8% ISA with London Capital and Finance PLC

cloud_dog

johncroberts wrote: »

Interested in this company for savings. What I read on this thread from many is that the company is not protected by Financial Conduct Authority and not protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, whilst their site does say so. Very confusing

Giving John the benefit of the doubt... It might be confusing if you don't actually read all of the words :cool:

TBC15

If some halfwit throws what little capital they have down the pan due to a link on aresface or whatever, can arseface be held liable for being the instrument of their demise? I think they should.

OldMusicGuy

Malthusian wrote: »

But in fairness to the OP, there are introducers who go out of their way to imply that the bonds are FSCS-protected. Some of them are referred to in this thread..

But the new poster John (to whom I was replying) says the LC&F website says they are FSCS protected. This is not true - the LC&F website very clearly states they are not FSCS protected. I do not see how there can be any confusion in this case. While we may be negative about the tactics of some of the online ads and various intermediaries, the LC&F website very fairly represents their products.

Malthusian

Eight years ago someone wrote a blog about Facebook's login process and was deluged with comments from people who'd mistaken their blog for the Facebook login page. They couldn't work out why they couldn't log in to their Facebook account.

If people can fail to grasp the difference between a blog about Facebook and the Facebook login page, they can fail to grasp the difference between the website of an unregulated introducer promoting London Capital and Finance and the website of London Capital and Finance itself.

Of course this doesn't matter if you take the view that people deserve to lose their money for being less clever than people who make their living promoting unregulated investments.

Personally I think the solution to this problem was not to make it easy to access the Internet, but that ship sailed 20 years ago on a sea of AOL discs.

PS I mistakenly referred to "OP" when I meant John (perhaps I should have said OTR for Original Thread Resurrector).

jimjames

OldMusicGuy wrote: »

But the new poster John (to whom I was replying) says the LC&F website says they are FSCS protected. This is not true - the LC&F website very clearly states they are not FSCS protected. I do not see how there can be any confusion in this case. While we may be negative about the tactics of some of the online ads and various intermediaries, the LC&F website very fairly represents their products.

However their website or that of their introducers does say this:


The average punter is not likely to know that FCA regulated means nothing in terms of security of their money.

https://damn-lies-and-statistics.blogspot.com/2017/03/london-capital-finance-reviews-scam.html

TBC15

Do you not need to be classified as high net worth/ sophisticated to be sold a product like this?

bxboards

jimjames wrote: »

The average punter is not likely to know that FCA regulated means nothing in terms of security of their money.

https://damn-lies-and-statistics.blogspot.com/2017/03/london-capital-finance-reviews-scam.html

But what is the solution? If people are ill informed is that the fault of the person or the company?

I think we are in danger of absolving people of any form of personal responsibility.

I also think you under-estimate the 'average punter' or to put it more bluntly, you think people are stupid.

le_loup

bxboards wrote: »

you think people are stupid.

Aren't we all when it's a subject outside our knowledge base?

jimjames

bxboards wrote: »

If people are claiming this is and out and out scam, then they need to be blunt and come out and say so, and not just edge around the subject as its not getting anywhere.

It's very hard to know something is a out and out scam until after the event - think about Enron. There are plenty of other threads here about companies like Store First, Universal Wealth etc where the warning signs were there and people have lost money. Whether they were scams or (giving the benefit of doubt) that the directors were very unlucky that the company didn't perform as well as they expected, it's difficult to know.

We do know that LCF are using loopholes to avoid having to file their accounts on time which delays the availability of information to shed any light on their finances but that doesn't mean they are a scam.

bxboards

le_loup wrote: »

Aren't we all when it's a subject outside our knowledge base?

Absolutely. But if something is out side of one's knowledge, then they can either try to learn hence this thread, people are researching which is good and finding out this isn't a good idea.

But I can't see how you can blame the company per se for that lack of knowledge. They do display warnings that money can be lost and there is no compensation scheme protection.

If people are claiming this is and out and out scam, then they need to be blunt and come out and say so, and not just edge around the subject as its not getting anywhere.