Tag: Investors Trust

Blackmore Global pension scam victim who cares

The following blog was written by Stephen Sefton: a Blackmore Global Victim who cares about pension scams.

Stephen was scammed by David Vilka of Square Mile International Financial Services around six or seven years ago. Vilka, who had neither qualifications nor a license to provide pension or investment advice, arranged the transfer of Mr. Sefton’s substantial final salary pension.

Stephen’s pension was transferred to the Optimus QROPS in Malta. It was placed in an Investors Trust offshore bond in the Cayman Islands. Then it was invested in high-risk, high-commission, unregulated funds. One of these was Blackmore Global.

A determined fight on the part of the tenacious Mr. Sefton did eventually result in the recovery of a large part of his funds. But his case was a rare exception. He was, indeed, very fortunate that he didn’t lose the whole lot. Most victims suffer total loss in such circumstances.

It is now looking very likely that Phillip Nunn and Patrick McCreesh’s Blackmore Global Fund is going to be as worthless as their other investment scam: Blackmore Bond (now in administration).

Pension Scam victim Stephen Sefton writes:

Finally, after two months of radio silence, Angie Brooks once again pens an article. It’s about time!

It’s an interesting title: “Who cares about Careys and the world of pension scams?”

I care. I don’t know why I should but I do. Maybe because I am seeing a media frenzy over the recent collapse of mini bonds in the UK. Especially LC&F and Blackmore Bonds plc to name just two. Meanwhile, victims of pension scams from the last decade are being forgotten and swept under the carpet. Much to the delight of many of those that oiled the wheels of the scams and helped them to happen – especially the QROPS and SIPPS!

There are many (especially the scammers) that really don’t like me. This is why they tried to offer me a paltry £6000 to silence me. Seriously?

There are many that don’t like my rhetoric and I regularly get blocked on Twitter, or thrown off Facebook. Here, I get to tell it like it is, however unpalatable the truth may be.

What I have learned over the years is that there’s an intricate web, woven around these scams. This interconnects a number of players whose names just keep on cropping up.

Malta was clearly the jurisdiction of choice for many pension scams. It seems to have hundreds, if not thousands, of victims. Many of these are not yet even aware that they face financial ruin in their retirement.

In my opinion, Malta has much to answer for and really should clean up its act. Journalists rarely focus their gaze on the real facilitators of pension scams: the Mickey Mouse jurisdictions that turn a blind eye and allow them on their patch.

Why are they not aware? QROPS Scheme Administrators are sending out fictitious statements implying members’ pensions are still intact. One member of STM Pensions Malta was sent a statement in Sep 2020 showing his pension still intact just one month after STM wrote to members invested in Blackmore Global – Nunn & McCreesh’s offshore unregulated collective – that in fact they (STM) have no idea what the value is!

As it happens, STM did manage to get Nunn & McCreesh to publish the underlying assets for Blackmore Global, in May 2020 (over 6 years since the fund was launched). Even with this list, there is little idea what the fund is worth because the underlying assets are themselves useless, opaque, private ventures in yet more Mickey Mouse jurisdictions. One offshore fund is already being pursued by Dalriada as part of other failed pension schemes from early in the last decade – but Dalriada are getting nowhere with it.

I am not convinced that “The Adams v Carey case is likely to herald a flood of similar claims …”.

Courageous Manita Khuller in front of the Guernsey courthouse

The Ombudsman case that went in favour of Mr. N against the Northumbria Police Authority (PO-12763) in July 2018, was also a landmark case against a negligent UK pension provider that had a tick box culture. The ceding provider transferred Mr. N’s pension without due regard for the Pensions Regulator’s requirements of 2013 for extra due diligence when handling transfers.

That decision doesn’t appear to have “herald[ed] a [likewise] flood of similar claims” three years on.

Also, the landmark appeal, Khuller v First International Trustees Ltd (Guernsey) (“FNBIT”) that was won by Manita Khuller, hasn’t seen any likewise “flood of similar” cases.

Why not?

The reason, in my opinion, is twofold:

Firstly, the victims were targeted by scammers because they were “ignorant”. That’s not meant to be derogatory.

They knew diddly squat about pensions, regulations, investments – nothing! They trusted the “adviser” – the con man persuading them to transfer their pension. For a con to be successful you need the essential skill of gaining people’s trust. Scammers have this skill in abundance. The ignorant fall for it every time.

Victims not only knew nothing about pensions and investments, they didn’t even know how to spot they were being conned. They were the perfect mark for scammers. They didn’t know what they didn’t know. Like taking candy from a baby – although a baby knows it is being robbed and often screams quite loudly (so maybe not the best analogy).

Secondly, even if victims have now discovered they have lost their pension, they have absolutely no idea what next to do about it. The ones I have come across are like fish out of water. Completely at a loss of where to go.

On Angie’s facebook group, one person recently told of their father’s loss of pension to Nunn & McCreesh’s Blackmore Global. In an attempt to do “something” the person went to the FCA on behalf of their father only to be told that investing in unregulated funds on the advice of unregulated advisers bars them from the compensation scheme and Ombudsman service. The FCA suggested looking into the Malta compensation scheme – which is a joke! That was the extent of help from the FCA. As useful as a chocolate teapot.

It hadn’t occurred to this person that either the ceding provider is guilty of maladministration for the transfer in the first place, AND/OR the receiving scheme in Malta is in “breach of trust” because it too is bound by legislation controlling its activities.

So the best next step is to pursue one or other side of the transfer – or both.

Manita Khuller went after the receiving trustee through the courts and eventually won. However, such legal action isn’t for the faint hearted. It cost her huge sums of money, which she took out loans to fund. Losing was not an option. On top of already losing her pension. It was a nightmare for her. I know – I was with her every step of the way since 2018 when we were introduced by a journalist. This was her only option because the Mickey Mouse jurisdiction, Guernsey, had no “Ombudsman” service. Moreover, the incestuous nature in Guernsey meant law firms declined to represent her. She had to go it alone for the first trial, adding a layer of stress no person should be subjected to. There are few victims with this determination or courage willing to take this course of action – so they don’t, even though she has paved the way.

We in the UK, at least, have the Ombudsman and now – relatively recently – Malta also has one (the Office of the Arbiter for Financial Services (“OAFS”)).

Guernsey is a backward, biased, Mickey Mouse, incestuous jurisdiction – which is why scammers love it.

The Scheme administrators on both sides of the transfer will fight tooth and nail and argue the victim is wholly to blame for their losses. Many victims just have no idea how to go about presenting their case.

There is no “free” professional service available to help victims navigate this minefield. Mr. N (referenced earlier) paid lawyers £25k to make his case. But the Ombudsman did not award costs – saying that it is not necessary to engage lawyers. However, it is not easy to fight a pension scheme that will employ a top notch law firm to present its defence. So by and large, the victims I have come across are at a serious disadvantage because they have no idea how to seek justice and have nowhere to go and don’t know how to present their case. That’s why they were targeted by scammers in the first place. They were (and still are) easy pickings.

In the article above, Ms. Brooks quoted from the appeal. I will do same. A more appropriate section, §115(i),

“… while consumers can to an extent be expected to bear responsibility for their own decisions, there is a need for regulation, among other things to safeguard consumers from their own folly.”

Members of Staff (in shorts!) from Carey Olsen

These victims are indeed victims of their own folly, but they never realised what they were doing. On both sides of the equation (ceding providers and the receiving schemes) there were duties of care designed to protect these victims “from their own folly”. In all cases I have come across, neither side fulfilled those duties of care. On the UK side there was contempt for the Pensions Regulator’s requirements of 2013, despite growing industry concerns for pension scams. On the receiving side, the QROPS didn’t (and still don’t) care about their members – period. And neither did the authorities in these Mickey Mouse jurisdictions. It was the perfect match and thousands of vulnerable victims are paying the price.

Carey Pensions was started in 2009 by the Carey Group. The Group is controlled in Guernsey by ten partners and ex-partners of the Law Firm Carey Olsen. This is an amusing coincidence in my opinion. Carey Olsen, perhaps the top law firm in Guernsey, represented FNBIT against Manita Khuller – and LOST at appeal by the way.

STM acquired Carey Pensions in 2019.
STM also had/has victims of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund scam which collapsed in 2016
STM announced its purchase of Harbour Pensions with some 1600 members. Some are invested in Blackmore Global.

At least one was invested in The Resort Group according to this money marketing article.

Justin Caffery floating in the sea while preaching stress relief

Harbour Pensions was started by Justin Caffrey, in 2013 and says in the STM announcement, “Harbour was always a five year plan…”. Justin made his money and now runs meditation classes (seriously?). He should meditate on the misery, caused by Nunn & McCreesh, of hundreds – if not thousands – of vulnerable victims of Blackmore Global that he allowed into his pension scheme, in my opinion, willingly and knowing the consequences of such an unsuitable investment. He permitted 100% allocation of one member’s pension into a fund that has never published audited accounts. At the material time, knowing the fund was opaque and unregulated, Harbour (and other QROPS) were happily permitting transfers and 100% allocations.

The fund’s offer document, which Harbour had, says the investment has a ten year lock-in. That condition, which the QROPS knew and willingly accepted, effectively locked Harbour (and subsequently STM) into an asset they knew nothing about – and still don’t – for ten years, with absolutely no knowledge or control of what Nunn & McCreesh were doing with the money.

The Scheme administrators in these QROPS in Malta were, and still are, completely at the whim of Nunn & McCreesh – who could misappropriate the pensions as they wish and the administrators could do absolutely nothing about it. The QROPS effectively abdicated all powers they had to run the scheme and mitigate risks in the interest of members, to Nunn & McCreesh. They have been passive bystanders to the destruction of their members’ pensions ever since. This is, in my opinion, in breach of the Malta Trust and Trustees Act. They are also willingly and knowingly in breach of trust.

All this really begs the question whether STM go looking for dodgy pension schemes or are they just plain stupid? What on earth is going on and why hasn’t the MFSA taken them to task? They seem to attract scams like flies to a pile of dung.

Blackmore Global Victim who cares about pension scams – says victims are being forgotten

Victims are being forgotten by the media and authorities. Victims had no idea what they were doing or how to seek restitution. They are guilty of nothing but ignorance and ALL the actors in these scams have gotten away with it. They have ALL dipped their hand in the pension pots and kept the spoils – and now moved on, leaving the pension pots empty.

This is frustrating in the extreme because I see no evidence of any “flood of similar claims”. The victims are, for the most part, still ignorant and there is no one “helping” them. This site (Pension Life) once purported to “help” victims but I am not at all convinced it has done much and now has long periods of radio silence. The newbies in this scam space, the journalists claiming to be the heroes that “blew the whistle” or warned the FCA, are just chasing big headlines for their editor on today’s flavour of the month: mini bonds. Soon the mini bond victims will be forgotten just like the victims of Defined Benefit Pension transfers. The blood sucking journalists will move on to the next headline. I have no time for these insincere upstarts because they don’t stay in it for the long haul.

Victims are on their own by and large and still ignorant. No one seems to care and there is no help from any quarter. They face a retirement with a significantly reduced standard of living and that’s the hard truth of the matter. There will be no “flood of similar cases”.

May 26, 2021
Death of the Life Bond (Life of the Death Bond?)
Attention financial advisers in Spain/who provide financial advice to Spanish residents.

18^th February 2019

DEATH OF THE LIFE BOND:

The Spanish insurance and pensions regulator, the DGS, made a judgment against Costa Blanca-based Continental Wealth Management (CWM) on 10.1.2019. The order (translated and summarised below) confirmed that there are strict regulations in Spain for the sale of insurance products. The DGS also made it clear that even if a firm is not regulated in Spain by the DGS, it must conform to the Spanish regulations.

The deadline for compliance with the order was Monday 11^th February. Unsurprisingly, CWM failed to comply. CWM had collapsed in September 2017 and all the scammers who worked for the firm headed for the hills (or Australia). We are now enforcing this order by criminal action against all those responsible. This also opens the way for similar action against any other firms who have mis-sold insurance products without complying with the Spanish regulations.

In certain, limited circumstances, insurance bonds can be beneficial. But in the vast majority of cases they are entirely mis-sold, and the underlying commissions concealed. These hidden commissions prevent the funds from growing and have an ever-increasing detrimental effect on the value of the fund. I have seen evidence of an entire fund being destroyed by irresponsible, risky, commission-laden investments. The life offices (such as OMI, SEB, FPI, RL360 and Generali) continue to apply their quarterly charges while the funds are being destroyed – sometimes even pushing the funds into negative territory.

Why should the use of life bonds be strictly controlled?

I have transcribed the DGS’ judgment below. It is an abbreviated, translated version of the original. I also set out below the reasons why life bonds should now be strictly controlled and only sold/advised by qualified, regulated firms. Once an international standards agreement has been established, it should be possible to ensure that only those firms who understand how to use these products properly will use them in future.

I hope that all advisers providing insurance advice in Spain – and beyond – will now ensure that losses caused by the mis-selling of life bonds are put right. I also hope that this policy will be adopted throughout Europe and in all other jurisdictions so that the worldwide mis-selling scandal can finally be ended.

There will be criminal proceedings – and these will extend to the life offices themselves for profiting from financial crime. The many victims whose life savings have been destroyed by the life offices and their toxic practices will welcome this news. The victims themselves know intimately the numerous faults of the life offices:
- accepting business from (and paying undisclosed commissions to) known scammers and unregulated advisory firms
- offering high-risk, unregulated funds such as Axiom, LM, Premier New Earth and other no-hoper funds
- offering professional-investor-only structured notes from providers such as Leonteq, Commerzbank and Nomura
- reporting the inexorable losses but taking no remedial action
- locking victims into the expensive, pointless bonds long after the majority of the funds had been destroyed
This latest development with the DGS judgment will help the victims take action against negligent life offices such as Old Mutual International and Friends Provident International. This will be a powerful weapon in the recovery process against these parasitic, negligent and greedy insurance companies.

I set out below, in red, reasons why insurance bonds should now be strictly controlled internationally. This is not just my opinion – but an order by the Spanish government. In my view, this is a very sensible and useful order which is in the interests of all consumers throughout Europe and the wider world.

Decent, ethical, regulated firms will comply with the DGS’ judgment. The scammers will not.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

Madrid, 10 January 2019 – Complaints service file number 268/2016

Chief Inspector of Unit – Ministry of Economy and Enterprise

Secretary of State for the Economy and Business Support

General Directorate of Insurance and Pension Funds (DGS)

Article 6 of Law 26/2006, of 17 July, on private insurance and reinsurance mediation, which regulates the general obligations of insurance intermediaries, states:

“Insurance intermediaries shall provide truthful and sufficient information in the promotion, supply and underwriting of insurance contracts, and, in general, in all their advisory activity….”

The scammers do not, of course, comply with this regulation. In fact, scammers rarely tell their clients that they are going to be put into an insurance bond. Unscrupulous advisers often conceal how the bond will work or for how many years they will be locked in for. Normally, scammers wave an agreement for an OMI, SEB, Generali, FPI or RL360 bond under the nose of the clients – and ask them to sign the agreement with no explanation. Rarely do the scammers allow the client to read the document properly, or disclose the commission they will receive from selling the often pointless bond.

Victims will be locked into the bond long after they have worked out that the adviser has mis-sold the product purely for the 8% commission – and that the charges will prevent the fund from ever growing. In fact, even if the underlying asset were to perform reasonably well, it would struggle to keep up with the combination of the bond and adviser costs.

It is rarely explained that the bond is a bogus life assurance policy (or series of policies); that any life cover is only actually 101% of the original value of the funds the victim has unwittingly placed into the bond. If all the clients had wanted was life cover in the first place, this product would represent terrible value for money. The Spanish Supreme Court has already ruled that life assurance policies are void for the purpose of holding investments – because the life office takes no risk.

Therefore, the life bond fails on three counts:
1. it is a useless life assurance policy
2. it is a useless investment platform
3. it does not comply with Spanish regulations.
I could go on: the life bond is expensive; fails to disclose adviser commissions; offers high-risk, unregulated funds; accepts business from known scammers and unregulated firms; allows professional-investor-only structured notes for retail investors. The list is endless.

Article 26 paragraphs 2 and 3 of Law 26/2006, of 17 July, on private insurance and reinsurance mediation, which refers to insurance brokers, establishes the following:

“Insurance brokers must inform the person who tries to take out the insurance about the conditions of the contract which, in their opinion, it is appropriate to take out and offer the cover which, according to their professional criteria, is best adapted to the needs of the former. The broker must ensure the client’s requirements will be met effectively by the insurance policy.”

If the client had stipulated that he needed a life assurance policy (which he usually didn’t), the adviser should have explained fully how and why any product offered fitted the client’s needs. This virtually never happens. The adviser has already decided (long before he has even met the client – let alone carried out a fact find) – that he is going to flog him a bond from whichever life company is paying the highest commission. And this is how so many victims end up with useless insurance products from OMI, SEB, Generali, RL360, Friends Provident International, Hansard, Investors Trust etc.

Even if the client had specifically asked for – say – £100,000 worth of life cover, these “life” policies could never guarantee to provide that cover. In a proper, bona fide life assurance contract (where the client pays a monthly premium for the life of the policy) the pay-out is guaranteed. In these bogus life assurance policies, the value of the pay-out inevitably decreases as the charges eat into the fund. This is normally the case when disproportionately risky investments are made by the life offices.

Article 42 of the Private Insurance and Reinsurance Mediation Act, which refers to the information to be provided by the insurance intermediary prior to the conclusion of an insurance contract, provides:

“Before an insurance contract is concluded, the insurance intermediary must, as a minimum, provide the customer with the following information:
1. a) The broker’s identity and address.
2. b) The Register in which the broker is registered, as well as the means of verifying such registration.”
This rarely happens in practice – unless the broker is one of the very few professional and ethical firms in the expat world. An adviser might claim to be based in one jurisdiction, but could – in fact – be based in an entirely different one. “Passporting” is often misused as advisers “fly in under the radar” and provide advice in jurisdictions where they have no legal right to operate.

Insurance agents must inform the customer of the names of the insurance companies with which they can carry out the mediation activity in the insurance product offered.

Agents often have terms of business with more than one life office – but will rarely disclose the fact that some or all of them have a long history of facilitating financial crime internationally.

In order for the client to be able to exercise the right to information about the insurance entities for which they mediate, insurance agents must notify the client of the right to request such information.

I have never seen an instance of this happening – which is not to say it doesn’t happen. Just that I haven’t seen it. But then people don’t come to me when things are going swimmingly – they only come when they have lost some, most or all of their fund.

Banking and insurance operators must inform their clients that the advice given is provided for the purpose of taking out an insurance policy and not any other product that the credit institution may market.

And herein lies the problem: the advice is rarely provided for the purpose of taking out an insurance policy – the advice is usually given because the client wants his pension or life savings invested safely, prudently and profitably. Few – if any – clients come to the adviser to ask for a life assurance policy. But they get one, whether they need it – or can afford it – or not.

Insurance brokers must inform the client that they provide advice in accordance with the following obligations:

“Insurance brokers are obliged to carry out and provide (to the customer) an objective analysis on the basis of a comparison of a sufficient number of insurance contracts offered on the market for the risks to be covered. Brokers must do this so that they can formulate an objective recommendation.”

I have never seen an example of an adviser offering a client a selection of possible insurance contracts. The adviser has normally decided which life product he is going to flog long before the client even walks through the door. In a normal insurance contract relationship, it is the insurer which takes the risk. But in life bond contracts, it is the insured who takes the risk – i.e. that his life cover will be substantially lower than that originally contracted and that, indeed, his fund will be severely impaired by the costs of the contract.

On the basis of information provided by the customer, insurance intermediaries shall specify the requirements and needs of the customer, as well as the reasons justifying any advice they may have given on a particular insurance. The intermediary must answer all questions raised by the client regarding the function and complexity of the proposed insurance contract.

I have never seen this happen – which is not to say that it doesn’t happen. But the adviser could only explain to the customer that the sole purpose of the life bond is to pay him 8% commission. And that would inevitably spook the customer – so the adviser doesn’t bother. There will surely be all sorts of flim-flam about the life bond allegedly providing tax efficiency. However, any real tax savings will be resoundingly eclipsed by the high charges.

All intermediaries operating in Spain must comply with the rules laid down for reasons of general interest and the applicable rules on the protection of the insured, in accordance with the provisions of Article 65 of the Law on the Mediation of Private Insurance and Reinsurance.

I have never seen a single instance of an intermediary complying with the DGS rules in Spain or anywhere else. But that is because I only ever hear about cases where the clients suffer losses. The people who are well looked after by competent, professional, ethical brokers never bother contacting me – because they don’t need to! However, I would love to hear from advisers who do abide by the rules.

Every insurance intermediary is obliged, before the conclusion of the insurance contract, to provide full disclosure.

Never happens in my experience. The commission is normally concealed, and the inflexibility of the lock-in period is rarely explained. The victims usually only find this out after they have realised they have been scammed.

In the event that a mediator was an Insurance Broker or independent mediator, he is also obliged to give advice in accordance with the obligation to carry out an objective analysis.

Never happens in my experience. The adviser/mediator doesn’t use the life assurance product for life assurance, but as a bogus “wrapper” for holding investments. Therefore, the likely outcome of any objective analysis is very unlikely ever to be fulfilled.

This must be provided on the basis of the analysis of a sufficient number of insurance contracts offered on the market for the risks to be covered. The mediator can then formulate a recommendation, using professional criteria, in respect of the insurance contract that would be appropriate to the needs of the client.

I have never seen an instance of a mediator offering a selection of possible contracts – and there are no risks to be covered, as the insurer takes no risks. This is why these products have been deemed by the Spanish Supreme Court to be invalid. However, if a mediator were to offer a “selection” of life bonds, they would all be identical as they are all just as bad as each other.

In the case in question, there is no evidence that the aforementioned information was provided to the client before the investment product was contracted. Therefore, Article 42 of the regulations has been breached.

As it has in just about every instance I have ever seen in Spain – and beyond. In fact, one firm in Spain – Blevins Franks – only offers one insurance product and that is Lombard. This is completely illegal.

Therefore, this Claims Service concludes that the mediator must justify the information and prior advice given to his client, so that the obligations imposed by the Law of Mediation can be understood to be fulfilled with the aim of protecting the insured. Failure to comply with their obligations could be considered as one of the causes of the damage that would have occurred to their client.

I have never seen an instance of any firm complying with the obligations imposed by law in Spain. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen – and I would love to hear from firms who do comply with this law so that my knowledge can be broadened. However, if this does happen, it is only likely to be in the case of ethical firms, and they are unlikely to use these bogus life assurance policies anyway.

The claim is understood to be founded. In the opinion of this Claims Service, the mediating entity has committed a breach of the regulations regulating the mediation activity – specifically of the provisions of articles 6 and 42 of Law 26/2006 of Mediation of Private Insurance and Reinsurance.

The DGS requires the mediating entity to account to this Service, within a period of one month from the notification of this report, for the decision adopted in view of it, for the purposes of exercising the powers of surveillance and control that are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economy and Enterprise.

The entity – Continental Wealth Management – did not, indeed, comply with the DGS’ requirement. This now gives the green light for this firm and the directors and shadow directors associated with it – as well as the life office which was complicit in this scam – to be subject to criminal proceedings. The life offices, in this case, were complicit as they were effectively profiting from financial crime.

The interested parties are informed that there is no appeal to this judgment. Both the claimant and the mediating entity are made aware of their right to resort to the Courts of Justice to resolve any differences that may arise between them regarding the interpretation and compliance with the regulations in force regarding the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, in accordance with the provisions of articles 24 and 117 of the Constitution.

THE DEATH OF THE LIFE BOND

I think it would be no understatement to say that this heralds the end of the mis-use and abuse of life bonds (also known as portfolio bonds or insurance bonds). Not just in Spain, but throughout Europe and beyond. This will be warmly welcomed by the thousands of victims who have lost their life savings to rogue insurance companies such as OMI, SEB, FPI and Generali, and unregulated scammers such as Continental Wealth Management.

The ethical sector of the financial advice industry will, of course, be delighted – and there will be a mad scramble by the rogues to find a way round this ruling. And they will fail.
February 18, 2019
International Adviser – Have I Got News For You!

International Adviser really can’t make up its mind whether it is organising a piss-up in a brewery, a news roundup carefully slewed in favour sponsors Old Mutual International, or a marketing machine. I read with interest the recent IA Industry Most Influential Top 100 described by IA thus: “we at International Adviser decided to shine a light on the movers and shakers that have helped this industry get to where it is today”.

But where exactly is the industry today? And have the so-called top 100 moved and shaken the industry in a helpful way or a detrimental way? To find out, why don’t we have a look at a few of the “influencers”. To get the measure of them, let’s put them into a game of “Have I Got News For You”:

Bob Pain in the chair as quiz master. A bloke who ran Cayman Islands-based Investors Trust until recently appointed chair of the Association of International Life Offices, the trade body for international life offices. During his 35 years of experience in financial services, he facilitated the scam run by Phillip Nunn of Blackmore Global and David Vilka of Square Mile International Financial Services. Investors Trust accepted over 1,000 investments into illegal UCIS funds for UK-based victims scammed into QROPS with Integrated Capabilities and Harbour (now STM).

As Captain of the Navel Team, let’s have dashing Tim Searle – Chairman of Dubai-based Globaleye. With his eight-year Naval history, he should make an ideal leader and would come in particularly useful in the event of icebergs, torpedos or sharks.

Captain of the Army Team I nominate as Sam Instone of AES International. His experience as an Army officer should give him the leadership skills to oppose the Navel Team. Sam’s track record as the “enemy of traditional financial services” should give him the basis for a sound battle plan.

On the Army Team, we’ll have international wealth and regulatory specialist, Phil Billingham. Phil must be utterly disgusted with the likes of Stephen Ward (another fully-qualified adviser) messing up the reputation of the profession by running a long series of pension scams and ruining thousands of lives.

And the final member of the Army team will be Paul Stanfield, CEO of FEIFA (Federation of European Independent Financial Advisers). Another real gentleman – and handsome to boot – and one who understands the importance of outlawing scammers. Several years ago he excommunicated Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions from FEIFA to loud cheers from victims and industry professionals alike. (My only gripe with him would be that he still hasn’t kicked out Square Mile Financial Services run by scammers John Ferguson and David Vilka).

On the Navel Team we’ll have Geraint Davies of Montfort International – an expert IFA specialising in international financial services, and Roger Berry of Concept Group Trustees in Guernsey. These two chaps also have, between them, extensive experience of Stephen Ward in their own ways and will, no doubt, have much to talk about.

The contest will be to spot the “odd one out”: Michael Doherty of Woodbrook Group, Conor McCarthy of SEB, Peter Kenny of OMI and Winnie-the-Pooh.

Tim Searle: “They’re all Irish, except Winnie-the-Pooh who’s English?”

Geraint Davies: “They all hate Angie except Winnie-the-Pooh who’s never heard of her?”

Roger Berry: “They all love Angie except Winnie-the-Pooh who’s never heard of her?”

Sam Instone: “They’ve all got names that end in Y except Winnie-the-Pooh?”

Phil Billingham: “They’re all involved in money except Winnie-the-Pooh who’s involved in honey?”

Paul Stanfield: “None of them have applied to be members of FEIFA except Winnie-the-Pooh?”

Bob Pain: “No, you’re all wrong. The answer is Peter Kenny of OMI. The other three have been doing “nothing”: Michael Doherty was employing ex CWM scammers Dean Stogsdill and Neil Hathaway (known as Dog Kill and Hadaway) but claimed he was paying them nothing; Conor McCarthy of SEB has been asked numerous times for his comments on why SEB allowed the scammers at CWM to invest most of their victims’ funds in toxic structured notes, but McCarthy is saying nothing and won’t reply; and Winnie-the-Pool is doing nothing all the time.

The odd one out is Peter Kenny who is doing “something” and is suing Leonteq for the £94 million worth of fraudulent structured notes they sold to OMI.

November 20, 2018
Serious Violation of Investors’ Trust – by Investors Trust (life office)
Investors’ trust is what gets violated in so many cases by irresponsible and negligent insurance companies such as Old Mutual International, SEB, Generali, RL360, Friends Provident International – and, of course, the firm in the Cayman Islands: Investors Trust. These companies – also known as “life offices” (although we prefer to call them “death offices” because they help destroy victims’ life savings – and sometimes cause the death of their distraught victims) – have a number of lethal practices which result in financial ruin for thousands of policyholders:
- The life offices take business from any old known scammers – firms without proper licenses and with a known history of defrauding the public
- The life offices will offer toxic, illiquid, risky funds – including UCIS funds – such as LM and Mansion on their platform (without doing any proper due diligence as to how quickly these funds can eradicate the life offices’ victims’ life savings)
- The life offices will accept investment instructions from unqualified scammers who work for firms with no investment license – and, in some cases, with no insurance license either
- The life offices will accept dealing instructions – often with fraudulently-copied or forged signatures – on dealing instructions for toxic assets such as professional-investor-only structured notes
A prime example of these vile practices was in the case of Mr. S – a driving instructor from Milton Keynes. His final salary pension scheme was transferred to a QROPS in Malta despite the fact that he was a UK resident and had no need for his pension to be transferred offshore. His “adviser” was David Vilka from a firm called Square Mile International Financial Services. This firm had an insurance license but no investment license. Therefore, Square Mile could legally sell insurance products such as dog insurance – but could certainly not provide investment advice.

Mr. S’ pension fund was then placed in a “life bond” with Investors Trust in the Cayman Islands. This was an entirely gratuitous transaction, as he had absolutely no need of such a bond – known to be a spurious life assurance policy used for what is called a “single premium” insurance contract. These bonds are illegal in Spain, since the Spanish Supreme Court has ruled that they are being used to hold investments in contravention of the nature of what insurance is supposed to be (i.e. risk for the insurer).

The entire fund – which represented Mr. S’ retirement savings – was then invested in two toxic UCIS funds (illegal to be promoted to UK-resident, retail investors) called Symphony and Blackmore Global. Investors Trust negligently accepted these investments from Square Mile – in the full knowledge that this was absolutely against the interests of the policyholder and that the “advisory” firm had no investment license.

After a protracted battle, waged with great tenacity and dogged determination, Mr S did indeed get back a large proportion of his fund. But he still suffered what can only be described as a harrowing experience which resulted in a total loss of a significant chunk of his pension to the scammers (who will have profited handsomely from scamming him in the first place).

Far from being contrite or apologetic, however, the scammer who risked Mr. S’ pension in the first place – David Vilka of Square Mile International Financial Services in the Czech Republic – showed no shame and made no attempt to recover the remainder of his victim’s pension. In fact, when I exposed Vilka’s vile scam, I was threatened by his two-bit American lawyer Douglas Davies of Lowell Davies LLP.

But what of the Cayman Islands-based life office – Investors Trust? Did they try to help Mr. S recover his serious losses? Did they offer him compensation for the significant distress he suffered at the hands of the scammers at Square Mile? Did they publish a statement demonstrating recognition of the damage done to victims’ life savings by investing in toxic crap like Blackmore Global on the instructions of scammers like David Vilka?

The answer, of course, is a resounding “no”. Investors Trust could have done so much to reform these illegal practices and expose the likes of scammer David Vilka who scammed not only Mr. S out of a big part of his pension, but also scammed hundreds of victims into the Hong Kong QROPS scam (many of which got invested in Blackmore Global).

Instead of showing any contrition or regret for facilitating financial crime, an idiot at Investors Trust called Lindsay Paris emailed me threatening to sue me for using a picture of David Vilka and John Ferguson posing as vulgar spivs at Las Vegas. This revolting photograph is, apparently, the property of Investors Trust:

“This is my second attempt to reach you regarding the copyright infringement on your website. Please have the image removed immediately or we will have no other choice but to seek legal action.

This is not the first time you have fraudulently misused private images and copyrights without authorization. You are imposing on our ownership rights and we would appreciate it if you would refrain from any future use of Investors Trust-owned materials. It is a serious violation which we will continue to pursue.

Please have the image on this page https://pension-life.com/david-vilkas-vile-us-attorney/ removed immediately.

Thank you,

Lindsay Paris, Media and Communications Manager, Investors Trust Administration

lparis@investors-trust.com”

So, no apology for destroying victims’ life savings; no apology for taking business from a firm which was not regulated to give investment advice; no apology for investing a victim’s pension in a toxic UCIS fund run by known scammer Philip Nunn….just a complaint about a violation of their ownership rights of a picture of the scammers bearing the Investors Trust logo.

It is reported that Old Mutual International has put aside £69 million to pay compensation for their victims’ losses. May I suggest that Investors Trust should do the same thing – and then I will happily take down the vile picture of Vilka and Ferguson. But until then, it stays up. And if you want to sue me – go ahead: make my day.
August 13, 2018
10 essential questions to ask an IFA
Most victims of pension and investment scams bitterly regret not having asked more questions with regards to their financial planning. The problem is that they wouldn’t have known what questions to ask, and they probably wouldn’t have understood the answers even if they had. Pension Life offer you 10 essential questions to ask an IFA so you can ensure you are not the next victim.

All existing victims wish they had asked questions, obtained assurances, checked advisers’ qualifications and regulation. But, of course, it is now too late for the victims who have lost part or all of their life savings.

These victims all agree that it is important to prevent future victims. This is why we have come up with these 10 essential questions to ask an IFA, when considering financial planning and the transfer of your pension:

1 – How is the adviser and/or his firm licensed to provide advice to you in the jurisdiction where you – the client – live? Don’t be fobbed off with the answer that the adviser has an insurance license – that isn’t enough. The adviser needs an investment license. Also, don’t be fobbed off if the adviser says the firm is licensed in another jurisdiction – it needs to be licensed for where you, the client, live.

2 – If you are transferring a DB (defined benefit) or FS (final salary) scheme, you must get FCA regulated, qualified, independent advice on the merits of the transfer. Remember, the advice might be that you are better off leaving your pension where it is.

3 – Make sure the transfer recommendation (from a DB or FS scheme) is correct. Get a second opinion. You only get to do this once – and if the wrong road is chosen, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to correct it.

Check that the transfer advice report makes it clear that you, the client, are being advised on the transfer and that the advice is about what you should do – not what you could do.

4 – Don’t let the adviser put you into an insurance bond. Examples of these are Old Mutual International, SEB, Generali, Friends Provident, RL360, Hansard, Investors Trust. An insurance bond is a wrapper. A QROPS is a wrapper. You don’t need two wrappers. That’s like Superman wearing two pairs of pants over his tights.

The only purpose an insurance bond serves is to pay the IFA 8% commission. Plus, the insurance bond will tie you in for between five and ten years, and you neither need nor want to do that with a pension.

Insurance companies will take business from any old unlicensed, unqualified scammers. They don’t care. The quarterly charges are called “management charges” but that is very misleading because they don’t do any actual managing. Once the value of your fund starts to diminish because of the high charges and the toxic, illiquid, high-risk investments, the insurance company will keep taking its fees – sometimes until the whole fund is extinguished and worthless.

5 – What qualifications does the adviser have?

You wouldn’t take medical advice from an unqualified person posing as a doctor; legal advice from an unqualified person posing as a solicitor or accountancy advice from a person posing as an accountant. So why take financial adviser from someone with no qualifications?

It is a sad fact that in many jurisdictions, so-called advisers spring up with no qualifications and even no Financial Panning experience. Sometimes, they had been selling mortgages, second-hand cars or ice cream the previous week to selling pensions.

Pension Life covered the question of qualifications in a recent blog by Kim:

Using advice from Chartered Global about financial qualifications, you can discover that:
Level 3 Financial Adviser Qualifications

The most basic or entrance tier is the certificate level which is classed as a level 3 qualification within the UK framework, equivalent to A levels. Level 3 qualifications include:

CertCII: Certificate in Financial Planning issued by the Chartered Insurance Institute

CertPFS: Certificate in Financial Planning issued by the Personal Finance Society

CeFA: Certificate in Financial Advice issued by the Institute of Financial Services

Cert IM: Certificate in Investment Management issued by the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment

Level 3 qualifications are sometimes held by adviser office staff and certain mortgage or protection advisers in a bank for example. These certificates require passing a selection of exams over 1-2 years and holders will have a general grounding in financial planning and financial services.
Level 4 Financial Adviser Qualifications

However, since 2012 financial advisers in the UK have been required to hold a minimum of a level 4 qualification to be able to continue to provide independent financial planning advice. The minimum required qualification to provide independent financial planning advice in the UK is now the diploma level, a level 4 professional qualification.

Look for the following letters or designations to identify a level 4 adviser:

DipCII: Diploma in Financial Planning issued by the CII

DipPFS: Diploma in Financial Planning issued by the PFS

DipFA: Diploma in Financial Advice issued by the IFS

IAD: Investment Advice Diploma issued by the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment

Building on the certificate knowledge, level 4 advisers will offer a well-rounded understanding of financial planning and products, from general investments, structured products, to basic pension, protection, tax and savings advice.
Level 6 Financial Adviser Qualifications

A full two levels higher are the profession’s top tier of financial advisers; holders of level 6 qualifications equivalent to a bachelor honours degree. Completing a comprehensive suite of professional exams over many years, these top-flight advisers will be designated through one of the following:

APFS: Advanced Diploma in Financial Planning issued by the CII

CFPCM: Certified Financial Planner

Adv DipFA: Advanced Diploma in Financial Advice issued by the IFS

Advisers at this level will have advanced expertise in the main areas of general financial planning.
6 – Is the adviser planning on investing your life savings in professional-investor-only structured notes?

Structured notes are complex, risky, expensive derivatives which are only suitable for sophisticated investors who understand them. Few advisers/brokers understand them – but love them because of the very high commissions they pay. They also love them because once they have purchased them, there is no management to do – only stand back and watch them plummet in value.

Examples of structured note providers are Leonteq (currently being sued by Old Mutual International for fraud), Commerzbank, Royal Bank of Canada and Nomura. There are, of course, many more out there.

However, if your adviser/broker says he wants to invest part of your life savings in structured notes – ignore any old baloney about “capital protection” – and RUN LIKE HELL!

7 – Why are the firm’s own in-house funds used? An adviser can’t be independent if he is recommending his own firm’s own funds.

The way that financial advice is supposed to work is the adviser does a thorough, detailed fact find to analyse the client’s individual circumstances and risk profile. Then the adviser can go out into the market and find the most suitable and cost-effective investment products.

There is a huge choice and many good low-cost investment platforms. But some firms set up their “own” funds – which are merely somebody else’s fund which has been “white labelled” as the firm’s fund. This means there are two layers of charges.

An adviser cannot be independent if he is advising that his own fund should be the investment choice. This recommendation is usually made because of the extra commission which can be earned from an in-house fund, rather than because it is in the client’s best interests.

8 – Are UCIS funds going to be used?

Many a poor victim has lived to regret his trust and faith in a silver-tongued adviser’s ability to manage his investments. UCIS funds (Unregulated, collective investment schemes) are inevitably high risk and can have catastrophic results.

Such funds include EEA Life Settlements, LM, Harlequin, Brandeaux Student Accommodation, Premier New Earth Recycling, Dolphin Trust and many more which are sometimes no more than Ponzi schemes. Underlying assets include forestry, “clean” energy, eucalyptus and truffle-tree plantations, chia seeds, fine art, wines and speculative property.

Life savings have been decimated by failed UCIS funds – make sure your adviser/broker understands you don’t want your money to be invested in any of these toxic, high-risk, unregulated funds. You could well be promised high returns, but you have to remember that with high returns comes high risk.

9 – What is the full extent of the charges/fees/commissions on the entire transaction?

So many advisers conceal the full extent of ALL the fees and commissions. Victims only find out about them long after it is way too late. The “drag” on a fund can be catastrophic, even without investment losses.

If you are being advised to go into a QROPS, there will be the set-up and yearly ongoing charge (as well as exit charge); the adviser will charge between 2% and 3% set-up and then 1% (at least) annually; if UCIS funds are used, these can pay up to 25% commission (or even more sometimes); if structured notes are used, these can pay between 6% (for the regular ones) and 8% (for the fraudulent Leonteq ones). Then there is the 8% on the insurance bond. Then there is anything else the adviser can slip in without you noticing.

Victims of poor advice often only notice the dragging effect of all these charges on their fund after a year or so – or more. And by then it is too late, and the fund can never recover.

10 – Why were you graded as a “7” balanced investor – or even higher as an “adventurous” investor (when, clearly, you should have been graded as a low-risk investor)?

Here is the basic problem – the higher an investor’s risk profile is, the riskier the investments can be. This, of course, means that the riskier the investments are, the more commission the adviser can make.

After suffering crippling losses, many victims (retrospectively) look at their statements and documentation and find that they were graded as medium or high risk without their knowledge or consent. The adviser’s excuse is that the client valued growth above all else and that this was reflected in the risk assessment questionnaire.

Often, clients start off as low to medium risk, and then the adviser surreptitiously increases the risk profile. This can have catastrophic consequences for investors – and is what ALL of the known victims report as being the cause of their crippling losses.

The bottom line is that the public needs to be educated and warned about the bad practices offshore. Only by spreading the word about what happened to existing victims, will future victims be prevented.

People who have lost part – or all – of their pensions and life savings, are devastated and destroyed. They are facing potential poverty in retirement. Some will lose their homes, their health and their relationships. Some will take their own lives.
June 25, 2018
BLACKMORE GLOBAL FUND – ASSET OR BLACK HOLE?
Blackmore or Blackhole Global fund

BLACKMORE GLOBAL FUND – BLACK HOLE?

A fund like Blackmore Global really ought to be audited as soon as possible – to make sure it isn’t simply a “black hole” into which victims’ hard-earned pensions have sunk. Numerous worried pension savers are stuck in the Blackmore Global Fund and finding it difficult – if not impossible – to get out. They are seemingly “locked in” for ten years.

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY SINCERE THANKS TO THOSE – INCLUDING IFAs, PENSION TRUSTEE FIRMS AND BLACKMORE GLOBAL VICTIMS – WHO HAVE CONTACTED ME AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS, CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS.

Allegedly, Grant Thornton is working on an audit – and has been doing so since September 2016. They could probably have audited Microsoft in that time – and squeezed in Amazon on the side during the lunch breaks. Just how difficult can it be to audit a fund which only has a handful of assets in it?

Originally, the directors of Blackmore Global were Brian Weal, Patrick McCreesh, and Phillip Nunn.

Brian Weal – sanctioned by the FSC in 2014 – was also a director of Swan Holdings – the only investment that the Advalorem Value Asset Fund made. Brian Weal was also a director of Advalorem. Advalorem lost most of its money because the investments in Swan Holdings were overvalued. The valuations were supplied by Stuart Black who also provided valuations for a Hedge Fund called Heather Capital which lost $300 million because of overvaluations. Swan Holdings had invested a chunk of cash in Etaireia Investments. Stuart Black was a director of Etaireia Investments. Brian Weal owns a controlling number of shares in Etaireia Investments. So, make up your own mind as to whether having Weal as a director of Blackmore Global is a good thing or a bad thing – or a “black hole” thing.

As for Nunn and McCreesh, I will let Leonard Fenton of the Insolvency Service do the talking:
- Documents and information received from members of CAPITA OAK indicated they were initially contacted by Craig Mason or Patrick McCreesh of Nunn McCreesh of Its Your Pension Ltd and offered pension review services prior to them being referred to JACKSON FRANCIS or Sycamore for the transfer of their pension to CAPITA OAK.
- On 3.3.15 I received an undated letter in which it was stated that Its Your Pension had not traded and was a dormant company and that Nunn McCreesh had traded as an insurance brokerage between 2009 and 2012 when they entered into a verbal arrangement with TRANSEURO where in return for providing pension leads to JACKSON FRANCIS they received a commission from TRANSEURO.
- Nunn McCreesh provided JACKSON FRANCIS with 100-200 leads per month which were provided by email and/or telephone for which they received £899,829.86 from TRANSEURO during the period 26.3.12 to 14.5.14.
So, again, draw your own conclusions about those connected with Blackmore Global. Nunn and McCreesh generated up to 200 leads a month to pension scammers in relation to a series of pension/investment scams which are now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. This entailed £120 million worth of pensions being invested in Store First store pods which are now the subject of a winding up petition – and arguably worthless.

When I first started investigating the Blackmore Global fund in 2016, I started with the brochure which makes all sorts of grand claims: “medium to long-term investment vehicle with a diversified investment portfolio
under one structure. The Company allocates investment between four distinct protected cells, giving a true
diversification of assets between property, sustainable, private equity and lifestyle”. Yeah, right. But what are the underlying assets? Where is the audit?

The Fact Sheet goes on to claim the fund’s NAV is £17.65 million and was launched on 1st May 2014. So why no audit? It also claims that the Investment Manager is a firm in Barcelona called Meriden Capital Partners. I thought it a bit strange that a fund based in the Isle of Man would appoint an investment manager in Spain – especially one without a website. So I called Meriden Capital Partners and asked them to confirm that they were the investment manager. They claimed they had never heard of Blackmore Global. Then one of the partners called me back and told me that some man who didn’t give his name had come to their office and asked them whether they would be interested in being the investment manager for Blackmore Global.

The partner at Meriden Capital explained that they had declined because they were not licensed to provide investment management advice to a fund – only to private individuals.

But then I discovered that that hadn’t been entirely true either. Meriden Capital had actually completed an application form to apply to become the investment manager to the fund on 4th April 2014. So either Meriden Capital was lying or Blackmore Global was lying – or both.

The Blackmore Global NAV Factsheet also states that there is a ten-year lock-in to the fund. So why would anyone invest a pension in such a fund? A pension saver has a statutory right to a transfer and might want to take his PCLS – 25% tax free withdrawal at age 55 – or retire, or even die. What on earth is the point in using Blackmore Global for a pension at all? Ever.

As Grant Thorton is clearly having a little trouble with the audit of a five-cell investment fund, I will lay a wee trail of bread crumbs for them to look at. Clearly they can’t even find the underlying assets – let alone value them:

Swan Holdings PCC (controlled by Brian Weal)

Kingston Capital Partners (Belize private equity vehicle controlled by Nunn & McCreesh)

GRRE Invest – fund manager for aptly-named GRREIF fund (Green Renewable Redeemable Energy Investment Fund –

GRRE Investment Fund – suspended by Anguilla FSC. (Brian Weal recently resigned as a director but still holds a controlling interest in the Fund – https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09132685/persons-with-significant-control)

Spinaris 90 – UK sports spread betting (invisible – and what happened to Aria Invest?)

Most of the victims of the Blackmore Global fund were initially cold-called by a firm called Aspinal Chase. And all the victims were advised by unregulated investment advisers Square Mile Financial Services (an insurance license does not cover regulated investment advice). But more worryingly, all of them were put into a QROPS in Malta or the Isle of Man. So why were UK residents transferred to an offshore pension at all, and why were most or all of their pension funds invested in a UCIS which is illegal to be promoted to UK residents?

The list of questions goes on and on. And here, we get back to whether the unscrambling of these pension and investment scams is more about who you know rather than what you know. One victim had his pension invested 75% in Blackmore Global and 25% in Symphony. Symphony was a fund invested in derivatives and highly leveraged. It was also a sub fund of the Nascent Fund run by Richard Reinert. Under the Nascent “umbrella” (a structure for wannabe fund managers) was also the Trafalgar Multi Asset fund which was run by XXXX XXXX who was one of the main distributors behind Capita Oak, Henley and Westminster – all of which are being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office.

Now we have gone round in a complete circle. A catalogue of lies, deception, fraud, mis-selling, negligence and incompetence.

I don’t envy Grant Thornton (if indeed they are the auditors) because they have got to unscramble this unholy mess. And I strongly suspect that, behind the scenes, there are certain parties who are busting a gut to ensure the audit is never published. Two of these may well be John Ferguson and David Vilka of Square Mile in the Czech Republic who seem to have a strong vested interest in promoting this black hole of a fund.

Meanwhile, the longer the victims are held back from transferring out of this toxic swamp of a fund, the more serious the complaints against the various parties involved will be. These will include the cold-calling scammers; introducers; advisers; pension trustees and insurance companies such as Investors Trust who allowed this investment and the pensions transfers from unlicensed advisers.

Finally, on the subject of Investors Trust, they showed not a shred of interest in the fact that they had facilitated financial crime in allowing UK residents to have their pensions invested in this UCIS, but when I published a photo of John Ferguson and David Vilka posing as a couple of gaudily-dressed spivs in Las Vegas, Investors Trust objected on the grounds the photograph was their property.

pension-life.com/top-10-deadliest-pension-scammers-hmrc/
July 7, 2017
Government Consultation on Pension and Investment Scams (The Square Mile)

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pension-scams/pensions-scams-consultation

So what makes a pension or investment scam? Unfortunately, the scammers don’t wear “I’m a fox” teeshirts, and the victims don’t know the questions to ask and even if they did, they probably wouldn’t understand the answers. Only by looking at individual case studies can the public learn what to look out for – and hopefully report all the scammers and help the authorities bring current scammers to justice and prevent future scams.

Is there a difference between an obvious scam and just negligent financial advice? They can both have the same bottom-line effect. But should one be jailed and the other simply prevented from working in financial services?

YOU DECIDE!

This is a real-life case study which has resulted in a victim losing £57,512.18 in 18 months. The victim, whom we will call Mr. Driver, went through seven months of hell after realising he had been scammed and fought hard to get some of his money back. The important thing to note is that neither the advisor nor the pension trustee nor the insurance company has lifted a finger to put right Mr. Driver’s losses. Nor have any of them offered to compensate him for the gains/interest his pension should have earned (but didn’t) in the past 18 months.

In May 2015, Mr. Driver (a UK resident close to retirement age) was advised by Square Mile Financial Services (Czech Republic) to transfer his final salary pension fund into a Maltese QROPS called the Optimus Retirement Benefits Scheme No. 1 whose trustees are Integrated Capabilities in Malta. They used an insurance bond from Investors Trust in the Cayman Islands. Mr. Driver’s entire pension fund was invested in two funds – one of which, Blackmore Global, was promoted and distributed by those behind Square Mile Financial Services. The other fund, Symphony, was from the same stable as the suspended £20 million Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund – run by the same distributors as in the Capita Oak, Henley and Westminster scams (all wound up by the Insolvency Service).

Blackmore Global was full of toxic, illiquid, high-risk assets, had no audit and as a UCIS (unregulated collective investment scheme) was illegal to promote to a retail UK investor. The brochure made a fraudulent claim as to who the investment manager was.

Symphony had no up to date audit, and there has been no explanation as to why – on the day Mr. Driver redeemed out of the fund – it mysteriously plummeted in value by 30% (despite the trustees claiming the fund was making a healthy profit).

The advisers at Square Mile – John Ferguson and David Vilka – have refused to engage. They have offered no compensation; provided no audit or evidence as to who the investment manager of Blackmore Global really is; provided no evidence their firm was regulated to provide pension and investment advice to a UK resident. The investment manager of the Optimus QROPS – Lombard Bank in Malta – has been ominously coy (even attempting to deny falsely they were involved).

The trouble is, while Mr. Driver has fought hard to get some of his money back, there are around 1,100 other victims stuck in this fund who may yet have no idea their pensions are invested in – how shall I say this – worthless crap.

The solicitors to the advisers, trustees and fund managers have bleated that they want their names kept out of this. Which I guess is fair enough because law firms will take business from anybody as long as they pay their bills. But the advisers, trustees and insurers must be exposed, brought to justice and shamed (or sued) into taking responsibility for the damage they have caused to innocent victims.

December 5, 2016
“Action Fraud are nobody and have no authority”: John Ferguson, Square Mile Financial Services

John Ferguson, Square Mile Financial Services

http://www.lillywhiteint.com/about-us.html

I am worried about the whereabouts of John Ferguson of Lillywhite International and Square Mile Financial Services (Czech Republic). The last I heard he was boarding a long-haul flight on 23rd November 2016 to an unknown destination. His solicitor assured me Mr. Ferguson would get back to me as soon as he landed to deal with a victim’s pension losses.

Mr. Ferguson has invested a number of victims’ pensions in the Blackmore Global and Symphony funds and was asked to provide a copy of the audit for Blackmore Global which his firm has been promoting and which appears to have some questionable assets – described as “esoteric” and “alternative”. He was also asked to provide evidence of his firm’s regulation to provide pension and investment advice.

One victim had threatened to report the matter to Action Fraud when he discovered multiple irregularities with his pension scheme. Mr. Ferguson had dismissed the victim’s complaint saying:

“All fine as Action Fraud are nobody & have no authority. But does that now mean we don’t have to answer his formal complaint?”

The factsheet for the Blackmore Global fund had falsely claimed a firm in Barcelona was the Investment Manager for the fund – robustly denied by the furious firm in question. Mr. Ferguson clearly has questions to answer and the victims’ losses to deal with – so I do hope Ferguson is safe and well. I am comforted by the fact that as recently as 26th November he was Tweeting about football https://twitter.com/thfcfancz so perhaps he just forgot my questions about audit and regulation?

NOT SO SQUARE MILE – AND FAR FROM LILLY WHITE

November 30, 2016