Menu
Home › Which case won? › ”I suffered a loss because of bad investment advice, so the financial advisor should compensate me.” Which case won?

Which case won?

”I suffered a loss because of bad investment advice, so the financial advisor should compensate me.” Which case won?
15 Oct | Which Case Won

”I suffered a loss because of bad investment advice, so the financial advisor should compensate me.” Which case won?

by Geoff Roberson, Parramatta

The Facts

Investment in mortgage fund for fixed rate of return

An investor was a long-term client and personal friend of the director of a financial firm. 

The financial firm was the responsible entity of a mortgage fund, and the investor was a long-term investor in the fund. 

The fund invited investors to invest in mortgages secured over real property and earn a fixed rate of return over a fixed investment term. 

The investor and his self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) invested a total of $172,000 in a second contributory mortgage in the fund.

No return to investor after property sold at loss

The corporate borrower defaulted on that mortgage and the property was sold at a loss. This resulted in only a partial return to the first mortgagee and no return to the second mortgagees, including the investor and his SMSF. 

The investor complained to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), which assigned a case manager to investigate the complaint.

casea
The case for the investor
  • My financial firm misled me about the creditworthiness of the borrower and the existence of a third mortgage over the property.
  • If I had known about these factors I would not have invested and would not have suffered a loss.
  • Therefore I am entitled to recover my losses from the financial firm.
caseb
The case for the financial firm
  • Our role as financial advisor was to provide general advice only, which we did. In doing so, we disclosed all required information to the investor.
  • Given the investor’s investment history, even if we had provided advice about the creditworthiness of the borrower and the existence of a third party mortgage over the property, the investor would have invested anyway and he would have still suffered the loss.
  • Therefore, we are not required to compensate the investor for his loss.

So, which case won?

Cast your judgment below to find out
Case A Case B

Case A won. You were right!

How people voted
a43%
b57%

Expert commentary on the court's decision

“If as a consumer or small business owner you have a concern regarding a financial firm, you may wish to contact AFCA.

AFCA is Australia’s financial industry ombudsman and provides an alternative forum to tribunals and courts for resolving financial disputes related to banking, credit, general insurance, financial advice, investments, life insurance or superannuation.”
Investor contributed to loss but still entitled to award with 40% reduction

AFCA found in favour of the investor, but adjusted the award down by 40% because the investor had contributed to his own losses.

The financial firm was required to pay the investor $97,500 plus interest, as well as paying the investor’s SMSF a settlement amount of $6,000 plus interest.

Failure to disclose existence of third mortgage was misleading by omission

AFCA found that there had been issues with late payments, and the existence of a third mortgage should have been disclosed to the investor in the relevant product disclosure statement.

By not disclosing the required information, the advisor had misled the investor by omission and the investor had suffered loss.

AFCA accepted that the investor would have continued to invest in similar sub-schemes anyway.

When to contact AFCA

If as a consumer or small business owner you have a concern regarding a financial firm, you may wish to contact AFCA.  

AFCA is Australia’s financial industry ombudsman and provides an alternative forum to tribunals and courts for resolving financial disputes related to banking, credit, general insurance, financial advice, investments, life insurance or superannuation. 

Bear in mind, however, that an umpire like AFCA will scrutinise not only the shortcomings of the financial institution at the centre of your complaint, but also the extent to which your own actions contributed to the situation in dispute. 

You cannot rely on a regulator alone. Instead, you must take responsibility for conducting your due diligence properly to protect your own interests. 

NOTICE: This article is accurate as at the time of publication and does not constitute legal advice. Please see our legal notices page for more information. Information related to coronavirus can be outdated very quickly.
Send case to a friend Get in touch with an expert Send me more cases
Have your say

Other cases

Did the employer have vicarious liability for the negligence of one of its bicycle couriers? Which case won?
18 May 2022

Did the employer have vicarious liability for the negligence of one of its bicycle couriers? Which case won?

On 22 December 1994 as he was leaving a building in Sydney, a man stepped onto the
Read More
“Four years after we separated, I received a large inheritance. Now my ex-wife wants a cut.” Which case won?
02 May 2022

“Four years after we separated, I received a large inheritance. Now my ex-wife wants a cut.” Which case won?

A husband and wife were married on 2 February 2002, separated on 9 April 2010 and got
Read More
“The police revoked my gun licence and I want it back.” Which case won?
20 Apr 2022

“The police revoked my gun licence and I want it back.” Which case won?

In 2001, a man was issued with a gun licence on the basis that he had the genuine reasons
Read More
Is an inventor necessarily human? Or could it be an artificial intelligence (AI) system as well? Which case won?
06 Apr 2022

Is an inventor necessarily human? Or could it be an artificial intelligence (AI) system as well? Which case won?

An applicant submitted a patent application for a new food container that is easy for
Read More
Injured cyclist sues council for negligence after falling from poorly maintained bridge – Which case won?
22 Mar 2022

Injured cyclist sues council for negligence after falling from poorly maintained bridge – Which case won?

In April 2008, a cyclist participated in an annual Sydney-to-Queensland charity ride. 
Read More
Was the pub owner entitled to loss of bargain damages after ending the tenant’s lease for failure to pay rent? Which case won?
09 Mar 2022

Was the pub owner entitled to loss of bargain damages after ending the tenant’s lease for failure to pay rent? Which case won?

In January 2007, a tenant leased a 100-year-old hotel west of the Blue Mountains in New
Read More
“I’m a paramedic, not a doctor!” Was a paramedic’s failure to administer adrenaline inconsistent with the exercise of reasonable care? Which case won?
23 Feb 2022

“I’m a paramedic, not a doctor!” Was a paramedic’s failure to administer adrenaline inconsistent with the exercise of reasonable care? Which case won?

On the evening of 21 July 2002, a 25-year-old chronic asthmatic woman drove to her
Read More
“The property vendor made a verbal agreement to accept a 5% deposit. Now they’re suing me for 10%.” Which case won?
08 Feb 2022

“The property vendor made a verbal agreement to accept a 5% deposit. Now they’re suing me for 10%.” Which case won?

The vendor listed a commercial property for sale in South Yarra, Victoria as mortgagee in
Read More
“The rules were changed retrospectively to avoid paying me the sales commission I’d earned.” Which case won?
25 Jan 2022

“The rules were changed retrospectively to avoid paying me the sales commission I’d earned.” Which case won?

Between May 2005 and November 2013, the employee was employed as a sales representative
Read More
“There was insufficient notice of the board meeting, so the new board of directors was elected validly.” Which case won?
15 Dec 2021

“There was insufficient notice of the board meeting, so the new board of directors was elected validly.” Which case won?

Trouble had been brewing for some time at a not-for-profit company.
Read More
“The police wrongly revoked my firearms licence and I want it back.” Which case won?
01 Dec 2021

“The police wrongly revoked my firearms licence and I want it back.” Which case won?

The licensee was the holder of a firearms licence issued under the NSW Firearms
Read More
“The vendor registered the wrong plan of subdivision, and now has to return the deposit we paid.” Which case won?
17 Nov 2021

“The vendor registered the wrong plan of subdivision, and now has to return the deposit we paid.” Which case won?

On 12 November 1973, a vendor and purchaser signed a contract for sale of land near
Read More
Get more cases
Find an office Find a lawyer Chat

Fill out this form and one of our local law professionals will be in contact

By submitting this form you agree to the terms of our Privacy policy