My response to the Senate Report into ASIC - Australia's corporate regulator | Media.com

Since 2020 my partner and I have endured the devastating impact of ASIC's actions since they targeted our family's investment business, Mayfair 101. For nearly five years, James has been relentlessly fighting to protect his business, the livelihoods of hundreds of lenders, and their $211 million from the senseless destruction by ASIC. The report published today by the Senate Economics Committee led by Senate Bragg labels ASIC’s culture as "very sick" and that its record on enforcement had made Australia "a haven for white-collar crime".&nbsp;However there is another critical element the public should be aware of to have a more complete picture of the state of Australia’s corporate regulator. &nbsp;There is a profound lack of accountability for ASIC's actions when they get it wrong. This Inquiry has predominantly investigated what ASIC has failed to do rather than delving into instances where they have acted beyond power or caused harm to innocent people. It is crucial that ASIC be accountable for their actions so improvements can be made to their regulatory practices. &nbsp;ASIC's decision-making when it comes to target selection is another area which would benefit from scrutiny. &nbsp;Big banks seem to get off with little consequence, whereas smaller businesses are easy pickings for a Government body with endless resources. &nbsp;In the instance of Mayfair 101, there were other market participants blatantly misleading the public with advertisements offering “term deposits” when they were not Authorised Deposit-Taking Institutions and were offering mortgage funds. Yet Mayfair was targeted for using the phrase “term deposit alternative” which makes clear what was on offer was not a term deposit. &nbsp;These other organisations likely raised billions of dollars by misleading the public and yet ASIC did nothing to them. The scandalous allegations directed at my partner and his business by ASIC are also deeply concerning. He was accused in open court of transferring investor money to an offshore bank account and of running multiple Ponzi schemes, and yet ASIC never had evidence to substantiate these claims. They couldn’t even produce a bank statement to show funds have been transferred into an offshore account (because one did not exist). They made these scandalous submissions orally to a judge to ban James from leaving the country and grab media headlines. &nbsp;This was not enforcement action, it was a disgraceful publicity stunt at the expense of innocent people. People’s lives get ruined by this type of conduct. It is unacceptable that an Australian Government body makes false claims in the absence of evidence. They need to be held to account for telling judges what the average person would consider to be outright lies. As someone deeply impacted by ASIC’s actions I hope the Senate’s report can be evaluated not just in terms of what ASIC isn’t doing enough of, but also in contexts like Mayfair 101 where they have invested millions of dollars to destroy a good business with real people, real investments, and happy clients. &nbsp;&nbsp; What they have done to my partner, his business, our family, and nearly 600 Australians and their families, is inhumane, discriminatory and does not serve the public interest. &nbsp;&nbsp;Victim support network&nbsp; If you or someone you know has suffered as a result of misguided regulatory action I urge you to get in contact. I have endured this situation for nearly five years and am making myself available as a support system to other victims. Please reach out by email for a confidential discussion - brigette.panetta8@gmail.com.&nbsp;

Melbourne

Media.com

Australia

Brigette Panetta

Public

Creator

User

Verified

Active

My response to the Senate Report into ASIC - Australia's corporate regulator

My Story of Injustice