Robert Brooks Ltd

northbob

Chickereeeee wrote: »

CEO Plus 'Doctor Moly' suspects he may have a urinary tract infection.

C

Holy Moly.

nobbly_knees

Thank you to everybody that replied to this thread, I have now decided not to invest money into this scheme, special thanks to colsten and a firm pat on the back from me!
This is advertised under the banner" best interest rates" on google!

Thanks again
nobbly knees

talexuser

I'm amazed that if the first time poster asking the question is a spammer trying to catch a few tiddlers, why they should do it on this forum which has such a good record in debunking these scams super fast. But I suppose they can always get a few hooks in from people desperate to get a little bit more income... very sad.

jimjames

nobbly_knees wrote: »

Thank you to everybody that replied to this thread, I have now decided not to invest money into this scheme, special thanks to colsten and a firm pat on the back from me!
This is advertised under the banner" best interest rates" on google!

Thanks for letting us know, it's always useful to know how Robert Brooks Ltd are promoting their products. With fake staff, no accreditations as claimed we can probably say it's not a genuine investment scheme.

doe808

Thanks all. I'll be avoiding Robert Brooks Ltd at all costs

nobbly_knees

Just to let you know I am definitely not a spammer as you so rudely suggested I might be, I am actually a genuine investor wanting to know if there was anyone who had invested with Robert Brooks! Surely these adverts should not be on Google if not genuine!

sorcerer

nobbly_knees wrote: »

Just to let you know I am definitely not a spammer as you so rudely suggested I might be, I am actually a genuine investor wanting to know if there was anyone who had invested with Robert Brooks! Surely these adverts should not be on Google if not genuine!

Classic, because everything on Google is true... have you ever used the internet. :rotfl:

bowlhead99

Google can't verify all claims made by companies who place adverts with them. People looking for suckers can use and abuse online and offline media to find them. Which includes posting "innocent" enquiries on forums and social media to get publicity for the scheme, in the belief that any publicity is good publicity.

So, new joiners to this forum asking about a non mainstream unregulated scheme that does not have a credible website and is offering something too good to be true, often get short shrift here.

If you go back 100 years to Mr Ponzi, he had a favourable write up in the press, because the press like all his investors were hoodwinked. When someone said his apparent returns were way too high, too quickly, to possibly be legit, he successfully sued them for libel for half a million... So Google won't want to pull ads on the basis of a website being "dodgy" if there are no complaints.

These days someone running a scam has their work cut out for them because everyone has the internet and can do proper research quite quickly, and the world is generally well informed about what a scam is and why you shouldn't trust everyone offering you riches via the internet.

But, the flip side is that there's a sucker born every minute and it's cheap to create a website, so the less reputable sites can get listed alongside the better ones. Google are not going to investigate the soundness of every product or service advertised, or that they find via crawling the websites for information and automatically add to a search database containing the key words "high rates" or whatever.

If you think the website is not being genuine in its offers, complain to the web site hosts and the search engines and the advertising standards agency (or FCA for financial products).

jimjames

nobbly_knees wrote: »

I am actually a genuine investor wanting to know if there was anyone who had invested with Robert Brooks! Surely these adverts should not be on Google if not genuine!

What definition do you have for genuine? It's a real company even if the staff photos shown aren't actually anyone associated with them. That doesn't mean you'll get any money you hand over back from them.


If you're a genuine investor why aren't you looking at standard regulated products such as S&S ISAs?

Chickereeeee

nobbly_knees wrote: »

Just to let you know I am definitely not a spammer as you so rudely suggested I might be, I am actually a genuine investor wanting to know if there was anyone who had invested with Robert Brooks! Surely these adverts should not be on Google if not genuine!

I think the suspicion was of the original poster, Ramro, not you….

C