So it's ok to talk about Nathan Tinkler but not about ......

[see_change]

There is a professional high profile ex member of this forum who gave financial advice that resulted in many members of this forum ( and other people ) loosing considerable amounts of money

I note that he is now back in the business of promoting property investing . If you google his name you will come up with links relating to the bankruptcy of entities that he was involved with .

I'm wondering whether as a community we have the right or obligation to draw attention to these , as this community is specifically about property investing and this is what he is promoting.

As he drew a considerable about of business from this forum do we have an obligation to the wider community to point out the results of what following his advice resulted in before .

Obviously he has the legal right to do what he wants , but as so many people here are aware of what happened previously , do we have the right to sweep it under the carpet and ignore what happened .

Cliff

 

[Aaron_C]

I thought if you are bankrupt you wouldn't be able to give financial advice?

 

[Aaron Sice]

see this post.

http://somersoft.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1055445&postcount=58

 

[see_change]

I thought if you are bankrupt you wouldn't be able to give financial advice?

I don't think he personally was bankrupt . I know he was very strong on asset protection.

I would like the debate on whether we should name him rather than guess the name . BTW , I don't intend to respond to any pm's asking me who it is ....

Cliff

 

[MarkB]

There is a professional high profile ex member of this forum....

... do we have the right to sweep it under the carpet and ignore what happened

It could be that there is a fine line between the truth and what could be construed as defamatory. And a reluctance on the part of the private owners of this forum to be seen to be seen walking that tightrope (and they will be seen, I am sure, if they do walk it...).

And I am not sure if said member (who I have never met, nor had any association with) is an ex-member.

Has this person asked to be banned from the forum?

 

[see_change]

see this post.

http://somersoft.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1055445&postcount=58

Hi Aaron , I'd already read that , but this particular person was very active on the forum and gained significant business from it . They are on public record of being associated with bankruptcies and they're back in the business of providing property investment advice .

Robert kiyosaki for example is quite upfront about having had failed businesses.

Cliff

 

[see_change]

It could be that there is a fine line between the truth and what could be construed as defamatory. And a reluctance on the part of the private owners of this forum to be seen to be seen walking that tightrope (and they will be seen, I am sure, if they do walk it...).

And I am not sure if said member (who I have never met, nor had any association with) is an ex-member.

Has this person asked to be banned from the forum?

Sorry mark , you're correct . He's still a member .

I realise that it's controversial , that's why this post has no links...

Cliff

 

[MarkB]

Measure twice, cut once....

(Or, in this case, "when temptation becomes too great, remove the temptation....")

The HotCopper Fighting Fund.

I think the idea is to avoid needing one of these Seech.

 

[handyandy]

Hi Aaron , I'd already read that , but this particular person was very active on the forum and gained significant business from it . They are on public record of being associated with bankruptcies and they're back in the business of providing property investment advice .

Robert kiyosaki for example is quite upfront about having had failed businesses.

Cliff

I do believe that he personally went bankrupt, as a number of loans that he also encouraged his client into, were in his name. It is my understanding that prior to the bankruptcy all assets were moved to family members.

My believe is that he gave up his licence and he is now working via other's as a consultant.

You will need to come to a meet up to find out the nitty gritty.

Cheers

 

[see_change]

I realise this Mark , but we have people coming here to the forum , asking advice , all the time.

Cliff

 

[see_change]

I do believe that he personally went bankrupt, as a number of loans that he also encouraged his client into, were in his name. It is my understanding that prior to the bankruptcy all assets were moved to family members.

My believe is that he gave up his licence and he is now working via other's as a consultant.

You will need to come to a meet up to find out the nitty gritty.

Cheers

Im waiting for the next one.....

Cliff

 

[MarkB]

I realise this Mark , but we have people coming here to the forum , asking advice , all the time.

And if someone new to this forum happens to raise this forumite.... I'm sure that thread will disappear beneath the waves as well, just like the last one did.

Now, if you were a newbie, wouldn't that tell you something?

Lets leave the policing of the law to ASIC.

And leave the lawyers to pursue other parties....

(Says he who is not a moderator here).

 

[see_change]

And if someone new to this forum happens to raise this forumite.... I'm sure that thread will disappear beneath the waves as well, just like the last one did.

.

Other two...

Cliff

 

[see_change]

And if someone new to this forum happens to raise this forumite.... I'm sure that thread will disappear beneath the waves as well, just like the last one did.

Now, if you were a newbie, wouldn't that tell you something?

Lets leave the policing of the law to ASIC.

And leave the lawyers to pursue other parties....

(Says he who is not a moderator here).

Part of my point of the thread , is that it ok to have a thread on Nathan Tinkler, but not on someone who is much more closely affiliated with the forum .

Cliff

 

[skater]

My personal opinion is that if any member of the forum is in the public eye promoting property, financial advice, or get rich quick schemes, then they should expect to be scrutinized by the forum as a collective. If they have done wrong in the past, it is by no means an indicator that they may do wrong again, but the newbies coming here seeking help and advice should at least have access to this information, as should anyone else proposing to go into business with them. At least then, people can make an informed decision based on all information available.

That being said, when giving information about said forumites, then this should be done in a constructive manner, void of all emotion, reporting facts only, and strict moderation should be undertaken of all such posts to ensure there is no needless mudslinging.

 

[MarkB]

Part of my point of the thread , is that it ok to have a thread on Nathan Tinkler, but not on someone who is much more closely affiliated with the forum .

And part of the point of my reply is that it is extremely highly unlikely that Nathan Tinkler will read a comment on SS and think "I'll sue those ******".

But someone who posts here currently or who has visited here not all that long ago... that's a lot more likely.... even more so if this forum (for better or worse / rightly or wrongly) is a source of business for them.

I'm not disagreeing with you Cliff (actually I guess I am disagreeing with you at some level, hell I can't even agree with myself in this sentence....), but we've been here before, and we keep going around in circles on this one.

My personal opinion is that if any member of the forum is in the public eye promoting property, financial advice, or get rich quick schemes, then they should expect to be scrutinized by the forum as a collective.

Yes, but...

What some consider scrutiny, others consider defamatory - and again it gets back to the willingness of this forum (eg Ian Somers) to establish a fund to defend itself (and the individuals on it) from legal claims.

Rather than having a fire extinguisher, wouldn't it just make sense to have a total fire ban altogether....

 

[Sim]

Other two...

Cliff

The first one had broken links and you yourself asked if it should be removed.

The second one you edited the content from, so it was no longer meaningful, so I deleted that one too.

You're more than welcome to start a thread ... but it is one of those topics which is extremely emotive for a lot of people (many lost a LOT of money), and so it is likely to become lawyer bait and will likely get heavily moderated anyway.

 

[Ausprop]

It is my understanding that prior to the bankruptcy all assets were moved to family members.

the bankruptcy trustee would reverse that lot in about... 2 seconds

 

[Sim]

the bankruptcy trustee would reverse that lot in about... 2 seconds

It's a lot more complicated than that ... it's not like "ooh, I'm going to have to declare bankruptcy, let's move all my assets".

Most of the key assets were always in the names of other family members.

 

[Ausprop]

It's a lot more complicated than that ... it's not like "ooh, I'm going to have to declare bankruptcy, let's move all my assets".

Most of the key assets were always in the names of other family members.

fair enough - fool the lenders that took a guarantee from a man of straw