Tag: STM Malta

Blackmore Global pension scam victim who cares

The following blog was written by Stephen Sefton: a Blackmore Global Victim who cares about pension scams.

Stephen was scammed by David Vilka of Square Mile International Financial Services around six or seven years ago. Vilka, who had neither qualifications nor a license to provide pension or investment advice, arranged the transfer of Mr. Sefton’s substantial final salary pension.

Stephen’s pension was transferred to the Optimus QROPS in Malta. It was placed in an Investors Trust offshore bond in the Cayman Islands. Then it was invested in high-risk, high-commission, unregulated funds. One of these was Blackmore Global.

A determined fight on the part of the tenacious Mr. Sefton did eventually result in the recovery of a large part of his funds. But his case was a rare exception. He was, indeed, very fortunate that he didn’t lose the whole lot. Most victims suffer total loss in such circumstances.

It is now looking very likely that Phillip Nunn and Patrick McCreesh’s Blackmore Global Fund is going to be as worthless as their other investment scam: Blackmore Bond (now in administration).

Pension Scam victim Stephen Sefton writes:

Finally, after two months of radio silence, Angie Brooks once again pens an article. It’s about time!

It’s an interesting title: “Who cares about Careys and the world of pension scams?”

I care. I don’t know why I should but I do. Maybe because I am seeing a media frenzy over the recent collapse of mini bonds in the UK. Especially LC&F and Blackmore Bonds plc to name just two. Meanwhile, victims of pension scams from the last decade are being forgotten and swept under the carpet. Much to the delight of many of those that oiled the wheels of the scams and helped them to happen – especially the QROPS and SIPPS!

There are many (especially the scammers) that really don’t like me. This is why they tried to offer me a paltry £6000 to silence me. Seriously?

There are many that don’t like my rhetoric and I regularly get blocked on Twitter, or thrown off Facebook. Here, I get to tell it like it is, however unpalatable the truth may be.

What I have learned over the years is that there’s an intricate web, woven around these scams. This interconnects a number of players whose names just keep on cropping up.

Malta was clearly the jurisdiction of choice for many pension scams. It seems to have hundreds, if not thousands, of victims. Many of these are not yet even aware that they face financial ruin in their retirement.

In my opinion, Malta has much to answer for and really should clean up its act. Journalists rarely focus their gaze on the real facilitators of pension scams: the Mickey Mouse jurisdictions that turn a blind eye and allow them on their patch.

Why are they not aware? QROPS Scheme Administrators are sending out fictitious statements implying members’ pensions are still intact. One member of STM Pensions Malta was sent a statement in Sep 2020 showing his pension still intact just one month after STM wrote to members invested in Blackmore Global – Nunn & McCreesh’s offshore unregulated collective – that in fact they (STM) have no idea what the value is!

As it happens, STM did manage to get Nunn & McCreesh to publish the underlying assets for Blackmore Global, in May 2020 (over 6 years since the fund was launched). Even with this list, there is little idea what the fund is worth because the underlying assets are themselves useless, opaque, private ventures in yet more Mickey Mouse jurisdictions. One offshore fund is already being pursued by Dalriada as part of other failed pension schemes from early in the last decade – but Dalriada are getting nowhere with it.

I am not convinced that “The Adams v Carey case is likely to herald a flood of similar claims …”.

Courageous Manita Khuller in front of the Guernsey courthouse

The Ombudsman case that went in favour of Mr. N against the Northumbria Police Authority (PO-12763) in July 2018, was also a landmark case against a negligent UK pension provider that had a tick box culture. The ceding provider transferred Mr. N’s pension without due regard for the Pensions Regulator’s requirements of 2013 for extra due diligence when handling transfers.

That decision doesn’t appear to have “herald[ed] a [likewise] flood of similar claims” three years on.

Also, the landmark appeal, Khuller v First International Trustees Ltd (Guernsey) (“FNBIT”) that was won by Manita Khuller, hasn’t seen any likewise “flood of similar” cases.

Why not?

The reason, in my opinion, is twofold:

Firstly, the victims were targeted by scammers because they were “ignorant”. That’s not meant to be derogatory.

They knew diddly squat about pensions, regulations, investments – nothing! They trusted the “adviser” – the con man persuading them to transfer their pension. For a con to be successful you need the essential skill of gaining people’s trust. Scammers have this skill in abundance. The ignorant fall for it every time.

Victims not only knew nothing about pensions and investments, they didn’t even know how to spot they were being conned. They were the perfect mark for scammers. They didn’t know what they didn’t know. Like taking candy from a baby – although a baby knows it is being robbed and often screams quite loudly (so maybe not the best analogy).

Secondly, even if victims have now discovered they have lost their pension, they have absolutely no idea what next to do about it. The ones I have come across are like fish out of water. Completely at a loss of where to go.

On Angie’s facebook group, one person recently told of their father’s loss of pension to Nunn & McCreesh’s Blackmore Global. In an attempt to do “something” the person went to the FCA on behalf of their father only to be told that investing in unregulated funds on the advice of unregulated advisers bars them from the compensation scheme and Ombudsman service. The FCA suggested looking into the Malta compensation scheme – which is a joke! That was the extent of help from the FCA. As useful as a chocolate teapot.

It hadn’t occurred to this person that either the ceding provider is guilty of maladministration for the transfer in the first place, AND/OR the receiving scheme in Malta is in “breach of trust” because it too is bound by legislation controlling its activities.

So the best next step is to pursue one or other side of the transfer – or both.

Manita Khuller went after the receiving trustee through the courts and eventually won. However, such legal action isn’t for the faint hearted. It cost her huge sums of money, which she took out loans to fund. Losing was not an option. On top of already losing her pension. It was a nightmare for her. I know – I was with her every step of the way since 2018 when we were introduced by a journalist. This was her only option because the Mickey Mouse jurisdiction, Guernsey, had no “Ombudsman” service. Moreover, the incestuous nature in Guernsey meant law firms declined to represent her. She had to go it alone for the first trial, adding a layer of stress no person should be subjected to. There are few victims with this determination or courage willing to take this course of action – so they don’t, even though she has paved the way.

We in the UK, at least, have the Ombudsman and now – relatively recently – Malta also has one (the Office of the Arbiter for Financial Services (“OAFS”)).

Guernsey is a backward, biased, Mickey Mouse, incestuous jurisdiction – which is why scammers love it.

The Scheme administrators on both sides of the transfer will fight tooth and nail and argue the victim is wholly to blame for their losses. Many victims just have no idea how to go about presenting their case.

There is no “free” professional service available to help victims navigate this minefield. Mr. N (referenced earlier) paid lawyers £25k to make his case. But the Ombudsman did not award costs – saying that it is not necessary to engage lawyers. However, it is not easy to fight a pension scheme that will employ a top notch law firm to present its defence. So by and large, the victims I have come across are at a serious disadvantage because they have no idea how to seek justice and have nowhere to go and don’t know how to present their case. That’s why they were targeted by scammers in the first place. They were (and still are) easy pickings.

In the article above, Ms. Brooks quoted from the appeal. I will do same. A more appropriate section, §115(i),

“… while consumers can to an extent be expected to bear responsibility for their own decisions, there is a need for regulation, among other things to safeguard consumers from their own folly.”

Members of Staff (in shorts!) from Carey Olsen

These victims are indeed victims of their own folly, but they never realised what they were doing. On both sides of the equation (ceding providers and the receiving schemes) there were duties of care designed to protect these victims “from their own folly”. In all cases I have come across, neither side fulfilled those duties of care. On the UK side there was contempt for the Pensions Regulator’s requirements of 2013, despite growing industry concerns for pension scams. On the receiving side, the QROPS didn’t (and still don’t) care about their members – period. And neither did the authorities in these Mickey Mouse jurisdictions. It was the perfect match and thousands of vulnerable victims are paying the price.

Carey Pensions was started in 2009 by the Carey Group. The Group is controlled in Guernsey by ten partners and ex-partners of the Law Firm Carey Olsen. This is an amusing coincidence in my opinion. Carey Olsen, perhaps the top law firm in Guernsey, represented FNBIT against Manita Khuller – and LOST at appeal by the way.

STM acquired Carey Pensions in 2019.
STM also had/has victims of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund scam which collapsed in 2016
STM announced its purchase of Harbour Pensions with some 1600 members. Some are invested in Blackmore Global.

At least one was invested in The Resort Group according to this money marketing article.

Justin Caffery floating in the sea while preaching stress relief

Harbour Pensions was started by Justin Caffrey, in 2013 and says in the STM announcement, “Harbour was always a five year plan…”. Justin made his money and now runs meditation classes (seriously?). He should meditate on the misery, caused by Nunn & McCreesh, of hundreds – if not thousands – of vulnerable victims of Blackmore Global that he allowed into his pension scheme, in my opinion, willingly and knowing the consequences of such an unsuitable investment. He permitted 100% allocation of one member’s pension into a fund that has never published audited accounts. At the material time, knowing the fund was opaque and unregulated, Harbour (and other QROPS) were happily permitting transfers and 100% allocations.

The fund’s offer document, which Harbour had, says the investment has a ten year lock-in. That condition, which the QROPS knew and willingly accepted, effectively locked Harbour (and subsequently STM) into an asset they knew nothing about – and still don’t – for ten years, with absolutely no knowledge or control of what Nunn & McCreesh were doing with the money.

The Scheme administrators in these QROPS in Malta were, and still are, completely at the whim of Nunn & McCreesh – who could misappropriate the pensions as they wish and the administrators could do absolutely nothing about it. The QROPS effectively abdicated all powers they had to run the scheme and mitigate risks in the interest of members, to Nunn & McCreesh. They have been passive bystanders to the destruction of their members’ pensions ever since. This is, in my opinion, in breach of the Malta Trust and Trustees Act. They are also willingly and knowingly in breach of trust.

All this really begs the question whether STM go looking for dodgy pension schemes or are they just plain stupid? What on earth is going on and why hasn’t the MFSA taken them to task? They seem to attract scams like flies to a pile of dung.

Blackmore Global Victim who cares about pension scams – says victims are being forgotten

Victims are being forgotten by the media and authorities. Victims had no idea what they were doing or how to seek restitution. They are guilty of nothing but ignorance and ALL the actors in these scams have gotten away with it. They have ALL dipped their hand in the pension pots and kept the spoils – and now moved on, leaving the pension pots empty.

This is frustrating in the extreme because I see no evidence of any “flood of similar claims”. The victims are, for the most part, still ignorant and there is no one “helping” them. This site (Pension Life) once purported to “help” victims but I am not at all convinced it has done much and now has long periods of radio silence. The newbies in this scam space, the journalists claiming to be the heroes that “blew the whistle” or warned the FCA, are just chasing big headlines for their editor on today’s flavour of the month: mini bonds. Soon the mini bond victims will be forgotten just like the victims of Defined Benefit Pension transfers. The blood sucking journalists will move on to the next headline. I have no time for these insincere upstarts because they don’t stay in it for the long haul.

Victims are on their own by and large and still ignorant. No one seems to care and there is no help from any quarter. They face a retirement with a significantly reduced standard of living and that’s the hard truth of the matter. There will be no “flood of similar cases”.

May 26, 2021
Time for all pension providers to wake up and stop pension scams

The recent PSIG (Pension Scams Industry Group) Scams Survey Pilot 2018 has identified seven “key” findings in their survey. As scam watchers, we are well aware of these points and are, of course, glad they have been highlighted.

PSIG’s key finding are set out below. So let us admit one key fact:

ALL PENSION SCAMS START WITH A TRANSFER BY A CEDING PENSION PROVIDER.

It is interesting that PSIG chose three particular providers to give their answers to the questionnaire sent out: XPS Pensions Group, Phoenix Life Assurance Company and Standard Life Assurance Company. I have no doubt they chose these three providers because of their extensive first-hand expertise at facilitating financial crime. In the Capita Oak and Westminster scams – distributed and administered by serial scammers XXXX and Stephen Ward – and now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office – Phoenix Life and Standard Life handed over dozens of pensions to the scammers. In Phoenix Life’s case, the total came to nearly half a million pounds’ worth, and in Standard Life’s case it was well over one million.

While there is, of course, substantial hard evidence that both the Pensions Regulator (formerly OPRA) and HMRC had been giving the industry plenty of warnings about scams long before the Scorpion Campaign was published on Valentine’s Day in 2013, it is also true that providers such as Phoenix Life, Standard Life – and other favourite financial crime facilitators such as Aegon, Friends Life, Legal & General, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life and Scottish Widows – carried on handing over millions to the scammers well into 2014, 2015 and beyond. And, in fact, they are still at it today.

The “Key Findings” do throw up some interesting facts:

“Information on scams is not readily available at an organisational level”.

Seriously? Don’t these organisations know how to do research? Do they really not know what to look for? They’ve had enough experience over the years – and have had enough examples of spending vast amounts of time trying to cook up reasons to deny complaints against their incompetence for handing over pensions to scammers – to write a whole encyclopedia about scams.

Organisations (such as Phoenix Life and Standard Life) could try talking to TPAS, or tPR, or the FCA, or the SFO, or Dalriada Trustees, or regulators in Malta, the IoM, Gibraltar, Dubai or Hong Kong. Or some of the thousands of victims – who have lost their pensions due to the incompetence and callousness of the ceding providers – who would readily fill in the blanks. There really is no shortage of readily-available, free information. They just need to take the time and trouble to ask for it. It really isn’t difficult. They just have to put their box-ticking pencils down for a few minutes.

“The Scams Code is seen as a good basis for due diligence”

I agree – it is really great. But it is also 78 pages long. Few people have to the time to read, understand or remember such long documents (with too many long words and not enough pictures). What would be helpful would be to get a few of the worst offenders: Aegon, Aviva, Friends Life, Legal & General, Phoenix, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life, Scottish Widows, Standard Life and Zurich, in a room at the same time – and bang their heads together. And threaten them that if they don’t get their acts together and stop handing over pensions to the scammers, they will be made to read and memorise the 78-page Scams Code and recite it every morning before coffee break. Twice. Then snap all their box-ticking pencils in half, and JOB DONE! It really isn’t rocket science – there are usually some hints which are as subtle as a brick, such as: the sponsoring employer doesn’t exist; or the member lives in Scunthorpe and is transferring to a scheme whose sponsoring employer is based in Cyprus. Or Hong Kong. Now, I know there was a bit of a hiccup with the Royal London v Hughes case when Justice Morgan overturned the Ombudsman’s determination. But dear old Hughes had probably had a few Babychams too many – and it had slipped his mind that the law is supposed to be about justice and common sense. And that just because a particular piece of legislation has been written by an ass, it doesn’t have to be interpreted with stupidity.

“Significant time and effort goes into protecting members from scams”

This, of course, may be true. I only get to see the cases where the negligent ceding providers do hand over the pensions to the scammers. I rarely get to see the ones that have a narrow escape. But what worries me is that I am in the process of making complaints to the ceding providers who have handed over pensions to the scammers, and not a single one of them thinks they have done anything wrong. So, if they do spend “significant time and effort” doing the protecting bit, how come so many of them still fail so badly? And then try to deny they failed. These providers spend very significant amounts of time and effort writing long, boring letters about how they did nothing wrong – letters which must have taken them at least an hour to write. And yet they won’t spent two minutes checking – and stopping – transfers to obvious scams.

“The more detailed the due diligence, the more suspicious traits are identified”

I am a bit suspicious that this indicates a touch of porky pies here. I’ve never seen any evidence of ANY due diligence by the ceding providers. A bloke at Aviva once told me that they spent thousands on research and due diligence – but I see no evidence of it. The problem is, the ceding providers don’t know what they don’t know. And, to coin one of my favourite phrases: “they don’t know the questions to ask, and even if they did then they wouldn’t understand the answers”.

Interestingly, if – instead of repeatedly spending hours denying they did anything wrong when they handed over millions of pounds’ worth of pensions to the scammers – they spent some time talking to me and the victims trying to learn what went wrong and what due diligence should have gone into preventing a dodgy transfer, they might learn how to stop failing so badly.

SIPPS (including international SIPPS) are the vehicle of choice by scammers

Agreed. But the scammers still love the good old QROPS. But whether it is a SIPPS or a QROPS – both of which are just “wrappers” at the end of the day, it is about what goes inside the wrappers. Where the scammers make their money is in the kickbacks: 8% on the pointless, expensive insurance bond from OMI, SEB, Generali, RL360, Friends Provident etc., and then more fat commissions on the expensive funds or structured notes.

“Quality of adviser tops the list of practitioner concerns, with member awareness a close second”

And hereby lies one of the main problems: ceding providers don’t know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. And that is because they don’t ask. And they don’t learn from their mistakes when they get it wrong. And they don’t care when they hand the pensions over to the bad guys and their former member is now financially ruined and contemplating suicide. Instead of trying to use their appalling mistakes to improve their performance and understand what “quality” actually means, and how to tell the difference between good and bad quality, they only care about avoiding responsibility for their own failings.

The problem about “member awareness” is that most people assume their ceding provider will do some sort of due diligence. They think that words like “Phoenix Life”, “Prudential” and “Standard Life” convey some sort of professionalism or duty of care. Most members are simply unaware of the appalling track record of these providers – and the extraordinary and exhaustive lengths to which they will go to avoid being brought to justice for their negligence and laziness.

“Sharing of intelligence would help avoid duplication of effort”

Oh, how heartily I agree! I remember a year or so ago, I shared some intelligence and a few beers with a nice chap from Scottish Widows. We met at one of Andy Agathangelou’s symposiums in London – the subject of which was pension scams. The Pensions Regulator was there, Dalriada Trustees were there, Pension Bee were there, lots of interested parties were there (including an American insurer from Singapore), and a couple of victims. I gave a joint presentation with one of the victims who described how he had been scammed and how his provider had handed over his pension so easily – well after the Scorpion watershed. The nice chap from Scottish Widows asked the victim why he hadn’t called the Police. The victim replied: “I am the Police”.

It was very telling that the room wasn’t full of delegates from Aviva, Phoenix Life, Prudential, Standard Life etc. None of them were interested.

Not a single provider has ever phoned me up to ask for advice, or to arrange to speak to some victims to learn something about how they were scammed and how and why their ceding providers had failed them so badly. There are so many victims all over the UK and the rest of the world. And what they all share is a passion to try to prevent other people from being scammed by the bad guys and failed by the bad pension providers. So this invaluable intelligence is freely available.

Until and unless the providers develop a conscience, they are going to continue to fuel the pension scam industry – and nothing will change. And the 79-page code might just as well be consigned to the bathrooms of Aegon, Aviva, Friends Life, Legal & General, Phoenix, Prudential, Royal London, Scottish Life, Scottish Widows, Standard Life and Zurich.

February 28, 2019
Cold calling scammers target expats after the ban in UK – BBC4 You and Yours

Every year we are seeing an increase in the number of victims falling for pension and investment scams. Despite warnings in the public domain and a huge array of information about how to avoid falling victim to a scam, it seems the scammers are so skilled at their sales techniques, that even the cleverest of people can fall for their slick pitches. Often the scammers use cold-calling techniques to initiate these pitches: using emails, texts, mail shots and the good ol’ phone.

We finally saw the introduction of the cold calling ban come into place in January 2019, with huge fines being threatened to firms using these techniques to promote pension sales. We have already written about the firms who have changed their scripts to escape the fines: Cadde Wealth Management is one of these firms. On top of this, we now find that the cold-calling ban has just encouraged the scammers to divert their efforts to British expats.

BBC4 You and Yours recently discussed how the cold-calling ban in the UK has seen a change in the scammers’ behaviour. Unfortunately, this is not a change for the better. As the ban only applies to the UK, scammers are targeting expats instead. This means UK pension holders are still the main target for pension scammers and are at greater risk than ever.

Listen to the show here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000241

Interviewed in the programme, Jamie Jenkins says he has noticed this change. He is Head of Global Saving Policy at Standard Life. He states in the report, “In recent months we have known that the cold-calling ban is coming in and criminals know that too. So we have seen a switch from cold calls originating in the UK to UK customers, to overseas calls to expat customers living abroad.”

Ironically, Standard Life has been one of the worst performers in terms of ceding pension providers who have recklessly and negligently handed over millions of pounds’ worth of pensions to the scammers. Completely ignoring the Pensions Regulator’s warnings in 2010, they shoveled £millions across to pension scams such as Ark, Capita Oak, Westminster, Continental Wealth Management, Global Fiduciary Services and many other QROPS scams.

Here at Pension Life, we know that expats are not just a new target of cold callers – many expats have already fallen victim to horrific pension scams, like those who lost large chunks of their pension funds to CWM. Continental Wealth Management fraudsters like Darren Kirby, cold-called victims, then followed through with repeat house calls and persuaded around 1,000 UK pension holders to transfer out of safe DB pensions into QROPS and illegally-sold life insurance bonds (such as OMI, Generali, SEB, RL360). With promises of high returns, a lump sum in cash and greater freedoms, many professional and well-educated people fell for the scam.

Many victims are now trapped in bogus life “bonds” that are falling in value yearly, while the life offices continue to take their quarterly charges – further damaging the impaired funds. Fortunately, the Spanish regulator – the DGS – has outlawed the selling of bogus life assurance policies this week, ensuring there should be fewer victims of this type of scam.

Here is our cartoon video reconstruction of how the Continental Wealth Management scam worked:

The BBC programme also talks to a Continental Wealth Management victim, Rebecca Cooke, who lost £75,000 after transferring out of an NHS pension and other secure investments.

“We were approached in 2012/13 by a company based in Spain (Continental Wealth Management) who were offering us advice about moving our private pension from the UK into another investment scheme based in the EU. We went with them, but it became blatantly obvious that we had suffered catastrophic losses in our pension and chased them up about what was happening. They had actually invested our funds badly and put them in high-risk rather in low to medium risk funds. Consequently, we had lost that amount of money (£75,000).”

She said she feels stupid for falling for the scam, but she is not alone in believing the shiny sales pitch of these scamming criminals.

It seems the only way to escape the scammers – anywhere in the world – is not to fall for their lies. But the challenge is to know what is true and what is false. And that isn’t easy – the scammers are very clever and can adapt quickly to invalidate public warnings and even use them to their advantage. In addition to the scammers, there are now offshore claims management companies circling like vultures and conning people into believing that complaints against offshore firms can be upheld by UK-based ombudsmen – and that claims can be made against the FSCS (Financial Services Compensation Scheme) in respect of Maltese trustees.

Know what questions to ask your IFA, click here to watch our cartoon

February 20, 2019
No more bogus life assurance policies in Spain
The Spanish Insurance Regulator – the DGS (Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones) – has made a most welcome judgment. This outlaws the mis-selling of bogus life assurance policies as investment “platforms” – aka “life bonds”. Read the translated summary below.

The iniquitous practice of scamming victims into these expensive, pointless bonds – so beloved by the “chiringuitos” (scammers) on the Costa Blanca and Costa del Sol for many years – will now result in criminal convictions for the peddlers of these toxic products.

The DGS’ judgment has provided reinforcement to the earlier Spanish Supreme Court’s ruling that life assurance contracts used to hold “single-premium” investments are invalid. This heralds a huge step forward in cleaning up the filthy scams which have for so long proliferated in popular British expat communities – making the victims poor and the perpetrators rich. This evil practice came to a head when scammers Continental Wealth Management collapsed in a pile of debris in September 2017. The main perps: Darren Kirby, Dean Stogsdill, Anthony Downs, Richard Peasley, Alan Gorringe, Neil Hathaway, Antony Poole all ran for the hills. Other scammers who played supporting roles – including Stephen Ward, Martyn Ryan and Paul Clarke – slithered away quietly to ply their scams elsewhere.

The DGS ruling has opened the way for criminal prosecutions against all those at Continental Wealth Management who profited so handsomely from flogging “life bonds” by Old Mutual International (aka OMI and Royal Skandia), Generali and SEB. While it goes without saying there will be a hearty cheer about the jailing of Darren Kirby and his merry men, they will soon be joined by other individuals who have joined in the bogus life insurance fest just as enthusiastically. And, of course, the life offices – from OMI, Generali and SEB, to Friends Provident and RL360 – will be treated to a proceeds-of-crime party.

Guest of honour will, of course, be Peter Kenny of OMI. But just to make sure nobody feels left out, Hansard and Investors Trust will certainly get their invites. Maybe Wormwood Scrubs will set up their own wing for life-office scammers.

It has long seemed curious that such a delightful part of Spain as the Costa Blanca should have fostered such an evil industry. From the arch scammer himself – Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Solutions, and his many associates including Paul Clarke who was helping him flog Ark before he joined CWM to learn to scam on a much larger scale. But anywhere along that delightful stretch of coastline running from Valencia to Alicante there are dozens of firms giving the life bond machine plenty of welly.

So popular is the use of life bonds among the seedier sector of the financial services industry, that multi-national firm Blevins Franks have their own their “exclusive” offering of bogus Lombard bonds. And you can see why: these scammers earn 8% from flogging these bogus life assurance policies. That’s 8% for doing nothing – and for trapping their victims into paying back this commission over up to ten years. Often long after the victims have worked out that the bond serves no purpose except to prevent the funds from ever growing.

The victims themselves – hundreds of which lost most (or in some cases all) of their life savings to Continental Wealth Management – will indeed see the DGS’ ruling as wonderful news. They will certainly celebrate the fact that justice has at last prevailed and that the law in Spain has made it clear that selling life assurance policies the traditional scamming way is illegal.

Continental Wealth Management (CWM – “sister company” to Stephen Ward’s Premier Pension Solutions) was set up initially to provide the cold calling and lead generation services to support Ward’s many scams – including the Evergreen (New Zealand) QROPS scam. Evergreen was swiftly followed by the Capita Oak and Westminster scams (now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office). Unregulated, and staffed by unqualified salesmen who took it in turns to sport grand titles such as “Managing Director” and “Investment Director”, most of these spivs had been car salesmen or estate agents before flogging QROPS and life assurance contracts used to hold the toxic structured notes which destroyed so many millions of pounds’ worth of the victims’ life savings. Many of these bonds were supplied by Old Mutual International, who despite the huge losses on the funds, continued to take their fees monthly.

Back in April 2018, OMI and the IOM were defeated by Spanish courts ruling that the jurisdiction in litigation against them for facilitating financial crime should be in Spain. This was a welcomed victory for the victims in the face of so much corruption and fraud in Spain for many years. It is certainly a turning point in the quest for justice by the thousands of victims of scammers such as Continental Wealth Management and life offices such as Old Mutual International, Generali and SEB.

I will be writing to all advisory firms who are selling life bonds to victims in Spain to advise them that this is now a criminal matter and to warn them that they will be reported to the DGS.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Madrid, 10 January 2019

General Directorate of Insurance and Pension Funds (DGS)

Complaints service file number 268/2016

COMPLAINT BY A CONTINENTAL WEALTH CLIENT IN RESPECT OF HEAVY LOSSES INCURRED ON HIS PENSION TRANSFERRED TO A BOURSE QROPS AND PLACED IN A GENERALI INSURANCE BOND.

The Directorate General of Insurance and Pension Funds is competent under the powers conferred on it by Article 46 of Law 26/2006 of 17 July, on the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, to examine the claim formulated for the purpose of determining non-compliance with current regulations on the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, and whether this is decisive for the adoption of any of the relevant administrative control measures, particularly those of administrative sanction, which contravene the aforementioned Law.

Article 6 of Law 26/2006, of 17 July, on private insurance and reinsurance mediation, which regulates the general obligations of insurance intermediaries, states:

“Insurance intermediaries shall provide truthful and sufficient information in the promotion, supply and underwriting of insurance contracts, and, in general, in all their advisory activity….”

Article 26 paragraphs 2 and 3 of Law 26/2006, of 17 July, on private insurance and reinsurance mediation, which refers to insurance brokers, establishes the following:

“Insurance brokers must inform the person who tries to take out the insurance about the conditions of the contract which, in their opinion, it is appropriate to take out and offer the cover which, according to their professional criteria, is best adapted to the needs of the former. The broker must ensure the client’s requirements will be met effectively by the insurance policy.”

Article 42 of the Private Insurance and Reinsurance Mediation Act, which refers to the information to be provided by the insurance intermediary prior to the conclusion of an insurance contract, provides:

“Before an insurance contract is concluded, the insurance intermediary must, as a minimum, provide the customer with the following information:
1. a) The broker’s identity and address.
2. b) The Register in which the broker is registered, as well as the means of verifying such registration.”
Insurance agents must inform the customer of the names of the insurance companies with which they can carry out the mediation activity in the insurance product offered.

In order for the client to be able to exercise the right to information about the insurance entities for which they mediate, insurance agents must notify the client of the right to request such information.

Banking and insurance operators, in addition to the provisions of the previous letter, must inform their clients that the advice given is provided for the purpose of taking out an insurance policy and not any other product that the credit institution may market.

Insurance brokers must inform the client that they provide advice in accordance with the following obligations:

“Insurance brokers are obliged to carry out and provide (to the customer) an objective analysis on the basis of a comparison of a sufficient number of insurance contracts offered on the market for the risks to be covered. Brokers must do this so that they can formulate an objective recommendation.”

On the basis of information provided by the customer, insurance intermediaries shall specify the requirements and needs of the customer, as well as the reasons justifying any advice they may have given on a particular insurance. The intermediary must answer all questions raised by the client regarding the function and complexity of the proposed insurance contract.

All intermediaries operating in Spain must comply with the rules laid down for reasons of general interest and the applicable rules on the protection of the insured, in accordance with the provisions of Article 65 of the Law on the Mediation of Private Insurance and Reinsurance.

Every insurance intermediary is obliged, before the conclusion of the insurance contract, to provide full disclosure. In the event that a mediator was an Insurance Broker or independent mediator, he is also obliged to give advice in accordance with the obligation to carry out an objective analysis. This must be provided on the basis of the analysis of a sufficient number of insurance contracts offered on the market for the risks to be covered. The mediator can then formulate a recommendation, using professional criteria, in respect of the insurance contract that would be appropriate to the needs of the client.

In the case in question, there is no evidence that the aforementioned information was provided to the client before the investment product was contracted. Therefore, Article 42 of the regulations has been breached.

Therefore, this Claims Service concludes that the mediator must justify the information and prior advice given to his client, so that the obligations imposed by the Law of Mediation can be understood to be fulfilled with the aim of protecting the insured. Failure to comply with their obligations could be considered as one of the causes of the damage that would have occurred to their client.

The claim is understood to be founded. In the opinion of this Claims Service, the mediating entity has committed a breach of the regulations regulating the mediation activity – specifically of the provisions of articles 6 and 42 of Law 26/2006 of Mediation of Private Insurance and Reinsurance.

The DGS requires the mediating entity to account to this Service, within a period of one month from the notification of this report, for the decision adopted in view of it, for the purposes of exercising the powers of surveillance and control that are the responsibility of the Ministry of Economy and Enterprise.

The interested parties are informed that there is no appeal to this judgment. Both the claimant and the mediating entity are made aware of their right to resort to the Courts of Justice to resolve any differences that may arise between them regarding the interpretation and compliance with the regulations in force regarding the mediation of private insurance and reinsurance, in accordance with the provisions of articles 24 and 117 of the Constitution.

Chief Inspector of Unit

Ministry of Economy and Enterprise

Secretary of State for the Economy and Business Support
February 17, 2019
STM Group Plc – announces trading update

STM Group has announced the following trading updates for the first half of this year.

STM state that the first half of the year has progressed in line with management´s expectations. They refer to this with particular emphasis on their SIPPS program. For those readers who are unfamiliar with STM’s past investment scams, here is a little bit of background information:

STM Fidecs scammed hundreds of victims out of their pensions. STM Fidecs took business from unlicensed scammer XXXX XXXX of Global Partners Limited (only had an insurance license with Marcus Groombridge’s firm Joseph Oliver) and then invested 100% of the victims’ funds into an illegal UCIS fund – run by XXXX XXXX. This fund was called the Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund.

One of the updates is that STM Group have appointed a Group Internal Auditor. I wonder if this is going to make their trading any more honest. One can only hope that their future auditing will be considerably better than their past.

STM Group accepted hundreds of transfers from UK residents in whose interests it was NOT to swap their British pension arrangements for an expensive QROPS. STM Group then allowed these victims to have funds invested in XXXX XXXX’s own fund – Trafalgar Multi-Asset (a UCIS which is illegal to promote to UK residents). There didn´t seem to be much in-house auditing going on then.

What makes this more hard to swallow is that:

Neither STM Fidecs nor the Gibraltar FSC has said a word about redress for the Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund victims.

Instead, in March of this year, STM Group’s Alan Kentish, was delighted to deliver reports of record profits for 2017. This was after he was arrested in October 2017. Unfortunately (for the Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund victims), he was released without charge and was fully backed by the STM Group board.

We are still wondering what the hell the Gibraltar FSC is going to do about this fraud. Leaving STM Group to commit further fraud does not seem to be a viable option.

August 13, 2018