Tag: pension liberation fraud

International Investment interview with Pension Life´s Angie Brooks

International Investment interview with Angie Brooks, founder of Pension Life this week. This blog is written by Kim, Angie´s Assistant. Here´s the interview video which explains how Pension Life works to help victims of pension and investment scams. The interview also raises the question as to why pension and investment scams are so prolific – despite Angie’s hard work to bring them into the public eye – and bring scammers to justice.

As Angie states in the video, Pension Life was originally founded to help victims of the ARK pension scam with their tax liabilities. However, four years on and Pension Life has evolved. Angie is now involved in helping 34 different groups of victims of pension and investment scams. Angie regularly goes to the regulators and ombudsmen in different jurisdictions and makes complaints on their behalf.

Pension Life is based in Spain, and Angie works with clients all over the world. Pension and investment scammers have no boundaries or borders and will weave their evil mischief wherever they can find British expats.

Angie offers her members a fixed membership fee, meaning “people know exactly what they are going to pay in advance”. Using privately-funded solicitors can be pricey and sometimes even non-starterer. Angie has, over the past four years, educated herself in pension and investment scams – how they work and how they are (constantly) evolving. Members can rest assured that they are being represented by a leading expert in the area of pension and investment scams.

If it were up to Angie, the people and firms responsible for pension and investment scams would all be sent to jail and the keys thrown away. With her weekly blogs and videos on the Pension Life website, and with the use of social media, Angie is hoping to get the word out there and warn both the public and the industry.

Angie stands up for the masses, where their single complaints are lost in a pile of excuses by the firms responsible for the destruction of their funds. She meets and speaks to as many victims as she can. Each victim has his or her own tragedy – often involving serious health issues and terrible financial hardship as a result of being scammed out of their life savings.

Some of Angie´s blogs are very hard hitting towards the firms and advisors who condone the use of pension and investment scams. The role Angie plays in uncovering the crooks of the industry is not without risk and often her outspoken words attract negative attention. Angie often receives threats of being sued by the lawyers who represent the companies she blogs about.

Angie states, “But If I was frightened I wouldn´t do it.”

Its not just solicitors who bombard her in outrage about the clearly-evidenced facts that Angie reports, she also has a herd of internet trolls who target her incessantly.

Angie says with reference to her blog trolls:

“There is a reason why I write my blogs. Firstly to warn the public and expose the things that go wrong in the financial services industry – to try to help new people avoid falling victim to scams, negligence and mis-selling; secondly to bring firms to the table to negotiate a solution to a problem where a client has suffered losses in their pension or investment portfolio. Few people have funds to instruct lawyers to sue firms to force them to pay redress for clients’ losses, so it is much better and cheaper to get the firm to volunteer to do so amicably and in a non-contentious manner.

But my blogs do upset the scammers and they regularly post negative comments. I have recently been accused of ‘being in cahoots with’ deVere and other companies and individuals. It is being claimed that I am being paid not to write about them, and to attack their competitors.  It will come as no surprise that those who are now attacking me and accusing me of all sorts of things are the ones whose firms’ questionable practices I have been blogging about recently.

I have in the past had very public spats on social media with deVere AND its CEO, Nigel Green, as well as the others who I have been accused of not writing about. And, if I need to have spats again in the future, I will not hesitate to do so. Like most firms, deVere has indeed made some serious mistakes in the past. However, I do not have any live, unresolved client complaints against the firm.

But this is all just rubbish from scammers who are trying to deflect attention from the main issues that I am writing about. The commenters ignore the facts I am reporting about – i.e. real scams which destroy victims’ life savings – and pick away at me personally. That is absolutely fine, because I am more than happy to be criticised and lied about – because it says more about the writer than it does about me. The people who matter know the truth.

Regular readers of my blogs may notice that sometimes my blogs quietly disappear with no public explanation. There is a reason for that too. The blogs often bring firms to the table and we get stuff done. Sometimes firms even preempt matters and make contact even before I get a chance to do a blog.

If I call a firm to discuss a problem and they enter into helpful and constructive dialogue over how to solve it, I don’t blog about it but keep the matter confidential. There are firms who quietly sort things out without making a fuss in a dignified and conscientious manner. In contrast, however, there are firms that just pull up the shutters – such as OMI and STM Fidecs. Hence why I keep blogging about them.

DeVere is indeed one of a number of firms I don’t currently blog about. So for the nice gentleman called Graham and another charming chap who calls himself “Innocent Bystander” who are accusing me of being partisan, don’t think just about what I do write, but about what I don’t write. There are good reasons for both.

I will continue to expose the actions, practices and vulgar conduct of firms who continue to ignore my questions; And I will tag all those who are stupid and irresponsible enough to keep on working for these firms and helping to fill these firms already bulging pockets.  In contrast, however, Holborn Assets and Guardian Wealth Management have engaged in relation to complaints, and so I have removed all blogs which mention the firm.”

For the future, Angie hopes things will get better and that the war on pension and investment scams can be won. However, much help is needed and Angie calls for the whole industry to get involved and make it their business to know what is happening to expats worldwide.

Airing the problem is one of the best solutions and International Investment has taken a keen interest in the campaigning side of what Pension Life does. It would be a really good thing if some of the media tried to educate themselves on what are the key issues and avoid barking up the wrong trees.

May 23, 2018
FCA Pension Scams

I like to have a good relationship with regulators. And believe me I have tried really really hard with the FCA. I didn’t have much of a relationship with the Pensions Regulator in the past. I asked for a meeting with Tinky Winky, tPR’s former executive director. He turned up with two lawyers (in case one blew away I guess) and a paralegal in an aptly-named conference room called the Warwick Suite at a hotel at Gatwick airport.

Winky accused me of bombarding him with emails (about the Capita Oak scam). I counted them: 16 over an 8-week period. My calculator said that was approximately two per week.

Then he threatened me for “tipping off” and said I could be prosecuted; then the uglier of his two lawyers threatened me with unspecified action if I didn’t wind my neck in. She said to me in a rather unpleasant manner “we can have you sent to the Tower you know – we have wide-ranging powers”.

Anyway, our little tea party in the stuffy room didn’t exactly make for a good spirit between us. So I sighed a huge sigh of relief when Winky departed tPR a year or so later and went to work for LGPS (one of the ceding providers who had performed so appallingly in Ark, Capita Oak and Westminster – handing over £ millions to the scammers without batting an eyelid).

I am happy to say I have a good relationship with Lesley Titcomb – Head of tPR – and am grateful to Henry Tapper for facilitating this.

But, back to the FCA. I went to see John Thorpe at the FCA a couple of years ago – with a rather thin colleague of mine who is a Chartered Financial Planner. John was very enthusiastic about working with us and asked me to give him any intel I had on scams and scammers. He said he would ensure all information would be passed on to the relevant people. However, he did warn me not to deluge him with emails and said: “not more than two or three a week please”.

But then John got moved to another department, which was disappointing. Since then I have sent dozens of complaints to the FCA – as have a number of my associates including IFAs, trustees, compliance officers, chartered financial planners and victims. But the firms in question are left unsanctioned. And the non-compliant practices continue unabated – and more victims are ruined on a daily basis.

In 2016, Jeremy Donaghy-Sutton (a senior airline captain and safety instructor) and I got together in London. He suggested we propose to the FCA an air-crash-style investigation and reporting system to analyse the causes of scams, prevent them from recurring and taking the appropriate action against those responsible for failures. Mostly his brilliant work, we finished and printed off our proposal and set off for the FCA offices.

I had called ahead and told them we would be coming and that we would like to hand our proposal, report and a series of complaints to an appropriate person. I said it was important that we had a brief chat so that we could explain the purpose of our visit (me plus an actual victim) and the accompanying documentation.

We got to the FCA’s North Colonnade office and went to reception. There I explained who I was, what I wanted, who and what I had with me. A very pleasant lady, flanked by two security guards, said “Oh, but we don’t see people here”. Her English wasn’t too bad, but I did wonder whether she hadn’t quite understood what I had said. So I tried again, and went into some detail about the fact that the person I had previously spoken to at the FCA had said that someone would indeed come down and see us.

But her English seemed to get worse the second time. And she still insisted that nobody would come to see us and accept the documents. I tried a third time, while Jeremy sat in the waiting area chuckling quietly as he could see and hear my fuse getting shorter and shorter.

This time the nice lady said she would get someone to speak to me on the phone and asked me to sit down for a few minutes while she got through to somebody. Jeremy and I sat watching the ghastly moving picture on the reception wall – and I wondered what on earth had inspired such a weird and inappropriate piece of “art” (and what the artist had been on at the time).

After about ten minutes, I was summoned back to the reception desk and the nice lady handed me a phone. I have no idea who the man on the other end of the line was, and not much idea whether he was speaking in English or some weird combination of Mandarin, Yiddish and Czech.

When I eventually got my head and ears around his weird accent, I realised he wanted me to explain – over the phone – who I was and what I wanted. By this time there were about twenty people hanging around in the reception area – so this extremely confidential complaint and report proposal was announced loudly and publicly as my voice got higher, squeakier and louder.

I had to spell out some words several times as the man’s English seemed to get worse as the agonisingly painful conversation dragged on and on. When I had finished, exhausted and wondering if this was all a bad dream, the man said “OK, hand your documents into the post room”. We duly dropped the bulging envelope into the tiny little room just outside the entrance to the FCA building. I assume it was all shredded as we never even got an acknowledgement.

Afterwards, over a quick lunch in a Thai restaurant just up the road from the FCA, Jeremy and I wondered if what had happened had all been just a bad dream. How could such a thing happen in a supposedly civilised and well-regulated country. But then Jeremy himself had spent the past five years wondering how the Ark “thing” had been allowed to happen.

The very things I warned about back in 2016 are still happening and victims’ pensions are being routinely destroyed – both in the UK and offshore. At the Transparency Task Force Symposium in November 2017, one victim stood up and related a remarkably similar story to mine about his treatment by FCA. The delegates – who included pension trustees, solicitors, police officers, victims and the wonderful Andy Agathangelou – were stunned and disgusted.

So, if anybody knows anyone at the FCA who might like to do a bit of regulating no more than twice a week, could they please let me know?

Here is the video Pension Life constructed with the help of Jeremy Donaghy-Sutton (a senior airline captain and safety instructor and Ark victim)

What is a Pension Scam?

May 16, 2018
Introduction: Anatomy of a Pension Scam
£11,000,000,000. That is an awfully big number. But this is what financial fraud of pension and investment scamming cost thousands of victims in 2016 according to reported statistics. This begs the urgent question: why have so few – if any – of them been prosecuted?

The Pensions Regulator’s Lesley Titcomb has now officially and publicly declared that scammers are criminals.

Pension Life´s book: Anatomy of a Pension Scam is going to be made into a series of blogs. The purpose of the book is to get the message out there and warn the public; the financial services industry in the UK and offshore; governments; regulators; ombudsmen; crime agencies, HMRC, and the scammers that this huge-scale financial crime will NO LONGER BE TOLERATED. The authorities who have stood by and allowed this to happen have to snap out of their complacency, laziness and incompetence, and actually take some action to bring these criminals to justice.

What we need now is all of the scammers behind bars and the keys thrown away.

The actions of these fraudsters have shaken the confidence in the pensions and investment industry as a whole. Not to mention the harm it has inflicted upon innocent, hard-working people on a huge scale.

Evidence suggests that in the past seven years, there have been many £ billions lost to pension and investment scams – there are no precise “official” figures. But the dreadful fact is that the scammers who were targeting victims back in 2010, continued doing it in 2011; and 2012; and 2013; and 2014; and 2015, and 2016. And they are still doing it today. Happily and profitably. And nobody has stopped them or brought them to account for the horrific financial damage and distress they have caused.

With this in mind it is hard to decide who is the devil himself, the vicious, greedy, cold-hearted scammers or the feeble authorities who let them get away with it. REPEATEDLY!

HMRC were warned by the industry about the potential for scams if the role of compulsory professional trustee was removed pre 2006. In a letter of March 2004, Nick White, specialist pension solicitor warned: “It is essential that schemes offering self-administration and wide investment choice should have in place an independent person who has sufficient control of scheme assets to prevent abuse and sufficient knowledge and experience to know abuse when he sees it.

That does not necessarily mean that the system of pension trustees should be retained in its current form but, if it is abolished without an effective replacement, we envisage that within the next 5 years the degree of abuse of such schemes by both incompetent and dishonest individuals will:
- further stain the reputation of pensions generally; and
- severely embarrass the government responsible for letting it happen
Reputable professionals in the industry and the Government share a common aim of building a system of tax rules that is simple but is robust enough to last for a working lifetime without major overhaul. Such a system needs to contain adequate protections against abuse.”

Nick White’s warning was brought to my attention by Martin Tilley who is director of technical services at Dentons Pension Management. Martin has written some excellent blogs and articles on the subject of pension scams and my favourite has to be this one:

http://www.retirement-planner.co.uk/9344/cleaning-up-pension-scams-with-soap-operas

Either way the one thing we can be sure of is that it has to stop NOW.

So watch this space as we at Pension Life, prepare a documentary series about pension and investment scams. There are many victims who would be only too happy to help recreate the exact wording – both written and verbal – of the scammers’ pitch. With their help we hope to create a military-style, zero tolerance campaign to wage against all the guilty parties until every last one of them is brought to justice.
May 15, 2018
Keep Calm: Just avoid OMI/Quilter

OLD MUTUAL INTERNATIONAL HYPOCRISY OVER NEW MALTA REGULATIONS

OMI’s Peter Kenny advises the industry to “keep calm”.

He obviously wants to be able to keep flogging these useless, pointless and exorbitantly expensive insurance bonds to thousands of innocent victims.

With the announcement of new regulations in Malta for QROPS, International Adviser has quoted managing director of OMI (soon to be Quilter) Peter Kenny: “Old Mutual International is encouraging all market participants to help rid the industry of inappropriate structured products“.

Kenny´s statement, to the untrained eye, may seem logical and thoughtful. However, here at Pension Life we are well educated about OMI´s dirty laundry and routine use of toxic structured notes.

The statement Peter Kenny made is downright hypocritical. He is clouding the irresponsible and negligent actions OMI have made in the past, and the damage the high-risk structured products have inflicted on pension funds. Kenny hasn´t even mentioned the huge quarterly fees OMI have applied to ever-dwindling pension funds.

These fees are OMI´s way of clawing back the commissions paid to the scammers. And this is why victims are tied into these insurance bonds for so many years, and why there are such enormous penalties for exiting the bonds.

Kenny told International Adviser:

“The Malta Financial Services Authority’s proposed new regulations are sensible, appropriate measures to be taking.

Specifically, we welcome greater restrictions on structured notes. Old Mutual International is encouraging all market participants to help rid the industry of inappropriate structured products which are having a damaging impact on investor confidence and outcomes.

Over the years, Old Mutual International has taken action to tighten its criteria, introduced a maximum fee level, and in some cases banned certain types of structured products from certain institutions.

Not all structured products are bad, and they can be useful for clients who want a degree of capital protection whilst also providing exposure to investment markets or a fixed return. However, many structured products are often very complex in design. Regrettably, some investors and advisers will not always possess the depth of knowledge required to fully understand the risks and rewards associated with investing in such structured products.”

Doesn´t that sound lovely in theory! However, I´m sure the victims of the CWM pension scam would not agree.

“Specifically, we welcome greater restrictions on structured notes. Old Mutual International is encouraging all market participants to help rid the industry of inappropriate structured products which are having a damaging impact on investor confidence and outcomes.”

For the last eight years at least, OMI have allowed the use of structured notes. We have seen many examples of victims having 100% of their portfolios invested in structured notes – including the fraudulent Leonteq ones. We have the hundreds of victims of the CWM pension scandal as evidence of this.

Peter Kenny must surely be aware that OMI were happy to invest the life savings of the CWM victims into structured products which clearly stated at the top of the investment sheets (so as even the most short-sighted OMI employee could not miss it):

HIGH-RISK AND FOR PROFESSIONAL INVESTORS ONLY

Here at Pension Life, we do hope that even trainees at OMI are aware that pension fund members are retail investors and should be placed into low to medium risk, liquid investments. However, it seems that these details obviously don´t feature in OMI´s training manual.

Structured products are illiquid and they often lock the fund in for fixed terms – up to 5 years. Added to this is the fact that victims were also locked into ten or eleven-year term OMI´s life assurance policies. It is absolutely ridiculous to lock people into a product which does nothing to protect the funds and only serves to erode the value of the funds with the exorbitant quarterly charges which inexorably “drag” the fund down.

“Over the years, Old Mutual International has taken action to tighten its criteria, introduced a maximum fee level, and in some cases banned certain types of structured products from certain institutions.”

This is an outright lie and we have hard evidence that even in the past couple of years, OMI has done nothing to tighten its criteria in any of the CWM cases. In fact, OMI were still accepting fraudulent Leonteq structured notes up until very recently. Peter Kenny is being dishonest as the reality is that there was no thought or care at all over a very long period.

One Pension Life member started with a fund of £38,000. His last valuation showed that it was now worth just £800. When OMI apply their next quarterly fee, the entire fund will be wiped out as OMI simply kept taking their fees based on 11% of the original value (as opposed to the constantly dropping value). But clearly OMI didn’t care or even show any interest – they made a packet in fees, paid a huge commission to the CWM scammers and sat back and did nothing while the fund dwindled to nothing.

“Not all structured products are bad, and they can be useful for clients who want a degree of capital protection…”

I highlight here a “degree of capital protection” – just a degree? Pension funds are normally a person’s life savings. So what does a “degree” mean? 10%, 50% perhaps 75%? The degree of capital protection in the case of the CWM/OMI scam was 0%.

“Regrettably, some investors and advisers will not always possess the depth of knowledge required to fully understand the risks and rewards associated with investing in such structured products.”

Regrettably for the investors who were victims of the CWM scammers and OMI, they most definitely did not possess the depth of knowledge required to fully understand the risks. They put their faith in the smartly- dressed scammers. With promises of high returns, the high risk of the investments and high fees to be charged were left unmentioned. OMI were supposed to protect the victims’ interests but failed dismally to lift a finger to help arrest the downward spiral of the funds.

OMI just sat there like a lazy, greedy, callous parasite and watched the victims’ retirement savings dwindle.

Malta´s new regulations have been put into place to protect investors from scammers like CWM and firms like OMI. I think OMI are secretly seething as the changes to the regulations will surely affect their already dropping profits.

International Adviser also reported on 30 Apr 18:

“Quilter, formerly Old Mutual Wealth, said its assets under management and administration had fallen in the first quarter of 2018.”

Here´s hoping they fall further – much further – 2/3rds further like Pension Life members Pete and Val´s did. Peter Kenny needs to experience a taste of how the victims of the CWM scam felt at finally receiving the news that their pension funds had been left in tatters.

May 10, 2018
Protecting your pension fund from pension vampires

Protect your pension fund at all costs. Pension “vampires” disguised as friendly and legitimate pension advisers are still out there – prowling the land trying to find victims. Ever evolving and changing their strategies to seduce you into transferring your pension fund, often into a high-risk, toxic investment that rewards them with high commission but leaves your pension fund and your health frazzled.

Pension vampires are very good at wearing disguises AND their credible eloquence and charming manner are sure to get your attention. This is why here at Pension Life we want to raise public awareness to discourage individuals from being drawn in by the vampires’ compelling sales techniques. We want victims to learn how to protect your pension fund.

Con artists and pension scammers love to cold call and give the impression they are official government representatives or fully qualified and regulated advisers. They are very clever at worming their way into victims’ homes and setting these vulnerable people up to get scammed out of their pensions.

THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN

If you are cold called – please just hang up.

Much like a vampire, once you have invited them into your life, it is very difficult to get rid of them. They will trick you into transferring you pension fund into their care – often with promises of high returns and low risk. In reality, they will bleed you dry.

What these pension vampires leave out of their convincing sales pitch is the high commission charges they will add every time they put your fund into a new or different investment. Often the commission charges heavily outweigh the interest that will be applied to the investment should it be successful.

Pension vampires hunt in packs and the first one you meet will NOT be the last. Often the first pension vampire will introduce you to several others. Each one will want to have a suck on your fund. This type of pension scam is called fractional scamming its happening more and more. Please have a look at our previous blog on fractional scammers for more information on how this type of scam works.

Pension vampires not only use cold calling techniques, they also send emails and use the postal system. The content is usually the same – they offer you a free pension review.

Nothing in life comes for free – the review may seem to be free but what comes after will be devastating to your pension fund and your health.

Pete and Val fell victim to pension vampires using a pension liberation scam – here’s the tragic story of how their pension fund was left decimated by a firm of unlicensed so-called advisers: Continental Wealth Management.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up to date on new Pension Life videos.

(more…)

May 2, 2018
Maltese QROPS regulations to change
Malta has announced changes to the way their QROPS funds will be regulated. The changes will come into effect from 2^nd July 2018, meaning that clients introduced by an adviser regulated only for insurance business will not be accepted as an investment adviser.

A letter this week from STM Malta reads:

“We are writing to inform you of some changes to Malta regulations which we believe will have a significant impact on the way that you conduct your pensions business in Malta. Whilst the final guidelines have yet to be published, it is anticipated that the changes will be brought into effect from 2^nd July 2018. With these changes in mind, we felt it is a good idea that we commence discussions regarding how this will impact on some of our processes going forward.

In particular, the changes will require:
- An expectation of further oversight from pension trustees in relation to investment selections by members as recommended by advisers;
- A mandated restriction on investment in structured notes to 30% of a member’s portfolio with a maximum of 20% per issuer;
- A restriction on those permitted to give advice in relation to investment selection to advisers authorised to give investment advice via MIFID or equivalent regime. For clarity and from discussions with the regulator, we understand that a licence to advise on insurance products will not be considered an equivalent regime; and
- A requirement that Pension Trustees obtain and maintain information about the fitness and propriety of investment advisers selected by clients.
From the consultation process, we understand that the Regulator has experienced a number of complaints in relation to pensions and these changes are intended to address these issues.”

*****************************************

Whilst this is an enormous step in the right direction for Malta, they are not the only country offering QROPS and therefore here at Pension Life we are calling for these regulations to be applied worldwide.

The lists here show that there are 28 other countries offering QROPS schemes. I can’t help but feel that unregulated (for investments) advisory firms will just change countries and continue to offer unregulated investment advice to innocent victims – but using QROPS in other jurisdictions.

Furthermore the decision has been made and announced, but will not come into place until 2nd July. That is nine weeks away. That’s 45 working days, 63 if they work weekends, that the unregulated advisers have to slog their guts out and get as many new “clients” to transfer their hard-earned funds – and invest them into unregulated, high risk, toxic investments. This may be the last opportunity to earn huge commissions in Malta. Then I guess these firms can have a wee holiday until they decide how best to alter the way they work.

STM’s letter goes on to state:

“Going forward we will need to fill the advice gap that is created and it occurs to us that there are two possible options for advisers going forward:

a) The adviser upgrades the license to become a regulated Investment Adviser; or

b) The investment is selected through a Discretionary Fund Manager which is a regulated Investment Manager”

What worries me is that the advisers with only an insurance license will be able to go on to become regulated, “upgraded” as the letter states, to fill the gap, so the process may be made easier for them.
- In response to the four changes reported by STM, I can see no mention of their past failures on a grand scale to carry out even the most basic due diligence on advisers or investments. STM has said nothing about the disastrous consequences of its own negligence – particularly in the case of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund;
- A restriction on investment in structured notes to 30% of a member’s portfolio with a maximum of 20% per issuer is still way too high – about 30% too high (and what about UCIS funds?);
- Restrictions on those permitted to give investment advice will need to be firmly policed. Firms with only an insurance license will inevitably try to continue as before. How will this be reported? And what action will be taken if trustees continue to accept dealing instructions from firms with no investment license? (A slap on the wrist with a soggy kipper?); and
- How will Pension Trustees decide whether investment advisers are fit and proper? One man’s fit and proper could be another man’s dodgy dealer.
One Pension Trustee in Malta told me recently that a grave concern of the industry is that firms who abide by the letter of the changes will lose out to firms that ignore them. This will set up an unequal competitive edge for those who interpret the new regulations more “loosely”. So, to make sure this new regime doesn’t end up as a bag of chocolate balls, the Maltese regulator has got to keep on his toes.

*****************************

As always, Pension Life would like to remind you that if you are planning to transfer any pension funds, make sure that you are transferring into a legitimate regulated scheme. Get all the information in writing and get a third party to double check the details.

FOLLOW PENSION LIFE ON TWITTER TO KEEP UP WITH ALL THINGS PENSION RELATED, GOOD AND BAD.
May 1, 2018
Holborn Assets – What a cheek!

Seems we can´t get enough of Holborn Assets’ cheek this week. CEO Bob Parker has sent out a Q1 2018 newsletter and included on his mailing list a very unsatisfied and traumatised client who, through Holborn Assets’ negligence, has suffered a significant loss to her pension fund, with no compensation – or even apology.

Glynis Broadfoot was a victim of Holborn Assets’ rotten advice and service in 2011 and which resulted in her losing a significant portion of what had originally been a final-salary pension which should never have been transferred in the first place. Holborn Assets refused to help her, and simply kept taking their extortionate fees from her ever-shrinking pension pot. They had invested her in high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes which were totally inappropriate for a low-risk investor.

You can imagine Mrs. Broadfoot’s fury and disgust when this message popped up in her inbox.

In summary, despite the expensive advice given to Mrs. Broadfoot by Holborn Assets, and assurances that her pension would grow at 8% per annum, she ended up losing nearly a third of her fund. Despite the fund’s losses, Holborn Assets continued to apply their fees to the fund, totaling somewhere in the region of £11k!

Holborn Assets informed her, at the height of her distress over her losses, that they “had closed the case, and would not enter into any further correspondence”. Yet now, several years on, it appears she’s still on their mailing list – despite knowing full well they have left this victim’s retirement prospects in tatters.

Mrs. Broadfoot’s case was typical of “fractional scams“: expensive and unnecessary insurance bond (only purpose was to pay a fat commission to the scammers); expensive, high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes (again, high commissions for the scammers and heavy losses for the victim); hefty advisor fees. This was a very obvious scam which caused great suffering for the victim who is resident in Spain – but Holborn Assets was not licensed to provide investment advice in Spain.

In the years since Mrs. Broadfoot was scammed, Bob Parker did start to engage half-heartedly with a process of negotiating compensation for her losses. But so far she has not received one penny. Her local government final salary pension scheme – which she was conned into sacrificing by these unlicensed scammers – would have provided her with a guaranteed, index-linked pension for life and she could have retired comfortably. Instead, she has a seriously damaged fund which is unlikely to ever recover and provide her with the retirement income she needed and deserved.

So, far from getting the “best level of service and advice available” as boasted by Bob Parker, Mrs. Broadfoot was conned, scammed, fleeced and then dumped by Holborn Assets.

Which brings me on to the Trust Pilot reviews. Only 2% scored Holborn Assets as average or poor. Which is very surprising – given the number of people who report similar stories to Mrs. Broadfoot’s. But I think it is likely that those who gave four or five stars, haven’t yet found out what their losses are. In fact, some of these reviewers admit they were cold called by Holborn Assets. We know for sure Claudia Shaw was flogging the high-risk Premier New Earth Recycling UCIS fund to her victims and that there have been heavy investment losses.

One person who has given Holborn Assets a “poor” rating on Trust Pilot is a Mr. Norton who writes:

Not very impressed

I don’t believe anyone from Holborn has contacted me since September last year. In August 2016 I was contacted and advised to switch my policy which seemed ridiculous considering the additional charges I would incur, the fact it was even suggested causes me concern.

Then in September 2016, I was contacted to recommend my wealth manager for an award, again the audacity of this makes me wonder.

I have no idea on what your investment performance to date is over the past 12 months and I have not been given any confidence how my investments will be managed going forward now that I have finished paying your fees and I actually begin to get money invested.

I do plan to visit within the next month and hopefully by that stage you in a position to assure me I did not make a big mistake investing my money with you.
Regards
Ian Norton

Another victim has complained directly to Pension Life about the appalling treatment he has had at the hands of Holborn Assets:

“Since 2013, the fund has not done anything at all. The fees are much too high, excessive transactions have been made to earn themselves money on my account and the investments went down in value. There is no communication with Holborn Assets and they are unwilling to discuss this matter with me or to do anything about it.”

So, as the cheeky Bob Parker is aiming to infiltrate South Africa with his new weapon – the bright-eyed and bushy-chinned Lourens Reichert – I thought now would be a good time to make friends with Reichert and see if he can put some pressure on Uncle Bob. Reichert will, no doubt, be very pleased to help me sort these victims out – as he has a big bulging lump in his trousers courtesy of Bob’s golden handshake.

I might even nip down to Johannesburg and have a cup of tea and a cheeky biscuit with him. No doubt, he won’t want the sordid details of Holborn Assets’ scams to compromise his quest to conquer South Africa. If the natives find out just what his colleagues have been up to, he might find himself on the wrong end of a Zulu spear.

April 19, 2018
British Steelworker – SIPPS Pension Scam Victim

I am saddened to write about the first (but probably not the last) British Steelworker who has fallen victim to an investment scam as well as a pension scam. The British Steelworker was persuaded to transfer his DB pension AND invest £35,000 of his personal saving into an unregulated fund – Dolphin Trust (in Germany).

More and more, we are seeing innocent, hardworking individuals falling victim to pension scams due to their pension funds being invested in unregulated, high-risk, illiquid investments. It is just a matter of time before these unsuitable investments leave victims’ pension funds in tatters.

Mike Pickett, a British Steelworkers, had his savings loaned to an unregulated German property development company called Dolphin Trust. This was courtesy of (now collapsed) IFA firm Active Wealth. Mike not only transferred his pension fund, but also his life savings. His pension funds went into a SIPPS which then found their way to Gallium Fund Solutions.

Mike’s non-pension savings then went through Active Wealth into Dolphin Trust GmbH, which specialises in the development of German-listed buildings and promises 10% returns on investment. He says he was unaware that he was signed up to a fixed term payment (minimum 2 years) and of the associated 5% exit penalty to withdraw money from Gallium early.

Dolphin Trust IS NOT regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

The way victims were lured into this scheme is more than a little questionable. It is also somewhat confusing as to who was actually responsible for investing Mike’s funds. Much little like an traditional fable, the storyline seems to shift to ensure the blame can be passed where necessary.

It all started with a presentation made to British Steel Workers via Celtic Wealth. How on earth are these people were able to make a presentation to innocent victims-to-be for an UNREGULATED investment is beyond me. Especially when Celtic Wealth was not authorised to provide investment advice.

And here’s where Active Wealth came in. Celtic Wealth claimed “All regulated advice in relation to pensions and investments is given by Active Wealth (UK) Ltd.”

After the presentation by Celtic Wealth, Mike Pickett claims to have spoken to Active Wealth adviser Andrew Deeney, and says he was visited at his home shortly thereafter by Deeney and a representative of Celtic Wealth. He had three meetings with Active Wealth in total – two of which he said were with Deeney.

Active Wealth has now surrendered its pension transfer permissions following FCA action in relation to advice given to steelworkers. Andrew Deeney, now sole director and shareholder of regulated IFA firm Fidelis Wealth Management, claims he has no relation to these investments.

No one wants to take the blame for these mis-sold investments. Yet all involved would have contributed to the demise of the pension funds – and earned fees and commissions along the way.

Transfers into self-invested personal pensions (SIPPS) dominated the pension transfer market in 2017, accounting for 51 percent of all transfers. It is worrying to consider what percentage of that figure is being transferred into unregulated, toxic investments.

The problem with pension scammers is that they are very good at disguising themselves. They wear smart clothes, they are friendly, knowledgeable and very very persuasive. They have a series of different scams disguised as a great investment – when one collapses they move onto another, just as Andrew Deeney has and the infamous Stephen Ward.

The first way of avoiding a possible scam is to reject all cold calling.

Never take a ‘free’ review on your pension.

Always check that the advisers and companies are regulated

Make sure you know ALL the facts

Low-risk high return investment – THEY DO NOT EXIST

Too good to be true – it probably is

******************************************

As always, Pension Life would like to remind you that if you are planning to transfer any pension funds, make sure that you are transferring into a legitimate scheme. To find out how to avoid being scammed, please see our blog:

What is a pension scam?

Follow Pension Life on twitter to keep up with all things pension related, good and bad.

April 12, 2018
OMI complaint
COMPLAINT TO OMI, THE ISLE OF MAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, THE CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND, FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN AND THE ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL LIFE OFFICES

ATTENTION:

Martin Middleton, CEO

Michael Hampson
Complaints Handler | Complaints Team | Old Mutual International

T: 44 (0) 1624 655451 | Int Ext: 75451
F: 44 (0) 1624 611715
E: omifmcomplaints@ominternational.com | W: www.oldmutualinternational.com

Isle of Man Financial Services Authority
PO Box 58
Finch Hill House
Douglas
Isle of Man
IM99 1DT

info@iomfsa.im

GeneralMailbox.ATG@gov.im

Central Bank of Ireland:

enquiries@centralbank.ie

Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman

Lincoln House, Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, D02 VH29. Tel: (01) 567 7000 Email: info@fspo.ie Website: www.fspo.ie

AILO – Association of International Life Offices

secretariat@ailo.org

COMPLAINT REGARDING OMI’S NEGLIGENCE, FAILED GOVERNANCE AND FACILITATION OF FINANCIAL CRIME – European Executive Investment Bond (EEIB)

OMI has facilitated financial crime over a period of many years; stood by while innocent victims’ retirement savings were destroyed; paid huge commissions to an unlicensed (and illegal in Spain) firm of scammers; continued charging crippling fees while victims’ funds dwindled away; extorted early exit penalties from victims unfairly and unreasonably; failed to take any action to stem the torrent of huge losses of millions of pounds’ worth of retirement savings for many years. And now it is failing to uphold the victims’ complaints.

OMI has been in receipt of a number of complaints (and will be in receipt of numerous further ones) regarding their negligence and facilitation of financial crime in offshore financial services. OMI has not upheld these complaints – and indeed has neglected to grasp the extent of their own multiple failings and errors.

The existing complaints do relate to serious regulatory breaches and fraud – as well as failing to adhere to OMI’s own terms and conditions. Much of the fraud was caused by the financial advisory firm: Continental Wealth Trust (which traded as Continental Wealth Management). However, the firm’s fraud was only successful because OMI facilitated it.

The complaints submitted to date include:
- That investments were made into high-risk professional-investor-only funds. Many of these failed and caused huge losses to victims’ funds.
- That OMI paid commissions/fees to CWM who not only held no investment licence – but also held no license of any kind.
- As a result of the huge, un-disclosed commission paid to CWM – an unlicensed firm – OMI imposes crippling early surrender charges on the victims.
OMI has responded that they are “very sympathetic to victims’ concerns” and has responded that it appreciates what a very worrying time this must be for those who have lost such huge amounts of their life savings.

OMI has also stated that the roles and responsibilities of all the parties involved with this fraud have got to be clarified. However, OMI claims – entirely disingenuously – it does not want victims to get the feeling it is trying to distance itself from the grievances.

In order to address what it refers to as “concerns”, OMI has attempted to “explain” matters. The use of the word “concerns” is obviously a really crass clanger on the part of OMI, since the victims are absolutely not just CONCERNED – they are furious, terrified and devastated at their dreadful losses. Some victims are suicidal, and many have had their health seriously compromised.

OMI has described the EEIB as being held by the trustee for the benefit of a member of their pension scheme, enabling policyholders to hold a “wide range of investments in one tax-efficient product wrapper”. OMI goes on to claim that policyholders and their investment advisers “have complete flexibility over the investments they place inside the EEIB”.

Some or all of the above may be true. However, that does not make it right that OMI has allowed unlicensed advisers to place clearly unsuitable investments inside their wrappers. Further, it does not make it right that OMI then stood by and watched the investments fail for many years AND DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING EXCEPT KEEP ON TAKING FEES BASED ON THE ORIGINAL VALUE – AND NOT THE REDUCED VALUE OF THE FUND.

OMI claims that it reviews all investments to ensure they meet Irish regulatory requirements, and their own administration requirements.

If this is indeed true, it is a very serious indictment of the Irish regulator if their requirements are so appallingly lax. What OMI seems to be claiming is that both the Central Bank of Ireland and OMI have such low standards that they will allow low-risk pension savers to have their retirement funds invested purely in high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes. If this is true, then the regulator is as bad as OMI in condoning an investment strategy which has no regard for suitability, liquidity, diversity and risk tolerance.

In fact, the Central Bank of Ireland has stated that it carried out a review of suitability requirements in 2017 and found that: “governance structures for the identification and treatment of vulnerable clients were absent or ineffective”. The CWM victims were about as vulnerable as it was possible to get – as their retirement savings were systematically and inexorably destroyed. And OMI’s governance structure was about as absent and ineffective as it is possible to get while it stood by and didn’t even bother to raise a red flag on the whole disaster as it unfolded.

There was no jangling of alarm bells as OMI watched millions of pounds wiped out. There was no expression of concern that the same toxic structured notes which had failed in earlier years were bought again and again by the same unlicensed scammers. There was no governance to protect new vulnerable victims from having their funds destroyed from 2015 onwards in the same way hundreds of victims had suffered in previous years.

OMI has claimed that customers/their appointed advisers are responsible for the suitability assessment and selection of the investments held in the policy – and that “it is important that customers read the prospectus/offering documents of investments carefully, before making any investment decisions”. However, OMI watched wholesale destruction taking place inside its own wrappers and took no action. Had OMI asked a few simple questions they would have found the following:
1. The victims were being advised by a known firm of scammers which had been involved in cold calling in the Evergreen pension liberation scam in 2012
2. The victims were being advised by a firm which was not licensed at all – for anything
3. The victims had ALL insisted they wanted either low risk or no risk investments as they could not afford to lose any part of their retirement savings
4. The victims had no idea their retirement savings were being invested in high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes
5. The victims’ signatures were repeatedly forged on the dealing instructions
6. The victims were duped into a false sense of security when losses started to be reported on their statements by the scammers claiming these were not genuine losses but only “paper losses”
7. The victims had no idea how high the charges and commissions were as these were not disclosed either by the scammers or by OMI
8. The victims were not consulted as to whether they wanted or needed an entirely useless and exorbitantly expensive insurance bond
9. The victims were unaware that tied agents are illegal in Spain
10. The victims were unaware of the huge fees and commissions which were concealed by both the scammers and OMI
OMI claims that term 12 of the EEIB policy terms states that it is the policyholder who bears the risk of investment. But then OMI goes on to assert that the policyholder was the trustee who would be classed as a professional investor.

So OMI has got to make up its mind – it has already stated that: “customers/their appointed advisers are responsible for the suitability assessment and selection of the investments held in the policy”. So who is the customer? The victim or the trustee? And whom did the adviser advise – the customer or the trustee? Or OMI?

OMI goes on to refer to term 11.4 of the policy which confirms that it may allow investment into professional or experienced investor funds because it owns the investments held within the EEIB, rather than the policyholder.

So, who gave the advice and to whom? OMI can’t seem to make up its mind who the customer is: the victim; the trustee or OMI itself. If OMI is the customer, why is it charging the victim fees?

OMI goes on to quote policy term 11.4.1 – which apparently clearly highlights that professional-investor-only funds carry a high degree of risk. So who is taking the risk? The victim, the trustee or OMI?

Let us ask ourselves, where did the original funds come from? Not the trustee; not OMI; but the victim.

OMI then procedes to claim that it will “only accept applications via regulated financial advisers”. But Inter-Alliance was not licensed to provide investment advice – or indeed insurance advice. CWM was not licensed either. So why did OMI accept applications from unlicensed advisors (who were also known scammers)? Also, OMI failed to identify that tied (insurance) agents are illegal in Spain – so it shouldn’t have been dealing with them at all – let alone paying them huge commissions.

OMI states that CWM was a member of Inter-Alliance WorldNet, and obtained their authorization to act via that membership. But this is not true – Inter-Alliance was not licensed and therefore neither was CWM. The application form may, in some cases, have confirmed the appointment of CWM as investment adviser with full discretion – but why didn’t OMI check that CWM was licensed? In fact, most of the victims were under the impression that they would be consulted on the investments and that their risk tolerance would be respected – but this never happened in any of the cases.

OMI goes on to claim that CWM was able to submit investment instructions directly to OMI, without consulting the trustees. But that isn’t true either: dealing instructions were sent to the trustees first, and then the trustees sent on new instructions. How can OMI not even know how its own internal systems work?

OMI concludes that it is sorry the complaining investor is “disappointed with the performance of some of the investments selected by CWM” and then goes on to claim the investments “met the criteria for a permitted asset under the EEIB policy terms”.

So who at OMI was responsible for writing and updating EEIB policy terms? Did this person not notice the losses repeatedly decimating the funds? Did this person not see the same investment failures repeating in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017? Did this person not question whether the policy terms ought to be revised somewhat? The answer to these questions is, inevitably, a resounding and disgraceful “NO”.

OMI is now refusing to refund or waive early withdrawal charges on the basis that CWM was an appointed investment adviser. This is because OMI initially paid a big chunk of commission to CWM – an unlicensed adviser and known scammer. If a victim wants to get out of the toxic, pointless insurance wrapper, in order to put a stop to the exorbitant fees taken quarterly out of the fund – and based on the original value rather than the decimated value of the fund – he basically has to refund the commission OMI paid to the scammers.

The victims remain dissatisfied with OMI’s response, and the complaint is now being referred to the Irish Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman. OMI has deliberately misunderstood and overlooked every aspect of the victims’ complaints and failed to address even the most basic issues surrounding OMI’s failures and negligence.

OMI has facilitated financial crime over a period of many years; stood by while innocent victims’ retirement savings were destroyed; paid huge commissions to an unlicensed (and illegal in Spain) firm of scammers; continued charging crippling fees while victims’ funds dwindled away; extorted early exit penalties from victims unfairly and unreasonably; failed to take any action to stem the torrent of huge losses of millions of pounds’ worth of retirement savings for many years. And now it is failing to uphold the victims’ complaints.
February 22, 2018
Be safe with PensionBee!

Having focused very much on bad pension investments, pension scams and how to avoid them, I´d like to talk a bit about PensionBee, a relatively new pension provider.

PensionBee offers the service of consolidating all your pension funds into one online fund. You are able to check your balance at any time and have a personal “Bee keeper” assigned to your account. The firm’s annual fees range from only 0.5% – 0.95% – significantly lower than the industry average.

Having explored PensionBee´s website, they are bright, modern and have a 9.2 out of 10 on trust pilot – not bad! You can use the PensionBee pension calculator to set a retirement goal and top up your savings to get on track. In our fast-paced, ever-changing online society, this is ideal for the busy working person.

Sounds great doesn´t it? Unfortunately, other pension providers wouldn´t agree, and it seems Aegon (formerly Scottish Equitable) isn´t impressed by their new competitor. Henry Tapper’s blog, ´PensionBee stands up to the bullies´ address the issue that Aegon are taking 38 days for a pension transfer to PensionBee. (The standard transfer time should be just 12 days). Fortunately, PensionBee is taking none of it, check out their video on “how to transfer your pension away from Aegon”.

In fact, Henry writes, ´Since 8 June 2017, customers wishing to transfer out of Aegon to PensionBee have faced barriers to switching, including multiple discharge forms, telephone calls and repetitive requests for information that has already been provided. There are various other steps that impede the customer’s right to switch pension provider easily (please see here). The average transfer out of Aegon for completed transfers now takes c.54 days – although the true scale of detriment remains unknown, since many people have been unable to overcome the barriers placed in front of them by Aegon in their attempts to switch or have simply given up.´

Upon doing some more digging I found that Professional Adviser, reported that nearly 900 customers were in fact ´stuck´ between Aegon and PensionBee. Going on to say, “So far, the longest transfer that has successfully completed is 176 days, or nearly six months.”

What we at Pension Life are struggling to grasp is, Why now?

Since 2011 big pension companies such as Aegon, Standard Life, Scottish Widows etc, have made transferring out of their pension scheme relatively easy. Even after the Scorpion campaign, which raised awareness about pension scams, these pension providers continued to release funds to bogus schemes. They have enabled the pension scammers to profit whilst the victims ended up being financially ruined.

In the Capita Oak scam – distributed by XXXX XXXX, promoted by Phillip Nunn and administered by Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions – Aegon was one of the leading offending ceding providers. Aegon handed over at least 13 transfers totalling £263,271.71. Then, in the Westminster pension scam, Aegon was still up there with the worst offenders, facilitating a further eight transfers totalling at least £253,305.63.

In neither Capita Oak nor Westminster, did Aegon question why both schemes had the same sponsoring employer: R. P. Medplant (Cyprus). Nor did Aegon establish whether the schemes were genuine occupational schemes. They just handed over the transfers without heed to the Pensions Regulator’s dire Scorpion warning.

But now Aegon appears to be resisting genuine, bona fide transfers. When victims complained to Aegon about the callous and negligent manner in which pensions were handed over to the scammers, Aegon failed to uphold the complaints and refused to pay any compensation. And this despite the fact that many of the transfers were made AFTER the publication of the Scorpion warning.

I wonder – is this change due to a weight on their conscience or do they realise that PensionBee could possibly be the new long-term market competitor? A real threat to their business. PensionBee is modern, clear, fresh and online – appealing to the technology savvy generation. With the introduction of pension freedoms in 2015, savers are looking to find new alternatives with their new choices.

FTAdviser reports:

Figures published by Mercer in April showed that as much as £50bn has been pulled from final salary pension schemes in the last two years.

Fortunately, the Pensions Administration Standards Association (PASA) is aware of these issues and has created a work group to enable transferring members a faster outcome. This will hopefully make transferring pensions to legitimate schemes much easier.

As always, Pension Life would like to remind you that if you are planning to transfer any pension funds, make sure that you are transferring into a legitimate scheme. To find out how to avoid being scammed, please see our blog:

What is a pension scam?

Follow Pension Life on twitter to keep up with all things pension related, good and bad.

February 18, 2018
James Hay + Elysian Bio fuel = Pension Liberation Scam
James Hay, the first UK SIPPS provider, could face tax charges of up to £20 million from HMRC, related to the Elysian Bio Fuel investment scam (sorry: scheme). Elysian Bio Fuels, which owned a bioethanol plant in the US and a renewable fuels refinery in the UK, was also used by other SIPPS providers such as Suffolk Life.

Money Marketing states : “Sipp investors are facing millions in write downs on a high-risk bio fuel investment, which has also been linked to a suspected pension liberation scam.”

Unsurprisingly, James Hay has launched an appeal against the tax charges AND as of January, has also slipped in a ban on non-standard investments including overseas commercial property, storage pods and carbon credits to be bought through its SIPPS platform.

We say to James Hay, “too little, too late, mate!”

Through SIPPS provided by James Hay, around 500 clients put £55m in to Elysian Bio Fuels. Yes, that´s 500 retail investors, placed into high-risk toxic investments, totally unsuitable for pensions. The business failed in 2015. James Hay claim that they did not advise their members AND limited their role to pension administration. Whilst they may not have directly advised their members, they did, however, allow crooked advisers to buy shares in Elysian Bio Fuels for the purpose of Pension Liberation.

The sheer act of letting crooked advisers advise their trusting members, whilst turning a blind eye to fraud, makes James Hay guilty in anybody´s book. How long can so called legitimate SIPPS providers continue to get away with this sheer negligence of their members´ funds?

Below is an email exchange between Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions, his lawyer Alan Fowler and Angela South of Magna Wealth. This thread describes exactly how the Elysian Bio Fuels/James Hay liberation scam worked.

From: Alan Fowler <fowlerpts@gmail.com>
Date: 17 October 2013 21:28:21 BST
To: William Perkins <billperkins62@gmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: a solution for you !

Interesting….but I’m amazed that reputable SIPP providers will countenance this. Who’s making the loans? I’m not sure I see how the SIPP pays the member (or anyone for that matter) £100k – with what/who’s money? And won’t the SIPP need to verify that the shares in Xco are actually worth £100k. That said, if the IFA is doing these, it seems the process works………..

Regards, Alan

**************************************************************************

From: Stephen Ward <SWard@ppsespana.com>

Subject: Re: a solution for you !

Date: 17 October 2013 20:58:15 BST

To: billperkins <billperkins62@gmail.com>

Cc: Alan Fowler <fowlerpts@gmail.com>

The arrangement I heard about today works like this as an example ( ignoring fees) and this is the simplistic version …
1. Client borrows 16k or thereabouts (this is available in the package)
2. He gets a non recourse loan (which will not be repaid) of £84k
3. He buys shares in Xco for £100k. These are listed on the CISX ( name is Elysium)
4. Transfers £100k to James Hay SIPP
5. SIPP pays member £100k for the shares .,,,
6. Member repays the 16k and trousers £84k
My IFA connection has done 40 of them so far

Advice to transfer to the SIPP is from an FCA regulated IFA

James Hay and Suffolk Life know the full structure and are happy with it ….

Fees ….. On transfer to SIPP ( need to agree the commercials with the IFA)

Regards

Stephen

**************************************************************************

From: Stephen Ward [mailto:SWard@ppsespana.com]
Sent: 18 October 2013 10:01
To: Angela (South – Magna Wealth)
Subject: FW: QROPS opportunity
Importance: High

Morning Angela

I was not expecting such a fast green light !

But it seems to me that a green light is what we have

The next step is a test case I guess ….. ? I may have one but just need to check his fund value.

Putting my provider hat on I do not need to understand the details of the back end engineering, the fact its OK with James Hay is good enough for me.

**************************************************************

As always, Pension Life would like to remind you that if you are planning to transfer any pension funds, make sure that you are transferring into a legitimate scheme. To find out how to avoid being scammed, please see our blog:

What is a pension scam?

Follow Pension Life on twitter to keep up with all things pension related, good and bad.
February 14, 2018
What is a Pension Scam?
There are many different types of pension scam – just as there are many types of genuine pension scheme. This can sometimes make it difficult to tell the difference so we are her to help you inform you about, what is a pension scam.

Fortunately, there are some common tell-tale signs that mean you could spot a scam and avoid it:
- Cold calling: always be suspicious of a cold caller. This can come as a text, phone call, email or even a smart-looking individual at your door!
  - Some cold callers may even imply that they are from the government or another government-backed organisation.
  - THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN!
- Hard sell: when your smart-looking/sounding “adviser” won’t take “no” for an answer and pressurises you into an on-the-spot decision
- No land-line contact phone number: the only contact they give consists of an email, mobile or PO Box address
- Use of words like ‘pension liberation’, ‘loan’, ‘loophole’, ‘free pension review’ or ‘one-off investment’
- Unrealistic claims:
  - You can unlock your pension before 55
  - Promises of tax advantages
  - investment is ‘unique’, ‘overseas’, ‘environmentally friendly’, ‘ethical’ or in a ‘new’ industry
- Low risk but high return investments (THEY DON’T EXIST!!)
What the scammers don’t tell you is that taking any part of your pension early (before 55 years of age) DOES result in tax charges. These charges can be up to 55% of the amount you take – even if you were told it was a “loan”.

With HMRC on your back for this tax demand, it will be hard to remember the pleasure of the money you received. Plus, whilst you are distracted with your tax demand from HMRC, it is likely that the rest of your pension fund is taking a nasty tumble.

Pension scams can involve various types of pension arrangements from QROPS and QNUPS to occupational schemes and SIPPS. These arrangements are not, in their own right, bad. However, if they are used for unsuitable investments, they most certainly can be. Know about these investments means you will know about what is a pension scam.

The investments inside the schemes can range from high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes to toxic, illiquid, risky UCIS funds (Unregulated Collective Investment Scheme – illegal to be promoted to UK residents). Whilst these types of investments are not illegal in their own right, they are only suitable for certain people with deep pockets and sound investment experience. Or, alternatively, they are totally unsuitable for pension funds – full stop.

When taking advice on transferring your pension fund you should always ensure the adviser you choose is either based in the UK OR in the country you reside/plan to reside in. Alternatively, you must make sure the adviser is regulated and qualified for pension and investment advice in the jurisdiction where you reside.

Some of the pension scams that we are aware of are Ark, Capita Oak, Evergreen QROPS, Henley Retirement Benefit Scheme, Westminster, Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund, Continental Wealth Management (CWM), London Quantum. The underlined scams are being investigated by the FCA.

The 5 pointers from the Pension Regulator are:
1. If you think you’ve been scammed – act immediately
2. Cold called about your pension? Hang up!
3. 3. Deals ‘too good’ to be true
4. 4. Using an adviser? Make sure they’re registered with the FCA
5. 5. Don’t let a friend talk you into an investment – check everything yourself
For more details please see their web page

Image from https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/news/scamproof-your-savings-mar15

If you’ve already signed something you’re now unsure about, contact your pension provider straight away. They might be able to stop a transfer that hasn’t taken place yet.

If you think you’ve been targeted by an investment scam, please report it to the FCA using their reporting form.

If you have lost money to a suspected investment fraud, you should report it to Action Fraud on 0300 123 2040 or online at www.ActionFraud.police.uk.

The FCA has launched a new campaign ScamSmart.

If you have doubts about what to do, ask The Pensions Advisory Service (TPAS) for help. Call them on 0300 123 1047 or visit the TPAS website for free pensions advice and information.

Beware of being targeted in the future, particularly if you lost money to a scam. Fraudulent companies might take advantage of this and offer to help you get some or all of your money back.

*************************************

With out due diligence and knowledge you often won´t realise that you are the victim of a pension scam until its too late. Its best to have the knowledge so you can tell what is a pension scam and what is a genuine pension scheme.

Therefore, Pension Life has written a series of blogs about pensions, pension scammers and how to safe guard your pension fund from fraudsters. Please make sure you read as many as possible and ensure you know everything you should about your pension fund. If we can educated the masses about pension fraud we can stop the scammers in their tracks – worldwide.

**************************************************************

Here at Pension Life we are noticing a new type of pension scam – Fractional Scamming – please read our blog about this type of scam.

Follow Pension Life on twitter to keep up with all things pension related, good and bad.
February 8, 2018