Disqualification

<html><body>
ASIC has disqualified Michael John Teys of Sydney from managing corporations for five years following his involvement in the failure of three companies. The disqualification commenced on 29 January 2016 and ceases 28 January 2021.
The disqualification follows an ASIC investigation which found that Mr Teys breached his duties as a director, including failing to comply with financial services laws.
Mr Teys was the director of:
<ul>
<li>ACN 127 707 671 Pty Ltd (formerly known as Teys Lawyers Pty Ltd) ACN 127 707 671 (Teys Lawyers),</li>
<li>TPFL Ltd ACN 105 164 047 (TPFL), and</li>
<li>TPL Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 010 892 243 (TPL).</li>
</ul>
Each of these companies was placed into liquidation between 20 April 2010 and 3 June 2014.
ASIC found that Mr Teys managed the affairs of Teys Lawyers, TPFL and TPL well short of the standards required of someone in his position as Mr Teys:
<ul>
<li>Managed Teys Lawyers and TPL such that each incurred a deficiency;</li>
<li>Managed Teys Lawyers such that it preferred trade creditors over the ATO and in so doing acted with a lack of commercial morality;</li>
<li>Used his position as a director of Teys Lawyers and TPL improperly to gain financial advantages for himself and other related parties;</li>
<li>Failed to exercise due care and diligence in the management of a number of loans made by TPFL through its registered managed investments schemes.</li>
<li>Failed to exercise due care and diligence to ensure that Teys Lawyers and TPFL lodged documents with both the ATO and ASIC.</li>
</ul>
Liquidators reported that the total deficiencies owed to creditors exceeded $5 million across all three companies.
ASIC Commissioner Greg Tanzer said, 'Directors have a responsibility to manage the financial affairs of their company in accordance with the law. As this case shows, directors who cause or permit their company to breach legal obligations can face significant consequences.'
Mr Teys has the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of ASIC’s decision.
Background
The five year period for which Mr Teys was banned from managing corporations is the maximum period of disqualification that ASIC can impose under section 206F of the Corporations Act 2001.
Teys Lawyers traded as a legal services business specialising in strata law and was previously known as Michael Teys Strata Law Pty Ltd, Teys Lawyers Pty Ltd, and ACN 127 707 671 Pty Ltd.
TPFL held an Australian Financial Services License and as a responsible entity operated a number of registered managed investments schemes including:
<ul>
<li>Teys Strata Mortgage Trust ARSN 108 137 195;</li>
<li>Teys Strata Development Trust ARSN 1129 939 509;</li>
<li>The Teys Income Builder ARSN 110 052 429;</li>
<li>Dunsborough Hotel Property Syndicate ARSN 098 946 733;</li>
<li>Teys Strata Lifestyle Property Trust ARSN 096 588 108;</li>
<li>Sydney Apartments Trust ARSN 121 041 405;</li>
<li>Teys Fixed Income Trust ARSN 121 041 503;</li>
<li>Broadwater Bungalows ARSN 090 521 163;</li>
<li>Teys Retirement Property Trust No 1 ARSN 112 939 705; and</li>
<li>Settlers Lifestyle Property Trust ARSN 112 939 572</li>
</ul>
TPFL went into external administration on 5 March 2010.  ASIC cancelled TPFL's Australian Financial Services license on 22 March 2010.
This matter received funding from ASIC under the Assetless Administration Fund to fund the Liquidator of TPL to prepare a supplementary report for the purposes of ASIC to consider a banning Mr Teys pursuant to Section 206F of the Corporations Act 2001 (the Act).
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Michael Teys disqualifed by ASIC

<html><body>
ASIC has banned Geoffrey Woodcock of Auckland, New Zealand, from providing financial services for a period of four years.
Between November 2011 and October 2013, Geoff Woodcock was the founder and manager of Capital Alternatives Pty Ltd and a director of Velvet Assets Pty Ltd. Both of those companies promoted alternative investments in Australia.
However, Capital Alternatives, Velvet Assets and Mr Woodcock were not holders of Australian financial services (AFS) licences. They were also not authorised representatives of a licensee.
Following an investigation, ASIC found:
<ul>
<li>a number of the alternative investments promoted by Capital Alternatives and Velvet Assets were financial products and as such the companies were required to hold an AFS licence;</li>
<li>as a consequence, Capital Alternatives and Velvet Assets carried on a financial services business without holding an AFS licence and so contravened s911A of the Corporations Act;</li>
<li>Mr Woodcock was involved in this contravention by the companies; and</li>
<li>Mr Woodcock personally induced clients to invest by failing to disclose that around 40-45 per cent of the money invested would be retained as commission.</li>
</ul>
Commissioner Greg Tanzer said, 'The Australian financial services licensing regime provides safeguards. Consumers should not invest with a person or entity in Australia unless they are authorised by, or hold, an AFS licence.'
Mr Woodcock has the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a review of ASIC's decision.
There has been action elsewhere too against Capital Alternatives and other firms. 
In February 2014, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority won a case in the High Court against two investment schemes promoted by Capital Alternatives and other firms.
The FCA accused the firms of “promoting and/or operating collective investment schemes (CISs) in the UK illegally and without our authorisation”.
Judge Nicolas Strauss QC ruled that the schemes were collective investment schemes. 
The fact that the investment schemes were not authorised by the FCA means that they were operating illegally.
The FCA took out the case against the companies and individuals in July 2013.
The case focussed on two investment schemes: African Land (also known as Agri Capital) which offers investments in rice farm harvests in Sierra Leone, and is operated by African Land Limited and Reforestation Projects (also known as Capital Carbon Credits) which offers investments in carbon credits generated from land in Sierra Leone, Brazil and Australia. It is operated by Reforestation Projects Limited.
To sell the land, Capital Alternatives was advertising “Projected returns up to 175 percent in over five years.”
</body></html>

Capital Alternatives' spruiker Geoff Woodcock cops ASIC ban

<html><body>
A Gold Coast real estate agent has been fined $5,000 in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) this month and permanently disqualified from holding a real estate licence.
Following an investigation by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), Alex Far, Sales Director of Sovereign Realty in Runaway Bay, was subject to this action after a complaint was received from sellers who had questioned the circumstances around the termination of a contract of sale for their property.
The tribunal heard Mr Far presented a contract worth $1.1 million to the property sellers, concealing that the buyer was a de-registered corporation of which he was a former director.
Mr Far also provided the sellers with false information regarding the supposed payment of a $100,000 deposit into the agency’s trust account. After the sellers became suspicious of his behaviour, Mr Far produced a series of falsified letters and emails pertaining to the progress of the sale, and then wrote a fake letter terminating the contract.
In sentencing, QCAT considered Mr Far’s lack of remorse, and the effort he went to in falsifying documents, which clearly showed his intention to deceive the sellers in order to make a profit.
Fair Trading Executive Director Brian Bauer said the disqualification from the real estate industry sent a strong message to others that misleading consumers would not be tolerated.
“Parties to a real estate transaction have the right to expect that documents they receive have not been tampered with or produced illegally,” Mr Bauer said.
“Real estate agents are placed in a position of trust and can be responsible for holding large deposits on behalf of buyers, so the OFT will take action to remove from the industry people like Mr Far who have displayed dishonesty.”
The OFT conducts a series of proactive compliance operations each year, targeting malpractice in the real estate industry, with a particular focus on trust accounting.
Real estate agents and consumers may report suspected misconduct directly to the OFT.
</body></html>

Disqualification

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Disqualification

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News