Tag: pension liberation fraud

  • CAPITA OAK PENSION SCAM

    Capita Oak pension scam: Imperial accounts 23.1.15

    Ark Class Action

    24 Calle Cuatro Esquinas, Lanjaron 18420, Granada, Spain

    angiebrooks@pension-life.com angiebrooks99@gmail.com

    0034674746663 (mobile) 0034858995645 (landline) www.pension-life.com

     

    Roger Chant, Director – Imperial Trustee Services Ltd.                                                                              28th January 2015

    Brian Downs, Downs & Co Accountants

    Imperial House

    21-15, North Street

    Bromley BR1 1SD

     

    Copies to:

    Pensions Ombudsman; Pensions Regulator; D.S. Rob Harvey, Economics Crime Unit; Dalriada Trustees; FCA; TPAS; HMRC; SRA; ACCA; Iain Duncan Smith (Minister for Work and Pensions); Steve Webb (Minister for Pensions); BBC; ITN; Daily Mail; The Times; Insolvency Service; members of Capita Oak and Westminster pension schemes.

     

    Dear Sirs

     

    CAPITA OAK AND WESTMINSTER PENSION SCAMS

     

    The responses below (in bold) to the “announcement” and “financial report” purportedly from Roger Chant of Imperial Trustee Services Ltd. (ITSL) must be taken into context with the Westminster pension liberation scam operated by those who set up, promoted and administered Capita Oak.

     

    “In the second member announcement, I indicated that I had authorised the preparation of a financial report, to be prepared by an independent registered firm of accountants, Downs & Co.”

     

    First of all, ITSL has no authority to issue financial reports or announcements. ITSL was apparently appointed as administrator in the invalid and possibly forged “trust deed” dated July 2012 and apparently signed by Alan Fowler and Karen Burton (although not in her handwriting but with a signature that looks suspiciously like the handwriting of Anthony Salih of Premier Pension Transfers. Downs & Co is not an independent firm of accountants. Brian Downs was brought on board on board by Christopher Payne (sole shareholder and at the time director of ITSL – but also owner/director of TKE Admin to whom the scheme fees were paid) in October 2014 to try to deflect the questions by Sean Hughes of the BBC X-Ray programme. Roger Chant was also already a client of Downs before he was appointed a director of ITSL. This could hardly be called an independent firm as Downs has admitted he is a “close friend” of Bill Perkins who acted as a shadow director of ITSL. A truly independent accountant and auditor need to be appointed in full consultation with the board of trustees and a proper forensic analysis done on all financial transactions carried out by ITSL, TKE Admin, Premier Pension Transfers and Metis Law, and reported properly to the members. Robert Stell is still happy to carry this out.

     

    “I have now authorised that a copy of the financial summary prepared by the accountants and certified by them should be distributed to all members. A copy of the certified financial statement is attached. Disclosure of the certified financial statement provides transparency to Scheme members.”

    The financial statement issued is far from complete, only covers the period to September 2013, and raises many questions. My specific queries on the accounts are set out below.

     

    “As stated in the second member announcement, it can be seen, quite clearly, that (other than the amount deducted for administration) the totality of the funds received into Imperial’s bank account were transferred, on the instructions of the directors at the time, to the account of a UK registered law firm, Metis Law, who are based in Leeds. This is evidenced by the bank accounts reviewed by the independent accountants.”

     

    Not evidenced at all because not reviewed by independent accountant/auditor – and the missing £1.22 million/47 transfers is still not explained. I have provided a complete schedule of all the transfers processed to Downs via Paul Thomas showing the transfers which were included in the £10,810,301.57 originally disclosed and the extra transactions which were not transferred to Metis Law to purchase store pods, but Downs has refused to acknowledge these missing transfers and provided no explanation. He has also refused to explain a number of suspicious entries on both the bank statements for accounts 03841928 and 83365921 (sort code 20-25-42).

     

    “In summary, 95% of the funds received into Imperial’s bank account in respect of Scheme members was transferred to Metis Law. The 5% deduction for administration was made, which deduction was clearly specified in the Scheme membership documentation signed by each member.”

    The members were clearly given the impression that the 5% was for administration, although 5% was grossly over-priced for a simple transfer for which no competent or diligent administration was carried out. I submit that this should be refunded to the members immediately by TKE Admin. The subsequent investment of 100% of the funds in Store First was clearly negligent and irresponsible, with no regard to the obligations for prudent investment principles required by law for a pension scheme.

     

    “My enquiries suggest that of the 5%, some 3% was applied to TKE Admin Ltd., who arranged for the administration and other necessary services. In this regard, it should be noted that there is no annual administration charge applied to your funds within the Scheme. The remaining 2% was directed by the directors at the time to be paid to Mr. GS.”

     

    What “other necessary services”? The only necessary service was to ensure that the funds of the scheme were properly invested and the scheme run responsibly with a view to providing retirement income for the members, rather than just fees and commissions for the operators/promoters of the scheme. This requires further explanation and complete disclosure of exactly who was paid what and why. It was agreed between Perkins, Fowler and Mr. G.S. that 3% would go to towards “processing” with Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions SL and Premier Pension Transfers Ltd receiving £250 per transfer. So where did the remaining 2% go and to whom was it paid? It is not accounted for. The statement that “no annual administration charge would be applied to the scheme” also needs explaining. How would the scheme be administered going forward for years to come? This suggests there never was any intention to manage the scheme properly in the long term and deal with members’ interests (such as retirement, transfers out, death of members and also diligent control of the assets and income). It is clear that the high level of up-front fees were intended as a quick way for the organisers of Capita Oak to earn a large amount of fees and then abandon the scheme altogether and ignore the many appeals by members for information, accounts, and data on the scheme and the investments. This includes Mr. X whose case was investigated by the Pensions Ombudsman who found ITSL guilty of mal-administration and referred to Capita Oak as being typical of a pension liberation scheme and organized crime.

     

    No mention has been made as to who has provided “services” to the scheme or in what capacity. Full disclosure and complete transparency is now formally requested as to who was behind these services and what services were provided. There has not been any evidence of any service to the members – other than complete silence and refusal to communicate. The people behind Capita Oak have provided no accounts, no reports, no transfers, no asset valuations and have ‘lost’ £1.6 million in “guaranteed” rental income: the main selling point that convinced members to transfer to Capita Oak.

     

    “There is a further purpose that is served by distribution of the certified financial report. I had hoped to avoid drawing these matters to your attention, preferring instead to focus on material and factual matters. In summary, I have been made aware of a number of comments and statements (many anonymous, others adopting obviously fictitious names) having been made on various social media or similar sites. Apart from being grossly misleading and wholly without foundation, some of the comments and statements are, frankly, shocking, containing as they do lurid and defamatory statements against a number of persons, including some who have provided services to the Scheme. In particular, some of the statements make allegations as to financial impropriety.”

    There is clear financial impropriety. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Not only has there clearly been obvious “financial impropriety” but also obvious fraud on the part of the operators and promoters of Capita Oak. The statements clearly and transparently made by me contained facts and hard evidence on the WhoCallsMe forum.

    http://whocallsme.com/Phone-Number.aspx/01516680386/120#p831709128742963577

    Various other contributors have posed as me and Downs using fictitious names, but although some have clearly sought to disrupt the flow of genuine information, there has been some valuable information provided about the activities of Perkins, Fowler and Downs. I stand by everything I have said on the forum and have always stated that if evidence can be provided that I have been mistaken I will gladly make a full retraction and apology. The only connected individuals I have ever communicated with have been Downs, the individual operating the Thurlstone loans and members of the Perkins/Fowler/Ward team who are disgusted at the wholesale defrauding of victims in Capita Oak, Westminster and other scams. I have also communicated extensively with Metis Law and JWK Solicitors acting for Toby Whittaker, but they have both now “pulled up the drawbridge” as they are now in contentious communication with each other.

     

    “As can be seen from the certified financial statement enclosed with this announcement, all monies transferred into the Scheme referable to members have been fully accounted for.”

    I refer to my previous comments about an independent auditor, only then will the members be satisfied that all monies have been accounted for. There is evidence that there is still 1.22 million missing and unaccounted for, with several members having confirmed that their funds are amongst the missing funds. In other words, members have transferred their pensions and yet these transfers are not on the list of transfers that went to Store First via Metis Law. The 100k paid to Thurlstone (which operated the pension liberation loans) remains unexplained, despite my asking about this repeatedly. Now, presumably, the 100k is hidden within the administration expenses. Further, my specific accounts queries below need to be addressed immediately.

     

    “It should further be noted that the certified financial statement was prepared with the independent accountant having been provided with copies of the bank statements for Imperial’s bank account. In view of this, I again ask that members rely solely on official announcements and information issued by Imperial and to ignore comments and statements issued by others, some of whom it must be assumed have ulterior motives.”

     

    The question remains: why did Downs refuse to provide the bank statements to the board of trustees? Further, I repeat, Downs is NOT independent. And this “financial statement” is far from complete and transparent as will be seen from my comments on the very incomplete “Analysis and Summary of Bank Account”. The question: why were the limited accounts only made up to September 2013? must also be answered. I would also like a proper explanation as to why the appointment of a truly independent (not previously connected with any of the parties who operated and/or promoted Capita Oak) accountant/auditor, Robert Stell, was rejected.

     

    “My enquiries, through my professional advisers, as to the investments made with the funds transferred to Metis Law are continuing.”

    I think at this point we have got to cut through all the obfuscation and ask who this communication is actually from? Imperial has had various directors since July 2012: Christopher Payne; Karen Burton; Karl Dunlop; Maria Orolfo (nominee in Dubai with false address in UK); me (immediately removed by Christopher Payne as I predicted); Christopher Payne (again); Roger Chant. Why so many directors? Why do they keep resigning? Why did Payne – the sole shareholder – resign from his own company? Then re-appoint himself and remove me? Why do the shadow directors Bill Perkins and Alan Fowler fail to appoint themselves as directors? Perkins, Fowler and Ward were clearly behind Capita Oak and Imperial Trustee Services. Ward had details not only of Capita Oak on his system but also of Westminster – which had the same sponsoring employer – RP Medplant in Cyprus (but whose assets have totally disappeared, totaling between 3m and 7m and clearly also run by Fowler and Salih). Although this letter appears to have been written by Roger Chant, why would a complete stranger, previously unconnected with ITSL and/or Capita Oak elect to be a director in the full knowledge that ITSL is in serious trouble over a fraudulently-operated pension scheme with compromised assets and stolen income? And why have neither Perkins nor Fowler appointed themselves as directors instead of Roger Chant?

     

    It must further be raised that Imperial (and the directors/shadow directors/shareholder) were entirely legally responsible for the set up, structure and operation of the scheme, as well as the illiquid investments in Store First. Christopher Payne – the founding director and sole shareholder of Imperial (as well as TKE Admin to whom the “administration” fees were paid) was clearly heavily involved from the start and is well known to Downs, so why does this letter seek to create the impression that investigations are required? Perkins, Ward and Fowler know everything about the Capita Oak scheme so why don’t they just come clean? 

     

    “I will authorise the preparation and distribution of a further announcement regarding the Scheme’s investments as soon as possible.”

     

    Further “announcements” will have much greater credibility if they are issued by the people who operated Capita Oak: Perkins, Ward and Fowler, rather than an un-connected person who has had no experience of the scheme and whose sudden, unexplained appointment as director appears to be a rather ham-fisted attempt to shield Perkins’, Ward’s and Fowler’s responsibilities and culpabilities.

     

    “I am also seeking information regarding the investment return that was due on the investments.”

     

    This statement unfortunately stretches credibility beyond the limit and is also insulting to the intelligence of the members. Perkins, Fowler and Ward devised and operated the scheme and Craig Hollingdrake of JWK Solicitors, acting for Toby Whittaker of Store First, confirmed to me that the 8% “guaranteed rental income” was paid to Transeuro Worldwide Holdings on the instructions “of the people operating Capita Oak”. According to the BBC, Toby Whittaker himself also confirmed this to the BBC investigating journalist. Let us be clear, the investments in Store First were done with the explicit intention of extracting the 30% introduction commission for those directly and indirectly connected with ITSL – not providing a secure retirement investment or income for the members. ITSL’s directors and shadow directors never intended running a long-term pension scheme for the benefit of the members: if they had, they would have invested the funds in diverse, prudent, liquid assets to provide for transfers, retirement and death. To claim to be “seeking information” is just nonsense. If the rental income of £1.6m has been stolen, then Chant and Downs have a duty to report the matter to the police and provide them with all the evidence. Have they done this?

     

    “Currently, and it must be stressed subject to confirmation, the position appears to be that the funds transferred to Metis Law (from which it can be expected that legal fees will have been deducted, but again that has still to be confirmed) were subsequently applied in the purchase of commercial property, principally storage pods with a company called Store First. These investments appear to have been made at the direction of the directors at the time. The former directors who were in office at the time that Scheme assets were transferred to Metis Law and/or were applied in the investment of those assets appear to be a Mr. Karl Dunlop and a Ms Maria Orolfo.”

     

    “These investments appear to have been made….” This is an unbelievable statement. A quick phone call to Metis Law would clear that up, though the fact that that current director of a pension scheme is not sure is damning in the extreme. The directors at the time were Christopher Payne, Karen Burton and Karl Dunlop – so what questions have been asked of them? And why did they resign? Metis Law confirmed that they were instructed by Karl Dunlop. Reverting to my previous comment above, the writer appears to express surprise at the position regarding the investments and the activities of Metis Law. ITSL was the “administrator” and instructed Metis Law. If (and it is a BIG if) Chant has no communication with Payne (who instructed Downs in the first place), Dunlop, Burton and the shadow directors Perkins, Ward and Fowler, why doesn’t he ask them? Why doesn’t he ask Ward whose 31 Memorial Road address was used as the Capita Oak address? Why doesn’t he ask Whittaker whose Goodlass Road address was subsequently used? Why is he purporting to “seek” information when the various parties who operated Imperial/Capita Oak are right under his nose?

     

    I have already sent in a much more complete set of accounts than the one submitted by “Chant” showing what was paid to Metis Law and TKE Admin but this was ignored by Downs and those instructing him. The investments were clearly made at the direction of those who set up, promoted and operated the scheme i.e. Perkins, Fowler and Ward. If another party had instructed the purchase of the pods or any other transaction connected with the scheme, this does not absolve the directors or shadow directors of legal responsibility and accountability.

     

    “Should any members have information as to how (and by whom) they were made aware of the Scheme, or if members have details of any promotional material or statements made (including, but not limited to, those regarding any investments and the expected return on investments) it would be appreciated if members could provide a copy or details to Imperial, either by post or by email. This information may assist in the enquiries being undertaken by my professional advisers.”

     

    This is an admission that the scheme has no idea how it was promoted to its members. I suspect that the director’s advisers are looking for evidence that the agents and promoters of the scheme are guilty of misleading statements to deflect the blame from those that set up the scheme itself. Many members have written and emailed “Imperial” and been denied any kind of response for many months. Indeed the Pensions Ombudsman has declared that this constitutes mal-administration over a prolonged period of time, and has described the scheme as typical of pension liberation and “organized crime”.

     

    “In response to the second member announcement, a very small number of members have enquired about, or have requested, a transfer payment to another scheme or arrangement. Until full details of the location, security, liquidity and value of the Scheme’s investments, and the investment return paid on those investments, is fully understood, in the short term it is not possible for transfer values to be quoted or transfers to be made. Naturally, as soon as it becomes possible, we will advise members as to next steps regarding the availability of transfers.”

     

    This statement really does again stretch credibility to the limit, and beyond. Could we have confirmation how many have enquired? It is surprising that only a very small number want to transfer out. The directors and shadow directors of ITSL clearly set up and ran this scam. They instructed Metis Law to effect the purchases of store pods using virtually 100% of the members’ funds, instructed Store First to pay the 8% 2-year guaranteed rent to Transeuro Worldwide Holdings Ltd., and operated the Thurlstone pension liberation scam. So how can they not know? It defies belief. The very fact that this letter appears to be trying to create the impression that ITSL was not responsible for everything that has gone wrong is damning in itself. Also, the fact there is no liquidity for transfers out, demonstrates again that this scheme has not been managed for the benefit of the members.

     

    “Please be assured that Imperial continued actively to pursue all matters relating to the Scheme, with the best interests of the members its paramount aim.”

     

    Am not sure any of the Capita Oak victims will believe this statement, having seen that they have been scammed out of £10.8 million (plus the £1.22 million missing transfers), as well as ITSL failing to account for the missing £1.6m rental income.

     

    “This is being done within the very limited funds available to Imperial.”

    Bearing in mind ITSL charged 541,775.51 by its own admission, according to the “financial analysis” reported by Chant, I would have thought Imperial had plenty of funds to “actively pursue” these matters. (Plus the 70,162.19 they are supposed to have as a “balance” which should be held in cash. Plus the 31k that Metis Law are sitting on.)

    If the funds are limited, how was the scheme ever going to be administered going forwards? Not only do we not have audited accounts, there are no individual statements for members. Why were the funds not segregated into individual accounts? It is not just a question of illiquid assets, the scheme cannot even tell an individual what the transfer value is in the first place. A shocking state of affairs that has not been addressed. Why not?

     

    “ITSL c/o Downs & Co

    Signed Roger Chant”

     

    PURPORTED “ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY OF BANK ACCOUNT” BY IMPERIAL

    Transfers Received: 10,835,510.21 (why is this 25,208.64 greater than stated in the original Imperial accounts and where is the missing 1.22 million made up from 47 transfers?)

    Interest Received: 832.11

    To open account: 75.00

    TOTAL: 10,836,417.32

    Pension cash lump sums: 82,911.31

    Bank charges: 812.33

    Administration fees: 541,775.51 (why did the original Imperial accounts state 441,751.85 and does this revised figure include the 10k paid to Christopher Payne when Barclays realised that ITSL was operating a scam? And further, does it include the 100,557.58 paid to Thurlstone by Metis Law?)

    Pensions Regulator: 157.71

    Metis Law re investment: 10,140,598.27

    Balance held by ITSL: 70,162.19 (does this include the 31k held by Metis Law which they are refusing to release?)

    Where are the following items in the financial statement?:

    9,828,750.00 paid to Store First – of which 30% was paid in introduction commission

    2,948,625 paid in commission (to whom?)

    647.00 in bank charges

    720.31 in courier services

    61,172.98 in fees to Metis Law

    3,990.00 to Harper McLeod

    1,696.00 in indemnity insurance

    12,370.00 in Land Registry fees

    5,194.20 to SDLT

    94,165.00 to Stamp Duty

    100,557.58 to Thurlstone

     

    It must be clearly declared that taking into consideration the 30% introduction commission and the 8% “guaranteed rental income” that in fact Imperial effected payment of 9,828,750 for property which was worth 46% less than the purchase price at the very least (and which may have a zero re-sale value). Furthermore, aside from the 5% “admin fee” paid to Imperial/TKE Admin, a further 179,955.29 in assorted costs added to the dilution of the value of the transfers.

     

    Finally, kindly respond to the following by return:

    1. Comments are sought on the invalid and forged “trust deed” which appointed ITSL as administrator but not as trustee. The signatures look like they could be Alan Fowler and Karen Burton (although it is not the same signature as Karen Burton used to sign letters to Capita Oak members and the handwriting is identical to that of Anthony Salih of Premier Pension Transfers at 31 Memorial Road, Worsley). Why were the signatures not identified, dated and witnessed? And why was no trustee appointed? Where is the original, witnessed trust deed?
    2. Who registered Capita Oak with tPR and HMRC?
    3. Why were the pods registered in the name of ITSL (as trustee of Capita Oak) when it was not the trustee? This means that the Capita Oak scheme is not the legal owner of the pods, but ITSL is. How will HMRC treat this?
    4. Why were the Barclays Bank accounts in the name of ITSL/Christopher Payne and not ITSL/Capita Oak?

     

    A full and prompt response to the above queries would be much appreciated. This letter is being copied to the Police Economics Crime Unit, the Pensions Regulator, the Pensions Ombudsman, the Insolvency Service, the members, the press as well as the SRA and Mr. Downs’ professional body.

     

    Angela Brooks

    Chairman – Ark Class Action

     

  • CAPITA OAK UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUIRED

    CAPITA OAK UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUIRED

    Capita Oak Pension Scam

    For the benefit of all 300 odd members of Capita Oak, here is an email that was sent today to Downs & Co, the accountants acting on behalf of Christopher Payne, the director of the trustees Imperial. This email has been circulated to many Capita Oak members and other interested parties such as the police and the BBC who are preparing a documentary on the subject.

    Hopefully it will not be too late to blow the whistle on this situation and rescue the members’ funds: https://pension-life.com/#!whistle/c13e7

    Admittedly, the contents of this email raises more questions than it answers, but it does at least go some way to establishing how many members there are, how much in total was transferred and who the various parties were who received money from the transfers. What it does not yet establish is what the 10.14 million paid to Metis Law is now actually worth and how (or if) it can be recovered.
    Dear Mr. Downs (info@downsandco.co.uk)

    Referring to our earlier correspondence, will you kindly ask your client Mr. Christopher Payne the following questions:

    1. A total of 10,810,301.57 was transferred in to Capita Oak from approximately 300 members and a total of 10,666,066.14 was paid out. This should leave a balance of 144,235.43 and confirmation is required that this is indeed the amount remaining in cash.

    2. A total of 82,911.31 was paid out in “PCLS” payments and confirmation is required as to what these payments were and who authorised them.

    3. The following “PCLS” payments were made and confirmation is needed as to who these people were and why these payments were made, upon whose authority:

    -5,054.24 J Whyte
    -8,854.53 G Rose
    -21,875.72 W Daniels
    -5,758.99 Mr Clemson
    -5,286.32 Mr. Charlesworth
    -17,231.51 Pamela Holt
    -18,850.00 A Levitt

    4. A total of 441,751.85 was paid to TKE Admin (of which Mr. Payne was a director). This was paid to TKE on 27 different dates between 12.11.2012 and 5.7.2013. Please explain what these payments were for and who authorised them.

    5. Premier Pension Transfers were apparently handling the transfers but there is no record of any payment to them for their services. How were they remunerated and why were two administration companies involved and who appointed them?

    6. A total of 10,140,598.27 was remitted to Metis Law between 11.20.2012 and 7.5.2013. Confirmation is required that Capita Oak now holds 10,140,598.27 worth of assets and exactly what income these assets are supposed to generate and whether they are unencumbered. Further we need evidence of title to these assets and a full explanation as to who authorised 100% of Capita Oak’s assets to be placed in illiquid property with very little liquidity remaining for transfers out.
    7. An explanation as to how and by whom the Thurlestone “loans” were transacted, administered and recorded.

    There will of course be numerous further questions which your client Mr. Payne will be required to answer, including why he has not contacted me or answered my calls. As I am sure you appreciate, as former and current director of Imperial Trustees, Mr. Payne is liable for any risks to Capita Oak and responsible for the members’ interests, investments and any non-compliant transactions linked to the pension, such as the Thurlestone loans of 5% of the value of the transfers.
    In the case of Ark, professional independent trustees were appointed by the Pensions Regulator and the majority of the assets were eventually recovered. However, this is not the case for the Capita Oak victims – who are extremely distressed – and therefore we are all relying on the full cooperation and disclosure by you and your client Mr. Payne.

    Your early response will be much appreciated. As I am sure you will be fully aware, this situation is being closely monitored by the police and the BBC, as well as the members and if you or your client Mr. Payne are unable to answer any of the above questions you must refer me to any other connected party who is in a position to do so. You will see that this email is copied to the Police, Store First and Metis Law.

    Regards, Angela Brooks – Chairman, Ark Class Action

  • BBC News England – Meet the pension liberation fraud victims.

    BBC Inside Out investigates a new cold-calling practice involving pension liberation fraud which is taking place across England.

    Liberating your pension

    Click here to watch video

    Pension liberation fraud has been reported widely in the press, on t.v. and on radio for several years.  The Inside Out documentary showed how easily victims are scammed by the teams of scammers.  The Ark Class Action, led by Angela Brooks, filmed part of this programme at the BBC studios along with a financial adviser and solicitor.

    Interestingly, Andrew Isles, the accountant who helped design and set up the Ark schemes, took part enthusiastically in the filming.  The BBC team did some secret shopping of their own, and uncovered another pension liberation scheme run by George Frost – former Chairman of Canvey Island Football Club.  Frost’s scheme invested victims’ pensions in “truffle trees”.

  • ARK PENSION DISASTER – THE TIMES ARTICLE

    The Times – good quality journalism reporting poor quality financial advice

    Ark Pension Disaster – The Times Article – Mark Atherton Uncovers Pension Liberation Scam

    Money

    Pension scam leaves victims in debt

    Angie Brooks is leading a campaign to secure justice for victims of a pensions “liberation” scam                                                  Pic: Richard Pohle

    Mark Atherton

    Last updated at 12:01 AM, September 13 2014

    Thousands of people have lost more than £500 million of their savings after being duped into taking part in unauthorised “pension liberation” scams. Experts say that the true figure runs into billions because many cases go unreported.

    They also warn that next year’s relaxation of the rules governing how you can take your pension cash will provide a fertile breeding ground for fresh scams as fraudsters queue up to exploit the uncertainty around the new pensions regime.

    Some of today’s victims fear they have lost their entire pension savings, while others say they have been driven to the brink of suicide.

    The lure of pensions “liberation”

    Savers were originally lured into transferring their pension pots by the promise of getting their hands on their retirement cash before the age of 55. However, many succeeded in “unlocking” only half of their pension pot, with the rest going partly into uncertain property investments, partly into cash and partly to the scheme’s promoters through hefty fees.

    Savers were told that these schemes were legitimate but that was not true. Now many of the victims are facing financial ruin as they are being told to hand back the money they “liberated”, while Revenue & Customs is poised to slap on a tax penalty of 55 percent of the “unlocked” cash. In many cases, they simply do not have the money to pay.

    The Ark schemes

    Among the biggest “liberation” schemes were those created by Ark, a pensions consultant. These were marketed by financial advisers and so-called “introducers” in the UK and Spain. One of the main players was Stephen Ward, of Premier Pension Solutions (PPS), a Spanish-based company.

    Angie Brooks, below, a former tax barrister, who is leading the class action on behalf of the Ark victims, says: “Mr Ward assured Ark applicants that it was lawful and tax-free and was approved by the Revenue and the pensions regulator. The Revenue registered the six Ark occupational pension schemes without checking for compliance. So did the pensions regulator. This understandably gave the Ark members the reasonable illusion that the schemes were lawful and approved by the UK government.”

    The registration procedures have now been changed. She says that between September 2010 and May 2011, £25 million was transferred from personal and occupational pension plans into Ark schemes, for fees of up to 10 percent of the value of the transferred pot. More was transferred after this, bringing the total to £27 million.

    PPS teamed up with AES International, a firm regulated in the UK, which gave PPS a tied agent agreement to operate in Spain under its regulation (though this did not authorise PPS to carry out pension transfers). PPS carried out at least 160 Ark pension transfers, totalling £10.7 million, with Ark taking a 5 percent cut of each transfer, PPS pocketing a further 3 per cent, as well as a slice of the Ark money, and AES receiving a 12.5 percent slice of PPS’s cut.

    The schemes “unlocked” money by arranging for members to make reciprocal loans, worth about half the value of their pension pot, to each other. Many believed they would not have to repay these loans, known as Maximising Pension Value Arrangements (MPVA). The remaining half of their pension pots, after deduction of hefty charges, was partly held in cash and partly used to buy plots of land or timeshares.

    Alarm bells started to ring in December 2010 when the Revenue expressed “concerns” over the lawfulness of the schemes, though it was not until May that they were suspended and a trustee — Dalriada — appointed. It embarked on litigation that resulted in the Ark schemes being declared invalid and the reciprocal loans judged to be “unauthorised payments” in the High Court in December 2011.

    The cost to Ark victims

    The judge’s ruling delivered a twofold blow to Ark members. First, Dalriada was enabled to demand back the money they had received as loans under the schemes. Second, since the loans were “unauthorised payments” the Revenue was entitled to levy a penalty charge of 55 per cent on these sums. The Revenue has not decided whether to tax the donors or recipients.

    Dalriada has managed to recover more than £6 million of the £7 million which Ark spent on property investments. Sean Browes, of Dalriada, adds that it also has £9 million of Ark money in a bank account and is seeking to unscramble the £10 million of reciprocal loans. However, this has come at the cost of £800,000 in Dalriada’s fees and £1.9 million in legal costs.

    According to Ms Brooks, Mr Ward has, since the suspension of Ark, been linked to pension liberation schemes which have attracted hundreds of fresh customers — something he denies.

    He says: “PPS provided information regarding the Ark schemes in good faith based on the information and opinions provided by Ark and our own independent research. We included statements that independent financial advice should be sought and a number of people who did take advice found the experts they consulted agreed with our understanding of the position. We believe the damage has been caused primarily by the Revenue’s failure to take action when it first became aware of the schemes and by Dalriada’s fees.”

    Sam Instone, the head of AES International, says: “We had nothing to do with the Ark scheme and we earned a negligible amount from our tied agency with PPS. We have no legal responsibility for what has occurred here.”

    Craig Tweedley, who created the Ark schemes, says: “We took extensive advice about the validity of these schemes before launch. We were concerned when we learned that some introducers were claiming that the MPVA loans did not have to be repaid when a key part of our scheme was that they should.”

    Dalriada says: “The Ark schemes were very unusual and have taken some time and, unfortunately, money to unravel. The members of these schemes have been scammed.”

    Anyone with information about these pensions “liberation” schemes is invited to contact mark.atherton@ thetimes.co.uk

    Be on your guard against scams

    • Ahead of next year’s changes to the rules, one aspect of which means those aged 55 or over can take money from their pension, the scammers are gearing up to part you from your cash. Be on your guard
    • If someone promises to help you take money from your pension pot before the age of 55 it is almost certainly a scam: you could lose the lot
    • Even if you are over 55, do not deal with anyone targeting you by phone, text message or approaching you in person. Beware the words: ‘free pension review’
    • Do not deal with anyone who is not registered with the Financial Conduct Authority for pension transfers

  • Ark, Evergreen Retirement Trust QROPS and Marazion Timeline

    Note similarity between the Marazion and Perpetual logos!

    ARK DISASTER – MARAZION/EVERGREEN PENSION LOAN SCHEMES:

    TIME-LINE

    ARK CLASS ACTION

    An Ark victim has suggested it would be a good idea to do a full update so everybody knows the entire story so far.  I agree that’s a good idea so here is a brief outline of where we are and how we got here.  If anyone has any questions or wants further information the Ark Class Action can be contacted on arkmarazion@gmail.com.

    2010: a group of investors got together and purchased a plot of land in Larnaca, Cyprus for 1 million pounds.  With the intention to try to turn it into a golf course.  Only they needed more land and more money.  So they consulted a group of “experts” who came up with the idea of attracting investment by starting a pension scheme.  Now, pensions are supposed to be LOW RISK. And diverse. Speculative land development projects are NOT a good idea for a pension (due to being high risk).  Financial advisers are supposed to know this and are not supposed to advise their clients to put their hard-earned pensions into a scheme based on a potentially worthless piece of land.

    OFFICIAL TIME-LINE 2010: Ark was formed by a group of “experts” and the worthless piece of land originally bought for 1 million was sold to Ark for 4 million.

    August 2010: Ark’s “Master Pension Schemes” (MPS’s) were aggressively promoted and sold by a clutch of financial advisers in Spain and the UK using pension liberation (also known as pension cracking or unlocking) in a scheme described by the promoters as “not traditionally available” (in other words unlawful). This “unique” process was called Maximising Pension Value Arrangements (MPVA) and facilitated a loan to the participant of up to 50% of the value of the transferred pension (after deduction of fees which ranged from between 5% and 15%).

    2010 to 2011: The Ark schemes began advertising and were sold through newspaper ads, websites, calls from financial advisers, seminars and advertisements posted on toilet doors.

    May 2011: The Pensions Regulator were actively shutting down pension liberation scams such as Ark and placed the six Ark schemes in the hands of Dalriada Trustees and the whole lot was suspended. The Regulator was actively promoting its “Scorpion” campaign to warn people about the dangers of pension liberation fraud. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pensionschemes/investments-tax.htm. HMRC also set up “Project Bloom” to help stop these scams due to the fact that the victims stood to lose their pensions AND get 55% plus tax bills on their pension loans. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pensionschemes/liberationud.pdf

    December 15th 2011: Justice Bean ruled in the High Court that the Ark schemes (MPS’s and MPVA’s i.e. pension transfers and reciprocal loans) were a “fraud on the power of investment” and that the loans constituted “unauthorised payments” (i.e. taxable at 55%). The ruling can be read here – note Clause 57: http://www.professionalpensions.com/digital_assets/3826/4568_001.pdf

    December 1st 2011: Evergreen Pension Scheme was established in New Zealand

    December 20th 2011: Marazion was incorporated in Nicosia, Cyprus.

    June 2012 Evergreen Pension Scheme commenced trading – making a loss in the first year and attracting 426 members

    August 2012 Marazion started selling five-year term loans and corresponding five-year “lock ins” to Evergreen pension transfers

    19th November 2012 HMRC suspended Evergreen from their QROPS list http://www.evergreentrust.co.nz/uk-pension-transfers/

    December 2012 Dalriada published the first year’s audited accounts (for the period May 2011 to May 2012) for the six MPS’s: Cranbourne Star, Tallton Place, Grosvenor, Lancaster, Portman and Woodcroft Dalriada’s audited accounts for the six Ark schemes for the first two years can be found here: http://dalriadatrustees.co.uk/ark/

    September 2013: The Ark Class Action was set up to help inform the Ark victims and negotiate and appeal their tax liabilities so that these (together with their pension losses) can be reclaimed from the negligent financial advisers who sold the Ark schemes to the victims .

    March 2014: HMRC finally agreed to confirm their full intentions regarding taxing the Ark loans.

    April 2014: HMRC finally confirmed their intention to try to tax the loans at both ends i.e. 55% at the receiving end AND 55% at the making end.  They also confirmed that Ark members who did not receive a loan would still be taxed at 55% for making a loan or intending to make a loan, and/or intending to receive a loan.

    Between 2012 and 2014 (to date), some Ark members have received demands by HMRC to complete Self Assessment returns declaring the Ark unauthorized payments for tax purposes; some members have received demands for the tax; some have received nothing at all, but HMRC have confirmed that the letters and demands are now on their way.  However, there really has been no consistency in their approach to the whole Ark matter, but they do now appear to be getting their act together.

    June 2014: Evidence regarding the Marazion/Evergreen pension liberation fraud was handed to the British authorities in London.

    June 2014: HMRC has issued a deadline of 30th of June for return of the 10 point questionnaire required in respect of the Ark loans.

    Any questions, just ask.  Angela Brooks

    [contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Website’ type=’url’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]