Harlequin Investor Update March 2015 from Regulatory Legal News on Vimeo.
Meanwhile at the Financial Services Compensation Scheme…
Financial advisers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of pounds after the latest twist in the Harlequin saga in which the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) has written down the value of the investment to nil.
In a document from the FSCS seen by Professional Adviser, dated 12 February and marked ‘compensation calculation’, the body lists the value of a Harlequin Property investment as £0.00.
A FSCS spokesperson confirmed the decision.
“Where applicable we will disregard the residual value in respect of Harlequin investments,” they said.
The move opens the floodgates for the FSCS to pay the thousands of Harlequin investors compensation on the full amount they put into the unregulated scheme, up to a £50,000 limit.
With around £400m originally invested in Harlequin, the compensation bill is set to run into hundreds of millions of pounds, putting it on a par with other investment disasters like Keydata and Arch cru.
As in those cases, the bulk of the cost of the compensation is likely to be borne by investment advisers.
Read the entire article: Spectre of £400m compensation bill looms as FSCS values Harlequin at nil
Barbados Free Press 
Come on Dave, how do you propose finance now you idiot! A build plan? Come on Dave what about the Trust; the one the FSCS supported!!!!
Oh dear Dave,his wasn’t your best moment,
In a conference call with about 70 Harlequin investors on 31 July, Ames said he and his legal team had met with the FSCS, that it supports the Harlequin trust, and that investors must join it or risk MISSING OUT ON COMPENSATION, according to two sources who were in on the call, including one who kept a transcript.
Well Ames followers- what’s your advice now? Me! well I’ll take Mr Fatchett’s advice thanks.
Absolutely, give me the cash every day of the week. Your welcome to the 15% RL
Interesting video
I do hope there is a dawn raid coming. With the investment now officially worthless, the SFO could hardly be blamed for this mess the GV has created
Yup.
The compensation will only cover sipp investments. Still nothing for cash investors
There never has been an option for cash / or finance investors, so sad, but nonetheless an unpleasant truth; that 99% of investors don’t have the fight to sue their agents.
BB has a value, whatever that may be. The apartment block is up and running and the resort has record occupancy. Getting rid of 3500 claimants is better for the 2500 left. Of course there is no guarantee that 3500 will sign up to the return offered. Let’s suppose BB is worth £150m? Divided by 2500 investors that’s £60k each.
I think the investors still have the fight in them. It’s the fact that the agents have been one step ahead of the game all the time, filing for bankruptcy, stashing money in offshore accounts, these people know how to play a weak system. Where do investors draw the line regarding financing litigation, people don’t have endless pockets? They were let down by Reg legal who were only ever interested in redress for sipp investors but strung along the direct investors to help fund the process. Brutal but it’s gonna pay off handsomely.
@It rumbles on
Can’t blame RL, you invested you pillock.
You’re just as thick Anonymous
March 5, 2015 at 6:31 pm
The 3500 have not gor rid of they have been replaced by the FSCS who will ‘own’ the contracts – listen to the tape GF done you twit.
“Listen to the tape GF DONE you twit” Yes we can who the grammatically illiterate twit is.
Ahn thought we had a civil post here given the Ames supporters have a curled up or hidden. I’m sure the FSCA will eventually do an audit- the but what will they do with the assets they own? Doubt £150 million is near either for BB. More like £5 mil! What’s the rest worth and what can be recovered from Ames?- who owns the stuff the receivers have logged? Lots still to do. RL haven’t done anything wrong in my view. Ames didn’t play ball over the Trust- Mr Ames supreme idiot Walter Mitty with an ego the size of the International CEO he believes he is. Delusional as his supporters.
@ Anonymous March 5, 2015 at 7:05 pm
“Listen to the tape GF DONE you twit” Yes we can who the grammatically illiterate twit is.
Your mocking of this poster is unpleasant but I suppose it makes you feel better?
Your post does not make sense though.
@SIPP -ing
£5million for a fake beach and a rundown resort in the armpit of the Caribbean….
Only shill Bob thinks is going to work – poor old fool.
@19.46 so is calling someone a Pillock and thick. Perhaps you could not be bothered to read the full thread. If the poster doesn’t want to be mocked then I suggest he winds his neck in. Understand?
Yank an easy one. Your post makes no sense, you should read what you have written before hitting the post comment button. Fool
Well £5 mil a better guess than the £150 mil someone here guessed. £500K THEN?
Anonymous 6.31 pm, “The resort has record occupancy”, exactly what we would expect out of Ames on the week that the FSCS announce that Ames’ companies are insolvent.
Well I am sure that Ames will be able to provide independently audited accounts to demonstrate that the record number of guests will be providing enough revenue to Ames to allow him pay the FSCS the £ 170 million they are about to pay out in redress.
I’m sure the FSCS will expect Ames to provide the accounts, along with a robust business plan, given that FSCS are now Ames’ new “business partners.”
Come Ames!!!! would it not be fit an proper to make a statement refuting your zero worth companies?
The FSCS have got it all wrong, surly you should sue them all?
What up Davy?
I was told by a little bird that James Albert Baker has been having a long chat with various Government departments; but hey ho we will never know, because I’m told such things are covered by a special section 2 or something 😉
Dear Harlequin Investor
Further to today’s unfounded and unsubstantiated attacks against Harlequin on BFP, Mr. Ames has cut short his extended break in the Caribbean to collaborate with his remaining legal team to put together a suitable statement to reassure all investors.
Harlequin is stronger than it has ever been. Despite ongoing attacks attempting to ruin the unmistakable and well earned reputation of the Ames Family, and notwithstanding years and years of litigation. kindly paid for by our loyal investors, the FSCS has taken it upon itself to publicise the highly questionable assumption that the Harlequin investment is now worth jack shit.
It is unfathomable to the highly successful developer, Mr. Ames, and his legal team how the FSCS could have come to this decision, since no accounts have ever been published for any of the remaining companies in the Harlequin group which haven’t been liquidised. In fact, Mr. Ames and his family, and their legal advisors would challenge anyone claiming to know the sum of the assets and liabilities of “The Group” since money has been carefully dispersed amongst many jurisdictions, over numerous overseas tax regions, in many company names, and discrete accounts, through numerous bank accounts and offshore, unregulated investments, trusts and schemes.
Despite these never ending attacks from government bodies (such as the SFO, police, FSCS and what was the FCA), the BBC, and a few disgruntled investors (who will now watch their sorry arses since the Supreme Court in California told Mr. Ames who they were and where they lived and he’s now going to sue them), Mr Ames is going to continue to work tirelessly in order to hang on to your money until one day it all runs out. Please rest assured that absolutely no investor will be given any refund as contractually due, since they have lost faith in the Harlequin investment and don’t deserve a penny of their money.
Although Mr. Ames is unable to reveal details as yet, in case it ruins everything, he can confirm that he has a Letter of Intent from an investor who has agreed to meet him in Starbucks to look at some brochures. No other developer in the Caribbean can claim to have met a financier in Starbucks, and this is why Ames is the most talked about developer in the Caribbean.
Also, we are happy to report that Mr. Ames is still discussing the Wilkins Kennedy litigation with regards to outstanding bills owed, and this is being very well received by creditors.
So, apart from a number of jealous individuals who are only interested in bringing down the world renowned Harlequin group in order to halt its unstoppable progress and growth, all is moving forward as planned and as guaranteed my Mr. Ames and his family.
As a special thanks to all our faithful investors, we would like to invite you to a special “Coming Out Celebration” being held for our beloved Matt Ames at Buccament Bay shortly. This will give you all the opportunity to welcome him back, and thank him for accepting our offer to recommence his position as manager at the award winning Buccament Bay resort. Please hurry though, as there are only a few tickets left!
Once again, thank you for your kind support, and all donations to your pension fund are welcome. Remember; if you don’t donate, Harlequin will go bust, and you will lose everything and be very very poor.
Very best wishes,
Harlequin Hotels and Resort’s ASOL
The SFO have been calling on a number of individuals associated with Ames and are forcing everyone concerned to hand over all documentation pertaining to Ames under Section 2 Orders.
James Albert Baker produced manifestly false accounts, pertaining to Ames’ companies.
Baker is claiming that the accounting information was supplied to him by Ames.
FAB Mr Group announcement. Where have all the Harlequin supporters gone, long time passing, when will they ever lean………….OH- maybe they have 😉
Section 2 and legislative tools
We use a range of investigation tools. Our primary investigation powers are those given to us by the Criminal Justice Act (CJA)1987 when we were established.
Section 2 investigation powers
The Serious Fraud Office’s statutory powers are:
– to search property
– to compel persons to answer questions and produce documents
Section 2 of the CJA 1987 gives the Director or a designated member of staff the power to require a person or entity to provide information to us for the purpose of an investigation. This takes the form of interviewing people, requiring them to produce material, or searching premises.
We can only use this power if the Director finds reasonable grounds to suspect an offence has been committed involving serious or complex fraud or corruption.
Written notice is always given when exercising this power. Notices are typically issued to individuals, banks, financial institutions, accountants and other professionals, most of whom will have a duty of confidence to their clients. Issuing them with Section 2 notices obliges them lawfully to give us the information we require.
Yes Anonymous 9.43 you would of course know who the SFO have served a section 2 on. Get real.
Anonymous 11.18 you have no idea who I am, therefore you will have no idea how I know or indeed what I know, but unlike you, I know what is going on.
Blah blah blah. Yes ok then. Let’s hope they have asked WK about e mails then.
Anonymous 11.47 pm, you would come across a little more credible if you did not change your Id so much and if you desisted from using expressions such as lol, Blah blah blah or trying to suggest that BBay is now booming especially in the context of the recent FSCS statement that Ames’ companies are insolvent. But to answer your question, yes the SFO removed dozens of files from the Wilkins Kennedy offices some time back as they did with files located at the offices of Michael Slade in Rayleigh in Essex.
I go by the name Bob Storey, Robert Storey, FDNRM, Anonymous, The Wise Old Owl and a whole host of other pseudonyms, I am however more than one person. My task is not to bring clarity to a situation but as per my instructions my role is to disrupt and critisise any who dare question the business ethics of Mr. Ames and his family, indeed there are times that I will defend my husband, my husband will defend himself, our staff will defend us, my son will defend me and I will defend him,
I am not in denial, I firmly believe everything I say, I am not bothered if anyone else believes it, I believe in me and I believe what I say and for me that’s all that counts.
When BDO resigned I pointed out in my response that BDO did not understand what they were doing and that they got it fundamentally wrong, as have the FSCS. My companies are growing day by day, I trully believe this, my family believe this, my staff believe this, and that’s what counts.
My companies will never be liquidated, HMSSE will exit the Adminstration process shortly as I have always stated, I will challenge the liquidation of HMSSE, I will do this because I believe the company can and will be saved, and what I believe is what counts.
HPSVG and HH&R will never face liquidation, why ? Because I have said so, because I believe this, this is what I believe, and that’s what counts.
This is not denial, this is my belief, and my beliefs are what counts, I believe my resort is full, fuller then it has ever been, and it will be full to December, and next years bookings are 100% up on this years, so next year will be our best year yet with double the bookings of this year.
I can say this, because I believe this, and it’s what I believe that counts. An entrepreneur must believe in themselves if they are to succeed, not only do I believe in myself I believe what I say. And that’s what counts.
I’m not in denial because I believe there is nothing to be in denial about.
This one is from the Book Dave.
Redefining, well anything.
@Anonymous 11.53 and you would be more credible if you did not misquote people. No one has said BB is “booming” The expression was the resort has record occupancy. I have no idea whether that makes it profitable or not, and neither do you. As to changing ID a lot, you have no idea who I am, so comments about ID are not relevant.
And who’s word do we have for that? Surly not the man that said the FSCS supported the Trust, or the one who said it was and I assume still is a banking error?
Semantic and pedantic- come on. Still little Ames defence now. Very telling
no Yank one Easy, from a different source.
@ Anonymous 10.22 am, how do you know the resort has record occupancy? To state this you must be privy to some kind of booking or sales information, please explain how you appear to know such information, it could help restore your credibility, unless of course you are a Harlequin staff member, if you are you are just lying.
Fortunately Anon I do not answer to you. Why should I feel the need to “restore my credibility”? Why should you state that if I am a HP staff member I must be lying? Do you think that only anti HP trolls are the ones with inside information? BB staff put on notice? Lol
There are only a few things we need to care about. They include will (I) get redress? Will Ames, dodgy agents and other cohorts get skinned? Cash investors shouldn’t put too much store in a rescue plan. The FSCS aren’t going to run in and sure as hell has no ice neither will Ames. I think the RL trust was probably the best bet for cash investors! Whether a non Ames rescue or a fire sale will now happen I don’t know. And neither do the “experts” here.
Anonymous you may have inside information, but just look at who and where your getting your information from?
The FSCS says Ames’ companies are insolvent, Ames says something different. Who would you believe ?
Ames says that interest payments have stopped because of a banking glitch.
Ames says the FSCS support his trust, The FSCS have come out and said that that is bollocks. Who would you believe ?
That David Ames has a lot to answer for he and his crew have worn me out.
We are travelling to Canada and USA “where they tweet in English” and where we can have a rest.
Oh we believe Dave- he’s FAB and takes time out form his animals to talk to us. Dave Dave Dave
You need to prove you are travelling to Canada and the USA. Unless you can prove this you have no credibility!
Anonymous 12.43, you are a complete dick head, you really are, the business is finished yet all you do is take the piss. Just like Ames has done for nearly 9 years.
Typical anti HP troll thug. You need to take a chill pill. IT WAS A JOKE. You moronic tw*t.
Is Bob a Mormon, ”He Believes”
Barbadians have been ripped off at a multiple many times the Ames shell game.
So where is section 2 against the principals and why aren’t they being extradited for massive fraud and some comfortable lodgings courtesy of her Majesty?
I’m very happy.
I will get my money back with interest & I will be delighted to pay RL.
Only a fool would sign up to the Trust with a valid FSCS claim.
Time to move on.
The following question has been posed,
“Any one else who was naive enough to follow Harlequins sales advice and broker request to cite ‘home improvements on their ‘ loan applications? One solicitor I have tried with felt it was going to be an unsuccessful claim. I am now with the mortgage claims bureau who feel I, with along others may have a case. Any one else in the same position? “.
There are a number of problems here for the investor, one being the loan application was made for home improvements, but the loan was used for an entirely different purpose, therefore the loan application was made fraudulently, if investor is the one who signed the loan application, then it is they who have comitted the fraud.
Harlequin and the agent will of course deny that they ever suggested that an investor raise the cash for a deposit by comitting a fraudulent act, unless of course the investor has it in writing from Harlequin or the agent, but it still does not diminish the seriousness of the fraudulent act carried out by the investor.
The investor also runs the risk that by seeking redress for the monies paid over to Harlequin, that the original lender will discover that the monies loaned for the purposes of home renovations were not used for that purpose and may decide to cancel the loan agreement and call in the original loan, even if the investor has maintained the loan payments.
The investor could also find that they would find it difficult if not impossible to raise a loan in the future and could potentially face criminal prosecution.
The investors in this category are at the most risk, not only will they have to thread carefully with respect to their financial institutions, but they run the risk of forfeiting their deposits if they were unable to come up with the 70% deposits should Ames be in a position to build and complete anymore units.
It is these investors who as a result of investing in Ames’ companies, run the highest risk of loosing their deposits and their credit rating along side the potential for receiving a criminal record.
I agree with all of the above, however, most investors will do nothing because of the risks – fraud is fraud no matter who you try and blame.
Cash and finance investors have no hope other than to sue the agent. Harsh but true.
Those investors who comitted fraud should understand that their situations are very precarious indeed, Ames will have no problem dropping these investors in it from a very great height indeed, Ames will deny he or his staff ever suggested anyone engage in a fraudulent act, and also if Ames thought that by dropping an investor in it, it would remove that investor from his creditor pile, Ames would do this in a heart beat.
Gabriella Klein
Hi Christine
Tailormade are a bunch of, well, I won’t say it. Please don’t believe any of their advice – I’ve been following RL’s advice since July 2013 and there’s none better. Ask RL to help you get redress. And whatever you do, please do not fall for Dave Ames’ Trust – it is NOT to be trusted – you’ll lose everything. Good luck.
Ahhhh Gobriella, you invested in Harlequin in the first place, so why you trying to destroy everyone’s investment now. Glad to see your back Gobby.
Gobby and her mates are being watched again, so continue to defame Mr. Ames and see what will happen,
Not Saint Gobriella.
Gobriella is over in the RL forum answering Investors questions and handing out advice, no need for Gareth, Gobby is the new sheriff in town. Go for it Gobby, your a star.
Obviously working the back shift. Walton will be on later. Wonder if GF is now going to represent Erica. Will they both be best buddies again now they can smell money.
Anyway, hypothetically, if the FSCS hold contracts in BB which covers the 30% deposit! how will the FSCS pay the 70% when it is due on a completion?
GF doesn’t smell money. He now positively reeks of it.
He’s spent his quiet time wisely getting the FSCS on side.
FSCS are paying up and then permitting investors to have a go at 3rd parties. Round 2 will be fun.
Gobriella must be beside herself with excitement knowing that Fatchops is going to pocket some twenty million quid from the redress.
Wonder if the cash investors who paid £240 for the DD can smell the money? Perhaps they can still smell the bullshit. Perhaps a statement from RL to the cash investors might be forthcoming? Anyone want a little bet on that?
Trying to destroy everyone else’s investment? Still trying that line Bobby?
Your “investment” is worth zero Bob. It was worth one pound, now it is worth nothing. There is no investment.
RL have offered direct investors options throughout. Problem is they are either too tight or too thick to take any action.
From the Harlequin Property Investor FB page, rather alarming to see that investors are still considering converting their properties over to BBay.
Pxxx Rxxx Harlequin Property Investors
5 January at 10:18 ·
I have put deposits down on 2 properties that are yet to be built on the Marquis estate, St Lucia.
I am tempted to transfer to a single property at Buccament bay but the closing costs are substantial.
Has anyone transferred and completed using this method????
Would love some advice/ guidance!!!!!!
Many thanks.
” Just love this response “, wonder who David Hollely is ?
David Hollely
Paul drop a mail to the Pro Harlequin Investors Group at do-give@phig.org.uk with your contact details they may be able to help you
Cheers
· Hide · 6 January
Fxxxxxxx Mxxxxxxxx
doesnt seem like anything being built. i know a good set of solicitors for redress
Sxxxxx Wxxxxx
I’m feel the same , be good to have some bricks and mortar.
You would think Harlequin would be encouraging it to get things moving.
· Hide · 6 January
Bxxxx
Hello Paul…..I made a deposit on a property on same development.. I have also been offered the chance to close on one at Buccament Bay. Like you, find the closing costs are a significant further investment.. Would love to hear from some who have completed. Are there investors out there who bought originally at B. Bay and went on to either enjoy the rental income or sell their property – if so, please respond to our requests……………..Sxxxxx
· Hide · 25 January
Harlequin was always targeting the unsophisticated investor, but clearly some are so unsophisticated that even comprehending basic facts are beyond them.
What part of INSOVENT is causing the most difficulty?
The stupid and their money are so easy to separate. Don’t give completion money to “Harlequin” (who ever that is), buy some property in Dubai and send the GV the title deeds….. its the same thing.
“It’d be nice to have some bricks and mortar”….. such a shame the bricks aren’t on land legally owned by HP, which then can’t be legally transferred to you. So what do you “own?” The same as Bob, you “own” nothing and the GV still gets your money.
Idiots.
There is no hope for most investors.
Thick beyond belief.
Just Wondering
How does Dave know what investors were putting on their finance applications ?
For a company that is insolvent, how is it still taking bookings, supplying holidays,paying it’s bills, paying investor returns etc? Doesn’t look very insolvent to me.
Anyway no one seems to want to answer the hypothetical question. Let’s try again.
Mr W gets his £42500 back from the FSCS as compensation for his 30% deposit! and the FSCS now holds his contract for an incompleted property in BB. DA then decides to restart building work in BB. Who pays the remaining 70% of the money due? The FSCS? Who?
Its different company in a deferent country (to HMSE). So I see the pro Ames brigade are here at last. Why did they take so long! And what’s the game now even the dim-est must realise the games up? Best they can do is have a go at GF And Ms Klein- run out of steam chaps? But you have proved the laws of physics wrong. You’ve converted nothing into energy- but not as we now it Jim= a spent force. Well done. And keep on bullying ladies, you hard men you 😉 chuckle.
even know it ha, silly fools
Anonymous
March 7, 2015 at 9:31 am
1.harlequin is not just one company,
2. If you ever manage to get your deposit back, then be grateful,.
I think you need to appreciate that the harlequin business model is broken, complete farce, no organisation in the world will throw more money at it.
Yup ! correct
“For a company that is insolvent, how is it still taking bookings, supplying holidays,paying it’s bills, paying investor returns etc? Doesn’t look very insolvent to me.
Anyway no one seems to want to answer the hypothetical question. Let’s try again.
Mr W gets his £42500 back from the FSCS as compensation for his 30% deposit! and the FSCS now holds his contract for an incompleted property in BB. DA then decides to restart building work in BB. Who pays the remaining 70% of the money due? The FSCS? Who?”
I do hope you don’t look as stupid as you write.
DA can “decide” to start building all he wants, all the contracts are in breach and he has absolutely zero money to build with. The conman spent it on planes and litigation. Indeed, you could argue that he has already “decided” to build H Hotel again. We’re yet to see any progress.
Just because a company is taking orders and providing piecemeal service does not mean it is not insolvent. Here is Wikipedia’s definition:
“Accounting insolvency happens when total liabilities exceed total assets (negative net worth). Cash-flow insolvency involves a lack of liquidity to pay debts as they fall due.”
“Considering the first definition of insolvency (“Insolvency is the inability of a debtor to pay their debt.”), this situation of ongoing balance-sheet insolvency with cash-flow solvency obviously does not qualify as “insolvency” defined that way. It has been suggested (for instance by Graeme Pietersz of Moneyterms) that the speaker or writer should either say technical insolvency or actual insolvency in order to always be clear – where technical insolvency is a synonym for balance sheet insolvency, which means that its liabilities are greater than its assets, and actual insolvency is a synonym for the first definition of insolvency (“Insolvency is the inability of a debtor to pay their debt.”)”
Currently, Harlequin has 6000+ outstanding contracts which are almost all in breach (deadlines gone). This gives the contract owners the right to request a refund from the company, which of course will bankrupt it. This was highlighted in 2013, and will surely be highlighted again at the upcoming criminal trial of David Ames and his family. It is important because the contract holders have every legal right to pursue their full deposit back, as per their contract, and will therefore be able to pursue the issuing of statutory demands. We all know the story of HMSSE’s run-in with a single statutory demand LOL
You also assert some very serious points:
“how is it still taking bookings, supplying holidays,paying it’s bills, paying investor returns”
1. Bookings are being taken it seems. Not covered by ATOL.
2. Supplying holidays is not what Harlequin does. Harlequin provides residence in a hotel, a tour operator will provide the holiday. As yet, it seems that DA’s main source of visitors is from cheap deal sites. This is a highly pertinent point for any investor looking to work with Harlequin, as the profit from these visitors will be menial.
3. I am yet to see any proof of “investor returns” being paid in ANY degree. Indeed, we’re still waiting for the “banking glitch” to be fixed for the interest payments. So to think that Harlequin has managed to scrape together the “guaranteed 10%” return over its obligation to the people who helped fund the venture is very serious indeed; a fraudulent act.
Finally, the idea that anyone owes Harlequin 70% is fictitious. Ames failed by not bringing in an external financier – the thought that he can pursue the remainder of his loot is frankly a joke.
I own a pub- the whole shebang. No mortgage on the building. No one drinks in it. I cant pay my bills, but I own the building- which is worth. more that my liabilities. So technically I’m insolvent- actually I’m not. Just thought I’d offer an oversimplification for the D-ames supporters. But believe you me that doesn’t give you much hope unless your a SIPP
Yep the anti HP thugs are about nice and early. So are you implying the contracts are then null and void? Is DA free to start reselling the incompleted properties in BB? Try to think it through rather than resorting to mindless rhetoric, just for once. And there is proof of returns being paid, you just choose to ignor it.
@SIPP-ing
That scenario would not be insolvent – the asset outweighs the liabilities. Remember, you didn’t promise to build 9000 pubs by a particular date several years ago, with other people’s money.
Insolvency means you cannot meet your financial obligations. The Anonymous alluded to Harlequin’s provision of service as “proof” this was not the case; notwithstanding the fact that Ames doesn’t even have money for the poor souls laden with the unnecessary burden of interest which Ames was meant to pay, if not for the pesky banking glitch, let alone construction.
@Anonymous
1. The contracts are very much valid thank you.
2. Proof? No-where have we been given information pertaining to the rental return of anyone within the Harlequin scheme. You choose to ignore the banking glitch, the fact that Ames has zero financing, most hotels are not constructed, the promotional methods of Ames being HIGHLY suspicious and the copious theft of victim’s money for forays in Dubai.
#4
Never provide proof of your claims, just denounce others’ as “mindless rhetoric” of a “thug”.
#5
“Dave” has never done anything wrong.
Quite Anon- I am surprised though you missed the subtlety! The “technicality” and even the intent!
I don’t care I’m a SIPP investor and will take the CASH.:)
So caring.
The Bullshit carrys on over on the RL forum.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
No, SIPP charges would continue. Hence the need for the Sipp operator claim. Most people have not engaged with this element. Winning redress is 80% of the job. The balance is the annual charges and any amount above £50,000.
“None of our “competitors ” are authorised or even understand that they need to do. Seen as most of them are agents or linked of agents, is there any wonder?”
Fatchops appears not to have learned his lesson. He would want to watch his back very carefully. He is just back from suspension, the next time it might not be so temporary. It is he who is doing the most damage to the investments. The hotel is fuller then it ever has been, the guaranteed returns are being paid as per the contracts. The delay in the other resorts is purely down to the fraud by the builder and Wilkins Kennedy, thats why the force major clause of the contracts kicks in. So please can someone tell me how any of this is really Daves fault. Nope you can’t cause its not, the reviews for blu and Buccbay tell a very different story.
Anon, proof of rental returns? Yes you have, ask GF. If the contracts are valid then who pays the 70% completion money then?
So now we’re bringing out the big guns…. “force majeure”
We need a qualified legal professional to determine the implication of this most serious of assertions. Perhaps “Legal Eagle” could make a return?
I find your repugnance to the needs of victims to be disgusting, and further your ideas that “Dave” has nothing to answer is nothing more than a complete falsehood. Your berating of victims, Regulatory Legal and everyone else under the sun does nothing to show how immature and infantile your arguments really are.
“It is he who is doing the most damage to the investments”
lol okay. Maybe the SFO, the builder, the FSCS, HMRC, Matt Ames’ jury, the whole Ames family have nothing to do with it then?
“The hotel is fuller then it ever has been,”
As mentioned numerous times previous, this does not really do anything to suggest returns are being paid. Also highlighted before have been the ridiculous deals which have been offered. Not much left to share around after Harlequin takes it’s cut.
And it’s “more full”.
“Anon, proof of rental returns? Yes you have, ask GF”
Funny how Harlequin are suddenly so quiet about such a success as their much vaunted business model yielding the returns they promised?
I wonder how people crippled with interest payments feel about this development. Further, I wonder why PHIG hasn’t reported this astounding “proof” of Harlequin’s “further success”?
Maybe because it doesn’t exist…….
“The delay in the other resorts is purely down to the fraud by the builder and Wilkins Kennedy”
lol.
“So please can someone tell me how any of this is really Daves fault”
Ames took the money. Ames spent the money. Ames is responsible.
“the reviews for blu and Buccbay tell a very different story.”
Looks like someone’s been buying up fake reviews again 🙂
Anonymous 11.45.
Was that tongue in cheek or are you really serious. I will let you into a poorly kept secret. That parrot is definitely dead. Now I know you thought you saw its feathers move and the person who sold you it to you has convinced you that it is very much alive but no no no. It is definitely deceased.
“He is just back from suspension, the next time it might not be so temporary.”
And you would know this, how? There is a certain individual in Basildon who seems to know a lot about RL. Wonder who it could be.
@Anon 12.10, “perhaps Legal Eagle could make a return” Well all you have to do is change your name in the ID box from Anon to Legal Eagle. Oh silly me you do that already.
“If the contracts are valid then who pays the 70% completion money then?”
No one wanting a stab at that then?
So GF is just back from suspension then. Did he crash into the back of an ambulance I wonder.
“DA then decides to restart building work in BB.’
The best laugh all morning. Thanks.
So can I infer from that, that DA “decided” to stop building at BB? It was something he did because he thought it was in the best interests of the empire? It had nothing to do with pissing away all the money then? He spent millions of investors money building cabañas and tower blocks and then “decided” to abandon half of them and let them rot away?
What a fantastic mind he has for business. Donald Trump could learn from this man.
““If the contracts are valid then who pays the 70% completion money then?””
We were hoping you’d answer it with your precocious wisdom on the legal system & Harlequin, but since you need some help, let’s look at it.
The FSCS recently claimed that Harlequin’s companies are insolvent. They did this independently, and therefore we have it from a UK public body (near enough government) what most have known for a long time – David Ames will again (for a third time) be in line for bankruptcy.
This determination would have been reached in a manner which the Harlequin team do not seem to be very familiar with – analysis of the situation. Let’s take you through how it looks:
1. Harlequin has 6000+ contracts which are mostly in breach (deadline, and in some cases provision of finance).
2. Harlequin are not in a position to repay any of the monies they owe to victims, a point demonstrated by the continued pushing of the “trust” which Harlequin have lied to people to try to join.
3. Contrary to claims by Harlequin (Ames), external finance has not been forthcoming, and as such, the company has no monies available for further construction. Out of £440m taken in, this is a serious point of consideration.
4. Anonymous now claims “Force Majeure” clauses in the contracts will be invoked if Ames is sued by victims. As there has not been any ruling in this part of the debacle, what I say would be speculative. However, as you want answers, the determinant would be based on the circumstances surrounding the “fraud” in which Ames would propose caused the entire derailing of his plans.
Firstly, he would have to demonstrate that whatever was done had an impact on the specific cases themselves. As Ames has taken £440m, the point then needs to be raised about build plans, schedules & how Harlequin planned to accommodate cash flow in their projections.
Of course, this will be forthcoming, and therefore they’ll be able to demonstrate that the $1.6m money which the builder apparently misappropriated was the downfall of the entire operation. To put this into perspective, “Harlequin Air” cost almost double that – £1.4m.
They will also be able to demonstrate their ability to raise the extra 70% finance for victims, as they would be able to complete multiple multi-million pound resorts in succession, even in parallel.
5. Depending on how a force majeure clause would be considered, the reality for majority of victims is that they don’t have to lift a finger until Harlequin build their room. Even if they do construct their unit (which, according to the FSCS is going to be highly unlikely), only then will they be contractually obliged to pay the remaining balance.
However, as per the force majeure discussion – if no force majeure can be affirmed, the victim has every right to sue Ames for breach of contract (deadline), and achieve a refund as per their contract. In this instance, the victim will not pay the 70%, they will receive a refund from Harlequin (else they’ll issue a stat demand), and Ames will be able to “resell” their unit to someone else, considering he is not in jail and his company is still operating.
So in short (pun not intended), the fact is that as Ames has broken his agreement in regards the deadlines, he’ll have to find new partners to continue the builds, after paying back his current ones of course.
@Anonymous
March 7, 2015 at 11:45 am. No one can be this stupid. You must be an Ames employee or beneficiary of some sort.
The contracts are valid. Anonymous you appear to miss the point, it is because the contracts are valid that Mr. Ames has the problem.
I will try and explain this in very simple understandable terms.
The contracts work both ways, if Mr. Ames companies complete a property on time, then the purchaser must pay the 70%, not withstanding the issue of the guranteed mortgages.
If Mr. Ames companies do not complete a property on time as per the contract completion date then the clause of the contract whereby Mr. Ames companies are obligated to repay the investor the full amount of the deposit + 10% kicks in.
Mr. Ames companies cannot without changing the contracts or getting investors to sign up to the trust, merely ignore this clause in the contract for a period of time.
The FSCS will in essence be honouring the contracts on behalf of Mr. Ames companies, in that they will be paying back the deposits, or the % up to the maximum amount permissible under the rules governing the payment of compensation by the FSCS.
The FSCS are not purchasing the contracts, they are honouring the compensation elements of the contracts in place of Mr. Ames, given that Mr. Ames’ companies are insolvent.
The FSCS will then put Mr. Ames on notice that they have paid out compensation on his behalf and will require Mr. Ames to propose to the FSCS how he intends to repay the FSCS.
If Mr. Ames companies pay back the full amount of the deposits to either the FSCS or the investors as per his contracts, then Mr. Ames is fully entitled to do what he so wishes with that property.
But Mr. Ames will understand that if he was to resell a property whilst trading insolvently he again would be breaking the law.
Mr. Ames cannot just wait for 5-10 years then complete some properties and pursue the FSCS for the completion monies as per the contract, given that Mr. Ames has failed to honor his part of the contract.
The other problem Mr. Ames has is that the FSCS are paying out compensation as a result of the determination that Mr. Ames’ companies are insolvent. If the companies were not insolvent there would be no need for the FSCS to pay compensation, aside from potential redress from misselling of property by individual agents or IFAs.
It would be wonderful if life was that simple.
Tidy argument Anon
The delay in the other resorts is purely down to the fraud by the builder and Wilkins Kennedy, thats why the force major clause of the contracts kicks in.
Did you mean Force Majeure?
An event that is a result of the elements of nature, as opposed to one caused by human behavior.
Bobit gets it wrong again
March 7, 2015 at 1:14 pm
“The delay in the other resorts is purely down to the fraud by the builder and Wilkins Kennedy, thats why the force major clause of the contracts kicks in”.
Are you serious!?
cross posted.
I see brollies and moldy towels is still a big issue over on TA.
So why should DA repay the FSCS? It is not the FSCS’s money, it is the IFA’s money. The FSCS only administer the money based on their assumptions. These assumptions, it would appear, are being questioned and possibly challenged. What you are stating now is contary to previous posts. You say the FSCS is not purchasing the contracts. Therefor they do not “own” the contracts. If they do not “own” them they will not be the largest contract holder in HP.
SIPP-ing
March 7, 2015 at 1:18 pm
I was quoting Bobit. Sorry I should have put in exclamation marks.
So why should DA repay the FSCS?
Because Dave Ames and his vile family owe millions to investors and creditors!
“Did you mean Force Majeure?
An event that is a result of the elements of nature, as opposed to one caused by human behavior.”
One could try the angle that the GV’s short comings (pun not intended) in business are due to his personality, intellect, and business acumen – all of which, it could be argued, are a result of nature.
@are you totally stupid aka anti HP thug. I’m afraid that is not a very good argument is it. Let me spell this out slowly for you.
1)IFAs contribute into the FSCS compensation fund.
2)The FSCS decide to compensate investors.
3)The FSCS is not a “profit making” organisation, it is a regulatory body.
4)If DA paid monies back to the FSCS then what would they do with that money?
Also I think you miss the point somewhat, if DA cannot repay the investors how will he repay the FSCS?
Try and think this through before silly replies.
Some previous posts from Robert Storey on the RL forum demonstrating how one sided his views really are, he does not reference the WK defence nor does he believe that Dave Ames could lie. Dave Ames produces material and Robert Storey takes this as gospel. Have a read Robert Storeys views are most interesting.
” Robert Storey
WK were employed to “liaising with the builder re construction costs and monitoring of construction budget” WK were paid to do a job, this was not some sort of old pals act.if you read through the whole document DA was constantly lied to re the progress of the resort by WK.”
“Robert Storey
Did the chairman of Harrods personally supervise your project, or did he have a company who supervised the work to bring it in on time? I do care if WK were responsible for this project, that’s what they were paid to do, and failed through fraud.”
“Robert Storey
On not sure which project you are referring to regarding “DA only has one project on which he clearly had his eye off the ball on”. Others who invested in 2 Rivers, Merricks etc might disagree with you. Don’t forget DA had already got rid of one contractor in 2008. Perhaps if you refer to page 8 of the submission you might point the finger at MacDonald who was “viewed as as the equivalent of a director or senior employee by many people”
“Robert Storey
Mr Findley “I have an opinion and it will be heard” unquote. Could I suggest that you read the 79 and 111 pages of the submission documents which might give you a better insight. The first contractor was dismissed after the suggestion from MacDonald, now why would that be? It is a pity you have chosen to personalise your post rather than debate the issues in a mature way. You are confusing “defend” with the truth.”
“Robert Storey
James, there is no doubt that a construction project was not his forte, but that’s why he employed WK and a person he thought he could trust. Have you read the 79 and 111 page submission? WK were paid money to project manage the building work including purchasing of materials and paying contractors. The level of fraud was unbelievable.”
“Maurice Patterson said:
Mr Storey. I suggest another lie down. As implied last night, your perceived unsavoury paranoid behaviour is becoming accute.
Maybe it’s down to your sensitive character.
It would be nice to get back to matters in hand -that is:Harlequin relevant.”
“Robert Storey
Thank you Dave, a simple reply to a simple question, I missed that one. Now do you know the reason why? Do you accept it was Erica who posted my e mail address on BFP? Do you think it’s acceptable for someone to post your e mail address on a forum? Do you think it’s acceptable for the details of my 91 year mother, who also lives with us to be posted on BFP. You answered a simple question with a simple answer, but then had to spoil it all with a silly comment. Shame.”
Looks like Bob has some serious problems,
Tall Storey eh!
Ah bless Anonymous, how nice of you to post some of the abusive comments directed at Mr Storey.
Perhaps I can add some more:
Reply by Gabriella Klein on Friday
Here we go again with Mr. Storey at the helm – so bored with his pointless and meaningless posts, his one-upmanship, his adolescent repartee. It’s been going on for so bloody long – don’t you get tired of your own smart-ass thoughts, Robert Storey? Don’t bother to reply
And one might wonder at the “Gobriella” tag?
Reply by Jane Davies 12 hours ago
Mr. Storey, I Jane Davies am a regular reader of BFP, you Mr. Storey are a regular contributor on BFP, and you have engaged in a war of words on that forum for quite a while and seem to revel in your notoriety there and on here, and you have regaled your take of woe to us on more than one occasion, demonstrating to us how you have been the victim of anonymous posters. A victim, a bit like Mr. Ames .Now if you don’t mind Mr. Storey, we all have far more pressing issues to discuss so please contribute in an intelligent manner or alternatively sod off.
Such an articulate lady. lol
Reply by Jane Davies yesterday
Mr. Storey you have played the idiot on here for long enough, with your subtle but steadfast support of Mr. Ames, attacking fellow purchasers, the latest referring to Gabriella as Gobriella, The document if read properly is self explanatory, you never answer questions, but you do ask pointed questions, your questions are designed to instil doubt. You appear not interested in seeking the truth merely engaging in infantile debate and goading others, and frankly I don’t believe I am alone in my views, We have all lost enough already, and what we least need is to have an Ames apologist on here playing the fool or worse reporting back to the visionary, sorry Mr. Storey but I have just two words for you, Sod Off.
Again such a little gem of literacy LOL
Oh compared to Tall Storey’s efforts they are indeed gems. Keep it up Gabriella K and Jane D.
Bob is definetly a one off, reviled not only by all on BFP but by those on the RL forum too. It must be lonely defending the indefensible, the Lone Ranger, good man Bob FDNRM the Anonymous Wise Old Owl.
Just found this little Gem.
Gabriella Klein said:
I stayed at Bucc Bay in September 2010 when loos were overflowing, because, it was discovered, they were not attached to drains. The nice gardens, which were freshly planted, had to be dug up. Perhaps O’Halloran thought they were building a film set, like the one down the coast where Pirates of the Caribbean had been filmed. But where oh where was the clerk of works? Fantasy and reality can become so easily blurred.
” I agree that Fantasy and Reality can easily become blurred, given that it was Ames and his witnesses evidence that millions had to be spent on rectifying this little problem prior to the opening of the resort in August 2010.
What Gabriella Klien was not aware of was that in late August early September 2010 the temp sewage treatment facility Ames had installed exploded. Ames’ engineers had to cap the pipes temporarily at the out flow point, to stop the sewage flowing into BBay directly. Which caused the drains to back up into the toilets. Ames then threatened to sue the Barbados supplier of the temporary sewage storage umbilicals which had exploded, however it was demonstrated by the supplier and manufacturer that the explosion was caused as a result of not following the manufacturers operational procedures.
How do I know this, I work with the supplier.
The issue of the drainage was another concocted story by Ames to cover up the explosion and the sewage problems caused as a result, it was easy to blame the builder.
Let’s not forget Ames brought in a whole bunch of engineers so he claims that claimed to have known about the drainage problem in July of 2010, so one has to ask why did Ames open his resort in August 2010 knowing that the sewage problem had not been rectified.
Sadly when it comes to Ames a small bit of digging no pun intended, demonstrates that not all is as it appears at first glance.
Eloquently put ladies. Bob has more than a little problem with articulate women.
@ Puzzled
March 7, 2015 at 2:40 pm
Was that when Matt Ames was in charge of BB? He couldn’t be trusted to run a whelk stall.
No Matt Ames felt it was easier and cheaper to pump the raw sewage into BBay rather then to have it collected.
Where does all the shit go from the shanty town next door to BB? I have seen local bathing in the sea, hardly 5*, notwithstanding, they are a little to close to the resort for comfort.
Is Dave ‘The Skunk’ Ames still a free man?
This is what happens when you trust a two time bankrupt window glazing salesman with your hard earned money. When he approached me to buy, I told Ames the only thing I was willing to give him was a swift kick in the ass.
@ Locals at BB, how dare the locals go bathing near BBay Resort. Why don’t the security at BBay deal with this. UK investors have pumped millions into BBay, surely it’s time to stand up and move the locals on. It’s not good enough, if the locals are damaging the investment they should be removed. Full stop. This is our money we are talking about. Shame on the Government of SVG for not dealing with that shanty town
I am an Arsenal supporter.
@anonymous 9:31, in answer to your question, no one needs to pay the remaining 70% as the contracts are in breach as they are long past their contracted completion dates so the original investor is actually entitled to a full refund of their 30% deposit plus 10% compensation. The simple fact is that HP can’t and won’t honour this clause in the contract so the FSCS will be reimbursing this money so the original investor doesn’t lose out. I’m sure they will then try to recover this 30% fee but will have absolutely no intention of completing on the contract whether Ames builds the units or not. As the contracts are in breach they are null and void and there is nothing Ames can do to enforce them. The outstanding 70% is no longer relevant so isn’t a point of contention.
Is Matt Ames going to be released soon from prison?
Interesting how the Harlequin shill the other day has posting about the 100% occupancy just prior to getting Harlequins insane update this morning.
Dear All,
It’s been a very busy first few months of the year so far. There are a few things we cannot publically disclose just yet, but please find below an update on what is happening at Harlequin.
100% occupancy for both hotels; new apartment block open at Buccament Bay Resort
The start of 2015 has been incredibly successful for both Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia with occupancy rates at 90-100% throughout January and February. The first two weeks of March will be equally busy. Whilst blu, St Lucia sells itself due to the ease of access, Buccament Bay Resort has to contend with the temporarily delayed opening of the new international airport (we have been informed it is on track to open in November of this year), which is why the team has been driving occupancy with special offers to build upon its already excellent reputation and encourage repeat business.
The vast majority clearly love their stay given the excellent feedback we receive, which bodes well for the time that Buccament Bay Resort is built to completion.
In other news, Buccament Bay Resort now has eight new suites available in its first apartment block, Elaenia Suites. In what will be a theme for all apartment blocks, Elaenia Suites is named after a tropical Vincentian bird that is known for inhabiting woodlands and gardens, which is very apt considering the block’s location in the lush lap of rainforest-cloaked mountains. There are four types of suite available: junior, which is a studio apartment; one-bed; two-bed; and master.
Elsewhere, development has continued on the Resort with a number of back of house improvements to the restaurants to meet growing demand. There are now over 100 villas open for guests with more being completed on an ongoing basis.
The Resort’s website, shows how well it is developing.
H, Barbados: construction update
We are making progress reaching an agreement for the construction of H, Barbados. As previously communicated, the goal is a 2016 opening. We will update you when we have further news.
The FSCS and the Trust
Following aggressive lobbying and PR by a compensation firm and a subsequent update by the FSCS regarding redress for SIPP purchasers, a great deal of uncertainty has been fostered by vague and disputable information in the public domain.Harlequin is currently in contact with the FSCS in order to clarify a number of ill-defined, unsupported or absent points. It is clear that the FSCS is doing what it can to allow compensation payments and this requires a certain valuation in order for payments to be valid, but the lack of detail has had the unfortunate consequence of allowing third parties to opportunistically fill in the gaps in information. We await the response of the FSCS to our recent comments.
Whatever response we receive, it is clear that the Trust will need to adapt to these new circumstances. Therefore we are going to postpone the Trust deadline until the situation becomes clearer.In the interim, Harlequin is working on the best way to securitise direct investors who, as things stand, can enter the Trust without added complication. This is likely to involve reducing the land assets to provide adequate security for the smaller membership base.
As stated previously Harlequin welcomes the opportunity for SIPP investors who consider they have been mis-sold a Harlequin investment by their adviser to seek redress.
Completions from £20,000*
We can now invite you to enter the completion process at blu, St Lucia and investors can even enter the completion process from just £20,000.
Investors can also join Harlequin in building towards a secure financial future by making instalment payments towards stage completion at H, Barbados. There are limited properties available for purchasers with deposits in other developments.Lastly, there are also a limited number of properties available for completion at Buccament Bay Resort, so investors have the choice of three exciting projects.
If you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available, please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can work towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:
Wilkins Kennedy claim
We can confirm more details on Harlequin’s professional negligence claim against Wilkins Kennedy. It has been agreed that the case will be listed for six weeks, which requires the court, a judge, and legal advisors on both sides to be available for the full one-and-a-half month period; additionally, the legal advisors must be available for a number of weeks leading up to trial, which posed particular difficulties for Wilkins Kennedy’s legal team. All parties have agreed that, for the sake of continuity, the trial is listed to take place in June 2016. The judge also agreed official directions for disclosure (i.e. each side disclosing the relevant documents they hold), filing of witness statements, and expert evidence, etc., leading up to the trial.
In recent days, further damaging evidence has come to light that strengthens both our case against Wilkins Kennedy and our stance with regards to the SFO investigation.
Graham Hawkins promoted to Director of Operations
Harlequin is pleased to announce the promotion of Graham Hawkins to Director of Operations for the Harlequin group. Graham, who has been with Harlequin for the past four years as Director of Trade and Leisure, has been responsible for developing our sales strategy and working relationships within the travel industry in the UK, Europe, and North America. His achievements have seen a tremendous year-on-year growth in sales over the past four years that has exceeded expectations. Additionally, Graham has worked with all of our partners in ensuring that Harlequin is an internationally recognised brand.
Now, in addition to those duties, he will also provide support to the General Managers of both Harlequin hotels to ensure their smooth operation, assist in the opening of H, Barbados, and oversee all Sales activity with the travel trade.
We will update you all again soon.
Regards,
Harlequin
*Terms and conditions apply
One in the eye for agents.
As stated previously Harlequin welcomes the opportunity for SIPP investors who consider they have been mis-sold a Harlequin investment by their adviser to seek redress.
Harlequin won’t last until June 2016. Are WK running Ames out of money / time?
So Sid if the contracts are null and void then the FSCS will be holding worthless pieces of paper and will not have any % ownership claims on HP.
@Legal mind
Not that interesting if you knew the poster was Vinny Stenning.
An interesting, and could it even be said mature, update from Harlequin.
Good news on Blu completions – hopefully people with outstanding balances will be able to buy up some of the property there to at least get an asset. Quite how that would work if you put in £50k+ for another unit, I don’t know.
Further decent news to hear that Harlequin actually have a management structure. When Ames gets taken down, these will hopefully be able to keep the investments afloat.
Some whitewash regarding the FSCS. This idea that Harlequin will now ride off into the sunset is false
Dear All,
It’s been a very busy first few months of the year so far. There are a few things we cannot publically disclose just yet, but please find below an update on what is happening at Harlequin.
( Dear Mr. Ames when have you ever disclosed anything which resembles the truth, for years now we have been told you cannot publically disclose all manner of details “just yet”, just yet is a long time coming )
100% occupancy for both hotels; new apartment block open at Buccament Bay Resort
The start of 2015 has been incredibly successful for both Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia with occupancy rates at 90-100% throughout January and February. The first two weeks of March will be equally busy. Whilst blu, St Lucia sells itself due to the ease of access, Buccament Bay Resort has to contend with the temporarily delayed opening of the new international airport (we have been informed it is on track to open in November of this year), which is why the team has been driving occupancy with special offers to build upon its already excellent reputation and encourage repeat business.
( The Special Offers have always been available. What airlines have signed up to fly to the new airport in November flying directly from the UK and US? With 100% occupancy without the new airport, why worry about it for now, it will take at least two years for new units to become available).
The vast majority clearly love their stay given the excellent feedback we receive, which bodes well for the time that Buccament Bay Resort is built to completion.
( Many of the reviewers have commented on the fact that the resort is big enough as it is, as you state further down you now have c 150 units available if you include the apartments, so how do you expect to accommodate guests when you complete the additional 1150 units + sold).
In other news, Buccament Bay Resort now has eight new suites available in its first apartment block, Elaenia Suites. In what will be a theme for all apartment blocks, Elaenia Suites is named after a tropical Vincentian bird that is known for inhabiting woodlands and gardens, which is very apt considering the block’s location in the lush lap of rainforest-cloaked mountains. There are four types of suite available: junior, which is a studio apartment; one-bed; two-bed; and master.
( Big deal, you are 7 years late in delivering these )
Elsewhere, development has continued on the Resort with a number of back of house improvements to the restaurants to meet growing demand. There are now over 100 villas open for guests with more being completed on an ongoing basis.
(You have been telling us for over three years now that you have opened over 100 villas and each update includes a mention of improvements to the back of house )
The Resort’s website, shows how well it is developing.
H, Barbados: construction update
We are making progress reaching an agreement for the construction of H, Barbados. As previously communicated, the goal is a 2016 opening. We will update you when we have further news.
( You stated you were starting in March, it is now March).
The FSCS and the Trust
Following aggressive lobbying and PR by a compensation firm and a subsequent update by the FSCS regarding redress for SIPP purchasers, a great deal of uncertainty has been fostered by vague and disputable information in the public domain.
Harlequin is currently in contact with the FSCS in order to clarify a number of ill-defined, unsupported or absent points.
(Dave the FSCS have publically stated that your companies are insolvent, if you have information that proves this is not the case, well why not go public with this information. The FSCS have stated that as a result of the insolvency of your companies there is no prospect of investors recovering any monies from your companies, please tell the world what it is that the FSCS got wrong, you have lied about the FSCS in the past, so what is different now ? ).
It is clear that the FSCS is doing what it can to allow compensation payments and this requires a certain valuation in order for payments to be valid, but the lack of detail has had the unfortunate consequence of allowing third parties to opportunistically fill in the gaps in information. We await the response of the FSCS to our recent comments.
( You have had plenty of opportunity to fill in the gaps, yet have failed to do so)
( The FSCS stated the companies were insolvent, Jim Baker stated that the companies were insolvent, Jim Baker works for you Ames)
Whatever response we receive, it is clear that the Trust will need to adapt to these new circumstances. Therefore we are going to postpone the Trust deadline until the situation becomes clearer.In the interim, Harlequin is working on the best way to securitise direct investors who, as things stand, can enter the Trust without added complication. This is likely to involve reducing the land assets to provide adequate security for the smaller membership base.
( Reducing what land assets? The common parts of Buccament Bay ? )
As stated previously Harlequin welcomes the opportunity for SIPP investors who consider they have been mis-sold a Harlequin investment by their adviser to seek redress.
( So you have no problem in throwing your much vaunted agents to the wolves, no surprise there).
Completions from £20,000*
We can now invite you to enter the completion process at blu, St Lucia and investors can even enter the completion process from just £20,000.
(BLU Hotel is not registered in any of the Ames company names, if you pay £ 20,000 do you obtain full legal title to your room. And why are you asking invrstors to complete on BLU when you have yet to undertake the refurbishment of this property. Anyone stupid enough to pay money over to you Mr. Ames deserves to lose the lot, if any investors ploughs money into Ames now and it goes belly up, you will find it impossible to obtain any redress. Ames’ companies are insolvent according to the FSCS,).
Investors can also join Harlequin in building towards a secure financial future by making instalment payments towards stage completion at H, Barbados. There are limited properties available for purchasers with deposits in other developments.Lastly, there are also a limited number of properties available for completion at Buccament Bay Resort, so investors have the choice of three exciting projects.
( Three exciting projects??? What about the 5 mega resorts? Investors already handed over in excess of £ 440 million quid, so by virtue of doing this have already joined Harlequin. What an absolutely disingenuous statement )
If you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available, please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can work towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:
( it’s simple, put the balancing funds into an escrow account, then the funds will be released once the investor has full and legal title, but given the insolvent nature of the companies it would be absolute madness to hand over one single red cent).
Wilkins Kennedy claim
We can confirm more details on Harlequin’s professional negligence claim against Wilkins Kennedy. It has been agreed that the case will be listed for six weeks, which requires the court, a judge, and legal advisors on both sides to be available for the full one-and-a-half month period; additionally, the legal advisors must be available for a number of weeks leading up to trial, which posed particular difficulties for Wilkins Kennedy’s legal team.
( Sorry what a load of horse shit, Dave why are you trying to blame Kennedys the insurers lawyers for any delay ?).
All parties have agreed that, for the sake of continuity, the trial is listed to take place in June 2016.
The judge also agreed official directions for disclosure (i.e. each side disclosing the relevant documents they hold), filing of witness statements, and expert evidence, etc., leading up to the trial.
( Thanks for the update, this is the same for all cases).
In recent days, further damaging evidence has come to light that strengthens both our case against Wilkins Kennedy and our stance with regards to the SFO investigation.
( Dave has this anything to do with the offer of £ 250 k for assistance in the Wilkins Kennedy case? And what do you mean by stance with regards to the SFO investigation? They are investigating you for serious fraud, you of course will deny any and all wrongdoing, are you suggesting that the SFO have acted in a manner unbeffiting of that organisation? ).
Graham Hawkins promoted to Director of Operations
Harlequin is pleased to announce the promotion of Graham Hawkins to Director of Operations for the Harlequin group. Graham, who has been with Harlequin for the past four years as Director of Trade and Leisure, has been responsible for developing our sales strategy and working relationships within the travel industry in the UK, Europe, and North America. His achievements have seen a tremendous year-on-year growth in sales over the past four years that has exceeded expectations. Additionally, Graham has worked with all of our partners in ensuring that Harlequin is an internationally recognised brand.
Now, in addition to those duties, he will also provide support to the General Managers of both Harlequin hotels to ensure their smooth operation, assist in the opening of H, Barbados, and oversee all Sales activity with the travel trade.
We will update you all again soon.
Regards,
Harlequin
*Terms and conditions apply
Well they don’t call him aimless ames for nowt
You assume the special deal has not been reported…..
Anon, if only you knew about the new evidence regarding WK and the SFO. But you don’t so you will just have to be patient.
@ Anonymous on March 7, 2015 at 9:52 pm
What a bizarre comment.
“Anon, if only you knew about the new evidence regarding WK and the SFO. But you don’t so you will just have to be patient.”
Whatever about WK, with respect to the SFO, I’ve always thought that it was they who obtained the evidence and investigated cases, Ames’ update seems to suggest that the SFO are about to be on the receiving end of redefined logic when it comes to criminal cases.
Can’t wait to find out what this new evidence is?
Sadly we will never know. And who cares, the SFO are investigating Ames, no change on the website, The FSCS have said that Ames’ companies are insolvent, and it’s the authorities who I believe.
All these years this stuff’s been rumbling on here in BFP- has any useful information actually ever come out of it? Do re-cap if you know of anything that might help.
Worth reposting this again given the expected reaction it has caused. If Dave does not want the world to see his BS then why send out updates in the first place.
Anon on March 7, 2015 at 9:32 pm
Dear All,
It’s been a very busy first few months of the year so far. There are a few things we cannot publically disclose just yet, but please find below an update on what is happening at Harlequin.
( Dear Mr. Ames when have you ever disclosed anything which resembles the truth, for years now we have been told you cannot publically disclose all manner of details “just yet”, just yet is a long time coming )
100% occupancy for both hotels; new apartment block open at Buccament Bay Resort
The start of 2015 has been incredibly successful for both Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia with occupancy rates at 90-100% throughout January and February. The first two weeks of March will be equally busy. Whilst blu, St Lucia sells itself due to the ease of access, Buccament Bay Resort has to contend with the temporarily delayed opening of the new international airport (we have been informed it is on track to open in November of this year), which is why the team has been driving occupancy with special offers to build upon its already excellent reputation and encourage repeat business.
( The Special Offers have always been available. What airlines have signed up to fly to the new airport in November flying directly from the UK and US? With 100% occupancy without the new airport, why worry about it for now, it will take at least two years for new units to become available).
The vast majority clearly love their stay given the excellent feedback we receive, which bodes well for the time that Buccament Bay Resort is built to completion.
( Many of the reviewers have commented on the fact that the resort is big enough as it is, as you state further down you now have c 150 units available if you include the apartments, so how do you expect to accommodate guests when you complete the additional 1150 units + sold).
In other news, Buccament Bay Resort now has eight new suites available in its first apartment block, Elaenia Suites. In what will be a theme for all apartment blocks, Elaenia Suites is named after a tropical Vincentian bird that is known for inhabiting woodlands and gardens, which is very apt considering the block’s location in the lush lap of rainforest-cloaked mountains. There are four types of suite available: junior, which is a studio apartment; one-bed; two-bed; and master.
( Big deal, you are 7 years late in delivering these )
Elsewhere, development has continued on the Resort with a number of back of house improvements to the restaurants to meet growing demand. There are now over 100 villas open for guests with more being completed on an ongoing basis.
(You have been telling us for over three years now that you have opened over 100 villas and each update includes a mention of improvements to the back of house )
The Resort’s website, shows how well it is developing.
H, Barbados: construction update
We are making progress reaching an agreement for the construction of H, Barbados. As previously communicated, the goal is a 2016 opening. We will update you when we have further news.
( You stated you were starting in March, it is now March).
The FSCS and the Trust
Following aggressive lobbying and PR by a compensation firm and a subsequent update by the FSCS regarding redress for SIPP purchasers, a great deal of uncertainty has been fostered by vague and disputable information in the public domain.
Harlequin is currently in contact with the FSCS in order to clarify a number of ill-defined, unsupported or absent points.
(Dave the FSCS have publically stated that your companies are insolvent, if you have information that proves this is not the case, well why not go public with this information. The FSCS have stated that as a result of the insolvency of your companies there is no prospect of investors recovering any monies from your companies, please tell the world what it is that the FSCS got wrong, you have lied about the FSCS in the past, so what is different now ? ).
It is clear that the FSCS is doing what it can to allow compensation payments and this requires a certain valuation in order for payments to be valid, but the lack of detail has had the unfortunate consequence of allowing third parties to opportunistically fill in the gaps in information. We await the response of the FSCS to our recent comments.
( You have had plenty of opportunity to fill in the gaps, yet have failed to do so)
( The FSCS stated the companies were insolvent, Jim Baker stated that the companies were insolvent, Jim Baker works for you Ames)
Whatever response we receive, it is clear that the Trust will need to adapt to these new circumstances. Therefore we are going to postpone the Trust deadline until the situation becomes clearer.In the interim, Harlequin is working on the best way to securitise direct investors who, as things stand, can enter the Trust without added complication. This is likely to involve reducing the land assets to provide adequate security for the smaller membership base.
( Reducing what land assets? The common parts of Buccament Bay ? )
As stated previously Harlequin welcomes the opportunity for SIPP investors who consider they have been mis-sold a Harlequin investment by their adviser to seek redress.
( So you have no problem in throwing your much vaunted agents to the wolves, no surprise there).
Completions from £20,000*
We can now invite you to enter the completion process at blu, St Lucia and investors can even enter the completion process from just £20,000.
(BLU Hotel is not registered in any of the Ames company names, if you pay £ 20,000 do you obtain full legal title to your room. And why are you asking invrstors to complete on BLU when you have yet to undertake the refurbishment of this property. Anyone stupid enough to pay money over to you Mr. Ames deserves to lose the lot, if any investors ploughs money into Ames now and it goes belly up, you will find it impossible to obtain any redress. Ames’ companies are insolvent according to the FSCS,).
Investors can also join Harlequin in building towards a secure financial future by making instalment payments towards stage completion at H, Barbados. There are limited properties available for purchasers with deposits in other developments.Lastly, there are also a limited number of properties available for completion at Buccament Bay Resort, so investors have the choice of three exciting projects.
( Three exciting projects??? What about the 5 mega resorts? Investors already handed over in excess of £ 440 million quid, so by virtue of doing this have already joined Harlequin. What an absolutely disingenuous statement )
If you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available, please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can work towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:
( it’s simple, put the balancing funds into an escrow account, then the funds will be released once the investor has full and legal title, but given the insolvent nature of the companies it would be absolute madness to hand over one single red cent).
Wilkins Kennedy claim
We can confirm more details on Harlequin’s professional negligence claim against Wilkins Kennedy. It has been agreed that the case will be listed for six weeks, which requires the court, a judge, and legal advisors on both sides to be available for the full one-and-a-half month period; additionally, the legal advisors must be available for a number of weeks leading up to trial, which posed particular difficulties for Wilkins Kennedy’s legal team.
( Sorry what a load of horse shit, Dave why are you trying to blame Kennedys the insurers lawyers for any delay ?).
All parties have agreed that, for the sake of continuity, the trial is listed to take place in June 2016.
The judge also agreed official directions for disclosure (i.e. each side disclosing the relevant documents they hold), filing of witness statements, and expert evidence, etc., leading up to the trial.
( Thanks for the update, this is the same for all cases).
In recent days, further damaging evidence has come to light that strengthens both our case against Wilkins Kennedy and our stance with regards to the SFO investigation.
( Dave has this anything to do with the offer of £ 250 k for assistance in the Wilkins Kennedy case? And what do you mean by stance with regards to the SFO investigation? They are investigating you for serious fraud, you of course will deny any and all wrongdoing, are you suggesting that the SFO have acted in a manner unbeffiting of that organisation? ).
Graham Hawkins promoted to Director of Operations
Harlequin is pleased to announce the promotion of Graham Hawkins to Director of Operations for the Harlequin group. Graham, who has been with Harlequin for the past four years as Director of Trade and Leisure, has been responsible for developing our sales strategy and working relationships within the travel industry in the UK, Europe, and North America. His achievements have seen a tremendous year-on-year growth in sales over the past four years that has exceeded expectations. Additionally, Graham has worked with all of our partners in ensuring that Harlequin is an internationally recognised brand.
Now, in addition to those duties, he will also provide support to the General Managers of both Harlequin hotels to ensure their smooth operation, assist in the opening of H, Barbados, and oversee all Sales activity with the travel trade.
We will update you all again soon.
Regards,
Harlequin
*Terms and conditions apply
I am still wondering how dave ames knew what investors were putting on their finance applications ?
This must be the first update from Ames where there has been no mention of 3rd party finance.
We do however have Ames telling investors that they can commence the completion process at Blu from as little as £ 20,000.00, what the hell does this mean? How many investors can complete on a room in Blu?
Is the £ 20,000.00 the 70% balance. Does this mean the rooms at Blu were sold for £ 28 k, or is Ames now changing the model into some form of timeshare? Or what they call an unregulated collective investment scheme?
It looks to me like Ames is desperate for cash.
And the H hotel in Barbados, the deadline for signing up for the stage payments on this was the 31st of December 2014, but who cares about deadlines eh,
So what did Ames tell us on the 7th of December vs what he told us today.
Ok completions of units carry on a pace albeit a very very slow pace.
The Wilkins Kennedy case was supposed to have been decided in 2015 but is now not due to be heard until July 2016, but this is no fault of Dave Ames, it’s the fault of the lawyers for Wilkins Kennedy, so to all investors who have been promised a share of the funds from the Wilkins Kennedy case of they promised to stay their proceedings for a short number of months, thanks to those nasty cooperate lawyers for WK you will just have to wait another 18 months or so, just for the conclusion of the case.
Harlequin was in a much more stable position on the 7th of December then it apparently finds itself now, on the 7th of December the FSCS had valued the contracts at £1 they are now valued at £0. The one upside is they can’t become less valuable.
The restart of the construction of the H Hotel was due to commence in the first quarter of 2015, looks like this might not happen now, but well we expect delays when it comes to Ames. Nothing new there then.
Oh yeah Ames was actively seeking finance on the 7th of December, well no mention of that now. Hmmmm I wonder.
Here is the update from December the 7 th.
H Hotel
December 7, 2014 at 9:32 pm
Dear H, Barbados Purchaser,
RE: H, BARBADOS – FINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT
Over the last 12 months, against all odds Harlequin has become an established name in the Caribbean tourism industry with the recent successes of Buccament Bay Resort, St Vincent & The Grenadines, and blu, St Lucia. Whilst construction and development has continued at these two properties, with completions of well over 100 properties already underway in St Vincent, it has always been the intention to restart development elsewhere and the natural choice to expand our Caribbean offering is the stunning H, Barbados project.
Construction at H, Barbados was at an advanced stage in 2013 before Harlequin experienced its various problems, which promptly halted Harlequin Developments’ ability to operate effectively and build luxury resorts. Since that time, many offers have been tendered to us for purchase of the site and proposals have been made to enter a joint venture agreement to build H, Barbados. All offers and proposals have been treated with the utmost care, caution and respect with due consideration given to the best way to proceed with the project – with or without Harlequin.
Harlequin is now in a more stable position than it has been in recent times and, with the expected professional negligence case against Wilkins Kennedy likely to be decided in 2015, Harlequin must now continue its restructuring efforts by restarting construction of the 78-room H, Barbados project in the first quarter of 2015.
In order for this to happen, we need willing purchasers who are able to pay in instalments for their H, Barbados property investment and fund the development so that the highly desirable luxury hotel can begin trading as soon as possible. Payments will be set at an agreed level for the duration of the development works, with each instalment after the initial payment tied to development milestones. This means that subsequent payments will only be sought upon completion of established development targets (e.g. finishing the hotel’s skeleton frame). Our preference would be for all of the original H, Barbados purchasers to take part, but we understand the challenge this presents.
If you are unable to commit to financing your H, Barbados property investment, Harlequin must act in the interests of all purchasers. The likely option for any purchasers who cannot meet the above terms is to re-allocate their deposit to a property of an equal or higher value at another development.
Please contact either Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning on 01268 242 460 by December 31st 2014 to discuss a way forward that works for you. Alternatively, you can email them on:
Our hope is that, on sight of this letter, you will either proceed with us or willingly consent to moving your deposit to a different development, thus enabling an able purchaser to join the process and increase the chances of future investment success for the Harlequin client base as a whole with a new luxury development up and running by early 2016.
In the meantime, we continue to work with our external advisors to restructure the business in order to raise external finance for the continuing development of the resorts in the Caribbean, which we hope will lead to mortgages being available for future completions at other developments.
Thank you for your continued support.
Yours sincerely,
Dave Ames
This is what Ames said on the 24th of December.
The deadline for investors to join the Trust has been set as Tuesday 31st March, 2015. We believe this will be enough time to allow Harlequin to meet the requirements of SIPP providers, but in the event that more time is needed for SIPP investors to enter the Trust, we will keep the deadline in place for direct investors.
This is what Ames said today.
Whatever response we receive, it is clear that the Trust will need to adapt to these new circumstances. Therefore we are going to postpone the Trust deadline until the situation becomes clearer.In the interim, Harlequin is working on the best way to securitise direct investors who, as things stand, can enter the Trust without added complication. This is likely to involve reducing the land assets to provide adequate security for the smaller membership base.
This is what Ames said on the 24 th of December.
Once the Trust is established and we win the Wilkins Kennedy claim, I am very confident that development on these projects will restart soon after, enabling Harlequin to deliver the investments.
Oooops so really nothing much can happen until September / October 2016, and if WK win? What happens ? Or if they loose and appeal what happens ?
This is starting to become pathetic,
Ames wants to have a kind of trust before he gets the SIPPs people on board,
Let’s look at what he said on the 24 th of December re SIPPs.
Harlequin has sought to alleviate the stress imposed by third parties by allowing investors and agents the time to digest the Trust documentation. It has also been necessary to allow time for the SIPP providers to work with us towards entering SIPP investors into the Trust. Now we are approaching what will be a very important year for Harlequin, it is essential that we have a deadline in sight.
Well it looks like the FSCS redress option kind of scuppers that option up for Ames.
So let’s see where we are, going by Ames’ time frames nothing of substance will really happen for another 20-24 months, and this is of course predicated on Ames winning the WK case, 24 months is two years. So let’s say it will take a further 2-4 years to build out some more units, hmmmm, remember it took Ames 9 years to construct a little over 100 units at Buccament Bay, it took him nearly 3 years to bring the H Hotel to where it is today, half demolished. It took him nearly 9 years to semi construct 3 now vandalised show rooms at Merricks, and this when he had over £ 440 million quid.
So some 13-14 years after Ames started taking deposits we have promises that more units aside from the H Hotel will be completed, but heh once again Ames is missing deadlines he himself has made, the H Hotel Barbados to restart first quarter 2015, the trust deadline 31st March, the WK case to be over in 2015.
Seriously what is this guy on, cause I would love some of it.
The FSCS are wrong and acted because of RL. The SFO case is over because an alleged witness is being sued for Defamation by Ames. The WK case has been delayed because of their lawyers. Wonder what the excuse is for not filing accounts.
A further 38 cases were filed against Ames his wife and various companies in Jan & Feb of this year in SVG this comes to a total of 114 cases against Ames and co. currently in SVG.
@ Just Wondering on March 7, 2015 at 11:57 pm
I am still wondering how dave ames knew what investors were putting on their finance applications ?
Well according to various investors it was Harlequin and Ames who told purchasers to lie about the purposes of loans being applied for, well at leasy thats the allegation anyway,
So the big news is that Dave Ames is suing me for defamation, well well well folks, Ames now wants to bully me ? Does he hope I will roll over and die ?
Yes I am a witness, and no suing me for defamation will not make a damned bit of difference.
Get in line, Son. Plenty of us being sued by Ames for defamation for discussing his fuck-ups and lies. Looks like you’re as bothered about that as the rest of us.
“A further 38 cases were filed against Ames his wife and various companies in Jan & Feb of this year in SVG this comes to a total of 114 cases against Ames and co. currently in SVG.”
This is the single most important point anyone looking to work with the remainder of Harlequin needs to consider.
Does this mean Mr Man you will now be posting under your read ID rather than hiding behind the other Anon ID that you use? I hope your charade will then stop.
Wonder what the “damning evidence” could be.
In our world, it would likely be some sort of smoking gun – a definite demonstration of not only the guilt of the accused, but also that the gravity of their crimes succeeded in derailing the entire operation (as claimed by Ames). We all know this is not the case, but this is Harlequin.
As we’ve come to realize, Ames’ claims in his updates will, in reality, likely be much less fantastic. Remember when he told everyone the IP’s he had from the subpoena gave him the identity of two companies? Wonder what happened to that. To that end, wonder what happened to Harlequin Air – all quiet about that gem now.
There was a time when I thought the pro Ames crew were simply deluded, not too bright or in his pocket. Now I’m convinced some are mentally ill.
RL are not bothered about anything else other than redress. Period.
The generated SRA complaints quietened RL up for a bit. However, they used the time well to get the FSCS to value the investments at “nil” and to apply an “insolvent” status to Harlequin.
These actions are not anti Harlequin, but pro RL and the redress lottery.
With 50% of SIPP Investors signed up, a process to work for the £50,000+ cases and claims to deal with the annual management charges levied by the SIPPs, RL have done a good job.
RL have no interest in all the sideshows as they do not make any money.
Just think while the Harlequin lawyers have to explain themselves later this year, the RL people will have more than enough money to retire. Poetic justice.
So Mote it Be,
S&F
GF
If that were true it would merely be pragmatic. It doesn’t exonerate Ames, the agents and others that helped £200 million in commissions and expenses + £40 and more millions still unaccounted for- disappear.
Who is Dave Man again? Oh yes he was a business partner of Dave Ames, ok so let’s not bother about what he says, let’s just stick with facts shall we, Dave Man must have some written material on Ames and Harlequin, emails perhaps? Now if someone had them, ouch, twitchy bottom time for Ames perhaps? Oh yeah Dave Man is the only one who made a complaint to the SFO, so now that Dave Ames has discredited him the SFO case is over.
I just love it, The FSCS have it all wrong, any one remember the update when BDO resigned??? Carol Ames said BDO got it all wrong too. And remember we were all told by Dave that HMSSE would exit administration shortly, well it did and went straight into liquidation, anyone remember an update from Ames then telling us that the liquidation of HMSSE formed part of the overall restructuring…
Then we had Ames promising litigants a share in the Wilkins Kennedy winnings, if that case was to be heard within the next 10 months or so, surprise surprise, the case is not due to be heard for another 17 months or so, with not outcome for 20-22 months. Oh yeah the delay is not Ames’ fault it is the fault of Wilkins Kennedys lawyers.
Jesus Christ there is nothing at all in the latest update that resembles the truth in any form, the freak show that is the Ames family just cannot help themselves one bit whatsoever.
The Brotherhood works in mysterious way, ever wondered why the FSCS rolled over……
When Dave Ames discovered investors were lying on their finance applications, I presume he immediately advised clients / ifas / agents to stop this practice, and returned the ill gotten gain, and informed all the relevant parties.
knowing what an honest , upright type of person Dave Ames is, he wouldn’t want to financially gain from any type of illegal activity, or misrepresentation., compromising clients. agents IFA’s and financial institutions. Dave would put his clients and partners interests first, even
if it meant not being able to complete 100 hotel rooms in 8 years.
Heaven forbid that one of the 6000 investors that have worthless contracts, would accuse dave of aiding and abetting. And I know the agents and IFAS that sold his legitimate investment, will rush to deny Dave, or any of his wonderful employees, would play any part in this.
I cant wait until his son is out of prison, I just hope I can get some money to invest in his next business venture.
The FSCS are a government department. Their announcements are the official position.
You cannot beat the establishment. It will be slow, but in the end, it will get you.
Ames is not part of the establishment, nor can he ever be. Breeding and background is the key.
The FSCS’s actions will have two effects :-
(a) to choke Ames
(b) to pay redress
At least for SIPP Investors they won’t have to receive any more Ames updates. Lucky them.
It’s taken a lot of work to get the various departments all reading from the same little blue book.
After the FSCS pay out, other departments will strike.
Then Harlequin will be deprived of everything, poor and penniless!
S&F
@Anon “who is Dave Man?” Thats you, you fecking donkey. Why keep hiding behind an Anon ID if you have nothing to hide?
The redress is like heroin. Investors love it. They love it more than Dave.
Dave cannot beat the opium of the masses.
Yank one off, it’s easy, another of your many many IDs.
It seems such a shame to sully these songs with anything to do with the Ames family.
The Blue Book tells me that it is “High Time” that this matter were closed.
It seems such a shame to sully this forum with idiotic video clips. Slows down the loading up of the thread.
I think your right, as long as matters are ”properly prepared” for the FSCS claims should sail through.
It’s such a shame investors have been kept in a ”state of darkness” over several matters.
Investors have no reason be in the dark. There is plenty of help and advice if you look for it.
Even if you stretched credulity to breaking point by believing that Ames has done nothing worthy of a criminal prosecution, you could only then think he is the most haphazard, unlucky and generally maladroit businessman who could not be trusted with anyone’s money.
Even if all the calamities that have fallen on Harlequin were all genuinely the fault of third parties, you have to agree that these were all business relationships that were, at one time, established and agreed by the company directors and chairman. If these people are all hopeless and/or criminals then you have to question his business judgement in appointing them in the first place.
Yup
He went from a shitty semi, to millionaire status in a few years. So, he’s fighting to :-
A) Keep that lifestyle up.
B) Stay out of jail.
I must say when he loses all that and ends up in jail, a broken old man, with his family in the next cell, that’s going to be a happy moment. To know that awaits his family must drive him insane.
Now, of course, the Ingham’s and Storey’s of this World will no doubt disagree; not being SIPP investors 😉
I really don’t know what to do with my SIPP payout, maybe buy a new car? Pay off my mortgage, some light at the end of the tunnel.
The problem for Ames is that he has never taken responsibility for his actions.
It is Ames’ assertion that both Ridgeview Construction and ICE Group robbed him blind, it is his assertion that Wilkins Kennedy were in league with the ICE Group.
However Dave Ames took in, in excess of a quarter billon pounds £ 250 Million after RidgeView, ICE Group and Wilkins Kennedy had left, yet was unable to progress any of his resorts substantially further then from where they were in 2010.
It is also Ames’ assertion that DLA Piper robbed him blind.
It is Carol Ames assertion that BDO were wrong in disclaiming the 2012 accounts for HMSSE, stating that BDO did not understand the business model.
It is Dave Ames assertion that the SFO investigation was triggered by a former shareholder and partner of Dave Ames, who Dave Ames will say was sacked due to incompetence.
It is Dave Ames assertion that Alan Bell a former VP of Harlequin was sacked for theft.
It is Dave Ames assertion that Gareth Fatchett pushed the SFO into going public on their investigation.
It is Dave Ames assertion that Gareth Fatchett brought the BBC Panorama journalists to SVG.
It is Dave Ames assertion that the issues with the FSCS and the determination by the FSCS that Ames’ companies are insolvent is as a result of the incessant lobbying by Gareth Fatchett.
It is both Dave and Carol Ames assertion that the liquidation of HMSSE by Shipleys was not necessary and was a mistake.
It is Dave Ames assertion that delays to the completion of units at Bucc Bay are down to the delays associated with the completion of the International Airport.
It is Dave Ames assertion that delays in investor completions in SVG are down to the lack of experience of local SVG lawyers in transacting completions.
It is Dave Ames assertion that delays to the projects in Barbados are down to that governments delays in granting concessions.
It was Dave Ames assertion that the Brazil resort was cancelled because of Brazilian Goverment Bureaucracy.
It was Dave Ames assertion that the Jamaican Resorts were cancelled as a result of Jamaican Goverment intransigence and bureaucracy.
It was Dave Ames assertion that progress on the Two Rivers Resort and on Los Canas was delayed because of environmental bureaucracy.
It is Dave Ames assertion that the UK is not the Jurisdiction to bring claims against him or his companies, given that there is no connection between the Caribbean and the UK operations.
It is Dave Ames assertion that the liquidation of HMSSE and ASOL was a deliberate act which formed part of the restructuring, this despite his assertion that Shipleys got it wrong on the matter of putting HMSE into Liquidation.
It is Dave Ames assertion that he has never lost a case, this despite confirmation from ELS legal that Ames is appealing a number of adverse judgments in St. Vincent.
Dave Ames has also agreed settlemenf terms with a number of investors exceeding £ 3 million. There are deadlines to the repayment of these monies, some of these deadlines were contingent on the Wilkins Kennedy case being resolved in 2015, we now have Dave Ames blaming Wilkins Kennedys insurers for slowing down the proceedings, of course Dave Ames will use this as an excuse as to why he is unable to pay the agreed settlements on time.
On this issue, it is also rather odd given the claims that there are freezing orders still in place over Dave Ames’ assets that he can state that he continues to spend money on the development of the Buccament Bay Resort on improving “Back of House” facilities, which by their nature could not be seen by the guests, and his continuous statements that building work at Buccament Bay continues apace. Building work has continued apace for nearly 9 years now and in that time Ames has managed to complete a little over 100 villas and 50 apartments,
And what else has Dave Ames told investors.
(a) A banking glitch prevented the payment of investors interest. Untrue.
(b). That the FSCS needed investors to join the trust. Untrue.
(c). That HMSSE would exit administration by December 2014. Untrue.
(d). That the administration of HMSSE was planned as part of the restructuring. Untrue.
(e). That the liquidation of ASOL was a deliberate action forming part of the restructuring. Untrue. To do so is an illegal act.
(f). That he has never lost a case. Untrue.
(g). That financiers have been queing up to provide finance. Untrue.
(h). That he has fulfilled his statutory requirements regarding the filling of accounts on SVG. Untrue.
(i). His apparent denial that his companies are insolvent despite a witness statement from his current accountants which demonstrate just that.
(j). His inability to account for substantial personal assets despite being obligated to do so through the courts.
(k). That the SFO were about to drop their case. Untrue.
Dave Ames is currently trying to raise additional funds from investors. Dave Ames has already comitted in excess of £ 3 million of this money to investors by way of settlement of claims.
If an investor was to pay Dave Ames additional monies and if they were to ask Ames what had become of this money he can correctly state that the money was spent in the ordinary course of business, even if the money is used to pay settlement figures to other investors. This practice as a matter law is recognised as being payments made under the ordinary course of business.
@ Supper SIPPS on March 8, 2015 at 2:45 pm
I really don’t know what to do with my SIPP payout, maybe buy a new car? Pay off my mortgage, some light at the end of the tunnel.
” How about investing this in the magnificent H Hotel in Barbados, which will achieve a 400 % occupancy rate and where you will obtain an immediate return of 100% of your investment daily, it’s your money so do what you want with it. Just make sure you keep a little aside just in case HMRC come knocking as a result of the failed SIPP investment. “
I believe Ames needs to worry about HMRC along with the agents who paid no tax on the money Ames paid in commission.
Crazier walked away, before she got in trouble. Lets just say her past caught up with her.
Has she been paid yet – nope.
Another long winded post from Davy boy. Look mr Man, give it up. Nobody really cares what you think.
Fatchett may be a slick operator, but he cannot direct the FSCS or the SFO.
That’s just nonsense.
Emptage Cases
by Regulatory Legal Solicitors
2 hours ago
All,
It is certainly worth applying to the FSCS as they value Harlequin investments at “nil” in re-mortgage cases.
We know there are some problems with “home improvement” cases. However, do not despair. If you have done this, you should be able to apply for redress.
You will need to make a full disclosure to the FSCS and tell them that the forms were completed for you. This will the case in nearly all cases. It will help a great deal if the handwriting is not your own.
Our Manchester office are dealing with these claims, please feel free to call them.
” Wonder who did fill out those mortgage application forms, what is sad is that investors were quite happy to engage in some form of mortgage fraud to obtain funds from a bank to invest in something other then what was declared to the bank, now RL are basically saying, well if it’s not your handwriting it’s worth a shot, who the hell would allow a third party apply for a loan in the name of an investor, whereby the investor will now say that they had no idea that mortgage fraud was being comitted. The investor did not point out to the IFA’s or the banks when they read the mortgage application in their name that the application was for not home improvements but for overseas properties.
RL are trying to say that the investors never knew what was on their application. The banks are going to love this, Ames obtained interest free loans from investors as a result of investors engaging in mortgage fraud, but it’s ok, because the investors handwriting is not on the FRAUDULENT documentation.
@ Anonymous March 8, 2015 at 4:13 pm
“Another long winded post from Davy boy. Look mr Man, give it up. Nobody really cares what you think.”
I beg to differ, I along with many others are extremely interested in any information on Ames, and I think the post was an excelkent summation of where we are today and a startling reminder of the lies that Ames tells.
Anonymous you have not asked Ames to give up his ludicrous long winded and factually deficient updates, nobody really believes these updates anymore.
And please enlighten me as to how you know who is posting on here?
It can only be someone who works or worked with the GV…..
If you buy a house in uk you have to prove where you got the deposit. The tm ifa told me the fee was paid to set up this ‘investment’ was to pay a solicitor, so harlequin didn’t get solicitors to draw up our contracts or if they did no ‘anti money laundering’ checks were done ? Harlequin colluded ?
By the way, what’s wrong with living in a shitty semi? I’m stuck in one myself!
@Anon March8 2015 Great post.
I just love myself xx
Quiet calling all- to claim RL can manipulate the authorities is just plain nonsense.
I’m not saying RL manipulated the FSCS, but the Freemason did. I remember reading about GF and his network of Masons a year or so back. It’s a fact they look after each other.
Sorry to swear but what a load of bollocks. Freemasons influenced FSCS! Think you’ve had a bit too much wacky baccie that’s fried your brain!
Freemasons??? Err no. It’s all about some pension thieving scumbags.
Smoke and mirrors. Perhaps the FSCS saw through the lies the ifa’s told to get their hands on our pensions for themselves and the Ames family.
Last two reviews from TA are quite alarming..sure doesn’t sound like BB is close to 5 star. Things are falling apart and local management can’t solve the problems without the money to do so.
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g147380-d1719145-Reviews-Buccament_Bay_Resort-St_Vincent_St_Vincent_and_the_Grenadines.html
The last 2 reviews are 5* reviews. Not sure which ones you are reading.
Perhaps it was this one?
“Lovely break in the sun”
5 of 5 starsReviewed yesterday NEW
Just spent 10 days relaxing in this lovely resort.
Admittedly its hassel to get to, a long flight to Barbados then exiting the arrivals hall and re-entering the departures with baggage in tow is bizarre, the duty free situation is also strange as you take it in to barbados and then out….lots of people had it taken off them, so we didn’t buy anything!!
The Liat flight was straight forward leaving from departure gate 9 ….basically a room at the end of the airport where all their flights leave from, just sit around and wait for them to muddle through getting you on the flight!! All our flights were on time.
Arrival at st. Vincent started straight forward til we realised the one man on duty was opening all passengers bags, there were only about 30 of us but it took quite awhile!!
Return flight was a doddle…fill in forms that had been taken off us on the way in!! Buy some items in the fairly priced airport shop ((tiny little thing!!) And got on the plane, no queues at Barbados and then a easy book-in with virgin checked out the local artisan shop just outside the departure door and flight home. we had 7.5hrs at Barbados so emailed the “southern Palms hotel” and asked if we could pop in and being nice they said yes…so we hopped in a taxi and spent the day there, fantastic 2 islands for the price of one!!..see the review.
Buccament resort is a laid back type of place, the staff including all the managers were friendly and helpful. Things got sorted if needed in a laid back way..you are in the carribean not England!!
The food was fabulous and plentiful. jack’s steaks and crawfish were massive and fantastic quality.
The coffee shop did great tea and coffee…(why bother with the coffee maker in the villa?) along with sandwiches, cakes and lovely ice cream.
Breakfast was Buffet and there was plenty of choice, picking your timing for the egg prep stand and the fruit and smoothly stand where esstential as it could be a bit of a wait otherwise….but it was just a matter of getting your food from the buffet and jumping over when the queues died down.
The beach was a small contained area with shallow calm water, all beaches are public so locals can wander into the resort to use the beach…but they were friendly and not intrusive.
The man bug bear was the bagging of sun loungers and sunshades…basically you need to baggsey one at 7am mark it with your personal possession then go back to bed!! Later when you fancy you can then use “your” area…we did it once and I just don’t like the hassle and the idea of blocking others for using the items for hours when we aren’t using them..was very temped to take
Items off beds and hand them in to lost property!! Just the devil in me!! Would be nice if this was sorted as its really silly leaving beds unused for hours in this way.
The villa we had was two rooms; one bedroom with large bed and ensuite, some villas had baths, some with shower over, some with separate showers and some with just showers…it depends what the original design for that villa was.
There were plenty of hangers and shelving for clothes. Some villas had ironing boards n irons, umbrellas, and torches it varied.
The second room was a lounge with bifolding doors onto the decking and jacuzzi. We had a couple of lounging Chairs with foot rests and cushion pads…the later I brought in during the brief showers n at night to stop any mould appearing. The jacuzzi was a good size…hubby managed 3 breaststrokes before he ran out of room!! There was a bit of sand at the bottom in the jacuzzi but nothing to fuss about in my book, the decking was bit weathered but didn’t stop our enjoyment of it.
Some villas had an air conditioning unit in each room some just 1 in the bedroom…some units were noisy….but didn’t bother us.
There were 2 fridges in our villa with water, wine, spirit, beer n soft drinks, the basic rooms only
had Soft drinks but once people got friendly I understand some drink swoping went on!!
Housekeeping was a bit hit and miss…I didn’t get too bothered until all our towels eventually got taken over a period of a few days and not replaced!! then we asked a few times for some more and eventually we got some!!
There is plenty of exercise to do if you feel the need, we just felt tired watching the jogging, boot camps on the beach etc so we only manged a 40min walk up to the village grocery shop and back….not much for the tourist..a cold drink for the walk back and some spices and local sauce for Marinates. but did notice the big sign boasting they now stock some tesco items (about 20 items).
So shopping is not really a big thing to do, it really is a poor island but the locals are friendly and always willing to help…directed us to a nice green route down hill from the shop.
So in conclusion if you don’t mind the hassle of getting here,,,the children just seemed to fall asleep and deal with it!! and don’t expect perfection it’s a great place to come. You won’t go hungry and there plenty to do or not do…there is a little library at reception…bit basic but it there. Tv is fine lots of channels and DVDs to borrow too. Everyone is friendly and hanging around your deck area and taking time out in the jaccuzzi in the sun is just great. You do get to walk at bit as the place is laid out as a village….but you walk off all the drink and food and there are bikes around to use if you want. Disabled people could phone reception for the minicar trolley things to pick you up but it would be a wait so as LNG as you were chilled out no problem!!
I suggest try out the 3 restaurants and then book all your meals at once..it does get busy..also book your free evening boat trip immediately…well worth it.
Stayed February 2015, travelled as a couple
5 of 5 stars Sleep Quality
4 of 5 stars Rooms
4 of 5 stars Service
Was this review helpful?Yes
Ask SusannaB88 about Buccament Bay Resort
No they are not 5*. Which ones are you reading?
What has the reviews at BB got to do with this multi million pound fraud.
or maybe this one?
We travelled to Buccament Bay Resort on December 7th for a week, before heading to St. Lucia for our 2nd week. After a long flight from gatwick, we arrived in st. Lucia ready for our transfer to Buccament. After a swift bypass of the huge queue at immigration, our thoughts were, wow, this will be the most seamless and hassle free transfer we’ve ever had! Not so, we had a 4 hour wait for the inter island transfer to arrive, at that stage we were shattered, I called the hotel a couple of times to check if they had forgotten us and they said that the plane was coming from Barbados after picking up more passengers, they had no answer for the time of arrival. I questioned whether we could still get food and they took my order on the phone and said that it would be in our room when we arrived. Eventually the plane arrived, it was the resorts own plane which under any other circumstances would have been enjoyable, however we were tired, starving and it was lashing down with rain which led to a bumpy transfer. Upon arriving at the airport in St. Vincent, our lift to the hotel was there, this took about 30 mins. Check in was in our room, which was a relief and was swift. Our sandwiches weren’t in our room as requested, we went down to the restaurant and they told us that they were closed, I nearly cried, it had been over 10 hours since we’d eaten. I after calling reception, it was soon sorted and we got lovely chicken wraps. I loved our room, it was near to the restaurants and across from the beach, the bathroom was fab and the plunge pool was a real treat. A lot of the other couples had issues with transfers to the resort also, I found a lot of guests had travelled from Manchester, touched down in Antigua and then landed in Barbados for the transfer to St. Vincent. The breakfast was plentiful and buffet style, the food, we found at other times, was fantastic, we loved all of the menus, my husband loved a little detour by HQ, the red velvet cake is to die for! Don’t come looking for nightlife, the bar was empty by 10.30, this was relaxation at its best. Aside from the transfer, this resort is a gem, with a few hiccups, I dread to think what will happen when the new airport opens, it is such a cosy place and I can’t see the restaurants or the beach/pool areas being able to cope with anymore guests. I had read a few comments prior to arriving about worn towels, beach lounger covers etc, I didn’t encounter any of these problems. The best thing about this resort, by far, were the staff, they are so friendly and work very hard. Special mention to Danny, take a trip down to the other bar at the end of the beach for a chat, he’s a great guy, he loves his football! Also Samuel and Christopher, the pool/towel guys, they were always smiling and ready for a chat and Sean, behind the bar, you never needed to order, he remembered your order every time. As with a lot of hotels, the reception staff were a bit surly and didn’t have that welcoming, friendly attitude. The transfer back was a joy, we got the private plane back and it was such a clear day that we got some great photo’s. To conclude, a great resort with a few issues, namely the transfer to the island. Would I come again? Yes, but not if the airport opens, the Americans will then start arriving in their droves and it could start to lose its charm from what is a lovely boutique style resort.
Room Tip: All rooms are good.
See more room tips
Stayed December 2014, travelled as a couple
5 of 5 stars Location
5 of 5 stars Sleep Quality
5 of 5 stars Service
The two latest reviews on TA are hugely critical of BBay. Harlequin just make idiots of themselves when they question the latest reviews.
“Disappointing trust the reviews and not the online pics”
Mar 7, 2015
Vickyhancox (6 reviews)
In summary I agree with all of the negative reviews on here, here is a more detailed overview;
Arrival
After an extremely long connection for the LIAT flight we arrived at St Vincent airport to be greeted by the concierge from Buccament Bay, having luckily made it through immigration first (as there was one officer on for the entire plane to get through) we expected then to be on our way. However the concierge then told us ‘we have 26 others to wait for and then I will get the bus’ – not quite the 5* transfer experience I was expecting. When the others eventually got through immigration (45 mins later) we were then all piled onto a clapped out coach, not branded with Buccament Bay and again not a 5* experience – when selling transfers I think this should be clearly described as every traveler seemed shocked at the state of the coach and the fact they were not private transfers. Again this added to our journey time our arrival was not until 11:30pm at the hotel.
Room(s)
The first room we were shown to had broken air conditioning and was not the upgraded deluxe room promised, after several phone calls we were then moved to a deluxe room which the receptionist stated had a few things missing – I suspect this was an out of service room but we needed the air con so agreed to move (I did later question this but had no response just met by puzzled faces).
I have provide some photos of the state of the cleanliness and tiredness of the room. To confirm a few points, the windows were filthy on opening them we found a dead lizard, the pool was disgusting in need of a clean and refurb and the decking was a safety hazard again tired and needing a refurb. The loungers for our deck were never provided and no umbrella for shade either (despite asking reception several times).
When waking up the following morning we realised we did not have any toiletries in the room, except a tired looking refilled shampoo and conditioner container (which I used and can say it must be very old and very poor quality as my hair never looked clean), I had to call housekeeping 3 times and waited 3-4 hrs to get any soap, which was handed to me a dove bar of soap. I have to say in all of the hotels I have stayed in I have never been given a bar of dove soap, I find it shocking that as 5* resort there are no toiletries in the room. I asked reception for an amenity kit (raiser etc.) and were told they don’t do this! We asked for another bath robe as only one was provided this never materialised.
We also struggled to get towels in the room and had to ask several times to get clean towels, they never changed them and hung up the old towels, after complaining again to a manager we eventually got fresh towels on our last 2 days.
The mini bar was poorly stocked again we had to ask for beers to be put in there (eventually got on day 3), the so called snacks advertised never came and when I asked reception they said we don’t have snacks.
After asking several times for items we eventually went to reception to complain in person, we were told the manager was at lunch and would call us in the room on her return. We had no call back, the pool man came to fill up the pool but no attempt was made to listen to our issues, move us to another room or even an apology made.
Turn down service was provided on some nights, however the maid came to the door at 6, we had to explain every time we were getting ready for dinner and could she come back at a more reasonable time which was greeted with attitude.
After speaking with some of the other hotel guests it appears there is a huge lack of consistency with the maids, some had fresh towels every day and rose petals on the bed etc we never had this and certainly did not feel the rooms are a 5* standard.
Food & Service
When we arrived at the hotel we were handed a newsletter to confirm what was happening at each restaurant. We went straight to reception on day 1 and asked to book tables and were told Jacks was already full on the first day, we managed to get reservations for the rest of the week but again a point The hotel should be addressing is to ensure travellers are aware to book in advance to get into restaurants.
The first couple of days went from script a la carte for lunch etc however as the resort got busier the hotel decided not to follow the newsletter and churn out buffets every day for lunch. Having only one restaurant open for lunch there is no other choice, and the buffets are poor cheaply stocked (frozen lasagnas etc.) and not what we signed up for.
Another issue we had when looking at the resort we noticed 4 restaurants plus coffee shop, however on arrival quickly learnt (the still advertised and sign posted) Bamboo had been shut since the flood in 2013 and not reopened. This makes a huge difference limiting choice of restaurants particularly when 1 of the restaurants is only open for breakfast and lunch (which you then don’t want to have to go back to eat for dinner).
We took advantage of the beach front dinner offered to us in the package, this was extremely poor, my fish was raw my husband’s steak over cooked, we complained to the manager on duty who told us all of the food was imported (despite Jacks advertising local fish it is also imported), hinted to the fact the resort had money problems and cost cutting was involved. She tried to make our following day better by offering us a la carte for lunch and I have to say we did see a notable change in the service as she was there. Unfortunately this was short lived, and service resumed the following days, extremely slow, unattentive and not sincere.
Facilities
A lot of the loungers are worn, umbrellas are faded or broken and towels are extremely poor thin and hard. The first couple of days we looked past this as the resort is in such a beautiful setting, however as the resort started to get busier we noticed more and more problems. Firstly everyone seemed to reserve loungers (by 8 they were gone) with towels and bags, as loungers are limited this meant we could not get a lounger for the last 2 days of our holiday and as none were provided at our own plunge pool had no were to relax. Again as an advertised 5* luxurious resort I felt like I was fighting with holiday makers in Tenerife and felt it was unfair of the management to allow people to reserve loungers (particularly when they did not use them till late in the day). Secondly by 9 am all towels had gone, I have never stayed in a resort to be told we have run out of towels! There other huge issue is if you are lucky enough to get a lounger there are not enough umbrellas provided so you face a day without shade, we were told by the pool boys to sit under the palm trees – this is unacceptable for a 5* resort, both myself and husband were severely burnt and ended up spending the rest of our holiday in our room unable to sit out.
The issue is the resort does not have the facilities to cater for the amount of guests, they have obviously taken loungers out of rooms and put these by the beach as loungers have got broken however you can see no attempt has been made to replace any equipment the resort desperately needs.Again this is not the 5* experience we had booked or hoped for.
Check out
Just to point out the receptionist was terrible on check out, she was miserable did not ask us how our stay was, tried to overcharge the departure tax which I pointed out was wrong, her answer was ‘must be a mistake’ however I learnt from the other guests they had been overcharged and not realised. I have also read on trip advisor this happens so made sure I looked out for it – this is fraud, I don’t believe it’s a mistake the hotel is deliberately over charging and made no apology about it
Overall
This hotel is not a 5*, it should not be advertised as luxury or 5* and frankly I am surprised Blue Bay are promoting it as this. The hotel obviously has cash flow issues which is reflected in the lack of facilities, cheap soaps etc. provided and on researching the Harlequin group further I can see there has been issues for years with investors and the owners son is now in prison for fraud.
I feel extremely disappointed with our experience at the hotel and feel that we have been overcharged to
“We are in no rush to go back.”
Mar 7, 2015
AsboAstbury (8 reviews)
Walsall, United Kingdom
The briefest summary:
5* range of spirits; 4* food and service; 3.5* surroundings and facilities – and that’s all based on ‘holiday level’ star ratings. Compared to ‘real’ 5* hotels like Four Seasons this is a 3* at best. We holiday 4-5 times a year so have broad experience to compare against.
Will I be recommending it? No
Did I think it was good value? No – you can get much better for the same price elsewhere in the Caribbean and much much better in Mexico.
A bit more detail:
The good bits first – the HQ coffee shop is great for drinks, snacks (cakes, crepes and sometimes crisps), smoothies, shakes and ice creams. Don’t be confused by the prices on the board as its all inclusive. The service is fast and friendly.
The pool staff bring round bottles of water and small pots of sorbet unprompted, which are always welcome refreshment.
Lunch in Bay has lots of options – salad, BBQ meats and fish, a couple of hot options and a themed main (tempura, Mongolian, Italian etc) and an al a carte menu with ‘always available pizza’ which is only available on certain random days?!? However is big, fresh and well topped when available. See note below about getting a table though!
There is a really good selection of premium spirits behind the bar, although the cocktail range of the barmen is somewhat limited. The piña coladas passed my husbands fussy standards though 🙂 The only popular spirit I noticed was absent was Southern Comfort. The measures certainly aren’t skimpy – hic!
It was lovely to fully open the bifold shutters are the back of the room and look out whilst relaxing in the living area. However there was no glass in them (only in the air conditioned bedrooms) so unless fully opened expect to enter a dark and hot living room which you’ll share with a few local lizards on the walls and floor. We didn’t mind the latter though 🙂
However, unfortunately the majority of the negative reports on Tripadvisor are true.
There are approximately 100 loungers (50 round the pool – I counted!) and maybe the same or less on the beach) which is nowhere near enough being as there are 100 villas each with 2-4 people plus more guests in apartments, and only half the number of beach/pool umbrellas to loungers. Expect to have to have reserved a sun lounger by 7am if you want an umbrella, and by 7.30am without. We saw arguments across the pool about people having moved someone else’s belongings/brolly. You’re made to sign towels in and out each day rather than just having a towel card at the beginning of the stay or, heaven forbid, they actually think their guests have more morals than to steal their (very tatty) beach towels so just leave them available each morning. On the (frequent) occasions where no one was next to the towel pile to sign them in or out the ‘towel police’ did not visit our villa, so it just seemed like a pointless exercise. Similar to the need to have to sign for lunch and dinner where all meals and drinks are included! None of that is explained at check in so on our first day we just wandered off oblivious. Frequently towels weren’t available until 8am or later.
Expect tatty surroundings, faded decking, trip hazards, broken tiles, DIY looking repairs, and plunge pools that don’t look like they have worked in months (more on that later). Bathroom and pool towels are worn and frayed, as is some of the furniture. I ended up wearing a Mojito after thinking I could trust a drinks holder on a beach chair which turned out to only have half a bottom to it. Expect the showers in a four person lodge to run out of hot water half way through the second persons shower. That said – those lodges are very big and much much bigger than the one bed equivalents.
One good thing we expected was for our room to have a lovely plunge pool of its own. Which it did. Only the filter was in pieces, the water was disgusting, and the deck was mouldy. We reported it on Sunday morning, then Sunday evening, then again on Monday morning. On Monday afternoon the pool pump appeared outside out room like a garden ornament so off I went to reception to find out what was going on. No one knew anything or when it would be fixed so I asked if an alternative room was available with a working plunge pool. We were offered an alternative room half the size of ours and the hassle of moving all of our stuff across the resort so declined and stuck with the larger lodge and having to use the main pools. Very very disappointing as comparing the water colour in our pool to ones with working filters it was clear this hadn’t been functioning for some weeks so the resort would have known and shouldn’t have put guests into the lodge (3021 in case anyone is reading this and due to arrive).
The staff try their best, sometimes or at least some staff, but the Caribbean is a laid back place and they can only do so much with the ‘tools’ they are given.
I chuckled to myself when I read a review suggesting guests bring their own bottle openers only to get here and find they were spot on. A 20 minute wait for someone to bring us (a broken) one only to have to wrestle my way into the bottle of quite horrible tasting white. It’s also a good idea to bring your own umbrella, something every other 4 star and above resort I’ve been to in the Caribbean has provided, as I gave up on requesting one after three attempts with reception who promised to have housekeeping drop one off. St Vincent is one of the wetter Caribbean islands after all, which isn’t a problem if you can take cover under a brolly.
Ensure you book your meals and trips in advance as soon as you arrive if you want to eat during the most popular slots. Breakfast and definitely lunch are chaotic, with potential queues for 4-5 tables waiting as everyone tries to get into the small ‘Bay’ dining area at the same time. There is a newsletter with details of restaurants, trips and actives which you’ll need to ask for on arrival. We didn’t know it existed until we asked about trips on the Monday (after arriving late Saturday evening), at which we found out the only trip we had picked that we wanted to do (boat trip to Mustique) had left that morning. Why they don’t leave them in guests rooms as soon as they are available or hand them out at check in is beyond me.
The steaks in Jacks are nowhere near as good as were expecting from the reviews on here. We had an early booking (7.30pm) as we had heard the best items run out quickly. We ordered at 7.45 pm and by 8.10pm the table next to us were informed fillet steak was no longer available. The top and bottom of my fillet were charcoal when my ‘medium rare’ steak arrived. It was edible though and the sides were delicious. The evening menu at the main Bay restaurant rotates around 3-4 days so there is enough variety for a one week stay. Anything longer that would have been repetitive. The food at the Indian restaurant was good compared to the Indian meals we’ve had elsewhere in the world, and I was pleased to see Indian staff as it gives you the impression at least that the food will be authentic rather than an interpretation of Indian cuisine.
Don’t bother with the deluxe upgrade. All it includes is the mini bar (which was empty when we arrived and took two days and three requests to get it filled, with sporadic refilling) and welcome drinks and canapés on arrival. As we booked with Kuoni we were also entitled to a welcome drink on arrival. We arrived. No drinks in sight. Not a canapé in the building. Not even a cold towel to refresh us after our 22 hour journey. And once in our room not even a bottle of water in the empty mini bar. So don’t waste your money on the upgrade as it includes nothing in reality, and don’t expect a 5* welcome as you’re lucky to get anything more than escorted to your room and your credit card and passports taken off you until the following day.
The spa range is limited, as is the wifi range unless you’re in your lodge or sitting at the main bar. Don’t expect to get it more than a few feet towards the sun loungers.
However at least you don’t have to pay for the privilege of it being rubbish.
PARENTS – Also very limited is the shop on site. We went on day 2 to have a look and contemplated buying the bottle of SPF 50 that was on the shelf (there were other SPF 30 and SPF 15 there too) and when we returned, with slight sunburn in places on day 3 all they had left was SPF8 and no date on when they would likely have some back in stock. So ensure you take adequate sun cream if you or any of your party have particularly sensitive skin. I’ve never known a resort you can’t buy sun ream in if you run out!
Don’t expect to be able to dry your hair whilst your other half irons a shirt. If you do – make a note of where your fuse board is before starting and forget using the emergency torch as it doesn’t work.
Overall, we had a nice week away in the sun but won’t be recommending St Vincent and definitely not Buccament Bay or Harlequin Resorts any time soon. You can get much more for the same or less cost elsewhere in the Caribbean and Mexico. For proper ‘holiday 5*’ at a similar price take a look at the Secrets and Excellence chains for adult only breaks, and Dreams, Beloved and Finest by Excellence for family resorts. Excellence Playa Mejures just north of Cancun is regularly voted one of North/Central Americas best all inclusive resorts and I can vouch for it myself as being similarly priced but way out there for service.
Helpful? 3
Bobit, give it a break. TA is just bollocks and for a few quid you can get fake reviews. The agents encouraged it. Now, imagine if God forbid these were fake reviews?
I’ve been to BB and it’s shit.
Looks like the staff at BBay are following in the footsteps of the GV, the staff are apparently ripping off the guests on the departure tax, engaging in Fraud. Pathetic just pathetic. And what was that in Ames’ update about upgrading the back of house facilities, what about the front of house.
Glad to see the truth emerging.
Yank an easy one, of course they are fake. Anything positive has to be fake doesn’t it while anything negative is real. Lol
Even the rave reviews are critical of the plunge pools, the mini bar, the AC units, the lack of sun beds and towels, and the monotonous food. Read them Bob.
@The Dim Poster …AKA Bob Storey…Wonder why it is over a year since the Dec 2013 Floods and the Bamboo restaurant is still not open? It still is listed, however, on BB website. Why?, because they are just a bunch of liars.
I think the positive reviews you posted are real, never said they were fake…..its just that some Brits can be so understanding, so patient, so forgiving, and so swept away the sheer beauty of the Caribbean and its friendly people, that they are willing to overlook all the crap that is being experienced at BB, and still give it a great review…especially if they got it at cut rate prices.
If it is taking over a year to refurb one Restaraunt how long will it take to build some 6000 + Units?
Well Anonymous, if there are some critical points then that proves they are not fake. If that is all they can criticise then that’s not bad at all.
Did you ever see the pictures on the RL site – it’s shit. Period.
The fact is, and has been since its construction, that the way Harlequin have cajoled people to visit the resort is by way of cheap discount sites. The most notable of these being TravelZoo.
Whilst such companies as Kuoni and Virgin Holidays have been offering the resort for as long a period, it’s evident both from the nightly rates, the Tailormade spreadsheet posted some time back, and some reviews, that many visitors have been lured by remarkably low prices.
This is a major point of concern for victims.
Reason being that as the hotel matures, and needs to be maintained, the threadbare profits created by each room will not be sufficient to provide for both Harlequin and the victim. This has been demonstrated by the many reviews on Blu, which suggest that it is in dire need of renovation, as well as that the parasols have apparently just been replaced at Buccment Bay amongst other problems.
Of course, this is not withstanding the fact that most of the claims made by Ames through his emails have been rebuked time and time again.
It is concerning for several reasons:
1) The idea that Matthew Ames was publicly offered a job of £10,000 a month at the resort for not being jailed raises many questions. Notably, if Ames has £120,000 a year to spend on a job for his fraudulent son, why is this money not being used to provide fixes for many of the small issues at the resort, constantly highlighted by the TA reviews (parasols, beach beds, swimming pool, coffee pods, etc).
2) If Ames has had “full occupancy” at the resort in the recent period, as highlighted by his latest discourse, as well as “record occupancy” for some time previous, why has no more progress been made on the other resorts in the portfolio?
H Hotel should have been started by now. Buccament Bay has a swathe of units yet to be constructed (1750+), and Blu is in need of renovation. These glaring requirements not being met are a sure sign that the financial position of Harlequin is definitely not as rosy as they would have you believe.
3) With the collapse of HMSSE, and putting into administration of HHR (now ASOL), the questions arise as to why the debts of these companies were not addressed by Ames before their closure. Indeed, it’s come to our attention that both are subject to investigations by HMRC.
If Buccament Bay’s success is so prolific, and is delivering a truly 5* holiday (as the questionable reviews would have you believe), why does the company not honour its outstanding liabilities? Procure It Direct, as well as a number of other suppliers, have not been paid for the products which Harlequin are still benefiting from to this day.
4) The premise of the Harlequin model was to achieve high “nightly” rates. Indeed, many of the calculations in their brochures were based on specific rates being met. These rates were meant to be achieved by way of the resort being “5 star” / “luxury”.
We’re now being told that occupancy is at an all time high, which builds on the successes mentioned in previous emails. Although this sounds good, victims need only be concerned with the achieved nightly rates for these successes. If Harlequin are making 10% profit, there’s going to be nothing for the victim to draw down by way of rental returns.
Unless, of course, Harlequin’s model is to “share” the room rates by way of gross takings? IE if they receive $600 per night (as per some of the material we have), they’ll happily share $300 with the victim based on the 50% rental share. Perhaps it escapes Ames’ mind that Harlequin will actually have to meet overheads, which will mean that a rate of $600/night gross would equal perhaps $300 / $400 net. It should be this net value which is shared with the victim, if the resort is to operate sustainably.
Perhaps this explains much of the neglect at the current operations.
5) Anonymous seems to highlight an interesting idea that “bad” reviews will not benefit anyone. This might be true for the short term, but what you have to remember is that Harlequin was not given a mandate to create positive reviews.
Harlequin was paid £440m to build 9000+ units. Harlequin was to offer “virtual mortgages” to its “investors” as a way for them to pay the remainder of the balance whilst earning a return from their unit (calculations subject to point raised #4).
This means that Harlequin were paid £440m to build 30% of the rooms, which is 3000, raise mortgages on the constructed properties, and continue to build with that money which would be paid off with the rental returns generated from the constructed rooms. To date, they have built but 1/10th of that, or a total of 0.03% of their sold units.
This point is where Ames will tell you that he was ripped off by the builder. However, a court in Ireland declared that the builder only misappropriated $1.6m, is under appeal, and has not been repaid (to compare this, Ames spent £1.4m on Harlequin Air in the same period). Ames further asserts that Wilkins Kennedy are responsible for a further $70m in neglect. Even if this was proven outright, the fact remains that out of £440m / $650m, Ames is claiming that $71.6m prevented him from delivering on his promises.
To put this into comparison, if Ames was able to help victims “complete” on their property (which to date, only 2 have), he would have the remainder of the $1.5bn order book to draw down. As he has not constructed anything of note, he cannot do this as there are so few rooms to complete on (hence why he’s trying to get people to complete on Blu / H).
So no matter how “successful” Buccament Bay might be (according to Ames), the fact remains that he, and Harlequin, have absolutely failed to honour the job they were paid to do. Even if they took all the money they had available (after commissions, dividends, directors loans, property in Dubai were paid for from victims’ deposits), one would hope that Buccament Bay *would* be successful (if you can’t make a popular resort with £150 – £250m you really do have a problem).
6) To top all of this off, Ames has offered victims a meagre compromise in the idea of his “trust”. To gloss over his contractual obligations (deadlines) with an ill-conceived, and amateur document is nothing short of scandalous.
For return of giving Ames 5 more years & not being able to say anything “bad” about Harlequin, you entrust the twice bankrupted, proven liar, to keep his promises of raising finance for the new builds (not forthcoming), mortgages on constructed properties & giving victims title on their unit whilst paying off their balance through this “virtual mortgage”.
Soon you begin to see through the charade (“an absurd pretence intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance”)…. Ames is profiting from your deposits, funding a luxury globe-trotting lifestyle & enriching his family by way of falsely representing an investment which, to this day, has not provided the returns it promised.
Anyone who still believes in the dream is entitled to do so (it’s a nice one), but I’m afraid for Ames & his followers, that is all it is.
@ Anonymous 8.35am
“Who do these benefit?”
The family who was considering spending hard earned money on a holiday there perhaps? I would want to know that the resort I’m intending to travel to had so few sunbeds that I would have to set my alarm clock earlier than I do to get to work on time in order to secure one for the day. That kind of thing ruins a holiday.
The camera never lies.
@Anon 10.15, don’t you get bored with writing the same old same old information. Let me ask you this, why should DA build out any more of the resort if there is not the capacity or infrastructure to get those numbers to the hotel? Your comment might be more appropriate when the new airport is open.
Yah lack of coffee pods cad really ruin a holiday lol
@Anonymous 10:32
You’re serious?
I think you might want to ask one of the cash victims the same question. The answer you’ll receive might have something to do with them having paid £10,000’s years ago, and not having anything to show for it.
And no, I don’t get tired of writing the truth. Just the same as Ames doesn’t seem to tire of writing his updates, or you in your childish comments. People need answers, and a balanced argument.
@ deleted 10.34am
Coffee pods might be a minor inconvenience and you’re right, I wouldn’t expect instant coffee in my room at a 5* hotel.
But getting up at 6am just to drag yourself to the beach to secure a sunbed?! That’s a ball ache that makes for a miserable time.
Anonymous 10.32 am, perhaps because he is contractually obliged to, and the lack of an international airport in SVG does not stop Ames from building in Barbados at Merricks ( Which has an International Airport, in St. Lucia at the Marquis Estate, ( Which has an International Airport) and in the Dominican Republic at Two Rivers, Los Canas and the Hideaway, again the Dominican Republic has a number of International Airports.
@Anon 10.37, you’re serious? Yes that’s a comment that supports a “balanced argument” viewpoint.
@ Anonymous 10.56 am what do you have to say to the post by Anonymous 10.46 am ?
Or will you remain silent on that one for a time.
Oh I’m sure my comments would be considered far too childish to reply. If you want a response to a question then you need to cut out the “childish” references.
#6
If in doubt, deflect attention to something else.
#7
Stimulate the masses with revelations just around the corner.
Interesting.Massive profits are just around the corner you just have to believe it.
Propagandist -do you mean you expect profits from a cash investment in Harlequin?
@SIPP-ing
It may be possible if Dave Ames puts his mind to it and thinks about the investors like he always has.
HHHAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAA HAH
Why is Dave Ames update such a load of horse shit,
Here is why.
Bob can you explain how you are obtaining a return when the Ames himself states that BBay is at best breaking even ? Or indeed making a small loss.
Harlequin & Heritage Meeting Notes – click on the link
All,
Harlequin Building Programme – minimum of 2020 for most investors
We have received a copy of Minutes of a Meeting dated the 20th January 2015 between Harlequin (1), Heritage Trustees Limited (2) and Kingsley David Solicitors (3). The meeting started at 10am and ended at 1pm. The meeting was attended by David Ames, Daniel Abrams (Harlequin), Simon Stone (Kingsley David Solicitors) and Colin Worbey (Heritage Trustees Limited).
Our clients have provided us with a copy of the notes (which were in turn provided to them by Heritage). An overview of the various Harlequin projects was provided by David Ames.
The explanation of the build program is helpful as it gives investors an understanding as to the position of their investment. The note also details the trading position of Harlequin.
Many investors remain persuaded that Harlequin will come up with the goods during 2015 and 2016. 2020 at a minimum is more realistic.
H Hotel – Barbados
“The completion of this project is scheduled prior to the end of 2016 subject to finance and other circumstances.”
Buccament Bay
See attached note.
Marquis – St Lucia
“Dave Ames suggested it might get completed within 5 years but with a project of this size and complexity it remains uncertain.”
Two Rivers / Las Canas / Hideaway – Dominican Republic
“These project were in a similar position to the Marquis Estate and there is currently no building activity taking place. “
Merricks
As above
Blu Hotel
See attached note.
Harlequin’s Income
See attached note.
Conclusion
It is helpful for all investors to see what is being said to SIPP operators about their project. 2020 for Marquis, Two Rivers / Las Canas / Hideaway – Dominican Republic & Merricks is a long time away. For some people this means the minimum of a decade in this investment.
The majority of our redress clients will be dealt with by the end of 2015. So before Harlequin make one single step forward, you could have your redress payment. The choice is very straightforward. Make a redress claim, move on.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Visit Harlequin Investor Group at: http://harlequininvestorgroup.co.uk/?xg_source=msg_mes_network
To control which emails you receive on Harlequin Investor Group, click here
Take note:
“Harlequin’s income
……
1) BB trading receipts
2) Blu trading receipts
3) Property completions
4) Litigation
”
Never knew Harlequin were in the litigation business? I mean £6m for $1.6m (yet to materialise) return is a pretty good rate, isn’t it?
“Many of investor contracts relating to this project suggest Harlequin is obliged to refund their money within 60 days of request. Dave Ames acknowledged this but said Harlequin was not in a position to honour this (INSOLVENT.INSOLVENT. INSOLVENT. INSOLVENT. INSOLVENT) at the current time. The options available include a swap to another property; bringing a claim against Harlequin in St Lucia; registering a charge over the land in St Lucia…. “
“Dave Ames has taken a much closer role in running the resort”
Was “Anon” taking these notes?
“Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they want their income from the top line (gross income) of the resort leaving the owner much less income to cover its costs (and presumably RETURNS TO VICTIMS) which of course means no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all income and has full control of expenses. Dave Ames is adamant without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.”
So let me ask Storey & Anonymous…
Where are the returns coming from? Top or bottom line?
Because you got it from the horse’s mouth right here in black and white – if they creamed returns from the top Harlequin would not have survived. This is without any analysis of their trading accounts. My God what would we find if they’re filling the place with discount hunters.
Will someone take them down and stop all this stupidity, its insolvant.
2020 – that means Matt will be out and ready to take over.
We are saved.
I must say I’m bemused by this comment from Ames.
“Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they want their income from the top line (gross income) of the resort leaving the owner much less income to cover its costs (and presumably RETURNS TO VICTIMS) which of course means no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all income and has full control of expenses. Dave Ames is adamant without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.”
It was actually Ames who suggested that a hotel management company was looking to come on board, well we can safely say that this is now not the case.
I also like the reference to the cost cutting measures, reducing staff levels, and rather then paying a normal salary, staff are paid by way of incentives.
So the cleaner who is normally paid to clean rooms, is now paid by way of some sort of incentive scheme to clean rooms.
The bar staff who serves drinks in an AI bar, are they now on an incentive payment scheme, Are they now paid if they water down the drinks or to discourage guests from drinking?
The front desk staff, are they paid by way of incentives if they charge guests more for departure tax, or if the charge guests for every extra.
What about the chefs, are they now paid on the production of boiled eggs and steaks?
I also like the fact that Ames wants to swap out investors who can’t complete on Buccament Bay with investors from other resorts. Ok so there are 150 units to complete on, Ames says the other resorts Marquis, Merricks and the Dom Rep may never get built, so great swap out some poor mug at BBay with an investor at the Marquis Estate, which looks like it will never be completed in the life time of any investor.
Ames says he is owed money on completions at Buccbay, he has said he is owed £ 48 million, on 150 units.
This means that each of these units sold for an average £ 460,000 each.
http://www.simpsonsoverseasproperty.co.uk/downloads/
Ames sold the first properties at Buccament Bay in 2006, but it looks like they must all have been resales, have a browse through the following. It’s rather interesting.
http://www.simpsonsoverseasproperty.co.uk/downloads/
But let us take Ames at his word, please do just for this exercise.
Ames claims he is owed £ 48 million, Ames has told us that Buccament Bay is at best breaking even or indeed making a small loss.
Of the £ 48 million Ames claims to be owed, £ 2.4 million goes on Harlequin completion cists £ 14 million goes on the 10% guranteed return for Two Years.
Leaving £ 31.6 million. Ames tells us that the business can’t survive without extended credit from suppliers, ok let us put this bizarre statement to one side, lets us apportion £ 4 million towards paying existing creditors, I acknowledge the true quantum of this debt is unknown. Ames has comitted another £ 4 million to investors who have agreed settlement terms with him.
Let us put another £ 3 million towards the operating costs of Bucc Bay, to include all those salaries in Basildon. And let’s include a £ 10 k a month salary for Matt when he is released shortly.
This leaves Ames with about £ 23 million, we also know that Ames has yet to pay for the land at Buccament Bay which he needs to build properties on if he is to expand that resort.
This will cost him another £ 7 million.
So Ames will be left with c £ 13.6 million.
Ames states in the minutes of the meeting released by Gareth Fatchett that investors will find it too costly and too time consuming to pursue him for breach of contract, Ames is basically giving the two fingers to investors, but we can see why Ames now needs a trust, Ames is not at all confident that investors will pursue him for breach of contract.
If we take away the 150 investors who might complete on BBay, this still leaves over 8900 contracts which have been breached, meaning creditors owed approx £ 400 million still out there.
Whilst Ames might feel that the average investor will not pursue him, and he can give them the two fingers, the fact that the FSCS have very deep pockets must be unerving him.
But what is £ 13.6 million going to give him? Another c 85 units at Buccament Bay, which in turn will give him about £ 27 million, again £ 5.4 million of this will have to be offset against the 10% guaranteed returns. Another £ 3-4 million on other expenses. Leaving him with the ability to build another c 115 units.
To get to this stage will take 4 years, you have the complex issues of getting investors to come up with the completion monies, the legal hurdles associated with the completions, the fact that construction will be taking place in a resort that is open to paying guests, a hammer hitting a nail reverberates through the Buccament Valley. Imagine a hundred hammers and the assiciated noise. Or heavy machines, cranes, kango hammers, dump trucks and excavators.
Sorry just love this post on the RL site, it does beg the question as to the intelligence levels of some investors, no offence Alan.
alan james neatis
Couple more questions…I note its a no win no fee deal but if we lose are we as individuals liable for any costs? Also my IFA no longer trades so are they not involved anymore at all..it seems strange that we may seek wider redress v the SIPP operator just because they are still around!! Does that make sense?
Pity Gareth doesn’t explain how simple the redress process is, he fills out a form and sends it to the FSCS, could not be simpler. Don’t even understand how you can call it a no win no fee, Fatchops is not suing the FSCS.
Got to wonder at your intelligence level mocking an innocent investor …hopefully your part in it will land you in prison.
The FSCS process is very difficult. very technical.
What’s15% as a cost of certainty ?
People back winners. RL wins.
Some muppets will try to DIY and cock it up, have you looked at the forms? Dream on….
That’s the simple choice for SIPP investors.
Is it such a difficult one? 😉 ……… I mean to say he has such a good track record of telling the truth, management skills, and delivering projects in a timely fashion etc etc
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g147380-d1719145-i125268034-Buccament_Bay_Resort-St_Vincent_St_Vincent_and_the_Grenadines.html
What’s wrong with the photo, that’s an antique cup holder.
Lots of sun loungers and umberellas there.
It’s the sun loungers and umbrellas that make or break the resort, loads of them but no staff, the next cost saving measure will be to convert Bucc Bay into a five star self catering resort.
Also glad to see that Ames got lovely new shiny umbrellas on credit.
Ames got credit! One might think after we gave him £4mil credit people would have learned!
Apparently David Ames may have lived for some time in Ukraine and surely a positive would be to resolve its problems peacefully, so that DA can build more resorts.
No winder he went bankrupt- very small market for double glazing the Ukraine! They all get blown in and you cant get insurance!
Social media and Isis?
An overview of the various Harlequin projects was requested and Dave Ames provided the following information;
H Hotel- Barbados
This is a ring fenced project which includes 78 rooms. The completion of this project is scheduled prior to end of 2016 subject to finance and other circumstances. Harlequin has received 30% deposits on all 78 rooms but requires a further 30% to fund the project costs. Consideration is being given how best to achieve this and it might include swaps; amalgamations etc. by existing investors. Harlequin has not been making any new sales and Dave Ames focus is to approach existing investors only to discuss the possible options.
Buccament Bay – St Vincent
Phase 1 of the building program has been completed by Harlequin. The purchase of a small number of properties has completed and there are circa 150 further completions ongoing. Having completed the building of these properties Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money which is proving challenging to collect. Whilst many investors were hopeful Harlequin would be able to source a mortgage on their behalf Dave Ames confirmed this was not currently possible. This position is making completions more difficult with the investor having to raise their own funds but Dave Ames is having conversations with investors and helping bring about completions with solutions again involving swaps and amalgamations.
Where investors in Phase 1 cannot raise the funds to complete they are being switched to Phase 2 to allow other investors that have the funds available to complete on the properties which has now been built. The revenue from these sales is essential for the financial wellbeing of Harlequin and will assist with the building of the properties scheduled in Phase 2.
Buccament Bay is currently enjoying an occupancy rate of circa 80% but this is a busy time of the year. For other times the occupancy has been lower but overall Buccament Bay is somewhere between breaking even and making a small loss. See international Airport below.
Dave Ames has taken a much closer role in the running of the resort and has recently introduced a significant number of changes which is proving financially beneficial. These include a reduction in staff numbers (without detriment to service – comments on Trip Adviser still very good) and a change to their contracts of employment to incentive pay as opposed basic salary. This has reduced the basic monthly wage bill significantly and turned loss making areas of the business into profit.
Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they often want to take their income from the top slice (gross income) leaving the resort owner with much less income to cover its costs which could of course mean no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all the income and has full control over all the expenses. Dave Ames is adamant that without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.
Delays with the completion of the local Airport are very frustrating as the opening of the International Airport will have a direct impact on cash flow by removing the requirement of expensive inter-island flights for Tourists to St Vincent. The local Government are hopeful the Airport will be fully• operational by the end of the year and suggested Buccament Bay might think about expanding to meet the anticipated demand this is likely to generate. Dave Ames believes the completion of the Airport will encourage more visitors to fly direct to St Vincent and ensure Buccament Bay makes a healthy profit.
Marquis Estate – St Lucia
The land was purchased several years ago which includes some 500 acres. A considerable amount of additional money has been spent on planning and infrastructure costs. Harlequin remains committed to this project but at the present time does not have the funds to move it forward. It is the most challenging of builds due to the land’s geography and consequently this project is currently on hold. Dave Ames suggested it might get completed within 5 years but with a project of this size and complexity it remains uncertain.
Dave Ames is amenable to investors in this project swapping to alternative Harlequin properties and Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning can be contacted to discuss the options.
Many of the investor contracts relating to this project suggest Harlequin is obliged to refund their money within 60 days of request. (Refer Clause 12). Dave Ames acknowledged this but said Harlequin was not in a position to make any refunds at the current time. The options available include a swap to another property; bringing a claim against Harlequin in St Lucia; registering a charge over the land in St Lucia. It was mentioned taking legal action against Harlequin in St Lucia will be very expensive and very slow and unlikely to bring about a refund. A swap to another property was the option most likely to bring about a return on their investment in the short to medium term.
Whilst Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning can be contacted to discuss the possibility of swapping; the following ball park figures were suggested. To move to another property an additional cash contribution would be necessary. Suggested amounts were as follows;
Swap to Buccament Bay. Minimum £50,000
Swap to H Hotel. Minimum £75,000
Swap to Blu Hotel. Minimum £30,000
Investors considering a swap would need to take independent advice.
Two Rivers/ Las Canas/ Hideaway- Dominican Republic
These projects were in a similar position to the Marquis Estate and there is currently no building activity taking place. Harlequin was still committed to these projects. To build these developments will be much easier than the Marquis Estate; particularly the Two Rivers development. The same options that apply to investors in the Marquis Estate are available to investors in these developments.
Merricks – Barbados
As above.
Blu Hotel – St Lucia
The Blu Hotel is in many ways similar to the H Hotel; a self-funding project. It is currently trading and somewhere between breaking even and making a small profit.
4) Harlequin’s income
Harlequin continues to face financial challenges but its position continues to improve. The main sources of income for Harlequin were explained as follows;
(i) Buccament Bay trading receipts
(ii) Blu Hotel trading receipts
(iii) Property completions
(iv) Legal claims (including claim against Wilkins Kennedy)
During the past few years Harlequin has run up debts with suppliers of goods and services to the various Harlequin resorts and developments. Attending to these debts remains a priority because without these goods and services Harlequin cannot trade and therefore cannot develop trust and relationships with suppliers in the Caribbean for further development at the right time. Dave Ames continues to manage creditors and trading relationships carefully and debts continue to reduce each month. The reputation of Buccament Bay continues to improve with its suppliers to the extent credit has recently been possible. This will help the cash flow enormously.
Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money for the properties which it has built. Not being able to secure mortgages on behalf of the investors has caused problems and delayed completions. This income will provide Harlequin with the means to continue to develop and build more properties. Harlequin is also in the midst of a US$70 million claim against Wilkins Kennedy (and its insurers) for professional negligence relating to the fraudulent misappropriation carried out by the Irish Builder, ICE. Harlequin had its first hearing by way of a Case Management Conference in the High Court in London on 23rd January and is extremely confident of success to be realised in 2016.
Are you just reposting the propaganda or are you delusional?
So, in summary Harlequin is @ucked and can’t pay its way.
An overview of the various Harlequin projects was requested and Dave Ames provided the following information;
H Hotel- Barbados
This is a ring fenced project which includes 78 rooms. The completion of this project is scheduled prior to end of 2016 subject to finance and other circumstances.
(1). Dave I think we would all like to know what the other circumstances are, you are asking for cash to complete this hotel but you are now telling us that cash is not the only issue, so please tell us what is?
Harlequin has received 30% deposits on all 78 rooms but requires a further 30% to fund the project costs.
(2). So the resort was sold out, and you recieved c £ 8 million quid half of which you spent on commisions.
Consideration is being given how best to achieve this and it might include swaps; amalgamations etc. by existing investors. Harlequin has not been making any new sales and Dave Ames focus is to approach existing investors only to discuss the possible options.
(3). Swap with what exactly, the investors in H have done as was required, 30% down with nothing more to pay to completion, it’s not complete, so why should an investor swap with a resort that now looks like it never will be built.
Buccament Bay – St Vincent
Phase 1 of the building program has been completed by Harlequin.
(4). Phase 1 has not been completed, unless of course you lied in the Irish case,
The purchase of a small number of properties has completed and there are circa 150 further completions ongoing. Having completed the building of these properties Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money which is proving challenging to collect.
Whilst many investors were hopeful Harlequin would be able to source a mortgage on their behalf Dave Ames confirmed this was not currently possible.
(5). In many cases you and Harlequin promised guranteed mortgages.
This position is making completions more difficult with the investor having to raise their own funds but Dave Ames is having conversations with investors and helping bring about completions with solutions again involving swaps and amalgamations.
(6). What happened your business plan ?
Where investors in Phase 1 cannot raise the funds to complete they are being switched to Phase 2 to allow other investors that have the funds available to complete on the properties which has now been built. The revenue from these sales is essential for the financial wellbeing of Harlequin and will assist with the building of the properties scheduled in Phase 2.
(7). You claim you are owed £ 48 million, you owe c £ 400 million. Of the £ 48 million you say you are owed in excess of £ 12 million needs to be ring fenced to pay the 10% guranteed returns another £ 4 million for completion costs, £ 7 million for the land you intend to build on, in excess of £ 4 million needs to be paid as per settlements you have entered into with Litigants, c £ 4 million is required to clear your back log of existing supplier debt, c £ 170 million could be claimed by the FSCS and some £ 80 million by Shipleys, add to this the cash needed to bridge the operational shortfall, the cash required to pay your criminal lawyers in the SFO investigation and the cash required to fund the ongoing litigation which now forms part of your business model. And the c £ 230 million you owe investors aside from the FSCS claims because you are in breach of contract.
Buccament Bay is currently enjoying an occupancy rate of circa 80% but this is a busy time of the year. For other times the occupancy has been lower but overall Buccament Bay is somewhere between breaking even and making a small loss. See international Airport below.
(8). Ok so despite the record numbers the resort is not making a profit, how are you paying the investor returns so?
Dave Ames has taken a much closer role in the running of the resort and has recently introduced a significant number of changes which is proving financially beneficial. These include a reduction in staff numbers (without detriment to service – comments on Trip Adviser still very good) and a change to their contracts of employment to incentive pay as opposed basic salary. This has reduced the basic monthly wage bill significantly and turned loss making areas of the business into profit.
(9). To maintain 5 star status you need to increase staff as you add on more rooms, you have just added on 50 more rooms, most people would increase staffing levels.
Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they often want to take their income from the top slice (gross income) leaving the resort owner with much less income to cover its costs which could of course mean no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all the income and has full control over all the expenses. Dave Ames is adamant that without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.
(10). You were the one claiming that you were in discussions with a Hotel Management company as part of the restructuring.
Delays with the completion of the local Airport are very frustrating as the opening of the International Airport will have a direct impact on cash flow by removing the requirement of expensive inter-island flights for Tourists to St Vincent. The local Government are hopeful the Airport will be fully• operational by the end of the year and suggested Buccament Bay might think about expanding to meet the anticipated demand this is likely to generate. Dave Ames believes the completion of the Airport will encourage more visitors to fly direct to St Vincent and ensure Buccament Bay makes a healthy profit.
(11). If the cost of the flight from Barbados to SVG is putting off guests because of costs, and BuccBay is making a loss at their current rates, to make a profit you will have to increase rates, so even if the flights were free there is no advantage to the guest, and if cost is an issue for them it will be if you increase your rates.
Secondly which airlines have signed up to fly into the new airport ? Have you the list, ? And who will be paying the airline grants that are paid everywhere else in the Caribbean.
The SVG government will have to pay the airlines to fly to SVG, the SVG Government States that these flights will make BBay profitable, so please tell us the deal you have struck with Ralph in that you have promised over a £ 1 million quid to fund the airline cost.
To be continued ………….
I would just like to know in ‘Dave’s World’, how he will raise finance, survive the FSCS and HMRC oh yes and Shipleys and ooops the SFO investigation.
Dave you prick it’s over, like you!
Dozy, Shipley’s have let him off the hook good and proper!
Why do you keep banging on about repaying back the FSCS? And what would the FSCS do with £170m, pay it back to the IFAs etc? That’s what a compensation scheme is, it compensates people. The FSCS will pay the SIPP compensation then rip up the contracts they hold. They will have honoured their obligations, job done,
Anonymous,
But has HMRC and the SFO, let him off…… lol.
Obviously, you are soooooooooo knowledgeable about the legal working of the FSCS 😉
You cock it’s over
I don’t give a toss anymore, I’m getting my money back via RL. The rest of you can bitch as much as you like – I’m okay and moving on.
I don’t care what happens to Ames, Harlequin, as long as I get my money back. This is a simple fact of life.
Given the choice you would all do the same.
Do you honestly think the FSCS will shell out £170m and then just rip up the contracts and walk away? Don’t you think they may try to enforce the refund clause in those contracts to recover the money they pay out?
Ames states he is owed £ 48 million quid on completions for Buccbay, he forgets that the cost to construct Buccbay was £ 109 million, his cost of sales was actually £ 218 million. There are 9,000 contracts, c £ 440 million taken in deposits, c 1700 of these contracts are at Buccbay.
c £ 85 million was paid by investors in Buccbay ( this being the cost of sales ) in real terms £ 42.5 million was used in the construction of Buccbay which means Ames had to borrow £ 66.5 million from other seperate RDC companies ie investors in other resorts to fund the build at Buccament Bay, yet no where does Ames address this inter company debt. So even though he claims he is owed money through the completions at Buccament Bay £ 48 million, this money plus a further £ 18.5 million is owed to other RDC’s. Including possibly the H Hotel.
Ames says the completion monies at Bucc bay will be used to futher develop that resort, he moans about investors being unable to complete, but he owes all this money to the other RDC’s. We don’t have Ames moaning that the Marquis Estate, or Two Rivers cannot be built because one of Ames’ own companies in SVG owes those RDC’s substantial amounts of money. But that folks is exactly what is going on.
Even if Ames were to get all the completion money, and win the Wilkins Kennedy case, coupled with the additional existing debts, the guranteed returns, litigation costs and closing costs referred to by an earlier poster, he still would not come out of insolvency.
So at BB there are currently 300 built units with 1,400 still to build. Where are they supposed to go and how will they fit thousands of guests around the pool? Is there really a plan for the construction of 1,700 units or were the original 300 sold 6 times?
Redress is the only way.
If your a direct investor we are not interested anymore.
No Sid c 150 units have been completed at Buccbay not 300,
Ok, so the same calculation plus another 150! Does anyone actually believe it?
Stupid, Stupid, what an appropriate name you have!
Shipleys cant be bothered recovering the Dubai cash or the Directors loans because its too difficult.
You forget you thick shit who chose Shipley’s they just want their fees for little effort.
As for FSCS and SFO I know nothing about those, never have claimed to, and neither do you!
Looks like this experience is giving you anger issues, go and have a lie down in a dark room and put some Classic FM on!
Dog eat Dog World, I hope your investment wasn’t more than £50k less 15%!
A Gabriella Klein has just asked the following question over on the RL forum.
“RL – As a cash investor without the means to pursue redress – which the Manchester office has told me could cost many thousands with no guaranteed positive outcome, plus the danger of having to pay the fees for the other side – what would be the position if I did not join the Trust and the unit was built?
Is joining the Trust logical in the event that Harlequin went bust, and as a Trust member one would have a claim against assets?
I look forward to reading your reply.
Thank you.
The answer to the question is rather simple, Harlequin are insolvent, and if the FSCS begin the process of paying out redress payments they will look to seek recovery of these funds from Harlequin, this if nothing else does will push Harlequin into liquidation.
If you are a member of a trust, you will then like most others become an unsecured creditor, the trust gives you absolutely no rights in the event of a liquidation other then unsecured status. Don’t forget the trust is being drafted under UK law, not SVG or Caribbean Law where the assets are being held, and Ames will defend any challenges to the trust by using the old jurisdiction card if he has to.
If RL state that by joining the trust you will become a secured creditor, keep the correspondance between you, that way when Harlequin is liquidated you will have come back against RL’ s PI insurance.
@ Anonymous March 10, 2015 at 3:23 pm
I am not sure who you are but here is your post again with my responses. You clearly know exactly how this works yet you are trying to convince many others who may not have an understanding of how this works.
Why do you keep banging on about repaying back the FSCS? And what would the FSCS do with £170m, pay it back to the IFAs etc?
“Any funds recouped are put back into the compensation fund, which would reduce the levy paid by Financial Institutions, Banks and IFA’s ultimately leading to potentially reduced financial charges for all of us.”
That’s what a compensation scheme is, it compensates people. The FSCS will pay the SIPP compensation then rip up the contracts they hold. They will have honoured their obligations, job done,
“That is not how it works I’m afraid, if it were to work that way you would have 100’s of scams like Harlequin being operated everyday. The redress option by the FSCS is the option of last resort, when the determination is that the investment (1). Has failed and (2). There is little or no hope of recovery from the investment, aside of what might be obtained through a liquidation of the assets.
But the contracts have no value. Therefor the value of what the FSCS hold is zero. They cannot have it both ways.
Trust Ames until 2020, or get your cash now?
March 10, 2015 at 2:45 pm
Get your cash NOW. Bloomin ek, how much evidence do you need ? £200mil shifted out, £40 mil still missing, little built, Walter Mitty on the bridge, SFO ET AL still in there. Cut n run if you can- if not hope there’s some sort of take over with pro managers injecting cash. You’ll also need a scale down of the grand plans., maybe an asset sale to help consolidate.
@Anonymous
March 10, 2015 at 4:18 pm
Dog eat Dog World, I hope your investment wasn’t more than £50k less 15%!
I hope your’s was cash – 100% of your investment = nil
Who’s the Daddy!!
Why would any SIPP investor not take the cash?
“But the contracts have no value. Therefor the value of what the FSCS hold is zero. They cannot have it both ways.”
Maybe you’d like to tell this to the FSCS directly? I’m sure you have the authority to decree how they should work.
This is from the FSCS website:
“Following the depositor payout, FSCS will take the place of the depositors as a creditor. FSCS expects to remain on the Liquidation Committee after payout, to work with the liquidator in the realisation and distribution of the bank’s assets. FSCS will rely on the provisions of Section 215 FSMA and COMP 15.1.17R to effect an automatic transfer or subrogation of depositor’s rights, rather than rely upon an application form or written assignment. FSCS expects to be admitted as a creditor for the amount of the SCV payout and in respect of accounts paid that are not in the SCV; if there are any changes to that data FSCS must be notified immediately. In the event of an overpayment, FSCS may wish to consider with the liquidator what (if any) action to take to claw back any funds overpaid to depositors.”
It is discussing bank bailouts – perhaps it could be for this case also. Most pertinent is that FSCS intends to remain as a creditor.
http://www.fscs.org.uk/industry/single-customer-view/insolvency-practitioners/
Here is another piece of information:
http://www.professionaladviser.com/professional-adviser/news/2375797/failed-networks-liquidators-chase-ars-for-millions-in-fscs-payouts
“However, as is part of the FSCS’s remit, the scheme is now seeking to recover money it has paid out to investors by making claims against the estate of A2O as the network is wound down by liquidators.”
Dog Eat Dog, no my investment wasn’t SIPP, it was cash.
£1000 deposit then changed my mind, so I am 100% loss as you wish.
Never known anybody get -15% and gloat before, hardly a winner.
I was smarter than the daddy!
I keep seeing the word “liquidator” in your FSCS quotes. There is no liquidator so the quotes are irrelevant.
The FSCS will actively pursue Ames for the monies, of that there is no doubt, but further more Ames actions have again allowed him to score another own goal in the Wilkins Kennedy case.
Maybe Mr. Spector or Mr. Rees needs to wake up to this fact.
A major part of the claim against Wilkins Kennedy centres around the solvency of the former contractor the ICE Group, it was Ames’ assertion in the Irish case and again in the Wilkins Kennedy case that the ICE Group was trading insolvently prior to their removal from the Buccament Bay site, a point which Wilkins Kennedy will argue is not the case in the course of the trial, given that Wilkins Kennedy acted for the ICE Group.
However it is Mr. Ames’ assertion that because the ICE group was insolvent it should not have been trading, which is rather rich coming from Ames, who’s companies have not only been deemed insolvent by his own accountants Jim Baker, the FSCS and now Mr. Ames himself (although he will state that the minutes of the meeting produced were not a true reflection of what he said),
It must be noted that if minutes of meetings are produced and Ames is subsequently confronted with them in the manner similar to the way RL have produced them and these minutes do not suit a particular agenda of Ames, he will just deny that’s what he said, we have the issue of the now infamous transcripts, we heard in the Irish court how Ames agreed to items contained in minutes of meetings because he was afraid for his life of the builder, or how Willkins Kennedy forced him into agreeing something, other times he just denied point blank that the minutes reflected anything he said.
We have also have had Ames state that he was taken out of context on numerous occasions.
But the facts are the facts, Ames has claimed that if a company is insolvent even in SVG, it should not be allowed to continue to trade and furthermore it is Ames’ assertion and argument as can be seen in the Irish case that the directors should be held personally responsible for the debts as a result of trading insolvently, a point Mr. Campion should consider given that Harlequin Developments, HD Studio was also trading insolvently at the time he was managing director.
It looks like Ames’ arguments in the Irish and Wilkins Kennedy case will come to haunt him, and a few others.
A classic but not untypical own goal from Ames, who really is clueless in running a business, and is just a pint sized horrible disgusting little conman.
“I keep seeing the word “liquidator” in your FSCS quotes. There is no liquidator so the quotes are irrelevant.”
You can only bury your head in the sand for so long.
Ingham is just hired flab.
Ames could do with giving refunds to cash investors instead of paying moronic staff to put ‘fat jokes’ on here! What is it exactly that you do in Basildon ?
To Pete and Chrissie Jackson over on the RL forum, cash investors are asking if they should join the trust. No they shouldn’t, it does not help them in anyway, it does not make them secured creditors, it possibly does make them responsible for the assets held within the trust, and mark my words, once investors join a trust, it won’t be long before Ames comes out with the story that unless the trustees come up with regular payments of potentially a few thousand pounds each all will be lost.
Ames will pull this card of that there is no doubt and he will do it in a way that will terrify investors into agreement.
RL know what will happen, Gareth Fatchett has stated this, no.
(1). Gareth will agree that because of the redress the numbers are just not there to make a trust work.
(2). Gareth knows that the FSCS will become the single largest creditor, they are not into operating hotels, they will call in the debt, Gareth Fatchett has stated as much.
(3). There is no real advantage to the trust that is not already covered by the contracts, the trust was primarily suggested to keep Harlequin from liquidation, the redress options will do what the trust was designed to protect against.
(4). The trust does not make you a secured creditor.
(5). Joining the trust precludes you from taking an action similar to the Carter Lemon Cameron class action which contrary to the rumours on here was in some respects quite successful.
Pretty obvious that the fatty comment have irritated Mr. None director / partnership Ingham.
Why do you have no account Dick?
No Vat number Dickie?
By the way your dirty little deal, it’s been reported.
Goodnight chubbykins 😉
There is a pattern, everytime we get some interesting posts like the one beliw they get followed by a whole heap of nonsense in a bid to push these posts down the thread.
The poster who is talking to himself a inout obesity must not like what is being posted.
Anon on March 10, 2015 at 6:16 pm
The FSCS will actively pursue Ames for the monies, of that there is no doubt, but further more Ames actions have again allowed him to score another own goal in the Wilkins Kennedy case.
Maybe Mr. Spector or Mr. Rees needs to wake up to this fact.
A major part of the claim against Wilkins Kennedy centres around the solvency of the former contractor the ICE Group, it was Ames’ assertion in the Irish case and again in the Wilkins Kennedy case that the ICE Group was trading insolvently prior to their removal from the Buccament Bay site, a point which Wilkins Kennedy will argue is not the case in the course of the trial, given that Wilkins Kennedy acted for the ICE Group.
However it is Mr. Ames’ assertion that because the ICE group was insolvent it should not have been trading, which is rather rich coming from Ames, who’s companies have not only been deemed insolvent by his own accountants Jim Baker, the FSCS and now Mr. Ames himself (although he will state that the minutes of the meeting produced were not a true reflection of what he said),
It must be noted that if minutes of meetings are produced and Ames is subsequently confronted with them in the manner similar to the way RL have produced them and these minutes do not suit a particular agenda of Ames, he will just deny that’s what he said, we have the issue of the now infamous transcripts, we heard in the Irish court how Ames agreed to items contained in minutes of meetings because he was afraid for his life of the builder, or how Willkins Kennedy forced him into agreeing something, other times he just denied point blank that the minutes reflected anything he said.
We have also have had Ames state that he was taken out of context on numerous occasions.
But the facts are the facts, Ames has claimed that if a company is insolvent even in SVG, it should not be allowed to continue to trade and furthermore it is Ames’ assertion and argument as can be seen in the Irish case that the directors should be held personally responsible for the debts as a result of trading insolvently, a point Mr. Campion should consider given that Harlequin Developments, HD Studio was also trading insolvently at the time he was managing director.
It looks like Ames’ arguments in the Irish and Wilkins Kennedy case will come to haunt him, and a few others.
A classic but not untypical own goal from Ames, who really is clueless in running a business, and is just a pint sized horrible disgusting little conman.
We know that Dave Carol, Dan Ames, Tazer Gun Stenning, the Good folks over on the RL forum. Richard I’m hiding from everyone Spector, young Dan I’ve not told the SRA who I work for Abrams because I don’t actually know, Andrew lie to the UK court Regan, even Simon I know I’m up shit creek Terry are all regular visitors to these pages, well boys, we gotcha, and we gotcha real good. Embedded files are a bitch, always we mean always be careful with any electronic storage device, and always make sure you know the source before being tempted to slot it into your computer, and never, We mean never make copies unless you are full sure of the source.
See shit happens when you try to be smart……. also always read the whole of the contents, and understand that it is the companies and not just the directors who are facing criminal prosecution.
Those minutes on March 10, 2015 at 1:11 pm
An overview of the various Harlequin projects was requested and Dave Ames provided the following information;
H Hotel- Barbados
This is a ring fenced project which includes 78 rooms. The completion of this project is scheduled prior to end of 2016 subject to finance and other circumstances. Harlequin has received 30% deposits on all 78 rooms but requires a further 30% to fund the project costs. Consideration is being given how best to achieve this and it might include swaps; amalgamations etc. by existing investors. Harlequin has not been making any new sales and Dave Ames focus is to approach existing investors only to discuss the possible options.
Buccament Bay – St Vincent
Phase 1 of the building program has been completed by Harlequin. The purchase of a small number of properties has completed and there are circa 150 further completions ongoing. Having completed the building of these properties Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money which is proving challenging to collect. Whilst many investors were hopeful Harlequin would be able to source a mortgage on their behalf Dave Ames confirmed this was not currently possible. This position is making completions more difficult with the investor having to raise their own funds but Dave Ames is having conversations with investors and helping bring about completions with solutions again involving swaps and amalgamations.
Where investors in Phase 1 cannot raise the funds to complete they are being switched to Phase 2 to allow other investors that have the funds available to complete on the properties which has now been built. The revenue from these sales is essential for the financial wellbeing of Harlequin and will assist with the building of the properties scheduled in Phase 2.
Buccament Bay is currently enjoying an occupancy rate of circa 80% but this is a busy time of the year. For other times the occupancy has been lower but overall Buccament Bay is somewhere between breaking even and making a small loss. See international Airport below.
Dave Ames has taken a much closer role in the running of the resort and has recently introduced a significant number of changes which is proving financially beneficial. These include a reduction in staff numbers (without detriment to service – comments on Trip Adviser still very good) and a change to their contracts of employment to incentive pay as opposed basic salary. This has reduced the basic monthly wage bill significantly and turned loss making areas of the business into profit.
Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they often want to take their income from the top slice (gross income) leaving the resort owner with much less income to cover its costs which could of course mean no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all the income and has full control over all the expenses. Dave Ames is adamant that without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.
Delays with the completion of the local Airport are very frustrating as the opening of the International Airport will have a direct impact on cash flow by removing the requirement of expensive inter-island flights for Tourists to St Vincent. The local Government are hopeful the Airport will be fully• operational by the end of the year and suggested Buccament Bay might think about expanding to meet the anticipated demand this is likely to generate. Dave Ames believes the completion of the Airport will encourage more visitors to fly direct to St Vincent and ensure Buccament Bay makes a healthy profit.
Marquis Estate – St Lucia
The land was purchased several years ago which includes some 500 acres. A considerable amount of additional money has been spent on planning and infrastructure costs. Harlequin remains committed to this project but at the present time does not have the funds to move it forward. It is the most challenging of builds due to the land’s geography and consequently this project is currently on hold. Dave Ames suggested it might get completed within 5 years but with a project of this size and complexity it remains uncertain.
Dave Ames is amenable to investors in this project swapping to alternative Harlequin properties and Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning can be contacted to discuss the options.
Many of the investor contracts relating to this project suggest Harlequin is obliged to refund their money within 60 days of request. (Refer Clause 12). Dave Ames acknowledged this but said Harlequin was not in a position to make any refunds at the current time. The options available include a swap to another property; bringing a claim against Harlequin in St Lucia; registering a charge over the land in St Lucia. It was mentioned taking legal action against Harlequin in St Lucia will be very expensive and very slow and unlikely to bring about a refund. A swap to another property was the option most likely to bring about a return on their investment in the short to medium term.
Whilst Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning can be contacted to discuss the possibility of swapping; the following ball park figures were suggested. To move to another property an additional cash contribution would be necessary. Suggested amounts were as follows;
Swap to Buccament Bay. Minimum £50,000
Swap to H Hotel. Minimum £75,000
Swap to Blu Hotel. Minimum £30,000
Investors considering a swap would need to take independent advice.
Two Rivers/ Las Canas/ Hideaway- Dominican Republic
These projects were in a similar position to the Marquis Estate and there is currently no building activity taking place. Harlequin was still committed to these projects. To build these developments will be much easier than the Marquis Estate; particularly the Two Rivers development. The same options that apply to investors in the Marquis Estate are available to investors in these developments.
Merricks – Barbados
As above.
Blu Hotel – St Lucia
The Blu Hotel is in many ways similar to the H Hotel; a self-funding project. It is currently trading and somewhere between breaking even and making a small profit.
4) Harlequin’s income
Harlequin continues to face financial challenges but its position continues to improve. The main sources of income for Harlequin were explained as follows;
(i) Buccament Bay trading receipts
(ii) Blu Hotel trading receipts
(iii) Property completions
(iv) Legal claims (including claim against Wilkins Kennedy)
During the past few years Harlequin has run up debts with suppliers of goods and services to the various Harlequin resorts and developments. Attending to these debts remains a priority because without these goods and services Harlequin cannot trade and therefore cannot develop trust and relationships with suppliers in the Caribbean for further development at the right time. Dave Ames continues to manage creditors and trading relationships carefully and debts continue to reduce each month. The reputation of Buccament Bay continues to improve with its suppliers to the extent credit has recently been possible. This will help the cash flow enormously.
Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money for the properties which it has built. Not being able to secure mortgages on behalf of the investors has caused problems and delayed completions. This income will provide Harlequin with the means to continue to develop and build more properties. Harlequin is also in the midst of a US$70 million claim against Wilkins Kennedy (and its insurers) for professional negligence relating to the fraudulent misappropriation carried out by the Irish Builder, ICE. Harlequin had its first hearing by way of a Case Management Conference in the High Court in London on 23rd January and is extremely confident of success to be realised in 2016.
Some comments on the minutes of the meeting which I’m sure you might find interesting on March 10, 2015 at 3:02 pm
An overview of the various Harlequin projects was requested and Dave Ames provided the following information;
H Hotel- Barbados
This is a ring fenced project which includes 78 rooms. The completion of this project is scheduled prior to end of 2016 subject to finance and other circumstances.
(1). Dave I think we would all like to know what the other circumstances are, you are asking for cash to complete this hotel but you are now telling us that cash is not the only issue, so please tell us what is?
Harlequin has received 30% deposits on all 78 rooms but requires a further 30% to fund the project costs.
(2). So the resort was sold out, and you recieved c £ 8 million quid half of which you spent on commisions.
Consideration is being given how best to achieve this and it might include swaps; amalgamations etc. by existing investors. Harlequin has not been making any new sales and Dave Ames focus is to approach existing investors only to discuss the possible options.
(3). Swap with what exactly, the investors in H have done as was required, 30% down with nothing more to pay to completion, it’s not complete, so why should an investor swap with a resort that now looks like it never will be built.
Buccament Bay – St Vincent
Phase 1 of the building program has been completed by Harlequin.
(4). Phase 1 has not been completed, unless of course you lied in the Irish case,
The purchase of a small number of properties has completed and there are circa 150 further completions ongoing. Having completed the building of these properties Harlequin is owed a significant amount of money which is proving challenging to collect.
Whilst many investors were hopeful Harlequin would be able to source a mortgage on their behalf Dave Ames confirmed this was not currently possible.
(5). In many cases you and Harlequin promised guranteed mortgages.
This position is making completions more difficult with the investor having to raise their own funds but Dave Ames is having conversations with investors and helping bring about completions with solutions again involving swaps and amalgamations.
(6). What happened your business plan ?
Where investors in Phase 1 cannot raise the funds to complete they are being switched to Phase 2 to allow other investors that have the funds available to complete on the properties which has now been built. The revenue from these sales is essential for the financial wellbeing of Harlequin and will assist with the building of the properties scheduled in Phase 2.
(7). You claim you are owed £ 48 million, you owe c £ 400 million. Of the £ 48 million you say you are owed in excess of £ 12 million needs to be ring fenced to pay the 10% guranteed returns another £ 4 million for completion costs, £ 7 million for the land you intend to build on, in excess of £ 4 million needs to be paid as per settlements you have entered into with Litigants, c £ 4 million is required to clear your back log of existing supplier debt, c £ 170 million could be claimed by the FSCS and some £ 80 million by Shipleys, add to this the cash needed to bridge the operational shortfall, the cash required to pay your criminal lawyers in the SFO investigation and the cash required to fund the ongoing litigation which now forms part of your business model. And the c £ 230 million you owe investors aside from the FSCS claims because you are in breach of contract.
Buccament Bay is currently enjoying an occupancy rate of circa 80% but this is a busy time of the year. For other times the occupancy has been lower but overall Buccament Bay is somewhere between breaking even and making a small loss. See international Airport below.
(8). Ok so despite the record numbers the resort is not making a profit, how are you paying the investor returns so?
Dave Ames has taken a much closer role in the running of the resort and has recently introduced a significant number of changes which is proving financially beneficial. These include a reduction in staff numbers (without detriment to service – comments on Trip Adviser still very good) and a change to their contracts of employment to incentive pay as opposed basic salary. This has reduced the basic monthly wage bill significantly and turned loss making areas of the business into profit.
(9). To maintain 5 star status you need to increase staff as you add on more rooms, you have just added on 50 more rooms, most people would increase staffing levels.
Whilst it has been suggested by some critics an independent Hotel management firm should be put into Buccament Bay it must be remembered they often want to take their income from the top slice (gross income) leaving the resort owner with much less income to cover its costs which could of course mean no profit. By managing the resort itself Harlequin takes receipt of all the income and has full control over all the expenses. Dave Ames is adamant that without this level of control Harlequin would not have survived.
(10). You were the one claiming that you were in discussions with a Hotel Management company as part of the restructuring.
Delays with the completion of the local Airport are very frustrating as the opening of the International Airport will have a direct impact on cash flow by removing the requirement of expensive inter-island flights for Tourists to St Vincent. The local Government are hopeful the Airport will be fully• operational by the end of the year and suggested Buccament Bay might think about expanding to meet the anticipated demand this is likely to generate. Dave Ames believes the completion of the Airport will encourage more visitors to fly direct to St Vincent and ensure Buccament Bay makes a healthy profit.
(11). If the cost of the flight from Barbados to SVG is putting off guests because of costs, and BuccBay is making a loss at their current rates, to make a profit you will have to increase rates, so even if the flights were free there is no advantage to the guest, and if cost is an issue for them it will be if you increase your rates.
Secondly which airlines have signed up to fly into the new airport ? Have you the list, ? And who will be paying the airline grants that are paid everywhere else in the Caribbean.
The SVG government will have to pay the airlines to fly to SVG, the SVG Government States that these flights will make BBay profitable, so please tell us the deal you have struck with Ralph in that you have promised over a £ 1 million quid to fund the airline cost.
To be continued ………….
What is a None Director?
Anon on March 10, 2015 at 8:06 pm
To Pete and Chrissie Jackson over on the RL forum, cash investors are asking if they should join the trust. No they shouldn’t, it does not help them in anyway, it does not make them secured creditors, it possibly does make them responsible for the assets held within the trust, and mark my words, once investors join a trust, it won’t be long before Ames comes out with the story that unless the trustees come up with regular payments of potentially a few thousand pounds each all will be lost.
Ames will pull this card of that there is no doubt and he will do it in a way that will terrify investors into agreement.
RL know what will happen, Gareth Fatchett has stated this, no.
(1). Gareth will agree that because of the redress the numbers are just not there to make a trust work.
(2). Gareth knows that the FSCS will become the single largest creditor, they are not into operating hotels, they will call in the debt, Gareth Fatchett has stated as much.
(3). There is no real advantage to the trust that is not already covered by the contracts, the trust was primarily suggested to keep Harlequin from liquidation, the redress options will do what the trust was designed to protect against.
(4). The trust does not make you a secured creditor.
(5). Joining the trust precludes you from taking an action similar to the Carter Lemon Cameron class action which contrary to the rumours on here was in some respects quite successful.
Anon on March 10, 2015 at 5:23 pm
This is from the FSCS website:
“Following the depositor payout, FSCS will take the place of the depositors as a creditor. FSCS expects to remain on the Liquidation Committee after payout, to work with the liquidator in the realisation and distribution of the bank’s assets. FSCS will rely on the provisions of Section 215 FSMA and COMP 15.1.17R to effect an automatic transfer or subrogation of depositor’s rights, rather than rely upon an application form or written assignment. FSCS expects to be admitted as a creditor for the amount of the SCV payout and in respect of accounts paid that are not in the SCV; if there are any changes to that data FSCS must be notified immediately. In the event of an overpayment, FSCS may wish to consider with the liquidator what (if any) action to take to claw back any funds overpaid to depositors.”
It is discussing bank bailouts – perhaps it could be for this case also. Most pertinent is that FSCS intends to remain as a creditor.
http://www.fscs.org.uk/industry/single-customer-view/insolvency-practitioners/
Anon on March 10, 2015 at 4:25 pm
A Gabriella Klein has just asked the following question over on the RL forum.
“RL – As a cash investor without the means to pursue redress – which the Manchester office has told me could cost many thousands with no guaranteed positive outcome, plus the danger of having to pay the fees for the other side – what would be the position if I did not join the Trust and the unit was built?
Is joining the Trust logical in the event that Harlequin went bust, and as a Trust member one would have a claim against assets?
I look forward to reading your reply.
Thank you.
The answer to the question is rather simple, Harlequin are insolvent, and if the FSCS begin the process of paying out redress payments they will look to seek recovery of these funds from Harlequin, this if nothing else does will push Harlequin into liquidation.
If you are a member of a trust, you will then like most others become an unsecured creditor, the trust gives you absolutely no rights in the event of a liquidation other then unsecured status. Don’t forget the trust is being drafted under UK law, not SVG or Caribbean Law where the assets are being held, and Ames will defend any challenges to the trust by using the old jurisdiction card if he has to.
If RL state that by joining the trust you will become a secured creditor, keep the correspondance between you, that way when Harlequin is liquidated you will have come back against RL’ s PI insurance.
The pressure on Ames is mounting hour by hour, the first of the Redress claims have been paid and contracts have bern exchanged. The FSCS will shortly approach Ames for the cash, we know he has some 300 k vested with lawyers in Dubai, but a number of individuals have their eye on this cash including Shipleys, HMRC and others.
Ames desperately needs funds to roll in for completion of Blu, H and BucBay to keep the FSCS claims fed, it is however a short term solution, but one Ames hopes will keep him out of prison a little while longer, Ames knows that if the FSCS call it, then the police will move in behind them, Ames will need to keep feeding the machine and pray that Wilkins Kennedy will offer him a settlement, Ames is desperately trying to hold off the mob till he squeezes some funds out of WK so look out for increased attacks and updates from Ames about NEW information he has on WK and the SFO. The man is in serious trouble.
We suggest that all mortgage investors obtain in writing from RL the merits of joining the trust and their status as creditors should Harlequin enter liquidation.
If you act on the advice of RL and it is subsequently found to be wrong then you may well have a valid claim against RL’s PI insurance. We have seen one instance already where RL have told an investor he can join the trust, yet provide nothing of substance to warn the investor against doing so.
RL have accelerated the demise of Harlequin by virtue of their lobbying of the FSCS, there is no turning the clock back now.
Have a look at this most recent thread from the RL forum.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
If the mortgage broker no longer trades, try the FSCS route.
Kalyan Ajoodha said:
I am to a direct investor via remortgage. The 3rd party I went through initially is no longer in business & am at a loss to of what I need to do. Is joining the trust the only option? Last Friday David Ames sent an email to all saying that the deadline has been extended to join the trust. Can we please confirm with RL that joining the trust is our best option as 3rd party pursuals have proved fruitless?
Harlequin Investor Group
0 16
Is it just me or are you confused too?
by Arabella Kennedy
on Friday
Hi
Well I’m a (foolish) direct investor and I am not sure how to go about retrieving my investment from the non-existent Buccament Bay.
There have been countless e-mails over the months, (most of which confuse me), so I just put them into my “Harlequin” folder and keep promising myself that I will read them again and try to take some action but other than a few unsuccessful calls to the Manchester Branch and the downloading of a couple of forms which may or may not be helpful, I’m at a loss.
For example, the last e-mail I received, which has a letter attached about Re-assignment of Rights – what is that about and who is it directed at?
So if there is anyone who can enlighten me in a simple, straightforward way I would be very grateful.
Many thanks
AKennedy
Pete and Chrissie Jackson
If it’s from Harlequin, it’s probably a lousy idea to respond. I understand from the stuff that’s been on the BFP over the last few months that H are desparate to get more money to keep their show on the road and to get as many customers as possible to give up their right to sue.
Do you mean the manchester branch of RL? If they thought it was a good idea to sign anything, they’s tell you very clearly.
I don’t believe there is a solution that includes Ames continuing (to run the company/run anything else) and I don’t think direct investors have anything to gain by helping to keep harlequin going.
on Friday
Shaun clark
Hi Arabella, I can not help you or advice you at all because i am in exactly the same position as you a “foolish” direct invester.
Now that the end of March 15 is approaching I would welcome any thoughts that people in our position have as I am really at a loss of what to do.The Trust option I do not believe is the one for me but what’s the alternative Liquidation? Or if the FSCS become the major invester in Harlequin what then happens and how will that effect Direct Investers?
I have not posted on this site before although when it is live I do catch up from time to time, if anyone can help or is in a similar position please get in touch as the 11th hour is fast approaching.
Best wishes
Shaun Clark
on Saturday
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Shaun,
Harlequin can offer no solution to direct investors. It would be foolhardy to hand over any more cash.
The only option for direct investors is 3rd party redress. We have said this from outset. Our Manchester office is handling these matters.
Our Brierley Hill office is handling the SIPP matters.
on Saturday
Michael Rogers
Hi,
After taking advice from youn Manchester office to make a claim through The Mortgage claims Bureau, which we did we have received a letter back stating we have no case to proceed as we had an unregulated IFA. Is there anything else we could do? Any advice would be appreciated thanks. Michael & Gail.
on Saturday
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Michael,
How did you re-mortgage? That’s key. We fear many re-mortgage claims will lose as people have quoted “home improvement ” as the reason for the further advance.
on Saturday
Shaun clark
Thank you RL I have spoken with your I think Manchester office last year but really without any success due to the sellers circumstances…….so this is my dilemma what can I do if anything given that redress appears not to be an option leaving the trust or sit here waiting to see what may happen when FSCS have the majority of the investments.That is where I need guidance from someone please.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors said:
Shaun,
Harlequin can offer no solution to direct investors. It would be foolhardy to hand over any more cash.
The only option for direct investors is 3rd party redress. We have said this from outset. Our Manchester office is handling these matters.
Our Brierley Hill office is handling the SIPP matters.
on Saturday
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Shaun,
If you are a direct investor, then you can join the trust, but it will not go ahead without a majority. The majority of SIPP / re-mortgage investors will opt for FOS / FSCS redress.
Joining the trust achieves very little as there is no finance at the moment. Without finance and a standstill arrangement with non-joining investors / FSCS – Harlequin will simply stumble on.
Make sure you have explored your options and limitation is getting close for many people which would bar you out from acting in any event.
on Sunday
Michael Rogers
Regulatory Legal Solicitors said:
Michael,
How did you re-mortgage? That’s key. We fear many re-mortgage claims will lose as people have quoted “home improvement ” as the reason for the further advance.
Hi RL,
We increased our facility on our one account and the reason we gave was a property investment in the Caribbean with returns on the investment in 3 years. Which sadly has not happened.
on Sunday
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
You should be ok then. FSCS or FOS are your two routes.
on Sunday
Joanne Martin
I too am in the same position having invested directly via a remortgage and bank transfer. I know the FA who did the remortgage put ‘home inprovements’ on the application so i have no redress to explore here.
I invested with Barrisford and Bird so u guess the only redress available to me would be third party?
I am at a loss also
yesterday
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Joanne,
Did you fill your own form or did the broker do it ?
yesterday
Nigel Clive Poole
Hi Arabella, i am exactly in the same position and having spoken with Manchester RL solicitors i don’t see any clear way forward. I was advised that Harlequin Property does not exist and ,they. for a fee, would pursue the financial adviser involved originally.
This seems a real long shot and as i recall the ‘agent’ was working for Harlequin property anyway – i shall look into this and post any points of interest but taking direct action against an individual who may or may not be indemnified seems ridiculous.
;
hours ago
Kalyan Ajoodha
I am to a direct investor via remortgage. The 3rd party I went through initially is no longer in business & am at a loss to of what I need to do. Is joining the trust the only option? Last Friday David Ames sent an email to all saying that the deadline has been extended to join the trust. Can we please confirm with RL that joining the trust is our best option as 3rd party pursuals have proved fruitless?
hours ago
Gabriella Klein
Hi Kalyan
No, joining the Trust is not your best option, as described above by RL. You should really try redress. If you contact Regulatory Legal they will point you in the right direction as there are several options you can pursue. It’s not the IFA or agent whom they pursue, but the mortgage broker or the lender. That’s my best advice, based on all the experience I’ve gathered in the past 21 months of being on these forums and pursuing my own redress.
Kalyan Ajoodha said:
I am to a direct investor via remortgage. The 3rd party I went through initially is no longer in business & am at a loss to of what I need to do. Is joining the trust the only option? Last Friday David Ames sent an email to all saying that the deadline has been extended to join the trust. Can we please confirm with RL that joining the trust is our best option as 3rd party pursuals have proved fruitless?
hours ago
Arabella Kennedy
Regulatory Legal Solicitors said:
Joanne,
Did you fill your own form or did the broker do it ?
Do you mean the re-mortgage form Joanne? if so it was done by my financial advisor, who incidentally didn’t think i should invest…..
hours ago
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
If the mortgage broker no longer trades, try the FSCS route.
Kalyan Ajoodha said:
I am to a direct investor via remortgage. The 3rd party I went through initially is no longer in business & am at a loss to of what I need to do. Is joining the trust the only option? Last Friday David Ames sent an email to all saying that the deadline has been extended to join the trust. Can we please confirm with RL that joining the trust is our best option as 3rd party pursuals have proved fruitless?
Bob and the other HP apologists here (and let’s be honest…… it’s only little old Bobbitt) are either totally stupid, or paid to deliberately deceive.
Bobbitt would have us believe the FSCS will pay out compensation, and then tear up the contracts. In Bobbie’s little world the FSCS are just a bank designed to bail out the GV.
Be under no illusions, if a government department pays out C£170 million because an investment has failed, they will want their pound of flesh, and they will be incessant. Like a hound on a very short fox, they will peruse their target. They will pursue that stunted little fox until either they or another government hound (let’s call this one the SFO) tear him apart.
The fox’s days are numbered. As are its wife’s teef.
Let us all rejoice.
@Anonymous 11.49, you are not capable of reading your own propaganda. The FSCS will not puts HP into liquidation. As their own web site says, they would only seek redress from a liquidator. Totally different.
@Watch out for the hounds, aka Yank it in easy, you poor idiot. Do you really think that Bob is the only poster who stands up to the Anti HP thugs? Still should be quiet now on here, you will be off to school soon.
In a nutshell direct investors, unless they have a few quid to take legal action against the agent ( assuming they didn’t commit fraud ) are up **** creek without a paddle? Joining the Trust just stops you suing little legs.
Nobody can blame RL for that, they got my SIPP money back, so in my mind they are hero’s.
Where is Bob Ladel with all his united to succeed crap? With promoting an unregulated company like Holkham Compensation.
Makes you wonder if some financial inducements were offered to the likes of him and TailorMade?
If I were a betting man……….. 😉
On point of question Games Begin- “but a number of individuals have their eye on this cash including Shipleys, HMRC and others”. Who has first call on this money which is investors? I would guess as Ames gave investors money to HIS overseas companies, then the money in HMSE- money taken out of investors funds for “commission” etc will be deemed “other creditors” dosh. I wonder how much is filtered away out of easy sight? There is still £40 million unaccounted for!
@ Anonymous March 11, 2015 at 8:48 am,
“@Anonymous 11.49, you are not capable of reading your own propaganda. The FSCS will not puts HP into liquidation. As their own web site says, they would only seek redress from a liquidator. Totally different……………………..”,
Look it’s very simple, the FSCS will ask Dave Ames to repay the FSCS the compensation the FSCS has paid out, if he can then there is no problem, he will get his contracts back, if he can’t then the FSCS will ensure the company is wound up. It is that simple. And Ames is only too aware of this.
All any investor considering putting money into Harlequin has to do is to seek advice from an independent lawyer, explaining about the FSCS determination on insolvency, the lack of audited accounts and the minutes of the meeting, and I doubt there is one lawyer out there who would suggest anyone puts one additional penny into this scam.
Okey all the Pro Harlequin muppets, I would just like you to explain how that bumbling twice bankrupt failure is going to pull this off.
Especially Bobit.
No Anon, it’s not that simple.
1)what is the value of the compensation vs the value of the redress.
If the FSCS has paid out £50,000 but the actual deposit value is substantially more than that then there is a contradiction. Who ownes the balance?
2)if the contracts have nil value then how can they be exchanged for a cash amount?
Sue the SIPP companies for the balance, or the agent.
Yes the SIPP providers have acted diabolically and immorally. Sent money to wrong companies? No proper Due diligence? Sue people for fees when they have no money left in their SIPP. Go for them, they deserve kicking
@ Anonymous on March 11, 2015 at 12:10 pm.
You said the following;
“No Anon, it’s not that simple.
1)what is the value of the compensation vs the value of the redress.
If the FSCS has paid out £50,000 but the actual deposit value is substantially more than that then there is a contradiction. Who ownes the balance?
2)if the contracts have nil value then how can they be exchanged for a cash amount?”
You either have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Or you are assisting in trying to con investors into continuing to support the Ames family. (1). A number of redress payments have already been paid up to the maximum of £ 50,000.00
In return for this redress payment the investor had to novate their entire contract over to the FSCS.
The investor does not have to do this, but if they want £ 50 k from the FSCS they do. It’s that simple. The FSCS becomes the contract holder.
(2). Once the FSCS become the contract holder they will ask Harlequin for the money, if Harlequin can’t pay, then the FSCS will begin the process of winding up the companies.
Companies get wound up when creditors call in the debts and the company is unable to pay the debt due to it’s insolvent nature, allthough many “HONEST DECENT” businessmen will do the honorable thing and call in the IP’s when they become insolvent but not Ames.
If we take your view of the world there would be no company insolvency procedure, your view is that if the debt cannot be paid, it is just written off and the creditors are given compensation by the UK government and the company that could not pay the debt is then free to carry on trading.
Not looking good is it? The GV said redress can work along side the trust, but it clearly can’t. We are watching the last act, the show is almost over.
@Anon 1.09, a typical reply from a anti HP thug. Ask a question, get abuse. Yes very simple. OK let me try this again.
Investor A has a contract worth £80k which was his deposit. THE FSCS pays out £50k, therefor there is a value of the balance of £30k. Does the FSCS just ask for £50k back, if so where does the balance go? Of course the FSCS has said the contract is worthless, so how can they try and claim back £50k with a worthless contract?
Waits for “thugish” answer.
And by the way Anon 1.09, no one is suggesting the dept is paid by the UK government. The UK government have paid no money into this scheme, it is the IFA’s. Or perhaps you do not understand that point.
@anonymous 3.07pm. Yes some IFA’s in the UK, admin staff etc will lose their jobs, some companies will freeze wages and some go out of business because of the levy the FSCS are going to charge the industry to cover their costs.
No Anon, the IFAs pay into the scheme regardless. There is a pot of money, perhaps as much as £1b. That money is then paid out by the FSCS. The FSCS do not award compensation and then go to the IFAs to get the money thus putting jobs at risk. The money comes off the IFAs top line, not bottom line. Why do you think they were so easily persuaded by RL to change their minds in a couple of months? It’s because they could afford to.
Anonymous, it seems you’re trying to persuade yourself that everything is going to be okay. SIPP people want an end to the ordeal, cash victims now looking at how they’re going to get any money out.
I think the fact that the FSCS is putting up the money to give back to SIPPs speaks volumes about Ames’ chances to get external finance, and to ultimately complete the resorts.
If I were you, I’d concern myself more with sharing a credible business plan instead of trying to deflect arguments about how the FSCS will respond. The links posted last night allude to “liquidators” but that does not mean they will not work to put the company into liquidation as a way to secure the assets.
Remember, David Ames is sitting on “$200m of assets” in the Caribbean. If he isn’t, then I’m sure not only he, but many of the IFA’s, have questions to answer about misrepresentation. This $200m of assets will suit a liquidator very well, as to provide the cash victims with some recompense, and the outstanding creditors getting their share.
I don’t know how the FSCS works (and by the sounds of it, neither do you). The fact remains though, that Ames had the money and spent it. He simply cannot be bailed out by an industry body because he spent money where he shouldn’t (£1.4m on Harlequin Air, £6m on litigation).
If that was the case, I’ll go to the Caribbean and get my fictitious property empire set up.
First £100m comes from IFA’s after that the industry as a whole.
So the money is covered. It’s happening as we speak.
“compensation and then go to the IFAs to get the money thus putting jobs at risk”
They raise a levy in different sections of their remit. This levy has been increased for all pension IFA’s because of the recent position on Harlequin, Green oil, etc. I can find the reference if you need it.
If this levy increase makes the IFA’s unprofitable, as you assert it comes from their “top line” income, then many will undoubtedly go out of business due to a lack of “bottom line” profit.
Further, you must remember that the companies / individuals which the levy raise effects is… you guessed it… the legitimate, honest IFA’s who have worked decades to cultivate a clientèle who not only trust them, but also are making the most of their managed funds.
If FSCS were awash with money, which is the gist of what you’re trying to explain, they would not have to raise levies when dealing with cases such as Harlequin. But as we have seen, they have done just that. To think they will not try and cover this levy increase through clawing back the money they’ve shelled out is wishful thinking indeed.
Anon 3.53, nice try at changing the subject. No one is trying to deflect any argument, I just won’t swallow the rhetoric posted on here by posters who don’t deal in facts, just guess work. These points are fundamental for anyone trying to understand the true situation, not the wishful thinking of some.
Just signed up with RL, feel happy I will get my money back.
“rhetoric posted on here by posters who don’t deal in facts, just guess work”
Welcome to life – the only facts you need to know are that there are none. People control the money, and as such you have a choice to trust those people or make your own mind up. I don’t trust David Ames, many people feel wronged by him and are using this blog as a way to gain solace & analyse their thoughts. It makes them feel better after investing a sizeable amount of money into a company which doesn’t even have a centralized legal structure, operated by a twice bankrupt (probably thrice) who will actively counter-sue the people whose contracts he has not honoured.
People get angry when certain individuals post on here that Harlequin is moving forward as planned when it evidently is not. The FSCS are the latest in a string of confirmations of this. Of course, Harlequin will deny any wrongdoing etc, but really you have to examine the state of affairs, highlighted by the recent minutes from RL – Harlequin is struggling and is in absolutely no position to build its planned resorts. This, of course, may change.
From the Harlequin side, they will therefore say that they are “doing all they can” in light of “unforeseen issues”. But how does that explain the banking glitch for interest payments? How does it explain a distinct lack progress on the resorts, despite Harlequin telling people that the court case was the reason they stopped building?
People want their money back. Someone called Anon keeps posting information which is staunchly anti-Harlequin. Others post pro-Harlequin. Unfortunately, neither of it gets money back for those people who are looking at potentially losing the lot.
@Anon 4.30 yes the other Anon does keep posting staunchly anti HP information. Why is that? Because he would want to destroy HP before him and his cohorts are found out. With total disregard to any investors. What about RL? Crowing about redress for SIPP investors. There’s money in it for them. Of course they couldn’t give a monkeys about the 2500 cash investors who are left. Stuff them. Yes the “I’m alright Jack” attitude is thriving.
It’s good to hear that people are starting to see redress. Here’s hoping that there aren’t too many people that lose out.
Well Sid I’m sure there are 3500 redress claimants who don’t give a stuff about the other 2500. All encouraged by the ethical RL of course.
I’m one of the 2500, but still don’t want to see people lose out of they have the chance to get their money back. And you never know, cutting 3500 investors loose may be a good thing for rest of us in the long term.
@anonymous 5.29pm. I think you work for harlequin. Has the investor with cancer had a refund yet ?
No I don’t work for HP. Do you think that anyone with a different view must be a HP employee? Very thuggish. And what has an investor with cancer got to do with it. Was he a cash investor? If he was then perhaps the 3500 SIPP investors will have a whip round.
“All,
“Bigger Claims”
When the FSCS determine a case successfully, they effectively take over the investment(s) they have compensated for.
If your “eligible amount” (loss) is less than £50,000.00 (including pension transfer loss, investment loss, interest etc) then frankly, you do not care.
If your loss exceeds £50,000.00 then compromising your rights means you have no further redress options. It would be negligent for any claims management firm to settle you without considering the implications of such a settlement.
The technical process with the FSCS is a “Re-Assignment of Rights”. As a firm, we have made sure all our clients are protected by seeking a re-assignment of rights to permit our clients to pursue third parties for top up redress. The enclosed letter confirms the position.”
Click to access 1426098261479.pdf
So what would you have RL do? Idiot.
Dave Ames has been trading insolvently for years, but some still want to give him an olive branch, sorry the man took investors money, gave some of it away to third parties by way of interest free loans, took large amounts of money out of the business for his and his family, has treated investors with utter contempt, has lied through his teeth, is the subject of a serious criminal investigation, is the subject of a major tax investigation, etc.
The man has been and is out of control, and we are expected to sit back and offer him an olive branch.
Ames has sold properties knowing they were being sold to investors at way above their actual value, the valuations Ames attributed to the properties was an absolute work of fiction and not in keeping with the numerous independent valuations he had commissioned.
Investors keep asking how much is available for them. Well let’s take the value of the Marquis Estate, Ames now admits that any build at the Marquis Estate will be technically complex, and as a result the project is on hold, on hold????? Technically complex also means it will cost a hell of a lot more then normal to build this.
Ames took over £ 120 million in cash for the Marquis estate, took £ 60 million of this in comissions and dividends for his family, spends all this, this money is gone and then has the gall to tell us that the project is on hold. ????
Those who have contracts in the Marquis estate should know that the value of this land, given the technical complexity of building on here and given that it is on the Atlantic Coast as opposed to the Caribbean coast is less then the £ 6 million quid Ames paid for it. Ames has also omitted to inform investors that as a result of the contracts Ames signed with land owners at the Marquis Estate, much of the land reverted back to the control and ownership of the former land owners given that Ames failed to develop this land as per the contracts, he also lost the money paid to the land owners as a result of the contracts he entered into.
Ames was buying the land cheap by offering the land owners units whereby they would have had a continuous income.
Those investors who purchased in the Marquis estate even if Ames were to give them the land will find that the asset is worth about 3 % of the money paid over.
A similar situation arises at the Two Rivers and Las Canas resorts in the Dominican Republic. And Ames was denied permission to build sea and river side properties at these locations yet it never stopped him for charging a premium for these units.
This is not a conspiracy, there are some on here who know the facts, many investors are afraid to acknowledge the facts because to do so will acknowledge that the investment is gone. BuccBay is not worth $ 250 million dollars, it’s making a loss or at best breaking even. To be worth $ 250 million dollars would suggest that the 150 units are worth $ 1,700,000 each. £ 1,130,000 each.
If Ames was to attempt to build the resirts he has sold by 2020 he will need to find initial funding to the tune of £ 800 million, 6000 units at an average of 1000 sq ft and multiplied by the build rate of US $ 200 per sq ft.
Interest payments on this finance would amount to £ 60-70 million a year.
Ames has planned to build c 6000 units but there are some 9000 contracts out there,
Ames would also need to find the c £ 146 million he owes on the 3000 contracts, over and above the 6,000 contracts on properties he had “planned” to build.
So Ames will need £ 1 billion in finance if he was to attempt to complete what he has sold by 2020. Even a win in the Wilkins Kennedy case £ 46 million, will not even put a small dent in the finance required. Neither will the £ 48 million Ames claims he is owed in completion money on BuccBay.
That will only give Ames less then 7 % of what he requires. Before other costs are taken out.
I think investors have no idea of the magnitude of the problem and the sums involved. There can never be anything for investors, not in their lifetimes.
Look like RL are doing pretty well with the third party ‘Top Up’ It does seem somewhat irregular?
Things quiet on the concrete block front today?
I like to keep things simple (like Ames) He cocked up when he had millions per month coming in, what makes anyone with even half a brain think he can make it work now? Utter madness.
Get your money back now or trust the GV.
Anonymous 6.25 aka RL.so I’m trying to understand this fully. Going back the hypothetical situation. An investor has a SIPP invested through Tailormade of let’s say £80k. RL gets the investor £50k redress back. Is the letter saying that the investor can claim the other £30k from Tailormade?
@ Sid on March 11, 2015 at 5:40 pm
You said,
“I’m one of the 2500, but still don’t want to see people lose out of they have the chance to get their money back. And you never know, cutting 3500 investors loose may be a good thing for rest of us in the long term.”
I have no axe to grind with you, but you too are falling into the trap. The redress payments are being made by the FSCS because it is their opinion that the business has failed, the FSCS is not bailing out the remaining 2500 investors, the FSCS will call in the debt.
They will not pay redress and just tear up the contracts. And Sid there are c 9000 contracts out there not c 6000, there are c 6000 contract holders holding c 9000 contracts.
And Sid in the event that Ames were in a position to complete all his resorts, do you honestly believe that Ames would be slow in enforcing the elements of the contracts whereby the investors would owe him the 70% completion monies.
There you go again Bob, blaming the SIPP investors who are lucky enough to have a chance to get out of this mess.
Will this be the new line from the GV in his next update? The SIPP investors bailed and that’s why Harlequin collapsed?
More news paper Bob. More news paper.
@ Anonymous on March 11, 2015 at 7:07 pm
You said,
“Anonymous 6.25 aka RL.so I’m trying to understand this fully. Going back the hypothetical situation. An investor has a SIPP invested through Tailormade of let’s say £80k. RL gets the investor £50k redress back. Is the letter saying that the investor can claim the other £30k from Tailormade? ”
Yes RL have stated that the FSCS have agreed that the investor can pursue the agent for the balance as long as the investor declares the full amount obtained from the agent and as long as a double payment is not made in respect of the claim made by the investor to the FSCS, any overlap on payments to the investor will have to be repaid to the FSCS.
Some of us are trying to understand the picture here. Your very stupid comments about “Bob” are pointless and irrelevant. If you have nothing constructive to add then please naff off.
Ok so the investor then gets £30k compo from Tailormade. Who then owns the contract?
The Wilkins Kennedy Claim.
The claim against Wilkins Kennedy is in essence a claim made in fraud.
However Wilkins Kennedys insurers like most others would have a clause whereby fraudulent acts or acts of deciet on behalf of the company or its employees would not be covered by the insurers.
Wilkins Kennedys insurers solicitors are still defending the case and have not come off record, which suggests that from the information they have they are confident that no fraudulent or deceitful act has been comitted which knocks out the bulk of Ames’ claims.
If however it is proved that Wilkins Kennedy did act in a fraudulent or deceitful manner then the insurers will not have to pay, as this will be a breach of the terms of the insurance, if and it is a very remote if, but if Ames were to win his case using his current statement of claim, then all it will do is to put Wilkins Kennedy as a firm into insolvency and liquidation, with little or none of the much talked about c $ 70 million USD ever being seen.
These are the hard facts. Furthermore should a Judgment be given sometime late 2016, and if one or other side looses, you will then have an appeal, which of course means the whole sorry mess will rumble on to 2018 and beyond. Anyone holding out for a share of the ” Wilkins Kennedy”
No Bob, calling SIPP investors selfish and not caring about the other 2500 direct investors is stupid and pointless.
In that case the WK insurers will back out. It was obvious fraud was carried out by WK employees. Jobs a good un!
@ Anonymous 7.34 pm, the contract rests with the FSCS. Gareth however has got permission from them to allow you make a claim from the agent who sold you the property to obtain from the agent the difference between what the FSCS has paid you and the money outstanding from the agent.
The FSCS will pursue Harlequin directly for the £ 50 k they have paid you as they will be the primary contract holder.
The agent may very well pursue Harlequin for any monies you may claim off the agent, there is absolutely nothing to stop the agent doing this.
Why would the contract rest with the FSCS? If the agent pays out £30k why should the agent not have a claim to the contract?
@ Anonymous 7.47 pm, it might appear to you that fraud has been comitted but it certainly has not appeared to the legal team who filed the Wilkins Kennedy defence and who are instructed and employed by Wilkins Kennedys insurers and NOT by Wilkins Kennedy, and to reiterate, if fraud has been comitted the insurers will not pay out, so investors will really not be better off, so one has to wonder why Ames has spent nearly £ 10 million quid on the case so far, £ 10 million quid of investors money.
This is all being done in an attempt to keep Ames out of the clutches of the SFO and the Prison Authorites. Just think about it for a minute.
If investors join the trust and Ames looses his case against Wilkins Kennedy, they will come after the Two Plaintiff companies for their costs, Harlequin Property SVG Ltd and Harlequin Hotels and Resorts Ltd, and these costs will be some £ 6-10 million, what’s the bet that Ames will turn to his trustees to get bailed out?
And what if the builder wins his appeal, again Harlequin Property SVG Ltd and Harlequin Hotels and Resorts will owe him some £ 3 million, what’s the bet that Dave Ames will once again look to the trustees for this cash, because as sure as hell he will claim he does not have it, and the same applies to the 140 or so pending cases in SVG.
But Ames never considers that he will loose a case, or at least that’s what he wants investors to think.
Anonymous on March 11, 2015 at 7:57 pm
“Why would the contract rest with the FSCS? If the agent pays out £30k why should the agent not have a claim to the contract?”
Ok the FSCS have stated that they will pay £ 50 k in redress but only if the investor novates the entire contract to the FSCS.
The investor must decide whether it’s in their best interest to do this, but if they do they agree to novate the contract over to the FSCS,
What they are allowing you to do is to seek the balance owing from the agent, the agent may well pay you the balance and once the FSCS is happy that this has happened they will reduce the amount owing on the contract accordingly,
Let’s for arguments sake say that the agent was willing to give you all your money back or indeed the balance of the money not paid by the FSCS to you and the balance paid by the FSCS to the FSCS + costs, then the agent would get the contract from the FSCS and would then be free to pursue Ames directly as they now are the contract holders. In essence the Agent would have purchased the contract from the FSCS.
But until the full amount of the contract + costs is paid the FSCS will not release the contract.
Note I inserted loose in place of lose, now let’s see if Mr. Ames will pick up on this, he then might understand the issues he has with the WK case.
Dave Man if some are to be believed is behind all these posts and has used loose in place of lose in the past, but I am not Dave Man.
I use an Apple I Pad and the spell checker automatically inserts loose in place of lose.
Firstly DA has insurance against a loss. That has been established. Secondly WK insurers have stated in their opinion one claim (cannot remember which one) should be struck out. They cannot have it both ways. And where does the £10m spent so far come from. Don’t forget the WK case is NWNF. It’s all hypothetical, it will never get to court.
Anon, it’s easy to spot the DM posts on here.
@ Anonymous March 11, 2015 at 8:18 pm
You say;
Firstly DA has insurance against a loss. That has been established.
Established by whom?
Dave Ames produced a proposal but has never produced any effective insurance documents. It is for reference called ATE ( After Event Insurance ). It is based on the statement of claim and defence responses.
In Ames’ case his companies Statement of Claim contain a number of deliberatly false statements, when an AEI insurer discovers this they would either increase the premium or take the plaintiff off cover.
Evidence of the deliberate false statements has been given to Kennedys, the insurers solicitors, and they will keep any potential ATE insurer for Ames abreast of these false statements.
Secondly WK insurers have stated in their opinion one claim (cannot remember which one) should be struck out.
WK insurers lawyers have stated that the claim by Harlequin Hotels and Resorts should be struck out as WK claim they never acted for them. This is a procedural issue and has little to do with the main thrust of the case.
They cannot have it both ways.
No idea what you mean by they cannot have it both ways, you appear to have no understanding of how litigation works.
And where does the £10m spent so far come from.
The £ 6 million spent on the case to June 2013, QC fees, in house legal costs, court costs to date have all mounted up. The day long case management hearing cost each side in excess of £ 100 k.
Don’t forget the WK case is NWNF.
There is absolutely no evidence that the WK case is no win no fee.
It’s all hypothetical, it will never get to court.
Ames truly hopes this is the case, but given the seriousness of the allegations made by Ames and his statements that he will win the case, I find it odd that Mr. Ames is now seeking arbitration in the matter. He is the agrieved party is he not, and the arbitration will be covered by an NDA therefore if one was entered into, investors would never know how much money had crossed hands, now would they?
More incompetence regarding the GV business acumen being discovered on a daily basis. All irrelvant albeit interesting.
Only Bob Le nob thinks Dave is a star – sad really.
WK insurers cannot try and have the claim by HH&R struck out, then should they win the case (lol) claim against a company they want to have struck out. They would only be able to do that if the claim by HH&R was kept in and DA lost. I don’t have to know how litigation works to understand that.
Better to be stupid, than be a big fat, bald, thick Paddy – who has been found guild of fraudulent misrepresentation in court, by a judge.
Had any decent contracts Paddykins with such a bad reputation?
1. RL instructed to obtain redress.
2. RL do this No Win No Fee
3. RL are cashflowing the file until it concludes
RL are not a charity. They are a hard nosed business. So far they have called almost everything right.
Yes, they lost on jurisdiction to Harlequin. So what, they tried. If they had won, it would have been over now.
RL are not interested in Harlequin, just redress. Nothing more.
That about sums it up PGM
@ Anonymous March 11, 2015 at 9:20 pm
“WK insurers cannot try and have the claim by HH&R struck out, then should they win the case (lol) claim against a company they want to have struck out. They would only be able to do that if the claim by HH&R was kept in and DA lost. I don’t have to know how litigation works to understand that.”
You have no idea how this works, if WK’s insurers lawyers Kennedys succeed in having Harlequin Hotels and Resorts removed as a plaintiff, then the court will have agreed that Harlequin Hotels and Resorts did not have a valid claim, and costs will be awarded to Kennedys for that element of the case, and unless the costs are stayed Kennedys will pursue Ames for those costs, conversely if the court throws out the strike out application, and should Wilkins Kennedy’s insurers win the main case, then they will pursue both HPSVG and HH&R. But Ames will appeal the judgment in this case, as will WK’s insurers lawyers.
Your LOL comment is a bit childish, given that Ames has failed abjectly to provide even 2.5 % of what he was contracted to do. The claim against Wilkins Kennedy is only for c 10% of the monies invested by investors.
The “tit for tat” between Harlequin and Mr O’Halloran shows why redress is the only real option.
I was unsure until about a month ago. At that point the lack of anything substantive from Harlequin changed my mind.
I have my FSCS form and I will send it in. I will be using RL because they offered this back in mid 2013.
I am not bothered about the 15% as it means I do not have to run the risk of doing it myself.
I feel very sad for direct investors because they are without options. I spoke to RL Manchester and got the feeling they were simply going through the motions.
All very sad because I would have preferred my place in paradise.
@ Paddy and his reputation March 11, 2015 at 9:23 pm
“Better to be stupid, than be a big fat, bald, thick Paddy – who has been found guild of fraudulent misrepresentation in court, by a judge.
Had any decent contracts Paddykins with such a bad reputation?”
What a stupid comment, has it not dawned on you that should the builder be successful in business, then of course if The Builder were to loose the appeal, the builder would then be in a position to pay the judgment amount and the adverse court costs which Ames could then plough back into the business building more units for his investors, but this is not about investors, this is about vengeance and the discrediting of witnesses, in other words all this litigation is about trying to save Dave Ames’ hide from HMP.
And it has to be restated that a number of findings of fraudulent misrepresentation have been found against Ames and his wife in SVG, is this why Ames is now insolvent ? Of course Richard ( Hiding the Dubaii Money Spector has stated categorically that the judgments in SVG against Ames his wife and companies have no standing as they are being appealled ).
And no I’m not Dave Man, Mr. Newman, the Builder, Mrs. Broughton or some of the many others Ames would like to blame for his inability to deliver what he was obligated to do.
@Anon 9.46 my lol comment is a bit childish. Get over yourself you muppet. You obviously take yourself far too seriously. Lighten up. I think your comment about my comment being childish, is childish. When has $70 been 10% of £400m? Yes you definitely a legal person, pompous without a doubt.
Anon, 9.57 your comment “Richerd ( hiding the Dubai Money ) Spector, is very childish isn’t it. Try and keep on topic.
@ Festive Board, you are correct, this has always been a battle between the ICE Group, Wilkins Kennedy and others against Ames, it never had anything to do with investors or their needs.
The stuff going on in the background has nothing to do with investors, ICE group are working with WK on their defence, Ames has tried every trick in the book to dissuade Kennedys from dealing with the ICE group, even going as far as to offer certain individuals a quarter of a million pounds, for material Ames would have had in any event had he not deleted it.
Ames has spent a fortune in an attempt to discredit witnesses for the SFO, wasting hundreds of thousands on actions on the U.S. which he subsequently dropped. Ames is playing for his Liberty and Freedom.
Ames’ associates made very real death threats against ICE Group management and senior Wilkins Kennedy staff, along with others.
This has become a very dirty business, all because Ames was advised in early 2010 to return to the UK and commence an orderly wind down of his businesses, which he refused to do.
Ames needed a scape goat, but has never explained why he could not account for in excess of £ 50 million.
Ames has stashed money all over the place, using people like Senka Besirivic to launder the money for him, why would Ames give interest free loans to these people as far back as 2008, to allow them to purchase properties in places like Dubai and Thailand.
This has never been about the needs of investors, it has been about the need to keep the lid on the corrupt little enterprise Ames was operating.
Yes we always know when Dave Man is posting.
@ Anonymous March 11, 2015 at 9:58 pm
“@Anon 9.46 my lol comment is a bit childish. Get over yourself you muppet. You obviously take yourself far too seriously. Lighten up. I think your comment about my comment being childish, is childish. When has $70 been 10% of £400m? Yes you definitely a legal person, pompous without a doubt.”
The total taken by Ames in deposits is closer to £ 470 million, should you care to anaylise the accounts for HMSSE to 2012 or should you have been privy to court evidence adduced by Ames in the various legal actions, and the claim against WK is for c $ 70 million USD which is about £ 47 million. 10%.
I do take this very seriously given the massive monies Ames has taken from investors and in some cases laundered.
@ Anonymous 10.01 pm, no I do not find it childish, Ames is claiming he has no money and is asking investors to commit £ 20,000 each to the BLU Hotel for example, yet Ames through a third party sold two properties in Dubai recently, properties held in the name of a Senka Beserivic for £ 360 k. Ames only sold these in an attempt to settle up with some investors who had the guts to pursue him all the way in SVG.
Why did Ames not sell these personal assets to pay back what his family owed Shipleys, why only do it when a gun was put to his head, and Richard Spector knew about this.
Do you think it is right that Dave Ames took investor deposits in 2008 and used the money to purchase property in Dubai, and why purchase the property in someone else’s name?
Pure disgusting, that’s why I don’t find any of this funny, not one bit funny.
No Davy boy you would not find it funny. Of course you can prove the Dubai accusation and the pussy woman? No we have been down this road before haven’t we. Your earlier posts were quite interesting but you have slipped back into the same old rhetoric. Not interested now at all.
There have been some excellent points made again this evening, and yes I have wondered why Ames and his supporters choose to try and destroy the business of those they are embroiled in litigation against rather then wait till the conclusion of the cases and thus recoup the awards and costs.
Neither ICE group nor Wilkins Kennedy ever appear to engage in the triumphant chest beating that Ames and Co engage in on an almost constant basis despite none of the cases having been concluded.
This point was lost on Anonymous on March 11, 2015 at 10:01 pm when his response to the issue as to why Ames and Co engage in business bashing was the following,
“Anon, 9.57 your comment “Richerd ( hiding the Dubai Money ) Spector, is very childish isn’t it. Try and keep on topic.”
The general theme and topic of all the threads is where is the money gone that was paid to build the resorts or where is the money to repay the investors, I agree Ames’ actions have nothing to do with protecting the interests of investors.
No I’m not Davy and yes as a matter of fact I do have all the proof, ask Dave Ames who tipped off Shipleys, The SFO and HMRC. He appears to know everything and everyone. Why did Dave Ames feel the need to have Shipleys copied in on correspondence on the matter? Perhaps Shipleys copied me in, but you have no clue who I am now have you? Nope no idea.
Perhaps I have connections in Davidsons the Dubai Lawyers, or Allsopps the Agents, who knows, but yes I have all the proof, I have the proof on this and a hell of a lot more.
Lol ha ha ha looks like someone breached the Tommy order lol ha ha muppet
Yup anonymous for once you are bang on, Ames breached the order by including Anthony Davidson and Grant Meadows in correspondence relating to the settlement with Ray Caldwell. But who cares about NDA’s drafted under SVG law, how much will it cost to go to SVG to argue the point.
My guess is that Ames will accuse Mr. Ray Caldwell of breaching the NDA which will give Ames the excuse not to give him the money. But it was Ames who breached the NDA by copying in Shipleys.
But please take a bow my friend, this is probably the first time you have stated the truth.
The amount being sent to Dave Ames’ solicitors in the UK was AED 1,373,250.58. I somehow doubt Mr. Caldwell will see this now.
For the avoidance of doubt a further AED 510,000.73 was forwarded to Ms. Senka Besirevics account.
Harlequin Scum get investors to engage in mortgage fraud.
RL should be advising investors to report this to the police and SFO.
From the RL Forum;
Rebena
Hello Matthew
Smooth talking rep at Harlequin and a broker for First plus gave me the same persuasion. The call was set up with First Plus via the broker with whom I gave the information to. ‘Home Improvements’ is stated on the data file. One solicitor has advised it is my word against theirs. Mortgage Claims Bureau advised that if they can demonstrate that several people have done this, about the same time of the Harlequin Sale, then they may have a case. Its no win no fee but would like to know if anyone else has had any success in this as RL has also advised that redress would be difficult.
For a direct investor that is struggling to pay the monthly payments ( am on maternity leave, two young kids) I rue day I agreed to this.
Matthew james said:
Can you please expand on that. I was persuaded to put home improvements on my remortgage applications for funds to purchase at St Lucia. I have spoken to the Manchester office and were told redress would be very unlikely. I feel the harlequin trust is my only option altho very frustrating watching R legal telling everyone that redress is the only option.
I’m sure there are other investors who are in my position.
Harlequin scum and The Anes family sue those who they say were engaged in wrong doing, having to lie to win their cases, yet the same scum were pushing investors into engaging in mortgage fraud just to get their cash.
The Ames fanily and those within Harlequin are nothing more then scum.
Why is it that everyone who comes into contact with Ames ends up in deep crap, the latest victims being ELS. They could lose their licence to practise over this.
Ames he hated by the people of SVG and by the workers. Its time he gone brothers. Time he gone for good.
To those who can get redress, go get it. To everyone else sorry but just let it go. Let the police have the Ames family. Vinnie Stenning, Dan Dalligan, Kathrine Wooler, Simon Terry, Andy Regan, Dan Abrams etc.
Seems like cash investors / finance are upset at the fact SIPP investors will be paid out. They have never had much hope of seeing their money again, very few will go after the agents.
I believe, most have committed mortgage fraud ( unwittingly) understandably, they are furious and looking for someone to blame.
No point blaming RL, what do you expect them to do?
Why not take some group action against the broker & do something constructive instead of bemoaning about things?
Have the CLC bunch been paid yet 😉 now that’s what you call a waste of money.
According to Ames and his lawyers the CLC group abandoned the case.
According to other sources the CLC Group kept up their side of the bargain even dropping actions in SVG as part of a settlement only to be given the proverbial two fingers by Ames subsequent to this.
And of course there are those charges over the Ames personal properties held by CLC nominees.
Also there are rumours that the Dubai money
@Anonymous
March 12, 2015 at 10:51 am
That could only be Dyslexic Dick. I did hear EB had nothing to pay.
If I were RL, I would be overjoyed at paying a few quid, especially as they will make millions – Thanks to Little Legs.
Dick, sometimes in life you do something called a loss leader. You know, lose something to make much, much more.
Ah I get it- like Harlequeen are about to lose their leader
No doubt about that!
I would like to know about the following lies:-
The FSCS supporting the Trust?
The banking error?
The Hotel chain that want’s to work with you?
The DD report strewn with errors?
The SFO not investigating you?
The build plan?
The finance?
David, could this be you are a compulsive LIAR?
Harlequin has been discussed at the highest levels in the Government, why do you think the FSCS rolled over, they have been told to do so.
How do you know this? Any evidence? Would be nice but so much crap flying about statements like this need substantiating
Who’s dick? Is he another delusional like tall storey who thinks he’s been looked after?
Shipleys may not be interested in pursuing the Harlequin debt,
http: //m.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2399342/leonard-curtis-picks-up-shipleys-corporate-recovery-practice?utm_term=&utm_content=Leonard%20Curtis%20picks%20up%20Shipleys%E2%80%99%20corporate%20recovery%20practice&utm_campaign=AA.Daily_RL.EU.A.U&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=AA.DCM.Editors_ Updates
Especially when they have just sold the WIP ( Work in Progress ) to Leonard Curtis, who’s sole speciality is insolvency,
Brown stain time over at the Basildon HQ I guess.
The likes of Shipleys may look at the debt- asses if it- or the easy bits will cover their fees, collect and run once paid..
Aahhhh yes
Anonymous 5.15 pm, you are not very bright are you, Shipley’s knew there was no chance of recovering any money from Harlequin and have decided to cut their losses and run, they have just sold Leonard Curtis a pup, good move on Shipleys part.
Leonard Curtis is a two bit firm with fewer staff then Shipleys, Shipleys probably paid them to get out of the Harlequin mess, they do local pubs and shops and would not have the money nor expertise to attempt to take on Harlequin, they have fewer then 100 staff, and have little or no real turnover.
If I was Ames Id be very happy indeed today, given that another firm Shipleys has just walked away lol.
@ Sipp-ing
My MP told me, he lives next door & I have know him many years.
Well if this is a two bit company, I want one.
£1,155,721 Cash
Net Worth £11,680,655
Read more at: http://companycheck.co.uk/company/04200476/LEONARD-CURTIS-RECOVERY-LIMITED/company-summary#basic-information
Tracing shut up you p#$£k.
Shipleys have just walked away, read it, a two bit firm with a few dozen employees has taken over. No one has proof that Dave Ames has done anything wrong,
Did I say he had 😉
Net worth £11 million, two bit really!
£7 million net worth
Thank you tracing. Anonymous- I don’t think I’ve been openly rude to anyone here before but here goes. You are indeed a half witted obnoxious twaatttt. Why bring your personal problems here? Jus apologise to your mum , dad and neighbours- get out of your darkened room and try and make some friends with humans.
Their nett worth is £9.4m which is higher than that two bit accountancy company Wilkins Kennedy lol
One T Richard just one
One tee Richard, just one.
All very exciting.
Get your redress and stop talking about irrelevant issues.
We have heard for nearly 2 years that the SFO were about to move, they didn’t, haven’t and won’t FACT.
Shipley’s said they had no interest in chasing Mr. Ames or the family, why because to do so would have threatened all the investments. All OUR investments.
RL have provided the FSCS with manifestly false information, Dave is currently engaging with the FSCS to correct the false information provided by RL.
Dave has always wanted to protect the interests of his investors, that’s why he came up with the idea of the trust for ALL investors, RL were fully supportive of the trust from day one. However RL wanted their personal slice of the action, Dave acknowledged that they should recieve some monetary compensation for their efforts, but RL wanted to rape the investors, diluting their investments radically and this was something Dave could not and would not accept.
RL also misinformed their clients, and as a result faced a serious SRA investigation which is still ongoing. More claims are expected to be made against RL in the near future.
Dave spoke to a number of disenchanted investors over the last few days, and has lent his support to a potential class action against RL. He will discuss with ELS Legal a mechanism whereby they might act for investors in such an action.
Dave has no issues with investors pursuing agents for having mis-sold properties and fully supports any and all investors who feel they were mis-sold a property by an independent agent.
Dave will also consider the circumstances of all investors who are unable to complete on available properties, but it needs to be understood that Dave is owed in excess of £ 50 million from investors who are unable to complete on completed units, this is having a massive impact on the solvency of the companies, but Dave is reluctant to call in these debts as to do so would be used by his detractors as a weapon against him and Harlequin.
But those investors who are unable to complete must understand that they are putting the investments of thousands of others at risk.
Over on the RL forum Gareth Fatchett has no solution for the thousands of cash investors, there is a solution, that being to join the trust, where your assets and investment will be protected.
RL know that if investors join the trust then it will be difficult for the FSCS to continue stating that Harlequin has failed or is insolvent. BCQS valued the assets of Buccament Bay in 2012 as being $ 250 Million U.S. The resort has grown significantly since this date, coupled with this Harlequin is owed a further in excess of £ 50 million. Or $ 80 million U.S.
Harlequin is in a very strong position given the monies owed. Harlequin’s debts should investors join the trust will be minuscule compared to the money owing to the business.
All Dave is asking is to give Harlequin 5 years to allow investors realise their dreams, the delays in completing the resorts are not something unknown or unheard of in this business, just look at the four seasons in Barbados or the Bacassa project, investors on those projects have been waiting in excess of 9 years for a return and unlike Harlequin those projects have been suspended Indefinetly.
It is time that the incessant attacks stop, these are doing nothing to secure our investments.
Don’t allow others through scare tactics destroy our investments.
Poor Dave, always the victim of scare tactics and he is so keen on making sure that investors get what they paid for…The Caribbean can`t get ahead without him…this guy is a genius.Just look at Merricks, H Hotel Barbados, Two Rivers in Dominican Republic and Marquis in St Lucia….
And then, look at what it is really all about..a solid company where they put their money where their mouth is.
http://www.sandals.com/main/barbados/bd-home/
Class action against RL. Oh dear, what fools some people are.
If I were RL I would crank up the redress machine to the highest volume possible.
Putting it simply, the only people who have seen a return on their Harlequin investment are those who have received redress.
Direct investors are in the main moaning and looking for someone to blame. Anyone can moan. Taking action requires more commitment.
I think RL did a great job getting the value to nil. They have allowed some investors to be financially stable again.
What’s not to like ?
It’s all about redress, no problem …..
Please redress me, let me go ….
Money’s too tight to mention ….
Lol now the builder is being accused of posting pro Harlequin posts, or was it Erica, or Wilkins Kennedy or Dave Man or Mr. Newman, lol.
Sadly the new IP’s will call in the debt owed by Carol, Dan and Nicola, oh yes her too, so at least Dave won’t be the only member of the family bankrupt.
Looks like BFP is not the only place that Vinnie Stenning refers to individuals as “Mongs”. He likes to do it on his FB pages too,
And just love his comments in one of his posts about an elderly couple who were scammed out of cash.
Screen shots taken of course.
That will teach Vinnie Stenning not to Tazer former colleagues in the car park of Honywood Business Park, poor Ryan. 😦
To be fair to Vinnie, if his hero is Andy Townsend then that about sums him up. And this is a guy we can trust with cash hmmmmm
“Lovely stay”
10 Mar 2015
Tony T (2 reviews)
Greater London, United Kingdom
Great place to stay lovely hotel. really friendly staff.
We had 9 great days there. Wonderful food, great drinks. The 3 resturants were greta to eat at. Lying uder plam trees on the beach was magically. (if you can’t find a new one, try the older blue ones, as there are more comfortable. Try to visit Montrel gardens and the vermont trail. You will really enjoy this hotel. Enjoy. (Look out for the humming birds early in the morning.
” after all the talk about the tattered and worn sun beds, Ames could not help himself but say that the older ones were more comfortable, lol. These are really sad pathetic reviews. “
And another bullshit review from someone who has travelled extensively yet only written 3 reviews.
Just loved some of the little gems on this work of fiction.
“The wifi was fast and in the main reliable. We were we able to obtain it most places on site within building areas or close by. Problems occurred normally due to the ISP provider which is outside the control of the resort, and these were very minimally.”
Again any problems had nothing to do with Ames, cmon lol,
“It is not often that my wife leaves a vacation with tears in her eyes but such was the experience these last ten days that she was reduced to tears.”
Oh come on, please. Let’s lay it on thick and heavy here. Lol. I think your wife needs help, serious help.
“Yes there have been several previous comments on minor issues, such as the lack of beds around the pool and on the beach, mainly brought about by selfish individuals who ‘bag’ their own personal spot early each morning and then hardly use the facilities all day. ”
I think the problem is there are not enough Beds for the guests, it is afterall called the Buccament Bay Beach resort. Beach should give you a hint. But typical of Ames lol blame those nasty guests for wanting a sunbed at a beach resort all day.
“A little attention to towels and the rugs being cleaned would enhance no end the overall ambience and quality. ”
You have travelled extensively, how many 5 star hotels have dirty towels and rugs???!
“Most enjoyable laidback quiet resort with friendly staff and ourtstanding food.”
9 Mar 2015
Colin M (3 reviews)
Old Windsor, United Kingdom
We have been very fortunate to have travelled extensively for many years owing to my wife’s work in BA Special Services. This resort has to be one of the best we have experienced. Our son came in 2011 and it lived up to everything he said it would. (Neil UK). We arrived at Saint Vincent airport at 11.30pm after an unscheduled diversion via St Lucia on Liat to be greeted by a very friendly, warm and competent resort representative who took care of our bags and transportation. A very affable and personable individual, we arrived at the resort at midnight to a warm welcome. No waiting around we were led straight to our villa and completed the formal registration the next day. All we had to do was leave our passports with them and produce our credit card the next day as guarantee against non inclusive extras. One of the speediest check in procedures we have experienced, so much so we were not sure if we had completed everything that was expected of us. In our room were a couple of wraps and cold drinks for weary travellers who may be in need of refreshments, a very nice touch, but we only wanted our bed.
The jewel in the crown has to be the extensive and high quality menu offered in all restaurants, which would grace many restaurants in London, accompanied by the most wonderful, attentive and friendly staff. An extensive selection of top brand drinks and wine accompanied the menu. The villa was superb and the grounds very well maintained and beautiful. We took advantage of the tennis coaching and football match between staff / residents but the highlight for us was the two hours dancing lessons with Shon for Salsa and Bachata each morning. Shon and his fiancée, Charlotte the fitness instructor, epitomised the staff ethos and attitude, they were delightful. It is not often that my wife leaves a vacation with tears in her eyes but such was the experience these last ten days that she was reduced to tears. Yes there have been several previous comments on minor issues, such as the lack of beds around the pool and on the beach, mainly brought about by selfish individuals who ‘bag’ their own personal spot early each morning and then hardly use the facilities all day. If the hotel can sort this out and a few other niggles, then it would be 5*all inclusive resort not a 5* hotel. It has charm and tranquillity you find difficult to achieve in most popular resorts.
The one bed villa with its own plunge pool was large and well equipped. We had no problem with the mini bars being stocked with water and cold soft drinks. As is always the case the odd repair is needed but nothing was shabby or dangerous. A little attention to towels and the rugs being cleaned would enhance no end the overall ambience and quality. However the daily cleaning of our villa was thorough and well accomplished. The wifi was fast and in the main reliable. We were we able to obtain it most places on site within building areas or close by. Problems occurred normally due to the ISP provider which is outside the control of the resort, and these were very minimally.
A comprehensive daily programme to suit most people is published each week in a newsletter. We were given one on arrival and advised that it was published each Sunday and available in reception. There are limited excursions which one has to book in advance, as is normal, but found no issues in doing so. The only disappointment for some is the timing of their arrival and when these excursions are run, often once a week. The island is beautiful but under developed for tourist so do not expect too much in the way of offsite activity. Trips to Mustique and other islands are no more than a 2 hr boat ride and sitting on another beach. The complimentary sunset cruise is an excellent addition, and despite the weather not being kind to us, and outside the resorts control, we had a very enjoyable trip and saw 80-100 dolphins swimming around out boat at one stage.
And of course there is no conflict of interest in the last review, even though his wife works for BA, I wonder how much they paid for their holiday given that BA sell holidays at BuccBay.
@ Anonymous March 12 10.38pm
“Shipley’s said they had no interest in chasing Mr. Ames or the family, why because to do so would have threatened all the investments. All OUR investments.”
I don’t think this was their stated reason now was it? If it was they would be failing in their duties to creditors.
I think the actual story was something along the lines that the cost of recovery would be too high given the number of overseas jurisdictions over which the owed money was spread. We can only draw the conclusion that they knew the family well enough to know that they would not cooperate by simply paying back their debts when asked but instead fight to keep the money that was never rightfully theirs.
If the family gave a FF about all OUR investments they would put back all the money they siphoned out of the companies instead of living celebrity chav lifestyles around the world.
Ames has failed, the combined Government departments have seen to that.
Harlequin is dead, it can’t survive Government scrutiny, it’s over.
Redress is the only way.
I have one burning issue though, what car should I buy with my SIPP money?
– Mercedes AMG C63, coupe or estate?
– Audi RS 6
Anonymous
March 12, 2015 at 10:38 pm
We have heard for nearly 2 years that the SFO were about to move, they didn’t, haven’t and won’t FACT. FUNNY
Terry Pratchett has passed on. Maybe his guy could take his place. Verbose and fantasy laden, unfortunately no talent.
@Installation, definitely the Mercedes AMG C63 coupe?
RL
“Quite true Ames generated complaints. Also true we had to respond to them.
Nothing has happened since”.
I think on balance I’ll believe RL.
Installation and Sid, your doing a great job winding up the pathetic pro Ames crew, but you upsetting the cash investors too! Maybe not so good eh!
I was just making a point that for some, there is light at the end of the tunnel, sadly cash investors have Ames’s gross incompetence to blame for having little chance of recovering their investment.
All,
It is certainly worth applying to the FSCS as they value Harlequin investments at “nil” in re-mortgage cases.
We know there are some problems with “home improvement” cases. However, do not despair. If you have done this, you should be able to apply for redress.
You will need to make a full disclosure to the FSCS and tell them that the forms were completed for you. This will the case in nearly all cases. It will help a great deal if the handwriting is not your own.
Our Manchester office are dealing with these claims, please feel free to call them.
Good and professional advice. I suggest that those that can take it- do take it.
£42.5k for a AMG C63 coupe? What pile of crap that would be.
RL are on the ball, little legs must rue the day they got involved. He couldn’t shake them off.
Now LL has to sue the Government.
Now, now nasty Anonymous – what if two of us invested? £85k would get a very nice one.
I may even have enough change to buy a ford fiesta like Dave.
How do the FSCS know Harlequin is insolvent? This could have damaged the brand Harlequin.
I think ifa’s now have to disclose how much commission they will receive to a prospective investor before they go ahead and sign up to investments. Thank god I joined the RL forum and started to get real!
RL have done more than any other legal firm to sort out Harlequin. It’s sad for cash investors, however, all investments carry risk – RL can’t do anymore than they have done..
@SIPP-ing, I am one of the cash investors….probably one of the biggest too, but like I said the other day everyone who is in this mess only has themselves to look out for. I wouldn’t expect anyone with the chance of redress not to take it to help me out. I’m pleased that some people are managing to recover the money they thought they had kissed goodbye.
Hello Sid, humane nature, as it is, people look after themselves. SIPP investors will go in a claim frenzy and that’s understandable.
You seem like a jolly decent chap Sid.I wish you the best of luck.
Sometimes things have a funny way of working out.
Thanks BoBtyS. i’m keeping everything crossed, but there’s not much else I can do now but sit and wait….which I’ve become pretty good at!
Good for you Sid. I made the mistake (yes MY mistake) of taking the advice of a trusted colleague (who invested heavily themselves) too lightly. Did do some pro DD but it was woefully inadequate. Did take too much notice of an IFA, lesson learned all around and I’ll invest more wisely next time- as in the past thankfully. So the best of luck to you and I did think their was a chance of a rescue one time, albeit not with Ames or anyone associated with him anywhere near it. I would still like to see something resurrected. It may not impossible- just a lot of barriers. A really forensic audit may be prudent once the crap is cleared out! Ps I’ll stick with an SLK soft top (it wont be kept in the rainy UK) – or even an EOS now I’m being sensible. Good luck Sid.
Em SIPP-ing, not posting under multiple IDs are we? Is Installation your posting also?
NO! why old bean. Have no idea who Installation is either. Can’t prove it but believe you me its as true I’m not as Ames isn’t.
Ah I see- he has some similar views as me but not the same taste in cars I assure you. For £40k- £60 K I’d go for a classic Aston soft top.
Aston Martin Vantage 4.3 2dr
£44,990
Exceptional Example
Trade seller, distance:
2007 (07 reg) Convertible 34,000 miles Semi-Automatic 4.3L Petrol
BLACK, 2 seats, …VERY RARE CHANCE TO AQUIRE A HIGH SPEC EXTREMELY LOW MILEAGE ASTON MARTIN VANTAGE, DESIRABLE SPORT SHIFT MODEL, PRESENTED IN THE THE FINEST COLOUR SPECIAL ORDER …
Here’s one in the middle 😉
@ SIPP -ing
A nice car, but no (proper) seats in the back…..
These two are almost understated but very quick ( with 4 doors) That’s the dilemma. What to buy that’s fun & practical?
Got it! A fiesta like Ames?
If you have money in a SIPP, there are rules about what you can and can’t do with it.
If the FSCS pays out, do you have to put the money back into a SIPP?
Sorry to potentially pour water on the idea of the car purchase.
Anyway you will only get £42500 max back. Leaves you £2400 light plus insurance and old Astons are very unreliable. Bad choice IMO
I am buying an Aston Martin Rapide S with my money.
I am also buying a £1.5m house as well.
Ask me how I can do that ?
Without putting too finer point on it, I am as pleased as punch with the redress option.
You must be Fatchett!!
Oh dear SIPP-ing “sport shift model” These an Americanism if I ever saw one. No wonder you didn’t put the distance from the add. About 3000 miles at a guess. Lol
GF could buy a Roller with the redress money. Guess again !
@SGD
I think if you’re over 55 you can take your cash – no tax. If under 55 I believe you can pay some tax and buy your car.
More Masonic mischief, I read Ames is a Freemason.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDUQqQIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itv.com%2Fnews%2Fupdate%2F2015-03-12%2Fduckenfield-i-was-freemason%2F&ei=HyMDVfHdL8qrUfy3gugF&usg=AFQjCNFf7hr-AZTjR4EztMP8ty6W9PFZMg&bvm=bv.88198703,d.ZWU
Maybe why RL and Ames have fallen out ?
GF is a mason, Paul Walton is a mason, Jim Baker is a mason, Simon Terry is a mason. Surely they could have squared things away ?
I feel in a state of darkness over all this. Maybe the FSCS senior management are Masons and have agreed a special process?
I have just found this, scary if Ames is a Freemason, explains a lot.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fcrime%2Frevealed-how-gangs-used-the-freemasons-to-corrupt-police-9054670.html&ei=1SsDVerJEoXzPN3fgOAO&usg=AFQjCNGu36ce66R-l9N5ZI42z-cigb1HRQ&bvm=bv.88198703,d.ZWU
All,
2015 or 2020 ?
Since outset we have wanted a solution which investors could live with. The other side of the bargain is that a tangible end product (a property) would have to be built by Harlequin. We could not recommend the security package offered to the trust following advice from overseas lawyers and senior barristers. It would have been irresponsible of us to recommend something with so many flaws.
Now that formal redress options have opened up for SIPP / Re-Mortgage investors, they should be explored. Not as a parallel option to the trust, but as the sole option.
This week marked a changing point in the calls we are taking. The numbers have increased and the overall message is clear. People are fed up with the whole Harlequin saga. They want an out which suits their own position. In the end, self interest always wins out. The collective desire to seek a solution appears to have evaporated.
The notes of the meeting between Harlequin & Heritage SIPP paint a building plan with 2020 as the target. 2020 is a huge amount of time away. Our redress project is going to be majority dealt with by the end of 2015. Yes, there will be some cases into 2016, but by the time our last case finishes, there will still be another 4 years to go to Harlequin’s build date for the majority of their projects.
We do not see how Harlequin could be unhappy with any investor who was not prepared to wait until 2020. 5 years is after all, a long time away. For some investors without redress options, they have little alternative but to consider the Harlequin Trust offer. We cannot responsibly recommend it. However, when you have only one option, we can understand why you would consider it.
For our part, we are well into dealing with the redress claims and returning money to investors. This (sadly) is what investors want, as many simply do not believe that Harlequin will ever fully deliver.
Our staff are ready to discuss your options. Please call us.
SIPP – Brierley Hill office
Re-Mortgage / Direct – Manchester office
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Visit Harlequin Investor Group at: http://harlequininvestorgroup.co.uk/?xg_source=msg_mes_network
To control which emails you receive on Harlequin Investor Group, click here
No, they said, they couldn’t recommend it.
Join if you want. Your risk etc.
People are getting paid. That’s a fact.
Ok they don’t recommend it, they did not have to say anything but they did, they recommend you do not join.
You have to laugh. It appears Harlequin tried to muscle out the FSCS due to the “insolvent” status.
That’s not the brightest of move. Having a go at the Govt.
Looks like Leonard Curtis might just go after Carol, Dan and Nicola personally,
Looks Dan Ames in laws are not impressed. No point in waiting for 2020 Ames won’t be around, neither will Carol or Dan………
And Nicola won’t be coming home in a hurry.
Only a cock would join the trust, Ames is a failure and about to become bankrupt a third time!
That takes some degree of incompetence 😉
David Cameron is spearheading the Harlequin project blue book.
WARNING
Very shortly, the trolls will be on to clog the discussion with nonsense.
Where is the “long poster” when we need them ?
Where’s Phil Spencer when you need him ?
Richard Spector, mmmm yes, this will be one individual who along with Daniel Abrams and Andy Regan will need to contemplate life after being a solicitor. Daniel Abrams will be able to tell his kid how he was involved in one of the biggest frauds in UK history. And how he became a stay at home Dad as a result, if he is lucky. Regan won’t get that option, neither will Wooler, Kim Fry better not have pressed the delete button, David Geddes, would want to be very careful what he does with those server logs. Simon John Terry will also be wondering what to do with his time, yeah he got out, but not in time, best he can do is bury Ames finally.
I don’t agree. RS has just done his job protecting his client.
“Kim Fry”? Keep up you fool. As Leonard Cohen said the trolls will be on soon with their crap. On time Non turns up.
*Anon turns up
shut up Bob is your box of wine empty? Drunken old lush
That FSCS shot certainly rattled Ames.
More to come on that front.
Richard Spector is not as clean as you think.
Is David Cameron a Mason ?
Yes Lily, more to come. But not what you think lol
The Leonard Curtis move has also pissed Ames off.
A little hint, someone left a disk on a train and that was full of juicy info. The SFO can kiss their case goodbye, it’s amazing what some of their key witnesses were up to. Naughty boy Davy lol.
Keep selling those concrete blocks Davy boy?
Jezza and the Builder got rightly stuffed by their “New” mates. Lol, their “New” mates lol. I heard it was like taking a sweet from a child lol.
And they thought they were helping investors awwwwwwwwww, how sad lol, how funny they ended up helping Dave lol. They won’t be welcome at WK’s office again in a hurry lol.
And Dave Man lol, ha ha, guess he won’t be a witness now lol.
Bunch of idiots.
Dave Ames got a load of emails which Dave Man left on a train, Dave Ames then threathened Dave Man with defamation. Dave Man was a witness for the SFO. But Dave Ames has now discredited him………,…………………
SO WHAT. ????????
Jarlequin is insolvent
Harlequin
@Weird. I wouldn’t be so sure about that one lol
It seems to me that DA would be wise to work with the FSCS to seek a solution for investors.
As for witnesses, well done DA. A master plan.
Anonymous are you saying Harlequin is not insolvent ?
I suggest you read the new HP update. The anti HP thugs will now look very stupid. I will not paraphrase from it but read and learn. HP insolvent my arse. Haha lol
I wonder what Saint Gobriela will have to say about this?
Ames has real problem now.
Yes. There are 350,000 freemasons in Britain. If you get to the 33rd degree like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or David Cameron you are then in the running to be a Bilderberger.
Bilderbergers are a higher, international, more exclusive level of freemasonry, only 140 strong, and their agenda is to build the EU dictatorship. Every Prime Minister since Edward Heath has been a Bilderberger, and they have controlled the leadership of the Conservative party since the late 1960’s.
The Rothschilds and the Queen are members of the top two levels; and our German Royal Family (real name Saxe-Coburg Gotha; Windsor is an adopted name) has always been head of freemasonry.
Nearly all British judges and Law Lords are Freemasons; so are most barristers, which is why miscarriages of justice are the norm in our now utterly corrupt British Courts.
Judges and Freemasonry barristers usually decide the outcome of a case to suit their own agenda beforehand. That agenda is often implementing the Frankfurt School subversion technique of “trauma through injustice,” particularly in our now secret family courts, where they snatch 4,500 children annually from good parents for forced adoption. The Daily Mail covers a tiny number of those cases.
Our corrupt freemasonry Law Lords refuse to rule the EU wholly illegal under our British constitution, which it is. They lead the pretence our written British constitution is unwritten, to render it worthless.
Current Conservative Bilderbergers include Francis Maude and Ken Clarke, apparently a DVD agent too; David Cameron, William Hague, George Osborne. Lib Dems: Nick Clegg. Labour: Ed Balls, David Millliband (DVD too), Peter Mandleson, John Sainsbury, Philip Gould; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. These evil men are deliberately destroying us every day.
Newspapers are censored for legal reasons by freemasonry lawyers or Common Purpose members; and the BBC has 400 Common Purpose staff censoring out anti-EU news, which is why they didn’t report that Westminster gave up the last 20% of its power in January 2009, and now only exists to help the press conceal what has happened, until the EU dictatorship has consolidated its power.
Let’s have a little taster “the FSCS does not regard Harlequin as insolvent” Oops weren’t ready for that one were you.
Given that we can’t see the latest update it will be hard to comment on it.
But lol are you saying that Dave Ames is now saying that the FSCS have said Harlequin is not insolvent, ok whatever, this is the same Dave Ames who said the FSCS stated investors had to join the trust.
Who cares, redress is being paid.
The use of words by the FSCS was unfortunate. However, how does this improve Harlequin’s lot one bit ?
Still planning 2020 minimum and are barely profitable. FSCS says they aren’t insolvent but used the “I” word by accident.
To be fair, the use of the word was sloppy. They had to move back a little.
Wont change the SIPP playing field.
After the last HP update a week ago it was stated on here that the anti HP thugs were jumping the gun regarding insolvency, nil value regarding contracts, the fact that the FSCS had not conducted a DD. But of course the “experts” were making statements such as ” you don’t know how the FSCS works” etc etc. Well the trolls will be chocking on their “knowledge” now won’t they.
Can Ames / Harlequin pay their debts as they become due ?
The answer is no.
James Albert Baker stated that the Harlequin companies had assets which were in all cases less then the liabilities.
Has Dave Ames provided the FSCS with audited accounts for all his companies ?
What about all those who invested in Brazil, that company has no assets, yet has liabilities.
What about the inter company debts?
So please Id like to see Ames explain how the hell his companies are not insolvent.
The FSCS said Harlequin was insolvent, if they got it wrong, then Ames can sue the FSCS.
Can someone put up the latest update please ?
Ames is crowing again, FSCS admit they got it wrong, more damages cases coming up, target for completion of the resorts 2020. SFO investigation dealt a blow, usual suspects behind the attacks. Trust is only option Blah blah blah .
Nothing new then. Although Ames I suppose could pursue the FSCS now that they are back-pedalling.
Despite the latest update from Ames / Harlequin RL are still confident that the FSCS are maintaining their stance that the contracts are worth £ 0.00.
The issue of whether the companies are insolvent or not is a relatively simple one to determine.
Tests to determine whether your company is insolvent:
The cash-flow test: are your company’s current debts, or future debts, unable to be paid as they fall due?
The balance sheet test: is the value of your company’s assets less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account the present uncertain circumstances and future liabilities?
Cash Flow Test;
Given the number of contracts now in default, there currently is not enough cash to cover payments due on the contracts, this includes the section in the contracts whereby investors are entitled to compensation or refunds should Ames / Harlequin be unable to fullfill its contractual obligations.
Balance Sheet Test;
According to an affidavit by James Albert Baker the assets of the various Ames / Harlequin companies was less than the amount of liabilities thus they would fail the test. James Baker based his calculations on information provided to him by Ames / Harlequin.
Ames will claim that the balance sheet should reflect the monies owed, the £ 48 million owed by investors for completions, but this in itself does not alter the insolvency issue.
£109 million in cash was spent on Buccbay
Hypothetically therefore £ 218 million would have had to have been paid by investors in Buccament Bay by way of 30% deposits just to cover the construction work to date if Bucc Bay was self funding, but if you read below we have unearthed some rather startling evidence to suggest that the 30% deposits paid at Buccament Bay were £ 237 million.
Ames claims that Buccament Bay was valued at some £ 150 million in 2011.
However the Valuation carried out in 2011 was not a valuation of the resort but a GDV valuation (Gross Devlopment Valuation) based it appears on the sales prices of the units on the date the valuation was carried out.
The GDV valuation is far higher then the valuations arrived at through the various Red Book valuations Ames / Harlequin had commissioned.
In other words the Valuation of £ 150 million was based soley on the sales price of units in 2011. Or on the prices as per the contracts.
Ames claims that some 150 units are now complete and that some £ 48 million is owed in completion monies on these units, this gives us a GDV of some £ 68.5 million for the 100 completed units and 50 completed Apartments.
The GDV of the additional 100 partly built units and 100 apartments is £ 81.5 million. Giving Ames an additional potential £ 57 million in completion monies when these are complete.
Ames has sold some 1700 units at Buccament Bay with a GDV of some £ 750 million note there is no value given for the football pitches, tennis courts, restaraunts, back of house, pools etc. We have given a value to these of £ 40 million.
Giving a GDV value of £ 790 million for Buccament Bay.
What does this mean, it means that investors in Buccament Bay would have had to pay £ 237 million in 30% deposits to achieve a GDV of £ 790 million.
This also means that the GDV for all the other resorts, and let’s not forget Ames has sold some 9000 units to some 6000 investors across 7 resorts and 2-3 refurbished hotels is £ 553 million.
That is £ 553 million across 7300 units. In other words the remaining 7300 units are worth 73% of what Buccament Bay is worth.
Therefore the average GDV for each unit across Merricks, the Marquis Estate, Two Rivers, Hotel Blu, H Hotel, the Hideaway, Las Canas and Brazil is
£ 75,750.00
To put this into context, the average 30% deposit paid at Buccament Bay is £ 132, 352.00 based on the GDV
The average 30 % deposit paid across all the other resorts is £ 22,725.00 based on the GDV.
The BCQS report is most interesting, we can deduce from the GDV calculations that the properties sold on all the other resorts apart from SVG have been sold at 62% of the cost to construct the units, in other words the units have been sold at £ 328 million below the cost to construct them.
Well you might ask why we are releasing this information, well (1). because in the same way some have cooperated with Ames to assist him in his case against Wilkins Kennedy, others have assisted Wilkins Kennedy in their defence against Ames. (2). We don’t believe for one moment that the GDV valuations produced by BCQS and Ames are correct and believe them to be a work of absolute fiction, (3). But if the GDV is correct then Ames took a hell of a lot more then £ 400 million in deposits. (4). Or possibly fed RL a whole heap of duff DD when Ames was trying to establish the trust. (5). We can also tell that the GDV produced by BCQS was a crock of shit when compared to the inter company loans. (6). Unless those inter company loans were used to fund operational losses at Buccament Bay.
This is a very brief summary of a far more detailed anaylisis we have undertaken of the BCQS GDV valuation produced in 2011 and to which Ames refers to as being the value of Buccament Bay.
We have provided copies of our work to all the interested parties. And will of course make the FSCS and RL aware of our findings too, If Ames wishes to standby the GDV and the fact that he only recieved £ 400 million in deposits then we are cool with that, because that puts beyond doubt that Ames / Harlequin are insolvent, if Ames wants to change his mind, that’s cool too, because then we will have demonstrated to what lengths Ames is prepared to go to decieve not only the courts but his investors too. And we would be asking where is the rest of the £ 400 + Million Mr. Ames.
Your call Dave, we are happy either way. And we would like to thank all those who provided us with information to assist Wilkins Kennedy in their defence. And thank them for doing so willingly, freely and without asking for a reward of any kind.
Why does Dave allow the FSCS have a look at his books then ?
Dear All,
We published an update last week updating investors on key matters that Harlequin has encountered in early 2015, as well as matters on the horizon. Since release of the update we have had a response from the FSCS legal department and would therefore like to clarify the section of the update entitled “The FSCS and the Trust”.
To remind you, the section stated we were seeking clarification on a number of points that were unfortunately incorrectly interpreted, without FSCS input, in video and email by Gareth Fatchett of Regulatory Legal. This was nothing more than a weak marketing attempt by the firm to attract new clients to make compensation claims, which is the mainstay of this law firm’s business.
Whilst Harlequin knew this was the case, it has now sought a full explanation from the FSCS, who have permitted Harlequin to quote responses in order to clarify the position. All emphases are Harlequin’s.
Regarding the statement that “the Harlequin Investment is insolvent”:
“FSCS does not regard ‘Harlequin’ as insolvent, as was incorrectly stated in letters sent to a small number of claimants. FSCS has taken steps to ensure that the status of Harlequin is correctly described in correspondence to claimants going forward and we regret any confusion caused.”
Whilst Harlequin is frustrated by the unnecessary confusion and alarm caused, the FSCS clearly didn’t anticipate that their private correspondence would be shamelessly exploited by a compensation firm suggesting that the statement resulted from the FSCS carrying out a full financial review of the Harlequin group. It is clear that no such exercise has been carried out at all.
For the avoidance of doubt, and as we reminded the FSCS, Harlequin is trading, has two successful Caribbean hotels, and over 100 purchasers are in the process of completing on their investments, with a handful having already completed and received title.
Regarding the £0 valuation of the investment for compensation claims:
“FSCS considers that the value of holdings in Harlequin are too uncertain to quantify, and in order to calculate compensation for affected claimants we have disregarded its value for FSCS purposes.”
Therefore it is clear that the valuation is a means of facilitating compensation payments at a time when the FSCS cannot value Harlequin’s overseas property investment, which is logical given that development has been postponed and refunds cannot be offered whilst Harlequin is restructuring and protecting your investments.
The FSCS also stated: “FSCS will review how it quantifies claims in relation to Harlequin holdings on an ongoing basis.”
Clearly this means the valuation is specific to the current circumstances and certainly can change, meaning no indication can be given as to the value in 2016, 2017, or at any point in the future. Harlequin is uncompromising in its belief that the business will continue to regain strength and open more hotels.
Unfortunately, the cynical, self-serving attacks on Harlequin during its restructuring programme result from compensation firms desperate to receive fees for submitting claims that members of the public can undertake themselves.
Hopefully we have shown yet again how certain sources of information cannot be trusted.
Harlequin certainly will not make a habit of responding to the marketing and trolling exploits of third parties because we have enjoyed being removed from the soap opera, but the above needed to be clarified for obvious reasons.
Regards,
Harlequin
Oh dear the anti HP thugs are really scrambling about now aren’t they. Not so long ago the line was ” if the FSCS say HP are insolvent it’s good enough for me”. Now they have changed their position the thugs are looking for any justification they can find to believe it to be true. But there again I don’t know how the FSCS works do I. Lol
And let’s not forget that anyone can put in a claim to the FSCS and not use the “services” of an ambulance chaser and have 15% shaved off their award for filling in a form.
But anonymous 2.51 are all those calculations changed if the price of a concrete block goes up lol
Thanks for the clarification Harlequin, let’s all hurry along and get our claims in. Before, all of a sudden, the FSCS value Harlequin at £500,000, 000 like Bob Fidel
I would just love to see your plan Dave?
Phew, for a moment I thought harlequin was insolvent, will i now get my refund, or return? My interest payments backdated?
Anonymous 1.01 and 2.51 am, thank you for your post.
Anonymous 8.57 and 9.04 am despite the latest update from Ames the issue of whether the companies are insolvent or not is a relatively simple one to determine. You should really read what Anonymous 1.01 and 2.51 am wrote,
What Dave Ames should have really done is sought clarification as to whether the FSCS would pursue his companies for any redress paid.
Also if you look at the tests for insolvency you will clearly see that Ames’ companies are most definetly insolvent. Sadly the FSCS are still paying out compensation.
Of course if Dave Ames feels agrieved he should once again pursue Gareth Fatchett and Regulatory Legal or indeed the FSCS, it’s also a shame that Dave Ames was unwilling to produce all the correspondence with the FSCS.
Tests to determine whether your company is insolvent:
The cash-flow test: are your company’s current debts, or future debts, unable to be paid as they fall due?
The balance sheet test: is the value of your company’s assets less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account the present uncertain circumstances and future liabilities?
Cash Flow Test;
Given the number of contracts now in default, there currently is not enough cash to cover payments due on the contracts, this includes the section in the contracts whereby investors are entitled to compensation or refunds should Ames / Harlequin be unable to fullfill its contractual obligations.
Balance Sheet Test;
According to an affidavit by James Albert Baker the assets of the various Ames / Harlequin companies was less than the amount of liabilities thus they would fail the test. James Baker based his calculations on information provided to him by Ames / Harlequin.
They are insolvent. This farce is not going to make the FSCS very happy, maybe they will test Harlequin now?
Oh Dave! Dropped another clanger.
Dave you refer to valuations in your update, this is why the BCQS valuation needs to be examined in great detail. As was pointed out at 1.01 am and 2.51 am if the BCQS valuation is correct then you have been selling properties well below the cost to complete.
What appears to have happened is you have appeared to have a valuation undertaken whereby you have had cause to have created a fraudulent or false document whereby you have set out to deliberatley decieve investors into thinking that the value of the assets is far greater then it is.
You have done this for a number of reasons one being to entice investors into joining your trust.
We also like what you stated here, note our comments ;
” Whilst Harlequin is frustrated by the unnecessary confusion and alarm caused, the FSCS clearly didn’t anticipate that their private correspondence would be shamelessly exploited by a compensation firm suggesting that the statement resulted from the FSCS carrying out a full financial review of the Harlequin group. It is clear that no such exercise has been carried out at all.
” OUR COMMENT; Firstly, these are your words not the FSCS’s Secondly, had you provided the FSCS with the affidavit from James Albert Baker produced in 2014, the accountant employed by you and your companies to produce the affidavit, then there would be no need to argue the toss over the issue of insolvency. That was clearly demonstrated by James Albert Baker, and unless Harlequin have somehow magically produced in excess of £ 400 million quid since the date of the affidavit then the position remains that Harlequin is insolvent. ”
For the avoidance of doubt, and as we reminded the FSCS, Harlequin is trading, has two successful Caribbean hotels, and over 100 purchasers are in the process of completing on their investments, with a handful having already completed and received title.
” OUR COMMENT for the avoidance of doubt and to remind the FSCS we will forward them a copy of the James Albert Baker witness statement which of course would demonstrate that Harlequin is trading insolvently.
Again a masterful stroke by RL and Gareth Fatchett, what this has done is bring the issue of the solvency of Harlequin firmly to the fore, an earlier poster stated that Harlequins current accountants had made a previous determination that Harlequin was insolvent by way of an affidavit, if this is true, then it is firmly an end of debate on the issue. If the authorities including the FSCS obtain a copy of the affidavit it might very we’ll help to clear up matters.
I have a feeling that the affidavit will end up not only with the authorities but with all the “Wrong” people as well.
Wow Dave Ames is not insolvent, quick everybody Lets get down to Bluebell Wood and get our money back + our 10% compensation, to all cash investors, there is no need to join the trust, infact there is no need for a trust, Harlequin is not insolvent, all is ok, in fact all is fantastic.
Horrrrray Horrrrray Long Live Dave Ames.
Keep it coming, have you sent it to mark Neale at the FSCS, he is more than interested in harlequin…..
He is how we say, on the level.
“Our comment”? Lots of our comment statements being made. Wonder who “our” is? Think we all know don’t we Paddy.
Oh look the builder is saying all these nasty things, therefore because the builder is saying this it must be untrue.
James Albert Baker is really working for the builder, it’s a conspiracy Dave.
You are not insolvent.
What value Dave Ames would put on the contract for my Cabana ?
Its not built yet, the contract is void & I have no legal claim over any development that may be built, even if the resources were there
It woud like be trying to sell a car on ebay , that is not built, with no resources to build it, by a company under investigation by the SFO etc.
Go and see what my Void contract is worth on the open market Dave, this is it’s true value,
& unfortunately, words from a man with your credibility and history will not somehow, raise it’s value.
Dave do you expect us to believe a few paragraphs cherry picked from alledged communication with the FSCS. Why not publish the entire communication unredacted?
Looking for a retraction over on the FSCS site, nope none there.
Dave you told us previously that the FSCS told investors that they had to join the trust to get redress, this was a blatant lie, so why the hell should we believe you now.
Nobody believes Ames, that’s one of little Legs many problems.
Maybe, the FSCS will now ask for proof Harlequin is solvent? Not one of the GV’s best moments, he is unravelling.
This has backfired.
Saintgeorges dragon you are very very wrong on many many fronts. Look at compensation rules- look at the latest pension reforms kicking in April 15. Please don’t confuse things if you don’t know what your talking about. Sorry. Ps I wont be buying a car!!
Anonymous the cap with the Ombudsmen is £150k I believe. Someone one else who doesn’t know what they’re on abut re claims ……or cars.
Hi Attacks of the incidious
March 13, 2015 at 5:12 pm Go on then- explain all.
It’s £85k for banks and building societies. Or have you found some other “ombudsmen”
It’s not necessarily the SIPP investors who wanted HP to fail. It’s RL (for purely smug reasons) and the builder and his 3 cohorts (for purely vindictive reasons)
Jeezzz banks and building societies are NOT ombudsmen! Banking claim limits are an entirely separate issue. No I know why no one listens to you
What legitimate reason does David Ames have for withholding business plans and accounts from the people whom entrusted him with their money?
Name some bona fide companies that don’t register company accounts.
There is a misconception out there that every redress payment by the FSCS will equate to one less investor or creditor in Harlequin, this is not the case.
SIPP investors who obtain redress via the FSCS will recieve Max £ 50 k. SIPP investors who go down the FOS route stand to recoup most if not all of their original investments if their claims are succesful, and if in many cases the IFA’s have the liquidity to repay the investments, however the FOS route is far more difficult.
But once redress is paid the debt transfers to those who have paid redress.
Notwithstanding all of this, HMSSE is owed c £ 80 million from the related RDC’s, the RDC’s in turn are owed a similar amount by HMSSE, but HMSSE has other creditors aside from the RDC’s.
However all these creditors are considered unsecured creditors, including the RDC’s.
It is most likely that Leonard Curtis will call in the debt owed to HMSSE, Ames cannot just reassign the debts to other RDC’s or wipe the slate clean, to do so would be considered preferential creditor status.
So it really looks like Ames is stuffed. It looks like that Leonard Curtis will also seek the repayment of the directors and shareholders loans from members of the Ames family, this will cause problems for Dan, Carol and Nicola, and could tip them into bankruptcy, however regardless Carol and Dave will most definetly face bankruptcy proceedings at some time.
The issue of the FSCS and whether they stated Harlequin was insolvent or not is immaterial. Ames’ own accountants have clearly stated that the various companies owned by Ames have liabilities that greatly exceed assets and therefore have a negligible value.
Sadly cash investors are the biggest losers here, they truly are, and they no matter what redress will be paid will never see their position improve.
On the issue of the trust, if one is to believe the updates from Dave Ames, that being that Harlequin’s position is improving all the time, even though a trust has not yet been established, it might be prudent if cash investors stayed out of the trust, cash investors could undertake not to pursue Ames for a period of say 6 months at a time, on the basis that Ames achieved certain targets.
It would also be prudent for cash investors to seek from Ames some sort of a legally binding mechanism whereby the investors would not find themselves time barred for any claims they may wish to make against Ames or his companies in the future.
But I fear that this is all rather irrelevant given that cash investors will have no say in any future action taken by either Leonard Curtis or the FSCS to recoup outstanding debts from Ames / Harlequin companies.
@ Anonymous March 14, 2015 at 1:19 pm
It’s not necessarily the SIPP investors who wanted HP to fail. It’s RL (for purely smug reasons) and the builder and his 3 cohorts (for purely vindictive reasons)
Well why doesn’t Ames just toddle on over to the SFO and tell them that all the problems are being generated by the builder, his three friends and RL, funny you have not mentioned CLC or CPC here, but of course to do so would breach the undertaking not to attack these two firms.
I’m sure if Dave was to go to the SFO, they would fully understand and that would be an end of the matter.
Given all this grief caused by four individuals and RL, one has to wonder if Ames still thinks it was worth it given all that has happened.
I also doubt that Richard Spector and Dave Ames thought that others would have obtained information to assist WK in their defence, or for other purposes, instead they really believed that only they could be in a position to offer substantial amounts of money for information on their percieved enemies, perhaps Ames and Spectors actions set a precedence, whatever it did, there actions have back fired in a spectacular fashion.
But Dave please go to the SFO, tell them your sob story and let’s see if the SFO drop the case. I recall over a year ago a poster called FDNRM stating that the SFO investigation was about to come to an end as a result of the conclusion of the defamation arbitration.
Jeeezzzz SIPP-ing don’t you read! It was not implied banks and building societies are ombudsmen. Doh! Ok let’s try this again. What Ombudsmen have a cap of £150k?
Ok Anon, DA problems have also been caused by CLC/CPC. But there again I have not given any undertaking. Perhaps you can confirm what the Davies group have recouped?
The GV has no intention of paying Crazier, just bought him time and no court case – simples.
Are you allowed to say that according to Anon lol
Surly the FSCS won’t be happy at Harlequin causing a kerfuffle and will ask for proof that Harlequin is not insolvent.
Again the GV has caused himself a problem with his arrogance and delusion.
You idiot. “FSCS do not consider Harlequin insolvent” is a direct quotation from correspondence from the FSCS. It was stated some time ago on here that HP was going to get clarification of certain points from the FSCS and that was one of them.
And you have forgotten that Ames’ problems have been caused by investors who can’t raise the cash to complete,
The worlds financial crisis,
The banking glitch,
The inability of local lawyers to understand the completion process in SVG,
The delays to the International Airport,
How about HP clarifying why they haven’t fulfilled the very basic legal requirements of registering accounts, a failure that is nothing to do with any third party. It leaves one to come to the conclusion that they have something to hide.
Anonymous on March 14, 2015 at 3:19 pm
You idiot. “FSCS do not consider Harlequin insolvent” is a direct quotation from correspondence from the FSCS. It was stated some time ago on here that HP was going to get clarification of certain points from the FSCS and that was one of them.
Anonymous all we have is Ames’ word for this, remember Ames told us before that the FSCS said investors had to join the trust in order to get redress and that turned out to be a lie,
But just to keep the FSCS in the loop the affidavit of James Albert Baker has been sent to the FSCS along with the intercompany debt issue and the minutes of the meetings produced here.
I’m sure the FSCS will reconsider their clarification when they look at the evidence.
But to be clear, Ames’ companies are insolvent and Ames is trading insolvently. Fact.
Come on David publish some build schedules along with financial planning. Straightforward standard requirements in the building industry.
Anywhere from £ 230 million upwards was taken by Ames after ICE and WK left. Where did that money go?
And what about the sale of properties in Dubai, The interest free loans, what was that all about?
Why did David Geddes accidently wipe the servers, that’s what Richard Spector said happened, how could this happen ?
Why didn’t Paddy connect the drains. He knows all about being in the shit.
Ames thinks he can fight the Government now.
I thought it was the contractor who took over from Paddy who discovered the drains were not connected.
Alistair Burns the TailorMade director, still trying to rent his house, same 😉
http://www.gascoignehalman.co.uk/resize/502493/0/850
“Come on David publish some build schedules along with financial planning. Straightforward standard requirements in the building industry.”
The properties were to be built by magic fairies, no money or build schedules needed. Its common knowledge that if people don’t believe in fairies, they die.
If those nasty investors had believed in Dave’s Business model, the fairies would have lived and we would all be enjoying cocktails and high returns
Damn those non believers.
Just say we invite RL (offended by the GV) to write to the FSCS and ask on what basis they can claim Harlequin to be solvent or otherwise.
Open letter to all investors.
Brings the Government in. Surely the FSCS does not want to reassure investors of a fact without checking evidence.
http://www.gascoignehalman.co.uk/
Broome House Chelford Road, Alderley Edge
£9500 pcm
ALDERLEY EDGE, Chelford Road, Optional Furnishings A stunning 6 bedroom 4 bathroom detached family house. Set in approx 1.29 acres accommodation comprises entrance, SieMatic kitchen with large living area, dining room, drawing room, family room, study and gym/6th bedroom, master bedroom with a dressing area and en suite bathroom, further 4 double bedrooms all with en suite. Externally far reaching views to both front and rear, ample parking and detached double garage. Deposit & Fees Apply. EPC Rating: C
I think RL have accidentally opened up a can of worms for Dave.
Their update last week was reporting rather than mischief. I am surprised Dave bothered as the average investor has no idea about solvency.
Solvents maybe, but not solvency.
How about writing to them, all of us? Keeps the pressure on Ames.
Surly he can’t think about suing the British Government!
I disagree, Ames caused it by being a lair – the FSCS support the Trust.
Just watch him sue the SFO
Poor Dave, tricky one to get out of. Show the FSCS accounts !!!
He will sue the British Government, and become PM.
Maybe Head of the SFO.
Once one had the following information it was clear what HP was.
50% taken in “commission” at point of sale.
Various building plots not purchased as claimed.
Many years of accounts not filed.
The confirmation for me was visiting BB. It was immediately and obviously apparent that it was not possible for that size of real estate to accommodate anywhere near the amount of tourists they had sold units for. Applied for refund and informed SFO on return to UK.
The Brotherhood won’t take kindly to Ames upsetting it’s most senior Freemason Mark Neale, the main man at the FSCS.
HARLEQUIN & THE FSCS
by Regulatory Legal Solicitors
All,
We saw the Harlequin update. No surprises that everyone is against Harlequin and they are yet again the “victim”. There are few victims who have received £400m.
The FSCS gave the insolvent status in a client redress determination. That is not anything we have written.
Why would we publish it ?
Easy, our clients want to know what is being said about their investment. We feel that an insolvent status is something they would want to know about. Whenever we get information that benefits our clients, we will publish it on our sites.
Harlequin would have felt uncomfortable with the insolvent status. Harlequin will have contacted the FSCS and done one of two things :-
(a) threatened the FSCS with action
(b) demonstrated that Harlequin was solvent
It would be interesting to understand which approach was taken. Frankly, all we are bothered about is that the clients who have instructed us to obtain redress, do so. Nothing else.
Mr Ames has got himself in a pickle over this, whatever will he do next?
FatBoy is off again
The recent updates say, well nothing. Unless, you count trying to get investors to part with more cash or sign up to the Trust.
Maybe a plan that would contain:-
An update on the elusive finance.
A build plan.
Accounts.
An update regarding all these ‘completions’.
I could go on….
It just seems Ames is bumbling round from one crisis to the next keeping his dream alive.
Believe it or not RL the FSCS does not answer to you. If you are not interested to understand which, if any approach was taken, then why ask the question. Of course HP would have “uncomfortable” with the insolvency status. Why don’t you just butt out RL, just concentrate on your 15% like any ambulance chaser. After all you are doing nothing to help cash investors who you will be happy to sacrifice.
Cash investors have only themselves to blame and are pissed off that SIPP investors are getting paid out.
I’m SIPP and I don’t give a PHIG for cash investors.
Anonymous
March 14, 2015 at 5:44 pm
HARLEQUIN & THE FSCS
by Regulatory Legal Solicitors
This surely is fakery?
Grammar, syntax and inappropriate use of an ampersand all look very dodgy.
It’s a dog eat dog World my friend.
99% of investors just want out, if it wERE the other way round SIPP investors would be moaning.
The fact is YOU invested – YOU were greedy.
Get a life and move on.
Yes it’s trickery most foul.
Just truthful mon ami.
@anonymous 6.17pm Everyone’s circumstances are different, some are facing illness now, bereavement, divorce or redundancy since investing. Not everyone has the luxury of waiting and hoping everything with harlequin turns out ok.
Walton has already completed numb nuts.
O would like cash investors get some recompense but there are just one of two ass- holes here I couldn’t care less about.
Look’s like wannabe tough guy Ingham is back.
Ingham and Storey hope they end up with nowt.
Ames does not have the cash reserves to fight off this latest salvo, more and more investors are pursuing him in SVG, he is also under pressure with UK litigation, to state otherwise is ridiculous.
In other news a husband and wife recieved a bloody nose in a recent UK court action where their personal assets worldwide are subject to a freezing order, they consented to paying in excess of £ 1.8 million by September 2015 to a group of clients who were claiming losses as a result of investing in overseas properties, the couple and their lawyers lied to a number of journalists on the issue of the settlement by stating that the group had dropped their case, they lied to prevent other investors from taking a similar action against them personally.
One does have to wonder about the ethics of lawyers who blatantly lie, lying scum Protecting this couple, who themselves are lying scum.
Meanwhile back to Mr. and Mrs. Ames, they were embroiled in a group action some months back but it appears this action was dropped, it’s amazing that this is an action that Ames or his legal team did not have covered by an NDA or Tomlin order,
Here is what Ames and his lawyers told Professional Advisor,
” Harlequin and its lawyers declined to comment, and would only say that the case to sue the Ames’ had been “withdrawn” by the group of 24 investors.”
See the full article below,
http ://m.professionaladviser.com/ professional-adviser/news/2376209/harlequin-investors-drop-case-against-chairman-and-wife
This must be true because Dave Ames said so,, I mean if it was not true, this would mean that Ames was a lying piece of scum, and his lawyers were lying scum aswell, with no idea of what ethics meant, and I mean how could someone trust scum like these to honor any commitments.
So there is no way Ames or his lawyers would lie about this no way.
OK its three or ten. The overly selfish disruptive few. How many? Well hard to tell eh! But what goes round…………..not an absolute but often works out.
Are Tall Storey and Ingham nasty selfish twerps?
A number of posts appear to have set off the usual nuts on here, so let’s recap.
Anonymous on March 14, 2015 at 5:44 pm
HARLEQUIN & THE FSCS
by Regulatory Legal Solicitors
All,
We saw the Harlequin update. No surprises that everyone is against Harlequin and they are yet again the “victim”. There are few victims who have received £400m.
The FSCS gave the insolvent status in a client redress determination. That is not anything we have written.
Why would we publish it ?
Easy, our clients want to know what is being said about their investment. We feel that an insolvent status is something they would want to know about. Whenever we get information that benefits our clients, we will publish it on our sites.
Harlequin would have felt uncomfortable with the insolvent status. Harlequin will have contacted the FSCS and done one of two things :-
(a) threatened the FSCS with action
(b) demonstrated that Harlequin was solvent
It would be interesting to understand which approach was taken. Frankly, all we are bothered about is that the clients who have instructed us to obtain redress, do so. Nothing else.
Anonymous 1.01 and 2.51 am, thank you for your post.
Anonymous 8.57 and 9.04 am despite the latest update from Ames the issue of whether the companies are insolvent or not is a relatively simple one to determine. You should really read what Anonymous 1.01 and 2.51 am wrote,
What Dave Ames should have really done is sought clarification as to whether the FSCS would pursue his companies for any redress paid.
Also if you look at the tests for insolvency you will clearly see that Ames’ companies are most definetly insolvent. Sadly the FSCS are still paying out compensation.
Of course if Dave Ames feels agrieved he should once again pursue Gareth Fatchett and Regulatory Legal or indeed the FSCS, it’s also a shame that Dave Ames was unwilling to produce all the correspondence with the FSCS.
Tests to determine whether your company is insolvent:
The cash-flow test: are your company’s current debts, or future debts, unable to be paid as they fall due?
The balance sheet test: is the value of your company’s assets less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account the present uncertain circumstances and future liabilities?
Cash Flow Test;
Given the number of contracts now in default, there currently is not enough cash to cover payments due on the contracts, this includes the section in the contracts whereby investors are entitled to compensation or refunds should Ames / Harlequin be unable to fullfill its contractual obligations.
Balance Sheet Test;
According to an affidavit by James Albert Baker the assets of the various Ames / Harlequin companies was less than the amount of liabilities thus they would fail the test. James Baker based his calculations on information provided to him by Ames / Harlequin.
Anonymous on March 14, 2015 at 1:01 am
Despite the latest update from Ames / Harlequin RL are still confident that the FSCS are maintaining their stance that the contracts are worth £ 0.00.
The issue of whether the companies are insolvent or not is a relatively simple one to determine.
Tests to determine whether your company is insolvent:
The cash-flow test: are your company’s current debts, or future debts, unable to be paid as they fall due?
The balance sheet test: is the value of your company’s assets less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account the present uncertain circumstances and future liabilities?
Cash Flow Test;
Given the number of contracts now in default, there currently is not enough cash to cover payments due on the contracts, this includes the section in the contracts whereby investors are entitled to compensation or refunds should Ames / Harlequin be unable to fullfill its contractual obligations.
Balance Sheet Test;
According to an affidavit by James Albert Baker the assets of the various Ames / Harlequin companies was less than the amount of liabilities thus they would fail the test. James Baker based his calculations on information provided to him by Ames / Harlequin.
Ames will claim that the balance sheet should reflect the monies owed, the £ 48 million owed by investors for completions, but this in itself does not alter the insolvency issue.
£109 million in cash was spent on BuccBay
Anonymous on March 14, 2015 at 2:51 am
Hypothetically therefore £ 218 million would have had to have been paid by investors in Buccament Bay by way of 30% deposits just to cover the construction work to date if Bucc Bay was self funding, but if you read below we have unearthed some rather startling evidence to suggest that the 30% deposits paid at Buccament Bay were £ 237 million.
Ames claims that Buccament Bay was valued at some £ 150 million in 2011.
However the Valuation carried out in 2011 was not a valuation of the resort but a GDV valuation (Gross Devlopment Valuation) based it appears on the sales prices of the units on the date the valuation was carried out.
The GDV valuation is far higher then the valuations arrived at through the various Red Book valuations Ames / Harlequin had commissioned.
In other words the Valuation of £ 150 million was based soley on the sales price of units in 2011. Or on the prices as per the contracts.
Ames claims that some 150 units are now complete and that some £ 48 million is owed in completion monies on these units, this gives us a GDV of some £ 68.5 million for the 100 completed units and 50 completed Apartments.
The GDV of the additional 100 partly built units and 100 apartments is £ 81.5 million. Giving Ames an additional potential £ 57 million in completion monies when these are complete.
Ames has sold some 1700 units at Buccament Bay with a GDV of some £ 750 million note there is no value given for the football pitches, tennis courts, restaraunts, back of house, pools etc. We have given a value to these of £ 40 million.
Giving a GDV value of £ 790 million for Buccament Bay.
What does this mean, it means that investors in Buccament Bay would have had to pay £ 237 million in 30% deposits to achieve a GDV of £ 790 million.
This also means that the GDV for all the other resorts, and let’s not forget Ames has sold some 9000 units to some 6000 investors across 7 resorts and 2-3 refurbished hotels is £ 553 million.
That is £ 553 million across 7300 units. In other words the remaining 7300 units are worth 73% of what Buccament Bay is worth.
Therefore the average GDV for each unit across Merricks, the Marquis Estate, Two Rivers, Hotel Blu, H Hotel, the Hideaway, Las Canas and Brazil is
£ 75,750.00
To put this into context, the average 30% deposit paid at Buccament Bay is £ 132, 352.00 based on the GDV
The average 30 % deposit paid across all the other resorts is £ 22,725.00 based on the GDV.
The BCQS report is most interesting, we can deduce from the GDV calculations that the properties sold on all the other resorts apart from SVG have been sold at 62% of the cost to construct the units, in other words the units have been sold at £ 328 million below the cost to construct them.
Well you might ask why we are releasing this information, well (1). because in the same way some have cooperated with Ames to assist him in his case against Wilkins Kennedy, others have assisted Wilkins Kennedy in their defence against Ames. (2). We don’t believe for one moment that the GDV valuations produced by BCQS and Ames are correct and believe them to be a work of absolute fiction, (3). But if the GDV is correct then Ames took a hell of a lot more then £ 400 million in deposits. (4). Or possibly fed RL a whole heap of duff DD when Ames was trying to establish the trust. (5). We can also tell that the GDV produced by BCQS was a crock of shit when compared to the inter company loans. (6). Unless those inter company loans were used to fund operational losses at Buccament Bay.
This is a very brief summary of a far more detailed anaylisis we have undertaken of the BCQS GDV valuation produced in 2011 and to which Ames refers to as being the value of Buccament Bay.
We have provided copies of our work to all the interested parties. And will of course make the FSCS and RL aware of our findings too, If Ames wishes to standby the GDV and the fact that he only recieved £ 400 million in deposits then we are cool with that, because that puts beyond doubt that Ames / Harlequin are insolvent, if Ames wants to change his mind, that’s cool too, because then we will have demonstrated to what lengths Ames is prepared to go to decieve not only the courts but his investors too. And we would be asking where is the rest of the £ 400 + Million Mr. Ames.
Your call Dave, we are happy either way. And we would like to thank all those who provided us with information to assist Wilkins Kennedy in their defence. And thank them for doing so willingly, freely and without asking for a reward of any kind.
Storey and Ingham are like those nasty car drivers then who hide behind the metal and run eh! Then are civil in the pub. Sad.
SIPP-ing, you are like those nasty anonymous posters who hide behind a keyboard. As you have never met me then you a complete moron to make that type of statement.
Ah Robert you finally post as yourself again, I do hope you have very deep pockets, because the fun has yet to start for you my friend, oh you can thank Dave and his little mission to the U.S. for that little gem.
Toodle pips for now Robert Storey from Nuneaton 😉
So Robert you are working with Dave Ames now tracking IP addresses, or is this a solo mission your on ?
Well Tall Storey one can make certain assumptions based on the puerile vitriol we see you posting here. The bragging sneering and will to see others suffer because you never did get that cabana you were promised, cash-man investor. One of the biggest losers here that gets satisfaction from others problems. Well you’ve lost, you live in hope but – your a loser. Dumped on. Oh and I do know people that have met you- and the cowardly car rage runner cap fits old man. That’s why just about everyone in every medium you post on despises you. And as for meeting, I’ll be happy to meet you somewhere private. x
No- but I may be punch- ual heh
SIPP-ing grow up. You know where I live, call round. Lol big mouth, no balls. Pathetic.
Anon, if only you knew. £3k gets you a lot of information.
The following from the RL website, many of the investors at Buccbay have been in since 2006, this particular gentleman paid an initial £ 60 k with £ 150 k to pay.
This gives an avg of £ 210 k per unit. A little different from the avg price of £ 470,000 Ames states as monies owing to him,
Ames claims that he is owed £ 48 million in completions. BCQS who based their GDV valuatuon on information provided by Ames valued phase 1 194 cabanas and 150 apartments at US $ 240 million.
It looks however like the GDV is closer to US $ 100 million, looks like Ames has been over egging it a tad.
My guess is that Ames is probably owed about £ 24 million and not the £ 48 million he claims, these figures would make far more sense based on the earlier GDV calculations.
See extract from RL forum below.
I have been in this since 2006 as a cash investor and wrote off my investment around 4 years ago as a bad lot. I do not expect to make any money or get my £60K back.
My unit is built and I could have completed, but without the ‘guaranteed’ finance i would rather lose the money than put in another £150K of my own as I know have no faith in what the business plan has become.
I will not be joining the trust as I don’t think it will be of any advantage to me over and above staying on the sidelines to see what happens and I feel there are more options in the future for tax write offs etc if I don’t join the trust.
I do realise that I’m not in as bad a place as some of you and don’t mean to be heartless but this is the way I see it.
Best of luck to you all whatever you decide to do.
Don’t actually but want common ground anyway.
Don’t forget the £40 mill still unaccounted for. Can anyone draw on that eh?
Robert you will get what you deserve my friend.
Lost your balls. Put your contact details on here and I will look you up. 🐓🐓
Yup and it wont be a cabana heh.
@anon, going to send me a concrete block as a present?
How about the M4 services Bristol ?
Chick chick chick chick chicken 🐓🐓🐓🐓 pathetic. Mind you don’t shit yourself reading this. Lol
I am a pensioner- and I didn’t start the fight Cum Storey Yup knew you’d bottle it heh
Piss off. If you think I’m going to drive 150 miles to meet some wannabe Rambo who would not turn up. Send me your home address I’ll call round for a cup of tea.
I live next to the M4 services. You’ll know me I have a white stick- two in fact. Gives you a chance eh
No you probably live at the M4 services.
Ha- keep very fit and would love a last few rounds. Been a bit, they stop you see, unless you want to go illegal. Your tag- a clue is it darkling 😉
M4 S, Almost Bob. Tell Anonymous why everyone despises you- and you double name post sweetie
Have to be re-treads like his posts
XX 🙂
Anything for a good distraction…HP trolling at its best…Bob will get a nice bonus this month…might be called something else on the books…if there were any books.
What has any of this go to do with anything constructive old bean. I call in on the off chance I’ll pick up some info and to chuckle at the idiots and the nasty’s- like Tall Storey. Bob baiting’s a sport here, he does deserve it though. There are however some very nice people here who I hope see a result, rare though. Night Night oh daft one xx
I’ve noticed that every time we get an intelligent post, the HP Guys jump on the forum, says it all really, anyhow I found this post very informative.
I agree the valuation bandied about by Ames makes no sense.
The following from the RL website, many of the investors at Buccbay have been in since 2006, this particular gentleman paid an initial £ 60 k with £ 150 k to pay.
This gives an avg of £ 210 k per unit. A little different from the avg price of £ 470,000 Ames states as monies owing to him,
Ames claims that he is owed £ 48 million in completions. BCQS who based their GDV valuatuon on information provided by Ames valued phase 1 194 cabanas and 150 apartments at US $ 240 million.
It looks however like the GDV is closer to US $ 100 million, looks like Ames has been over egging it a tad.
My guess is that Ames is probably owed about £ 24 million and not the £ 48 million he claims, these figures would make far more sense based on the earlier GDV calculations.
See extract from RL forum below.
I have been in this since 2006 as a cash investor and wrote off my investment around 4 years ago as a bad lot. I do not expect to make any money or get my £60K back.
My unit is built and I could have completed, but without the ‘guaranteed’ finance i would rather lose the money than put in another £150K of my own as I know have no faith in what the business plan has become.
I will not be joining the trust as I don’t think it will be of any advantage to me over and above staying on the sidelines to see what happens and I feel there are more options in the future for tax write offs etc if I don’t join the trust.
I do realise that I’m not in as bad a place as some of you and don’t mean to be heartless but this is the way I see it.
Best of luck to you all whatever you decide to do.
SIPPing, I think you need to speak to your carer at your Residential Home. I think it may be an idea to ask them to get your doctor to review the cocktail of medication you are taking as it seems to be making you aggressive and delusional,
We you mixing your medication with alchol last night?
Haha Yank it in easy, you think you are baiting Bob Storey. You fool you have been had hook line and sinker. Fell right in didn’t you. Hohoho
Ingham suffers from a mental condition that makes him think he is tough and wealthy. This condition usually manifests it’s self initially by renting cars and bullying women. In extreme cases dyslexia is commonplace.
I haven’t posted on here for days. To the posters who think they are talking, or threatening, me well you need to have a lay down in a dark room. Or perhaps thats where you are already. i hope thats clarified things for the very odd people on here. Toodle pip
SIPPing is a tw*t pure and simple.
Ha and you lot are a bunch of idiots getting side lined. Listen I’ve taken me steroids and amphetamine for the day, I’ll take ya all on one at a time starting with Tall Storey and assuming the brave big mouths here are all over 60 🙂 Hit the moral high ground when you hit the cowardly low ground eh x. Wednesday 18th March Bristol, services. Cmon on down gullible twonks. After that I’ll unsubscribe because as usual I get bored after a bit when the constructive posts run out, and of course they’ll be a few less of you here- if you turn up sweeties. And of course – If I’m now getting press as bad as Storey- well I’ve really pulled in the Ameless (sic) idiots eh. Yup time to vacate. Sycophants, fools and general arse’s – you’ve revealed yourselves xx
Precisely anonymous heh- no serous poster would have risen to my flies.
Does it matter ? redress is being paid to SIPP investors and Re-Mortgage investors.
That’s all we are bothered about.
Dave’s “bombshell” was a bit of a waste of time. Nothing constructive and more time ticking away.
Each day, week, month that goes past people turn to redress.
Redress means people won’t be giving any more money to prop Dave up.
The pool of people prepare to “complete” is but exhausted.
The cash will run out slowly. Too slowly for some.
However, since the FSCS valued HP at nil per contract, the game is over.
Redress is the meth of the masses. They love it.
I use March Brown’s this time of year- its when the easiest trout rise in those shallow, dark northern streams 🙂 x
Yes I would like to see most of the cash investors get some redress. However I’d like to see the toadies and vitriolic here continue to stay losers as some of them sought to undermine the honest majority. Its very difficult to care for them, those that would not only like their own money back but would snatch ours as well given a chance- indeed some have tried, thinking they were Dave’s special friends.
16 son- 1 stone over the weight but hey- time goes on eh! xx
Ha- no your (probably) right- but only because they got stitched up. Some of you live in hope. In any case, you don’t know it all sonny.
RL be careful here, Dave Ames could sign this and claim later that he did not understand what he was signing. It would be better to get Ames and James Albert Baker to sign the document and insert a paragraph whereby Ames acknowleges that he fully understands what he is signing.
Also include his lawyers.
It must be remembered that when BDO disclaimed the HMSSE accounts Carol Ames came out publically by stating that BDO had got it wrong and did not understand the business.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
The document is very clear. We can see why the FSCS might have backed off a little.
The FSCS are valuing at “nil”, which is the key thing for redress.
The solvency issues is more dangerous because trading while insolvent causes all manner of issues.
We will address the solvency issue next week. We feel there is a simple solution which involves Mr Ames (as director of the Harlequin companies) signing a statutory declaration declaring that the companies are solvent using standard accounting principles.
We feel that this would clear matters up and draw a line in the sand.
@ Anonymous 12.27. What a disgusting and racist person you are. I hope BFP expose you for your racism. And as for this thread and forym being shitty, no it isn’t, it has been most informative aside from the posts from people like you, which have only convinced me that there is no way I will put another penny into Harlequin.
If BFP is so shitty, why spend your Sunday morning reading it and commenting,
I think I need to have a lay down. I don’t know why I am on here. I keep having conversations with myself. 😐
http://www.independent.ie/life/travel/world/vibrant-st-vincent-31058785.html
I can’t help but feel a little smug. Just a few hours have passed since I landed on the Caribbean island of St Vincent, but I’ve resisted the lure of cocktails on the beach to partake in a bootcamp session. Instead of sinking a sundowner, I’m swinging a kettlebell up to the sky, which is slowly morphing into a vibrant shade of pink.
The fact that I’m the only person doing it should have rung alarm bells.
Charlotte, the resident trainer at Buccament Bay Resort, is leading me through a series of squats and lunges, while a backdrop of craggy, volcanic peaks looms behind us. As we finish the final round, I can almost feel the lapping of the ocean on my toes. My mind wanders, pondering what cocktail would be best to celebrate my epic workout.
“Great job! Now, we’ll start with five reps of each, 40 seconds a go,” sings Charlotte. Turns out, my ‘workout’ was actually a warm-up. Pretty soon, my face is the same pink as that vibrant sky, and it’s not long before I admit defeat, collapsing in a heap on the ground. Buccament Bay isn’t your typical Caribbean resort. It ticks all the standard boxes, of course - the white sandy beach, the pretty villas dotted with plunge pools and a bar serving frosty beers on the shore. But it’s also the place for those who get bored after 10 minutes on a sun lounger.
As well as Charlotte’s bootcamps and classes, there’s the Pat Cash Tennis Academy, soccer classes run by ex-Premier League players like John Barnes, and coaches from the West Indies Cricket Board… if cricket is your cup of tea.
With all that exertion at your disposal, it’s just as well that the food is top notch. Buccament Bay is an all-inclusive resort, but it serves food that you actually want to eat, rather than bland, endless buffets. There are four à la carte restaurants, ranging from an authentic Caribbean joint to a New York steakhouse, and sushi and sashimi at its beach bar with platters of fish so fresh they practically quiver.
I’ve been told that I can’t miss Chef Murphy cooking up a storm on the beach, so I make it my business to save some room for lunch. It’s a good call. I hear the chef before I see him – his rip-roaring cackle makes me jump, unsure if someone is laughing or screaming. I find him standing behind a giant barbeque, honking with infectious laughter as he serves up platters of ribs, chicken and pork.
“This is where I’m happiest!” Chef Murphy shrieks, slathering sizzling chicken with his infamous BBQ sauce, made strictly to his grandmother’s recipe.
There’s life beyond the resort, of course. In terms of landscape, the volcanic peaks of St Vincent feel a million miles from the flat, preened islands you often find in the Caribbean. Instead of endless resorts clogging the shore, for example, you’ll find rickety beach shacks.
Wherever you go, peaks of deep, luscious rainforest surround you, and I’m itching to get out and explore. To do that, I arrange to meet a local guide, who ushers me into his Jeep for a drive into the mountains to the Vermont Nature Trail (nationalparks.gov.vc).
“Don’t worry about the machetes,” he calls from the front seat, as we pass a man swinging one idly on the roadside. “They’re all farmers.”
The trail weaves through 10,870 acres of preserved rainforest, towering with ferns, bamboo and monkey goblets – a parasitic vine that smothers the tree beneath, leaving a hollow mass of roots soaring towards the sky. The ground is littered with colourful jumbie beads and hibiscus flowers, which the native St Vincent parrot finds difficult to resist.
We stand silently at the parrot lookout, eyes trained skyward in an effort to spot one of these elusive ‘Vincies’. Just over 500 of the birds remain on earth, and they’re as fiercely protected as they are devilishly tricky to spot.
We’re told to keep our eyes peeled for vibrant yellow tails, and for birds flying in pairs – the Vincie mates for life, and rarely strays from its partner. After a heavy dash of rain, we’re finally gifted with the sight of a pair, who flutter into our eyeline for just a few scant seconds before disappearing back into the thick growth of the forest.
Afterwards, we make our way back down to Buccament Bay. Pulling in, a score of young fisherman walk up to the beach, ready to see out the day with a well-earned swim and a game of football.
That’s the refreshing charm of St Vincent and this luxury resort – locals are as welcome on the white sands as guests, something that is depressingly rare in the world of five-star escapes.
Back at Buccament Bay, I lie back on my lounger as the sun dips, leaving the beach filtered with a sepia glow. My days of bootcamps and collapsing on the tennis court are behind me, and I’ve finally rewarded myself with a cocktail… spiked with a hefty dose of Caribbean rum.
Before me, a teenage couple flirts in the surf. The fishermen are playing around a makeshift goal, sending streams of water flying into the air. A lone kayaker drifts along the horizon, silhouetted by the dimming light. I think about how a view doesn’t get much better than that.
WHAT TO PACK
As well as the usual beach fare, be sure to pack your runners and workout gear. It’s difficult to resist the active lifestyle when you’re on St Vincent. You don’t need any vaccinations, but a good insect repellent is a must for the balmy evenings and rainforest.
GETTING THERE
Fly to Barbados via London with British Airways (ba.com), taking a connecting flight to St Vincent with LIAT (liat.com). Prices from Dublin start from around €1,066pp return, based on travel in June. An international airport is due to open on St Vincent this year, which may speed up the travel time.
WHERE TO STAY
Tropical Sky (tropicalsky.ie) offers a seven-night holiday in a one-bedroom garden villa at Buccament Bay Resort (buccamentbay.com) from €1,859pp. The price is based on two people sharing on an all-inclusive basis and includes all transfers and flights from Dublin.
THREE MUST DOS
What to eat
You don’t want to leave this island without sampling some of its traditional staples. Roasted breadfruit is the traditional dish of St Vincent & The Grenadines… and surprisingly, it’s not unlike Ireland’s humble spud. Order it with a side of fried jack fish, tack on a Hairoun beer, and you’re practically a local.
Day Trips
Most hotels on St Vincent can organise boat trips to the Grenadine islands, where you can swim in deserted waters or explore the millionaire’s playground of Mustique. If you have to pick just one, try the “moonhole” at Bequia, a natural arch that is perfect for snorkelling. See: discoversvg.com
Insider Tip
If you like calypso and soca, you’ll love Vincy Mas, one of the hottest festivals in the Caribbean. Starting at the end of June, the wild party is an explosion of dancing, music and skimpy costumes. The 2015 event takes place from June 26 to July 7 (Mardi Gras). See carnivalsvg.com for more.
Irish Independent
“leading me through a series of squats and lunges, while a backdrop of craggy, volcanic peaks looms behind me” YUP sonny boys, sums up what you’ve got coming. And if its so enjoyable….how come you have time to write this Dave, anonymous and Tall Storey heh And how much did you pay the Indy to print. Listen readers, subscribe to a proper travelogue if you want honest reporting. Yes….. I have been there, and a few other (sewage free mind) places to compare.
Hah bogus SIPP-ing, flattery indeed-TY, but the know who you really are sweetie x
Sounds like Nicola had a freebie press trip to BB and made the rest up from guide books.
WARNING Do not snorkel off Moonhole under the arch!
And it’s cutlass love not machete!
Oh dear “but the know who you really are sweetie x” Im all confused now. My grammar has gone along with my marbles.
So mote it be.
We feel there is a simple solution which involves Mr Ames (as director of the Harlequin companies) signing a statutory declaration declaring that the companies are solvent using standard accounting principles.
We feel that this would clear matters up and draw a line in the sand.
The FSCS are valuing at “nil”, which is the key thing for redress.
The solvency issues is more dangerous because trading while insolvent causes all manner of issues.
There is no Pat Cash Academy at BB, its Pat Cash Tennis Club.
There are not four a la carte Restaurants…Bamboo has been closed since 2013. HQ can hardly be considered a Restaurant.
Great Architect of the Caribbean can’t sue the British Government and must stop upsetting Bro. Mark Neale. We take a very dim view of that.
“That’s the refreshing charm of St Vincent and this luxury resort – locals are as welcome on the white sands as guests, something that is depressingly rare in the world of five-star escapes.”
Really ???? Locals are welcome hmmmmm lol
Fishermen playing football on the beach ?????? You couldn’t make it up. I mean perfect harmony.
“Before me, a teenage couple flirts in the surf. The fishermen are playing around a makeshift goal, sending streams of water flying into the air. A lone kayaker drifts along the horizon, silhouetted by the dimming light. I think about how a view doesn’t get much better than that.”
“There are four à la carte restaurants, ranging from an authentic Caribbean joint to a New York steakhouse, and sushi and sashimi at its beach bar with platters of fish so fresh they practically quiver.”
Four à la carte restaurants ????? You have an Indian, jacks, the Bar come Restaraunt and the fourth ???? Oh yes the bamboo, which is still closed.
Looks like the resort is getting less then
£ 80 a night pp.
“Fly to Barbados via London with British Airways (ba.com), taking a connecting flight to St Vincent with LIAT (liat.com). Prices from Dublin start from around €1,066pp return, based on travel in June. An international airport is due to open on St Vincent this year, which may speed up the travel time.
Tropical Sky (tropicalsky.ie) offers a seven-night holiday in a one-bedroom garden villa at Buccament Bay Resort (buccamentbay.com) from €1,859pp. The price is based on two people sharing on an all-inclusive basis and includes all transfers and flights from Dublin.”
With figures like this Ames has huge problems.
Ames says he is owed £ 48 million quid on completions (the 70%) that means that £ 68 million is the GDV. Ames owes £ 13.6 million of this in guranteed returns.
With these kind of rates based on 80% occupancy Ames will gross c £ 7 million quid a year, he will owe £ 6.8 million quid in guaranteed returns, leaving £ 200,000 to run the hotel for a year.
Or £ 4 per person per day to feed, house them, pay staff costs and operational costs, based on 80% occupancy..
The HP supporters hate having the figures analysed and with good reason, not only is Harlequin insolvent now but moving forward it gets worse based on the figures being quoted.
Good post. One point though, this Ames is owed stuff. He’s owed nothing- £40,million is still missing (not inc the £200 mill skimmed) and he’s defaulted.
“Most hotels on St Vincent can organise boat trips to the Grenadine islands, where you can swim in deserted waters or explore the millionaire’s playground of Mustique. If you have to pick just one, try the “moonhole” at Bequia, a natural arch that is perfect for snorkelling. ”
No sweetheart the moonhole ain’t perfect for snorkelling, it’s good for diving though. Moonhole is a private Eco development. Would not recommend snorkelling there, unless you would like some raw sewage stuck in your snorkel pipe.
SIPP-ing I know, I’m just basing this on Ames own figures.
Good, I’m glad some of us have a grip- rugby’s on now. Got the result yesterday but can look and dream of yesteryear today eh!
Going to watch the Rugby then down to the M5 services to pick a fight with someone. Testosterone will be up. Let’s see if I can find an old lady to batter. I’m so tough me.😐
Moonhole/raw sewage. Did Paddy do the drains there?
M4 old trout, another fly I’ll have to re-tie sucker.
Yes I definitely need to re-tie my fly. Must stop this flashing at the old ladies otherwise I will get a sucker.
Naw – zip it- catch it and eff off crying. Cash investor eh, Jealous and evil minded.
@ Anonymous March 15, 2015 at 12:27 pm
“Bit repetitive this shitty forum, even the Barbadian monkeys that run it will be bored soon.”
A piece of helpful advice. People in the Caribbean do not much like being called monkeys. Here, it is known as racism and frowned on, as it is, of course, in the UK.
Quite and on that note I’ll unsubscribe. Gosh they’re so short of meaningful contributions they’re even copying me, that’s sad eh. Bys
What I mean is I will unsubscribe as SIPP-ing but I will reappear as something else.toodle pip for now 😐
I see Ingham is posting again, such a tough guy, lets Ames take his money and does nowt about it. The big fat softy.
Ingham is ‘far’ or soft – please explain I don’t speak dislexsick.
Who is Erics?
Anonymous suck it up?
We would not even have these threads if Ames his family and UK sales staff were not such ignorant thieves.
On the one hand we have Ames and his family grovelling to investors and begging them to join a trust which prevents them from pursuing him and his family until he is at least 70, by which time Matt will be at the helm.
On the other hand you have Ames lying to the FSCS about the solvency of his companies.
I have it on very good authority that the Hon. Ralph Gonsalves is facing insurmountable international pressure on the issue of Ames, his intransigence in cooperating with the authorities in itself speaks volumes, he is hoping that he wins the next election, otherwise he will lose his diplomatic immunity and may find that he becomes the first leader of a country to be prosecuted by the SFO.
Ralph’s political opponents will only be too happy to pack him off to the UK given his behaviour towards those same opponents.
Expect an announcement soon from the powers that be.
Funny given Carols love for her grandchildren, the legacy the Ames family will leave through out the Caribbean will be lasting indeed, something even her grandchildren will be embarrassed about.
Given Carols age, I doubt she will leave prison in anything but a box. Along with her husband.
But her grandchildren will be able to read about their grandmother and grandfather and indeed their parents. Because this fraud will be read about for years to come.
Dans wife will certainly be filing for divorce, and I doubt Nicolas husband will care to travel to the UK to visit Nicola in HMP my guess is he will take custody of the kids.
Dans inlaws will never welcome him back into the fold.
And others too will face the wrath of the law, Wooler will surely miss her little man for a while, Tricker will miss all her horsey friends, Geddes won’t need to worry about IT in HMP, Abrams will be kissing his little bundle of joy goodbye for a while, doubt that marriage will survive, maybe he can retire to a kabutz when he has done his time, Regan and Terry may well get a job flipping burgers when this is over, Spector is someone who won’t be a loss to the legal profession in the UK, and no NDA will protect him. Dalligan and Stenning, well they will carry on doing what they have always done when they are released, Stenning following in his families business of criminality and Dalligan, well he will never learn, churning out second hand dodgy motors in Essex. And then we have Taylor, his good looks will attract some unwanted attention behind bars.
Then we have the proceeds of crime act, ouch Campion may become personally responsible for the money laundered through Harlequin Developments, in addition to the insolvent trading nature of that business as identified by James Albert Baker.
It does appear that most of those referred to above are wholly oblivious to the unfolding situation that is about to slam into them.
Foreign nationals cannot be prosecuted by the SFO.
Anonymous 6.22 pm, Boy have you got that wrong, you have got that so wrong.
Foreign nationals as in residing in a foreign country. Foreign countries can request assistance from the SFO but the SFO have no jurisdiction in foreign countries. Hence the statement about the first leader of a country to be prosecuted by the SFO is rubbish.
Anon – a good synopsis.
The solvency update from Ames has opened up the issue. This week will see things take a turn for the worse.
Ps – redress is flowing.
Is this the same “slam into them” scenario that has been muted on here for the last two years? Not happened yet has it.
Anonymous on March 15, 2015 at 6:46 pm
You are getting a little bit confused, you are confusing companies with induviduals. Ralph Gonsalves PM of St. Vincent is facing prosecution in the UK for aiding Ames in his little venture. Whether he will turn up in the UK or not is anyone’s guess.
Ames has been under investigation for the past two years or more, we will soon see the fruits of the investigation.
@ Likes to give but cannot take! March 15, 2015 at 4:45 pm
“St George, don’t be so sensitive [monkeys] was meant to mean a moron not racism.”
Don’t worry, I am indeed “sucking it up”.
I suspect Harlequin’s staff at Buccament Bay and Blu and others who are Harlequin supporters in the Caribbean like Ralph Gonsalves might not be so keen on your terminology, though.
For the good of our brethren.
Mr Ames (as director of the Harlequin companies) signing a statutory declaration declaring that the companies are solvent using standard accounting principles.
We feel that this would clear matters up and draw a line in the sand
Redress the final solution.
Anonymous on March 15, 2015 at 6:46 pm
Foreign nationals as in residing in a foreign country. Foreign countries can request assistance from the SFO but the SFO have no jurisdiction in foreign countries. Hence the statement about the first leader of a country to be prosecuted by the SFO is rubbish.
Just to correct you, it’s the SFO who can request the assistance of foreign governments, authorities etc. If the Hon. Ralph Gonsalves loses the upcoming election there are those who are currently in opposition who will be more than happy to personally escort Mr. Gonsalves all the way to Cockspur Street in London.
For one Vinette Fredericks.
You sure as heck have no understanding of Island politics.
International collaboration
Our International Assistance team deals with requests for assistance from overseas courts and prosecutors. We have assisted many overseas authorities for a number of years.
What can we do to assist you?
In cases of serious or complex fraud, overseas prosecutors and investigators may ask for our assistance to obtain information in the United Kingdom. Our powers allow us to obtain documents, interview witnesses (but not under oath) and restrain assets.
What powers do we have to help?
We have compulsory powers, under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987, which enable us to:
require any person (or company/bank) to provide us with any relevant documents, including confidential documents. Note, however, that we cannot use Section 2 to obtain documents to which legal professional privilege attaches. A lawyer can, however, be required to give the name and address of his client.
require any person to answer any relevant questions, including questions about confidential matters. The same position regarding legal professional privilege applies.
We normally use these powers by serving a notice on the person concerned. The notice states a date by which the action should be carried out. However, if necessary, a Section 2 notice can require immediate action.
If a person fails to comply, if it is not possible to serve a notice, or if we have reasonable grounds to believe that serving a notice would seriously prejudice the investigation, we may apply to a court for a warrant to search their house or business premises and seize the documents. However, before granting a search warrant, the magistrate needs to be satisfied that we have considered all other ways of obtaining the material. This means that your request must set out the facts in such a way that the conclusion is that a search warrant is the only way to recover the documents. A search warrant cannot authorise the seizure of documents covered by legal privilege.
Who may ask for assistance?
The United Kingdom accepts requests for assistance from overseas criminal courts or tribunals, overseas prosecutors, or any other overseas authority which makes requests for assistance in criminal cases.
Who can we not help?
If you live abroad, or have been defrauded by people overseas, you need to contact the law enforcement agency where the fraud occurred for help.
Notice the bit “ask for our assistance”
And no Im not confusing companies with individuals.
The masonic response will come tomorrow.
Anonymous, Ames is being investigated as a UK domiciled national for alledged criminality originating in the UK. Yes with overseas elements.
I will try and explain this as simply as possible.
You are talking about the SFO being called in to look at potential overseas criminality by other governments sometimes involving a connection with the UK.
In this case, the allegation of criminality is based out of the UK, yes Ames will argue as he did in the RL case that all his companies are outside the jurisdiction of the UK with the exception of HMSSE and ASOL.
In the case of HMSSE he will deny that he was party to the decision making process, the authorities will try prove that he was a shadow director, once they have him on that and the fact that he is domiciled in the UK, (there is a big difference between domiciled and resident), and given that the majority of his victims are UK based, along with the fact that the vast majority of the fraudulent sales were conducted in the UK and let’s not forget even Ames appears not to argue the issue that many fraudulent sales were made in the UK, given his unequivocal support for the actions being taken by the FSCS and FOB against IFA’s and Agents. Then this becomes primarily a domestic criminal investigation by the SFO, however for evidentory purposes the SFO do need the information from the RDC’s in order to give them the fullest picture,
The SFO instigated the investigation, not some foreign government or authority, this is a domestic investigation.
However if anyone from any other jurisdiction is implicated in the criminality, or in aiding and abetting Ames in any way, then they too will face prosecution in the UK, if they reside in a country that has no extradition treaty with the UK or don’t volunteer themselves to travel to the UK, then the prosecuting authorities in the UK will have to explore any avenues they have open to them to have those non nationals returned to the UK to face trial.
There are hundreds of migrants jailed in the UK for crimes committed in the UK and when they serve their respective sentences some who have no legal staus here are deported back to their country of origin.
There are non nationals who have committed crimes in the UK who have then absconded, sometimes back to their home countries, some of whom have been extradited back to the UK to face justice.
Yes the SFO does not have a remit to investigate non domestic serious financial crime, or serious financial crimes committed by non UK nationals or companies, and where the victims of those crimes are not UK nationals or domiciled, the fact that the SFO is investigating Ames should clearly demonstrate that they are very much of the view, that a potential crime or crimes have been comitted and that they have the remit to investigate and prosecute these crimes.
But not to prosecute a foreign resident. “The first leader of a foreign country to be prosecuted by the SFO” is what you originally stated. I’m glad your last paragraph agrees with me and you accept you were wrong. Cheers.
@ Anonymous on March 15, 2015 at 8:25 pm
Anon is correct, you are confusing assistance sought from the SFO by foreign courts and prosecutors with domestic criminality where investigations have been instigated by the SFO.
And as Anon has quite clearly pointed out it is the SFO who instigated the investigation against Ames.
The International collaboration is a team within the SFO that deals with requests from foreign courts are prosecutors were investigations have been instigated in foreign jurisdictions.
This is totally seperate to domestic investigations where the power of the SFO domestically is far greater.
Surely you understand what you yourself have posted, see below.
“International collaboration
Our International Assistance team deals with requests for assistance from overseas courts and prosecutors. We have assisted many overseas authorities for a number of years.
What can we do to assist you?”
Of course overseas courts can ask for assistance. The original assertion was that “the first leader of a foreign country to be prosecuted by the SFO” Perhaps you don’t understand what I have written. Assistance does not mean the same as prosecution.
Anonymous 10.27 pm, sorry you are still not getting it. My last para does not imply that a foreign national even the PM of St. Vincent if implicated in a fraud perpetrated by Ames will not face prosecution in the UK.
Anyone foreigner or otherwise implicated in the Fraud perpitrated by Ames will face prosecution in the UK if the authorities can extradite them,
Your opinion is wholly wrong, seriously if what you are saying is correct we would have a thriving business of fraud bring perpitrated against UK nationals by foreigners setting up dummy UK companies in the knowledge that they could never face prosecution in the UK.
Grow up.
Anonymous, Anon is right get over yourself.
If the PM has aided and abetted Ames and Ames is prosecuted in the UK for fraud against UK nationals then the PM will also face prosecution here.
Whether the PM comes over here well that is a different matter.
Or as was pointed out if he loses the election Im sure the opposition would gladly hand him over.
Anonymous 10.36, the SFO are not assisting anyone with investigating and potentially prosecuting Ames, they are the ones who initiated the investigation, they are seeking assistance not assisting. Big difference.
Nice to see the discussion has defended into anti HP thuggery again. Grow up, get over yourself. Tut tut, you believe what you want. At least try and understand between yourselves who is supposed to be assisting whom. Hoho. And just to be clear, it is not the opposition who would/could hand him over, it’s the judiciary. Perhaps it’s you “who has no clue”
Anonymous 10.55 pm you really have no idea how small island politics works. If the opposition came into power they would hand their nemesis Mr. Gonsalves over in a heart beat.
How many months before Gonsalves flees to either Venezuela or Cuba
and asks for political asylum?
Heh Dave, Dan and especially Carol, pay backs going to be a bitch, but boy are you guys so deserving of it.
We was asked was what we are doing worth it, absolutely totally, we are just sorry it has taken this long. But yeah it was worth it.
Taking scum like you three off the streets is always worth it.
No more pathetic lies, I hope those you drag down with you remember you for a very long time…………
Oh Dave, your second Gerald Ratner moment; and both involve the FSCS.
Quite funny analogy that. Rather was actually telling the truth about his products. You obviously thing DA is telling the truth also. Well done.
Quite funny, lets ask him to prove it!
If somebody owned a solvent company and it’s reputation was being badly damaged by speculation that it was insolvent when it wasn’t, why wouldn’t the owner of that company publish evidence to prove categorically that it wasn’t trading insolvently? What would be the gain of not producing this evidence?
Sorry change of subject. If I hear that Harlequin investers have invested in an unregulated product and lost their money, I might consider shooting myself.
Hello Sid,
Just imagine if the FSCS asked him to prove it? That would be tricky for example was insolvent……
@Sunshine
Yes but the advice for the SIPP was regulated, or you could sue you scum agent.
What a total joke.
We can all see Ames has been running two resorts, is apparently attracting visitors (through deal sites), and is barely making any money (as per the minutes put out by RL and our own assumption that he’s getting the bargain hunters). He has failed to deliver on the vast majority of his contracts and is now crying about how the FSCS have misrepresented his companies.
What Dave doesn’t tell you is that James Baker sated that the companies are insolvent. Insolvency doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of cash flow (which of course Anonymous will try and scare you with – “the resorts are receiving record bookings” blah blah blah). You can be insolvent even if you have money coming in – IE if you have a building mortgaged, your occupancy is never going to meet the interest repayments, you’re insolvent. It means you have to sell some assets to get liquidity back (IE scale down for the short term).
Dave also won’t tell you where his “finance” is going to come from.
Remember, he needs finance to continue building. Dave keeps telling us this. This is where the insolvency issue is best demonstrated – if he needs external finance to continute construction, and does not have access to that resource, his projects are insolvent. IE they cannot meet their outstanding liabilities (contracts in breech). He will have to sell some of the assets in order to create the funding himself.
A distinct lack of both progress (wasn’t H Hotel meant to be started by now? Oh wait…. that was finished. Was meant to be finished), and external financing is nothing more than whispers in the wind, we can finally state that Harlequin is on its death bed.
The FSCS have made a public expression of their opinion that Harlequin is unable to honour its contractual obligations. I don’t know the inner workings of the FSCS, but if I were a highly public body with affiliations with some of the most revered financial institutions, I would not make rash decisions based on specific cases. The FSCS is an impartial & objective organisation, and they will have, therefore, come to their conclusions themselves.
The update from Harlequin, yet again, seemingly demonstrates Ames’ apparent summation that the vast majority of the victim base having no grasp on reality, and is frankly insulting. I rue the day when the Ames rabble appear before justice to receive their just desserts.
And remember – Ames recommended Holkham, likes his “trust” and has lied through his teeth about the “banking glitch”, “home improvements”, “SFO closing the case” etc etc.
If you’re a cash victim, make your own informed decision about the company. Request financial data pertaining to your specific resort (how much is required, how much is there, where is the rest coming from). Without this most base of details, you should do nothing.
Hello LL, I’m sure that day will come….and probably soon, if it hasn’t already of course.
We have had a look at the accounts produced by Ames and shown by RL in the DD and frankly they are a work of fiction, we are surprised that James Albert Baker is an accountant but soon he will have to answer to the right people. Nice try Dave, was it really worth it ???????
I did what was asked of me potato head.
Nope Jim needs to have a look at his witness statement again, he has no excuse, he can’t say Dave told him, and isn’t it sad that Dave thinks the builder is behind his demise, Dave’s demise is for reasons Dave knew would come out in the wash eventually.
Well I suppose one could say had Ames not lied through his teeth about the builder, and then to his investors, the SFO, the FSCS, etc. that all would be well now. Not really because if Ames had been truthful his companies would have closed a long time ago.
The problem with lying is that you have to maintain consistency, if you can’t it all starts falling apart.
Ames is going down, and the speed of his demise has reached break neck speed, yet the idiots close to Ames seem oblivious to their plight, they believe that Ames will pull this off, everyone one of them with the exception of two people, Simon Terry and Carol Ames, Carol Ames who will lose what’s most precious to her, her Grandchildren, ( first we had Matts divorce, now Dan and Nicola fast approaches, there is no way that Dans in laws will allow Carol access to her grandkids, especially with a criminal record. And Nicola’s inlaws will never expose her kids to the trauma of seeing Mummy locked up in the UK, never mind letting the kids see Granny again.)
But that’s what you get Carol for trying to destroy thousands of others lives, you reap what you sow.
You and your husband have lied to investors on an almost constant basis, through your fictitious updates. In the hope that you both along with your son will not be blamed for the farce you all operated.
How can DA have lied to the SFO . He has never been interviewed by the SFO. How has the speed of his demise reached breakneck speed? You do speak some garbage.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2997089/Mark-Wright-Michelle-Keegan-results-pre-wedding-workouts-luxury-break-Caribbean.html
Mark Wright and Michelle Keegan show off the results of their pre-wedding workouts during luxury break in the Caribbean
They’re preparing for their big day, so Mark Wright and Michelle Keegan are probably in need of some rest and relaxation.
Before they tie the knot and have what will no doubt be a no-expenses spared honeymoon, the couple jetted off for a pre-wedding break in the Caribbean last week.
Former TOWIE star Mark has been posting stunning photos of the couple’s sunshine getaway on Twitter, labelling the holiday as ‘paradise.’
Mark and his Coronation Street actress fiancee stayed at a luxury 5-star resort on the island of St Vincent.
Clearly the two enjoyed their travels with Mark tweeting a series of snaps from the holiday, while labelling the Buccament Bay Resort as ‘best gaff in the Caribbean #fact’.
One photo sees Mark giving Michelle a piggy back around the resort as the sun sets.
The Essex boy shows off his athletic body in a pair of lime green swimming shorts as he flashes a big smile for the camera.
The results of Michelle’s intense pre-wedding workouts can be seen as she holds onto her fiance and give a big thumbs up.
In another picture shared by Mark, the actress can be seen sipping on a colourful drink as she wanders around their home away from home.
Dressed in a pink and green cover-up and flip flops, the stunning star piled her brunette hair into an up do as she enjoyed the sunshine.
Mark meanwhile seems to have a penchant for bright swimming trunks, posing in both a green pair and a yellow.
The Take Me Out: The Gossip presenter was clearly missing the resort as he tweeted alongside the pics: ‘I love you @buccbayresort you will be missed !! #untilnexttime.’
Mark and Michelle are thought to be getting married this spring after getting engaged in 2013.
The couple are reportedly choosing not to wed in either of their home towns of Stockport and Essex respectively, instead selecting a grand Tudor mansion in Suffolk for their venue.
The manor they are thought to have picked is called Hengrave Hall is in the small town Bury St Edmunds and boasts 350 acres.
They are reportedly due to tie the knot in the church of St John Lateran, right by the main hall where their family and friends will stay and celebrate with them.
And in keeping with most celeb nuptials, according to The Sun Mark and Michelle have received funding from a glossy magazine with a deal believed to be worth over £1 million.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time.
Redress is the only game in town.
Anonymous how the hell would you know if Ames had been interviewed by the SFO or not?
And as for the piece in the daily mail, “best gaff in the Caribbean”, says it all, wonder who paid for that holiday. Must also prove that the Resort is solvent.
Each and ever day we receive more redress. The train is rolling. We don’t need Ames.
The numbers are staggering. We are overjoyed.
So how may people have actually been redressed so far?
A few hundred. 98% win rate. #nice
I made it up, I guessed, I work for the SFO. Or perhaps I am DA. Do you really think I’m going to tell you.
98% seems like an odd percentage. Why were 2% turned down? And have they all been SIPP claims so far?
Yes Anon 6..13, you are right. The FSCS are independent and they have made their own decision. They have said that HP is nor insolvent. It’s good you have reiterated this. Thanks.
@ Anonymous 9.26 pm if you were Dave Ames why should we believe you now, you have not told us the truth in the past, and if you are representing the SFO then perhaps you can tell us the case is dropped.
2% execution only.
Rest are clean as a whistle.
#nice
Mark Neale
Financial Services
Compensation Scheme 10th
Floor Beaufort House 15
St Botolph Street
London EC3A 7QU
sorry if i sound stupid but what does execution only mean? and of the 98% success rate roughly what is the split between sipp and remortgage?
Anon, don’t you be worrying about that.
All you need to know is that we don’t need your jibber jabber.
Anonymous 9.45 pm given Ames’ recent protestations that his companies are not insolvent, all this has done is to trigger an avalanche of correspondance to the FSCS by a number of parties with proof that Ames’ companies are insolvent, this includes analysis of some very dodgy Caribbean accounting.
Yes this information could be classed as coming from enemies of Ames, but let’s be realistic here, most of those Ames has come into contact with could now be classed as enemies of his.
Thousands of investors have chosen the redress route and there is now solid evidence that the accounting produced by Ames and James Albert Baker is nothing more then a complete act of fiction.
Unless of course Ames will accept that he took in excess of £ 650 million in deposits, because that is what the act of fiction states, when analysed.
“Yes Anon 6..13, you are right. The FSCS are independent and they have made their own decision. They have said that HP is nor insolvent. It’s good you have reiterated this. Thanks.”
If you think Harlequin are solvent, it’s your choice. FSCS has made up their mind without you.
I personally believe Harlequin’s investment RDC’s (not the resorts Ames built with other people’s money) to be insolvent. I don’t know the balance sheets for BB and Blu, so unless you work at Harlequin and can get access to them, you won’t either. Therefore, whatever you or I write is but speculation. What is a fact is that each RDC has contracts weighted against it. These contracts contain refund clauses which can be invoked through a case, and eventually statutory demand. This creates a liability from an accounting perspective, balanced against the only asset of land, leading to insolvency.
Since Harlequin is a string of these independently owned companies, the FSCS must have determined that each RDC in relation to the cases they’ve awarded has become insolvent
Notwithstanding that they might not even be able to build certain resorts (Merricks etc), I find it bemusing how certain individuals (Storey and Anonymous) cling to Ames link a lost dog. Amazing to think these people actually once held positions of responsibility in society.
May I suggest that every investor email the senior management of the FSCS and ask why it is they have stated that Ames’ companies are not insolvent as per Ames’ pronouncements.
If you wish to contact the non-executive directors, please email sharon.hoye@fscs.org.uk
@Let’s all email the FSCS hierarchy
What a good idea consider it done.
@Anon 10.22, all I did last night was reiterate what Anon 6.13 (probably you) said. Of course you then went to type and became a typical anti HP thug with your pathetic individual comment. Has the concrete dust got to your brain?
@Anonymous 9:11am
My apologies if you felt my reply “thuggish”.
You obviously support Harlequin. Who would not to be impressed by the CGI brochures and other marketing material. No one can fault the marketing/sales aspect of the business. Indeed, as I alluded to in my reply, Harlequin seem – in the most part – to be running the existing operations relatively well (although that relativity is dependent on who you ask).
The problem with Harlequin is actually very simple. Harlequin made promises to every single one of their “investors” (your term) which was to build their revenue-generating room (10% returns guaranteed) by a particular date (the deadline). To date, only Buccament Bay has had any significant progress made (Blu was a refurb, not a new construction).
Harlequin have used the “builder” line as the reason why this progress could not be made. Constant references to “Paddy” are a demonstration of this.
Ames proceeded with litigation against Mr O’Halloran in 2013 and was awarded a favourable decision. Although this decision is under appeal, it demonstrated that $1.6m was misappropriated by him. Investors (your term) understand this, and have been very patient awaiting the outcome of the legal proceedings. However, the idea that pursuing these proceedings to right the situation is incorrect.
Out of £440m that Harlequin took in, they spent ~£100m on Buccament Bay. They spent £1.4m on Harlequin Air, and spent more on the different resorts. No problem in itself.
The problems begin when you appreciate the numbers, and how they’ve been used. For example, the underlying principle of the Harlequin model was to use the constructed units as a way to raise leveraged capital (apparently Ames has $200m assets in the Caribbean which was based on the red book valuation), so the rest of the units could be constructed. This was always the plan (investors would receive virtual mortgage etc etc), but thus far has not been forthcoming. Indeed, in order for this model to work, Harlequin actually have to have a financial partner, which again has not been forthcoming.
The entire Harlequin operation was based on 30% down, with the remaining 70% balance being raised by Harlequin, and deducted from the returns to investors to service the debt. This, again, was acceptable to every investor (your term) who signed their contract – the understanding that by finding the 30% deposit, they’ll wait until the deadline, and then have a virtual mortgage to pay the balance. This virtual mortgage would still provide them with the 10% guaranteed returns, alleviate the interest obligations, and allow them an appreciating asset in the Caribbean. They would be then free to sell the unit, or at least work on the premise that it will deliver much higher returns after their mortgage has been serviced.
If this model were to work, Harlequin have to build all the units they prescribed, as to provide as much security for a financial partner. With the numbers from Harlequin’s RL spreadsheet (IE including inefficiencies etc), you could argue that you’d expect at least 3 Buccament Bay’s to exist today (£330m) for the money Harlequin had been paid.
Unfortunately, Harlequin decided to spend 50% / ~£250m on up-front commissions for their sales team. Instead of using industry commission structures (paying over time), the company paid on gross sale value, thus causing a huge shortfall (70% of the balance was yet to be forthcoming). This is a similar situation to the credit crunch (sub prime mortgages), and is not sound economics.
This shortfall might have been acceptable to some. An attempt to correct it (by selling some land, giving investors the chance to own equity etc) might have been appealing. However, what we have instead is a combative, bestial attitude from all and sundry.
Ames blames not only the builder (who misappropriated $1.6m), but also his former accountants. The case is yet to be decided, but Ames has put emphasis on the $70m he claims he was left out of pocket. Put this into comparison with the £250 he spent on commissions, and you can begin to see why many investors (your term) are sceptical of any progress from it.
This is on top of the many different “misunderstandings” Ames has yet to correct:
– The interest payments stopped by “banking glitch”
– The SIPP funds changing their policy to “hold onto more funds”
– The SFO stopped investigating
– The FSCS supports his trust
– RL “ambulance chasers”
– $200m of assets (which is not true – this figure was based on phase 3 being constructed at BB)
– HMSSE buying property in Dubai
– Directors’ loans from HMSSE not being paid back
Whilst many would call the misunderstandings “lies”, you could argue that Ames has simply misunderstood the situation, and is a genuinely looking out for investors’ interests.
The contention is here. You seem to think the misunderstandings are no big deal, but unfortunately, they translate into how the Harlequin model will continue to function (IE how to achieve returns). This is important.
By denying that Harlequin / Ames has done anything wrong, you affirm that the Harlequin model would have actually worked before the misappropriations occurred. You affirm that Harlequin would in fact be able to complete all of its resorts – if not with its own – then with a financial partner’s money. You affirm, by virtue of the Harlequin model, that the investors who have the deadlines on their contracts would have already had their unit completed, and would be receiving their 10% guaranteed return. This is yet to happen.
Time and time again, Harlequin has failed to deliver on what it promised, and yet individuals, both on here and within Harlequin, seem to think nothing has been done wrong. They don’t appreciate that out of the £440m, only 1/4 was spent on BB (there were at least another 5 resorts), 2/4 was spent on commissions, and 1/4 was spent on other unrelated things.
So now we have Ames apparently claiming the FSCS did not call his companies insolvent. I don’t know why they replied to Ames personally, because there is no “Harlequin” to which they mention. There is HHR based in the Caymen islands, but I don’t think any investor paid monies directly to this. There are of course the RDC’s, but they didn’t offer the products. They were paid by HMSSE. So to whom are FSCS referring when they mention “Harlequin”?
In conclusion, Ames took £440m, is running two resorts, and is stuck to make progress. He has failed on his promises (not failed in running the resorts). People are angry that he used their money to make a nice little business for himself. People need their money back or returns. Neither of these are forthcoming, and is why there is a strong negative feeling towards Ames on here, further exacerbated by the constant window-dressing of the issues at hand.
£440m or “in excess of £630m” Let’s make up a figure eh.
Anonymous 11.03 am, exactly that’s what Ames appears to have done as in make up a figure. Or figures.
Having conducted a thorough analysis of the BCQS GDV valuatuon coupled with the various accounts produced in the various court cases, the James Albert Baker witness statement and associated appendices JBA 1,2,3 etc and along with copies of numerous contracts that were provided to us, it is quite apparent that the figure of £ 400 – £ 440 million deposits paid, quoted in the RL Due Diligence is grossly understated.
Based on the figures todate provided by Dave Ames the amount paid in deposits is in excess of £ 630 million.
The anaylisis of the accounts produced by Dave Ames also demonstrates that the witness statement produced by James Albert Baker is WRONG in many respects. Whether this was a deliberate act or the act of a grossly incompetent accountant will be determined later.
The only way that the figure of £ 400-£440 million quoted in the RL Due Diligence can be correct is if (a). BCQS over stated the valuation of Buccament Bay by providing a manifestly false document designed to mislead those who would seek to rely on it or (b). That Dave Ames provided BCQS with false fraudulent documentation in order to mislead those who would seek to rely on it. Or (c). Both BCQS and Dave Ames conspired to produce a false fraudulent valuation for the purposes of deceiving those who would seek to rely on it.
We would like to take the opportunity to thank all those who provided us with all the relevant information even though some were putting themselves at risk from attacks and threats from Ames, his family and his lawyers, who have thrown their ethics hand book out the window.
All those who provided information did so in the hope that Ames, his family and staff members would be brought to justice.
Are you incapable of answering a simple point with a simple answer rather than something which is longer than a chapter in War and Peace. Bored to death now.
Anonymous 2.10 pm, most people are very interested in understanding the Ames business model, if you are bored to death with this then move on, stop making comments on subjects which bore you, and let others decide for themselves.
If you are bored by all this and do not wish to impart any information you might have on Ames and Harlequin that might help others aside from your continuous snide sarky comments, then why not just leave us be.
“Snide, snarky comments?” Now is it? Don’t like being questioned do we. Well you have proved one thing, the RL DD was inaccurate as was claimed by DA. And I am bored to death with your long winded answers, not by subjects which are posted on here. You couldn’t even get that right.
Being bored by truth and facts, painful. Some people refuse to believe long or shots posts about the truth.
Just to clarify, I wrote the long post about War and Peace. I use the “Anon” name to confuse you. I only go off what I’ve seen (IE £440m taken).
“RL DD was inaccurate as was claimed by DA.”
DA can claim what ever he wants. At least the Regulatory Legal due diligence was forthcoming.
Anonymous I think you questions were answered comprehensively and you seem to miss the point, The figures being quoted are from Ames directly and his valuations, but you carry on shooting your mouth off, my guess is the info posted on here is being sent to those who matter, oh yes of course, your take on this, is that the SFO are not or never will do nothing 😉
Dream on
I work at Regulatory Legal, too
I worked for Ames too.
Anon has clearly pointed out that they do not believe the figures in the RL DD are correct, and you are making the exact same point so finally you agree on something.
Anon has already demonstrated that the GDV value of Buccament Bay is c £ 900 million if memory serves me correctly meaning c£ 230 million in deposits taken, again these figures from Ames and BCQS.
This means that if the RL figures are correct then c 7400 contract holders paid an average deposit of £ 23000 on the remaining 7400 properties. A tiny sum indeed, and a figure you have to agree cannot be correct.
Therefore yes the RL DD is wrong, because the BCQS report was produced with information provided by Ames therefore it has to be beyond question.
You don’t confuse anyone. RL can be forthcoming about what they like. Especially using confidential correspondence for their own ends, I.e. Insolvency vs solvency. Funny I’ve been on the RL books also lol
So anonymous are you now saying that the insolvent nature of Ames’ companies is confidential, but that this confidential information, is / was the subject of some sort of an NDA lol, Dave go argue that point with the Police lol, this takes the biscuit lol.
Whether Harlequin is solvent or not does not affect my SIPP claim; so frankly I don’t give a dam.
Contract holder compared to investor can you explain the difference at sometime in the future?
@Bob Storey and all your many HP keyboard personas
Please give your mouth and fingers a rest
There are 9100 contracts. RL believe that there are c 6100 “investors”. But this figure may not include many if not all those “investors” from the U.S.
The accounts we have suggest that there may have been far more then 6100 induvidual investors, furthermore there is more than one company owned by Ames which is a party to the contracts.
There seems to be no accounting for the US monies, and no accounting even though Ames had a company registered in the US.
The actual number of investors may never be known.
When we refer to contact holders, We are also referring to those investors who may have purchased multiple units across multiple resorts and companies.
For example;
Investor A purchases two units, a unit at BuccBay and a unit at Two rivers. These are two different companies, two different resorts, so investor A has two seperate contracts and is a contract holder with two legally distinct and seperate companies.
It is technically wrong to state that there are 6,100 investors in “Harlequin” There is no such thing as “Harlequin”.
And whilst we acknowledge that some investors may have invested in more then one unit in the same resort and not withstanding this it is for the reasons above that we refer to contract holders as opposed to investors.
If anyone can put a figure on the number of US investors this would help greatly.
Bob, hope you have plenty of Kleenex in stock:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2997089/Mark-Wright-Michelle-Keegan-results-pre-wedding-workouts-luxury-break-Caribbean.html
Anon, there you go again. Who mentioned a NDA? Lol You do like to exaggerate things don’t you. Lol Confidential and NDA do not mean the same do they. Lol x 2
Anonymous we are fully aware of a whole heap of absolute fiction produced by Ames for the purposes of litigation which Ames considered confidential and had various parties sign up to NDA’s as a result.
Regardless of the NDA’s we have obtained copies of much of the information covered by these NDA’s and before Ames and Spector jump up and down with excitement it has to be pointed out that both Ames and Spector have breached the NDA’s including those we speak of.
Richard, Dave cheers for the information much appreciated.
Anonymous 6.29 pm, do you like making an idiot of yourself lol Ho ho lol * 2 etc, it does you or Ames no good.
Confidential and NDA are two very different things. Ames could pass confidential information onto third parties, there is nothing to prevent those third parties from passing this confidential information onto others, unless of course this confidential information is covered by an NDA which is a seperate and distinct agreement not to share the confidential information.
Off you go again. Jeeeez you do like the sound of your own keyboard. “FSCS does not consider “Harlequin” insolvent,as was incorrectly stated in a letter to a small number of claimants”
See no NDA but the FSCS referring to “Harlequin” . But if a “claimant” wants to publicise a confidential letter to the outside world that is up to them. Especially when there is 15% to be earned.
Anonymous 6.57 pm
You are quoting from an Update from Ames, where by he produced a number of paragraphs he claims formed part of correspondance he has had with the FSCS, I say Ames but if it wasn’t him it was someone employed by one of his many companies.
None of us know or can verify that these so called extracts did indeed come from the FSCS, none of us have proof of this. Let’s not forget that it was Ames who originally stated that the FSCS stated that to obtain redress from them you had to join the trust, and we know now that was a bare faced lie, yet Ames stated this in an update. So why should we believe him now.
Ames has also stated in the past that he has been taken out of context, so why not produce the entire communication from the FSCS just on the off chance that Ames might have taken the FSCS statement out of context.
And if Ames has provided information to the FSCS which might prove that his companies are not insolvent, why not share this important information with the wider world, afterall Ames has always stressed the importance of being transparent and has stated that he intends to be far more transparent going forward.
Few if any with the exception of yourself are willing to accept a few extracts in an update as being factual given Ames’ track record.
Anonymous 6.57 pm, if the FSCS write to a claims management company or their clients stating that they are willing to pay redress to a number of clients, what the hell do you think the claims management company will do with the information.
Of course, if the FSCS have the issue of the solvency of Ames’ companies all wrong then presumably the redress payments will stop.
Also if Ames has been wronged by the FSCS, why does he not pursue them for damages ?, or if it is your contention that RL published a confidential document between investors and the FSCS, why doesn’t Ames pursue RL for damages on the basis that RL knew the information to be confidential and RL did nothing to check the veracity of the what you seem to consider absurd and wholly inappropriate claims about Ames’ companies by the FSCS.
I have sent the Harlequin update to Mr Neale at the FSCS, just incase it could have been taken out of context.
Everyone is sick of Ames and his obsessive lies, it’s over; he has failed again.
However, this time he has failed not only in businessmen, but as a husband, father and grandfather.
That’s a pretty good failure rate Ames, your dad would be proud of you 😉
Ah SIPP-ing aka countless ids is back. Totally pointless thuggish post. No doubt your dad would be proud of you, do you have a dad for each of your personalities?
There are many valuations on H Barbados including one for 1.250 billion,today. However it has no beds.If a poster decides to take action would it make a difference?
Can someone tell Ames (The Failure) we have no interest in some Z list wannabe celeb going to BB.
Finance, yes, returns yes – but some freeloader *uck off!
SCS No Land is the next matter which will blow up.
At last I will have proof.
Can we run a sweep to see how long Harlequin will survive? Or how long he will be ‘on holiday’ with his family…
Only Ames cares if the FSCS say he is insolvent, they will still payout because they value the investment as £nil.
Nil value or insolvent, who cares!
But the FSCS say that Harlequin is solvent. If they got that wrong perhaps they got the nil value wrong also.
@Anonymous
And changing the nil value will help whom exactly? The SIPP people finally have a way out. Pensioners can’t wait until 2020 to get any money back, especially as they were promised returns far before that time. In this instance, Ames has failed (deadlines). In running the resorts, not.
I also owe you an apology as I found on the RL forum that someone called Darren had been receiving £150 a month for 2 years. Although there is no proof, I doubt he would have written what he did without having substance to back it up (he was questioning about what he should do etc etc). So “sorry” 😉
Finally, I think Ames could put the matter of insolvency to bed pretty simply – by producing a set of accounts which explains where the original deposits went (some would say £440m), management accounts for the operational resorts, and the next step (IE financial partners / business plan). Without these, the only thing we have to go with is Jim Baker’s assertion that the RDC’s are insolvent.
David Ames – Harlequin Solvency Declaration – click on link
FSCS Clarification Letter – click on link
All,
The FSCS determinations referring to Harlequin being “insolvent” certainly ruffled some feathers. The FSCS have issued an amendment letter to our clients who have received positive determinations. The FSCS have provided a clarification which steers a middle course.
Simply :-
1. Harlequin investments have no quantifiable value.
2. Harlequin is not formally insolvent.
Point (2) could refer to the formal process of insolvency under the Insolvency Act 1986. It is true to say that the Harlequin Resort Development Companies are not in any formal insolvency process.
The bottom line for our clients is that redress values Harlequin at £0 value. This is what we need in order to maximise redress. In simple terms, business as usual for us.
Is Harlequin solvent ?
This is a different question. With investors being invited to invest more monies, it would be prudent to wait until Harlequin have declared themselves solvent.
We have provided David Ames lawyers with a simple draft Statutory Declaration that should clear this matter up. We can see no reason why this declaration can be made to draw a line under the issue.
LIVE CHAT – 8pm this evening.
We look forward to you joining us.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
RL just cannot help but interfere yet again. What has it got to do with RL about solvency/insolvency? Nil value gets your redress and your 15%. Not a personal crusade is it?
Anon – 1,54
RL will make millions in 2015. This kind of money plus the £1m trust fees allows all sorts crusade to be run.
So what’s the alternative….wait 5 more years to see if anything happens? I will have been a HP ‘investor’ for the best part of 15 years by then when it was supposed to be a quick win! It’s a ridiculous situation.
Will Diddy Dave confirm his companies are solvent? If not why not?
Oh Dave, talk about digging yourself into a hole.
And as for the FSCS supporting the Diddy Man Trust!!
Oh Dave….
The Trust is a non starter.
Trade out or liquidation are the two options for Harlequin.
For investors it’s either redress or ruin.
“RL just cannot help but interfere yet again.”
Funny aye Bob? DA has snookered himself and it’s all RL’s fault.
You’re just too predictable.
Oh Diddy Dave, taking on the FSCS it’s not too bright, it’s a little bit silly to be honest.
Last time I looked they were part of the British Government, just like the SFO and HMRC.
Now, lets imagine they were looking at your activities, don’t you think they’ll all have a nice little chat in the many Government Masonic lodges?
A fellow Brother informed me a project is already underway, it’s called
Operation Blue Book.
Oh Dave!
No wonder Ames takes about conspiracy.
http://fallingmasonry.info/masonic-mps.html
Gerald Ratner is now worth £35m. Not the best of analogies is it. Something you could only dream about.
Just like Richard Ingham…….He dreams of owning a car.
Out for blood on the RL forum.
Wow, the lynch mob are really going at it. This will be the end of Ames and the greedy agents. Not to mention Harlequin.
Bobend still feeling smug now?
RL seem to be encouraging a final showdown.
Maybe the crusades are back on.
So Fatchett thinks a class action funded by the lemmings who will get Jack shit back? Yea right. Don’t forget the crusades finished in a defeat.
Not for the crusade leaders. They did well. Lots of funding to crusade.
Dave’s crusade ends in liquidation.
Richard the Lionheart ended in death.
Anon,
Fair point. Crusades are called off, pro tem.
Whatever happens, Ames can’t ignore the people he’s sold units to. He might think he’s doing well with his hotels in the Caribbean, but the 6000+ people who are struggling will not just go away.
This is where a group action would be effective. Currently, the Harlequin business cannot move forward. It can continue to trade, as the two operations seem to be at least self funding (although Ames mentioned BB was trading at a small loss, which I’m sure will improve). The other resorts are where the problems exist.
No matter how much chest-beating is done on both sides (RL as bad as Ames for it), you have to recognize that in order to get anything built, Ames firstly has to have capital, secondly has to have a clear runway. At the moment, there are so many creditors, so much wreckage, that any money he gets will almost certainly be the target of one of those parties.
A group action would give claimants the chance to claim over more of the capital which Ames will raise, hence preventing any further building. This will probably lead to liquidation, as the creditors will not go away without some sort of agreement in place.
It’s just a classic shit storm. I am sorry for anyone having to spend time unravelling the mess. It’s certainly opened my eyes to the level of ineptitude of some people.
Desperate affairs require desperate measures.
Oh Dave, this is your Battle of the ‘Little’ Bighorn
Easy, let’s get everyone to do a new statutory demand.
I believe.
Pro-Harlequin Investors’ Group
The Pro-Harlequin Investors Group is a wholly independent group of Harlequin investors. We believe that the only way in which all investors will realise a profitable investment is for all investors to unite behind Harlequin and support the stated project objectives.
Consequently, the primary aims of the group are:
Work with Harlequin companies worldwide to help, wherever possible, to ensure the project meets all published objectives
Present a united response to all negative press and action by individuals and minority groups
Take independent action to address / redress unfounded and inaccurate press reporting in all media, newspapers and TV
Engage constructively with regulatory bodies, the SIPP companies and IFAs to regain their support
Provide a web based repository of all relevant Harlequin information, that can realistically be made public, relating to the investments for the benefit of registered Pro-Harlequin Investors
@PHIG, how about….
1) HP provides documented evidence that the company is solvent
2) HP provides documented evidence that funding is available
These are the only 2 points that anyone needs to worry about right now. If they can be proven by HP public support will rise dramatically and all of your points above will work themselves out. If they can’t however, then it is human nature for us to assume that HP is in fact insolvent and that finance is unavailable, in which case there is nothing left to support. Solvency is a hot topic right now and finance has been talked about for a very long time. Both points need to be addressed as a matter of priority.
Bonkers!
Mr Ames is working very hard to protect your investment in these very difficult times, he deserves some recognition for this. These ambulance chasing ‘firms’ are just that.
We need to be united to succeed.
£9500 rental per month.
http://www.gascoignehalman.co.uk/property/502493
What about the other director of TM, really who would trust them when you die!!
http://talkingwills.co.uk/meet-the-team/robert-shaw/
I admire your loyalty and commitment PHIG, but Ames has had my money (and a lot of it) for 8 years and has never given me anything in return. I’m now told that I need to give it at least another 5 years. Do these difficult times span over 13 years?
Sid in 13 years you will be over it and won’t care, start forgetting about it from today and begin the healing process
Robert I Shaw
41 Whitbarrow Road
Lymm
Cheshire
WA13 9AW
https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/director/1853175/robert-shaw
@heriff Fatman Walton – No legal fees plus commission, best investment yet for him!
Good on him, but then again, dare we ask for proof.
It’s all his fault Harlequin is in such a mess, he was offered a refund.
@PHIG 10.47 am
@FasotEDoTh 11.00 am
@RSedoTM 11.04am
@SFWNlfpcbiyfh 3.10pm
@FasoRShEDoTM 4.00pm
@Anonymous 4.11pm
@Trouble 4.24pm
All are Misrepresentations.
@Sunshine, and your point is?
Will Ames confirm, ignore, or deny, the recent request from Reg Legal about his companies solvency?
I know it’s a big word Dave, so here is an explanation.
Solvency, in finance or business, is the degree to which the current assets of an individual or entity exceed the current liabilities of that individual or entity
Talking of misrepresentations, the topic of this thread, by the GAC (great ambulance chaser) clearly says “as in those cases the bulk of the compensation is likely to be bourne by investment advisors”. So there you have if folks not by The FSCS but the IFAs.
Come on Dave, what’s up the FSCS saying nasty things about you?
What about the GV Bob and all his lies?
Looks like someone is about to wet their pants. Let’s take a guess. Ignore would be my bet. With the way that RL is stoking up the rhetoric (is it legal for a legal firm to do that?) I don’t think DA will be getting into a dialog any time soon with RL.
Yes but when he ignores it it will fan the flames of the insolvency word. If he say’s the companies are solvent – then it’s proved otherwise, he’s in trouble.
So, i would say he is between a rock and a hard place.
Maybe the FSCS will dig a little deeper into the murky non accounts.
Burns must be feeling the pressure trying to rent his house out for £9500 PCM 😉
FSCS have confirmed Harlequin is not insolvent. Good enough, get over it.
I did hear that he has become almost a recluse, such a shame not rubbing shoulder with the rich and famous aye? That will stop you bragging in your ex offices in Warrington.
Shame it must really hurt HAVING to rent your house and lose the Aston Martin.
That makes me happy because Alistair I KNOW what you are like. Not showing off now to your minions 😉
FSCS have confirmed Harlequin is not insolvent. Good enough, get over it.
CORRECT, JUST LIKE VALUING IT AT ZERO – GET OVER IT.
Anon – they haven’t confirmed it to be solvent either.
But at zero for sure.
Zero value is only marginally better than insolvent.
What’s the opposite of insolvent? That would be solvent. It’s either one or the other.
That court claim against the agent on the RL site looks a bit nasty.
Some agents may feel a little uncomfortable this evening.
RL have some friends who are agents. They also have a list of “Holkham” promoters who will be targeted.
The claim on the RL site has after the event insurance. RL have nothing to lose.
Who do you think they should target ?
I think TailorMade Tw@ts should be top of the list.
All agents aren’t bad, just most. They sold it for the huge commission & now they pay the price.
And why did they get for recommending Holkham Compensation?
Apart from a split of the non profits of course and a few wills 😉
Scum pure scum, stuff you when you’re alive and after you went you’re dead.
Robert Shaw. Gob shite stumpy.
Harlequin and TM if not finished already will be shortly.
Can cash investors and others get their investments back?
Not cash investors, no. Look at the RL site.
Has the GV declared his companies insolvent yet?
it is unlikely that most of the agents who recommended/advised this will be the ones that end up paying redress. if they are still trading and solvent then maybe BUT the reality is that the FSCS will pay out and it is the rest of the industry via their levies that will be the ones that stump up the monies to cover the fscs redress ( given that may of these advisers/ifa’s / etc never sold or recommended this investments and by all accounts according to some other online sites they have been airing concerns for some many years regarding this i would imagine that they will be not too happy having to foot the bill)
So Anonymous, you concur that it is the IFAs that will foot the bill and not the FSCS not trying to reclaim the money from Harlequin.
If I had assets and sold Harlequin I would be worried.
It seems unfair the honest ifa’s have to pay a levy for the one’s that sold harlequin. Why are some of these ifa’s still working in the industry when they have destroyed so many people’s lives?
The good news is that Uncle Al & Uncle Rob got a bit close to Uncle Hector.
Bank transfers are such pesky things. Provide evidence and all.
God bless the GV.
We will have brand new vehicles for our chasing of Ambulances.
Interesting that the big hotel chain Radisson launched a BLU brand…I believe this was in 2009, before BLU in St Lucia….so was this a deliberate copy or an accident?
Radisson Blu operates 265 hotels, with 42 projects in development.
Harlequin operates 2 Hotels with 0 in development.
I don’t care who pays me as long as i get my money back
From today’s Gazette:
Well someone’s got a sniff that there is some money laying about. I do think ‘Address Unknown’ is rather amusing though. I wonder if Matt the convicted fraudster (currently serving a 40-month jail term) had a Director’s Loan from Harlequin? He certainly was a shareholder in HP along with his brother and sister. And a salesman.
Appointment of Trustees
In the High Court of Justice
No 3949 of 2014
Matthew David Ames
Of Address Unknown, Currently Unemployed and lately of Marimba, Goldfinch Lane, Thundersley, Essex SS7 3LT
Birth details: 11 May 1975
A General Meeting of Creditors is to take place on: 16 April 2015 at 14.00 pm
Venue: At the Official Receiver’s office at the address stated below:—
4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2HT
Meeting summoned by: Official Receiver
The Purpose of Meeting: To appoint trustee
Proofs and Proxies: In order to be entitled to vote at the meeting, creditors must lodge proxies and any previously unlodged proofs by 12.00 noon on 15 April 2015 at the Official Receiver’s address stated below.
Paul Stewart, Official Receiver, London A, 2nd Floor, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2HT, 020 7637 1110, LondonA.OR@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk
Capacity: Trustee
15 April 2015
Matt Ames the convicted criminal fraudster has a loan from HMSSE but Shipleys always were doubtful about recovering the monies loaned.
I will help the two parties who support children’s mental health care.
It will be more than a handful of votes.
You can’t just go round upsetting The Government, I does’t work like that.
HMRC, The Official Receiver,SFO, FSCS……. the list goes on.
Georgina Philippou, acting director of enforcement and market oversight, said:
“Pope and Legerton exposed customers to risky investments without considering if these products met their needs. Their actions mean many customers face losing all of their hard earned pension funds and fell woefully short of the standards we expect of senior individuals.”
TMI provided advice to customers on transferring their existing pension funds into unregulated investments such as green oil, biofuels, farmland and overseas property via SIPPs. Between 2010 and 2013, 1,661 customers invested £112,420,985 in these investment products, many of which were not typically permitted by their existing pension schemes.
As directors with responsibility for the management and oversight of TMI, Pope and Legerton should have ensured that TMI considered the suitability of the investment products for customers but failed to do so.
They were also responsible for managing a number of conflicts of interest – including one created by commission payments to Legerton which he received when these investment products were sold to customers directly or through an unregulated firm which introduced customers to TMI for SIPP advice. During the relevant period Legerton’s total income from TMI was £300,567.
These payments created a conflict of interest and so should have been identified, and then disclosed to customers. However, no adequate disclosure was made.
The issue was compounded by Pope and Legerton’s failure to act quickly when TMI’s external compliance consultants warned them of the need to consider and disclose conflicts of interest to their customers.
TMI has ceased trading and is now in liquidation. The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) is investigating claims made by TMI’s customers – consumers that are concerned they may be affected should contact the FSCS. The FCA continues to undertake extensive work on SIPPs, and wrote to the CEOs of all SIPP firms in 2014 asking them to take action to ensure that their business operates within the FCA’s rules. Customers should be alert to the risks of switching their pensions into risky investment products
FCA fines Harlequin IFA directors over SIPP suitability failings
Professional Adviser | 20 Mar 2015 | 10:18
Author:
Scott Sinclair, Laura Miller
Two ex-directors of failed adviser TailorMade Independent (TMI) – the main distributor of £400m troubled unregulated property scheme Harlequin – have been banned and fined by the regulator for not assessing the suitability of clients’ investments made through self-invested personal pensions (SIPPs), the method most commonly used to invest in Harlequin.
Lloyd Pope and Peter Legerton have been banned from senior positions in financial services. Pope has been fined £93,800, Legerton would have been fined £84,000, but for financial hardship.
The FCA found both men fundamentally failed to act in the best interests of clients, but Legerton benefitted financially from conflicts of interest between TailorMade and an unregulated firm that introduced new business to it.
Advisers and agents selling clients investments in Caribbean villas run by Harlequin received commissions of up to 15%, according to a lawyer close to the situation.
Pope and Legerton failed to ensure TailorMade assessed the suitability of clients’ investments made through SIPPs, failed to identify and manage its conflicts of interests and failed to properly oversee compliance, which had been outsourced to external consultants, the FCA said.
TailorMade entered liquidation in September 2013 because it could not finance redress payments being demanded by Harlequin investors.
Warnings
High risk unregulated property investment scheme Harlequin has suffered a series of catastrophic problems since January 2013, including warnings from the regulator and an on-going investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.
Investors – who put hundreds of millions of pounds of their pension money into the scheme expecting a ‘guaranteed’ monthly income from rents on Caribbean tourist villas – have been left without the promised income or even access to their capital, after work stopped on the Harlequin resorts and its sales arm entered liquidation.
Most Harlequin investors put money into the scheme via their SIPP.
TailorMade – which had an advice arm, an alternative investment business and a SIPP – said it stopped taking new money into the overseas property scheme in January 2013 following a Financial Services Authority (FSA) alert about Harlequin.
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) is to compensate SIPP claimants for losses in the value of their investments in Harlequin.
It said this was in addition to compensating for lost pension growth and charges taken from their SIPPs.
Compensation
Financial advisers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of pounds after the FSCS wrote down the value of the investment to nil.
In a document from the FSCS seen by Professional Adviser, dated 12 February and marked ‘compensation calculation’, the body lists the value of a Harlequin Property investment as £0.00.
A FSCS spokesperson confirmed the decision.
“Where applicable we will disregard the residual value in respect of Harlequin investments,” they said.
The move opens the floodgates for the FSCS to pay the thousands of Harlequin investors compensation on the full amount they put into the unregulated scheme, up to a £50,000 limit.
With around £400m originally invested in Harlequin, the compensation bill is set to run into hundreds of millions of pounds, putting it on a par with other investment disasters like Keydata and Arch cru.
As in those cases, the bulk of the cost of the compensation is likely to be borne by investment and pension advisers.
The FSCS has already hit pension advisers with a £20m interim levy as it deals with “bad” SIPP advice.
Looking forward to the next Harlequin update, reminding us that Dave Ames is working tirelessly (I doubt he’s slept for days) in order to protect our investment which is being threatened my the mindless thuggery of a few (thousand) disgruntled investors with their own agenda, the FSCS, the FOS, the SFO, the police, Laura Miller, RL and associated claims firms, CLC, Professional Advisor, and those scoundrels who advised people to invest in the Harlequin Scheme in the first place. If it hadn’t been for them, we wouldn’t be in this mess!
Fresh from the FCA – Disciplinary Notice
LXP00027 – Lloyd Arnold Pope
‘The following information includes such details of the supervisory, disciplinary and civil regulatory action (but not criminal action) which the FCA or PRA may have taken, may have decided to take, or may have proposed to take, under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 or civil penalties which the FCA may have imposed, or may have decided to impose, under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 in relation to Lloyd Arnold Pope and which the FCA or, where relevant, the PRA considers it appropriate to publish. The Financial Services Register does not hold information on action taken by other enforcement agencies.’
‘Date: 20/03/2015 Type of action: Partial prohibition
On 20 March 2015, the Financial Conduct Authority (the ‘FCA’) issued to Lloyd Arnold Pope a Final Notice, which:
a) made an order, pursuant to section 56 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the ‘Act’), prohibiting him from performing any significant influence function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by any authorised or exempt person or exempt professional firm; and
b) imposed on him, pursuant to section 66 of the Act, a financial penalty of £93,800.
A copy of the Final Notice is displayed on the FCA’s website.’
PCL00008 – Peter Charles Legerton
‘The following information includes such details of the supervisory, disciplinary and civil regulatory action (but not criminal action) which the FCA or PRA may have taken, may have decided to take, or may have proposed to take, under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 or civil penalties which the FCA may have imposed, or may have decided to impose, under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 in relation to Peter Charles Legerton and which the FCA or, where relevant, the PRA considers it appropriate to publish. The Financial Services Register does not hold information on action taken by other enforcement agencies.
Date: 20/03/2015 Type of action: Partial prohibition
On 20 March 2015, the Financial Conduct Authority (the ‘FCA’) issued to Peter Charles Legerton a Final Notice, which:
a) published a statement of Mr Legerton’s misconduct;
b) made an order, pursuant to section 56 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the ‘Act’), prohibiting him from performing any significant influence function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by any authorised or exempt person or exempt professional firm; and
c) withdrew Mr Legerton’s significant influence controlled functions at TailorMade Independent Limited.
But for serious financial hardship, the FCA would have imposed on Mr Legerton, pursuant to section 66 of the Act, a financial penalty of £84,100.
A copy of the Final Notice is displayed on the FCA’s website.’
The next swoop will get Alistiar Burns and Rob Shaw, on much more serious charges. Not limited to, hosting come dine with me in his £9500 PCM house.
So mote it be.
Looks like the scumbag duo ALISTAIR RAE BURNS and ROBERT SHAW are still flogging the talking wills.
I wonder when the next swoop will be? [chuckles to self]
It does make me wonder about this SCS farmland malarky, how involved they were they?
Did they know, no land existed?
Did they know, Holkham Compensation was unregulated?
Why did Holkham give the TM directors a £100k ‘loan’ and attempt to write it off?
They are not fit and proper persons. S&F
TailorMade directors – further victims of the Ames cancer.
‘TailorMade directors – further victims of the Ames cancer.’
Are you on glue or drugs, or maybe the tail end of a box of Lidl vino?
They were part of the conspiracy.
When I walked in this morning, things were average.
4 maximum redress winners at 15% made me happy.
I think Alistair my enjoy prison.
I wonder which friends and family are ‘looking after’ Matt’s assets during his term of Bankruptcy and prison-stay? What assets did wife Mandy (and the kids) get out of the divorce?
Maybe Matt’s trustee in Bankruptcy should look to Hong Kong and the Bank of Nicked Barckerleeys. That’s where the money went.
Oh and by the way, where is the flash car hidden?
Lidl don’t do wine boxes. Keep up.
Each know at the door must be scary for the ex TM directors.
*KNOCK
The Freemasons have moved yet again.
More fines and bans.
The TM directors are not “on the square”. What protection do they have ?
S&F
Dear All,
Following on from our recent Trust update, Dave Ames is currently working on the Trust security offering for cash investors – who make up around half of all investors – to ensure progress continues and investors can be protected as soon as possible. We expect the modified security offering will be confirmed by the end of April, but the general idea is that the value of the security will be provided on an ascending scale that is proportionate to the Trust membership.
It is not Harlequin’s Trust, it is your Trust; however, Harlequin is providing the security, which is the crucial element that requires modification in order for the Trust to proceed.
Ironically, what is clear regarding the Trust and how FSCS redress for SIPP investors impacts upon it is that the situation is unclear. To quote the FSCS: “FSCS is not able to comment on any implications for investors of signing up to the ‘Harlequin Investor Trust’ for any claim they may make with FSCS.”
The consequence is that SIPP investors remain in limbo and are, without seeking true independent legal advice, at the mercy of commission-driven compensation firms that advise against the Trust they originally promoted, which speaks for itself.
Harlequin will continue to monitor the situation and seek a solution for SIPP investors where possible.
Another completion confirmed
Harlequin’s progress continues! It has been confirmed by a Vincentian solicitor that another Buccament Bay Resort completion has been finalised.
Celebrity coverage continues
Last but not least, Michelle Keegan’s stay at Buccament Bay Resort with her fiancé, Mark Wright, continues to gain excellent coverage. This time, Mail Online has written about her new role with Ambre Solaire and once again shared her public thank you message to the Resort.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3003167/Golden-girl-Michelle-Keegan-named-new-face-Ambre-Solaire-fake-tan-just-time-glowing-bride-summer.html
We will provide another update soon.
Regards,
Harlequin
Question :
The solvency question?
The All Seeing Eye, knows what you have been up to…
‘Ironically, what is clear regarding the Trust and how FSCS redress for SIPP investors impacts upon it is that the situation is unclear.’
‘It is not Harlequin’s Trust, it is your Trust; however, Harlequin is providing the security, which is the crucial element that requires modification in order for the Trust to proceed.’
IT’S ILLITERATE!
lol that update from Ames. Where to begin.
1. Congratulations on another completion. 3 out of 9000 isn’t too bad.
2. The situation has been clear for years – Harlequin could never have built the resorts they promised with the money they had. This has recently been confirmed by the FSCS’s stipulation that Harlequin’s investments are unquantifiable. It was clear even before HMSSE’s administration they would have to raise external finance, which is yet forthcoming.
3. The FSCS did indeed mention these words. However, it must be noted the context in which they were written:
“At this stage, I can confirm that FSCS has not given any advice to claimants on whether or not they should join the “Harlequin Trust” group. Neither does FSCS have a view on the merits of the group. Furthermore, prior to FSCS being able to confirm its position in respect of claims relating to Harlequin, we do not consider it appropriate to speculate about the potential implications of investors joining the “Harlequin Trust” group, or how that might impact upon any future claim submitted to FSCS.”
I’d like to see where the FSCS claimed victims should join the trust, as per Ames’ assertions in his conference call.
4. Harlequin’s trust is not “your” trust in any degree – it is a feeble attempt to get Ames out of jail. Ames owns all of the RDC’s (which were bought with your money). What he’s actually doing is lending you the keys to the house which you bought & he’s living in. He still owns all the RDC’s regardless of a trust being in place. This means he’s free to sell this equity as he likes.
5. “at the mercy of commission-driven compensation firms” like Holkham whom you promoted without mercy? Oh maybe the commission-driven agents who originally promoted Harlequin?
6. “The consequence is that SIPP investors remain in limbo” not really. SIPP victims now have a much clearer path to getting out. Cash victims, if any, are the ones in limbo. Again, if the marketing of Harlequin were to be believed, this would never have been the case.
7. “Harlequin will continue to monitor the situation and seek a solution for SIPP investors where possible.” – “wherever possible”? The solution for SIPP victims can be one of two routes – completion or redress. RL’s efforts seem to have opened the door to at least some redress, which leaves the only other route of completion. In order to complete, Harlequin actually has to build, which people are being told is not going to yield results until 2020.
8. “We expect the modified security offering will be confirmed by the end of Apri” Why are you modifying the security? The current proposals do nothing to impede Harlequin’s growth (except of course you want to sell some land). Therefore, why are they reconsidering the security? The trust offering by Ames is nothing short (no pun intended) of an insult to the cash victims.
9. Congratulations on getting exposure for Buccament Bay. I’m sure many of the “luxury” holidaymakers you’re targeting will be swayed by these recent celebrity endorsements.
The solvency question has been answered. get over it.
Dave , its a bit late to be thinking of investors security, you should have thought of that before misusing our life savings, pensions and homes.
Not of all your ‘investors’ have time on their hands Dave, some are approaching retirement soon,
If this was a fair world, you would be stripped of your assets , imprisoned, and then forced to live on what your average investor receives, which to date, is lies, more lies, misleading guarantees. unfulfilled promises , missed targets and fairy tale updates.
When you no longer have money to pay for the essentials of life Dave, lets just hope that your family can cheer themselves up by reading tripadvisor reviews about buccament bay, and robert Storey comments.
@ investors Security – 8 years too late.
Hear, hear!
Or like yourself, investor security, posting from a care home.
I think it says it all that we are supposed to cheer a single completion. On the basis that HP have managed 3 completions in 8 years, they should complete on the remaining 8,997 units in just under 24,000 years. We just need to be patient!
Little legs, will be locked up very soon. We have had some very interesting developments regarding bank accounts and property transactions.
Did I mention, insolvency talks? Naughty!😏
No you didn’t. There again as Harlequin is not insolvent there is no reason for there to be any mention, is there? 😂😂
As mentioned many times..there is no such thing as “Harlequin”.
What happened to Positive Plus and the silver-tongued Chris Jones ?
Where is the fair & fragrant Kim Withey of Invest Five Star and her luffly hubby Mike?
They flogged Harlequin and took huge commissions.
“Harlequin is not solvent” lol. How can you be so stupid and still remember to breathe. You don’t need anybody tell you whether HP(whatever that means) is solvent or not. Anybody with two brain cells or above should be able to work that one out with a fraction of the information available.
I think all the cash investors would love to hear that Harlequin isn’t insolvent. If they are able to pay their obligations as they fall due then everyone can have a refund as per their contracts. Everyone happy after all. Great news.
why has the little man been talking about liquidation ?
If somebody had a gift maybe like WC,he would have the edge.
I am a cash investor as well and I hope I will see Ames again.
The stump has been in discussion with different professionals about the best way(for him) to liquidate his various companies – yes all you people who hand over anymore money have lost it 😰
You have been warned before but never take heed.
Who or what is Wc ?
I am not the blue anon of 6:24 but will repeat his/her question:
Who or what is WC?
Eh, nobody posted saying “harlequin is not solvent” Think you have your glue mixed up.
Anonymous 3.27 you really need to read the FSCS statement. If it’s good enough for them to talk about Harlequin it should be good enough for you.
Anyone remember this little gem?
“Many of the investor contracts relating to this project suggest Harlequin is obliged to refund their money within 60 days of request. (Refer Clause 12). Dave Ames acknowledged this but said Harlequin was not in a position to make any refunds at the current time. ”
That’s the GV confirming that his collection of companies cannot honour their contractual commitments. That means they cannot pay their debts as they fall due. That means they are insolvent.
Dick you dick wad, we know what you are implicated in So it’s better you shut the duck up, or pay the price………
Now , those meetings😢Dave about insolvency – we know about them.
“That means they are insolvent” Not according to the FSCS it doesn’t. Has the multiple ID poster worked out why his various and many posts are all in blue?
@anonymous 12.25. Awww bless. Haven’t you got more than one brain cell to work it out for yourself. It’s not that difficult really, alternatively just keep repeating to yourself “Not according to the FSCS it doesn’t”. Of course your money is safe in David’s hands, all this is just propaganda designed to bring down Harlequin etc etc etc. I understand that you are still just trying to protect your “investment” but it may be the time to give the Doctor a visit. He will be able to give you some meds to help you through the difficult eye opening times to come.
Can someone quote the bit where the FSCS say that Harlequin isn’t insolvent. I think the straw that the Probies are clutching at is the one where the FSCS have backed off a bit (not doubt after being threatened by legal action) and said that they can’t say that the company is insolvent. That’s a very different statement to saying they believe the company is solvent. After all, on what basis could they even make a judgement like that when the pile of companies involved haven’t had any audited accounts put in the public domain for years. There is simply no basis to make a statement either way.
So, anyone wishing to determine the solvency of the company has to look at other indicators like its ability to pay debts as they fall due. By the admission of the Chairman they can’t pay the investors as per their contracts and so they are refusing to do so. Quite simple really.
Winston Churchill
The colour is Blue but I can’t be right all the time.Can I?
@ You can’t have it both ways 6.07am
Exactly.
It’s a bit like me picking a card randomly from a deck and asking you to tell me if you know it isn’t an ace of hearts. To which you answer, “no, I don’t know it isn’t an ace of hearts”. The Probies (love it), in their limited capacity for dealing in logical statements, think this is the same thing as you saying, “I know it is an ace of hearts”.
In exactly the same way, if FSCS says, “no we don’t know that Harlequin is insolvent” is falling way short of them saying, “we know it is solvent”.
Those meetings we know what you’re up to Davy boy. So does the SFO.
Ames has been asked to prove his companies are solvent formally. He is now in a panic, More problems to follow😘
Has Yank it in easy got a new tablet/phone to post on? All your posts now have the ID in blue. What a tool you are.
“The FSCS does not regard Harlequin as insolvent” was the statement. No double negatives, notice the description of “harlequin” Dress it up however you want but it’s pretty straight forward. The FSCS regard “Harlequin” as solvent.
But they value your investment at nil Bobbykins, please explain that?
I don’t care what the #uck its valued at because I have a sipp claim, I can honestly say if I was a cash or finance investor some people would need sticks to walk with by now.
If the FSCS are saying that Harlequin is not insolvent, indeed that they are solvent, thus able to pay debts as they fall due, why is the FSCS paying out redress payments to SIPP investors. ?
The FSCS is afterall the redress option of last resort. Just asking?
I live in York. 😉
@ Anonymous 9.44am
Your logical reasoning is so flawed.
“The FSCS does not regard Harlequin as insolvent” is not at all the same as “The FSCS regard Harlequin as solvent”
Just to emphasise the point, the following two statements are entirely consistent with each other:
“The FSCS does not regard Harlequin as insolvent” AND
“The FSCS does not regard Harlequin as solvent”
All we could draw from those two statements is that the FSCS doesn’t know whether Harlequin is, or is not, solvent.
It is interesting to note that the FSCS chose to word their statement (if the above quote is accurate) as “The FSCS does not regard Harlequin as insolvent” rather than “The FSCS does regard Harlequin as solvent”. Given the complete lack of audited accounts in the public domain they couldn’t possibly make this call.
So you see, the solvency question has most emphatically NOT been answered by anyone.
It’s that difficult word your or you’re please pay attention.
That’s predictable.
When the argument is lost then fill up the forum with attacks on overweight people in the hope that most people won’t notice.
So let’s repeat.
The solvency question has NOT been answered.
Click to access witnessstatementfinalon16414.pdf
James Baker, Ames’s accountant and a director of the Baker Clarke Partnership, produced this in the Davies litigation. He clearly states that the “Harlequin” companies controlled by Dave Ames are valueless and that their liabilities exceed their assets.
S 123 Insolvency Act 1986 defines insolvency from a UK perspective
(2) A company is also deemed unable to pay its debts if it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the value of the company’s assets is less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account its contingent and prospective liabilities. This is known as balance sheet insolvency.
The test in St Vincent, St Lucia and Barbados is that a company is insolvent if “the realisable value of the assets of the company are less than the aggregate of its liabilities and stated capital of all classes.”
You can draw your own conclusions as to whether “Harlequin” is insolvent or not.
The argument has not been lost. I can start an argument with myself using my multiple IDs 😉
I thought you could only have One ID? This is where I have missed out.
I do have 4 computers and 25 IDs but you do have to remember who you are.Back to the cleaning.
Those accounts are from Gareth Fatchett’s due diligence which Dave Ames says is not correct.
“If you threatened Ames and he took a little tosser like you seriously, don’t you think he has the funds tucked away to tuck you away first.”
And now the first signs of the true face of Harlequin appear. What a truly disgusting sight it really is. When you see past the charade, you realize that this is what you’re really dealing with.
Charming posts from Richard lapdog, so articulate.
n January, the BBC’s Rip off Britain programme featured victims of the failed Harlequin investment scheme. They talked about how they had lost their retirement funds and had been forced to sell their homes because Harlequin would not return their investment despite its failure to complete the build.
TMI provided advice to customers on transferring their existing pension funds into unregulated investments such as overseas property, green oil, biofuels and farmland through SIPPs. Between 2010 and 2013, 1,661 customers invested £112,420,985 in these investment products, many of which were not typically permitted by their existing pension schemes.
Georgina Philippou, acting director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: “Pope and Legerton exposed customers to risky investments without considering if these products met their needs. Their actions mean many customers face losing all of their hard earned pension funds and fell woefully short of the standards we expect of senior individuals.”
TMI has ceased trading and is now in liquidation. The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) is investigating claims made by TMI’s customers.
At the beginning of March, the FSCS valued Harlequin Property Investment as £0.00 it was revealed by Professional Adviser. Around £400m was invested in the scheme and it is expected that investment advisers will be have to foot the bill to compensate the victims of the scandal.
“Those accounts are from Gareth Fatchett’s due diligence which Dave Ames says is not correct.”
I believe Fatchett’s accounting information was provided by Harlequin under NDA. Fatchett felt it necessary for victims to make an informed decision to see the said information, but was not allowed to by Harlequin. That is where RL deviated from the trust onto redress.
The Davies case, as linked to above, was between Harlequin and a number of claimants, with Jim Baker called to provide evidence on Harlequin’s behalf. The fact he asserted that the various companies’ liabilities outweighed their assets suggests those companies are not solvent.
The anonymous poster on here – probably Storey or Stenning – is probably going to allude to the fact that none of the RDC’s have been called into administration or insolvency proceedings. This does not make them “solvent”, it merely means they are not insolvent (in definition of the law). I don’t have much experience in this area, but for anyone in doubt as to the solvency of the “Harlequin” group of companies, here is a definition you should use (from Investopedia):
“The ability of a company to meet its long-term financial obligations. Solvency is essential to staying in business, but a company also needs liquidity to thrive. Liquidity is a company’s ability to meet its short-term obligations. A company that is insolvent must enter bankruptcy; a company that lacks liquidity can also be forced to enter bankruptcy even if it is solvent.”
It seems the liquidity and solvency of all the RDC’s are under question. You could argue BB’s liquidity is also under question, as Ames asserted it was struggling to turn a profit, 5 years after opening.
This appears to have generated a hell of a lot of comments on BFP why do they want to push it up the thread?
Jm Baker speaks on March 22, 2015 at 12:08 pm
Click to access witnessstatementfinalon16414.pdf
“Mask Removed, and how does this mornings threat from an investor reflect on the rest?
How do you expect anybody to react to being threatened including Ames? if that’s the level that that investor wants to deal at then he made the choice and that’s fine.”
I’d imagine a lot of victims would like to see physical harm done to both the Ames family and many of the Harlequin staff.
I think it escapes Harlequin’s esteem that they are currently responsible to all of the people they made promises to. These people are having to burden themselves through financial hardship (lack of money, and sometimes debt) because the management of Harlequin is either unable or unwilling to provide refunds or returns.
From latest review on TA, what seems to be a very positive( 5 star) review from a seasoned UK traveller..
“There’s a lot of comment on here about star ratings. I neither know nor care what star rating this resort merits. What I do know is that we certainly paid a 3* price and got a great deal more in terms of accommodation, service and facilities than might have been expected.”
I think this is the reason the resort is barely breaking even, according to a report attributed to be from DA. They are just not getting top dollar for the all inclusive resort…so wether it is a 4 or 5 star resort is not the problem.The problem is the relatively low rates they are having to offer to get a decent occupancy rate .
Example below, from Booking.com, 1 week mid August 2015.
Rack rate US$800, reduced to US$360,,and that is for two people, All inclusive!
2BR/1BA Suite First floor Garden View with Balcony – 1 queen bed or 1 king bed
Includes meals, premium drinks, sports, kids club
FREE Cancellation
55% OFF
Meals included: All Inclusive Meal description
$800
$360 avg/nigh
@Anon 2.28. Are you getting bored counting today’s concrete block pile? Only an idiot would try and guess who an anonymous poster is. Which anonymous are you trying to guess? You tool.
Little legs will be trying to put all the caribbean companies into liquidation in the next couple of weeks.
Has Nikki & Chris sold any blocks for you yet Paddykins? a very odd set up, working with someone found guilty of ripping off Harlequins clients.
Maybe Nikki and Chris discovered that the builder did not do anything wrong, I wonder if Richard Spector understands what Method Data is.
And frankly I couldn’t give a toss what the builder did or did not do, I’m glad to see that RL and CLC still have Ames on the ropes.
I’m glad to note that Ray Caldwell as Ames on the Ropes, and Anna Canga, and dozens more to come in the next few weeks.
Ames agreed to a consent order in the Court in SVG to put his Caribbean companies into administration, over a debt owed to a Raymond Caldwell and his clients.
Ames is now challenging the consent order,
Ames had promised some £ 300 k to Caldwell from the sale of properties in Dubai, however the properties were technically under the control of Shipleys, or Leonard Curtis now, Ames also promised this money to CLC’s clients.
Ames also offered Caldwell and the CLC clients the proceeds from the sale of properties in Thailand, also under the control of Shipley’s now Leonard Curtis.
In a nasty but almost typical stunt from Ames, Ames knew he only had £ 300 k to share between all the above and has been stating that he was forced into selling the Dubai properties by litigants who he says have no valid claim against him, and if they took him to court they would lose ( so why sell the properties Dave?)
Rumour has it that Ames tipped off Shipleys because, as he has claimed, he is being forced to sell the properties, so rather then let the party who he claims forced him to sell the property, have the cash, he hopes that Shipleys will challenge them for the cash, he will state that he kept up his side of the bargain, and that Shipleys, Caldwell and CLC can fight it out for the cash. He will say it is not his problem.
You really have to wonder how much lower this guy is willing to go.
Is that the same money for the same properties that Shipleys said was too difficult to pursue? Bet the old cat woman will rear her head again soon. How could Nikki and Chris discover Paddy had done nothing wrong? He’s been found complicit in fraud. Oops under appeal of course. Funny how all the points for his appeal weren’t brought up in the hearing.
Anonymous 5.29 pm what are you prattling on about, the cat woman was holding the properties for Dave Ames, so what. Dave doesn’t want to give any money back to investors, that is fact. Because he says he hasn’t got it to give, that too is fact.
The builder has a judgment against him for 0.2% of the deposits taken by Ames, that is also a fact.
So why you continue to prattle on about the builder is beyond me, unless you think this 0.2 % was enough to bring this down.
I have just spoken to Dave on my direct line. I trust Dave he has just been unlucky over the last 8years,so I have agreed to give him another 10 years to complete my property. It is in the bag.
Oooh Anonymous 5.36. Bit techie aren’t we. Paddy is fair game. No doubt a Hertz car hire business and other misappropriations were “just a mistake” Just remind me again why he needed the car hire business.
so he could hire cars,
Why did Dave Ames want to start a construction company called Harlequin Developments, it’s not like he used it to build anything? Lol
Why did Dave Ames buy two aeroplanes ? Was it to gift them to Caribbean Helicopters?
Why did Dave Ames buy a Vinyard in Wandering in Australia ? Was it to make his own wine? Oh yeah it was.
Why did Dave Ames not buy land in SVG to build all the units he sold ?
Why did Dave Ames offer Caldwell, CLC, Canga, Pre Conco, etc units at Bucc Bay for settlements, I thought all those units had been sold.
Why was Dave Ames born ?
Why is Harlequin insolvent yet solvent ?
The other scumbag Burns, this will go when he is nicked.
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/property/broome-house/chelford-road/alderley-edge/sk9-7tq/28528811
Ames and his cohorts can not carry one much longer, he is running out of rocks to hide under.
@Next Steps 6.02pm. Hope Rob does lose his house as pay back for giving our money to a twice bankrupt with no apparent morals
I did hear a whisper Burns can’t pay his massive mortgage and the real fear is the SFO – I wonder what is making them so techie ???
Could they have possibly had some dodgy dealings?
Again my TM whisperer mentioned poor Mr Burns has lost the plot and is a gibbering wreck. Rob Shaw’s wife is also taking things very badly, not so much swanning around Lyme more of a skulking 😉
Episode 2.
What night will they come and arrest you both?
Of course, hiring cars is a key part in building a resort. Is that because he was hiring them to other people or he just needed to hire a car?
Ask Ingham about car hire lol
Well as Ingham is not a director, I certainly wouldn’t be asking him!
Richard Ingham | LinkedIn
https://uk.linkedin.com/pub/richard-ingham/15/104/590
Bobit, let me explain he did it for his paymaster. I have been digging around and all is not as it seems wink, wink, nudge nudge!
Look closer at the contacts, maybe contact them….. a sinister picture arrises.
Jm Baker speaks on March 22, 2015 at 12:08 pm
Click to access witnessstatementfinalon16414.pdf
I need clear thoughts and there is a lot of duff information out there.
If I have read the name it will arrive early one morning.
Some posters even make phone calls at 11am in the morning.
DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK TO LINKEDIN. The account holder can see who is looking at their profile.
Not very lucid this morning are we Bobit?
I need clear thoughts and there is a lot of duff information out there.
If I have read the name it will arrive early one morning.
Some posters even make phone calls at 11am in the morning.
@Robert Storey AKA Yank one in, you have been played and fallen for it. What a tool you are.
Robert, what do you think of Jim bakers statement, is he not saying Harlequin is INSOLVENT?
No Trust, no finance, not solvent……… The British Government ‘conspiring’ against him.
Excuse me Robert, you appear to have fallen for it. With your life savings, you silly old duffer.
It won’t last long enough to get the £70 million from WK that’s for sure.
Surely, the fact that HP stopped making interest payments to re-mortgagers some time ago because the money wasn’t available to pay them was in itself an admission of insolvency, wasn’t it?
No Sid, that was a banking error. Unless Mr. Ames was telling lies, you know, or it could have been taken out of context.
How do these so called ‘in house’ solicitors work for this man with a clean conscience?
The same way a couple of accountants can work for a bent builder.
Or a couple of “solicitors” can go into partnership with a bent accountant.
So they are basically needy, unethical and unemployable?
I wonder why Mr Aimless has not answered the solvency question?
If Ames did not lie about the banking error and did not lie to CLC about his assets 6 times in court documents or did not lie about the FSCS telling investors they had to join a trust or did not lie to investors about HMSSE exiting administration or did not lie about a marina, or if they never used forged documents in court cases, and did not lie along with his solicitors to professional advisor when he and his solicitors told professional advisor that the CLC claimants had dropped their case against him, then I can see that he his solicitors or his paid witnesses did not lie in the builder case.
But …………………………….
In all of the above instances Ames and or his solicitors have lied. FACT.
Ames and his lawyers are liars, FACT.
f there was one word to some up the resort it would be ‘Inconsistent’. Surely the staff realize guests speak to each other and compare notes. Some were welcomed in the traditional manner of a cold drink and towel (we weren’t), some had an umbrella in their room, some had beer and wine in the fridge, some had dirty lunge pools …
DA does not need to answer the question about glue. The FSCS has answered for him.
So did James Baker.
@Anonymous 2.22, are you referring to the article by Laura Miller on the 24/10/14? I suggest you read the article again and refer to it accurately. Laura Miller is no friend of HP so to suggest she has incorrectly reported something at the behest of HP is quite frankly laughable.
Anonymous 3.16 pm, I take it you did not read the article then,
For the record here it is;
http://m.professionaladviser.com/professional-adviser/news/2376209/harlequin-investors-drop-case-against-chairman-and-wife
“Harlequin and its lawyers declined to comment, and would only say that the case to sue the Ames’ had been “withdrawn” by the group of 24 investors.”
Anonymous please note the words “AND WOULD ONLY SAY THAT THE CASE TO SUE THE AMES’ HAD BEEN ” WITHDRAWN” BY THE GROUP OF 24 INVESTORS”
Anonymous are you saying Laura Millar lied about what Ames and his lawyers did or did not say. ?
Is the case withdrawn or not ? or have Dave and Carol Ames settled with the 24 investors for a sum of £ 1.3 million to be paid on or before the 2nd of September 2015 along with an additional payment of £ 250 k for any information that CLC and the claimants might be able to give to Ames to help with the Wilkins Kennedy claim.
Anonymous you seem to know everything so please which is it?
One thing for sure, I have no doubt they have not been paid. Sounds like they got cold feet, or the promise of something sometime in the year never never.
Gosh that name gives me the willies, yuck.
Richard, rumour has it that you Ames and CLC entered into an NDA on the issue of the Davies case,
I have no idea how true this is but if you did or if you are aware of any such NDA surely what Ames and his legal team told Laura Millar, as reported in the professional advisor is a breach of this NDA,
Ames and his lawyers “WOULD ONLY SAY THAT THE CASE TO SUE THE AMES’ HAD BEEN ” WITHDRAWN” BY THE GROUP OF 24 INVESTORS”
Maybe you Mr. Spector should consider pursuing Laura Millar if she has misquoted or taken Mr. Ames and his lawyers out of context.
Maybe you should consider forcing Ms. Millar to publish a retraction of the comments she states are attributable to Ames and his lawyers.
I wonder what Ames does on a day to day basis? Cos he an’t good at finding finance or running a company lol
There is a rumour that a certain Irish builder posts on BFP, who was found guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation.
OUR FOUNDER
Dave Ames is a British Entrepreneur who has had a range of successful businesses in the UK over the last 30 years.
A visionary and creator, Dave Ames has designed business models and systems which are unique in their market place. It is this that defines Harlequin Group’s competitive advantage in the market place and provides the impetus for an entrepreneur who is constantly seizing new opportunities, identifying new markets and revolutionising market places.
He has a unique skill in recognising opportunities and managing economic mechanisms to turn resources and situations into practical account.The Harlequin brand has seen considerable growth over the last three years, supported by the sales mechanism of Harlequin Property and 3,000 independent property brokers throughout the UK, Europe and worldwide.
His dynamic, forward-thinking approach and drive have led him to create ground-breaking concepts that have evoked a revolution of the investment property and destination resort markets.
I wonder whether Mr Ames will declare his companies solvent? You’d imagine he would have wanted to be absolutely “clear” on the issue.
Well anonymous 4.05 if what you say is correct, I.e. The settlement then this, according to @Dear Richard Spector, then you have just breached that NDA. If that information has been imparted to you then someone has also breached the NDA. Now I would hazard a guess that it would not be DA but someone on the Davies case. Oops has someone dropped a big one here by disclosing the settlement details? Yes I also wonder if DA reads this? Perhaps we will find out soon.
Are they still suing DA? If the case has been withdrawn due to a settlement being agreed, then they are not are they. Which one is it.
Or perhaps someone who now sells concrete blocks as a side line. 😏
Mr Aimless said all bets are off now.
Can’t say anything about anything.
Are they still suing DA? If the case has been withdrawn due to a settlement being agreed, then they are not are they. Which one is it.
A visionary and creator, Dave Ames has designed business models and systems which are unique in their market place. It is this that defines Harlequin Group’s competitive advantage in the market place and provides the impetus for an entrepreneur who is constantly seizing new opportunities, identifying new markets and revolutionising market places.
Lets hear again Dave Ames revolutionising investment in the Caribbean,
💤💤💤
Ames failed. His Dad would not be proud of him.
All I know, after speaking with my MP, David Cameron, he is taking a close personal interest in David Ames and his cohorts.
They have good reason to be worried.
All I know is you are full of crap. There’s an election to be won. Very poor trolling.
Are Harlequin’s RDC’s solvent?
I’ve just spoken to my MP. Mr Ames is just the type of entrepreneur the Labour Party want to encourage. They see people like Mr Ames as a good source of party funding.
And because of the election, all party members have been informed….. You’re not very bright are you?
They all want to score points 😊
Don’t forget to inform the Scots Nats. They will offer incentives to build a hotel in jock land.
Dear Richard, Mr. Ames’ comments to professional advisor appear to be causing consternation amongst the masses,
Anonymous on March 23, 2015 at 5:42 pm is asking a question we would all like you to answer?
“Are they still suing DA? If the case has been withdrawn due to a settlement being agreed, then they are not are they. Which one is it.”
Richard have the Davies 24 withdrawn their claim, I know from previous unrelated cases that until the settlement terms were met by the defendants, the case would be “STAYED”, but you as a solicitor would understand the term “STAYED”, “Stayed” is very different from “WITHDRAWN”. I suppose an easier question to ask is why are there not only charges but cautions registered against Dave and Carol Ames’ personal assets in the UK, if as Dave has claimed the case has been ” Withdrawn” can you explain why there are charges and cautions on Dave and Carols properties in favor of a company called CLC nominees as per public documents available from the registry office. ?
Richard are these cautions in place perhaps as a result of the original freezing orders, I mean surely if as Dave has stated that the case has been withdrawn then the freezing orders must have been lifted.
Surely Ames and or his lawyers have not lied to Laura Millar, I mean if they had or if there was an NDA in place covering the case, then surely Dave and or his lawyers have breached it.
Why breach it, to what end?
So if Dave and or his lawyers have not breached an NDA and the case is withdrawn then surely you can confirm that the freezing orders have been lifted so that Carol and Dave can sell their properties and Carol can pay the money she owes HMSSE.
If the case is “stayed” as “opposed” to “withdrawn” then perhaps you could ask Laura Millar to correct her article, if the case is covered by an NDA or Tomlin order, then you will be prevented from saying anything on the matter, which begs the question as to why Laura Miller refers to Ames and his lawyers claims that the case had been withdrawn. Surely if there is an NDA and Tomlin order then Ames and his lawyers have breached it.
An unequivocal statement on the matter should be forthcoming from you Mr. Spector in a bid to quash all the rumours, even those about Dave and Carol having until the first week of September 2015 to come up with £ 1.3 million, and a further £ 250 k for information the Davies cliebts might have given Dave Ames to assist in his case against Wilkins Kennedy.
If you can’t make a statement on the matter the only conclusion we can come to is that the case is “stayed”, not “Withdrawn” and the freezing order remains in place and that Dave and Carol will owe a rumoured £ 1.3 million to the Davies clients in September.
It is in your best interest to clarify this because Ames is asking investors to part with even more cash to recommence the build program, and the last thing Ames needs is allegations that money from investors is going to pay off settlements with current litigants.
Richard, for the avoidance of doubt please find the article at the center of the current angst amongst readers of BFP below.
http://m.professionaladviser.com/professional-adviser/news/2376209/harlequin-investors-drop-case-against-chairman-and-wife
“Harlequin and its lawyers declined to comment, and would only say that the case to sue the Ames’ had been “withdrawn” by the group of 24 investors.”
Richard please note and inwardly digest the words “AND WOULD ONLY SAY THAT THE CASE TO SUE THE AMES’ HAD BEEN ” WITHDRAWN” BY THE GROUP OF 24 INVESTORS”
All this talk about breached NDA’s, Tomlin Orders, lose lips sinking ships etc, is so very sad, given that investors have to spend time, effort and hard earned cash to get what’s owed to them by Ames and his family.
Dave and Carol need to be more concerned about the fact that someone else has a claim on the properties in Dubai, ain’t that right Richard, 😉😉😉😉😉
And of course you know this because you recieved the documents recently….. 😉😉😉😉😉
Is this why you can’t respond to certain parties on the matter ?????
@DRS are you deluded or something. Why should RS read the drivel on here and more to the point why should he answer it. You need to get a life rather than write pages of absolute boring mind blowing instalments equal to War and Peace. Don’t you understand that about 20 posters contribute to this forum, and I would guess that RS is not one of them. In fact I would guess that no one from HP reads this at all. Please don’t answer this with another long winded monologue. Perhaps you should concentrate on selling a few more concrete blocks.
Anonymous 9.53 pm
You said, “In fact I would guess that no one from HP reads this at all.”
Then why did Dave Ames make a big deal about the IP addresses, ????????
You know who reads this, and you know most of what is said against Ames is true.
That was then. He got the information he required.
Anonymous 9.53 pm. I know for a fact Richard Spector reads this blog, he was rather upset when he felt that some of the comments were anti Semetic,
Richard Spector was also working with Ames in identifying posters who Ames claimed were defaming him, and I have emails from Carol who trawls the worldwide web for all those negative comments, so please shut up, and stop making an idiot of yourself.
I fail to see what is wrong with anyone reading BFP.
It’s obvious Ames and co. read it otherwise how would they know he has been de-famed 😉
@ Anonymous 10.17 pm, and what did Ames do with the information he required eh ?
It has not silenced his critics on here, now has it ? Nor have we heard an update on how Ames intends to pursue a whole host of others including current business partners like Dave Man, YES DAVE MAN, and YES CURRENT BUSINESS PARTNERS, not that DAVE MAN would willingly want to be associated with AMES or his family.
That little issue is proving a tad problematic for Ames, don’t worry we have passed this onto Leonard Curtis and the authorities, in much the same way that we tipped off Shipleys about Senka Besirivic and her role in the Dubai properties.
We have a further update for Leonard Curtis on the Thailand Properties too.
Oooh making an idiot of myself. Thugs are alive and kicking tonight. How come RS does not answer your rantings then? You have e mails from CA. What an important person you must be.
Ah the famous cat woman. Wondered how long it would take for her to come back up. 💤💤💤
The RL case failed spectacularly hence why RL are paying Ames £100k costs in instalments – RL don’t crow much about this although they state that they inform investors of anything that is relevant.
Funny I’ve always wondered why the RL case failed so “spectacularly”, given all the info RL had on Ames.
I doubt very much that Dave Ames is making too much of a noise about getting those costs back, especially when one sees the stuff Gareth has on Ames but for some strange reason has not released to the masses yet.
Ames and Gareth have made their peace of sorts, cmon it’s not that hard to see, Ames makes oblique references to RL in his updates.
I’m certain that this whole smelly affair will come home to roost at some stage.
Well if Ames is getting £ 100,000 off Gareth, there are plenty of people ready to swoop down for the cash, Leonard Curtis, Shipley’s, CLC, Ray Caldwell, Anna Canga, POCA, HMRC, etc etc etc even Two Prawn Cracker Spector, or to give him his Chinese name, “Foo King Tommy Lin”
Spector now speaks Hebrew, Mandarin, Cantonese, Ping, Jin, Jan, Huizhou, Xiang. And is renaming his offices at ELY place “The Golden Wok”.
Clients are being asked to dress appropriately and not to come in shorts or shirts with out collars.
Hoodies, burkas, shemaghs, A Gutras are all banned, skull caps are of course allowed as are guide dogs, but not guide pigs, unless they are Chinese of course.
Can anyone explain what role the company Leonard Curtis is playing in this whole debacle please?
Leonard Curtis are asset strippers, they have purchased the work in progress from Shipleys.
The will go after assets, it’s what they do.
Oh yes, forgot LC paid for Harlequin, and as assets strippers they won’t be famed for compastion. Aimless has no influence over them.
@ Whatsthefuss or whoever you are, nothing at all made up. Why make it up. ? I told Shipleys about Senka Besiviric, I told Shipley’s about the sale of the Dubai property.
I told HMRC about the loan agreements etc and Senka Besiviric.
I told the authorities too. So what’s your problem ?
I just wish, somehow the authorities make a move. Amazed they have not done so already.
We are making so much from the redress that we do no care about this sideshow.
Click to access witnessstatementfinalon16414.pdf
James Baker, Ames’s accountant and a director of the Baker Clarke Partnership, produced this in the Davies litigation. He clearly states that the “Harlequin” companies controlled by Dave Ames are valueless and that their liabilities exceed their assets.
S 123 Insolvency Act 1986 defines insolvency from a UK perspective
(2) A company is also deemed unable to pay its debts if it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the value of the company’s assets is less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account its contingent and prospective liabilities. This is known as balance sheet insolvency.
The test in St Vincent, St Lucia and Barbados is that a company is insolvent if “the realisable value of the assets of the company are less than the aggregate of its liabilities and stated capital of all classes.”
You can draw your own conclusions as to whether “Harlequin” is insolvent or not.
All,
Why won’t Harlequin declare they are solvent ?
With nearly every contract in breach and beyond the completion date, there is a live issue over solvency for Harlequin.
The FSCS used the word “insolvent” incorrectly, which they have clarified. One thing remains, which is that the Harlequin Property investment has no value. What has not been confirmed is that Harlequin are solvent.
The key to all investors is that Harlequin Property have a plan to get everyone out of this. This has to involve :-
* finance
* a building & development plan
* solvency
Following our due diligence process, it seems to us before any investor joins any trust or other Harlequin proposal they should have proof of the above three issues. The solvency issue is fundamental. The enclosed declaration is straightforward and we cannot see any reason why it cannot be attended to.
To unify investors, Harlequin need to stop telling us about their 3rd completion (out of 9000 contracts), the visits of reality TV “stars” and deal with the hard facts.
As a firm, we fear that our clients and other investors will be offered a “liquidation or trust” style offer by Harlequin. Effectively, seeking to push the blame for any failure by Harlequin on to investors.
To draw a line under all speculation and to convince investors Harlequin are solvent and can be re-shaped, David Ames needs to prove solvency.
* If so, as far as we are concerned the subject is closed and we can all move on to consider any solution put forward.
* If not, we cannot see how we can properly advise our clients to accept any proposal issued by Harlequin.
Investor Meetings
April / May 2015 dates will be issued shortly. We are going to segment the meetings into different groups, so we can keep focused. The majority of investors are primarily concerned about redress, so we will ensure we explain to them how we have achieved redress and how we are going to continue dealing with redress.
Watch this space.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
The Solvency Issue is one entirely created by David Ames. He hammered the FSCS and by doing so opened up the solvency door.
Not the best tactical choice.
Click to access witnessstatementfinalon16414.pdf
James Baker, Ames’s accountant and a director of the Baker Clarke Partnership, produced this in the Davies litigation. He clearly states that the “Harlequin” companies controlled by Dave Ames are valueless and that their liabilities exceed their assets.
S 123 Insolvency Act 1986 defines insolvency from a UK perspective
(2) A company is also deemed unable to pay its debts if it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the value of the company’s assets is less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account its contingent and prospective liabilities. This is known as balance sheet insolvency.
The test in St Vincent, St Lucia and Barbados is that a company is insolvent if “the realisable value of the assets of the company are less than the aggregate of its liabilities and stated capital of all classes.”
You can draw your own conclusions as to whether “Harlequin” is insolvent or not.
It is quite apparent from the witness statement of James Baker that the companies as a matter of law in St. Vincent and St. Lucia are insolvent, it is my guess now that these documents have surfaced that it is only a matter of time, maybe weeks, or even a few months before RL or Leonard Curtis push the nuclear button.
My bets are on Leonard Curtis.
I can see why RL published the witness statement of James Baker to force the hand of Ames on the matter.
Oh Dave, I’ve had to write to Bro. Neale at the FSCS (again) and
Bro. David Cameron.
They are not amused.
My bets are on Ames pressing the button himself.
I just come across this web site and found it very intresting.
http://www.thepackagingcompany.co.uk
@James Baker- reprise. And to quote JB “in many cases the value of the assets exceed the liabilities by just £1” Not nil value but £1 value. This is contrary to the FSCS assumption. So looks like you want to pick and choose which part of JB you want to quote. And no he does not quote the “Harlequin” companies, he details them individually. So now you think that there is a company called “Harlequin”. Hope you have passed that confirmation on to the WK lawyers.
A cunning plan….
In the UK, a pre pack administration sale is a powerful, legal way of selling the business on to a trade buyer or a third party. Or to the existing directors operating under a new company (or “newco”) if the business is facing serious problems and creditor threats.
I distinctly remember the old baggage herself Carol Ames signing the papers declaring that HMSSE was unable to pay its debts.
Anonymous 3.24 pm, you don’t appear to have read the James Baker witness statement or if you have you don’t understand it. Probably one of the reasons you invested in Harlequin or one of Ames’ companies in the first place.
I suggest you read the Jim Baker witness statement again and seek an professional opinion on what it states before trying to convince yourself that Ames’ companies are solvent by virtue of £ 1.00.
Well Anonymous March 24, 2015 at 3:24 pm let’s see what Mr Baker said.
Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd: “I believe it is a reasonable conclusion to believe that the liabilities of this company are in excess of its assets”
Buccament Bay Resort Ltd: “I exhibit at JAB 4 being the management accounts of this Company indicating that its liabilities exceed its assets”
Two Rivers Beach Resort SA: “the liabilities of this Company exceed its asset value”
Waters Meet Beach Resort SRL: “These accounts record the fact that the liabilities of the Company exceed the asset value by some RD$ 16,597,717.”
Las Canas Beach Resort SA: “These accounts show an excess of liabilities over assets.”
Harlequin Developments (SVG) Ltd: “These accounts show an excess of liabilities over assets of some EC$ 16,597,717. I believe this to be in the region of £3.6m at the time.”
Harlequin Boutique Hotel Ltd (St Lucia): “The Company shows an excess of liabilities over assets of a modest £582”
Harlequin Boutique Hotel Ltd (Barbados): “These accounts do show a surplus of assets over liabilities by a sum of £46,124. However, there is due a sum of £291,642 due from related parties. Given the position of the related parties and available assets I think it prudent to provision the recoverability of this sum”
Blu Hotel Ltd: “The accounts demonstrate that the liabilities are greater than the assets by more than $1.1m. as a direct result of accumulated losses.”
Harlequin Resorts (St Lucia) Ltd: “These accounts show that the liabilities are greater than the assets by some £150,389.”
Harlequin Hotels and Resorts Cayman Ltd: “I exhibit at JAB 21 a schedule recording the Assets of the above company at £1,126,795 with liabilities of £4,679,353 as of 31st March 2013. On this basis as the liabilities exceed the asset value”
Harlequin Air Ltd: “the assets of the Company are less than $1m with liabilities in excess of $3m.”
Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd: “the liabilities of the company exceed the assets.”
Wow. Not even an excess of assets over liabilities of £1. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of solvency for any of the GV’s companies.
@Anonymous 3.20. No you tw*t. The JB statement of £1 value is at odds with the SFCS valuation of nil which has prompted the redress claims by RL. You are obviously incapable of reading my post correctly.
Semantics dear chap, Harlequin is simply insolvent.
Now, if Pre pack happens that would well and truly stiff the cash investors.
I can see little legs pulling off something like a pre pack liquidation or it’s SVG equivalent………
Then blaming the usual suspects.
Who keeps the cash if Ames ‘Pre-Packs’ harlequin? The constant references to lack of umbrellas/coke and crap at BB just smelt of trying to appear broke to all us gullible investors
Is that the Irish equivalent to a six pack.
I get to keep my airplane. Oops dave had that 😉
Why wont Dave sign the solvency declaration ?
It is still Paddys plane lol, All Ames has is a freezing order, Paddy still has one plane more then Dave lol. Dave had to give his to Caribbean Helicopters.
But I see it is all Paddy’s Newman’s Fatchett’s Crozier / Dixon’s Corney’s MacDonald’s Wilkins Kennedy’s fault.
Dave was it really worth it? Was it really really worth it, or did the above drop you in it from a very big height?
Surely you read the discovery in the CLC claim, interesting eh ?
Does not really put you in a very good light now does it ?
No idea what you’re on about Paddy?
The only dim light is in your brain Paddykins
Now Paddy is dim, says alot about Ames so, he gave Paddy $ 52 million.
Now that’s what I call dim.
More to this than meets the eye. All this Man talk.
You would think for $52m you would at least get the drains connected
“Harlequin Hubris”. Superb. All in a name.
It’s all in the evidence. The truth is out there, for a price.
Can we discuss the evidence – ‘Man to Man’
Dave Ames wants to sue Dave Man for defamation, Dave Ames obtained a whole load of Dave Mans emails.
Dave Man was Ames’ business partner.
Dave Man is still a director of Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd.
Dave Ames has correspondance between the SFO and Dave Man, Dave Man and the SFO and a draft SFO witness statement of Dave Man.
The Authorities know, The SFO know, Kennedys know (cause Dave Ames told them)
So what? Who bloody well cares?
None of this is putting money into the pockets of investors and none of this is getting resorts built.
And frankly I think we are all getting tired of stories about Dave getting ripped off by all and sundry.
(1). Where is your finance Dave. ?
(2). Where are your build plans Dave. ?
(3). Where is your business plan Dave ?
(4). Where are your audited accounts Dave ?
Isn’t it about bloody time you concentrated on getting things moving rather then spending time and effort trying to keep your backside out of jail.
If you need reminding we are a few days off the end of the first quarter, a quarter in which work on the H Hotel in Barbados was to recommence, well it hasn’t, what a surprise, or is it that your engineers, architects, and other “mysterious staff” are beavering away in the background.
Get real Dave and get on with either looking after “YOUR” investors or shutting down the farce of a business you operate.
The bulk of your Caribbean companies face being struck off for failing in your corporate obligations, ie reporting and accounting, is it not time you tended to these rather pressing matters.
This is just a wild guess but the reason Gonsalves has totally ignored
Ames is that within a year’s time he will be in the political fight of his life
and he needs Buccament open as an argument to the trunk airlines
that (and even if Buccament had 500 rentable rooms its a stretch)
SVG has the infrastructure to justify international flights.
Hopefully this is all moot and a new government will be in power.
What a sad, sad, sad commentary on a physically stunning chain of
islands.
Message for Richard Won Ton Spector,
理查德你的公司有一个信贷评级，也不好，反正我可以有一些云吞汤，春卷和鸡炒面。我要问的排骨，但我不想冒犯你。
What happened with H Hotel? Nothing. Still waiting. More bullshit from the King of Bullshit Dave Ames. Sign the solvency declaration from RL Dave, tell us all you are solvent. Just sign the paper.
deVere Reveals It’s [sic] Role In “Exposing” Belvedere Management
“One of the world’s largest independent financial advisory organizations today revealed it helped a U.S. based investigative financial news service expose what could be one of the world’s biggest-ever frauds in order to protect investors and try to recover assets.
deVere Group confirmed it provided evidence of wrongdoing to Miami-based OffshoreAlert, run and managed by investigative journalist David Marchant, to highlight the alleged shady dealings of Mauritius-based Belvedere Management Group.
OffshoreAlert describes Belvedere as “an essentially criminal enterprise” saying it has evidence of “funds that are blatantly fraudulent, including a current $130 million Ponzi scheme in Cayman” and “Funds that simply disappear or fail in dubious circumstances, including the £400 million Harlequin Property Fund that has been unraveling over the last few years.”
more here
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/03/devere-belvedere-management/
Did a little deeper into the Belvedere Management Group story and up pops Caldora and Thailand. For those whose memories don’t stretch that far back Thailand is where Dave Ames started out with his property empire but left a trail of victims who lost their investments.
Sorry BFP won’t allow me to post links so you will have to Google
“Thai links to ‘one of the biggest criminal financial enterprises in modern history”
or look on the Alex Drummond website.
Sorry that should be
Andrew Drummond dot com
Caldora, yes I remember that weird block giving a presentation with Ames about finance, he looked like a pervert.
Turns out he was a conman. And yes, Ames was promoting him – a little bit like Halkham Compensation?
Why doesn’t Dave Ames sign the solvency paper?
I’m really confused.
I was under the impression Dave Man was working with the Paudie against Ames.
Now, are we saying he is working in cahoots with Ames?
Because he is insolvent?
@Anonymous 12.59 “Gezza tried to help an investor” The biggest laugh I have had all year. He got caught because he is computer illiterate and could not help himself.
The truth, I believe, why this saga has gone on for so long is because all parties have been feathering their OWN nests.
As a direct result of that, it’s difficult to blame each other without implicating yourself.
A hypothetical situation.
A builder commits fraud, who works for a developer who skims off some cash, both know what’s going on, but are happy.
An accountancy firm, are happy because they get paid, a big chunk. Agents can’t believe their luck.
Then something (we don’t know about happens) They all have a big fall out and blame each other. Now here’s the tricky bit.
They are all in it together, nobody will come out of it clean.
What a problem.
So Dave Man is a director of a company that had property in Dubai. Looks like Dave Man is up to his armpits in a lot of things. Are his cohorts turning on him? Or is he on here desperately trying to plead his case because he is being done for deformation. Or is Dave Man in with the cat woman?
I find it all a bit too much to comprehend. Is Dave Man linked to people smuggling with that Walton – cat woman was from eastern Europe?
In my earlier post of 12.59 am I incorrectly stated Dave Man instead of Dave Ames, I apologise for all the confusion. However Dave Man is still a director of Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd all though it is believed that he and Dave Ames do not speak.
This is the company that it is claimed Dave Man is still a director in.
According to James Baker:
Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd
21. This company held various properties in Dubai for which I enclose at JAB 23 a
schedule showing same at 2010. I did not have accounts for this Company and thus
converted the AED currency shown at the exchange rate applicable at the time of
0.169 AED to GBP. This gave rise to an asset value of £4.79m. The Accounts of
Harlequin Management Services South East Limited to March 2011 note 17 exhibit
JAB 24 show the funds due to that company of £4.873m Thus giving rise to a
position whereby the liabilities of the company exceed the assets. I am also aware
from discussions with Mr Ames that some of these properties have been sold since
these schedules were prepared and have been advised they were sold at a loss. The
exact quantum was not known to me at the time of the statement of 15th November
2013 as this was produced with only very limited time available. The conclusion that
I made was based upon the available information that I had that there was every
indication that the shares in this company would have negligible value.
Not a very good director are you Mr Man.
Perhaps selling concrete blocks is more suitable to your talent.
Of course this makes you a director of a company that your current employer is in a little legal wrangle with. I’m sure you have passed this information regarding being a director in a DA company (if true of course) has been passed to the SFO?
And Anonymous 10.27pm, “who bloody well cares”. Well a lot of people do.
Any news on the evidence that Ames alluded to in his previous update?
What about the issue of solvency?
So, has Dave Man gone over to the ‘dark side?’
Yep FSCS obviously concur that DA is solvent. Ok? Good enough?
Just imagine, if Dave Man, was playing a double agent role in this debacle.
If this were indeed true, would he not be best placed to give for example the Irish builder, misleading Information?
Just imagine, if this were true the information flow back to Little legs?
It is rumoured that the Irish builder and a London based solicitor are close, maybe even business partners?
Now, if Dave Man was in this in sanctum; is it too much of a stretch of the imagination to think that things could leak to the Darkside?
I know very little this in fact anything about this Dave Man character, but he was a business partner of the little one.
Does this now mean that Crazier is now indirectly a business associate of DA?
But his accountant says otherwise….OK Good enough.
“Yep FSCS obviously concur that DA is solvent. Ok? Good enough?”
1. FSCS commented on “Harlequin” not David Ames. As I still don’t see any single company, or even a legally recognized group called “Harlequin”, I don’t know to which enterprise they were referring?
2. FSCS mentioned “Harlequin” are “not insolvent”. This can be taken that none of the Harlequin RDC’s have entered formal insolvency proceedings, and as such from a legal perspective would be classed as “not” insolvent. It does not address the question of solvency – to which David Ames has been presented a simple document which all he has to do is sign, like he signed the 9000 contracts in existence. Surely this shouldn’t be such an undertaking if indeed all of his companies are “solvent” by the legal definition as directed in the declaration?
Yes but, the GV is all powerful and does not need to do anything so mundane.
#8
Divert attention at all costs.
Why won’t David Ames sign the solvency declaration?
These guys have been hawking ‘Harlequin’s’ fictitious portfolio as their own and attempting to raise cash for the Harlequin Income Fund – which really should be named the Davies & Simmons-Lifestyle-Fund.
They have been kicking about the bars in Rawai while operating non-functioning companies based in Mauritius.
Most of their funds have been suspended. But they still advertise them.
That of course may be a little immaterial because nobody is policing these guys anyway.
Actually they could have made lots of fast bucks and kept their heads down and got away with it – but, driven by greed, apparently they have taken a few locals to the cleaners.
Dave introduced PETER SIMMONDS – FUND MANAGEMENT whose background is Asset Management. Peter worked for Emirates Bank and more recently Caldora Assets Management who have put together an open ended offshore fund, with Deutsche Bank holding all the assets, for the purpose of Harlequin completions. Further information to be released as this progresses. For further information view: http://www.caldorafunds.com
Peter offered us some information about his past experience and background and explained how the fund must only be accessed through accredited Independent Financial Advisors. This is also suitable for SIPPs, please see the following note from Harlequin:
Harlequin are currently working with an overseas regulated fund that has packaged a new product for sale via IFA’s. For those of you who are either regulated IFAs or work closely with a regulated IFA and the fund is therefore looking to gauge interest from you (or related IFAs) in this product. If you (or your IFA) is interested in receiving further information about this product, representatives from the fund will be available to discuss this product in more detail. Please be advised that any introduction is intended solely for professional investors with expertise in investing in financial products.
@Same old pigs at the trough
You should credit your source. The above came from a report posted by Assets International on their website about a Harlequin Property Open Day back in Feb 2012 . Now we all remember them don’t we?
@Dave Man, semantics dear boy, semantics. Lol
@same old pigs in the trough aka what happened to the Caldora plan. You really must stop having conversations with yourself. It is just too obvious.
@ Anonymous 11.52am
The FSCS have not stated that they regard Harlequin as solvent so please stop trying to peddle this mis-information.
Funny how Ames recommended Halkham and Caldora.
You have attracted the wrath of the Gods, and shall be punished by damming evidence.
No they regard Harlequin of not being insolvent. Opposite of insolvent is…….? SOLVENT. There is no other opposite.
Define Insolvent at Dictionary .com. “Not solvent”
Therefor solvent = not insolvent. Simples.
Valued at nowt, FSCS payout were happy.
I’m glad to see Ingham has wound his neck in. That linkedin thing must have made him understand his behaviour could cause his business real or otherwise, complications.
Next post will be from the RI imposter. You can bet on it. Looks like someone is about to start a slanging match with himself.
@ Anonymous 2.02pm
Not so simples.
You are being logically incoherent.
The FSCS do not regard Harlequin to be insolvent
is NOT the same as
The FSCS regard Harlequin to be solvent
I do not regard Dallas to be a good city to visit
Is not the same as
I regard Dallas as a bad city to visit
(Good being the opposite of bad)
I haven’t been to Dallas and so I can make both those statements honestly and consistently. There is a third position which is
I regard Dallas as neither a good nor bad city to visit (because I don’t have the evidence to make a judgement.
Had the FSCS wished to communicate that they regard Harlequin to be solvent then that is what they would have said. The fact that they have chosen to word it using a double negative is in itself telling and probably points to them not having the evidence to form a judgement. After all, who does?!!
So, Ames’ strategy is for him, his relatives and remaining cronies to implicate as many as possible, and cloud the waters with conspiracy to try to dissipate his, his wife’s, Wooller’s, Terry’s etc, retribution.
It’s frustrating to see this circus carrying on, whilst the authorities stand back and let Ames spend more and more of his proceeds of fraud, reducing any pot left for refunds to cash investors, trying to set-up all his former cohorts and enemies, but anyone else who did get involved with Ames’ deceit and scamming of investors for their own financial gain deserves everything they get. You’re all going to have to turn on each other like rabid beasts in your death throes, snarling and lashing at each other as justice finally looms. You lay down with dogs ….
What you all forgot is that Ames had, and still has, £ millions he stole off investors to pay for every trick in the book, legal and illegal, to make everyone and anyone but him pay for what he’s done. He’s a liar, a conman, a crook, a bully, a psychopathic narcissist and, like is wife, is possessed by an overwhelming, crazed, irrational desire for vengeance. He will do absolutely anything to avoiding accepting that he is a fraudulent crook and a failure (again).
When will Dave Ames pay back his “investors”?
@ Dave Man the tightrope walker on March 25, 2015 at 11:18 am
Not a very good director are you Mr Man.
( Dave Man and Dave Ames are both current directors of Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd, therefore it has to be assumed that Dave Ames is also not a very good director.
What is odd however is that Dave Man is not a signatory to the loan agreement with Senka Besirivic re the loans she obtained from HPC Ltd, nor is Dave Man a signatory to the agreements between members of the Ames family and HPC Ltd re the properties held in the name of those family members for the benefit of HPC Ltd. but this is a story for another day).
Perhaps selling concrete blocks is more suitable to your talent.
(Dave Man does not sell concrete blocks).
Of course this makes you a director of a company that your current employer is in a little legal wrangle with.
( Mr. Newman never has and is not now in any little or otherwise legal wrangle with Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd, the same applies to Wilkins Kennedy, ICE Group, Cellate Caribbean and Mr. O’ Halloran, so no Mr. Man is not a director of any company involved in legal wranglings with the above named).
I’m sure you have passed this information regarding being a director in a DA company (if true of course)
(The information is true and is contained on the statutory company declaration from the equivalent of the SVG companies house and was produced in the RL DD in 2014.)
has been passed to the SFO?
(Dave Ames is fully aware that this information has been passed onto the SFO, in the discovery part of the Davies case in the UK, CLC provided Ames with correspondance between Dave Man and the Serious Fraud Office including the draft witness statement of Dave Man as sent by the SFO for final checking, Dave Ames will see from that draft witness statement that Dave Man does indeed make reference to his directorship of Harlequin Property Caribbean Ltd. so that should really be an end of that matter. )
And Anonymous 10.27pm, “who bloody well cares”. Well a lot of people do.
( Yes some 6000 investors are very concerned and do care, some want to know why their interest payments have stopped and when they will recommence, others want to know when the guranteed mortgages will be provided, most want to know when their units will be complete, many want to be compensated as per the contracts for the delays incurred in building their respective units. Others just want out and want a refund as a result of Ames being in default with respect to the contracts they hold. Most want Ames to make a statutory declaration as to the solvency of his companies. This is what investors care about. To put this into perspective, Ames took between £ 210-290 million after the Builder, Accountants etc left. What happened this money. c a quarter of a billion pounds paid over and nothing to show for it, you can’t blame the builder, accountants and Dave Man for this, so yes we all care and we all want answers).
Dave Man along with Paddy and Newman stupid thick bastards lol thought they were helping Crozier and Corney in their case against Ames, you would think that Newman would have learned his lesson with Harlecon, but he didn’t, dumb ass lol, as part of the deal Ames struck with Crozier and Corney, they passed on all the emails given to them by Man, Paddy and Newman,
Instead Man, Paddy and Newman lol ended up helping Ames against Wilkins Kennedy lol, and Crozier and Corney well they got jack shit for their clients. Lol.
Lol, yeah Jezza, Paddy and the Man from Amman shouldn’t have bothered to try help the Davies 24, looks like their “Mates” Audrey and Corney played them for suckers. Lol. It wasn’t really a case of loose lips sinks ships, more like taking sweets from a child.
Thanks to Jezza, Paddy and the Man from Amman, they have just blown apart the SFO investigation, they first started lol, serves them right for trying to take Dave and Harlequin down through lies and bullshit. My guess will be that those three will be in the dock shortly lol, stupid bastards. Lol ho ho ho. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@Some clarification re Dave Man.
1)Taken from the Kelltek web site:
One major problem with conventional concrete is the limited insulation capacity and heat or cold storage in the concrete mass, particularly in the extremes of climatic zones.
The way in which our pre-cast panels are engineered ensures that they have thermal qualities that are significantly better than traditional pre-cast.
Yep looks like concrete blocks to me
2)Taken from the Kelltek Org Facebook page:
– مهندس تصميم انشائي خبره 6 – 8 سنوات له خبره في تصميم Post tension system
– مهندس تصميم معماري خبره 2 – 4 سنوات
-سكرتيرة
– موظف بوفيه
ترسل السيرة الذاتية لـــــــ david.man@kelltek.org
او فاكس رقم 065823880
للاستفسار :
065823990
Like · Comment · Share
Yep looks like David Man at Kelltek
3)Of course this makes you a director of a company that your current employer is in a little legal wrangle with.
Let me write this a bit slower so you understand
1)You are the director of a company, (HPC ltd)
2)That your current employer (Gezza, who is the only director of Kelltek cough cough)
3)Is Gezza in a legal wrangle with Harlequin?(Does HPC ltd come under the umbrella of Harlequin?) Well as JB had to list the assets of DA and CA and they are in most cases the only directors then read “Harlequin” That would make Dave Mans boss in a legal wrangle with “Harlequin”
Awkward or not.
Can Crazier get struck off? Oh silly me she has to be a member of a professional body to get struck off!
@ Dave Man the tightrope walker on March 25, 2015 at 8:42 pm
1)Taken from the Kelltek web site:
One major problem with conventional concrete is the limited insulation capacity and heat or cold storage in the concrete mass, particularly in the extremes of climatic zones.
The way in which our pre-cast panels are engineered ensures that they have thermal qualities that are significantly better than traditional pre-cast.
Yep looks like concrete blocks to me
( Then you don’t understand what a concrete block is? But tell me how does this get victims their money back ??? )
2)Taken from the Kelltek Org Facebook page:
– مهندس تصميم انشائي خبره 6 – 8 سنوات له خبره في تصميم Post tension system
– مهندس تصميم معماري خبره 2 – 4 سنوات
-سكرتيرة
– موظف بوفيه
ترسل السيرة الذاتية لـــــــ david.man@kelltek.org
او فاكس رقم 065823880
للاستفسار :
065823990
Like · Comment · Share
Yep looks like David Man at Kelltek
( David Man is an employee of Kelltek, who said he wasn’t ??? What is your problem with this ? ).
3)Of course this makes you a director of a company that your current employer is in a little legal wrangle with.
Let me write this a bit slower so you understand.
( It really does not matter how slow you write, we will all read it at a normal pace, and again please tell me how this helps victims. )
1)You are the director of a company, (HPC ltd)
( Sorry incorrect. I’m not the director of HPC Ltd. not sure why you think you know who I am, again how does this help victims? ).
2)That your current employer (Gezza, who is the only director of Kelltek cough cough)
( Kelltek as a matter of law only has one director, law being a word Dave Ames has no concept of, but again how does this help victims ? and I think you need to take something for that cough ).
3) Is Gezza in a legal wrangle with Harlequin?
( Are you referring to Mr. Newman ? No Mr. Newman is not in any legal wrangle with Harlequin, as a matter of law no such entity exists, furthermore Mr. Newman is not involved in any legal wrangle with any of the ‘fraudulent’ companies owned by the Ames family, again how does this help victims? ).
Does HPC ltd come under the umbrella of Harlequin?
( No HPC Ltd does not come under the umbrella of Harlequin, as a matter of law there is no group structure and no legal entity called Harlequin, thus no umbrella, something Bucc Bay badly needs, again how does this assist victims?).
Well as JB had to list the assets of DA and CA and they are in most cases the only directors then read “Harlequin”
( JB most definetly did not list the assets of DA and CA, he listed some of them. DA and CA produced 6 differing affidavits of disclosure of assets, yes
“DIFFERING”. Why differing, because DA and CA were lying about their assets. Yes “LYING”. Now this is of great interest to Ames’ victims. Because these “ASSETS” were purchased with victims cash. )
That would make Dave Mans boss in a legal wrangle with “Harlequin”
Awkward or not.
( Dave Man being a director of HPC Ltd makes nothing awkward for Mr. Newman or others, it makes life extremely awkward for Dave Ames, given that the loan agreement between Senka Besirivic based on UK law, is not valid without Dave Mans signature, now that is awkward, and futher more given that the loan agreement as a matter of UK law is invalid, the claim by Dave and Carol Ames that the proceeds of the sale of two properties in Dubai in November / December 2014 February 2015 is theirs to do as they wish with is not valid either, now this is also going to be of interest to Ames’ victims as it was when we told Shipleys, Leonard Curtis and HMRC and SFO. ).
( Now for a while I thought you were someone unconnected to Harlequin, but reading your latest garbage, you are most definetly a member of the Harlequin Team, because only those in Harlequin have no idea what they are talking about. Which is why we as victims are all in the mess we find ourselves in. )
Well well poor old Gobby Klein got hacked, it’s Fraud she screams, RL do something about it ” NOW ” . Lol shut up Gobby you stupid cow, lol. GF can’t sort it you stupid cow.
From the RL forum.
Gabriella Klein
No, Gabriella Klein did not write what appears below. Someone is using my name or has somehow broken into my account. THIS IS FRAUD!!! RL, please do something about it now.
Gabriella Klein said:
RL and GF on their toes again, even on a Sunday, and always hot on the heels of new obstacles. S235 FSMA 2000 – whatever it means, you will sort it. I TRUST you. Thanks.
Gobby appears to be suffering from memory loss. Lol
@Anonymous 9.47, please accept my sincere apologies. It’s concrete PANEL. I didn’t realise you were so protective of your industry.
I have no problem with Dave Man (you) being an employee of Kelltek. Just emphasising the connection between you and your boss, Mr Newman. Now the use of the word “you” is generic. You can be who you want. And you think that Mr Newman, an ex employee of WK, who was suspended befor resigning, is not in a legal wrangle with DA? That concrete dust has gone to your head. And to class yourself as a “victim” is very strange. There I’ve typed this at normal speed, glad you can keep up.
seems S235FSMA2000 is something to do with off shore inheritance tax. Yes Gobriela you are right, it could be fraud. But whos?
What a day it has been. Money pouring in for redress today.
We even pulled back some Holkham clients.
Could the day be any better ?
@ Anonymous on March 25, 2015 at 10:35 pm
@ Anonymous 9.47, please accept my sincere apologies. It’s concrete PANEL. I didn’t realise you were so protective of your industry.
( It’s an insulated fire rated panel made from fiber steel, amongst other components, it actually looks like a very good product, which also has all the services built into it.
I understand your confusion between blocks and the panel given that it has been so long since Dave engaged in any real construction, indeed I very much doubt he will ever construct anything else ever again, apart from perhaps woodwork classes in HMP.
Now what has any of this got to do with victims, your apology has not done anything to increase mine or any other victims bank balances. )
I have no problem with Dave Man (you) being an employee of Kelltek.
( Nope I’m not Dave Man and I’m not an employee of Kelltek, but glad to see you have no problem with Dave Man. It’s funny Dave Ames had to go all the way to California to try and identify posters on BFP yet you claim to know who I am just through some physcic powers, still your physcic powers are lacking some what as I am not Dave Man nor an employee of Kelktek. )
Just emphasising the connection between you and your boss, Mr Newman. Now the use of the word “you” is generic. You can be who you want.
( I know who I am, so don’t need your assistance on that matter, you don’t know who I am so use you, we, I, them or anything else generically and given that I’m not employed by Kelktek nor do I work for Mr. Newman then there can be no connection. )
And you think that Mr Newman, an ex employee of WK, who was suspended befor resigning, is not in a legal wrangle with DA?
( Ex, former, are these generic words too? Mr. Newman is not in any legal wrangle with DA, perhaps you would care to demonstrate where Mr. Newman is in a legal wrangle ?, indeed even though the complaint made to the ICAEW by Carol Ames cannot be considered a legal wrangle perhaps you would like to update us all on the outcome of that particular matter, given that it’s been over a year since Carol made her complaint? )
That concrete dust has gone to your head.
( How would you or Dave or the rest of you in any of Ames’ companies know how concrete dust would affect anyone, the resorts Ames has sold but not constructed for nearly a decade now are filled with dust, but sadly it’s not dust of the concrete kind. )
And to class yourself as a “victim” is very strange.
( Anyone who has had the misfortune of crossing paths with the Ames family and their colleagues can only be classed as victims. Even those three unfortunate investors out of over 6,000 who were foolish enough to complete. )
There I’ve typed this at normal speed, glad you can keep up.
( Now that you have gotten that off your chest can we not get back to discussing the issues surrounding probably the biggest Fraud in recent UK history, and the thousands of victims that are out there. The fact that CLC gave dozens of emails to Dave Ames of correspondance between Dave Man and the SFO, will do nothing to help Dave Ames’ case. On the contrary it may speed up the process to finally put Ames and his family behind bars where they belong, and I doubt you will find many who will argue with that point.)
Mr. Corney and Mrs. Crozier have been working and indeed continue to work with Mr. Newman on a number of business ventures.
Mr. Newman along with Mr. O Halloran are also working closely with Kennedys the lawyers for Wilkins Kennedys insurers to assist them in the defence of the claim being brought by Dave Ames against Wilkins Kennedy.
RL have also been most helpful in that they have provided information which greatly assists Kennedys in defending the claim brought by Mr. Ames.
Mr. Ames has had to resort to offering
£ 250 k for information that would help him win the case against Wilkins Kennedy, payable only if he wins, yet there are dozens of people queing up to provide information to Kennedys the lawyers for Wilkins Kennedys insurers in a bid to assist Kennedys in their defence of the action and they do so freely, without need for reward.
The fact that Ames is offering £ 350 k for evidence against Wilkins Kennedy speaks volumes.
Such is the distrust in the information being provided by Mr. Ames in that he has previously produced forged and false emails and documents, Kennedys have put Ames on notice that they will be checking the method data of all evidence Ames produces.
This will also include the false or misleading accounting produced by Adela Chalmers and James Albert Baker.
If anyone out there has an issue with any of the above then please feel free to raise this with the SFO.
I should note that we don’t see anyone rushing to work with Dave Ames on the construction of his resorts and this speaks volumes and should remain a very serious cause of concern for investors.
Dave Ames is using Reynolds Porter Chamberlain in his defence in the SFO investigation.
http://www.rpc.co.uk
They don’t come cheap.
@The avoidance of doubt, of course using multiple IDs creates more doubt
“Now that you have gotten that off your chest can we not get back to discussing the issues surrounding probably the biggest Fraud in recent UK history, and the thousands of victims that are out there. The fact that CLC gave dozens of emails to Dave Ames of correspondance between Dave Man and the SFO, will do nothing to help Dave Ames’ case. On the contrary it may speed up the process to finally put Ames and his family behind bars where they belong, and I doubt you will find many who will argue with that point.)”
And how will that help investors get their money back? Your comment has not helped anyone get their money back
Appeal Court ruling raises fresh questions over Harlequin advice
Professional Adviser | 26 Mar 2015 | 09:44
Author:
Laura Miller
A Court of Appeal ruling about what constitutes a collective investment scheme has raised questions about the status of Harlequin that could cast further doubt on its suitability for retail investors.
The Court of Appeal has backed the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) case that Capital Alternatives and others promoted and operated collective investment schemes without authorisation.
Capital Alternatives had structured its schemes to try to avoid the need to be regulated, the FCA said.
But Lord Justice Christopher Clarke ruled the schemes met the definition of collective investments – that they pooled investors’ monies and that the investments were managed centrally by a firm or firms.
He agreed with the FCA that the schemes were unauthorised collective investment schemes and could not be lawfully operated by the defendants.
Harlequin next?
The ruling could have repercussions beyond Capital Alternatives’ schemes.
Tracey McDermott, the FCA’s director of enforcement and financial crime, fired a warning shot to other firms at the time of the original High Court ruling in the regulator’s favour in 2013.
“Collective investment schemes are complicated and investors put their money into the operator’s hands with no real control over what happens to their money.
“This ruling shows that even if operators have deliberately tried to structure their scheme to avoid regulation, the court will still look at whether those operating the scheme should in fact be regulated for consumer protection.”
TROUBLED OVERSEAS UNREGULATED PROPERTY INVESTMENT HARLEQUIN – into which mainly pension savers have put £400m they now can’t access – has always denied that it is a collective investment scheme.
The distinction is important for advisers because the Financial Conduct Authority has strict rules about who can be promoted and recommended unregulated collective investment scheme (UCIS) and other ‘non-mainstream assets’.
But lawyers have said Harlequin’s scheme has a similiar structure to Capital Alternatives, and the Appeal Court ruling could support claims that Harlequin is in fact a UCIS.
If those claims are backed by the regulator and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), advisers who recommended clients who do not meet the FCA’s strict criteria for UCIS promotion invest in Harlequin, could face enforcement action.
Harlequin could also face legal action for unlawfully operating a collective investment scheme.
UCIS regulation
In June 2013 the FCA banned the promotion of UCIS – and that of other non-mainstream assets such as traded life settlements – to the vast majority of retail investors in the UK.
Most investments in Harlequin were made prior to the rule change, but when certain restrictions still applied.
Before June 2013, UCIS funds could be promoted to certified high net worth individuals, certified sophisticated investors, and self-certified sophisticated investors.
They could also be promoted to those assessed by the adviser or promoter as failing within certain FCA categories; 1) A person who is already a participant in an UCIS; A person who has been a participant in the last 30 months; 2) A person for whom the firm has taken reasonable steps to ensure that investment in the collective investment scheme is suitable; and who is an “established” or “newly accepted” customer; 7) an eligible counterparty or a professional client.
If the FCA uses the Court of Appeal ruling against Capital Alternatives to define Harlequin as a UCIS, many investors who were advised into it could be found to not meet the regulator’s criteria for eligible investors at the time.
FCA vs Capital Alternatives ruling
The question in this case was whether four different schemes constituted collective investment schemes within the meaning of section 235 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
The High Court ruled in 2013 that they were. Capital Alternatives disagreed and appealed the decision.
Two types of scheme were named in the appeal; the African Land Scheme; and the Carbon Credits Schemes.
The African Land scheme involved the exploitation of a rice farm in Sierra Leone. It had been promoted since about November 2009 and, at the time when proceedings were brought in July 2013, had attracted investment totalling some £8.1m from some 1,160 investors.
The Carbon Credit Schemes related to forest areas in Australia, Sierra Leone and the Amazon. The aim was to generate tradable carbon credits, which could be resold at a profit. The Australian scheme involved reforestation; the other two schemes involved the preservation of existing forests. These schemes had attracted investments totalling some £ 8.8m from 919 investors.
Capital Alternatives argued it had received legal advice when setting up the schemes that they were not collective investments. Harlequin has previoulsy said the same.
But Lord Justice Clarke, backed by a second judge, ruled the schemes met the definition of collective investments – that they pooled investors’ monies and that the investments were managed centrally by a firm or firms.
Tobias Haynes of law firm Regulatory Legal said: “The judgment is welcome news for investors and the regulator no doubt.
“It provides clarity with regard to what constitutes a UCIS, bringing many schemes into regulation and potentially offering redress that would otherwise be unavailable.
“The decision also brings new hope for direct and SIPP investors who did not have the benefit of advice.”
Don’t be ridiculous!
Ames should never have deceived his investors.
Oh so now we do have a company called “Harlequin” Funny how the concept changes to suit the latest press release or which way the wind is blowing.
Nope there is no such company as Harlequin, Harlequin does not exist as a matter of law. If people want to refer to about 47 legally seperate entities as Harlequin so be it, but as a matter of fact and as a matter of law, no such entity as Harlequin exists.
However you only seek to comment on absolutely irrelevant matters, in a bid to deflect attention away from Ames and his companies, it is a pity that you have no comment to make on the thrust of Laura Millars article, that being that Ames may very well have operated a CIS, and the ramifications that will have on the Ames family and the myriad of insolvent ( as a matter of Caribbean law) that they operate.
Anonymous
March 26, 2015 at 2:21 pm
Oh so now we do have a company called “Harlequin” Funny how the concept changes to suit the latest press release or which way the wind is blowing.
It is not a Press Release. It is a report in the financial press about an Appeal Court ruling against Capital Alternatives who operated a collective investment scheme without authorisation; it also suggests that Harlequin (a brand name and not a group of affiliated companies as some people believe) has also done the same and could face legal action.
Yes I have a comment to make on Laura Millers article, the RL mouthpiece. Nowhere in the court ruling does it mention Harlequin, yet Miller just cannot help herself to add Harlequin into the equation. There has been no ruling about Harlequin, but what does that matter to a puppet.
@ Anonymous 3.35 pm, would you care to comment on all the false dawn updates from Ames going back for years? The banking glitch update, the groundbreaking ceremony update for Merricks, the updates giving completion dates that have not been met, would you care to comment on any of these.
Would you care to comment on Paddy being implicated in fraud, Newman being suspended by WK, RL having to pay DA legal costs? Or Laura Miller only writes what RL tells her about Harlequin. Would you care to comment on any of these rather than the way that Laura Miller, recommended for an award for here coverage of HP, just cannot help herself.
Laura’s father is a very senior freemason.
Everything is hidden within plain sight.
Harlequin still faces a likely legal action for unlawfully operating a collective investment scheme. It’s really bad news but you know that anyway Dave.
If DA has taken legal advise he will sue the legal company who gave him that advise. Simple solution.
@ Anonymous on March 26, 2015 at 4:13 pm
You asked Would you care to comment on Paddy being implicated in fraud, ?
( Yes I would, the Judge based on the evidence put forward by Ames
(( Evidence which was subsequently found to be false )) stated that Paudy engaged in Fraudulent Misrepresentation, the exact same finding a judge in SVG made against Dave Ames, the Irish judgment is under appeal as you know. But the Judge did not “IMPLICATE” Paudy, it was his belief and judgment that Paudy engaged in fraudulent misrepresentation. No implication whatsoever mate. Let’s see what comes out in the appeal. )
Newman being suspended by WK, (All we have is Ames’ word on that matter, and let’s face it, Ames is hardly the most credible person around, now is he? )
RL having to pay DA legal costs?
( RL lost the application in the UK High Court so of course the would have to pay the other sides costs, nothing at all odd there, )
Or Laura Miller only writes what RL tells her about Harlequin.
( If Laura Miller only writes what RL tells her about Harlequin, then it must be correct, see if it was not correct Ames would sue her for defamation and we would all hear about it, just take WordPress in California as an example.)
Would you care to comment on any of these
( I just have.)
rather than the way that Laura Miller, recommended for an award for here coverage of HP, just cannot help herself.
( Now would you care to make any comment on the issue of a CIS, or on the many false and fraudulent updates by Dave Ames? ).
No evidence was found to be false. It has not been tested in a court of law, so not proved. I did not say the judge implicated Paddy, they are your words. Mate.
Wonder why the all knowing oracle Laura Miller did not write an article on RL having to pay DA costs. Ah that would be because the puppet master did not tell her perhaps.
“The judge directed that the UK was not the correct jurisdiction for prosecution for breach of contract since the contracts were with various of Dave Ames’ companies registered in the Caribbean. The judge commented that the contracts were clearly in breach and the claimants were clearly entitled to refunds plus 10% since they, like thousands of other contracts with every other company set-up by Ames in the Caribbean, were in breach for having failed to deliver. In accordance with due protocol, Ames’ bent lawyer, let’s call him Devil’s Advocate, for the sake of our fictional press release, applied for award of costs. The judge had no choice but to award costs and wished the claimants the best of luck obtaining their money back from the thieving crook who’d stolen it off them fraudulently.” by Laurence Milliner, Daily Recorder.
Help !!! The only Laurence Milliner I can find on the internet is a
hat shop in Paris…
And a cutting edge journalist on BFP!
http:/ /www
.rightmove.co.
uk/commercial-property-for-sale/property-49063174.html?utm_content=v2-ealertspropertyimage&utm_medium=email&utm_source=emailupdates&utm_campaign=emailupdates1day&utm_term=buying&sc_id=3706474&onetime_FromEmail=true
Ames is selling Honywood business park.
This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
I can’t wait to hear DA’s excuse for this one.
What do you think Bob? Any cause for concern? Is everything still peachy at Harlequin?
Ames told professional advisor the case was dropped so what freezer ?
Something is not right here, perhaps Barclays have called in the debt?
@anonymous 9.59 your link is shite it doesn’t work.
DESCRIPTION:
An impressive building comprising a ground floor Warehouse 3,396 sq.ft. with storage & WC, and first floor air conditioned Offices 3,392 sq.ft. with WC’s & open kitchen. Front parking for 6 with an additional 6 spaces nearby. The existing owners would consider a sale of the property, providing vacant possession of the ground floor, and with a lease being taken of the 1st floor Offices on terms to be agreed at a rent of £25,000 per annum.
Seems an excellent business decision to me.
Link is fine when you close the gaps, not shite at all.
@Why own when you can rent.
Hopefully any potential purchaser will be smart enough to Google Harlequin before they agree to any kind of rental agreement. The GV isn’t known for paying his bills.
Isn’t the crinkly tin shed of an office in the ownership of the liquidators? Wouldn’t they be selling it?
That’s what puzzles me too.
Do the liquidators even know?
I suppose it depends which of the myriad of Ames’ companies owns the freehold, or maybe that should read Carol and Dan’s companies as they are nearly always the directors.
I wonder which company will take on the new ‘lease’ at £25k pa?
The fraudulent empire is coming to an end
Do you just like the sound of your own keyboard! How about a comment Davy about Paddys fraudulent misappropriation of funds? Oops sorry under appeal of course.
Why who is?
@ 6.49. Mmmm let think. I paid in £80k, if I believe Ames paddy nicked less than £1600. Why would I want to comment or talk about that instead of the other £78400 your paymaster has had away.
So who is about to be nicked then? Talking of paymaster, haven’t RL written anything for Laura Miller today?
Yawn usual diversion tactics. I didn’t pay £80k to RL. I paid it to Ames/HP. I see no denial that Ames is your paymaster one way or another.
And I see no proof of money laundering. But perhaps you should have an early night if you are yawning.
I never said anything about money laundering. Take note of the Anon and Anonymous. So who are you and what is your interest. Investor? No not really. You sound like one of Ames paid slimy detractors. Taking your cut of people’s pensions to divert attention away from the fraud committed by your boss.
Ooh techie, and how are your thuggish comments going to help investors get their money back? Take note of which Anon and which Anonymous? Is Fatchett taking a cut of other people’s pensions?
Not tetchy at all (I assume that’s what you meant, rather than I am technology geek)l. I’m just a fraud victim being honest and straight with my opinion. Something you are unable to do being the paid Ames lackey that you are.
No you sound like a technology geek, because your other comments are rather infantile. Sort of thing a person with no life (or money lol) would say. And how are your comments going to help you get your money back.
Mmmmm let me think, maybe I should pay a lawyer to try and get some of my money back. Yes there’s an idea, how about me using RL’s services to recover some of it. Thanks for the idea.
Come to think of it, I see a pattern emerging here. You gleefully defend a fraudster and enjoy making fun of his victims(real big boy well done). Whilst coming up with any distraction that puts Ames squarely in the frame for ripping people off. Just in case you haven’t figured it out yet I will tell you. You are the baddie.
I suspect you don’t care beyond the cash.
It’s funny really, Robert Storey thinks HP’s collapse all Paddy’s fault too. He also thinks GF is an ambulance chaser and that what isn’t Paddy’s fault is his. Bob even told everyone GF wasn’t even a lawyer. Bob doesn’t like Laura Miller reporting about HP either, he thinks she just writes whatever GF tells her, and that all she writes about Ames and HP are lies and are part of a greater smear campaign against an honest business man.
So Bobby must be happy that there’s another anonymous poster (who definitely isn’t the one handed toilet typist) who shares his views. How nice.
The other “pro” HP poster is Vinnie Stenning.
Anon 11.18 if you don’t like a bit of “making fun of his victims” then don’t do it yourself. “Slimy detractor, paid lackey” If the comments back are a bit to offensive for you then you need to read a something different, like the benno. Poor sensitive soul that you are.
I see Storey is back from his hols. He hates Laura Millar because she is female and she makes him feel inferior.
Harlequin could also face legal action for unlawfully operating a collective investment scheme.
Flogging the office building and asking to rent the top floor.
Selling holidays at BB for next to nothing.
Freezing order on his property.
Election coming up in SVG and Uncle may not be able to swing it this time.
The airport nowhere near finished.
Son in prison for fraud.
You must be desperate Dave.
@ 9.14. Awww and I thought it was you that couldn’t cope with the “thuggish” comments. Although if you consider them thuggish, you must not get out that much. You have really lost touch with reality if you are comparing victims of this fraud with a deluded supporter of a liar and a cheat. Still not figured out you are one of the bad guys yet.
Not sure what publication the benno is.
You’re not really that good at this are you.
@Anon 10.38, just explain again how your comments help investors get their money back? Compared with you I am excellent.
Explain myself to you. Lol. That is rich coming from you, the person who never answers a straight question. “Help investors get their money back”. There you go talking about HP as if it is legitimate business. You see I haven’t been talking about getting victims money back, there are many agencies and professionals working on that one. I am simply amusing myself on a quiet weekend taking the piss out of a con mans brain dead supporter.
Simply amusing yourself? Nah you are just making yourself look stupid. What exactly are you talking about? You need to get a hobby. Looks like you need the money. Go and work in a Polish car wash and work off your frustrations.
Ambulance chasing pays handsomely.
Much better than fire fighting and pretending things will be ok.
We are buying new property, not selling.
We are millionaires and we will keep the money.
We are solvent.
Swap places with us ?
What a shame we earned our money through actually doing some work.
Millionaires yes we are.
We have more cases after Harlequin. £30m+ from Redress for a few months work, paying a student to monitor a forum and bullshitting Ames into giving us his SIPP client list. Not bad return.
Now tell me how many of the Harlequin millionaires will keep their homes?
Yyou might be laughing, but let me assure you we are most definitely “laughing all the way to the bank” 😉
@12.21.12.51. See you are getting yourself all excited and confused again. How does me having a quiet and relaxing weekend equate in your brain to a lack of hobby, overweightness and no money! (All incorrect). Any possibility you could run by me, just one more time please, what exactly was the business model that you are such an avid supporter of.
hahahah Storey isn’t making any. He’s lost the lot – doesn’t even know it yet poor sod. RL are rolling in it.
@lodge of redress, your math is crap. Just like your posting.
What’s happened? Thoughts of RL – the ambulance chasers – making more money than Harlequin ruffled your feathers?
Fatchett is on property watch. He’s going to buy a new gaff for his wife and kids. He’s in line for millions after Harlequin is sorted out. Who knows, maybe he has more “clients” who want to provide letters of intent to set up a duff trust hahahahahahhahahahahahaha
Ahh justice never looked so good.
One afternoon, a wealthy lawyer was riding in the back of his limousine when he saw two pathetic-looking men by the side of the road (Ames), eating grass. He ordered his driver to stop and got out to investigate. He asked the men, “Why are you eating grass?”
“We don’t have no money for food,” the first man replied.
“Then you must come with me to my house,” insisted the lawyer.
“But, sir, I got a wife and three kids here,” said the man.
“Bring them along!” replied the lawyer.
The second man exclaimed, “I got a wife and six kids!”
“Bring them as well!”, the lawyer proclaimed as he headed back to his limo.
They all climbed into the car, and once underway, one of the men expresses, “Sir, you are too kind. Thank you for taking all of us with you.”
The lawyer replied, “I’m most happy to do it. You’ll love my place. The grass is almost a foot tall.”
Bye bye Harlequin.
🙂 What’s wrong with being a rent boy?
Redress flowing thick and fast now.
Oh but we are getting fees. Lots and lots of them.
Difference is we don’t waste money on planes & glossy brochures, and focus on the job in hand. Once Harlequin is gone, we’ll be moving onto the next thing.
Ambulance chasing 🙂
What happened to Dave’s planes?
Those that went up tiddly up up,
and went down tiddly down down.
Actually we do know don’t we? You had to hire them out to another Caribbean company. Any money coming in there Dave?
Hire them out? Is that what you call it when you don’t pay what you owe and have to ‘transfer’ assets?
What happened to the Indigo Dive company that used to be on the beach at Buccament Bay? It was fantastic. Why did K part company with Harlequin? It surely can’t be anything to do with not being paid by Dave? Has K had her day in court yet with Dave?
How about the Black Perl? where did that burnt out monstrosity of “galleon” go?
There is a poster this afternoon showing serious signs of psychotic disorder. First tries to involve Vinney Stenning. No response. Then tries to involve Robert Storey. No response. Then tries Richard Ingham. Guess what. No response. The skunk is deff working because you are away with the fairies with your multiple IDs and talking to yourself. I think we should call you Dillon from now on.
Give it up dude
Hey Bob,
You know so much about Harlequin and Buccament, especially from the early days and we are grateful for your knowledgeable posts. Please can you tell us where is the Black Pearl?
http://Www.blackprearl.com
I’ve tried all night to get someone, Vinney, Richard or Robert to take the bait tonight but no one has. I’m so lonely. Please speak to me.
Marchant’s website this week claimed Belvedere had falsely inflated the value of funds to dupe investors, and managed funds that had either disappeared or failed in mysterious circumstances (including the £400-million Harlequin Property Fund) and misappropriated millions.
Two of Belvedere’s funds have been placed under curatorship and are prohibited by Mauritius’, financial services authority from taking new investments. The scandal resulted in local asset managers, including the high-flying Anchor Capital, scrambling to put as much distance between themselves and Kellermann as possible.
For Kellermann, a maths wunderkind who studied at Stellenbosch University and who has been involved in a number of investment schemes in South Africa, the allegations have come as a shock.
Speaking to Business Times, Kellermann said he probably won’t be back at work any time soon. “I doubt I’ll be coming back professionally.”
http:// http://www.timeslive. co.za/businesstimes/2015/03/29/did-sa-man-mastermind-world-s-biggest-ponzi-scheme
Steph could you please let me know where you purchased/ borrowed that tacky wedding dress from please?
Was it Matalan or Primark plus size range?
Could you let me know please? I am starting a decorating business and need some big cheap dust sheets.
Same place as your wife Dick…
The correct link
http://www.timeslive.co.za/businesstimes/2015/03/29/did-sa-man-mastermind-world-s-biggest-ponzi-scheme
Who’s this “pressed to impress” that keeps looking at my profile on LinkedIn multiple times a day?
Richard grow a pair. Stop hiding.
Many people still remember the shocking abuse you dished out on the forums. We don’t like you.
You will reap what you sow if this continues.
Mr Owner of your own company….. 😉
Go and take you fat family for some exercise.
Not that daft…… soft lad.
Karma says stop hiding! The issue with this is that you don’t post with your name but you think others should?
The dry cleaning fluid has given you brain damage.
Karma, do as you preach and reveal yourself!
More Harlequin diversionary tactics.
Not long to wait now. Every day more nails are hammered into the Harlequin coffin.
Dawn Raids, dream on, and like you know.
You watch too much TV!
Who is this Dawn who is going raiding? Where is she getting the nails from? I would have thought midday was a bit early for a roll up.
It’s so easy to wind up Dickless, good bye.
Is this a game now? Is it (she loves you) yeah yeah?
I am a walrus
Harlequin is still implicated in this breaking Ponzi story. It won’t go away however much you post your pornographic filth on BFP.
A Ponzi deal’s absentee shareholder?
http://www.bdlive.co.za/businesstimes/2015/03/29/a-ponzi-deals-absentee-shareholder
What does peace of mind feel like?
Maybe it feels like going to work on Monday knowing your Redress cheques are going to keep flowing?
Maybe it means being in the ambulance chasing game gives you opportunities to catch more fraudsters spending pensioners’ money on aircraft and non existent land?
Maybe it means you have a qualified team of professionals, 1,000’s of clients and one giant pot of money from which you’re going to receive 15%?
Life is good!
Why so long to answer the solvency question Dave? Are you going to answer it before or after you correct RL’s DD report “strewn with errors”?
Richard, what have I told you about your spelling.
Beates – please explain what this word means?
Ah 5 star. Another great band. Are we on 5 star songs now?
Yes System Addict. That would apply to a few people on here.
Poor old Dave, why won’t he answer a very basic question about the solvency of his companies?
Nothing poor about Dave. Perhaps he won’t answer the question because he doesn’t respond to idiots.
I can wash but your wife will always be pig ugly.
Letters on the way, now your associates will know what you’re like, good for business Dickwad 😘
SVG biggest grower of drugs in the Caribean, well done Ames. The PM of SVG wants to legalise it, not even a mention of BB😥
SVG looks like a real dump.
No surprise, I did read something about white powder at BB, does anyone remember the details?
No that was white sand.
Talk of group actions from early investors on the RL forum.
“My wife and I had a lovely stay at Buccament Bay during May 2015. Everything you read on the other reviews is a great summary. You have a choice about whether or not you are going to let these things spoil your holiday. For us, the problems were just little niggles. The staff were generally excellent – including the reception…”
Think the propaganda machine getting a bit ahead of itself
Any news?
BB is low end, for people who don’t know ant better.
Any update from the GV regarding the RL solvency letter?
Yes Dicky, Ames owed you much more than Mrs B, a SIPP investor if I recall.
Poor Dickykins, if you’re to be believed, was yours not a cash or finance agreement.
That’s you fucked then – Joy!
Johnsons baby powder
March 29, 2015 at 8:29 pm
No surprise, I did read something about white powder at BB, does anyone remember the details?
That was Mr & Mrs A ‘s tooth powder for his&her new teef
Redress Monday.
We will keep you posted as to the success of the event.
More successful than the £400m millstone which is going to drag some of the posters here down.
How much washing will the pill popping carol have to do in order to pay back the 6000 investors she owes 400 million to ?
Heard they are renaming Buccament Bay Resort…Its going to be called “Niggles Resort” and it will be a 7 star, but priced as a 2 star.
Another unhappy customer on trip advisor. It is funny that a (self awarded) 5 star resort can’t even organise a simple birthday cake for a guest.
It must be difficult operating a resort when you can’t get credit. Why doesn’t anyone give BB credit? Dave said they aren’t insolvent so it can’t be that. Maybe it’s just a big conspiracy to bring Harlequin down. It’s all that damn builder’s fault. That’s what there wasn’t a birthday cake. Damn you paddy!
Just another niggle at “Niggles Resort”
Risk Warning @Risk_Warning · Mar 28
Redress received for #GOP #harlequin #scsfarmland this week. At last something for investors to smile about.
0 retweets 1 favorite
Reply Retweet Favorite1
From garstar’s glowing review
There was adequate choice of drinks for anybody other than the most fussy (I genuinely heard people complaining that there was only chardonnay and no sauvignon blanc or pinot grigio….. I think the appropriate holiday response to that is to shrug your shoulders and either drink the chardonnay or drink something else, not to get upset).
Not very 5-star is it?
But in Essex pink wine is dead posh init?
Has David Ames answered the solvency question? If not, why not?
Is pommagne and mild more to your northern tastes?
Well it’s certainly not a fake beach, plastic glasses,on a run down resort situated next door to a chanty town. However, for some that’s 5 star.
When it comes to wines and star ratings an easy test is to check out the wines available to order to see if you can buy a bottle of 2005 Lafite, Latour or something the quality of a Domaine Armand Rousseau Père et Fils.
If you can’t get something of that ilk from a vintage year then you are not in a 5+ star establishment but just a wannabe hotel.
Anon, just clarify something for me please. I have just read the BB website and cannot see anywhere where it states that it is ranked as a 5 star resort.
Could you let me know where you have found the 5 star description?
Let’s face it BB is not 5*. SVG as a place is hideous just a pot growing nasty little Island.
Does it matter, the GV has been in talks with liquidators about an exit strategy.
“A little teaser of the truly Caribbean 5 star experience at Buccament Bay Resort in St Vincent & The Grenadines.”
For @Anonymous 8:51am who doesn’t see where BB was billed as 5 star.
Join the Trust or bust
@Anonymous
March 30, 2015 at 8:51 am
Look at their Facebook page
I quote:
‘Buccament Bay Resort – A Truly Caribbean 5 Star Experience’
That do you?
Well please enlighten us as to the difference.
Sounds a lot like back peddling to me. I think you’ll find that almost everybody who put money into HP believed they were buying into 5-star resorts when they did so. I know I did.
In many places. It has always been documented as a 5 star resort. How many stars do you think it is then?
So now you’re telling us that Buccament Bay was never billed as 5 star?
You’re telling us that there is a difference between a 5 star “experience” and a 5 star resort? I beg to know what the difference is.
In support of Sid, let’s take a look at what some of Harlequin’s agents are saying about Buccament Bay:
SecretEscapes (on offer – expired)
http:// www secretescapes .com/5-star-all-inclusive-caribbean-holiday-buccament-bay-resort-st-vincent/sale
“A five-star, all-inclusive Caribbean stay with flights, inter-island transfers, a romantic dinner and a spa treatment”
HolidayPlace (I don’t know them either)
http:/ / holidayplace .co.uk/hotels/details/CAGNCA03/buccament-bay-resort
“Bay resort is the first luxury 5 star resort to be built on the Caribbean island of St Vincent .”
HarlequinHotelsAndResorts (official wordpress blog)
https:/ / harlequinhotelsandresorts .wordpress.com/2014/05/22/buccament-bay-resort-wins-tripadvisors-2014-certificate-of-excellence/
5 star hotel tag at top
TravelDesigners
http:/ / traveldesigners .co.uk/buccament-bay-resort.html
“This 5 star all inclusive luxury beach hotel is located on the stunning Caribbean island of St Vincent”
Kuoni
http:/ / www. kuoni .co.uk/st-vincent-and-the-grenadines/hotels/buccament-bay-resort
“St Vincent’s only all inclusive Five Star resort”
BestAtTravel
http:/ / bestattravel .co.uk/buccament-bay-resort.aspx
“The 5 star Buccament Bay Resort St Vincent”
http:/ / harlequinhotelsandresorts com / resorts / buccament-bay-resort /
“Harlequin Hotels & Resorts has created a sophisticated and exclusive, luxury, all inclusive 5 star resort on the stunning island of St Vincent. “
This from another newsletter dated Sept 2012 signed by the Chief Goblin himself
Harlequin Hotels will be a range of larger 5 star family hotels with luxury
accommodation available on an all-inclusive or bed and breakfast basis. Although with fewer of the amenities available in a resort they will offer a choice of bars and restaurants, and will be situated beachfront to provide the best location for a family holiday
Professional Adviser | 30 Mar 2015 | 11:27
•Author:
•Laura Miller
Troubled overseas property investment scheme Harlequin has put its headquarters up for sale.
The warehouse and offices in the Honywood Business Park in Basildon have been listed for sale on property website Rightmove for £525,000.
Harlequin owner David Ames would also consider leasing back the first floor offices at a rent of £25,000 per year, according to the advert.
The company had not responded to a request for comment at the time of writing.
The move raises further questions over the financial situation of the company, which has received £400m from investors that they are currently unable to access.
Unregulated investment scheme Harlequin worked by taking deposits from mainly UK pension investors to build off-plan properties in the Caribbean, which could then be sold at a profit on completion or used to generate a rental income from holidaymakers.
But out of a scheduled 6,000 properties, about 300 have been built.
Trapped cash
Harlequin has told investors that since its sales arm entered liquidation last October, it can not return their deposits, despite clauses in some investors’ contracts saying that, if the properties had not been built by now-lapsed deadlines, they would be entitled to a full refund.
Ames has blamed the problems at Harlequin on the “global recession, contractor fraud, defamatory campaigns and new FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] regulations”.
However, the Serious Fraud Office and Essex Police have had an open and ongoing investigation into dealings at Harlequin since 2013.
The then regulator the Financial Services Authority issued a warning to advisers about the company in January 2013, and a further warning to investors in June of that year.
Advice to invest
About 85% of those who invested in Harlequin did so on the recommendation of a financial adviser, according to law firm Regulatory Legal which acts on behalf around 2,000 investors in the scheme.
The majority of the estimate 6,000 investors put money into the scheme via their self-invested personal pension (SIPP).
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) has said it will compensate SIPP claimants for losses in the value of their investments in Harlequin, in addition to compensating for lost pension growth and charges taken from their SIPPs.
These losses are likely to be substantial, leaving financial advisers on the hook for potentially hundreds of millions of pounds, after the FSCS wrote down the value of Harlequin investments to nil.
Pension advisers have already been told they face a 73% increase in the amount they pay to the FSCS as the service prepares for a “significant” rise in claims linked to SIPP advice.
There is also the threat of regulatory action against advisers.
Fined and banned
Two ex-directors of failed adviser TailorMade Independent (TMI) – the main distributor of Harlequin – have been banned and fined by the regulator for not assessing the suitability of clients’ investments made through SIPPs.
Lloyd Pope and Peter Legerton have been banned from senior positions in financial services. Pope has been fined £93,800, while Legerton would have been fined £84,000 but for financial hardship.
The FCA found both men fundamentally failed to act in the best interests of clients, but Legerton benefitted financially from conflicts of interest between TailorMade and an unregulated firm that introduced new business to it.
Advisers and agents selling clients investments in Caribbean villas run by Harlequin received commissions of up to 15%, according to a lawyer close to the situation.
Pope and Legerton failed to ensure TailorMade assessed the suitability of clients’ investments made through SIPPs, failed to identify and manage its conflicts of interests and failed to properly oversee compliance, which had been outsourced to external consultants, the FCA said.
TailorMade entered liquidation in September 2013 because it could not finance redress payments being demanded by Harlequin investors.
Pot growing island
The Great Goblin Visionary – I like that one.
“Sid, I don’t know how many stars BBis because I do not know the assessment criteria or who issued the ratings.”
BB’s number of stars – as many as it’s possible to give!
Assessment criteria – It’s a product of the Great Visionary, is perfect in every way, and therefore it deserves the maximum star rating!
Who issued the ratings – The Great Visionary himself!
There has been so may statements from HP from day 1 that BB is a 5* resort that there is no way anyone can deny that fact. It says a lot that some are trying to do so, which in itself is an admission that it is no way 5*. Below is one of the early statements taken from HP’s website which twice states BB is 5*:
“Harlequin Hotels & Resorts has created a sophisticated and exclusive, luxury, all inclusive 5 star resort on the stunning island of St Vincent. Situated in a delightful bay with a backdrop of high mountains cloaked in lush tropical forests, Buccament Bay Resort’s luxuriously-appointed and spacious rooms are the perfect space for guests to enjoy exceptional customer care and experience truly 5 star experience.”
“I’m so sorry sir, we appear to have run out of Chateau Lafite, would sir like some hooch served in a jam jar instead?”
@ Anonymous 2.11pm
It’s not me making a claim that BB is 5* and nor am I making any judgements about whether the Caribbean competitor resorts are making exaggerated star rating claims either.
The quality of the wine cellar is a pretty reliable guide for a hotel that is of a genuine 5*+ standard and one that is actually 4* but has delusions of its own grandeur.
@ Anonymous on March 30, 2015 at 2:11 pm
http: //www.sandylane.com/pdf/Internet-Master-Wine-List-2015.pdf
Sandy Lane in Barbados offers Chateau
Lafite on page 15 of 30 no. 0928 and 1017 of their extensive wine list.
Sandy Lane is a Five Star Resort which gets many A rated celebs staying there yet have no need to broadcast it to the world.
He is your comment, which in light of the above is a little ridiculous don’t you think?
“What fucking retard thinks they get £500 bottles of wine in these resorts run by anybody in the region.
Bet it took you ages looking up a wine of that cost.
Now your imagining you are a RL solicitor drinking fine wine – been in touch with Crozier yet? You are very similar.”
No but it’s a more reliable way of sorting the men from the boys.
If you’re going to put your hotel in the same family as the Savoy, Claridges and the Waldorf Astoria then don’t complain when people make unfavourable comparisons.
I would like to see someone’s face if the waiter opened a fine wine and proceeded to pour it into a plastic cup!
It’s irrelevant really as HP now seem to be saying that BB isn’t 5* and was never supposed to be! That’s the worrying part. I wish I’d known that at the time I invested. I obviously misinterpreted the literature I was given saying that BB was 5* and listened to the agent and HP staff who all said that BB was a 5* resort. By 5* they obviously meant not 5*. My fault. It was bad enough when all we all thought we had chipped in £400m+ to build 5* resorts, but to now learn that we paid £400m+ to build ‘ok’ resorts is really rubbing salt into the wounds!
Of course Sandy Lane sells expensive wine. That’s where Paddy was holed up whilst “working” on BB.
Well done Laura Miller for bringing to everyone’s attention the excellent commercial decision made by DA to sell the Harlequin property in Basildon. Anyone who has taken the trouble to look at the advertisement pictures could see that the ground floor, or warehouse could see that it was an unused and redundant facility. Full credit to DA for attempting to release the capital to use to full fill investors expectations. Well done sir.
@ Sid 3.46pm
I think I recall one news update that claimed that it was a 5 star-plus resort. does anyone else recall this?
“What fucking retard thinks they get £500 bottles of wine in these resorts run by anybody in the region.”
Perhaps some of the customers at BB (who aren’t interested in all you can eat swill) would like to purchase a bottle of fine wine for dinner. This is hardly an unusual request, especially at a five star establishment.
Are you suggesting that Harlequin can’t afford to hold a selection of wines in stock? According to Ames Harlequin aren’t insolvent so ordering in some wines shouldn’t be a problem, unless of course Gonsalves Liquor don’t give BB credit anymore. It may be a little more difficult if that were the case.
Maybe the exchange is more like this:
“May we have a bottle of Chateau Lafite please”
“An excellent choice Sir, one bottle of Chateau Lafite and two plastic beakers coming up. You’ll need to give us the cash now, and we’ll get someone to catch a van to town and buy one for you. Do you have a vintage in mind?”
Why has Ames not answered the solvency question?
Poor little runt Ames, people picking on him.
“global recession, contractor fraud, defamatory campaigns and new FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] regulations”.
So nothing about being an incompetent, twice bankrupt, ‘businessman’ who has a son who has been sent to jail for fraud?
Come on stumpy, answer the solvency question…. or the finance one, or the RL DD ‘strewn with errors’….. or the IP address malarky.
Ames you have failed, again, this time you and the family will go to prison.
Quick, hot off the press. RL get a message off to Laura Miller(does she have a desk in your office) Dave Ames had a meeting today with somebody about something. A true journalist would get to the bottom of it, so I guess we will not get to hear any more.
@Anonymous March 30, 2015 at 6:19 pm
A bottle costs less than a night’s accommodation at Buccament Bay, that’s not a great expense now is it? So why doesn’t BB have a descent wine selection?
You couldn’t even name a bottle of wine could you? You even think others who can must have looked it up, and you’re trying to make BB five star? No wonder BB is failing when you Harlequin people think wine comes in two types – fizzy and flat (or should that be bottle and box?)
Buccament Bay is becoming a backpacker’s hostel. Someone who writes a Trip Advisor review suggesting those who were disappointed they couldn’t even get their choice of grape variety are “moaning” probably prefers all-you-can-drink lager and therefore isn’t qualified to comment on five star resorts.
Ames is struggling and those wanting to attack are doing it for sport.
The Lodge of Redress is funded well enough now.
You don’t need to be as wealthy as a Ponzi fraudster to enjoy good wine.
If you follow the predictions for a good vintage year you can buy en primeur at far less than £100 a bottle and then lay it down in decent storage conditions and then try to keep your hands off it for 20 years. The last bit is the hardest. By then it’s turned into a luxury you could probably never afford (unless you’re a Ponzi fraudster)
Harlequin update – 30th March, 2015
Dear All,
So much for R Legal no longer involving itself in Harlequin’s affairs, as was stated publically on 11th January, 2015. However, that was the latest of several such announcements that didn’t last, so the latest interference is of little surprise.
To be very clear, this update does not signal a return to the unconstructive matches of update tennis we witnessed over the last two years – there is no desire within Harlequin or amongst the majority of investors to re-engage in such a futile exercise – but we will take this opportunity to highlight R Legal’s latest cynical and destructive tactics so that we can clarify matters.
Solvency
The FSCS issued an apology for its mistake and clarified its stance, therefore the matter is considered closed.
R Legal’s arrogance in expecting Harlequin to respond to a tawdry marketing exercise is expected, especially when: (a) any trace of trust or good faith towards R Legal was eroded a long time ago; and (b) it concerns a since-corrected error in private FSCS correspondence that R Legal improperly broadcasted and failed to seek clarification on from the FSCS.
Harlequin and its investors have endured two years of false inferences and various underhand attempts, both public and private, to harm the business – yet the business continues to strengthen.
For the avoidance of doubt, R Legal is not a client or business partner of Harlequin, as such Harlequin’s lack of engagement with R Legal on this matter should not be interpreted as anything other than a lack of appetite to be drawn in to the latest round of sparring with R Legal.
Harlequin’s offices
Harlequin owns its Basildon offices and occupies the 1st floor of Unit 11, with all other space let to third parties. Harlequin is attempting to sell in order to discharge its liability and remove its responsibilities as a Lessor. As a condition of sale, Harlequin is seeking a leaseback option for the office space it currently occupies.
It’s bizarre that Harlequin’s office arrangements are deemed so newsworthy but unsurprising that R Legal’s latest scaremongering has been published so eagerly by a particular journalist.
Progress with finance Investors should understand that Harlequin has existing options to obtain finance and is currently considering a formal offer; however, Dave Ames will only accept the right deal for investors and the business. With public investigations ongoing and difficulty in passing the ‘Google Test’, the process of securing the right deal for Harlequin and its investors is not straightforward, but progress is being made all of the time. R Legal doesn’t care if investors lose everything; Harlequin does.
We hope that this update has clarified recent publications. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call the office.
Regards,
Harlequin
Unsubscribe me from this list
To unsubscribe from the mailing list, please click here.
Please, do not reply to this email address as this mailbox is not monitored.
It can take up to 3 working days to be unsubscribed from our system.
Tel: +44 1268 242460
Fax: +44 1268 242461
11 Honywood Business Park
Honywood Road
Basildon
Essex
SS14 3HW
Owner of the award-winning Buccament Bay Resort
Second Caribbean hotel now open!
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential. It is intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this email or its attachments. Replies to this email may be monitored by Harlequin Hotels & Resorts Limited for business or operational purposes. Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus free and Harlequin Hotels & Resorts Limited does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorized access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. All information or opinions expressed in this message and/or any attachments are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Harlequin Hotels & Resorts Limited.
Registered Office: Harlequin Hotels & Resorts Limited, PO Box 309, Ugland House, South Church Street, George Town, Grand Cayman KY1–1104 Cayman Islands. Company Registration Number: WT-195924
@ Here’s your chance Laura. on March 30, 2015 at 9:30 pm.
I think we would all love Laura Millar to reproduce this Update,
(1). Harlequin do NOT own the offices at Honywood Business Park, the offices according to the public records are owned by two individuals, Daniel Ames and Carol Ames,
(2). There is no such entity as “Harlequin”.
(3). Why doesn’t Ames produce the “APOLOGY” from the FSCS. Perhaps Laura Millar could ask the FSCS to comment on this “APOLOGY”.
(4). There is a lot of talk of a freezing order, one presumes that Carol and Dave Ames declared all their assets as a result of obtaining the freezing order, I wonder if the freezing order is indeed still in place and if it is, I wonder if Carol ever declared the “RENTAL INCOME” that she would have obtained as “LESSOR”.
(5). Ames in his update makes the following “FALSE” statement, and if it was not Ames it was someone employed by him.
“Harlequin owns its Basildon offices and occupies the 1st floor of Unit 11, with all other space let to third parties.”
This statement is a blatant lie, so how the hell are we expected to believe anything else in the latest update.
And no news on the restart of the H Hotel Barbados which was to have restarted in the first quarter of 2015.
Yes I would be only too delighted if Laura Millar runs this update and seeks clarification from the FSCS on the “APOLOGY” and asks Ames if the accounts produced by James Albert Baker were false, they clearly state that Ames’ companies are “INSOLVENT”.
Harlequin update – 30th March, 2015
Dear All,
So much for R Legal no longer involving itself in Harlequin’s affairs, as was stated publically on 11th January, 2015. However, that was the latest of several such announcements that didn’t last, so the latest interference is of little surprise.
To be very clear, this update does not signal a return to the unconstructive matches of update tennis we witnessed over the last two years – there is no desire within Harlequin or amongst the majority of investors to re-engage in such a futile exercise – but we will take this opportunity to highlight R Legal’s latest cynical and destructive tactics so that we can clarify matters.
(Maybe you’d like to start building again?)
Solvency
The FSCS issued an apology for its mistake and clarified its stance, therefore the matter is considered closed.
(Except no it isn’t is it Dave? The FSCS are paying compensation for YOUR “investment”. This means that anyone who is not a SIPP victim needs to know why they value YOUR company’s capacity to fulfil its promises as nil. That’s the real question, especially when you ask people to pay £20k+ to “complete” on rooms which are not built yet)
R Legal’s arrogance in expecting Harlequin to respond to a tawdry marketing exercise is expected, especially when: (a) any trace of trust or good faith towards R Legal was eroded a long time ago; and (b) it concerns a since-corrected error in private FSCS correspondence that R Legal improperly broadcasted and failed to seek clarification on from the FSCS.
(R Legal are acting on behalf of the clients you gave them. You seem to have forgotten the arrogance to which you’ve put the “trust” document together. 5 year waiver. Really?)
Harlequin and its investors have endured two years of false inferences and various underhand attempts, both public and private, to harm the business – yet the business continues to strengthen.
(You’ve had plenty of time to set the record straight. Not signing that simple document speaks volumes Mr Ames. You’re insolvent).
For the avoidance of doubt, R Legal is not a client or business partner of Harlequin, as such Harlequin’s lack of engagement with R Legal on this matter should not be interpreted as anything other than a lack of appetite to be drawn in to the latest round of sparring with R Legal.
Harlequin’s offices
Harlequin owns its Basildon offices and occupies the 1st floor of Unit 11, with all other space let to third parties. Harlequin is attempting to sell in order to discharge its liability and remove its responsibilities as a Lessor. As a condition of sale, Harlequin is seeking a leaseback option for the office space it currently occupies.
It’s bizarre that Harlequin’s office arrangements are deemed so newsworthy but unsurprising that R Legal’s latest scaremongering has been published so eagerly by a particular journalist.
(They are important because you owe people money Davey boy. £525,000 is a pretty penny when you have charges against your assets, your family has over £250k in directors’ loans outstanding and a swathe of creditors to pay back. R Legal are in the business of getting their clients’ money back. Your “owned premises” were bought with what money exactly?)
Progress with finance Investors should understand that Harlequin has existing options to obtain finance and is currently considering a formal offer; however, Dave Ames will only accept the right deal for investors and the business. With public investigations ongoing and difficulty in passing the ‘Google Test’, the process of securing the right deal for Harlequin and its investors is not straightforward, but progress is being made all of the time. R Legal doesn’t care if investors lose everything; Harlequin does.
(Progress with financiers should have concluded long ago. If your financiers will not sign cheques because of some nasty comments appearing on Google, you aren’t talking to the right people. Investors won’t “lose everything” now – SIPPs have a way out. This is about securing the rest of the assets for the remainder of the victims).
We hope that this update has clarified recent publications. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call the office.
(A simple signature is all it takes Dave. One little signature to declare yourself solvent and the whole matter will go away)
Regards,
Harlequin
hahahha what tripe. Maybe PHIG will write an update next?
If HMSSE is in liquidation, “Harlequin” is managed overseas and the business has “no more sales”, what do the people in Essex do? And who pays the rent?
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/property-history/blind-pond-cottage/castledon-road/downham/billericay/cm11-1lh/28531151
Wonder when Dopey Dan’s £1.2k property will come back on the market? Or maybe he rents it to his wife?
It’s interesting to note that the sales particulars for the Basildon Bunker mention that the ground floor provides vacant possession.
‘The existing owners would consider a sale of the property, providing vacant possession of the ground floor, and with a lease being taken of the 1st floor Offices on terms to be agreed at a rent of £25, 000 per annum.’
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/commercial/details/36354418?search_identifier=a736dc0ef322a33a37ab7e6f39ef2702#CEeRuEXBjGLTg5Dy.97
Dave distinctly said ‘Harlequin is attempting to sell in order to discharge its liability and remove its responsibilities as a Lessor.’
Appointment of Trustees
In the High Court of Justice
No 3949 of 2014
Matthew David Ames
Of Address Unknown, Currently Unemployed and lately of Marimba, Goldfinch Lane, Thundersley, Essex SS7 3LT [in prison ]
Birth details: 11 May 1975
A General Meeting of Creditors is to take place on: 16 April 2015 at 14.00 pm
Venue: At the Official Receiver’s office at the address stated below:—
4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2HT
Meeting summoned by: Official Receiver
The Purpose of Meeting: To appoint trustee
Proofs and Proxies: In order to be entitled to vote at the meeting, creditors must lodge proxies and any previously unlodged proofs by 12.00 noon on 15 April 2015 at the Official Receiver’s address stated below.
Paul Stewart, Official Receiver, London A, 2nd Floor, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2HT, 020 7637 1110, LondonA.OR@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk
Capacity: Trustee
15 April 2015
Regarding the Great Goblins update:
– No finance
– No mention of the freezer
– No mention of the solvency of Harlequin
But, somehow they are going from strength to strength?
Poor Dave, it’s all Googles fault.
Dear Mr. Ames, You reap what you sow my friend you reap what you sow.
Had you and your colleagues not been so quick to use google against all those who you attacked in the past, and had you operated your businesses in a transparent and honest manner perhaps Google would have been kinder to you, allthough I cannot see why you don’t just direct financiers to Trip Advisor.
However real financiers rely on audited accounts, business plans, level of debt etc, it’s you who feels that most people rely on the “Google” test.
Do you even know what the Google Test is?
Google Test is a unit testing library for the C++ programming language, based on the xUnit architecture.
Will the Bank of England start using the GV Google Test?
How dare RL ask THE GV if his companies are solvent, with such a track record of incompetence one would think the answer is obvious.
The unemployment bunker.
investigations@dailymail.co.uk
Does anyone apart from Bob Storey and PHIG think Harlequin have any hope, whatsoever of lasting much longer?
E mail them what exactly? You e mail them.
RL are nasty, horrible and arrogant.
They are also solvent . More than can be said for Harlequin.
Be under no illusion, the solvency campaign will continue.
Letters to MP’s asking why Insolvency Services are allowing this charade to continue.
This will certainly help with the “Google Test”.
I want to know if Harlequin are solvent. Does anyone know who I can ask?
Gareth Fatchett would know if Harlequin are solvent as he is a high class lawyer.
I think GF does know, which is why he keeps pushing the issue with Ames knowing that Ames can’t tell the truth without incriminating himself.
@ Sid
After chasing Ames around the planet for 8 years it a waste of time because I have realised he will just lie to you.
Is Harlequin solvent? I have asked Bro. Cameron to investigate.
“there is no desire within Harlequin or amongst the majority of investors to re-engage in such a futile exercise – but we will take this opportunity to highlight R Legal’s latest cynical and destructive tactics so that we can clarify matters.”
No, I suspect the “vast majority of investors” would like you to categorically put the solvency question to bed, surely answering this would be constructive, not destructive. Don’t worry too much, we all knew you wouldn’t answer it, to do so would be suicide. We were just interested in how you’d worm your way out of answering it, much like the Due Diligence report you lambasted but did nothing to rectify.
“The FSCS issued an apology for its mistake and clarified its stance, therefore the matter is considered closed.”
No they didn’t, they admitted they aren’t legally in a position to call your companies insolvent, as they don’t have the evidence to do so. No one does as you don’t file the accounts you are required to as a matter of law. No one can categorically call you insolvent (except for Mr Baker, who has already done so). This is why an answer to RL’s question is so important not only to victims, but to the authorities also. The solvency question is VERY far from closed. The FSCS stance remains the same, your companies have zero value. They have simply clarified their position in a way that keeps your lawyers at bay.
“……..Harlequin’s lack of engagement with R Legal on this matter should not be interpreted as anything other than a lack of appetite to be drawn in to the latest round of sparring with R Legal.”
You really are trying to hammer this one home aren’t you? You aren’t going to confirm your companies are solvent, but this has nothing to do with your solvency……riiiiiight…….we’ve got it (wink, wink).
Come on Dave, we all want to know what the Google test is, is it a bit like an O level? Or a Maths GCSE?
“………..yet the business continues to strengthen.”
In every update the business is strengthening, it’s been going on for years now. How strong does it have to be to actually build anything? Can we get an indication of how much more strengthening will be required to build the other c8900 units you sold?
“It’s bizarre that Harlequin’s office arrangements are deemed so newsworthy”
When you try to sell assets purchased with victim’s money it tends to interest a lot of people. Make all the excuses you want, but the vultures are circling and they can smell the money.
“Harlequin has existing options to obtain finance……”
This charade has gone on for years, no one believed it then and no one believes it now. If you have an option, any option, then take it. We all know you’re in desperate need of money, and that money will be used to pay off those who have judgements against you. That in itself is a clear indication there will never be finance.
“We hope that this update has clarified recent publications”
Not at all! You won’t declare yourself solvent, and you were caught trying to sell more assets. Could the two be linked? You could hardly blame someone for thinking they are.
More discrepancy emerges from the Basilon Bunker PR team. Now, according to a HP spokesman, the leaseback option is a condition of sale.
This from ftadvisor: A spokesman for Harlequin said: “Harlequin [yes he says ‘Harlequin’ which we all know means no particular firm, business, corporation, or legal establishment] owns its Basildon offices and occupies the first floor of Unit 11, with all other space let to third parties. Harlequin is attempting to sell in order to discharge its liability and remove its responsibilities as a lessor. As a condition of sale, Harlequin is seeking a leaseback option for the office space it currently occupies.”
The two-story [sic] property, on the Honywood Business Park, is on the market for £525,000.
http://www.ftadviser.com/2015/03/31/investments/harlequin-puts-headquarters-up-for-sale-sHAKhMFFjVGCza87LjXIIK/article.html
Anyone know who the third parties are? Surely, it could not possibly be any one of the Great Goblin’s other companies?
About 20 people read this?
Perhaps BFP could tot up the number of unique IP addresses have accessed this thread and let us know. Would be an interesting statistic.
We know your solvency position, which is why we keep asking.
You cannot declare as you know to do so is a noose.
This will be a theme which just rumbles on and on.
S&F
The SFO is currently investigating the Harlequin Group over the marketing, sale and construction of luxury off-plan property developments in the Caribbean, in which a number of people invested.
A spokesman for Harlequin said: “Harlequin owns its Basildon offices and occupies the first floor of Unit 11, with all other space let to third parties.
“Harlequin is attempting to sell in order to discharge its liability and remove its responsibilities as a lessor.
“As a condition of sale, Harlequin is seeking a leaseback option for the office space it currently occupies.”
The two-story property, on the Honywood Business Park, is on the market for £525,000.
It has been listed on property website Rightmove and is described as “impressive”
It’s time for little legs to play his trump card.
Join the Trust, or liquidate.
We don’t care, redress, redress. I declare this lodge fully redressed.
For those who might be interested TripAdvisor is offering
BB for US$255 and Blu for US$105 a night
Is Harlequin solvent?
Do you not realise that you are just boring everyone to death. No one is interested in your inane boring repetition. Grow up
the solvency issue needs to be answered!
The finance needs to be addressed
We won’t let you sell the bunker
This is comical. Dave is stuck.
Problem is that when you hold a rubbish hand, you cannot change it. However much you bluff and bluster.
The redress qualifying investors will always chose money in front on Dave.
It is drawing to a close.
S&F
I would ask the brethren to prove themselves as Master Masons by signs.
Anyone struggling to understand this, is outside the loop.
S&F.
Investor special offer: Harlequin Caribbean holidays from just £15pppn! Offer ends 31st May, 2015
It’s interesting to note Ames no longer signs his updates. Now they just come from “Harlequin” whoever that is. This can only be a precursor to attempting to use the Madoff defence in his upcoming criminal trial.
This defence might be slightly difficult though. Imagine claiming your business interests were so vast that you couldn’t possibly know what you staff were up to when your empire consists of a budget B&B in St Lucia, a Chavy 100 room “resort” on St Vincent, and one rented floor in a crinkly tin shack in Basildon.
ake advantage of these special offers exclusive to our investors and experience Harlequin’s Caribbean hotels for yourself!
Investors & Agents Special
blu, St Lucia
£25 per adult per night bed & breakfast or £50 per adult per night for the all-inclusive package
£15 per child (under 12 years of age) per night bed & breakfast or £30 per child per night for the all-inclusive package
1 x FREE 60 minute spa treatment per booking
Buccament Bay Resort
£99 per adult per night
£69 per child per night (under 12 years of age)
2 x FREE 60 minute spa treatment per booking
What if you don’t want to goto a resort with minor freeloading celebs?
It just makes the Great Goblin continue his delusion thinking he has a resort real celebrities want to visit.
Now, GG how much did they pay (cough cough) or should I say how much did you pay them?
I could eat and drink more that £99 per day, so that equals a loss. I don’t want to be trapped on a little resort with a couple of bars watching people kiss the arse of wannabe egotistical has beens.
Ames is charging investors £99 per night to stay at BuccBay, the flights will cost an additional avg £ 640 with BA & £ 212 with Liat for the Barbados St. Vincent leg. Bringing a 7 night stay to £ 1545.00
Luckily if your not an investor you can get a 7 night deal for £ 1,399.00 ex London.
You forget BB is run down and limited use of restaurants plus a beach overrun by locals.
By Damian Fantato | Published 12:03
ftadviser
Concerns over pension provider Harlequin values
Providers who held Harlequin investments could find themselves out of pocket if the financial services compensation scheme turns its attention to Sipps for the purposes of redress.
In March, the FSCS said it was pursuing IFAs for redress in relation to inappropriate advice given over failed Harlequin overseas property investments, requiring advisers to compensate clients to 100 per cent of their initial investments.
However, in 2013 and 2014, FCA audits of some Sipp providers valued investments significantly lower than the initial investment. In July 2014, the Lifetime Sipp wrote to investors telling them the value of their investments had been written down to a nominal amount of £1.
If the FSCS were to turn its attention to Sipp providers, questioning their due diligence process as Fos did in the Berkeley Burke case in 2014, it might require them to pay out compensation at 100 per cent, despite the low audited value.
A pensions lawyer who acts for a number of Sipp providers expressed concern about these firms being held increasingly responsible.
He said: “There has been a change in attitude at Fos, which has started to opine on whether Sipp providers are liable. We are therefore required to do more due diligence than was the case.
“Historically, a more robust view was taken against the individual member because Sipps are generally designed for people who want to manage their own investments.”
Sipp providers with large exposure to Harlequin include: Lifetime, Curtis, Hornbuckle and Rowanmoor.
Robert Graves, head of pensions technical services for Rowanmoor, said: “There seems to be a dangerous precedent being set in the Berkeley Burke case that the provider is responsible, even if they have sent out letters warning that the investment is high-risk.
“It is the IFA’s job to be advising the client on the product and the underlying investment proposition.”
Mr Graves did not disclose whether the FCA had audited and revalued Rowanmoor’s book of Harlequin investments.
A spokesman for Hornbuckle said: “We value all Harlequin contracts at a nominal value of £1.
“We continue to monitor all the arrangements of Harlequin investments, including the on going fraud investigations by the SFO, and update our members holding such investments accordingly.
“We are not under investigation by the FCA or any regulatory body in respect of Harlequin investments.”
Curtis Banks managing director Rupert Curtis said he could not offer comment as they were busy getting ready for the pension freedoms.
The Lifetime Sipp did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
A spokesman for the FSCS said it was too early to say what recoveries were available. This week it also emerged that Harlequin has put its Basildon headquarters up for sale.
Right to reply
A spokesman for Harlequin said: “Investors generally purchased an off-plan property interest in the Caribbean paying a 30 per cent deposit, with the balance payable in stage payments or on completion.
“Due to a multitude of well-publicised reasons, development has currently stalled at most resort sites in the Caribbean while Harlequin is restructuring its business.
“Harlequin continues to operate the Buccament Bay Resort, St Vincent & The Grenadines, and blu Hotel, St Lucia, where property investments are in the process of being delivered to existing Harlequin investors.”
Harlequin is solvent.
But cant buy umbrellas and lounges.
Why won’t Ames confirm Harlequin is solvent?
Could it be that he can not?
Well if he is running a company that is INSOLVENT, that is very wrong indeed.
Ames is punch drunk, selling the offices and discounted holidays all desperate measures to get cash in…. the money has ran out.
Only PHIG and Bob Storey think Dave is great…. Apparently.
Why won’t Aimless sign a simple request?
12 winners today.
We have the money to run the solvency PR. Ok, it is a bit repetitive, but those in power will take notice.
Those considering a deal will also take notice.
Those considering consolidating or putting more money in will also take notice.
Better than that, Google will take notice.
‘In March, [2015] the FSCS said it was pursuing IFAs for redress in relation to inappropriate advice given over failed Harlequin overseas property investments, requiring advisers to compensate clients to 100 per cent of their initial investments.’
Freemason IFA’s will be left alone.
@ Robert Storey 2.59pm
Just shut up Robert, you know that Harlequin is INSOLVENT.
Insolvency service
https: //www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-insolvency-service-company-investigations-what-we-do
Carol ames thought she could help with the solvency issue, unfortunately she mis-understood the problem.
That would melt her new teef 😉
Much better than going to jail in a family cell.
I’m sat at home pretty chilled because i’m a SIPP investor.
Aimless is shitting himself ….
Odd how something as silly an a solvency declaration can start the slide.
The RL member of staff who thought that gem up is not even a lawyer.
That’s even more funny.
Article in Barbados Nation News today about Harlequin selling their headquarters in England. Talks about abandoned Merricks and H Hotel, about owing $80000 Bdos(US$40000) in Barbados National Insurance payments from employees, and $3 Million Barbados to various creditors in Barbados/
Redifining Luxury in the Caribbean….Not!
Its April 2015, and the derelict H building in Barbados is in the same state it was in over a year ago…Talks about restarting construction in the first quarter 2015 seem to be just bull caca or a wild dream
According to latest comments on TA about BB. From now on only water and soft drinks are available in ALL rooms and many no longer have a coffee machine.
Why would anyone expect Harlequin to sign a declaration of solvency? You are confusing them with an organisation that wishes to deal transparently and cooperatively with the people who gave them money.
They don’t even make the accounting returns that are a legal obligation so why would anyone expect a spirit of cooperation to descend on them?
Oh but hang on. Wasn’t it said in Court (correct me if I’m wrong) that Harlequin are in the “process” of filing their returns in the Caribbean. They must have chosen the filing option which involves chiseling it on slabs of granite and lashing it to the neck of a sloth which they released somewhere in the Andes.
Surly you can’t be suggesting little legs has committed the very serious crime of perjury, (also known as forswearing, is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding)
Why has Aimless not answered the solvency question? Is it because he can’t?
What a jolly good idea from the RL forum.
Here’s a link to a government issued pdf on how the department concerned with insolvency works. Just in case you can think of a company you might like to be looked into.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_dat…
From the doc:
“We don’t usually investigate companies that are:
• in compulsory liquidation;
• being investigated by someone else, such as the police or another regulator”
You can complain but looks like they won’t investigate until SFO and HMRC have finished. However, the key term is “usually”. Harlequin (whatever that is) is certainly a non-usual case.
Plus HMSSE is in liquidation, so they’d have to investigate one of the other co’s that Ames has registered under the guide of legitimacy.
Anonymous 6:36am my god I actually peed from the granite / sloth thing. Almost as funny as Great Goblin’s attempts at feigning transparency.
If I can have Dave’s big important table ?? If so, I may make an offer on the crinkly tin building.
It must be the biggest p.enis extension ”In the World” must be pronounced
in a Jeremy Clarkson accent.
How did he manage to get it there?
All this talk of Freemasons, does anyone know if Ames belongs to this secret society? It would explain a lot .
http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/news-and-analysis/regulation/fscs-pays-out-13m-for-four-sipp-advice-firms/2020071.article
2 April 2015 10:00 am | By Tessa Norman
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme has paid out almost £13m in compensation claims against four failed Sipp advice firms, Money Marketing can reveal.
The FSCS declared TailorMade Independent, 1 Stop Financial Services, Kynaston-Carnoustie Financial Consultancy and Crawford Scott in default in July following Sipp transfer claims against them.
Advisers hit out at FSCS for ‘heart sinking’ £20m interim levy
‘We don’t have 20/20 vision’: FSCS chief on £20m interim levy
Advisers face £20m FSCS bill over Sipp misselling
Advisers criticise FSCS over ‘unfair’ Sipp stance
Apfa calls for audit of ‘unacceptable’ FSCS costs
The FSCS says it has received 450 claims against 1 Stop and paid £7m in compensation. It has received 362 claims against TailorMade and paid £5m in compensation.
It has also received 53 claims against Crawford Scott totalling £500,000, and 37 claims against Kynaston-Carnoustie totalling £450,000.
The FSCS has issued repeated warnings over the rising number of Sipp claims, and last month hit life and pensions intermediaries with a £20m interim levy.
The lifeboat scheme said the primary driver for the interim levy is its recent decision to start paying compensation for losses in the value of investments held in Sipps, as part of advice claims over Sipp transfers.
The FCA banned 1 Stop partners Andrew Rees and Timothy Hughes and fined them £490,100 in April 2014. They were ordered to pay their penalty to the FSCS in the first instance of a fine being paid to the lifeboat scheme.
1 Stop advised nearly 2,000 customers between October 2010 and November 2012 to transfer into Sipps and invest in diamonds and overseas property.
In March the regulator banned and fined former TailorMade directors Lloyd Pope and Peter Legerton.
Between 2010 and 2013, the firm advised 1,600 customers to invest £112m in unregulated investments via Sipps.
More than half of the firm’s customers invested in overseas property operated by the Harlequin group of companies, which is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.
Yes,David Ames is a high ranking freemason.
“Non-usual” lol
I see that the Blue Lagoon Hotel is now No 1 on St Vincent according to TA. Facilities include Indigo Dive on site, Horizon Yacht Charters and it is also a port of entry for SVG. No z list slebs or discount tourists to spoil the experience either!
@BB, you have missed the point The Great Goblin thinks z list plebs makes his resort posh (with plastic glasses and fake small beach)
Yes and no beach either. A real Caribbean experience.
Our plan is coming together nicely, we have need for Dave’s table – that’s what this is about really.
Is Harlequin solvent?
That’s a good question….has any asked Mr Ames yet?
That’s the whole point, we do not expect or want Ames to answer.
We just want him to look shifty by avoiding it all the time.
That’s where the damage comes. Honestly, basic PR !
Is Harlequin insolvent?
Ames never had any problem telling lies in the past. It’s like he’s now overcome with conscience.
*imagines the SFO poised in front of their monitors, waiting for Ames to tell the truth … or not*
Ames is a compulsive liar, plain and simple. He and he alone has destroyed his baby 😉
How about the question: Is Harlequin solvent?
Dammed if he does answer, dammed if he don’t!!
Dear All,
It has been a very busy 2015 so far and things are continuing to gradually falling into place.
Finance
We have had a firm offer of finance from a party that is interested in purchasing the Harlequin group and building out Harlequin’s developments. I am currently considering the offer with my advisors because it is of course crucial that we only accept the right deal for investors and the business; however, whatever the outcome, this clearly demonstrates the growing strength of the business and gives good cause for confidence in what awaits on the horizon.
Completions
As we confirmed recently, another completion has been finalised at Buccament Bay Resort. The process can frustrate at times and these frustrations are felt by everyone, including us, but we are overcoming obstacles and this year there is a momentum and commitment from many more investors. Equally, nobody can underestimate the commitment and efforts made by our team of lawyers and management in ensuring that these completions happen.
Argyle International Airport
From discussions I am having with a number of people in St Vincent who are connected to the airport project, there is a great deal of confidence and optimism that it will open by the end of this year, which is extremely exciting for St Vincent, Caribbean tourism, and of course Harlequin.
Representatives of an American airline are in Buccament Bay Resort at present and they tell us they are planning to fly into St Vincent by October of this year, which is a huge step as this will assist in the continued success of the hotel by creating a direct gateway for far more people to visit the island without the need for inter-island transfers.
Harlequin’s hotels
Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia continue to exceed expectations for occupancy levels this year. Combined with the revenue that is being generated from completions, monies are being applied to developing Buccament Bay Resort by opening more cabanas, apartments and facilities, which will strengthen the product and allow for future increases in the numbers of guests staying at the resort.
Conclusion
I do not doubt that Harlequin is not where some of you would like it to be, especially if you are in financial difficulty. If I could make things move faster, of course I would, but remember where Harlequin was two years ago and the progress is clear to see. Outsiders with no interest in your wellbeing will continue to interfere and seek to damage Harlequin – Jeremy Newman of Harlecon infamy remains in contact with journalists and R Legal – but despite these obstacles, Harlequin remains on course in its restructuring effort.
Lastly, if you read The Sunday Times, keep an eye out for an article we hope will be published featuring Olympic and World champion athlete Sally Gunnell regarding an upcoming stay at Buccament Bay Resort.
Kind regards,
Dear All,
It has been a very busy 2015, what with the celebrity endorsement of Buccament Bay. We’ve been in overdrive buying fake TA reviews so people who want to buy their “5 star experience” won’t be disappointed by the “niggles”.
Finance
As no one will lend us money, I am considering liquidating Harlequin’s assets in a “fire sale” to anyone who’ll give me my retirement money. No, I won’t declare solvency because of course the FSCS put that chestnut to bed with their “apology”.
For cash victims, this means you’re fucked. You’re nothing more than unsecured creditor, and will be completely at the mercy of the buyer of all of Harlequin’s assets. That’s right folks. The time has come for me to sail off into the sunset.
Completions
Because it’s blatantly obvious that we’ve failed to get any progress on completions, I’ll give you the same bullshit but in a different flavour. Our “lawyers” are bribing their way through the SVG court system in order to get our land encumbrances overturned, so we can give out title. To date, this has only worked for 3 of our 9000 units. Of course, it would help to have money to “oil” the cogs but what can you do when you blow it on planes.
Airport
No sign of the airport I said would be here 2 years ago.
Harlequin’s Hotels
Our shit hotels are still attracting bargain hunters. Since our expectations are so low, I can confirm that we’ve exceeded them yet again. I am also please to announce that we are actually building out Buccament Bay……………… apparently.
Conclusion
You must be a real mug if you don’t see the writing is on the wall. All my assets are overseas and I’m now in the final throws of unloading this mess onto someone else!
D Ames
I’m just wondering why Dave Ames only referred to Mr. Newman, afterall Ames was given 100’s of emails which include, Dave Man (Harlequin), Jon Austin ( Basildon Echo), Dave Dinell (SFO), Barry Collins (SFO), Matt Ames ( They are really interesting), Nicola Kelliher (Aka Dave Ames), Dan Ames, ( some really incriminating stuff there), Cliff Jones ( Former Security Chief Buccament Bay), Paul Walton, Gareth Fatchett ( Regulatory Legal), Aahraf (SFO), Nikki Crozier (CPC), Chris Corney (CLC)and the list goes on and on and on,
But there are also all the emails between Richard Spector ( lawyer for Ames) and various litigants, 6 differing affidavits of disclosure from Carol and Dave Ames, and all sorts of other juicy stuff,
Looks like Ames was not the only one who did a deal re the Wilkins Kennedy case, well that’s what happens when you are willing to cut rather unconventional deals,
It’s always about the clients best interests, something Dave holds so dear to his heart.
Dear All,
It has been a very busy 2015 so far and things are continuing to gradually falling into place.
(Fall not falling it’s FALL, and what do you mean by gradually ?)
Finance
We have had a firm offer of finance from a party that is interested in purchasing the Harlequin group and building out Harlequin’s developments.
(We have had a firm offer of finance from a party that is interested in PURCHASING the Harlequin Group ? What does that mean ? If they are purchasing they are purchasing, full stop. And Davey you know they are not “Purchasing” the “Group” there is no such thing as the “Harlequin Group” what you mean is the assets, they are purchasing the assets, so what will be left to go into the trust, and if they are purchasing the assets, why do you need to lease an office in Honywood Business Park?
If someone was to purchase the companies owned by Ames, they would be crazy to pay anymore then a £1. Jim Baker stated that the value of the assets was less then the liabilities in all cases,)
I am currently considering the offer with my advisors because it is of course crucial that we only accept the right deal for investors and the business; however, whatever the outcome, this clearly demonstrates the growing strength of the business and gives good cause for confidence in what awaits on the horizon.
(How does someone who is buying the assets equate to the growing strength of the business? And if someone purchases the assets outright, how will this be good news for any investors, and please don’t tell us that the purchaser is purchasing £ 400 million + of debt).
Completions
As we confirmed recently, another completion has been finalised at Buccament Bay Resort. The process can frustrate at times and these frustrations are felt by everyone, including us, but we are overcoming obstacles and this year there is a momentum and commitment from many more investors. Equally, nobody can underestimate the commitment and efforts made by our team of lawyers and management in ensuring that these completions happen.
(BULLSHIT)
Argyle International Airport
From discussions I am having with a number of people in St Vincent who are connected to the airport project, there is a great deal of confidence and optimism that it will open by the end of this year, which is extremely exciting for St Vincent, Caribbean tourism, and of course Harlequin.
Representatives of an American airline are in Buccament Bay Resort at present and they tell us they are planning to fly into St Vincent by October of this year, which is a huge step as this will assist in the continued success of the hotel by creating a direct gateway for far more people to visit the island without the need for inter-island transfers.
Harlequin’s hotels
Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia continue to exceed expectations for occupancy levels this year. Combined with the revenue that is being generated from completions, monies are being applied to developing Buccament Bay Resort by opening more cabanas, apartments and facilities, which will strengthen the product and allow for future increases in the numbers of guests staying at the resort.
(What firm is carrying out all this work?)
Conclusion
I do not doubt that Harlequin is not where some of you would like it to be, especially if you are in financial difficulty.
(Investors are in financial difficulty because of you Mr. Ames)
If I could make things move faster, of course I would, but remember where Harlequin was two years ago and the progress is clear to see.
(Two years ago HMSSE was trading, ASOL was trading, Two years later they are both in liquidation, Two years ago you were building showhomes at Merricks, now it is a rotting eyesore, Two years ago you were building H Hotel, now that too is rotting, Two years ago you employed staff in Harlequin Developments, now it is closed and you owe $ 3 million + in Barbados. Two years ago you were making interest payments, then you had the yet to be resolved Banking glitch, Two years ago the contracts may have been worth something, now they are worth £ 1.00, Two years ago the SFO formally announced an investigation which if you have not noticed, is still ongoing. So tell us where is the “CLEAR” progress. )
Outsiders with no interest in your wellbeing will continue to interfere and seek to damage Harlequin –
Jeremy Newman of Harlecon infamy remains in contact with journalists and R Legal – but despite these obstacles, Harlequin remains on course in its restructuring effort.
( Why would Mr. Newman be an obstacle if as you stated previously he apologised and has been discredited, oh yes sorry, you said he did NOT apologise, and he has not been discredited. Silly me eh).
Lastly, if you read The Sunday Times, keep an eye out for an article we hope will be published featuring Olympic and World champion athlete Sally Gunnell regarding an upcoming stay at Buccament Bay Resort.
( I’m more of Google, FT Advisor, Laura Miller Professional Advisor fan myself, they are far more interesting.)
Kind regards,
Dear Mr. Spector we will gladly provide you with further documents in the same ilk as you have previously obtained from Mr. Corney of CLC, however unlike Mr. Corney we would like the £ 250 k (bribe) paid upfront, see we can’t be bothered waiting for your victory in the Wilkins Kennedy case, we know your client Dave Ames has the cash from the recent sale of some of those Thailand assets, and we know how much your client Dave Ames has in his Barclays (NewYork USA Branch).
We will also throw in all the correspondance between you and Mr. Corney including those recorded telephone calls if you like. To sweeten the deal.
Toodle Pip for now. 😉
PS if you don’t believe us, would you like us to put a sample up on BFP and then in a similar ilk to what we post up here provide you with further documents, confidential documents between potential witnesses and the SFO perhaps, or draft witness statements sent out by the SFO, oh sorry you already have got these, and promised to pay £ 250,000 for them.
Anyway we have no interest in perverting the course of justice, we leave that dirty business to you and your “mates”.
Btw if you have a problem with this why not contact the SFO, afterall you have all the correspondance. You (bribed) paid ( well sorry correction ) promised to pay for it.
Surely the only way the combined assets of all the Harlequin companies can only have any value worth selling is if all the liabilities are shed. Am I wrong?
Shedding liabilities means getting rid of all the obligations to purchasers of properties.
So long suckers!
I’ll sell all the assets at a real knock down price (because I can) take a few million backhander into a off shore bank account and well, stuff the investors.
Simple. I have been lining up people to blame for months now.
And then it will be all the fault of the nasty purchaser of the assets who simply won’t honour the contracts!
Should make enough for some plastic surgery, a new ID and a one way ticket to Argentina.
Yes, it sounds like……. tut tut that would be telling. It does ‘Beg’ a question 😉
No one cares who the Great Goblin met last week.
It’s defamation Bob!
By the way dave, if you do get this finance, how will this actually benefit investors ?
( remembering that 99% plus of your investors have nothing to show for their combined investment of 400 million )
Will you be insisting that the finance company doesn’t screw us over, in the same way as you ,and your jailed for fraud son, did.
The great goblin is going to use the emails given to him by Chris Corney for even more defamation cases, I hope Corney and his clients have very deep pockets, that’s what happens when you think you have done a deal with the great sorry no deluded Goblin.
When I read the Goblin’s update I thought someone was posting an April Fool’s Day jape at his expense.
Now it turns out it really is a quote from the Fibster himself.
What an unbelievable load of fabrication & guff.
What’s to stop the Hob Goblin from trousering a few million, then the new buyer tells all the investors to F@@k off?
No 3rd party with half a brain will finance harlequin other than through NewCo.
NewCo will need to give Ames and interest to make it work.
NewCo will need to buy from liquidation to clean up the liabilities. If this happens all investors are screwed.
Shortly, this will turn nasty.
“I do not doubt that Harlequin is not where some of you would like it to be”
Show me the investor who is happy with their investment !!!
The Great Goblin gets a few million tax free, whilst the SFO stand by an watch.
We will challenge any sale. So mote it be.
We will say it here and now. We know Harlequin watch this.
Dave will try to roll the companies as he has no choice.
When he does, we will challenge it, just long enough to let the venture capitalists come in with their own bid.
Dave knows the fund to which we refer. His hope is that he can get his deal done before they get chance to bid.
This will not be allowed to happen. 28 days under the SVG insolvency rules. That will give us enough time to do what we need to do.
We have a Brother keeping us updated.
For two years we have been hearing this, and guess what. HP still there, still trading, still solvent. You are obviously not up to date with the latest behind the scenes goings on. Do you really think that DA updates tells you everything. Muppets.
f any deal goes ahead for Harlequin, investors need to be ready to act. There are a number of options :-
The “Liquidation Option”
1. A deal involving a liquidation of the Harlequin asset owing companies. The liquidator will then sell the assets to a bidding company. The bidding company would acquire the assets free from any claims from investors – eg all investors become unsecured creditors in the liquidation.
The key issues under this option for investors would be :-
(a) was the transaction at arms length ?
(b) Does David Ames, his family members or a part holding as a nominee retain any interest in the bidding company ?
(c) does the transaction represent the best option for creditors ?
Remember, under this option David Ames as sole shareholder and director can pick which liquidator he appoints.
The “Historical Option” :-
2. The companies are sold. The bidding company acquires the assets and liabilities. We do not see this as an option any third party would want. Why inherit the historical problems ?
Preparation
We have lawyers in the main jurisdictions. We have a very detailed understanding of the companies.
We have been instructed by (in the past) or continue to be instructed by significant numbers of Harlequin investors. We have the ability to reach the majority of investors quickly.
Preparation is key and lack of it will allow those who do not hold investor interests at heart to act without challenge.
And you think the Goblin won’t feather his nest out of the deal?
Looks like RL will challenge any dirty little deals.
Bobless, what do you think of your mate selling you out?
You’re quite right. We don’t have a clue what’s going on because the Chief Goblin runs his affairs in a completely opaque manner designed to confuse and obfuscate. Quite contrary to the open transparency guff that spews out of his updates.
All we can do is guess that the Goblin intends to sue countless more for defamation, what we do know is that he does not have the cash to honor his contractual obligations to his thousands of investors, what we do know is that he defends vigorously any attempts by investors to enforce their contracts, what we do know is the Goblin lies on an almost constant basis.
But given that a contributor on here professes to know what is going on, perhaps he/she/they would like to share this with the rest of us.
Afterall it affects all of us. Does it not?
Dave ames told investors on video that his business model would work, ……even without external finance.
Either dave knew his business had serious financial problems, and so was willing to lie on video, to make some short term financial gains, while sacrificing his ‘investors’ homes, pensions and lifes savings .
or Dave is so stupid, he under estimated the cost of building 6000 hotel rooms by billions of pounds
so Dave, are you a fool or a fraudster.
Sorry ok I now believe all the Goblins updates, I really do, they are factual, and honest.
The GVG (Great Visionary Goblin) is just trying to dispose of assets sharpish before the whole thing collapses, can you see him giving it to anyone else?
Hands off it’s mine.
No, No it’s all mine.
Come on chaps, Gareth promised it to me.
Sorry, we have the freezing order in the UK = we hold all the cards.
Hardlyquims is in the best position it’s ever been in, things have never been better.
Jeremy Newboy of Harlecoon infamy remains in contact with journalists and Regurgitated I-legal – but despite these obstacles, Hardlyquims remains on course in it’s destructuring effort. We just need to stash some cash whilst disposing of more assets.
Coons is not an appropriate jokey word to use
Mark my words the Greedy Goblin is preparing to liquidate ALL of his companies, someone ( known to him) will swoop in and buy them….. for a pittance.
The Greedy Goblin will have received a ‘Thank you’ from the new owner maybe even an interest in the Newco.
None of this helps investors.
It does help the GG, he has started the blame game; The Irish builder, WK, God, the World, a few disgruntled investors, RL, CLC Paul Walton, SFO, HMRC, all the usual suspects.
But, we do have a much more Machiavellian scape goat the most evil Google test – Yes, Google redefined the financialWorld with hitherto unheard of dreaded, Google test.
The Google test is the real villain.
Could the GG use a proxy to buy back his own assets at a knock down price and get the investors off his back at the same time?
New holding company without those pesky investors demanding their contractual dues.
Think about it logically.
If the “know all” Harlequin employee (Stenning) won’t tell, let’s work it out. There are certain permutations this can take:
1. David Ames is at liberty to sell whatever “assets” he likes. He is the sole director, and has been stipulated time & time again, the “investors” are nothing more than customers. Although SIPPs have a way out, it leaves cash people with absolutely nothing to show for their “investment”.
2. Regardless of which freezing orders / encumbrances are on land etc, Ames can sell to any company willing to give him money.
3. You can skirt around the whole nasty problem of contractual obligations by simply putting the companies into a form of liquidation (not sure how to do it in SVG), and then “recommending” another company purchase the assets at a nominal price. This will both remove any contractual obligations (tied to the old RDC’s), leaving unsecured creditors to receive pennies on the pound of the proceeds, and will give the new co the assets.
Any legal proceedings will then have to be against Ames personally. As he’ll have “nothing to do” with a new company, he’ll find a way to wriggle out of any obligations.
An important note here is that of asset stripping. Most people jumped to the conclusion that this would be a firesale. In Goblin world, maybe. However, the update mentioned that the resorts would be built out. If you think about it properly, the only person who’d benefit from selling the land would be Ames. The other company would have to build out the resorts, which will take funds.
4. Therefore, it’s plausible that the Goblin could sell. HOWEVER, you must remember one important point – all of his other updates have been absolute bullshit (H Hotel construction, WK case decided by 2015, BBay occupancy, FSCS “apology” etc etc).
This means if you want to consider the way forward for the “Harlequin Group”, you have several steps:
a. The GV will almost certainly have to include his current revenue-generating assets to make the deal worthwhile for the buyer. BB and Blu won’t be cheap – BB will be worth about £25m in its current state, blu probably £5-7m although both are just guesses.
b. The land, from what I saw from RL’s DD, will likely be worth £15m in all. Again, a guess.
c. If he wanted to sell up, he’d probably get £35m – £50m for the lot.
d. Out of that £35m-£50m, creditors will receive some, Ames will receive some as a director etc. However, if they were to build out the resorts, I’m sure a better way would be to sell for a nominal price (EG $1), then use the “valuation” money for construction.
e. Therefore, maybe you could consider a “partnership” would be announced, which will give the goblin some funds whilst “restructuring” the company into a new organisation, with him and some other individuals as board members. With new construction funds, they’ll try and build out H, with the other resorts following (finances granted etc).
f. In terms of the “investors” / creditors, the two ways it could go are as follows:
f (i) It’s almost certain that any new “deal” will remove the contractual obligations. It would be stupid not to. Ames could “liquidate” (or equivalent), and then offer to renegotiate contracts, in a much similar fashion to how the trust was based. This could come in the form of releasing equity (unlikely), or just offering people new “units” in the new builds under similar conditions to their old contracts (albeit without the deadlines)
f (ii) If the Goblin were as devious as people make out, he could just put it all down the tubes and get rid of the “investors” as unsecured creditors in liquidation proceedings. However, as has been noted, if he wants to build out the resorts, it would make sense to not do this, as it would only benefit the Goblin (not even the buyer) if he received cash for the land etc. Building out the resorts will take money, which isn’t just going to magically appear overnight. The buyer will have to put it up (unless they’re working with another party who’ll underwrite), which means they won’t want to write £m cheques to Ames (dead money).
It will be interesting to see what the Goblin comes out with.
But then again, when has he ever followed up on what he’s promised.
The GG is capable of anything, however, this ‘Teflon Dave’ approach will be his downfall.
And those that worked for him. When will all the baby Goblins work now?
Dave Ames signed a consent order in the courts in SVG some months back in an action taken by Ray Caldwell, Ames consented to put his companies into administration, Ames has since decided to challenge the consent order, a hearing on the matter is imminent.
Whilst Ames wants to be seen to challenge the consent order, the challenge is meerly an exercise to try and convince the SFO that he has done all in his power to restructure the companies, however it suits Ames to allow an administration of his companies, he already has chosen a local IP to deal with the matter, the IP will then sell the assets as a going concern, that way Ames will be “seen” to have no involvement as such in the sales procedure.
Investors have contracts with various Ames companies, but in many cases the investors DO NOT have contracts with companies which own the assets. For example investors have contracts with Merricks Resorts Ltd, but the company that originally owned Merricks was Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd. however it is believed that Ames subsequently attempted to set up a Barbados registered company to hold those assets. I say attempted because the transaction will have to be challenged in court by investors if and when investors lodge their interests with the administrators.
BLU St. Lucia is another example of this, investors have contracts with an entity that DOES NOT own the BLU Hotel, so when the administrator sells those assets the only one with a claim on that property will be Dave Ames.
H Barbados and the Marquis Estate along with the assets in the Dom Rep are all set up in a similar fashion.
Like in the case of Shipleys LLP, the adminstrators in SVG will look at the investor contracts, and if those contracts are not with the asset owning companies, there is little if anything the investors can do to change this, aside from spending an absolute fortune in challenging the administrators.
Leonard Curtis will also be eyeing up any assets that fall into the intercompany loan debts owing to HMSSE,
Many are asking what can be done to stop this, but few have reported Ames to the authorities, and NO ONE has pressed the NUCLEAR button of ISSUING and ENFORCING any STAT DEMANDS.
To do so would put the companies into liquidation and Ames into Bankruptcy.
How does this help the situation.
But time is running out, on or before the 2nd of September 2015 Ames has to pay the Davies claimants £ 1.3 million, if on the 3rd Ames has not paid the Davies claimants this money then they could very well begin enforcement proceedings which will bankrupt Mr. Ames and that will then be an end of the matter.
The Davies case was taken in the UK against Dave and Carol Ames personally, it is these 24 clients of CLC who hold the destiny of the remaining 5976 investors in their hands.
However to remove this very real threat would only cost the other investors £ 217 each.
This is an option that needs to be looked at, a deal could be done with Ames by the remaining 5976 investors to assist Ames and the investors from losing the whole lot because of a tiny minority of investors who have no interest in seeing Harlequin succeed.
But something needs to be done quickly, otherwise in 6 months the Davies bunch will take down the whole empire.
Stat Demand the stump and do it now.
Question.
Who could issue a stat demand and who could enforce it?Would it need to be in SVG or UK, how much would it cost?
We feel it important that Harlequin confirm their solvency. See attached declaration sent to David Ames’s lawyers. We can see no reason why this cannot be attended to. It would provide reassurance.
@ The lodge of knowledge. on April 4, 2015 at 1:50 pm
@Anonymous 11.32, a lot can happen in 6 months. Stop sowing the seed of panic……………………
“Nothing has happened in the last 9 years, so what can change or happen in 6 months, Ames has instilled the panic, now is the time to move, not in 6-12-18-24-30-36 months …………………”
A liquidation helps RL as it means that redress becomes the only option.
Ironically, certainty helps RL.
Ames is now in full panic mode, the SFO will pounce when he tries this latest swerve.
Why if no one is reading these threads are the posts appearing on the RL forum, and why did the Goblin go all the way to California to get the identity of the posters.
Richard, what have I told you about spelling, capitalisation and grammar. This proves beyond doubt you can’t take the working class and make them something better.
The all powerful Goblin lol. I was told a funny joke about the GG lack of trouser department prowess.
Call me cynical but doesn’t this appeal sound like a desperate attempt to get 5976 investors to pay off the debt owed by the Goblin in Chief?
It sounds like, “if you don’t pay my debts then these nasty 24 people (who only want to claim what is rightfully theirs under the contracts) will bring down the company and you 5976 will be the ones that pay in the end”
and more posts about paddy, one of daves strengths was choosing the right team.
What do people really think of Dave Ames ?
Richard must have been told by his paymaster to disrupt.
Now, back to the sale of Harlequin and shafting all the cash investors, sorry the GG will only do the deal, if it’s best for investors (cough cough)
Why has nobody enforced a stat demand? Is it so difficult?
Even the diehard number one fan Storey has decided Aimless has led him a merry dance, all those 1000s of posts, defending the Great Puppeteer.
I would imagine Storey and Ingham feel a bit stupid now, couldn’t happen to a nicer couple.
Who could advise me bout a stat demand? I wanna do it – proper
– No Doubt
Would that be to confer with the Belvedere Group ponzi artists who
provided the seed/start up money to get the Harlequin scam going
in the first place?
@ tth The world is looking good.
Can we stop the Lodge references please.
Bob, Ingham and the other scuzz balls who post here are not masons.
They are not deemed to be the type.
The great puppeteer. Yes that would be Fatchett pulling Laura Millers strings. No we cannot stop the lodge references. It was a good laugh for the anti HP trolls a couple of days ago. Live with it.
Anonymous, you will never know.
Don’t try and tell me how to post
Nor me
Scuzz is a British radio music channel. Just shows the mixed thinking of the anti HP trolls.
Scuzz is what is on the surface of the BB lap pools
Meanwhile Ames plots his exit plan.
As it happens I do know. But then, how would I, unless someone very close to Ames told me ?
The real question is would they tell me?
The liquidation is virtually done, but of course Dave has told you how he will look after you 😉
So, just keep posting and I’m sure Dave will keep to his word, he has a history of that!!
KST, of course your in the inner circle, that’s why your busy shooting your shit on here.
As for Dave looking after me, that’s something that you have just proven you know nothing about because I am not expecting anything from Ames, he owes me nothing.
Happy dreaming! You are miles from reality but I just don’t run my mouth off with confidential information.
Just like Yank one off easy. He forgot to change his ID and started a discussion with himself. These anti HP trolls are such muppets.
What if I am Gareth Fatchett?
I’ve met GF. You are no GF. You are just an idiot.
From MPK 100 London….a 5 star review of BB…….wow, this person claims to have travelled extensively…yet this is his first review…not surprising…Tackles the “niggles” issue right away….those pesky “niggles’…just relax, you are in the Caribbean..nothing is perfect…relax man… so frigging transparent this review..the best is at the end where it is revealed that 12 days there (AI ) cost twice as much as a family meal at the Cliff in Barbados.
That is some real 5 star pricing, for sure!
You can’t make this up…but then again, you can.
“Absolutely Wonderful – have nothing but praise”
Reviewed yesterday NEW
We returned last week after 12 days at Buccament and our only regret is that it wasn’t for longer. Having travelled extensively we have learnt that it is best to try to mellow into each resort as it is easy to criticize, and at Buccement did we mellow!
Yes a few niggles to begin with but once we acclimatised we have absolutely no complaints as the very friendly and professional management and staff were always happy to help. We have to say a special thank you to Rathmath, the manager at the reception, who dealt with every issue or request faultlessly and with such genuine kindness.
in a nutshell: Food absolutely fantastic (Jack’s as everyone else has said is spectacular), but take advantage of the fully fitted Gym so as not to add too many inches by the time you go home! – drink extensive and all premium brand inclusive (I guess depending on your package) – accommodation superb – location unspoilt and spectacular – trip to Mustique, especially lunch at Basil’s Bar and swimming in Bequia (even with the boat breaking down) a must. Overall go with the flow and you will have a memorable time.
Would have no problem whatsoever in recommending Buccament and will definitely be returning very soon
The Knights
PS on reflection the whole 12 day holiday for 2 of us cost just twice as much as one family meal at The Cliff in Barbados earlier on this year – unbelievable value for money
Stayed March 2015, traveled as a couple
Slee
Bob is batting for BB over on TA posting as Sportingman. His latest post is truly cringeworthy.
@Anonymous 1.37 what is a “moppet?” You muppet hahaha lol has the desert sun got to you?
The real plan. Ames will put the companies into ADMINISTRATION the dangle the join the Trust campaign or this elusive financier will not invest / purchase.
Bob can’t string a sentence together, lost before he started.
What is a moppet? Is it a mini mop?
Anyway we now have a new plan. It is administration. Couple of days ago it was liquidation. Come on you anti HP trolls, get your act together. If you are going to tell us all what the grand plan is at least come up with the same plan. Hahaha lol MUPPET
Okay Bob, Harlequin is great, investors are happy and it’s all the Irish builders fault.
There now, what a good lapdog you’ve fixed evrything.
Yes, Harlequin is such a success ‘storey’. That Mr Ames a true marvel a real vision, a man of the people.
Looks like someone is have a conversation with themselves again.
It’s that well known Irish foursome The Moppets. Will Paddy enter them for Eurovision?
Harlequin is great, just ask the SFO
“Anti HP troll” is that a pseudonym for pissed off f*cked over pensionless fraud victim.
No Anonymous, an anti HP troll is typified by the tw*t Beguia P who posts on TA. An older lady is explaining her experiences with booking at BB but she gets an earful from the resident tw*t about who does and does not own BB amongst other things. What a tool.
Your self righteousness is nauseating considering the bullying and outright dishonesty posted on TA forums by you. There is a reason why lots of your posts got deleted off TA. You do actually realise that you are putting a minor holiday booking issue in the same league as thousands of people being conned out of their life savings/pensions don’t you.
It’s Bequia Bob. Bequia.
Is it time to start another ‘Why are reviews of BB so disparate?’ thread on TA? The last few look like they were written by travel agents which as we all know is totally against TA rules if they accepted complimentary or discounted accommodation.
Any reviews on TA will be disappear soon. When an old couple write about an experience booking a holiday through a 3rd party travel agent and get vile rhetoric shoved down their throat, then no one will want to write anything about BB again. Buquia P should be ashamed of crap he writes.
Nice little earner, split a few ways.
Ames is preparing his final update, the one where he blames:
The Irish builder
WK
Reg Legal
A few determined investors ( out to damage your investment)
The press
The SFO
Harlecon website
Did I mention the Irish builder
I think we all get the picture.
I have faith in the GB system, albeit slow. Ames and his cohorts will be taken to task.
He simply can’t win against the Government, WK, that pesky Irish builder and a whole shit load of other people out for blood.
One way or another someone will get him, and it will be soon.
Sportingman, FDNRM, 36, BobStorey….@8.02am predicts that comments from Bequia P on TA will disappear .. So I thought I would put the latest one here in case it does. Also , Bob refers to the poster on TA as being an older lady, and then as an old couple….be a little bit more factual Bob, nowhere does the lady describe herself as being old. Just more BS from you.
”
Bequia P
London
posts: 106
14. Re: Elaenia suites at Buccament Bay resort
Apr 06, 2015, 3:30 PM
Just to be accurate Buccament Bay does not have a ‘parent’ company as many investors in the Harlequin brand have discovered to their financial disadvantage. Investors who put hundreds of millions of pounds of their pension money into the Harlequin scheme expecting a ‘guaranteed’ monthly income from rents on Caribbean tourist villas have been left without the promised income or even access to their capital, after work stopped on the Harlequin resorts and its sales arm entered liquidation. Harlequin (as a group of unrelated companies) in the UK has been the subject of a Rip Off Britain BBC documentary as recently as Jan 2015 and is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office. The company headquarters in Essex has recently been put up for sale. And by the way Sportingman claims to be an investor and effusively promotes Harlequin across many forums on the internet including the one hosted by the firm of solicitors that represents aggrieved investors.
2 destinations mentioned in this post
1
Caribbean
See all 2
Reply
Report inappropriate content
How can Harlequin Travel tell the lady that the block she booked in at BB will be finished in May, when we are in April and no work is going on at all!
They can’t even replace the parasols and damaged lounges for God sake.
I wonder if there will ever be a time when lap-dog Storey will ever realise he has been taken for a mug and betrayed by the one he trusted with his retirement savings. Or will the disconfirmation bias keep working to the bitter end and he would offer to go to prison to serve his master through thick and thin.
@Anonymous 1.54 Well not only can you not read but you are a liar who likes to distort the truth. A typical anti HP thug.
1)Nowhere is it predicted a post will disappear. Liar
2)For clarity 2 posts from Durie are below with a comment from Sportingman .
As the readers will appreciate Durie is well pissed off with the comments from
a)the deleted post
b)The comment from Bequia P
Sportingmans comment is included.
Grow up you tool.
Re: Elaenia suites at Buccament Bay resort
03 April 2015, 19:43
Excuse me for telling people what I have been told by Harlequin Travel!! I have never been on such a nasty forum as this one! It seems some people on here like being so negative!
15. Re: Elaenia suites at Buccament Bay resort
yesterday, 20:57
I wondered how long it would take for this to start . Can I just state I’m not an investor , just a middle aged couple trying to look forward to our holiday, please stop this arguing and scare mongering as its coming across as very childish and unhelpful to be honest . Just to state this will be my last post on this forum and will update my review when I return from my holiday in October .
17. Re: Elaenia suites at Buccament Bay resort
yesterday, 21:39
Hi Durie, well you can make your own judgement on the reply from the above poster. (Bequia P) Your post does not ask about the percent company, your post does not ask about pension scheme investment etc etc. I could go on. The poster above has an agenda which does not help you at all. Perhaps the above poster will respect your request and stop involving you in his nastyness. I very much doubt it. Good luck.
Any news from Mr. Ames about the solvency issue? The FSCS have asked him to prove he is solvent. This has caused a kerfuffle in the bunker.
I quote Bob from his post at 8.02 AM under the ID.”The lodge of the tool Bequia P”
“Any reviews on TA will be disappear soon. When an old couple write about an experience booking a holiday through a 3rd party travel agent and get vile rhetoric shoved down their throat, then no one will want to write anything about BB again. Buquia P should be ashamed of crap he writes.”
So Bob, you are the one telling lies, and calling the lady, Mrs Durie old.
Of course you will say its not your comment, but your writing style, use of the word tool,misspelling of Bequia, and many other Bob trademark stupid comments give you away every time. You might as well post as the beloved Robert Storey.
By the way, how is that title for your cabana coming along?
Progress of transfer of title is progressing really well thanks for asking, title for a special price is wonderful.
Rental is coming in as planned for a 10% rental return, that’s far better than the -15% RL and Fatshit are offering.
Oh what joy in addition to mocking you fools.
What goes around, won’t be the plod because last time you wasted their time and they told you that you were a deluded nut job!
Barbados Underground’s publisher has been revealed. Oh Oh!!!!
It is Euclid Herbert.
http://donaldbest.ca/donald-best-files-injunction-motion-against-barbados-underground-publisher-euclid-herbert-ontario-provincial-police-and-civil-case-defendants/
Progress of transfer of title is progressing really well …. at a similar pace as the construction of Resorts.
Mid-sold Investment, it’s a bit difficult to call the police as a victim when you yourself have been posting filth and abuse on the forum also?
My cabana is built and giving me a return so I don’t give a shit how the others are progressing.
Very similar approach to the SIPP investors selfish posts of the last month.
SIPP investment less 15% Fatshit cut, really top investment!
What are you going to post next week when Harlequin are still trading?
But Harlequin isn’t trading.
Buccament Bay is trading. Blu is trading.
The other resorts aren’t build yet, so they aren’t trading. HMSSE is in liquidation, so that’s not trading. “Harlequin” is not an actual legal organisation, and so cannot be trading.
Please remind us how much return you’re seeing from your investment in one of the RDC’s David Ames owns?
Why should I tell you which of the Smes company pays the return?
You should mind your own business.
So that’s none then?
What happened to all the 9000 contracts yielding the “guaranteed” returns from the build-outs? All the deadlines are broken now aren’t they Davy? So where are the returns? Fact is you don’t have them.
There are a very small number of people getting returns, just not you.
@Anonymous 11.43, All the deadlines broken are they now Davy? No they are not Davy. Another rubbish posting.
So what is the % split of contracts that are broken and still current? Mine was broken 6 years ago.
The answer was Sid to the statement “all deadlines are broken” A lie.
For those of us who don’t know the one-bit sideshow players in this debacle can someone give us a rundown? Who are Sunny, Vinny, Sonia or Zonia?
Anonymous 7:19 here is Sonia:
https: / / facebook.com/people/Sonia-Stenning/100007882935010
The two in the top photo are Sunny (left) and Vinny (right) her sons. These three have been the main protagonists in the sale of Harlequin’s products over the years.
It must really make Anonymous feel a big man, sat in his lonely 1 bed council flat prowling around Facebook, 192.com, electoral register, death announcements for any information he can post on here. You need help.
And how is it different than expensive litigation in California for IP’s? At least my snooping is free!
24 hours to liquidation lol. Someone is going to really stupid on Friday night.
Where is my money?
@ anonymous April 9, 7.14pm
Tut tut, having the audacity to ask where your money is makes you a selfish anti-HP troll. It also probably means you are fat, smelly and live in a less than average priced home.
You have been warned.
Liquidation by the end of play today. Will it happen? Will it hell. Lol
David Ames should have been liquidated long ago.
The idea that the little runt is still running around with other people’s money is disgusting. I wonder when he plans to get around to the contracts which are in breach? The interest payments outstanding? He’s made a nice little nest egg for himself, but how long will it last?
Dan Ames has a very nice house too, but will he keep it?
Dave Ames has a very nice house too, but will he keep it?
Matt Ames HAD a very nice house, now he is a convict, a divorcee, a bankrupt, unemployed and homeless.
Dave Ames has a nice hotel too, but will he keep it?
Solvent !
That’s not what the recent IP’s said recently.