Former brokerage director sentenced to 12 months imprisonment

Background to the case

The recent contempt proceedings come following a swathe of other convictions and penalties.

It was established that between March 2019 and April 2023, the director breached the financial services injunctions through his involvement in five companies: including former brokerage Ansa Finance (the licence for which has already been cancelled), as well as State Advice, AFSL Group, About Advice, and Advice Now.

These businesses generated over $2.2 million in income and operated a model similar to one previously denounced by the court for breaching financial services laws and engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct.

For example, one business offered cash to financially vulnerable clients in exchange for lucrative commissions from insurance policies, often unwanted or unneeded, which significantly depleted clients’ superannuation balances. Part of this alleged model was to advertise personal loans through Ansa Finance, which then informed applicants they needed insurance to secure or improve their loan chances.

These loan applications were referred to related entities like State Advice, AFSL Group, or About Advice, which advised clients to take out various insurance policies, often paid from their superannuation, as a purported loan requirement.

These advice businesses then received fees from clients and commissions from insurance providers, with Ansa Finance only proceeding with loan applications once insurance was obtained.

Fuoco had previously been found to have been managing financial services companies while he was disqualified from doing so (and was convicted of doing so in 2023) and was then permanently banned by ASIC from engaging in any credit activities on the basis that he was not a fit and proper person to engage in credit activities, and was likely to contravene the credit legislation.

In December 2023, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) filed its contempt application in the federal court against Fuoco, alleging he had breached these court orders.

On Wednesday (2 July), Justice Horan of the federal court handed down his judgment.

What did the judge find?

In his judgment, Justice Horan described Fuoco’s conduct as the ‘most serious incident of contempt of court in recent years,’ finding him guilty of all 18 charges of contempt.

He determined that Fuoco’s actions "amounted to a premediated, persistent and wilful defiance" of the court’s orders, constituting "an extremely serious contempt with a clear tendency to interfere with the administration of justice and the authority of the court".

Justice Horan noted: “It is not in dispute that the contempts committed by Mr Fuoco involved contumacious conduct of the most egregious kind.”

The judge further stated: “In broad terms, the most serious charges are those relating to the conduct of the Advice Business and the Loan Business, having regard to their nature, duration and impact on clients.”

The case had also noted that there were multiple withdrawals of money by Fuoco and his family from bank accounts held by State Advice, AFSL Group and Ansa Finance, including around $400,000 for personal expenses such as restaurants, private school fees and holidays.

Justice Horan also highlighted Fuoco's history of non-compliance.

“Mr Fuoco has a long history of contravening, or being involved with corporations that have contravened, financial services laws, credit laws and corporation laws, as well as being the subject of and contravening banning orders made by ASIC," he said.

"This reflects a pattern of conduct over the last 20 years in which Mr Fuoco has paid scant regard to his legal obligations, including pursuant to regulatory and court orders.”

Justice Horan concluded: “I consider that the conduct of Mr Fuoco amounts to a very serious contempt of court. The conduct involved the deliberate and persistent breach of the Restraint Order over a lengthy period, motivated by personal financial gain, with significant impacts on financially vulnerable individuals who were within the protection of the Restraint Order.

“The conduct was engaged in by Mr Fuoco with full knowledge of the prohibitions imposed by the Restraint Order.”

Fuoco has 'no intention of working in regulated credit space'

In an affidavit, sworn on 19 March 2025, Fuoco had conveyed his remorse, stating: “I accept and acknowledge that the conduct in which I have engaged is a very serious matter and a grave error of judgment on my part. I understand and acknowledge that it has affected people who were financially vulnerable, and I deeply regret the harm it has caused to those persons. I unreservedly apologise to them and to the Court.

“I am very embarrassed by my conduct and regret the shame and embarrassment it has caused to my family, as well as the fact that my conduct has resulted in my earning capacity being lessened, meaning that I will not be in a position to ensure my family is as financially secure as I would like it to be.

“I have no intention of working in the regulated credit space or financial services ever again. I have voluntarily provided an undertaking to the Court, on a permanent basis, to that effect, as a way of showing my remorse and that I have learnt my lesson.

“I understand that breaching the undertaking will jeopardise my relationship with my family and it may, depending on the penalty I receive, result in me going to jail.”

The judge said he had taken into account Fuoco’s admissions, together with his expressions of remorse and apologies, along with his personal circumstances, but affirmed the necessity of a prison sentence.

Justice Horan stated: “In the present case, I consider that it is necessary that Mr Fuoco be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and that any alternative penalty would not provide an appropriate vindication of the authority of the court nor serve the purposes of general and specific deterrence.

“In particular, the imposition of a fine would be inadequate, particularly in circumstances where Mr Fuoco would not have the capacity to pay any fine, and has failed to pay pecuniary penalties and costs that have previously been ordered. In all of the circumstances, I consider that the appropriate sentence is imprisonment for an aggregate period of 12 months.”

ASIC deputy chair Sarah Court commented: "Mr Fuoco continued to run a financial business over a prolonged period in deliberate contempt of federal court orders.

"Today’s judgment demonstrates such brazen and intentional disregard of the law will be strongly punished. ASIC will continue to take action to ensure court orders are complied with."

[Related: Brokerage underpaying staff slammed with $99k penalty]