Ever since we were successful in the Goodridge case against Macquarie Bank, we have received a number of enquiries from people who lost money when Storm Financial collapsed.
From what we have learnt by talking to people affected we believe that there are a number of similarities between the Goodridge case and the Storm Financial cases. Indeed the case for Storm clients may even be stronger because it seems that, unlike Goodridge, they did not even receive a margin call before their holdings were sold out from under them. Many people did not even find out until well after the event when they received their routine monthly or quarterly statement!
As a firm we are concerned that the proposed settlement terms offered by CBA to ex-Storm clients is much less than they could expect to receive from the court if successful.
To highlight this, I have compared what Mr Goodridge would have been entitled to if he had accepted terms similar to those now being offered to ex-Storm clients by CBA, with his result under the judgment.
The difference is quite startling. Under the terms of the CBA offer he would have received about $10,000. Under the judgment of the court he has now received back all of his units that were sold by the bank and today they are worth approximately $3.2 million. In addition, he received the benefit of all dividends paid in the interim.
In these circumstances, it is not surprising that many ex-Storm clients are seeking our advice. In order to help us understand your particular circumstances, please answer the following questions: