Income Asset Management Group has attributed a late director interest notice to an administrative oversight and miscommunication, after ASX questioned whether disclosure rules may have been breached. IAM says it has reiterated its director reporting process and will strengthen controls if required.
- Late Appendix 3Y notice attributed to administrative oversight
- ASX raised possible Listing Rule 3.19A and 3.19B breaches
- IAM says director disclosure procedures were reiterated
- No breach finding or penalty disclosed in the response
ASX Questions Delayed Director Disclosure
Income Asset Management Group Limited (ASX:IAM) has responded to an ASX query over the late lodgement of a director interest notice, saying an administrative oversight and miscommunication between director Jonathan Lechte and the company secretary caused the delay.
ASX’s 27 August letter said IAM’s Appendix 3Y notice, lodged on 26 August, indicated changes in Mr Lechte’s notifiable interests on 5 May 2026 and 22 December 2025. The exchange said the notices appeared to be due by 12 May and 31 December respectively, and warned that IAM may have breached Listing Rules 3.19A and 3.19B. ASX also said Mr Lechte may have breached section 205G of the Corporations Act 2001.
Company Points to Oversight and Miscommunication
IAM said Mr Lechte had notified the board and executives at the time of the securities trade that he had made an on-market transaction. The company said the notice was prepared and lodged once the oversight was identified.
The filing also addresses the separate 22 December reference. IAM said a contract disclosed to ASX on that date, which included Mr Lechte’s name, did not relate to securities. The response does not set out the precise securities transaction details behind the Appendix 3Y notice, nor does it state that ASX has determined a breach occurred.
IAM Reiterates Director Reporting Arrangements
IAM said it already has arrangements under Listing Rule 3.19B requiring directors to notify the company of changes in relevant interests as soon as reasonably possible, and no later than two business days after the change. It said it would reassess the adequacy of those arrangements and strengthen other requirements where necessary.
A board meeting held on 26 August reiterated the process, according to IAM, while Guidance Note 22 on director disclosure was circulated to all directors. The company said it regretted the delay and took its continuous disclosure obligations seriously.
Regulatory Follow-Up Remains Unresolved
The immediate filing is an explanation and a description of remedial steps, not a penalty notice. No enforcement outcome, fine, trading suspension or financial impact is disclosed. The open question is whether ASX considers the explanation and controls sufficient, or seeks further action over the timing of the disclosures.
Bottom Line?
IAM has explained the delay, but the regulatory issue is not fully closed until ASX indicates whether any breach or further action will follow.
Questions in the middle?
- Will ASX make a formal finding on the possible Listing Rule breaches?
- What exact securities transactions were covered by the delayed Appendix 3Y notice?
- Will IAM introduce documented controls beyond its existing director notification process?