01516680386

not at the moment i am not

Its all well and good stating that a government investigation team have confirmed that there is no missing 1.2 million, but before anyone apologises YOU should officially inform the members and provide the evidence to demonstrate this. Its easy to come on here and try and win points over Ms Brooks, but this still provides no reassurance to the members of this terrible pension scheme!!

The problem is that I informed Downs months ago exactly what happened with full, detailed accounts based on the Salih data and the ML data but Downs either chose to ignore it or was instructed by Perkins and Fowler to ignore it - hoping it would "go away" and that just by saying "you are totally wrong" over and over, they could skate over it and continue to pretend to be working in the interests of the members.  Downs has clearly stated in the past that he was working with Metis Law, so is it credible that either he wouldn't have asked them for their accounts or that a firm of solicitors instructed by Imperial would have refused to provide accounting information to an accountant also instructed by their client?  No, of course not.  Salih, Ward, Fowler and Perkins didn't want anyone looking too closely at the 100k paid to Thurlstone - that's why they always ignored my accounts which clearly showed it.  Downs deliberately published a financial statement which omitted the ML transactions (including the 100k to Thurlstone) because neither he nor those instructing him wanted the 100k out in the open.  Had Downs been genuine he would have asked me to substantiate my accounts (and the 100k) instead of just repeating the same old same old about not being able to include information from a "third party".  Anyway, that was then and this is now.  So, Mr. Downs - kindly explain the 100k to Thurlstone once and for all. You have wasted enough time and now answers are required.

i cant believe what you are saying , i will certainly not provide any evidence  as you ask  and i am certainly not trying to score points  .did you ask miss brooks for the evidence when she made the spurious claim. it would be nice if she did apologise but i wont hold my breath for too long

my god , what do you not understand . imperial did not make the payment  metis law did ,i assume on the instructions of the sole director or the other gentleman that was instructing them . yes you did send me documentation stating that it came from metis law  but as they neither denied or confirmed  that it was from them  ,i decided to ignore it. it is of little consequence at this moment of time ,the event took place some two years ago but  i can assure you as it is such a large figure  something will be done  with the right people. once again i did not publish a false statement , it did not omit anything , the statement that i prepared was a summary of the imperial bank account  as to what funds came in  and what funds went out and NOTHING not one penny went to thurlstone . i would suggest you ask metis law as to why they paid thurlestone.

Downs won't have shown them my accounts which provide clear evidence that 1.22 million was missing.  All of this now clearly shows why Downs, Perkins and Fowler were so keen to avoid an independent accountant and auditor months ago.  If Downs and the fraudsters had allowed independent professionals to do proper accounts and audit months ago, all this could have been sorted before xmas.  But that was the last thing they wanted.  Still no answers about the 100k to Thurlstone?  Come on, you've had months to come up with a smarter reply than "wrong" or "theory".  How about the truth for once?

i knew and was very confident that you would not believe it  ,  you would not accept the truth if it fell on you

This is getting nowhere ladies.
Ms Brooks has made a claim, that now is not being challenged anymore, regarding the 100, 000 paid to Thurlstone.
Anyone got a legal opinion on whether a director instructing this payment is "Imperial" paying this? Bear in mind the money was paid from Imperial to Metis Law. I disagree about the little consequence, it links Imperial directly to pension loans.

Invested in store pods with store first..
Thank you for the positive step comment...expected rather more positive feedback from the post from others but hey,I should know better...having now seen the letter received by Imperial  from ML, all 34 pages containing the addresses of the pods in question , it is clear who they took instructions from..and the authorities have this letter too...

My god indeed.  ML made the payment on the instructions of the sole director of Imperial(Karl Dunlop at the time). You were sent documentation but decided to ignore it? You now claim it is of little consequence at this moment of time as the event took place some two years ago? Doesn't matter how long ago it was, it still needs to be declared, accounted for and explained. You did deliberately publish a false statement and omitted key evidence and information. Your statement was incomplete and deliberately  evasive. It is your legal obligation to ask Metis Law why they paid Thurlestone and to ask your own client why they instructed ML to do so. While you are about it, ask your client why they instructed ML not to do valuations?

Sorry, am getting abit lost. 34 pages of what? how do we get our pensions back from this scam?

please telephone me and i will answer your questions

And yet you are still going around in circles and with more repeats then the B.B.C

If I had paid money as a victom I would be getting more AND more despondent.

And now it is confirmed that the fund owns a pile of tin cans

But will you know the answers? You have deliberately ignored the 100k to Thurlstone apparently. Do you know the answer now? Or will that take you another 4 months? Think it would make more sense if you answered on here and kept it all transparent - been too much subterfuge already from what I can see. Do you act for Imperial or not? If you do then you had a duty to investigate and report the Metis Law transactions. Months ago.

Sorry dont see what this has to do withanything. How do we get our pension back? I want to transfer out of Capita and the Ombudman say we have a right too. How do we do it?

Tin cans...well I suppose you know where you or they are. And wouldn't have caused all this fuss and bother !

ML told me they took instructions from Karl Dunlop.  Is that what their letter confirms?

i can assure you i do not ignore anything  but what is the point in giving an explanation that is 100 percent correct when madam very quickly attacks. for example she sent to a government  body details of the so called missing 1.2 million and they after serious investigation have found it not to be missing , miss brooks still insists that it is . i have also proved it to paul t but she still insists that she is correct . this proving,simply because of her to be the most frustrating  person to deal with .  on the basis iwas not handed any documents by metis law  i could not investigate ,if metis law did send monies to thurlstone it was authorised by the then director  or by the other gentleman who was giving instructions at the time . i think too many people consider that the problems with this scheme are down to a group of people here in bromley but i can assure you that is incorrect but when miss brooks reads this posting she will attack again . as i said earlier ,please telephone me .

You have confirmed that you ignored 100k paid by Metis Law on instructions from your client to Thurlstone. Don't care if the directors were based in Bromley or Alaska - they are still your client. Who was the "other gentleman"?