ASIC stated that following an investigation it found Mr Tindall had been engaged in “misleading and deceptive conduct on a client’s behalf by failing to disclose their pre-existing medical conditions on an insurance application submitted to an insurer”.

It also found that he had engaged in dishonest conduct by not disclosing the medical conditions in transferring that insurance obtained to a new insurer.

He had also “recklessly made misleading comparisons about superannuation products to four clients, which induced those clients to switch their superannuation”, the corporate regulator said.

ASIC deputy chair Peter Kell said ASIC will take action against financial advisers who have been “dishonest or who mislead their clients, in order to increase public confidence in the financial services industry”.　

On 17 January 2017, Mr Tindall applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a stay on the ban and a review of ASIC’s decision. The stay application was heard on 27 January 2017. On 9 February 2017, the AAT refused the stay. The date for the hearing of a review of ASIC’s decision is yet to be set.