Tag: Store First

  • HMRC’s APN £1 Billion (or £2 Billion) Tax Demand: “TAKE THAT!”

    HMRC’s APN £1 Billion (or £2 Billion) Tax Demand: “TAKE THAT!”

    Gary Barlow was allowed to keep his OBE after being caught using a tax avoidance scheme

    HMRC is reported to have collected a billion quid in APN tax demanded (Accelerated Payment Notice) in the past year.  A figure of £2 billion is also reported in other Google searches according to other reports.

    We are talking about over 1,000 different types of tax – er – “planning” schemes flogged by accountants and tax advisers.  If the gentle reader wants to be picky, the actual number is 1,181.  Should the gentle reader still want to be picky, tax planning is another term for tax avoidance.  Which is legal – as opposed to evasion which is illegal – but HMRC still doesn’t like it.

    When HMRC issues an APN (aka “demand”) the tax must be paid within 90 days without appeal.  Challenges and appeals don’t have much effect and HMRC loves APNs because it allows them to collect the tax and ask questions later (or possibly never).  APN recipients can get tax demands for crippling amounts and even face bankruptcy.

    So how would a person know whether an avoidance scheme was likely to result in an APN tax demand?  Most people rely on their accountant to advise them.  If an accountant says “here’s a legal way to pay less tax – it will work, trust me I’m an accountant”, the client usually jumps at the opportunity.  After all, what could possibly go wrong if one’s own accountant suggests it?  The answer is, sadly, everything.  Because at the end of the day, if HMRC decides to issue an APN, it is not the accountant who gets clobbered for the tax, it is the client.

    How would the client know if his accountant was giving him wrong advice?  He could try checking the HMRC website – but all he would get is a bewildering list of numbers rather than the names or descriptions of the avoidance schemes themselves.  Sometimes the accountant isn’t even using a named scheme but rather relying on his own experience and expertise to use a strategy he thinks/believes/considers/hopes will work for his client without risk of challenge by HMRC.

    So why am I going on about tax avoidance schemes? What has this got to with pension and investment scams?  The answer is EVERYTHING.  HMRC’s £1 billion (or £2 billion – take your pick) tax take from APNs – at the rate of 3,000 a month – is designed to plug loopholes exploited by taxpayers and their advisers. The “everything” bit is in the word “approved” – which is what the advisers tell their clients the tax avoidance scheme is.  Tax avoidance schemes can be registered by HMRC.  But that doesn’t make them safe or approved as they can be added to the naughty list at any time without either warning or explanation.

    Similarly, many financial advisers (or chiringuitos masquerading as financial advisers) tell their clients that a pension scheme – such as an occupational scheme or a QROPS (or a ROPS, or an OPS, or a PS, or an S) – is HMRC “approved”.  Of course, there is no such thing.  Just because HMRC registers a scheme doesn’t mean it is safe and not a scam registered by a known serial scammer.  In fact, all the big, high-viz pension scams were HMRC registered. It is, indeed, a curious thing that HMRC never thinks to ask any questions about the validity of a scheme – but then they are probably far too busy issuing APNs to do so.

    Celebrities are particularly at risk of being sold high-risk – and ultimately highly expensive – tax avoidance schemes:

     

    • Michael Caine, George Michael, Anne Robinson and Gary Barlow among 1,600 people who contributed £1.2 billion to the Liberty tax avoidance scheme: artificial losses created to reduce tax liabilities
    • David Beckham, Wayne Rooney and Andrew Lloyd Webber among a group of people stung with a £520 million tax bill after investing in blockbuster films such as Life of Pi and The Girl with the Pearl Earring
    • Gary Barlow (again) in the Icebreaker scheme involving intellectual property rights set up to make tax-deductible losses
    • Chris Moyles and 450 other celebrities in the Working Wheels scheme – a car dealership which cranked up huge losses so the investors could claim tax against them
    • Sven Goran Erickson and Alex Ferguson in the Eclipse 35 scheme
    • Jimmy Carr among 1,100 participants in the K2 offshore loans scam run by Roy Lyness of Peak Performance

    The term “offshore loans” will, of course, ring some very unpleasant bells for victims of pension scams such as Capita Oak who started receiving their tax demands in March 2017.  The pension scheme was 100% invested in Store First store pods and the victims received “loans” (you know – the sort you never have to repay, nudge/wink) from Seychelles-based loan company: Thurlstone.

    So, what a murky old World!  Seems accountants and tax advisers can be just as bad as the rogue cohort of the financial and pension advice industry.  Meanwhile, HMRC continues to crank the tax-take machine while the victims face financial ruin.

     

  • CAPITA OAK – THE GINGER SCAMMER

    CAPITA OAK – THE GINGER SCAMMER

    In the Capita Oak pension scam, the “Ginger Scammer” – XXXX XXXX – is reported to have earned over £200k in transfer/administration fees alone. It is not known how much he earned in investment introduction commissions.

    The Ginger Scammer can afford to stump up some cash for the benefit of the victims of the Capita Oak and Henley Retirement Benefit Scams. Over a thousand victims are facing the partial or total loss of their pensions and are also now being pursued by HMRC for tax liabilities on the Thurlstone liberation “loans” operated by XXXX XXXX

    Here is the email sent to the lawyers acting for XXXX:

    Dear Dick

    I am setting out below the redacted tax appeal in respect of “Mr. X”.  He had the largest transfer in Capita Oak – and by definition the largest Thurlstone loan (operated by XXXX XXXX and Tom Biggar) and resulting tax demand.
    Mr. X’s case was the subject of a Pensions Ombudsman’s determination where Capita Oak was clearly stated to be a scam.   Undoubtedly the Ginger Scammer is familiar with the Ombudsman’s determination: https://www.pensions-ombudsman.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/PO-3590.pdf
    Further, I am sure you have seen the FCA sanction against IFA Popplewell:
    £128 million worth of pensions investments is an awfully big number and I am sure that after all the money your client earned out of these scams, he can come up with sufficient funds to place in a secure account for the benefit of the victims who are now being pursued by HMRC for tax on the Thurlstone “loans”.  Although it is a matter of public record that XXXX earned well in excess of £200k in transfer fees in Capita Oak alone, it is inevitable that he will also have received some introduction commissions.
    The Thurlstone loans were operated by XXXX XXXX and therefore he must take responsibility for the tax liabilities on behalf of the victims.  Can you please both get back to me by return.  Ignoring this situation and turning your back on the Capita Oak victims is not an option.
    Regards, Angie
    ——————————————————————————————————————————————————-
                                                                                                                                                  

    HMRC Specialist Personal Pension Schemes Services – Attn Lynn Faulkner                                            11 April 2017

    Fitz Roy House

    Castle Meadow Road

    Nottingham NG2 1BD,

    United Kingdom

    Dear Ms Faulkner

    Ref: Mr. X: UTR: 9227156060 – Amount of Assessment: £31,473.89


    Please accept this as the appeal and request for     postponement of the tax sought by HMRC on behalf of the above-named taxpayer in respect of the protected assessment issued.  The grounds are as follows:
     

    1.       Capita Oak was registered by HMRC on 23.7.2012 (PSTR 00785484RM) by Stephen Ward of Premier Pension Transfers of 31 Memorial Road, Worsley and Premier Pension Solutions of Moraira, Spain.  

    2.       Capita Oak was also registered by the Pensions Regulator (PSR12006487) who had placed Ward’s Ark schemes in the hands of Dalriada Trustees – yet allowed him to register a further scheme with no regard to the risk that it might be a scam (as indeed it was).

    4.       This taxpayer – along with 300 other victims – was given the Thurlstone loan on the basis it was definitely not taxable by an individual who purported to be a financial adviser.  Had the victim known this would be treated as an unauthorised payment, he would not have gone ahead with the transfer. 

    5.       The Thurlstone loans were processed by two CII members practising as financial and tax advisors. They would have known there was a risk the loans would constitute unauthorised payments and result in tax assessments by HMRC.  

    6.       Once the transfer request had been signed by the victim, there was nothing further he could have done to influence any further transactions since these would have been outside of his control.  The trustees, Imperial, and the Thurlstone loan company were by now in total control of the transfer, investment and loan.  The victim had zero input or influence over what happened subsequent to the transfer being executed by the negligent ceding providers. 

    7.       There appears to be no evidence whatsoever that Capita Oak was set up for the purpose of providing an income in retirement for the members.  It must be questioned, therefore, whether it even constituted a pension scheme at all – save for the valid HMRC and tPR registration numbers.  As supported by the Insolvency Service’s witness statement, the following are compelling reasons why this was a bogus pension scheme from start to finish:

     ·         The trust deed was forged

    ·         The sponsoring employer – R. P. Medplant Ltd was stated to be in Cyprus

    ·         The sponsoring employer – R. P. Medplant Ltd did not exist – although there was a company registered in Cyprus called R. P. Med Plant Ltd (which was also used for the subsequent Westminster scam).

    ·         The scheme was set up purely as the “super fund” of a bunch of known, serial scammers, to earn investment introduction commissions of 46% out of Store First’s store pods

    ·         The scheme’s own bank – Barclays – didn’t know it was a pension scheme – and when Barclays eventually realised this, they blocked the account

    ·         No arrangements were ever made to communicate with the members.  Once the various scammers in their respective roles had earned their fees and commissions, they all simply walked away and abandoned the scheme and the members

    ·         The transfer administration was carried out by Stephen Ward, Level 6 qualified CII and author of the Tolleys Pensions Taxation Manual.  After the disasters of both Ark and Evergreen, Ward would have known he was condemning all the victims – whether transferring from personal or occupational pensions – to certain financial ruin and potential unauthorised payment charges

    ·         The unauthorised payment charges arose from the Thurlstone loans and the tax should, therefore, be sought direct from the extremely wealthy scammers – not from the victims of the large-scale Capita Oak scam.

    Angela Brooks – Chairman, Pension Life Group Action 

  • Henley Pension Scam

    Henley Pension Scam

    HENLEY PENSION SCAM

    THE WAY THE SCHEME WORKED

    This was the “sister” scheme to Capita Oak, whose trustee was Imperial Trustee Services.  The Henley trustee was Omni Trustees.  Both Omni and Imperial were wound up by the Insolvency Service in the summer of 2015 and the two schemes had around £20m invested in Store First store pods.  Store First is part of Toby Whittaker’s Group First – and another of his companies is Park First which Stephen Ward’s London Quantum scam was invested in.

    The Henley Retirement Benefits Scheme was a bogus occupational scheme registered by HMRC and the Pensions Regulator.  The scheme received £8.6m from members of the public between 2012 and 2013.  

    The administrator to the scheme was T12 Administration followed by DBC Pension Services Ltd on 7.3.13. Stuart Chapman-Clarke’s firm Sanderson Clarke was involved in promoting the scam.  The store pods were purchased by solicitors Metis Law in Leeds.

    The victims were promised guaranteed 16% returns and were told they could legally access 50% of their pension without incurring tax liabilities.

     

    https://www.pensions-ombudsman.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/PO-4414.pdf and https://www.gov.uk/government/news/insolvency-service-takes-action-to-protect-pension-funds

     

     

  • A Day – a Starting Point to Understanding How you got scammed out of Your pension

    A Day – a Starting Point to Understanding How you got scammed out of Your pension

    A DAY – The WHEN, WHAT, WHO, HOW, & WHERE

    Pension tax simplification, often simply referred to as “pension simplification” and taking effect from A-day on 6 April 2006 was a policy announced in 2004 by the Labour government to rationalise the British tax system as applied to pension schemes.

    The aim was to reduce the complicated patchwork of legislation built up by successive administrations which were seen as acting as a barrier to the public when considering retirement planning. The government wanted to encourage retirement provision by simplifying the previous eight tax regimes into one single regime for all individual and occupational pensions.

    What happened after A day ?

    The first thing to understand is that retrospective legislation is not desirable and would be open to challenge. In other words, many of the previous pension regimes provided better pension options than the new simplified rules. In these cases, investors were allowed to keep the previous benefits earned before 2006, with only their post 2006 benefits being automatically affected.

    In practice, this means those with a foot on either side of 2006 can opt for the post 2006 on all their benefits if this suits them.

    A word of caution

    We would refer to A Day as adding a layer of simplification, not removing previous layers of complication. The interaction of the new rules and those with protected benefits – both pre 2006 and after – is extremely complex and the advice requirements are stiff.

    Who are the players in pension transfers?

    Outside the UK, any man and his dog can claim to be a pensions expert. Of course, there are genuine pension specialists outside the UK who have the necessary competencies to undertake pension transfer advice. The public need to undertake their own checks on their advisers to make sure they are regulated and qualified.

    In the UK, this is straightforward. The FCA register shows the permissions of each firm.

    Outside of the UK, advisers do not need any qualifications if they only undertake money purchase transfers or transfers with guaranteed benefits valued at lower than 30,000 GBP.

    For transfers of schemes with guarantees (such as final salary schemes and policies with guaranteed annuity rates) that are valued over 30,000 GBP, then only a UK IFA with the correct FCA permissions can advise.

    However, many money purchase schemes that do not require qualifications for transfer advice also straddle the pre 2006 and post 2006 rules. Namely, occupational money purchase schemes such as CIMPS/COMPS, Sec 32, EPP and SSASs. An unqualified adviser is unlikely to know all the rules and transfer advice may be inappropriate from such an individual.

    To be safe, people should only take advice from holders of AF3 and G60 pension qualifications – always ask to see the adviser’s certificate.

    Who are the regulators of pensions

    In the UK, there are two:

    Financial Conduct Authority – FCA – for personal pension schemes

    The Pensions Regulator – TPR – for company pension schemes

    Outside the UK, not all jurisdictions have pension regulators and, even if they do, if the pension is not a local pension it will not be of interest to the regulator (i.e. someone living in Spain with a pension in New Zealand, where the advice was given in Spain, is unlikely to get much help from the regulator in New Zealand).

    Pension Scams

    Since A Day, the old HMRC approval system came to an end. Each scheme is now registered only and not approved in any way. Thousands have been registered, many of them being bona fide schemes, but also – because of the absence of due diligence by HMRC and tPR – many also being bogus and/or scams.

    A Day opened the door to unethical salesmen and scammers to set up fraudulent schemes with the sole intention of stealing pension funds or milking victims for fees with ludicrously high commissions on toxic and illiquid investments. Often, the assets are high risk and toxic and the victims face a total loss. If the advice was unregulated, there is no recourse to the Statutory Compensation Scheme (FSCS).

    Cartoon blog – Don’t be the next pension scam victim

    Pensions were also targeted for liberation scams. Here the promoters provided “loans” to members from their own scheme or from an associated source, or just cashed in part or all of their pension prior to the age of 55. Many thousands now face financial ruin as HMRC will tax them 55% of the funds they took early (unauthorised payment tax). Despite the fact that the investors acted in good faith and were the victims of fraud as well as negligence on the part of HMRC, tPR and the ceding providers, HMRC will still make every effort to enforce the tax.

    Meanwhile, the government sits idly by and does nothing. Pensions Minister Ros Altmann merely says that the victims are “fools”.

    International Investment interview with Pension Life´s Angie Brooks

  • CAPITA OAK PENSION SCAM

    Capita Oak pension scam: Imperial accounts 23.1.15

    Ark Class Action

    24 Calle Cuatro Esquinas, Lanjaron 18420, Granada, Spain

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

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

     

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

    Brian Downs, Downs & Co Accountants

    Imperial House

    21-15, North Street

    Bromley BR1 1SD

     

    Copies to:

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

     

    Dear Sirs

     

    CAPITA OAK AND WESTMINSTER PENSION SCAMS

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

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

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

     

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

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

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

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

     

    “ITSL c/o Downs & Co

    Signed Roger Chant”

     

    PURPORTED “ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY OF BANK ACCOUNT” BY IMPERIAL

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

    Interest Received: 832.11

    To open account: 75.00

    TOTAL: 10,836,417.32

    Pension cash lump sums: 82,911.31

    Bank charges: 812.33

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

    Pensions Regulator: 157.71

    Metis Law re investment: 10,140,598.27

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

    Where are the following items in the financial statement?:

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

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

    647.00 in bank charges

    720.31 in courier services

    61,172.98 in fees to Metis Law

    3,990.00 to Harper McLeod

    1,696.00 in indemnity insurance

    12,370.00 in Land Registry fees

    5,194.20 to SDLT

    94,165.00 to Stamp Duty

    100,557.58 to Thurlstone

     

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

     

    Finally, kindly respond to the following by return:

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

     

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

     

    Angela Brooks

    Chairman – Ark Class Action

     

  • CAPITA OAK PENSION SCAM: BBC Radio 4 You and Yours.

    toCapita Oak pension scam: hundreds search for pensions they transferred after cold calls.

    In a special You and Yours, we investigate a web of companies that sold millions of pounds of pension investments to hundreds of people – and has left many of them desperately trying to find out where their money has gone.

    Click here to listen to the programme.

    Liberating Pension Pots:

    LIES, FRAUD AND FORGERY

    STORE FIRST/CAPITA OAK/IMPERIAL TRUSTEES AND VARIOUS SIPPS

    Shari Vahl – BBC Radio Four You And Yours 20.10.2014

    Transcribed by Angela Brooks, Chairman – Ark Class Action 20.10.2014

    (comments in bold by AB)

     

    Store First is doing really well.  Next year it is expected to open more of its self-storage warehouses.  It has celebrities such as Quentin Wilson recommending people invest in its storage units. Wilson claims: “I’ll be honest, I like it so much, I’ve got one myself.”  The BBC has spoken to some of the people who sold the Store First investments.  They told Shari how they lied, as well as forged documents and signatures to make sure that pension money was moved from secure schemes into Store First.  One salesman said: “I feel kind of sick to the stomach that I had transferred pensions from an elderly lady who completely trusted me.  I played with her dog.  She made me cups of tea.  She gave me biscuits.  I built trust with her.  And I don’t know if any of these people ever received any money.”

     

    The BBC’s You And Yours team devoted the entire programme to the thousands of people who invested millions of pounds in this one company: Store First.

     

    “I was asked by listeners to look into two Liverpool-based pension funds which had gone horribly wrong.  These were Capita Oak/Imperial Trustees (300+ members with total transfers of at least £10.8m) and Henley/Omni Trustees. £20 million of pension money had been invested in Store First but around 500 people hadn’t received the returns they were promised and now they can’t get their money.  The two pension funds were wound up in the High Court in 2015 and the judge described them as “dishonestly disadvantaging pensioners and sold on the basis of false representation”.  From the start, it was clear from the people who came to us that those two pension funds that the court wound up weren’t the only ones driving huge investments in Store First.  I’ve discovered another much bigger one marketed by the same Liverpool sales team, sending all the funds raised to Store First – a chain of storage warehouses.

    Alan: “I don’t suppose I’ll ever see that £140k again.  I don’t want other people to fall into the same trap.  Which they might do now with the new pension rules”.  Lolita: “This is the most appalling scheme I have ever heard of.  It is awful.  It is actually costing me money now.  I would never have agreed to this.”  David: “I’m annoyed with myself but I am even more annoyed with the people who took it off me.  £66k and I want it back”.

     

    “Those are three of the listeners that came to see us: Alan, David and Lolita.  They were promised big returns on their pension investments and access to a quarter of it, tax free when they reach 55.  They were told their money would go into Store First in 2012/2013.  He engaged a sales company in Liverpool to sell people the idea of investing their pensions into his company.  What the investors would get was a physical storage unit or pod and the money raised from renting out that pod (to people who wanted to store their stuff) is how they get the returns.  Or that was the promise.  The Capita Oak victims were also given non-repayable, interest free “loans” of 5% of the value of their pension transfers by a supposedly non-connected company registered in Gibraltar called Thurlstone.

     

    Quentin Wilson featured in the advert claiming a “guaranteed 8% for the first two years and up to 10% in years 3 and 4”.  This was due to rise to 12% by year 6.  So even people with secure, generous, final salary pension funds moved them into Store First.

     

    Alan, an ex postman, paid into the Royal Mail pension scheme: “I had about £144k.  These people came to me and said they could put it in a SIPP (Self Invested Personal Pension) and I’d get guaranteed returns on it”.  These people were the sales team based in Liverpool.  He believed the claims.  “I looked on the Store First website and they were predicting the same thing.  And then this guy Quentin Wilson doing a video about how it was the fastest growing market in the UK and predicted 85% profit in six years”.

     

    Alan and hundreds of others like him were really interested and excited by this offer.  Interest rates on savings were so low and they needed money.  The salesmen said they had “frozen” pensions from their old jobs just sitting there.  Lolita also took one of these cold calls from Jackson Francis – the Liverpool sales team.  We’ve obtained a copy of the script they used for the phone calls and it shows the cold callers described themselves as “pension specialists”.  Lolita was 36 when she signed up so she is much younger than Alan and she had £20k in a pension pot from her old job.  Jackson Francis asked if she would be interested in taking control of that fund and she said yes, she would be prepared to re-invest it somewhere so that it would be working for her and give her a good pension.  So she allowed Jackson Francis to transfer her old pension into a SIPP (really only suitable for people with lots of money to invest).

     

    David Griffiths did the same thing with his pension which had taken 20 years to build up working as a van driver for the Birmingham Post and Mail.  A salesman visited him and gave him a glossy booklet and told him it was a very good investment and many people had had their money back on it and the website looked kosher so he decided to go with it.

    For a lot of people the promise of a tax-free lump sum was a big part of it and they could have got that out of their old pension schemes, but they didn’t know that and Jackson Francis didn’t tell them that.  Other people just wanted to make their money work harder for them and get better returns.  This has been researched by BBC Radio 4 for more than a year after being contacted by desperate people who had not received their lump sums at 55, couldn’t contact the Liverpool sales team and were very worried.

     

    Several former Jackson Francis employees started to get in touch with the BBC and started to reveal what was really going on inside Jackson Francis.  They believe that Alan, Lolita and David and hundreds of others were lied to and defrauded.  One salesman said that the promise of getting 25% of the pension at age 55 was really the main bait.  “A lot of people, especially over 55, were struggling and that tax-free lump sum would have helped them out”.

    People who go into a SIPP are strongly advised to get independent financial advice.  The cold callers described themselves as “pension specialists” and offered a free pension review and Alan thought he was getting good advice.

     

    Under the rules, you can’t take out any part of a pension under the age of 55, and if you do move your pension pot, you should have a third party company regulated by the FCA in the middle to manage the pension pot for you.  So who managed the Store First investment?  A company in Leicester called Berkeley Burke (SIPP administration company) – unrelated to Store First and Jackson Francis and wasn’t paid by either of them but took on the majority of Jackson Francis clients – hundreds of them – and handled their investments into Store First.

     

    Berkeley Burke was happy to facilitate the transfers provided the clients signed to say they recognised the investment was high risk.  After a few months, Berkeley Burke wouldn’t take any more Jackson Francis clients unless those people had received independent financial advice.  Jackson Francis approached an IFA called Keith Popplewell, experienced in pensions, who was paid to help them.  They asked him to provide advice to their clients so he needed information from these clients but before he could give advice he needed Jackson Francis to do a questionnaire but he didn’t meet the people he was advising.  He didn’t speak to them on the phone either.  He just looked at the questionnaires returned by the salesmen and then wrote a financial report either recommending or not recommending they move their money into a SIPP.

     

    This is where the allegations of fraud and forgery really begin.  This is what one of the salesmen said about the so-called fact-finding questionnaires: “There was a series of boxes and you had to tick one.  It went from low to high risk and we were told by our bosses that people needed to be at the higher end or there wouldn’t be a transfer.  If the client didn’t want to be high risk, they were told they would have to leave the pension where it was.  Another salesman reported it was more than just scaring people “When I was training I went out with one of the field agents.  He filled in the form before he went into the client’s house and ticked the box to say the client did have an appetite for risk before meeting him.  Clients did not see a copy of their reports.  Keith Popplewell claims he never recommended anyone in a final salary scheme to transfer into a SIPP.  Even clients whose reports said the pensions should not be transferred were still transferred and did not even see the report from Popplewell.

     

    One salesman witnessed another salesman signing pensions transfer paperwork himself and filled in the fact-find questionnaire himself.  Another salesman reported that this was routine and that the salesmen would sign the forms rather than the client.  In other words, forging signatures.  You would see them practising on a piece of paper until they got it right.

     

    Jackson Francis was a “machine” that drove £100 million into Store First.  The salesmen did not know about the level of commission paid by Store First.  Over two years, Store First paid £33 million to a mysterious company called Transeuro Worldwide Holdings and it worked like this: every time an investment was received into Store First via the Liverpool sales team, Store First would pay Transeuro a commission of 30% or 46%.  So when Alan put his £141k pension from the Royal Mail into a SIPP and that went into Store First, Transeuro was paid nearly £65k – 46% commission.

     

    The government took Transeuro to the High Court to wind it up in the public interest after complaints from people who had been persuaded to move into two other pension funds also invested in Store First and millions of pounds are also missing from those pensions.  Up until that court hearing, it was really hard to see who really ran Transeuro.  It seemed to be based in Gibraltar and was shrouded in layers of nominee directors in the Caribbean and Central America and at the winding up hearing the court forced Transeuro’s solicitors to name the man in charge.  That man is Michael Talbot who all the Liverpool salesmen believed was their boss.  The man they described as having the big glass desk in the Speke office; the quiet man who hired and fired; the man with the chequebook.

     

    But in a letter to the BBC from Talbot’s lawyers, he denied he ran the Liverpool sales operation or Transeuro Worldwide Holdings.  He claimed his role was IT and databases and he told the BBC that at his garden gate in 2014.  Talbot is 42, from the North of England and he used to be a nightclub promoter, married with two children.

    Transeuro used £5m of the £33m they were paid to run the Jackson Francis operation and for buying in names of potential customers; they rented offices in Speke.  Mike and Stuart would often roll up to the office in Ferraris and Rolls Royces, a Porsche, all owned by Store First.  These offices were called Business First and Jackson Francis worked from there.  Store First owned all the cars that the salesmen used to drive to visit clients and provided all the glossy brochures, and the product knowledge training for the sales team.

    We can’t say that the investors have lost everything because they still are the legal owners of these storage pods.  Quentin Wilson promoted the “exit strategy” as being able to “bail out at any time without cost and can sell to Store First who have a guaranteed buy-back scheme or you sell to another investor”.  But Store First told one investor “on the fifth anniversary if you request for Store First to buy your pods back and if this is agreed then Store First have a further five years to complete the buy back”.  And over that time you have to pay another five years’ fees and management costs.  SF claimed it could organise an “in house” sale and sell the storage pods to someone else and make the original investor a profit of 25% but simultaneously offer a 25% discount on a new one.  Why would anyone buy a second-hand unit for 50% more than a new one?  It has been three years since Alan asked Store First to his sell his units and so far nobody wants them.  Nobody has bought David Griffiths’ pods either.

    BBC went to speak to Mike Burkey at Andrews Estate Agents in the Wirral and he said they had one on the market for £15k in February.  They dropped the price in June to £9k as interest was minimal.  The realistic price could be £5k and they charge a flat fee of £1k plus conveyancing fee of about £600.  So after total fees of around £1800 the seller might walk away with £3.5k.  Other estate agents tell the same story and one said they thought the investors had been “stung”.  A major auction house had 9 pods for sale from the Blackburn site.  The auctioneer started at £10k but there was not one single bid.  No-one out of the 400 people in the room showed even a flicker of interest.

    The original investors were shown a valuation by a chartered surveyor and the BBC asked him how he had calculated the market value and he said it was a sum based on how much rent the pod would generate.  He was then asked where he got the rental figures and he said “Store First”.  He was then asked whether he checked those figures to prove those rents were coming in and he said “no”.  When the Capita Oak store pods were purchased in 2012/13, the solicitors used for the conveyancing – Metis Law – were specifically instructed not to get valuations for the pods they bought using £10m of funds from the Capita Oak members.

     

    “As a matter of policy, Carey Pensions use a conservative valuation estimate for Store First storage units of 50% of the original purchase price in preparing annual SIPP reports”.  This was a letter sent in 2015 to some Store First investors telling them their investment is worth half what they paid.  When asked why the value of the investments had dropped so much they didn’t answer.

    Store First claims it has 5,000 investors who have put £250 million pounds into Store First.  Tom McPhail of Hargreaves Lansdown says the way these investments were sold was wrong because unregulated advisers were selling high risk investments with financial advisers signing off risk profiles that were inappropriate and then people buying into unregulated high risk investments and people who should never have been moved out of final salary schemes and unregulated investments shouldn’t be in the SIPPS at all in the first place.

    The BBC tried to get in touch with the SIPP administrators Berkeley Burke, regulated by the FCA, but they didn’t respond.  Carey Pensions did respond saying that they did do checks in line with FCA regulation and that they are happy.  The Self Storage Association says that the figures that Store First are putting out are not viable and they got an independent report from Deloittes who confirmed the initial suspicions that the promised returns are unviable from a self storage business and there were two similar operations in Australia that failed and the investors were left out of pocket.  There is very little, if any, market for re-sold units.  Tom McPhail says there is very little avenue for compensation for the investors.

    Quentin Wilson states he has asked Store First to remove the videos from their website and he has confirmed he has received no income from his pod.

     

  • CAPITA OAK UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUIRED

    CAPITA OAK UPDATE AND INFORMATION REQUIRED

    Capita Oak Pension Scam

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Regards, Angela Brooks – Chairman, Ark Class Action