01516680386

Another teaim member....let him get on with it...
Does it really matter who works for who. ..who knows his goldfish...who once walked his dog...
BD is trying to get the information  out of a firm of solicitors who have a habit of stalling where SF are concerned...other solicitors have tried to get clients assets out of SF via SIPPS and have had similar problems

He has previously confirmed on here I believe sub page 100 that Perkins is a friend of his. This was then backed up again by Downs after in further pages. Also before you say it was someone else who posted several imposters around the same time posted under various names some using brian downs all of which were refuted apart from the ones where Downs confirms his friendship

So this was not dreamt up it was confirmed by the man himself. However you are right let him get on with it but you didn't an my question.

A person who had nothing to do with the running of the scheme but has been accused of being a shadow director has a "good friend" acting "independently" surely you cannot doscout this as nonsense or conspiracy theory.

I would like an answer directly

do you feel that it is appropriate for the link between the two to be so close ?

I will come in here .i totally deny that I knew  bill Perkins before last October,he is not a shadow director . For god sake all we are trying to do is to regularise this scheme which was in a mess caused by other people who are not now involved ,so as most of you are not members as you do not phone ,with respect why do you not shut up and most certainly grow up

Let you trawl through the pages sub whatever to find a posting that says whatever you said in the first place (not the second)..
He has since posted ..so there you go..
Whilst your question is irrelevant (good friend..nonsense)....I simply do not care
I want Brian to carry on doing what he is doing..simple...so please,let him do it..

Brian just stop what you are doing. These dorks deserve to lose everything. You are the only chance they have and they are spitting at you.

Drop what you are doing and leave them to fester in their pile of tosh. They deserve it! Gob shites.

What ever Fowler you sad t w a t

This is people's retirement money being discussed on here, not a place for the Nth Watford vs Sth Watford crews to slang it out.

Why don't you all cut out the nonsense and let us get on with securing this fund ,which I am sure we shall.we are very close ,so please everyone let us have nothing but your support as it will make a difference.

Brian doesn't have your money ! He doesn't have to do anything but give information to the authorities when asked, which he has done but is still working to sort this mess out. Perhaps if individuals are unhappy ... they  could do the dirty work themselves ?

I have been posting nonsense have I?  Not from my perspective.  What is your definition of securing the funds?  The full value?

The value of the assets will be the amount  that can be realised...and it certainly will not be BD'S fault if that is not the full value

I am not suggesting it is his fault at all. It most certainly is not.
My concern is the context of the  word "secure" and that there is nothing "untoward''.
Are the pods actually saleable on the open market?

Maybe not him personally but his buddies Fowler and Perkins for sure

We stole your money

Where does Whittaker stand in all this? The first two years was supposed to go direct back into the SIPP? So why was it paid to MT and Scc?
He needs stringing up

We stole your money

Must be the sun that's bought the idiots out, ignore them and keep going Brian

Hey paul mate give a ring Monday please. lets know latest

I was reading this and wondering, as there are two issues here
http://www.professionaladviser.com/profession ... spicious-scheme

a) The advice to move from reputable schemes with guarantees? Are there plans to take to task the people that processed the transfers as they were not in the clients' best interests. Even is the full value of the pods is as invested, it will leave people in these schemes well out of pocket. The people doing the processing knew this was appalling advice and yet were happy to process these pensions into the sausage machine.

b) The issues we discuss on here about the rent and the pod values.

I would suggest that the people who processed the paperwork are merely simply doing that and would not necessarily know what was appalling advice...besides, no advice was given remember.
Money had gone into SIPPs with Storefirst which needed independent advice...this went into Storefirst via an Occupational scheme and therefore did not require advice.
I would also point out that there are times(not many, granted) when the reputable firm with guarantees is NOT the correct thing for the individual...and the person pushing the paper would not know anything about the client and their circumstances...
I think it comes down to the fact that no advice was given at all.
Rent and pods...hope to find out soon.