This is some of my corespondance to the ombudsman when I had a...

This is some of my corespondance to the ombudsman when I had a case running last year.
Both FOS and the brokerage house were stating I had not technically lost any money so didnt have a case to run.
So my response to the statement the client hasnt lost any funds so there is no case to answer.

"I am not able to give you a definitive answer here as the company is suspended. It would be reasonable to assume I have made a loss, given if you read the company’s last financial report dated April 11 –

“Should the Company be unable to obtain sufficient funding as outlined above, there is material uncertainty which may cast
significant doubt over the consolidated entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.”

Quote from December 31 2011, the company’s last announced financial report.

Arturus is effectively insolvent. Until they have funding they will never resume trading. The commentary provided to you by the Brokerage house(FSP) in question regarding a deal in Siberia or Western Australia is speculation and not the reason for the suspension. The company doesn’t have the funds to be listed on the ASX; I believe it is quite odd that FSP forgot to mention this to you in their letter dated to 19 March 2012 in which they state-

“The stock is currently in suspension on the ASX pending release of their half yearly report, when it recommences trading the movement in its share price will be driven by announcements of acquisitions etc which is the exposure Mr XYZ was originally looking for”

I believe it is improper for the FSP to use the term “when” in this sentence; the term if should be used due to the actual current status of the company based on the announcement below .
Also please note the commentary “exposure Mr XYZ was originally looking for”, infers to me as stated above could be seen as admittance once again the original investment was for shares not notes.

In question 2 to “The onus is on the FSP/adviser to show that there was a reasonable basis for making the representation”. It appears FSP commentary is misleading here as XYZ from the FSPis more than aware of Arturus’ financial position as noted many times in his correspondence previously.

From the most recent Arturus financial report written by an independent auditor.

“The ability of the Group to continue to pay its debts as and when they fall due is dependent upon successfully raising
sufficient working capital via the non-renounceable entitlement rights issue, the successful execution of the funding facility
agreement, the conversion of remaining notes to equity, and the continued support of its creditors and directors.
Although the Directors believe that they will be successful in these measures, if they are not, the Group may be unable to
continue as a going concern and therefore may be unable to realise its assets and extinguish its liabilities in the normal
course of business and at the amounts stated in the financial report.
As a result of these matters, a material uncertainty exists which may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue
as a going concern and therefore it may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of
business, as described above. The financial report does not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and
classification of recorded asset amounts nor to the amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should
the Group not continue as a going concern”


The company has now been suspended for over 5 months and at no time have I had the opportunity to divest my holdings."



I have so much info here on all this....