New rules require financial planners to act in the best interests of their clients. But some take that too far.
It was a cool June day in 2013 when John Ian Wright's door bell rang. On answering, the former maritime industry worker and a big bear of a man found two strangers on his doorstep with the most incredible story regarding what had been happening to his superannuation without his knowledge.
From there the intrigue only deepened, and within a couple of years one of the men would be banned from acting as a planner by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
That ban would later be overturned by the Australian Administrative Tribunal, sparking an appeal by the corporate watchdog that was filed this month.
It all began two years before the strange doorstep meeting, when one of the three men made a simple business decision.
Simple search
It was October 2011, and another John Wright decided his super balance was too low and he'd had enough of his planner, Malcolm Bell.
A quick search led him to South Melbourne-based NAB planner Gerard McCormack, who was decorated with diplomas and had been a planner at the bank since 2006.
It's where the matter should have finished, as a simple act of a customer choosing to deal with another business.
But around 18 months later, things changed.
In June 2013, when McCormack was putting together Wright's paperwork to send to his tax accountant, he came across a document that was major red flag.
The document detailed a MLC pension account held in the name of "John Wright" with a $275,000 balance. Yet, according to all of his other paperwork, Wright did not have any such account.
Further inquiries by McCormack found the funds had been transferred into two Maritime Super accounts under the name of John Wright. The paperwork included an incorrect date of birth, listed Wright's address as a post office box, and named Bell as the advisor. Worse still – the signatures did not match.
What on earth was going on here? Who had forged Wright's signature? Who had taken Wright's money?
Yet despite suspecting fraud, McCormack didn't notify the police or the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
Instead, he decided to get the money back.
Wrong John's silver?
On June 24, 2013, McCormack and Wright separately called Maritime Super to withdraw the funds.
The pair completed the forms and Wright signed them – not with his own signature but with the one on the form.
In line with the great maxim that two wrongs making a right, McCormack believed Wright was forging a forged signature, so was on the side of angels.
The money was received on June 26 and placed in Wright's NAB account.
The next day, Wright called Bell's office. The details of the call are not known but what he learned shocked him and McCormack. Bell had two clients with the name of John Wright.
There was a John William Wright (who had ditched Bell for McCormack) and a John Ian Wright.
The accounts were not in the name of a fictitious John Wright, but John Ian Wright.
(In fact, there are actually two men called Gerard McCormack who have worked as authorised financial advisors under NAB's licences in Melbourne).
Put simply, McCormack and John William Wright had taken someone else's money.
Scramble begins
No doubt in a bit of a panic, McCormack tried to fix the problem before anyone noticed.
Over the next two days, McCormack would again impersonate John Ian Wright to Maritime Super and call John Ian Wright using a pseudonym in his desperate race to return the $275,000.
McCormack also sent John Ian Wright a cheque for an amount equal to the interest lost on his investments by the unauthorised transfers.
Then, on June 29, just days after the error was discovered, John Ian Wright's doorbell rang
It was McCormack and Wright. They were there to explain what had happened and offer their apology.
According to the AAT judgment, John Ian Wright "was very angry at first, after the explanation was fully given to him, they left on good terms".
Yet the hope it was all resolved and would be forgotten was already shot.
Inquiry underway
John Ian Wright had already noticed his accounts were incorrect and had called Maritime Super, which had commenced its own inquiries.
Maritime Super's review of the matter conducted in the months following was damning.
"[Maritime Super's] John Parker received a call from someone purporting to be John Wright (different voice then [sic] previous calls) requesting a copy of Pension Application form to be emailed directly to his financial planner Gerard McCormack. There is a second person audible in the background when this person is put on hold," the report says.
"We believe this is John W Wright and he is misrepresenting himself in the presence of Gerard McCormack, who sounds like he is coaching him."
In late August, McCormack was hauled in for a formal interview with NAB's fraud unit and confessed that he did not self-report to the fraud unit because he felt "embarrassed".
A week later and ahead of the final determination, McCormack resigned from the bank because he was sure he would be fired. He would later join Westpac.
Soon ASIC came calling.
Ban lifted
In March 2016, McCormack, shortly after leaving Westpac, was banned for five years from providing financial advice for misleading and deceptive conduct due to his own actions and for assisting and encouraging Wright to breach the Corporations Act.
At the time, NAB wealth advice executive general manager Greg Miller welcomed the orders.
"Advisers must follow all processes and procedures at all times to make sure they are doing the right thing by our customers, but this wasn't the case for Mr McCormack," Miller said.
But the banning order was short-lived, with McCormack's appeal to the AAT successful.
AAT senior member Ergon Fice found that while McCormack had engaged in "deliberately deceptive" conduct of a "serious nature", a banning order not appropriate because "Mr McCormack's concern was solely for that of his client".
His lack of financial gain from the John Wright saga and perfect disciplinary record prior to the incident was also taken into account.
'Serious embarrassment'
Fice also excused the cover-up, despite noting "it may be the cause for some concern about his character overall".
"His serious embarrassment at what is now obvious to him was remarkably foolish behaviour, inhibited his forthright disclosure," Fice said. He also took into account the adverse publicity McCormack received from the initial banning.
Fice also noted that McCormack said he had disclosed his issues with Westpac ahead of being hired and that bank had no concerns about his conduct while he was working there.
But if McCormack thought that was that was the end of it, he was wrong.
ASIC this month filed an appeal in the Federal Court seeking to have its ban reinstated, and the matter will return to court in February.
And for its part, a spokesman for Westpac said the bank had no intention of reinstating the planner because his ban was lifted.
"The circumstances which led to ASIC's investigation into Mr McCormack were not disclosed to us prior to his employment with us," a spokesman for Westpac tells Fairfax Media.
"Where planners do not meet our expected levels of professionalism we would not offer employment."
The spokesman added the bank was not aware of any complaints against McCormack while he was an employee at the bank.
Calls to McCormack's last listed location in South Melbourne were not returned this week.
A spokesman for NAB declined to comment.
And after hours searching the phone books and company records, Fairfax Media was unable to make contact with either Wright due to the sheer number of men with the same name.
But Malcolm Bell, a bystander to the whole affair and until this week when contacted by Fairfax Media unaware of the shemozzle involving his now former clients, said he believed both John Wrights were "really lovely guys".
0 comments
New User? Sign up