After investing his superannuation in Shield Master Fund, Graeme Dyall feared he would retire destitute when withdrawals were frozen in early 2024 as the $1.1billion First Guardian and Shield collapse unfolded.

Mr Dyall, 59, rolled $230,000 of his super into the Shield Master Fund after responding to a Facebook ad from Australian Super Compare and being told he would be investing through Macquarie, one of Australia's biggest financial institutions. 

Now, after a long battle, he is among the handful of investors to recover most of his money, receiving about $219,700 through Macquarie's remediation program.

Mr Dyall said Macquarie's involvement gave him confidence to move his retirement savings from Colonial First State.

He said the collapse ultimately cost him his $125,000-a-year corporate job, his Melbourne lifestyle and the future he had spent decades building.

The stress left him battling anxiety and depression, and at one point he required hospital treatment.

'I was told it was Macquarie, a massive financial conglomerate, from the start,' he told the Daily Mail.

'They were all just denying responsibility. It was disgraceful how Macquarie treated me. I become consumed with it. I was not sleeping at night because I was worried I was going to retire destitute.'

His money had been rolled into Macquarie Investment Management Ltd (MIML), a subsidiary of Macquarie Bank, on the advice of financial services firm InterPrac. 

The whole ordeal became so overwhelming he sold his Melbourne home and relocated to regional Victoria. He now works casually for far less than his corporate job.

But he says the move has given him a different perspective on life.

'I'm just living every day now. I've moved to this little country town. I've got a little casual job.

'I'm probably happier now than what I was even before this started.'

Financial watchdog ASIC is investigating legal and regulatory action over the collapse of the Shield and First Guardian funds.

Mr Dyall said experience left his faith in Australia's financial system shattered and he is frustrated by what he saw as a lack of government action.

He was also stunned when advisers later had the audacity to contact him about reviewing his superannuation after the collapse.

'You put me in this mess and now you want to review my super,' he said.

'I've got no faith in the financial system anymore. I think the government could have done more.

'To bail out Qantas to the tune of $2billion made my blood boil.'

MIML admitted it failed to act 'efficiently, honestly and fairly' by not placing Shield on a watch list for heightened monitoring.

In September 2025, Macquarie agreed to reimburse investors for 100 per cent of their net capital invested in Shield through its platform. 

While Mr Dyall has recovered most of his original investment and continues to pursue further compensation through the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) for lost investment growth, his thoughts remain with thousands of other investors still trying to rebuild their retirement savings. 

'My thoughts are really with the people who are retired now that have lost everything,' he said.

'They've got no income, they've got to go on just an age pension.'

An estimated 12,000 Australians lost some or all of their retirement savings in the First Guardian and Shield collapses, with many still awaiting determinations. 

However, a new battle is now emerging over how investors should seek further compensation.

Melbourne law firm Gordon Legal has launched a class action in the Supreme Court of Victoria on behalf of about 2,800 MIML-linked investors, alleging Macquarie failed to conduct appropriate due diligence and oversight before allowing investments into Shield through its super platform.

The lawsuit argues Macquarie's repayments did not fully compensate investors because they failed to account for the investment returns members could have earned had their retirement savings been invested elsewhere.

Lead plaintiff Rachelle Dessent said she was devastated when she discovered the extent of her losses.

'The blood just drained from my face when I first saw how my super had dropped,' she said.

'I was absolutely gutted. I trusted the Macquarie brand, and I wouldn't have invested in Shield if it wasn't them.'

Advocacy group SOS Save Our Super founder and fellow First Guardian investor Melinda Kee does not support the class action, believing the AFCA pathway offers investors a faster and less costly route to compensation.

Ms Kee urged investors not to assume a class action was their only option. 

'My focus has always been on what gets victims as close to whole as possible, as quickly as possible,' she told the Daily Mail.

'AFCA is free and, for eligible unpaid determinations involving financial advice, the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort can provide compensation of up to $150,000.

'A class action offers no guarantee of how much will ultimately be recovered or how long it will take.

'These people have already lost enough. This shouldn't be about who gets another slice of the pie. It should be about getting as much as possible back into the hands of the victims.'  

Gordon Legal partner Andrew Grech rejected suggestions investors would be better off avoiding the class action, arguing it may offer the best avenue for compensation.

He also argued AFCA was not designed to process thousands of complaints arising from a single investment collapse and warned investors could face lengthy delays. 

'For most Australians, superannuation is their most important asset,' he said.

'When your retirement savings are tied up in a failed investment, you miss out on funds that could be life changing. That's what happened in this case. It's time for Macquarie to pay the full amount back.'

The class action is being conducted on an opt-out basis, meaning eligible investors will automatically be included unless they choose to exclude themselves during a court-approved opt-out period.

But some investors, including Mr Dyall, remain unconvinced. With his 60th birthday approaching, he said time was not on his side.

'I don't have the time for that. I'm 60 next year,' he said.

Mr Dyall argued that while litigation funders may take a fixed percentage of any settlement, additional legal and funding costs could further reduce investors' payouts.