Risk Adviser To Appeal ASIC Action

An adviser who may be subject to sanctions by the FPA will appeal against separate action taken by ASIC, having already restricted the regulator from publishing its decision.

Darren Tindall, of PWM Advice in Orange NSW, was named in a press release from the FPA last week which stated the Association’s Conduct Review Committee (CRC) Disciplinary Panel concluded he had breached the FPA’s Code of Professional Conduct.

The CRC Panel stated he was found to have engaged in misleading, deceptive, dishonest and fraudulent conduct in obtaining life insurance for a client who was otherwise unlikely to obtain it.

Tindall is also engaged in an effort to overturn a five-year ASIC ban which took effect from 9 January 2017. The ban is listed under Tindall’s name on the ASIC Financial Adviser Register but no background information regarding the ban has been made available by ASIC.

When approached by Riskinfo as to the details of the ban ASIC stated it “…is not in a position to further elaborate on what is on the register as Mr Tindall has applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review ASIC’s decision. He has sought a stay of ASIC’s decision and any further publication in relation to the decision.”

ASIC also stated the hearing for the stay of application would take place on 27 January.

Riskinfo spoke with Tindall for comment, who said that while he was appealing the ASIC action against him, he was unable to make any further comments at this time.

Tindall argued at the CRC Panel hearing that he would not receive a fair hearing because the witness who filed the complaint, who was also a principal of the firm that employed him, declined to give evidence before the Committee on the basis of legal advice he received.

While the CRC Panel disagreed with this position it stated the unwillingness of the witness to be at the hearing, despite having made a statement and provided documents, “…is certainly unhelpful for the Panel in circumstances where there are a number of contested facts”.

“The Panel’s ability to make findings to the requisite standard of satisfaction might be hampered,” the CRC Panel stated in its hearing notes.

The Panel also noted that Tindall had been under the supervision of the witness and the two men had been in dispute on matters not related to the complaint.

The FPA stated it was still considering what determinations would be made against Tindall for the actions, which took place in late 2013, six months after he started working in his first role as an adviser, and as an authorised representative of Roan Financial Planning.

In a supporting document linked to its release, the FPA indicated a decision was due after 11 January, but at time of publication this decision had yet to be released.

Tindall’s current licensee, Synchron, said it was made aware of the complaint against him when the FPA began its investigation, but would not comment further as the matter was not related to advice provided by Synchron or its representatives.

Synchron was, however, putting in place temporary arrangements to provide advice services to PWM clients, stating it still retained a responsibility to Tindall’s clients to provide financial advice.