Tag: Pension Life

  • COMPLAINT AGAINST HMRC – REGISTERING PENSION SCAMS

    COMPLAINT AGAINST HMRC – REGISTERING PENSION SCAMS

    COMPLAINT AGAINST HMRC 30.12.2016

    RE ARK PENSION AND OTHER PENSION LIBERATION SCHEMES

    COMPLAINANTS:

    VICTIMS OF PENSION SCAMS AND MEMBERS OF THE PENSION LIFE GROUP ACTION:

    AND MEMBERS OF THE PENSION LIFE GROUP ACTION:

    AND MEMBERS OF THE PENSION LIFE GROUP ACTION:

     

    1. BACKGROUND:
    2. HMRC’S OBLIGATIONS AND OBJECTIVES:
    3. WHAT HMRC MUST NOW DO TO PUT THINGS RIGHT:

    BACKGROUND

    This complaint against HMRC for registering pension scams is one of a series of complaints against public bodies which have collectively failed British citizens and UK pension savers by omitting to take timely action to prevent and warn potential victims.  The multiple failures of HMRC, the regulators, the DWP and the police authorities have contributed to numerous pension disasters – all of which could and should have been avoided.

    To put this complaint into perspective, and highlight how HMRC have failed in their public duty over a period of many years and in many difference cases, it will be helpful to explain an exchange which happened in 2011 in the Salmon Enterprises case.

    In the matter of TM8648, the Pensions Regulator and HMRC had been investigating the directors of Tudor Capital Management, a pension trustee and administration firm, for offences involving dishonesty, deception, fraud, cheating the Public Revenue and money laundering.  This process had started in early 2010 and tPR’s Determinations Panel met several times over the next couple of years or so.  The directors of Tudor Capital Management – Peter Bradley and Andrew Meeson (ex HMRC tax technicians) – were eventually jailed for eight years.

    HMRC did nothing, however, to prevent these two suspected fraudsters (Bradley and Meeson) from registering further pension scams while they were under criminal investigation.  These further scams included Hollywell, Pennines and Mendip – all operating pension liberation – well over a year after the criminal investigations had been launched.

    In the Salmon Enterprises case – one of 25 registered by Tudor Capital Management, one victim’s ceding provider – Nationwide Building Society – was concerned about a transfer request in excess of GBP 200k and sought confirmation of Salmon Enterprises’ HMRC registration.  HMRC responded in June 2011 to confirm that the scheme was indeed registered under Section 153 of the Finance Act 2004 – but made no mention of the trustees’ criminal investigation.  Richard Farrell, Compliance Manager of Nationwide, then expressed further doubts to HMRC: “My concern about the scheme administrator, Tudor Capital Management, is based on the fact that an article appeared in the pensions press on 21.10.2010 stating that four people connected with Tudor Capital Management have been arrested on suspicion of fraud, cheating the Public revenue and money laundering”.  HMRC replied that they were unable to disclose any information regarding Tudor Capital Management due to their “strict rules on confidentiality”.

    Clearly, HMRC could and should have taken steps to de-register the Salmon Enterprises scheme but failed to do so.  In the full knowledge that the scheme was being run by suspected fraudsters and was operating pension liberation, HMRC stood back and allowed 116 people to transfer into Salmon Enterprises, and then issued tax demands for unauthorised payment charges on the entire amount of all the transfers.

    This echoes HMRC’s conduct in the Ark schemes: they were aware of the reciprocal “loan” system being operated by the trustees in quarter three of 2010.  They made “enquiries” repeatedly until the end of the year and had a meeting with the operators at the end of February 2011.  But still HMRC did nothing: did not de-register the schemes and did not issue any warnings to potential victims.  At this time, there was GBP 7 million in Ark.  By the time tPR eventually placed the schemes in the hands of Dalriada Trustees, there was GBP 30 million in Ark.  HMRC had stood by for more than six months, and done nothing to prevent hundreds of victims from being scammed.  But then sent out the tax demands for 55% tax on the “loans”.

    HMRC registered the Ark and

    schemes as occupational pension schemes in 2009/10 and will claim they had no obligation to perform any due diligence at the time of registration – and indeed that they had no responsibility for consumer protection.  They will also claim that when a scheme is first registered – and before anyone transfers into the scheme – there is no evidence that there is anything wrong or that a scheme is being used fraudulently for liberation.

    But, at some point before, during and after the registration of the Ark and Salmon Enterprises schemes, HMRC, the Crown Prosecution Service and tPR were already investigating Tudor Capital Management for fraud and were in regular communication with the operators of Ark.  Tudor Capital Management had registered 25 different pension schemes in total – one of which was Salmon Enterprises.  But long after HMRC knew the directors of Tudor was suspected of fraud, they left all these schemes operating and scamming hundreds of victims. In the full knowledge that both consumers and the pensions industry see HMRC registration as a robust reassurance that a receiving scheme is bona fide, HMRC took no action to warn the public as widely as possible that scams and scammers were proliferating, nor to warn the industry and make ceding pension trustees’ legal responsibilities and obligations clear to providers.

    In fact, at the height of the flourishing growth of Ark, one ceding provider – HSBC – was contacted by a member for reassurance that the Ark scheme was indeed bona fide.  HSBC assured the member that the only thing they were required to check was that the receiving scheme was HMRC registered.  HSBC concluded that as the Ark scheme was indeed HMRC registered, there was no reason to perform any further due diligence.

    During the same period, the disgraced former barrister Paul Baxendale-Walker was registering hundreds of pension schemes for liberation purposes.  So, 2010 was a fertile and busy year for the scammers with large numbers of bogus occupational schemes being registered by HMRC and thousands of victims being scammed into losing their pensions.  HMRC were not only fully aware of this, but had been investigating the criminal element of various schemes along with the Crown Prosecution Service for many months.  Indeed, the first recorded pension liberation scam was investigated by HMRC in 1999 and the pair behind this fraud were jailed in 2003 – although not for defrauding the public but for defrauding HMRC.

    So, from 2010 onwards, nobody at HMRC decided to “call time” on this obvious large-scale fraud and implement any degree of policing or researching schemes at the point of registration – to put in place some form of prevention rather than waiting until after thousands of lives had been ruined.  Indeed, in the Ark case, HMRC had stood by between September 2010 and February 2011 and left the promoters and administrators to get on with building up a head of steam to the point where there was around £7 million in transfers (and presumably, half of that given out in MPVA loans).

    From late February 2011, when HMRC met with Craig Tweedley and Stephen Ward, until the appointment of Dalriada on 31.5.2011, a further £23 million was transferred into Ark while HMRC allowed hundreds of victims to proceed to probable financial ruin.  HMRC could have suspended the schemes at any point while they conducted their investigations – and indeed Craig Tweedley repeated offered to do so.

    Ark, Tudor Capital Management/Salmon Enterprises and Baxendale Walker’s various schemes accounted for around £200 million worth of lost pensions and at least a further £60 million in tax liabilities.  And yet since 1999, when Russell and Ferguson were jailed for five years for cheating the Public Revenue, the only criminal action taken by HMRC was against TCM directors Peter Bradley and Andrew Meeson who were jailed for pension tax fraud against HMRC.  No action has ever been taken against any of the scammers for defrauding ordinary citizens.  Thanks to HMRC considering consumer protection was not within their remit, the scammers have all been left to go on to set up and run dozens of further scams and ruin thousands more lives over the next several years.

     

    1. HMRC’S OBLIGATIONS AND OBJECTIVES:

    HMRC have stated that their role is to “protect the valuable tax reliefs given to pension savings”.  But if this were so, the question must be asked: why did HMRC do no due diligence at the point of registration of these various scams?  Active consumer protection may well not be part of HMRC’s specific roles, but equally avoiding consumer damage should be an automatic matter of common sense and decency on the part of HMRC. It is well known that consumers and even industry professionals have assumed that HMRC registration strongly implies some form of “approval” – and indeed even former Pensions Minister Steve Webb used the term “HMRC Approval”.  It makes no sense for HMRC to register so many pension schemes in the full knowledge that they could be used for scams without carrying out even the most basic checks. On the HMRC website, the Taxpayers’ Charter is published: “Your rights – what you can expect from us”:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/your-charter/your-charter

    1.1 Respect you and treat you as honest

    “We’ll treat you even-handedly, with courtesy and respect. We’ll listen to your concerns and answer your questions clearly. We’ll presume that you’re telling us the truth, unless we have good reason to think otherwise.”

    How can it possibly be “even handed” to pursue the victims of scams so vigorously for unauthorised payment tax charges when no action is ever taken to pursue the scammers who caused the situation in the first place?  This is inequitable.  It is neither courteous nor respectful to demand tax which has arisen through no fault of the victim because they have been defrauded.  HMRC has not listened to the concerns of the victims – either at meetings or in correspondence and has not answered any questions either clearly or at all in the Ark matter.  For five years, HMRC has given confusing and contradictory answers to the question of if/how/where they intended to try to tax the Ark loans and claimed to be consulting tax experts.  In the Salmon Enterprises case, HMRC have claimed they did not believe the loans were loans because there were no loan agreements produced by James Lau.  Even though all the victims have made clear statements they were told the loans were indeed loans and that this was why they were not taxable, and HMRC has admitted they have had meetings with Lau, they are still treating the victims as though they are not telling the truth and denying their Protected Assessment appeals.

    HMRC does not operate in a vacuum.  HMRC has the power to influence outcomes for thousands of people and make the difference between financial ruin and financial stability; literally the difference between life and death for some people.  Respect for their fellow man should be at the heart of HMRC’s operation.  Taxes come from people – human beings.  But it is not enough to claim to treat people with courtesy and respect – HMRC have to actually do it.

    In their appeals against HMRC’s demands for unauthorised payment taxes, victims have repeatedly informed HMRC that they were victims of fraud, that they were told the transaction used a lawful tax “loophole” and that the “loan” would definitely not be taxable.  And yet still HMRC treat the victims as though they were the dishonest ones and pursue them relentlessly for the tax, while completely ignoring the dishonest scammers themselves.

    1.2 Provide a helpful, efficient and effective service

    We’ll help you understand what you have to do and when you have to do it.

    HMRC gave many of the victims no warning of their intention to issue Protected Assessments (tax demands) and accused the victims of not declaring their pension “loans” on their tax returns when the victims had had no idea the loans would be taxable.  But there was no question of HMRC telling the victims anything or giving them any warning of the position.  

    We’ll deal with the information you give us quickly, efficiently, and keep any costs to you at a minimum.

    HMRC have spent five years messing about with the Ark cases – giving contradictory and confusing information and opinions on the possible tax outcomes.  To call this dealing “quickly” is totally untrue and misleading. 

    We’ll put any mistakes right as soon as we can.

    It was a mistake to have registered the Ark schemes in the first place.  And once HMRC knew or suspected – in Q3 2010 – that Ark was operating pension liberation, HMRC should have de-registered the schemes immediately.  When HMRC held their meeting with Craig Tweedley and Stephen Ward in February 2011, they should have agreed to suspend the schemes – at the point when there was £7 million in the schemes.  Instead, HMRC did nothing until tPR placed the schemes in the hands of Dalriada Trustees on 31.5.2011 at which point there was £27 million in the Ark schemes – and over the next three months a further £3 million was transferred in.  Had HMRC taken action back in Q3 2010, or December 2010, or February 2011, hundreds of victims would have been saved £ millions in lost pension funds and tax liabilities.  This was indeed a grave mistake, and HMRC has done nothing to put this right.  Quite the reverse in fact.

    1.7 Tackle those who bend or break the rules

    We’ll identify those who are not paying what they owe or are claiming more than they should and recover the money. We’ll charge interest and penalties where appropriate and be reasonable in how we use our powers.

    There is no evidence that apart from the four known prosecutions in the past thirteen years, that not a single one of the many other serial pension scammers has ever been brought to justice.  Many – if not most – of these scammers have actively practised tax evasion themselves and had sheltered the £ millions earned out of scamming thousands of victims over a period of many years by sending the proceeds of their crimes offshore.

    The Ark, Salmon Enterprises, Baxendale-Walker victims did not consciously or deliberately bend or break the rules.  They were defrauded by bent financial advisers (and/or “introducers” posing as financial advisers – some regulated, some unregulated); a solicitor; an accountant and many other professionals.  And HMRC know this perfectly well. 

    This complaint against HMRC concludes with the fact that in the full knowledge of who the scammers were, they allowed them to continue registering, promoting and operating new scams for years – in fact right up until the present day – unhindered.  The scammers who were running the Ark schemes went on to run Capita Oak, Westminster and London Quantum.  And even when HMRC were handed the evidence they still did nothing.

    It is hard to quarrel with the victims who strongly suspect that HMRC themselves are guilty of a scam: allow the registration of a scam in the full knowledge that it is operating pension liberation, leave it to defraud hundreds of victims into participating, and then levy GBP millions worth of tax dem

    3. WHAT HMRC MUST NOW DO TO PUT THINGS RIGHT:

    • Declare an immediate amnesty for victims of pension fraud.  HMRC’s failure to de-register scams was what led to the scammers defrauding the victims.  This is akin to rape victims being punished in Middle Eastern countries, while the perpetrators are left free to re-offend as often as they like without sanction.  The pension fraud victims have been through years of hell and should now be left alone by HMRC tormentors to get on with what is left of their lives in peace – and to try to find a way to avoid poverty and deprivation in retirement as most of them have lost their pensions.
    • Pursue the perpetrators vigorously for tax evasion.   Most of them have earned vast fortunes since 2010 and enjoy high standards of living complete with helicopters, private planes, sports cars, country houses, offshore property portfolios and champagne lifestyles.  These are the people (and their assets) that HMRC should be pursuing – and not the hard-working, conscientious, innocent people who were defrauded by these monsters in the first place.
    • Compensate the victims for losing their pensions avoidably.  HMRC has failed to de-register so many schemes over so many years, and has caused financial ruin which could so easily and simply have been prevented and so many innocent people saved from the wretchedness of the past six years.
    • Put in place a system of policing and properly approving pension scheme registrations.  This should include (inter alia) the following basic and obvious steps:
    1. Check that the trustees/administrators of a scheme are not under criminal investigation
    2. Check that the registrants have not been involved in previous scams
    3. Check that the registrants’ address has not previously been used for scams – e.g. 31 Memorial Road, Worsley
    4. Check that an occupational scheme is genuine i.e. set up by a sponsoring employer which trades and employs people
    5. Check that an occupational scheme’s sponsoring employer actually exists
    6. Check that a scheme has a trust deed which is not forged
    7. Check that evidence that a trustee, administrator or scheme is a scam has not previously been provided to HMRC
    8. Check that legislation works. If it doesn’t, report it to the government and get it strengthened.  The “not my job/responsibility/concern” approach is invalid and flies in the face of what a body of public servants should be doing – i.e. serving the public.

    It is no good for HMRC simply to protest that when a scheme is first registered, there is no evidence that there is anything amiss.  Taxpayers are supposed to be diligent, and there are severe penalties for failing to be so.  The same applies to HMRC: it is supposed to serve the public – not fail and betray them.

    Finally, HMRC must engage with all the other responsible authorities and be VIGILANT against pension scams.  One of the most important examples of HMRC’s failure to carry out any due diligence is the case of the Barratt and Dalton scam (now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees).  One of the main promoters of this scam was Julian Hanson who was a leading promoter and introducer in the Ark matter – and was responsible for GBP 5.5 million worth of transfers – second only to Stephen Ward’s GBP 10.6 million worth of transfers.  And yet neither HMRC nor tPR nor any of the other public bodies (staffed by highly paid employees with healthy final salary pensions) bothered to pick up on this.

    HMRC must now put their failures right, compensate their victims and put together a coherent plan to avoid this kind of negligent, incompetent performance in the future.

     

    What is a Pension Scam?

     

     

     

     

     

  • EYE ON DUBAI – GUARDIAN WEALTH MANAGEMENT AND HOLBORN ASSETS

    EYE ON DUBAI – GUARDIAN WEALTH MANAGEMENT AND HOLBORN ASSETS

    dubai-blog-snap

    GUARDIAN WEALTH MANAGEMENT AND HOLBORN ASSETS

    A TALE OF TWO PUZZLES

    Don’t you just hate it when you see a puzzling situation and can’t quite put your finger on what is behind it?  There are two firms in Dubai that have got me thinking these past few days and I reckon the “jungle drums” in the Gulf have finally confirmed my best suspicions.

    Guardian Wealth Management and Holborn Assets: two financial advisory firms HQ’d in Dubai with clear aspirations to become leading global players, but hampered by the skeletons rattling in their respective cupboards.  Both firms have recently poached rivals’ staff in a bid to increase sales.  But both have some pretty challenging hurdles to overcome before they can be taken seriously as contenders for the status of leading, award-winning, multi-national advisers.

    My guess is that Guardian is likely to win the race, and leave Holborn struggling with its own self-inflicted albatrosses.  And the guy who will lead Guardian to victory will be former deVere managing director, Mike Coady who jumped ship from deVere to Guardian a while back.  But what was puzzling me was why would a man at the top of his profession, earning an eye-watering £250k salary and heading up the World’s biggest financial services company, take a less senior, non-executive position with a small firm which is heavily in debt to the Welsh government?

    Coady’s gone from M.D. to “chief commercial officer” (and you can imagine the chorus of snorts that title caused throughout the industry) in the blink of an eye.  A huge disaster for his c.v.?  Or a golden opportunity perhaps?  I think the answer to that question may be contained in a quote from Coady just a couple of months ago: “there is something that money can’t buy, and that is experience”.

    At the beginning of 2016, Guardian poached three of deVere’s staff and paid them nearly a quarter of a million quid in (how should I phrase this?) “bonuses” – aka “golden handshakes”.  But only a few months earlier, Guardian had been exposed as having received a GBP 850k grant from the Welsh government for a venture which promptly collapsed, and then failing to repay the grant.  So, effectively British taxpayers were paying for the very “experience” which Coady was saying money couldn’t buy.

    A “little birdie” has tipped me the nod that Coady is going to rescue Guardian’s tarnished image, by forgoing his GBP 250k annual salary for two years, and forcing the three deVere poachees – John Green, Joe Woodhouse and William Burrows – to repay the GBP 250k “bonuses” they received.  And repay the Welsh government every penny they are owed.

    Interestingly, Coady has been joined by another ship jumper: Darren Jones of Old Mutual International.  I haven’t found out whether he is also going to forgo his previous  GBP 250k salary to help speed up the repayment of the Welsh debt, but I am sure somebody in the “jungle” will tell me sooner or later.

    Alas, Holborn Assets don’t have a Mike Coady to rescue them and give them a shot at the “crown”.  Despite also recently poaching a rival firm’s staff (Finsbury Associates’ Nicholas Thompson and a team of five salesmen), Holborn can’t shake off the disgrace of their adviser Paul Reynolds, now allegedly going under a different name to hide his past.  Fined GBP 300k and banned by the FCA for a series of misdemeanours (including falsification of documents- as confirmed by the FCA in the UK), Reynolds clearly knows where the body is hidden as he remains a prominent member of Bob Parker’s team.

    Funnily enough, I ran into Reynolds in Dubai last year when I had gone to Holborn Assets’ office to see Parker – who heads up the firm.  Parker had been dodging my calls and emails for months while I had been trying to get him to agree to compensate one of his victims whose pension had been decimated by Holborn’s pension investment “advice” in Spain – a jurisdiction where they had no licences.  The poor client had spent years watching the high-risk investments Holborn had put her pension into shrink alarmingly, while she discovered the huge commissions and fees Holborn had earned out of her misfortune.

    During my wait in reception at Holborn’s Al Shafar Tower office in Dubai, Mr. Reynolds had a visitor – and we had a very nice, interesting chat – not really relevant here or now (another time perhaps).  Then Mr. Parker’s charming executive assistant Chimaa Meftah took me to a pleasant(ish) meeting room and listened patiently and sympathetically to my account of how Holborn had ruined a victim’s pension and health.  Chimaa promised that Mr. Parker would contact me as soon as he got back from South Africa.  However, I fear he may have been mistaken for a missionary as he doesn’t appear to have returned to any part of civilisation which has either telephones or internet.

    So the puzzle is solved as the clever and canny Mr. Coady clearly knows something that Bob Parker doesn’t: you can’t move forward successfully until and unless you sort out the messes and disgraces of the past.  Coady has a coherent plan for repaying the Welsh government and restoring faith in the integrity of Guardian’s advisers – after all, who would want to listen to any advice, let alone financial advice, from people who have taken bribes paid for by British taxpayers.

    Mike Coady made a resounding prediction for deVere back in October 2016: “There’s a clear and definite trend that independent bodies, agencies and organisations are increasingly recognising our (deVere’s) high quality work, advice and service – and I am confident this will gain further momentum in 2017.”

    So here’s my own prediction for 2017: in the wake of the recent resignation of Guardian’s CEO David Howell, Coady will, before long, get a promotion and a significant stake in the business.  Money may not be able to buy experience – but it sure helps clean the skeletons out of the cupboards.  Perhaps, as Mr. Coady won’t be earning any salary for the next two years, he might like to offer his consultancy services and priceless experience to Holborn Assets in his spare time?

     

     

  • “Action Fraud are nobody and have no authority”: John Ferguson, Square Mile Financial Services

    Action Fraud

    John Ferguson, Square Mile Financial Services

    http://www.lillywhiteint.com/about-us.html

    I am worried about the whereabouts of John Ferguson of Lillywhite International and Square Mile Financial Services (Czech Republic).  The last I heard he was boarding a long-haul flight on 23rd November 2016 to an unknown destination.  His solicitor assured me Mr. Ferguson would get back to me as soon as he landed to deal with a victim’s pension losses.

    Mr. Ferguson has invested a number of victims’ pensions in the Blackmore Global and Symphony funds and was asked to provide a copy of the audit for Blackmore Global which his firm has been promoting and which appears to have some questionable assets – described as “esoteric” and “alternative”.  He was also asked to provide evidence of his firm’s regulation to provide pension and investment advice.

    One victim had threatened to report the matter to Action Fraud when he discovered multiple irregularities with his pension scheme.  Mr. Ferguson had dismissed the victim’s complaint saying:

    “All fine as Action Fraud are nobody & have no authority. But does that now mean we don’t have to answer his formal complaint?”

    The factsheet for the Blackmore Global fund had falsely claimed a firm in Barcelona was the Investment Manager for the fund – robustly denied by the furious firm in question.  Mr. Ferguson clearly has questions to answer and the victims’ losses to deal with – so I do hope Ferguson is safe and well.  I am comforted by the fact that as recently as 26th November he was Tweeting about football https://twitter.com/thfcfancz so perhaps he just forgot my questions about audit and regulation?

    NOT SO SQUARE MILE – AND FAR FROM LILLY WHITE

  • Three words about pension scams

    Three words about pension scams

    Three words about pension scams

    Can I have a word please?  In fact – can I have three words?

    free

    loophole

    sophisticated

    Now, these are not just any old words – they are the keys the scammers use to unlock victims’ savings and make huge amounts of money out of destroying innocent people’s retirement income:

    http://www.professionaladviser.com/professional-adviser/feature/2441535/revealed-the-top-three-watchwords-in-pension-liberation-scams

    Let´s look at these words in more detail to see how they become part of the language of fraud:

    “Would you like a free pension review?”  The answer is so often a heart breaking “yes please!”  This leads on to the scammers telling a bunch of lies about how the existing (often final salary) pension is no good and needs to be transferred offshore and invested in store pods, car parks, holiday resorts, care homes, student accommodation, derelict German government buildings and forestry.

    “Would you like a free pension transfer?”  Again, people who don’t understand the question think “free” means “free”.  It doesn’t.  So often, the transfer ends up costing a huge amount in hidden fees and commissions which are not disclosed up front and often only discovered years later.

    “You can access your pension free of tax”.  That old chestnut!  When you are told that by the author of the Tolley´s Pensions Taxation Manual, it is hard to figure out for yourself that it isn’t true.  But it isn’t.  Or, at least, HMRC don’t think it is true and they send you fat tax bills.

    “You can access your pension free of tax because of a legal loophole”.  The scammers claim that because the liberation is a loan (which doesn’t need to be paid back) there will be no tax.  Again, the scammers and HMRC don’t sing from the same hymn sheet and HMRC inevitably demand 55% tax on the “loan”.

    Scammers try to fool victims into thinking they are regulated.  One loophole often used is to become a tied agent of an offshore firm which is regulated to create the illusion that the scammer’s firm is regulated.  Only too late do the victims realise this is not the case; there is no regulation in force and therefore no safety net when the inevitable happens and the pension fund is worthless.

    In both knitting and crotchet, loopholes are an essential part of creating a jumper because they are used (and exploited) to put the next stitch in; the next row; the next part of the pattern.  And this is how the world of the pension and investment scammers works.  And the jumper gets bigger and bigger as every day the scammers find more ways to trick, con, deceive, defraud and scam thousands of victims out of their savings.

    The scammers frequently trick victims into agreeing they are “sophisticated” investors in order to invest in high-risk, illiquid assets and UCIS (unregulated collective investment schemes).  The victims often think the use of the word sophisticated is a compliment and they don’t realise this is just one of the many weapons in the scammer’s arsenal to help market the toxic wares.

    The scammers’ business models become increasingly sophisticated as the industry and regulators struggle to keep up with their methods of scamming.  The scammers got very rich selling other people’s funds for enormous commissions.  Now they sell their own funds and conceal what the assets of the funds are.  But, of course, the underlying investments are the same old same old toxic rubbish.

    The scammers use very sophisticated terminology to bamboozle the victims into believing the investments are desirable: “highly diversified and non-correlated investment portfolio providing maximum growth”; “asset classes have not only attracted the attention of the fund managers but also many astute investors”; “state of the art markets (such as store pods)”.

    In fact, this whole stinking mess can be summed up by the phrase: “no such thing as a  free sophisticated loophole”.

    Often scammer aren´t even qualified to give any financial advice, make sure you know what qualifications they need to advice you on your pension transfer.

    Click here to make sure you know what questions to ask when transferring your pension.

    Trolley’s Pension Scam Guide

  • Scorpion Campaign and Henry Tapper

    Scorpion Campaign and Henry Tapper

    The Scorprion Campaign and Henry Tapper

    The Scorpion Campaign was the Pensions Regulator’s attempt to warn the public and the industry against pension liberation scams.  It wasn’t a bad try, but it failed.  It was a bit like trying to stop a herd of stampeding elephants with a whoopee cushion.

    Henry Tapper, pensions actuary and dedicated blogger on pensions, posted this:

    https://henrytapper.com/2015/07/20/trust-me-im-a-scorpion/

    The problem is that many pension trustees don’t take any notice.  They didn’t back in 1999 when HMRC and tPR (then OPRA) first warned trustees about pension liberation fraud.  They didn’t in 2003 when the first two liberation fraudsters – Steve Russell and William Ferguson – were jailed.  They didn’t in 2010 and 2011 when the huge tide of Ark and Tudor Capital Management transfer requests into bogus occupational schemes were processed without so much the tiniest flicker of curiosity or interest.  They didn’t in 2012 when 300 transfers into Capita Oak were made – even though the sponsoring employer didn’t exist.  When the Scorpion Campaign was launched in February 2013, the trustees carried on making transfers into Capita Oak and the sister scam, Westminster (with the same non-existent sponsoring employer).

    Now here’s the puzzling thing: didn’t the Pensions Regulator notice that their Scorpion Campaign was failing?  Usually, when time, effort and money are invested in an important project, there is some sort of measuring process deployed to see how effective and successful the project is and to examine whether any improvements or reinforcements are needed.  Clearly not in the case of tPR and Scorpion, because the same old same old scammers were allowed to keep registering pension schemes and becoming trustees and administrators of “occupational” scams obviously designed to defraud innocent victims.

    Don’t take my word for it though.  https://www.ftadviser.com/2016/07/05/pensions/pension-scheme-gets-dressing-down-from-regulator-bZo5EVFahYzEFkvNsF8jdK/article.html

    In particular, the regulator issued a damning assessment of the scheme’s former trustee, Dorrixo Alliance, and its director Stephen Ward.

    So, didn’t anybody at the Pensions Regulator (or HMRC for that matter) notice that Stephen Ward had become trustee of the doomed London Quantum “occupational” scheme (now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees)?  Didn’t the memory of Ark, Evergreen, Capita Oak, Westminster and dozens of other liberation scams run by Ward and Dorrixo ring any bells?  Didn’t London Quantum’s address: 31 Memorial Road, Worsley cause a sharp intake of breath?

    The answer to all of the above is, of course, a resounding “no”.  The Scorpion Campaign’s warnings were ignored 96 times in 2014 in the London Quantum case.  Negligent, lazy and incompetent trustees handed over a total of £6.8 million to an obvious scam which had all the hallmarks of Ward’s handiwork – including the fact that it was registered to Ward’s UK address.  But not a single one of the trustees heeded tPR’s Scorpion warning – including the trustees of the Police pension scheme.

    My advice to the Pensions Regulator, is to put the whoopee cushion away.  It doesn’t work.  The stampeding elephants are too big and too determined.  And don’t just knit a bigger whoopee cushion either – ban cold calling and put the scammers behind bars.  Then spend some money on advertising (after all, the government found £10m to spend on the Remain campaign – which was arguably a complete waste of money).

    And by the way, the Regulator’s “dressing down” was a complete waste of time.  It might just as well have been a formal dressing gown for all the effect it had.

  • Justice Morgan’s Mad Mistake: Donna-Marie Hughes and Royal London Mutual Insurance Society

    Justice Morgan’s Mad Mistake: Donna-Marie Hughes and Royal London Mutual Insurance Society

    JUSTICE MORGAN’S MAD MISTAKE

    (IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CHANCERY DIVISION)

    The law is an ass – especially when it fails to protect pension scam victims

    This judgement makes the law not just an ass, but a whole herd of donkeys.

    Dear Justice Morgan

    I refer to your judgment in the matter of Donna-Marie Hughes and Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Case Number CH/2015/0377 on 19th February 2016.  

     

     

    With absolutely no apology whatsoever, I must point out that your judgment – overturning the Pensions Ombudsman’s Determination in this matter – is so stark staring, raving mad that it verges on utterly bonkers.

    In a number of complaints, the Ombudsman has found that although the legislation is missing a few key words, it is clear that a person should only transfer into an occupational scheme if they are genuinely employed by the sponsor of the scheme.  The Ombudsman drew attention to the fact that the words “employed by the sponsor of the scheme” are, curiously, missing (obviously, whoever wrote that passage nipped out for a liquid lunch at the crucial moment).  But he used his common sense and pointed out that it would be a “very strange result” if a person wanted to transfer into an occupational scheme without any employment relationship or arrangement with the sponsor.

     

    It is my obligation to refer you to the fact that the industry, regulators, law enforcement agencies, courts, ombudsmen and victims (existing and future) desperately need the legislation to be tightened – not relaxed (or, as in this case, made completely impotent).  This judgment has effectively given the green light for hundreds of scammers to scam innocent victims out of their hard-earned pensions.

     

    History, since 2011, shows that various pension liberation scams including Ark (Lancaster, Portman, Cranbourne, Woodcroft, Tallton, Grosvenor) Capita Oak, Westminster, Evergreen, Salmon Enterprises, Eric’s Yard, Pennines, London Quantum, Headforte, Southlands etc., all share a collection of common traits:

     

    1. They were set up, administered and promoted by unregulated firms
    2. These firms obscure the identity of the team
    3. The address of the firm is a virtual office
    4. The assets of the scams being peddled include high risk, illiquid, speculative investments entirely unsuitable for pensions
    5. Bogus “occupational” schemes are registered with HMRC and tPR (who do nothing to check that the sponsoring employers actually trade or employ anybody – or indeed even exist at all)
    6. Pensions are liberated using a variety of “loan” structures which victims are assured are legitimate “loopholes”
    7. Transfer and loan fees are extortionately high
    8. Victims are promised unrealistic gains such as “guaranteed 8% return per annum”
    9. Assets are entirely unsuitable for pension schemes and often include huge “kickbacks” for the introducers

     

    The firms and individuals offering these schemes have included:

    • Premier Pension Solutions in Spain (run by Tolleys Pensions Taxation author Stephen Ward – available on Amazon if you need a copy: http://www.amazon.com/Tolleys-Pensions-Taxation-2014-2015-Stephen/dp/0754549356)
    • Gerard Associates http://www.gerardassociates.co.uk/
    • Frost Financial
    • Continental Wealth Management
    • J. P. Sterling
    • Viva Costa International
    • Windsor Pensions
    • Blu Debt Management
    • Wealth Masters
    • Paul Baxendale-Walker
    • James Lau

    Thousands of victims have lost £ billions and gained £ millions in tax liabilities.  The assets of these schemes have included offshore property, store pods, car parking spaces, unregulated collective investments, eucalyptus forests, hedge funds, forex, Cape Verde etc.

    Now, I am not saying that Bespoke Pension Services are scammers.  http://bit.ly/1VGeSPn but on the back of their victory in the case of Ms. Hughes, there are a further 160 blocked pension transfers sitting with the Pensions Ombudsman.  We have no way of knowing whether they will all be pension transfers invested in Cape Verde, but we do know the Hughes case must have been very important to Bespoke Pension Services’ business.  After all, they must have invested a considerable amount in legal fees to take an £8,000 transfer attempt to the High Court.

    Interestingly, Bespoke Pension Services are unregulated and their address is a virtual office.  According to their latest published accounts the firm is insolvent.  The two directors/shareholders – Mark Anthony Miserotti and Clive John Howells – have between them an impressive portfolio of investment, consultancy, property development, investment and financial planning companies – one of which is called “Fortaleza Investments” which suggests something Brazilian.

    On the back of your judgment in respect of Royal London, there will be a serious problem for all the pension providers who performed so appallingly in Ark, Capita Oak, Westminster, Evergreen et al: the worst of which being Standard Life, Prudential, Scottish Widows, Aviva and Legal and General.  Having handed over £ millions worth of pension funds since 2010 – in a lazy, negligent, box-ticking fashion – there is evidence that they are trying to mend their ways.  Or there had been, until your judgment in the Hughes/Royal London/Bespoke Pension Services case.

    I would draw your attention to Clause 53 in Justice Bean’s Ark ruling where he makes it clear that legislation wording must be interpreted intelligently – and not blindly.

    Justice Bean ruled on the ARK Pension Scam case

    He is obviously trying to make the point that it is essential to avoid an anomalous or unjust result from failing to look behind the intended meaning of wording.  Indeed, the Pensions Ombudsman had already done that when looking at the wording when he said that he found that a transferee did need to be employed by the sponsor of an occupational scheme in order to avoid a “strange result”.

    Your judgment has put at risk thousands of victims’ pensions.  There have already been suicides, nervous breakdowns, life-threatening illnesses, broken marriages and families.  There will be widespread poverty in retirement and many people will lose their homes.  A strange result indeed – which does rather beg the question of how victims will get any protection or justice now?

    This judgment makes the law not just an ass, but a whole herd of donkeys.

    Regards, Angie Brooks

     

  • Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund

    TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET FUND (SUSPENDED)

    After the disasters of failed pension schemes Capita Oak, Henley and Westminster (aggregate of £20 million lost to over 500 victims through investments in Store First store pods – wound up by the Insolvency Service), there are now concerns about the suspended Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund of £20 million.  The board of directors have published the below report and are investigating how this fund came to be mostly invested in one asset: Dolphin property development loans.

    In fact, Dolphin was one of the assets of Stephen Ward’s London Quantum scam which is now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees (appointed by the Pensions Regulator).  Dalriada stated a year ago that Dolphin was not a suitable investment for a pension scheme and yet the investment manager of Trafalgar has invested most of the fund in Dolphin.

    The unlicensed adviser to the victims was also the investment manager of the Trafalgar fund.  The advisory firm, Global Partners Limited – which then changed its name to The Pension Reporter – was an agent of a firm called Joseph Oliver and was not licensed to give pension or investment advice.

    Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund (Suspended) shareholders report (excerpts):

    Board’s significant concerns with respect to the conduct of the Investment Manager:

    • Repeated and consistent failure to carry out and maintain records of proper due diligence with respect to investments
    • Making investments which involve inappropriate or unjustified risk, particularly in allowing the over-exposure to two counterparties and allowing loans to suspected related parties without any disclosure of interests to the Board
    • Repeated and consistent failure to ensure that the position of the Fund is properly protected by having appropriate, properly executed legal documentation in place
    • Repeated failure to provide the Board with relevant information with respect to investment activity e.g. variations to the arrangements with investments in Dolphin and Quantum
    • Inability to answer straightforward questions put forward by the Auditors
    • Providing misleading and even dishonest information to the Board
    • Transacting business on behalf of the Fund knowing that the Board had suspended subscriptions and redemptions
    • Failure to make investments which are appropriate for the Fund

    The question must also be asked of STM Group WHY DID THEY ACCEPT BUSINESS FROM AN UNLICENSED ADVISER AND ALLOW THEIR VICTIMS TO HAVE 100% OF THEIR PENSIONS INVESTED IN A FUND WHICH WAS A SCAM?  THE TRAFALGAR MULTI ASSET FUND WAS A UCIS WHICH IS ILLEGAL TO BE PROMOTED TO UK RESIDENTS.  STM ARE ENTIRELY NEGLIGENT AND CULPABLE FOR ALLOWING THIS SCAM TO HAPPEN AT ALL.

  • Windsor Pensions Pension Liberation Scam

    Windsor Pensions Pension Liberation Scam

    THE WAY THE WINDSOR PENSIONS PENSION LIBERATION SCAM WORKED

    Members were persuaded to transfer their pension into a QROPS and with a hefty transfer fee of at least 10%.  The rest was liberated with no attempt to even try to clock the transaction in a “loan” vehicle.  In fact, the transfers never went anywhere near the actual QROPS but into a bank account with the same name as the QROPS.  This was clear fraud.

    IDENTITY OF THE MAIN PLAYER IN THE WINDSOR PENSIONS PENSION LIBERATION SCAM

    Steve Pimlott of Windsor Pensions

    http://www.windsorpensions.com/

    HMRC is now sending out the tax demands to the victims and these are being appealed.  It is not known how many people were involved, but according to HMRC it is a lot.  When asked about the possibility of a tax liability, Pimlott’s response has been:

    “I cannot give you tax advice. If you cash out, it’s possible that HMRC will send you a tax bill. We assisted approximately 5,000 people who took that route and I would estimate that 200-300 did receive a tax bill. The rest to my knowledge did not. Of those that did, many just ignored it because they were resident in a different country and had no assets left in the UK.” 

     

  • Salmon Enterprises Pension Scam – how it all worked

    Salmon Enterprises Pension Scam – how it all worked

    SALMON ENTERPRISES PENSION SCAM – THE WAY THE SCHEME WORKED

    James Lau, allegedly a financial adviser with Wightman Fletcher McCabe operating from an office in the Regus building, Great Pultney Street, Bank London. Lau explained the Salmon Enterprises pension scam to clients using a series of diagrams that members could release funds from a pension transfer and use them for any investment rather than be tied to investments chosen by the pension trustee/administrator.  He also explained that part of it could be taken out as a loan which he claimed was legal.  He also stated that HMRC was aware of this and accepted that it was not a tax avoidance scheme.

    Members never received any loan agreement or pension statement from either James Lau or the trustees – Tudor Capital Management – despite repeated requests to both Lau and his assistant Victor Ray.  A number of members subsequently introduced the scheme to friends, family and associates.

    The advantages stated by James Lau were that pension funds could be released legally and used for a person’s own use.  Members could invest it or receive as a non-repayable loan which was “legal and non-taxable as it was a commercial loan”. Lau also claimed the loan would have a nominal percentage each year to pay back which would be covered by the rest of the pension left (approx. 15% of the transfer) which would be invested. The returns it would make would cover the interest of the loan.  Lau made it clear this was not a tax avoidance scheme and complied with HMRC rules and that the loan could be extended.

    Lau also claimed that the underlying assets of the scheme were “various, diverse, low-risk opportunities, including forex in his own company Goswell Square Capital – a venture with Omari Bowers and Andrew Skeene who have since been investigated and made bankrupt following the collapse of the FX venture.

    James Lau claimed to be authorised by the FSA at the time with Wightman Fletcher McCable under the Clarkson Hill insurance group.

    The trustees of the Salmon Enterprises pension scam – Tudor Capital Management – were the subject of a criminal investigation by the CPS, HMRC and the Pensions Regulator which was published on 8.4.2010 (prior to many of the transfers) and resulted in the trustees: Peter Spencer Bradley, Alison Bradley and Andrew Meeson, being jailed for tax fraud.  Tudor Capital Management had been the trustees for 25 schemes in total.

     THE IDENTITY OF THE MAIN PLAYERS

    James Lau

    Victor Ray

    Peter Spencer Bradley

    Alison Bradley

    Andrew Meeson

    HOW THE MAIN PLAYERS WERE INVOLVED

    Lau was the main promoter; Ray was the administrator; Bradley and Meeson (now in jail) were the trustees.

     

  • Pennines Pension Scam: How it worked

    Pennines Pension Scam: How it worked

    THE WAY THE PENNINES PENSION SCAM WORKED

    Members were targeted by “Cash From Pensions” and persuaded to transfer into Pennines to get an “unconnected loan” once they had transferred into the Pennines scheme which was invested in Hedge Capital.  The scheme is now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees.

    There were around 143 victims with a total value of £3,280,325.27 worth of transfers in the fund. The Pennines pension scam was run alongside two other schemes: Mendips and Malvern between August 2011 and March 2012.  The trustee was John Laurence Woodward (of HCL) and Jennifer Doris Ilett.  The administrator was  T12 Administration.

    The promoters of the scam were Unlock My Frozen Pension and Cash 4 Pensions (Adrian Price). The “hook” used to tempt victims into the scam was the assurance that they could “legally access pension funds without incurring tax liabilities”.  The fees charged were 3% per annum plus £500 management fee

    Dalriada Trustees were appointed on the 28th March 2012 by the Pensions Regulator. The victims of the Pennines pension scam liberated various amounts ranging from 25% upwards and HMRC started sending out protected assessments in March 2015.

    http://www.thepensionsregulator.gov.uk/docs/dn2144796.pdf

    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/21626.html

    One very distressed victim of the Pennines pension scam – who has been treated for severe depression for several years as a result of this scam – reported:

    “I was doing several searches online for a loan, that would maybe accept a person with bad credit when the “unlock my frozen pension” appeared.  It all seemed very legitimate so I sent off an enquiry form.

     I was called back immediately by a member of the unlock my frozen pension team, they spent a lot of time telling me that they would put me in contact with a company called Hedge Capital who would transfer my pension into their scheme, and that I would legally be able to access 25% of my pension fund as a tax-free lump sum which was to be repaid once I reached the age of 55 .  In the meantime, the remaining amount of my pension would be invested , in the scheme until I reached the age of 65 and there was little or no risk involved.

     I was also contacted by a company called Money Helpers, who prompted me to word an email to Towers Watson for the transfer of my pension.  My knowledge of the pension and taxation position was very limited at that time and I believed what I was being told by the Unlock My Frozen Pension people. I contacted Towers Watson who held my pension from JP Morgan (my former employer) about the transfer and they told me they were happy to go ahead with it.

    I believed I was taking an advance on my pension in a perfectly legal manner as it was to be repaid at age 55.”

     

     

  • London Quantum Pension Scam: How it worked

    London Quantum Pension Scam: How it worked

    HOW THE LONDON QUANTUM PENSION SCAM  WORKED

    The London Quantum pension scam was the brainchild of Stephen Ward.  Ward’s firm Dorrixo Alliance was the trustee and administrator of the scheme.  Dorrixo was also trustee for a number of other pension liberation scams such as Headforte and Southlands which were used for “loans” when Evergreen got removed from the HMRC QROPS list.

    London Quantum victims were promised “healthy” returns and the scheme is now in the hands of Dalriada Trustees who were appointed by the Pensions Regulator in 2015.

    THE IDENTITY OF THE MAIN PLAYERS

     Stephen Ward of Dorrixo Alliance (trustee/administrator)

    Gerard Associates

    Viva Costa International

    HOW THE MAIN PLAYERS WERE INVOLVED

     Ward’s Dorrixo Alliance was the trustee/administrator.  Gerard Associates https://www.gerardassociates.co.uk/ (website undergoing “routine maintenance”) provided (or didn’t provide) advice.  VCI were the introducers.

    WHAT THE PENSIONS REGULATOR SAID ABOUT THE SCAM

    TPR gave Stephen Ward a stern “dressing down” over the London Quantum scam and warned all pension savers to be extra careful when considering transferring away from their existing pension, after publishing details of governance failings in the London Quantum Retirement Benefit Scheme.

    The London Quantum pension scam brought into sharp focus how people should remember that promises of high and/or guaranteed investment returns that sound too good to be true are often scams.

    While investigating this scam, the regulator discovered that more than £5.8 million worth of victims’ pension funds had been put at risk between August 2014 and May 2015.

    Nicola Parish, Director of Case Management at TPR, said: “The concerns we received about the scheme highlighted worrying factors regarding its governance.

    “This case should act as a reminder to all savers, pension scheme trustees and administrators to remain alert to the dangers of transferring pension savings in order to access unrealistically high returns often associated with exotic sounding investment opportunities.”

    TPR reported that, as trustee, Dorrixo – run by Stephen Ward and his sidekick Anthony Salih, had a “serious disregard to the obvious risks that members might be misled about the true nature of the investments held by the scheme”.  The regulator also exposed other aspects to Ward’s scam which included:

    • Risky and illiquid investments
    • Lack of documentation
    • Introducer fees – The scam was promoted to victims by introducers and cold callers, who were paid up to 30%.
    • Advisers – There was no auditor was appointed to the scheme and Stephen Ward did not take proper advice on the investments.

    Clearly, the London Quantum scam was never set up for the benefit and in the interests of the victims, but in the interests of Stephen Ward and his team of scammers to earn the maximum amount of commission out of the toxic, illiquid, high-risk investments.

     

  • Evergreen QROPS Pension Scam and Marazion Loans

    Evergreen QROPS Pension Scam and Marazion Loans

    EVERGREEN RETIREMENT TRUST QROPS PENSION SCAM AND MARAZION LOANS

    THE WAY THE SCAM WORKED

    When Ark got shut down in June 2011, Stephen Ward flew to New Zealand and set up the Evergreen NZ QROPS liberation scam with Simon Swallow of Charter Square.  Ward also set up a “loan” company in Cyprus called Marazion.  He also did a deal with two investment funds: Penrich and Spectrum.  Expats would transfer their UK pensions to Evergreen and pay a 10% transfer fee.  As soon as the transfer was complete, a loan – funded by either

    Expat victims (mostly) would transfer their UK pensions to Evergreen and pay a 10% transfer fee.  As soon as the transfer was complete, a loan – funded by either Penrich or Spectrum (to whom the loans were assigned) was arranged between Marazion and the member.  The loan was for a fixed five-year term, and the member was made to sign a “lock in” agreement with Evergreen.

    The loan interest was 8.5% compound (quarterly) and would mean that the original loan amount would increase by 50% by the end of the five years.  Ergo, the maths worked like this at the outset: £100k transfer; £10k fees; £90k Evergreen fund; £50k loan.  At the end of the five-year term, the Evergreen fund would either have increased, decreased or remained the same (in fact, it has decreased) and the loan would have increased to £75k.  The member was offered the option to renew the loan for a further five-year term at a higher rate of interest.

    For three years, Evergreen managed to avoid disclosing what the assets of the scheme actually were, but in 2015 they had no choice other than to disclose that 41% of the scheme’s assets consisted of Penrich and Spectrum.  After a lengthy and detailed complaint to the NZ Ombudsman, the complaint against Evergreen was not upheld and the victims were originally left “locked in” until 2017.  However, Evergreen has now moved the goal posts and the victims are locked in until they reach the age of 55.  Evergreen was removed from the QROPS list by HMRC in November 2012.

    THE IDENTITY OF THE MAIN PLAYERS

    Stephen Ward of PPS/Marazion

    Continental Wealth Management SL who acted as introducers

    Simon Swallow of Charter Square

    HOW THE MAIN PLAYERS WERE INVOLVED

    Continental Wealth acted as introducers – and referred to the firm as the “sister” company to Ward’s company Premier Pension Solutions; PPS processed the transfers and loans; Swallow of Charter Square managed the scheme.