Panorama Blackmore global scandal

westv

From what  I've read elsewhere it sounded like a lot of Bmackmore investors were first contacted by cold calling. Is that correct?

jimjames

Wildsound said:

I remember when posts were popping up on this forum left right and centre about Blackmore circa 5 years ago. 

As one of the people responding to those posts and similar ones about LCF it was incredibly frustrating that the FCA took no obvious action at the time when it was very clear from the posts here that investors were being misled. Hopefully the replies stopped at least one person from investing but I know of one who did invest after being told the risks and is now proclaiming no knowledge. 

The programme did leave a few unanswered questions which seemed to be skipped over. One investor claimed they had been advised to invest in Blackmore - but didn't ask by whom. There was mention of the requirement to be a sophisticated investor but no explanation how/why the investors ticked those boxes. 

baldeagle09 said:

Personally I would 'blame' the regulator rather than the investors. Blackmore was regulated by the FCA.

Unlike LCF I understood that Blackmore was not FCA regulated and made clear FSCS protection did not apply.
https://damn-lies-and-statistics.blogspot.com/p/blackmore-bond.html

jimjames

westv said:

From what  I've read elsewhere it sounded like a lot of Bmackmore investors were first contacted by cold calling. Is that correct?

Potentially via a number of different routes. There was a company mentioned by the whistleblower but there was also a company called Surge that sold LCF bonds and apparently also sold Blackmore to the same investors. When LCF went bust they moved over completely to promoting BB.

Parking_Trouble

westv said:

From what  I've read elsewhere it sounded like a lot of Bmackmore investors were first contacted by cold calling. Is that correct?

Yep, Typically offered a free pension review. Leads passed to dodgy companies, outside the reach of UK regulator.  Employed regulated UK IFAs to recommend pension transfers in SIPP then investing in high risk (high commission) investments like Blackmore Global.

Nunn and McCreesh owned the cold calling firm. Took over £2m in commission which ended up in Gibraltar.

Fractional commission scam. Everyone takes a cut at one or more points, plus ongoing fees and less than half the money ends up in (toxic) investments. Punters lose their pensions. The scammers riding jet skis in exotic locations.

Where has the remaining money gone? Offshore bank accounts is my guess.

Albermarle

Wildsound said:

I remember when posts were popping up on this forum left right and centre about Blackmore circa 5 years ago. 

Whilst I remember being concerned about how unsuspecting people were being marketed these products, it puts a smile on my face when I look back and see a raft of regular forum posters were highlighting the risks and the nature of the product and the shady nature of it all.

I genuinely hope that the people that were posting here were able to deter people from throwing their money away. I imagine this forum probably did more help on that front than the fca ever did...

Commiserations to those who have lost money. 

Sometimes I believe the companies mentioned in this forum as potentially being a bit dodgy, complain to MSE and say certain posts are defamatory and threaten to sue.

dunstonh

Albermarle said:

Wildsound said:

I remember when posts were popping up on this forum left right and centre about Blackmore circa 5 years ago. 

Whilst I remember being concerned about how unsuspecting people were being marketed these products, it puts a smile on my face when I look back and see a raft of regular forum posters were highlighting the risks and the nature of the product and the shady nature of it all.

I genuinely hope that the people that were posting here were able to deter people from throwing their money away. I imagine this forum probably did more help on that front than the fca ever did...

Commiserations to those who have lost money. 

Sometimes I believe the companies mentioned in this forum as potentially being a bit dodgy, complain to MSE and say certain posts are defamatory and threaten to sue.

Indeed they do.

Rollinghome

Nebulous2 said:

london21 said:

Shocking the numbers involved and the amount of peiple affected. 

If it seems too true to be true,  it probably is. 

The  ponzi schemes never seem to stop been created.  

They'll keep being created as long as they work. Greed is a very powerful lever.

Send me £100 and I'll release your million pound prize, doesn't stand up to the most cursory examination, but the allure of it has hypnotised people from long before the internet existed......

I'm not sure that implying people who lose their savings are greedy helps very much.

We are all looking for the best returns on our money. Many of us invest in stock markets, knowing but accepting the risks, as I do, to that end. Labelling people caught by scams as greedy encourages boasting of impressive wins but keeping quiet when scammed - when we need them to speak out, as did the people in that programme did, as a warning to others.

It's the scammers, and the lax regulation that enables them, we should condemn. 

Nebulous2

Rollinghome said:

Nebulous2 said:

london21 said:

Shocking the numbers involved and the amount of peiple affected. 

If it seems too true to be true,  it probably is. 

The  ponzi schemes never seem to stop been created.  

They'll keep being created as long as they work. Greed is a very powerful lever.

Send me £100 and I'll release your million pound prize, doesn't stand up to the most cursory examination, but the allure of it has hypnotised people from long before the internet existed......

I'm not sure that implying people who lose their savings are greedy helps very much.

We are all looking for the best returns on our money. Many of us invest in stock markets, knowing but accepting the risks, as I do, to that end. Labelling people caught by scams as greedy encourages boasting of impressive wins but keeping quiet when scammed - when we need them to speak out, as did the people in that programme did, as a warning to others.

It's the scammers, and the lax regulation that enables them, we should condemn. 

Certainly the scammers need condemnation, they also need taking to court and being imprisoned. Banning them from running companies doesn't begin to cover it in my view. 

However they prey on gullibility and yes greed. A lot of the scams have red flashing lights all over them, but the hope of making an unfeasible return blinds people to the warning signs. 

A phone call from someone you don't know, offering you a guaranteed return that you can't get anywhere else on the planet, as long as you sign to say you are a sophisticated investor and you know what you are doing. 

You need a certain level of denial to get caught by that. 

And yes - I've been caught out as well. Lost £300 to a boiler-room scam some 30 years ago. It was a valuable lesson in questioning things and doing my research.......

DannyCarey

Must watch this tonight - cheers for the reminder!

Rollinghome

Nebulous2 said:

Rollinghome said:

Nebulous2 said:

london21 said:

Shocking the numbers involved and the amount of peiple affected. 

If it seems too true to be true,  it probably is. 

The  ponzi schemes never seem to stop been created.  

They'll keep being created as long as they work. Greed is a very powerful lever.

Send me £100 and I'll release your million pound prize, doesn't stand up to the most cursory examination, but the allure of it has hypnotised people from long before the internet existed......

I'm not sure that implying people who lose their savings are greedy helps very much.

We are all looking for the best returns on our money. Many of us invest in stock markets, knowing but accepting the risks, as I do, to that end. Labelling people caught by scams as greedy encourages boasting of impressive wins but keeping quiet when scammed - when we need them to speak out, as did the people in that programme did, as a warning to others.

It's the scammers, and the lax regulation that enables them, we should condemn. 

Certainly the scammers need condemnation, they also need taking to court and being imprisoned. Banning them from running companies doesn't begin to cover it in my view. 

However they prey on gullibility and yes greed. A lot of the scams have red flashing lights all over them, but the hope of making an unfeasible return blinds people to the warning signs. 

A phone call from someone you don't know, offering you a guaranteed return that you can't get anywhere else on the planet, as long as you sign to say you are a sophisticated investor and you know what you are doing. 

You need a certain level of denial to get caught by that. 

And yes - I've been caught out as well. Lost £300 to a boiler-room scam some 30 years ago. It was a valuable lesson in questioning things and doing my research.......

You may know it's an unlikely return, as do I, but when others are seen quadrupling their money, and more, with stock markets investments, as so many of us have done, with, for example, apparently mainstream investments such Scottish Mortgage, then it should be very easy to comprehend why many people, used only to regulated savings accounts, find it difficult to understand what you describe as an "unfeasible" return, is. 

Many, less savvy, will also have lost a considerable sum investing in high-rolling stocks like SMT, likely because they knew less than they thought and failed to take profits.

Nor will many fully understand the implications and consequences of allowing themselves to be described as a "sophisticated investor".  Few, even on this board, will know exactly what a sophisticated investor is. The bar can be implausibly low, and It typically requires just a tick in a box. Lots of people with a little cash and money from pensions certainly don't.

Many people lost money in P2P which was given what appeared to be a favourable review by an editorial on this website and given the added legitimacy of ISA eligibility. I don't consider that the inability to calculate risk equates with "greed". Lots of people on boards such as this are clearly taking on more risk than is wise, encouraged by confident voices.

So, many people have done just as you did, but for a lot more than just a few hundred quid.  You were lucky, so let's not be too smug about those who have been less lucky.