The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has banned two former financial advisers in separate actions, after it found one had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct and the other had not acted in the best interests of clients.
The two advisers – Andrew TambyRajah, of Sydney, NSW who was previously with ANZ Financial Planning, and Mateen Mohammed, of Calamvale, Queensland who was previously with Synchron – were banned from providing financial services for five years and seven years, respectively.
ASIC said it banned TambyRajah, who was employed at ANZ Financial Planning at Hurstville between 19 January 2006 and 30 July 2014 aftert it found he engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by creating false documents and falsely amending documents contained on client files.
ASIC stated TambyRajah wrote clients’ names and initials on documents in the places designated for their signatures and initials and also changed the dates recorded on a number of documents; and created false investor profile forms for two clients by photocopying forms they had signed in previous years and changing the dates on the copied documents.
The regulator’s actions against Mohammed, who was an authorised representative of Synchronised Business Services Pty Ltd (Synchron) from 1 July 2010 to 22 April 2015, were the result of surveillance of life insurance advice.
As a result of that surveillance ASIC found that Mohammed did not understand the duties and obligations imposed on a provider of financial services; and could not be relied upon to discharge the duties and obligations imposed on a provider of financial services.
The regulator stated that his specific actions, in which he did not act in the best interests of his clients, were that he failed to make reasonable enquires into clients’ relevant objectives, financial situation and needs and to conduct a reasonable investigation into financial products that might achieve the objectives of the clients, including their existing superannuation and insurance products.
ASIC also found that he had submitted an insurance application without his client’s knowledge and as a result had misled or deceived the insurer as to his authority to do so.
Both TambyRajah and Mohammed have the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of ASIC’s decision.
