Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • daniel80
    • By daniel80 22nd Oct 15, 6:31 PM
    • 230Posts
    • 48Thanks
    daniel80
    London Capital and Finance
    • #1
    • 22nd Oct 15, 6:31 PM
    London Capital and Finance 22nd Oct 15 at 6:31 PM
    Anyone had any dealing with this company. My son has 25k to invest for only 2 years as it will be a house deposit. Iv`e told him to stay away from the stock market as 2 years is not long enough. As he is not overly keen with saving accounts cash isa`s etc due to low interest rates I said what about premium bonds a gamble on winning but stake is safe only loss would be inflation. When I googled investment ideas a link came up who were called specialist investment ideas with free advice. I put in my details..I received a call about half an hour later the guy recommended the above company which was based in Mayfair. he sounded very posh. He said London Capital and Finance were offering bonds paying 8% the money being lent to various companies to a maximum of 60% of their assist. He seems more of a salesman than an advisor and wants to phone back Monday. Brochure looks ok online but something does not seem right. Anyone dealt with these.

    MSE Insert

    Check out our Where to Start Saving guide for help.
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 01-09-2016 at 2:14 PM.
Page 9
    • doe808
    • By doe808 6th Nov 17, 9:47 PM
    • 255 Posts
    • 247 Thanks
    doe808
    someone who doesn't even appear to have researched the difference between 'their' and 'there'....
    Originally posted by eskbanker
    Sorry - English is not my first language.
    Total - £340.00

    wins : £7.50 Virgin Vouchers, Nikon Coolpixs S550 x 2, I-Tunes Vouchers, £5 Esprit Voucher, Big Snap 2 (x2), Alaska Seafood book
    • bail-in
    • By bail-in 26th Jan 18, 11:32 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    bail-in
    Invitation to LC&F Plc bondholders to post
    I wrote a post a few weeks back inviting LC&F bondholders to give their investment experience here. When a couple did and it was positive other forum members wrote negative posts in reply to them. Why? Maybe because they expressed their positive experience. One was implied to be a liar and the other as an employee of LC&F. Unsurprisingly we have not heard of them since and their benefit or not since. Seeing such negative response it does not encourage other bondholders to contribute their investment experience here. When other LC&F bondholders see these negative reaction posts in forums, do you think they are going to contribute and be subject to the same treatment?

    To put the record straight, neither they nor me are employees of LC&F. A short visit to Companies House or LinkedIn indicates there are only two employees of LC&F, both luvly ladies, students and working at the head office on low wages! Shame on you CEO!

    The bond marketing team at the end of the LC&F 0800 number is made up of employees of Surge Financial Ltd a successful financial marketing company based in Brighton that specialises in financial management of alternative investment vehicles and the main driving force behind the marketing of the bonds.

    Surge Financial has nothing to do, above and beyond passing relevant queries on, with the corporate lending side of LC&F if indeed it has one as there is little evidence to show that LC&F are lending to SMEs. Well, except for the company profits and bondholder interest payments which actually is quite a good indicator come to think of it. The company officers are very tight lipped on the lending side. Surge themselves do not know anything. They are happy being paid for rolling up the bond investors and operating the bond investment!
    Last edited by bail-in; 07-02-2018 at 11:06 PM. Reason: Correction
    "Derivatives are weapons of financial mass destruction." Warren Buffet.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 27th Jan 18, 1:03 AM
    • 91,124 Posts
    • 58,142 Thanks
    dunstonh
    When a couple did and it was positive other forum members wrote negative posts in reply to them. Why? Maybe because they expressed their positive experience.
    There are only two things that are going to happen with an LC&F bond. It will succeed or fail. Until it fails, no-one is going to be unhappy. All the other bonds that failed with total loss would have seen very happy people upto the point they failed. People who do not know the risks are not good judges of the risks.

    You completely miss the point of the regular one-off posts that appear on a weekly basis. Those people posting are mistaking this high risk unregulated investment to be savings account protected by the FSCS.

    They get that opinion as LC&F pay referral fees to unregulated sites that promote it as a savings account.

    These people are after savings accounts. They dont realise this high-risk unregulated bond is not a savings accounts and are being caught out by rather dubious marketing techniques. It isnt even a retail financial investment. It is not meant to be marketed like a retail product. When they come on this site to ask questions, everyone except you tells them of their mistake and why and to avoid it. You try to blind them with pages of text, much of which does not apply to their bond and none of it applies to what the OP is looking for.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Lungboy
    • By Lungboy 27th Jan 18, 7:49 AM
    • 1,208 Posts
    • 1,120 Thanks
    Lungboy
    I wrote a post a few weeks back inviting LC&F bondholders to give their investment experience here
    Originally posted by bail-in
    Why would you do that unless you have a vested interest?
    • bail-in
    • By bail-in 27th Jan 18, 12:26 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    bail-in
    These people are after savings accounts.... When they come on this site to ask questions, everyone except you tells them of their mistake and why and to avoid it.
    Originally posted by dunstonh
    I do not have any right to give financial advice in a professional or other capacity here. Nor do I have a right to tell anyone how to make their decisions and whether or not they have or have not made a mistake. I can write posts like others pointing to other opinions, warnings, articles or regulatory authorities and giving my view and experience. But I do not tell people they are making mistakes because they may be or may not be. I do not know that.

    Professionals claim to help people avoid mistakes and take a fruitfull line of action. Regarding professionals, many are worse than amateurs re action results in my opinion. Professionals often compromise quality for money, whereas amateurs are often devoted to quality of action which naurally leads to a better result. I have seen professional (which simply put means paid) decorators sanding with one hand and painting with the other! Something an amateur working on his own house would not do as it would spoil the paint finish.

    In hindsight I would be a lot wealthier now if I had not listened to professional financial advisors whose advice focused on safety and not risk. Of course, it could have gone the other way too. Look online on the differences between a millionaire and a multimillionare. One of the differences is the latter takes a lot more risk, but the risk is well evaluated not reckless risk. Nevertheless it is more risk. Many investors who rely on investment income in the low interest mainstream banking industry are being forced into more risky investments in order to live.

    Some of the adverts for unregulated products, minibonds, are misleading but mini-bonds, born from the 2008 financial crisis, look like they are here to stay as it is an easier and a direct way with FCA provisos for smes to approach investors directly when banks refused to lend to them after the crisis. They resulted from increasingly risk averse banks, yet these same financial institutions are quite happy to continue on an even grander scale to invest trillions of dollars in highly risky derivatives investments which could well precipitate the next world financial crisis.

    Mini-bonds will probably be regulated and listed in the UK as has been happening in other countries eg. Greece. Certainly, hindsight shows if I had invested a year ago in particular mini-bonds I would have been much better off than in bank accounts having recovered my capital and interest. But that is where the risk evaluation has to be considered and that is hard to be positive about in the case of some high interest mini-bonds because of lack of company disclosure, transparency, track record and so on.
    Last edited by bail-in; 05-02-2018 at 9:33 AM. Reason: Spelling correction
    "Derivatives are weapons of financial mass destruction." Warren Buffet.
    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 27th Jan 18, 12:52 PM
    • 6,294 Posts
    • 6,361 Thanks
    eskbanker
    In hindsight I would be a lot wealthier now if I had not listened to professional financial advisors whose advice focused on safety and not risk.
    Originally posted by bail-in
    I'm sure dunstonh will be along at some point to highlight more of the oddities in your post but I'd just observe that you seem to be moving the dialogue away from LC&F towards a critique of FAs (not necessarily IFAs, a crucial difference) based on a bad experience you've had, and if you were guided by an FA that didn't consider risk as a primary issue then that's clearly not representative of the industry as a whole....

    Higher risk will often equate to higher reward but it's obviously not as simple as that or everyone would pile into high risk investments - the key to any dialogue between FA and client will be to assess risk tolerance, not just looking at the upside but, more importantly, the potential downside, given that higher risk investments by their very nature will have more chance of failing spectacularly than those closer to the mainstream!
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 27th Jan 18, 4:19 PM
    • 843 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    Professionals claim to help people avoid mistakes and take a fruitfull line of action. Regarding professionals, many are worse than amateurs re action results in my opinion. Professionals often compromise quality for money, whereas amateurs are often devoted to quality of action which naurally leads to a better result. I have seen professional (which simply put means paid) decorators sanding with one hand and painting with the other!. Something an amateur working on his own house would not do as it would spoil the paint finish.
    Originally posted by bail-in
    I must remember that maxim if I ever need surgery! "No, I don't want a qualified and experienced professional operating on me, I want an amateur, because some random bloke on a forum has opened my eyes to the problems with using professionals. Just get me someone who is enthusiastic and will try really hard to take care."
    • jimjames
    • By jimjames 27th Jan 18, 5:07 PM
    • 12,400 Posts
    • 10,986 Thanks
    jimjames
    I must remember that maxim if I ever need surgery! "No, I don't want a qualified and experienced professional operating on me, I want an amateur, because some random bloke on a forum has opened my eyes to the problems with using professionals. Just get me someone who is enthusiastic and will try really hard to take care."
    Originally posted by ValiantSon
    I think Bailin must be Michael Gove
    Remember the saying: if it looks too good to be true it almost certainly is.
    • bail-in
    • By bail-in 27th Jan 18, 5:24 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    bail-in
    OK! I will concede there are one or two exceptions!

    However, medically diagnosed with gallstones many years ago after many months of digestive problems. £3000 for an operation, privately. Lot cheaper in those days. Decided to self medicate with olive oil and lemon treatment as potential side effects of surgery were horrendous.. Passed hundreds of bilirubin bile stones over next two days. Result totally cured with repeats periodically to prevent recurrence. Cost £3. What the surgeon said when asked if he knew about this low cost simple natural remedy when informed no need for operation: "Yes, but I did not tell you because I am a surgeon and I only recommend surgery! "

    However, again, medically diagnosed with hernia recommeneded operation ASAP. Decision, decided to forget about it. 50 years later no hernia. Either went by itself over time or the doctor medically misdiagnosed it. One of the most highly respected, qualified and experienced, Indian government doctors said, besides confirming no hernia, "Do not visit doctors because they will tell you you are ill!"

    However, cousin given immunosuppression drug for autoimmune disease. Massive reaction to the drug, she died the next day. Side effect on drug leaflet: death.

    Totally agree with you though. Our modern healthcare service is brilliant and well qualified and innovative. However, side effects of unnatural medical treatments can be worse than the disease. Could always check for simpler, natural less invasive treatments first unless it is an emergency. Believe it or not, I read the most prescribed drug in the world is Siberian ginseng, a natural plant which in not related to Chinese ginseng and which most doctors in the west have never heard of. It is prescribed or at least was many years ago to every member of the armed services in China and Russia as research there showed it could increase resistance to stress by an amazing 30 per cent if taken regularly over a period of six months. Generally research in communist countries in those past years was ignored in the west by the medical establishment.
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 27th Jan 18, 5:48 PM
    • 843 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    I think Bailin must be Michael Gove
    Originally posted by jimjames


    Is he really worthy of such a terrible insult?
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 27th Jan 18, 5:56 PM
    • 843 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    OK! I will concede there are one or two exceptions!
    Originally posted by bail-in
    Just one or two??? Well, that is progress, at least.

    However, medically diagnosed with gallstones many years ago after many months of digestive problems. £3000 for an operation, privately. Lot cheaper in those days. Decided to self medicate with olive oil and lemon treatment as potential side effects of surgery were horrendous.. Passed hundreds of bilirubin bile stones over next two days. Result totally cured with repeats periodically to prevent recurrence. Cost £3. What the surgeon said when asked if he knew about this low cost simple natural remedy when informed no need for operation: "Yes, but I did not tell you because I am a surgeon and I only recommend surgery! "
    Originally posted by bail-in
    Of course he did, he's a surgeon and that is his area of expertise. You should have discussed it with a physician. They aren't the same thing.

    It might have worked for you, but it wouldn't necessarily for someone else.

    However, again, medically diagnosed with hernia recommeneded operation ASAP. Decision, decided to forget about it. 50 years later no hernia. Either went by itself over time or the doctor medically misdiagnosed it. One of the most highly respected, qualified and experienced, Indian government doctors said, besides confirming no hernia, "Do not visit doctors because they will tell you you are ill!"
    Originally posted by bail-in
    A hernia cannot heal itself. I'd suggest that maybe you were misdiagnosed. People do make mistakes, but there would have been further examinations of your condition before you went under the knife and if there was, in fact, no hernia, then they wouldn't have operated.

    However, cousin given immunosuppression drug for autoimmune disease. Massive reaction to the drug, she died the next day. Side effect on drug leaflet: death.
    Originally posted by bail-in
    I'm sorry to hear that happened.

    All drugs come with risk and, sadly, your cousin was one of those who experienced a fatal side effect. That doesn't mean that the prescription was wrong.

    Totally agree with you though. Our modern healthcare service is brilliant and well qualified and innovative. However, side effects of unnatural medical treatments can be worse than the disease. Could always check for simpler, natural less invasive treatments first unless it is an emergency. Believe it or not, I read the most prescribed drug in the world is Siberian ginseng, a natural plant which in not related to Chinese ginseng and which most doctors in the west have never heard of. It is prescribed or at least was many years ago to every member of the armed services in China and Russia as research there showed it could increase resistance to stress by an amazing 30 per cent if taken regularly over a period of six months. Generally research in communist countries in those past years was ignored in the west by the medical establishment.
    Originally posted by bail-in
    Without a long process of double-blind studies and clinical trials it is impossible to establish whether a medication has efficacy, or is "safe". (N.B. "Safe" does not mean that there will be no side effects, nor that it may cause death. It is a statistical definition).
    • bail-in
    • By bail-in 8th Feb 18, 8:21 AM
    • 34 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    bail-in
    Surge Financial Ltd, LC&F, and proof of lending
    I mentioned Surge Financial Ltd in an earlier London Capital and Finance post above. This company is responsible for the marketing and administration of the LC&F mini-bond investment. It mans the LC&F 0800 number. According to Companies House Annual Return, Surge has two officers, Paul Careless and Kerry Jane Graham. The company has on average 10-15 employees according to LinkedIn, although more than this number is said to be involved with LC&F. Surge, based in Brighton, has been in existence for three years and according to Companies House Annual Accounts has made in the last financial year most of the 1.5 millon pounds income since formation. Perhaps that has mostly come from its employer, LC&F. Credit where due, good performance for a start up company by the officers and staff.

    We have all heard of the adage: don't bite the hand that feeds you. However, you would think the officers and staff of Surge would want to know something about how LC&F, a commercial lender, a very small start up with debts and no previous track record of sme lending is making the money to pay Surge, company expenses and profits, and the investor interest, especially as that is not clear at all. Yet staff in Surge appear to have no information about the bond related commercial lending business of LC&F, even basics such as how many lending team employees, who they are and where they are based. In fact there are only two employees in LC&F, both students according to LinkedIn.

    I can understand Surge Financial not pursuing it, but it should be careful. If LC&F does fail and any wrongdoing or negligence is shown in the receivership process then for sure the daily newspapers will jump on it, as in the case of recent mini-bond failures (Secured Energy Bond and Providence Financial), and Surge could end up being a casualty in the media fallout.

    If I was an officer in Surge Financial that would make me a little concerned. Why? For the same reason investors and prospective investors in LC&F should be concerned. Everything depends on the success of this vague commercial lending business: company profits, wages, contractor payments, tax payments, investor periodic interest and repayment of capital.

    Yet LC&F have not disclosed evidence of the sme lending business existence. This does not mean it does not exist. Rather very few appear to know that it does exist. Audited Account Returns are lodged at Companies House. Is it the norm for loan companies offering investment bonds to not provide such evidence? Data protection is a lame excuse as data protection laws in the UK only apply to live individuals not to companies.

    Many companies like to showcase their trading clients names on their websites, including the company website of one former director of LC&F. You see many invited investor Feefo reviews on the LC&F website. Do you see any names of the hundreds of companies LC&F is lending investor capital to on the LC&F bond website? No, only numbers, how many and how much and not a single loan failure, even though the LC&F loan interest rate as high as 12 to 20 per cent, well above average, would indicate a greater lending risk.

    It is true that employees and directors are bound re disclosure by their employment contracts, but we are here talking about disclosure of the basic fundamentals of the very existence of a business which is supposedly the only source of LC&F income and bond interest payments. But what if a company had no choice but to not provide or disclose evidence of a commercial business because the business actually did not exist? The only business that can be really seen to exist in the case of LC&F is the bond marketing business exclusively dealt with by the LC&F website run by the contracted Surge Financial. Millions of pounds of bondholder capital brought in by Surge for LC&F with no proof of what it is actually being used for and no proof where the company earnings and capital interest payments are coming from.

    Thousands of reasonable, experienced and risk aware investors, not confused savers, are investing in LC&F (and other mini-bonds). Probably aware that there is no proof of the existence of the lending business, no track record of sme lending. Yet they are all quite happy to invest in an unregulated, unprotected, non-negotiable, 100% capital at risk investment product, assuming a much higher than average market rate of capital interest and 100% return of capital. However, even if a track record of past and present business is provided this does not mean the company will not fail.

    Explanations for this assuming investment behaviour? Is it the result of slick advertising and marketing? Is it somehow related to the herd mentality seen in the stock market? The Lemmings syndrome? More money than sense? Lack of time or will to investigate? Is common sense doomed on the rocks of greed or even desperation to find a reasonable interest rate? Or even perhaps arises from the false promises of optimism? Or simply, it's working so far?

    If I invest in a company especially a start up I expect honesty, openness, disclosure, verified trading facts and figures, and so on from the beginning. Like others I get very concerned not just for me but for other potential investors if legitimate questions are answered evasively and there is no proof of trading. If I ask what is one plus one I expect the answer to be two not three or whatever evasiveness or excuse as an answer. Never rely on just a company statement as to what are its business doings. Never assume it is true. Always seek verification, third party preferably. Due diligence is essential. Otherwise you may be risking all your investment returns and capital on a promise. Investment is not the same thing as gambling.
    Last edited by bail-in; 08-02-2018 at 8:31 AM.
    "Derivatives are weapons of financial mass destruction." Warren Buffet.
    • cloud_dog
    • By cloud_dog 8th Feb 18, 9:16 AM
    • 3,508 Posts
    • 2,029 Thanks
    cloud_dog
    I'm really unsure if Bailin is agreeing to the risks and possibly underhand way LC&F advertise or if he has taken it upon himself to tear Surge Financial a new one?
    Personal Responsibility - Sad but True

    Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone
    • firestone
    • By firestone 8th Feb 18, 10:22 AM
    • 146 Posts
    • 54 Thanks
    firestone
    I'm really unsure if Bailin is agreeing to the risks and possibly underhand way LC&F advertise or if he has taken it upon himself to tear Surge Financial a new one?
    Originally posted by cloud_dog
    could be a double bluff have to see if people try and talk him back the other way now!
    To me mini bonds seem less transparent then P2P and that is risky enough but still pays comparable rates
    • Reaper
    • By Reaper 8th Feb 18, 2:05 PM
    • 6,179 Posts
    • 4,417 Thanks
    Reaper
    I was going to comment, but on balance I think it's too risky. I'll leave it to Dunstonh
    • verybigchris
    • By verybigchris 8th Feb 18, 2:14 PM
    • 399 Posts
    • 518 Thanks
    verybigchris
    Thousands of reasonable, experienced and risk aware investors, not confused savers, are investing in LC&F
    Originally posted by bail-in
    Care to share your source on that?

    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 8th Feb 18, 2:29 PM
    • 91,124 Posts
    • 58,142 Thanks
    dunstonh
    I was going to comment, but on balance I think it's too risky. I'll leave it to Dunstonh
    Thanks for that!!! Is it that you think I have a greater chance of reinstatement?

    So sad that we have to tip-toe around it.

    Care to share your source on that?
    Originally posted by verybigchris
    They say on their website that they have over 7000 investors. So, if only a few thousand know what they are getting into then it doesnt paint a good picture.

    Speaking of their website, I like what they say here:

    We have a 100% track record of paying interest on time and the initial investment upon maturity.*

    *Period 07/2012-11/2017, all interest and bonds have been paid on time and when due. Please note that past performance is not an indicator of future results. Information reflects all bonds offered by the company.
    It is worth restating that all the bonds that have failed in the past and took the investors money with them also had a 100% track record up to the point they failed.

    Their website also says:
    No set up costs, no management fees, and no charges
    This shows the difference between unregulated investments and regulated investments. Unregulated are saying things that you know are not true. Are LC&F really not receiving any fees for issuing this? Of course, they are. However, it is taken indirectly. In the regulated world, that would be disclosed (and in many areas, not actually allowed). In the unregulated world, it translates into a company doing it for free just because you cant see them.

    And finally, just to wrap it up nicely, their website says the following:
    Your details are 100% secure
    Unlike your money.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • TrustyOven
    • By TrustyOven 8th Feb 18, 2:53 PM
    • 683 Posts
    • 732 Thanks
    TrustyOven

    And finally, just to wrap it up nicely, their website says the following:

    Your details are 100% secure
    Unlike your money.
    Originally posted by dunstonh

    Fundamentally, no one's details are 100% secure (**) ... so we know they are not 100% truthful.

    ** - think back to all the different break-ins, hackings, data leaks over the last 15 years, all the big players that had to publically apologise. This lists some of them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches
    Last edited by TrustyOven; 08-02-2018 at 2:56 PM.
    Goals
    Save £12k in 2017 #016 (£4212.06 / £10k) (42.12%)
    Save £12k in 2016 #041 (£4558.28 / £6k) (75.97%)
    Save £12k in 2014 #192 (£4115.62 / £5k) (82.3%)
    • ChesterDog
    • By ChesterDog 8th Feb 18, 3:00 PM
    • 844 Posts
    • 1,559 Thanks
    ChesterDog
    Quite so.

    "Your details are secure" - possibly an honest statement.

    "Your details are 100% secure" - definitely a dishonest statement.
    I am one of the "Dogs of the Index".
    • TrustyOven
    • By TrustyOven 8th Feb 18, 3:06 PM
    • 683 Posts
    • 732 Thanks
    TrustyOven
    Quite so.

    "Your details are secure" - possibly an honest statement.

    "Your details are 100% secure" - definitely a dishonest statement.
    Originally posted by ChesterDog
    Thing is, it's probably just some stupid marketing gimmick. But they should know better.

    I have a pet peeve about people saying/writing "100% sure" or anything like that, because life has taught me that there are always things that could happen that invalidate that statement. Examples:

    - "I 100% guarantee I will pay you back next week"
    - "I'm 100% sure she likes you"
    - "100% sure you will get a fine"
    - "it's your engine that's died, 100%"
    and so on.
    Goals
    Save £12k in 2017 #016 (£4212.06 / £10k) (42.12%)
    Save £12k in 2016 #041 (£4558.28 / £6k) (75.97%)
    Save £12k in 2014 #192 (£4115.62 / £5k) (82.3%)
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

701Posts Today

6,666Users online

Martin's Twitter