Fluid ISA Bond 1 Limited

jimjames

pauline_88 said:

I received a list of all creditors names & addresses from Leonard Curtis, which I believe was sent to all creditors? I completed the Creditors questionnaire & returned and I believe Leonard Curtis has sent a report to the Insolvency Service. 

Really? That sounds massively against GDPR & data protection unless there is a legal requirement to distribute

masonic

jimjames said:

pauline_88 said:

I received a list of all creditors names & addresses from Leonard Curtis, which I believe was sent to all creditors? I completed the Creditors questionnaire & returned and I believe Leonard Curtis has sent a report to the Insolvency Service. 

Really? That sounds massively against GDPR & data protection unless there is a legal requirement to distribute

Cue letter from scammers claiming they can help recover the lost money / pushing other questionable investments / claiming to be LC and requesting an advanced fee ahead of distributing money* (delete as applicable)

pauline_88

Yes  I did see that, I haven’t received anything but it may have gone to an old address. I agree with huge breach of GDPR releasing all creditors details but as you say may have been a legal requirement. 

Tracy66D

I see this forum not been messaged on since July, but kind of written off receiving or hearing anything further, I then received a letter from Leonard Curtis this morning dated 9th January 2023
Re: Fluid ISA Bond Limited - In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation

Detailing that Alex Cadwallander and Alex Poxon have been appointed joint liquidators of the company on March 31 2022

It enclosed 2 forms to fill in and return before the 26th January 2023 a proof of debt and a voting form to whether I agree or disagree to the fee that LC want for preparation of statement of affairs and any other associated expenses

It gives a prepared report via a password/ key code and a link on there LC website

I have taken a look and it does list of all creditors names & addresses and the amount they invested

Also causes of failure:

The directors attribute the failure of the Fluid Group to the following factors:

Changes to rules around marketing of mini-bonds to retail investors 

Reduction of inward investment following rule changes
Failure of one of the fund administrators
Covid-19 pandemic affecting staff ability to provide customer service 

Decline in customer confidence following cloning scam

And Failure of several investments

There seems to be only one secured creditor and a charge is outstanding owed to More Group

Seems to me that Fluid Isa company was doomed from the start, and was still taking peoples money, how can a company loose over a million in such a short space of time :-( and operate as long as it did? My investment was due to mature on the 1 December 2021 and I was sent a letter with apologies in the delay!! but on a phone call I was reassured that it would be paid, so not that honest!!

masonic

Tracy66D said:

Seems to me that Fluid Isa company was doomed from the start, and was still taking peoples money, how can a company loose over a million in such a short space of time :-( and operate as long as it did? My investment was due to mature on the 1 December 2021 and I was sent a letter with apologies in the delay!! but on a phone call I was reassured that it would be paid, so not that honest!!

If it was still taking people's money then it may still be trading today. The FCA banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds to retail investors at the start of 2021. That would have dried up any money that could have come in to pay off existing investors, meaning that those existing investors were entirely dependent on the borrowers repaying their loans on time and not needing further tranches of funding, or forbearance. It's very easy for a lending business to lose a large amount of money in a short time if borrowers cannot repay. Loans typically have a term of up to 5 years, interest only, with final bullet repayment of the capital. Borrowers can sometimes borrow the money to fund the interest repayments, or this money is retained on account, so the first sign of trouble is when the final repayment isn't made. The real killer is when investors have to be repaid to different timescales than the loans made with their money. This requires an influx of new money, which in this case dried up. This creates risks generally associated with a Ponzi scheme - where existing investors are dependent on new investors cash to repay their own investment.

Some investors clearly were paid back during 2021, but by the end of that year any money to do so had dried up. A couple of months later insolvency practitioners were brought on board and it seems some efforts were made to rescue the company before it was finally put in liquidation 5 months later. But in practical terms it had ceased operating in any meaningful sense when NPI failed in the last quarter of 2021.

Nobody should have reassured you that your investment would be repaid, but it is probably the case that the person you spoke to had no authority to make such a statement and was not aware themselves of the financial position of the business. They'll be well aware now, having been made redundant. There are no winners here, even Ansar Mahmood will be blighted by what has happened.

Why the FCA ever allowed such speculative investments to be marketed to consumers, when arguably they were not capable of understanding the risks, is beyond me. This is not the first time they have stepped in to protect prospective investors at the expense of existing investors.

pauline_88

Update.. I applied to FSCS  online & on advice and on the back of Northern Provident going liquidation, made my application, quite lengthy questioning & sending in lots of written correspondence but hey ho I did win my claim got nearly all my money invested less interest back. So happy! 

masonic

pauline_88 said:

Update.. I applied to FSCS  online & on advice and on the back of Northern Provident going liquidation, made my application, quite lengthy questioning & sending in lots of written correspondence but hey ho I did win my claim got nearly all my money invested less interest back. So happy! 

That's a great result for you, and frankly better than you could reasonably have hoped for, given the FSCS can't normally consider claims on investment losses like this. Did they explain why they were able to make an exception in your case? Did they treat you as having received financial advice to invest like the LC&F bondholders, or something else?

pauline_88

Also I received £2500 from Santander after they partially admitted responsibility for not warning me sufficiently regarding my investment with Films4U. 

I was advised by Leonard Curtis to make my claim to FSCS on the back of Northern Provident going into liquidation and they were, I believe, signed up to FSCS. At the time I made my investment in May 2020 it was covered by FSCS and on that basis they honoured the claim. 

dunstonh

pauline_88 said:

Also I received £2500 from Santander after they partially admitted responsibility for not warning me sufficiently regarding my investment with Films4U. 

I was advised by Leonard Curtis to make my claim to FSCS on the back of Northern Provident going into liquidation and they were, I believe, signed up to FSCS. At the time I made my investment in May 2020 it was covered by FSCS and on that basis they honoured the claim. 

You need to be taking more care with what you are doing.     Going into unregulated areas and scams multiple times is not a good sign.    You have got lucky on both occasions as theoretically, you shouldn't have got anything back.  it is only the current over generous compensation schemes that really shouldn't be that generous.

masonic

pauline_88 said:

Also I received £2500 from Santander after they partially admitted responsibility for not warning me sufficiently regarding my investment with Films4U. 

I was advised by Leonard Curtis to make my claim to FSCS on the back of Northern Provident going into liquidation and they were, I believe, signed up to FSCS. At the time I made my investment in May 2020 it was covered by FSCS and on that basis they honoured the claim. 

The investment was not FSCS protected and the financial promotion approved by NP stated that. I think you have been very lucky. Perhaps FSCS decided you could be covered as NP really had no business approving such an investment to be marketed to consumers like you, so you'd have a claim against NP for negligence, and any compensation you were due would be FSCS backed.