Franklin Investors – Neither the regulator nor regulated entity to your rescue. It’s the Court!

Share on whatsapp
Share via Whatsapp
Share on twitter
Tweet it out
Share on facebook
Share on FB
Share on linkedin
Post on LinkedIn

Well before the Franklin debt saga broke out and thereafter, we have been analyzing and covering events that were unfolding and the next steps for you through various articles since November 2019.

  1. Cut exposure ahead of the Vodafone issue, in November 2019
  2.  The Actual Vodafone Impact in January 2020
  3. The announcement of winding up and what it means
  4. Similar risks in debt funds from other AMCs
  5. Status on winding up and next steps
  6. Will demat of your FT units help

Now, with Franklin India AMC facing multiple lawsuits on the manner of winding up its six debt funds – the saga has taken a new turn.

Justice
  • Lawsuits by unitholders against Franklin bring to light the fact that the rights of unitholders under SEBI regulations are ambiguous. It cannot simply be assumed that unitholders rights are limited to simply voting for liquidating a fund’s assets.
  • In communicating with unitholders, Franklin’s line of argument also comes across as somewhat high-handed.

We would like to detail the above points but before that, we would like to state that we aren’t legal experts and that the Courts will be the best judge of the way forward. Nor would we like to judge the rights or wrongs of the case at this juncture. We would simply like to offer perspective to an ordinary investor on what she can read from the current situation.  

What really are your rights?

We believe there are two reasons why Franklin investors need to take fresh stock of the situation now. One, until the lawsuit in Gujarat High Court, the general understanding of SEBI’s regulations was that an AMC’s trustees could make the decision to wind up a scheme and only needed the vote of unit holders to dispose off the assets thereafter. Franklin too took this view while making the winding up decision. But the petitions filed in Court suggest that the SEBI Regulations relating to winding up of schemes aren’t that straightforward. Two, Franklin itself has taken a rather high-handed approach to its obligations in its arguments at the Court and the communication to investors.

So, here’s why the exact rules for winding up are a bone of contention. This is what SEBI’s MF regulations say about winding up of a scheme:

Under Regulation 18 of SEBI (Mutual Fund) Regulations, 1996:
(15) The trustees shall obtain the consent of the unitholders—
(a) whenever required to do so by the Board in the interest of the unitholders; or
(b) whenever required to do so on requisition made by three-fourths of the unit- holders of any scheme; or
(c) when the majority of the trustees decide to wind up or prematurely redeem units.

Now, the above is not the only section that deals with winding up.

Under Regulation 39:
(2) A scheme of a mutual fund may be wound up, after repaying the amount due to the unit holders,—
(a) on the happening of any event which, in the opinion of the trustees, requires the scheme to be wound up; or
(b) if seventy-five per cent of the unit holders of a scheme pass a resolution that the scheme be wound up; or
(c) if the Board so directs in the interest of the unitholders.(3) Where a scheme is to be wound up under 115[***] sub-regulation (2), the trustees shall give notice disclosing the circumstances leading to the winding up of the scheme:—
(a) to the Board; and
(b) in two daily newspapers having circulation all over India, a vernacular newspaper circulating at the place where the mutual fund is formed.

So, does this mean that a scheme can be wound up only after repaying amounts due to unit holders? Not really! There’s another section 41 – that the notice that you got from Franklin comes under.

Under Regulation 41:
41. (1) The trustee shall call a meeting of the unitholders to approve by simple majority of the unitholders present and voting at the meeting resolution for authorising the trustees or any other person to take steps for winding up of the scheme:

Let us take Section 18. As a lay reader, it seems to me, that under sub-section (c) of 18, when a majority of trustees decide to wind up, they need the consent of the unit holders.

However, in the intimation received by investors on voting, Franklin has stated that “Please note that voting ‘No’ to the Authorization will not change the winding-up status of the Scheme.” In other words, the winding up decision will not change even if your vote is a NO. So, this does not seem to be the applicable section on which the AMC acted.

Also, you will recall the first notice you would have received dated April 23, 2020 from Franklin spoke of winding up of the 6 schemes under regulation 39(2)(a). So that means that the trustees have called for the winding up.  This regulation has been used earlier too by AMCs to wind up schemes (check here)

But if Regulation 39 applies, then what is the intent of Regulation 41? To simply give consent to sell the assets? If unit holders don’t give their consent, what is the outcome? The regulation seems silent on this aspect.

Investor protection?

If not for the lawsuits and the interpretations coming out of them, most of us would not have known the regulations governing this event.

The point here is simple. Even financial experts and advisors do not know how to interpret the law. And we are therefore left with little choice but to go with what the AMC and its trustees say. While the regulator SEBI is known to step up every time there is an issue relating to investor protection, its own regulations do not provide investors with much clarity on how MFs can be wound up. Nor has SEBI come up with any awareness material or any special notification to investors of Franklin on what their rights are in this extraordinary situation. To us, this does seem like a let-down of the small investor by a regulator which has always proactively championed the investor cause.  

buy hold sell

In such a situation, true investor protection can come only from the Courts – where such contradictions can be resolved in a fair and just manner with protections afforded to the aggrieved.

It could be the case that the regulator is forced to remain silent, taking cognizance of the fact that the regulations have been loosely drafted. In such a situation, true investor protection can come only from the Courts – where such contradictions can be resolved in a fair and just manner with protections afforded to the aggrieved.

High handedness

If, as an investor, I am at a loss on what my rights are, the AMC’s approach to my plight has been somewhat lukewarm. Let us not doubt the AMC’s intention is to return the invested amounts as soon as possible. No doubt it wants to put this unpleasant scenario behind and move on. But the recent communication on voting, leaves much to be desired.

Repeatedly telling us that we had a choice on the voting, but a ‘no’ would mean only delay in receipt of proceeds and that nothing would change as far as the decision to wind up goes – leaves us with no real choice!

Doesn’t that simply amount to saying – sign this if you want your money back? From an AMC that is highly regarded, this approach has a not-so-subtle coerciveness to it.

Next, in the litigation in the Gujarat High Court, Franklin’s lawyers have argued that investors have entered the schemes after going through the risks mentioned in the memorandum of the schemes and thus have to be bound by the terms of the contract.

No investor enters into an open-ended fund thinking that this is part of the ‘market’ risks he or she has been warned about. Nor does the scheme information document mention that this can happen.    

Unfortunately, this argument belies the fact that Franklin itself has breached a contractual promise of running an open-ended fund by suddenly stopping redemptions. No investor enters into an open-ended fund thinking that this is part of the ‘market’ risks he or she has been warned about. Nor does the scheme information document mention that this can happen. Yes, in the past, schemes have been closed when they fall below the threshold AUM stated by SEBI or sometimes merged. But you don’t expect flagship funds with several thousand crores of AUM to shut shop suddenly because of their inability to manage flows!

Why all this matters to you

All of this may seem of little relevance to you when your only priority is to get some money back into your bank account. With the Court cases, many of you believe there could be more delay. But here’s why understanding what’s transpiring now becomes important:

  • As a small investor neither the regulator nor media nor advisors nor analysts like us could tell you what exactly your rights were as the AMC suddenly decided to wind up its schemes. The regulations have not made this easy. You have been let down.
  • While the AMC and its trustees can, hopefully, be trusted to return your money, the direction of their argument and their stance do not provide comfort, especially on the part of respecting unitholder rights.

At this juncture, there will be little choice but to look up to the Courts to provide the right legal interpretation and help investors realise the fair value of their investments. Some of the aggrieved but larger investors who have gone to Court have not done it just prove their point. They have done it to realise a fair price too. And if that happens all investors will stand to benefit. Four out of six Franklin schemes have seen a 1.5-3.5% fall in the NAV thus far. The risk is even more in this current environment where defaults on the papers held by Franklin could cause further erosion.

In this situation, one can only look up to the Courts for justice. And we hope it is delivered for all the pain and trauma endured by thousands of investors in these tough times. Also, we hope that any precedent that emerges from this ruling will prevent other AMCs from launching into such misadventures in the future.

At PrimeInvestor, we are of course seriously re-examining our stance on the other schemes of this AMC. If you are a subscriber, you will soon hear from us on our views on this front. If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe to stay tuned. You will know, going by our coverage since November 2019, we stand by you, to the extent our knowledge on this matter permits us to help you.

prime funds
Share on whatsapp
Share via Whatsapp
Share on twitter
Tweet it out
Share on facebook
Share on FB
Share on linkedin
Post on LinkedIn

Please note that any specific queries on any of our recommendations will be answered ONLY through email. If you are a subscriber, please mail [email protected].  Only general queries or discussions will be answered through the comment section of the blog. For full details, please refer to this post – How to communicate with PrimeInvestor.

22 thoughts on “Franklin Investors – Neither the regulator nor regulated entity to your rescue. It’s the Court!”

  1. Tavinder Singh Saran

    a very good article Vidya. Thanks for sharing such valuable insights. Hopefully MF investors get their rightful due in this matter.

  2. example given of BNP paribas by you is one of 39(2)(c) and not 39(2)(a). where a direction is given by SEBI, 18(15) would in any case wont apply. Here the power is being exercised by the trustees and hence would trigger 18(15).

    1. HEllo Sir, Yes we are aware and have mentioned the different sections clearly. The point we tried to make is that Regulation 39 is being used in the industry and not Regulation 18 given that there weren’t such circumstances. thanks, Vidya

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Register for FREE!

Gain instant access to more PrimeInvestor articles, researched products, and portfolios

The essence of PrimeInvestor

Register for FREE!

Gain instant access to more PrimeInvestor articles, researched products, and portfolios

Legal Disclaimer : Redwood Research (with brand name PrimeInvestor) is an independent research entity offering research services on personal finance products to customers. We are a SEBI registered Research Analyst (Registration: INH200007478). The content and reports generated by the entity does not constitute or is not intended to constitute an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation to an offer to buy or sell financial products, units or securities. All content and information is provided on an ‘As Is’ basis by PrimeInvestor. Information herein is believed to be reliable but PrimeInvestor does not warrant its completeness or accuracy and expressly disclaims all warranties and conditions of any kind, whether express or implied. The services rendered by PrimeInvestor are on a best effort basis. PrimeInvestor does not assure or guarantee the user any minimum or fixed returns. PrimeInvestor or any of its officers, directors, partners, employees, agents, subsidiaries, affiliates or business associates will not liable for any losses, cost of damage incurred consequent upon relying on investment information, research opinions or advice or any other material/information whatsoever on the web site, reports, mails or notifications issued by PrimeInvestor or any other agency appointed/authorised by PrimeInvestor. Use of the above-said information is at the user’s own risk. The user must make his own investment decisions based on his specific investment objective and financial position and using such independent advisors as he believes necessary. All intellectual property rights emerging from this website, blog, and investment solutions are and shall remain with PrimeInvestor. All material made available is meant for the user’s personal use and such user shall not resell, copy, or redistribute the newsletter or any part of it, or use it for any commercial purpose. PrimeInvestor, or any of its officers, directors, employees, or subsidiaries have not received any compensation/ benefits whether monetary or in kind, from the AMC, company, government, bank or any other product manufacturer or third party, whose products are the subject of its research or investment information. The performance data quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results. Investing in financial products involves risk. Mutual Fund Investments are subject to market risk, read all scheme related documents carefully. As a condition to accessing PrimeInvestor’s content and website, you agree to our Terms and Conditions of Use, available here. This service is not directed for access or use by anyone in a country, especially, USA, Canada or the European Union countries, where such use or access is unlawful or which may subject Redwood Research or its affiliates to any registration or licensing requirement.

• Aditya Birla Mutual Fund • Axis Mutual Fund • Baroda Mutual Fund • BNP Paribas Mutual Fund • BOI AXA Mutual Funds • Canara Robeco Mutual Fund • DSP Mutual Fund • Edelweiss Mutual Fund • Essel Mutual Fund • Franklin Templeton Mutual Fund • HDFC Mutual Fund • HSBC Mutual Fund • ICICI Mutual Fund • IDBI Mutual Fund • IDFC Mutual Fund • IIFL Mutual Fund • Indiabulls Mutual Fund • Invesco Mutual Fund • ITI Mutual Fund • Kotak Mahindra Mutual Fund • L&T Mutual Fund • LIC Mutual Fund • Mahindra Mutual Fund • Mirae Asset Mutual Fund • Motilal Oswal Mutual Fund • Nippon India Mutual Fund • PGIM Mutual Fund • PPFAS Mutual Fund • Principal Mutual Fund • Quant Mutual Fund • Quantum Mutual Fund • Sahara Mutual Fund • SBI Mutual Fund • Shriram Mutual Fund • Sundaram Mutual Fund • Tata Mutual Funds • Taurus Mutual Funds • Union Mutual Funds • UTI Mutual Funds • Yes Mutual Funds

Equity: Large Cap Funds | Mip Cap Funds | Large And Mid Cap Funds | Small Cap Mutual Funds | Contra Mutual Funds | Dividend Yield | Focused Mutual Funds | Find Top Index Funds | Best Sector Funds | Thematic Mutual Fund | Best Value Mutual Funds | Equity Linked Savings Scheme | Tax Saving Funds
Debt: Banking And PSU Funds | Corporate Bond Funds | Credit Risk Funds Mutual Funds | Dynamic Bond Funds | Floating Rate Funds | Gilt Mutual Funds India | Find Top Liquid Funds In India | Long term debt funds | Low Duration Funds Debt Funds | Medium Duration Debt Funds | Medium To Long Duration Funds | Money Market Debt Funds | Overnight Debt Funds | Short Duration Debt Funds | Ultra Short Term Debt Fund
Hybrid: Aggressive Hybrid Funds | Arbitrage Mutual Funds | Balanced Advantage Mutual Funds | Conservative Hybrid Funds | Dynamic Asset Allocation | Equity Saving Funds | Multi Asset Funds | Multi Asset Allocation

Scroll to Top
Login to your account