London Capital and Finance

Malthusian

bxboards wrote: »

I wonder if action should be taken against sites that promote them?

First rule of law: don't sue people who don't have any money. RPDigitalservices, by a distance the main promoter of LCF, has net assets of £28k according to its last accounts. Less than what the average LCF investor owns, or used to.

Time to make the owners / directors of these sites personally liable rather than hide behind their Ltd company.

The entire point of setting up a Limited company is that the owners / directors aren't personally liable, except in exceptional circumstances. Unregulated introducers introducing people to failed investments is, by itself, not an exceptional circumstance. In any case, the owners / directors are unlikely to have many more assets within the reach of UK courts than the company, apart from the odd stables in Essex.

Malthusian

Cape Verde hotels. Oh my. I thought that s---e went out of fashion in 2016. What next, self-storage sheds? Postal stamp arbitrage?

sully1311

I would hate to be looking at this thread now if I had invested my money into this.

rr755507

masonic wrote: »

Reposting due to substantial edit...

What's interesting is that there is a company that appears to be the Security Trustee (Global Security Trustees Limited). This company has two charges registered against LCF, supporting the case that LCF is lending itself money from these bonds. If you look at the directors of this Security Trustee, you'll see the connection with the company in the previous paragraph.

Interesting stuff.

It looks like {Text removed by MSE Forum Team} resigned from GLOBAL SECURITY TRUSTEES LIMITED and a few days later a company in Malta took control.....
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09846126/persons-with-significant-control

A lawyer with previous in this area, it seems he got off lightly
https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/tribunal-rejects-solicitors-agreement-sra-strike-off-dubious-investment-schemes

masonic

jimjames wrote: »

I'm not sure if you spotted but this certainly backs up your statement above. Looking at the charge document the lender is LCF at {Text removed by MSE Forum Team} and borrower is Leisure & Tourism PLC registered at - wait for it - {Text removed by MSE Forum Team}. Company reg # 09324527

I'd noticed that Global Security Trustees Limited and London Capital & Finance PLC share the same address, as seen in the charges registered against the latter in favour of the former. In that case the address was the only obvious link between the companies. 7-9 Church Road seems to be a hotbed of lending activity, and with shared directors also connecting borrower to lender, borrowers invariably being inactive micro-companies or LC&F itself, things are not looking good for bondholders unfortunately.

Aretnap

Malthusian wrote: »

Cape Verde hotels. Oh my. I thought that s---e went out of fashion in 2016. What next, self-storage sheds? Postal stamp arbitrage?

Hey, look on the positive side! At least some of the loans might be secured against an abandoned building site somewhere on one of the less fashionable Cape Verde Islands.

Linton

Other LCF charges:
LPE Support Ltd. Now owned by London Group LLP. Previous major shareholder was formerly a director of Leisure & Tourism Devewlopments, CV Resorts, London Capital & Finance amongst many others.

London Power Management. Now owned by London Group LLP. Previous major shareholder (in addition to above) is a director of Cape Verde Finance

Jelli

There are many companies that seem identical in google. One below is

https://www.renewable-bonds.com

Asset backed etc.

Malthusian

Aretnap wrote: »

Hey, look on the positive side! At least some of the loans might be secured against an abandoned building site somewhere on one of the less fashionable Cape Verde Islands.

Which the LCF network probably acquired for a few Cape Verde centavos from the liquidator of a collapsed pension liberation scam. Assuming of course that they've acquired anything at all.

HappyHarry

Hopefully this thread alone put off a few people from 'investing' with LC&F. I hope that no investors lose money, but I feel that is unlikley to be the case.

Regular posters on these threads often warn against the risks of unregulated investments. These risks are often overlooked by less experienced investors.

I do remember that one of our forum members got PPR'd for posting warnings and negative comments about LC&F a couple of years ago, before eventually getting re-instated

MSE says that "Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code."

It would be nice to think that the MSE forum team reflected on the LC&F situation, the warnings that experienced posters gave against it, and their treatment of such posters.

Who knows, we might then be able to save even more people from losing money in unregulated investments in the future.