DO big payoffs only come with big risks? Maybe in the normal world, but this was something else.
On the third day of Maleny financial adviser Peter Hugh Mettam's fraud trial, Perth woman Lorna Kyle told the court of conferences she would attend in New Caledonia and Hawaii, where she said investors would be given talks on wellness, health and financial matters.
Earlier this week, the court heard Mrs Kyle claim she lost more than $2 million when after investing with Mettam.
Mettam is facing a jury trial after pleading not guilty to two counts of fraud.
Under cross examination from defence barrister Kevin Kelso, Mrs Kyle was asked about a visit she had made to Mettam's Maleny home in 2003.
He questioned Mrs Kyle on comments made that alleged Mettam's home was chosen to "hide himself from the rest of the community".
"Mr Mettam considered living in a not-ostentatious home and not driving around in big cars would keep him under the radar," Mrs Kyle told the court.
"He said he chose a property for that purpose".
Mrs Kyle told the court that while at the Hawaiian conference with other investors, Mettam had personally asked for money and gave advice on how to avoid investigation.
As he wrapped up his questioning, Mr Kelso asked Mrs Kyle if she understood what "rate of return" meant.
Mr Kelso used the example of how a credit card interest rate may be lower than a mortgage rate, then asked, "Do you agree the interest rate reflects the amount of risk?"
"It would in the normal world," she said.
Mrs Lyle told the court Mattam had promised the funds she invested would be guaranteed.
The trial is expected to last two weeks.
Update your news preferences and get the latest news delivered to your inbox.