01516680386

The monies were coming in while Payne was director between 11.10.12 to 18.10.12, then while Burton was director between 22.10.12 to 19.11.12, then while Dunlop was director from 20.11.12 to 7.5.13.  Please can we have the professional indemnity insurance cover confirmation that has been repeatedly requested by me and various other people.

First monies went to ML on 20 / 11/ 12 four days after Burton came off. ..and Dunlop (  appointed by.......!?) went on....why??....HMRC screenshot of Westminster says scheme registered by Thames...

So who registered Thames?

So, as stated by others, nothing to do with Imperial. Can we stick to the accounts and valuations?

Why do you think SF do not want to communicate. ...with anyone ??....I don't think Imperial will have P.I (then again if it's passed all the monies to ML it won't need it.....same for Westminster  if it's done what it should have)..

Yes  no that's cleared up...hoping ML will reply to requests to get things moving this week

It is everything to do with Imperial.  ITSL was the administrator, just as in Capita Oak.  Same sponsoring employer: RP Medplant.  Same fraudsters behind it all.  Both Capita Oak and Westminster were operated by Ward and Salih who handled all the transfers, and Perkins/Fowler were behind both.

I will stand corrected if required ...but I genuinely believe that is not the case..I. e same.. and as I understand it, Karl Dunlop was appointed to Imperial  by James Hadley....and four days later the movements to Metis Law began. ....

It was Imperial's decision to invest, not ours.  We just carried out Imperial's instructions.  Imperial are responsible for the investment decision, not us.  All we did was carry out instructions from ITSL.  ITSL instructed us and also Store First.  The entire responsibility lies with ITSL.

I hear you guys

Hang on....ITSL instructed storefirst ?

So does this means that imperial are to mostly blame for all this fiasco?

Don't know who was pulling the strings  for Imperial John..we're  are getting somewhere though...I believe the posting from Metis was genuine...though as usual will stand corrected  if I discover it was someone else...

Hi raj we have spoken, why won't TW agree to a valuation? And was they over valued , if do why did you not pick up on it and hold off or at least query it, you have a duty if care surely ?

Come on guys would a firm of solicitors post on here after all that's going on, I count Imperial mentioned 6 times.
Some one trying to divert attention, its not rocket science guys ask yourself who had authority to add or remove directors.
Who's scheme was it in the first place.
Who gets the biggest cut in Admin and a share of the 20-30 % commission.
Who's idea was it to invest in storage units ??

Joe...it's not them posting..I've spoken to Raj a minute ago

Well it wasn't genuine was it, so you got that one wrong Paul

Well I dragged them out of a restaurant on a Saturday night for them to tell me ..so unless  they've turned against one another then it wasn't Metis..it wasn't

Oh dear you interrupted their Sat night, eating out, glad they can afford it

Sandwich on a park bench