Tag: Pension Liberation

Pension liberation scammers of Successful Pensions JAILED

Two pension liberation scammers have been sentenced to time behind bars AND a recovery of funds after creating an elaborate pension liberation scam, involving around 23 victims and nearly 1 million pounds of pension funds. Successful Pensions sure was unsuccessful for all involved.

Anthony Locke, 33, from Christchurch in the UK, was sentenced to a five-year jail term, after being found guilty of 23 counts of fraud by false representation and three counts of money laundering.

Ray King, 54, who was employed by Lock, was also found guilty at the trial of 14 counts of fraud by false representation and given a three-year jail sentence.

FT Adviser reported:

“According to investigating officer Paul Sullivan, of Dorset Police, between September 2013 and April 2014 Mr Locke obtained almost £1m from various pension companies, which represented the ‘pension pots’ of the victims in this case”.

A timetable was set out for Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings in relation to the recovery of funds from the defendants.

Successful Pensions, Lock’s company, allegedly created an ‘elaborate façade’ comprising of hundreds of documents to convince genuine companies, including Friends Life and Virgin Money, that they were operating a genuine occupational pension scheme.

Successful Pensions, set up a website to attract people who were interested in pension liberation. The victims were given a 50% cash payout on their funds’ total worth, with the other half to be re-invested – reportedly in eco-friendly investment schemes.

Unfortunately, there were no investments. Rather than cream large commissions by reinvesting the funds into high-risk toxic assets (which most scammers do), they instead laundered the money into offshore accounts including Lock’s Mum’s account and his ex-partner’s!

The scammers then went on to live the life of Riley with the victims’ money. They treated themselves to an Aston Martin Vantage, Porsche 911 and Mercedes B180, along with lots of other luxury items and nice holidays.

Paul Sullivan also stated:

“Not only have the victims lost half their pensions but now may face financial penalties from HMRC (Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs) who will want to recover the lost tax (on the pension liberation).

The sentences imposed send out a clear message to fraudsters who perpetrate these types of offences.”

This is indeed positive news. But the message it sends out isn’t good enough. These fraudsters were clearly not very bright and made no attempt at smoke and mirrors. They scammed 23 people out of nearly £1 million. What about those in other schemes that scammed hundreds and sometimes even thousands of victims out of many £ millions? And did so repeatedly.

To my mind, the message sent out is that only the stupid scammers who don’t aim high get caught and punished. The more clever and cunning ones get away unscathed time and time again. And are left free and unfettered to enjoy their expensive lifestyles at the expense of their victims.

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

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, get all the information in writing and get a third party to check the details.

If you have been the victim of a scam hear how Pension Life member Jessica M.J. who lost two thirds of her pension to Continental Wealth Management, talks about dealing with stress.

May 1, 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
Fractional scamming – The trending pension scam

Having read Henry Tapper’s A Master Class in Fractional Scamming, here at Pension Life we feel we should share some facts with our readers about the “trending” investment and pension scam of 2018 – fractional scamming.

First of all here´s a bit about the fractional scam:

Today with new regulations, pension liberation has pretty much gone out of the window. Instead, victims are being offered to transfer their pension fund into a “new” scheme and invest in funds with promises of high returns and low risks. What is hidden in the small print is that whilst there MIGHT be high returns (possibly, if the wind is blowing in the right direction for long enough), the fund has to work its way through the hands of many parasitic introducers and advisers – each one taking their own fraction of the fund.

Henry Tapper uses a Pizza as a great example. Say you ordered a pizza which has been cut into eight slices. On its way to you, the pizza goes past 6 people, and each one takes a slice. Therefore 3/4 of the pizza has already been eaten by the time it gets to you. That does not leave much for you, the person whose pizza it was supposed to be.

This is what is happening to pension funds subjected to fractional scamming, they are being passed from one adviser to another and each one takes their slice.

So whilst the pension fund may well be going into a high-return investment, (when they finally arrive there), the fund has to recover from the percentage slices taken before any profit can be made. Using the pizza as an example, 75% of it was eaten before it arrived at its promised destination. 75% is a pretty high figure – even if the investment interest is 6.5%/7.5% – it is going to take another lifetime to get it back to its original value. Something the victims of fractional scamming don´t have.

The trending pension scam, fractional scamming – this image shows how the scammers skim their slice of the victims’ pension fund in this new wave of pension scam. Chip, chip, chipping away until the original pot is but a fragment of its original state.

What is most frustrating about the situation is that many of the people benefiting from the fractional scam are unregulated advisers. They are the unauthorised introducers who work with unauthorised – as well as authorised – IFAS who worked with Pension Trustees to transfer money into overseas funds. Each one taking their fraction of the fund.

$Pension Life blog - Fractional Scamming - The trending pension scam - don´t let your pension pot fall victim to fractional scamming$

Ways to avoid falling victim to fractional scamming are to ensure that the adviser you are proposing to use is fully authorised by the FCA in the UK. Or by the appropriate regulator in whichever jurisdiction you are resident. Do your own due diligence to ensure that you know all the facts about the transfer of your pension fund. What are the fees – as in ALL THE FEES – relating to the transfer; where will the fund be going and what exactly will it be invested in.

If you are cold called – HANG UP IMMEDIATELY

Do the adviser’s promises sound too good to be true? IF THEY DO, THEY PROBABLY ARE

High return/low risk investment – NO SUCH THING

The illustration on the left is based on the Continental Wealth Management scam which saw nearly 1,000 people have around £100 million worth of retirement savings put at risk. The first year would have cost the victim at least 16% of the fund, and thereafter around 8% a year. So it never had any chance of growing – while the “advisers”, bond provider and structured note providers got fat and rich.

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

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 19, 2018
Holborn Assets Johannesburg – Damaging more life savings?

EXCLUSIVE: Holborn Assets opens new office in South Africa. Oh, how wonderful for them! However, not so wonderful for the new victims Holborn will obviously be trying to scam into losing large percentages of their pension funds.

None of the existing victims have received compensation yet for their crippling losses due to expensive insurance bonds, high-risk, professional-investor-only structured notes, and even higher-risk UCIS funds such as New Earth Recycling. And yet Holborn Assets appear to have plenty of spare cash to open a new office in Johannesburg. This new venture will be led by Lourens Reichert and will apparently employ an eight-strong team of advisers. Seems Holborn Assets is now set to exploit this new market and will, of course, have no trouble finding plenty of new victims and relieving them of their pension savings.

Bob Parker, Holborn Assets’ CEO and founder, said: “South Africa is full of potential. There’s an enormous amount of capital held by residents outside of the country and Lourens and his team are experts in advising clients on how to manage that for maximum growth and efficiency.”

You can almost hear Bob Parker smacking his lips and rubbing his hands with glee as he is already counting the enormous amount of money he is going to make out of scamming more victims.

If you are new to Holborn Assets here is a bit of background information on them. The outfit is based in various locations including Dubai, Saudi and Kuala Lumpur, as well as the UK and run by various Parkers: Simon, Bob, James etc. They have used mass cold-calling techniques to lure in victims and place their pension funds into high-risk, toxic investments – that pay maximum commissions.

Holborn Assets’ past victims have seen heavy losses to their pensions due to negligent, unregulated, unqualified advice into entirely inappropriate, high-risk, illiquid assets. This includes one victim’s $600k life savings – half of which were invested in New Earth Recycling (which, of course, was paying the best investment introduction commissions at the time).

Not only is Holborn Assets in the habit of destroying pension funds, the firm also has no shame in who they stick on their payroll. Take Paul Reynolds, who was banned by the FCA and fined nearly £300,000 for giving unsuitable and misleading financial advice, yet Bob Parker of Holborn Assets Dubai welcomed him with open arms. Holborn Assets also employed Darin Brownlee-Jones: the “Champagne Killer“. A drunk hit-and-run driver who killed an innocent man then walked away to drink champagne.

Bob Parker is clearly a man whose conscience bothers him not one bit after failing to compensate victims. He has the astonishing audacity to have his own page on his website to warn people about scammers!

And now Holborn Assets has employed Lourens Reichert, to be the face of Holborn Assets Johannesburg. Reichert has reportedly said “Holborn has a great reputation for its integrity, professionalism and for supporting its staff and investing in them and the business. It is also going in a really exciting direction and it’s great to join the company when it is on such a growth track.”

He obviously hasn’t done much research on the company he now works for and represents. Or did the whopping “golden handshake” he received from Bob Parker make him turn a blind eye to the grubby goings on inside Holborn Assets?

Reichert has apparently stated:

“Coming to Holborn gives my team and I the opportunity to grow the business even further. The first priority will be within South Africa and then we will explore the many opportunities that exist for providing specialist advice across the African continent.”

But Reichert has said nothing of repairing the damage done to so many victims and Holborn Assets’ failure to compensate them. Is Reichert really so blind? Or is he just greedy, selfish and heartless – willing to go on and do to more victims what Holborn Assets has already done to so many?

All that’s left to say then is “Look out South Africa!” If any South African residents get cold called by Reichert and his merry men, just tell them to hop it.

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

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 18, 2018
Victory for SIPPS Pension Scam Victims

A happy tale for the end of the week… not just one but two firms have been told they must compensate clients for poor advice on SIPPS transfers. A great victory against all firms using SIPPS to disguise their ill-advised pension scams sorry schemes.

Financial Planning today reported that:

The Financial Ombudsman Service has ruled against Portafina and Greystone Financial Services in two recent separate cases.

In both instances the clients were advised to invest in unregulated collective investment schemes (UCIS). These schemes are generally high risk and unsuitable for retail investments such as pension fund SIPPS. Both victims have suffered severe financial loss due to the UCIS their funds were invested in.

Mr P invested sums from his SIPP of £50,000 and two more of £20,000 into various funds before 2007 on the advice of Greystone. In May 2007 Greystone advised Mr P to invest £25,000 of his SIPP funds in the Rock Industrial UK Property fund and to also invest £25,000 in the Phoenix Spree Deutschland fund.

Mr P at 51 should have been a low risk investor, however he was encouraged to invest a high percentage of his SIPPS into the commercial property market. Greystone argued that the loss was not caused by the advice but by the unprecedented fall in the commercial property market.

The FOS told the firm it must put Mr P into the position he would probably now be in – or as closely as possible – if he had been given suitable advice.

With this case and many others now coming to prosecution, there is hope that there will be a reduction in firms advising their clients to invest in unregulated high-risk investments. In this case there is no mention of the ´fees´the firms applied to the investments they made, however it is safe to assume they would have applied a nice percentage to each investment, ensuring their pockets were well lined whilst the victim´s funds end with severe losses.

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

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 13, 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
A win for the FCA against Capital Alternatives
Pension Life is pleased to report that the FCA has woken up long enough to do a spot of regulating and has won an important case over the promotion of unregulated investment schemes. The firm flogging the schemes, Capital Alternatives, must pay back nearly £17m to investors.

The FCA alleged that Capital Alternatives used “false, misleading and deceptive statements” to lure unsuspecting investors into four toxic, high-risk investments (scams) between 2009 and 2013. Capital Alternatives, ran investment schemes/scams involving rice farm harvests in Sierra Leone and carbon credits across Sierra Leone, Brazil and Australia.

In reality, Capital Alternatives sold more land to investors than it actually owned.

Court proceedings have been taking place since July 2013, with The High Court deciding in February 2014 that the schemes/scams were collective investment schemes which could not be lawfully operated by the defendants. Since this date defendants have been appealing the decision.

It must be highlighted that Capital Alternatives are not the only defendants involved in this case. This is perhaps why proceedings have taken so long. In fact, the FCA stated that there are a staggering 15 more defendants involved in this case.

The FCA lists the defendants:
1. Capital Alternatives Limited
2. Capital Secretarial Limited
3. Capital Organisation Limited
4. Capital Administration Services Limited
5. MH Trustees Limited
6. Marcia Hargous
7. Renwick Haddow
8. Richard Henstock (case settled)
9. African Land Limited
10. Robert McKendrick
11. Alan Meadowcroft
12. Regency Capital Limited
13. Reforestation Projects Limited
14. Mark Ayres/Eyres
15. Mark Gibbs
16. the estate of David Waygood (case settled).
The eighth and sixteenth defendants settled their cases previously and have paid £33,000 and £200,000 towards compensation for the investors. The FCA has received this money and will hold it until the Court issue further directions to the FCA about the return of money to victims.

The bad news for investors in Capital Alternatives, is that the High Court’s decision is still open to appeal. The FCA can proceed to obtain monies from the Defendants only when no further appeals are made. In the meantime, the FCA is seeking new injunctions restraining the assets of some of the defendants. We sincerely hope this means there will be some funds left to be returned to the victims of this scam.

But it would be better news if the other 14 defendants find it in their conscience to settle out of court and put the victims out of their misery. It is terrible to find out that you have put hard-earned money into high-risk, illiquid or even worthless investments.

FCA Director of Enforcement Mark Steward has been reported as saying:

“This judgment should send a clear message to all of those who use corporate facades to sell dubious investments. We will do what it takes to hold them to account for their misconduct.

We are acutely aware from experience that the risk to investors who deal with unauthorised firms is that most, if not all, investors are likely only to get a fraction of their money back.

Consumers should recognise that there are huge risks involved when investing with unauthorised businesses.”

Investors should be aware that investments into sustainable/renewable energies, farming and recycling schemes are favorites of scammers. They entice you in with promises of your investment being good for the environment. However, they are rarely good for your pocket. James Hay and Elysian Bio fuel is one example of toxic investment using biofuels as a lure.

In Novemeber 2017 we also wrote about the SFOs letter to Frank Field. The letter highlighted cases of prosecutions against pensions fraud.

Sustainable Agroenergy (SAE) Plc: investors were told their investments were in biofuel products, that land was owned in Cambodia and planted with Jatropha trees – a tree with highly toxic fruit that could be used to produce biofuel. At the time of sale, there was already evidence to show that the product was neither sustainable nor profitable.

New Earth Recycling fund – an investment scam promoted by a number of dodgy firms including Robert Parker of Holborn Assets and Paul Herd of Elite Wealth Management. This high-risk, toxic investment offered big fat introduction commissions. The introducers were the only ones to profit from this investment.

The BARRATT AND DALTON PENSION SCAM: – one couple fell victim to this scam despite being advised by their pension provider that it could be a scam. They received a lump sum and were told their pension was invested in truffle trees. After reporting the case to the police, they were later informed that their lump sum was from their own funds and HMRC promptly served them with a large tax bill.

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

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
EVERGREEN RETIREMENT TRUST QROPS SCAM

EVERGREEN RETIREMENT TRUST QROPS SCAM – HOW DID IT ALL WORK?

Victims were cold called by Continental Wealth Management (CWM) and duped into transferring their UK pensions into the Evergreen New Zealand QROPS on the promise that they could access 50% of their pension. CWM acted as the “sister” company to Stephen Ward’s Premier Pension Solutions (PPS).

Once the 300+ victims had been sold this idea – on the promise by pensions “expert” Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions that the 50% in cash would not be taxable – the transfers went ahead. More than £10 million pounds’ worth.

CWM assured the victims that the 50% cash would not be taxable because the scheme was set up and run by international pensions expert and author of the Tolleys Pensions Taxation manual Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions.

Once the transfer had gone ahead, and the victims were eagerly awaiting their 50% in cash (albeit having to pay 10% in fees for the privilege), they then started to chase up their cash. There were delays after delays.

After many weeks of frustration, the victims were then told they had to apply for a loan. They were told that this was merely a formality – paperwork to ensure that the cash would not be taxable by HMRC. And they were sent loan application forms from a company called Marazion – Stephen Ward’s company in Cyprus.

Victims were then forced to sign a five-year Marazion loan agreement. And forced to sign a five-year Evergreen “lock in”. Clearly, this was designed to stop victims from transferring out of Evergreen before their Marazion “loans” were paid off.

Evergreen recently sent out a notice to victims advising them the Evergreen Scheme is being wound up. (Surprise surprise!!). Here is the Evergreen notice with my comments in bold:

Evergreen Retirement Trust – closure and winding up

We are writing to inform you that the Evergreen Retirement Trust (“ERT”) is being closed and wound up with effect from Friday, 6 April 2018. So why, just days earlier, were you writing to victims to tell them could take their 30% tax-free lump sum and transfer out? You knew this day and the winding up would eventually take place – and why as well as when. And yet you have misled and distressed a large number of your victims knowingly and intentionally.

Why is ERT being wound up? We all know exactly why ERT is being wound up. HMRC realised that the scheme was operating pension liberation fraud in partnership with Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions early on – in 2012 – so removed it from the QROPS list in November 2012. Your Manager’s Report for the year ended 31.3.16 refers to “concerns raised by HMRC” but you do not disclose the fact that you had been caught and the scheme removed from the QROPS list as a result. The other reason the fund is being wound up is that you have run out of excuses now the five-year lock-in period is up. In your Manager’s Report, you claim that service contracts were entered into by Evergreen Retirement Trust for admin, trustee and other services which have minimum fixed fees. But you have never provided evidence of these alleged “contracts” – nor have you explained why you have carried on paying these unaffordable costs. You have been trying to obscure the fact that 41% of the underlying assets of the fund were in Penrich and Spectrum and that this is where the loan funds came from. You have for years tried to pretend that you knew nothing about the Marazion loans. But the original trustee – Perpetual Trust – even had a virtually identical logo to Marazion!

We have been considering the future of ERT for some time. Despite our best efforts, ERT has not been as successful as we had originally hoped. This is the understatement of the century surely? Best efforts? I would really hate to see your worst efforts. You’ve spent the last five years telling members they can’t transfer out because of the five-year term Marazion loans – and knowing all along that you were always going to wind the scheme up because there was nothing to be done about at least 41% of the scheme being in illegal loans using Penrich and Spectrum funds – the underlying assets of the scheme.

The main reasons for this have been the inability to attract new membership into ERT and the increased compliance costs arising from transition to the new, more rigorous, Financial Markets Conduct Act regulatory framework that now applies to it. And what exactly did the “more rigorous regulatory framework” say about the scheme operating pension liberation fraud as part of the scheme?

Although we explored a number of avenues to resolve these issues, we ultimately determined that it would be in members’ best interests for ERT to be wound up and the scheme brought to a close. What would have been in the members’ best interests would have been to allow the members to transfer out several years ago when we first asked Evergreen for transfers. It is clear from your own accounts that you have indeed allowed 10 people to transfer out £500k worth of funds last year – presumably these were people without Marazion loans?

What happens next? Until 6 April 2018, ERT will continue as normal and you will have the same rights and benefits as before. On and from 6 April 2018, the assets in your member account will be realised and the proceeds paid into your nominated bank account after the deduction of applicable fees, expenses and any taxes in respect of the winding up process. So for people under the age of 55, you are proposing triggering an unauthorised payment which would be taxed at 55% by HMRC? Unbelievable.

A final set of scheme financial statements will be prepared, audited and sent to all members, and the relevant regulatory notifications will be filed. So how are you going to account for the Marazion loans? You must surely realise that this is a huge problem and you can’t just keep ignoring it and pretending you weren’t involved in this aspect of the scam.

To allow this process to occur in an orderly fashion, members will not be able to request transfers (except as set out below) or make further contributions, and benefit payments will be put on hold pending the final distribution of wind up proceeds. So how are you going to account for the Marazion loans? How will these be factored into the wind-up proceeds?

Some of the scheme’s assets are illiquid and as a consequence the winding up process could take some time. Why on earth are any of the assets illiquid? No pension scheme assets should be illiquid. You have been dealing with this matter for more than five years and you always knew that there was a purported five-year lock-in, timed to coincide with the five-year term of the Marazion loans. So why on earth invest in illiquid assets?

Based on current market conditions, we expect the winding-up process to be fully completed and a final distribution to be made around December 2019. So what you are saying is that you never intended to honour the five-year lock-in in the first place. You wanted a seven-year lock-in so that you could continue to hide the Marazion loans.

Prior to the final distribution of wind up proceeds, partial distributions may be made as assets are realised, provision for anticipated costs are made and as such funds become available to make those partial distributions. In 2016 you purchased £5.87 million worth of assets. Why – in the full knowledge that you were going to wind the fund up a couple of years later – did you buy illiquid assets?

What are my options? Unless you advise us otherwise by 6 June 2018, you will receive your winding up proceeds in cash to the bank account nominated in accordance with the requirements noted below once the winding up process above has been completed. For members under the age of 55, you cannot do this as it will trigger an unauthorised payment and the victims will get taxed at 55%.

For members who have not been tax resident outside the UK for five clear and consecutive UK tax years, receiving winding up proceeds in cash could have adverse UK tax consequences. We are therefore offering members the option of having their winding up proceeds transferred to another QROPS or registered UK pension scheme instead of being paid directly in cash. But you are asking other trustees to accept in specie transfers of unknown provenance (by your own admission at least half of the fund is illiquid) and with at least 40% of the fund subject to a fund which provided the Marazion loans.

These members are strongly encouraged to obtain professional tax advice from an independent and qualified UK tax adviser before making any decision. Of course they do – including tax advice on the 50% Marazion “loans” which you facilitated and of which you have always been not only aware but in which you have been complicit.

If you wish to have wind-up proceeds transferred to another scheme you will need to provide us with notification by 6 June 2018. And which “other scheme” is going to accept illiquid – possibly toxic – assets bought by a clearly inept and irresponsible trustee which has also facilitated pension liberation? Any members with a Marazion loan will be deemed to be “high risk” by any new pension trustee and a mechanism for repayment of the loan will need to be put in place.

Please note that transfer of the assets will occur over time, in line with the distribution of the funds to other members. What do I need to do? If you have been tax resident outside the UK for five or more clear and consecutive tax years then all you need to do is provide us with updated proof of identity and address documentation together with official bank documentation evidencing a nominated bank account held in your name (see the Appendix to this letter for more details about this requirement). But that only applies to those over the age of 55 and without a Marazion loan presumably?

Once that documentation has been provided, you will receive your winding up proceeds into your nominated bank account as funds become available through the winding up process. You will also receive copies of the final audited financial statements in due course. Do you mean once you have figured out how to account for the Marazion loans funded by Penrich and Spectrum?

If you have not been tax resident outside the UK for five complete and consecutive UK years, we strongly encourage you to seek professional tax advice from an independent qualified UK tax adviser. You should then advise us whether you wish to receive your winding up proceeds in cash, or transfer your member account to another QROPS or registered UK pension scheme. So what are you going to do if no trustee will accept an in specie transfer and the members are under the age of 55?

If you still wish to receive your proceeds in cash, you will need to provide us with the documentation (including official bank documentation evidencing a nominated bank account held in your name) referred to in the previous paragraph. In either case, if you wish to transfer your member account to another QROPS or registered UK pension scheme, please advise us before 6 June 2018 and we will send you the relevant transfer forms. It is now clear, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you must immediately account for the Marazion loans and show how these are accounted for in the scheme accounts. You have avoided this question for several years and now is the time finally to come clean.

If the trustee of the other scheme agrees, a proportion of your transfer to that scheme might comprise a transfer of underlying investments of ERT, as well as cash. I doubt any receiving scheme will be thrilled at the thought of accepting any of ERT’s underlying investments in the full knowledge that approaching 50% of the original transfers were given out in fraudulent “loans”.

Please be aware that all payments made out of the scheme, including in the winding up process, are required to be reported to HM Revenue & Customs.

Who should I contact with questions? If you have any questions about the winding up process, you can contact our customer services team by email at transfers@evergreentrust.co.nz, by telephone on +64 3 974 1505 or by post to PO Box 36270, Merivale, Christchurch 8146. Please note that we do not provide financial advice or tax advice. Yours sincerely, The Directors Evergreen Capital Partners Limited So, will Evergreen finally answer the questions about the Marazion loans? Fully and transparently? I doubt it. And I would like to remind Evergreen that scammers are criminals.

April 11, 2018
Alan Kentish of STM Groups delivers news of record profits for 2017
QROPS provider STM Group’s Alan Kentish, is delighted to deliver reports of record profits for 2017. I wonder how delighted the victims of his previous scam, the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund, are to hear this. I think we’d be more delighted to hear that Kentish planned to pay all the victims of this investment fraud (currently under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office) full compensation for their losses.

The company, STM Fidecs, which has recently moved its head office to the UK from Gibraltar, says its annual profits grew last year by 43% after the introduction of a new SIPPS.

Kentish went on to say,

“Moving into 2018, we have a solid recurring revenue platform on which to look to launch new products and to expand our distribution network as part of a strategy to make our business even more robust.”

In our opinion, there is nothing robust about Kentish and his various dodgy products. And the Gibraltar regulator shares our opinion as well as our concerns. In a letter dated 6.11.2017, the GFSC wrote to the directors of STM Fidecs about their concerns following a series of onsite visits:

“COMPLIANCE: effectiveness and oversight of the company’s internal compliance functions; high turnover of staff in compliance officer and money laundering regulatory officer roles; general suitability and experience of compliance staff.

PROFESSIONAL TRUSTEE SERVICES: level and nature of due diligence when accepting new QROPS business and whether legal and regulatory obligations were being met; nature of investments e.g. the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund linked to serious customer detriment and fraud”

The Gibraltar regulator appointed three partners of forensic investigators CVR Global LLP to inspect and investigate the affairs of STM Fidecs. The deadline for completion of this inspection is end of March 2018 and the GFSC has warned that:
- a person who wilfully makes a statement or furnishes information knowing it to be untrue;
- a person who refuses to supply information or cooperate with an inspector
is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment.

I wonder if any of STM’s fat profits will be used to help balance the heavy losses made by the company’s past “mistakes”. At the height of the success of the Trafalgar Multi Asset investment scam, STM Fidecs was accepting more than £1 million a month from UK residents (none of whom should have transferred into a QROPS at all) and allowing it all to be invested in XXXX XXXX’s illegal UCIS.

I find it very hard to swallow that Kentish can continue to offer his “products” to unsuspecting future victims – given his murky past record. Kentish has stated “I look forward to updating the market on our developments during the year.” But has he updated the Trafalgar victims about the development of their lost funds being recouped? No he has not. He has just scraped his past misdemeanors under the carpet and hoped they will be forgotten.

After his arrest in October 2017, Kentish was released without charge and was fully backed by the STM board. (They are obviously a load of crooked clowns who are no better than Kentish himself). He has, also, been given the green light to further his venture into offering legal SIPPS wrappers to clients, that have the potential to contain high-risk, toxic investments. The results of which may well leave even more unsuspecting victims’ pension funds in tatters.

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

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.
March 29, 2018
Better Protection Against QROPS Pension Scams from PLIG

Here at Pension Life, we are well aware of QROPS and SIPPs providers being a favorite of the serial pension scammers and are very pleased to report that there is positive news of better protection against this, on the horizon.

Three years ago the Pension Liberation Industry Group (PLIG) launched a code of practice to protect retail investors from serial scammers. Whilst the code of practice managed to help towards the eradication of the big occupational scams, the serial scammers altered their gameplay and continued to score. Serial scammers are focusing on using SIPPS and QROPS providers as a way to lure unsuspecting victims into toxic, high risk investments. Legal “envelopes” with corrupt contents.

Fortunately, the PLIG has finally recognised this change of tactic and has now announced that it will be updating the code of practice to reflect the new tactics of scammers, with the hope of reducing the number of pension scam victims.

Despite this welcome positive news, I still can’t shake the idea that this updated code of practice by PLIG, is possibly too little too late. The situation with James Hay springs to mind. James Hay – the UK´s largest SIPP provider – has announced losses in 2017. James Hay was also involved in the pension liberation scam with Elysian, in which around 500 clients put £55m into Elysian Bio Fuels. The business failed in 2015.

The business failed in 2015 after SIPPS – including James Hay – had already been misused to lure in pension scam victims. This is just one of many such scams (off the top of my head). Believe me, there are many, many more similar to this – that have scammed unsuspecting victims out of millions of pounds’ worth of pension funds and into crippling tax charges.

Darren Cooke, a chartered financial planner at Derbyshire-based Red Circle Financial Planning, launched a petition to the government to ban cold calling in 2017, argued that it wasn’t new that Qrops had been “a favourite” of pension scammers.

He was quoted as saying: “The new Qrops legislation that was introduced in the budget [last year] has reduced scams a bit. So, to some extent, revisions are a little behind the curve. I actually think scammers are switching back to using SIPPS and [small self-administered schemes] SSAS again.”

We welcome this new code from the PLIG, however we can’t agree more with Darren Cooke who also stated, that the FCA needs to regulate the products and not just the advisers.

“As soon as the FCA [starts] regulating the product, it would stop regulated advisers recommending unregulated products. That would stop 99 per cent of scams.”

A small step in the right direction, where a huge leap needs to be made.

Dear FCA,

If you really want to stop pension scamming in its tracks:

BAN COLD CALLING

REGULATE THE PRODUCTS

PROSECUTE THE SERIAL SCAMMERS – ALL OF THEM!

Many thanks

Pension Life

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

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.

March 27, 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