The key message for anyone who visits this website is:

If the victims of this superannuation fraud can lose 80% or more of their lawful superannuation entitlements due to the actions of well known white-collars criminals, how much of my superannuation entitlement may have been stolen by less well known white-collar criminals who infest the $1 Trillion COMPULSORY superannuation system?

  • Slide1
  • Slide2
  • Slide3
  • full screen slider
  • Slide5
image carousel by v7.4

The website has been established on behalf of the victims of Australia’s Worst White-Collar which also makes it Australia’s Largest Superannuation Fraud.

These victims have now established an “action group” similar to that established by the victims of a large pension fund fraud in the United Kingdom.

There are three aspects to this major fraud:

  • The fraud itself (which affects a few thousand Australians),

  • The attempted cover-up by Australian Public Servants (which affects 12 million adult Australians who are COMPULSORY members of superannuation funds), and

  • The failure of the Coalition Government to provide PROMISED compensation to widows and other victims of this major fraud (yet another “Broken Promise” by Australian Politicians)

Further details of the three major aspects can be found on the following links: Now what is remarkable about this fraud apart from the amount that the victims have lost is that it is such an easy fraud to prove.

Very little evidence is required and further details of this evidence can be found here.

Superannuation funds are in most cases established as a “trust” because a “trust” places legal obligations of the trustees as well as providing legal rights to the beneficiaries who are entitled to a benefit under the “trust“.

The original Trust Deed confirms if a “trust” has been lawfully established and who are the class of persons who are entitled to receive a benefit from the trust and what type of benefit the beneficiaries are entitled to receive.

Because Trustees have direct control of large amounts of “other people’s money” the law requires that Trustees must be properly appointed to the office of trustee and that they remain under the control of the Court.

Superannuation funds are anticipated to last for decades if not indefinitely and for this reason the original Trust Deed that established the trust should include a power that allows the terms of the trust to be amended from time to time. This power is referred to as the Power of Amendment.

Power of Amendment determines who has been provided with the power to amend the terms of the trust and what conditions and restrictions have been placed on the exercise of the Power of Amendment.

In The Laws of Australia {Thompson Reuters) at [15.14.1450] under the section “It is the trustee’s plainest duty to obey the terms of the trust” the following is stated:

“Where the trust instrument confers a power of amendment, the conditions and restrictions imposed on its exercise must themselves be strictly observed.”

Therefore it is trite law that a Trustee must obey the original Trust Deed as lawfully amended.

In the case of employer-sponsored superannuation trusts (funds) the Power of Amendment is often provided to either:

  • The Directors of the company {who are natural persons}; or
  • The Company {the Principal Employer) {who is a legal person}

{IMPORTANT: The Directors of the company and “The Company” are not the same legal person – Salomon v Salomon (1897) AC 22 HL}

It is also a common condition imposed by the Power of Amendment to require the Trustee or Trustees of the fund to provide written consent to any proposed amendments to the terms of the trust.

Trustees are the quintessential “fiduciary” who must act honestly and in the best interests of the beneficiaries and not in the Trustees’ own interests or in the interests of third parties such as the sponsoring Employer.

The company (ie the Employer) is not a “fiduciary” and may act in the company’s own interests.

The condition requiring the Trustees’ written consent should in theory mean that no Deed of Variation could be executed that  would reduce the entitlement of any person who has an entitlement under the superannuation trust, without the informed consent of that beneficiary.

However in the case of Australia’s Largest Superannuation Fraud the Trustees elected by Members and Pensioners were unlawfully removed from office and replaced by a interstate corporate Trustee that had not been lawfully appointed to the office of Trustee. This loss of prudent governance was a key enabling factor that allowed this fraud to occur.

The loss of prudent governance that occurred on two occasions is covered in more detail here.

A fraudulent Deed of Variation, that did not comply with the Power of Amendment provided by the original Trust deed, was then executed when the former National Companies and Securities Commission ( NCSC) commenced an investigation into the conduct of senior executives of the sponsoring Employer.

The fraudulent Deed of Variation is a classic example of a “Fraud on a Power” which purportedly abrogated the right of widows to receive a survorship pension and purportedly reduced the value of retrenchment and retirement benefits for qualifying male officers by 80% or more.

This website provides the evidence necessary to prove the fraud along with references to the legal principles and case law that confirms the legal principles involved.

The essence of this major fraud is the drafting of fraudulent purported amending instruments that were then executed by a party that had not been provided with the amending power {“the Company“} as well a by purported corporate Trustees that had not been lawfully appointed to the office of trustee.

The original Trust Deed that established the occupational pension trust  provided the Power of Amendment to the Board of Director of “the company” {where “the company” is a separate legal person} subject to the consent in writing of the natural person trustees {who were also required to be resident in South Australia in order to comply with the provisions of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA)}.

This is not just a “technical issue“. Even if purported amending instruments executed from 20 December 1982 onwards had been executed by a majority of the Board of Directors and by a majority of lawfully appointed Trustees, then these purported amending  instruments would still be void and ineffective under the doctrine of a “Fraud on a Power“. That is the power to amend the terms of the trust had not been used to promote the purpose of the trust and in the interests of the beneficiaries, but instead had instead been used for an improper or ulterior purpose.

This website also provides evidence of the orchestrated attempted cover-up by Australian Public Servants who are committed to look after the interests of the Big End of Town financial institutions such as the National Australia Bank,  instead of protecting the interests of the Australian Public who pay their salaries as taxpayers.

In this fraud widows were specifically targeted since they were the most likely to be unable to fight back.

The National Australia Bank continues to refuse to pay these widows their pensions, but instead relies on a fraudulent document signed by a white-collar criminal who served a term of imprisonment for dishonesty as justification for refusing to pay widows their lawful pension entitlements.

At the Third Parliamentary Inquiry into the National Crime Authority, former NCA Investigator Gary Livermore stated:

“In 1986, Lord Roskill, in England, chaired the fraud trials committee and prepared a report. The very start of that report reads as follows: The public no longer believes that the legal system…is capable of bringing the perpetrators of serious frauds expeditiously and effectively to book. The overwhelming weight of evidence laid before us suggests the public is right. In relation to such crimes, and to the skilful and determined criminals who commit them, the present legal system is archaic, cumbersome and unreliable. At every stage … present arrangements offer an open invitation to blatant delay and abuse. While petty frauds, clumsily committed, are likely to be detected and punished, it is all too likely that the largest and most cleverly executed crimes have escaped unpunished”

The National Australia Bank exploits the realities in the legal system so that it can rob its customers and clients, which includes widows.

The Fraud in One Page  

Every Member of a superannuation trust (fund) should also be aware that they have a legal right to compel the proper administration of their superannuation fund. This right has been confirmed by the High Court of Australia.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather