<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/s-p-setia">SP Setia</a> has lodged plans for a $750 million, three-tower mixed-use precinct that would complete the long-running redevelopment of Carlton's former Carlton United Breweries site.

The proposal at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/185-195-queensberry-street-carlton-vic-3053">46-78 Bouverie Street and 185-195 Queensberry Street</a> spans a 6,468 sqm site, the last remaining undeveloped parcels within the former brewery's 2007 masterplan.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">COX Architecture</a>, the development will comprise two purpose-built student accommodation towers and a third build-to-sell apartment tower above a shared commercial podium and basement.

Across the three towers, SP Setia is proposing 606 build-to-sell apartments and 1,499 student accommodation units containing 2,009 beds.

The apartments will sit in the tallest tower, which will rise nearly 200m and 55 storeys. It will become&nbsp;one of the more substantial new build-to-sell apartment projects at the northern edge of Melbourne's CBD.

The apartment mix is weighted toward smaller inner-city product, with 188 studios, 206 one-bedroom apartments, 192 two-bedroom apartments and 20 three-bedroom apartments

<img alt="First look: SP Setia plans three-tower finale for Carlton’s former CUB precinct" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="8271bc87-1b0a-41b7-ac73-a425ee375261" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/3_2.png?VersionId=G4lw23o90B1boX4k4dj7rdz2ZEajS9wy" />

Part of the precinct will be a large-scale&nbsp;3,684 sqm supermarket and a further 2,198 sqm of speciality retail, creating close to 5,900 sqm of new commercial space within the precinct.

But one of the biggest components of the proposal is what sits between the buildings.

Around 4,650 sqm, or roughly 72 per cent of the site, will be publicly accessible open space, incorporating plazas, pedestrian connections, landscaped laneways and retail spill-out areas.

The ground plane is intended to finally complete pedestrian connections envisaged when the CUB masterplan was first approved nearly two decades ago, stitching together Victoria Street, Queensberry Street, Bouverie Street and Swanston Street through the former brewery precinct.

Urbis said the development would "complete the CUB precinct", with the public realm providing important north-south and east-west connections through what is currently the final undeveloped portion of the masterplanned site.

SP Setia is also exploring a new linear park within the Bouverie Street road reserve, with the concept to be developed further with the City of Melbourne through the planning process.

The proposal is being pursued through the Victorian Government's Development Facilitation Program under Clause 53.23 for significant residential development with affordable housing.

The planning report acknowledges the proposed heights exceed those contemplated under the original Comprehensive Development Plan and masterplan, but argues the built-form context has changed considerably over the past two decades.

Urbis said the three towers would instead create a stepped transition between Carlton and the Hoddle Grid, rising progressively from the 94.1-metre Tower One along the Queensberry Street edge to the 199.44-metre Tower Three closer to the established CBD-scale buildings to the south.

<img alt="SP Setia" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="e885a07a-592c-40fc-bf82-e6dbaf32da54" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-21%20at%208.52.24%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=7s_ErUkSKAdY1mAWp3GRZgMNCGtwhk5m" />

SP Setia plans to deliver the development across three stages.

Stage One would deliver the basement, podium and retail areas for the entire precinct alongside the first student tower. Tower Two would follow in Stage Two, before the 606-apartment Tower Three is delivered as the final stage.

If approved and delivered, the project would close out a redevelopment process that has been underway since the former brewery masterplan was approved in 2007, adding more than 2,600 student beds and apartments to a precinct already home to Swanston Central, the Barak Building, RMIT Design Hub and several large student accommodation developments.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Joel Robinson

SP Setia plans three-tower finale for Carlton’s former CUB precinct

Melbourne developer Lowe Living is seeking to add to its growing bayside apartment pipeline, filing plans for a boutique eight-residence development in tightly held Middle Park.

Lowe Living, which has built much of its development portfolio across Melbourne's affluent bayside and south-east suburbs, is behind the plans for the 730 sqm site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/123-125-erskine-street-middle-park-vic-3206">123-125 Erskine Street</a>, just off Armstrong Street and within the Armstrong Street Neighbourhood Activity Centre.

The developer is seeking approval for a five-storey residential building above two basement levels, with just eight large-format apartments and 18 car spaces.

“This is a deliberately very different proposition for us,"&nbsp;Tim Lowe, Co-Founder of Lowe Living, said.

"Eight residences is exceptionally boutique, but that's precisely what this site calls for.

“There is a strong community in Middle Park and the surrounding suburbs who have spent decades building a life here. They no longer want the maintenance of a large period home, but they aren't prepared to compromise on space, quality or location. We think there is a real opportunity to capture that hyper local market. A site like this rarely comes to market.”

<img alt="Lowe " data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="875fe572-0f14-4d90-9e11-55b28dd07731" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-21%20at%208.42.49%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=GDNQRv9BfpR9r1zkZ5UDyUM4ZvpIksut" />

The low-density proposal has been designed by Cera Stribley and is being progressed through the Victorian Government's Great Design Fast Track pathway, having already secured eligibility from the Minister for Planning.

The Office of the Victorian Government Architect supported its eligibility after finding the proposal demonstrated consistency with the program's seven design principles, while the project's financial feasibility has also been independently confirmed by Invest Victoria.

The project is targeting the downsizer market, with the planning documents describing the homes as larger-format residences and noting the two penthouses could otherwise have been configured as four separate apartments.

<img alt="Lowe 2" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="60ab0987-2da6-4175-adac-315dcf6053c6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-21%20at%208.43.15%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=bOCPH0B2MFwlmaRW.TTCF9TzyifgVoQI" />

The site has dual frontage to Erskine Street and Canterbury Place and currently comprises a collection of commercial buildings used as offices, including a former heritage bakehouse, a former stable, a later gabled addition and a central courtyard.

It sits within the Commercial 1 Zone and the Armstrong Street Commercial Precinct heritage overlay, with the existing property classified as a contributory heritage place.

Heritage has subsequently played a significant role in Cera Stribley's design.

The front section of the former bakehouse facing Erskine Street will be retained, including its return walls, street-facing hipped roof and chimneys, while the Erskine Street façade and part of the western return wall of the former stable will also be incorporated into the new development.

Levels four and five will be set back five metres from the retained stable façade, while bricks removed through demolition are proposed to be salvaged and reused within the new building where possible.

<img alt="Lowe 3" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="e97927a9-a2de-4a0f-83b6-65451238abfa" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-21%20at%208.43.06%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=VR44AChLrX9q1XPB9GvVQV.ALXXbe4gC" />

Rather than presenting as a single five-storey building to Erskine Street, Cera Stribley has broken the development into a series of distinct forms.

A three-storey infill element will sit between the retained bakehouse and stable façades, with the upper levels recessed behind the heritage fabric. Canterbury Place will similarly feature two three-storey podium forms, separated by a central pedestrian accessway, before the upper two levels step back from the street.

A pedestrian through-link will run through the centre of the project between Erskine Street and Canterbury Place, creating entrances from both sides of the site and introducing landscaping and communal areas through the ground plane.

Landscape architect Acre has designed planting across the ground level, private terraces and upper levels, including a feature canopy tree at level three and integrated planting and arbours across the level four terraces. Five existing Erskine Street trees are proposed to be retained.

Sustainability is also a significant component of the Great Design Fast Track application. The apartments are targeting an average eight-star NatHERS rating, with no residence below 6.5 stars, while the project has achieved a 75 per cent BESS score. Seven of the eight apartments are designed for cross-ventilation, with the remaining residence using mechanically assisted natural ventilation.

The plans also incorporate an 8kWp rooftop solar system, a 5,000-litre rainwater tank and infrastructure allowing future electric vehicle charging for every residence.

Lowe has a strong portfolio across Melbourne's blue-chip suburbs. They recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/jardin-house-by-lowe-living-camberwell-335-camberwell-road-camberwell-vic-3124">Jardin House by Lowe Living</a> in Camberwell, their first development in the Stonnington LGA.

Lowe Living unveils Middle Park apartment development

Article summary

<ul data-end="888" data-start="289">
	<li data-end="442" data-section-id="8tsh6o" data-start="289">DVB Projects is preparing to launch its second Gold Coast apartment development, with demolition now underway at 137 Old Burleigh Road, Broadbeach.</li>
	<li data-end="573" data-section-id="1nyxl3e" data-start="443">The 34-level tower will comprise just 49 ultra-luxury residences, including half-floor, full-floor and penthouse apartments.</li>
	<li data-end="717" data-section-id="oiyimj" data-start="574">The launch follows strong demand at DVB's nearby Sea Glass project, which is more than 50 per cent sold and currently under construction.</li>
	<li data-end="888" data-section-id="epk9o9" data-start="718">The development adds to the transformation of Old Burleigh Road, with premium beachfront apartment projects continuing to reshape the tightly held Broadbeach strip.</li>
</ul>

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/dvb-projects">DVB Projects</a> is preparing to launch its second Gold Coast apartment development, with demolition now underway on the Broadbeach site as the Sydney developer moves closer to bringing the ultra-luxury project to market.

The 34-level tower at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/137-old-burleigh-road-broadbeach-qld-4218">137 Old Burleigh Road</a> will comprise just 49 residences, ranging from half-floor apartments through to full-floor homes and a penthouse. The launch follows the strong sales performance of DVB's nearby Sea Glass development. More than half of the apartments at Sea Glass, on the other side of Broadbeach, have been snapped up, well ahead of its late 2027 completion

<img alt="DVB Projects to commence demolition on $320m Broadbeach luxury tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2944b4be-c84e-4b54-8dc1-c712e76704c0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/E02_Exterior_Street%20Level%20Entrance.jpg?VersionId=YoNig7pRdrE3HCue7sUj78LzJteeQf3H" />

The start of demolition at 137 Old Burleigh Road signals DVB Projects’ underlying confidence in the Gold Coast’s luxury beachside apartment sector.

“We see the Gold Coast as one of the most compelling lifestyle markets in Australia, particularly at the premium end where demand continues to deepen,” said Dean Brown, Managing Director of DVB.&nbsp;

“This project has been carefully designed to respond to that demand - delivering large-format residences with a level of quality, privacy and amenity that is still relatively rare in the apartment market on the beachside."

Brown says the site itself is "exceptional."

"Old Burleigh Road is one of the most tightly held beachfront strips, and opportunities to deliver a project of this scale and calibre in this location are extremely limited.”

<img alt="DVB Projects to commence demolition on $320m Broadbeach luxury tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="398f377a-c037-455e-9250-0c5e0d84c35b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/I12_FF%20Balcony.jpg?VersionId=NwOiRWGMubR1c8wthuEfggklcja7al9." />

The project will comprise 40 half-floor residences of approximately 260 sqm, alongside eight full-floor residences spanning around 524 sqm.

A single penthouse will crown the building, featuring a private pool, barbecue area, indoor gym and dedicated entertaining spaces.

Residents will have access to a resort-style suite of amenities, including a 20-metre pool with daybeds, a gymnasium, hot and cold plunge pools, a sauna, and private residents’ lounge and dining facilities.

<img alt="DVB Projects to commence demolition on $320m Broadbeach luxury tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d1642bb0-9a66-4427-a022-dfc0988c6287" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/A02_Pool%20to%20View.jpg?VersionId=c0IXPyn_Gp_Kn3XCwzMrqIVkAdCEwVXP" />

Sales agent Todd Matheson, of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/pezet-matheson">Pezet Matheson</a>, which is marketing both 137 Old Burleigh Road and Sea Glass, said 137 Old Burleigh Road would address a clear gap in the market for genuine luxury products.

“There are very few opportunities on the Gold Coast where buyers can secure a residence of this size and quality in a new building,” Matheson said.

“What we’re seeing is a growing cohort of downsizers and interstate buyers who still want space - they’re not willing to compromise on living area, entertaining or finishes.

“This project has been designed with that buyer in mind. It offers the scale of a home, combined with the convenience and security of apartment living, in one of the coast’s most desirable positions.”

<img alt="DVB Projects to commence demolition on $320m Broadbeach luxury tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="59aae0ca-5639-4320-8aca-d0bf60f48e43" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/E01_Exterior%20Hero.jpg?VersionId=DS8Zfy2WtgUEtdfe0TEUuf1W1GfcZq8S" />

Located on a 1,156 sqm site one block from the beachfront, the development will replace an ageing walk-up building and is expected to contribute to the ongoing transformation of the Old Burleigh Road strip into one of the Gold Coast’s most prestigious residential corridors.

With the development moving into the delivery phase, 137 Old Burleigh Road is slated to hit the market later this year.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=145141]

DVB Projects to launch second Broadbeach apartment tower as demolition commences

<a data-end="327" data-is-only-node="" data-start="250" href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/norus-projects" rel="noopener" target="_new">Norus Developments</a> has lodged plans for a new apartment development in Clayton that would add further momentum to the suburb's emerging Green Street corridor.

Plans have been lodged for the consolidated site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/1359-1365-centre-road-clayton-vic-3168">1359-1365 Centre Road</a>, where Norus is seeking approval for 218 apartments across a 12-storey apartment building designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/life-architecture-and-urban-design">Life Architecture</a>.

The proposal sits within the Clayton Major Activity Centre at the threshold of the planned Green Street corridor, a landscaped pedestrian connection intended to improve links through the precinct towards Clayton Railway Station.

The development would replace the site's existing collection of low-scale residential and commercial buildings with a single consolidated building, introducing significantly greater housing density to this part of Centre Road.

A retail tenancy is proposed at ground level to activate the Centre Road frontage, accompanied by transparent street interfaces and landscaping intended to create a more pedestrian-focused edge to the development.

<img alt="First look: Norus Developments plans landscape-led apartment project for Clayton’s emerging Green Street" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0a5a763a-d9e9-4253-af2f-88008de27ebf" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Clayton%20a.png?VersionId=S2WJJbat1XVkZwB9SnYtygirXgWHiklX" />

The building has been designed with stepped massing and upper-level setbacks to manage its transition towards surrounding residential properties. The planning report describes the approach as one that integrates the building into the landscape rather than treating landscaping as a secondary element.

"A strong landscape and public realm strategy underpins the proposal," Urbis states in the planning report.

"Public benefits include an affordable housing contribution, a new pocket park, generous landscaped setbacks, deep soil planting and integrated Water Sensitive Urban Design."

The report adds that these elements are intended to create "a permeable, pedestrian-focused ground plane that enhances walkability, supports urban cooling and reinforces the emerging Green Street character."

Biophilic and passive design principles extend through the residential levels, with planting, daylight, natural ventilation and views towards landscaped areas forming part of the amenity strategy.

Parking would be concentrated away from the public realm, with 145 car spaces proposed from the rear laneway rather than dominating the Centre Road frontage.

The proposal follows an extensive pre-application process with the City of Monash. Three formal meetings were held between the project team and Council from December 2025 to March 2026, with the scheme evolving through several concept iterations before the current design was lodged.

The project arrives as Clayton prepares for substantial change around its established activity centre and the wider Suburban Rail Loop precinct. Its position on Centre Road places the development within an existing concentration of shops, services and public transport, while the Green Street connection is intended to strengthen pedestrian access towards Clayton Railway Station.

First look: Norus plans landscape-led apartment project for Clayton’s emerging Green Street

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/gardner-vaughan-group">Gardner Vaughan Group</a> has officially commenced construction on Bronze on Chevron, celebrating the sod turning of its first-ever Gold Coast development and marking a significant milestone in the company's continued expansion across South East Queensland.&nbsp;

Following the successful delivery of premium residential developments throughout Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/bronze-on-chevron-8-mawarra-street-chevron-island-qld-4217">Bronze on Chevron</a> represents Gardner Vaughan Group's entry into the Gold Coast market. Bronze will deliver 119 one, two, three and four-bedroom apartments above two ground-level retail tenancies.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=107520 project_image_fid=367193]

The recent sod turning ceremony was attended by Deputy Mayor Mark Hammel, President of the Surfers Paradise Surf Life Saving Club, Cassandra Sedgman, project consultants, purchasers, project partners and invited guests to celebrate the commencement of construction.&nbsp;

Gardner Vaughan Group Chief Executive Officer Simon Betteridge said Bronze on Chevron represented an exciting new chapter for the business.&nbsp;

"We've spent almost four decades building homes that respond to the way people want to live, and we're excited to bring that experience to <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/chevron-island-qld-4217">Chevron Island</a>," Betteridge said.

"Bronze on Chevron is particularly significant because it marks Gardner Vaughan Group's first development on the Gold Coast following many successful projects across Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=107520 project_image_fid=367183]

Betteridge said the ground breaking is a proud moment for the&nbsp;team and their purchasers, who can now see their future homes beginning to take shape.&nbsp;

"As both developer and builder, we're able to oversee every aspect of the project from design through to construction, ensuring the quality and attention to detail Gardner Vaughan Group has become renowned for."&nbsp;

Designed by acclaimed architectural practice <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cottee-parker-architects">Cottee Parker</a>, Bronze on Chevron has been thoughtfully designed to complement Chevron Island's evolving streetscape while embracing its relaxed coastal lifestyle.

The development will offer generous residences with refined interiors, premium finishes and resort-style amenities, with completion anticipated in early 2029.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=107520]

The development will offer generous residences with refined interiors, premium finishes and resort-style amenities, with completion anticipated in early 2029

Gardner Vaughan Group breaks ground on first Gold Coast development, Bronze on Chevron

Asic

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67834/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
In it’s latest report, the Australian Securities &amp; Investments Commission (ASIC) found the big four banks sold products to some customers through their adviser network, with a fee for ongoing advice, but the advice was never given. 
None of this came to light until the banks were asked by ASIC to look at adviser compensation, following the introduction of the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) legislation in 2013. 
No wonder the banks were wary of their practices being investigated. Not only has it come to light that many customers (176,000 at the last count) were being charged for services they were not receiving but, in many cases, the banks didn’t have the data they needed to find out whether customers had been dudded or not. 
And ASIC is pretty sure why such systemic issues emerge at regular intervals, stating:
Cultural factors in the banking and financial services institutions covered by this report may have contributed to the systemic failures we observed. 
The ASIC report details the reason for the cultural failings it observed in the wealth management businesses of the major banks:
Some advice licensees prioritised advice revenue and fee generation over ensuring that they delivered the required services.
ASIC found that the IT systems in wealth management in the major banks were stone-aged at best. The banks appear to have no idea what they don’t know, but are all working to identify how many more customers need to be compensated. 
ASIC also found that some banks failed to keep complete or accurate records to enable compliance to be analysed. And in some cases, authorised representatives had taken customers’ files with them when they left the firms, making it impossible to check whether or not advice was given.
It appears that every time a question is asked of the big banks, another example of bad behaviour is unearthed.
In the recent questioning of bank CEOs by the House Economics Committee, questions were raised with all CEOs about systemic issues. The answers were generally evasive and short on specifics. 
For example, when talking about a different but related, financial planning scandal, Andrew Thorburn, NAB CEO, said:
“We did a review and we had an independent party come and do that review with us, and we concluded and we stand by that, that it was not a systemic issue.”
What Mr Thorburn and other CEOs neglected to mention was that the banks had, as revealed in ASIC’s report, all already been in the middle of deep discussions about so-called “fee-for-services failures” . The regulator wrote:
Of particular concern is that many of the banking and financial services institutions covered by this review publicly state that their core values include being customer focused, “doing what is right” for customers, and acting with integrity. We encourage the institutions reviewed in this report to consider how their culture may have supported these systemic failures, and why their stated commitment to providing excellent service to customers is not translating into good outcomes for customers in the many instances we identified in this report.
At long last, ASIC has highlighted cultural issues across the industry that the boards and management of the largest banks have long refused to acknowledge. 
The regulator has done its job and found compelling evidence that the culture of the banks is rotten. 
It’s over to the politicians now.
Pat McConnell is honorary fellow, Macquarie University Applied Finance Centre, Macquarie University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/pat-mcconnell-13137" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

ASIC report highlights a deep culture problem in Australia’s banks

<html><body>
Mark McIvor, former chief executive officer and founding director of Equititrust Limited (in liquidation) (Equititrust) remains permanently banned from providing financial services after withdrawing an application to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) to appeal against ASIC's original banning decision.
Mr McIvor was permanently banned from providing financial services on 2 September 2015 following an earlier ASIC investigation into the collapse of Equititrust.
At that time, Equititrust held an Australian financial services (AFS) licence and was the responsible entity of two registered schemes; Equititrust Income Fund (EIF) and the Equititrust Priority Class Income Fund (EPCIF) and was also the trustee of Equititrust Premium Fund (EPF); an unregistered managed investment scheme.
An ASIC delegate found that whilst he was the director of Equititrust, Mr McIvor contravened a financial services law and was not of good fame or character to provide financial services.
His conduct involved breaches of the financial services legislation which were considered to be very serious, repetitive, prolonged and dishonest.
In particular, the ASIC delegate found that Mr McIvor contravened financial services laws by:
<ul>
<li>Signing 28 board meeting minutes, which falsely recorded a board meeting to approve a loan application had occurred, when no such board meeting had taken place, and in doing so, Equititrust did not meet its obligations under EIFs Compliance Plan; and</li>
<li> </li>
<li>Failing to take all the steps that a reasonable person would take, if they were in Mr McIvor's position, namely to ensure that accurate, true and correct documents were relied upon for compliance checks and not be involved in the production of false documents.</li>
</ul>
Mr McIvor subsequently filed applications for a review of ASIC's decision to permanently ban him from providing financial services and to stay the operation and implementation of the banning order.
The stay application was refused by the AAT (refer 16-181MR) and on 1 September 2016, Mr McIvor withdrew his application for review of ASIC's decision to permanently ban him from financial services.
ASIC Commissioner John Price said Mr McIvor's conduct was at the most serious end of the offending range and that it was appropriate he be permanently banned from providing financial services.
'People who provide financial services, especially those in senior management positions, are required to discharge their obligations under financial services laws efficiently, honestly and fairly. ASIC will ensure those who fail in these duties are removed from the industry,' Mr Price said.
Equititrust was incorporated on 18 August 1993 and was placed into voluntary administration on 15 February 2012. 
The creditors of Equititrust resolved that the company should be placed into liquidation on 20 April 2012.
The voluntary administrators of Equititrust reported that as at the date of their appointment:
<ul>
<li>    EIF had about 1620 unitholders who were owed approximately $203.6mil;</li>
<li> </li>
<li>    EPF had about 38 unitholders who were owed approximately $56.7mil; and</li>
<li> </li>
<li>    EPCIF had 5 unitholders and held no tangible assets.</li>
</ul>
On 19 December 2011, ASIC suspended Equititrust's AFSL for 12 months, for failing to comply with a number of key obligations as a financial services licensee (refer 11-306MR). Equititrust's AFSL remains suspended.
On 22 August 2014, Mr McIvor was convicted and fined $10,000 in the Brisbane Magistrates Court of six charges of failing to provide a Report as to Affairs and to deliver books and records to the liquidators of Chevron Capital Pty Ltd, MHSM Holdings Pty Ltd and SM Capital Pty Ltd (refer 14-223MR).
Mr McIvor was made bankrupt on 28 November 2012, however, his bankruptcy period has since expired.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Former Equititrust CEO remains permanently banned from providing financial services

<html><body>
The Federal Court has declared that land banking developments operated by Jamie and Dennis McIntyre were unregistered managed investment schemes in a decision delivered by His Honour Justice Bromwich on 17 October 2016.
The Court also made orders that Jamie and Dennis McIntyre be disqualified from managing corporations and restrained from carrying on financial services for a period of 10 years each, due to them being officers of companies that had failed, by virtue of them being wound up, and which had also repeatedly contravened the Corporations Act .
Jamie and Dennis McIntyre agreed to the banning orders made against them.
Further, the Court made orders to wind up the unregistered managed investment schemes, which were promoted and advertised by the 21st Century land banking companies.
The unregistered managed investment schemes are known as:
<ul>
<li>Botanica, located at 805 Archer Rd, Kialla, Victoria 3631</li>
<li>Secret Valley Estate, located at  955, Old Sydney Road, Bylands, Victoria 3762</li>
<li>Oak Valley Lakes Estate &amp; Resort, located at 124 Booth Road, Brookhill, Townsville, Qld 4816</li>
<li>Bendigo Vineyard Estate &amp; Resort, located at  51 Andrews Road, Bendigo, Victoria 3551</li>
<li>Melbourne Grove Estate, located at  1491 Dohertys Road, Mount Cottrell, Victoria 3024</li>
</ul>
Simon Wallace-Smith and Robert Woods of Deloitte have been appointed as joint liquidators of the unregistered managed investment schemes.
ASIC Commissioner Greg Tanzer said, "The high banning periods ordered by the Court in this case are necessary to protect the public from those who are officers of companies that repeatedly contravene the Corporations Act.  It also serves as a warning to those involved in unlawful unregistered managed investment schemes, including those that involve land banking, that ASIC will take action."
ASIC's investigation into the matter is ongoing.
ASIC commenced proceedings in August 2015 against Jamie and Dennis McIntyre and the 21st Century land banking companies in relation to their promotion and sale of interests to investors in five land banking schemes.
ASIC’s proceedings are part of ASIC's wider and ongoing investigation into land banking schemes.
</body></html>

Federal Court declares 21st Century land banking schemes unlawful

<html><body>
Jamie McIntyre and his brother Dennis McIntyre have accepted 10-year bans from ASIC on managing corporation or operating a financial services business.
This follows an agreement between ASIC and the brothers that the five Victorian land banking schemes, promoted through Jamie McIntyre’s 21st Century Group, were unregistered.
It also noted that they operated a financial business without a license at the time that they promoted it to their investors. Liquidators were unable to locate more than $7 million outlaid on controversial options on five landbanking schemes proposed for the outskirts of Melbourne, Bendigo and Townsville.
The McIntyre brothers also agreed to pay the $50,000 legal costs for ASIC.
Fairfax Media reported the $7 million was lost from more than 100 investors.
Justice Bromwich said that there were little prospect of reimbursement to the investors.
"[The defendants] have effectively capitulated in the face of what seemed the inevitable prospect of success [for ASIC] and reached agreement that the relief agreements were necessary and appropriate," said Federal Court Justice Bromwich in his judgement on Monday.
"Five illegal investment schemes were operated by the eight companies associated with Jamie and Dennis McIntyre," Justice Bromwich said.
Deloitte were appointed as joint liquidators to the corporate respondents to ASIC’s proceeding that commenced in August last year.
There is an unrelated property group by the same name. 
</body></html>

Landbanking 21st Century's Jamie McIntyre and brother accept 10 year bans from ASIC

<html><body>
ASIC has cancelled the Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence of Western Australian-based Macro All State Investments &amp; Securities Limited (Macro).
In general, the Macro AFS licence allowed Macro to:
<ol>
<li>provide general financial product advice;</li>
<li>deal in a financial product, issue or vary a financial product;</li>
<li>apply for, acquire, dispose of financial products on another's behalf;</li>
<li>operate a managed investment scheme, and</li>
<li>provide a Custodian or Depository service.</li>
</ol>
The directors of Macro included Ms Desiree Veronica Macpherson. 
ASIC obtained various ex parte interim orders in the Perth Federal Court on 21 July 2016 in part restraining Ms Macpherson and various companies that she was a director of, including Macro, from providing financial services advice, dealing in financial products, promoting financial products and otherwise carrying on a financial services business (see: <a href="https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/media-centre/find-a-media-release/2016-releases/16-258mr-asic-obtains-court-travel-restraint-and-asset-preservation-orders-against-west-australian-property-developer-and-macro-realty-group-of-companies/" title="16-258MR ASIC obtains court travel restraint and asset preservation orders against West Australian property developer and Macro Realty Group of companies">16-258MR</a>).
Section 915B(3)(d) of the Corporations Act 2001 states ASIC may suspend or cancel an AFS licence held by a body corporate by giving written notice to the body, if the body lodges with ASIC an application for ASIC to do so, which is accompanied by any documents required by regulations.
ASIC's investigation is continuing into the activities of Ms Macpherson and various companies of which she has been a director.
</body></html>

ASIC cancels Desiree Macpherson's Macro financial advisory licence 

<html><body>
As part of its ongoing work to curb illegal phoenix activity, ASIC has completed a proactive surveillance program that monitored the integrity of the payment systems in the Australian building and construction industry.
The surveillance program, carried out during the 2014/15 financial year, targeted eight large commercial construction projects across New South Wales, Victoria and Qld. ASIC checked the payment processes and systems of 40 individual building and construction companies (contractors) working on those projects.
The campaign identified concerns about the conduct of some companies within the building and construction sector, which may be falsifying statutory declarations when claiming payment from principal contractors for work undertaken. 
The focus of ASIC’s surveillance centred on:
(a) principal contractors requiring contractors to provide statutory declarations to confirm that the contractors have paid all amounts owing to employees and secondary contractors, before principal contractors pay invoice issued by the contractor; and
(b) contractors signing statutory declarations and providing it to principal contractors, in circumstances where it appears that contractors may not have paid all secondary subcontractors at the date of swearing the statutory declarations.    
As a result of surveillance campaign, ASIC found that two contractors may have provided principal contractors statutory declarations that falsely claimed that secondary contractors had been paid at the time of signing the statutory declarations.  ASIC also found that once the contractors had received payment from the head contractors, they subsequently paid all secondary contractors the amounts owing. 
Both contractors were issued warning letters about their conduct and advised to review their internal compliance systems and processes. 
ASIC has also identified a further two matters, outside of this surveillance program, where contractors have been engaged by a number of local councils and who have allegedly provided false statutory declarations where it appears that subcontractors had not been paid at the date that the statutory declarations were signed.  ASIC is investigating that matter. 
ASIC Commissioner Greg Tanzer said, 'While this conduct may benefit contractors by improving their cash flow, the flow-on effect is likely to cause significant detriment to other operators in the supply chain, such as other businesses engaged to work on these projects, in particular secondary contractors. Secondary contractors are often small business operators engaged by contractors to complete building works.  The viability of their businesses is often dependant on being paid by contractors in a timely manner.  They usually are not in a position to carry cash flow risk imposed upon them by contractors. 
'This practice by contractors, in addition to being an offence, can cause secondary subcontractors to suffer cash flow problems and experience financial distress, placing them at risk of insolvency', Mr Tanzer added. 
ASIC encourages anyone who has suffered loss as a result of these practices to report their concerns to us on 1300 300 630 or to lodge a <a href="https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/contact-us/how-to-complain/report-misconduct-to-asic/" target="_blank">report of misconduct online</a>. 
Background
The surveillance program was undertaken following feedback received from small business, industry bodies and other government agencies about the endemic use of false statutory declarations in the building and construction industry.
The falsification of statutory declarations to obtain payment from a head contractor could be an indicator that contractors are experiencing cash flow problems and may be in financial distress. This may subsequently give rise to illegal phoenix activity.
While false statutory declarations and fraud matters are matters for other regulatory and enforcement agencies, company officers who knowingly make a false statement regarding payments to creditors may find themselves facing criminal or civil action by ASIC.
Under the Corporations Act, ASIC can also take administrative action against company officers who engage in misconduct.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Property 101: ASIC warns directors of construction companies using false declarations

<html><body>
ASIC has discontinued its proceedings against Simon Tickner and Lisa Darcy, former directors of LM Investment Management Ltd (LMIM). 
In 2014, ASIC commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia seeking financial penalties and banning orders following the collapse of the Gold Coast-based fund manager against founder Peter Charles Drake and former directors Francene Maree Mulder, Eghard van der Hoven, Simon Jeremy Tickner and Lisa Maree Darcy.
The claims against Mr Tickner and Ms Darcy focused on their conduct as directors in signing off a loan to Maddison Estate Pty Ltd, which Mr Drake owned and controlled, in 2011. Proceedings against the other directors focused on both the 2011 transaction and another transaction that occurred in 2012.
The trial commenced on 29 August 2016. On 12 September 2016, after the close of its case, ASIC discontinued its claim against all directors in relation to the 2011 transaction.   
The proceeding related to the 2012 transaction continues against Mr Drake, Ms Mulder and Mr van der Hoven and has been adjourned until 23 September 2016 for closing submissions.
LMIM was the responsible entity for seven registered managed investment schemes and the trustee for MPF, an unregistered managed investment scheme with about 4,500 investors. More than $400 million was invested in MPF. In total, LMIM was responsible for managing at least $800 million on behalf of approximately 12,000 investors in Australia and overseas.
</body></html>

ASIC discontinues proceedings against LM Investment directors

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65714/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Australian government is planning to privatise the management of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission database of companies. This is a potentially damaging move which goes against the government’s own open data policy.
On behalf of the Australian government, ASIC currently charges businesses and individuals around A$50 million each year for company searches. The information covers everything from details of shareholders and company officers (A$19 per document) and their roles and relationships with other bodies, to financial reports and records of charges over company assets (A$38 per document).
It is undoubtedly a great money-spinner to charge members of the public more than A$1 per page for a downloaded pdf document. However, the original legislative purpose of making information about companies publicly available was surely not so that the Australian government could profit from selling that information. Indeed, there is no public policy or economic rationale for the charges.
I am yet to meet an economist who argues that levying costs on public information about companies helps markets operate more efficiently. What we’re actually doing is segregating the market into those who can afford public information about companies and those who cannot.
The movement of company data from public to private hands is likely to entrench the charges for public information about companies. The corporate database is likely to be treated as nothing more than a cash cow.
Inevitably the focus will be on how to fatten the cow. The question asked will not be should we make [so much] money from public information, but how can we make more? The adverse economic consequences and lost productivity benefits that flow from costly public data will not enter the calculations.
<h2>Malcolm Turnbull has supported open data</h2>
In March 2014 Malcolm Turnbull, then communications minister, made the following salient comments:
"To be frank with you, I think it is really regrettable that ASIC’s data is behind a paywall.
I have to say as a matter of principle, I don’t think the government should be charging the public for data.
Obviously these are tough and troubled times from a budgetary point of view – and there will be all sorts of contractual issues – but really, the productivity benefits from making data freely available are so much greater than whatever revenues you can generate from them.
Our goal is … wherever possible to make that data accessible and free."
Our prime minister’s reported comments are consistent with the Australian government’s own 2015 Public Data Policy. This commits to optimising the use and reuse of public data, releasing non-sensitive data as open by default, and collaborating with the private and research sectors to extend the value of public data for the benefit of the Australian public.
I know many accounting academics who wish to conduct research to inform public policy using the financial reports on ASIC’s database. They are prevented from doing so because they do not have a spare A$50,000 lying around to buy the data.
<h2>Better corporate and tax regulation</h2>
Academics are not the only ones who would benefit from making ASIC’s public data freely available. It would also help individuals to scrutinise corporate affairs and, in doing so, make valuable contributions to the Australian regulatory authorities. This is the Jerry Maguire principle of public administration: help me, help you.
In carrying out its regulatory functions, ASIC relies heavily on complaints and reports of corporate misconduct received from individuals. Let’s do a cause and effect analysis here: the higher the charges for corporate information, the lower the scrutiny of corporate affairs by individuals, the fewer complaints made to ASIC, the weaker and more untimely corporate regulation.
The 2014 Senate inquiry report into the performance of ASIC must have had such an analysis in mind when it recommended that ASIC charges be brought into line with other jurisdictions. Searching for public information about companies is free in New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
The 2010 Senate inquiry report into insolvency practitioners is archetypal of the public policy problem. This committee found overwhelming evidence of bad and illegal practices in the insolvency industry. These practices thrived while there was low scrutiny and costly and missing financial information. ASIC was unaware of the nature and extent of what was going on.
Similar to ASIC, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) relies on individuals to inform it of taxation misconduct by corporations. The same cause and effect analysis for complaints made to ASIC applies.
In carrying out its functions, the ATO is effectively hamstrung if individuals are unable to freely scrutinise the financial affairs of corporations and make timely complaints or reports. The heaving lifting of scrutiny and accountability in taxation falls on the few and the public purse is worse off because of it.
The 2015 Senate inquiry into corporate tax avoidance was remarkable not so much for the outlandish evidence of aggressive tax avoidance, but the incredulous expressions of senators in the Sydney hearing room as the evidence emerged. It was almost possible to read their thoughts: how could it be that we, the elected representatives of the people, could have missed this disgraceful state of tax affairs and for so long?
The answer, of course, is that there was a lack of timely genuine scrutiny by the public. It finally fell to investigative journalists such as Michael West (then of Fairfax) to blow the whistle after acquiring the financial reports of various multinational companies.
<h2>Cutting red tape for small business</h2>
Small businesses – often described as the engine room of the Australian economy – could also benefit from freely available company data. Small businesses and contractors should be able to educate themselves about the affairs of their corporate customers without having to pay the government for the privilege.
Unsecured creditors should be able to view the charges held against a company’s assets by secured creditors so they too can make informed decisions.
Employees and their representatives should likewise be able to freely access public information about corporate employers. Employees have an active and ongoing economic interest in a company, not least because of the employee benefits they accumulate such as annual leave, long service leave and superannuation contributions.
It is inefficient for the Australian government to levy charges that discourage timely regular scrutiny of large companies by employees. The social costs can be high when a company fails. Uninformed employees are likely to suffer shock and dislocation. Meanwhile the government often incurs the cost of paying out accumulated employee benefits.
<h2>In the public interest</h2>
Keeping public information about companies locked up behind paywalls and maintained by private interests is not in the public interest.
Free public information about companies in public hands will contribute to higher transparency, better governance and accountability, and less secrecy, incompetence, fraud and corruption. If the ASIC corporate database is sold, the opposite effects are virtually certain.
Jeffrey Knapp is lecturer/Accounting, UNSW Australia and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jeffrey-knapp-128623" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Property 101: ASIC company data should be open and free – even Malcolm Turnbull agrees

<html><body>
ASIC has banned Geoffrey Woodcock of Auckland, New Zealand, from providing financial services for a period of four years.
Between November 2011 and October 2013, Geoff Woodcock was the founder and manager of Capital Alternatives Pty Ltd and a director of Velvet Assets Pty Ltd. Both of those companies promoted alternative investments in Australia.
However, Capital Alternatives, Velvet Assets and Mr Woodcock were not holders of Australian financial services (AFS) licences. They were also not authorised representatives of a licensee.
Following an investigation, ASIC found:
<ul>
<li>a number of the alternative investments promoted by Capital Alternatives and Velvet Assets were financial products and as such the companies were required to hold an AFS licence;</li>
<li>as a consequence, Capital Alternatives and Velvet Assets carried on a financial services business without holding an AFS licence and so contravened s911A of the Corporations Act;</li>
<li>Mr Woodcock was involved in this contravention by the companies; and</li>
<li>Mr Woodcock personally induced clients to invest by failing to disclose that around 40-45 per cent of the money invested would be retained as commission.</li>
</ul>
Commissioner Greg Tanzer said, 'The Australian financial services licensing regime provides safeguards. Consumers should not invest with a person or entity in Australia unless they are authorised by, or hold, an AFS licence.'
Mr Woodcock has the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a review of ASIC's decision.
There has been action elsewhere too against Capital Alternatives and other firms. 
In February 2014, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority won a case in the High Court against two investment schemes promoted by Capital Alternatives and other firms.
The FCA accused the firms of “promoting and/or operating collective investment schemes (CISs) in the UK illegally and without our authorisation”.
Judge Nicolas Strauss QC ruled that the schemes were collective investment schemes. 
The fact that the investment schemes were not authorised by the FCA means that they were operating illegally.
The FCA took out the case against the companies and individuals in July 2013.
The case focussed on two investment schemes: African Land (also known as Agri Capital) which offers investments in rice farm harvests in Sierra Leone, and is operated by African Land Limited and Reforestation Projects (also known as Capital Carbon Credits) which offers investments in carbon credits generated from land in Sierra Leone, Brazil and Australia. It is operated by Reforestation Projects Limited.
To sell the land, Capital Alternatives was advertising “Projected returns up to 175 percent in over five years.”
</body></html>

Capital Alternatives' spruiker Geoff Woodcock cops ASIC ban

<html><body>
Australia's home loans industry has improved its performance over the past year, adopting better 'responsible lending' practices, an ASIC review has found, though there is still  room for improvement. 　
ASIC has released its report (<a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-493-review-of-interest-only-home-loans-mortgage-brokers-inquiries-into-consumers-requirements-and-objectives/" target="_blank" title="REP 493 Review of interest-only home loans: Mortgage brokers’ inquiries into consumers’ requirements and objectives">REP 493</a>) 'Review of interest-only home loans: Mortgage brokers’ inquiries into consumers’ requirements and objectives' on the responsible lending practices of 11 large mortgage brokers with a particular focus on how they inquire into and record consumers' requirements and objectives.
It also examined how the changes implemented by lenders in response to the findings from ASIC’s report into interest-only home loans from 12 months ago last year (refer: <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-445-review-of-interest-only-home-loans/" target="_blank" title="REP 445 Review of interest-only home loans">Report 445</a>) have flowed through to mortgage brokers.　
Since the release of Report 445 in August 2015,  　
<ul>
<li>the percentage of new home loans approved by lenders which are interest-only has decreased by 12 percent; and　</li>
<li>the amount that can be borrowed by an individual consumer through an interest-only home loan has decreased, as lenders have adjusted their assessment of consumers' ability to repay, in line with ASIC's recommendation in Report 445. 　</li>
</ul>
Information provided by the mortgage brokers showed that for the six months from July 2015 to December 2015,    　
<ul>
<li>the number of new interest-only home loans fell by 16.3 percent, with total value of these loans reducing by 15.6 percent; and　</li>
<li>the percentage of interest-only loans with a term greater than five years reduced by more than half, from 11.2 percent to 5.1 percent.　</li>
</ul>
Almost 80 percent of applications reviewed included a statement summarising how the interest-only feature specifically met the consumer's requirements and objectives. This compared favourably with Report 445's finding that more than 30 percentof applications reviewed showed no evidence the lender had considered whether the interest-only loan met the consumer's requirements.　
'It is vital that mortgage brokers understand consumers' requirements and objectives to ensure they are not placed in unsuitable credit contracts,' said ASIC deputy chairman Peter Kell.
'ASIC is pleased that our concerns about interest-only loans and responsible lending are being acted on by the home lending industry, but there is still room for improvement.' 　
ASIC identified practices that place brokers at increased risk of non-compliance with their responsible lending obligations, and identified opportunities for brokers to improve their practices. Key compliance risks identified included:  　
<ul>
<li>Policies and procedures—Mortgage broker policies and procedures provided only general information, rather than tailored information on specific products and loan features that may impose increased financial obligations or restrict repayment flexibility (such as interest-only home loans); 　</li>
<li>Recording of inquiries—Record keeping was inconsistent and in some cases records were fragmented and incomplete; 　</li>
<li>Explaining the loan choice—More than 20 percent of applications reviewed did not include a statement explaining how the interest-only feature of the loan specifically met the consumer’s underlying requirements and objectives. The level of detail in these statements varied considerably and in some cases, where an interest-only loan was specifically sought by a consumer (including where this option was recommended by a third party, such as an accountant), the reason for this was not clear; 　</li>
<li>Consumer understanding of risks and costs—In some cases, where the potential benefit of the interest-only loan depended on the consumer taking specific action (for example, allocating additional funds to higher interest debt), it was unclear whether the consumer understood the potential risks/additional costs if the specific action was not taken. 　</li>
</ul>
The report details steps that mortgage brokers should take to improve their current practices, including: 　
<ul>
<li>Ensuring they understand the consumer's underlying objectives for requesting specific loan products and features;　</li>
<li>Recording concise summaries of consumers' requirements and objectives and the reason why a particular product, features and lender was chosen;　</li>
<li>Providing a statement summarising the broker's understanding of the consumer's requirements and objectives, which could also include the reason a particular loan is suggested, for the consumer to confirm before obtaining a loan.　</li>
<li>Where the potential benefits of a loan feature might require the consumer to undertake specific behaviour, ensuring consumers were aware of the action they needed to take to obtain the potential benefit, as well as the potential costs should this action not be taken.</li>
</ul>
<h2> </h2>
<h2 dir="LTR">Background　</h2>
The review of mortgage brokers' practices follows on from ASIC's previous work on interest-only loans, which reviewed how lenders were meeting their responsible lending obligations when providing interest-only home loans (Report 445) . 　
The National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (National Credit Act) requires mortgage brokers to make reasonable inquiries about the consumer’s requirements and objectives in relation to the loan and make an assessment of the as to the suitability of the loan they assist the consumer  in obtaining. 　
Report 445 found that a greater proportion of interest-only home loans were arranged through the mortgage broker channel than direct channels (lenders). More than 50 percent of consumers use the services of mortgage brokers to assist in securing credit more generally.　
Mortgage brokers are well placed to assist consumers find products that meet their requirements. For these benefits to be realised, it is important that consumers have confidence in mortgage brokers, including their compliance with the National Credit Act.　
ASIC is currently undertaking a separate review at the request of the Government in relation to broker remuneration structures and their effect on consumer outcomes. That report will be provided to the Government by the end of 2016.
To download the report, <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-493-review-of-interest-only-home-loans-mortgage-brokers-inquiries-into-consumers-requirements-and-objectives/" target="_blank">click here</a>.
<h2> </h2>
</body></html>

Asic

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Asic

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News