Dodgy Pension Trustee

MrUnhappy

Mr Harris was contacted by 2 independent financial advisers, one gave up after getting zero response, he then after an eternity responded to the second and seemed to have changed his character, he informed the advisers that I was free to move my pension when ever i wanted. Things were looking up maybe??? He was sent the relevant paperwork three times, as they had got lost in the post (sounds familiar) and gone astray in his email system. When he did infact get round to filling the forms in and returning them, everything he needed to fill in was marked as "Not Applicable" consequently no genuine company will touch them, so he still has my money and yours by the sound of it and probably several other peoples, might be time to send the boys round Mr Harris!!!!

atush

Have you reported him to the police? The pensions regulation service? the FCA? anyone?

MrUnhappy

Mr Harris has been reported to everybody you could report him to, including Action Fraud who are looking into the matter and the TV show "Rogue Traders" who are again are showing interest.
There are obviously dodgy dealings going on between Howard Davies from Green Footprint Investments, Eco Quest, Mark Harris from AC Management and Administration Ltd and possibly a company called Bennett Brookes who occupy the same building as Green Foootprint and have an office in Macclesfield which coincidently is the same address as a company called Taurus Trading who just happen to own Green Footprint.
Round and round we go!

Davnik

Mark Harris is the only person I know whose correspondence regularly gets 'lost in the post.'
Other than him I've NEVER had anything lost in the post.
He must think we are idiots.
I certainly wish I'd never transferred my pension to him.
I wonder if he carries on as a solicitor as he does as a pensions trustee?
He's either a crook or just downright lazy.

Davnik

Any more updates? I shall be expecting my next statement from Harris around February and hope to take the whole lot away from him under the new rules in April, but don't hold out much hope of either.

Maybe I should write to him now to give him plenty of time for his replies to get lost in the post. It appears he's not even capable of sending an email properly.

MrUnhappy

I shouldn't imagine that you will receive a statement from these cowboys, but just for the record, feel free to check, there are now several outstanding CCJ's against AC management & Administration, but if anybody would like to know the whereabouts of Mr Harris, let me know as he is now working within another company in the Swansea area, no doubt still up to his usual tricks.

magpiecottage

zagfles wrote: »

Scams are being excluded from professional indemnity insurances?? How can they possibly do that - surely the whole point of professional indemnity insurance is to insure against exactly this sort of thing - ie a mistake such as being taken in by a scam.

Bit worrying for people who use IFAs if this is true.

Sorry - I lost this thread and it has only just come back onto my radar.

PI cover is on a "claims received" basis. So an insurer will meet any claims an IFA receives during a period of insurance but will not cover anything actuall done during that time (unless the claim comes in during the same period).

When the IFA comes to renew the insurer is free to vary the terms.

It is a very unsatisfactory arrangement and I think it should be like employers' liability where the insurer at the time of the event giving rise to the claim remains liable. It would also largely do away with the need for the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as it relates to IFAs.

I seem to be something of a lone voice on this, though.

magpiecottage

MrUnhappy wrote: »

I shouldn't imagine that you will receive a statement from these cowboys, but just for the record, feel free to check, there are now several outstanding CCJ's against AC management & Administration, but if anybody would like to know the whereabouts of Mr Harris, let me know as he is now working within another company in the Swansea area, no doubt still up to his usual tricks.

The other firm is called Alexander Chambers (note the initials are AC). Its website says they are property and probate lawyers and commissioners for oaths.

If they really are lawyers, they are not very good ones because they have failed to give proper details of their Companies House registration number, registered address or Solicitors' Regulation Authority registration.

zagfles

magpiecottage wrote: »

Sorry - I lost this thread and it has only just come back onto my radar.

PI cover is on a "claims received" basis. So an insurer will meet any claims an IFA receives during a period of insurance but will not cover anything actuall done during that time (unless the claim comes in during the same period).

When the IFA comes to renew the insurer is free to vary the terms.

It is a very unsatisfactory arrangement and I think it should be like employers' liability where the insurer at the time of the event giving rise to the claim remains liable. It would also largely do away with the need for the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as it relates to IFAs.

I seem to be something of a lone voice on this, though.

Also what would happen if the IFA retires/changes career? If the insurer at the time of the event isn't liable then presumably nobody is?

Davnik

Thanks for the updates. But what I don't understand is how Mark Harris continues to get away with this? Surely he should have been arrested and charged with fraud by now?