Tag: Pension Fraud

  • HOW TO SPOT A SCAMMER (FOR DUMMIES)

    HOW TO SPOT A SCAMMER (FOR DUMMIES)

    Al Rush, Henry Tapper, Darren Cooke, Steve Webb and Michelle Cracknell

    Knowing how to spot a scammer is half the battle in the fight against pension and investment scams.  And my idol and hero in this fight is Darren Cooke of Red Circle Financial Planning.  Armed with his petition calling for a cold-calling ban, he quickly became a t.v. star and National celebrity.

    UPDATE: Cold-calling has still not been fully banned!! (20/11/2018)

    Last week, on Monday 19th June 2017 (the week of the dreaded Ark trial) I had the privilege to attend the Great Pension Transfer Debate in Peterborough – organised by the amazing Al Rush and chaired by the awesome Henry Tapper.  There I met a few people I already knew but also got to meet Darren Cooke in person and tried hard not to graze my knees as I groveled humbly before him.  I also met some other wonderful professionals and heard some wonderful speakers – not the least of which were Sir Steve Webb and Michelle Cracknell.

    But – and I mean no disrespect to the event and it’s organisers – all the excellent things which were said during the presentations depended entirely on the quality and honourability of the advice given.  With only one notable exception, the event was attended by the ethical, qualified, regulated cohort of the profession.  But, of course, out in the field there are sharks and shysters by the dozen – both in the UK and offshore.

    In fact, this event was a world away from the world I live and work in.  The attendees of this event were the cream of the financial services profession; those who pride themselves in being ethical, honest and conscientious.  Most of the people there already had reputations for maintaining the highest possible standards of professional excellence, respecting the law and regulations, and actually caring about their clients.  But I felt like a fish out of water, because generally I am dealing with criminals who have deliberately and callously ruined thousands of lives – some of whom are now, thank goodness, under official investigation by the SFO.

    I asked the question “could all the scammers identify themselves” – and while this produced a few chuckles, it produced not a single (or the single) hand.  And thereby lies the problem: how does the public distinguish between the ethical guys and the scammers?  The scammers wear the same clothes; talk the same talk; have the same leather-bound portfolios and briefcases and sport the same smart hair cuts.  They probably have more go-faster stripes and fluffy dice on their Aston Martins, but other than that they are indistinguishable from the good guys.

    So, those in the know probably understand how to check qualification and regulation at the drop of a hat – but how does the ordinary man in the street – or on the Clapham Omnibus – know how to do that?  Does the public know that there are a few – very few I would add – regulated and qualified firms and individuals in the UK who are scammers?  (Ok, there are masses offshore, but let’s concentrate just on our mainland for the time being).

    And even if a member of the public does know how to do that, do they have any idea what else to check or verify? Again, the answer is: of course not.  So why don’t we start with the basics: the FCA register.  That ought to tell the enquirer whether a firm is regulated – but that is part of the problem: regulated for what exactly?  A firm which is regulated for insurance mediation is not regulated for pension or investment advice.  But the ordinary man in the street does not understand that.  Then you’ve got qualifications; looking up an individual on the CII register might show up a “student” member, but a member of the public might not know that is not the same thing as a qualified member.

    But then you have firms which are FCA regulated but which are still scammers – albeit very few to my knowledge (but still enough to cause sufficient damage to large numbers of victims).  And, of course, offshore it is simply “open season”.

    The creepy crawlies of the financial services world (ugh!)

    Rather than trying to figure out how to spot a scammer, perhaps we should have a go at deciding what constitutes a scam and work backwards from there.  The Cambridge dictionary defines a scam as an illegal plan for making money, especially one that involves tricking people

    The Business Dictionary defines a scam as “A fraudulent scheme performed by a dishonest individual, group, or company in an attempt to obtain money or something else of value. Scams traditionally resided in confidence tricks, where an individual would misrepresent themselves as someone with skill or authority, i.e. a doctor, lawyer, investor”

    The classic financial services scam consists of an individual who purports to be a qualified adviser who is part of a firm which is licensed in the appropriate jurisdiction to provide the advice required – normally something to do with pensions and/or investments.  Then the adviser, who has by now claimed to be “fully” qualified and regulated, will sell the unsuspecting client a scheme and/or investment which is not appropriate for their agreed risk profile.  Often the word “independent” has gone out of the window, because the adviser will merely invest the client into whatever pays the adviser himself the most commission – and sometimes that is even his own fund for which he is promoter or distributor.

    There are many variations on this theme – and many peripheral scammers providing cold-calling, lead generation and marketing services and loan facilities as well as spurious “introducers” which pose as quasi advisers.  And then there are the accountants who sell tax-avoidance investment schemes and employee benefit trusts – resulting in heavy losses and tax liabilities.  And then there are the UCIS providers peddling such rubbish such as collapsible holiday flats in an obscure part of Africa; oblong bits of tarmac not too far from an airport; truffle tree plantations; recycling inventions and empty tin cans.

    If we keep it simple for now: how does the ordinary man in the street or on the Bakerloo Line check out a UK-based financial adviser?  First check his qualifications; second check out that his firm is regulated by the FCA to provide the service being sought i.e. pension and/or investment advice; third ask for evidence of professional indemnity insurance; fourth check the solvency of the firm.

    If the advisory firm goes bust and the client loses a large amount of money, the maximum the client can claim from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme is £50,000 for investments.  The best place to check solvency is Companies House where you can look up a company’s accounts and see how profitable and solvent it is.  And then ask yourself whether you want to take financial advice from a firm which can’t even look after it’s own finances.

    One example is an advisory firm in Guildford which has been trading for 21 years.  For twelve of those years the company has made a loss.  On total turnover of £11 million since it started trading, it has made a total profit of £36 thousand during the entire period.  Would you want that firm to advise you on your finances?

    So, my advice is check, check and check again.  And when you think you have exhausted all the checks, get a second opinion.  The information is out there – it is just a question of knowing where and how to look for it; what questions to ask and how to understand the answers.  And then you’ll be a man, my friend.  SMILEY FACE 🙂

    What is a Pension Scam?

  • IF CAMPAIGN – JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF INVESTMENT FRAUD

    IF CAMPAIGN – JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF INVESTMENT FRAUD

    If only investment fraudsters were prosecuted…

    IF – INVESTMENT FRAUD

    CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS

     

    In the famous poem extolling Victorian virtues – Kipling advises: “if you can watch the things you gave your life to, broken, and stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools, you’ll be a man my son!”

     

     

    Investment Fraud Victims’ Group Action and Task Force:

    “Fighting Investment Fraud – Supporting Victims”

    What Kipling did not take into consideration was that today’s investment fraud victims are punished by HMRC while the fraudsters escape prosecution and are simply left to continue re-offending.  Therefore, the victims cannot afford to build up their life savings again because they have to pay crippling tax liabilities to HMRC.

    Summary

    • The Investment Fraud Victims Group Action and Task Force aims to unite investment fraud victims, industry experts, lawyers and politicians to tackle the serious and growing problem of Investment Fraud.
    • We aim to raise awareness of this all too often overlooked crime and to campaign for positive reform.  We advocate victims’ rights. 
    • We are campaigning for a change in the law. Our fair tax treatment for fraud victims campaign aims to encourage the investigation of Investment Fraud and to introduce tax exemptions for victims which are astonishingly currently not in place.
    • We are forming a professional, influential and passionate Task Force to research and investigate this issue and make sound, sensible and workable recommendations to Parliament which we hope will result in positive legislative reform.

    IF Task Force

    Members of the Task Force are being appointed to help highlight the flaws and weaknesses in the current system which allows investment fraud to proliferate, leaves victims at the mercy of HMRC and also leaves the perpetrators free to commit further crimes and ruin further lives.

    Task Force Agenda

    A summary of a large cross-section of victims will be analysed by the Task Force. The results of this survey, including stories and case studies of our members, the financial damage summarised, the scams and scammers which have ruined so many lives and the impact and working practice of the current system and laws on the victims will be compiled into a report.

    The Task Force will then consider the results and make recommendations to the government based on their research.  The recommendation report will be circulated to the press, government, regulators and police authorities in the UK and also in other key jurisdictions involved.

    We aim to achieve positive reform by parading the problem that the current status quo is unacceptable and highly damaging to our society on a number of levels.

    The Campaign

    • Investigate the Fraudsters and Stop punishing the Victims
    • Fair Tax Laws for Investment Fraud Victims

     UK tax laws currently unfairly penalise investment fraud victims who are suffering onerous tax liabilities for the actions of criminals who in turn are largely escaping investigation or punishment.

    Our outdated and unfair legislation needs to be brought in line with other countries which tackle this issue head on and in a manner which avoids anomalous and unjust results.

    The Cause

    Investment Fraud is a very serious and growing problem.  It is a disgraceful and unacceptable fact that individuals become victims of investment fraud every day.  Victims have nowhere to turn as the police, regulators and government do nothing to stem the tide of this widespread, international crime.  Many victims make reports to Action Fraud but no action is taken.  Not even serving police officers themselves who have been defrauded can get criminal investigations launched.

    Investment fraud impacts a huge number of people each year across a broad range of financial products and markets.  According to reports, more than 5 million people a year in the U.K. are victims of scams and one in ten people in the UK have fallen victim to investment fraud in the past five years.  This is costing in excess of £6 billion every year.

    Fraud is now the UK’s most prevalent crime. Fraud and online crimes make up almost half of UK’s 11.8m total financial losses to financial criminals.

    Since the new pension freedoms were introduced in April 2015, giving over-55s access to their entire pension fund, there has been an explosion of fraudulent investments in the UK. Billions of pounds of “unlocked” pension cash is a golden opportunity for con artists.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/11812377/Victim-of-fraud-Why-the-authorities-WONT-investigate.html

    Raising awareness of Investment Fraud and encouraging the regulators, HMRC, police forces and the government to tackle Investment Fraud prevention

    The current laws and system are unfair and unjust.  HMRC pursue victims rather than perpetrators for tax liabilities. This does not happen in other countries like the US, as exemptions are available there for fraud victims.

    Many victims of fraud, who have been mis-sold investment and pension schemes are being aggressively pursued by HM Revenue and Customs for resulting tax liabilities.  Many victims have not made much, if any, financial gain and in most cases have actually lost funds, with some being very large sums.  In contrast, those perpetrating the fraud, have made huge amounts of profit at the expense of the victims – much or all of which is not declared for tax purposes.

    Calling on the Government to introduce a tax exemption for victims of fraud in respect of liabilities arising as a result of investment fraud

    Few crimes are being investigated or prosecuted in this area – the fraudsters are escaping penalty whilst the victims are penalised.  Investment fraud is a “Cinderella Crime”: in the shadows and overlooked, with the chances of prosecution of the perpetrators being minuscule.

    Countless victims who have reported incidents to Action Fraud (the government’s designated facility for dealing with such matters) have been told that no action will be taken, despite very costly and devastating crimes having been committed against them.

    In practice, when complaints are filed victims typically wait six weeks or more before their case is passed on to another police department to investigate.  This gives criminals plenty of time to move money offshore, escape and continue to trick other savers, often under a different guise.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/11812377/Victim-of-fraud-Why-the-authorities-WONT-investigate.html

    Those who defraud investors in the UK often suffer little more than a slap on the wrist.  Police are often unwilling to investigate allegations of complex financial crimes, especially when cases involve smaller financial frauds that don’t attract media attention.

    Even if the police do manage to tackle more fraud cases, Crown prosecutors need to make the issue a higher priority in order to put more fraudsters in jail.

    Sentences for defrauding the public are non-existent or feeble – while sentences for defrauding HMRC are much more appropriate (e.g. eight years for the directors of pension trustees Tudor Capital Management).

    In the US, fraudster Bernie Madoff revived a sentence of 150 years in prison – a sentence usually reserved for serial killers, such was the recognition of the devastation he had caused and the abuse of trust. In the U.K., prison sentences are rarely more than a few years. This is little deterrence to the unscrupulous fraudsters who stand to gain millions of pounds from conning investors

    Fraud victims are also often reluctant to come forward.  Some refuse to believe they have been swindled, and others are so embarrassed they can’t bring themselves to tell a spouse, let alone a police officer. The stigma needs to be broken and victims encouraged and supported in coming forward.

    The double injustice of failures to investigate coupled with tax laws that penalise the victims has led to the suicide of good, honest, hardworking taxpayers, multiple families losing their homes, welfare issues, depression and family breakdownsThis is completely unacceptable and the law must be changed immediately to stop this devastating double victimisation

    Investment fraud victims have already committed suicide over this issue – and more are still contemplating suicide as they contemplate the loss of everything they have ever worked for.

    The victims’ lives are changed forever; savings and pensions which have taken a lifetime to accumulate can be gone in an instant.  Victims may have to delay or even cancel retirement if they are defrauded out of their pensions or life savings.

    Multiple victims have lost their family homes and some face homelessness.  Fraud doesn’t just affect the victim. It affects a whole family. Partners need to take on extra jobs and victims may struggle to pay for food or clothing for their children.

    Despite the complexity of the frauds committed, victims often feel blamed for having been defrauded. Many victims say they feel panic, anger, fear, anxiety, shame and guilty themselves after being defrauded.

    Fraud can undermine the victims’ self confidence and make them feel that they are incapable of running their day to day life.  Some victims report feeling vulnerable, lonely, violated and depressed.  In the most extreme cases, suicidal, as a result of the fraud they experienced. These emotional and psychological impacts relate to both the stress of financial loss and the HMRC liabilities they are now facing following the fraud.

    Investment Fraud is a devastating breach of trust. The experience was also reported to have affected relationships with others, making it difficult for victims to trust anyone again.

    Victims are losing faith in the government and systems that should be protecting them rather than penalising them. Whether it is direct or indirect, investment fraud’s effects are profound – financially, emotionally and psychologically.

    What needs to change?

    Our laws and systems MUST be reformed. They are broken and unjustly penalise the wrong parties. This is a problem that will affect more and more hardworking families throughout the UK and offshore as fraud levels continue to rise.

    More must be done to raise awareness of this growing area of criminal activity and preventative measures taken. HMRC must exercise their discretion against fraud victims more sensitively until the law is changed and stop enforcing liabilities against victims in cases where fraud can be proven.

    The law must be changed to introduce a fair and robust system of tax exemptions for fraud victims to align our treatment of fraud victims with other countries

    Investment Fraud must become a priority policing issue. There must be increased priority given to investigating and prosecuting Investment Fraud. Investment Fraud must no longer be a “Cinderella Crime” – in the shadows and overlooked.

    Criminal sentences must reflect the impact and devastation caused by investment fraud.  Tougher penalties for the perpetrators must send out a ZERO TOLERANCE to this iniquitous crime.

     

     

     

  • HOLBORN ASSETS’ NEW CALCULATOR

    Holborn Assets’ Bob Parker needs a bit of help with his ‘rithmetic

    Holborn Assets has been trying to calculate how much victim Glynis Broadfoot is due in compensation for loss to her pension fund invested by them for the past five years.  But it is an uphill struggle and I am not entirely sure that poor old Bob Parker hasn’t either lost his marbles altogether, or never actually did maths in the first place. Either way I’ve decided to buy him a new calculator.

    Let’s look at the maths – they are quite straightforward.  When Holborn Assets first approached Mrs. Broadfoot, they promised her a “free” pension transfer from her final salary scheme with her local authority employer into a QROPS with Gower Pensions.  They assured her this was in her best interests.

    Five years and thousands of sleepless nights later, Mrs. Broadfoot has watched the value of her pension fund sink relentlessly while Holborn Assets has showed not a drop of concern and even refused to talk to her about it.  They have said “the case is closed”.

    To give them their due, Holborn Assets has now at last started coming to the table and have been making offers of compensation for Mrs. Braodfoot’s losses.  They started at thruppence and have now upped their offer to £35,000. But let’s have a look at the maths:

     

    Original cash equivalent transfer = £195,105

    Actual transfer = £146,379

    Big chunk of money inexplicably got lost = £48,726

    At a cautious low-risk growth of 4% per year, pension should now be worth £178,000

    But Mrs. Broadfoot has £106,730 left of her pension thanks to Holborn Assets

    So, even forgetting the £48k that Holborn “lost”, Mrs. Broadfoot needs £71,270 to put her back to where she should be.  And then there is compensation for the damage this has done to her health for five years.

    So come on Bob, do the maths!  We all know Paul Reynolds is making you a fortune so you can afford to pay proper compensation to your victim.

    And another thing, Holborn Assets is using cold-calling scammers in Manchester to sign up more victims.  Here in Spain, the leads generated by this scam are followed up by Holborn Assets salesman Jason Ryder who purports to have an office in Barcelona and another one in Marbella.

    Just hope it is not bank of Dunlop!

    Now, come on Uncle Bob, you know Holborn Assets has no license to operate in Spain or provide financial, pension or investment advice here.  That is how Mrs. Broadfoot got scammed in the first place and lost such a huge chunk of her pension.  So cold calling, scamming, destroying pensions, offering derisory compensation, ignoring a victim’s pleas for help…..not very nice.  Get your chequebook out mate!

    Finally, how is Paul Reynolds doing?  I met him at your office in 2015 you know.  He is quite handsome.  I hear he is your best salesmen which is why you won’t get rid of him – he is making you so much money.

    And what about your 40+ other “consultants”?  Don’t any of them care about your firm’s professional reputation?

     

     

     

     

  • VOTE FOR GREG MULHOLLAND – LEEDS NORTH WEST

    Two champions for the fraud victims

    It takes balls to stand as a parliamentary candidate.  It takes even bigger balls (or cojones as they say here in Spain) to champion a thorny cause and table an early day motion.Please vote for Greg if you are in Leeds North West.  If you are in another constituency, please post and re-post this; tell any of your friends, relatives, colleagues, customers or bosses to vote for Greg.  I would vote for him irrespective of whether he was Labour, Tory, Lib Dem or Monster Raving Looney Party. 

    If you are a victim of a pension or investment scam, you should be aware that Greg has championed the cause of victims and was one of the very few MPs who was ever prepared to put his head above the parapet and openly parade this problem.

    Greg has a long history of championing victims and has actively campaigned against a number of issues involving injustice.

    Mulholland’s EDM just before parliament was dissolved

    Greg has tabled Early Day Motions on various subjects including support for small breweries, winter fuel payments for the severely disabled under 60, and biometric data collection in schools. He has spoken on dementia during a Health Hotel session at the 2009 Liberal Democrat Party Conference.

    Two more champions for the fraud victims

    Before the dissolution of Parliament, MPs Fabian Hamilton and Beth Prescott supported the motion and pledged to get involved in the campaign against pension and investment fraud if they were elected.  Labour MP Wes Streeting has been involved in the Ark Class Action for some years and has a large number of victims of pension scams in his constituency.

  • STM GROUP: THE TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET PENSION INVESTMENT SCAM

    STM GROUP: THE TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET PENSION INVESTMENT SCAM

    No image for now.

    It is rare for me to say nothing.  On this occasion, STM Group has stated they are going to stick their heads in the sand and zip their lips. They have facilitated a financial crime…….OK, enough said.  For now. I will leave it to STM Group/Fidecs to decide what goes into this blog.  They have until close of play tomorrow, Friday 26th May.  Then we can either deal with this discreetly and privately – or we can do it all publicly.  With every sordid detail exposed in the public domain, to the regulators, the police (who are already investigating, with victims making their reports to the Serious Fraud Office) and the press.  And, of course, the Stock Market.  Your call STM.  Silence is not golden.  It is distinctly brown.  Get your lawyers to talk to me if you want, but let these victims have some answers if you have any conscience.

  • SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE REQUESTS PENSION AND INVESTMENT SCAM REPORTS

    SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE REQUESTS PENSION AND INVESTMENT SCAM REPORTS

    Pension Life Blog - The Serious Fraud Office has asked victims of the Capita Oak, Henley, Westminster and Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund scams to make a report so that these crimes can be investigated. Pension ScamsThe Serious Fraud Office has asked victims of the Capita Oak, Henley, Westminster and Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund scams to make a report so that these crimes can be investigated.

     

    But I am urging all victims of ALL scams to also make reports to the SFO, please.

     

    This story was first published by International Investment journalist Helen Burgraff on 22.5.17 and heralds a welcome start to the much-needed initiative to bring pension scammers to justice.

     

    Unfortunately, the pension landscape – both in the UK and offshore – is no better now than in the days of the Wild West.  Back then, first the Sheriff’s Fraud Officer had to catch his horse; check the horse wasn’t lame; saddle up; then whistle for his tame injun to help him track the thief. Finally, once his water bottle was filled, the brave sheriff set off with his companion, Raging Bull, by around lunch time.  Usually, they had tracked the thief down drinking whisky in a saloon by tea time, and after a dusty skirmish, he was thrown in jail by supper time.

     

    Almost exactly two years ago, on 27.5.2015, the Insolvency Service published a witness statement on the £120 million Store First fraud which saw more than 1,000 victims lose their pensions and gain tax liabilities.  The statement clearly named 18 scammers involved in these cases – many of whom had been visited at their offices.  And yet, not a single one of these criminals was prosecuted or jailed.

     

    Of course the blooming obvious happened – all the scammers went on to operate further scams and ruin thousands more victims’ lives.  The cold calling firm, Nunn McCreesh, went on to operate the toxic UCIS fund, Blackmore Global; many of the cold callers upgraded their operations to “introducers” and the Ginger Scammer promoted himself to fund investment manager in the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund (£21 million now suspended).

     

    Pension Life Blog - Scrap heap investments: Toby Whittaker's Lootin' Airport - The Serious Fraud Office has asked victims of the Capita Oak, Henley, Westminster and Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund scams to make a report so that these crimes can be investigated. - pension scams
    Scrap heap investments: Toby Whittaker’s Lootin’ Airport

    Whatever all the rest of the scammers are doing, it won’t be making good the damage they caused back in 2012/13. And Group First is now launching a new Park First car park at Luton Airport.  Doubtless there will be healthy investment introduction commissions for the scammers to con hundreds of investors and pension savers into losing their life savings.  Perhaps Toby will name this new venture “Lootin’ Airport”.

     

    Meanwhile, I have discovered one of the advantages of having police officers among the members of the Pension Life Groups. You get the benefit of a wee bit of inside information and I hear that a bunch of the scammers have been arrested. About time!

     

    Pension Life BLog - I called the Ginger Scammer's lawyer a "dick" once - maybe it should have been "tick". - pension scamMeanwhile, the Ginger Scammer’s lawyer is complaining about an image on the Pension Life website. Trouble is, I can’t work out which one it is – I’ve searched and searched and I can’t find a single offensive photo.  But then what is offensive to one person is inoffensive to another.    I called the Ginger Scammer’s lawyer a “dick” once – maybe it should have been “tick”.

     

     

     

     

     

  • PETER MOAT AND SARA MOAT – FAST PENSIONS

    See how fast your pension can disappear?

    There is growing concern about Peter Moat and Sara Moat of Fast Pensions.  There have been a number of Pensions Ombudsman’s determinations which expressed concerns about the maladministration of the unlicensed firm owned/run by the Moats.

    One of these was reported by FT Adviser on 10th May 2017:

    Fast Pensions told to pay £79k death benefit

    The article stated the Pensions Ombudsman had told Fast Pensions it must pay out a death benefit to the widow of a former client after the company was accused of purposely delaying payments and quoted the Ombudsman as saying: “We have dealt with a number of other cases recently involving Fast Pensions, where there have been continued failures to respond to requests.”
    The Ombudsman went on to cite delays and maladministration on the part of Fast Pensions which caused much distress and inconvenience to the complainant.  Apparently, Fast Pensions has failed to comment and Karen Johnston, Deputy Pensions Ombudsman, has said: “We have dealt with a number of other cases recently involving Fast Pensions, where there have been continued failures to respond to requests and payment/transfer applications. Fast Pensions has also failed to communicate effectively with this office.”
    A number of very distressed and worried members of the Fast Pensions scheme have contacted me and asked me to help them find out why they can’t transfer their pensions out (as is their statutory right).  I filled in the contact form on the Fast Pensions website (there was no address, email or contact number on the site) and was contacted by James Porter. He told me that after some administrative problems in 2016, he had been appointed in January 2017 to look after the pension queries for Fast Pensions.
    He also said he was dealing with all the members and the Ombudsman.  However, the members have claimed Porter takes days to respond and that Fast Pensions have failed to pay compensation they were awarded and to facilitate transfers out.
    CONTACT DETAILS
    Porter’s email address is james.porter@fastpensions.co.uk and Fast Pensions have just changed their postal address from PO Box 4385 08121954: Companies House Default Address Cardiff CF14 8LH to Crown House 27 Old Gloucester Street London WC1N 3AX on 18 May 2017.  This is a virtual office with thousands of companies registered there and nowhere near where Porter appears to be based in Manchester or where Moat is based in Javea, Alicante, Spain.  There is nothing wrong with using a virtual address – I use a UK one myself as I am resident in Spain. But then I don’t run a pension scheme and the members suspect – perfectly understandably – there has been a deliberate attempt to make it difficult to contact anyone at Fast Pensions.
    When we spoke a week or so ago, Porter – a very personable gentleman – assured me he was dealing with everything assiduously and that there would soon be a contact number and address so that worried members could contact the company.  He told me there were about 400 members in total and he reassured me that the assets of the schemes were unregulated long-term loans held within bonds.  What I relief!  He said he would be sending out a newsletter to update all those who are so anxious to know whether their pensions are safe and are desperate for news as to when they can transfer out.  Unsurprisingly, nobody has any confidence in the custodianship of their pensions.
    There are a few worrying things about Fast Pensions – apart from the various Ombudsman’s determinations, the numerous worried members and reports of liberation and tax demands – and that is that Sara Moat resigned as a director on 17.3.17 and then a Sara Grace Moat (with the same date of birth) was appointed as a director on 6.4.17. Sara, or Sara Grace, is also director of Fast Enrolment of Gilbert Wakefield House Bewsey Street Warrington WA2 7JQ.

    Would you buy a second-hand house from the Moats?

    Peter Daniel Moat and Sara Grace Moat have been involved in a string of businesses called Blu somethingsomething… Blu Debt, Blu Property, Blu Property GroupBlu Financial Services of Cinnamon House, Cinnamon Park, Crab Lane, Fearnhead, Warrington WA2 0XP etc.  As director of Blu Debt, Peter Moat introduced one victim to Stephen Ward’s Ark pension scam – and charged him £500 for “advice”.

    The Moats also have a business in Javea called DEYSE INVESTMENTS SL  plus Blu Holding Group, Desinplot, Desysins, Deysecomunic, Deyserents, El Arenal de Deyse, Property Exchange.  I feel exhausted just thinking about running so many businesses and think I can understand why Fast Pensions has not received the attention it deserves when the Moats have so many other ventures – all based in Javea, Spain.  The address for some of these businesses is Avenida la Llibertat 31, Javea 03730, Alicante.  But who knows – it could equally be somewhere in Moraira at Stephen Ward’s office, or at LettersRUs next to Barclays Bank.
    I have asked James Porter who the trustees are and for a complete schedule of the scheme assets.  Many of the members suspect that Mr. Porter is actually Peter Moat.  If this is true, then it is hard to understand why he would hide behind his pregnant wife.  When their baby is born – and I do of course wish them well – I hope they will be more decisive about names than Sara Moat is with her directorships on Companies House.
    Meanwhile, there are 400 people worried sick about their pensions.  And I am concerned that the track record which is in the public domain in both the UK and Spain does not inspire confidence – neither does the Moats’ inability to spell the word “blue”.  Further, the fact that the underlying assets of the scheme are unregulated loans and that the trustees are an unknown entity.
    Nice as James Porter was when we spoke by phone, and sincere/reassuring as he sounded, I am afraid this has undeniably got all the hallmarks of a typical, bog standard scam.  It looks, sounds, feels, smells like a scam.  The victims are not stupid.  Neither is the Pensions Ombudsman.  The jury is out on the Pensions Regulator.  I still wish and hope that it is not a scam and that the victims will be able to safely transfer out their pensions and receive their awarded compensation without further delay.
  • TICK CAMPAIGN – NEGLIGENT PENSION PROVIDERS – STANDARD LIFE

    THE PENSION LIFE TICK CAMPAIGN: now that Andrew Warwick-Thompson, Executive Director for Regulatory Policy at the Pensions Regulator is joining LGPS Central as CEO, it is time for him to help us to ensure all negligent ceding providers compensate their victims.  No doubt Andrew will engage enthusiastically with this campaign and lead by example.

    tPR Chair David Norgrove stated on 13.7.2010:

    “Any administrator who simply ticks a box and allows the transfer, post July 2010, is failing in their duty as a trustee and as such are liable to compensate the beneficiary.”

    But on 29.12.2010, LGPS simply ticked a box, failed in their duty as a trustee, handed over a nurse’s pension to a bogus occupational scheme operating pension liberation, and is now liable to compensate her for her losses.  The victim in question, Mrs. G, will be in the High Court as Representative Beneficiary of the Ark schemes to challenge Dalriada Trustees’ application to recover the loans on 19.6.2017.

    Although LGPS did indeed perform badly in the case of Ark – handing over many thousands of pounds’ worth of pensions – the worst performing personal pension provider was Standard Life (by a mile).  And Standard Life have rejected all the complaints made by their victims and refused to compensate them for their losses due to Standard Life’s failings.

    STANDARD LIFE

    The 2016 Report states: “During 2016 we engaged directly with our customers, investors and employees to review our strategy and ensure we continue to focus on the right areas. We asked these stakeholders to provide their views on what is important to them across our four sustainability priorities. This review highlighted a number of areas that matter most to our stakeholders including trust and transparency, governance, sustainable economic growth, cyber-crime, climate change, responsible stewardship, financial inclusion and decent work and pay. This input will also help focus our activity in 2017 and beyond.

    If Standard Life are going to claim transparency and want customers to trust them, they have to prove they are capable of responsible stewardship.  Handing over millions of pounds worth of pensions to obvious scammers neither inspires trust nor evidences responsible stewardship.

    Standard Life declared a profit of £723 million in 2016 – after paying its four directors salaries in excess of £10.8 million – 40% of which was in bonuses.  It is ridiculous, offensive and disgusting for Standard Life to fail to compensate the victims of fraud who are facing financial ruin due to Standard Life’s own failings.

    There are only three questions to ask about Standard Life’s obligation to compensate its victims:

    Did Standard Life simply tick a box and allow a transfer? TICK

    Did Standard Life fail in their duty as trustee? TICK

    Are Standard Life liable to compensate their beneficiaries? TICK

    Don’t use Standard Life until they compensate their victims.  Don’t put money in the pockets of these negligent people who pay their directors obscene salaries and lie about their company’s ethics.

     

     

  • WINDSOR PENSIONS STILL SCAMMING AFTER ALL THESE YEARS

    Steve Pimlott of Windsor Pensions is still scamming people out of their pensions.  And seeking new victims on LinkedIn.  Inviting people to:

    Transfer your frozen UK pensions to a QROPS

    Still scamming after all these years

    He will charge between 10% and 20% and will use forged documentation from an obscure QROPS such as Danica and BSEC and then fool the ceding provider into transferring a pension into a fraudulently-set-up bank account in a dodgy jurisdiction such as the Isle of Man.

    Pimlott – who may also go by the name of Steve Derrick Pimlott – claims to have done many thousands of these transactions and states that only a couple of hundred people have ever got caught by HMRC.  And even then, he says, as most of the people live offshore they ignore the tax demands of 55% on the amount liberated.  HMRC’s version of events is somewhat different and tell me that in some cases Pimlott made off with the whole transfer and the victim never even got the 80% or 90% that was left.

    Pimlott involved a firm allegedly called Insignia Financial Services in some of the cases.  Although this gave some of the victims an illusion of respectability, the firm was in fact a clone of an FCA-registered entity.

    Dozens of properties as opposed to Ward’s mere six

    Pimlott is reportedly in Florida – not too far from Stephen Ward’s Indian Point holiday villa empire.  Ward also told his victims to throw the tax demands in the bin.  However, Pimlott’s property portfolio is considerably larger than Ward’s. If Pimlott is telling the truth about having done 5,000 liberations, then HMRC will be pretty busy.  If we assume the average pension pot size was, say, £50,000 and Windsor Pensions charged 15% fees for each one, then Pimlott earned a cool £37.5 million.  And herein lies the problem: while these scammers are earning such huge amounts of money, they are hardly likely to give it all up voluntarily.

    I hark back to the Pensions Regulator’s Lesley Titcomb’s statement that “scammers are criminals”.   Steve Pimlott and his associates are criminals.  They need prosecuting, given maximum jail sentences and their assets confiscating. The industry needs to get behind this and support the pressure that must be put on law enforcement agencies in the UK, USA and beyond.

    Ceding Pension Providers ignored warnings about scams

    HMRC say there were sufficient warnings about pension scams in the public domain for years.  In 2009, the FCA warned about a rogue firm called Cash In Your Pension operating liberation scams;  HMRC warned about pension liberation scams involving rogue IFAs. Yet still the ceding pension providers carried out zero due diligence.  For years they just kept handing over thousands of pension pots to the scammers without a thought to the financial ruin they were inflicting on the victims.

    Hopefully, now the Pensions Regulator’s Andrew Warwick-Thompson is going to work for one of these negligent pension providers – LGPS – he will help bring these companies to justice as well.

    HMRC NEWSLETTER 39:

    Compliance issues

    Fraud

    Readers may have seen the HMRC News Release on 22 June 2009 which confirmed 11 people, including some independent financial advisers, were arrested following raids in the North West and Midlands. These arrests were linked to an estimated £2.5 million suspected tax relief fraud involving bogus pension schemes. Enquiries are continuing in that case.

    Pension Schemes Services (PSS) and other areas of HMRC are continuing to work closely with our regulatory colleagues to ensure that the interests of members are properly protected through bona fide pension schemes and that the generous tax reliefs available through employer/member contributions are not abused. We will vigorously pursue those who deliberately attempt to defraud the public purse.

  • AWT’S NEXT CHALLENGE: NEGLIGENT CEDING PROVIDERS – STARTING WITH LGPS

    AWT’S NEXT CHALLENGE: NEGLIGENT CEDING PROVIDERS – STARTING WITH LGPS

    Shedding a tear or two at the departure of tPR’s Head of Willy Waggling

    Bye bye Tinky Winky.  Good luck and have fun at LGPS!

    His next challenge will be to lead by example and ensure negligent ceding providers compensate their victims whose pensions were transferred into scams.  And he can start with LGPS as a shining example so the rest can follow.

    As Tinky Winky sails off into the sunset and leaves his regulatory willy waggling duties behind, his first mission is to understand the other side of the coin: the transfer of £millions from secure pensions into the trousers of the scammers.  He will now see with a fresh pair of eyes how ineffective tPR has been – and how negligent the ceding providers were.

    Winky is going to have quite a mess to clean up when he gets to LGPS – so he had better make sure he takes Noo Noo with him.

    Will probably need more than 1 Noo Noo – in different sizes for all the mess at LGPS

    And I am sure he is going to be cheerfully looking forward to working even more closely with me from now on.

    On June 19th, the Secretary of the Ark Class Action – Mrs. G – will be in the High Court as the Representative Beneficiary for the Ark victims challenging Dalriada Trustees’ Beddoe application.  Dalriada, appointed by tPR in May 2011, have already spent around 15% of the £30 million Ark fund.  They are now seeking the court’s permission and directions to use even more of the victims’ funds to take legal action against them to recover £11 million worth of liberation loans. This will result in financial ruin for most of the victims – many of whom will lose their homes.  HMRC say the loans will remain taxable even if they are repaid so there is the real possibility that members will face two sets of crippling proceedings.

    Mrs. G and the other Ark victims – originally 487 of them but now significantly fewer as some have died (some as a result of taking their own lives) – became victims because HMRC and tPR took way too long to take action to suspend the schemes.  Also, the schemes were registered negligently in the first place – tPR allowed fourteen occupational Ark schemes to be registered by the same person without there being evidence of any intention or chance of the sponsoring employer being a bona fide employer.

    Between August 2010 and August 2011, dozens of personal and occupational pension providers cheerfully handed over £30 million to the scammers with utter incompetence, no due diligence and complete disregard for all the dozens of warnings which had been put out by HMRC and tPR for many years.

    In particular, these negligent ceding providers ignored this one issued by tPR Chair David Norgrove on 13.7.2010 just before Ark was launched:  “Any administrator who simply ticks a box and allows the transfer, post July 2010, is failing in their duty as a trustee and as such are liable to compensate the beneficiary.”

    I shall be looking forward to my next meeting with Tinky Winky because he will be able to bring a wealth of first-hand knowledge and experience to the table.  I will probably be bringing Mrs. G to the meeting with me.  Because guess who her negligent ceding provider was?  Yep, you guessed – LGPS.

    BACKGROUND TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF CEDING PROVIDERS SUCH AS LGPS:

    The Ark schemes were launched in 2010 by – among others – Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions S.L. and Premier Pension Transfers Ltd.  The six Ark schemes had been registered by HMRC and the Pensions Regulator with no due diligence by either to establish whether the schemes had been set up with the specific purpose of operating pension liberation; whether they were bona fide occupational pension schemes set up by a sponsoring employer which intended to trade and provide employment; whether there was a competent trustee and board of trustees in place; whether there was a clear Statement of Investment Principles or whether there was ever any realistic prospect of the schemes providing member benefits.

    At around the same time, a multi-million pound occupational pension scam was being vigorously promoted by James Lau of Wightman Fletcher McCabe while the administrators/trustees of the scheme, Andrew Meeson and Peter Bradley, were under criminal investigation for cheating the Public Revenue (and were subsequently jailed).  Also, former barrister, solicitor and porn star Paul Baxendale-Walker was promoting a whole series of liberation scams unhindered by the authorities – despite having been firmly in the spotlight since 2007 as a passionate advocate of liberation.  And KJK Investments/G Loans was a further liberation scheme flourishing at around the same time, having been started in 2009.

    By the time Ark was getting well underway, tPR (formerly OPRA) was fully aware that liberation scams were proliferating and that the feeble warnings they had made back in 2002 about scams which had been operating as far back as 1997 had reached neither the public nor the industry effectively.  In 1999, tPR had been investigating two scammers – Stephen Russell and William Ferguson – for a £6m pension fraud.  The pair were jailed for five years in 2003.

    In fact, tPR were fully aware that since 1999 pension scams were on the increase, and yet did not make it clear to ceding pension trustees what their statutory obligations were in respect of transferring victims into scams. On 13.7.2010, tPR Chair David Norgrove stated that: “Any administrator who simply ticks a box and allows the transfer, post July 2010, is failing in their duty as a trustee and as such are liable to compensate the beneficiary.”  But pension trustees claim they never read that message (let alone heeded it) and that it was neither publicised nor distributed.  Further, in the same year Tony King, the Pensions Ombudsman, reported that he had “found that pension trustees failed in carrying out serious fiduciary responsibilities to others in circumstances in which the law specifically states that they should not be protected from liability.”  And still tPR did nothing.  And the Pension Schemes Act 1993 was not amended to reflect the urgent need to protect the public.

    The Scorpion Campaign was launched by tPR in 2013 after fifteen years of failing to warn the public sufficiently, and omitting to make it clear to trustees what their statutory obligations were to pension scheme members.  During this period, the pension scam industry matured into a deadly serious and well organised large-scale operation in the UK, with many new “players” coming into the arena having been trained by Stephen Ward and other founders and pioneers of early scams.

    It was – by the time Scorpion dribbled weakly and ineffectually into the arena – well known to tPR what the typical characteristics of pension scams were and what phrases and claims were habitually being made by the scammers to dupe their victims into signing over their gold-plated pensions into worthless, toxic schemes and being financial ruined.  Among the many key phrases (such as “your pension is frozen”; “tax-free loan”; “guaranteed 8% returns” etc.), was the most powerful of all: “the scheme is HMRC approved”.  There was, of course, no such thing as HMRC were as guilty of lazy, box-ticking negligence as the culpable ceding provider trustees.  But to this day, tPR has done nothing to dispel this myth, and in fact even continues to help the scammers by using the same incorrect phrase on its own website: If you are required to register a scheme with TPR that does not require HMRC approval, please contact us.”

    Even by the time tPR had published the feeble Scorpion campaign in February 2013, the scammers acknowledged this was having a negligible effect on their various scams, and merely moved the goalposts a little to avoid detection.  Capita Oak, Henley and Westminster continued to operate successfully beyond February 2013, but only a few ceding pension trustees either noticed Scorpion at all or took any steps to put into practice the minimal due diligence suggested by Scorpion.

    In the full knowledge that Stephen Ward was one of the most prolific pension liberation scammers, tPR took no action to suspend any schemes in which he was involved.  As a consequence, in August 2014, a Police officer was scammed out of his Police Pension by Ward’s Dorrixo Alliance and into the toxic London Quantum scheme.  In fact, far from having any widespread effect, the multitude of scams continue to this day unaffected by tPR’s dismal attempts to protect and inform the public.

    PENSIONS REGULATOR’S OBLIGATIONS AND OBJECTIVES:

    According to their own website, tPR’s statutory objectives are set out in legislation and include promoting and improving understanding of the good administration of work-based pensions to protect member benefits.  These objectives are detailed below with notes in bold.

    • to protect the benefits of members of occupational pension schemes tPR has failed to do this and as a result of repeated failures over a period of more than fifteen years has facilitated the scamming of thousands of victims out of millions of pounds’ worth of occupational pensions and into millions of pounds’ worth of tax liabilities
    • to promote, and to improve understanding of the good administration of work-based pension schemes tPR made no effort to work with administrators and trustees of schemes such as Royal Mail; local authorities; the NHS, the Police etc., to help them improve their understanding of how to avoid transferring victims into scams
    • to reduce the risk of situations arising which may lead to compensation being payable from the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) Through multiple failings over a period of more than fifteen years, tPR has exposed the PPF to huge amounts of compensation claims. This is paid for by the ethical, compliant sector of the financial services industry who are understandably deeply unhappy that they have to bear the cost of tPR’s negligence and omissions
    • to maximise employer compliance with employer duties and the employment safeguards introduced by the Pensions Act 2008 tPR has done nothing to ensure that occupational pension schemes have a bona fide employer that either trades or employs anybody – or even exists at all

    One thing which tPR omits to state as being one of its obligations or objectives, is to take action to prevent pension scams in the first place by carrying out due diligence on the trustees, administrators or sponsors of a scam before registering it.  In fact, it is clear from evidenced facts, that what should have been simple common sense in terms of basic, obvious vigilance and diligence, was not done.  No questions were asked; no checks were made; no basic suspicions were raised.  There is no evidence that anybody at tPR ever had the intelligence to ask questions such as whether schemes repeatedly administered by Stephen Ward or his accomplice Anthony Salih and registered to 31 Memorial Road posed any risks to the public.

    Over the past couple of years, numerous “whistle blowing” reports have been made to tPR by members of the Class Action but they have been studiously ignored.  At a meeting in April 2015, tPR were invited to work with (rather than against) the Class Action, but this too was ignored.  Also at this meeting, the Capita Oak case was discussed.  The Insolvency Service subsequently wound up the trustee of Capita Oak, Imperial, but tPR has taken no action to protect the members’ interests and has left 300 victims facing the loss of £10.8 million worth of pension transfers which were 100% invested in Store First store pods (now arguably worthless).  The Henley and Westminster victims are facing a similar fate with zero intervention by tPR.

    In 2014, evidence of Stephen Ward’s pension scam portfolio was handed to HMRC – including numerous occupational schemes and a pension trustee company: Dorrixo Alliance (registered at 31 Memorial Road, Worsley).  However, neither HMRC nor tPR carried out any due diligence to see how many scams were under the trusteeship of Dorrixo and the toxic London Quantum scheme slipped through yet another gaping hole in the net, leading to dozens of victims losing £ millions of pension funds (including final salary ones).

    Reverting back to 2010 when the most damning of tPR’s multiple failings started, hundreds of people were left to be scammed into the Salmon Enterprises scheme with no warnings by tPR that the administrators were under investigation for fraud, and thousands of people were left to be scammed into the various Baxendale-Walker and KJK Investments schemes.  Along with Ark, 2010/11 alone accounted for well over a quarter of a billion pounds’ worth of pension fund losses and crippling tax liabilities.  And this excludes the dozens of scams still being run by Stephen Ward to this day and which tPR continues to ignore.  In fact, it has recently been reported that pension scams are by now accounting for over £10 billion worth of losses so the 2010/11 figure may well be substantially higher in reality.

  • THE PENSIONS REGULATOR’S PLANS TO FINE PENSION SCAMMERS

    THE PENSIONS REGULATOR’S PLANS TO FINE PENSION SCAMMERS

    The Pensions Regulator’s plans to start regulating

    The Pensions Regulator has sent out a clear message in the Johnsons Shoes case where an employer failed to comply with its legal obligations regarding workplace pensions:

    Our message is clear: fail to comply with the law and you may be fined.

    This was clearly the right course of action for the regulator to take and will both encourage some employers to be compliant and discourage others to avoid compliance failures.

    But here is a curiously anomalous situation: I can find no evidence that the company just fined £40k by the regulator has ever scammed thousands of victims out of millions of pounds’ worth of pensions and left them with crippling tax liabilities.  Many of these victims have had heart attacks and strokes as a result of the stress of being scammed. The employer, Johnsons Shoes, sanctioned by tPR, has been in business for 25 years and it is possible that one or two customers might have experienced the odd blister if the hand-made shoes were too tight.  But my search for skeletons, scams or scandals came up with nothing more serious than the fact that they can’t spell the word “paid” on their website.

    A little birdie has tipped me the wink that LaLa has had a quiet word in TinkyWinky’s shell like and told him that now he has got a taste for a spot of regulating, he really ought to up his game and sanction some of the outright scammers (i.e. criminals).  There is a touch of embarrassment now that a long-established family business has received such a high-profile and high-value fine, while the worst sanction that has ever been handed out to criminals is the odd flaccid waggle.

    Tinky Winky’s first dilemma is how to catch the scammers.  Shoe shops are easy because they don’t tend to fly away to exotic places like Gibraltar and Malta but stay neatly sandwiched between a travel agent and a book store.  The Insolvency Service very helpfully named 18 of the scammers in the Capita Oak, Henley and Store First SIPP investment scams which cost over 1,000 victims over £100 million worth of pensions plus tax liabilities.  And I am sure all these criminals will be relatively easy to find in their various magnificent country mansions.

    Once caught, the next dilemma will be to work out how much to fine them.  My suggestion would be to simply divide £100 million by 18 – interestingly that comes out to £5,555,555.55 each.  On top of that, the scammers should be made to pay the victims’ tax liabilities.

    Speed is now of the essence to avoid the embarrassment that it took the Pensions Regulator more than four years to ban 5G Futures trustees Williams and Huxley and that the only action ever taken against Stephen Ward was a “severe dressing gown”.

    If the shoe fits….

    Tinky Winky has got to realise why there is the word “Regulator” in the Pensions Regulator – and if the shoe fits, he has got to wear it.

    Another reason for the urgency of taking some long-overdue action against the criminals, is the part played in the financial ruin of so many thousands of victims by tPR itself.  14 Ark schemes, now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, were registered by tPR; Capita Oak now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, was registered by tPR; Westminster now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, was registered by tPR (and tPR failed to spot that both Capita and Westminster shared the same non-existent sponsoring employer); London Quantum, now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, was registered by tPR and its trustee was Stephen Ward who was behind Ark, Capita Oak and Westminster…….etc. etc.

    The Pensions Regulator has warned employers not to ignore their automatic enrolment duties.  It would be good to see the regulator’s duties clarified and restore some public confidence in the performance of this public body that is supposed to protect workplace pensions so that people can save safely for their retirement.

     

  • FRAUD VICTIMS TASK FORCE

    FRAUD VICTIMS TASK FORCE

    Fraud Victims Task Force

    Pension Life is joining forces with another group action in order to set up the Fraud Victims Task Force. The objective of this initiative is to reinforce the campaign to protect fraud victims.  As outlined in Greg Mulholland’s motion before parliament was dissolved,  victims want to see prosecutions and sanctions against those who commit fraud.  Further, they want to see a workable tax exemption regime for victims who are pursued for tax by HMRC in addition to pension and investment losses they have suffered.

     

     

    AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE FRAUD VICTIMS TASK FORCE

    1. To unite victims of financial fraud, abuse and mis-selling – and give them an effective voice
    2. To campaign for positive change to defend victims’ rights and interests
    3. To call for a change in the law to introduce an exemption for tax liabilities arising as a direct result of fraud
    4. To investigate, analyse and summarise patterns of financial fraud which result in tax demands
    5. To report on the unjust result of victims rather than criminals being pursued and penalised by HMRC
    6. To calculate the inequitable correlation between tax collected and the long-term cost to the State
    7. To build strong reporting relationships between stakeholders in the industry to expose scams as early possible
    8. To bring to justice negligent parties who facilitate financial crime and ensure they compensate their victims
    9. To expose the failures in regulation and law enforcement which encourage fraud
    10. To recommend improvements in cooperation of government, regulators, ombudsmen and law enforcement agencies internationally

     

    FRAUD VICTIMS TASK FORCE STRUCTURE

    The proposed Task Force membership – subject to acceptance by each individual member – is intended to cover all the disciplines required to produce an in-depth analysis and subsequent powerful report which identifies and quantifies the problem and recommends workable solutions for implementation by the government, HMRC, regulators, ombudsmen and police authorities.

    The members of the Task Force will include the below functions and invitations for each position are being sent out currently:

    Joint Chairs – representing the two Action Groups

    Parliamentary Advisers – to be finalised after the election

    Criminal Specialist – criminal and sports barrister

    Financial Services Specialist (and Treasurer) – Chartered Financial Planner and pension transfer specialist 

    Pensions Specialist

    Tax Specialist

    Legislative Specialist

    Political Specialists

    Technical Tax Specialist (to draft proposed legislation)

    Mental Health Specialist (to advise on the effects of being a victim of fraud and HMRC simultaneously)

    Ambassadors (high-profile celebrities from the world of sports and music)

    Victims (members of scams such as Ark, Capita Oak, Salmon Enterprises, London Quantum and Trafalgar etc.

    PROPOSED FRAUD VICTIMS TASK FORCE REPORT STRUCTURE – DRAFT

    • Outline the main types of pension and investment fraud
    • Describe how each type results in financial loss and tax liabilities
    • Provide examples of each type identified
    • Identify the “players” behind each type and example
    • Explain what regulatory omissions failed to prevent or sanction the individuals and firms
    • Quantify known losses and tax liabilities
    • Outline the impact on the victims and their families
    • Define how the government can lead a strong collection of measures to combat pension and investment fraud
    • Calculate the financial damage done to the public and the State by the present position and…
    • Calculate the potential financial advantages to the public and the State achievable through reform

    SPOTLIGHT ON THE HIGH COURT ARK/DALRIADA BEDDOE PROCEEDINGS ON 19.6.2017

    To highlight the problem, attention is drawn to the impending Beddoe proceedings in respect of the Ark matter.  Ark was placed in the hands of Dalriada Trustees on 31.5.2011 and consisted of 487 members; £30 million worth of transfers and £11 million worth of loans.  The reciprocal loan structure was judged to be a fraud on the power of investment by the High Court in November 2011 and Justice Bean determined that the loans were not validly made.

    In the intervening six years, approaching 15% of the fund value has been spent on trustees’ and solicitors’ fees; Dalriada are now threatening to bankrupt the victims in order to recover the loans; HMRC are threatening to bankrupt the victims in order to collect 55% tax on the loans at both the receiving end and the making end – as well as 40% tax on the scheme itself.  The tax will, according to HMRC, remain payable even if the loans are repaid.

    Dalriada are asking the High Court for permission and directions to use the victims’ funds to pay for legal action to recover the loans.  Few victims have sufficient assets or income to either pay the tax or repay the loans.  Some have already died, either through stress-related diseases or suicide; many are very ill – mentally or physically; many will lose their homes.  Even those who did not receive loans are being taxed because, according to HMRC, they transferred to Ark with the intention of receiving a loan.

    Representative Beneficiary Kim Goldsmith (a community nurse) and her legal team, QC Keith Bryant and solicitor Trowers and Hamlins will be vigorously contesting Dalriada’s application.