Federal Court finds S&P guilty in landmark rulingBY MARK SMITH | FRIDAY, 6 JUN 2014 12:05PMA landmark ruling by the Federal Court against ratings agency Standard & Poor's, ABN AMRO and Local Government Financial Services (LGFS) could have implications across the world. Related News |
Editor's Choice
Advisers lean on AQF7 to meet education standards: Rainmaker
A new report indicates that Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) 7 qualifications are the most common forms of qualification among financial advisers, held by 85% of the population.
Labor commits to compulsory super for under-18 workers
Labor has unanimously supported extending superannuation to under-18 Australian workers.
Trump slugs Australia with new 'forced-labour' tariffs
US President Donald Trump will slug trading partners, including Australia, with new tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on the premise of pressuring foreign governments to strengthen bans on "the importation of goods produced with forced labour."
Centuria quashes governance allegations amid fund downgrades
Centuria Capital Group has swiftly provided a response to media reports suggesting that its exposure to the Bathla Group, a Sydney-based property constructor and developer, raised questions over its governance, following a downgrade of one of its private credit funds this week.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Hugh Killen
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
For Hugh Killen, several life lessons came from spending time on pastoral properties stretching across northern New South Wales and South-West Queensland.







S&P commented: "to enforce a legal duty against a party like S&P, which has no relationship with investors who use rating opinions, yet impose no responsibility on those investors to conduct their own due diligence."
This says it all about how ratings agencies in general think - they have 'no relationship with investors who use rating opinions'. Why do they think investors use their rating opinion? Because investors and financial planners trust that these organisations which hold themselves out to be holier than thou, say they have the expertise and experience to rate product properly, and have access to far more inside information than any investor or financial planner can ever get their hands on.
So S&P are only in it to take money off product suppliers who use them to confirm their product is clean and good to invest in.
If S&P think this way and don't want to be held to the high standard the ratings profession has set, simple, close up shop and do not offer a ratings service. It is about time ratings agencies where held to account for false and misleading ratings.
Do that and their job is done and the investor and planners can have faith in what they were rating. Knowing that bad products will not be miss rated. That's how the market should work.