01516680386

When did Brian confirm the Westminster connection ??

Page 133 Paul,response to drafts ,from Brian

It's here Paul:

Let me explain about Westminster. When the scheme was set up the draft of the Capita Oak scheme was used and incorrectly it was never noticed by anyone. I have in my possession a document from HMRC registering the Westminster scheme with them on 6th December 2012 clearly showing that the scheme administrator to be Thames Trustees not and I repeat not Imperial, it never was Imperial it was always Thames. There is no point in me misleading you where would that get me

So, the same people that set up the Capita Oak scheme set up Westminster scheme if they were using the same draft then.

Finally.......we got there!



That's the question Brian confirmed

Well if you count "someone" using  the same set of paperwork for a scheme a  connection then fair enough...I agree with Joes comment...the same people that set up Capita Oak set up Westminster...end of.

Just that different people / trustees did the admin for the schemes

Point to make.  The administrator is different from the administration.  Did Ward and Salih process Westminster too?

Yes, Salih and Ward again.  And Perkins, Biggar, Duffel and Fowler.  If they registered Westminster with HMRC with Thames as Administrator that was wrong because the trust deed clearly states ITSL was the administrator.  The CO and Westminster trust deeds are similar but different.  When some of the ceding providers started asking for a trust deed because they were suspicious of the transfer requests, they were sent the deed and it names Thames as trustee and ITSL as administrator.  A director was appointed to Thames Trustees on 13.11.12 - Robert McGivern (who resigned in October 2013) and the fraudsters kept a picture of his signature so they could forge documents and letters. The governing document for a pension scheme is the trust deed which for Westminster clearly states that: 1.3 The sponsor appointed ITSL to be the Administrator of the Scheme for the purposes of s.270 of the 2004 Finance Act.  1.4 The Administrator applied to HMRC to register the Scheme (PSTR 00788986RE on 6.12.12).  However, in fact letters to ceding providers stated that transfer administration was handled by Salih at 31 Memorial Road.

In summary,  Capita oak and Westminster,  different team selection but same squad.

By the way..... If what she just said is true then that is fraud and the ceding providers must take action.

Interestingly, the ceding providers were starting to ask questions and reject some requests.  They started asking for the HMRC reg cert and trust deed.   Tom, Sarah, Alan, Anthony were certainly struggling with some cases and getting very frustrated.  But they managed to transfer 3.3 million before they had to abandon it because Barclays froze the bank account when they realised this was another scam like Capita Oak.

Was this just as capita was being set up then,because it ceding providers where aware before capita started requesting transfers, then ceding providers due diligence is certainly questionable

You are absolutely right.  That is  why I am putting complaints in to all the ceding providers and the Ombudsman.  If the HMRC registration stated Thames was the administrator and not ITSL then that is fraud.  Thanks for that btw Mr. Downs.  Most helpful.  Would you like a job?

Just looking at dates they must have been run at same time roughly, at what date did ceding providers become suspicious,and start requesting trust deeds? Do you have a rough idea ?

Round about May/June 2013: this one is quite funny, note about query from ceding provider: "18/6 - Letter response sent - - Scheme asking for provider address, trustee address, HMRC adminstrator and copy of trust deeds - 4/7 Scheme are now looking into the letter and with technical may take 10 days".  The ceding provider was BARCLAYS!  Here's another one regarding a Prudential transfer attempt: "14/6 - Letter drafted awaiting trustee signature - Letter in asking for deed, employment turst info including diretors, HMRC cert etc….. Leter on file 4/7 - Letter is due out to the scheme in due course for further info. 10/7 - Letter received requesting further info. 9/8 - Chasing requirements letter received. 9/9 - Another chasing requirements letter received." (note atrocious spelling).  Also one potential victim had a lucky escape (I hope). His pension pot was £3,853,883.00 but the ceding provider asked for trust deed, scheme booklet and annual accounts.  Which would have been tricky as Imperial and Premier Pension Transfers never kept proper accounts, just ragged spreadsheets.  If you want, I will send you both the Capita Oak and Westminster spreadsheets (redacted) and you can see for yourself.

Just curious, Downs & Co have lots of different limited companies: D&C 1, D&C 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11and 13.  What happened to 2 and 12?  And do you trade as Downs & Co Ltd or Downs & Co (Accountants) Ltd?  And who made death threats against Payne?  Perkins or Fowler?

Joe ,i can assure you that Westminster had no connection with imperial ,other than the person who set up the scheme . Miss brooks knows the answers but as I said yesterday she only attacks other people   I would dearly like to get the information from Metis law and hopefully that would at least prove that the investments were made . I accept that you have very patient  but there now appears to be people on this site making very wild statements and they do not identify themselves . I can do no more than I have done but I will continue to be active  .

Yesterday you as good as begged for my help ,now you start looking at companies I have formed ,in words that you will understand       What have my companies formed well before October 2014got to do with imperial  or more important got to do with you .

Would you phone me this morning at about 10,thanks

Hit a raw nerve have we Brian?