Good performance must be rewarded. Poor performance must be held to account.
An untruth that appears to have been swept under the carpet is the evidently poor management by and/or professional advice given to the MFS/Octaviar Ltd management leading to the release of the erroneous interim financial results on 28 April 2008.
I mean how many advisors and other 'professionals' were feeding off investor savings at the time? Deloitte? PWC? KordaMentha/333 Capital? Even Wellington Capital?
Chris Scott wrote to all MFS/Octaviar Ltd shareholders on 7 March 2008 calling for a general meeting of shareholders to consider the Board election of:
Chris Scott
Craig Wallace
David Burke
Craig Chapman
Graham Lillyman
That letter included two proxy forms "The yellow one appoints me or Jenny Hutson (Managing Director, Wellington Capital) to be your proxy at the meeting and has been pre-completed?"
On 18 March 2008 MFS/Octaviar Ltd announced to the market that Chris Scott, David Burke and Craig Chapman were appointed to the Board. "Mr Scott's adviser, Ms Jenny Hutson, said the agreement to move forward together was in everybody's best interests. Ms Huston said she was confident the new directors would work well with the existing directors to ensure the MFS Board was focused on the best interests of both shareholders and the Company."
ASX release 2 April 2008: Chairman Andrew Peacock announced resigning in May
ASX release 23 April 2008: Director Geoff Williams announces resignation.
28 April 2008: Interim Financial Results signed by resolution by that Chris Scott heavy Board of directors Directors: Peacock, Manka, Cronin, Burke, Chapman and Scott.
Those Interim Results were wrong. Badly wrong. When the Octaviar decision was handed down by Australia's High Court, the learned Justices held: "Thus a person minded to search the resgistar would be informed, ..., of the need to look elsewhere to ascertain the precise nature and details of the liability or liabilities secured"
Well guess what honourable learned Justices. How are Mum and Dad investors supposed to get the info to make informed decisions when not even the Directors presiding over the assets successfully did so? Or professionals such as Jenny Hutson?
The interim results include the following false statements:
Note 8(d) on page 27: "Fortress ... held a fixed and floating charge ... this loan has been repaid in full..."
Note 13(l) on page 37: "the Group repaid in full the loan facility to Fortress".
Fortress were NOT "repaid in full". And a further payment to Fortress has facilitated by Deloitte's Greig and Harwood. A payment that lead to Justice McMurdo deciding Deloitte was conflicted and sacking them.
Another 'professional' who didn't do their homework as directed by the High Court Judges and hence spread the falsehood that Fortress had been repaid in full was our own Jennifer Joan Hutson.
During the road show Hutson was asked about the liklihood of recovery from PIF's $197.5M claims against OCV. Hutson responded by claiming that there were 5 equally ranked creditors with claims against OCV.
Equally Ranked? Really? The High Court and a united protesting profession totally disagree with you. Your judgement Hutson? Or were you just too willing to accept the Chris Scott heavy Octaviar Board's information? Either way - you were wrong?
OCV
octaviar limited
