Inside Track goes into administration.

Alan_M_2

GavP wrote: »

The victims of this have been foolish and greedy and are at least partially culpable for being ripped off, so I can understand why people are not necessarily sympathetic towards them, but realistically Inside Track are no different from the dodgy tradesman who make little old ladies pay over the odds for work that they don't even need doing. By your line of argument little old ladies always lose their shirts, and that's just the way things are. Survival of the fittest, eh?

As long as they operate within the realms of law what do you suggest.

People are all too willing to band around words like Fraud too often, where in most cases they are simply trying to wriggle out of a bad decision.

Inside track posted profits approaching £30 Million.....they rode the wave then got off, it appears many of their investor thought it would go on forever.

If these investors obtained mortgages, the properties would have been surveyed and valued independently and professionally, I'd be aiming my complaints to the surveyors if I felt there was mis valuation....which I doubt there was, as a property is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Gullible investors are looking for someone to blame, they should be looking in the mirror, nowhere else.

Thomas99

BettiePage wrote: »

Inside Track goes into administration.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/apr/29/buyingtolet.mortgages
With thanks to Buccaneer on GHPC
:beer::T

Best news i'm going to read all day!

Pez2

Alan_M wrote: »

It was ironic, as was the whole tone of my post if you care to re read it.

I don't take to gloating, I find it as distasteful as people posting about how much they have.

I do get particularly annoyed with the general lack of responsibility that people seem to have these days for their own decisions. It appears when the Sh*t hits the fan they want to know why the government (or governing body) hasn't intervened to stop it, yet the very same people are the first to accuse the government of "Big brother" syndrome.

We live in a capitalist society, and as long as we do enterprises will exist to (legally) take advantage of gullible people. Caveat Emptor if you prefer.

What you're confusing for gloating in my post is actually realism......

Given your picture I did wonder if you were being ironic, so I apologise for taking your post too seriously.

But I disagree with your view that this is a necessary aspect of capitalism. The whole basis of of capitalism and the free market is 'voluntary exchange', and the case were one party delibarately lies and misleads the other party about the product or service they're selling does not constitute a voluntary exchange, it is fraud. Moreover, by distorting economic incentives such transactions are likely to have a negative impact on the economy.

In the case of Inside Track, the consequnces have been:
1) Syphoning money away from investment in productive aspects of the economy into an over-valued asset.
2) Artifically increasing demand for that asset (new build flats), and hence incetivising builders to over-produce that asset, which not only has poentially created the slum housing of tomorrow, but diverted builders away from building the kinds of properties that would otherwise be in demand.
3) Thus, helping to fuel a bubble in housing that has encouraged increaing numbers of people to overstrech themselves with debt.

So it's not my argument that Inside Track's customers should be bailed out. I'm certainly in favour of personal responsibility. But there are costs to the economy as a whole of this kind of activity, and so the authorities should do a lot more to stop it happening in the first place, and certainly shouldn't be giving people the impression that it's easy to get away with this kind of con.

Plus every bone in my body tells me that if the people who bought these properties have to absorb their losses than natural justice says that the characters behind Inside Track should not be able to keep their millions and live the life of Reilly in the Bahamas.

BLOO_LOO_2

this and the many other scammers in this "industry" should not be in administration- It should have been CLOSED for the Fraud it clearly is.

If not that, a health warning should be put on the label, just like newspapers do in their small ads section about taking advice before you invest.

BettiePage

BLOO_LOO wrote: »

If not that, a health warning should be put on the label, just like newspapers do in their small ads section about taking advice before you invest.

I'm sure they've covered themselves in that respect, but how many people actually read the smallprint, despite spending potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds? Especially when blinded by greed?

Pez2

Alan_M wrote: »

As long as they operate within the realms of law what do you suggest.

Make the law tougher. Regulate them. One of the reasons thay have got away with what they have is that they are not regulated by the FSA.

teabelly

Anyone that invests in property without seeing it or exercising due care and attention deserves to lose their shirt. Prescott decided that developers were to build loads of new build flats even though most people would much rather live in a house so he is the root of why there are so many. Inside track just jumped on a bandwagon to extract money from the terminally stupid. Most of the people investing were allegedly intelligent middle classes who often didn't even bother to make the most basic of checks ie what will they rent for and what do 4 or 5 year old flats sell for.

If you don't understand what you are investing in, don't invest in it and put the money in a high interest bank account or something else you do understand.

m00m00

it's not the buyers of the property I was inferring the fraud was related to

it's the banks who have been potentially defrauded through false valuations etc

PasturesNew

teabelly wrote: »

Anyone that invests in property without seeing it or exercising due care and attention deserves to lose their shirt. Prescott decided that developers were to build loads of new build flats even though most people would much rather live in a house so he is the root of why there are so many. Inside track just jumped on a bandwagon to extract money from the terminally stupid. Most of the people investing were allegedly intelligent middle classes who often didn't even bother to make the most basic of checks ie what will they rent for and what do 4 or 5 year old flats sell for.

If you don't understand what you are investing in, don't invest in it and put the money in a high interest bank account or something else you do understand.

About a year ago, I faced this choice: plough my money into BTL or stick it in the bank.

I looked VERY briefly into BTL property and pretty immediately decided that the properties were places I didn't know, I'd need a good look around the properties and areas. And - I had no idea why on earth they thought the rents achieved would be so high... where would they find enough people to fill them that could afford to pay that much. There's no dispute that there are enough people to fill property, but not at the prices they were suggesting.

So I just kept subscribed to the emails from these property investment clubs etc so I could scorn their "offers" they sent. I just couldn't ever see how the maths stacked up. And I saw the debt as risk.

I banked my house profits. I chose to take a minimum wage income from interest (safe) rather than mortgaging and being an instant overnight property portfolio millionairess. Or, as I'd now be known: a buffoon with £ signs for eyes and no brain.

RabbitMad

Conrad wrote: »

The problem with vulnerable people is they wont be told.

Over on the debt free section, people were extolling the virtues of spread betting and some were citing it as a way out of debt. Others regularly discuss other money making means that do not involve much work.

While I agree there is no such thing as money for nothing, "Match Betting" is a way of making some money risk free. Check out the Gambling intro board for details. However it does involve some work.


On the whole I don't know whether to feel sorry for these idiots that bought up 15 flats in a town they had never been too or not. Have they been conned? - I'm not sure, I believe they were greedy but does that mean they deserve to loose everything?