Following questions raised by Liberal senator Slade Brockman, the regulator recently conceded that the advice sector had been charged for a proportion of its High Court case against Westpac that found the major bank’s call centre staff had given unlicensed personal advice to super fund members.
ASIC said actions related to unlicensed conduct were “in the interests of licensed participants in [the advice] sector, because it maintains integrity and trust in the licensed sector and deters competition from unlicensed and unregulated competitors”.
The regulator said both the super and advice sector had been charged for the case, however in a further response to Senator Brockman around the detail of total costs charged, ASIC revealed that the majority had been charged to advice licensees.
The regulator’s figures showed that 60 per cent of costs in the case had been charged to the advice sector, while 40 per cent had been charged to the super sector.
The total costs charged for the case over three financial years were approximately $600,000, with $264,712 charged in the 2020 year, $75,449 charged in 2019 and $261,419 in 2018.
ASIC said the costs would be “credited to the levied subsectors” once the case concluded.
“The Westpac personal advice super fund High Court case is still in litigation. No costs have been recovered by ASIC to date,” the regulator said.
“In August this year, the court will hear and determine what civil penalties should be imposed for the breaches of the law already found. Further orders will be made and then ASIC will be in a position to pursue recovery of costs of the litigation.”
The news comes following calls from industry bodies for ASIC’s funding model to be urgently reviewed, after the most recent estimate of levies for the 2021 financial year showing costs charged to the advice sector had increased by more than $16 million.
ASIC are useless. They process false director appointment notices without any checks, faciliating fraud of company bank accounts.