Dear Ms Simpson

I refer to your request for a document (Deed) under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982  (the FOI Act) set out below.

ASIC proposes to release the Deed to you administratively, that is,
outside of the FOI Act.

From the information you have been able to provide about the Deed we are
of the view that you are associated with (or may even be) a Mr Phillip
Sweeney who has provided documents like this to many government  agencies
and then requested either by himself, his agents or using pseudonyms under
the FOI Act, the very documents which he has provided to those agencies.  

We note that Mr Sweeney has previously been the subject of vexatious
applicant declarations under the FOI Act for, among other things, conduct
like that described above.  We refer to the decisions of the
Administrative Appeals Tribunal in [1]Sweeney and Australian Information
Commissioner & Ors [2014] AATA 531 and [2]Sweeney and Australian
Information Commissioner and Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
(Joined Party) [2014] AATA 539.

One of the consequences of Mr Sweeney's conduct is that the document you
seek in your request is now publically available from many sources.  

The Deed, and parts thereof also appears on the disclosure logs of many
other agencies including the [3]Administrative Appeals Tribunal.  It has
previously been provided to the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal and
then requested through the Right to Know website by Mr Sweeney and is
available here
[4]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/8...
.

There is a comprehensive list and copies of all deeds relevant to Mr
Sweeney's areas of concern published on a website that we understand is
closely associated with Mr Sweeney.  Here is a link
[5]http://superfraud.org/?page_id=3187.  

Given that the Deed is readily and publically available we ask that you
withdraw your FOI request, upon which we will provide you with a pdf copy
of the document if you advise that you still genuinely require it.

Otherwise, if you wish to proceed with this request under the FOI Act for
the purposes of having the Deed appear on this agency's disclosure log,
please state that purpose.

Kind Regards,

Matt Povey
Senior Manager
Administrative Law Team
Chief Legal Office| ASIC | Melbourne

From:        Julie Simpson <[FOI #1243 email]>
To:        FOI requests at ASIC <[ASIC request email]>,
Date:        23/09/2015 08:02 AM
Subject:        Freedom of Information request - The Ken Jarrett Deed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Australian Securities and Investments Commission,

The document I seek is a copy of a purported "Deed" dated 26 August
1986 for a superannuation fund where the sponsoring employer was
Elders IXL Limited and a copy of the attached purported "Rules".

This purported "Deed" has not been executed by the majority of the
Directors of Elders IXL and Regulation 50 (the Power of Amendment)
is not recited in this Deed although the original Trust Deed dated
23 December 1913 is recited. No Power of Amendment is recited in
this purported "Deed".

The purported Deed has been executed by two legal persons; the
company Elders IXL Limited and a corporate Trustee, Elders
Superannuation Limited

This document does however bear the signature of Mr Ken Jarrett. Mr
Jarrett served a term of imprisonment for dishonest conduct after
three major investigations by the former National Crime Authority
(NCA).

Yours faithfully,

Julie Simpson

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #1243 email]

Is [ASIC request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to Australian Securities and Investments Commission? If so,
please contact us using this form:
[6]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...

This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This
message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet.
More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
[7]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

show quoted sections

Dear Ms Simpson

I am afraid your response has not specifically addressed the question put
to you in the email of 25 September being :

1.  Whether you genuinely require the document and are content for ASIC to
provide it to you administratively; or

2.  Whether you continue seek the document under the FOI Act for the
purposes of having it placed on this agency's disclosure log?

It is at least clear from your response that you consider the document
should be on ASIC's disclosure log but it is not clear whether you want
the document at all.  From the detail set out in your email below, it
seems entirely possible that you are already in possession of the document
you seek.  Further, we have noted that the document is already publically
available.

We note that the provision of a document pursuant to a request under the
FOI Act does not automatically result in the document being placed on an
agency's disclosure log.

If we do not receive a response to the matters raised at 1) and 2) above
within 7 days we will assume you do not require the document and treat
your request as withdrawn.

Matt Povey
Senior Manager
Administrative Law Team
Chief Legal Office| ASIC | Melbourne

From:        Julie Simpson <[FOI #1243 email]>
To:        FOIrequest <[ASIC request email]>,
Date:        28/09/2015 02:24 PM
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information request - The Ken Jarrett Deed
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear FOIrequest,

I am responding your letter dated 25 September 2015.

A number of persons lodged submissions to the Senate Inquiry into ASIC in
relation to ASIC's dealing with complaints associated with a regulated
superannuation fund once known as the Elder's IXL Superannuation Fund that
was established on the 23 December 1913.

When the Senate Committee referred these complaints to ASIC, the response
from ASIC to the Senate Committee was that there was "No Evidence" to
support the allegations of the complainants.

If ASIC has possession of the document signed by Ken Jarrett, then this
should be confirmed as a matter of public interest on the FOI Disclosure
Log of ASIC.

Mr Jarrett served a term of imprisonment for dishonest conduct following
three major investigations by the former National Crime Authority (NCA).

Therefore the "Jarrett Deed" should be a "Red Flag" document for any
"Regulator" that warrants further investigation by that agency - in this
case ASIC in conjunction with APRA if necessary.

There will likely be further Senate inquires in relation to the Elders IXL
Superannuation Fund and the conduct of Mr Jarrett and his associates.

It is important that ASIC cannot use the "No Evidence" excuse for a second
time and then claim ASIC did not have possession of the Jarrett Deed.

ASIC will need to explain to the Senate Committee why ASIC ignored such an
obvious "Red Flag" document.

When Harry Markopolos, the Bernie Madoff Whistleblower, testified before
the United States Congress' House Financial Services Committee, Harry
revealed the number of "Red Flag" documents that had been in the
possession of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the US equivalent
of ASIC), which had been ignored by the SEC.

Therefore it is important to properly document the number of "Red Flag"
documents in the possession of ASIC - starting with the "Jarrett Deed".

The Power of Amendment for this fund {Regulation 50} is referenced by the
Elder Smith & Co Ltd Provident Funds Act 1963 (SA) and the provisions of
Regulation 50 require a majority of Directors of the sponsoring Employer
to sign any Deed of Variation. The Jarrett Deed is not signed by a
majority of the Directors of Elders IXL Limited.

The only Director's signature is that of Ken Jarrett so the "Jarrett Deed"
is easily proven to be fraudulent, as one might expect from someone who
later served a term of imprisonment for dishonest conduct in relation to
another matter.

It is now a matter of Public Interest as to what "Evidence" is now in the
possession of ASIC.

The new Prime Minister, the Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP, has made public
statements that he supports "Open Government".

Yours sincerely,

Julie Simpson

show quoted sections

Dear Ms Simpson

Please find attached ASIC's decision in relation to your FOI request
received on 23 September 2015.

Kind regards

Lauren

Lauren Roy | Escalated Matters & Government - Misconduct & Breach
Reporting | Assessment & Intelligence | ASIC | ' +61 3 9280 4638 | Fax:
+61 3 9280 3392 | * [email address]

Please consider the environment before printing this document

Information collected by ASIC may contain personal information. Please
refer to our Privacy policy http://www.asic.gov.au/privacy for information
about how we handle your personal information, your rights to seek access
to and correct personal information, and how to complain about breaches of
your privacy by ASIC.

NOTICE

This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and
may be confidential. They may contain legally privileged or copyright
material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose them without
authorisation. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the
sender as soon as possible by return e-mail and then please delete both
messages. This notice should not be removed.