more of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty. What can be said with more certainty, however, is in the months leading up to the Chartwell collapse you became a very conspicuous consumer in Geelong, and the investors in and financiers to Chartwell underwrote that consumption.
23 Black Swan, your company, purchased an 87' Warner Sport Yacht in 2007. In April you transferred $700,000 of investors funds from Chartwell to Grant Torrens International Marine Pty. Ltd, as deposit on the yacht 'One Song'. In August CBFC finance loaned Black Swan $6.7m in what was styled as 'equipment loan' the equipment being the yacht. You used your position as a director of Chartwell dishonestly by executing a guarantee on behalf of Chartwell in respect of this loan. This occurred at a time when Chartwell was not trading and completely insolvent. This constitutes charge 47. It appears that a significant amount of these funds were indirectly repaid to Chartwell or directly to investors as interest. (See exhibit 3 ).
24 At about the same time you purchased a Rolls Royce Phantom motor car. This vehicle was leased for a relatively short time before being repossessed and the lease payments were made from Chartwell funds. Three lease payments of $14,323 were made. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that these conspicuous displays of wealth were designed to complement the false Chartwell image of great prosperity.
25 You have pleaded guilty to carrying on a financial services business whilst not being the holder of an Australian Financial Services Licence. Chartwell is the principal offender and your liability is accessorial via s 11.2 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. In substance, Chartwell provided through you, and sometimes Rau, financial product advice, as a result of which people invested money with it. The purpose of this legislation is to protect the investing public from unskilled or unscrupulous advisers. Chartwell was both. By your actions you aided and abetted Chartwell to conduct its business whilst unlicensed. You were, in effect, a 50% shareholder in Chartwell. You knew that it was required to be licensed and that it was not. In November 2007, Chartwell purchased PGM (a holder of the relevant licence) with investors funds. You emailed investors at that time advising them that a reason for this purchase was so that Chartwell could come within the "regulated umbrella". Chartwell also referred to this purchase in this context in a Newsletter dated 18 December 2007 and Rau made statements to this effect at the dinner held for investors on 12 December 2007. I regard this as a serious example of this offence. You assisted Chartwell to practice without a licence at a time when you must have known that the affairs of Chartwell were highly irregular. The very people this legislation aims to protect were the targets of Chartwell's blandishments and inducements. This constitutes charge 45 of the indictment.
26 Charge 46 alleges a contravention of s.1041G (1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (C'th). You admit aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring Chartwell to engage in dishonest conduct in relation to financial service. This dishonest conduct involved providing false explanations to investors relating to reasons for the delay in interest payments, the security of their investments and the financial status of Chartwell and its future prospects. I have referred already to an occasion on 12 December 2007 at your then restaurant Riviera on Yarra. Mr Rau, prompted by you, assured concerned investors of the future health of Chartwell. Thereafter when investors inquired about the security of their investments you painted an entirely misleading picture. It was not until 22 April 2008 that you finally admitted certain realities to the administrator, Mr Secatore. You stated no funds had been invested for about two years and funds had been applied to running expenses, wages, research and development and as general returns on investment in the form of capital and interest payments.
27 Charge 47 relates to the guarantee you signed with Rau for the 'equipment loan' for the yacht. I have dealt with the circumstances relating to this earlier in these reasons. You dishonestly used your position as a director by signing this guarantee to acquire for Black Swan the loan necessary to purchase the yacht. The yacht was not for Chartwell's use and Chartwell had no chance of legitimately meeting the guarantee should it have been called upon.
28 You are now 58 years old. Since Chartwell collapsed you have lived with your former partner Ms Johns and your three stepchildren. I understand this to be emergency accommodation rather than any resumption of the relationship. I have read references provided by Ms Catherine Johns and her children. You were together for over twenty years having met as teachers at Deer Park High School. You have supported Ms Johns through a serious illness and have taken an active and loving role in bringing up your three stepdaughters. Ironically, it seems the catalyst for the breakdown in the relationship was your developing involvement with Mr Rau and the Chartwell business.
29 Your childhood was, I am told, a difficult one characterised by clashes with your mother. You were a good student who matriculated from University High School and subsequently completed an Arts degree and a Diploma of Education at the University of Melbourne. You have one older brother. Psychological evidence has been tendered on your behalf. You have been prone to depression over the years and have been prescribed anti-depressants around 1990 and more recently Aropax tablets from February 2003 until October 2004.
30 You had not received any formal psychiatric or psychological treatment in the years leading up to the Chartwell collapse. In late April 2008 (i.e. not long after the collapse) you were referred by your GP to Mr Martin, a clinical psychologist. You saw him initially on 5 May 2008 and thereafter on regular occasions until October 2008. Given the recent turmoil in your life it is not surprising that Mr Martin diagnosed an Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood (DMS-IV: 309.28). Your symptoms of anxiety and depression became chronic and persisted until Mr Martin ceased psychotherapy in October 2008. During this time your GP prescribed anti-depressant and anxiolytic medication. Your GP describes you as a shattered man. This observation seems to have been made at a time just after Chartwell collapsed.
31 Dr Tofler, a psychiatrist, took over your treatment in October 2008. In an unsigned report he states that you have consulted him for treatment on a total of six occasions, most recently early this month. You received legal advice that you had no defence to these charges which seems to have triggered a depressive relapse. Dr Tofler has expressed the opinion that you have developed some insight into your contribution to Chartwell's collapse and that you express an appropriate level of remorse. You have expressed some depressive symptoms at times but generally your affect has been reactive and your outlook positive. Dr Tofler is of the opinion that the inevitable custodial sentence that I must impose will be detrimental to your mental health.
32 Very recently your solicitors have commissioned a forensic psychological report from Mr David Ball. He saw you twice at the beginning of March for a total of two hours. Mr Ball agreed with the prior diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and Depression but also concluded that you satisfy the diagnostic criteria for a dysthymic disorder. As I understand these criteria (set out in Appendix Two of Mr Ball's report) this condition manifests itself in a chronically depressed mood more on than off, but with a lower level of symptoms than is observed with major depressive episodes. Again, given the tumultuous events of the last couple of years, this diagnosis is hardly surprising. Mr Ball concurs with Dr Tofler's opinion that incarceration may trigger a recurrence of a depressive episode. On the issue of incarceration you offered the following to Mr Ball:
"I'm in a process of psychological rehabilitation and self discovery that will be adversely affected by the circumstances of incarceration. I do not yet feel that solid "core of being" that I have described that would facilitate dealing self-reliably with both the adversity of incarceration and any recurrence of major depressive illness."
33 On balance, I accept that you are prone to depressive illness and that any term of imprisonment that I impose may be somewhat more onerous because of this tendency.
34 It was submitted on your behalf that your moral culpability for the offending was reduced by your depressive illness. Of the four health professionals whose opinions have been tendered in evidence, none link any psychological or psychiatric illness to your offending. Whilst Mr Ball stands alone in diagnosing a dysthymic disorder stemming from a dysfunctional upbringing, it is of fluctuating chronicity and unlinked to the offending. I understand Dr. Tofler, Dr Grambas your GP and Mr Martin to be saying that any depression or anxiety that you were experiencing when they saw you was largely reactive to the collapse of Chartwell and your predicament. In fact, you reported precisely this to Mr Martin in your initial consultation. I do not accept that your moral culpability for offending is reduced by mental illness.
35 It was also submitted that your physical health ought act to mitigate the sentence I am to impose. I consider that your health is no better or worse than may be expected for a 58 year old man. I have been supplied with your GP's records from both the Geelong City Medical Clinic and medical reports from the Clifton Hill Medical group. High blood pressure has been a concern for a number of years and this has been treated with medication, recently more aggressively. In December 2007 you complained of sudden onset of dizziness and confusion. You described this at the time to investors as a mini-stroke. The clinical indications were of a "transient ischaemic type of attack". However, this diagnosis was not confirmed and tests on your carotid arteries did not disclose any significant interference of blood flows. You have experienced gout over recent years. I take the view that these ailments are essentially age-related and your age is a factor that I take into account in determining the appropriate sentence. I do not consider there is any unusual medical condition that calls for specific attention in the sentencing process.
36 You have no prior convictions, save for minor traffic infringements. As I have observed, you have been an admirable husband and stepfather. Prior good character in cases involving white-collar crime is of lesser significance than in other types of crime. That good character is often the reason why an offender is positioned so as to effect the crime and it is often also a reason why the offender is the repository of the very trust he has breached. That said, it is not completely irrelevant - it informs aspects of rehabilitation and the genuineness of any asserted remorse - and I will give it some weight in the sentencing mix.
37 I accept that your prospects for rehabilitation are excellent. You will be significantly older when released and I think it highly unlikely that you will re-offend. You are also entitled to some credit for your pleas of guilty. Those pleas were entered at a late stage. You pleaded not guilty at your committal on 10 March 2010. You indicated on 1 December 2010 before me that you would plead guilty and you were arraigned on 9 December 2010. Despite its lateness your plea has a utilitarian value. The community has been spared the inconvenience and expense of a lengthy criminal trial and the witnesses, particularly the investors, have been spared the task of giving evidence at that trial. I am also prepared to infer that there are elements of remorse that are demonstrated by your plea. Your counsel accepted that what remorse there was has been halting. I am also prepared to infer some remorse from your co-operation with the Administrator, Mr Secatore. Although you were keen to attribute Chartwell's failure to Mr Rau, you at least conceded that it had not been trading for approximately two years and that the funds received over that time had been diverted for unauthorised purposes. I do not consider that any remorse you have felt is complete or profound. I do consider, however, that you have exhibited some remorse and I take this into account.
38 You will be disqualified from holding office under the Corporations Act 2001 (s.206B Corporations Act 2001). This itself is a punishment which I am obliged to take into account. Given the circumstances of your offending and the need for general deterrence, this disqualification is not one, however, that weighs heavily in your favour.
39 I do not consider that the principles of parity have any real application in this exercise. Your co-offender Mr Rau was sentenced by me upon a different set of offences. He pleaded guilty to eight offences, two of which are common to your indictment they are (charges 45 and 46). The extent of your offending is so significantly different and more extensive than that for which Rau was sentenced that I do not consider you to be like co-offenders in any meaningful way. This proposition can be illustrated by reference to a number of distinctions between your respective positions. First, Mr Rau was not dealt with in respect of any monies received from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. By contrast, you have pleaded guilty to two charges (charges 31 and 37) involving obtaining a dishonest financial advantage to your private company of nearly $6m. Secondly, Rau has pleaded guilty to one charge of obtaining property by deception. This involved Chartwell receiving $40,000 from an investor prompted by a deception practised by Rau. You have pleaded guilty to 44 deception related charges (contrary to s.82(1) or S.81(1) of the Crimes Act 1958) involving Chartwell receiving nearly $16m of investor funds and a further $5.8m being received by Black Swan. Finally, Mr Rau pleaded guilty and undertook to give evidence at your trial. Leaving aside the two common offences, I do not consider that parity principles have any application in this matter.
40 I consider that the aspects of general deterrence, punishment and denunciation must be given significant weight in this exercise. You have been responsible for fraud on a grand scale. You have practised it on the vulnerable and the gullible. You have caused incalculable damage to decent people whose only fault was to believe your lies. Those people have either been ruined financially or significantly financially impaired. You have humiliated them all. The sentence I am about to pass is designed in part to punish your criminality, denounce your conduct and deter like-minded others. Those contemplating fraud on this scale must understand that long terms of imprisonment await them.
Balancing these factors as best I can, I sentence you as follows:
I propose to treat the sentence on charge 31 of 9 years imprisonment as the base sentence. All other sentences are to be served concurrently save where I specifically direct cumulation.
• Charge 9 12 months cumulative on charges 31 and 37
• Charge 5 9 months cumulative on charges 31, 37 and 9
• Charge 1 6 months cumulative on charges 31, 37, 9 and 5
• Charge 28 6 months cumulative on charges 31, 37, 9, 5 and 1
• Charge 27 4 months cumulative on charges 31, 37, 9, 5, 1 and 28
• Charge 8 2 months cumulative on charges 31, 37, 9, 5, 1, 28 and 27.
That comes to an effective total sentence on the State charges of 13 years and 9 months imprisonment. I fix a non-parole period of 9 years.
On the Commonwealth charges I sentence you as follows:
On charge 45 I sentence you to 12 months imprisonment.
On charge 46 I sentence you to 9 months imprisonment.
On charge 47 I sentence you to 18 months imprisonment.
I declare that each of those sentences commence today. Given that these sentences are subsumed by the State sentences, it is not appropriate to impose a recognisance release order.
I declare that you have served 17 days of pre-sentence detention including today and it be reckoned as already served under this sentence and I so certify.
Pursuant to Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 I declare that but for your plea of guilty I would have fixed a total effective sentence of 16 years and six months with a non-parole period of 12 years.
Pursuant to s.6F of the Sentencing Act 1991 I declare that in respect of charges 1 - 7 and charges 9 - 43 that you have been sentenced as a serious offender and that that fact will be entered in the records of the Court.
I have prepared a table of the sentences imposed and an explanatory note relating to the approach I have taken to cumulation. This will be incorporated into the reasons for sentence.
I have taken the following approach to sentencing on the State charges.
Charge 9 is representative of the charges involving between $1,000,001 and $2,000,000.
Charge 5 is representative of the charges involving between $500,001 and $1,000,000.
Charge 1 is representative of the charges involving between $250,001 and $500,000.
Charge 28 is representative of the charges involving between $100,001 and $250,000.
Charge 27 is representative of the charges involving between $50,000 and $100,000.
Charge 8 is representative of the non-CCE charges below $50,000.
I have made no distinction between rolled up charges and single transaction charges.
All charges except charges 8 and 44 of the Crimes Act charges are continuing criminal enterprise offences for the purposes of Part 2B of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).
Rau Enterprises Pty Ltd ACN 098 112 791 ("Rau Enterprises") was formed and registered on 10 September 2001 [M01357203]. At the time Ian Stuart Rau ("Rau") was the sole director and company secretary of Rau Enterprises.
On 8 May 2002, Rau Enterprises changed its name to Chartwell Enterprises Pty Ltd ("Chartwell"). On that day, Rau ceased to be the director of Chartwell, but continued in his role as the company secretary. Graeme Ronald Hoy ("Hoy") became the director.
Chartwell conducted a financial services business in Geelong. Hoy was generally responsible for attracting investors and liaising with them, whereas Rau was generally responsible for trading.
The shareholders of Chartwell were Black Swan Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 007 394 354 ("Black Swan"), a company of which Hoy was its sole director and equal shareholder with his ex wife, and Uzzi Pty Ltd ACN 007 357 799, a company of which Rau was the sole director and shareholder. [M01357204 & M01357205]
The registered office of Chartwell was 18 Eastern Beach Road, Geelong. Its registered place of business was level 1, 229 Ryrie Street, Geelong and this was where it was based and conducted its financial services business.
The business activities of Chartwell involved the receipt of funds from investors who had normally entered into a loan agreement with Chartwell or Black Swan prior to providing funds. Investors were informed and understood these funds would be pooled with other funds which would then be used to trade on the financial markets in the expectation of generating profits. For Chartwell to trade on the financial markets it utilised the services of licensed brokers, namely Peter G. Moloney & Associates Pty Ltd ("PGM") and CMC Markets Asia Pacific Pty Ltd ("CMC").
In mid 2006 Rau placed a number of large trades, which were unsuccessful. From August 2006 there was little money left in the trading accounts, and consequently monies received from investors to be used for trading on the financial markets were instead largely used to pay purported interest payments, as well as to pay business expenses and personal expenses of Hoy and Rau.
ASIC conducted an investigation relating to the period 1 January 2007 to 22 April 2008, during which period Chartwell received $21,852,062.18 of investor funds. Only $429,139.00 was traded on the financial markets. In effect Chartwell was a Ponzi-scheme, on a grand scale, destined for financial disaster.
Ultimately Chartwell was placed into voluntary administration on 22 April 2008, and on 28 May 2008 it was placed into liquidation. In a report to creditors dated 20 May 2008 [M01376008] the administrators advised that as at 22 April 2008 Chartwell owed approximately $80.6m to various entities, including $68.19m to investors. Total assets were estimated to be $21,966.04.
Bendigo bank a/c no. 120892997 ("CEBB 997 a/c")
Bendigo bank a/c no. 115027617 ("CEBB 617 a/c")
Macquarie IML a/c no. 120366679 ("CEMB 679 a/c")
Bendigo bank a/c no. 127175784 ("BSBB 784 a/c")
Bendigo bank a/c no. 130052632 ("BSBB 632 a/c")
Macquarie IML a/c no. 119170520 ("BSMB 520 a/c")
Bendigo bank a/c no. 125867713 ("GHBB 713 a/c")
Bendigo Bank a/c no. 106625270 ("IRBB 270 a/c")
Bendigo Bank a/c no. 117937011 ("RRBB 011 a/c")
Bendigo bank a/c no. 125867978 ("DCBB 978 a/c")
ASIC FINANCIAL RECONSTRUCTIONS OF BANK ACCOUNTS
Under this arrangement, Chartwell would have an agreement with the Syndicate Leaders about the interest rate it would pay to the Syndicate Leader on the capital invested. Once the interest rate had been negotiated, Syndicate Leaders could then determine what interest rate they could offer and pay to their respective investors. Usually, but not on every occasion, the interest rate negotiated between Chartwell and the Syndicate Leader was higher than what the Syndicate Leader offered his or her respective investors. The difference in the two interest rates was the margin or profit made by the Syndicate Leader. The interest rate offered to investors was also specified in the loan agreement that was executed between the Syndicate Leader and their respective investors.
THE CRIMES ACT CHARGES - Charges 1-44
Before investors (Syndicate Leaders or direct investors) committed to making an investment in Chartwell, most first met and spoke with Hoy. On most occasions Hoy essentially made the same, or substantially similar, verbal representations about the business activities of Chartwell and how it would use the investor's funds to generate a profit. Hoy said to investors that Chartwell would pool their funds with other investors and then use those funds exclusively for the purpose of making financial trades on the Australian and global financial markets by trading in commodities, currencies, futures and options.
Hoy explained that Chartwell had developed sophisticated trading systems, and used the trading methodologies of WD Gann, to generate high profits for its investors, regardless of whether the financial markets were going up or down. Hoy said that the trading systems used by Chartwell allowed it to make profits that were not generally available to others. In many cases Hoy told investors that Chartwell had sophisticated risk management systems that identified when investments would be affected. It was asserted that these systems allowed Chartwell to take evasive action to minimise the prospect of making a loss on the trades.
In the majority of cases Hoy explained to investors that Chartwell would pay a fixed interest rate on their investments, which would be paid either monthly, quarterly or yearly. However, in some circumstances Hoy offered to pay investors a variable return based on the performance of the trading activity. Alternatively, investors could also roll over their interest payments so that interest they received on their investments was compounding. Hoy also represented that interest was paid on a sliding scale and was indexed according to the level of investment. That is, the more invested the greater the interest rate.
In addition to the verbal representations made by Hoy, most investors were shown the business operations of Chartwell. That usually included a tour of the Chartwell office in Geelong, where numerous staff were employed as market analysts and where numerous charts were displayed on walls depicting the financial markets in which Chartwell had purportedly invested. This tour reinforced the representations made by Hoy and influenced the decision to invest in Chartwell.
Contrary to the assertions by Hoy and the facade of success and systems, in reality Chartwell was a poorly run organisation, with a lack of proper systems and funds with which to trade. A number of former employees refer to the inadequate accounting systems and lack of an automated database to record and produce monthly reports for investors. Clint Sanders, Operations Manager stated that he complained to Hoy about the lack of such systems and Hoy told him that he used a calculator to prepare quarterly reports to be sent to investors. Sasha Melnik (a bookkeeper at Chartwell) referred to the monitoring of investments as 'appalling'. Chartwell was effectively broke from mid 2006, and required new investor funds in order to meet its daily financial commitments and to pay purported interest to investors. Investor funds were not invested as represented by Hoy, but were utilised on a needs-basis to pay 'interest' - failure to pay would have revealed the parlous state of Chartwell's finances, caused a run on its remaining funds and effectively brought to an end its operations much sooner than transpired - as well as to pay ongoing business expenses of Chartwell and personal expenses of Hoy and Rau. By way of example:
[nb. For precise representations made to individual investors relevant to the charges, see the particulars in the charges
The summary also refers to investments by a number of investors additional to those covered by the Crimes Act charges. Those investments are relevant to the s. 911A Corporations Act charge. Where an investor has made other investments not the subject of the Crimes Act charge, the investments the subject of the Crimes Act charge are bolded]
George Mihos / Today Not Tomorrow Institute Finance Pty Ltd/Georone Nominees Pty Ltd (charge 1 re $395,000)
(payment made by Georone Nominees Pty Ltd to CEBB 617 a/c)
(payment made by Georone Nominees Pty Ltd to CEMB 679 a/c)
(payment made by Georone Nominees Pty ltd to CEMB 679 a/c)
[nb - repaid same day - see M01295136 at p. 13 of 22]
Christine Pedersen / C & J Goddard Investments Pty Ltd
Alison Sinclair is the partner of investor Ian McKenzie (see above). She first became aware of Chartwell in 2005 when McKenzie commenced investing, but knew of Hoy for approximately 7 years. In February 2007, Sinclair decided that she would also invest in Chartwell and arranged a meeting with Hoy.
At the meeting, Hoy explained to her the business activities of Chartwell. When Sinclair expressed to Hoy that she wanted to invest $300,000.00 in Chartwell, Hoy told her that she could expect to receive an interest rate of between 30% and 40% pa.
On 16 February 2007, Sinclair invested an amount of $300,000.00 by electronic funds transfer into the CEMB 679 a/c as instructed by Hoy.
Sinclair elected to receive compounding interest payments on her investment in Chartwell.
On 6 May 2007, Sinclair received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the March 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Sinclair's investment in Chartwell for the March 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $12,300.00 and the balance was $311,070.00 as at 1 April 2007. [M01273322]
On 2 September 2007, Sinclair received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Sinclair's investment in Chartwell for the June 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $13,064.94 and the balance was $322,828.45 as at 1 July 2007. [M01273453, M01273323]
On 22 January 2008 Sinclair received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the September 2007 quarter. [M01273327] In the letter, Hoy stated that Sinclair's investment in Chartwell for the September 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $20,015.36 and the balance was $322,828.45 as at 1 October 2007.
Terry Ellingsen/Lynette Needham (charge 12 re $338,500)
Ian McKenzie first became aware of Chartwell in early 2005 through an associate. On 10 May 2005 McKenzie attended at the offices of Chartwell where Hoy explained to him the business activities of Chartwell and made representations that Chartwell could respond to rises and falls in the market, doing well irrespective of whether the market was up or down. At this meeting Hoy explained that investments in Chartwell returned an interest rate that was based on 'best endeavours', which related to the trading performance of Chartwell. Hoy explained that based on Chartwell's past performance, McKenzie could expect an interest rate of approximately 40% pa.
Subsequent to the meeting with Hoy, McKenzie made a number of investments in Chartwell, which over time showed significant returns.
On 2 May 2007 McKenzie invested an additional $500,000.00 by electronic funds transfer into the CEMB 679 a/c as previously instructed by Hoy.
McKenzie elected to receive compounding interest payments on his investments in Chartwell.
On 25 February 2007 McKenzie received an email from Hoy [M01273456] with an attached letter [M01273310] stating that the quarterly compounding interest return was $200,129.05 and that the account balance was $2,355,431.98 as at 1 January 2007.
On 6 May 2007 McKenzie received, on a Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the March 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that McKenzie's investment in Chartwell for the March 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $193,145.42 and the balance was $2,529,262.86 as at 1 April 2007. [M01273311]
On 2 September 2007 McKenzie received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that McKenzie's investment in Chartwell for the June 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $120,215.04 and the balance was $3,137,456.40 as at 1 July 2007. [M01273312]
On 22 January 2008 McKenzie met Hoy and Rau and queried them about the funding of Hoy's other assets. Both Hoy and Rau assured him that those assets - a large boat and Rolls Royce car - had nothing to do with McKenzie's investments in Chartwell. Chartwell was the guarantor for the loans for those assets.
On 21 February 2008 McKenzie received, via an email from Hutchinson, on Chartwell letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the September 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that McKenzie's investment in Chartwell for the September 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $194,522.04, and had a balance of $3,312,526.24. [M01273313]
Also on 21 February 2008 McKenzie received, via Hutchinson, a signed letter on Chartwell letterhead from Hoy for the December 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that McKenzie's investment in Chartwell for the December 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $278,252.16 and had a balance of $3,562,953.18. [M01273314]
Darren Carson Boal / DRMG Investments Pty Ltd
Peter Graeme Norman first met Hoy in 2002 when both attended a trading seminar and became associates. Subsequently, Norman became aware that Hoy had formed the company Black Swan, through which he conducted financial trading. Some years later, an associate told Norman that Hoy had formed Chartwell and was using client funds to invest in financial markets. The associate told Norman that Chartwell was generating very good returns for its investors.
In early 2006 Norman contacted Hoy by telephone and Hoy explained to him the business activities of Chartwell. When Norman explained that he wanted to invest $200,000.00 in Chartwell, Hoy told him that he could pay an interest rate of between 5% and 8% quarterly. In April 2006 Norman met with Hoy and told him he wanted to invest $200,000. Hoy had him sign a loan agreement with Black Swan. Norman shortly thereafter invested the $200,000.00, which was paid to Black Swan.
On 29 May 2007, Norman made an additional investment of $100,000.00 by electronic funds transfer into BSBB 698 a/c as instructed by Hoy.
Norman elected to receive compounding interest payments on his investments in Black Swan.
On 20 February 2007 Norman received, on Black Swan letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy stating that there was a gross return of $20,682.66 for the quarter and the balance of the account was $243,425.95 as at 1 January 2007. [M01289009]
On 20 May 2007, Norman received, on Black Swan letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the March 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Norman's investment in Black Swan for the March 2007 quarter achieved a gross return of $19,960.92 and the balance was $261,390.78 as at 1 April 2007. [M01289010]
On 1 September 2007, Norman received, on Black Swan letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Norman's investment in Black Swan for the June 2007 quarter achieved a gross return of $10,978.41 and the balance was $271,271.35 as at 1 July 2007. [M01289011]
On 24 January 2008, Norman received, on Black Swan letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter (revised). In the letter, Hoy stated that Norman's investment in Black Swan for the June 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $10,978.41 and the balance was $372,600.31.
A couple of days after 24 January 2008, Norman received, on Chartwell letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the September 2007 quarter (revised). In the letter, Hoy stated that Norman's investment for the September 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $23,103.80 and the balance was $393,435.43 as at 1 October 2007. [M01289022]
On 24 January 2008, Norman received, on Black Swan letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the September 2007 quarter (revised). In the letter, Hoy stated that Norman's investment in Black Swan for the September 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $23,101.21 and that the balance was $393,391.40 as at 1 December 2007. [M01289021]
On 20 April 2008, after hearing that Black Swan had gone into receivership, Norman contacted Hoy, and was told by Hoy that his investment was safe. A few days later an administrator was appointed to Chartwell.
Kenneth Ross Muller / Clydesdale Enterprises Pty Ltd / Rellum Investments Pty Ltd (charge 19 re $920,000)
Ronald Anthony Nekrep / Nekrep Nominees Pty Ltd
Dean Eugenio Ernesto Hedriana (charge 23 re $50,000)
Dean Eugenio Ernesto Hedriana first became aware of Chartwell in early 2006 through his sister-in-law. Around June 2006 Hedriana met with Hoy at the offices of Chartwell where Hoy explained to him the business activities of Chartwell.
On 26 June 2007, Hedriana's wife, Emma, invested an amount of $50,000.00 by electronic funds transfer into the CEMB 679 a/c as instructed by Hoy.
The Hedrianas elected to receive compounding interest payments on their investments in Chartwell.
On 20 February 2007 Hedriana received on Chartwell letterhead a letter signed by Hoy stating that the investment achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $3,680.00 or 9.2% and the balance was $40,000.00 as at 1 January 2007. [M01285167]
On 12 May 2007 Hedriana received, on Chartwell letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the March 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy states that Hedriana's investment in Chartwell for the March 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $3,280.00, or 8.2%. [M01285168]
On 1 September 2007 Emma Hedriana received, on Chartwell letterhead, a signed letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy states that Emma Hedriana's investment in Chartwell for the June 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest return of $1,680.00, or 4.2% for the quarter. [M01285171]
Antje Janssen/Antje Janssen Consulting Pty Ltd (charge 24 re $200,000)
Arne Harald Nielsen (charge 25 re $500,000 & charge 46)
Arthur Esteban / A & T Infinite Investments Pty Ltd
(payment made by A & T Infinite Investments Pty Ltd)
Stephen Wayne Hutchinson (charge 28 re $120,000)
Wayne Hutchinson first became aware of Chartwell in 2005 when he was introduced to Hoy by a mutual friend. In late 2006, early 2007, Hoy contacted W. Hutchinson and asked if he could arrange funding for potential clients to invest in Chartwell. W. Hutchinson subsequently made those loan arrangements on behalf of the clients.
In August 2007, Hoy contacted W. Hutchinson to ask if he was interested in taking up employment with Chartwell as a Marketing and Investor Relations Manager. Hoy explained the business activities of Chartwell. W. Hutchinson expressed his interest in the position offered by Hoy.
Later in August 2007, W. Hutchinson contacted and met with Hoy at the Riviera restaurant in Geelong and told him that he wanted to invest in Chartwell. Hoy explained that the interest rate was dependant on the profitability of the traded funds, less 10%, which was retained by Chartwell as an administrative fee.
On 29 August 2007, W. Hutchinson invested an amount of $120,000.00 by electronic funds transfer into BSBB 698 a/c as instructed by Hoy.
In October 2007, Hoy informed W. Hutchinson that he could commence employment with Chartwell. W. Hutchinson formally commenced employment with Chartwell in early November 2007.
Trenten Jon Adams / TJAI Pty Ltd (charge 30 re $250,000)
12 September 2007 - $100,000.00 (charge 30)
Susanne Mary Silver first became aware of Chartwell through her friendship with Hoy's brother-in-law. In May 2006 Silver attended at the offices of Chartwell where Hoy explained to her the business activities of Chartwell and represented that the investment was safe and offered high returns. After expressing her interest in investing in Chartwell Hoy explained that he could not say for certain what interest rate would be paid because it was dependant on the trading performance of Chartwell. After her meeting with Hoy, Silver made an investment through the Michael and Susanne Silver Superannuation Fund.
On 25 June 2007, Silver made an additional investment in Chartwell by purchasing a bank cheque made payable to Chartwell in the amount of $28,000.00 (from the M & S Silver Superannuation Fund account) and mailing it to Hoy. That cheque was deposited into CEBB 617 a/c on 4 July 2007.
On 9 January 2008, Silver made an additional investment of $500,000.00 in Chartwell by electronic funds transfer into CEBB 617a/c.
Silver elected to receive compounding interest payments on her investments in Chartwell.
On 1 September 2007, Silver received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the June 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Silver's investment in Chartwell for the June 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest payment of $3,680.80 and the balance was $118,950.94 as at 1 July 2007. [M01289336]
On 1 November 2007, Silver received, on Chartwell letterhead, an unsigned letter from Hoy for the September 2007 quarter. In the letter, Hoy stated that Silver's investment in Chartwell for the September 2007 quarter achieved a quarterly compounding interest payment of $10,943.48 and the balance was $128,800.17 as at 1 October 2007. [M01289338]
David Marcus Glasscock / Act Now Trading Pty Ltd
Anthony Graeme Long first met Hoy in 2000 when they both attended a trading seminar. They later became friends. Subsequently, Long became aware that Hoy had formed Chartwell and was aware that it was involved in making investments for clients on the financial markets.
In June 2007 Long expressed a desire to invest in Chartwell and met with Hoy at the Chartwell offices. During this meeting Hoy explained to Long the business activities of Chartwell and showed him the charting systems used.
Subsequent to the meeting with Hoy, Long made a number of investments in Chartwell though a Syndicate Leader that paid an interest rate of 15.5% pa.
After making these investments, associates of Long told him that if they invested a combined amount of $500,000.00 directly in Chartwell, Hoy would pay them an interest rate of 30% pa. In December 2007, Long and his associates met with Hoy who confirmed the interest rate of 30% pa he would pay for a $500,000.00 investment in Chartwell.
On 1 February 2008, Long invested $176,320.05 from his and his wife's self-managed superannuation fund by electronic funds transfer into CEBB 617 a/c as instructed by Hoy.
Rocco Biagio Sciarrone / Roc Designs & Engineering Pty Ltd
OBTAIN BY DECEPTION CHARGES RE CBA LOAN/OVERDRAFT
On 28 September 2007 the Commonwealth bank provided to Chartwell/Hoy a Letter of Offer confirming approval of a business loan to Black Swan in the amount of $3,680,500.00. Hoy signed the Letter of Acceptance on 1 October 2007. [M01357295] Prior to approving the loan the bank obtained from Hoy, via Bell Group accounting, the financial statements for Chartwell, the Chartwell Unit Trust, Black Swan and the Black Swan trust for the 2006 financial year [M01357232/34/39]. Brett Bell stated that had he prepared the accounts based on information supplied by Hoy. According to the Chartwell Unit trust Balance Sheet as at 30 June 2006 [M01357234] there were total assets of $19,052,234 in the trading accounts, and net assets of $100.00. The Chartwell Enterprises Pty Ltd Balance Sheet recorded that as at 30 June 2006 [M01357239] there were net assets of $3,176,143.00 and in the Profit and Loss statement [M01357239] there was an operating profit after tax of $2,018,668.00, and retained profits of $3,176,143.00.
These amounts were false. Sasha Melnik had compiled a spreadsheet in July 2006 that disclosed that Chartwell owed its investors $27,166,955.94 in capital plus $1,325,548.56 in interest [M01273511]. He forwarded that spreadsheet to both Hoy and Rau. Chartwell's MYOB management accounts for the financial year ending 30 June 2006, produced by the liquidator, show in the Balance Sheet net assets of ($28,573,309.84) (ie approximately $3.7m in assets and $32.3m in liabilities) and in the Profit and Loss statement as at 30 June 2006 an operating loss of $2,754,291.08 and a net loss of $5,059,137.11. [M01376029]
Subsequently Hoy requested additional finance, which was later granted in the form of an increased overdraft to Black Swan in the amount of $2,150,000.00 (see letter of offer dated 22 January 2008 [M01357296]). Hoy signed the Letter of Acceptance on 23 January 2008. Prior to obtaining the overdraft Hoy provided to the bank, via Bell Group accounting, a copy of Chartwell's financial statements as at 30 June 2007, together with the financials as at 30 June 2007 for the Chartwell Unit trust and Black Swan unit trust [M01357233/35/40]. In the Chartwell Unit Trust Balance Sheet [M01357235] is a current asset of 'trading accounts' in the amount of $19,000,000.00, and net assets of $100.00. The Chartwell Balance Sheet records net assets of $5,418,852.00 and in the Trading Profit and Loss statement an operating profit after tax of $2,346,458.00 and retained profits of $5,418,852.00 [M01357235].
These amounts were false. Chartwell's MYOB management accounts for the financial year ending 30 June 2007 produced by the liquidator show in the Balance Sheet net assets of ($35,122,651.75) (ie approximately $3m in assets and $38.1m in liabilities) and in the Profit and Loss Statement an operating loss of $2,974,467.53 and net loss of $6,549,341.91 [M01376029].
Furthermore Hoy attached to an email dated 17 January 2008 sent to the bank [M01357263] a Plan for Allocation of Funds to May 2008 in which Hoy asserted that the Wool Exchange freehold was sold for $5.9m and that funding of approximately $600,000.00 was required in relation to the acquisition of PGM.
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 CHARGES
Section 911A(1) - carry on a financial services business without holding an Australian financial services licence ('AFSL') (charge 45)
RG 1.3: ASIC assesses applications for AFS licences as part of our role as regulator of the financial services industry. When we assess a licence application we consider whether you:
(a) are competent to carry on the kind of financial services business you are applying for;
(b) have sufficient financial resources to carry on the business you are proposing - unless you're regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA); and
(c) can meet your other obligations as a licensee if we grant you a licence.
RG 1.10: Licensees have obligations under s912A and 912B of the Corporations Act requiring them to:
(a) operate their business efficiently, honestly and fairly;
(b) maintain the organisational competence to provide the financial services covered by their licence;
(c) ensure their representatives are competent and adequately trained to provide the financial services;
(d) have adequate financial, technological and human resources to provide the financial services;
(f) have arrangements in place for managing conflicts of interest;
(g) have dispute resolution systems and compensation arrangements for retail clients;
(h) comply with the financial services laws and ensure their representatives comply with them; and
(i) comply with the conditions on their AFS licence.
RG 1.11 If we grant you an AFS licence, you must comply with each of these obligations from day one in relation to all of the financial services and products covered by your licence. You need to have systems and processes in place that will enable you to comply with these obligations at the time you apply for your licence. When you complete your application form, you'll be asked to make declarations and certifications to this effect.
Section 1041G(1) Corporations Act charge (charge 46)
(b) False representations to investors that funds were safe
Section 184(2)(a charge - Guarantee re Yacht
R
Hoy [2011] VSC 95