Having the highest possible regard for lawyers in general, and JMW Solicitors in particular, it is good to report that there is now a dialogue in progress which will hopefully result in Dolphin Trust producing a copy of the audited accounts. An excellent outcome would also be the repayment of the loan notes.
JMW Solicitors appears to be a promising outfit – especially as their website states: “No matter who you are or what you need, you can be assured of a great personal service from us.” As we need a copy of the Dolphin Trust audited accounts and the return of the money that Dolphin Trust borrowed (unsecured) from hundreds of pension and investment scam victims, I hope this promised great personal service will extend to a prompt and hassle-free resolution to the Dolphin Trust lenders’ problem.
The lawyer from JMW acting for Dolphin Trust – Nick McAleenan – has championed the cause of the supermarket chain: Morrisons.
MORRISONS DATA LEAK CASE – MORRISONS HELD LIABLE IN LANDMARK COURT RULING
JMW is representing thousands of claimants in a legal action for compensation against Morrisons Supermarkets.
The case is the leading legal case in the UK concerning “data breach”. It relates to the unauthorised copying and disclosure of Morrisons payroll information by a disgruntled ex-employee. In 2017, the High Court ruled that Morrisons is legally responsible for the data breach. In 2018, Morrisons appealed the High Court’s judgment, but the Court of Appeal dismissed Morrisons’ appeal. Further legal proceedings will take place to determine what compensation must be paid to the victims.
Nick McAleenan clearly has genuine empathy for the awful ordeal suffered by the Morrisons victims who had to undergo the trauma of having their privacy violated.
I sincerely hope this will translate into similar empathy for scam victims whose life savings have been “loaned” to his clients: Dolphin Trust.
If Nick (interesting name!) wants any clarification about how these scam victims compare to the Morrisons supermarket victims, he might want to have a chat with some of the victims of the STM Fidecs Trafalgar Multi-Asset Fund scam.
Plus a little word in Nick’s shell-like: Morrisons’ audited accounts can be found here. (There – that wasn’t difficult!).
https://www.thelandlordspension.co.uk/single-post/Truth-About-Dolphin-Trust
All looks very believable and credible. So why do they do so much business with scammers? And why don’t the give the victims their money back when they realise they’ve been scammed?
I’ve looked at The Landlord’s Pension and it is an unregulated firm of “introducers” (which is what many of the scammers do). I also found this firm – John Charles Property Investments: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05091892 which seems to be insolvent and has the same directors as The Landlord’s Pension – Alan and Gareth Bertram. On their website it states: The Landlord’s Pension is approved by hmrc to administer uk pension schemes. hmrc number a0140182. This is entirely false, as HMRC does not “approve” anything – whether schemes or administrators. HMRC only registers. “Approve” is a much used (and abused) term by scammers.
https://www.thelandlordspension.co.uk/single-post/Truth-About-Dolphin-Trust
Refund people like THIS do you mean?
https://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/news/refund-victory-for-steelworker-invested-in-property-scheme/a1111341
Do you seriously think Al Rush is one of their paid stooges or introducers too???
Thing is, Angie, you’re very well aware that for some years people have been lending Dolphin money and getting their interest paid and their capital returned.
Okay, MAYBE it’s all a giant Ponzi scheme waiting to implode ONE DAY, but to date – and it’s been going for some years now – many people are doing just fine with it. (I’m one).
The only way Dolphin’s going to collapse is if the business plan collapses. And if you know what they do and how they do it, how can you possibly say that’s likely.
Most of these investment/loan scams collapse sooner or later. Some of the earlier investors/lenders do indeed get their promised returns and/or money back – this is what gives future victims the confidence to keep allowing their funds to be used to keep it going. But eventually, Dolphin will go the way of EEA, Axiom, LM, Mansion, Premier New Earth, Jatropha trees, truffle bushes, three-legged chickens, flying pig farms and one-legged ostriches.
Yes, you’re right. Eventually Dolphin WILL collapse. Like Lehmann Bros, RBS, BoS, Clydesdale, Northern Rock, the Liberal Party, BHS, Woolworths, Homebase, and a million businesses around the world every year.
EVENTUALLY every cryptocurrency, The Royal Family you, me and even the world itself will collapse. Eventually.
And UNTIL it collapses, it will continue to do what its lenders want it to do. Pay reasonable interest and return their capital.
“Okay, MAYBE it’s all a giant Ponzi scheme waiting to implode ONE DAY, but to date – and it’s been going for some years now – many people are doing just fine with it. (I’m one).”
Scammer middlegame cliché #6 – “Who cares if it’s a scam, I’m making money biatch-ezz”.
Number one, you have not made any money until your interest AND CAPITAL is in your bank account.
There is no market for these investments so until that date you have nothing.
Number two, giant Ponzi schemes, as you describe it, are a zero sum game. Even if you win, your win is somebody else’s loss.
Number three, the mathematics of Ponzi schemes dictate that winners are *vastly* outnumbered by losers. If you don’t know who the sucker is, it’s almost certainly you.
Al Rush helped someone get out of Dolphin Trust, not into. Your implication that Al Rush has promoted Dolphin Capital is borderline libellous. The implication of Rush’s words “It’s fair to say they will never be high on my list of solutions” is very clear, regardless of the hollow praise that follows, which I will remind you was only given because DT allowed a client of his to exit.
I’m not sure who you are arguing against. I’ve never called DT a Ponzi scheme and I’ve never implied that Mr. Hurry Up promoted DT. You seem to be arguing with yourself (I wonder what else….never mind). The point is, Dolphin is a loan and not an investment. And it is high risk, illiquid and there are no audited accounts – so we don’t know for sure what is going on. Dolphin’s lawyer, Mr. McNickalot, has forgotten how to write emails and I think the dog ate the one which he wrote which said “Sure Angie, I’ll send you a copy of the audited accounts by the end of the week – its just I’m a wee bit busy with the poor souls whose privacy was sold in Morrisons supermarkets”.
I thought it was fairly clear that I was arguing against Penny Dreadful, not you, given that I quoted part of their post at the top of mine, in quotation marks.
It is clear now – unreserved apologies. I think Penny Dreadful is probably one of those dodgy introducers (who made a packet out of flogging Dolphin to unsuspecting victims). Actually, I have just got off the phone from one of the victims and we must not forget the appalling distress these people are suffering. Al Rush may have succeeded in getting one person’s money back, but there are more than 400 in the STM Fidecs scam who are still in the dark and facing the possibility that the liquidator of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund will take whatever is left when the second-hand Dolphin loan notes are sold.
“……I think Penny Dreadful is probably one of those dodgy introducers (who made a packet out of flogging Dolphin to unsuspecting victims)……”
This doesn’t really inspire a high opinion of what you “think”. And if this opinion of yours is nonsense then why shouldn’t other opinions of yours be equally nonsensical.
In this instance I have offered you a wager (involving donation to charity) on this opinion of yours which you have refused to take.
Which, in turn, doesn’t really give much confidence in your own beliefs in your own opinions/thoughts, or you’d take the wager. Had you any faith in your ad hom you’d surely be too charitable to refuse. Hmmm
I don’t think you really understand how Dolphin Trust “investment” works. And, with respect, I don’t think you really understand much about their German redevelopment business specifically or how business more generally works either.
I’ll try and be brief:
DT “investment” is an unsecured loan with the principal at 100% risk, although every year of fulfilled repayment agreement reduces that risk by 10%. If the business collapses before the agreed end of the loan term, the principal (minus any periodic interest repayments) is gone. To a certain extent, like all unsecured lending, it is a gamble. Like bookmakers, companies who take these bets won’t return your stake if you change your mind (which seems to puzzle Angie) or decide you can’t afford it or need the stake for some other more pressing requirement etc.
For this reason potential “investors” are ‘screened out’, in an attempt to exclude people who don’t really know how the thing works and people who are gambling with money they can’t afford to lose. In my case (and I suspect everyone else’s too) I had to sign an undertaking to this effect.
Of course the investor/gambler also owes it to themselves to understand what they are investing in. Because, apart from the (pretty flawed imo) actuarial ‘understanding’ of risk, the businessman knows there really are only two risks in reality, far and away the main one being that the investment will be lost.
So the investor who understands business will look at the two ways how this could happen.
One is because of dishonesty. Basically because from the outset the ‘business’ is a deliberately staged sham. And the other – far more common and likely – is that the business will fail.
You’ve thrown plenty of shade at Dolphin Trust. Hinting it’s a scam and a Ponzi scheme and suggesting I’m an ignorant and naive stereotypical victim, sucker and loser.
Could I ask you what flaws you see in the Dolphin Trust business plan that is in day to day operation and has been for some years and has been successfully fulfilling its obligation for some years including repayment in full of all sums loaned to it that in your opinion indicates a business likely to fail either imminently or at some time in the future?
I accept that to do this you’d have to know quite a bit about what they do and how they do it and a plethora of ancillary matters of fiscal and legal significance to the business. But really without that knowledge your case for criticism – which is either that DT is dishonest with no evidence of dishonesty, or that the business is doomed to failure without any knowledge of the business – is just a bit of an empty box.
I think the point Angie is making is that many investors (particularly those in the Trafalgar fund) were not made aware that the majority if not all of their pension fund would be invested in toxic loan notes such as Dolphin.
While many like my husband (61 at the time) were willing to take a low – medium risk as stipulated to the report from the (supposed) independent financial advisor at Global Partners (signed by xxxx xxxx) who recommended the Trafalgar fund as a balanced risk investment and who we later learned (too late unfortunately) was the manager of the same fund who invested our pension in a high risk UCIS namely Dolphin fund.
My husbands pension (held with Aegon) from previous employer had been frozen for 6 years as being in a low paid job he could no longer afford to add to it and his current employer did not offer a pension scheme until government legislation changes forced them to put one in place approximately 18mths after he had transferred to Trafalgar fund.
So after reviewing its value in late 2013 we decided to look at alternative ways to invest the fund to improve its value which was diminishing yearly with admin charges and when we received a call out of the blue in February 2014 offering a free pension review it seemed like fate. A week later a visit from a financial consultant/salesman followed, after taking some details re his pension he discussed options such as SIPP and QROPS, the latter he recommended for tax reasons should my husband die before getting his pension.
Next he gave us a professionally produced brochure showing the range of investments in the Trafalgar fund (at no point was property development or renovation mentioned) and additional literature from London & Colonial on the key features of the Multi Platform International Pension who we were told would hold the pension.
After he had finished his presentation we said we wanted time to think about it and discuss with a financial advisor and he accepted this and left saying he would ring the following week to see what we had decided.
A week later after still not being able to get in touch with our previous financial advisor and working long busy days at my hospital meant I had not been able to find an alternative in our area so when he rang back and offered to put us in touch with a company of independent financial advisors (as mentioned above) one of his other clients had used we accepted and he sent the paperwork off and the rest as they say is history.
As a result of his (JH) actions, the failure of Aegon to give Scorpion advice when my husband requested the transfer to QROPS and to a degree our naivety and misplaced trust my husband now has to continue working long past his planned retirement date as due to ill health I had to give up my career in nursing and only have a small NHS pension myself.
While Trafalgar in now in the hands of the liquidator its highly unlikely we will ever see any returns from his mis-invested his pension.
In your first para you refer to DT loans as ‘toxic’. If Dolphin are paying interest on the loans and repaying capital when the loan term ends, in what way are they ‘toxic’ ?
Who is receiving the interest from the loans made to Dolphin by Trafalgar?
Good question Mr. Dreadful (note that Denise Morris has had the courage to use her own name, but you don’t – I wonder why?). We assume STM Fidecs has had any interest which may have been paid to the fund – although now the fund is suspended it is probably going to the liquidators to pay their fees. But it is doubtful the members will ever see a penny after all the snouts in the trough have had their fill. STM Fidecs has written to some members to say there won’t be a distribution at all now.
Sorry to appear so ignorant, but how does anything in your reply explain Ms. Morris’s description of DT loan notes as “toxic”?
DT’s part in this pantomime is to act as covenanted in respect of their loan note. That means pay the interest they promised and return the capital at term end.
I would be very surprised if DT can LEGALLY pay the interest or repay the capital to anyone other than the party who bought their note. And if that party is STM Fidecs then it is to STM Fidecs that the money must be paid. If STM Fidecs are in liquidation then I would be very surprised if anyone other than the liquidators are LEGALLY entitled to DT’s interest payments.
If DT were to pay the interest/return the principal to anyone OTHER than the liquidators without the liquidators expressly requesting them to do so (for example to The Morrises)I imagine DT would be in all kinds of trouble.
So what do you expect them to do?
If DT are to be called “toxic” then it must be shown that they have dishonoured their agreement. But if they have honoured their agreement
and The Morrises are unhappy about the disposal of the proceeds of DT’s loan note then that is something they really need to take up with STM Fidecs’ liquidators.
And a bit of research into JMW Solicitors shows pretty much the same thing in respect of them. A perfectly good – above average if their reviews are to be believed – legal firm which you have pointlessly maligned.
I’m starting to get the feeling that you are well aware that Dolphin Trust aren’t a scam at all, and that you can’t bring yourself to say so because you are one of that HUGE group of people who somehow find it demeaning or a sign of weakness to say “I got it wrong, sorry”.
Finally, can I “take the bait” re. preferring a username to using my real name. This doesn’t appear to be a problem for you when replies and comments which agree with you are made by people using pseudonyms. But, of course, as it’s your website there is nothing to stop you from publishing commentary only from those who use and prove they are using their real-world identity. Can I suggest you do that; implement a rule which would prevent you becoming perturbed by noms-de-plume. Real name only from now on!! Job jobbed!!
STM Fidecs’ liquidators are keeping very tight-lipped and saying nothing to the victims about what they are going to do about the loan notes – which they should never have accepted in the first place (just as they should have never accepted business from an unregulated, unqualified, known scammer.
Looks like the interest is being swallowed up by the liquidators who seem to be mates of STM Fidecs. Nobody is revealing anything about if and how the loans are going to get repaid and whether the interest is being paid. As STM Fidecs was in on the Trafalgar Multi Asset scam, it is hardly surprising that Alan Handcuffs Kentish and his accomplices are keeping quiet about the whole thing. Why do I get the feeling you have a heavily-invested interest in the Dolphin scam? Are you an introducer?
Angie
The point I’m trying to understand is how Dolphin Trust are to blame for the collapse of the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund.
As I’m sure you are aware, when an investment house attracts investment from a multi asset fund, the house as the recipient of the funds (in this case Dolphin Trust) have no prior knowledge of how the investment funds have been aggregated. You are certainly unaware of the sales process/advisory process that the investors have been through.
The fiduciary responsibility that the investment house has, is to compete the necessary checks and balances Anti Money laundering and KYC etc. I’m not aware of a fund house that receives aggregated investment funds from a multi asset fund, that would then second guess the processors of the fund providing the capital. This would be extraordinary
Dolphin Trust have no right to question (without due cause) the methodology the multi asset fund used to attract it investments.
So therefore, when you are taking a swipe at Dolphin Trust, you actually mean the Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund and the people behind THAT organization. Which with respect, has NOTHING to do with Dolphin Trust. Trafalgar were an investor in Dolphin Trust I believe and nothing more. Correct me if I’m wrong apologies.
Let me hypothesize, are you saying that if an investor in Dolphin Trust (a client effectively) was proven to be a bank robber at a later date, this in turn makes the Dolphin Trust directors implicit??
Does it mean Dolphin Trust were involved in the bank robbery that the client (unbeknown to them!) carried out some years ago??!!
In summary, I fail to see why you have such an axe to grind with Dolphin. Surely your frustration should be vented towards the real culprits
Your points are valid. However, the real nub of the matter is that they keep on dealing with known, serial scammers (unregulated) and victims of scams end up stuck in Dolphin loan notes. However wonderful you (and anyone else) think Dolphin loan notes are, they are entirely inappropriate for pensions. Plus, we still don’t have any audited accounts. Why would a bona fide property development which seems to rely almost exclusively on borrowing money from low-risk savers fail to publish their accounts? Doesn’t make any sense at all. There are some lenders who are reporting that communications with both Dolphin and Vodere is very poor and payments are late.
As a seasoned, and regulated adviser, I would say that if something looks fishy and smells fishy it is probably is not what it seems.
I suspect Angie will be proved right, as she has been many times before.