ob体育

media release (23-152MR)

ob体育 bans financial adviser for five years, stay application refused

Published

ob体育 has banned Brisbane financial adviser Stephen Garry Vick from providing financial services, performing any function involved in the carrying on of a financial services business, and controlling an entity that carries on a financial services business, for five years.

The banning took effect on 5 September 2022. Mr Vick applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) seeking a review of ob体育鈥檚 decision, as well as stay and confidentiality orders. The AAT refused his applications for stay and confidentiality orders on 17 May 2023. No hearing date has been set for the substantive review of ob体育鈥檚 decision.

ob体育 found that Mr Vick failed to act in the best interests of clients when he recommended his clients roll over their existing superannuation to a newly-established self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) and borrow to invest in residential property.聽

Mr Vick鈥檚 business comprised a group of companies that provided services in property sales, mortgage broking, accounting and financial advice.

ob体育 found that Mr Vick:

  • did not act in the best interests of clients and provide appropriate advice,
  • gave defective statements of advice to clients that contained numerous misleading statements and omissions,
  • had a business structure that created conflicts of interest, and that Mr Vick prioritised his interests over the clients鈥� interests, and
  • accepted conflicted remuneration.

ob体育's surveillance of Mr Vick looked at client files from his time as an authorised representative of Madison Financial Group Pty Ltd.

Mr Vick's banning is recorded on ob体育's publicly available聽聽and the聽Banned and Disqualified register.

Background

ob体育's Information Sheet 182 Super switching advice - complying with your obligations (INFO 182) provides information and compliance tips for financial advisers who provide super switching advice.

Editor鈥檚 Note:

On 15 May 2024, Mr Vick withdrew his application to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of the decision.