Login
AMP: Clayton Utz report has been mischaracterised
Embattled financial services company AMP has hit back at implications that the report conducted for it by national firm Clayton Utz was anything but independent, following a segment by ABC’s Four Corners program.
Jerome Doraisamy
In a statement, AMP reiterated its position from its 4 May submission to the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry that “the Clayton Utz report could never have been considered as independent” under ASIC regulations relating to independent reports.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
“Nonetheless it was an uncompromisingly direct report into the issues”, the company repeated.
ASIC was fully aware, it continued, that “Clayton Utz is a member of AMP’s external legal panel and was acting for AMP in relation to ASIC’s investigation into fees for no service”.
Separately, the company has moved to defend itself against claims in the shareholder class action led by Quinn Emanuel in the Supreme Court of NSW, with comments regarding the supposed “mischaracterisation of the Clayton Utz report”.
The report notes, the company said, that the board of AMP appointed Clayton Utz to conduct an independent investigation of its advice business, and there was “nothing about the independence of the report that required disclosure”.
“Further, Clayton Utz did not make any changes to the report as a result of communications with AMP which Clayton Utz did not agree with, and Clayton Utz carefully verified the accuracy of the statements in the report.”
AMP’s comments follow last night’s report on Four Corners, in which shareholder advocate Stephen Mayne said “[Catherine Brenner] should’ve commissioned the report and let the report stand.”
“If it’s an independent report, let Clayton Utz say what they want to say,” he said.
The report underwent 25 drafts as it was shuttled between the firm and AMP, ABC reported.
