Tag: Pension Life

HOLBORN ASSETS – HEALTH WARNING

Holborn Assets Warning: their rogue advisers can seriously damage your life savings – and your life

Holborn Assets: This Toxic Dubai Firm Comes with a Health Warning

Holborn Assets can seriously damage your life savings – and indeed your health and even life.

Holborn Assets does have a few decent advisers. When I published the “Champagne Killer” blog last week, I was contacted by over a dozen advisers who asked me (courteously and respectfully) to remove their names and profile links from the blog. This I did immediately in all cases except Gerard Frew who was simply rude and abusive.

Quite a few of these advisers had had no idea they worked in such a cess pit. None of them seemed to have had any idea about Paul Reynolds and Darin Brownlee-Jones. They appeared unaware that the FCA had ruled both individuals unsuitable to be financial advisers. And they didn’t seem to know that some advisers at Holborn Assets are routinely destroying victims’ life savings – and Bob Parker simply shrugs the complaints off.

A couple of the “good guys” raised the point that if one person at Barclays had done something wrong, it did not necessarily mean that all the other staff at Barclays were rotten. A valid point, perhaps, but if there was a rotten apple at Barclays, they would get sacked – whereas Bob Parker deliberately goes out and picks rotten apples because they have no principles, no scruples, no hesitation in scamming people out of their pensions and investments. And they make Uncle Bob lots of money.

The advisers who contacted me claimed to have unblemished records (which they didn’t want to be besmirched by the likes of Reynolds and Brownlee-Jones). But the question is: if they have good records, what on earth are they doing working at Holborn Assets? If they care about their professional reputations, why not go and work for another firm which is not full of cowboys and run by a man who cares not a jot for the distress his firm causes to innocent victims.

Let’s have the drains up on how Holborn Assets really works and see how and why it is so “successful”.

HOLBORN ASSETS KUALA LUMPUR:

Holborn Assets has a team of about 50 “contact generators” based in Kuala Lumpur (where labour is cheap). They trawl social media for names and contact details.

The leads are passed to a company in the UK set up by Holborn Assets to run as a cold calling “boiler room”. They used to use a boiler room in Manchester for their cold calls, but now they’ve got their own: The Retirement Shop. The company was set up in September 2016 and has two directors: James Patrick Parker and John Cornelius Parker who was arrested and charged after extreme violence against fans and police at a football match in 2002. Presumably, they are relatives of Bob Parker – James lives in the UK and John in Dubai. In fact, when you call The Retirement Shop, James Parker answers the phone.

Holborn Assets’ cold calling boiler room, The Retirement Shop, has around 40 callers – mostly young, poorly-educated people desperate for work. Bob Parker pretends this company is in Bournemouth, but it is actually based in Sale, Cheshire. The cold callers basically bombard people throughout the UK and offshore with calls designed to book a telephone call and/or meeting appointments with Holborn Assets advisers.

Bob Parker is enthusiastic about this “lead generation” scam as the cold calls come from a UK number, so it’s less likely the potential victims are going to drop the call. Holborn Assets also uses a voice-over IT system that can change the number so that victims in – say – Saudi will see a Saudi number come up even though the call is actually coming from the UK.

Holborn Assets openly admits to doing cold calling in Saudi but in Dubai Bob Parker wants to conceal the company’s cold calling operation so he pretends the calls come from an allegedly entirely separate and independent company (The Retirement Shop) – which is, of course, controlled and run by Bob Parker himself. This is what Parker calls “warm calling”.

The way that Holborn Assets’ cold (or warm) calling operation works is that they have 16 to 20 year olds calling from The Retirement Shop to potential victims in the UK or anywhere in the world. Working from a prepared script, the caller asks the person if they’ve got a pension, and if they keep up to date with it. The caller is instructed to tell the victims the company works alongside HMRC, then to ask them loads of questions such as whether they know about legislative changes. Then the caller says he will get a “specialist” to call – so the lead is now “warmed up”. Bob Parker thinks this is “quite clever really”.

How does The Retirement Shop “package” itself? The company claims that: “We have assisted thousands of clients all over the world to transfer their frozen UK pensions and plan for their retirement. To date, we have helped successfully transfer over 500 million Pounds worth of frozen UK pensions. We are amongst the best at what we do.” But as the company was only registered in September 2016, how can it possibly have “assisted thousands” of clients since then? But the thought of Holborn Assets handling £500m worth of pension transfers is utterly blood curdling.

The Retirement Shop‘s website further claims to be “UK Qualified”, “Experts in UK Tax Law”, have “Knowledge in UK Pension Transfers” and “We also link you up with UK qualified pension specialists across the globe”. In fact, none of these claims is true – especially the last one as the only “pension specialists” they link people up with are those at Holborn Assets Dubai. And that firm is not licensed to provide advice in many jurisdictions.

Holborn Assets rogue advisers can wipe out at least half your life savings in a heartbeat.

Having been cold called and “warmed up” by Holborn Assets’ boiler room scammers, what sort of investment advice is the victim likely to receive? Various victims have seen heavy losses 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).

So why would decent, ethical, conscientious advisers choose to stay at Holborn Assets? Do they really want all this toxic, unethical practice to rub off on them? Do they want their leads to come from Bob Parker’s boiler room scammers in Kuala Lumpur and “Bournemouth”?

Lastly, why don’t they all get together and tie Bob Parker to a chair then slap him with a wet fish and a copy of the Bible until he agrees to pay proper compensation to the Holborn Assets victims?

July 24, 2017
WASPI – EQUALITY, FAIRNESS, KNOWLEDGE AND TRANSPARENCY

WASPI issue not likely to buzz off anytime soon

WASPI – Women Against State Pension Inequality: a fight against equality, fairness, knowledge and transparency (lack thereof).

I got into an interesting debate with Frances Coppola on Twitter last night (a very auspicious date: 17.7.17). Frances is a very knowledgeable and capable pension person – with whom I don’t always agree – but she always conducts herself with me in a dignified and respectful fashion and I much admire her expertise.

She said “You were never told you were entitled to a pension at 60. You may have believed that, but that’s not the same as being told.”

If that is true, then this was one of the greatest magic tricks of the last century – all women born in the 50’s thinking/imagining/dreaming they had been told the same thing; at the same time; in the same way; entirely independently. And then all thinking/imagining/dreaming they hadn’t received the letters the DWP alleged they had sent advising the cohort – of which I am one – that the imaginary dream we had all had about receiving our State Pension at 60 was going to be changed to 65, 66, 67 or 68.

This does, of course, beg the question: if we had never been told we were paying our NI contributions so we could receive our State Pension at age 60, why did the DWP subsequently claim they had moved the goalposts to age 66? Surely, if they had never told us in the first place, they wouldn’t have needed to tell us otherwise? And who can provide any evidence that from an early age we Cohorts had paid our NI contributions so we could receive our State Pension at some undetermined age from middle to late sixties – or beyond? Wouldn’t one or two of us have queried this state of affairs?

But the point of this blog is not to scratch the scab of the whole WASPI debate, but to look at the thorny question of “equality”. WASPI opponents bang the drum that we don’t want equality – but are seeking “preferential treatment” over men. I can’t speak for WASPI members, but here is my take on this equality/inequality issue:

As little girls, we were generally segregated from little boys in many different ways – and treated differently because it was accepted that our lives would be different when we grew up. At school we did needlework, domestic science (including ironing, cooking, cleaning the silver) and in general our whole academic and sporting education and development were geared towards our femininity. The boys were steered towards metal work, carpentry, football, rough and tumble and engineering.

As we got older, our education, families and society in general taught us that we needed an “interim” career to prepare us for being wives and mothers. In many different social classes, large numbers of young women prepared to be nurses, secretaries, shop workers so we could have a job we could return to once we had married and brought up our children. We were taught that it was a man’s job to go out to work and bring home a wage for the family, and the woman’s job to keep a good home, put a decent meal on the table, and bring up the children.

I remember being a first-time mother in Edinburgh in 1980 and going back to work a few weeks after my baby was born. And I was treated like a pariah. Many mothers were so treated in Scotland, England and Wales (and undoubtedly Northern Ireland). In fact, I had been unceremoniously sacked by my employer when I announced my pregnancy as they didn’t think I was capable of continuing to work either throughout my pregnancy or after my baby was born. I do not believe this was entirely untypical back then.

We women earned considerably less than our male counterparts and were not entitled to occupational pensions. So we never had the opportunity to build up pensions of our own – and for those of us who were widowed or divorced, we were left hung out to dry in later years. In fact, many of us also had the additional responsibility of looking after and supporting our elderly parents or parents in law.

Does anyone remember the term “housewife” being replaced by “domestic engineer”? I do, and I remember the challenges of looking after and juggling the multiple responsibilities of young children, a home, a husband who was often tired and grumpy, and my own health/well-being/emotional stability. It wasn’t easy. And when my father died and my mother developed dementia it got harder still.

This isn’t about me – but this will be a situation with which many WASPI members will be entirely familiar. And here’s where we come to the “equality” bit. How many men gave birth to a number of children? How many men never had the opportunity of occupational pensions? How many men never had their own income but relied on the dregs left over after the bills were paid and the children supported? Yes, I know many men worked their backsides off in a wide variety of different jobs and professions. But there was a clear distinction between the situations and opportunities afforded to men and women in the 60’s and 70’s.

We women gave our lives to supporting our husbands, families, children, homes – and working as much as would could depending on our domestic circumstances. And now we’ve been shafted, are being told to “get over it” and accused of not wanting equality. We weren’t equal back in the 60’s, and we can’t backdate equality now.

So whether we were told, or we believed, or we imagined, or we hoped we would receive our State Pension at age 60, we didn’t. We haven’t. We won’t. And this gimpy government with which we are unfortunately saddled can make all the excuses in the World, but it won’t change the fact that a major part of the backbone of British society – 1950’s women – were told we would receive our State Pension at age 60.

Many of us gave up career and pension opportunities to look after our families. None of us entered into marriages and families assuming we would become widowed or divorced. None of us imagined that in addition to looking after our children we would also have to look after our parents.

But perhaps the most sinister and incomprehensible part of the whole WASPI matter is the number of MPs and ministers who have refused to acknowledge the WASPI problem on the basis that the State could not afford to introduce transitional arrangements. WASPI women are not asking for an unfair advantage over men – they are asking for something which approaches and addresses (albeit inadequately) the inequitable position of women who were not given the opportunity to make revisions to their retirement arrangements.

Our only crime is that we are living too long. We refuse to die on time. Despite the demands on our bodies of child birth and domestic industry, we have failed to pop off on time. My posturing will make not a blind bit of difference, of course.

Frances Coppola can keep on saying we were told that our SPA would be increased and that we were never told we could expect to receive our SP at age 60 all day long. But that does not change the fact that there is very considerable hardship for many 1950’s-born women who did believe they could expect to receive their SP at age 60 and who are now unable to get jobs to support themselves. Many of these women are in desperate need of transitional arrangements. These women paid their NI contributions all their working lives, brought up their children, supported their husbands and lived an unequal life. But now the State wants to backdate equality.

July 17, 2017
HOLBORN ASSETS AND THE CHAMPAGNE KILLER

Holborn Assets mercilessly leaves its victims facing financial ruin

HOLBORN ASSETS “CHAMPAGNE KILLER” APPROACH TO FINANCIAL ADVICE IS DESTROYING VICTIMS’ LIFE SAVINGS

Holborn Assets “Champagne Killer” approach to financial advice is ruining victims. Holborn Assets is routinely destroying people’s pensions and life savings, and refusing to compensate the distraught victims facing poverty in retirement. The so-called “advisers” at Holborn Assets give investment advice (often unregulated) which entails investing victims’ funds in whatever toxic, illiquid, high-risk rubbish pays the highest commissions, and then leave the devastated investors hung out to dry. Neither the firm nor the “advisers” responsible for this outrage show any compassion or contrition. This is no different to the callous actions of a common drunk, hit-and-run driver.

As if this wasn’t bad enough, Holborn Assets also employs Darin Brownlee-Jones: the “Champagne Killer“. A drunk hit-and-run driver who killed an innocent man then walked away to drink champagne. He didn’t stop to try to help the victim he left dying in the road – or show any remorse for the horrible, painful death the poor man suffered.

Holborn Assets seems to make a habit out of employing the unemployable. First, there was Paul Reynolds who was banned by the FCA and fined nearly £300,000 for giving unsuitable and misleading financial advice. The FCA declared Reynolds was not a fit and proper person to give financial advice. But Uncle Bob Parker of Holborn Assets Dubai welcomed him with open arms – and Reynolds has since changed his name to try to conceal his unsavoury past. But I bumped into Reynolds when I was at the Holborn Assets office at the end of 2015 – so I know it is him despite trying to change his appearance as well as his name.

And now there is Darin Brownlee-Jones who is commissioning pension reports for more poor unfortunate victims. These people are transferring their defined benefit pension schemes to offshore QROPS in dodgy jurisdictions where negligent trustees peddle their toxic wares. In one case, Brownlee-Jones has employed a Spanish firm to sign off a DB transfer for a resident of France. The advice is covered (allegedly) by the Spanish insurance regulator (which doesn’t cover pension or investment advice) and not the French regulator or the FCA.

So why would Brownlee-Jones in Dubai get a Spanish firm to provide unregulated advice to an investor in France? In 2003, the FSA had refused an application from Brownlee Jones to perform investment and pension-transfer functions. The reason was that the FSA did not consider him to be a fit and proper person as he had indecently assaulted a woman, caused criminal damage and death by dangerous driving.

I think any reasonable person would agree that Brownlee-Jones was the last person you would want handling investment and pension advice. But Bob Parker at Holborn Assets clearly likes having misfits, FCA rejects, sex offenders, drunks and killers on his team.

Brownlee-Jones: after a belly full of beer in 1999, got into his car and hit a motor cyclist head on. He left the poor man dying in a pool of blood and went to celebrate at his favourite wine bar. He ordered two bottles of Dom Perignon champagne at £95 apiece. When he was arrested, he was quaffing his favourite bubbly – although he probably wasn’t smiling quite so broadly when he was jailed for four years.

The distraught father of the victim said that Brownlee-Jones had treated his dying son “like an animal“. And yet Bob Parker employs this callous killer and encourages him to provide unregulated pension advice to victims in France and Spain.

This routine callousness is shown by Bob Parker and many other Holborn Assets salesmen. Where their victims’ pensions and investments have been decimated by high-risk structured notes and unregulated, toxic, illiquid funds -such as Premier New Earth Recycling – Holborn Assets just shrugs and leaves the victims to face poverty in retirement. Once they have earned their fat commissions from the victims’ pension funds, Holborn Assets doesn’t want to know any more. Bob Parker and his merry men simply walk away without a backward glance.

Holborn Assets has been aggressively targeting new victims with a cold-calling campaign using a well-known boiler-room scam operation in Manchester. The cold calls to Spanish residents are followed up by salesmen such as Jason Ryder who claims that Holborn Assets have offices in Barcelona and Marbella. Of course, Holborn Assets is not licensed to operate in Spain – and once conned into letting these cowboys plunder their pensions for fat commissions and fees, there is no regulator to complain to.

Apart from Bob Parker, Paul Reynolds, Darin Brownlee-Jones and a bunch of other “snake oil salesmen”, there are some people at Holborn Assets who do have some ethics and a conscience. Surely, if these people had any sense they would distance themselves from this cesspit of financial disservice? Why stay with a firm with such an appalling track record?

Below is a list of all the people who work for Holborn Assets (excluding admin and finance). I wonder if a single one of them will feel some sense of disgrace at being a part of this “champagne killer” approach to financial services?

Robert Parker, Phillip Parker, Simon Parker, Gerard Frew, Gerard J Leahy, Adrian Bliss, Alexander Herbert, Andrew Jarvis, Daniel Quinn, Joanne Phillips, Michele Carby, Nicholas Thompson, Rubina Khan, Ryan Quinn, Vince Truong, Paul Barrass, Kapil Mathur, Mark Powsney, Payal Trehan, Richard Hanna, Samuel Ebbs, Simon Burrass, Steve Lawton, Steven Downey, Usman Ahmed, Conor O’Shaughnessy, Anthony Murray, Colin Estlick, Creigh Classey, Jamie Arthur, Gavin Webster, Guillermo Martorell, Adrian Luscombe-Whyte, Tim Sant, Stuart Bichard, Richard Colburn, Kevin Curtis, Alison Sant, Ian Leigh, Darin Brownlee-Jones, Colin Kneale, Bryan Wawman, Vivian Van Eeden.

If not a single one of the above group of people is prepared to put ethics and principles at the top of their agenda and ensure their professional reputations are not sullied by the “champagne killer” approach to financial advice, then there truly is no hope for Holborn Assets.

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

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.

July 17, 2017
SAIL FINANCIAL – ANOTHER SCAM?

Plain sailing in the world of pension scams

SAIL FINANCIAL AND TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET FUND: What is the connection?

Who is behind Sail Financial? And what is the connection to Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund? We know Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund was originally run by XXXX XXXX as “Victory Asset Management” and that XXXX had also been behind the Capita Oak, Henley Retirement Benefits Scheme and Westminster pension scams: wound up by the Insolvency Service; now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees and under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.

We also know that the £120 million of store pods purchased for Capita Oak, Henley RBS and hundreds of SIPPS are now probably worthless and Store First is subject to a winding up petition due to be heard on 1st August in Manchester.

In addition to being the Investment Manager of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund, XXXX was also the “financial adviser” in the form of his firms Global Partners Limited and The Pension Reporter – a “trading style” of XXXX’s Nationwide Benefit Consultants. But none of these firms were licensed for pension or investment advice.

In fact, Nationwide Benefit Consultants were an appointed representative of Joseph Oliver – Mediacao de Seguros LDA, a firm registered with the FCA. Joseph Oliver is a UK branch of a Portuguese firm and has permission for insurance mediation under both the FCA regulations and those of the Portuguese insurance regulator.

However, Joseph Oliver’s Marcus Groombridge has stated:

“I can confirm that XXXX XXXX and Nationwide Benefit Consultants Ltd were appointed on the 29th of May 2014 and terminated on the 8th of April 2016. The permission for insurance mediation covers pension advice.”

Phew! What a relief. I am now looking forward to Mr Groombridge’s full cooperation with putting XXXX XXXX’s victims back into the position they should have been in had they not been scammed into investing their pensions in the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund in the first place. I will also probably remind Mr Groombridge that the Trafalgar matter is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office – along with other pension scams “distributed” by XXXX XXXX in 2012/13.

If there hadn’t already been enough misery for the hundreds of victims of the Capita Oak and Henley Retirement Benefit schemes run back in 2012/13 – XXXX had also been operating pension liberation in the form of “loans” from his company Thurlstone, based in the Seychelles. The victims have now been sent tax demands. But XXXX and his solicitor, Mark Manley of Manleys Law, have ignored pleas to indemnify the victims from these crippling tax liabilities.

I have often wondered what people like XXXX do after their latest scheme collapses or implodes. History tells us that they simply get straight on with their next one – and in fact had probably started it already. XXXX has been a director of seven companies (according to Companies House):

Nationwide Benefit Consultants (active)

Nationwide Corporate Benefits (active)

Proactive Administration Solutions (active)

Nationwide Trustee Services (dissolved)

Ashton Abbott (dissolved)

Nationwide Tax Administration (dissolved)

Admin Protection (dissolved)

XXXX has resigned from Nationwide Benefit Consultants and Nationwide Corporate Benefits – and appointed someone called Raymond Hampton as a director. But XXXX remains a director of Proactive Administration Solutions. So perhaps that is one to watch.

XXXX’s background is in the “distribution of pension schemes” (his words). He has worked closely with the cold-calling and lead generation firms (such as Jackson Francis, Sanderson Clarke and Barncroft Associates run by XXXX´s mates Ben Fox and Stuart Chapman-Clarke) who were involved in the Capita Oak and Henley scams.

So what is XXXX doing now? Perhaps whatever project he is working on involves trying to make enough money to compensate the victims of Capita Oak, Henley, Westminster and the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund – all of the schemes are now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. It is also probable that Gibraltar Trustees STM Fidecs no longer want terms of business with XXXX XXXX now that so many of his schemes are subject to criminal investigations. STM Fidecs also probably now realises it was a serious conflict of interest taking business from an adviser who was also the Investment Manager to the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund – which is now in the process of being wound up.

While I was idly puzzling over what XXXX´s next scheme might be, I started hearing reports about a firm called Sail Financial doing the rounds of firms in Europe – touting offering to do “introducing” and cold calling. Looking at the Sail Financial website, it is impossible to see who is involved in the business – no names, no address, no regulation. According to the Companies House register, Sail Financial – incorporated on 8.5.2015 – has two directors: Robert Hathaway and Brian Westhead. Neither of those names rang any bells with me.

Hathaway has no other directorships listed. However, Westhead does: he is listed as a director of a dissolved company called BIGB22 (08559856). This company’s previous names were Portia Financial and The Pension Reporter: XXXX XXXX’s firms. These firms have a history of being involved in pension and investment scams, cold calling and unregulated financial advice. The victims of the Trafalgar Multi Asset/STM Fidecs pension and investment scam were introduced and “advised” by Portia Financial, GPL (Global Partners Ltd) and The Pension Reporter, with advice letters signed by XXXX XXXX and Tom Biggar.

So clearly there is a connection between Sail Financial and various firms and schemes run by XXXX XXXX – including Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund. Perhaps XXXX XXXX is sailing round the Mediterranean now? I just hope he doesn’t have one glass of champagne too many and fall overboard.

July 13, 2017
BLACKMORE GLOBAL FUND – ASSET OR BLACK HOLE?
Blackmore or Blackhole Global fund

BLACKMORE GLOBAL FUND – BLACK HOLE?

A fund like Blackmore Global really ought to be audited as soon as possible – to make sure it isn’t simply a “black hole” into which victims’ hard-earned pensions have sunk. Numerous worried pension savers are stuck in the Blackmore Global Fund and finding it difficult – if not impossible – to get out. They are seemingly “locked in” for ten years.

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY SINCERE THANKS TO THOSE – INCLUDING IFAs, PENSION TRUSTEE FIRMS AND BLACKMORE GLOBAL VICTIMS – WHO HAVE CONTACTED ME AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS, CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS.

Allegedly, Grant Thornton is working on an audit – and has been doing so since September 2016. They could probably have audited Microsoft in that time – and squeezed in Amazon on the side during the lunch breaks. Just how difficult can it be to audit a fund which only has a handful of assets in it?

Originally, the directors of Blackmore Global were Brian Weal, Patrick McCreesh, and Phillip Nunn.

Brian Weal – sanctioned by the FSC in 2014 – was also a director of Swan Holdings – the only investment that the Advalorem Value Asset Fund made. Brian Weal was also a director of Advalorem. Advalorem lost most of its money because the investments in Swan Holdings were overvalued. The valuations were supplied by Stuart Black who also provided valuations for a Hedge Fund called Heather Capital which lost $300 million because of overvaluations. Swan Holdings had invested a chunk of cash in Etaireia Investments. Stuart Black was a director of Etaireia Investments. Brian Weal owns a controlling number of shares in Etaireia Investments. So, make up your own mind as to whether having Weal as a director of Blackmore Global is a good thing or a bad thing – or a “black hole” thing.

As for Nunn and McCreesh, I will let Leonard Fenton of the Insolvency Service do the talking:
- Documents and information received from members of CAPITA OAK indicated they were initially contacted by Craig Mason or Patrick McCreesh of Nunn McCreesh of Its Your Pension Ltd and offered pension review services prior to them being referred to JACKSON FRANCIS or Sycamore for the transfer of their pension to CAPITA OAK.
- On 3.3.15 I received an undated letter in which it was stated that Its Your Pension had not traded and was a dormant company and that Nunn McCreesh had traded as an insurance brokerage between 2009 and 2012 when they entered into a verbal arrangement with TRANSEURO where in return for providing pension leads to JACKSON FRANCIS they received a commission from TRANSEURO.
- Nunn McCreesh provided JACKSON FRANCIS with 100-200 leads per month which were provided by email and/or telephone for which they received £899,829.86 from TRANSEURO during the period 26.3.12 to 14.5.14.
So, again, draw your own conclusions about those connected with Blackmore Global. Nunn and McCreesh generated up to 200 leads a month to pension scammers in relation to a series of pension/investment scams which are now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. This entailed £120 million worth of pensions being invested in Store First store pods which are now the subject of a winding up petition – and arguably worthless.

When I first started investigating the Blackmore Global fund in 2016, I started with the brochure which makes all sorts of grand claims: “medium to long-term investment vehicle with a diversified investment portfolio
under one structure. The Company allocates investment between four distinct protected cells, giving a true
diversification of assets between property, sustainable, private equity and lifestyle”. Yeah, right. But what are the underlying assets? Where is the audit?

The Fact Sheet goes on to claim the fund’s NAV is £17.65 million and was launched on 1st May 2014. So why no audit? It also claims that the Investment Manager is a firm in Barcelona called Meriden Capital Partners. I thought it a bit strange that a fund based in the Isle of Man would appoint an investment manager in Spain – especially one without a website. So I called Meriden Capital Partners and asked them to confirm that they were the investment manager. They claimed they had never heard of Blackmore Global. Then one of the partners called me back and told me that some man who didn’t give his name had come to their office and asked them whether they would be interested in being the investment manager for Blackmore Global.

The partner at Meriden Capital explained that they had declined because they were not licensed to provide investment management advice to a fund – only to private individuals.

But then I discovered that that hadn’t been entirely true either. Meriden Capital had actually completed an application form to apply to become the investment manager to the fund on 4th April 2014. So either Meriden Capital was lying or Blackmore Global was lying – or both.

The Blackmore Global NAV Factsheet also states that there is a ten-year lock-in to the fund. So why would anyone invest a pension in such a fund? A pension saver has a statutory right to a transfer and might want to take his PCLS – 25% tax free withdrawal at age 55 – or retire, or even die. What on earth is the point in using Blackmore Global for a pension at all? Ever.

As Grant Thorton is clearly having a little trouble with the audit of a five-cell investment fund, I will lay a wee trail of bread crumbs for them to look at. Clearly they can’t even find the underlying assets – let alone value them:

Swan Holdings PCC (controlled by Brian Weal)

Kingston Capital Partners (Belize private equity vehicle controlled by Nunn & McCreesh)

GRRE Invest – fund manager for aptly-named GRREIF fund (Green Renewable Redeemable Energy Investment Fund –

GRRE Investment Fund – suspended by Anguilla FSC. (Brian Weal recently resigned as a director but still holds a controlling interest in the Fund – https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09132685/persons-with-significant-control)

Spinaris 90 – UK sports spread betting (invisible – and what happened to Aria Invest?)

Most of the victims of the Blackmore Global fund were initially cold-called by a firm called Aspinal Chase. And all the victims were advised by unregulated investment advisers Square Mile Financial Services (an insurance license does not cover regulated investment advice). But more worryingly, all of them were put into a QROPS in Malta or the Isle of Man. So why were UK residents transferred to an offshore pension at all, and why were most or all of their pension funds invested in a UCIS which is illegal to be promoted to UK residents?

The list of questions goes on and on. And here, we get back to whether the unscrambling of these pension and investment scams is more about who you know rather than what you know. One victim had his pension invested 75% in Blackmore Global and 25% in Symphony. Symphony was a fund invested in derivatives and highly leveraged. It was also a sub fund of the Nascent Fund run by Richard Reinert. Under the Nascent “umbrella” (a structure for wannabe fund managers) was also the Trafalgar Multi Asset fund which was run by XXXX XXXX who was one of the main distributors behind Capita Oak, Henley and Westminster – all of which are being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office.

Now we have gone round in a complete circle. A catalogue of lies, deception, fraud, mis-selling, negligence and incompetence.

I don’t envy Grant Thornton (if indeed they are the auditors) because they have got to unscramble this unholy mess. And I strongly suspect that, behind the scenes, there are certain parties who are busting a gut to ensure the audit is never published. Two of these may well be John Ferguson and David Vilka of Square Mile in the Czech Republic who seem to have a strong vested interest in promoting this black hole of a fund.

Meanwhile, the longer the victims are held back from transferring out of this toxic swamp of a fund, the more serious the complaints against the various parties involved will be. These will include the cold-calling scammers; introducers; advisers; pension trustees and insurance companies such as Investors Trust who allowed this investment and the pensions transfers from unlicensed advisers.

Finally, on the subject of Investors Trust, they showed not a shred of interest in the fact that they had facilitated financial crime in allowing UK residents to have their pensions invested in this UCIS, but when I published a photo of John Ferguson and David Vilka posing as a couple of gaudily-dressed spivs in Las Vegas, Investors Trust objected on the grounds the photograph was their property.

pension-life.com/top-10-deadliest-pension-scammers-hmrc/
July 7, 2017
HYPOCRISY BY PARKER – HOLBORN ASSETS DUBAI – MONTFORT INTERNATIONAL

Holborn Assets’ Bob Parker commits a gloat too far.

Holborn Assets Dubai – under the questionable leadership of Bob Parker – has been responsible for ruining quite a number of victims’ pensions. With a deft waggle of the Holborn Assets magic wand, a pension transferred from a gold-plated final salary scheme can be reduced by at least 50% in just a couple of years. Trouble is, the magic kind of runs out of steam if asked to work in reverse.

Glynis Broadfoot and various other victims in Spain were “advised” by dodgy Holborn Assets’ advisers to transfer their pensions into a QROPS with Gower Pensions in Guernsey. Then the victims’ pensions were invested in toxic, illiquid, high-risk, professional-investor-only funds and shrank relentlessly. The problem was that Holborn Assets had no license to provide pension or investment advice in Spain. This is the sort of scam that the CNMV, the Spanish investment regulator, refers to as being operated by “chiringuitos” (bar flies) which translates as “scammers”. And the UK Pensions Regulator clearly refers to scammers as criminals.

Holborn Assets’ home – a low-rise advisory firm amongst the high-rise buildings

So why is Bob Parker – from Dubai – gloating over Geraint Davies from Surrey? OK, Geraint’s firm Montfort International has been sanctioned – and very publicly so. And, knowing Geraint I believe he will take his punishment pragmatically and stoically. He has fought back from other challenges in the past and he will fight back from this. But at the end of the day, whatever other faults he may have, he does have respect for the establishment, the law, the regulators and the ethical sector of the financial advisory profession.

I suspect – if Geraint saw Bob the Knob’s post on the LinkedIn QROPS group – he will have had an ironic chuckle at the Bible-thumper’s hypocrisy. And if he had known that Bob’s response to his various victims’ distress and pleas for help had been “buzz off – case closed” he would most probably have been enraged that Parker the Not-So-Magic Marker should remark on the mote in Geraint’s eye and cynically gloss over the socking great forest in his own.

Of course, Geraint himself will certainly know that Parker’s top salesman is Paul Reynolds who has been sanctioned by the FCA (banned from regulated activities due to lack integrity and fined nearly £300k) and may even have had a wry smile to himself that a man who professes to be a devout Christian is prepared to employ a publicly-condemned pariah of the profession. But, of course, Reynolds is Holborn Assets’ best salesman – flogging toxic assets to ruin their clients – so it is worth keeping him in order to keep the wheels of Parker’s Rolls Royce well oiled.

So, am just wondering how the devout Christian Bob Parker is getting Holborn Assets’ DB pension transfers done now? What dodgy outfit is he using? Because it won’t be anything ethical or honourable. And whichever firm it is, it will be helping Holborn Assets ruin hundreds – or even thousands – of victims have their pensions decimated by execrable, unregulated investment advice.

Despite Parker’s hypocritical post on LinkedIn, I think Geraint Davies’ firm Montfort comes out of this considerably better than Holborn Assets. I have no doubt Geraint will have more success in plucking the mote out of his eye than Parker will in taking a whole sawmill out of his.

July 3, 2017
WHAT IS WORSE? A SCAMMER OR A SCAMMER’S LAWYER?

Scammers are loathed by victims, regulators, police, ombudsmen and financial services professionals whose professional reputations are compromised by the nefarious practices of the scam merchants. But however damning the hard evidence is about the scams and the various promoters, introducers, advisers, administrators behind them, the scammers still protest their innocence.

Even when there are announcements and articles in the public domain confirming criminal investigations, winding up petitions, arrests, Pensions Ombudsman’s determinations, regulatory intervention and sanctions, the scammers still try to protest that they are innocent and that the damage done to the victims is everybody else’s fault but theirs.

But as soon as I publish something on the Pension Life blog, to inform and warn the public, the scammers’ solicitors swoop like vultures with their cease and desist letters – threatening defamation proceedings. Never mind the £ millions lost to hundreds or even thousands of victims – many of whom are worried sick about losing their pensions; never mind the tax demands which are driving the victims to complete despair and could result in HMRC making them bankrupt; never mind the heart attacks, strokes and other fatal illnesses brought on by stress and sleepless nights. The scammers’ solicitors pull out all the stops – even going so far as to threaten the Pension Life web host and complain to Google about Pension Life’s website blogs.

I’ve been through this with – among others – Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions – who actually took me to court for upsetting his “picky” clients (Ward didn’t even turn up); Paul Baxendale-Walker, the disgraced former barrister (struck off) and porn star; XXXX XXXX of Global Partners Ltd and The Pensions Reporter (now under investigation by the SFO);and now Peter Moat of Fast Pensions (see Sam Brodbeck’s article of 1.7.2017).

In fact all these solicitors – including DWF, Mishcon de Reya, Carter Ruck, Manleys Law, Molins & Silva et al, all bleat that the Pension Life blogs are harming their clients by “causing reputational damage generating huge financial damages and danger of losing business interests and opportunities”. But not so much a squeak about the huge financial damages the scammers they represent cause to the victims who are in danger of losing their homes.

And not a word about the crippling financial damages the scammers they represent cause to the victims who are in danger of losing their homes.

Below is the email exchange between Peter and Sara Moat’s solicitor Monica Caellas and me dated 27th June 2017. Worth noting she has not responded. Perhaps her website, email and telephones have been hit by the same virus as appears to afflict the Moats and Fast Pensions?

Ms. Brooks:

We hereby contact you in name and on behalf of our clients, Ms. Sara Grace Moat and Mr. Peter Daniel Moat, in connection with the statements set forth in the article “Peter Moat and Sara Moat – Fast Pensions” (hereinafter, the “Article”) included in the website https://pension-life.com/peter-moat-sara-moat-fast-pensions/ since May 18, 2017. I am enormously relieved that you have contacted me and would be most grateful if you would be kind enough to act as intermediary in relation to many hundreds of victims who have been scammed out of their pensions. As you can imagine, this is an extremely worrying time for these people and some of them are now receiving tax demands from HMRC as the Moats were operating pension liberation fraud as part of the “package”.

Some of the statements of the Article are extremely serious and could be constitutive of various crimes sanctioned by the Spanish Criminal Code; among them, serious offences of defamations and calumnies. I do not agree that the Moats’ actions include defamation and calumnies – but they certainly involve pension, tax and investment fraud.

FAST PENSIONS is a UK Limited Company licensed by HMRC. No it is not. HMRC do not license companies in the UK. HMRC registers pension schemes, but this implies no approval or license.

Ms. Sara Moat is the sole Director and the sole shareholder of FAST PENSIONS. Her husband, Mr. Peter Moat is the owner and administrator of Blue Property Group, a Group of corporations that has nothing to do with FAST PENSIONS. From a corporate point of view you are correct, however, Peter Moat was the controlling mind behind the company and has been masquerading as “James Porter” in his communications with the victims to attempt to conceal his involvement. Also, I think you will find that Blue Property Group has gone bust and owes money to creditors all over the Costa Blanca.

With the Article you have caused serious confusion against third parties and it is hurting my clients and their companies. I regret that neither the victims nor I will have any sympathy whatsoever with any hurt your clients are experiencing. They have hundreds of victims’ pensions in limbo – and despite numerous Pensions Ombudsman’s determinations, no transfers out (which is a UK citizen’s legal right) have been facilitated. The victims of this scam include several deaths whereby the deceased pension member’s family has not been able to benefit from the pension fund as required by law in the UK.

In particular, the Article expressly and roundly states “There have been a number of Pension Ombudsman determinations which expressed concerns about the maladministration of the unlicensed firm [Fast Pensions] owned by the Moats”. Yes. This is in the public domain on the Pensions Ombudsman’s website.

In this sense, you claimed that a number of very distressed and worried members of the Fast Pensions scheme had contacted you, while those four hundred worried members have not directly contacted FAST PENSIONS itself. I cannot comment on how many worried members have directly contacted Sara and Peter Moat (masquerading as “James Porter”) direct. Many may have attempted to do so but the Moats have made this impossible by disabling their website and emails and not answering their phones. Their claims that the website, email and phone number have all been hit by a “mystery virus” are simply not credible.

As a consequence of the alleged existing claims you contacted Mr. James Porter, the person in charge of leading with any pension queries for Fast Pensions and that has nothing to do with Mr. Moat, despite your suggestions of identifying them as the same person. That is not correct. Peter Moat contacted me, pretending to be “James Porter”.

Anyhow, and after being correctly assisted by Mr. Porter, you claimed that he takes days to respond and you interpreted that as a “deliberate attempt to make it difficult to contact anyone at Fast Pensions”, which is untrue, since all queries have been responded to and dealt with quickly. I am afraid you do not know the facts. Numerous victims have attested to the fact that their desperate pleas to transfer out have been ignored.

If there were clients with concerns they would contact FAST PENSIONS in the First instance to get these resolve. Why don’t you try contacting Fast Pensions and let me know how “fast” they respond? A journalist tried to contact them just now and got this response: Your message wasn’t delivered to james.porter@fastpensions.co.ukbecause the domain fastpensions.co.uk couldn’t be found.

Moreover, in the Article you have made several statements that make Mr. Peter Moat, Ms. Sara Moat, FAST PENSIONS and all of Mr. Peter Moats companies look like a scam. Then I have done my job properly. They are all a scam.

For example, by trying to link Mr. and Ms. Moat as well as FAST PENSIONS to Mr. Sthephen Ward. Also, and more seriously, you stated that you are afraid that the professional environment of Mr. and Ms. Moat “has undeniably got all the hallmarks of a typical, bog standard scam”. And you insisted: “It looks, feels, smells like a scam”. And I stand by all of that. And so does the Pensions Ombudsman.

As a consequence thereof, there are actually a huge number of parties affected by the Article, Peter Moat and his associated companies, Ms. Moat and FAST PENSIONS. The unjustified reputational damage caused by the Article is generating huge financial damages and is putting Mr. Peter Moat and his companies in danger of losing business interests and opportunities. Perhaps you would like to ask some of the victims how they feel about poor Mr. and Mrs. Moat losing business interests and opportunities?

Based on all the foregoing, and without prejudice to the express reservation of legal actions that correspond to my clients, through this communication you are FORMALLY REQUIRED TO IMMEDIATELY REMOVE THE ARTICLE FROM THE WEBSITE AND STOP DISSEMINATING IT THROUGH INTERNET. I will happily reach an agreement with you Monica: you get Sara and Peter Moat to return all the victims’ pensions to them immediately – in full plus interest – and I will remove the article.

Otherwise, we will be forced to exercise the corresponding judicial actions, especially criminal ones, to protect our clients in defense of his freedom and other rights that protect them. I hope you will exercise criminal judicial actions against your clients who have scammed hundreds of victims out of their pensions. Meanwhile, a little friendly advice – as a Spanish lawyer you clearly do not understand UK law, so please tread very carefully. You clearly do not know the facts and are in danger of defending a party which has clearly contravened UK law and compromising your own standing as a legal practitioner in Spain.

Sincerely,

Mònica Caellas

Advocada

Aribau 198, planta 5                 José Abascal 56, planta 6

08036 Barcelona                       28003 Madrid

Tel. 0034 934 152 244              Tel. 0034 913 103 008

Fax 0034 934 160 693              Fax 0034 913 915 158

www.molins-silva.com

July 3, 2017
HOW TO SPOT A SCAMMER (FOR DUMMIES)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What is a Pension Scam?

June 28, 2017
IF CAMPAIGN – JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF INVESTMENT FRAUD
If only investment fraudsters were prosecuted…

IF – INVESTMENT FRAUD

CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS

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

Investment Fraud Victims’ Group Action and Task Force:

“Fighting Investment Fraud – Supporting Victims”

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

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

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

Task Force Agenda

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

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

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

The Campaign
- Investigate the Fraudsters and Stop punishing the Victims
- Fair Tax Laws for Investment Fraud Victims
UK tax laws currently unfairly penalise investment fraud victims who are suffering onerous tax liabilities for the actions of criminals who in turn are largely escaping investigation or punishment.

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

The Cause

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What needs to change?

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

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

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

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

Criminal sentences must reflect the impact and devastation caused by investment fraud. Tougher penalties for the perpetrators must send out a ZERO TOLERANCE to this iniquitous crime.
June 20, 2017
HOLBORN ASSETS’ NEW CALCULATOR

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

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

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

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

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

Original cash equivalent transfer = £195,105

Actual transfer = £146,379

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

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

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

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

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

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

Just hope it is not bank of Dunlop!

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

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

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

June 5, 2017
VOTE FOR GREG MULHOLLAND – LEEDS NORTH WEST

Two champions for the fraud victims

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

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

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

Mulholland’s EDM just before parliament was dissolved

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

Two more champions for the fraud victims

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

June 5, 2017
STM GROUP: THE TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET PENSION INVESTMENT SCAM

No image for now.

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

May 25, 2017