Lapland New Forest Scam. How to get money back...

EdnaCloud

codger wrote: »

Come on, Gomer. You should be charging commission and I can be your agent.

Yeah! :j


Jarvis Bognopper Esq

I take exception to this. Firstly I have been Gomer's agent for some time now, courtesy of a contract drawn up by Plagiarise, Copy and Lie, literary agents to the gentry, and therefore am solely and completely the only person getting any dosh.

Gomer is unaware of this but I confirm that it is all above board and trading standards have given it the go ahead.

Secondly, and as you will soon be aware the use of my name as a [STRIKE]psoodo, suedo[/STRIKE], false name is aborent to say the least

Jarrvis Bognopper IV (no relation)

GomerPyle

My presumption is - and I doubt I'm wrong - is that the indemnity will state that the customer will hold the bank/cc company harmless in respect of any loss or claim they should suffer in making the refund.

Though the amount of the indemnity is fixed, the amount that could be claimed isn't. It is rather a weasely way for a credit card company/bank to handle things, but in the circumstances it may offer the best way round this impasse. For cautious people it might be as well to hang on before signing anything like that.

Though I believe that the money is frozen at the moment, that will be at the order of the merchant facility provider (so Mr Mears says), as far as we know. There is also the issue of VAT, though no one has ever managed to catch sight of a VAT registration number (i.e it wasn't posted on the website where it should have been).

My concern is that many hungry eyes will be on that money, and no doubt those of a certain Mr Mears, but an approach has to be made that secures those funds for the customers who were duped into paying.

smevs

I've spoken to my bank - First Direct - who advised that as I had paid by Visa but the tickets were less than £100 each I should write to their Disputes Dept asking for a refund under the Chargeback scheme citing breach of contract as LNF are unable to provide the service paid for.

Apparently the credit will go onto the CC straight away but the other party has 60 days to dispute the chargeback - an event which she thought would be unlikely giventhe circumstances !

The nice lady also said that I need not persue a claim with the 'supplier' as I would "not feel justified to complain directly to the retailer given the recent publicity".

Hope this helps somebody.


PS - Thanks to all for the advice etc on this thread !!

:beer:

EdnaCloud

GomerPyle wrote: »

My presumption is - and I doubt I'm wrong - is that the indemnity will state that the customer will hold the bank/cc company harmless in respect of any loss or claim they should suffer in making the refund.

So if the cc company, having made refund (as they appeared to have done), can reclaim that from the customer in the case of failure to recover the monies from the merchant?

Though the amount of the indemnity is fixed, the amount that could be claimed isn't. It is rather a weasely way for a credit card company/bank to handle things, but in the circumstances it may offer the best way round this impasse. For cautious people it might be as well to hang on before signing anything like that.

Again I'm sorry for my stupidity but this is not clear to me - the amount of the indemnity is fixed for or to who? Is the amount that could be claimed not fixed for one party, the other or both?

Elucidation please?

rgds
Edna

GomerPyle

Sorry - my brain is wilting.

You sign an indemnity and your cc company or bank repay the money to you.

If at a later date the people they claimed the money off demand repayment from them, they have the right to reclaim off you. It is an added thing about most indemnity wordings that the amount they can reclaim from you can be more than they repaid you to include charges, interest etc. I must say that in these circumstances, I think this is pretty unlikely.

However, I would only sign an indemnity if they held my teddy bear hostage.

GomerPyle

Right - here it is

You are undoubtedly aware of the national controversy concerning the event organised by Lapland New Forest Ltd. Indeed this ‘fiasco’ has received international coverage in newspapers and TV from Australia and New Zealand, to California and across Europe.

I can provide a variety of links in many different languages to support this, and any Google search of Lapland New Forest Ltd will bring up hundreds of links and news stories, few of them positive. Most of them highly negative.

My call has nothing to do with whether or not the event lived up to the advertising.

The sums of money speculated to be involved in what has been described as a ‘scam’ have totalled up to £2m and there has been a storm of controversy leading Trading Standards to consult a specialist Barrister to explore what action they should take

http://www.dorsetforyou.com/index.jsp?articleid=390730

QUOTE
We want to take legal action and are currently taking advice from a specialist consumer barrister and the Office of Fair Trading in order to make sure we are in the strongest position to move forward.
The council is looking into a range of legal options, including how to help consumers get their money back and the action that can be taken against Lapland New Forest Limited for misleading consumers.
We cannot give any further details, as this might prejudice any legal action we do decide to take, which will not help consumers.
UNQUOTE

My concern is that the sole director has a background which can hardly be described as spotless, indeed convictions for fraud are common knowledge.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/scammed-by-santa-attraction-closes-six-days-after-it-opened-1055550.html

QUOTE
It's quite a mess, and it all began, as far as official records show, on 12 August, when a company called Lapland New Forest Ltd was registered. Its sole director was Victor Robert Mears, a 65-year-old member of the Brighton Mears clan and related to Mary Mears, Conservative leader of Brighton council. In the 1980s, he served four years for tax evasion, during which he gave evidence about the Brinks Mat robbery on behalf of the defendant Kenny Noye, later the M25 killer. Mears, then a gold trader, had links to the case through another trader called Derek "Little Legs" Larkins. These are, to say the least, unusual antecedents for a man who planned to spread festive joy.

Victor Mears, 65, served four years in the 80s for evading £2million in tax. The news came as it was revealed his shambolic Lapland New Forest attraction took 50,000 bookings, potentially worth £2million.
Mears, who has been a gold dealer and market trader, was once called as a defence witness in the Brink's-Mat robbery.
He spoke from prison on behalf of M25 killer Kenneth Noye, who was jailed for laundering gold bars. While in the dock, Mears admitted handling bullion.
UNQUOTE

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2002669.ece

QUOTE
In 1986, while he was already serving four years for tax evasion, he was given another three years after he admitted failing to pay £500,000 in VAT.
At first he claimed he had put £1million aside for tax but it was stolen in a burglary at his flat. But he later said he could not read or write well and therefore could not keep proper accounts.
UNQUOTE

Hardly glowing credentials for someone starting out on a new venture.

It has been reported that the Company Secretary has an uninspiring track record

Company Secretary, Gavin Tanner, 26 Wembley Avenue, Lancing BN15 9JZ has the following information against him:

17 Directorships of Trading Companies
5 Directorships of Insolvent Companies
51 Directorships of Dissolved Companies
34 Resigned Directorships

Holding the account of a company with primary officials having such a background is one thing, but it is common knowledge that Streamline, a subsidiary of Royal Bank of Scotland also provided a merchant facility which was the main vehicle used to obtain payment, prior to the event opening.

Under the ‘know your customer’ rules and ‘money laundering law’ both streamline and Royal Bank of Scotland should have known their customer and monitored what was going on.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/mlr/mlr8.pdf

The appropriate sub paragraphs to which they are required to adhere are

Risk Monitoring
6.3
Sudden increase in business


Managing and Mitigating the Risk
6.4

Additional information high risk customer
Ongoing monitoring


…..and indeed the Streamline website alludes to this, but appears to lay off responsibility to the client, which is not where all the legal responsibility lies.

http://www.streamline.com/downloads/Streamline_web_site_rules_feb06.pdf

The Government site clearly details what a merchant provider should expect to be provided with

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?r.l1=1073861197&r.l3=1073920405&r.lc=en&type=RESOURCES&itemId=1073791017&r.l2=1073866263&r.s=sc

QUOTE
outline your business plan - including details of your cash flow and how you'll promote your online activities supply your website address
explain the details of your product or service
give your suppliers' details
describe how you will deliver your product or service
set out your terms and conditions for online trading
work out your expected average online transaction values, your estimated turnover from online sales and number of credit and debit card transactions
provide details of the secure server you'll use
make your audited business accounts available
supply your bank details and authority to carry out a check with credit reference agencies
detail your trading history
provide details of the directors or partners in the business - including full contact details
UNQUOTE

Clearly stating that a business formed in August’08 would receive £2 million from nothing before Christmas is sufficiently unusual to prompt enquiry.

A cursory examination of the company website would have revealed it as being inept and the Terms and Condition alone expose it as having no intent to trade regularly. Though the website has disappeared it remains in Google cache and can be viewed here

http://216.239.59.132/search?q=cache:jt3y6AVyK_4J:laplandnewforest.co.uk/shop/index.php%3Fmain_page%3Dconditions+Lapland+New+Forest&hl=en&gl=uk&strip=0

QUOTE
Lapland New Forest Ltd is bound by the laws of England and Wales………………………………............
UNQUOTE

QUOTE
These Terms of Use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of New Jersey, USA, as they apply to agreements made and solely performed therein. You irrevocably consent and waive all objections to personal jurisdiction and venue in the state and federal courts located in Essex County, New Jersey, USA, and you shall not commence or prosecute any suit or action except in the foregoing courts.
UNQUOTE

It is utterly ridiculous

I must also mention that the website omitted mention of the VAT registration (among other information required by law), clearly a matter of very strict relevance.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/vat/vat-registering.htm

QUOTE
You must register for VAT if your annual sales are £67,000 or above and you may be able to voluntarily register if your sales are under £67,000
UNQUOTE

Without the banking facilities and merchant facility in particular, this would never have taken off in this monstrous manner, and provided a veneer of respectability, this project should never have been given.

There are also unsubstantiated reports that some customers, who paid by cheque, were directed to send them to a house recorded as being the home of Victor Robert Mears, believed to be the son of the Director of Lapland New Forest Ltd. This person is recorded as being an undischarged bankrupt who should play no part in the running of a company or receiving its payments.

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/eiir/IIRCaseIndivDetail.asp?CaseId=42301267&IndivNo=1&Court=BRI&OfficeID=20&CaseType=B

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/insolvencyprofessionandlegislation/con_doc_register/con_doc_archive/consultation/freshstart/annex_b.htm


The Company Secretary has stated that problems were caused by the ill health of Mr Mears senior, which raises the issue of who was/is taking care of the company during that period ?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2002669.ece

QUOTE
The Lapland New Forest company secretary, Gavin Tanner, said Mears was seriously ill with cancer.
UNQUOTE

It is my contention that this company should never have been allowed to form, let alone be provided with facilities to take money from the public. The slightest scrutiny of the background of the people behind this venture should have set off alarm bells, and the incredible amounts of money generated on a new venture and supported by a website of comic shoddiness. The terms and conditions were unbelievable and the site was missing the basic requirements for any company trading on the internet.

It is hard to believe that any scrutiny took place and wonder what other irregularities have been overlooked.

I would expect a formal investigation to take place into how this was allowed to happen, and if is found that the bank or subsidiary failed in their obligations, they take steps without delay to ensure that all customers of this enterprise are refunded in full.

GomerPyle

If anyone wants to query - comment - make suggestions - criticise - feel free.

This is intended as the basic argument and if it can be polished or improved I won't hesitate to welcome it.

There's only one intention.

I started with the aim of carrying on and assisting those who had started out on bringing these enterprises to an end and considered walking away after that had been accomplished, but clearly that is not satisfactory and just leaves the victims hanging with their pockets emptied.

This is the final solution - though it may not be the last step.

cynical-lady

Wow Gomer,you have been busy!:A I have one day away in Bonnie Scotland and look what greets me on my return...


That looks fantastic............Where do I sign?

GomerPyle

I have also managed to track down copies of the original Lapland New Forest Ltd web pages and have the main two copied and saved.

The 'About' page is quite amazing. It disappeared before I got a chance to read it.

You mean you didn't see the spectacular Hollywood special effects staged by the expert responsible for some of the most amazing recent films ? :rotfl:

It WAS amazing though - wasn't it ? :eek:

EdnaCloud

GomerPyle wrote: »

Sorry - my brain is wilting.

As is mine, and sorry to be so silly.

I haven't heard from Will Ting lately has his take-a-way (sic) been closed?

**snip**
can be more than they repaid you to include charges, interest etc. I must say that in these circumstances, I think this is pretty unlikely.

Now I understand. Doh.

However, I would only sign an indemnity if they held my teddy bear hostage.

*Anyone* who holds a teddy bear hostage should have his paddingtons forcibly removed without anesthetic, a large implement inserted in his rupert thus causing distress to his pooh. I'm sorry to be so emphatic but as my bear in waiting (OK, so it's a cat, but could pass as a small polar bear) is very upset about this.

Off topic - sad to hear of Oliver Postgate's demise. he pshticuffed off his mortal coil today. RIP.