ING frozen fund - bang overselling without disclosure...

Surprised no-one has mentioned this.

Did anyone see Gareth Morgan on Close-Up on Mon/Tues talking about the frozen ING fund which was sold by ANZ who co-owned it but didn't disclose it.

When asked if the bank/ING would have to refund everyone's money he said yes. He made it very clear they're misrepresented what they were selling and were also negligent in advice they gave.

Wonder how much he knows about this specific case.

The video is here: http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/is-your-money-safe-2578890/video

Interesting how he's so sure the bank will basically be forced to refund the investments.

if the nature of type of the investments were given then imo they should be shit out of luck.

they're only losing that percentage of their investment that nearly every other financial market participant has

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/2077099/ING-boss-Thats-our-best-offer

Not disclosing the bank was a half owner is misleading sales so far as the fair trading act goes.

Not to mention many, many cases have shown the bank/ING invested in type of investment they were specifically instructed not to invest in. Likewise for ignoring investors requests on risk balancing of portfolios.

I know of one customer, a family trust for two elderly people, which was not to have any more than 25% of the total in any one fund or type of fund.... when they had their money frozen they discovered the bank and ING had put something like 60% into a high-risk fund.

I think the "final offer" is wishful think from ING and I bet it entails signing a "can't change your mind or be part of any future legal action" clause.. It suits them to a tee to have people sign up for their crappy offer.