Tag: bespoke pension services

SCAMS AND SCANDALS SYMPOSIUM – TRANSPARENCY TASK FORCE 15.11.17
IT IS A SCANDAL THAT THE WOLVES, VULTURES, SCORPIONS AND BLOOD-SUCKERS OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES WORLD STILL FLOURISH

SCAMS AND SCANDALS SYMPOSIUM – PART OF THE TRANSPARENCY TASK FORCE: WEDNESDAY 15TH NOVEMBER AT THE OFFICES OF IG GROUP, 12.30 TO 5PM

Pension and investment scams and scandals are a blight on financial services and saving for retirement. The energetic and inspired campaign by Darren Cooke of Red Circle successfully raised awareness of the problems of cold calling. But the snap general election scuppered serious traction on this and the most the government has achieved so far is to make a vague promise to talk about talking about it. But still it is not illegal, and still the scammers are scamming away merrily.

Chair of The Transparency Task Force

The Scams and Scandals team was formed as a result of inspiration by the Transparency Task Force’s Andy Agathangelou. It has attracted a group of like-minded professionals who believe passionately that a concerted effort should go into coordinating a zero-tolerance approach to scams and scandals. All members of the team are committed to producing a White Paper which can focus the minds of government ministers, regulators and law enforcement agencies on the whole problem – not just the cold calling bit.

Irrespective of which version of which political party we are talking about, the ultimate object of a successful and fulfilled life is to be happy, healthy and solvent. And this includes getting a decent education, leading a responsible and law-abiding life, and saving for a comfortable retirement. Millions of British citizens manage to achieve this goal, but sadly many thousands of them lose part of all of their retirement savings to the armies of scammers.

Pension Life has been dealing with dozens of different scams in different jurisdictions by an army of repeat scammers since 2013. These include Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund scam operated by XXXX XXXX and facilitated by STM Fidecs in Gibraltar; Continental Wealth Management pension investment scam (with much of the transfer advice provided by “sister” company Premier Pension Solutions run by Stephen Ward); Blackmore Global run by Nunn and McCreesh (who ran the cold calling and lead generation for Capita Oak and Henley); Fast Pensions run by Peter and Sara Moat in collaboration with Bridgebank Capital; Premier New Earth Recycling Fund; Park First – part of Group First (along with Store First); Windsor Pensions and the Danica QROPS liberation scam; London Quantum and Stephen Ward’s Dorrixo Alliance; Holborn Assets in Dubai; Ark (Lancaster, Portman, Cranborne Star, Woodcroft House, Tallton Place, Grosvenor); Toby Whittaker’s Store First; Elysian Biofuels liberation scheme; Axiom UPT; Capita Oak; 5G Futures; Guardian Wealth Management; Square Mile Financial Services; https://pension-life.com/incartus-investment-pension-scheme-in-the-hands-of-dalriada-trustees/Incartus Investment Pension Scheme; KJK Investments and G Loans; Westminster pension scam run by XXXX XXXX; Salmon Enterprises – run by James Lau; Pennines, Malvern and Mendip liberation scams; Henley pension scam run by XXXX XXXX; Evergreen QROPS and Marazion loans; Bespoke Pension Services.

XXXX XXXX, one of the many pension scammers ruining thousands of victims’ lives

All these scams and scammers have caused thousands of victims to lose hundreds of millions of pounds’ worth of retirement savings. And caused untold misery – in many cases exacerbated by HMRC punishing the victims rather than the perpetrators.

The Scams and Scandals Team has a clear five-point goal:
1. Ban UK cold calling and fraudulent calling
We must not let this disappear off the agenda and must keep up pressure on MPs and Ministers – as well as the regulators. But this must also be extended to overseas as we already know that the UK-based cold calling outfits have made arrangements to move their operations or merely facilitate re-routing of phone numbers. However, the twilight industry of “introducing” must also be examined as this is a serious source of scam facilitation.
1. Support Lesley Titcomb “Scammers are Criminals”
Ms Titcomb has publicly declared scammers to be criminals

We must work with the regulators, government and law enforcement agencies to enhance existing and introduce new regulation and legislation to prevent new scams, close down known existing scams and bring those involved in conceiving, operating and promoting both to account.
1. Revitalise Scorpion Campaign
Fundamental to preventing scams is communication to the public of the dangers of cold calls and pension/investment scams which would include the Scorpion Campaign – but so much more as well. A key part of this exercise is the use of social media and the plan to produce a documentary and Youtube channel giving real-life examples of past and current scams. Explaining the mechanics of a scam is one thing – but showing an actual example of a victim and the scammer is bound to have even greater impact.
1. Write off HMRC debt where scams are proven
HMRC celebrating the tax they collect from victims of pension liberation fraud

We need the help of the government here and could do with an actuary to help us work out what the cost to the State is of taxing victims of scams. If we can demonstrate that by ruining a scam victim (who has already probably lost part or all of his pension) with the tax charge, the long-term cost of supporting the victim and his family will far outstrip the tax collected. This is especially well demonstrated in the Ark case where the victims have got to both repay the “loans” and pay the 55% tax even if the loans are repaid.
1. Ensure AML regs include pension scamming
TOBY WHITTAKER’S TOXIC EMPIRE WILL FINALLY BE HUFFED AND PUFFED AWAY

I would widen this to include investment scams. This is because at the heart of every pension scam there is a fraudulent investment (and/or loan). The actual pension itself is harmless as it is essentially just a box with a label on it and only becomes toxic and dangerous once you put the scorpions, snakes and cockroaches inside it. You could equally put fluffy kittens in it. It is the mis-use of the pension “box” which is the scam.
November 6, 2017
Justice Morgan’s Mad Mistake: Donna-Marie Hughes and Royal London Mutual Insurance Society
JUSTICE MORGAN’S MAD MISTAKE

(IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CHANCERY DIVISION)

The law is an ass – especially when it fails to protect pension scam victims

This judgement makes the law not just an ass, but a whole herd of donkeys.

Dear Justice Morgan

I refer to your judgment in the matter of Donna-Marie Hughes and Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Case Number CH/2015/0377 on 19th February 2016.

With absolutely no apology whatsoever, I must point out that your judgment – overturning the Pensions Ombudsman’s Determination in this matter – is so stark staring, raving mad that it verges on utterly bonkers.

In a number of complaints, the Ombudsman has found that although the legislation is missing a few key words, it is clear that a person should only transfer into an occupational scheme if they are genuinely employed by the sponsor of the scheme. The Ombudsman drew attention to the fact that the words “employed by the sponsor of the scheme” are, curiously, missing (obviously, whoever wrote that passage nipped out for a liquid lunch at the crucial moment). But he used his common sense and pointed out that it would be a “very strange result” if a person wanted to transfer into an occupational scheme without any employment relationship or arrangement with the sponsor.

It is my obligation to refer you to the fact that the industry, regulators, law enforcement agencies, courts, ombudsmen and victims (existing and future) desperately need the legislation to be tightened – not relaxed (or, as in this case, made completely impotent). This judgment has effectively given the green light for hundreds of scammers to scam innocent victims out of their hard-earned pensions.

History, since 2011, shows that various pension liberation scams including Ark (Lancaster, Portman, Cranbourne, Woodcroft, Tallton, Grosvenor) Capita Oak, Westminster, Evergreen, Salmon Enterprises, Eric’s Yard, Pennines, London Quantum, Headforte, Southlands etc., all share a collection of common traits:
1. They were set up, administered and promoted by unregulated firms
2. These firms obscure the identity of the team
3. The address of the firm is a virtual office
4. The assets of the scams being peddled include high risk, illiquid, speculative investments entirely unsuitable for pensions
5. Bogus “occupational” schemes are registered with HMRC and tPR (who do nothing to check that the sponsoring employers actually trade or employ anybody – or indeed even exist at all)
6. Pensions are liberated using a variety of “loan” structures which victims are assured are legitimate “loopholes”
7. Transfer and loan fees are extortionately high
8. Victims are promised unrealistic gains such as “guaranteed 8% return per annum”
9. Assets are entirely unsuitable for pension schemes and often include huge “kickbacks” for the introducers
The firms and individuals offering these schemes have included:
- Premier Pension Solutions in Spain (run by Tolleys Pensions Taxation author Stephen Ward – available on Amazon if you need a copy: http://www.amazon.com/Tolleys-Pensions-Taxation-2014-2015-Stephen/dp/0754549356)
- Gerard Associates http://www.gerardassociates.co.uk/
- Frost Financial
- Continental Wealth Management
- J. P. Sterling
- Viva Costa International
- Windsor Pensions
- Blu Debt Management
- Wealth Masters
- Paul Baxendale-Walker
- James Lau
Thousands of victims have lost £ billions and gained £ millions in tax liabilities. The assets of these schemes have included offshore property, store pods, car parking spaces, unregulated collective investments, eucalyptus forests, hedge funds, forex, Cape Verde etc.

Now, I am not saying that Bespoke Pension Services are scammers. http://bit.ly/1VGeSPn but on the back of their victory in the case of Ms. Hughes, there are a further 160 blocked pension transfers sitting with the Pensions Ombudsman. We have no way of knowing whether they will all be pension transfers invested in Cape Verde, but we do know the Hughes case must have been very important to Bespoke Pension Services’ business. After all, they must have invested a considerable amount in legal fees to take an £8,000 transfer attempt to the High Court.

Interestingly, Bespoke Pension Services are unregulated and their address is a virtual office. According to their latest published accounts the firm is insolvent. The two directors/shareholders – Mark Anthony Miserotti and Clive John Howells – have between them an impressive portfolio of investment, consultancy, property development, investment and financial planning companies – one of which is called “Fortaleza Investments” which suggests something Brazilian.

On the back of your judgment in respect of Royal London, there will be a serious problem for all the pension providers who performed so appallingly in Ark, Capita Oak, Westminster, Evergreen et al: the worst of which being Standard Life, Prudential, Scottish Widows, Aviva and Legal and General. Having handed over £ millions worth of pension funds since 2010 – in a lazy, negligent, box-ticking fashion – there is evidence that they are trying to mend their ways. Or there had been, until your judgment in the Hughes/Royal London/Bespoke Pension Services case.

I would draw your attention to Clause 53 in Justice Bean’s Ark ruling where he makes it clear that legislation wording must be interpreted intelligently – and not blindly.

He is obviously trying to make the point that it is essential to avoid an anomalous or unjust result from failing to look behind the intended meaning of wording. Indeed, the Pensions Ombudsman had already done that when looking at the wording when he said that he found that a transferee did need to be employed by the sponsor of an occupational scheme in order to avoid a “strange result”.

Your judgment has put at risk thousands of victims’ pensions. There have already been suicides, nervous breakdowns, life-threatening illnesses, broken marriages and families. There will be widespread poverty in retirement and many people will lose their homes. A strange result indeed – which does rather beg the question of how victims will get any protection or justice now?

This judgment makes the law not just an ass, but a whole herd of donkeys.

Regards, Angie Brooks
October 13, 2016
Pension Transfer decision from Ceding Provider to Pensions Ombudsman to the High Court

Pension Transfers are the cornerstone of pension scams. We expect to be looked after by the law, the large financial institutions and the government institutions such as ombudsmen but when they disagree our best interests often form the debris of the squabble. If you have saved for a pension, worked for years and years earnestly squirrelling away what you can for those golden years, you do not want to lose it. In fact that is what has happened to countless pension holders when they decided to transfer their pensions into what were presented as legitimate pension schemes. Some transfers were for liberation and some were to increase value of the pension. A recent High Court decision has opened the doors for scammer to legitimately roll out more of these scheme. Here is what happened when the High Court overruled the upright decision of the Pensions Ombudsman.

£8000 in a Secure Occupational Pension Scheme

Ms. Hughes was an Occupational pension holder with Royal London. Her Occupational Scheme was generated by the company she worked for and would have been available as a benefit of employment with that company. Had it been a contributory scheme both Ms.Hughes and her employer would have contributed to a fund which grows free of tax during the savings period. In non-contributory schemes, only Ms. Hughes’ employer contributes. The amount paid out to Ms. Hughes on her retirement will depend on the type of scheme and reflect either the contributions put in or the number of years’ service and the final salary of the employee. The main point of this is that the Occupational scheme is a benefit of employment with a particular company and this is managed by a trustee, in this case Royal London.

Royal London acts on behalf of the employee

Royal London is the largest mutual life, pensions and investment company in the UK. They are undoubtedly a secure pension trustee. They were the ceding provider for Ms. Hughes’ £8,359.71 occupational pension. As the pension trustee Royal London technically held the pension scheme’s assets for Ms.Hughes (the beneficiary of the occupational pension scheme). They act separately from Ms.Hughes’ employer for her benefit. Royal London’s powers are written in the trust deed and the scheme’s rules.

Bespoke Pension Services (Virtual Office)

Bespoke Pension Services made contact with Ms.Hughes through a cold calling operation First Review Pension Services, a UK promotor. Bespoke Pension Services claim to be ‘experts in pension scheme design, administration and regulatory pension guidance in the UK and EEA, including the Isle of Man’. They ‘design and implement pension schemes in the tax jurisdiction that is most advantageous to your requirements’. They do not have the same weight of reputation or confidence that a company such as Royal London have in the area of insurance and pensions.

The process starts with a Letter of Authority

Having engaged Bespoke Pension Services, they would have produced a Letter of Authority (LoA). This was sent to Ms. Hughes to complete, sign and return. She signed would have signed it. The LoA was then sent to Royal London (Ceding Scheme) to provide authority to Bespoke Pension Services to act on the client’s behalf. The LoA instructs the Ceding Scheme to send Ms. Hughes’ existing pension information (type of pension, investment structure, charging structure, growth rates, etc) to Bespoke Pension Services with Discharge Forms and Ms. Hughes’ pension documents.

To facilitate the Transfer Ms. Hughes needs her own company and a SSAS

In order to facilitate the transfer Ms. Hughes needed a company in her own name and so Babbacombe Road 1973 was set up for this purpose. This company is the sponsor for the SSAS Small Self Administered Scheme. This is a type of UK Occupational Pension Scheme which is trust based and established individually, usually by directors of limited companies for specified employees of the company. Babbacombe Road 1973 ltd. was possibly never intended to trade and was set up solely for the purposes of the pension transfer. All of the pension scams we have been dealig with to date have involved a bogus sponsoring employer which never traded or employed anyone

Royal London declined the Transfer

Royal London informed Ms. Hughes in September 2014, that they would not be able to facilitate the transfer to the Babbacombe Road 1973 SSAS. Through their investigations they were unable to confirm that the transfer would result in appropriate pension benefits for Ms. Hughes. They were also unable to determine that the scheme was a registered pension scheme. This was the first stumbling block for Bespoke Pensions Services and Ms. Hughes.

Bespoke Pension Services Apply to the Pensions Ombudsman

The Pensions Ombudsman settles disputes and acts within the laws set up for Pensions and Pension holders. They are an independent organisation for the moderation of pension administration. Ms. Hughes via BeSpoke Pension Services complained to the Pensions Ombudsman about Royal London’s decision to decline the pension transfer request. Anthony Arter, the Pensions Ombudsman, upheld Royal London’s decision describing it as “typical of one presenting itself across the pensions industry in relation to pension liberation”.

And finally…..to the High Court and the case is presented to Justice Morgan

Determined to put the transfer through for Ms. Hughes, the case is taken to the High Court by Bespoke Pension Services. Justice Morgan decided to overrule the Pensions Ombudsman’s decision and allow the pension transfer to go through. His decision was based on the wording of the legislation which in fact states that a member of an occupational pension scheme should have some sort of earnings/employment – but falls short of saying that the earnings/employment should be with the sponsor of the occupational scheme (to which a member is intending or attempting to transfer).

Pension Scammers will delight in this decision by Justice Morgan

Were this is a decision which only affected Ms. Hughes and her £8,359.71, it really would not be newsworthy at all. The fact of the matter is that it sets a precedent as an interpretation of the law surrounding many pension transfers. When the expertise of the pension trustees such as Royal London and the Pensions Ombudsman can be overrriden in this manner (i.e. an interpretation of legislative wording which is too weak and takes away the intelligence factor), you have to ask are whether ordinary pension holders in the UK are the first priority? Has this opened the flood gates for more fraudulent pension transfers? Have pension scammers been given the green light?

March 9, 2016