Safe or Scam

Avoid Investment Scams
Scam Alert

Fabcourt Developments Scam

Fabcourt Developments Scam 300 233 SOS Team

Fabcourt Developments Scam.

On 2nd March 2021, the FCA issued a warning [LINK] about a company called Fabcourt Developments.  The warning was to advise the public that the company may be providing regulated services or products without FCA authorisation.  The sale of loan notes and bonds to retail investors is a regulated activity which requires FCA permission in the UK.  Here is an excerpt from the FCA warning:

Unauthorised firm – Fabcourt Developments

Address: 2 Gladbeck Way, Enfield, London, UNITED KINGDOM, EN2 7JA

Telephone: 02087206798, 07933009233, 02034755312

Email: admin@fabcourt.co,

peter.redwood@fabcourt.co,

nicholas.thornton@fabcourt.co,

james.walker@fabcourt.co,

james.edwards@fabcourt.co

Website: https://fabcourt.co/

Be aware that some firms may give out other details or change their contact details over time to new email addresses, telephone numbers or physical addresses.

Our Scam Alert warning takes this a step further.  Investigations into the Texmoore scam [LINK]revealed that the people behind it also established the Fabcourt Developments scam and the Cavendish Incorporated Ltd / Cottesmore Associates Ltd scams [LINK].  Three supposedly separate investments operated by seemingly separate companies, but in reality three scams involving the same group of people.

Fortunately, the more scams a team of scammers establish the more mistakes they make which makes it possible to trace key players involved in the scams.  Some of those people think they have got away with it, but they haven’t.  We have traced the scams right back to the very first involvement and are confident we know most of the people involved.

The first scam was Texmoore Ltd which involved two other companies, Sentor Solutions Ltd and Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd.  We know that a number of investors reported Texmoore to Action Fraud and were informed that the case had been reviewed and it had been decided that no further action would be taken.  We sent our full report to City Of London Police who have now confirmed that enquiries are being made and the matter will be passed to a police force for further consideration.  We are expecting that police force to take the matter forward.

Whilst investigating the network of scam companies we came across one of the investors who was a director of a linked company.  It would appear that the scammers used his identity to establish a new scam company.  When an investor makes an investment and completes an Application Form they provide a lot of personal details – name, address, date of birth, phone number, email, bank account they’d like their payments made into etc.  Scammers use these to register the unsuspecting investor as a company director in a new scam company !  There is no doubt they had every intention of using that company in a new scam.  Companies House does not carry out any checks on company directors.

If you have made an investment with Fabcourt Developments please go to the Action Fraud website and make a report [LINK to Action Fraud website].  Mention in your report that you believe Fabcourt may be linked to a current investigation under the name of Texmoore.  That should enable Action Fraud to link the cases.

Fabcourt Developments scam.

 

Cottesmore Associates Update 1

Cottesmore Associates Update 1 300 224 SOS Team

Cottesmore Associates Update 1.

Five days ago on 6th May 2021 we published this article [LINK] on Cavendish Incorporated and Cottesmore Associates.  We had linked the people involved in both these companies to the Texmoore scam.  We had reported this matter to the Enforcement Department at the FCA and given them details of how the various parties were interlinked.

On 7th May 2021, the day after our article was published, Cottesmore Associates Ltd’s status as an Appointed Representative of Cavendish Incorporated Ltd was cancelled.  This means that Cottesmore Associates Ltd is no longer able to claim that it is FCA-regulated.  Here is a LINK to the FCA entry.

However, that has not stopped Cottesmore Associates having one last roll of the dice at stealing money from investors.  Despite not being FCA-regulated the company has been contacting people who had made investment enquiries giving them the ‘hurry up’ message.  Here is a copy of their email:

I hope you are well.
Regarding your previous online enquiry, today, we have attempted to contact you by telephone.
At a time most convenient to yourself, we look forward to further introducing a new opportunity – a Property Bond (Loan Note), that is:
Fully regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
Fully protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
Tax-exempt.
Offering fixed-rate annual returns, upwards, of 6%.
For further information, at no obligation, please suggest the best time/s to speak and we will be happy to help.
Kind regards,
Michael Stern

Senior Representative | 

Cottesmore Associates Ltd |

phone:  020 3970 9785

website:  www.cottesmoreassociates.com

email:  admin@cottesmoreassociates.com

address:  12 Chapel Road, Ilford, England, IG1 2AG

So what about the top company of the two – Cavendish Incorporated Ltd.  Well, that’s still FCA-regulated for the time being.  According to its last accounts it has been doing pretty well.  It was formed in July 2019 and in its first year of operation it is showing net assets of £2.2m (if you believe the filing at Companies House).  It’s amazing that just before these accounts were filed it was ‘all change’ at Cavendish Incorporated with directors leaving and new directors taking over.

If you think that’s impressive it is nothing compared to Ledbridge Consultants Ltd [LINK to Companies House].  This is the company which has registered a charge over Cavendish Incorporated Ltd.

We could go into a lot of detail about these two companies, but suffice to say that the links to the Texmoore scam are many. Ledbridge Consultants Ltd has had meteoric success (if you believe the filings at Companies House).  We don’t.

One of the reasons we don’t believe the account filings which show large surpluses of cash is because of our old friend Barbara Kahan.  Here we go again….. Barbara is 90 years old and has formed more than 30,000 companies. Go back through our blog articles and you’ll see she comes up a lot. The thing about Barbara is that the companies she forms are shell companies. They don’t trade. They are formed so that scammers can buy them ready-made with no questions asked.  Hence the term ‘shell company’.

Scammers bought Ledbridge Consultants Ltd from Barbara in September 2018.  Six days later they filed the company accounts.  Those accounts ran for the period from February 2017 – February 2018 i.e the period while Barbara was in control.  Barbara must have been on a hellish cocktail of drugs because despite NEVER doing any business with any of her shell companies, she turbo-charged her walking frame and, if the accounts are to be believed, was shooting around doing deals left, right and centre.  The accounts filed at Companies House show that in that period, whilst Barbara was in charge, the company reported it went from Nil assets to assets of £6.8m !  Barbara has to be up for Businesswoman of the Year.  It’s not the first time the Texmoore group of scammers have filed false accounts.

Tomorrow we will publish details of the third scam perpetrated by the same people.

Cottesmore Associates Update 1.

 

Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update

Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update 300 300 SOS Team

Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update

Further to our previous articles concerning the involvement of Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law in a number of companies in administration, including Northern Powerhouse Developments’ companies, the Carlauren group of companies, MBI and Qualiacare companies, and St Camillus companies, we have received information from a number of sources which has enabled us to write this Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law update.

See below for links to some of our previous articles.

Qualiacare Link 1

Alastair Dobbie LINK

St Camillus LINK 1

It is our contention that victims of the scams have been misled into supporting people who were involved in promoting and facilitating purchases of rooms in the scam companies.  Investors have not been informed of all the facts.

The investor co-ordinators in several of the above administrations have deliberately and intentionally suppressed important information and sought to deceive investors.  The aim has been to manipulate the insolvency processes for personal gain and to disadvantage some groups of creditors.  In suppressing this important information they have denied investors the opportunity to make informed choices and have misled them by omission.  We are grateful to the parties who have contacted us providing this new information.

We have still not received any answers to the questions we put to Shortlands Law and the investor co-ordinators in Qualiacare and St Camillus despite repeated requests.  We will not list those questions here because they appear in our previous articles.

Nico Bruyniks, the ‘Chairman of Co-Ordinators’ for Qualiacare has claimed that he will not ask Alastair Dobbie to answer the questions.  Mr Bruyniks is also a self-appointed investor co-ordinator for the NPD scam.  None of the other Qualiacare ‘investor co-ordinators’ have been willing to ask the questions either.  There is a cover-up of Alastair Dobbie’s and Roberto Pancaldi’s roles in the sale of the scams.

The investor co-ordinators know the truth, but do not want to tell anyone because it would expose the Alastair Dobbie-Roberto Pancaldi scheme as another money-making venture targeting victims of the scams in which they were involved.  Based on information received we now understand that investor co-ordinators have already agreed deals behind the scenes which have not been communicated to investors.

Tom McNerney, a new investor co-ordinator for a St Camillus company in administration (working alongside Kirill Sobolev), has also been contacted several times to ask the same questions of Alastair Dobbie.  He has not informed any of the investors of the serious questions we have raised.

There are two aspects of the involvement of Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law which raise concerns.  Those are:

1. The Solicitor’s Regulation Authority Code of Conduct for legal professionals; and

2. The standards required for persons elected to Creditors’ Committees for companies in administration.

We will only cover the SRA Code Of Conduct in this article and will be writing a separate article on Mr Dobbie’s and Mr Pancaldi’s involvement in company insolvencies later this week.  We will also list the investor co-ordinators and provide such information as we have on their backgrounds where it is considered relevant.  Any person who is a party to misleading investors can expect to be held to account.  We have given the investor co-ordinators enough opportunities to do right by investors and they have chosen to turn a blind eye and keep investors in the dark in respect of what has really been going on.

THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT FOR LAW FIRMS AND SOLICITORS

Here are a few excerpts from the SRA Code Of Conduct which applies to both Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law:

1.  “You do not abuse your position by taking unfair advantage of clients or others”. 

2. “You do not mislead, or attempt to mislead, your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client)”.  

3.  “In respect of any third party who introduces business to you or with whom you share your fees, you ensure that:

>> a) clients are informed of any financial or other interest which you or your business or employer has in referring the client to another person or which an introducer has in referring the client to you;

>> b) clients are informed of any fee sharing arrangement that is relevant to their matter;

>> c) the fee sharing arrangement is in writing;

>> d) any client referred by an introducer has not been acquired in a way which would breach the SRA’s regulatory arrangements if the person acquiring the client were regulated by the SRA”.

4.  “You do not act if there is an own interest conflict or a significant risk of such a conflict”.

This is how the Alastair Dobbie-Roberto Pancaldi scheme works today and has worked in the past.

In the early days Alastair Dobbie / Shortlands Law charged a fee to investors.  This was before we highlighted Mr Dobbie’s relationship with the sales agent Roberto Pancaldi.  We have spoken to investors who paid the fee and became clients of Alastair Dobbie / Shortlands Law.  None were made aware of Alastair Dobbie’s involvement in each of these scams, nor were they informed of his professional relationship with Roberto Pancaldi and other sales agents, nor were they made aware of any fee-sharing arrangement in respect of any party.  It is our view that Alastair Dobbie has breached the Code Of Conduct standards above.

We now understand that as a result of us highlighting his activities, Alastair Dobbie of Shortlands Law has adapted his approach.  He has stopped charging some room investors an upfront fee because they won’t pay it.  Instead, he only takes on clients he can trust to keep his prior involvement and payment arrangements secret e.g the investor co-ordinators.  A number of the investor co-ordinators have become Alastair Dobbie clients.  They then claim that Alastair Dobbie has been providing invaluable advice on legal matters and is willing to work for all other investors free of charge. Clearly they believe that by an investor NOT becoming a client of Alastair Dobbie / Shortlands Law they can circumvent the Code Of Conduct standards.

However, we have been advised that the scheme of using ‘investor co-ordinators’ as front-men was devised by Alastair Dobbie and Roberto Pancaldi for the NPD scam and has become their standard way of operating across all scams. We have also been advised that investor co-ordinators have secretly agreed that if they can acquire assets of an administration, they will ensure Alastair Dobbie receives 20% of any uplift in value once the assets are sold by them later on.  This uplift is based on the difference between the money investors receive from a CVA / administration and the final sale price the co-ordinators receive from the ultimate sale of the assets.  For this to work, the investor co-ordinators would need to control the assets, hence the fact that Alastair Dobbie works for them in a solicitor-client relationship, but not for the rest of the leaseholders. Those leaseholders are not his clients so he has no duty to achieve the best outcome for them.

The main body of investors have not been made aware of this arrangement.  The concern we have is that this payment scheme encourages a solicitor to ensure that non-clients receive as little as possible from a CVA / administration.

We have noted in previous articles that Alastair Dobbie has put forward numerous unworkable and unachievable proposals which have required the administrators and their lawyers to respond many times.  Not a single one of his proposals has ever been adopted in an administration, but every minute that an administrator or lawyer spends dealing with these proposals is billed against the administration, reducing the amount of money that will ultimately be paid out to creditors.

The lower the amount creditors receive from an administration, the greater the potential profit for the solicitor and his sales agent partners.  Technically it cannot be argued that the solicitor is working against his investor co-ordinator clients’ interests because they are the ones who have agreed this payment structure with him.

We have asked Shortlands Law to comment on this and to answer a few more questions.  Namely:

A)  Are they aware of any 20% uplift deal ?  If so, is that a standard billing arrangement they support ?  Are they satisfied that this complies with the SRA Code Of Conduct ?

B)  Who are the elite group who will end up acquiring the assets if Mr Dobbie is ever successful ?

C)  Bearing in mind the allegations made by the FCA that MBI / Qualia has been operating an unregulated collective investment scheme and that parties such as solicitors and sales agents involved in such a scheme can be liable to compensate investors, are they satisfied that there has been full disclosure to clients and prospective clients, and that there are no conflict of interest issues ?

D)  Is Shortlands satisfied that clients are aware of all fee-sharing arrangements and if so, what are those arrangements ?  Please note this is a question which has been asked of Shortlands several times, but we will keep asking it.  We believe Alastair Dobbie and Roberto Pancaldi have been fee-sharing either directly or indirectly.

It is worth noting that if there are fee-sharing arrangements with other parties who act as intermediaries in order to cover up payments to sales agents, that in itself would be a breach of the SRA Code Of Conduct.

E)  Has Alastair Dobbie received any direct or indirect undeclared benefit from his involvement with the Northern Powerhouse Developments’ companies, the Carlauren group of companies, MBI and Qualiacare companies, and St Camillus companies ?  We want to understand if he has been paid by any of the buyers of the assets.

We will publish the Shortlands Law reply if they deem to provide one. As usual, they have the opportunity to advise us of any incorrect statement and we will be happy to amend it and publish an apology.  It is worth noting that we have never received any notification from either Alastair Dobbie or Shortlands Law requesting us to correct any statement made in our articles.  We take that to mean that our articles are true and accurate.

In reality, Alastair Dobbie is not working for investors for free.  He is working for the clients who have paid him.  We have been informed there is a group of wealthy individuals who have been brought together by some of the parties involved to purchase the assets from the investor co-ordinators if the co-ordinators can acquire them from the administrators.  In other words, we have been told this is an entire structure with the aim of ultimately transferring assets into the hands of the select group of wealthy investors.  We have been told that some parties benefit at every stage of the process.  We have asked Shortlands Law to comment and made our position clear to them.  Our comment to Shortlands Law was:

“We are not suggesting for one minute that Mr Dobbie is involved in the sale of scams, then seeks to disrupt the insolvency process in order to make it difficult for administrators to sell the properties, and then benefits from working with vulture groups who swoop in to pick up those properties at low prices. That would clearly be something the SRA would regard as an extremely serious breach of its Code Of Conduct”.

Just wanted to make it clear that we are not suggesting that.

Alastair Dobbie has repeatedly told investors what they want to hear i.e that the buildings cannot be sold without the agreement of 100% of leaseholders, which is absolutely not true, and that investors can buy the freeholds for £1.  He’s never managed to achieve that yet.  If anyone feels they have been misled into paying money to Alastair Dobbie, Shortlands Law or any investor co-ordinator they should request a full refund and report the matter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority using this LINK.  Please be aware that if you do request a refund you can expect to be contacted by Alastair Dobbie in an attempt to persuade you to cancel the request.  That is what has happened to some investors.

If anyone feels they have been misled by Roberto Pancaldi and/or the investor co-ordinators we would like to hear from you.  If you are making a claim for a refund of monies paid to Alastair Dobbie, Shortlands Law, or a co-ordinator we would also like to hear from you.

Finally, to show our articles are fair and balanced we would like to provide Alastair Dobbie with some free advertising.  If anyone is in need of a maths tutor he may be available.

Alastair Dobbie _ Founder @Zimple.it _ F6S Profile

We’ve never seen a solicitor offer maths tuition alongside legal services !  Normally a solicitor tends to focus on his/her legal skills.  As for listing his third major attribute as “Dreamer”  –  well it’s unique.  We’ll give him that.  Not sure that’s a major consideration for most people when they feel they need a solicitor.

“So we need legal help.  Let’s make a list of what we need.  He/she must be inexperienced, must tell us what we want to hear, must charge us £1,000 for a service which will not result in any financial benefit, must be able to convert fractions into decimals without the use of a calculator, Oh – and he / she must be a dreamer.  That’s essential”.

Thank you to all people who have provided information.  All information is always gratefully received.  Our article on how investors have been manipulated in the insolvency processes will follow later this week.

To view a more recent article on the manipulation of investors by Alastair Dobbie and his associates please click here [LINK].

Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update – Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update – Alastair Dobbie and Shortlands Law Update

 

High Street GRP

High Street GRP 300 238 SOS Team

High Street GRP Ltd has recently issued a brochure which it claims is a fair deal mapping a pathway out of its current financial difficulties.  The key elements of its rescue plan are to be found at the back of the brochure. Here it is in full with our comments.

THE PROPOSAL

The board has successfully delivered funding solutions and a robust business model that enables the Group to grow and thrive over the coming years.  

[SOS Comment:  Not true.  The company is in default on many loan contracts and it admits that if this proposal is not voted through it will have to undertake a ‘Going Concern’ review.  There is nothing in the proposal which proves the organisation will be able to survive, let alone thrive].

The launch of the PLC and the implementation of strong corporate governance is geared towards a stock market listing at the earliest opportunity.  

[SOS Comment:  No institutional investor, bank or financing organisation is going to risk investing its capital in a group where the accounts were two years overdue, where those accounts have not been audited (which is a legal requirement), and where the auditor has resigned [LINK] stating that High Street GRP was unable or unwilling to produce evidence to support the claims made in the accounts.  The 2019 accounts have still not been filed and are now 5 months overdue.  It would be very unusual for any company to achieve a stock market listing and a successful refinancing under these circumstances].

However, we have one remaining significant issue that is having an impact on our ability to deliver the business plan.  The 7 Year Loan Note has an “Early Redemption” clause that enables investors to redeem their Loan Note with just 30 days’ notice.

Unfortunately, the early redemptions are impeding the company’s ability to move forward and secure a sustainable and profitable future. It is imperative that the directors are able to operate with secure cash flow to ensure the delivery of the Group’s business plan. 

[SOS comment:  In other words, the company doesn’t have enough money to pay the people who are entitled to be repaid, despite them being small investors when compared to the senior debt].

BINDING CONDITIONS TO THE PROPOSAL

Binding Conditions to the Proposal (the “Binding Conditions”).

Loan Note Holders will be asked to approve the following resolutions which amend their rights with respect to the Note:

Restriction on a Loan Noteholder or the Security Trustee from petitioning for redemption or taking any other acceleration, early redemption or enforcement action against the Issuer, the Guarantors, or in respect of the Loan Note Assets until the end of the terms of the Loan Note.

Irrevocably rescinding any redemption notices issued to date.

Waiver of all existing events of default under the Note.

[SOS Comment:  WOW – that’s absolutely shocking.  High Street GRP Ltd is effectively seeking to remove all investor rights in one fell swoop.  Those investors who are entitled to the immediate return of their capital will be prevented from claiming it until August 2025.  The Security Trustee and none of the investors will be allowed to take any form of action to recover any money until August 2025.  The proposal covers not only the SPV company which borrowed the money from investors, but also the Guarantor company.  The Group is also seeking to remove all existing Events of Default.  Here is a list of the Events Of Default copied from a standard Loan Note Contract for which the Guarantor is High Street GRP:

HSG Loan Note Contracts_Events of Default

If this is voted through, the Borrower (the High Street GRP company) can immediately cease all interest payments to investors, will not be held liable for any untrue, incorrect or misleading statements from before the investment was made up to the present day, will be able to prevent any investor recovery action even if the company declares itself to be insolvent, and can enter into agreements with new lenders which could significantly worsen the financial position of existing investors.  The company can even cease its operations and there would be nothing investors can do until August 2025.

Of course, this assumes that the proposal made by High Street GRP is enforceable and will stand up in court if challenged.  It is imperative that investors take legal advice.  We know of many investors who have already requested the repayment of their capital in accordance with the terms of the Loan Note Contract.  We believe the proposal has been made to frustrate their efforts to recover their money].

Consequences of Not Voting in Favour of the Proposal

Should the support from the Loan Noteholders not be forthcoming, the board of directors will have no choice but to undertake a “Going Concern” review of the business. The board cannot stress strongly enough the importance of ensuring stable cash flow to enable delivery of these projects

[SOS Comment:  High Street GRP has had a full year to get its accounts in order AND to undertake a ‘Going Concern’ review of the business.  Both should have been done BEFORE putting a restructuring proposal to investors.  They haven’t been done].

SECURITY POSITION OF THE NOTE

The security position remains in place but it is further enhanced by the creation of High Street Group PLC which will be taking all future projects forward.

[SOS Comment:  How ?  What does the ‘Security Trustee’ ( Castle Trust and Management Services [LINK] ) say about the proposal ?  As usual they have said nothing].

The current PRS business (High Street Residential), projects, special purpose vehicles, assets and all of its employees will be transferred into the new PLC by the end of 2021.

High Street Group PLC

The success of High Street Group PRS projects has attracted interest from investors and stimulated a pipeline of opportunities for future growth. Within these opportunities is a demand for greater governance and more structured control

As a PLC business there is much stronger Corporate Governance.

Two non-executive directors, Andrew Marsh, who is the Chair of the Board, and Rachel Turnbull, have been appointed to the PLC board. Both have considerable experience in governance, investments, and finance.

This significant shift in structure will empower investors and Loan Noteholders with improved reporting and governance and also helps to attract and retain corporate investors into the business.

[SOS Comment:  High Street GRP should start by ensuring that its historical accounts are properly audited.  That is the first step in providing stronger Corporate Governance.  It has had plenty of time to arrange that, but the Group has always avoided independent scrutiny of its financial dealings].

High Street Group will continue to provide a corporate guarantee to Loan Noteholders.

High Street Group PLC will provide an additional guarantee for any shortfall to Loan Noteholders that the Group does not deliver for whatever reason.

[SOS Comment:  A corporate guarantee is worth nothing if these companies are insolvent and unable to pay their existing debts.  What would give investors more reassurance are personal guarantees from the directors.  If they have confidence in the business they would give personal guarantees, not worthless corporate guarantees].

LEGAL GUIDE TO THE LOAN NOTEHOLDERS

Together with this document you will receive notice of a meeting for Loan Noteholders where a vote to pass a Special Resolution to the terms of their Loan Notes will be undertaken. The purpose of each of the Loan Noteholders’ vote is for the Issuer to propose that Loan Noteholders approve, by way of a Special Resolution, amendments to each of the relevant loan note instruments to give effect to the Proposal and approving the Binding Conditions. For a Special Resolution to be passed, it requires the approval of not less than 75% of Loan Note Holders (or their proxies) at a meeting to be held at the Sea Hotel, South Shields on the 10th of May at 10:00.  [SOS Comment:  the date has been pushed back].

The notice of the meeting will contain instructions on voting personally or by proxy, and will attach the form of supplemental or amended and restated Loan Note Instrument, giving effect to the Proposal, that will become effective if this Proposal is approved by the Loan Noteholders by way of Special Resolution.

Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact our Customer Care team on registration@thehighstreetgroup.com or call 0191 432 7915.

Confidentiality

The Loan Noteholders should note the content and terms of this Proposal are confidential and the information provided regarding the Group’s financial affairs are confidential. Accordingly, the information should not be disclosed to any person other than their professional advisors as required in the course of duty to consider the same.

[SOS Comment:  We haven’t revealed any of the unaudited ‘Group’s financial affairs’ or the questionable estimated future revenues.  The financial statements are suspect due to the lack of independent verification.  We’ve chosen instead to highlight what voting for this proposal would mean for ordinary investors].

Independent Financial and Legal Advice

We recommend that Loan Noteholders take both independent financial and legal advice regarding the Proposal.

[SOS Comment:  Well, a statement we can finally agree with although the company is not giving them enough time].

INVESTORS MUST JOIN TOGETHER AND TAKE INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL AND LEGAL ADVICE.  IN THE MEANTIME, INVESTORS SHOULD WRITE TO THE SECURITY TRUSTEE REQUESTING AN ADJOURNMENT TO THE PROPOSED MEETING UNTIL THE GROUP’S ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN INDEPENDENTLY AUDITED.  THIS WILL ALLOW INVESTORS’ FINANCIAL AND LEGAL ADVISERS THE NECESSARY TIME TO UNDERTAKE A THOROUGH REVIEW.

It took High Street GRP more than 3 years to file its 2018 accounts so it cannot complain if investors ask for a much shorter period to be able to undertake a proper review of the proposal. It is time for the Security Trustee to step up and prove that it’s not in bed with High Street GRP.  Castle Trust and Management Services Ltd should be informing High Street GRP that it needs the accounts to be signed off by an independent auditor].

We can confirm that it is still the intention of our clients to pursue actions to recover their investments.  They oppose the attempts of High Street GRP to deprive them of their contractual rights.

To view a previous article on High Street Group click here [LINK].

 

Cavendish Incorporated and Cottesmore Associates

Cavendish Incorporated and Cottesmore Associates 300 300 SOS Team

Cavendish Incorporated and Cottesmore Associates

We have evidence that some of the company directors of Cavendish Incorporated and Cottesmore Associates were involved in the Texmoore loan note scam [LINK].

Cavendish Incorporated Ltd is currently promoting a similar investment product to Texmoore i.e loan notes for student accommodation, mixed residential and commercial properties.  The company became FCA-regulated on 17th January 2021.  To quote from the website:

“At Cavendish, we believe in creating communities and making a positive and enduring impact on the country’s built environment. We focus on developing student accommodation (Purpose Built Student Accommodation and traditional residential properties), social housing and commercial schemes, creating vibrant and sustainable urban environments. We deliver long-term value to our stakeholders through our rigorous approach to development and our innovative design”.

“Our aim is to create developments that enhance the areas around them and improve the lives of their occupiers, whether residential or commercial. We deploy innovative design and thorough research, working only with trusted partners, to achieve this goal and make our vision a reality.”

Bhavita Punja | Director

“We undertake as much of the development process as we can in-house, from identifying sites, to financing and designing the building or scheme, and will only work with trusted professional partners when required. We don’t have generic blueprints that we impose across the board; instead we treat every site individually, with sensitivity to its particular needs and environment. We focus on developing our schemes with a specific requirement or ambition in mind, whether that be a great place for a business to thrive or high-quality social housing for those that need it most – our schemes have individual personalities that suit their locales. Our potential development portfolio is broad in scope, with greenfield and brownfield sites, and both city centre and out-of-town locations. We develop sites from the ground up and also improve and redevelop existing sites, renovating them in their entirety and bringing them up to date for modern living and working”.

“We either sell our developments upon construction or enter into long-term leases: with local councils and authorities in the case of social housing, with universities and privately in the case of student housing and with businesses on the commercial side. In a world of historically low interest rates and volatile markets, secure assets that produce predictable income over a long period of time and can help hedge long-term liabilities are becoming ever more valuable for investors and for our stakeholders”.

Cottesmore Associates Ltd was incorporated on 23rd November 2018.  It became an Appointed Representative of Cavendish Incorporated Ltd on 11th February 2021.  This means that it can carry out FCA-regulated activities under the umbrella of Cavendish Incorporated Ltd.

We tried contacting both companies by telephone several times asking to speak to a company director or to one of their team.  Nobody was available.

We have more information but cannot publish it at this time.  We have made a report to the Financial Conduct Authority and we advise any person who may be considering making an investment with either of these companies to contact the Financial Conduct Authority on this link before parting with any money.

To view a more recent update please click this LINK.

 

 

Merydion Hotels

Merydion Hotels 700 447 SOS Team

Merydion Hotels

A civil legal action has started on behalf of investors who purchased hotel rooms at four Merydion hotels.  The action is being led by a law firm involved in the case against Merydion Corporation Ltd and the hotels involved are:

1. Northop Hall Country House Hotel;

2. The Belgrave Hotel, Chester;

3. Durker Roods Hotel, Meltham;

4. The Star Hotel, Great Yarmouth.

The hotel operations are unaffected by this legal action.  At this time, none of the Merydion hotel companies are involved in the legal action.

In January 2021, Merydion Corporation Ltd [LINK] was closed down following an investigation by the UK’s Insolvency Service.  It was alleged that the company had been involved in money-laundering and tax evasion.  Merydion Corporation Ltd did not own any of the Merydion hotels and an investigation is ongoing to determine how the money paid to that company was used.

Merydion Corporation Ltd, along with the  four current hotel-owning companies and the four separate management companies are all owned by Michael James McMahon.

In the past 12 months Mr McMahon’s companies have used the services of at least three people who have served prison terms for either fraud, money-laundering or other financial crimes.  Since January Mr McMahon has been repeatedly asked by investors to organise online meetings to discuss their investments.  He has not held any meetings and has declined to show his face.

We can show his face.  He is the gentleman on the far right of this image.

In December 2020, Mr McMahon brought in a new director to head up his organisation, Philip Heron-Carne.  Mr Heron-Carne has no hotel management experience and it is unusual that an inexperienced person was brought in to manage four hotels during what must be one of the most difficult periods ever experienced by hotel owners.

An example of the reason why we believe Mr Heron-Carne has been brought in can be seen in the filings of 80/20 Services Ltd [LINK], the McMahon company which was allegedly managing the Northop Hall Country House Hotel until 23rd December 2020.  Mr Heron-Carne was appointed as a director of that company on 15th February 2021.  Mr McMahon resigned as a director one week later on 22nd February 2021.  Four days later on 26th February 2021 Mr Heron-Carne signed off the company’s accounts for the period February 2019 – February 2020.  Surely Mr McMahon could have stayed on as a director for just another four days so that he could sign the accounts relating to the year that he was in charge of the company !  Suspicious ?  We think so.

It’s even more odd when three weeks later Mr McMahon reappoints himself as a director and removes Mr Heron-Carne as a director.  So now we are back to how it was before, except that Michael McMahon had avoided signing off the accounts as being a true and honest record.  Then, two weeks after that Mr McMahon resigns as director for a second time and reappoints Mr Heron-Carne ! Perhaps Mr Heron-Carne felt he had been used and told Mr McMahon it looks a bit fishy.

At this stage, the civil claim is restricted to the law firms which represented investors, but we are continuing to investigate the McMahon companies and a company called Opulent Investments Ltd.  We initially believed Opulent Investments Ltd to be the master sales agent controlling a network of sales agents which were promoting the sale of rooms to investors but, following correspondence with the Opulent Investments Ltd solicitor, we now know that this company’s involvement extended far beyond that of simply being a master sales agent.  Opulent Investments Ltd was also mentioned in the Secretary Of State’s witness statement presented to the Merydion Corporation Ltd court hearing.

What we found somewhat confusing is why Opulent Investments Ltd would choose to involve their solicitor. We had not mentioned their involvement at that point.  Even more confusing is why they would claim that we had been in contact with one of their investors.  We checked with the investor concerned and she had never heard of Opulent Investments Ltd.

We have further information on the Merydion room investments which is reserved for the legal action.  To view a previous article related to this topic click here [LINK].

 

Texmoore Scam Update 1

Texmoore Scam Update 1 300 224 SOS Team

Texmoore Scam Update 1.

Just before Christmas we were asked to investigate a loan note scam operated by Texmoore Ltd [LINK HERE].  The other parties named in the scam were Sentor Solutions Ltd and Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd.

The brochure described the investment as loan notes.  The funds would be used to invest in residential, commercial and student developments.  It stated that there was a “Security Trustee” in place to protect investors’ funds and that Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd, which is FCA-regulated, was that Security Trustee.  Readers of our articles will know our opinions on ‘Security Trustees’.  They are installed to provide false reassurance to investors and allow scammers to perpetrate their scams for much longer.

There was a letter from Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd in the brochure confirming its appointment.  It was later claimed that the Security Trustee was not Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd.  It was Sentor Solutions Ltd.  This is a separate company which is not FCA-regulated.  It was owned by the scammers themselves.  Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd denied all knowledge of the Texmoore scam.

The FCA put out a warning about Texmoore Ltd which can be seen here [LINK].

Quite often it’s the case that scammers will use the identity of an FCA-regulated company to add credibility to their investment.  In most cases the target company is unaware its name is being used by scammers.

Sentor Solutions Ltd was incorporated in 2012.  It’s been around a long time but that doesn’t tell us very much because it was formed by our old friend Barbara Kahan.  We call her an old friend for two reasons.  The first is because we come across her all the time.  She has owned more than 30,000 companies.  Barbara forms companies, opens bank accounts and then lets the package sit on the shelf until a scammer comes along and buys the package.  In this way the scammer gains control of a company and a bank account without ever having to reveal his identity.

The other reason we refer to Barbara as an old friend is because she is 90 years old.  It’s fair to assume that she is not sitting in her armchair with her computer in her lap forming new companies and opening bank accounts eight hours a day.  If she’s still alive she either doesn’t have a clue her identity is being used, or she does and doesn’t care because she’s 90 and knows she won’t be prosecuted. Who knows.

Scammers like to have companies which have history because it allows them to say that the company has been trading since 2012.  Investors rarely look at the annual account filings at Companies House which show NIL income year after year.  A quick look at those accounts would have made investors think twice.

What interests us is when a Barbara Kahan company transfers into new ownership.  That’s when the scam actually starts.  In the case of Sentor Solutions Ltd that was January 2019.

Texmoore Ltd was also a Barbara Kahan company, this time going back to 2013.  However, that was transferred into new ownership in February 2019.  In the space of a few weeks at the start of 2019 the pieces of the scam were being put in place.

Texmoore Ltd filed annual accounts in August 2019, six months after purchase.  According to this wonderful piece of fiction the company went from NIL income to a valuation of £27m in the space of six months.  But clearly this stellar performance could not be sustained because by the middle of 2020 their website was gone, their emails didn’t work and all the phone numbers were dead.  Scam over – people gone – dead end ?

Not exactly.  This is where the story gets interesting.  When we were first contacted about Texmoore we did our usual thing.  We gather the information from the victim and we spend maybe 30 minutes checking things out.  We went back to the victim and said that one of the companies had registered their office in an old derelict bank which was empty, the perpetrators were most likely using false names, the money would not be in the accounts any longer and the chance of recovering any money would be slim.  We recommended that she file an Action Fraud report and lobby the Police to pick up the case because it would not be cost-effective for her to pay us to undertake a more detailed review.  She might not ever recover any money.

We were contacted by other investors and we told them the same thing.  Then, a few weeks ago we were contacted by another investor.  We said the same thing and he said he didn’t care.  He would pay for us to review his case.  We told him to think about it for a while because it would be unlikely he would recover any money.  He did think about it and came back to say “I want to do it”.

We started looking into Texmoore Ltd, Sentor Solutions Ltd and Sentor Solutions Advisory Ltd. Three companies.  By the end of the first week we had looked at dozens of companies and countless individuals.  We found that the Texmoore scam had been replicated twice.  It is a network of scammers and they are running / have run at least three separate scams that we have discovered so far, all involving loan notes for the same fake purposes.

More importantly, we believe we have identified a potential recovery route for investors.  We say ‘potential’ because there’s still some way to go, but the route does exist, whereas before we started the investigation we thought it would most likely not identify any recovery options.

We are quite limited in what we can publish.  We have notified City Of London Police about the other scams and we have provided them with some names.

This is where it gets a bit strange.  During our investigation into all these different companies and linked individuals we came across the investor’s name.  A man with the same name and of the same age was a director of one of these companies.

This could mean that the man is involved in some way and came to us to find out what we know about the scam, or it could be that the scammers have used the investor’s ID documents to form a scam company.  We have seen that several times before.  We even published an article where we were checking out a company director and he sent us a copy of his passport to prove his identity.  We published the passport photo page and were contacted by the son of the passport holder who told us that this was his father and he had invested in a scam.  His father had dementia issues and had made some bad investments.  The original scam had collapsed so the scammers moved on to a new one.  They used the investor’s identity to form the new company and open a bank account.

We’ve gone back to the investor to ask for more information before we send anything to him.

Texmoore Scam Update 1.

Qualiacare Deception

Qualiacare Deception 400 267 SOS Team

Qualiacare Deception.

Further to our recent article on Alastair Dobbie and Qualiacare [LINK HERE] we have some additional information concerning the Qualiacare deception and manipulation of the insolvency process.

When the scam companies collapsed, Alastair Dobbie somewhat bizarrely chose to approach Qualiacare investors under the Shortlands Law banner.  Shortlands specialises in Family Law (divorces, child custody etc).  B&M Law would surely have been a better choice as they are a law firm which deals with property issues and he has a role as consultant solicitor at that firm.  Our previous article explains why he may have wanted his involvement with B&M Law to remain a secret.  The most worrying aspect is that he never declared his involvement in the scam to his newly acquired clients.  We assumed that Shortlands Law would want to get to the bottom of this.

We emailed Shabana Walayat and Wajiha Shah with the questions below and didn’t receive any answers.  We emailed again once it became clear Alastair Dobbie and the investor co-ordinators he and Roberto Pancaldi had established, were negotiating with Robin Forster.  Mr Forster was subject to a worldwide freezing order obtained by the FCA.  The freezing order was known to Alastair Dobbie.  The head of the co-ordinators is Mr Nico Bruyniks and he has confirmed he is a client of Alastair Dobbie / Shortlands Law so we presume he was also made aware of it. At the moment we believe Mr Bruyniks has genuine intentions, but he may have been misled. We will know more in the next 24 hours.

We were surprised to hear that Mr Bruyniks and/or Alastair Dobbie were negotiating to have the care home freeholds transferred at under-value to a new Austrian company they had established (both Alastair Dobbie and Nico Bruyniks are based in Austria), The freezing order made it clear that:

“Any person who knows of the First Defendant’s [Robin Forster’s] undertakings and/or this Order and does anything which helps or permits Robin Scott Forster to breach the terms of his undertakings may also be held to be in contempt of court and may be imprisoned, fined or have their assets seized”.  

We were even more surprised when we were told they had persuaded Robin Forster to agree to put the PAHL companies into a CVA process.  This was without prior FCA approval.  The Qualiacare deception is murky enough without private deals being done behind closed doors.  It seems the deal which has been agreed includes rewarding Robin Forster for assisting their group. This is a man who took £50m from investors and had agreed to pay £6.5m back to them over the next nine years ! He took £4.5m from investors for rooms in care homes that he didn’t own, but the deal being proposed by this group is that his new company is going to be allowed to run the care homes !

We expect the investors who paid the £4.5m to challenge this deal.  They come so far down the pecking order that they will never see any money.  All of this was done against a backdrop of the care homes being transferred out of the ownership of Qualiacare Developments Ltd and Qualiacare Properties Ltd to new companies (the PAHL companies) owned by Robin Forster. This was facilitated by the insolvency firm appointed by Mr Forster, Auker Rhodes.  Mr Forster puts quite a lot of business their way so they quite like him. They like him so much that they declared they had no intention of trying to recover any money from him !

The transfer was done against the express instructions of the FCA who advised that no assets were to be transferred. I think most people are expecting the FCA, or any new insolvency firm, to return those assets back to those companies. If the FCA doesn’t act then it is a clear signal to other scammers that the FCA doesn’t care so they can ignore any FCA intervention and do what they like.

At a couple of recently choreographed creditors’ Zoom meetings organised by Auker Rhodes, one for QCD and another for QCP, it became apparent that a deal had been done.  Alastair Dobbie was given a disproportionate amount of time to wax lyrical about himself and his services.  Any dissenting voices were muted out and not given an opportunity to question his pitch to creditors.  Auker Rhodes announced to the surprise of many that it had changed the room investor claim values.  It had previously published the claim values in its Administrators Reports which are available for public viewing on [THIS LINK] and [THIS LINK].  Auker Rhodes made the announcement without any prior notice to creditors.  The effect of this sudden change was to increase the value of Alastair Dobbie’s and Nico Bruyniks’ proxy votes in order to give them a voting majority so they could force through the appointment of Alastair Dobbie and Roberto Pancaldi to the creditor’s committees of both companies.  That’s what some might call manipulating the UK’s insolvency process to favour one form of creditor.

It is incredible that Mr Bruyniks would use the proxy votes he had obtained from investors to vote a solicitor and his sales agent partner onto creditor’s committees.  These are people who were involved in selling and arranging deals in this scam. They may be subject to prosecution by investors under the very same regulations that the FCA is applying in this case. We are not convinced that investors who have allowed Mr Bruyniks to vote for them would want to see anyone involved in putting investors into the scam on creditors’ committees.  We’re also pretty sure most of them don’t want to see the salesmen and their lawyer partners receiving any more fees from their continued involvement in the scam. 

The investor co-ordinators who were put in place by the salesman Roberto Pancaldi will be asking investors which way they want them to vote. We recommend that investors make their feelings known and insist that nobody involved in putting investors into the scam should be given any role whatsoever. 

SHORTLANDS LAW COMMUNICATIONS

Here are the questions we asked Shortlands Law:

1. Were you aware that Alastair Dobbie is a consultant solicitor with B&M Law ?

2. Were you aware that B&M Law was involved in the sale of leases to investors in the Northern Powerhouse Developments, Carlauren, Qualiacare and St Camillus scams when you began approaching investors to offer legal services ?

3. Are you aware of the SRA Warnings that law firms should not get involved in high-risk investments, including the sale of hotel rooms, and that law firms and lawyers who do get involved could be liable to compensate investors for their losses ?

4. If the answer to any of the above is Yes, please can you explain the level of Mr Dobbie’s involvement at B&M Law, the duties he performed and why this was not communicated to the victims of scams before they instructed your law firm. Do you regard Alastair Dobbie as having a conflict of interest ?

5. Has Alastair Dobbie or Shortlands notified the investor groups that legal advisers who were negligent in their advice to clients can be liable to compensate investors and that may include a law firm associated with Alastair Dobbie, and even Alastair Dobbie himself ?

6. Does Alastair Dobbie and/or Shortlands have any financial arrangement with Roberto Pancaldi or any of his companies to pay him any commissions, introduction fees or any other compensation relating to the introduction of clients or to the provision of services related to investments ? If so, why has this not been declared to investors who have made financial contributions for recovery action services ? If such an arrangement exists and has not been declared to clients this would raise serious questions as to the honesty and integrity of the people involved.

7. Are any parties paid any commission, introduction fee or other compensation and if so, which parties ?

8. Is it acceptable for Alastair Dobbie to write letters to investors and not sign them ? Are you aware of any occasions where he has done this ? Investors who have been duped into becoming ‘investor co-ordinators’ are being asked to send out letters under their own name when those letters were not written by them.

9. In light of the information in this article do you feel that Shortlands should now self-report to the SRA requesting them to investigate ?

We also asked whether Shortlands Law Firm was aware of any regulatory investigations involving Mr Dobbie’s conduct.  They did not respond.

In our email to them we wrote “ It is unfortunate that Shortlands should find itself drawn into the murky world of unregulated investment scams and unscrupulous sales agents on high commissions, We are happy to amend any element of our article which is incorrect.  We do not know the terms of Mr Dobbie’s contract with yourselves, but as he is acting under the Shortlands name it is obviously your firm which has to deal with enquiries. We are happy to publish an update / clarification once the questions have been answered. We regard the exploitation of victims of scams as a serious issue and we are sure that you do too”.

It doesn’t look like they do regard it as a serious issue.  They did not answer any of the questions. Neither did they raise any issues with our published article which suggests we were spot on with our analysis.

We also sent these questions to the investor co-ordinators so that they could ask them too. We thought they would want to get answers to these questions so that they could inform the investors who they had persuaded to sign up with them.  Unfortunately they also didn’t want investors to know the truth because if they ever bothered to ask the questions to Shortlands or Alastair Dobbie they haven’t passed the answers on to the investors. We have started communications with Mr Bruyniks and asked again for him to obtain answers to these questions. He has not yet confirmed whether he will do so. We believe the co-ordinators and Alastair Dobbie need to be transparent with investors. 

We will provide an update very soon based on their response. We also raised the issue of Alastair Dobbie’s latest efforts in the Qualiacare case with Shortlands.

“Dear Ms Walayat

 We have been informed by a Shortlands client that Alastair Dobbie has advised him Shortlands is negotiating with Robin Forster of Qualiacare to obtain a Heads Of Terms Agreement to transfer the freeholds of care homes to a select group of creditors. Mr Dobbie says he anticipates that completing within the next two weeks. 

You will be aware that the FCA obtained a worldwide freezing order on all Robin Forster’s assets. He is forbidden by Court Order from entering into any agreements which might diminish any of his personal assets. This includes his companies’ assets and those that the FCA regard as assets of the administration of QCP and QCD. You will be aware that the FCA are seeking to have the freehold assets which were improperly transferred to 13 Forster SPVs returned to QCP and QCD.

Notwithstanding the fact that the transaction would be challenged by both the FCA and other creditors, for a law firm to encourage a person subject to a Court Order to enter into an agreement which would breach that Order is clearly holding both the Judge and the Court in contempt. We also have evidence of Mr Dobbie’s advice to Mr Bruyniks to lead this action on behalf of non-clients.

We asked a specialist litigation solicitor to comment on some of the communications which have been sent out by investor co-ordinators to investors.  It was his view that the ‘co-ordinators’ should take legal advice from someone who understands the law because they were potentially placing themselves in a position where creditors could sue them.  All creditors should remember that if things do not work out as they have been promised they may have a claim.

Our last email did finally elicit a response from Shortlands Law Firm. This is what it said:

“Please refrain from contacting us further”. 

“Please refrain from contacting our clients”. 

 “Please remove all reference to us, our staff and our clients from your website and the public domain”. 

 “Please confirm your acceptance of the above and provide undertakings that you will cease and desist from all further contact with us and our clients., Please also confirm that you have removed all references as above and undertake not to make any more. We are willing to grant you 7 days for compliance”. 

 “If we receive the undertakings and confirmation of removal as requested above by close of business on 23rd April 2021, our next step will likely be to seek one or more Court orders to restrain your activities. We will also seek our costs for taking such action”.  

 This is the second time Shortlands have demanded that we do not contact their clients. We told them the first time that we don’t know their clients, but if they wanted to give us a list we would consider it.  They didn’t provide one.  We also noted they gave no valid reason for us to remove our articles.  We have given them the opportunity to identify any errors in our reporting, but we’ve received nothing from them.  It is therefore fair to assume that our report on Alastair Dobbie and his relationship with sales agents and his links to the sale and promotion of unlawful investment schemes was accurate.

INVESTOR ACTION

We’ve asked the co-ordinators to insist on Mr Dobbie declaring his current disciplinary status to them. We will not go into specifics at this point because we are seeking clarification of some issues.  We have given them 24 hours to provide the answers to these questions and others.  They are the self-appointed investor co-ordinators so they have a moral and ethical duty to be honest with the investors they have persuaded to sign up with them.

Mr Bruyniks claims to represent investors who do not want to pay any more money into this scam.  Alastair Dobbie allegedly represents investors who have paid £1,000 each for his services. OK, that seems clear. What hasn’t been clarified is what do the people who pay £1,000 get that those people who haven’t paid don’t get ? Why would anyone pay £1,000 if the person next to them is getting the same service for free ?

We have said many times that creditors should question Shortlands Law and Alastair Dobbie over their qualifications to represent investors in complex insolvency cases.  We see no evidence that Shortlands or Alastair Dobbie has any insolvency experience.  Investors should be asking the questions we raised above.  If they are not satisfied with the answers and feel they were misled they should ask for their money back and instruct a specialist insolvency law firm.  We can point investors in the direction of several specialist insolvency law firms, but a Google search will bring them up anyway.

If Shortlands’ clients are happy with the law firm they should at least obtain written assurance that should any deal it negotiates with Robin Forster be undone in the future, they are guaranteed a full refund.  If that assurance is not given it would suggest Shortlands are not confident in their consultant solicitor’s ability to achieve a proper deal which stands up in court.  It’s easy for a solicitor to get a deal with Robin Forster on paper because it suits both parties. Any deal, even one that ultimately doesn’t stand up in court, allows Alastair Dobbie to justify his fees. It also gives Robin Forster a stab at trying to remain involved so that he can earn more money too. You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.

Anyone who signed up with the ‘investor co-ordinators’ should state that they do not want their vote to be used to support anyone who was involved in selling or arranging deals in the Qualiacare scam.  We don’t believe investors knew they were signing up to that scenario and that they have been misled.  They should also request confirmation that everything they have been told by the investor co-ordinators is true and if it is subsequently found not to be true the investor co-ordinator accepts full responsibility for any losses the investor might incur from following their advice.  

They should also insist that their investor co-ordinator obtains answers from Shortlands Law Firm to the questions we asked above.  These are important questions which investor co-ordinators, if they truly represent the interests of victims of the scam, should have insisted Shortlands answer.  The co-ordinators must be transparent otherwise they are just part of a scam.  

Finally, investors should ask their co-ordinators to confirm that they will never be asked to amend, alter, cancel or surrender their leases.  The co-ordinators are carefully skirting around that issue in order to get people to hand their votes over to them.  It is noticeable that neither Alastair Dobbie nor the co-ordinators have provided a breakdown of how their proposal would affect each class of investor and what they would have to do, or give up, in return.

Any investor who is offered any deal put together by Shortlands, Alastair Dobbie or the investor co-ordinators should take independent legal advice before they sign up to it.  If the investor co-ordinators are opposed to ordinary investors taking legal advice on their lease positions it would be seen as a huge red flag. Giving up your vote or your entitlements without having taken independent legal advice would not be wise.

What a disaster for investors. We don’t like to see lawyers not being honest with investors. Alastair Dobbie needs to provide answers because his silence on his involvement is damaging any genuine investors who are trying to do the best they can to be fair to all investors.  We believe the people who invested £4.5m for thin air are being harshly treated by the current proposal and things need to be balanced out more favourably so that no creditor is disadvantaged.

We have had some Press interest relating to what is going on in Qualiacare.  We’ll see what develops.

Qualicare Deception.

Information on Scams

Information on Scams 226 160 SOS Team

We greatly appreciate the information on scams and scammers that we receive from people who take the time to complete the Contact Form.  We do not need to know the identity of the provider, but we do need a valid email address (even if it is a hotmail, gmail etc) because there will normally be follow-up questions.

For example, this week two people have contacted us with information, but have not given a valid email address.

The first relates to a person who we know well and who has altered his name slightly in the latest scam. Thank you to the informant who has given us some limited information, but we have nothing we can publish to warn the public. We would like you to contact us again and give us a valid email address so we can email you with a few questions about the latest scam.

The second involves a recent article and relates to information regarding two alleged investigations into an individual.  We need evidence to support these allegations because if we were to contact the organisations carrying out the alleged investigations they would refuse to comment. We need something like a copy of an email or a letter from those organisations or another way that we can verify that the investigations are genuinely taking place. We cannot publish articles on something as serious as someone being under investigation by regulatory bodies unless we have evidence to prove it.  We will not publish anything contained in the proof which may identify the source, but if we have the evidence we will be able to publish that the investigations are taking place. We have already written to the company under whose umbrella the alleged offender is working to ask them to comment on whether they are aware of any investigations into this person. Please use the Contact Form again and provide a valid email address. We will then contact you to ask you to send through any proof.  You may blank out any marks which might identify you because we are only interested in being able to prove that the allegations are true.

Anyone who wishes to provide information on scams but would prefer to remain anonymous should set up a hotmail or gmail account and use that on our Contact Form Page. We quite often have to email informants to gather a bit more information before we can publish an article.

 

TQ Property Law

TQ Property Law 400 300 SOS Team

We are interested in any investments in which TQ Property Law represented investors.   TQ has been associated with several collapsed investments.  There is a group legal claim in progress against the insurance company which provided the cover for TQ Property Law.  The company no longer exists, but that does not mean that claims cannot be made if there is evidence of professional negligence because the insurance cover may still be valid.  There may still be recovery options available to its clients.  Please use our Contact Form [LINK] if you would like further information.

    Safe Or Scam is prohibited by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (and associated regulations) from allowing individuals ordinarily resident in Great Britain to access our pages or use our services. Please confirm your status below.

    1.  I am currently ordinarily resident in the Great Britain; or
    2.  I was ordinarily resident in the Great Britain at the time I made my investment; or
    3.  I made my investment through my company which is incorporated under the laws of England and Wales and Scotland.

    If NONE of the above apply click the box below.

    I CONFIRM THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE APPLY TO ME AND I WOULD LIKE TO ACCESS THE WEBSITE:

    I CONFIRM

    Our Scam Alert articles are sponsored by The Fraud Team Ltd, a not-for-profit UK company which is permitted to provide services to residents of Great Britain.
    If you are someone who is not permitted to visit our website because one of the boxes 1-3 apply to you, please complete the Contact Form below. Your enquiry will go The Fraud Team Ltd.






      By Submitting you agree with the SOS Privacy Policy