Moneda Capital Warning

clairec666

artyboy said:

clairec666 said:

I suspect the previous posts may have been "reported as spam" by Moneda in order to get them removed

The MSE team should perhaps be using this as an object lesson on not just deleting threads based on a (now it appears) dodgy company telling them to. 

Given the fact that MSE still prominently uses Martin Lewis, this is a situation where they could have done a much better job of alerting the public, but actively failed to do so. And as a result, their reputation as a consumer champion risks being tarnished.

Depends what you think MSE's remit is - as far as I'm aware they haven't endorsed Moneda in any way, and they can't be responsible for warning us on every dodgy company that pops up online.

Meanwhile, this thread survives...

artyboy

clairec666 said:

artyboy said:

clairec666 said:

I suspect the previous posts may have been "reported as spam" by Moneda in order to get them removed

The MSE team should perhaps be using this as an object lesson on not just deleting threads based on a (now it appears) dodgy company telling them to. 

Given the fact that MSE still prominently uses Martin Lewis, this is a situation where they could have done a much better job of alerting the public, but actively failed to do so. And as a result, their reputation as a consumer champion risks being tarnished.

Depends what you think MSE's remit is - as far as I'm aware they haven't endorsed Moneda in any way, and they can't be responsible for warning us on every dodgy company that pops up online.

Meanwhile, this thread survives...

I think MSE is well aware of how it is perceived publicly. As for your last statement, kudos to @jimjames but the words "horse" and "bolted" spring to mind.

masonic

artyboy said:

clairec666 said:

artyboy said:

clairec666 said:

I suspect the previous posts may have been "reported as spam" by Moneda in order to get them removed

The MSE team should perhaps be using this as an object lesson on not just deleting threads based on a (now it appears) dodgy company telling them to. 

Given the fact that MSE still prominently uses Martin Lewis, this is a situation where they could have done a much better job of alerting the public, but actively failed to do so. And as a result, their reputation as a consumer champion risks being tarnished.

Depends what you think MSE's remit is - as far as I'm aware they haven't endorsed Moneda in any way, and they can't be responsible for warning us on every dodgy company that pops up online.

Meanwhile, this thread survives...

I think MSE is well aware of how it is perceived publicly. As for your last statement, kudos to @jimjames but the words "horse" and "bolted" spring to mind.

In general, keeping posts up that have been subject to a defamation complaint does require forum members making the potentially defamatory statements to agree to have their personal details passed on to the claimant so that legal proceedings can be issued against them directly.

I don't know if anyone would have agreed to their details being shared. I would take the view that it is more productive to replace with a factual statement, which I would also share with the FCA.

Hypothetically

ivormonee

I was intrigued to view Moneda's website today but I am greeted with nothing more than the following message:

Important Information

As you may be aware, we are under investigation by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). A full asset restraint order took effect on 2 September 2025. At this stage, the FCA does not wish for us to provide any details beyond confirming that an investigation is ongoing. Anyone seeking further information should be directed to the FCA directly at 020 7066 1000 (Case Reference: UB00019). 

Can anyone explain what a "full asset restraint order" is as I don't know?

wmb194

ivormonee said:

I was intrigued to view Moneda's website today but I am greeted with nothing more than the following message:

Important Information

As you may be aware, we are under investigation by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). A full asset restraint order took effect on 2 September 2025. At this stage, the FCA does not wish for us to provide any details beyond confirming that an investigation is ongoing. Anyone seeking further information should be directed to the FCA directly at 020 7066 1000 (Case Reference: UB00019). 

Can anyone explain what a "full asset restraint order" is as I don't know?

It appears to be what it sounds like:

masonic

It doesn't take much reading between the lines to conclude how the investigation is coming along.

jimjames

ivormonee said:

Can anyone explain what a "full asset restraint order" is as I don't know?

Sounds like exactly the same order as was put in place for LCF when the FCA realised that things weren't as they originally expected. That didn't end well so hopefully this might be better. I was given details of the FCA from one of the banks that was claimed to be party to funds from Moneda so it would seem there are multiple threads involved in this process.

https://www.londoncriminalbarrister.co.uk/regulating-the-regulator-the-fca-and-the-collapse-of-london-capital-finance

jifmoose

The SFO, working closely with the FCA, are also taking a very close interest in London Capital & Finance’s conduct, with five individuals already arrested and released under investigation including Paul Careless: the founder of ‘Surge Financial’ 

Some spectacular nominative determinism there

masonic

jifmoose said:

The SFO, working closely with the FCA, are also taking a very close interest in London Capital & Finance’s conduct, with five individuals already arrested and released under investigation including Paul Careless: the founder of ‘Surge Financial’ 

Some spectacular nominative determinism there

If the FCA call in the administrators, hopefully they'll appoint this one: https://www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/our-people/shane-crooks

UncleK

jifmoose said:

Some spectacular nominative determinism there

My education for the day! Brilliant!