The chat centred on the fact Richard, the former Astarra/Trio Capital chief executive was out on bail for his crimes, yet Cassimatis, the founder of Storm Financial, was yet to face charges.
Perhaps, like many Storm Financial clients, my colleague couldn’t quite understand how investigations into Cassimatis and the collapse of the financial advice firm could still be continuing, with no charges laid.
It baffled her that no charges had been laid against Cassimatis even though ASIC began investigating the firm in December 2008.
Yet, the corporate regulator’s October 2009 investigations into Astarra Asset Management and then Trio Capital led to Richard facing criminal charges in December 2010.
Richard faced allegations that he dishonestly received undisclosed payments in his role as investment manager of the Astarra Strategic Fund (ASF) and Astarra Superannuation Plan.
He also faced allegations that he knowingly made materially misleading statements about the value of investments made by the ASF.
As well as already being handed a life ban from managing, Richard is now looking down the barrel of a maximum 10 years in jail and will learn his fate in the Supreme Court on 13 May.
On the flipside, however, Cassimatis is facing no charges, with ASIC’s court action brought against him and his wife already hitting a slight hurdle.
Earlier this month, the Federal Court judge presiding over ASIC’s legal action voluntarily stepped down over issues of conflict.
Justice John Logan dismissed himself from the case after agreeing his involvement in the 2009 wind-up of Storm Financial constituted bias.
A few days later, the FPA confirmed Cassimatis had filed an appeal against the advice association’s charges and a $20,000 fine.
“The member has lodged an appeal and we are progressing with that activity. I can’t give a definitive date on how or when that will conclude – all I can tell you is that it is subject to an appeal,” FPA deputy chief executive and general manager for professionalism Deen Sanders said at the time.
The fine and expulsion was handed down after the FPA found him guilty of multiple breaches of its code of ethics and rules.
While the situations of both men are extremely different in their complexities, the fact one is potentially facing jail time and the other remains uncharged becomes a momentary fascination.
We deduced that in Richard’s case, it was perhaps a little more black and white in terms of where the paper trail led the investigations and his ultimate guilty plea.
However, as the Storm Financial case involved so many entities, including a number of Australian banks, the paper trail could play out like a round-robin or complex game of connect the dots. In short, not just one person or entity can be easily held responsible.
We both also agreed ASIC made us lose our appetite for lunch.
