Tag: OMI

  • Hidden charges that destroy your pension funds

    Hidden charges that destroy your pension funds

    Pension Life blog - The hidden charges that put your investment in dangerWhen we buy certain products, they have a warning on them.  Cigarette packets, for instance, state that smoking is bad for your health. The wrappers show hideous images of what might happen to you if you use tobacco.

    However, when it comes to investments, the ‘advisers’ selling dangerous investments are able to disguise the risks and costs. Offshore, there seems to be no effective code of conduct, or regulation as to what they must disclose and what they can conceal.

    Last week the FCA slammed asset managers and retail investment firms over hidden fund charges.

    When selling their investments, these firms are really good at omitting details of the full charges that will apply – not only initially – but on an ongoing annual basis as well. These hidden charges put your investment in danger.

    The FCA has stated:

    “In one case it found an asset manager had omitted a 4 per cent a year transaction cost from the UCITS Key Investor Information Document (KIID).”

    In so many pension scams, we hear that the victims were sold a ‘free pension review’; they were not told about the transfer costs; that they were not told about annual fees either.  In many cases, the transfer costs and fees work out to be considerably higher than if they had paid a proper fee for the review in the first place. These hidden costs put a huge strain on the fund and sometimes victims can lose up to 25% of their fund to hidden charges.

    Pension Life blog - The hidden charges that put your investment in dangerWhat worries us most is the lack of regulatory concern or control in respect of expensive and risky investment products. You can’t buy cigarettes without a stern health warning. The same goes for alcohol: bottles and cans clearly state how many units are in the container, and how many units men and women can safely drink per day.  They also state that alcohol should not be consumed by pregnant women.

    Alcohol companies manage to fit all this info about the dangers of drinking on a tiny label. And this poses the essential question as to why financial advisory firms are able to sell risky investments again and again – omitting clear warnings about the dangerous aspects of them.

    Also highlighted in an article by Corporate Adviser:

    “The FCA reserved its fiercest criticism for asset managers, saying it found instances where asset manager fact sheets or websites did not mention costs. When they did, they often gave the ongoing charge figure, which omitted transaction costs, performance fees and borrowing charges which are shown in the Key Information Document (KID). In one example, total charges in the PRIIPs KID equated to around 3 per cent per annum – but the only costs given in the fact sheet was the 1.2 per cent annual management charge (AMC).”

    This is not news to us at Pension Life.  It is something we have been writing about for sometime – and we have a great deal of evidence that hidden, excessive charges are a terrible blight on the face of financial services internationally.  It is indeed excellent news that the FCA has finally highlighted the dangers of such hidden charges, but now we need to make sure these dangers are highlighted to the public. CLEARLY AND VISIBLY.

    A prime example of advisers and hidden charges is the dastardly duo: Phillip Nunn and Patrick McCreesh.  This pair of scammers received £ millions promoting the Capita Oak, Thurlstone Loans, Henley Retirement Benefits Scheme and Berkeley Burke SIPPS scams – leaving 1,200 victims facing poverty in retirement.  With that disaster comfortably behind them, they then launched the £40 million Blackmore Global scam and now their network of scammers are promoting the Blackmore Bond which pays a 20% introduction commission to the introducers.

    Pension Life blog - The hidden charges that put your investment in dangerYou can’t buy a gun without going to a registered shop and having a licence.  (Although, I guess on the black market you can). If you buy a gun on the black market, it is going to be ‘hot’. The person you buy it from is going to be dodgy and it certainly won’t come with the correct paperwork.

    So if you are a normal, law-abiding citizen (and cautious investor), you would want a legitimate investment which fits your risk profile – and full paperwork disclosing ALL the charges. Make sure you pick the right adviser who will give you evidence of all these essential details.

    Dodgy advisers are still getting away with selling ‘hot’ investments: funds that are clearly toxic and dangerous to your pension fund.  These advisers manage to do this very successfully by wrapping them in a fluffy cover and selling them with an array of unrealistic promises of high returns and alleged capital protection to reel the victims in.

    When considering a pension transfer, we urge you to familiarise yourself with our ten standards.  Your adviser ought to adhere to these standards anyway – and if he doesn’t then walk away. Number eight covers what we have talked about in this blog: CHARGES.

    Your adviser MUST GIVE YOU: Full disclosure of fees, charges and commissions on all products and services in writing, before you commit. So before you sign anything regarding a pension transfer and subsequent investment, please ensure you know exactly what charges will be applied to your fund: before, during AND after.  It is also imperative to know if there is a lock-in period and early exit penalty and to make sure you are comfortable with that.

    Excessive and concealed fees can ruin a once healthy and happy pension fund – just like smoking can ruin your lungs and drinking can ruin your liver.  Hidden charges can put your funds in danger and ruin your retirement savings beyond repair.

    Here is a list of our ten standards.

    STANDARDS ACCREDITATION CHECKLIST FOR FINANCIAL ADVISERS:

    1. Proof of regulation for all services provided by the firm and individual advisers in the jurisdiction(s) where advice is given and the clients are based.
    2. Verifiable evidence of appropriate, registered qualifications and CPD for all advisers. (Where there are insufficient qualifications, there must be clear evidence of plans and preparation to achieve required goals within a reasonable, stated time frame).
    3. Professional Indemnity Insurance
    4. Details of how fact finds are carried out, how clients’ risk profiles are determined and adhered to.
    5. Details of the firm’s compliance procedures – assuring clients of the highest possible standards and assurance that risk profiles are always accurately and faithfully respected.
    6. Clear and consistent explanation and justification of the use of insurance bonds for investments.
    7. Unambiguous policy on structured notes, UCIS funds, in-house funds, non-standard assets and any ongoing commission-paying investments. Report of all investment recommendations for all clients and evidence as to how these match individual risk profiles.
    8. Disclosure of fees, charges and commissions on all products and services at time of sale, in writing, before clients commit.
    9. Account of how clients are updated on fund/portfolio performance.
    10. Public evidence of complaints made, rejected or upheld and redress paid.

    For more in depth explanation check out our other blog on the ten standards:

    Cartoon blog – Don’t be the next pension scam victim

     

  • Time for all pension providers to wake up and stop pension scams

    Time for all pension providers to wake up and stop pension scams

    The recent PSIG (Pension Scams Industry Group) Scams Survey Pilot 2018 has identified seven “key” findings in their survey. As scam watchers, we are well aware of these points and are, of course, glad they have been highlighted.

    PSIG’s key finding are set out below.  So let us admit one key fact:

    ALL PENSION SCAMS START WITH A TRANSFER BY A CEDING PENSION PROVIDER.

    It is interesting that PSIG chose three particular providers to give their answers to the questionnaire sent out:  XPS Pensions Group, Phoenix Life Assurance Company and Standard Life Assurance Company.  I have no doubt they chose these three providers because of their extensive first-hand expertise at facilitating financial crime.  In the Capita Oak and Westminster scams – distributed and administered by serial scammers XXXX and Stephen Ward – and now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office – Phoenix Life and Standard Life handed over dozens of pensions to the scammers.  In Phoenix Life’s case, the total came to nearly half a million pounds’ worth, and in Standard Life’s case it was well over one million.

    While there is, of course, substantial hard evidence that both the Pensions Regulator (formerly OPRA) and HMRC had been giving the industry plenty of warnings about scams long before the Scorpion Campaign was published on Valentine’s Day in 2013, it is also true that providers such as Phoenix Life, Standard Life – and other favourite financial crime facilitators such as Aegon, Friends Life, Legal & General, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life and Scottish Widows – carried on handing over millions to the scammers well into 2014, 2015 and beyond.  And, in fact, they are still at it today.

    The “Key Findings” do throw up some interesting facts:

    “Information on scams is not readily available at an organisational level”.

    Seriously?  Don’t these organisations know how to do research?  Do they really not know what to look for?  They’ve had enough experience over the years – and have had enough examples of spending vast amounts of time trying to cook up reasons to deny complaints against their incompetence for handing over pensions to scammers – to write a whole encyclopedia about scams.

    Organisations (such as Phoenix Life and Standard Life) could try talking to TPAS, or tPR, or the FCA, or the SFO, or Dalriada Trustees, or regulators in Malta, the IoM, Gibraltar, Dubai or Hong Kong.  Or some of the thousands of victims – who have lost their pensions due to the incompetence and callousness of the ceding providers – who would readily fill in the blanks.  There really is no shortage of readily-available, free information.  They just need to take the time and trouble to ask for it.  It really isn’t difficult.  They just have to put their box-ticking pencils down for a few minutes.

    “The Scams Code is seen as a good basis for due diligence”

    I agree – it is really great.  But it is also 78 pages long.  Few people have to the time to read, understand or remember such long documents (with too many long words and not enough pictures).  What would be helpful would be to get a few of the worst offenders: Aegon, Aviva, Friends Life, Legal & General, Phoenix, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life, Scottish Widows, Standard Life and Zurich, in a room at the same time – and bang their heads together.  And threaten them that if they don’t get their acts together and stop handing over pensions to the scammers, they will be made to read and memorise the 78-page Scams Code and recite it every morning before coffee break.  Twice.  Then snap all their box-ticking pencils in half, and JOB DONE!  It really isn’t rocket science – there are usually some hints which are as subtle as a brick, such as: the sponsoring employer doesn’t exist; or the member lives in Scunthorpe and is transferring to a scheme whose sponsoring employer is based in Cyprus.  Or Hong Kong.  Now, I know there was a bit of a hiccup with the Royal London v Hughes case when Justice Morgan overturned the Ombudsman’s determination.  But dear old Hughes had probably had a few Babychams too many – and it had slipped his mind that the law is supposed to be about justice and common sense.  And that just because a particular piece of legislation has been written by an ass, it doesn’t have to be interpreted with stupidity.

    “Significant time and effort goes into protecting members from scams”

    This, of course, may be true.  I only get to see the cases where the negligent ceding providers do hand over the pensions to the scammers.  I rarely get to see the ones that have a narrow escape.  But what worries me is that I am in the process of making complaints to the ceding providers who have handed over pensions to the scammers, and not a single one of them thinks they have done anything wrong.  So, if they do spend “significant time and effort” doing the protecting bit, how come so many of them still fail so badly?  And then try to deny they failed.  These providers spend very significant amounts of time and effort writing long, boring letters about how they did nothing wrong – letters which must have taken them at least an hour to write.  And yet they won’t spent two minutes checking – and stopping – transfers to obvious scams.

    “The more detailed the due diligence, the more suspicious traits are identified”

    I am a bit suspicious that this indicates a touch of porky pies here.  I’ve never seen any evidence of ANY due diligence by the ceding providers.  A bloke at Aviva once told me that they spent thousands on research and due diligence – but I see no evidence of it.  The problem is, the ceding providers don’t know what they don’t know.  And, to coin one of my favourite phrases: “they don’t know the questions to ask, and even if they did then they wouldn’t understand the answers”.

    Interestingly, if – instead of repeatedly spending hours denying they did anything wrong when they handed over millions of pounds’ worth of pensions to the scammers – they spent some time talking to me and the victims trying to learn what went wrong and what due diligence should have gone into preventing a dodgy transfer, they might learn how to stop failing so badly.

    SIPPS (including international SIPPS) are the vehicle of choice by scammers

    Agreed.  But the scammers still love the good old QROPS.  But whether it is a SIPPS or a QROPS – both of which are just “wrappers” at the end of the day, it is about what goes inside the wrappers.  Where the scammers make their money is in the kickbacks: 8% on the pointless, expensive insurance bond from OMI, SEB, Generali, RL360, Friends Provident etc., and then more fat commissions on the expensive funds or structured notes.

    “Quality of adviser tops the list of practitioner concerns, with member awareness a close second”

    And hereby lies one of the main problems: ceding providers don’t know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are.  And that is because they don’t ask.  And they don’t learn from their mistakes when they get it wrong.  And they don’t care when they hand the pensions over to the bad guys and their former member is now financially ruined and contemplating suicide.  Instead of trying to use their appalling mistakes to improve their performance and understand what “quality” actually means, and how to tell the difference between good and bad quality, they only care about avoiding responsibility for their own failings.

    The problem about “member awareness” is that most people assume their ceding provider will do some sort of due diligence.  They think that words like “Phoenix Life”, “Prudential” and “Standard Life” convey some sort of professionalism or duty of care.  Most members are simply unaware of the appalling track record of these providers – and the extraordinary and exhaustive lengths to which they will go to avoid being brought to justice for their negligence and laziness.

    “Sharing of intelligence would help avoid duplication of effort”

    Oh, how heartily I agree!  I remember a year or so ago, I shared some intelligence and a few beers with a nice chap from Scottish Widows.  We met at one of Andy Agathangelou’s symposiums in London – the subject of which was pension scams.  The Pensions Regulator was there, Dalriada Trustees were there, Pension Bee were there, lots of interested parties were there (including an American insurer from Singapore), and a couple of victims.  I gave a joint presentation with one of the victims who described how he had been scammed and how his provider had handed over his pension so easily – well after the Scorpion watershed.  The nice chap from Scottish Widows asked the victim why he hadn’t called the Police.  The victim replied: “I am the Police”.

    It was very telling that the room wasn’t full of delegates from Aviva, Phoenix Life, Prudential, Standard Life etc.  None of them were interested.

    Not a single provider has ever phoned me up to ask for advice, or to arrange to speak to some victims to learn something about how they were scammed and how and why their ceding providers had failed them so badly.  There are so many victims all over the UK and the rest of the world.  And what they all share is a passion to try to prevent other people from being scammed by the bad guys and failed by the bad pension providers.  So this invaluable intelligence is freely available.

    Until and unless the providers develop a conscience, they are going to continue to fuel the pension scam industry – and nothing will change.  And the 79-page code might just as well be consigned to the bathrooms of Aegon, Aviva, Friends Life, Legal & General, Phoenix, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life, Scottish Widows, Standard Life and Zurich.

     

     

  • Death of the Life Bond (Life of the Death Bond?)

    Death of the Life Bond (Life of the Death Bond?)

    Attention financial advisers in Spain/who provide financial advice to Spanish residents.            

    18th 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 11th 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. 

  • No more bogus life assurance policies in Spain

    No more bogus life assurance policies in Spain

    The Spanish Insurance Regulator – the DGS (Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones) – has made a most welcome judgment.  This outlaws the mis-selling of bogus life assurance policies as investment “platforms” – aka “life bonds”.  Read the translated summary below.

    The iniquitous practice of scamming victims into these expensive, pointless bonds – so beloved by the “chiringuitos” (scammers) on the Costa Blanca and Costa del Sol for many years – will now result in criminal convictions for the peddlers of these toxic products.

    The DGS’ judgment has provided reinforcement to the earlier Spanish Supreme Court’s ruling that life assurance contracts used to hold “single-premium” investments are invalid.  This heralds a huge step forward in cleaning up the filthy scams which have for so long proliferated in popular British expat communities – making the victims poor and the perpetrators rich.  This evil practice came to a head when scammers Continental Wealth Management collapsed in a pile of debris in September 2017.  The main perps: Darren Kirby, Dean Stogsdill, Anthony Downs, Richard Peasley, Alan Gorringe, Neil Hathaway, Antony Poole all ran for the hills.  Other scammers who played supporting roles – including Stephen Ward, Martyn Ryan and Paul Clarke – slithered away quietly to ply their scams elsewhere.

    The DGS ruling has opened the way for criminal prosecutions against all those at Continental Wealth Management who profited so handsomely from flogging “life bonds” by Old Mutual International (aka OMI and Royal Skandia), Generali and SEB.  While it goes without saying there will be a hearty cheer about the jailing of Darren Kirby and his merry men, they will soon be joined by other individuals who have joined in the bogus life insurance fest just as enthusiastically.  And, of course, the life offices – from OMI, Generali and SEB, to Friends Provident and RL360 – will be treated to a proceeds-of-crime party.

    Guest of honour will, of course, be Peter Kenny of OMI.  But just to make sure nobody feels left out, Hansard and Investors Trust will certainly get their invites.  Maybe Wormwood Scrubs will set up their own wing for life-office scammers.

    It has long seemed curious that such a delightful part of Spain as the Costa Blanca should have fostered such an evil industry.  From the arch scammer himself – Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions, and his many associates including Paul Clarke who was helping him flog Ark before he joined CWM to learn to scam on a much larger scale.  But anywhere along that delightful stretch of coastline running from Valencia to Alicante there are dozens of firms giving the life bond machine plenty of welly.

    So popular is the use of life bonds among the seedier sector of the financial services industry, that multi-national firm Blevins Franks have their own their “exclusive” offering of bogus Lombard bonds.  And you can see why: these scammers earn 8% from flogging these bogus life assurance policies.  That’s 8% for doing nothing – and for trapping their victims into paying back this commission over up to ten years.  Often long after the victims have worked out that the bond serves no purpose except to prevent the funds from ever growing.

    The victims themselves – hundreds of which lost most (or in some cases all) of their life savings to Continental Wealth Management – will indeed see the DGS’ ruling as wonderful news.  They will certainly celebrate the fact that justice has at last prevailed and that the law in Spain has made it clear that selling life assurance policies the traditional scamming way is illegal.

    Continental Wealth Management (CWM – “sister company” to Stephen Ward’s Premier Pension Solutions) was set up initially to provide the cold calling and lead generation services to support Ward’s many scams – including the Evergreen (New Zealand) QROPS scam.  Evergreen was swiftly followed by the Capita Oak and Westminster scams (now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office).  Unregulated, and staffed by unqualified salesmen who took it in turns to sport grand titles such as “Managing Director” and “Investment Director”, most of these spivs had been car salesmen or estate agents before flogging QROPS and life assurance contracts used to hold the toxic structured notes which destroyed so many millions of pounds’ worth of the victims’ life savings.  Many of these bonds were supplied by Old Mutual International, who despite the huge losses on the funds, continued to take their fees monthly.

    Back in April 2018, OMI and the IOM were defeated by Spanish courts ruling that the jurisdiction in litigation against them for facilitating financial crime should be in Spain. This was a welcomed victory for the victims in the face of so much corruption and fraud in Spain for many years. It is certainly a turning point in the quest for justice by the thousands of victims of scammers such as Continental Wealth Management and life offices such as Old Mutual International, Generali and SEB.

    I will be writing to all advisory firms who are selling life bonds to victims in Spain to advise them that this is now a criminal matter and to warn them that they will be reported to the DGS.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

    Madrid, 10 January 2019

    General Directorate of Insurance and Pension Funds (DGS)

    Complaints service file number 268/2016

     

    COMPLAINT BY A CONTINENTAL WEALTH CLIENT IN RESPECT OF HEAVY LOSSES INCURRED ON HIS PENSION TRANSFERRED TO A BOURSE QROPS AND PLACED IN A GENERALI INSURANCE BOND.

    The Directorate General of Insurance and Pension Funds is competent under the powers conferred on it by Article 46 of Law 26/2006 of 17 July, on the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, to examine the claim formulated for the purpose of determining non-compliance with current regulations on the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, and whether this is decisive for the adoption of any of the relevant administrative control measures, particularly those of administrative sanction, which contravene the aforementioned Law.

    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….”

    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.”

    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.”

    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.

    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.

    Banking and insurance operators, in addition to the provisions of the previous letter, 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.

    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.”

    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.

    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.

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

    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.

    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.

    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 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.

    Chief Inspector of Unit

    Ministry of Economy and Enterprise

    Secretary of State for the Economy and Business Support

     

  • NOVIA GLOBAL VS OLD MUTUAL INTERNATIONAL

    NOVIA GLOBAL VS OLD MUTUAL INTERNATIONAL

    The problem with money is that it blows away if you don’t hold it down, tie it up or stuff it down your knickers.  That’s why you need to put it somewhere safe: in a shoe box on top of the wardrobe; under your mattress; in the safe or – if you’re feeling really brave – in the bank.  Trouble is, left in cash, money shrinks (inflation, charges, moths).  This is why so many advisers recommend a platform – aka “somewhere safe” to keep your money.

    So, let’s look at two possible alternatives: the Novia Global platform and the Old Mutual International “bond”.

    I’ve met Bill Vasilieff who runs Novia Global.  He serves Earl Grey and nice biscuits.  A man of few words, and even fewer syllables, he gave me a quick rundown on how the Novia Global platform works – and how much it costs.

    I haven’t met Peter Kenny of Old Mutual International (OMI) – although I have spoken to him several times.  As broadly Irish as Bill is Scottish, Peter Kenny also comes across as a softly-spoken and sincere chap.  But there the similarity seems to end.  Peter stood me up – I got a view of his office waiting room but wasn’t offered a cup of tea (let alone a biscuit).

    Mind you, there isn’t much I don’t know about the Old Mutual International bonds.  I’ve seen thousands of their policyholders’ statements – and they are frighteningly ugly and depressing.  They accurately, faithfully and unemotionally report the destruction of their victims’ atrocious losses.  And OMI regularly (like clockwork!) take their quarterly fees – irrespective of how deep the destruction of the policyholders’ funds is.  In fact, some victims even find themselves in negative figures as OMI continue to account for their fees long after the whole blooming lot has gone.

    Anyway, back to Bill and his welcoming teapot….I can’t really compare him to Pete but I can compare the two products.  So here is a brief and brutal side-by-side line up of what the two “platforms” offer.  And how much they cost.  And how difficult they are to get out of.  And how much financial crime they are associated with.

    So the OMI “life bond” costs almost six times as much as the Novia Global platform.  But that is if you are locked in for five years.  You can get it cheaper – 1.15% – if you get locked in for ten years.  But you must remember that if you are scammed, then OMI will have paid the scammer an 8% commission and you could get stuck with paying the quarterly fees for the next ten years, even if you’ve figured out you’ve been scammed.  And the quarterly fees are based on your original investment – not on the impaired amount.  If you’ve been scammed, and your fund value drops inexorably, the 1.15% will become bigger and bigger.  And even if you lose your whole fund, OMI will keep taking their charges and pushing you further and further into debt.

    A bit like the lyrics to Hotel California, with an OMI “bond”, you can’t check out any time you want, and you can only leave after between five and ten years.  OMI will take that number of years to claw back the commission paid to your adviser – even if you have long since learned that your adviser was an unregulated scammer and has conned you into unsuitable, high-risk, high-commission investments that have badly damaged your fund.  You are stuck with paying the quarterly fees to OMI – even after your whole fund has gone.  One victim went from plus £300k to minus £25k – and counting.  As your funds inside the OMI bond shrink, the 1.15% grows and helps destroy what is left of your fund even faster.  But with the Novia Global platform, you can leave any time you want.  No exit penalties.  No hard feelings.

    In Spain, the Supreme Court has ruled that bogus life assurance policies – such as those provided by Old Mutual International – used to hold investments are illegal.  This is because they are neither proper insurance policies (which take risk in the interests of the consumer) nor are they proper investment platforms.  The Spanish aren’t stupid – they can spot a scam much more easily than other jurisdictions and take action to prevent them from ruining future victims.  This is in stark contrast to the likes of the Isle of Man and Gibraltar – which seem to revel in encouraging scams and protecting firms such as Old Mutual International (and STM Group) which facilitate financial crime on a massive scale.

  • Pension scammers must be stopped

    Pension scammers must be stopped

    In the Pension Life office, we have been wondering how to get the information about pension scams more widely seen, heard and taken on board. We’d like to ensure the masses are educated and aware that pension scammers can strike from many angles, and with a variety of “deals”. Pension scammers must be stopped and together we can work towards this.

    A quick Google search of the phrase “Pension Scam” shows no end of advice available, so why is this information not being spread to the public more widely and effectively?

    Why was 2017 the WORST year for pension scams?

    Google’s current top-ranking search return for the phrase “pension scam” is How to avoid a pension scam by Pension Wise. This site offers simple and basic information on how to spot a scam and how to report it.

    This is followed by The Pensions Regulator (tPR) which, offers 5-step advice to protect a pension from pension scammers.

    In third place, the Money Advice Service offers information on “How to spot a pension scam”. Money Advice highlight that scammers can be very good at disguising themselves as bona fide, regulated companies.

    Pension scammers must be stopped

    The FCA’s website comes in fourth, with their information on smart scams, advising people to be aware that the offer of a free pension review is often cause for concern and suspicion.

    But, even with all this information out there, 2017 was still the worst year ever for pension scams. It seems that despite changes to regulations, scammers seem to come out on top nine times out of ten. Serial scammers are able to move onward and upward, scam after scam after scam.  Officials, like the regulators, ombudsmen, arbiters and HMRC just stand idly by letting it happen again and again and again.

    Maybe the problem is that the scammers are ever evolving in their behavior and tactics – and the authorities just can’t keep up.  Pension Life came about because of the Ark pension liberation scam. But scamming tactics have moved on considerably.

    We now we have noticeably less liberation and more investment scams where the introducer heads for the investment with the highest commissions, with no regard for the risk or fees that are applied to the fund.

    Pension Life blog - Pension scammers must be stoppedFurthermore, if someone does approach you via a cold call claiming to be a viable company with a convincing sales pitch – how do you know if what they are saying is genuine? How do you know if they are a qualified financial adviser? Unfortunately, in the business of pensions and finance, the sad truth is that you need to: trust slowly; question quickly.

    In the CWM case, victims saw unqualified, unregulated advisers placing low to medium risk investors’ entire funds into high-risk, fixed-term structured notes.

    Fractional scamming is also on the up.  Unqualified, unregulated firms posing as financial advisers act as “introducers” – and often introduce thousands of victims to outright scams. The funds then go through various other parties’ hands to ensure everyone gets their piece of the pie. Each party involved along the chain, creams their bit off the top of the pension fund, until the fund is a fraction of its former self.  This means it will take years to get the pension back to its original state, let alone to start showing a profit.

    Perhaps one of the most iniquitous aspects of pension and investment scams is the routine use of insurance bonds. (a significant part of the fractional scam and an unnecessary second “wrapper”).  The life offices themselves are a big part of the pension scam industry.

    Firms such as OMI, SEB, RL360 and Generali accept business repeatedly from unlicensed firms and known scammers.  These so-called “life offices” (although they really ought to be called “death offices”) sit back and watch while these scammers gamble away the victims’ life savings on toxic structured notes and high-risk investments. Despite reporting on the inexorable destruction of the funds, firms like Generali et al just keep on taking their fees every quarter – and will sometimes do so until there is nothing left in the fund.

    The best advice we can give, is to ensure you know exactly who you are dealing with and where your money will be going – every penny of it.

    There is no such thing as “free”, and there will ALWAYS be commissions and fees on any pension transfer, legitimate or not. But however much it is – as in REALLY IS – the client needs to know and accept these costs.  Many advisory firms conceal the real costs and the clients only find out what they are when it is too late, and the damage has been done.

    Make sure you have everything in writing AND read it all – at least three times, if not more!

    Make sure you understand everything: the costs, fixed terms, the risk level of investments – and if you don´t, then ask more questions.

    Keep a regular eye on your fund; don´t trust any company 100%; make sure you know exactly what your fund is doing and do not ever be fobbed off with the explanation that any losses are “just paper losses”.

    If in doubt – JUST SAY NO!!

    I am writing a series of blogs about pensions, pension scammers and how to safeguard your pension fund from fraudsters. Please make sure you read as many as possible and ensure you know everything you should about your pension transfer.  You only get one shot at getting it right – if you get it wrong, the damage may never be undone.

    If we can ensure the masses are educated about pension scammers and financial fraud, we can help stop the scammers in their tracks – globally.

  • Vueling v Old Mutual International

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victims pension scam vicitm - responsibility for a lossIntro written by Kim: ‘This week Angie travelled for work (yet again): she had to fly from Granada to Barcelona. Disaster struck –  her baggage sadly did not make the full journey -it’s sitting in the triangle of lost luggage no doubt. The airline – Vueling – whilst only providing the flight, was still happy to take responsibility for the loss of her bag and its contents, and compensate her. That got her thinking: if an airline can take full responsibility for a loss, why are life offices like OMI turning a blind eye to the massive losses they have caused to thousands of pension scam victims’ funds?

     

    Over to Angie:

    The financial services industry (especially offshore) has a lot to learn from the airline industry. Aviation stakeholders internationally provide the highest possible levels of safety for air travellers.  This due diligence is constantly reviewed, updated and improved. The same standard of responsibility routinely happens in all jurisdictions. Regulators, as well as air crash investigators, work together when things go right.  As well as when they don’t.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a lossThe work of the air industry regulators, investigators and safety trainers never ceases with all parties constantly striving to maintain the highest possible standards of performance and safety. And when something goes wrong, everybody swings into action like the A-team, International Rescue and Tom Cruise combined.

    I know all this because one of my members is a Captain with a well-known airline (probably quite easy to guess which one!). He also trains pilots from a variety of other airlines in simulators – and this includes Vueling pilots. I will call him Captain BJ.

    BJ is a thoroughly decent bloke and has a rather endearing fondness for chickens.  He has devoted his professional life to the business of safety in travel.  And behind him is a comprehensive and robust system of regulation – internationally. Financial services regulators, on the other hand, stand by and watch (with their hands firmly in their pockets – and their fingers compulsively searching for something with which to fiddle) as the equivalent of hundreds of passenger planes crash every month. The regulators stare blankly at the charred remains of the passengers’ life savings and shrug carelessly at the huge scale of human misery caused so routinely. With such flaccid regulatory regimes in so many jurisdictions, these chocolate-teapot regulators de facto facilitate and encourage losses caused by negligence and scams.

    I know all this because Captain BJ is also a pension scam victim – courtesy of Stephen Ward’s Ark £27 million pension scam. Despite the extreme stress of losing his pension, he has to keep a stiff upper lip and continue with his daily routine of flying thousands of passengers safely around the skies of Europe.

    My recent experience on a Vueling flight provides an interesting parallel with the “financial services” provided by Old Mutual International. Vueling sells flights. They provide the aircraft; the pilots and the cabin crew. They offer a selection of routes, food and drink, duty free goods, toilets and the expertise to get many thousands of passengers from one destination to another safely and on time; day after day after day.

    What Vueling doesn’t do is operate a baggage handling service – this is provided by the airport you travel through. However, no matter how enjoyable a flight has been (if such a thing is possible!) and how punctual the take-off and landing are, the whole experience can be badly marred by the loss of a passenger’s luggage. While Vueling is responsible for the safety of the passengers, it is NOT responsible for the safety of the passengers’ luggage when it is not in the bowels of the aircraft. However, Vueling goes to extraordinary lengths to help people whose luggage has been delayed or lost. Vueling take full responsibility for a loss of luggage, luckily for me.

    Earlier this week, it was the baggage handlers at either Granada airport or Barcelona airport who were responsible for my medium-sized, black, tatty suitcase. And they lost it. The case had been full of clothing typically worn by a slightly fat, grey-haired woman on the wrong side of something ending in a nought. So no desirable or valuable designer totty wear, expensive perfume or sparkly jewellery.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a lossBut Vueling provide people like me (who end up wearing the same orange jumper and purple socks two days in a row) with an easy to use, online complaints and redress facility. It wasn’t Vueling’s fault that my luggage got lost, but they take responsibility for it anyway because it is part of the whole flight “package”.

    Contrast this with Old Mutual International (OMI) and the IoM regulator. And thank your lucky stars that they don’t try to run an airline (because if they did, it is unlikely any passengers or luggage would ever survive). OMI provides “insurance bonds” or bogus life assurance policies. These products serve no purpose except to pay fat commissions to rogue IFAs. And they feature a selection of risky investment products for the IFAs to earn even more commission. What OMI does not provide is financial advice – that is the job of someone else (i.e. the IFAs). But when the IFAs do the equivalent of losing the baggage, OMI takes no interest or responsibility other than to record the loss.

    In the air industry, there are two things that can go wrong that can cause customers financial damage: flight delays and loss of luggage. A comprehensive complaints and redress system is routinely provided by all leading airlines. In the financial services industry, there are two things that can go wrong that can cause customers financial damage: investment failures and disproportionately high charges. No complaints and redress system is provided by life offices such as OMI and no one takes full responsibility for a loss.

    If an airline experiences a crash, a huge machine swings into action to investigate the cause and take immediate remedial action to prevent the same or similar event from ever causing another accident. If a life office such as OMI experiences a crash, it pretends nothing has happened.  Pension scam victims? No pension scam victims here! OMI denies all responsibility. And blames the IFA. Or the weather.  Or Brexit.  And keeps charging the victims the same disproportionately high fees based on the huge commissions they originally paid to the IFA that caused the crash.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a loss

    Here are some examples of OMI’s crashes in the past six years:

    * Axiom Litigation Fund – this was a PROFESSIONAL-INVESTOR-ONLY fund which was routinely used by rogue IFAs for ordinary, retail investors (and from which the IFAs earned fat commissions). OMI offered the Axiom fund on the bogus “life assurance” platform. And when the fund went into administration in December 2012, OMI shrugged its shoulders and said “not our problem“. And kept charging the victims the same fees as if the £120 million loss hadn’t happened.

    OMI knew that many of the IFAs had been neither regulated nor qualified and that the investors were unsophisticated, low-risk, retail customers.

    * LM Australian Property Fund – this was a PROFESSIONAL-INVESTOR-ONLY fund which was routinely used by rogue IFAs for ordinary, retail investors (and from which the IFAs earned fat commissions). OMI offered the LM fund on the bogus “life assurance” platform. And when the fund went into administration in March 2013, OMI shrugged its shoulders and said “not our problem“. And kept charging the victims the same fees as if the £240 million loss hadn’t happened.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a lossOMI knew that many of the IFAs had been neither regulated nor qualified and that the investors were unsophisticated, low-risk, retail customers.

    * Premier New Earth Recycling Fund – this was a PROFESSIONAL-INVESTOR-ONLY fund which was routinely used by rogue IFAs for ordinary, retail investors (and from which the IFAs earned fat commissions). OMI offered the PNER fund on the bogus “life assurance” platform. And when the fund went into administration in June 2016, OMI shrugged its shoulders and said “not our problem“. And kept charging the victims the same fees as if the £800 million loss hadn’t happened.

    OMI knew that many of the IFAs had been neither regulated nor qualified and that the investors were unsophisticated, low-risk, retail customers. That is £1.16 billion worth of fund losses in just over six years, but they take no responsibility for loss of funds and the pension scam victim gets no redress.

     

    (Note – if you read the above three examples, you will see that although the funds, dates and amounts were different, the circumstances were EXACTLY the same!)

    Add to this the £ billions lost through toxic, risky structured notes, and that adds up to quite a cricket score that OMI “wasn’t responsible for“.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a loss

    The causes were all the same:

    UNREGULATED ADVISORY FIRMS

    UNQUALIFIED ADVISERS

    FUNDS OFFERING HUGE COMMISSIONS

    FUNDS SUITABLE FOR HIGH-RISK, PROFESSIONAL INVESTORS SOLD TO LOW-RISK, RETAIL INVESTORS

    NO DUE DILIGENCE BY OMI

    We know that OMI bought:

    £200 million worth of failed Leonteq structured notes

    between 2012 and 2016 as OMI is claiming to be suing Leonteq. But this does little to distract attention from OMI’s multiple, long-term failures for allowing such toxic investments in the first place and causing many people to become pension scam victims.

    Pension Life Blog - Vueling v Old Mutual International - pension scam victim - responsibility for a lossIf I give my car keys to someone who is so drunk they can barely stand up – and certainly can’t spell either OMI or IOM – and there is a serious accident, whose fault is it? The drunk’s or mine?

    OMI’s CEO is a bloke called Peter Kenny who used to work for the IoM regulator. So he should know better. But he doesn’t. So we must assume he would be happy to hand his car keys over to a drunk or let an unqualified pilot fly a plane with a broken wing. And he would still claim it wasn’t his fault, despite the number of pension scam victims.

    The moral of this blog is: never wear orange and purple on a flight; never use an OMI life bond; always use a qualified, regulated and insured IFA. Don’t become the next pension scam victim.

    My next dilemma is what to buy with my Vueling compensation. I feel a trip to Marks and Sparks coming on. (I needed a bigger size anyway!).

    (Huge thanks to Captain BJ – to whom I owe my sanity).

    PS – since we wrote and published this blog, my luggage has been found.  Apparently, it never left Granada airport.  I suspect somebody pinched it – then found the clothes inside were so dull that they didn’t think it was worth taking it after all.

    CWM Pension scam – A victim’s reconstruction

  • Expats and Brexit – Safeguard your pension

    Expats and Brexit – Safeguard your pension

    BREXIT is the question on everybody’s lips at the moment.  BREXIT: will we? won´t we? deal? no deal? So many unanswered questions and so much scaremongering. We would like to offer some helpful words and hopefully protect you from making rash decisions.  This could help you to safeguard your pension. Many scammers are trying to cash in on Brexit – make sure sure you’re not their next victim.

    Pension Life Blog - Expats and Brexit - Safeguard your pension

    Remember I am not a financial adviser.  I am a blogger, and I write about financial crime. I provide information about past scams and on how to avoid falling victim to new scams – especially pension scams. The words I write are aimed to help you safeguard your pension from the many offshore scammers.

    So, Expats, what does Brexit mean for your pension rights? The short answer is that we really do not know! There are currently lots of “coulds” and “mights” being thrown around, but no certainties. And herein lies the risk that you and your pension could fall victim to a scam with all this scaremongering.

    We are seeing a lot of adverts for expats to transfer into a QROPS before the dreaded 11pm on March 29, 2019. One company I have noticed that seems to be using Brexit to attract customers is Spectrum IFA. Back on 1st July 2018, we wrote a qualified and registered blog about Spectrum IFA.  They didn´t do too well.

    Firstly, despite Spectrum IFA advertising themselves as “international financial advisers”, with some digging we were able to find out that they DO NOT  in fact have an investment licence. This means they are not legally allowed to advise on pensions or investments. Secondly, they scored rather poorly on the qualified and registered percentage too. Out of the 16 advisers we checked up on, only four were registered with the appropriate institutes. The rest came up red – meaning the institute had no record of them.

    Pension Life Blog - Expats and Brexit - Safeguard your pensionWorrying isn´t it?  Offshore companies can try to claim they are international financial advisers, but actually be unregulated and unqualified to carry out the very service they offer!  The “advisory” firms have flash websites, and some have several offices around Europe and beyond.  Their PR is great at scaremongering expats about their pension investments in the lead up to Brexit.

    In Spectrum’s ´Deal or no deal´ article number 14, they suggest you marry a Spaniard in order to prepare for Brexit. I´m not sure about you, but I feel that getting hitched to a native to be able to stay in Spain is a pretty drastic measure and definitely more than a little illegal.

    Spectrum IFA is just one example of a firm that probably ought to be given a wide berth when transferring your precious pension fund offshore. Safeguard your pension by avoiding unregulated and unqualified firms like this one.

    ********

    Pension Life Blog - Expats and Brexit - Safeguard your pension

    It may seem daunting when you read that your UK pension could be subjected to extra taxes if we leave the EU on a no-deal basis. You may be thinking that you should transfer into a QROPS quickly, to save on these taxes. But what you really need to know is that a QROPS is not without punitive costs of its own. They can be expensive and unless you have a good lump sum to transfer you could see a huge chunk of your pension pot taken in transfer and set-up fees anyway! Potentially making you worse off.

    Unfortunately, until we make a deal or actually go through with Brexit, nothing is very clear for expats. Which leaves us in an uncertain time and situation.  This, I understand, may be daunting for many people, but I urge you to take a deep breath before considering any speedy offshore pension transfers.  Thousands of people – especially those who have already fallen victim to scammers such as Continental Wealth Management – would give you exactly the same urgent advice.

    If you do want to transfer your pension, please heed this advice to safeguard your pension: 

    Make sure you choose a reputable firm – one that is regulated, insured and employs fully qualified (and registered) advisers.

    We did a series of blogs last year on offshore companies and their advisers.  The results were extremely worrying. Aside from their blatant disregard for the necessity of these qualifications – due to being offshore – the number of unqualified advisers offshore was cause for serious concern.  Many of the firms had not one single qualified and registered adviser on their team. 

    Qualified & registered? We do not need to be – we are offshore!

    Pension Life Blog - Expats and Brexit - Safeguard your pensionKnow all the correct questions to ask an adviser before you sign on the dotted line. 

       A reputable firm will have a fact-find procedure, and adhere to a client’s risk profile.

       A reputable firm will have compliance procedure.

       A reputable firm will have clear and consistent explanations and justifications for the use of insurance bonds.

     

    Where will your funds be invested, and how will you know if this is in line with your risk profile?

       A pension fund should be placed into a low-medium risk investment.

    Scammers tend to go for high-risk, professional-investor-only investments as they offer them the best commissions.  But a pension fund should have more protection than this.  Avoid investments that involve structured notes (like CWM´s Blue Chip notes), UCIS funds (like Blackmore Global), in-house funds, non-standard assets and any ongoing commission-paying investments.

    Insurance bonds – often used by scammers – are usually an unnecessary double wrapper on your fund, that costs you more in fees and charges than a straightforward platform, lining the pockets of the scammers – but making your fund smaller. 

    Pension Life Blog - Expats and Brexit - Safeguard your pensionHow much will the fees and charges be?  Remember NO pension transfer is free.

       Legitimate firms will normally have a small transfer charge and a small annual fee.

    Scammers will often be vague about fees and charges, and avoid giving you a straight answer so they can cover up the true figures. These hidden figures can see your pension fund decrease by 25% or even more in some cases.

    A reputable firm should offer you regular updates on the progress of your fund.

       You should receive an annual review and a quarterly update showing the fees, charges and growth of your fund.

    If your new firm and adviser fail to do this, alarm bells should ring loudly.

    Finally, a reputable company will publish evidence to show records of complaints made, rejected or upheld and redress paid.

    If the adviser cannot show you all this information, do not trust them.

    If it all sounds to good to be true, it probably is – RUN!

    Safeguard your pension from the scammers

  • Cold calling ban still not approved

    Pension Life Blog - Cold calling ban still not approvedFT adviser published an article entitled, Cold calling ban approved by committee.  However, do not get too excited as it hasn’t actually been approved by Parliament or got anywhere closer to being included in UK legislation.

    Plans to ban cold calling were announced back in August 2017. Scammers love to cold call their victims and hard sell them their schemes.  But it seems the number of people being targeted by scammers has risen immensely despite campaigns by the FCA and tPR.

    In our opinion, there should be a blanket ban on cold calling and it should have happened many years ago. There really is no debate necessary. Scammers use cold calling techniques to lure their victims in. If they were not allowed to do this, there would be a significant reduction in scams.

    Just this week, I have had two scam emails sent to me. One supposedly from HSBC (with whom I don’t bank!) and one supposedly from HMRC. The bank email told me I needed to log into my internet banking via their link and add my card details. The HMRC one promised me a tax rebate if I followed their link and input my credit card details!

    Pension Life blog - Cold callingTo my relatively informed eye, it was obvious these were scam emails, but the offer of money back from HMRC did have a certain compelling lure to it. Several hundred pounds just before Christmas, yes please! However, I haven’t completed my tax return yet and very much doubt HMRC owe me anything. With tempting offers like this, it is easy to see how people can be lulled into a false sense of security, especially by a smooth talking salesman.

    In so many scams, we hear the same thing; “I was called by a lovely man and he told me he could make my pension value increase if I transferred into…..but now my pension pot is worth less – much less.” The sad truth is that invariably the salesman is based offshore, is completely unqualified and only interested in the high commissions he will get from selling you a thoroughly inappropriate investment.  He will probably sell you a useless life bond too. Both of which will take a huge chunk of your pot before it has actually been invested anywhere.

    The government has apologised for missing their deadline on passing this law, but I guess with all this Brexit chaos they are somewhat distracted. Given that they are unable to make a decision or deal on Brixit, I would guess they might struggle with passing a law that would protect their hardworking, tax-paying citizens.

    I would also like to suggest that passing the ban might not be quite in the British government’s best interest. Often victims who have been scammed, have also liberated a cash amount out of their pension and this is taxable. 55% taxable to be precise. Therefore, by allowing the scams to go on, HMRC can coin in more tax revenues.

     

    Pension Life Blog - colled calling still not bannedSo, as we cannot count on our government to protect us from the cold calling scams, Pension Life is here to help.

    Cold called? HANG UP!!!!

    You don’t have to say anything, but if you do, make sure it’s something along the lines of:

    “Buzz off.”

    Trolley’s Pension Scam Guide

    In a perfect world, we would also like to see an international ban on the following:

    Unregulated advisory firms

    Unqualified advisers

    Commission on financial products

    Life bonds – such as Old Mutual International, SEB, Generali and RL360

    Structured notes

    Investment funds with entry and exit fees

    UK residents being put into QROPS

    Retail investors being put into UCIS funds

    AND, WE’D LIKE TO SEE LIFE OFFICES AND ADVISORY FIRMS COMPENSATING VICTIMS OF MIS-SELLING, NEGLIGENCE, AND FRAUD.

  • Scammers are criminals. So why aren’t they in jail?

    Scammers are criminals. So why aren’t they in jail?

    Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted?As 2018 draws to a close, a recap is in order to review the year’s progress in the war against pension scammers. Let us not forget – in the immortal words of the Pensions Regulator’s Lesley Titcombe: “scammers are criminals“. However, the sad truth is that most of them have not been prosecuted or jailed.

    The vast majority of the well-known pension scammers are still roaming free, busy thinking up yet more life-destroying schemes to make them rich and the victims poor.  Whilst the scammers enjoy champagne this New Year’s Eve, many victims will be worrying themselves sick about their bleak financial future.

    The Pensions Regulator, the Serious Fraud Office, the Insolvency Service, crime enforcement agencies and courts all seem to drag their feet when it comes to actually bringing charges against these criminals. Yet we see people being locked up for renting out caravans to help vulnerable homeless families! I would love it if this was a short and sweet blog, with many happy endings.  But, alas, the scams are plentiful and the victims are left uncompensated for their losses.

    Let’s have a quick round up of where we are with the scams and scammers.  And remember: all the thousands of victims want to see the scammers sent to jail and the keys thrown away so they can’t ruin any more innocent people’s lives.

    5G Futures

    5G Futures: in May 2013 Garry John Williams and Susan Lynn Huxley were suspended as trustees of the 5G Futures pension scheme, and from trust schemes in general. Pi Consulting was appointed as the new trustee by the Pensions Regulator.

    About 400 people had invested a total of £20m into the 5G Futures scheme – which was invested in high-risk, illiquid off-shore investments, with insufficient diversification making them completely unsuitable for pension scheme investments. There was no due diligence exercised by Williams and Huxley – and the scheme records were a mess.

    The scheme operated pension liberation through ‘loans’ to members. Williams and Huxley were found to have taken very high commissions on the investments – taking nearly £900,00 in one year alone.

    One of the most worrying things, however, is that the pension scammers don’t just leave the pensions industry and dedicate themselves to helping their many distressed victims – they start up all over again:

    Garry Williams and Sue Huxley went on to run Corporate Futures.eu

    Neither Garry Williams nor Sue Huxley has ever been convicted or jailed.

    Ark

    Stephen Ward: (this will not be the last time you hear this name in this blog) was the mastermind behind this scam (dating back to 2010).   It was his first known scam – but by no means his last one. What is left of the Ark fund, stands still frozen, in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, who continue to take their yearly costs and fees from what little is left.  Dalriada has done nothing to ensure the scammers are prosecuted – saying it is “not within their remit”. The victims of the Ark scam also have the heavy hand of HMRC hanging over them.  And let us not forget that it was HMRC who happily registered this scam and failed to withdraw the registration when they discovered that Stephen Ward was operating pension liberation fraud.

    Dalriada has never reported Stephen Ward to the police as it is not “within their remit” to ensure the scammers are prosecuted.

    In 2018 we saw Stephen Ward being banned from acting as a pension trustee. Eight years after his first scam, he has still not been imprisoned for the millions of pounds’ worth of life savings he has destroyed and the thousands of lives he has ruined.

    Other prominent figures in the Ark scam were Julian Hanson – who went on to play a key role in the Friendly Pensions scam; George Frost who went on to operate a new pension liberation scam using truffle trees as investments; Andrew Isles who went on to sell his accountancy business, Isles and Storer to LB Group; Peter Moat of Blu Debt Management who went on to operate the Fast Pensions scam.  None of these scammers has ever been convicted or jailed.

    Axiom

    Another pension liberation scam, which saw victims with HMRC tax demands of 55%. Rex Ashcroft of Wealth Protection International was one of the main introducers of this scam. According to his Linkedin profile, he offers business development strategy planning for the UK, Spain, Portugal and France.  He also offers “day-to-day application of wealth protection strategies”.  Ashcroft lied to Axiom victims telling them they could access part of their pensions and not pay tax on the cash they took out.

    Rex Ashcroft has never been convicted or jailed.

     

    Blackmore Global FundPension Life blog - Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted? Blackmore Global

    The Blackmore Global Fund saw UK-based victims conned into transferring their pension funds into QROPS in Malta and Hong Kong between 2014 and 2016.  After the transfers, the funds were invested in the Blackmore Global UCIS fund (Unregulated Collective Investment Scheme) and the victims were locked in (unknowingly) for ten years.  Huge commissions were taken by the introducers, Aspinal Chase and David Vilka of Square Mile International and the fund managers Phillip Nunn and Patrick McCreesh.  Victims locked into ten-year fixed terms are still waiting for a copy of an independent audit – which was promised back in 2016! Despite media attention from the BBC, victims still do not know how much of their pension fund – if any – is left.

    David Vilka, Phillip Nunn and Patrick McCreesh have never been convicted or jailed.  Blackmore Global Group is still being promoted by Phillip Nunn!  Nunn and McCreesh had been the main lead generators in the Capita Oak scam – earning nearly £1 million in the process.

    Capita Oak

    This was another of Stephen Ward´s scams – on which he worked closely with his pensions lawyer Alan Fowler (ex Stevens and Bolton Solicitors) and his sidekick Bill Perkins.  Ward carried out the transfer administration for this scam which was mainly operated by XXXX XXXX who offered victims 5% Thurlston “loans”.   Over 300 victims are facing the partial or total loss of their pensions and are also now being pursued by HMRC for tax liabilities on the “loans”.

    Capita Oak – like Ark – was placed in the hands of Dalriada Trustees.  But Dalriada has never reported Stephen Ward – or any of the other scammers – to the police as it is not “within their remit” to ensure the scammers are prosecuted.

    Stephen Ward, Alan Fowler, Bill Perkins and XXXX XXXX have never been convicted or jailed (although XXXX XXXX is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office). 

    Continental Wealth Management

    Pension Life blog - Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted? Stephen Ward’s firm Premier Pension Solutions (in Moraira, Spain) was the “sister” firm of Continental Wealth Management, run by scammer Darren Kirby.  This was one of the biggest single scams – known as CWM – with around 1,000 victims losing part or all of their life savings. Other scammers involved were Anthony Downs, Dean Stogsdill, Alan Gorringe, Richard Peasley, and Neil Hathaway.

    This scam was promoted by cold-calling victims and promising unrealistically high returns and “capital protection”.  Darren Kirby and Anthony Downs used the victims’ funds to invest in totally unsuitable, high-risk, fixed-term structured notes.  This scam saw huge commissions paid by the life offices – Old Mutual International, SEB, and Generali – as well as by the structured note providers: Leonteq, Commerzbank, Royal Bank of Canada, and BNP Paribas to this unregulated firm.  Let us not forget that this was without question financial crime and was facilitated by the life offices.

    Old Mutual International, run by ex IoM regulator Peter Kenny, was the leading life office which facilitated the CWM scam.  Generali and SEB also routinely accepted business from these known scammers and unlicensed advisers.

    Stephen Ward, Darren Kirby, Anthony Downs, Dean Stogsdill, Alan Gorringe, Richard Peasley, and Neil Hathaway have never been convicted or jailed.

    ELYSIAN FUELS

    James Hay and Suffolk Life were accepting Elysian shares for liberation purposes

    Another Stephen Ward creation which was operating 80% liberation with the full cooperation of the SIPPS providers James Hay and Suffolk Life.  The SIPPS providers and the victims could face tax charges of up to £20 million from HMRC.

     

     

     

    Despite clear evidence that Stephen Ward pushed this scam in emails to Alan Fowler and Bill Perkins, neither Ward nor Fowler nor Perkins have ever been prosecuted or jailed.

     

    EVERGREEN RETIREMENT TRUST NZ QROPS PENSION LOAN SCAM

    A New Zealand QROPS scam with Marazion pension loans

    When Ark got shut down, Stephen Ward went straight to New Zealand to set up his next pension liberation scam with Simon Swallow of Charter Square.  A further 300 victims were scammed out of over £10 million and conned into Marazion “loans” AND locked into the Evergreen scheme for five years.  After the five years victims were told: ´Despite our best efforts, Evergreen has not been as successful as we had originally hoped.´  Evergreen was wound up April 208.

    This scam was promoted by Darren Kirby’s Continental Wealth Management which cold called the victims.

     

    Stephen Ward, Darren Kirby, and Simon Swallow have never been convicted or jailed.

    Fast Pensions

    Pension Life blog - Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted?Fast Pensions, run by Peter and Sara Moat was wound up by the High Court 30th May 2018, after the six companies and 15 occupational schemes were put into liquidation in March 2018. £21m was transferred into the schemes under Peter Moat’s set of Blu loan companies. However, there was no information on the pension portfolios and what happened to the investors’ funds.  Other persons named as being involved in this scam are Miss Jane Wright (who acted as a trustee) and a Mr Chapman. Maladministration was noted by the ombudsman back in 2016.  However, nothing was done to stop the Moats.

    It was determined that there is no doubt this was a scam.

    Peter and Sara Moat and their accomplices have never been convicted or jailed.

    Friendly Pensions Limited (FPL)

    Back in January of 2018, the Pensions Regulator asked the High Court to act on their behalf in the Friendly Pensions matter.  Scammers: David Austin, Susan Dalton, Alan Barratt and Julian Hanson (also involved in ARK) were ordered to pay back £13.7 million they took from their victims and banned from being pension trustees. However, Dalriada the independent trustee appointed by TPR to take over the running of the schemes, is in charge of confiscating the scammers’ assets for the benefit of their victims. (Who knows how long this could take: how long is a piece of string?) As yet, no compensation has been offered to the victims.

    David Austin, Susan Dalton, Alan Barratt and Julian Hanson and their accomplices have never been convicted or jailed.  However, there have recently been some arrests – so let us hope this results in maximum sentences.

    HEADFORTE AND SOUTHLANDS

    Two bogus “occupational pension schemes” set up for pension liberation fraud by Stephen Ward after the Evergreen QROPS scam hit the rocks (when HMRC removed Evergreen from the QROPS list).  Victims have no idea where or how their pensions are invested.  The pensions are allegedly invested in “The Treasury Plus Fund” (whatever that might be – and it is not likely to be anything good) and the trustee is Ward’s bogus trustee firm Dorrixo Alliance.

    Nobody knows the total aggregate value of lost pensions and tax liabilities Ward has caused – we hazard a guess at a figure in the region of £100 million +.

    Stephen Ward has never been convicted or jailed.

    Henley Retirement Benefit Scheme

    Another double act by Stephen Ward and XXXX XXXX.  This was the “sister” scheme to Capita Oak.  Ward did the transfer administration – from safe, well-known and regulated pension providers to this bogus occupational scheme run by XXXX.

    Neither Stephen Ward nor XXXX XXXX  has ever been convicted or jailed.

    Incartus and Bluefin Trustees

    Another pension liberation scam – placed in the hands of Dalriada Trustees by the Pensions Regulator.

    Incartus was placed in the hands of Dalriada Trustees by the Pensions Regulator.  But Dalriada has never reported the scammers to the police as it is not “within their remit” to ensure the scammers are prosecuted.

    None of the Incartus or Bluefin trustees scammers has ever been convicted or jailed.

     

    KJK Investments and G Loans

    £11.9 million worth of transfers were made, with the victims receiving approximately 50% of their pension as a loan and the promise of the rest being invested into a high-interest generating SIPPS. The loans were made from the pensions and therefore the victims have the usual HMRC tax demand letters.  Further to the victims’ misery, the other 50% of the funds was not invested as promised. Most of the funds were swallowed by high commissions paid to the scammers.

    None of the KJK Investments/G Loans scammers has ever been convicted or jailed.

    London Quantum

    Pension Life blog - Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted?Another of  Stephen Ward’s many pension scams, this one was courtesy of his bogus pension trustee firm Dorrixo Alliance, his accomplice Gary Barlow at Gerard Associates, and introducers at Viva Costa International. Like Ward´s other scams, London Quantum scam was never set up for the benefit of the victims, but in the interests of Stephen Ward and his team of scammers to earn the maximum amount of commission out of the toxic, illiquid, high-risk investments.

    The London Quantum scam is now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees.

    London Quantum – like Ark, Capita Oak and Fast Pensions – was placed in the hands of Dalriada Trustees by the Pensions Regulator.  But Dalriada has never reported Stephen Ward – or any of the other scammers – to the police as it is not “within their remit” to ensure the scammers are prosecuted.

    Stephen Ward and Gary Barlow have never been convicted or jailed.

    Successful Pensions

    This pension liberation scam dating back to 2013 and 2014, involved around £1m of victims pension funds. Anthony Locke, was sentenced to a five-year jail term and Ray King, 54, who was employed by Lock, was given a three-year jail sentence.

    It is great that these two crooks received jail terms, however, they are relatively “small fry” in comparison to the other serial scammers who are still walking free!  The question remains: why have two minor players such as Locke and King been convicted and jailed while the “big fish” remain free to keep on scamming?

    Salmon Enterprises

    Pension Life Blog - Salmon Enterprises Scheme Pension Scam116 victims were scammed out of their pensions by James Lau of FCA-regulated Wightman Fletcher McCabe.  Victims were assured the loans they were given did not come from their pension funds and would not be taxable by HMRC.  The trustees of the scheme – Peter Bradley and Andrew Meeson (both ex HMRC) of Tudor Capital Management – were jailed for eight years for cheating the Public Revenue.  James Lau is currently under criminal investigation by the Insolvency Service. The victims are awaiting a verdict on whether they will still have to pay the tax penalties.

    James Lau has not yet been convicted or jailed – although he is clearly a wanted man.

    Pension Life blog - Scammers are criminals, so why are they not being prosecuted?Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund

    This fund, created by XXXX XXXX, loaned most of the £21m invested by hundreds of victims to Dolphin Trust. Dolphin Trust is a UCIS which was illegal to be sold to UK residents. The Trafalgar Multi-Asset fund was suspended back in September 2016 and victims are still waiting to find out if they will ever get their money back.

    This scam was facilitated by STM Fidecs in Gibraltar – one of Europe’s biggest QROPS providers.  The regulator did order Deloittes to carry out an inspection into STM Fidecs’ books, but no action was taken against STM Fidecs for their part in this scam.

    STM Fidecs accepted transfers into the QROPS by UK-resident victims “advised” by XXXX XXXX – even though he was not licensed to give financial advice.  And then XXXX’s clients were 100% invested in XXXX’s own fund.

    XXXX XXXX has not yet been convicted or jailed – although he is clearly under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.

    Westminster Pension Scam

    Another of the schemes under investigation by the SFO.  This liberation scam with more than £3 million worth of (now worthless) investments was registered and administered by Stephen Ward.

    Windsor Pensions

    A no-frills pension liberation scam run by Florida-based Steve Pimlott.  This scam has been going on for years and there is no sign of any let up – despite the fact that the regulators and ombudsman are well aware of Pimlott’s modus operandi.  Pimlott doesn’t bother with any attempt to conceal the loans with fancy “loans” or complex mechanisms to try to “distance” the liberation from the pension transfer.  He uses QROPS and a fraudulently-set-up bank account in the Isle of Man (of course!).  HMRC catches many of the victims and charges them 55% tax on the liberated amount.  Pimlott charges around 15% for the liberation.

    Steve Pimlott has not yet been convicted or jailed

    What a sorry state of affairs that out of all the pension schemes I have mentioned here, only one of them has seen the scammers jailed. Serial scammers like Stephen Ward and XXXX XXXX seem to slip the noose of justice again and again.

     

     

  • International Adviser and the Old Mutual International/Quilter Scams

    International Adviser and the Old Mutual International/Quilter Scams

    International Adviser and the Old Mutual International/Quilter Scams.  Today’s jolly:

    “Future Advisory Forum Europe 2018”

    at the Courthouse Hotel, Shoreditch, will see a number of players in the financial services industry discussing – presumably – financial services in 2018.  I’ve looked at the agenda, however, and I can’t see anything about pension scams or investment scams and how to prevent them.  Neither can I see anything about bringing negligent, lazy, dishonest, callous, greedy life offices such as Old Mutual International/Quilter to justice for facilitating financial crime.

    I can’t see any evidence of any of the victims of scams either attending or speaking at this do.  Surely to goodness, these people – the first-hand witnesses and experts on the mass destruction of life savings by the likes of Old Mutual/Quilter – should be the stars of the show.  How can anyone discuss the future of financial advice in Europe without examining how the perpetrators operate, and planning how to stop them from doing so in the future?

    International Adviser should hang its head in shame for failing to make sure that the perpetrators – especially Old Mutual International/Quilter – are brought to justice publicly for the destruction of hundreds of millions of pounds’ worth of life savings.  And yet IA’s Old Mother Hubbard is consorting with them and giving Quilter’s Ryan Gardner a speaking slot on the “return of volatility”.  How absolutely disgusting and sickening!  The victims of Old Mutual International or Quilter – or whatever the hell they are calling themselves this week to try to obliterate their grubby past – know far more than this idiot will ever know about “volatility”.  One calm and composed victim could sum the subject up in one simple sentence:

    “I started with a lifetime’s worth of savings and now I’ve got nothing – although I’m still paying the OMI quarterly charges”.

    That is pretty bloody volatile I would say.  And all because OMI accepts business from any old filthy, unqualified, unregulated scammers – and pays them handsomely to invest in disgusting, toxic crap like professional-investor-only Leonteq structured notes.

    Apart from IA’s Richard Hubbard and Quilter’s Ryan Gardner, the other speakers should know better and hang their heads in shame for consorting with the scum of financial services and leading perpetrators of financial crime.

    Michelle Hoskin of Standards International intends to speak about a “global movement of change”.  I hope that “change” includes campaigning for all scammers to be brought to justice, and all regulators encouraged to get off their lazy backsides and outlaw scams in their backyards.  Michelle doesn’t say whether she wants the change to be good or bad.  Hopefully, she means “good” – and that should include boycotting any rogue firms such as Old Mutual International which facilitate financial crime.  If this woman wants to know why, she should perhaps ask Ryan Gardner why OMI bought £94 million worth of fraudulent, high risk, toxic crap from Leonteq between 2012 and 2016.

    Then she should ask him why OMI just sat there for six years and watched thousands of victims’ life savings dwindle away to nothing.  While OMI did nothing.  And their victims considered suicide.  Putting that lot right would be a pretty good global movement of change.

    Other speakers at this CONference include Andy Cowin of Sterling – who wants to talk about taking advice on residency and domicile status.  Hopefully, his talk will include advice for OMI’s victims who are in the process of losing their homes and will have nowhere to live thanks to OMI’s negligence.  Residency/domicile is a pretty hot topic for these people.  If Cowin doesn’t address this particular aspect of the subject, he should hang his head in shame.

    And another one is Edward GOTT. Head of FX private clients. Caxton FX.  He’s going to talk about “strategies to help high net-worth customers understand the risks relating to Brexit”.  Hopefully, he is not going to ignore the plight of OMI’s victims – the low to zero net worth people whose only risk right now is starving or freezing to death – and for whom Brexit is irrelevant since OMI have destroyed all their money and they are staring at the prospect of homelessness in any country (whether part of Europe or not).  Hopefully, he’s GOTT the balls to publicly shame OMI for facilitating such large-scale financial crime and hanging their victims out to dry.

    Also on the roster of shame at this disgraceful event is Philip Robotham from Schroders.  He is going to talk about “conversations advisers have with their clients and the investment selection process”.  What he really needs to do is row his bottom to the murky end of the pond and examine why so many scammers were allowed by the likes of OMI to invest clients’ funds in toxic, risky, fraudulent investments.  And why OMI accepted so many investment instructions (in toxic structured notes) from pond life such as unregulated Continental Wealth Management.

    This event is being hosted by Richard Hubbard, Group Editor of Last Word, and Karen Blatchford, Head of International Proposition & Marketing, Old Mutual Wealth.  Hopefully, during the “networking lunch”, their consciences will trouble them enough to give a thought to OMI’s victims.  While Hubbard and Blatchford sip their bloody marys, maybe they will ask OMI what the bloody hell they are going to do about compensating their victims.

    The victims are bound to ask why OMI are spending a huge amount of money sponsoring this event when, in fact, they have paid zero redress to those whose life savings they are responsible for destroying.  Perhaps there are some real investigative journalists out there who would see the disgraceful irony in this and write a proper article on this sickening event.

     

     

  • CWM CONference

    All victims of the Continental Wealth Management pension scam will agree – this kind of disaster must never be allowed to happen again. Here´s Pension Life´s take on what happened in the CWM CONference given by Darren Kirby.

    The CWM advisers. . . Dean Stogsdill   *   Alan Gorringe   *   Richard Peasley   *   Neil Hathaway, but to name a few. . . lied about charges; lied about investment “guarantees” and growth; lied about structured note losses (“don’t worry – they are only paper losses”); lied about the firm’s regulation.

    Through a series of cold calls and personal house visits, they were able to persuade the victims into trusting them with their hard-earned pension pots. Aided and abetted by Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions – who provided the initial transfer advice – CWM brought financial ruin to hundreds of victims.

    The rogue “advisers” of CWM, forged clients’ signatures on dealing instructions and conned hundreds of victims in Spain, France, Portugal and beyond into transferring their safe, UK-based pensions into this dreadful scam, which was bound to lose some, most of or all of the money in each victim’s pension fund.

    Pension Life Blog - CWM CONference pension scam - Continental Wealth Management

    Trustees and insurance companies must never give these kinds of firms terms of business again. Old Mutual International (OMI), facilitated the fraud, paid commissions/fees to CWM who not only held no investment licence – but also held no license of any kind. Furthermore, OMI continue to apply crippling fees to these ever decreasing and totally unsuitable investments they made. SEB also acted as facilitators to this heinous crime.

    These so-called advisers must never be allowed to work in financial services again. However, the sorry truth is that they all are still working AND they are still scamming!! Raising awareness on how scammers work and how to avoid being scammed, seems to be the only defense we currently have.

    Pension Life will continue to speak out against these companies – the public must be warned – loudly and publicly. Scams like the Continental Wealth Management (CWM CONference) disaster must be stopped!

    SCAMMERS ARE CRIMINALS!!!