Overview: FMA warning raises investor red flags
The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) has issued a formal warning to investors connected with the Chance Voight group, citing concerns over payment requests associated with Bernard Whimp. The regulator’s alert signals possible breaches of New Zealand’s corporate and financial markets laws and underscores the risk of unsolicited requests from individuals linked to the Chance Voight network.
Who is involved?
Chance Voight refers to a group of companies operating within New Zealand’s financial markets, with Bernard Whimp identified as a key director in some of the entities. The FMA’s communication indicates that Whimp’s involvement and the group’s governance could be at odds with statutory requirements. While the exact nature of the “payment requests” is not fully detailed in the public advisory, the regulator emphasizes that investors should scrutinize any demands for funds, particularly when they originate from affiliated directors or linked entities.
Legal context and potential breaches
The FMA’s warning centers on possible breaches of two cornerstone pieces of New Zealand law: the Companies Act 1993 and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA). The Companies Act governs corporate duties and director responsibilities, while the FMCA regulates conduct in financial markets, including the offering and trading of financial products, and imposes duties on market participants to operate honestly and transparently.
Specifically, the regulator suggests that the group’s affairs “may have been conducted in a manner that breaches” these laws. Such breaches could range from improper disclosures, conflicts of interest, and transactions that lack proper approval processes, to misleading or aggressive fundraising tactics tied to payment requests. It is a reminder to investors that legal compliance is foundational to the trust and legitimacy of investment schemes.
What investors should watch for
In light of the FMA warning, aspiring and current Chance Voight investors should be vigilant about:
- Unsolicited payment requests, particularly those requesting unusual or recurring contributions beyond any quoted terms.
- Requests for funds that come directly from directors or from entities closely linked to the Chance Voight group, without clear, independent disclosures.
- Lack of formal documentation, such as prospectuses, risk disclosures, or audited financial statements that are typical in regulated offerings.
- Payment terms that deviate from standard investment structures or that promise unrealistic returns or guarantees.
- Opaque governance, including insufficient information about related party transactions, and unclear approval processes for fund movements.
Regulator’s guidance for investors
Regulators typically urge investors to pause and seek independent advice before parting with funds. This includes consulting licensed financial advisers, requesting comprehensive disclosures from the issuer, and verifying any regulatory notices against official FMA communications. For those who have already invested and are unsure about recent requests, it is prudent to document all correspondence and seek timely legal counsel to assess potential breach risks and remedies.
What happens next?
The FMA’s warning does not necessarily imply illegal activity has occurred, but it does highlight the possibility and the seriousness of non-compliance. The agency may continue its monitoring, request further information, or take enforcement actions if warranted by the evidence. Investors should remain cautious and stay informed through official FMA updates and verified company disclosures.
Conclusion
The FMA warning regarding Chance Voight and Bernard Whimp underscores the importance of rigorous governance and transparent fundraising practices. For investors, the message is clear: demand clear disclosures, verify regulatory status, and be wary of unsolicited payment requests tied to directors or affiliated entities. In a landscape where legal compliance and investor protection are paramount, prudent due diligence remains the best defense against potential financial losses and regulatory risk.
