November 2019

Carlauren Group is in administration. There’ll be no more important business meetings like the one shown above (Mr Murray on the yacht he bought for the company with investors’ money).

Please read this link to a BBC article on the result of the Carlauren Group administration hearing.

Late yesterday Quantuma LLP issued this update below:

To all investors and creditors of the Carlauren Group (“the Group”).

Please note that as of 2.31 pm today, Carl Jackson of Quantuma LLP and Philip Duffy of Duff and Phelps were appointed as Joint Administrators of Carlauren Group Limited (in Administration) and Casarian Holdings Limited (formerly Carlauren International Holdings Limited) (in administration) and a number of subsidiaries of the Group.

Following the appointments, the Joint Administrators are taking control promptly of all Group companies with a view to preserving all assets within the Group and protecting the interests of all investors and creditors. Please note that Mr Sean Murray no longer has any authority to deal with any assets of the Group companies and all communication in relation to creditor and investor interests should be directed to the Joint Administrators, contact details below  – 

carlauren@quantuma.com 

The Joint Administrators will be conducting a detailed and extensive investigation into the affairs of the Group and the application of all investor funds. Whilst the strategy for recovery is yet to be determined, the Joint Administrators’ intention is to maximise the value of assets within the estate. We will keep all investors and creditors updated as matters progress.

So now investors can expect to find out how more than £76m of their money was spent.

To view our previous article on Carlauren Group please click here.

Last week we came across a story on the BBC which highlights the dangers of cryptocurrency investment.  It also highlights the dangers of investigating those who carry out cryptocurrency frauds. It can be summed up by our title – Cryptocurrencies Are Dangerous.

Here is the link and we suggest you read it if you are ever tempted to consider cryptocurrencies as a way to make big profits very quickly. It is a great story which explains how a multi-billion dollar cryptocurrency scam was established and able to grow to a size which rivalled that of Bitcoin, and it was all fake.  There is a series of podcasts available if you register with the BBC.

This links in with the latest follow-on-fraud doing the rounds and which we received this morning. This FOF is targeted once again at the victims of European Property Coin, a fake cryptocurrency scam which proves that cryptocurrencies are dangerous.  The letter is being sent by a group of scammers who are using the identity of an established firm, City Capital Markets, to make it look as if they are genuine. The fact that EPC investors are receiving so many follow-on-frauds suggests that these letters are being sent out by the people who actually carried out the fraud.  We believe the group of scammers, led by Florian Pierini, will prove to be behind these FOFs.

We have copied the text of the scam letter below. If you ever receive a letter like this in connection with any scam investment you made it is guaranteed to be a follow-on-fraud.  The name and address of the victim has been removed from the text below.

Dear XXXXXX,
After a long turbulent journey and ultimately due to the amount of uncertainty surrounding the cryptocurrency market, it is with regret that we write to inform you that European Property Coin have now entered voluntary liquidation under the authority of the Insolvency Service and the high court. This means that they are no longer in a position to act in any capacity as your cryptocurrency broker or to manage your cryptocurrency portfolio.

Throughout their existence they did make it their ethos to provide unparalleled customer service to their investors, ensuring that profits were paid on time and portfolios were managed accordingly. This duty of care is something that we intend to continue despite their impending demise and therefore we are urging all existing clients who still hold portfolios under management with European Property Coin to contact us immediately in regard to redeeming any stagnant funds still held within the market.

The liquidation of European Property Coin will unfortunately affect all clients regardless of whether you invested as a private or corporate client.

We are aware that companies are currently contacting investor’s and offering them options to trade out of the market. Please be very careful and only deal with companies that are able to issue you with your URN [Unique reference number). We are giving clients the opportunity to sell their current cryptocurrency portfolio and allowing all clients the chance to redeem their full portfolio value including any profits made from the sale of assets.

Failure to act proactively will result in your portfolio and ultimately your finances dissolving with European Property Coin as a company when they go into official liquidation, resulting in a loss of assets and funds. If this applies to you please feel free to contact us on 0203 633 7563 in order to discuss your options.

Yours sincerely,
Mark Lockwood Director

City Capital Markets,

Address: 1st Floor, 239 Kensington High Street, Kensington, London, W8 6SN   Contact 020 7164 6018

Company Registration Number: 06561725

Cryptocurrencies are dangerous. Before you risk any money on them ask yourself “Can I afford to lose this money” ? because there is a strong likelihood that you will lose your money.

To view our previous article on European Property Coin please click on this link

Yes children it’s cartoon time.

Pension Life has produced a piece of animated propaganda on behalf of the Administrators of Park First. The cartoon features a small greying figure who is supposed to represent Finbarr O’Connell, the person leading the Smith and Williamson involvement in the Park First debacle. In order to differentiate between the real-life Finbarr O’Connell and the animated version we will call one by his full name and the other by his initials – FOC.

Why would Finbarr O’Connell choose to be represented by FOC and not speak on camera himself ? Well, the words ‘plausible deniability’ spring to mind. “It wasn’t me who said that – it was FOC”.

On 15^th November, Angie at Pension Life wrote an article on Park First on behalf of “investors who had contacted her”. We think she might mean pension funds who need somebody to undermine the liquidation proposal because they are vulnerable to claims from pension holders if the Park First companies are liquidated. We particularly like the biased and misleading graphic showing that if investors support the Administrator ‘Whittaker pays £33m’, but if investors support a liquidation ‘Whittaker pays £0’. That’s a very emphatic statement which has been proven to be a lie.  The latest update issued by Finnbar O’Connell has confirmed that the FCA oversees these funds.  What Angie should have said was ‘Whittaker would like to pay £0’.  What Whittaker likes and what he gets are likely to be two different things.  See yesterday’s article here.

She goes further. She has “spent a few weeks speaking to Quantuma, Smith & Williamson, Mishcon de Reya, Park First and Paul Hastings”. So she spoke to Quantuma and then spoke to four parties who have a vested interest in opposing the liquidation, some of whom were integral parties in this investment. She says “I can see that there is a dilemma for the investors and unfortunately, not a lot of time to make up their minds about which way to vote”. There’s no dilemma here Angie. All you had to do was ask your four friends what happened to the £115m, why is it unrecoverable and why won’t you tell the truth to investors ? Surely that would have been the first thing an impartial enquirer would ask, but we couldn’t find any reference to it in the report.

Angie then says that investors “just want to understand two things:

What their investments are worth

What refunds and returns they will get”

These are two good points, but we actually believe investors want to know more than that. They also want to know:

Where has the missing money gone ?

Is there any other party, or parties, I could go after to recover any shortfall ?

We sat down for cartoon time but found very few honest answers to these key points.

We think the answer to the first point is contained in the administrators report to creditors. It states that £230m was invested and the assets are only worth around £12m. So, we presume the accounts of the companies will show that the investments are worth £12m.

Point 2 is a tough one, but the latest update from Finnbar O’Connell shows that whichever option is chosen there will be £12m in assets and £33m in cash (the allocation of which requires the approval of the FCA). Both the CVA option and the liquidation option has no automatic right to these funds. Both options are before costs. The Administrator’s costs are already astronomical and it hasn’t even been able to tell anyone where the £115m has gone.

As for point 3 the only people in a position to tell investors where the money has gone is Mr O’Connell, his team and of course Toby Whittaker, but none of them are able or willing to tell investors. I don’t know why Mr O’Connell is finding it hard to tell investors. It is a very simple question. He was appointed by Toby Whittaker so just ask him “where is the money” ?

Point 4.  If creditors vote for a liquidation the liquidators would investigate and report to creditors because that is the role of a liquidator. Another element of a liquidator’s role is to seek the recovery of funds which may have been unjustly distributed, whether that be to other companies or to individuals. The important benefit of voting for a liquidation rather than a CVA is that a liquidator can instigate recovery actions against any party that it feels may have some liability to creditors. This means that a liquidator can consider ALL parties involved in the investment and take action against any of them if the liquidator feels it is likely to benefit creditors. This could include company directors, pension trustees, IFAs, solicitors, sales agents etc.

We believe that if investors vote for the CVA proposal the Administrators would be very unlikely to assist investors in pursuing any claims against the parties involved. They were appointed by the directors to protect directors’ interests. We also believe it is highly unlikely the Administrators would later approve a liquidation without investor compensation routes having been completely closed off.  In cases such as this directors appoint Administrators to enable the write off of missing money, to ensure no investigation into the conduct of the directors takes place and to return newly sanitised companies back into the hands of the directors.

Investors should vote to protect their own interests. Any director who takes in £230m and turns it into £12m would not get our vote.

Getting back to cartoon time we tried to maintain our interest but found it quite hard work. It’s a bit of a gimmick. They would have been better off interviewing the parties properly so that investors could look for any body language signs which might suggest that the interviewee is not telling the truth. Perhaps that’s why it was turned into cartoon time and FOC was used instead of the real person. Somebody wrote the script for the cartoon and paid for it. It was simply a paid-for commercial on behalf of the Administrators.

We thought the choice of character for FOC was quite a good likeness to Mr O’Connell so we give them a plus for that. The over-riding message we got from cartoon time was that anyone who chooses to vote for this CVA is likely to be well and truly FOCKED.

​If anyone wishes to vote for the liquidation but is unable to attend they can send another person who will vote as instructed. The necessary forms to enable this to happen are at the end of this earlier article.

Well well…. the Park First updates are coming thick and fast.  Today there has been yet another Park First update from the Administrator.  At the 11^th hour Finbarr O’Connell of Administrator firm Smith & Williamson finally admits to Park First investors that the £33m pot “is held by solicitors for the benefit of investors” and that it is “subject to the agreement of the FCA”.

He confirms for the very first time that the £33m is not automatically released if investors vote for his proposal i.e the CVA. The Administrators have to gain the approval of the FCA in order to have that money released. That is exactly the same as a liquidator would have to do should creditors support a liquidation. Finally we get something truthful from Mr O’Connell and it shows that a CVA DOES NOT automatically result in the release of the £33m.

Some might say Mr O’Connell intentionally left it to the last minute to inform investors because he had been frightening them into supporting the CVA proposal and it may now be too late for them to switch to the liquidation proposal. We think Mr O’Connell may have been persuaded by the authorities to put out this update to clear up the false and misleading impression he had created in his countless previous statements.

Whatever the reason, it raises serious concerns about the honesty and trustworthiness of the Administrators. It is shameful how the Administrators have misled creditors in an attempt to push through their proposal on behalf of the directors.  A proposal which results in creditors having to accept the write off of £115m of their investment money without any explanation at all over where that money has gone.

It must have pained Mr O’Connell to have to tell investors that neither the CVA nor the liquidation has any automatic right to the £33m. However, he then goes on to use a range of scare tactics telling investors that if they don’t vote for the CVA then the two Park First entities, which were forced by the FCA to pay the £33m into the pot in the first place, would block the release of funds to a liquidator. Pull the other one Mr O’Connell. These entities did not donate that money out of the kindness of their hearts. They paid it because they knew the FCA allegation, that Park First was an unregulated collective investment scheme promoted in breach of FSMA regulations and therefore unlawful, was sound and likely to succeed if tested in court. These entities are very unlikely to want to anger both the FCA and investors by blocking any funds which have been deposited “for the benefit of investors”.  As much as Mr O’Connell would like investors to believe that the money deposited by his clients and their associated business entities is still theirs and they can decide how it is used, the reality is that it was a reluctant payment made because the potential repercussions of refusing to pay it would be much more severe.

Investors may wonder why there is such a rush by the Administrators to push this CVA proposal through when, as the comical figure in the Pension Life video says, “I haven’t yet finished my analysis of how the money has been spent so I can’t give any information out on it”. Surely an Administrator ought to complete his analysis BEFORE forcing investors to commit to a course of action which writes off that money !

This CVA is a deliberate rush-job because the longer this goes on the more likely it is that information will leak out about the conduct of the directors and the whereabouts of the missing money. That would really upset the company directors who want an end to any chance of an investigation and who appointed Mr O’Connell and his colleagues to protect their interests.

In an ideal world investors would take control of these companies, negotiate the release of the money from the FCA, commission their own in-depth investigation using those funds and push for a prosecution of any offenders and culpable third parties with a view to recovering funds from them. Unfortunately we are not in an ideal world. These things take time to organise and there is no time. So, investors are faced with a choice between supporting a biased and punitive CVA proposal which is highly protective of the company directors, or supporting a liquidation, the likely purpose of which is to sell assets, investigate the conduct of directors and trace the missing money with the aim of recovering any unlawful or excessive payments, and potentially taking action against culpable third parties. On both sides of the equation there are large firms which will charge substantial fees. It is regrettable but that will be the same whatever the outcome.

There has still not been one word from the Administrator about where the £115m has gone and why he has stated in his report that he regards this money as “unrecoverable”.  In order to take that view he must know where it went and why it is unrecoverable.  That is an incredible amount of money to just misplace.

As we have said before, if it were our money we would not let the company directors get away with misappropriating our investment funds and not giving any explanation for it. We would not support this CVA proposal. If it is a straight choice between CVA or liquidation, which it appears to be, we would be voting for liquidation.

If the latest update from Finnbar O’Connell has made you realise that you were misled by his earlier reports and you would now like to support a liquidation please read our previous article here where you will find the necessary forms.

We will delve into this a bit more tomorrow when we have a special report just for any children out there. Yes children, tomorrow is Cartoon Day where we will be reviewing Bugs Bunny, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and the Pension-Life CVA Support video….. but remember, don’t take these cartoons seriously. They’re not real, just enjoyable fantasies.

As the Park First hearing approaches we have received a request from Mr Kevin Cresswell who made a large investment with Park First. He has met the people who control Park First and it is fair to say that he was not impressed by them or with their failure to answer his questions.

Mr Cresswell is determined to recover his money and has appointed Quantuma to represent him at the hearing on the 25^th November. He has asked us to publish his details because he would like others to join him and support a liquidation. He has invested more than £500,000.

We have been made aware of some incorrect comments regarding the two competing proposals. As far as we are aware the FCA have confirmed that the £33m held in escrow will not be affected by either proposal. The funds are protected by the FCA and they will make the decision on how those funds will be used.

Investors should read this update from the FCA which contains this sentence “The FCA is asking the Court to order the Defendants to pay a just sum to the FCA to then distribute among the investors who have suffered loss as a result of the Defendants’ alleged contraventions“.  It does not say “but only if investors vote for a CVA“.  That is a rumour spread by those who are trying to frighten investors into supporting the CVA.  The fact that they have to resort to telling lies should be a warning sign to investors of what they can expect in the future.  It seems to us that the FCA statement is very clear.  They are seeking compensation for investors irrespective of the outcome of the hearing.

From: KEVIN CRESSWELL
Sent: 15 November 2019 10:51
To: Mark Hendrick <Mark.Hendrick@quantuma.com>
Subject: Park First

Dear Mark

Further to our recent communication in relation to this matter I write to confirm that I am happy for you to share this email with investors as a guidance note on how I am intending to vote at the meeting on the 25^th November.

In order to assist you, I attach a copy of my proof of debt and proxy (completed) and should investors so desire, I would invite them to vote in the same manner.

As a further point of note, I attach the guidance note that leads me to vote in the manner that I do

I look forward to speaking with you again soon

Thanks

Kevin Cresswell

From: Mark Hendrick
Sent: 15 November 2019 11:39
To: Mark Hendrick <Mark.Hendrick@quantuma.com>
Subject: FW: Park First

Dear Investor

I write further to your recent communication and can confirm that I am representing Mr Cresswell (and others) who has asked me to respond to you all to advise of his intentions regarding the meeting of creditors on the 25^th November 2019.

Attached you will find a copy of a guidance note which highlights why my clients are intending to reject the Administrators’ proposals.

Further, attached is a copy of Mr Creswell’s form of Proof Of Debt and Proxy, which he is lodging in respect of the meeting of creditors itself. I will be in attendance at the meeting on his behalf and Mr Cresswell invites you to vote in the same manner that he does, should you so desire.

If your intention is to reject the administrators’ proposals in order to seek that the companies go into liquidation with both Carl Jackson of this firm and Ben Barrett of Dow Schofield Watts appointed to act as joint liquidators I would be happy to act as your proxy holder at the meeting on the 25^th November (free of charge)

In order to do so, I will need you to send to me your completed forms of proof of debt and proxy, with myself as the named proxy holder, and completed in the same way that Mr Cresswell has done.

Should you wish to accept the administrators’ proposals, I would also be happy to act as your proxy holder and convey that vote at the meeting.

In order to assist, I have attached copies of all forms of proxy for the respective companies in Administration and where you will hold a claim.

I look forward to hearing from you

Mark

Mark Hendrick
Director of Creditor Services
Quantuma LLP

Direct:  +44 (0)203 8566736

Office:  +44 (0)203 8566720

Mobile: +44 (0)7818 354802

Please see the links below for the documents referred to in the above.

Quantuma_K Cresswell POD & Proxy

Quantuma_Investor Guidance on Liquidation_Nov 2019

Quantuma_Freeholds Proxy

Quantuma Rentals Proxy

Quantuma Glasgow Proxy

To view our previous article on Park First please click here.

To view our more recent article on Park First please click here.

Investors in the five UK oil companies run by Martin Finch have received an email outlining a new proposal which we refer to as the Martin Finch Scam Swap.

In a nutshell, he is advising investors to accept a swap from one scam to another. In proposing this arrangement to investors he breaches a lot of the fiduciary duties of a company director but that has never worried him.

We’ve copied his email to the Kansas B2 Project investors below and have added our comments to clarify the position for investors. As usual, we issue the standard warning which is that when a scam has been exposed it is not wise for investors to follow the advice of one of the people involved in implementing it.

Once again, the Martin Finch Scam Swap proposal involves Scuba Steve Upton. We give a link to a previous article on a similar proposal which was made to Phenco investors at the end of this article. This was the one where emails were sent out from a Martin Finch email address and were written as if they were from Martin Finch and were signed with the name of Martin Finch, but which Scuba Steve Upton later claimed were written by him. It was clearly a lie to protect Martin Finch from censure for their plot to unlawfully disperse the assets of Phenco Ltd to Scuba Steve. It makes it very hard for anyone to believe or trust Scuba Steve Upton. It is not reassuring when the man leading the latest Martin Finch Scam Swap has already been exposed as a liar.

Before we get into the email we ought to mention one very important thing. Kansas B2 Project Ltd will be dissolved on 1^st December unless action is taken to prevent it. This would result in the total loss of investment for shareholders.  

Martin Finch has not filed the annual accounts due 31st July 2019 for the company nor has he filed the annual Confirmation Statement. Companies House began the process of dissolving the company on 1^st October and this will complete on 1^st December.

We are surprised that Martin Finch found the time to email investors about the Martin Finch Scam Swap and did not mention the imminent closure of the company.  

We are taking steps to prevent the dissolution of Kansas B2 Project Ltd to protect the interests of investors. The status of the company can be viewed on this link.

Below is the Martin Finch Scam Swap email. Investors in his other companies have a slightly different version of the email but the message is the same. Our comments are in blue italics.

From: Kansas B2 Administrator <admin@kansasb2.co.uk>

Subject: FW: Re: Kansas Oil lease and Royalty Payments

Date: 13 November 2019 at 15:20:50 GMT

To: Kansas B2 Administrator <admin@kansasb2.co.uk>

Dear Shareholder,

Re: Kansas Oil lease and Royalty Payments

I trust you are well.

I apologise for the absence of late, I have been working closely with a shareholder to try to bring a resolve to our payment conundrum across the multiple companies for which I am the managing director.

Too busy to file accounts and Confirmation Statement. Too busy to respond to Companies House warning letters that the company will be dissolved on 1^st December 2019 if action is not taken to meet the filing requirements ?

As some of you will be aware, one of my companies, PhenCo Limited, has been wound-up by the courts because it was unable to make the payments. This had been brought about by a shareholder taking action against the company. This included court fees and an interest on the delayed payment which the UK company would not have as it is solely there for the purposes of being a conduit to making the royalty payments only. The UK company does not make a profit, whatever it receives it pays back out to shareholders. Hence, the company was not able to make the payment and subsequently wound-up.

Here is a link to the PhenCo Corporate Prospectus. We do not see the words “Phenco Ltd is solely there for the purpose of being a conduit to making the royalty payments only”. This looks very much like a brochure encouraging investment into an oil development company and not for an empty shell. The statement from Martin Finch makes it sound as if Phenco was purely an investment fund, in which case it should have been FCA-regulated.

Furthermore, we would draw Mr Finch’s attention to the Subscription Agreement in which the Business of the company is very clearly defined.  It states:

“Business means the principal activity of the Issuer [Phenco Ltd], being the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas wells in Oklahoma, USA”.  It is very clear to us what shareholders believed the business of the company to be when they invested. Now that Martin Finch has confirmed that the company was nothing more than a conduit for making royalty payments we can add fraudulent misrepresentation to the list of his crimes. Osage 1 Ltd, Sooner Energy SPV-1 Ltd, Kansas B2 Project Ltd and Kansas MB Project Ltd contained the same description of their Business too (except in the case of the two Kansas companies the word ‘Oklahoma’ was replaced by ‘Kansas’).  

What that means for the PhenCo Limited shareholders, is that the company goes into the control of liquidators.

Correct.

Luckily for those shareholders, the asset is in the name of the corresponding US entity and they haven’t lost their project, just the means to get paid their royalty.

Incorrect. The investors haven’t lost the means to get paid their royalty. In fact, the opposite is true. Phenco is still entitled to those payments and they will now be made into the liquidator’s Phenco account. The fact that payments have not been made to shareholders for around 18 months will form part of the investigation undertaken by the liquidator. We have no doubt that the liquidator will want all payments, both current, future and back-dated payments, paid into its account. The liquidator will not make excuses like “I haven’t been able to get a payment platform”.  

The same is true of all the UK oil companies. A liquidation changes nothing. It just removes crooked directors and replaces them with a liquidator. The liquidator then conducts an investigation into the money trail and the conduct of the director (and the shadow directors). There will be no opaque “payment platform” which enables the payer of royalties to be hidden from shareholders. Investors in some types of scams are limited in their recovery options unless someone they trust can gain access to the company accounts. In many cases that has to be a liquidator.   

So, why is all of this relevant to you as a shareholder in a separate project?

Well, since SoS (Safe or Scam) first came onto the scene in 2018 and started writing damning blogs on their website, the reputation of each of the companies and myself have been tarnished beyond repair, there will be no chance of opening any kind of account or payment platform to make any future payments to shareholders. This has shown that the UK companies now to be redundant and costly.

Safe Or Scam was asked to investigate these scams by investors because their payments had already stopped. All of the UK companies are neither redundant nor costly. They own contracts which should have generated, and should still be generating, royalties. Therefore they are not redundant. They are also not costly because the accounts filed by all the companies show that absolutely nothing changes each year. The costs are negligible because there are no employees, no office rent, no stationery costs etc.  The costs are virtually non-existent.

According to the filed accounts of all the companies, Martin Finch isn’t paid a penny. He has been working for free for years in every company. Of course, that is absolutely not the true picture. He has not been working for free. He has been paid but it has just been hidden from shareholders. It has just been creamed off the top, probably in the USA, so that it won’t show up to the company shareholders.  

As previously mentioned, the oil project and asset in the US remains unaffected by the outcome of the UK entity. Since the US asset still remains protected, the problem lays with me being able to conduct business and make any future payments on the UK side.

Martin Finch is taking investors for fools. Royalties are being generated and paid by an unknown entity. Martin Finch is admitting this. He has also previously stated that the UK oil companies do not have bank accounts. We think differently. It would be easy for Martin Finch to ask the unknown entity to pay the shareholders direct. The problem for him is that he can’t do that because then the shareholders would see where the money was coming from and he really doesn’t want shareholders to see that.

This leads me onto what the future holds and the necessary steps to make this work:

I have been liaising with a shareholder who has a large stake in two of the companies, Mr. Steve Upton, who has very kindly taken it upon himself to pick up the torch and is organising a new company to look after the oil lease investors in going forward.

Mr. Upton will be visiting the lease and Mr. Rick Coody in the very near future in order to put together a plan of action, this will include finishing the project and organising investor royalty payments through a new UK limited company.

Mr. Upton is one of you, an investor in oil leases in both Kansas and Oklahoma and wishes to see it completed as it should have been, which includes looking after all of the investors. From what I understand, there will be regular updates and royalties via a new platform. Mr. Upton has requested that I contact you and provide his contact email address so that all can be explained in further detail, and to answer any questions you may have.

I must ask that you give Mr. Upton your time and support, his willingness to take on the entire project and its investors is no small task. This will be a fresh start with a new manager at the helm and one with a vested interest to make this work.

Mr. Upton’s contact email address: scubasteveupton@hotmail.co.uk

As Mr. Upton will be the sole director of the new company, he will need your correspondence and payment details in order make the transition as swift and seamless as possible.

In due course you will be receiving information from Mr. Upton on how the transfer to the new company would work.

We’ve let people read all those paragraphs together before commenting because this is a critical situation. This is the crux of the Martin Finch Scam Swap.

Firstly, there is no need for any of these UK oil companies to change anything. According to Martin Finch they all own contracts which generate revenues. He keeps saying that the problem is that he has no way to pay the royalties. So, the solution is for Scuba Steve to take the royalty payments (existing and the back-dated ones) into his new company bank account. He can then pay them out for Martin Finch. Problem solved. That’s all it takes. Alternatively, put the companies into liquidation. Let the liquidator investigate and then ALL INVESTORS WHO WANT TO TAKE OVER THE LEASES CAN DO SO. WHY IS THIS OFFER ONLY OPEN TO SCUBA STEVE ? The liquidator will give investors the option to take over the leases.

Then we move on to the critical statement “Mr Upton will be the sole director of the new company”. The Great Martin Finch Scam Swap.

The proposal is that all the business of each oil company, i.e all the contracts that they own, are switched into a new company. This will allow Martin Finch to close down the crooked companies without any investigation into where the money went. It’s a very crude attempt to slip away with the money.

Surely a much better and completely honest proposal would be for Martin Finch to resign from each oil company and be replaced by a group of existing investors. Scuba Steve can still have his new company which could be used solely to distribute royalty payments.  

The Great Martin Finch Scam Swap has only one aim. That is to come up with a structure that enables Martin Finch to avoid an investigation into his network of scam companies.

Recent evidence from court hearings has disclosed that 81% of money from one of the oil companies was never sent to the USA. We expect investigations into each of the UK oil companies will reveal the misappropriation of millions of pounds of investor money. Investors need to protect their right to recover that money and should not accept the transfer of any company assets to a new company.

Finally, let’s take a look at the Scuba Steve and Martin Finch relationship. Martin Finch claims Scuba Steve “is one of you, an investor in oil leases in both Kansas and Oklahoma”. Is he really ?

Well, there are two Kansas oil companies. He’s not an investor in Kansas B2 Project Ltd according to the filings at Companies House, but he is listed as an investor in the second company, Kansas MB Project Ltd.

The problem we have with the Kansas MB Project shareholdings in relation to Scuba Steve Upton is the filings at Companies House. They don’t support the claim that he is a shareholder.  The filings made by Martin Finch show the following:

In March 2016 there were 2,764,100 shares of £1 each. Scuba Steve Upton was not a shareholder;

In February 2017 the same – 2,764,100 shares of £1 each. Scuba Steve Upton was not a shareholder;

In Nov 2018 the same – 2,764,100 shares of £1 each. This was a Statement of Capital.  The Statement of Capital does not have to list the shareholders and it did not.  It did however confirm that the number of shares had not changed.

Feb 2019 – still 2,764,100 shares of £1 each, but Scuba Steve is now shown as owning 157,000 shares. That’s rather odd. He appears to have come to the party very, very late. In fact, several years after other investors. It is so late that it may have been after all these damaging Safe Or Scam blogs Martin Finch refers to. It may even have been after the Kansas MB royalties had stopped being paid. He must have been a fool to invest after reading those things. Why would anyone pay £157,000 under those circumstances ? Well, perhaps he didn’t.

We totalled up the individual shareholdings of the shareholders registered with Companies House and we discovered that they total 2,915,000. That’s 151,000 more than the number of shares that actually exist. We think the participants in the Great Martin Finch Scam Swap have some questions to answer. The good news is that Martin Finch can correct this if it is an error. He can file a new Confirmation Statement and the accounts at the same time.  The accounts are due for filing before 30th November 2019.   

Investors cannot trust this pair. Something stinks in Kansas and it’s not Dorothy’s feet…..

Kind Regards & Best Wishes,

 Mr. Martin Finch

Managing Director

Or perhaps it’s Scuba Steve pretending to be Martin Finch.

One final very interesting point. At the end of September 2019 Martin Finch submitted a Form RP02A to Companies House. This form is used when a director wishes to correct an error. The completed form is not available for public viewing. The error that seemed to concern Martin Finch so much was in the Incorporation Document which was filed when the company was formed on 15^th October 2014. That was five years ago.

Martin Finch changed his personal “Service Address” to that of the company’s registered office. Companies House only shows the amended Incorporation Document and not the original. They will not provide the original document. Why would anyone check back through all the company filings and make a change to a document which is five years old ?

We think it might be because he put an address in the document which would allow him to be traced and now that he is in serious trouble he is covering his tracks.

Sorry Martin.  If only it was that easy.  We downloaded the original Incorporation Documents for all your companies when we first started looking into them.  You did put a residential address down and we were quite surprised by it. 

Martin Finch still has the opportunity to come clean, but that opportunity won’t be available for much longer.     

To view the previous article on Martin Finch and the oil scams please click here.

Carlauren Group and John Joannis have written to Carlauren investors attempting to persuade them to support the appointment of their preferred administrator.  As usual, everything that comes out from Carlauren Group and John Joannis should be treated with suspicion.  Everything they write is an attempt to confuse investors and tie them up in knots (hence the image above). They will do anything to avoid an investigation into the company’s affairs.

This latest attempt should set alarm bells ringing for investors.  Safe Or Scam gets a mention in the email from Mr Joannis.

We’ve copied the email below in full.  We have not corrected any of the spelling mistakes so that investors can view the entire email and our response.  Our response is in blue italics.

From: John Joannis <j.joannis@casarian.com>

Date: 12 November 2019 at 19:07

To: John Joannis <j.joannis@casarian.com>

Subject: Carlauren Updates

Without Prejudice

Mr Joannis has used the words ‘Without Prejudice’ at the beginning of his email because this term has legal implications. The term “Without Prejudice” means that his email cannot be tendered as evidence in court. It allows him to make false statements to investors safe in the knowledge that this email cannot be used in court if he fails to deliver on his promises.

Dear Studio Owner,

Im writing this letter by way of an update since you were last contacted by Carlauren and its associated companies. As you know, I have been speaking too many investors with a view to a rescue plan which we are in the process of putting together. This plan would see an approximate 20% cash return on what you have paid for your studio along with a 5 year plan based on the continued refurbishment of non completed properties and a trading future which would be in line with Carlauren’s initial plans .

“an approximate 20% cash return”. The investors who have contacted us have said Mr Joannis has offered them less than 20%.

“A 5 year plan based on the continued refurbishment of non-completed properties”. This is very dangerous for investors. Mr Joannis has given no details of what investors can expect as a deal for accepting less than 20% of the price they paid. This appears to be an attempt to take control of investor properties so that investors cannot prosecute Carlauren Group, Mr Murray, Mr Jamieson and others for the misappropriation of funds.

It is not worth us commenting on the phrase “a trading future in line with Carlauren’s initial plans”. Those trading plans were pure fantasy at the start and they’re fantasy now.  Carlauren has 25 sites and not one of them is operating as a care home.

The time involved in presenting a proper plan you all will not be in place before the hearing listed on the 26th November 2019. The reason for writing you this urgent letter is as follows.

That’s just not acceptable. It is fair to accept that DETAILED plans might take some time to put together, but to just say investors will get approximately 20% and then say nothing else about what their future entitlements might be is a deliberate attempt to make it look like there is a plan when there is not. Mr Joannis is just trying to protect his friend, Sean Murray,  from prosecution. We have a note on file to check the transactions between Carlauren Group companies and Mr Joannis.  

In the last week , I have been made aware of a BBC interview statement from Phillip Duffy ( a proposed joint partner with Quantuma) the interview was in regards to his successful court appointment around Gavin Woodhouse company NPD, I have noted 2 alarming points around his appointment which was deemed to be for the interests of investors as a whole.

His comment to the BBC which was released on the 9th November ( 3 days ago) says the following

“ Administrator Phil Duffy told the BBC that investors’ interests in the hotels were being set aside by a judge in order to market the hotels.  They are inviting bids from potential buyers, to be received by 15 November.  Any money raised from the sales will be distributed among investors according to how much they had invested.”

Based on the above, if Quantuma and Phil Duffy are to win their application on our properties, I and all of you will loose any rights to the actual unit we purchased, they will then fire sale for the best offer on a 6 day auction , how can this possibly be in our best interest. I would also like to advise you that the fee’s in question amount to extortionate hourly costs. We affectingly are allowing them to run our investments and get paid first leaving whatever is left to the owner of a studio.

We haven’t seen the BBC comment, but if it is true then Mr Duffy is talking about a scam which is almost identical to Carlauren Group. We wouldn’t disagree that something similar might happen with Carlauren Group properties. That might actually be in investors’ best interests. Here’s why –

Let’s say a hotel is taken over by an administrator acting IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF INVESTORS. The hotel has 50 rooms owned by 50 different investors spread around Europe, the Middle East and the Far East. Let’s forget about an outside buyer coming in for the moment. Let’s say that 45 of the investors decide they want to take over the hotel. Investors can do that. 3 investors don’t want to be a part of it so they would take a fair settlement payment. 2 investors have not responded. The takeover cannot go ahead because 2 people own rooms and are not part of the deal. For the 48 to be able to move forward they have to ask the court to “set aside” all the leases so that the takeover can go ahead. It does not mean that the 2 investors get nothing. It just means that those 2 investors, if they ever make contact in the future, cannot undo the takeover. The court will see to it that they are treated fairly if they ever come forward.

Investors need that to happen anyway even if an outside buyer wants to buy the hotel. A buyer is not going to buy a hotel where there are 2 rooms owned by people who have not come forward. If the buyer WAS prepared to take the risk he would reduce the price to the other 48 owners to cover any potential claims from the 2 missing investors. At some point it is likely that every investor is going to have to agree to give up their lease in order to get the best possible price. The important point here is that investors have no choice.  They have been advised by their administrator to give up the leases to get the best possible price for their rooms.  Under the Joannis proposal investors are voluntarily giving up their leases in order to go into a business arrangement with him and the people responsible for the losses.  In court that looks entirely different and may affect the investors’ right to prosecute the guilty parties.  Mr Joannis’ deal is far worse for investors. 

I have been working closely with Sean Murray and also talking to Craig Povey of CVR Global LLP, an international from of restructuring specialists ( who would with the support of creditors, would be in a position to be appointed Administrators) It is clearly apparent that their is a rescue plan that is far more advantageous that what looks like is going to happen if Carl Jackson and Philip Duffy are appointed.

I would urge investors to read the articles on our blog page which relate to Park First. What Mr Joannis is proposing is that investors choose to support an administrator appointed by Sean Murray. Park First has an administrator appointed by the directors. That company has also been described as a rescue specialist. When an administrator is appointed by directors it will promote solutions that protect the interests of those directors.  Its recommendation to investors in the Park First case was as follows:

1. That investors write off the missing money (in the case of Park First it was £115m);
2. That investors accept that there will be no investigation into the conduct of the directors;
3. That investors allow the existing directors to continue to run the business.

 Any investor who supports an administrator appointed by Sean Murray can expect to see the missing money written off, no investigation and Sean Murray left in control. That is the worst possible outcome for investors.

I have also attached a statement from Carl Jackson on his 2018 accounts filed for Quantuma , you will see that he makes point about a “new GDPR department “ If the court agree that he was wrongly appointed of which seems very apparent from the evidence, he may have broken every rule in the book on GDPR which is why I believe he is aggressively trying to get his appointment back dated by the court . If he is not successful, we are able to seek damages from his firm based on all the speculative information he has circulated to us and by default to the media via Safe or Scam, using our private email addresses. This has without question ruined the Carlauren brand and seen the turnover plummet based on staff leaving, also any fees run up to date by them would not be claimable.

We will see what happens in court. I don’t think Safe Or Scam can be blamed for ruining the Carlauren brand. Murray killed it stone dead by misappropriating all the money.  The Group was broke and had stopped paying rentals many months before we appeared on the scene.  Carlauren Group was supposed to be a care home business but it only had one care home in operation and that was closed down because it was losing money.  Murray and Jamieson have a lot to answer for.  We would refer Mr Joannis to a relatively well known saying –  “You can’t polish a t**d”.  We would suggest that Mr Joannis puts his polish away. 

Mr Joannis was an investor in Carlauren but is now an employee.  Now that Mr Joannis is at the heart of the scam why hasn’t he come out and told investors where the money went ? Any person who is genuinely on the side of investors would be able to tell them exactly where the money went.

I have attached a vote document in favour of appointing Craig Povey over Carl Jackson , the net effect is the same, however I do believe as an investor and also someone who has personally called over 150 investors that this would be a far better appointment over Jackson and Duffy should the court decide on the 26th November. If you are in agreement with me, please fill out the attached document, scan and email back to me. I will then ensure that the document is submitted to the court along with my wildness statement.

Mr Joannis hasn’t called 150 investors. We know a hell of a lot of them and they haven’t been called. There is no doubt that the appointment of Craig Povey would be a much better appointment for Sean Murray and John Joannis. It would be a very bad appointment for every other investor.

I believe in light of the pending issues which will effect us all the appointment of Craig Povey over Carl Jackson would be a more viable option, the net effect is the same, however I do believe as an investor and also someone who has personally called over 150 investors that this would be a far better appointment over Jackson and Duffy should the court decide on the 26th November.

“The net effect is the same”. Oh no Mr Joannis, the net effect is most definitely not the same. We are certain that neither Mr Jackson nor Mr Duffy will allow the missing money to be written off. Neither will they allow the directors of Carlauren Group to avoid investigation and/or prosecution. They certainly will not allow the existing directors to remain in control.

It is important that you all understand that if Carl Jackson and Phillip Duffy are appointed that we will have no control anymore and what they decide will happen as legally appointed administrators, as a result , I have attached a simple document that needs to be signed and dated in order that I may lodge the results with the court on your behalf.

Investors would be foolish to sign the document. They would be in a far worse position. Mr Murray and Carlauren Group can have their say in court. Sean Murray is trying very hard to stop an investigation into where the money has gone.

Kind Regards

N.B . On a private note, I apologies if I have not had the chance to call you all personally as it has taken longer than I thought calling personally, I will endeavour to continue to contacting those who I have not spoken to

Mr Joannis is phoning people because he doesn’t want to put anything in writing. They don’t have any money left and they don’t have any investment in place to deliver on their promises. Mr Joannis thinks investors are fools.

To view the previous article on Carlauren Group and John Joannis please click here.

Recover Funds UK is a scam. A day after we published an article warning that cooperateinsurance.com is a scam we began receiving emails about Recover Funds UK. The two organisations are linked. They are run by the same people.

Yesterdays’ article began with this paragraph “cooperateinsurance.com is a scam linked to Market Effects, Brokers Community and Traders Insurance Bureau. Mark Edward (not his real name) is working his socks off to find as many ways as he can to scam investors. All four of the organisations mentioned above involve the same team of scammers”.

Well now we can add a fifth organisation, Recover Funds, full name Recover Funds UK, to that group of four. This is a concerted effort by very determined scammers to take more money from the victims of binary option and cryptocurrency scams. These five organisations are all part of the same complex scam. How do we know ?

1. They’ve all come along at the same time.
2. They are targeted at the same groups of investors.
3. The emails they send out and the websites they’ve produced refer to the other parties involved in the scam.
4. All the domain names used by the scammers have been bought very recently.
5. The new websites contain the same wording. Somebody has been lazy.
6. The logos are almost identical.

Sometimes the reference to their other scam partners may be deliberate and sometimes it may be a mistake. Here is a mistake from the cooperateinsurance.com website.

Uncover the Truth

Recover Funds has an intelligence gathering team that tracks down underground information about unregulated binary options companies.

Oops. The person who wrote the text forgot which website and organisation he was supposed to be writing about. Nowhere else on the website does cooperateinsurance.com mention an organisation called Recover Funds so it is very odd that this phrase suddenly appears. Recover Funds UK is a scam.

Here’s a list of things that the cooperateinsurance.com website claims it can do for investors.

We offer our clients the following services:

✓ Asset recovery
✓ Risk management
✓ Litigation advisory
✓ Crisis management
✓ Claims assessment

Here’s a list of things that the Recover Funds UK website claims it can do for investors.

Recover Funds UK provides its clients with the following services:

✓ Asset recovery
✓ Risk management
✓ Litigation advisory
✓ Crisis management
✓ Claims assessment

Lazy devils. They can’t even be bothered to shuffle the list around. It’s a straight copy.

The final nail in the coffin is that the logos for both companies are exactly the same. The logos are an image of a handshake with the same vertical bar. The only thing they’ve bothered to change is the wording. One says “Recover Funds” and the other says “Co-operate Insurance”.

So let’s look at what Recover Funds UK is sending out. Here is the text of two emails received by investors.

Hello.

We came up with a new service to specifically help medium to big size investors.

If you believe you have been scammed by an online trading company and your losses surpass $5,000, you’re 1000% eligible for a full refund.

This course may take up to 120 days.  We wish you a lovely week,

Sincerely,

Recover Funds UK

team@recoverfunds.co.uk

and it was closely followed by this one.

Dear Investor,
 
Your account under the Trader ID #XXXXXX is qualified for a full investment recovery.

Please add us as a contact on your E-Mail account It’s highly important that you will receive all of our E-mails to your inbox.

Take me to recovery page

The process takes 60 seconds, And you will learn how to save yourself from bad investments as well.

Thanks,

Jeff Mcadoo | Chief of Compliance

Email: jeff.mc@recoverfunds.co.uk

Phone: +442034555222

Wow…. “You’re 1000% eligible for a full refund”. 1000% – I assume that is ten times better than 100%. We’re not even going to bother to talk about Jeff Mcadoo because he’s using a false name.

A little bit of research reveals that the emails were sent from this company and address located in Bulgaria: PMC MEDIA LTD, Address: 1124 Sofia, Bulgaria, Sredets Region, Yavorov R.A., 3 Chavdar Voyvoda, ent.V, app.6

So.….Recover Funds UK emails come from Bulgaria.

The interesting thing is that the Recover Funds scam introduces a new element. Initially you might think this is a typical follow-on-fraud where they will claim to have recovered the money and will release it once the investor pays an admin fee or local taxes or a commission etc, but they’ve altered it by introducing a bizarre 120 day training course which claims to be able to help the investor recognise scams. However, the real twist comes once the investor clicks on the link take me to recovery page. I have to admit I thought I would be taken to a website which would talk about how I could recover funds. After all, that’s the name of the company and that’s the service they seem to be offering.

Sure, there are sections which explain how they are going to recover the funds (they’re not by the way – it’s just a pretence. Recover Funds UK is a scam). But the real aim of Recover Funds UK is to try to get more money from people in the form of a new investment. The website is a thinly disguised attempt to persuade the people who lost money in binary options and cryptocurrency scams to invest with Recover Funds in another trading scam focused on CFDs and Forex ! 

For example, here is the first part of the wording on their Disclaimer (or as they call it ‘Disclamer’):

INFORMATION ON THIS SITE:

‘Recover Funds’ sales video is fictitious and was produced to portray the potential of ‘Recover Funds’ 3rd party signals software. Actors have been used to present this opportunity and it should be viewed for entertainment purposes only. We do not guarantee income or success. All income results shown in the video and anywhere else on this website do not represent an indication of future success or earnings.

Information on ‘Recover Funds’ should not be seen as a recommendation to trade CFD and Forex. ‘Recover Funds’ provides you with links to free CFD and Forex trading software that enables you to receive free signals from 3rd parties……

And here is the text from the bottom of their Home Page:

HIGH RISK INVESTMENT WARNING: Trading CFDs and Cryptocurrencies is highly speculative, carries a level of risk and may not be suitable for all investors. You may lose all of your invested capital. You should not speculate with capital that you cannot afford to lose. Past performance is not indicative of future returns.

OUR COMMENT:  DO NOT BE TAKEN IN BY PROMISES OF FUNDS RECOVERY, CHARGEBACKS, INVESTIGATIONS ETC. RECOVER FUNDS UK IS A SCAM AND IS PART OF A NETWORK OF SCAMMERS. DO NOT GIVE THEM ANY OF YOUR PERSONAL ID OR BANKING DETAILS.

The “new service to specifically help medium to big size investors”, which they claim is a course which could take up to 120 days, will be them pretending to teach the victims how to successfully trade CFDs and Forex. Our experience of trading scams like this is that none of the trades are real. Investors can login to their own personal accounts and view the trades which have allegedly been done on their account, but they are really watching a piece of software designed to show fake trades. The truth is that their money was stolen the moment they paid it over and none of those trades ever took place. The account will show a steadily rising profit in order to encourage the investor to invest more money. The “Trader” will regularly call the investor to tell them to put more money in because then the profits will be even greater. Eventually the company will disappear along with all the cash. This has happened hundreds of times to many thousands of investors.

DO NOT BE TEMPTED TO ENGAGE WITH RECOVER FUNDS. RECOVER FUNDS UK IS A SCAM.

To view our previous article on this scam network please click here.

cooperateinsurance.com is a scam linked to Market Effects, Brokers Community and Traders Insurance Bureau. Mark Edward (not his real name) is working his socks off to find as many ways as he can to scam investors. All four of the organisations mentioned above involve the same team of scammers.

Mark Edward is so desperate to get money from investors that he is hitting them from all sides with all kinds of weird and wonderful stories. He is sending out so many emails and whatsapp messages to investors that it has become quite confusing. In the space of one week he has told investors that they are dealing with Market Effects which is working with Brokers Community alongside Traders Insurance Bureau which is collaborating with Co-operate Insurance. The truth is that this is all one big scam aimed at binary option victims.  If investors don’t buy his first story about how they will recover all their money it’s not a problem because he has other stories he can fall back on.  Each one has a different way of conning investors into thinking he can recover their money.

A couple of days ago he was telling investors that Market Effects was working with Brokers Community and they would pay back 100% of the investment + 80% of the profits (the profits never existed – it was a scam). All the investor had to do was pay money to a bitcoin dealer to buy bitcoins which could be used to pay Brokers Community. As we described in our earlier article this is a classic money-laundering operation. Bitcoins are untraceable so once an investor transfers the bitcoins to the scammer they will never see Mark Edward or their money again.

Two days later he is sending out this email below. It is basically the same as his other emails except this time instead of Brokers Community paying the investor it is Traders Insurance Bureau which is allegedly going to pay the investor. He advises people to start the withdrawal process by visiting https://cooperateinsurance.com . Here is his email to investors:

This message is to serve as a confirmation of your investment with [Name of Binary Option Scam].

Traders Insurance coverage in conjunction with Traders Insurance Bureau have registered against losing your investment with the [Name of Binary Option Scam] trading platform. International Traders Policy registered the fact that you have lost your investment with [Name of Binary Option Scam].

 Your policy registered number is XXXXXXXXX.

 This policy has been in full effect since 18.02.2014 with no lapse in coverage and a high level of recovering success.

 In conclusion, Traders Insurance Bureau must pay the insurance coverage to you immediately, but we need your confirmation. You will withdraw your 100% initial investment plus 50-85% of the estimated profits.

To start the withdrawal process you need to visit our website https://cooperateinsurance.com/

Or contact us +442038078218

We pointed out in our article on Market Effects that the domain name of www.marketeffects.co which was used for the email address and the website was only registered in February 2019. That made us wonder when the domain name for the cooperateinsurance.com was registered.

The cooperateinsurance.com website says “We have already recovered millions of dollars in stolen assets and fraudulent online deposits”. That is very impressive for a company that has only been in existence for 37 days. Its domain name was registered on 2^nd October 2019. Cooperateinsurance.com is a scam.

The testimonials on the website are fake. The images of the people who allegedly give the testimonials are stock images. For example, Steve Bradley who it is claimed is a Swissport employee and who really values the work done by Co-operate Insurance, is also Adam Smith, a teacher, who gives a testimonial on the Kalmar Montage website about what a great job they did fixing his roof. His image is also on the “Perth Chihuahua Rescue” website.

Another testimonial on the cooperateinsurance.com website is given by Jesse Rowling who is allegedly the Managing Director of THF Global Inv. But this is also the face of Bob Herman who claims to be a Coach and Mentor for Personal Health. It is also the face of Mag Richards who gives a testimonial for a company called “Pest Busters”. The only pest we would like busted is Mark Edward.

Amazingly, this guys face appears again on……..the “Perth Chihuahua Rescue” website. My God, how many chihuahuas are being badly treated in Perth ? This is an international chihuahua scandal !

Cooperateinsurance.com is a scam. The company website lists its four values. Apparently they are:

Honesty / Professionalism / Justice / Perseverance.

Under the Honesty section the company states “I work for people like you, folks, who are tired of the deceptive business practices pervasive in the retail mutual fund industry, and who are tired of suffering greater risks, higher fees and lower returns than they should”.

Err…… first of all this is written in the singuar which suggests that cooperateinsurance.com is just one person. Secondly, the whole basis for the website is that it claims to be all about “recovering money from binary options, forex and cryptocurrency scams“. What the hell has that got to do with “the retail mutual fund industry” ? These guys have just copied and pasted any text they could find from any website. It is very amateurish.

Under the Professionalism section the company states “I am the owner of the largest independent planning firm in the nation, managing more than $15 billion for more than 28,000 clients both online and via 41 offices across the country”.

Err…… really ? What happened to the honesty part of their values. They’re telling some very big lies.

Of course, if anyone thinks the cooperateinsurance.com website statements are true and that the owner of cooperateinsurance.com really does manage more than $15 billion for more than 28,000 clients and has 41 offices, and that despite running such a huge business this person has so much free time that he decided 37 days ago he would rather trick scam victims into changing their cash into bitcoins to send to him, and that he has already recovered millions of dollars for investors in just 37 days…… then that person should probably consider writing to the Australian Prime Minister to draw his attention to the great Perth chihuahua scandal.

If anyone is foolish enough to believe the Market Effects, Brokers Community, Traders Insurance Bureau and cooperateinsurance.com scam after what we have written here, they should pack their bags and get on a plane because the Perth chihuahuas need their help !

To view our previous article on Mark Edward and his portfolio of follow-on-frauds please click here.

Further to our recent article on Van Gossum Consult and St Johns Asset Management we are pleased to announce the closure of Crest Security Contracts Ltd. This closure was enforced on the company by one of our clients.  Van Gossum Consult and St Johns Asset Management were frauds which raised substantial sums of investment from the general public.

Crest Security Contracts was a money mule company which collected money on behalf of the scams. Its role was to act as a cut-out between the investors and the scammers.  It was owned and operated by Soren Andreasen, a Danish citizen. We assisted one of our clients in a legal action against the company which has resulted in its closure and a referral to the UK’s Official Receiver for an investigation into the activities of the company and the conduct of its director.

Other money mule organisations involved in collecting money for Van Gossum Consult and St Johns Asset Management were:

Clearline Contracts Ltd of the UK owned and operated by Aren Pedersen (another Danish citizen); and

Parkwood Financial Ltd of the UK owned and operated by Tommy Bishop (aka ‘Dopey’ Tommy Bishop), a bodybuilder type with a brain the size of a walnut; and

Uldis Traders of the UK (any information on this group would be appreciated); and

VesMotion Pte Ltd of Singapore owned and operated by Karen Pang Peng Im, a Malaysian citizen; and

VipCo Holdings Pte of Singapore owned and operated by Sharifah Farhana Syed Sultanal Abidin, a Singaporean citizen and Hoang Dinh Phuong Thao, a Vietnamese citizen; and

ILF Services Pte of Singapore owned and operated by Ahuja Deepak Shankarial, an Indian citizen; and

East Lake Investments Ltd of Hong Kong owned and operated by an untraceable Chinese nominee director .

The enforced closure of Crest Security Contracts is just the first step in helping our clients recover their money. The arrest and conviction of the perpetrators is a secondary aim. We are confident we will catch these people because we are in possession of additional information which we have chosen not to publish at this time.

To view our previous article on the Van Gossum Consult and St Johns Asset Management frauds please click here.

To view a more recent article on the activities of these scammers please click here.