The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has issued two orders banning Abdullah Popal of Rouse Hill, Sydney, from providing financial services or participating in credit activities permanently as a result of fraud convictions.
Bopal was convicted on 11 January 2026 on two counts of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception. He was subsequently sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment to be served by way of intensive correction in the community. Further, he was required to perform 220 hours of community service work.
The latest orders specifically permanently prohibit Bopal from providing any financial services or engaging in any credit activities, controlling an entity carrying on a financial services business or credit activities, and performing any function for an entity carrying on a financial services business or engaging in credit activities , including as an officer, manager, employee or contractor.
The fraud convictions were made under section 192E of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and related to the activities of Bopal that saw him access the bank accounts of former clients and transferring a total of $89,932 into accounts held in his own name.
In particular, ASIC established that between 4 May 2009 and 4 August 2024, Bopal advised clients on purchasing property through the use of an SMSF while he was a director of Wealth Street Pty Ltd. As part of this activity, he would assist individuals in setting up a bank account for their SMSF and in doing so make himself a signatory of those accounts.
Between 10 and 28 November 2024, Bopal was then found to have transferred client funds into his own accounts without obtaining authorisation from any of his clients.
The permanent ban was made under the Corporations Act 2001 and National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, both of which allow the regulator to take such action preventing a person from providing financial services and engaging in credit activities if they are convicted of fraud.
The banning took effect from 2 June 2026 and Bopal has the right to appeal the decision in front of the Administrative Review Tribunal.
