01516680386

There is no one looking after the investment, and like you i am sure the units are sitting empty gathering dust...how nuch demand can we have for self storage in this country. TW made his money and can make his pods look successful, capita and imperial made off with massive funds.
Im sure there is a lot of work going on in the background but this forum has turned in to a sham.
If it really is Brian Downs posting on here i wouldnt have him as my accountant!!!
The right action needs to be taken, this people should be in prisob

No idea Joe...!

Does Imperial have any idea ?

i am surprised you have not replied to my question ,just to remind you ,where did you see  the amount of 100k to thurlstone ,was it in the metis analysis  because it was not paid to them direct from imperial . come on miss brooks ,this is very  very important to a lot of people ,so please tell us straight away . i suppose the same goes for the missing 1.2 million , let us at least get these two points put to sleep as a number of people have wasted a lot of time on these two points. i also need an apology from you concerning the so called instruction that i received not to disclose the metis law accounts , i have been asking metis law for these figures since last october and still have not received them . i know that you have them but i simply cannot and will not use them . early reply please ,i am sure that the members are anxious to see this information from you .

Moving on swiftly from the last couple of posts, I am afraid you are right.  Capita Oak was indisputedly set up for the organisers to earn maximum fees and commissions, at the expense of the victims.  The tragedy is that these people are intelligent, well-educated, well-qualified and good at innovation.  If they channeled their energies into genuine schemes and prudent assets, they probably wouldn't make as much money, but at least they would be contributing to society rather than damaging it.  The saddest thing of all is that Downs remains of the firm opinion that CO was a bona fide pension scheme, and that independent accounts and audit are not required.  Until someone can convince him otherwise, he is never going to be of any help to the members.

will you please listen for once , i was brought in last october that is 2014 . the scheme was set up in 2012, two years earlier . since last october i have been , as you well know, been trying to get information  from metis law  in order to prepare these accounts . i will contact metis law again today  but in the meantime please respond to my earlier posting.

Just emailed you (and Paul T) the ML accounts produced by ML and sent to me by ML on 16.10.14.  These formed the basis of the accounts I issued many weeks ago.  The 100k to Thurlstone needs to be explained without further delay.  You have had the reconciliation showing the missing 1.22 million for many weeks and you have not responded.  Simply saying repeatedly that I am "totally wrong" and that everything I say is "based on theory" is not an answer.  You need to prove I am wrong with proper evidence.  If I am wrong (and I will be delighted if I am), I will immediately issue a public apology, but you need to provide proper evidence, which to date you have refused to do.  My member transaction reconciliation was based on a combination of the Salih, Perkins and ML reconciliation spreadsheets and the 1.22 remains unaccounted for.

i cannot accept figures sent by you ,i am sorry but i cannot  so to save time is the 100k in the metis figure? please answer  this . with regard  to the 1.2  i would suggest that you speak to paul t   . you listed certain items on a sheet  and i have proven tthat all these items were paid into the bank  either by cheque or by the bacs system . as i said speak to paul  and i hope that he can convince you.

Dear Mr Downs (if it is indeed you),

£100,557.58 was paid by Metis Law to Thurlstone Management on 3/1/2013 from the funds passed to them by Imperial Trustee Services Ltd derived from investors in the Capita Oak pension scheme.

This was while Karl Dunlop was sole director of Imperial.
You might like to ask him why he authorised that payment.

Row 74 on the spreadsheet:

100,557.58    3/1/2013    Payment to Thurlstone Management

One of the big questions that we need to keep a focus on is:

Where is the 16% return that should have been paid to Capita Oak from Storefirst?

Has it been paid, if so where is it?
If it has not been paid, why not?

This would produce some cash liquidity and help some of the people who wished to transfer out of the scheme.
Which is the recent case adjudicated by the pension ombudsman.

Its possible that Metis Law have already answered this question.

yes it is the real me . why has it taken all this time to get this info from miss brooks . she has been saying that imperial paid the  money but they clearly did not .

Hang on, who is the accountant here? Aren't you supposed to know that an Imperial director instructed this payment? Or, if you arrived late onto the scene, it would have been in the ITSL management accounts and properly documented for you to check... of course!

No, but it was broadcast on the BBC Radio 4 programme You and Yours that the 1.6m was paid to Transeuro Worldwide Holdings at the beginning.  Transeuro was a tenant of Toby Whittaker's at Goodlass Road, and a guest at the Store First 2012 xmas party, so clearly known to Mr. Whittaker.  Transeuro also had 3 million in introduction commission, is a company registered in Gibraltar and has nominee directors in Nevis, West Indies.

"Has it been paid, if so where is it?
If it has not been paid, why not?"
There is obviously a reason that information is being held back.

You have had the information for months and never informed me that you did not have the Metis Law records, nor explained why you had not requested them.  Metis Law would not have paid the 100k to Thurlstone without being instructed by Imperial to do so.  So clearly Imperial knew who Thurlstone was, and you act for Imperial, so lets have a clear, transparent explanation please.

Yes DOWNS answers please, stop all the battling with Ms Brooks and just answer the bloody question!!!
You might win the battle, but you won't win the war
ANSWERS PLEASE DOWNS

What should have happened, of course, is that Downs and Chant should have gone straight up to Leeds and demanded answers, evidence and documentation from Metis Law.  They were legally entitled to it, unquestionably.  Then they should have gone on to Store First and demanded the same from Toby Whittaker and his solicitors.  The question remains: why wasn't that the first thing they did?  The answer is simple: Chant wanted nothing to do with Imperial (despite being appointed a director, which he was in name only and certainly wasn't prepared to get his sleeves rolled up and hands dirty); and Downs was instructed by shadow director Perkins - not Chant.  Perkins had just gone into a business with Anthony Salih of Premier Pension Transfers (who handled all the transfers into Capita Oak), so the last thing he would have wanted was any transparency or truth coming out at that point.

Yes I agree with that , the burning question is if people who claim to want to help, why as no one gone to Leeds , for a face to face with Metis then to Bolton for a word with TW

Because they are all in on it that's why