Member log in

Kiwi investors' $140m revolt against Aussie fund manager

New Zealand investors are leading a call to replace the Surfers Paradise-headquartered manager of a $A418 million mortgage fund.

Disgruntled investors in so-called wholesale and currency funds managed by LM Investment Management will vote on November 1 on whether to replace LM with rival fund manager Trilogy.

Figures provided by Trilogy show 2750 New Zealanders have put money into the two LM funds, with an average investment of about $A40,000 – a total of more than $A110 million, or almost $NZ140 million at today's currency exchange rate.

LM, founded and run by Kiwi-born Peter Drake, manages funds of more than $A3 billion.

LM's main fund – which has three feeder funds, including the wholesale and currency funds – has been frozen for three years and the units' value has declined 27%, Trilogy says.

Mr Drake's fund lent predominantly to Gold Coast developers, who have been hit by the global financial crisis and Trilogy says 89% of the loans are in arrears or default.

Trilogy, which is paying for the investors' meeting in Sydney next month, also accuses LM of charging "extraordinary" fees and of breaching ASIC regulations because it has not updated its asset position in more than a year.

Trilogy claims investors are also concerned about alleged related-party lending between LM funds.

However, Mr Drake, LM's chief executive, says in a statement Trilogy's "hostile" takeover attempt is based on inaccurate and misleading information and is not in the best interests of investors.

He says the main fund was closed in 2009 because of the financial crisis – not bad or poor performing loans – and the company has a solid sale campaign "with a number of large transactions due to settle towards the end of the year".

LM is discussing its fund strategy and "comprehensive investor information" with ASIC, he says, and fees for its First Mortgage Income Fund are "historically low".

"LM believes that it is on the strength of very minimal support that Trilogy embarks on this campaign."

Investment eroded by fees

Trilogy's Brisbane-based managing director Philip Ryan told NBR ONLINE LM's investors want out and they do not want to see their money "effectively evaporate" because of LM's fees.

"The only reason we're involved is that investors in the major feeder funds have come to us and said we're tired of the fees.

"When you aggregate the fees for the main fund and the fees for each feeder fund it comes close to 5%, which is well above the industry average, and that's on an asset base that is actually declining," Mr Ryan alleges.

"The final accounts for this year haven't come out or haven't been released yet and everyone, of course, is scared that there's going to be further impairments."

If successful, Trilogy stands to make millions of dollars from its 1.5% fee on the main fund, though Mr Ryan says it will be on a declining pot, as the intention is for an "orderly" wind-down.

Two Australian institutions – which Mr Ryan would not name – are leading the revolt in the wholesale fund, while a group of Kiwi investors in the currency fund are calling for LM's replacement.

David Jansen, a New Zealand-based financial consultant for Trilogy, says the New Zealand feeder fund, known as the LM Currency Protected Australian Income Fund, is now thought to be worth about $90 million.

He says Kiwis were sold investments in the funds by financial advisers four or five years ago.

In 2009, Trilogy took over management of failed Brisbane property investor City Pacific's first mortgage fund.

Earlier this year, Trilogy took a lawsuit against City Pacific directors for alleged "unreasonable" loans to developers. A hearing date is yet to be set.

dwilliams@nbr.co.nz

More by David Williams

Comments and questions
10

Who needs NZ to devalue its $ when these punters are doing it for free!

LM Investment Management must be comprised of lawyers.

i invested in the LM currency Protected fund. When I asked the financial advisor (commission based salesman) who sold me this product about why he invested this cash with a bunch of gold coast sharks considering I was only after a low risk investment, he simply said " who pays your money, you takes your risk". He is still receiving commission whilst the fund is closed.I was referred to this individual by the Medical Assurance Society so i thought he was respectable. I will never use a financial adviser ever again.

I am a financial advisor (salary based) and it disgusts me that there are still some bad eggs in the industry concerned only with making money themselves and not putting the clients' interests first. All I can say is to ask as many questions as you can think of when dealing with an advisor. That includes questions about the underlying investment and fees. Document everything, and then at least you will have a decent case to go to the FMA with if things go wrong. The FMA does act retrospectively so in your case I suggest talking to the FMA about this particular advisor as I'm sure the FMA will want to have a chat with them.

Thanks for your response. I know nothing about the FMA.I would be very surprised that following a chat between the FMA and this Financial Advisor that it would result in a reimbursement of my invested funds. I suspect at most I may receive a letter of acknowledgement "but the FA has worked within published guidelines and no further action will be taken bla bla bla". The burden of proof would be on me to prove malpractice and it would come down to he said , I said which would be insufficient for any action. I will not use a FA again.

I have seen a material number of taxpayers invest through LM.
Every one has been through a financial advisor.
No member of the public would have heard of this shonky outfit.
So it is ticketclippers who have put people into these.
It is those who tended to put their clients into weird and wonderful finance company investments.

Only the dumb and the desparate should use so called financial advisors. Even the cheapest take 1% to 1.5% off you. Better to invest yourself at a slightly lower rate in solid investments than deal with them. So sad the numbers who have lost money when they could have picked safer and better investments themselves. If in doubt TDs and the NZX top 50 are a safer bet than the promised returns that never happen from these guys.

I agree. Dumb, desperate, naive and trusting but sometimes you think people with financial qualifications and experience know better than you, especially when referred to them by a reputable organization. The positive is I have learned my lesson in my 30's rather than later in life. The unfortunates who invested their retirement savings must be heart broken.

I warn you all that BT is no better, look what they have done with PFMF.

Agreed. They are as bad as LM Mortgage. But if I am going down, I'm going to take LM Mortgage with me!