3 Comments

  1. Stephen
    December 29, 2018 @ 8:42 am

    You look at the numbers above and recall Micawber’s philosophy (David Copperfield, published Nov 1850) for happiness:-

    “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.”

    It’s not rocket science.

    The only reason this was allowed to continue was because those promoting this investment were never at risk of losing money – they were paid in commission in the first place and then take annual administration fees. Though why the admin costs went dramatically down in 2014 even though turnover went up, is a mystery.

    Surely someone had a duty of care to the “investors”? We are up to our neck in regulations and the regulators hound the “honest” firms, charge them a fee for the regulation but do nothing about the rogues. That’s like the Police hounding innocent people but letting criminals do as they please ….

    Can anyone justify this situation?

    Reply

  2. KATHLEEN KAY woods
    February 16, 2019 @ 2:18 pm

    My aunt was a victim of the Premier New Earth company. Amazingly she had a solicitor deputy that handled her financial affairs and invested monies from the sale of her apartment through a financial advisor.
    My aunt had been in a nursing home suffering with severe dementia since 2009.
    She died in 2016.
    It became clear to the family( after probate was granted) the extent of the losses.
    After 12months trying to get information from the (deputy) solicitor on this investment , which we believe to be unregulated and high risk we are no nearer to an explanation or an outcome.
    After exhausting research and numerous phone calls and a solicitors letter to the said deputy and the powers that regulate deputies I am at a brick wall!
    I know that solicitor deputies have to take out a bond for losses that happen with regulated investments.
    Any advice that I can get would be very helpful.

    Reply

  3. Nicola Woods
    March 15, 2019 @ 3:47 pm

    Why were solicitors acting as deputies for vulnerable , elderly dementia patients allowed to invest their monies in this ‘ too good to be true scam’!
    Surely investments in a case where you are unable to carry out a persons tolerance to risk and loss should be secure, safe and regulated
    Could the administrator of this site please advise it’s purpose and are certain posts not displayed ?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *