Arria shares

The only major instance found so far of David Ross potentially salting money away has been the accidental discovery of shares in Arria NLG Ltd in United Kingdom.

You can view a copy of the Arria company annual return here.   We have posted it because we are asking you if the names or relationships of the New Zealand shareholders mean anything to you.  Please have a look, and if anything jumps out please let me know.  This may help us to find more hidden funds.  Because a full forensic analysis has not yet been performed there is a likely hood that more ‘stash’ may have been hidden away.

The shareholding for the DRG Ross family trust can be seen at Shareholding 25, and a holding for a Jillian E Ross at Shareholding 96.  Further background on the finding of the Arria money can be found here and here.

NBR 20 Dec 2012 – FMA conflict of interest allegations misconceived and flawed

This appeared in the NBR in response to a complaint by the RAM investors group to the Solicitor General

FMA conflict of interest allegations misconceived and flawed

Article by Blair Cunningham  http://www.nbr.co.nz/subscribe?return=134177

The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) says it has fulfilled its statutory obligations amidst a conflict of interest complaint.

Ross Asset Management investors’ group has complained to the solicitor-general’s office of a perceived conflict of interest.

“FMA is not simply an investigatory and enforcement agency, but also has a statutory mandate to authorise and license market participants. It is inevitable the FMA will at times investigate and bring proceedings against entities it has previously licensed,” spokesman Tony Reid told NBR ONLINE in a written statement.

Investors’ group spokesman Bruce Tichbon says he got a “strong sentiment” from members of the group he should seek clarification of whether or not the FMA has a conflict of interest concerning RAM and related investigations.

He cited four major concerns:

• David Ross was licensed by the FMA as an Authorised Financial Adviser and David Ross had issued a disclosure statement to clients in mid-2011 stating this. The action of the FMA and this disclosure was instrumental in assuring many investors RAM was legitimate and had a more reasonable risk profile.The FMA was charged with doing due diligence on Authorised

• Financial Adviser’s, but had not investigated RAM.
• The government had passed major pieces of financial legislations since the finance company crashes of about 2008, including the Financial Advisers Act 2008 and the Financial Markets Act 2011. These actions created the impression of reasonable regulatory supervision and oversight of the financial markets, but this was not in fact the case, as evidenced by the collapse of RAM.
• The Securities Commission (the precursor to the FMA) was warned there was cause for concern about RAM three years ago in 2009, yet no action was taken.

Mr Tichbon has been referred to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and is currently considering his next steps.

“The FMA may now have a conflict of interest, in that it has failed to act on previous warnings but is now engaged in the investigation, receivership, liquidation of RAM and potential action against Authorised Financial Advisers who were involved,” Mr Tichbon says.

But Mr Reid says the FMA has applied the law “consistent with our mandate and discretion.”

Blair Cunningham – Wellington reporter

Group Discussion #1: What expectations do you have for the Support Group ?

This discussion is an opportunity to have your say in how the Group should focus it’s activities. And also identify any resources, skills, or ides that may be useful in achieving a more beneficial outcome to this sorry affair.

So it’s over to you … please add your comments by clicking on the link Leave a Reply below.

NOTE: These comments are private to Group Members only.