David beats Goliath using a recorded phone call
Bank's own recording used against it in court
What would you do if faced with a call on a margin loan of $160,000 from Macquarie Bank and given three working days to pay it? Over the past 12 months this has became a common situation in Australia, and around the world.
Last year one investor’s offer to meet the Bank’s call didn’t go exactly as planned and the Bank claimed he had failed to comply. However the Federal Court agreed that the investor’s efforts were actually sufficient to meet the Bank’s call. They ordered the Bank to compensate the investor.
The Bank’s own recorded phone calls actually helped the case against them.
This court decision could impact every investor who uses margin lending arrangements.
Next time you hear the words “this call may be recorded for training purposes” it may just help you. Lawfully obtained ‘surveillance’, in this case recording of phone calls, were used in this court decision. This type of surveillance evidence is often most useful in the detection and proof of frauds but this case was different.
In the Federal Court decision on 12 February 2010 of Goodridge v Macquarie Bank Ltd and Leveraged Equities Ltd recorded telephone conversations were used to prove an aspect of the case. The Plaintiff is a Barrister (as a litigant in person) and he decided to take on the might of Macquarie Bank and Adelaide Bank.
The main issue was whether or not the Borrower had satisfied a Bank’s “call” under a Margin Loan. Read what happened on the blogsite
If you need the assistance of a lawyer, or know someone who does, contact my team at Streeterlaw Sydney.
Regards
Mark Streeter
Senior Partner Streeterlaw
PS Below are links to more blogposts and new information available on the website.
|
