Safe or Scam

Avoid Investment Scams
Scam Alert

SJT Wealth Scam

SJT Wealth Scam 300 233 SOS Team

SJT Wealth Scam

SJT Wealth has purchased a list of investor details and has been writing out to those investors enclosing a particularly crappy brochure (see brochure link below):

SJT Wealth Scam Brochure

Just to be absolutely clear – this is not an advert for people to invest in this rubbish.

It’s hardly surprising the brochure is so bad. They bought the domain name of sjtwealth.com only twelve days ago. They are clearly desperate for money and wanted to get their scam out as early as possible.

It’s quite interesting because on the same day investors received this brochure, they also received an apparently unconnected approach from an organisation calling itself Premier Capital Finance. Premier Capital Finance is a follow-on-fraud. They are targeting the same investors offering to recover their money from the original scam. It’s clear to us that it’s the same group of scammers simply trying a different approach. They’ve sat down and said “Let’s run the standard recovery room scam, but also try our luck at getting them to invest in something new so we’ll need two fake organisations”.

We will write a separate Scam Alert on Premier Capital Finance.

Back to SJT Wealth, here is the email investors have been receiving:

From: n.collins@sjtwealth.com
Sent:
To:
Subject: SJT Wealth Introduction – Emergency Cash Out

Dear

As discussed, please find our current introduction brochure attached to this email.

The emergency cash out option provides clients with a quick and easy way to exit the market. This option is usually reserved for clients that have struggled to successfully retrieve their funds from an alternative asset.

As opposed to the clients continuously paying fees for the additional documentation required to achieve the full amount of funds, we simply release what we can from the account, based on the work that has already been completed.

This option is a guarantee, which is why many clients choose it. We aim to achieve at least 40-60% of the funds being held in escrow for you. You will be notified of the exact amount before the emergency cash out option is completed.

Best regards,

Nick Collins

SJT Wealth

0207 097 1640
www.sjtwealth.com
International House, 24 Holborn Viaduct, London, EC1A 2BN

I’ll be honest, we couldn’t work out what the fictitious Nick Collins was actually saying. We came to the conclusion that he’s using the triple B approach  –  Bull**it Baffles Brains.

Be warned. If you receive an approach from the SJT Wealth scam DO NOT RESPOND.

 

Merydion Hotel Freeholds

Merydion Hotel Freeholds 500 333 SOS Team

Merydion Hotel Freeholds.

We first notified investors in Merydion hotels that they had been the victims of a scam in June 2020.  Some of them refused to believe it and accused us of being the scammers.  They then picked our brains for a while and some of them were persuaded to go off to do their own thing whilst others decided to work with us.

Everything we told them has been proven to be correct.  Unfortunately, as a result of the actions of some Merydion investors we have changed our policy and no longer provide any detailed information on recovery options to non-clients.  We always advise investors not to blindly follow leadership of any investor they do not personally know.  Quite often some room owners are sales agents who are on the side of the scammer.  They accept a room as payment instead of commission because they don’t want their commissions to show up.  Sometimes these people take the lead in groups in order to ensure there’s a lot of talk and no action taken against the scammer. Information is then fed back to the scammer.  It always happens.  There’s always one person who will look after number one.  That is why we keep tight-lipped about what we know and we do not share it unless it benefits our clients.

Michael McMahon, the initial owner of the Merydion hotel freeholds through his UK companies, has a tendency to use the services of convicted criminals.

For a period of time until his death in December 2020, Michael McMahon’s Client Liaison Manager was Tony Hilton.  You can read about his conviction in this newspaper article – LINK.

After his death the position was taken over by Sam Doyle.  You can read about her conviction in this newspaper article – LINK.

Michael McMahon has recently been working with former accountant, Geoff Langdale.  We’re expecting to see some of his creative accounting fairly soon.  You can read about his conviction in this newspaper article – LINK.

Michael McMahon and his hotel companies are toxic to genuine law firms.  He has been taking advice from struck-off solicitor, John Hardman.  LINK to the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority website. 

Michael McMahon’s hotels have not just defrauded room investors.  They have left a trail of debts involving tradespeople and couples who paid deposits for weddings.  Michael McMahon has ignored requests for refunds from many couples desperate to move on with their lives and book their weddings at another venue. They are doing their best to recover their money through the courts, but scammers like Michael McMahon do not worry about CCJs or legal threats.  He has two fears.  The first is having his companies closed down so that a thorough investigation can take place into the money trail.  The second is losing the cash and assets he has hidden away.

We have a very good idea of how much Michael McMahon has stolen and we also believe we know what he has done with it.  That information cannot be made public.  However, what we can say is that in March and April of this year Michael McMahon secretly incorporated several new offshore companies.  He then filed documents shortly after at the Land Registry recording that the ownership of the freeholds of three of his four hotels had been transferred to these new offshore companies.  The freeholds are, according to these filings, owned by companies incorporated in a country which does not recognise insolvency action.

In other words, three of McMahon’s current freehold-owning companies based in the UK will be empty and have no assets.  He clearly believes no action can be taken against his new companies because that jurisdiction does not recognise insolvency.  We have been monitoring this for a while and have a strategy in place for our clients.

After Michael McMahon had incorporated these companies, he wrote to room owners asking them to surrender their leases so that the hotels could be sold.  He did not tell them he had transferred the freeholds of three of the hotels to the offshore companies.  He promised that the proceeds of the sale would be shared amongst the room owners.  He then pretended that he had every intention of selling the hotels when, in fact, he had already transferred them.  We knew he had no intention of sharing the proceeds and we informed him that we knew what he was up to.  The money was always going to be sent offshore beyond the reach of creditors.

Once a scammer is sitting on a large pot of money it is always much more difficult to take action.  He has the potential to out-fund any action taken against him.

The situation for our client group is not as bad as it appears because we have irons in the fire.  We do not know whether other creditors are in the same position.

To view our previous article on the Merydion Hotels Scam please click here.

Merydion Hotel Freeholds.

 

Lee Bramzell IVA Non-Disclosure

Lee Bramzell IVA Non-Disclosure 500 333 SOS Team

Lee Bramzell IVA Non-Disclosure.

We recently wrote an article about the Lee Bramzell IVA in which we said it was passed with 79% of the vote. LINK to article here.  We were wrong.  An IVA needs 75% of creditors to support it in order for it to succeed.  The actual votes cast in favour of the IVA at the meeting was 75.24%.  That’s what you call winning by the skin of your teeth.

The difference was due to the fact that some key supporters of Lee Bramzell did not cast their vote.  These were led by Lee Bramzell’s long-term ally and business partner Emmanuel Ezekiel.  He represented Scott Cole, St James Investment Trust, Gary Weber, Weber Investment Properties Ltd and Sharon Woolf (J.B.W Pension).  A fine and trustworthy body if ever there was one. Very long-term and close associates of Lee Bramzell.

The feeling amongst some of those who opposed the IVA was that this group had been informed in advance that the IVA was going to scrape through so did not need to cast their votes.  We have been advised that some of Ezekiel’s group, including Mr Ezekiel himself, have charges over Mr Bramzell’s assets.  Had they voted it would have affected their ability to enforce those charges.  It was important to them that they knew whether or not the vote would pass without their votes.

The opposition group feel that some creditors who also had charges were tricked into voting to support the IVA believing that Mr Ezekiel’s group would do the same.  The deceit never stops where Shepherd Cox directors are concerned.  The 79% figure we quoted was because Purnells stated that the Ezekiel group said that “they would have voted in favour of the IVA”.  But the fact is that they did not vote, thereby preserving their privileged position. There must be quite a few creditors who feel they’ve been royally stitched up by Lee Bramzell’s closest creditor friends and those who rallied them to support the IVA.

We also described in our previous article about the Lee Bramzell IVA Non-Disclosure.  He did not inform Purnells of the existence of a winding up petition which, if upheld, would have serious repercussions in terms of Mr Bramzell’s ability to make the payments he estimated he could make to creditors.

We wrote to Purnells and referred them to our article.  Purnells then wrote out to creditors informing them of the existence of the petition and that they had now spoken to Lee Bramzell who advised them that one of his staff had sent him an email containing the petition on the day before the hearing.  Well, that’s true, but it is a very selective account of events.  It appears from the Purnells letter that they had not, at any time, been informed of either the threat or the existence of a winding up petition.

We have seen emails confirming that Mr Bramzell was informed a petition would be filed against SCH Sunderland.  The first email was sent on 18th July 2021 and was acknowledged by Mr Bramzell.  He was then sent a copy of the draft petition on 21st July which was also acknowledged by him.  He was sent the final petition on 26th July 2021.  It appears that Mr Bramzell didn’t declare that sequence of events to Purnells either. We believe the petition has a strong chance of being successful because the debt fell due pre-Covid and had already been part-paid.

We weren’t impressed by the sentence in the Purnell’s letter which read “For whatever reason this information was not provided, by anyone, to the Joint Nominees until after the creditors meeting”.  There is only one person who is legally obliged to inform Purnells of any development which affects the IVA Proposal and that person is Lee Bramzell.  If the petition was sent to Mr Bramzell in order to test his honesty with creditors then he failed miserably.  It does not bode well for the future.

In contrast, Luqa Ltd sent an email to Purnell’s just before the hearing which was circulated to creditors. Lee Bramzell sent out a detailed response to that email two hours before the hearing. He had to deal with the Luqa email because it had been circulated, but he had chosen to keep quiet about the winding up petition. He could easily have added a line to his Luqa response stating that he had recently been served with a winding up petition over SCH Sunderland.

Surprisingly, instead of stating that the IVA had failed for due to the Lee Bramzell IVA non-disclosure of important material potentially affecting his ability to make payments, Purnells decided to uphold the vote and is asking creditors if knowledge of the petition would have affected the way they voted.  Errrr…. isn’t the IVA process clear ?  Debtor discloses all relevant facts – creditors vote.  If debtor covers up the extent of his debt or does not disclose all relevant information, the vote for the IVA should be failed.  Non-disclosure is a criminal offence. You can’t just ignore it like it’s a minor issue.

To add further insult to 240+ ordinary hotel room investors who lost more than £15m at the hands of Lee Bramzell, Purnells decided to allocate them £6 worth of voting rights.  £15.2m of claims against Lee Bramzell were reduced to a value of £6 for voting purposes.  This was in stark contract to Nick Carlile’s IVA where the full value of £15.2m was allocated for voting purposes. 

Purnells took legal advice on whether they could do this and they admitted that the advice was that each of the six Shepherd Cox companies’ claims could be valued at £1 under insolvency law “unless the Chair decided to put a higher value on them”.  Their words.  The Chair had discretion to recognise the losses of 240+ investors which averaged out at around £63,000 each.  The Chair of the Nick Carlile IVA allowed those claims at full value.  The Chair of Lee Bramzell’s IVA chose to value every £63,000 loss at 2.5 pence each.

Purnells will be paid £50,000 over the next 5 years if Lee Bramzell’s IVA goes through.

 

SFO Investigation Into Room Sales

SFO Investigation Into Room Sales 350 225 SOS Team

SFO Investigation Into Room Sales.

Yesterday the UK’s Serious Fraud Office announced an investigation into the sale of hotel rooms and care home rooms by Gavin Woodhouse.  See LINK for a BBC Report on the investigation.

Quoting the report:  “The SFO said it is investigating suspected fraud and money laundering in relation to the conduct of business by Gavin Woodhouse and individuals and companies associated with him” [our bold].  We assume that may include Robin Forster of the MBI companies, Qualia Care companies, and Property Alternative Holdings companies. Mr Woodhouse and Mr Forster are long-term associates having both been directors or shareholders in each other’s companies.

We hope the investigation will include the people involved in the subsequent recovery room scam where investors in Gavin Woodhouse’s companies AND Robin Forster’s companies were encouraged to pay money for highly questionable ‘legal services’. The solicitor and law firm had no experience of insolvency and acted for clients who had sold the scam, using them as introducers.  The people described as investor co-ordinators were primarily those involved in some way in the sale of the rooms to investors.  The solicitor, law firm and investor co-ordinators all declined to comment on who was being paid out of investor money. We hold emails from this group which made false statements about being room owners themselves when they were not and exaggerated the skills and experience of the solicitor.

We will be contacting the SFO, as will others who have been concerned about the recovery room element, to request that it investigate other similar room scams such as Carlauren Group (where the same recovery room group offered its services), St Camillus (where once again the same recovery room group offered its services), Shepherd Cox Hotels where rooms that did not exist were sold, and Merydion Hotels where Michael McMahon, the founder, is currently exploring ways to get himself out of his scam operation. One of Mr McMahon’s companies, Merydion Corporation Ltd, was recently closed down by the Secretary Of State on the grounds of being involved in money-laundering and tax evasion.

We hope that this is just the start of a crackdown on all parties involved in room scams.

SFO Investigation Into Room Sales.

 

High Street Group and Bondreview

High Street Group and Bondreview 400 300 SOS Team

High Street Group and Bondreview .

Last month Safe Or Scam took over the management of the bondreview site – LINK to website following the retirement of the previous owners.

Some people have questioned why there are no articles on High Street Group on that website.  We do not know the full story behind it and have no interest in the reasons, but it was a condition of the takeover that we agree to not publish anything on that site relating to High Street GRP Ltd, Gary Forrest or High Street Commercial Finance Limited (“High Street Group”).

Since the takeover we have been contacted several times by an intermediary seeking reassurances that we would honour our pledge.  It seems that High Street Group do not trust us not to publish.  They are apparently concerned that we have not publicly declared our position.  Therefore, we now publicly declare our position in this article.

Safe Or Scam will not re-publish previous bondreview articles relating to High Street Group on the bondreview site, nor will we publish new articles written by Safe Or Scam or any third party relating to High Street Group on the bondreview site. 

That should be enough for them.  We gave our word to the previous owners and we stand by it.  This was the only condition. No other scam or defaulting investment is excluded and never will be.

However, it has been made clear to High Street Group that this promise does not extend to this website.

We have written articles on High Street Group before (here’s a LINK to our previous article) and will do so again.  In fact, we expect to write one in the next few weeks so keep your eyes peeled for it.

High Street Group must have been concerned that the original bondreview articles painted them in a bad light which they felt was unjustified.  We think it unlikely any article could damage High Street Group any more than they damage themselves.  The failure to file accounts for more than two years, the resignation of the independent auditor on the grounds that it was unable to verify figures quoted in the draft accounts despite repeated efforts to do so, the suspension of bond interest payments to investors, the refusal to repay long overdue capital to investors and the recent allegedly successful attempt to deny investors their lawful right to take action to recover their investment capital, does far more damage than a few articles reporting on those facts.

The vote to remove all Events Of Default from the Bond Instrument was, according to High Street Group, carried by the necessary majority.  That vote is to be challenged.  It was organised with the assistance of the inappropriately named “Security Trustee”.  An organisation which was described in marketing material as being in place to protect the interests of investors.  Clearly that is not the case.

Where can you find the Security Trustee ?  Try looking in Gary Forrest’s trouser pocket.  In fact, trouser pockets are where you will find most “Security Trustees”.  They’re employed for two reasons.

1. To provide false reassurance to investors; and

2. To protect the party which pays them.

High Street Group and Bondreview .

 

Lee Bramzell IVA Approved

Lee Bramzell IVA Approved 500 333 SOS Team

Lee Bramzell IVA Approved ……… or is it ?

On the afternoon of 29th July 2021, the latest IVA Proposal of Lee Bramzell was approved by the creditors who had been accepted by Purnells Licensed Insolvency Practitioners – LINK to Purnells website.

However, as is becoming standard practice with Mr Bramzell the IVA was not without contentious issues, allegations of misleading creditors and the usual failure to disclose all relevant facts.

This was compounded by the fact that creditors ended up split into five groups.

Group 1 was the Lee Bramzell supporters who had done very well out of their long-term relationship with Shepherd Cox and Lee Bramzell, many of them right from the very beginning.  That group did not want Lee Bramzell to be made bankrupt because that could have brought their transactions into the limelight.  There have been allegations of favourable treatment, funds being siphoned off, high commissions to introducers etc.  This group is characterised by the Ezekiels and their allies, the introducers (those who ran organised investor pitching events) and the facilitators (those who helped establish the SPVs through which people could invest).

Group 2 was the parties involved in the administration of several of the hotels and against whom Lee Bramzell states he is preparing a legal claim e.g Tony Murphy of Harrisons, Elliot Webster of Luqa Ltd, and Peter Shakeshaft of FHG and Minories B Ltd.  Luqa Ltd sent an email to Purnells for circulation to creditors alleging that Lee Bramzell had not disclosed all relevant issues and was misleading the creditors.  It was sent on 28th July 2021, the day before the hearing.  Lee Bramzell replied to it on 29th July 2021 and it was then sent out by Purnells to creditors two hours before the hearing.  Nice move.  We will return to the disclosure issue because it may well have relevance as to whether or not the IVA approval is to be challenged.

Group 3 was the bulk of creditors who really didn’t know who to believe.  There were so many accusations, denials and counter-accusations, that creditors were being asked to vote on the basis of not knowing what was fact and what was fiction.  Could Lee Bramzell really rise like a Pheonix and repay them, or was he blagging and they would end up with nothing, or was a bankruptcy the best option so that they would at least get something out of it ?  It’s no wonder the majority of them lent towards the Phoenix scenario and supported the IVA proposal.  The decision was based on hope more than judgement.

Group 4 was those investors who felt that they had been misled from the moment they gave their money to Lee Bramzell.  They wanted to hold him to account.  They wanted bankruptcy and an investigation.  They also wanted to know the truth about the involvement of the Group 1 creditors and whether there had been any dishonesty. If there had, then the Group 1 investors could potentially be open to legal action.

Group 5 was those creditors whose claims Purnells had declined to recognise at full value.  Predominant amongst those was the administrator of six Shepherd Cox hotel companies who was acting on behalf of the creditors of those companies i.e more than 200 room investors who have claims of around £16m.  Had Purnells recognised those claims the IVA would have failed miserably and Lee Bramzell would be bankrupt.  You can’t fight voting power of £16m+.  Purnells chose not to recognise those claims at full value, thereby supporting the person who appointed them.  We believe the IVA approval may well be challenged on that point.

Before we move on we should mention the fact that an IVA Proposal must be truthful and include all issues which may have a bearing on the proposer’s ability to deliver on his commitments.  An IVA Proposal is a legal document and as such, to falsify or fail to disclose information is a criminal offence.

In Mr Bramzell’s IVA Proposal and in the period between issuance and the hearing, Mr Bramzell informed creditors of some developments e.g new IVA amendments and he answered creditor questions.  He declared at the time of signing the IVA Proposal his FHG Group owned five hotels (down from ten in the original IVA).  The remaining hotels were:

The Bridge Hotel & Spa;

The Three Ways House Hotel;

The Wroxton House Hotel;

The Olde Barn Hotel;

The Comfort Inn Sunderland.

He declared that Luqa Ltd had approached the bank lenders at The Bridge Hotel & Spa and The Three Ways House Hotel to take over their positions and that this might result in those hotels being repossessed by the senior lender.  That would reduce the portfolio down to three hotels.  He had already declared that “he was preparing an action” against the Group 2 parties.  Creditors should have recognised that “preparing an action” is not the same as having started an action.  Preparations can easily be halted once an IVA Proposal has been approved.

However, it has come to our attention that neither Lee Bramzell nor Purnells advised creditors of an important development which would detrimentally affect the calculations of potential returns to creditors.  A winding up petition has been filed against the Comfort Inn Sunderland.  That petition, if successful, would result in the loss of this property from the FHG portfolio.  FHG could effectively be down to two properties only. The petition has not been filed by a Group 2 creditor and there is no question of this creditor being subject to any “preparing an action” proceedings by FHG because it is clear that the creditor has a valid claim.

The Comfort Inn Sunderland is described in Lee Bramzell’s IVA Proposal as “A former Premier Inn, which was rebranded by Shepherd Cox. Again, significant revenue streams from parking and located next to the new Northern Spire Bridge in Sunderland”.  Significant revenue streams which are now under threat.  The loss of that hotel would significantly impact on the ability of Lee Bramzell to meet his commitments to creditors. It should have been disclosed.

We have been informed that the petition was served on him on Monday 26th July 2021.  Ample time for creditors to have been informed prior to the hearing.  That information was not disclosed to creditors and the question is “If creditors had been informed of an insolvency action against this hotel would it have been enough to make 2% of them change their vote and decline to support the IVA”?  The IVA was approved on a 79% in favour, 21% against count.  An IVA needs 75% approval to be passed.  We think it would have had a material effect on the vote because creditors would have seen that the FHG portfolio was falling apart. We do not know whether there have been any actions taken against the remaining hotels, but if this petition was not disclosed then perhaps there are other issues which have been covered up.

So, who suppressed this information ?  Clearly Lee Bramzell did.  Did anyone else in a position of authority decide not to advise creditors ?

At the beginning of the article we made the statement “Lee Bramzell IVA Approved ……. or is it”?  We believe this non-disclosure of an important factor is likely to result in an appeal and the IVA approval being rescinded.  That is assuming Purnells does not take action itself to declare the vote invalid.  We await developments.  It’s never simple and straightforward where Lee Bramzell is concerned.

Lee Bramzell IVA Approved …… or is it ?

To view our previous article please click HERE.

 

Scam Alert

Zehnder Consultants Scam

Zehnder Consultants Scam 300 233 SOS Team

Zehnder Consultants Scam.

Scammers have been telephoning people who invested in Westway Holdings bonds and Blackmore bonds with a new attempt at a follow-on-fraud.  The Zehnder Consultants scam could easily have been titled the Securities Best Inc scam because the initial approach is made under the name of ‘Securities Best Inc’.  If they get a response from an intended victim they pass that person over to ‘Zehnder Consultants’, but the two bogus organisations will continue to work together to perpetrate the scam.

Securities Best claims to be based in New York and is using the fake share model.  A man calling himself Stuart Jones contacts investors telling them that shares in a company called International Bonds have been reserved for them.  Stuart sends out a fake share certificate in the intended victim’s name and tells him/her that the certificate is “currently restricted” because the investor has to sign some documents.  Stuart tells the victim that he/she will be contacted by Zehnder Consultants who can arrange to have the restriction lifted, but there is a fee to be paid.  If they pay the fee they will end up owning the shares and will be able to sell them.  Stuart says that International Bonds is expecting to be paid for the shares, but they already have a buyer in place who has agreed to pay a lot more than the investor has to pay.

If the intended victim says they’ve never heard of International Bonds and cannot understand why they have shares in it, Stuart tells them that International Bonds has bought up the bonds issued by companies like Westway Holdings and Blackmore and that is how the investor has this chance to get shares in the company at a bargain price and immediately sell them to their buyer.

Here’s the follow-up email which arrives after the first call from Securities Best.

From:  stuartjones@securities-best.com

Following our conversation, please find attached, the documentation required for you to complete and sign to process the sale of your shares.

i. Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA).
ii. Private Share Purchase Agreement (PSPA)
iii. Payment Settlement Agreement (PSA)

Important  –  Please confirm receipt of this email.

After your perusal, we ask that you initial each page and sign each document where indicated this will allow us to process your sale and execute all legal processes.

Once all documents have been completed please send back the signed copies to the email address stated.  Send your signed documents in good legible order.

Once your documents have been returned they will be submitted to the compliance department to ensure all is in good order.

If however, you do not wish to actively pursue the sale,  then please notify us by return so we can forward you a Notice of Default which you need to complete and return so we may notify the relevant parties involved that you do not wish to proceed.

We are currently processing a large number of applications regarding this matter and therefore we are facing specific deadlines and would ask that you return your paperwork promptly so as not to delay proceedings.

Should you have any questions regarding the completion of these documents, please contact feel free to contact me back.

Regards,

Stuart Jones

Acquisition Adviser

Securities Best Inc

www.securities-best.com

134 Broadway, Brooklyn, New York, 11211

Tel. +1 (917) 200 9541

This is a transmission from Securities Best Inc and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and protected by the attorney-client or attorney work-product privileges. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this email is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete it and notify us immediately at our telephone number +1 (917) 200 9541

The Securities-Best website domain name was purchased three months ago in May 2021.

As promised, the intended victim then receives a call from Zehnder Consultants and the follow-up email below:

From:  alan.jones@zehnderconsultants.com

Following our conversation, I’ve since been in contact with your legal representative Mr Stuart Jones in New York. I’ve expressed my concerns regarding potential deadlines with Stuart and he’s scheduled an appointment for me to speak to the head of accounts over the next hour. Therefore, I’m hoping to try and implement some security measures for you within this transaction.

I will update you accordingly, however, should you need any assistance or any questions answered then feel free to contact me.

Regards,

Alan Jones

Senior Portfolio Manager

Zehnder Consultants

www.zehnderconsultants.com

So now the Securities-Best guy has apparently become the intended victim’s “legal representative”.

Within 24 hours the Zehnder Consultants scammers are back with good news (see below):

From:  alan.jones@zehnderconsultants.com

I have now received back a signed copy of the Advanced Payment Guarantee from Securities Best Inc.

Once signed and returned by you it will mean that funds can be pre-booked in Escrow under your name, meaning, that at this stage all risk regarding time frame and available funds in Escrow has been eliminated.

I am hoping to receive some form of a response from Transfer Agents today and will update you accordingly. If you have any queries regarding the Advanced Payment Guarantee or anything else then, please feel free to contact me at any time.

Regards,

Alan Jones

Senior Portfolio Manager

Zehnder Consultants

Here is a LINK to the Zehnder Consultants scam website.  The domain name of zehnderconsultants.com was purchased in November 2020.  The gap between the dates of the two websites (Zehnder Consultants in Nov 2020 and Securities-Best Inc in May 2021) suggests that Zehnder Consultants was being used in other scams before the same team of scammers moved on to using the name of Securities Best Inc.

Here is an excerpt from the Zehnder Consultants website:

Zehnder Consultants was incorporation in July 2006 and is today considered one of the world’s leading global venture capital and private equity institutions.

Here at Zehnder Consultants we have an International team of financial experts who are all dedicated to our client’s success. With multiple offices located around the world, we attend to all global markets and cover every corner of the globe.

So, “one of the world’s leading global venture capital and private equity institutions”, which claims it was established in 2006, didn’t buy a website domain until the end of 2020 !  Pull the other one.  The website is plush and believable.  They’ve spent some money on establishing their scam profile.  The company claims to offer shares in Alibaba, Tesla, Alphabet, nVidia, Apple etc but the reality is that it is all a complete scam.

How does the scam work ?  The initial effort is designed to get the intended victim to pay the fee to lift the restriction on the shares, but they aren’t satisfied with just the one fee from their victim.  In the first email they attached three documents.  One was a NDA.  This is designed to prevent the intended victim from discussing this with anyone else and is often used to frighten the victim later on to stop them seeking help.  The other two documents were the PSPA and the PSA.

The PSPA (Private Share Purchase Agreement) effectively commits the intended victim to purchasing the shares. They are told that the shares have to be paid for, but they don’t have to worry because the funds are being provided by their buyer.  The PSA (Payment Settlement Agreement) lays out the terms of how and when the payment for the shares will be made. It is the intended victim who signs these contracts, not the mysterious buyer.

In other identical fake share scams which use the same model, the victims have later been informed that the buyer has withdrawn its offer to buy the shares.  The scammers told their victims that they signed the PSA and PSPA so the company, International Bonds, is expecting to be paid for those shares.  They have insisted that the victim has to pay.  Most victims never realise that this was always a scam. The scammers agree to accept a low first payment to help the victim out, but this is just a smokescreen. They come back time after time for more money. When the investor refuses to pay they bring in a bogus law firm allegedly based in the USA.  This firm threatens legal action in the USA against the victim for breach of contract.

This fake share scam model is particularly nasty and can cause a lot of anguish for the people who fall victim to it.

Zehnder Consultants Scam.

 

Intercare Wealth and Coastal Supported Living

Intercare Wealth and Coastal Supported Living 320 400 SOS Team

Intercare Wealth and Coastal Supported Living.

Last week we published three articles titled Intercare Wealth Scam, Parkmount Group Scam, and Coastal Supported Living Scam.  There are links to those three articles at the bottom of this page.

The gist of those three articles was that Rav Singh Dhillon, Amandeep Saur, Ansar Ali (aka Adam Ali, Ansar Noor), Shuma Ali (aka Shuma Noor, Shuma Noor-Ali) were colluding to carry out a series of scams on investors. It’s a complex arrangement where efforts had been made to make the scams appear to be separate entities controlled by unrelated parties, but the reality is that they are all part of one big scam. Hopefully the three articles explained the steps in the scam in a way that readers could understand.

We’ve now had further supporting evidence which links the Intercare Wealth scam to the Coastal Supported Living Scam. This evidence has come in the form of an email from Rav Singh using the email address of intercarewealth@outlook.com.  Here is a copy of his email below:

Dear,
I would like to thank you for your interest in investing with Intercare Wealth and Supported Living / Accommodation.
This particular newsletter has been constructed to offer you further insight into the Company, our business model and ethos. We operate on both sides of this industry by working with Sophisticated / High Net Worth Investors through Intercare Wealth LTD to build Purpose Built Homes and we also manage and provide the care for the tenants via our fully registered and regulated care business “Coastal Supported Living”
You can take a look at our Care Home set up and read in more depth by visiting this link to the Coastal Housing website
I am often asked how the investment into Intercare Wealth is protected, and the simple answer here is that your investment is secured against the asset itself. In most cases the Mortgage Lender will have a 1st charge on the asset and you the investor will have a second charge. If a decision is made (dependent on investor funds) to purchase the house without finance, the investor will have 1st charge on the asset.
As a regulated care home provider and registered with the CQC all of our offerings for monthly and yearly dividends are guaranteed and Government backed. This agreement can last up to 10 – 15 years, solidifying the income further.
Returns range from 8-15% depending on the level of the investment and the structure of the project, however all investments from £150,000 + provide an annual return of 15% with dividends paid monthly.
The demand for purpose build accommodation is currently at an all time high post Covid and we have a number of opportunities open to build homes for those that need them most.
For further information, you can book a consultation with me by clicking on the link below:
Meet With Rav Singh.
Best,
Rav Singh

Here’s a LINK to Meet with Rav Singh

It is important to point out that the monthly and yearly dividends are not guaranteed and they are certainly not Government backed. 

The email confirms that Intercare Wealth and Coastal Supported Living are part of a process which would enable scammers to get involved in the Supported Living sector. Each part was compartmentalised to make it appear separate and unrelated. There are currently 9 companies owned by Shuma Ali or Ansar Ali (or their aliases) which are overdue on their filings at Companies House and are subject to Striking Off applications.

See our previous articles on these linked scams below.

ARTICLE 1 – INTERCARE WEALTH SCAM – LINK

ARTICLE 2 – PARKMOUNT GROUP SCAM – LINK

ARTICLE 3 – COASTAL SUPPORTED LIVING SCAM – LINK

 

Scam Alert

BitIndexFarm Scam

BitIndexFarm Scam 300 233 SOS Team

BitIndexFarm Scam

BitIndexFarm is using a fake trading platform as cover for a Ponzi Scheme.  We received the following enquiry from a BitIndexFarm investor through our Contact page:

Dear Sirs

BitIndexFarm is a scam.

Please advise anyone you know who is at the verge of taking an investment decision not to fall into this trap. Any money less than $500 you invest into this platform will be refunded with 20% interest in 24 hours, but anything more will be absorbed by their system and they will start using new vocabulary which they had never mentioned before like, auto-invest, kick-start, ROD…

Don’t buy into all of these. It is a scam. They convince most people to join through a private Telegram group known as BitIndexFarm, similar to their website. In this group, they show fake withdrawals they claim people have made so that no one doubts the authenticity.

Permit me tell you that the only thing which is authentic about these guys is their thieving scheme. The admin of the Telegram group is the same team that acts like the support desk. So they have all the information to manipulate you while you keep on dropping in your hard-earned money in hope to cash out a jackpot when the time comes.

Unfortunately, this is just a dream. Please advise people not to invest a dime into this website.

We took a look at the BitIndexFarm website – LINK to website hereUPDATE: 5th August 2021 – the BitIndexFarm website has now been removed.

We were able to confirm that it was a scam within a couple of minutes. On one page they have provided a copy of the company’s Certificate Of Incorporation (see below).  The certificate is fake.  It is a copy of a standard UK Certificate Of Incorporation and includes the words “The Registrar of Companies for England and Wales hereby certifies that…….”.  It then says “Given at Companies House , Amsterdam……”.  The last time we looked Amsterdam was in the Netherlands, not the UK.  Maybe it was part of a secret Brexit deal.  “Boris, we want your fish and we’re prepared to give you Amsterdam in exchange”.

Just for good measure we checked with the UK’s Companies House (admittedly it wasn’t the new Amsterdam branch) and there is no record of a company called Bit Index Farm.  Neither is there a record of any company with the company number of 26432786.

On the FAQ page of their website the first question is:  What is BitIndexFarm ?  Their answer is:

BitIndexFarm.net is an online investment platform who was appointed representative of BitIndexFarm.net who are authorised and regulated by the United Kingdom Company House Authority under firm reference number 234512. This information can be verified on the Company House website. BitIndexFarm.net is registered in England No. 153. Registered office, Wellington St, Leeds, United Kingdom

The opening sentence doesn’t actually make sense.  It’s like saying “I can speak for myself because I have appointed myself to act as my representative”.  There is no “United Kingdom Company House Authority”.  The organisation which authorises and regulates forex trading platforms in the UK is the Financial Conduct Authority.  We checked their records. BitIndexFarm.net is not registered with them and there is no firm registered with the number of 234512.  BitIndexFarm.net is a scam.

How does the BitIndexFarm scam work ?  Well, we’ve seen this a few times. They offer four different bogus trading plans which are as follows:

PLAN A  –  invest $50 and receive your money back + 20% interest in 24 hours.

PLAN B  –  invest $500 or more and receive your money back + 50% interest in 48 hours.

PLAN C  –  invest $2,000 or more and receive your money back + 200% in 48 hours.

PLAN D  –  invest $3,000 or more and receive your money back + 400% in 5 days.

Let’s say you’re tempted to invest.  How much would you start with ?   Most investors would start with the minimum investment of $50 just to see what happens.

Lo and behold, the $50 investors get a full refund + 20% interest within 24 hours.  They’ve made a $10 profit.  This is called “using a sprat to catch a mackerel”.  BitIndexFarm pays out on the  small amount because the scammers know the investor is certain to increase their investment once they receive their payout.  After all, who wouldn’t want to make 200%+ on their money in a couple of days ?

The sums quoted above are minimum investment levels for each of those plans.  The BitIndexFarm scam allows people invest up to $100,000.  As soon as someone has invested into PLAN B, C or D they suddenly find that BitIndexFarm isn’t paying out as they promised .  As the enquirer above wrote in the Contact Form, BitIndexFarm comes up with an excuse why they are not paying out.

When an investor opens an account they don’t pay their money to a bank account.  They have to open a digital currency account e.g a Bitcoin account and pay into that account.  The money is then used to purchase digital currency for the scammers which makes it untraceable.  The BitIndexFarm scam website has a Terms & Conditions page.  Several of the clauses are designed to prevent investors from taking action against them, but the clauses aren’t enforceable.  It’s not possible to have clauses which effectively say “It is a condition of joining this platform that if I steal your money you cannot prosecute me”.

In another twist, BitIndexFarm offers investors a “Trading Class” membership which costs $5,000 for three months.  Here is a short video from the website produced by “Andrew”.  Not sure why he believes filming a selfie on his mobile phone in front of a hotel pool is the best way to get his message across. Maybe he’s really a pool cleaner ?

 

Can’t wait for Andrew’s next video.  Let’s hope he’s not going to attempt to explain the complexities of crypto-currency trading while sat on the toilet.

If investors can find these people they can prosecute them, but finding them will not be easy.  We’ve seen versions of this same scam being operated by scammers in Asia and in Eastern Europe.

BitIndexFarm Scam.

 

Scam Alert

Burton & Bailey Escrow Scam

Burton & Bailey Escrow Scam 300 233 SOS Team

Burton & Bailey Escrow Scam

Burton & Bailey are operating a follow-on-fraud targeting the victims of investment scams.  We were contacted by a woman who had invested in the Park First scam after she was contacted by one of the Burton & Bailey scammers and she wanted to know whether they were genuine or not.  They are not genuine.  It is a follow-on-fraud.

They use the domain name of burtonbailey.com which was purchased less than three months ago on 30th April 2021.  They have been able to publish a website in that time – LINK to website here.  The website looks professional and it is easy to see why some of their intended victims will be taken in by it.

According to the website the company is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, but the Home Page has a lot of detail on The Enterprise Investment Scheme (“EIS”) which is a UK Government tax-efficient investment scheme !  Not sure what relevance that has at all to the alleged business of Burton & Bailey.  Sometimes scammers want to make it appear that they know what they are talking about so they’ll pick up text from any financial website and use it on their site.  That is what they have done here.

For example, this section below is from the Burton & Bailey Escrow Scam website:

Early stage businesses who have raised finance under the EIS scheme may fall victim to the difficult market conditions. EIS relief requires a business to meet certain relevant conditions throughout a 3 year period from the date of investment, so what does it mean for investors who claimed tax relief on their investments if a business goes into liquidation in this timeframe?

Income Tax – Relief Withdrawal:

–    If the EIS company goes into liquidation within (generally) three years of the share issue, Income Tax relief originally given is clawed back.  The amount clawed back is 30% of any value received on liquidation (up to a maximum of the relief originally given).
–    However, if the value received on liquidation is considered insignificant or no value is received at all, no Income Tax relief is withdrawn.

Capital Gains Tax Deferral – Relief Withdrawal:

–    If an EIS investment was used to defer a capital gain, this gain will become chargeable on the liquidation.

Use of Losses:

–    If the liquidation proceeds are less than the original investment a loss arises. This loss is reduced by any Income Tax relief not withdrawn.
–    The loss can be set against income in the year of the disposal or the preceding year.
–    Alternatively, the loss can be set against capital gains made in the year of the loss, or carried forward to be set against future capital gains arising.

It has been lifted word for word from the website of Bishop Fleming, a reputable UK company.  Here is a LINK to the section on the Bishop Fleming website.

We have copied below the email which the investor received.  The investor was initially cold-called on her home telephone.

From: Admin | Burton & Bailey

Sent:

To:

Subject: Burton & Bailey Introduction

Dear

Thanks for speaking with us earlier today.

As explained over the telephone, we are currently carrying out a few legal checks on your active investment. Typically these checks consist of asset authenticity, its value (if any), and eligibility for any potential sale.

 Please allow 1-2 working days for these checks to complete. Once completed, we will be in contact with any results we feel are pertinent to discuss in terms of any potential sale opportunity.

In the meantime and in order to support the best possible outcome for your case, please provide as much information as you can regarding your investment for us to investigate. If you have any proof of ownership documents such as bond or share certificates, payment confirmations, etc. please send them in for us to review accordingly.

In the meantime, should you require further information on our company, you can view our website online at www.burtonbailey.com.

 Should you wish to reach us by telephone, you can reach us on our free-phone number at 0800 031 8239. Please note however there may be waiting times with this method of contact.

We will be in touch with you in due course.

Kind regards,

Michael Trainor

We were able to warn the investor straight away that this was a scam.  This investor, like many investors, has received several follow-on-fraud approaches in the past and we have been able to help her spot them.  She’s a woman of few words, but it’s nice to receive praise once in a while.  It’s a bit too short to put on our testimonial page, but here it is anyway.

Thanks

 You guys do an amazing job.

 

Burton & Bailey Escrow Scam.

 

    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