'Horrified' First Guardian and Shield investors consider class action

Natasha Langby feels she has nothing left to lose.

The 55-year-old says she pumped tens of thousands of dollars of her retirement savings into First Guardian through the Netwealth super platform.

She is one of 6,000 people who lost a total of $446 million when First Guardian collapsed last year.

In December, Netwealth reimbursed about $100 million to about 1,000 First Guardian investors, including the money Ms Langby invested.

However, her payout did not include the compounding impact — the amount of superannuation she would have accumulated had her money stayed in a performing fund rather than one that collapsed.

Ms Langby said she made a complaint through the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), but was not successful.

"They just couldn't get anywhere with it," she told ABC News.

"That's when I contacted Jason from Gordon Legal and said, 'look, are you guys doing a class action because I just think this is ridiculous'."

Gordon Legal and Keily McCrosson are jointly investigating potential claims involving the First Guardian and Shield Master Funds, including those who invested through Macquarie and Netwealth.

More than 100 investors reach out

Gordon Legal's James Naughton said some people who invested in Macquarie and Netwealth may not have been fully compensated for all their losses, even if they have already received payouts.

"We've already had over 100 people contact us in a really short period of time, and we expect more people to contact us over the next few weeks,"

he said.

In addition to the 6,000 First Guardian investors who lost out, another 5,800 people invested $480 million of their retirement savings into Shield, which also later collapsed.

Of the total $480 million worth of investments made in Shield, Macquarie reimbursed $321 million to 3,000 investors.

"Macquarie and Netwealth entered into agreements with ASIC to pay back the capital that had been lost by those investors … but those investors are still in the dark and haven't been compensated fully," Mr Naughton argued.

"In particular, they haven't been compensated for the fact that during the time after the collapse of First Guardian, they were out of their money for a significant amount of time, and they lost the opportunity to have that money in their super funds earning money for them for their retirement."

He said the purpose of super was to have money in a fund earning interest "so that people can have a nest egg for their retirement".

"If you take money out at the start and just put the same amount of money back, you're not compensating people fully for the amount that they've lost,"

he said.

"We're talking about thousands of people, thousands of investors, and we're talking about at least tens and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars of compensation that still hasn't been paid to Macquarie and Netwealth investors."

Macquarie and Netwealth have been contacted, but both declined to comment.

Mr Naughton said many investors were still confused about what had happened.

"Some people don't fully understand yet. It takes them a while to understand that they've actually lost money," he said.

Investors mull over options

Investors could pursue other avenues to get compensation, such as through AFCA.

Melinda Kee lost about $370,000 by investing in First Guardian.

Ms Kee, who leads investor advocacy group SOS Save Our Super, received a determination from AFCA in her favour.

That determination is being challenged by Interpac — the licensee of the financial advice firm that helped move her money into First Guardian — and, as a result, AFCA has had to put all determinations related to First Guardian and Shield cases on hold.

But Ms Kee still believed AFCA is the best avenue for investors to get money back and noted that, unlike class actions, which can involve hefty legal fees if there is a win, individuals lodging through AFCA can do so for free.

"Even though the AFCA process is incredibly cumbersome and it's a long process, doing a class action is also a long drawn-out process," she told ABC News.

"My recommendation strongly is for people to lodge their AFCA complaint."

Mr Naughton hoped that investors would instead join the class action, saying "AFCA has some limitations in terms of what it can resolve" since many of the cases focus on the role that financial advisers and their licensee played, rather than on the super platforms that hosted the investments.

"What we're really focused on is a claim against the superannuation trustee," he said.

"That's ultimately the entity that we think is legally responsible to make sure that if it's promoting or offering a fund on its platform, that it has done its proper due diligence to check and understand that."

Ms Langby said a class action may be her best bet.

"You can't just say to somebody, 'sorry, it [your superannuation] is gone'," she said.

"I was just horrified that they think they can do this to people."