Charles Ponzi never worked for Harlequin… but he could have!
Dear BFP
My anonymous ID is one of those referred to in the Harlequin subpoena, but I always used an anonymous proxy.
Nonetheless, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t fighting off an overwhelming fear of the consequences of them discovering my identity. Not because of the defamation threat; I see no issues with me proving what I said was true. I just could not stand by and watch the shameful lies, deception, bullying and propaganda being spouted from Ames and his conspirators. They misuse the courts to shut down any public criticism because they cannot continue to defraud people when information is flowing freely.
Too many peoples’ lives have been damaged in the Caribbean and UK. Many lives have been irreconcilably ruined. And the UK authorities just stand by, knowing what is happening, and let it continue to happen.
Barbados Free Press on WordPress has been the only major website which has continuously stood up to threat of litigation and enabled the reporting of the true Harlequin story to appear on internet search results despite Harlequin’s scatter gun litigation attack on the rest of the internet.
BFP and WordPress must have saved hundreds and maybe thousands of people from being ripped off and has given those who want to keep the real facts out there and alive a mainstream social media channel to communicate through.
Many thanks; my prayers are with you, me, and all the other contributors who had good reason to comment anonymously under the fear and threat created by Harlequin.
signed, A Harlequin victim and grateful BFP reader!
BFP Editor Robert replies…
Thanks for your prayers, friend.
And thanks to Matt Mullenweg and the WordPress gang for defending freedom of the press, freedom of speech and giving freedom a home.
Robert
Amen sir – you have more support than you know
Hi BFP please share all the info we will put up on this site with anyone who feels threatened by Ames and Co.
We hope to put up the DD from RL as soon as it is available, Thank you BFP for keeping this Story alive.
Thank you BFP!
It is coming up on ten years anniversary of BFP. What a wonder you survived!
The Bunker is running out of loo roll.
5 pm – D Day
Welcome back leaky
RL will announce later this evening issues which will prevent them from providing all the due diligence, RL will also be making a statement with respect to certain legal issues pertaining to the trust and it’s implementation.
Due diligence is an independent process, I’ve never heard such a bizarre proposition, Gareth Fatchett was engaged to carry out due diligence and to carry out an independent valuation of the Harlequin assets, and he is publishing all this, this evening, so stop scaremongering,
Gareth Fatchett has promised come what may, that the due diligence will be produced this evening, when he does this, this will dispel the rumours surrounding the control Dave Ames has being asserting over this wholly Independent process.
“There will be an important announcement in relation to the trust and due diligence later this afternoon” So Perplexed don’t count on it. The trust won’t happen, I hope Perplexed you are not a cash investor because creek, barbed wired canoe and paddle come to mind.
Harlequin refuse to allow the disclosure of Baker Clarke figures.
Posted by Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 21 2014 @ 11.47pm
All,
The £400 m was provided by investors.
The breakdown of the £400 m is available. We are going to be prevented from sharing it.
This spells the beginning of the end for Harlequin. No right minded person will sign up to any arrangement whilst this is the case.
We need to decide the best way of dealing with matters and report to you all.
We may simply issue a redacted reported.
The BBC Panarama figures give enough of an outline. There is a decision to be made tomorrow. Too long have investors been treated as irrelevant.
These are the audited accounts for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd to April 30th 2007
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/a6ac4274d0d26b80bf9936b69561f940
At page 5 of the REPLY TO THE DEFENCE OF THE FIRST DEFENDANT,
at para 17.5. Mr. Ames states the following; “Financial statements for the Fifth Claimant for the years ended 30 April 2009, 2010 and 2011 have recently been filed.”
The fifth claimant being (5) HARLEQUIN PROPERTY (SVG) LIMITED.
Gareth Fatchett of Regulatory Legal Solicitors refers to the Panarama Figures contained in the letter from Harlequin to Panarama.
We would like to bring Mr. Fatchet’s Attention to page 2 of the letter and specifically the paragraph entitled “Overseas Companies”. see below.
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/6f56a3c81081a40dea7791b3b403a965
The Panarama letter also refers to fact that the accounts for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd the company which owns Buccament Bay and Merricks have been filed for 2007,2009, 2010 and 2011.
Why cant Mr. Facthett produce these, Ames in a certificate of truth and on oath said he filed these accounts, so Gareth Fatchett should have no problem getting them.
We tried and were told they DO NOT exist. So Mr. Ames lied on oath, committed perjury, A CRIMINAL OFFENCE.
OMG WW3 on the RL site.
They want blood……
Gareth the financial information you have obtained from Jim Baker is not an audited document. It is just a list of meaningless numbers produced by Jim based on, and he is at pains to point this out, unverified and not independently authenticated information provided to him by Harlequin.
So your reliance on these worthless figures is rather odd.
The Independent Valuation Regulatory Legal Solicitors stated they would get carried out.
We look forward to the independent valuation you had carried out on the Harlequin and Ames assets in the Caribbean, this document will be far more relevant to the purchasers, especially the value of the assets to be placed into trust.
You do have this valuation exercise? Or do you wish us over here on BFP to produce the valuations for you?
Let us think about that for a while…………………………..
Don’t tell me GF took about £1m from clients for the DD and didn’t use some of it to get an independent valuation? It will be like rats in a sack on the RL site. Lol
ADELA CHALMERS former FD for Harlequin is facing an investigation by her Regulatory body the ACCA, after financial documents have come to light which suggest that some accounts of Harlequin were prepared in an improper manner. We have been told and have sight of a report being prepared for the ACCA, SFO and Essex Police.
Could this be the reluctance on the part of Harlequin to allow the financial information as was provided by Harlequin to Jim Baker to be released to the purchasers as part of the due diligence.
Is the Baker Clarke Partnership and or Adela Chalmers about to become another victim of the toxic toad Ames.
Ames looks like he was the tail wagging the RL dog, but it appears that BFP have been wagging both RL and Ames,
The RL forum has descended into a blood lust. Ames surely must go now.
Wait for it folks, Fatchett will announce an 11th hour u turn by Ames, with respect to the accounts. The smoke screen needed to hide the fact that valuations for the various companies have not been produced, In the elation following the u turn purchasers will be so over joyed they will fail to see that the due diligence they paid for could have been found here on BFP at no charge.
The Baker Clarke accounts are totally meaningless, irrespective of whether they are produced or not. THEY ARE NOT AUDITED, therefore are worthless as documents of fact.
What will be hugely revealing is the result of the independent Valuation Regulatory Legal Solicitors were to have carried out for their clients.
If Ames lied in court documents well that’s him finished, Wonder what role Simon Terry had in all this, its time that bastard was hunted down too.
No BFP has been wagging GF. He allowed all the posts on BFP to be replicated on the RL forum through his chief mouthpiece Paul Walton. Wonder if Nick O Name will still be allowed access to the “secure” new RL forum now that GF realises he has been duped. And the lemmings are still following their leader.
Could it be that the DD is simply what gets posted on BFP? Or perhaps Marathon Man took copies of everything on Harlecon before that disappeared? Oh, hang on – it was all the guff on Mrs Broughton’s forum. Or maybe all three.
We’ll know later today if it’s just the emperor’s new clothes and how well £1m of client money was spent.
The trust is dead. Long live the trust!
Valuations of the common parts at BB – of course, RL commissioned a fully independent Red Book for that. Let’s see – reputable surveyors in the region… BCQS? Nope – they work for Harlequin and would happily prove that black was white before being run over on a zebra crossing. RLB? No – Ames accused the Irishman of bribing them, so they’re out. So just who would have done the work? That’s assuming it was, actually, like, y’know, done. Which it has to have been, or how could RL recommend spending gazillions on getting the trust documents drafted. Oops.
Yesterday we published this on the other Harlequin Thread and today as promised we have uploaded a selection of the Judgments and Incumberances, scroll down to UPDATE 22 / MAY / 2014
The truth, AMES IS A LIAR
May 21, 2014 at 10:51 pm
The following are six of many claims against Harlequin companies and Mr. Dave Ames personally, part of the claim is for misrepresentation, to the simple folk out there, that means lying. Now Ames in his claim in California denies he lied, well folks tomorrow we shall show six judgments which go with these claims which kinda suggest that the Judge also believed that Ames had engaged in misrepresentation, or the act of lying. Lets hope the folks at wordpress and Barbados free press pass these claims and judgments to their legal teams if required.
Judgments and Incumberances tomorrow.
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/829ab9e478424a5dd40dbeb6c5429785
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/b31153bcb3ab9036286378615c131c02
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/1d6a4ac97cf9aa9f63d6f717ec20ece1
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/aa25cdc13a0ad4ea541f68e323ca8559
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/d9f2da80430ccd97e01f9ad298deb831
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/87377c412ec4d8526c5d051734976bc5
UPDATE 22 / MAY / 2014
JUDGMENTS AND INCUMBERANCES BFP, WORDPRESS, AUTOMATIC INC please feel free to use these documents as evidence in the hearing in California tomorrow.
See link below for PDF’s of some of the judgments obtained.
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/7513fa8dc2f6948371ac032344cf3271
Now see link below for PDF’s of some of the Incumberances obtained.
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/b379cb3062bd6de0c219587607dbb267
We have been informed by reliable sources in St. Vincent that Mr. Ames has taken issue with the Incumberances, sources state that he feels they have not been registered or some such nonsense
The Incumberances are clearly marked with an official stamp, stating : ORIGINAL DOCUMENT LODGED AT THE REGISTRY HIGH COURT ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES.
However we have taken some extra precautions on the matter and will be able to update all with the good news for those with Incumberances later tonight or tomorrow morning.
I think the judgments alone tell the story, we fail to see how Ames can have any justification in his statements that he has not lied or engaged in mis-representations in light of these and other judgments.
A word of warning to investors, Harlequin and Ames have politicised the situation in St. Vincent, how they have done this has always been the subject of speculation, but sadly the latest moves by Harlequin in St. Vincent have Government Lawyer support.
This will never bode well for investors in the future as the Government has always stated that the Resort at Buccament Bay is of national importance. Meaning that the Government of St. Vincent will do almost anything to protect the resort, whether that is a good thing or otherwise for investors.
And thats the way it is on our little Island. Ames is reviled by most on the Island and our leader will loose no sleep when Ames is brought to justice, but our leader has the interests of the Island at heart ahead of those of speculative overseas investors, and RL need to understand the Island mentality and politics. this is not the UK. This is St. Vincent.
@Slimchops
May 22, 2014 at 11:00 am
Is that the best you can come up with? 😉
Garth Fatchett is working with WK
Will the authorities be looking into GF working with others? All the anti Ames posters, Ralph, Henry O Ware etc who were allowed to post on the RL blog. Yet he was supposed to be setting up a trust with Ames for the benefit of all. Feet in all camps?
@ Anonymous, I doubt very much anyone wants Ames involved in anything, if it can be helped, Going by the sentiment on the RL forum, 99% of people are anti Ames, its just that Ames is trying to have everyone over a barrel.
Fatchett is not setting up the trust for the benefit of all, He is adamant that he is proceeding with redress claims for the SIPP purchasers which constitute 50% of the purchasers. And he has been very vocal on this point.
And once the redress process starts its curtains for Harlequin anyway.
The wheels of justice turn slowly but they do turn and this trust will do nothing to save Ames’ hide, 😉 😉
@Anon why will it be curtains for HP when the redress process starts. The Redress will be against the SIPP companies, not HP.
Excuse me, I take massive offence to this statement, “Yet he was supposed to be setting up a trust with Ames for the benefit of all.” Mr. Fatchett was trying to recover some of what we lost as a result of Mr. Ames absolute incompetence, as a result of Mr. Ames I know have no pension and will struggle to meet my weekly payments on the bare necessities like food.
And to add insult to injury Ames is reportedly travelling to California today to spend more of our money in looking for IP addresses of folks who are disgusted with this creep and hope soon the UK authorities will do their job and remove this parasite. The man has left a path of destruction in his wake.
Can’t get any of the anonfiles downloads to work; and yes I did notice and correct the “dot”.
@ Anonymous; You ask this question? why will it be curtains for HP when the redress process starts. The Redress will be against the SIPP companies, not HP.
(1).Q. Who benefited from the miss-selling?
A. The Agents and the Ames family.
(2). Q What will happen when redress payments are made.
A.The insurance companies or UK government will hold the purchaser
contracts.
(3) Q What does this make the Insurance companies or UK government?
A. Creditors with delinquent contracts.
(4) Q. Will they join the trust.
A. Keep taking the Colombian marching powder.
(5). Q. So what will they do?
A. They will call in the contracts.
(6) Q. What will happen then?
A. A liquidator will be appointed.
@ St George’s Dragon we also had to put a space between https and :// so just close the space by pressing delete once, sorry about that.
GF was setting up the trust for the benefit of GF. Do you think he is in business because he has a social conscious? All he wanted was the list of SIPP investors. Why do you think he has allowed Paul Walton to post as much negative information as he could from BFP?
@Anon 2.19 and that will take years. 10 I should imagine.
Mr. Ames is far from finished, he engaged in a process to help investors out, he even paid their interest payments for them, how many developers would have done this, he has tried to engage with RL but time and time again they have demanded way more from him and he has now decided to put his foot down.
As for the judgments posted on here, they are fewer then 12 out of 6,000, most investors are quite happy with their investment, despite the scaremongering tactics of RL. Yes there have been delays, but these have been caused by the Builder and Wilkins Kennedy and Newman and the Harlecon site.
It must be noted that RL are targeting greedy and unscrupulous IFA’s who mis-sold the Harlequin product and brought not only the Ames family good name into dis-repute but that of Harlequin.
We have worked with the FSA and assisted them in drafting new protections to prevent further miss-selling by greedy IFA’s
The SFO investigation was instigated by Newman and by Wilkins Kennedy, Our claim in the case against Wilkins Kennedy is very strong indeed, and we expect that Wilkins Kennedy’s insurers will sit down later this year with Mr. and Mrs. Ames and payout the bulk of the damages sought.
We have seen the references to the filed accounts on this site, we filed accounts as per Mr. Ames various court statements, however given the national importance of Buccament Bay the Government has sought to protect the commercial information of Buccament Bay and has seen fit to remove the accounts from public record.
We have had to revisit the business model as we fully understand that investors were badly affected by the international financial crisis, we could have let this take down the business, but Mr. Ames felt it was his moral duty to rescue the company for the good of his investors.
The trust is not for Mr. Ames, it is for investors, Mr. Ames does not need to encourage investors to join the trust, he is fully confident as he always has been that his business is both robust and sound and has stood the test of time.
Investors are being asked to join the trust to give them additional comfort that their investments are 100% secure. Yet the trust is now being used as a stick in which to beat Mr. Ames and Harlequin with.
And that is why Mr. Ames is taking such a strong stand against RL and others.
12 Noon – Deadline – 22nd May 2014
Posted by Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 22, 2014 at 11:08am
All,
We will be hearing from Harlequin with their final position on the :-
(a) James Baker – disclosure of accounting information and £400m breakdown.
(b) Disclosure of the BCQS Buccament Bay resort valuation
After that, we will make a call on matters.
@Anonymous
May 22, 2014 at 2:30 pm
“Why do you think he has allowed Paul Walton to post as much negative information as he could from BFP?”
Anonymous the information being put up on BFP is factual and correct, the fact that it is negative is sadly not the fault of BFP but of the Ames family and Harlequin, Ames has had ample opportunity to provide documentary evidence that he is operating a viable business and he has failed to do so.
The information being posted on BFP, in the main comes from Harlequin themselves so that in itself speaks volumes.
Harlequin Investor Group
Dear All,
Publication of Due Diligence / Executive Summary
INSTRUCTIONS NEEDED – PLEASE COMPLETE SURVEY BY 12 noon – 23rd MAY 2014
During the last week, we have been negotiating with Harlequin to smooth the process to publication. Unfortunately, we are now at deadlock.
Our Due Diligence report has been drafted and disclosed to Harlequin in the week commencing 5th May 2014. The Due Diligence report is extensive. The main report contains 69 pages and has a significant number of supporting documents. Some of the documents are well known to Harlequin, as they disclosed them to us in the first place. The documents from the various Caribbean Companies House equivalents / Land Registries are public documents.
The contention comes with the advice we have received from the lawyers in the four jurisdictions (Saint Vincent, St Lucia, Barbados & Dominican Republic). This advice is the opinion of lawyers we have instructed. In the weekend of the 10th May 2014, Harlequin issued an update to which described our draft report as “strewn with errors”. Naturally, we asked for examples of these errors. Nothing has been provided to us.
Harlequin want until the 3rd June 2014 to respond to us. We are told that the “errors” will be pointed out at that point. Harlequin do not feel they have had enough time since the release of our draft report to respond. This is just a matter of opinion as normal due diligence has no set time limits.
In our draft report, we have included information from James Baker of Baker Clarke accountants which breaks down the £400m(“the James Baker information”). This information is crucial. It gives investors an understanding of where there money has been spent. This information is certainly confidential to Harlequin and provided to us under a non-disclosure agreement. We have been told that Harlequin will not allow us to use this information in our report.
Our view is that if Harlequin were to unconditionally allow us to use the James Baker information, then we would feel a short delay to allow Harlequin to respond to the due diligence would be appropriate. As we stand, Harlequin are not permitting us to use the James Baker information. Without this quid pro quo, we see no reason to delay any further. With this quid pro quo, we see a sensible reason to delay for the next week and a half. We are asking our clients for their instructions. We will act on the majority instructions tomorrow.
Re-Negotiation with Harlequin
We are putting a hypothetical situation to you, based on Harlequin agreeing the unconditional use of the”James Baker information”. If we receive investor support for the hypothetical position, we will be able to return to Harlequin and suggest a compromise. We would hope at that point that Harlequin would follow the will of the investors.
Harlequin Management
If Harlequin are able to demonstrate finance, publish a credible plan, then the next question is whether investors believe they can “deliver”. We have put this question to investors as this will impact on our future thinking.
Conclusion
We want their to be a solution for our clients. Harlequin are not our clients. We want to be collaborative, but not to the extent that our report is watered down. Our report does not need to be “balanced”, nor does it need to be made to be more palatable. It is a due diligence report, not a sales and marketing document.
We expect a Harlequin riposte at the unfairness of everything. However, with £400m at stake, we simply want a result for our clients. Please complete the survey and provide us with your instructions as this will allow us to move forward secure in the knowledge that our clients are standing squarely behind us.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
@Harlequin Employee.
“he even paid their interest payments for them” – WITH HIS OWN MONEY? IF NOT, “HE” DID NOT PAY THE PAYMENTS, SOMEONE ELSE DID
“most investors are quite happy with their investment” – AND YOUR NUMBERS TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CLAIM? SIMPLE SURVEY WILL DO
“Yes there have been delays” – IF THE ONLY DELAYS HAVE BEEN HARLECON ETC, WHY NO MONEY TO BUILD?
“Ames family good name” – LIKE “MATTHEW AMES”?
“expect that Wilkins Kennedy’s insurers will sit down later this year” – EVIDENCE? OTHERWISE SPECULATION
“We have had to revisit the business model” – SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE PENSIONERS & RE-MORTGAGE CUSTOMERS?
“Mr. Ames felt it was his moral duty to rescue the company for the good of his investors” – AND TO STOP HIM GOING TO JAIL LIKE HIS SON
“the Government has sought to protect the commercial information of Buccament Bay” – DOESN’T SOUND LIKE A “SECURE” INVESTMENT TO ME?
“Yet the trust is now being used as a stick in which to beat Mr. Ames and Harlequin with” – HOW?
Publication of Due Diligence / Executive Summary
INSTRUCTIONS NEEDED – PLEASE COMPLETE SURVEY BY 12 noon – 23rd MAY 2014
https ://app.icontact DOT com/icp/sub/survey/start?token=c1c640682ce5d3b7c6c6c289d47685d0&sid=303388&cid=152652 – SURVEY LINK
Of course the only people who can see the discussion points on the RL forum are the mugs, sorry investors, who have paid their £240. The open forum closed a week ago. Think we know which way this will go then.
@Anonymous
May 22, 2014 at 3:00 pm
Maybe because it was true 😉
Ames is being outwitted, funny to see this slow train wreck from afar.
Lets see the DD, then Harlequin can make up their own spin version.
Harlequin is now a toxic brand, it’s finished.
@SW
Jealous, eh?
If Marathon Man does release the BCQS valuation, well, let’s just say it’s amazing how much a foundation block can increase in value in a year.
OUR COMMENTS; RL YOU STATED THAT YOU WOULD PRODUCE THE DUE DILIGENCE COME WHAT MAY BY THE 22ND OF MAY, ONCE AGAIN YOU HAVE FAILED TO MEET THIS DEADLINE.
YOU WERE ENGAGED BY YOUR CLIENTS TO CARRY OUT WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDEPENDENT DUE DILIGENCE , IT IS NOW APPARENT TO ALL THAT THIS IS NOT THE CASE,
SEE OUR COMMENTS BELOW.
Harlequin Investor Group
Dear All,
Publication of Due Diligence / Executive Summary
INSTRUCTIONS NEEDED – PLEASE COMPLETE SURVEY BY 12 noon – 23rd MAY 2014
During the last week, we have been negotiating with Harlequin to smooth the process to publication. Unfortunately, we are now at deadlock.
OUR COMMENT; THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS PAID FOR BY YOUR CLIENTS IT SHOULD BE PUBLISHED UNRESERVEDLY, UNLESS YOU HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN ITS CONTENT.
Our Due Diligence report has been drafted and disclosed to Harlequin in the week commencing 5th May 2014. The Due Diligence report is extensive. The main report contains 69 pages and has a significant number of supporting documents. Some of the documents are well known to Harlequin, as they disclosed them to us in the first place. The documents from the various Caribbean Companies House equivalents / Land Registries are public documents.
OUR COMMENT; THEN THERE SHOULD BE NO ISSUE WITH THE PRODUCTION OF THESE DOCUMENTS.
The contention comes with the advice we have received from the lawyers in the four jurisdictions (Saint Vincent, St Lucia, Barbados & Dominican Republic). This advice is the opinion of lawyers we have instructed. In the weekend of the 10th May 2014, Harlequin issued an update to which described our draft report as “strewn with errors”. Naturally, we asked for examples of these errors. Nothing has been provided to us.
OUR COMMENT; AS A LAWYER YOU WILL KNOW THAT OPPOSING SETS OF LAWYERS WILL HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS, ESPECIALLY WERE DISPUTES ARE CONCERNED, THAT IS THE BEAUTY OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM, THE LAWYERS WHO ARE MOST ADEPT AT ARGUING THEIR VIEW TEND TO WIN THEIR CASES.
YOU HAVE ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION HERE, DESPITE HARLEQUIN STATING THAT YOUR REPORT IS STREWN WITH ERRORS THEY HAVE FAILED TO COME BACK TO YOU.
PLEASE PRODUCE THE ADVICE OF THE LAWYERS YOU ENGAGED AND THEN GIVE HARLEQUIN TIME TO RESPOND.
Harlequin want until the 3rd June 2014 to respond to us. We are told that the “errors” will be pointed out at that point. Harlequin do not feel they have had enough time since the release of our draft report to respond. This is just a matter of opinion as normal due diligence has no set time limits.
OUR COMMENT; HARLEQUIN HAVE BEEN OPERATING THEIR CARIBBEAN BUSINESSES SINCE LATE 2005, IF THE MISTAKES WERE THAT OBVIOUS THEY COULD RESPOND WITHIN 24 HOURS. THE FACT THAT THEY NEED 10 DAYS TO RESPOND SPEAKS VOLUMES.
In our draft report, we have included information from James Baker of Baker Clarke accountants which breaks down the £400m(“the James Baker information”). This information is crucial. It gives investors an understanding of where there money has been spent. This information is certainly confidential to Harlequin and provided to us under a non-disclosure agreement. We have been told that Harlequin will not allow us to use this information in our report.
OUR COMMENT; THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TO YOU BY BAKER CLARKE IS NOT INDEPENDENTLY AUDITED AND BAKER CLARKE HAVE QUALIFIED THEIR REPORT BY CLEARLY STATING THAT THE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THEM BY HARLEQUIN AND HAS NOT BEEN INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED SO FRANKLY ITS NOT WORTH THE PAPER ITS WRITTEN ON.
NO REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE ACCOUNTS ALLEGEDLY FILED BY HARLEQUIN IN ST. VINCENT. AMES STATES THESE ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN FILED, AND AS PER THE LAW IN ST. VINCENT THEY HAVE TO BE AUDITED, SO WHERE ARE THESE ACCOUNTS.
Our view is that if Harlequin were to unconditionally allow us to use the James Baker information, then we would feel a short delay to allow Harlequin to respond to the due diligence would be appropriate. As we stand, Harlequin are not permitting us to use the James Baker information. Without this quid pro quo, we see no reason to delay any further. With this quid pro quo, we see a sensible reason to delay for the next week and a half. We are asking our clients for their instructions. We will act on the majority instructions tomorrow.
THE JIM BAKER INFORMATION IS NOT AUDITED AND IS A COLLATION OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY HARLEQUIN AND HAS NOT BEEN INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED. SO AS IN THE ABOVE COMMENT IT IS BASICALLY USELESS INFORMATION.
Re-Negotiation with Harlequin
We are putting a hypothetical situation to you, based on Harlequin agreeing the unconditional use of the”James Baker information”. If we receive investor support for the hypothetical position, we will be able to return to Harlequin and suggest a compromise. We would hope at that point that Harlequin would follow the will of the investors.
OUR COMMENT; TO DATE HARLEQUIN HAVE NOT FOLLOWED THE WILL OF THE INVESTORS SO WHY CHANGE NOW.
MAY WE REMIND YOU WHAT YOU STATED YESTERDAY ON THE SECURE SITE.
“We may simply issue a redacted reported.
The BBC Panarama figures give enough of an outline. There is a decision to be made tomorrow. Too long have investors been treated as irrelevant.”
Harlequin Management
If Harlequin are able to demonstrate finance, publish a credible plan, then the next question is whether investors believe they can “deliver”. We have put this question to investors as this will impact on our future thinking.
OUR COMMENT; WHY IS THE CREDIBLE PLAN NOT INCLUDED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE? HOW LONG WILL HARLEQUIN BE GIVEN TO PRODUCE A CREDIBLE PLAN?
Conclusion
We want their to be a solution for our clients. Harlequin are not our clients. We want to be collaborative, but not to the extent that our report is watered down. Our report does not need to be “balanced”, nor does it need to be made to be more palatable. It is a due diligence report, not a sales and marketing document.
OUR COMMENT; SO WHY ASK WHETHER HARLEQUIN SHOULD BE GIVEN TIME TO DIGEST THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PAID FOR BY YOUR CLIENTS. YOUR STATEMENT IS WHOLLY CONTRADICTORY. YOUR CLIENTS INSTRUCTED YOU TO PROVIDE THEM WITH DUE DILIGENCE, AT NO STAGE WHERE YOUR CLIENTS INFORMED THAT HARLEQUIN WOULD BE GIVEN SIGHT OF THE DUE DILIGENCE AHEAD OF YOUR CLIENTS RECEIVING THE DOCUMENTATION.
IF YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE DUE DILIGENCE YOU HAVE COMPILED THEN PRODUCE IT. IF YOU ARE NOT CONFIDENT IN THE INFORMATION YOU HAVE COMPILED THEN SADLY YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN INSTRUCTIONS FROM YOUR CLIENTS.
YOUR OBLIGATION IS TO YOUR CLIENTS, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO OBLIGATION TOWARDS MR. AMES OR HARLEQUIN. NONE.
AND YOU SHOULD REFUND THEM THEIR PAYMENTS WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT.
We expect a Harlequin riposte at the unfairness of everything. However, with £400m at stake, we simply want a result for our clients. Please complete the survey and provide us with your instructions as this will allow us to move forward secure in the knowledge that our clients are standing squarely behind us.
OUR COMMENT; YOU HAVE A SECURE FORUM YET YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO OPEN YOUR SURVEY UP TO EVERYONE. THIS SMELLS.
AND YOU YOURSELF HAVE STATED THAT THE £400 MILLION IS GONE, SO HOW THE HELL CAN IT BE NOW AT STAKE.
GARETH PRODUCE THE DUE DILIGENCE OR REFUND YOUR CLIENTS MONEY. ENOUGH OF THE CHARADE.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
@ SLIMCHOPS, INCREASE BY 30 MILLION 😉
AND WHICH BCQS REPORT, THE ONE FOR THE MUGS SORRY INVESTORS WHICH HAS THE HUGE VALUE OR THE ONE FOR THE COURT CASE WHICH UNBELIEVABLY SHOWS A MINUS 10 MILLION VALUE. LOL
@BCQS
Could be both. That would be a hoot!
A “compare & contrast” would be an eye opener for some. And so Diddy Dave will do his very best to stop the $oodles one being published. If it gets out then that lovely Mr Amin may have some very awkward questions to answer – such as how a bare concrete foundation block can go from being worth $1m to $30m with nothing more than some weeds and a deckchair being on it.
Oh, hang on – they are “special” weeds!
@ slimchops, imagine if someone were to give Gareth the BCQS report from the court case, and imagine if he had the “OTHER” BCQS report, well, that would be most interesting, and there is also a refrigerated container on the foundation, so Ames will claim that there was $29 Million USD of fois grois in the container.
anyway it will be the subject of an nda most probably,
@BCQS
NDA – surely not! Marathon Man has cojones the size of planetoids, so I’m sure he’d publish whatever he has, cough, cough.
But first, he’d have to have a survey. All a bit of fluff for the clients, but it makes them feel involved. Much like the recipient of any good shafting.
You cant make this shit up. Ames has dropped Adela Chalmers in it from a huge height, probably Jim too looool, Amin is facing a disciplinary hearing at least if not potential charges, loooool ok so now we have two more to add to the toxic toads list and Gareth well he will not come out of this unscathed,
It his silent majority he needs to be wary of.
@ slimchops
Well well, it will be very interesting, I note that Jim would not like Ames’s accounts divulged either because surprise surprise he has qualified his report on the financial information by saying he got the information from Harlequin, but guess what Adela Chalmers was cough cough shhh this is confidential, so dont tell anyone but Adela was the acting FD, FD means financial director for Harlequin up to mid 2013 and she also is a senior member of Jims Team, christ please slimchops dont let this out, the poor RL mob will do their nut if they find out.and the sfo would have a field day not to mind the acca.
@RLs stance is an absolute disgrace etc. looks like you (Henry O Ware) are starting to disagree with RL. Could the cease fire be suspended.
@BCQS
You mean the Adela Chalmers who recently got married and used to work for E&Y (as they then were) in Dubai? The one whose name escaped a certain controlling director in the witness box last year in Ireland.
Well I never. You could knock me down with a feather.
@Anonymous not at all, I just gave my opinion, see that’s the beauty of free speech, it’s a concept alien to Ames, me and Fatchett are still close, probably too close for Ames’ liking. 😉
I bet Jane Davies has gone cross eyed flitting from BFP to the RL forum. “You would never believe what I’ve just read” bless dear. Bet it’s time for a group hug and a glass of wine.
You mean Carol, oi me lord, I leave the finances to me husband and that evil guy Mac who spurned the advances of me sister me lord worship.
That Carol, the Carol that knew little or nothing about her business with the exception of the commission they were making,
The porridge maker, me lord.
That Carol?
The one in Stilletoes and a mini skirt, the 65 year old crack head whore?
That Carol, the poet and she knows it?
Sue me Carol, go on make my day .
That Carol?
@BCQS Far be it from me to name names…
Oh sorry slimchops you are talking about Carol Ames Dave Ames wife, oh ok
The Brotherhood is closing ranks. So mote it be.
We have cut off links with the demented one.
Has Mr. Walton been having any cozy little meetings in London hotels with a certain Ms. Crozier 🙂
Won’t that upset Mr. Horny Corney?
Walton’s internet wife won’t care, maybe we should tell her?
Dear Henry,
Have you anything to send to me ?
Like the WW1 battle field on Christmas Day we have suspended the hostilities so you can deliver your bombs to us.
As Madness said, “tomorrows just another day ….”
W Bro Henry,
We bring you hearty and fraternal salutations and wish you well.
Henry,
Happy we meet, happy we part and happy shall we meet again …
Poor and distressed masons …
Taking the time from me ….
Point left, right
Left foot forward.
“is there no help for the widow’s son?”
The work of the evening being over, I will proceed to give a description of the manner of closing this mess down for good.
3rd of the 6th Month, is a special Masonic date.
It is asking for all 3rd degree Master Masons to Help a fellow Mason in distress, the number 6 when divided by 2 equated to 3.
33 relate to the rank of the Mason asking for help.
From: Harlequin Hotels & Resorts
Date: 22 May 2014 19:09:07 BST
To:
Subject: Harlequin will release information with a due diligence response
Reply-To:
Harlequin will release information with a due diligence response
Dear All,
Thank you for the overwhelming support we have received regarding our stance on Regulatory Legal’s (R Legal) due diligence. Harlequin does not want to become embroiled in “update tennis” but once again feels the need to clarify the sensible and measured approach it is taking in relation to the R Legal due diligence report, which is intended to be for the benefit of Harlequin’s investors. Clearly the due diligence report must be independent, it is not a shared report, but Harlequin’s contention is that it must also be accurate and balanced with proper context, which it currently is not.
OUR COMMENT; RL SHOULD PRODUCE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE NOW, HARLEQUIN CAN THEN COME BACK AND REBUKE ELEMENTS OF THE DUE DILIGENCE WITH DOCUMENTATION TO BACK UP THEIR ASSERTIONS.
Unfortunately, R Legal’s latest updates are also found lacking where accuracy is concerned. We note in their update dated 22nd May that apparently we are in deadlock. This is news to Harlequin because we have been corresponding and cooperating with R Legal on a daily basis. According to R Legal, we received the due diligence report on 5th May, but in reality it was not until 13th May that we received the report in full. This brings us to the biggest accusation.
OUR COMMENT; HARLEQUIN ARE ATTEMPTING TO UNDERMINE RL HERE AND RL NEED TO RESPOND HERE ROBUSTLY.
It is simply untrue and, quite frankly, puzzling for R Legal to state that Harlequin is not allowing them to use certain information when R Legal is fully aware from our discussions that we are committed to allowing full disclosure of all relevant information in due course once given the opportunity to comment in full on the report. R Legal have been told many times that this is the case.
OUR COMMENT; AS ABOVE
We assign no blame for the inaccuracies in the due diligence report as it was a significant undertaking; we merely requested to have until 3rd June for Harlequin’s legal team to check the hundreds of pages only received last week, so that we may provide as full a response as possible to accompany the due diligence report. We hope our response will include advice we are seeking from our local lawyers regarding inaccuracies in the report, but a few weeks is a short time period and might be optimistic here.
OUR COMMENT; WHY AFTER 8 YEARS ARE WE TO EXPECT HARLEQUIN TO COME CLEAN ON ANY INFORMATION.
R Legal agreed to wait three weeks at a meeting two weeks ago, so the change in tone since then is disappointing and confusing to say the least. We find it hard to fathom that purchasers would compromise the accuracy of such an important report for the sake of an extra week. Harlequin is therefore standing by this pre-agreed timescale.
OUR COMMENT; REGULATORY LEGAL WERE PAID IN THE REGION OF £1 MILLION POUNDS BY THEIR CLIENTS TO CONDUCT PROPER DUE DILIGENCE, THIS THEY STATE THEY HAVE DONE, SO THEY SHOULD BE HAPPY WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE, RL SHOULD PRODUCE THE DUE DILIGENCE NOW, HARLEQUIN CAN THEN COMMENT ON ITS VERACITY AT A LATER STAGE.
Without the opportunity to provide a full response, we have serious reservations about waiving confidentiality as a partial report with information taken out of context will not be beneficial to anyone. Purchasers need to understand all material information before making a decision as to whether or not to enter into the Trust and Harlequin will always try to be open and transparent. We see no benefit in a premature release of an inaccurate report for the sake of a short delay.
OUR COMMENT; ITS IRONIC THAT HARLEQUIN WHO HAVE FAILED TO BE TRANSPARENT IN ANY OF THEIR DEALINGS FOR 8 YEARS ARE NOW CLAIMING THAT THE RL DUE DILIGENCE IS INACCURATE OR TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT.
We understand that the delay may frustrate some purchasers, but it has taken several months to get to this crucial stage and the situation demands accuracy, not haste, especially when purchasers have each paid at least £200 + VAT for the opportunity to enter into the Trust.
OUR COMMENT; THE £200 + VAT WAS TO FUND THE DUE DILIGENCE, AS STATED BY GARETH FATCHET OF RL.
There is a clear demand and necessity from Harlequin for the R Legal due diligence report to be based on fact and delivered as a complete and balanced report with no bias. We therefore urge R Legal not to release the incomplete report prematurely.
OUR COMMENT; DUE DILIGENCE BY ITS VERY NATURE TENDS TO BE SLIGHTLY BIASED, IT IS MEANT TO BE A WARTS AND ALL VIEW, NOT SOME DOCUMENT ISSUED WITH CORRECTIONS BY THE COMPANY TO WHICH THE DUE DILIGENCE APPLIES.
Regards,
Harlequin
This whole thing stinks to high heavens, you have RL on the 11th hour conducting a survey as to whether to release the due diligence or to allow Harlequin time to dissect the information the majority of which apparently came from Harlequin anyway.
Funny how according to RL the vote was 50-50 an hour or so ago. with many amazed at the result, a survey which by the way is not subject to any scrutiny,
So we have Gareth Fatchets word for it. Funny how the vote will suit the agenda of Harlequin.
It looks like a stitch up to me and this has not been lost on the authorities either,
I see the masonic bullshit has started again now that proper information is being posted on these forums.
You just love the timing of this crap. Amazing what purchaser & agent reviews can do.
http ://harlequinhotelsandresorts.wordpress dot com/2014/05/22/buccament-bay-resort-wins-tripadvisors-2014-certificate-of-excellence/
Given Ames’ struggle with literacy, who is writing on behalf of Harlequin?
Nick Name was formerly asking if anyone has emails where Katherine (nee) Wooller lied. I have some in my loft somewhere where she lies about construction programmes and planning. If these help anyone, let me know.
I also have threatening emails from Terry and Ames.
I’d given up involvement in this battle, but that litigious, greedy bastard Ames needs to be ripped apart by the judicial systems he has abused all along using purchasers deposit money.
The Misrepresentation Act exists to protect consumers from false or fraudulent claims that induce you into buying something, or entering into a contract and allows you to claim damages in the case of fraudulent misrepresentation.
Fraudulent misrepresentation
A fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when someone makes a statement that –
they know is untrue, or,
they make without believing it is true, or,
they make recklessly
If you enter into a contract as a result of a fraudulent misrepresentation, then you can cancel the contract, claim damages, or both.
The Misrepresentation Act 1967 allows you to base your claim on negligence or on the fraud.
In addition, when a misrepresentation claim is based on negligence, the law states that the person who made the misrepresentation has to disprove the negligence.
In other words, they must prove that they had reasonable grounds to believe the statement, and that they believed the facts represented were true.
And that is why RL avoid answering questions from cash and remortgage investors about what their option is.
Their only option is to sue for fraudulent misrepresentation. Many early investors did take that route, and received refunds conditional on signing Harlequin’s most beloved document, the NDA. Ames had to stop any fraud claim going to court as the scam would be exposed under judicial scrutiny.
The good thing about the fraud option is that Ames the Bastard’s personal assets aren’t protected against criminal prosecution. The bad thing is that it takes a bit of dosh to sue for fraudulent misrepresentation.
However, and this is the really good bit, all the research and investigation has been done to prove the fraud (by RL, Harlecon and posters on BFP etc). The evidence for outright lies and misrepresentation is all over the web, and historic web pages.
The reason RL aren’t publicly disclosing this mastermind solution to the cash investors is that this would f*ck up their negotiations with Harlequin about what lies to include in the DD, and would therefore screw up the chances of some easy win mega bucks on SIPP claims for RL.
Actually, maybe that’s a bit strong. I retract that.
I’m still glad I didn’t chose RL to represent me though. I’d rather a lawyer wanted to metaphorically kick the shit out of the lying bastard who had defrauded me out of my life savings rather than one who was shit scared of handing over the DD I’d paid him to carry out because Harlequin didn’t like it. Some f*cking lawyer that is!
Its time that the Police moved in on this, purchasers have just been taken for another £1 million. This time by Fatchett. Where is the valuation of the assets to be held in the trust, not the BCQS valuation. The RL one.
Thought so. Its a disgrace.
In English tort law, an individual may owe a duty of care to another, to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. If such a duty is found to be breached, a legal liability is imposed upon the tortfeasor to compensate the victim for any losses they incur. The idea of individuals owing strangers a duty of care – where beforehand such duties were only found from contractual arrangements – developed at common law, throughout the 20th century. The doctrine was significantly developed in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson,[1] where a woman succeeded in establishing a manufacturer of ginger beer owed her a duty of care, where it had been negligently produced. Following this, the duty concept has expanded into a coherent judicial test, which must be satisfied in order to claim in negligence.
Generally, a duty of care arises where one individual or group undertakes an activity which could reasonably harm another, either physically, mentally, or economically. This includes common activities such as driving (where physical injury may occur), as well as specialised activities such as dispensing reliant economic advice (where economic loss may occur). Where an individual has not created a situation which may cause harm, no duty of care exists to warn others of dangerous situations or prevent harm occurring to them; such acts are known as pure omissions, and liability may only arise where a prior special relationship exists to necessitate them.
Now here’s a very interesting link to a statement by Harlequin regarding BBC’s Panorama and Gareth Fatchett. Harlequin is very accusatory of our Gareth.
“Despite the shameful and shocking behaviour of the programme just weeks ago, BBC Panorama is back and this time they apparently have a friend in Gareth Fatchett of Regulatory Legal. Whilst attempting to appear as if he is representing investors’ best interests and claiming he is working with Harlequin, he is in fact briefing journalists against Harlequin and providing Panorama with misinformation. After all, the greater amount of concern and alarm that exists, the greater amount of custom can be attracted to his firm.”
A year to the day (23 May) and how times have changed.
But read it for yourself at
http://harlequinupdates.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/statement-bbcs-panorama-and-gareth-fatchett/
Harlequin’s response to Regulatory Legal’s PR campaign
May 20 2013 by Harlequin Hotels & Resorts
“R Legal has made a number of conflicting public statements recently, which contain a number of falsities. In the circumstances, it is imperative to set the record straight immediately.
R Legal has recently stated that it is working with Harlequin on a “rescue plan”. It is not. Harlequin as a group is, however, engaged in a restructuring process. Neither R Legal nor any of its staff are involved in this process in any way.
Harlequin is increasingly concerned by the on-going PR campaign by R Legal, which is intended to do little more than create further anxiety amongst investors in order to attract custom to their firm.
It must be remembered that R Legal was the firm that, through the media and its own websites, encouraged purchasers to turn against Harlequin. Only two months ago, R Legal featured in an article claiming Harlequin’s assets would be frozen in March. This application failed but the intention was to cause undue panic and alarm amongst purchasers.
R Legal is of course entitled to represent its clients and advise them as it deems fit; it is not, however, allowed to attempt to jeopardise the investments of the remaining overwhelming majority of investors, nor will we allow this.
Further, R Legal has also tried to draw Harlequin into its campaign against IFAs. Harlequin absolutely has not and will not speculate on advice given by IFAs. Any view allegedly expressed concerning the suitability of such advice cannot be attributed to Harlequin.
Harlequin is currently engaged in assisting a number of purchasers to complete on their properties in Buccament Bay Resort and in sourcing external finance, both of which will dramatically hasten the future development of its projects and our clients’ investments.
Harlequin is not yet at the stage to release details about the restructuring process but will provide information directly to its investors very soon.
Harlequin sincerely regrets that some purchasers have found themselves in hardship and is doing everything it can to ensure it delivers on its promises.
A key message taken from the meetings held with investors in the past month was that lines of communication need to be transparent, and so it is with a conscious effort Harlequin makes the above statement, in order to ensure the minimum of speculation surrounding the spread of disinformation by parties with ulterior motives against the best interests of the majority.”
Read it here
http://harlequinupdates.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/statement-bbcs-panorama-and-gareth-fatchett/
But don’t worry because Harlequin, as of 20 May 2013, sincerely regrets that some purchasers have found themselves in hardship and is doing everything it can to ensure it delivers on its promises, purchasers are completing on their properties at BB and Harlequin is currently engaged in sourcing external finance.
HARLEQUIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES (SOUTH EAST) LIMITED
(IN ADMINISTRATION) 2989 of 2013
Administrators were appointed 3 May 2013. In view of the now very serious problems would it not be prudent of the Joint Administrators at Shipleys LLP to give us an update on their progress.
I see on their last statement dated 21 March 2014 that the Baker Clarke Partnership was paid £6,000 for producing a Statement of Affairs re HMSSE. And Charles Russell LLP have run up a bill of £100 grands worth of legal services.
Soooooooooooo predictable of Harlequin.
Why is the investigation into Harlequin by Essex Police taking so long? You can make a complaint to Essex Police in the following ways:
By phone on 101 or alternatively, 01245 491491
Online or by e-mail
By fax on 01245 452158
In writing to:
Professional Standards Department
Essex Police Headquarters,
Springfield Road,
Chelmsford,
Essex,
CM2 6DA.
RL need to produce the DD today – they look weak dancing to the DA tune.
Prove them wrong.
Latest piece of UK legislation news – With Effect October (Nice Timing):
“Fraudsters who target vulnerable victims, such as the elderly, could face more severe sentences under new guidelines.
Victims will be placed at the centre of new guidelines for fraud, money laundering and bribery, which may mean higher sentences for some offenders compared to current guidance, the Sentencing Council said.
Victim’s vulnerability will be given due weight, the Council said, citing cases where unscrupulous builders target pensioners as an example.
Sentencing Council chairman Lord Justice Treacy said: ” Fraudsters are in it to make money, but for their victims it can mean much more than losing money.
“Our research with victims showed the great impact it can have on them, so the guideline puts this impact at the centre of considerations of what sentence the offender should get.”
In 2012, 17,926 people were sentenced for fraud, a hugely varied offence that can affect individuals, businesses, public money and charities.
Fraud against individuals cost victims £9.1 billion in 2012/13, the Council said.
It includes Ponzi schemes, gangs targeting people using cashpoints, cowboy builders who rip off vulnerable older people, identity fraud and internet offences like phishing, running fake online ticket sites and duping dating site and social media users.
Private sector fraud cost business £21.2 billion in 2012-13, while f raud targeting public money amounted to £20.6 billion.
In addition, fraud against the not-for-profit sector cost charities £147 million in the same period.
Previous guidelines for confidence fraud only refer to harm to victims as an aggravating factor, while the revamped guidance places victim impact at the centre of considerations for judges and magistrates.
The guideline will come into force in courts from October 1.
Justice Minister Jeremy Wright said: “The upset and embarrassment of falling victim to con artists and fraudsters can often be at least as bad as the financial loss, and we welcome these guidelines which make sure courts will take that into account in future.
“Fraud is a serious crime and those who commit it should be properly punished, which is why Parliament has made tough sentences available to the judges, including 10-year prison sentences.”
Was Dave Ames in SVG this week, did he have a little chat with his mate?
All,
We do not intend to get into an argument with Harlequin over when they received our report and how much time they need to respond etc. Counterproductive and a distraction. The main issue is can a £400m business be accounted for and restructured to protect your investments. The odd legal difference of opinion is neither here nor there.
The overwhelming majority of the 900 or so respondents are prepared to wait subject to the James Baker information being revealed. We have asked Harlequin for this simple clarification. Yes or No will suffice.
We feel that if the answer is “no” our clients will support an interim release, subject to caveats about any issued raised by Harlequin’s overseas lawyers. We have received an update from our Saint Vincent lawyer. There are indeed matters arising. However, many of these are created by there being no public record of the various acts Harlequin claim to have happened. A good example relates to the planning permission and change of use for some of the land. We are told that the change of use was agreed at Cabinet within the SVG government. No one has access to the minutes of a sovereign government. All of sudden, Harlequin appear to have such access.
Our lawyer will be making some amendments and re-issuing an updated report. Is this material ? No, the bottom line is still the same – 19.05 acres is the only land properly registered to Harlequin in SVG. Not the 72 or 100 claimed.
We are only bothered about what can be granted as security to the investor trust. Nothing else. Therefore, although there will be matters arising, they are not likely to be material issues.
We will make a final call after the final surveys are completed at noon today. Thank you for your support
Final Confirmation
This morning our legal team handed Harlequin a final note stating that , unless we hear from them by 12oclock that they were prepared at once to unconditionally agree that we could use Baker Clarke financial information , a state of deadlock would exist between us .
We have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received and that consequently the interim executive summary / interim due diligence report will be released today .
Has anybody got any information about these so called judgments?
If they have I’ll buy them a pint of cider.
Where O Ware is Henry when you need him?
Someone has been impersonating Neville Chamberlain, and we all know what happened to him.
“This morning the British Ambassador in Berlin handed the German Government a final Note stating that, unless we heard from them by 11 o’clock that they were prepared at once to withdraw their troops from Poland, a state of war would exist between us.
“I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received, and that consequently this country is at war with Germany.”
Does that make Dave Ames Adolf Hitler? Where is the Downfall parody on Youtube when you need it??
And who will be Churchill? Or is someone lined up to be a marginally more successful version of Halifax?
If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.
Adolf Hitler
Certain similarities.
So what will be the final solution?
For Dave
A group of investors in troubled overseas property sales agent Harlequin has claimed a first victory in its battle to receive compensation from advisers who ‘facilitated’ their investments.
The Harlequin Investor Group, which includes hundreds of self invested personal pension (SIPP) investors and is backed by law firm Regulatoy Legal, had a complaint against an IFA upheld by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) earlier this month.
Though the adviser is understood to be appealing the ruling, if upheld again it could stand as a “test case” for other, pending actions against advisers related to SIPP investments in unregulated schemes, Regulatory Legal lawyer Gareth Fatchett said.
The Harlequin Investor Group is pursuing claims of up to £200m against …, including failed firms 1 Stop Financial Services and Tailormade, citing negligent advice.
They are also pursuing five SIPP providers for a perceived failure to conduct proper due diligence on their underlying investments.
If successful, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) could face claims of several hundred million pounds, according to Fatchett.
The group’s test case involved an IFA who claimed he had only ‘facilitated’ pension transfers into SIPPs, which later invested in Harlequin on the recommendations of “non-regulated agents”. The adviser denied picking the investments.
But, after considering the wider duties of the IFA in the context of the then-Financial Services Authority’s (FSA) conduct of business rules, the FOS found the adviser was liable for the resulting investments.
In January last year, the FSA issued an alert to advisers about SIPPs investing in Harlequin.
It read: “If a financial adviser recommends a SIPP knowing that the customer will sell current investments to invest in an overseas property, then just how suitable the overseas property investment is must form part of the advice to the customer.”
> Read: What went wrong at ‘deficient’ 1 Stop Financial Services? <
Fatchett described the FOS ruling as "quite a large extension". "It means that all unregulated investments where pension transfers were being used to fund them will be in that category now."
JUST FOR YOU GARETH ; )
http ://www.iwnsvg dot com/2014/05/23/high-court-registrar-resigns/
High Court Registrar resigns
ADMIN By
1 MIN AGO · LEAVE A COMMENT
Registrar of the High Court, Tamara Marks, has resigned from her position, I-Witness News has been reliable informed. The circumstances surrounding the resignation are unclear, but a usually reliable source I-Witness News that she was not on the job on Friday. Marks is wife of former senator for the ruling Unity Labour Party, lawyer Ronnie Marks. I-Witness News will bring you more information as it comes to hand.
When we strike, we strike hard.
We do not forget. We store up the hurt.
We return it with interest.
All,
Today
We tried very hard until the last minute to agree the unconditional release of the James Baker / Baker Clarke information. Let us make it clear. We did not want the James Baker information today. We wanted it after the 3rd June 2014, when Harlequin had provided us with their comments on our draft report.
Harlequin having “full intention to disclose at the appropriate time” was just not good enough. The lawyers we deal with at Harlequin are not stupid. They know what we needed. They clearly did not want to provide the confirmation we needed.
Our Interim Report will be amended to reflect the comments made to us by Harlequin. That is only fair. We will concede points and be reasonable.
Harlequin now have every incentive to respond quickly. They also have to make a tactical choice. Are they now going to sit down with us to amend the original trust proposal ? Are they going to seek to rubbish RL, claim conspiracy and seek to tell investors that we are trying to damage their investments.
We are committed to finding solutions for our clients. It should now be very apparent that every investor needs to consider all their options. We will allow the dust to settle and then return to investors with a menu of options.
Reports
The Interim Due Diligence / Executive Summary are on the tabs on the site. The supporting documentation is within the tabs on the site by resort.
The Executive Summary is a short document which sets out the issues. The Due Diligence Report is long with many documents to consider.
Questions
We would like you to consider the report before breaking our telephone / email system with queries. Let us have a period of reflection and consideration.
We will be setting out the options in the w/c 2nd June 2014. Redress / Trust / Liquidation etc
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
“The lawyers we deal with at Harlequin are not stupid” Yes RL you have got that one right. And it’s taken you until now to realise that. Perhaps the lawyers at Harlequin realise that you don’t really want the trust to work, hence the flooding of your blog with the negative postings copied from BFP?
Could you be one of the not stupid ones? About to be unemployed?
So who has this list from the DD – Will make interesting reading
The lawyers may not be stupid, they may have just fed Ames to the wolves as he has just been caught committing a criminal act.
The postings from BFP were true, and in being true were negative.
Odd but true.RL tried all day to get the confirmation they needed. Ames just messed them about.
Due Dil – why ?
Ha! He was caught several years ago and not much has been done.
There really is something wrong with the British authorities.
Well they had to earn their double the going rate salary 😉 Just hope it was enough to ruin a career for?
Or you could rise to the dizzy hights as a consultant solicitor like Mr Terry.
We were just coming of a train just outside London and we found a box of documents relating to ” Due Diligence” of a company or companies called Harlequin, they appear to be developing resorts in the Caribbean so we feel this is probably a good place to show what we found, especially for anyone out there who might be interested in investing in Harlequin.
There are many files to upload so please bear with us.
https://anonfiles.com/file/351d18d270fae8b8a5c7eff47a338fdb
This is an interesting witness statement from Jim Baker contained in the due diligence documents apparently left on the train, by a guy who resembled Simon Terry, but it was dark so we could not be sure.
Seems to be a lot of people suing Dave and Carol Ames in the Courts in the UK, wonder why this was in the Due Diligence, Seems like Jim is saying that Harlequin are worth nothing.
https://anonfiles.com/file/47fadd21967bd8aa58bad9e0d7a2e71e
Loads more to come. Will not have it all up tonight. But from now on we will put a title on each post.
All I can say after reading that statement from RL is WOW!….and WTF?
We found this in the document properties, of the site plan, how bizarre, wonder if RL have these documents, maybe they can have a look at the document properties, The path name says it all.
I:\BACKTOFUCKUP1-SITE\Site Survey\LOT PLAN_29 03 2011_REV14_Management ROAD MAP (1)
https://anonfiles.com/file/9eba3e582cbc82a791ec1335c084fe17
It gets better and better and we have hundreds of documents to go. jeez
This one is from Ames telling a company called Regulatory Legal how any judgments are against his RDC’s??????
Anyway look at the disclaimer in the letter from Ames, lol Jesus you cant make this shit up.
https://anonfiles.com/file/11f2f6af61863b07d93fc0b018d3b3d9
Completely and utterly insolvent.
This is a 70 page redacted interim intelligence report from Regulatory Legal Solicitors, it makes for pretty grim reading, we did not redact it, the documents are exactly as we found them on the train.
https://anonfiles.com/file/891a31ecf7464e00c9d4225308992021
These are questions Regulatory Legal asked Harlequin about the title to the land, we just LOOOOOVE some of the answers.
https://anonfiles.com/file/74acfcda3024d0dc73f553bb9dddbdc9
https://anonfiles.com/file/733e28ba8dbfe76d01d45a60beecf08c
These are questions Regulatory Legal asked Harlequin about the title to the land, we just LOOOOOVE some of the answers.
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/74acfcda3024d0dc73f553bb9dddbdc9
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/733e28ba8dbfe76d01d45a60beecf08c
Let’s hope the Local and UK press are picking this up, this is pure dynamite, it is definetly curtains for Ames,
Whomever the DD posters are: you have my utmost admiration.
Not all of the original investors are mesmerized. This is from
someone who was tangential to this massive FRAUD. And man
do I ever regret it.
LATER WE WILL NAME THE DIRECTORS OF ONE OF THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES IN BARBADOS, DAVID CAMPION BEING ONE AND GARETH RONAN BEING ANOTHER. SO IF AMES IS BROKE LETS GO AFTER CAMPION AND RONAN, WE ARE ALSO SURE THE SFO WILL BE VERY INTERESTED IN THESE TWO GENTLEMEN. AND INDEED OUR BROTHERS ACROSS THE POND. RONAN IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED IN NEWYORK. FYI 😉
Oops we named them, shucks, we will just provide the proof in a few hours from the Regulatory Legal Website along with a few other little bombshells, if I was Campion and Ronan, I’d be looking at getting out of dodge rather rapidly, Bolivia might be a good start, or the nearest embassy which does not have extradition with the UK or US. 😉
Run baby Run.
Who ever found these docs on a train – Brilliant find !! I am still not seeing the list of agents and commissions – Is that bit missing ?
This is getting really interesting………….
This forms part of what they call the due diligence left on the train,
The following link is to the list of agents and the commissions they obtained.
I THINK THIS DOCUMENT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
https://anonfiles.com/file/32603eb7a19c8d986100dbce382618db
Ames, I’ve got banks lining up to give me money mate,
HELLO WE DON’T THINK SO YOU DELUDED SICKO YOU, THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF COMPANIES FACING BEING STRUCK OFF FOR FAILING IN THEIR STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, MORE TO FOLLOW………….
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/3c6459991b97c58ed8419f4546fdd805
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/bd468da46c2e070fe3c7edc0411f87a8
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/3e5d4cf57db3b0cd6ee5918832bdc456
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/b52a02ef16c2c3b2337060b2e5328013
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/56c578c906266ffdf700a3de296ac574
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/8616f954aa680b9d4234f2126376a15e
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/0df355eefe45e36dfd7154b12a809943
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/ee5df51eac4b312f43891e6b7e49d8ad
https ://anonfiles dot com/file/640304bf92747f3b8eba880a43922523
DUE DILIGENCE REPORT BARBADOS
WE NOTE THAT OUR OLD FRIENDS DAVID PATRICK CAMPION AND GARETH KEVIN RONAN ALONG WITH DAVID EDWARD AMES ARE DIRECTORS OF HARLEQUIN BOUTIQUE HOTEL LTD. SO THESE GENTLEMEN ASIDE FROM AMES WERE A LITTLE MORE THAN PAID EMPLOYEES, I SEE THEY ARE NOW OF INTEREST TO THOSE SHINING A LIGHT ON MR. AND MRS. AMES.
ANYONE WITH A CONTRACT IN THIS COMPANIES NAME SHOULD CONSIDER GOING AFTER ALL 3 GENTLEMEN, WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH DETAILS OF MR. RONAN’S CURRENT WHEREABOUTS SOON.
https://anonfiles.com/file/3f65abf552a14260d0279f3a01607078
Big thank you for the details. The 70 page intelligence report is the nail in the coffin – insolvent companies, no building plan, no finance. Curtains
Mr. Ames you have a leak. Rats leaving a sinking ship, as stated your legal team are not stupid 😉
Just imagine if they had a little chat with the boys in blue to cut a deal?
What about Page 46 and the injunction ?
What else is Ames hiding ?
Where is Bob Story – still happy with your investment?
He will be with PHIG preparing a new £1bn valuation !
Yes thanks
By the way its StorEy, Makes you wonder who the fool is.
THE FOLLOWING FROM THE RL FORUM, WE ON BFP WERE AROUND ALOT LONGER THAN GARRETH FATCHET AND REGULATORY LEGAL AND HAVE ALWAYS FREELY PROVIDED INFORMATION ON THE AMES FAMILY AND HARLEQUIN, IN A BID TO EXPOSE THE WRONGDOINGS BY HARELQUIN, BFP FIGHTS FOR THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, WITH FREEDOM OF SPEECH COMES SOME NEGATIVITY,
WE ARE SORRY HELEN IF YOU ARE UPSET, FRANKLY THERE IS A FAR BIGGER PICTURE HERE TO BE DEALT WITH.
Posted by Helen xxxxxxxxxxx on May 24, 2014 at 4:24am
Just read to the bottom of all the comments…one/some of you leaked the DD and associated documents. I don’t even want to remember the utter disregard and lack of anything resembling humanity in the comments made about investors in general and more specifically those of us that are
cash investors. I feel utterly sick.
Shame on you.
AND THIS A RESPONSE FROM REGULATORY LEGAL
Sxxxx,
We used the Panorama thread as it provided us the information and figures to replace the James Baker figures.
It is very irritating that people feel the need to post our confidential information. However,you cannot stop determined people.
One point to note is that the BFP posters are not criticising the content. That tells you a lot.
THE INFORMATION IN THE MOST PART IS NOT CONFIDENTIAL, IT IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE IN THE CARIBBEAN,
AND YES WERE ARE NOT CRITICISING THE CONTENT, IT IS CURRENTLY BEING EXAMINED AND AN UPDATE ON THE INFORMATION WILL BE SUPPLIED IN DUE COURSE.
Could it be that GF is leaking the DD? How secure is a secure web site, not very it would seem. Is it still bluff and double bluff? What happened to the NDA? What if I had paid £240 for a DD that anyone can read, bet the lemmings aren’t happy.
When are we going to see the RL recommendations for cash investors? Bet poor old Helen will feel utterly sick then.
@ ANONYMOUS, We can assure you that Mr. Fatchett and Regulatory Legal is not leaking any Due Diligence to us.
One could also claim that Harlequin are behind the leaks in a bid to undermine the work done by Gareth Fatchett, we cannot comment on this matter, but it would be another good smoke screen on the part of Harlequin.
We know that Harlequin have access to the secure website and we can state that some associated with that Group of Companies have attempted to pass log in details to non purchasers for a “LITTLE REWARD” to put it mildly. Nothing surprises us about Harlequin and some associated with them.
We find this behaviour to be disgusting to say the least.
…
…
How do you know that that Harlequin have access to the secure website? How do you know that they have attempted to pass log in details to non purchasers? The only way you would know this is if RL had passed that information to you. In which case what other information passed to you? Is this behaviour not disgusting?
RL won’t be leaking. It will be someone who has paid £240.00.
Not difficult to find a dishonest person in this mess.
RL have done the work they set out to do. Redress is the next move.
Not a surprise and hardly hidden from anyone.
Anonymous – 12:21
It does not matter anymore. The game is going to stop soon. When I read the due diligence, if it is half right, Harlequin is over.
RL have enough about them to get it more than half right.
Robert, the voice of reason the Harlequin devotees still can’t see that it’s over.
I would be very worried if I worked for Harlequin, one because they will be out of a job, two because they will be linked to this whole sorry mess when it falls over.
Cash investors are screwed.
So J Rudd has taken over 3 mil in commission – Massive big house in the countryside of Ingatestone Essex. Now closing company down ….. Lets hope the authorities step in now. Disgusting low life.
Registered address.
R & R SOLUTIONS LIMITED
977 LONDON ROAD
LEIGH-ON-SEA
ESSEX
SS9 3LB
Company No. 07134131
R & R Solutions – Status: Active – Proposal to Strike off
Date of Incorporation: 22/01/2010
Company Name : TAILORMADE ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Company Number: 08079423
The following form/document(s) have been filed for the above company and are
available to order from our Companies House WebCHeck service:
Document Type Form
————- —-
Misc Doc GAZ2
Trumped that – J rudd is a one man band and is living off investors money. his accounts show money straight in and out – It was designed that way. He was used by rogue agents to traffic funds via his limited company to IFA’s to process.. Money for old rope. R&R show as creditors on the Shipley report for 33K .. No wonder they are prepared to write that off … COMPlAIN to companies house and dont let this man close down while legal proceedings are taking place.
That only applies if he is requesting to be struck off, you can’t if you have any legal action or debts.
Distressingly people seem intent on suing the financial advisors prior to taking down Ames / Brand Harlequin .Surely first one must attempt redress against the organ grinder before hitting the monkey …..
Just for Diddy Dave
I wonder if its the same http://www.michaelmccarthy.net/ who sang at the Wembley event that has been paid (BACS) commission of 128 K … One of the same I would reckon
@ Commission
Are you saying £128k of investor monies were paid to some signer by Ames?
Disgusted – To be proven but How else are they paying for Les Mis performance … My bet it is investors money for sure.
Have you seen the football ambassador on ITV ? What a high profile advert for Harlequin !
Andy T
It’s all going tits up for the toxic toad.
Amazing those people who have turned on him, after being overpaid for so many years.
Dave my old mate you’re like the little boy trying to stop the leaky dam.
And you thought you could buy loyalty – well Dave me old mate you were wrong.
How is the state of your family? Happy? Grand kids?
Will they visit you when you have a ‘holiday?’
Simon Terry, do you trust him? Big mistake 😉
Of course you can buy loyalty ! It’s just that Mr and MRs Ames don’t have the money any more to pay…….
Old saying Dave …. Careful who you stand on when climbing the ladder , you may pass them when you fall
I see the fat attack dog is winding up the lemmings on the RL site.Booting out Harlequin management, fools.
It’s about time your wife booted you out for all the ‘special little trysts’ with Ms Nikki or is It Audrey 😉 …… you dirty ditty
Jesus you think Harlequin management should stay?
The Ames family have been exposed for what they truly are, totally incapable of running a business or worse and those who support Harlequin can only come out with the above.
If after the last couple of days you still support HP management – Go see a head doctor seriously
In every chain there is a weak link.
In the Harlequin chain there is a loose Coggle …………………….
Dan – as a solicitor, should you really be hiding things from valuers ?
#naughty
The ironic thing is Paul Walton could have had his money returned in full, just had to sign an NDA. Why was that such a problem? Now he is the most vitriolic on the RL web site. Could it be he now realises he could have been out of this a long time ago and is looking for someone to blame? Compromise, it’s a fact in any business negotiation.
Anonymous –
We all know that Paul Walton would not have been refunded in full. He would have signed a Cancellation Agreement which would not have been honoured.
It does not matter, Harlequin is finished. There is no way that the trust will work on the current basis. The only way will be a complete handover of Harlequin or a liquidation.
A complete handover to whom?
A unity dream ticket of course.
Multi national (English, Scottish and wait for it … Irish).
Ames would have shafted Paul Walton,got him to sign NDA, pay a month then F***k you.
Was he not the one that brought Gareth along? I owe him a wee dram.
On the 24th day of February 2014 the Deputy Registrar of Companies in St. Vincent issued not one but two strike off notices for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd.
See (A) and (B) below.
Both are still publicly available or were until the publication of this post.
(A) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/3c6459991b97c58ed8419f4546fdd805
(B) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/bd468da46c2e070fe3c7edc0411f87a8
The Strike off notice (A) states that Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd is in default of its obligations in respect of;
(1) The failure to file Certificates of Solvency / Financial Statements for the period April 30th 2011-2013.
The Strike of notice (B) states that Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd is in default of its obligations in respect of;
(1) The failure to file annual Returns for the years 2006-2012.
(2) The failure to file Certificates of Solvency / Financial Statements for the period 2006-2012.
Both Strike off notices appear to be inaccurate, but we do not believe this to be a mistake. We take a closer look.
On the 19th of December 2012 Mr. Sam Commissiong*** filed three annual returns for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd for the years 2009,2010 and 2011.
See (C), (D) and (E) below.
These returns were Registered with the Commercial Intellectual Property Office in St. Vincent on the 29th of January 2013.
(C) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/dfe5d65aa3c40e3d515b5e3989f77fca
(D) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/0a85d04cdc236b3beffd5f65a4f01908
(E) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/6a61059bb4e9b1e3cede5f0321c28e21
*** (More on this guy later and the fact that the Hon Rene Baptiste, CMG, President St.Vincent and the Grenadines Bar Association has swept the allegations of perjury against Sam Commissiong under the carpet,)
At section (9) of the Annual Returns, under the heading “Financial Statements”, Sam Commissiong has stated the following,
That the assets of the company exceed $2,000,000.00
And
That “NO” Financial statements have been filed for the company in respect of the reporting period.
SVG Companies Act 1994, section 154 requires any company which has assets over EC$2m to have the accounts audited.
See http ://svgfsa dot com/pdf/svg_co_act.pdf for a copy of the Act. s 154 refers back to s 149, which is the section that deals with auditors.
On the 28th of December 2012 Harlequin filed “Unaudited” Financial Statements in St. Vincent for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd. for the financial years ending 30th April 2009, 30th April 2010 and 30th April 2011,
see (F,G and H below),
These accounts were registered by the Commercial and Intellectual Property Office in St. Vincent on the 2nd of January 2013. It has to be noted that the “Unaudited” Accounts for 2008 for Harlequin Property SVG Ltd have “NOT” been filed or more importantly had not been filed as of the 2nd of January 2013.
(F) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/f52fb74d56a5f595107a0a9f380c6eca
(G) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/265afabacadc12f33df8e11a3cfc4203
(H) https ://anonfiles dot com/file/4a12240c12a610ba0a3d69264ae92376
The law in St. Vincent however requires that the Accounts to be filed are audited if the companies assets exceed EC $ 2,000,000.00 (Two Million Dollars) see Act sections 149-154 in the PDF above.
The accounts that Harlequin have filed are “not audited”, so a question has to be asked as to why the CIPO accepted the Harlequin Accounts.
The Accounts are also to be accompanied by Certificates of Solvency, the accounts that Harlequin filed do not have these.
The Law also states the accounts have to be filed chronologically, yet the 2008 “Unaudited” accounts were never filed.
Can Jim Baker the accountant for Harlequin explain this?
We have issues and we raise very serious questions as to the filing of the returns accounts and Certificates of Status.
Let us go back to the filing of the annual returns by Mr. Commissiong.
(1) These were filed with the Commercial Intellectual Property Office in St. Vincent on the 19th of December 2012, stating as in above that the accounts had not been filed, yet nine days later the “Unaudited” accounts get filed.
Sam Commissiong can therefore state with conviction that he has done nothing wrong, by clearly stating that the accounts were not filed on the date that he filed the returns.
But what was the hurry to file the returns just nine days ahead of filing the “Unaudited” accounts, and over the Christmas Holiday period. Commissiong was late by 3,2 and 1 year respectively in filing the returns, so what was the rush?
Sam Commissiong knew that if he filed the annual returns after the filing of the “Unaudited accounts” he still would have had to state At section (9) of the Annual Returns, under the heading “Financial Statements”, section (d) That “NO” Financial statements have been filed for the company in respect of the reporting period.
Sam Commission understands the law in St. Vincent requires the Harlequin Property (SVG) Accounts to be audited. The filed accounts were not.
Had the date of the submittal of the Annual returns post dated the date of the submittal of the “Unaudited accounts” it would have put beyond doubt that the accounts filed by Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd, were not valid.
What is also interesting to note is that it took the Commercial and Intellectual Property Office in St. Vincent 40, forty days to register the annual returns, again they were filed on the 19th of December 2012 and registered on the 28th of January 2013.
Yet the “unaudited” accounts were filed with the Commercial and Intellectual Property Office on Friday the 28th of December 2012 and registered the following working day that being Tuesday the 2nd of January 2013.
Apparently the accounts were not checked against the annual returns, which had they been, would have clearly shown that the “unaudited” accounts should not have been filed.
Again refer to section (9) of the Annual Returns, under the heading “Financial Statements”, Sam Commissiong has stated the following,
“That the assets of the company exceed $2,000,000.00” meaning that under St. Vincent company law the accounts for the company need to be audited.
Of course the Commercial and Intellectual Property Office in St. Vincent will state that they did not have any registered Annual Returns for Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd on the date the “unaudited” accounts were filed and thus this they believe will exonerate them from any wrong doing.
But how can they explain that they registered accounts for 2009, 2010 and 2011 yet had not received any accounts for 2008, as is required under St. Vincent company law.
And then we have the very strange circumstances surrounding the issuing of the two “Certificates of status for Harlequin Property SVG issued on the 24th of February 2014. We wonder what phone calls were made that day?
If all the above happened in the UK or any other normal country there would be a major investigation into what appears to be massive incompetence or worse corruption on the part of organs of the state.
But we are talking about St. Vincent where the Government have stated that Buccament Bay is of “National Importance”.
But maybe Comrade Ralph should consider this as he enters his election months, Ames is being investigated for Fraudulent Activities in excess of EC$ 1,817,556,000.00 One Billion, Eight hundred and Seventeen Million, Five Hundred and Fifty Six Thousand EC Dollars, the amount that his so called “INVESTORS” have lost.
What kind of a legacy will this be for Comrade Ralph even more so that the integrity of organs of the State of St. Vincent are now being brought into question.
Will it really have been worth bending the laws of St. Vincent for a bent little conman from Essex. Will this instill confidence amongst future overseas investors and investment in St. Vincent, and will this not give the opposition and opponents of your regime huge ammunition against you in this your election year.
Unless you distance yourself from the little conman, you too Mr. Gosalves will become another victim of the Toxic Toad.
@Loose cobble. No chance.
Being somewhat of a “disinterested observer” i.e. I have no
skin-in-the-game, am American and am only tangentially associated
with anything Harlequin I must say that it is a national tragedy that
the leader of the opposition in SVG appears to be just as stubborn
and power-hungry as the current PM. What SVG desperately needs
if for there to be a revolt of Young Turks from both parties that form
a unity ticket dedicated to the advancement of SVG and NOT
personal power. Granted this is pie-in-the sky but at least would move
things forward for the greater good.
Funny how Gareth missed of the biggest agent in the “name and shame ” list of earnings one MRS Carole AMES
Now there’s an agent to go after if ever their was one lol
I believe the only thing that trumps the freezing order is the SFO and bankruptcy.
Bankrupt them, now that idea, I like.
But that would mean the people on the CLC case lose the lot?
Reg legal would control the liquidation as they have the most creditors .
RL have done their deal with the Irish Builder. Ames knows this.
CLC CPC RL and the Irish Builder have already carved up the assets, it’s a done deal. And all are working with the SFO, the release of the due diligence on BFP and RL simultaneously is no coincidence. Ames is in one simple word “Fucked”
SIPP claims are all RL are interested in. The rest of the lemmings will be abandoned.
Ames is all we are interested in.
And the hangers on.
David Campion and Gareth Ronan are from documents we have now active suspects along with the Ames family and ors in the criminal investigation into the Harlequin Group.
We have also been reliably informed that contra mundum freezing orders are being sought against Campion and Ronan.
More on this and the criminal reports being made against this pair soon.
Simon Terry jumped ship and is now squealing like a bitch, of course people will listen, he has enough intel to cause many problems for shorty and his family.
Karma 😉
This DD is truly gobsmacking, and I for one have waited a long time for some investigative hero like whoever is behind all these revelations to come along and show what Ames the Bastard and Harlequin and his conspirators have been up up to.
At the very least it’s a fraudulent cover-up of an insolvent / ponzi business.
Thing is, what now? Who is going to do anything with this invaluable info?
Where is that guy robert story? 🙂 🙂 🙂 he was always shooting off his nut here, now vanished…funny how that works 🙂 i bet many are headed into hiding….eastern europe? 🙂 🙂 🙂
I’m still here Septic. It’s StorEy by the way. You just don’t know which are my posts anymore. Good eh. Funny how that works.
Oh no, Mr BS Storey is still at large. With about as much credibility and personal charm as an apologist for the Nazi party. He’ll still be here posting good news stories about the latest towel animals being crafted by housekeeping staff at Buccament Bay for years to come.
@BS – Out of interest, and without squirming out of answering the question, what is your frank and honest opinion of the Due Diligence report and the associated disclosures that have come to light in the last few days? Do you think they reveal a healthy company run in a professional and orderly way?
Whatever became of the foul mouthed Mr Ingram?
“Apologist for the Nazi party” What are you on? You have nothing to add so just make something up. Pathetic.
@anon 7.36 he married Erica Broughton
URGENT ! The Leak.
Dave do you trust Mr. Terry, your ex in house solicitor?
How come we know about the multiple valuations?
And the ‘dirty laundry’
@BS – You are nothing if not predictable. You had to squirm out of answering the question.
Dave, you poor old deluded fool it’s over.
Do yourself a favor and try and cut a deal like simple Simon.
Did I mention Katherine, she loves to sing too 😉
And what exactly did I make up?
Dave have his bank accounts frozen in SVG
Double selling put your hand on your head…..
Lots about BCSQ……
Dans big bank account……
What a supportive son you have…..
@ Dave.This is theend – Are you saying that some people have already started plea bargaining? Is this true or just a rumour?
section 2
Cockspur st.
Section 2 of the Mental Health Act?
This section allows for a person to be admitted to hospital, for up to 28 days, to assess whether they are suffering from a mental disorder
@BB “”apologist for the Nazi party” That is what you made up. Keep up.
@BS – Comprehension has never been your strong point. I didn’t say you were an apologist for the Nazi party I merely offered the opinion that you had the credibility and personal charm of someone who was. So what exactly was made up?
But I do accept that the acts perpetrated by said party are of a magnitude far in excess of anything being discussed here and so apologise and withdraw the comment in that spirit.
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.
Where a person or entity does not comply with a notice, or when someone is interviewed and is found to have given false or misleading information, they can be prosecuted.
On 14 July 2008, Section 2A of the CJA 1987 came into force enabling the Director to use Section 2 powers at a ‘pre-investigation’ stage in relation to overseas bribery and corruption cases.
View Criminal Justice Act 1987 for more information.
Other legislative (investigation and prosecution) tools
Other tools and legislation we use include:
Criminal Prosecution: Fraud Act 2006, Theft Act 1968, Companies Act 2006 S 993, and so on
Serious Crime Act 2007
Serious and Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
Serious Crime Prevention Orders
Financial Reporting Orders
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 Section 2
RIPA
Imagine this little scenario, in one corner you have Harlequin, Bob Storey and Bob Ladel with his 40 followers. ( Matt can’t play ‘cos he is in prison)
Rather oddly, in the other corner you have several thousand unhappy investors, the Police and the SFO.
Take this a stage further. 😉
What if all the above, Reg Legal, CPC, CLC, Wilkins Kennedy, Jeremy Newman, ex Directors of Harlequin, the Irish builder,Dave Man, ex legal representatives of Harlequin and all the other companies and individuals damaged by the Toxic Toad all pulled together??
Swapped notes, compared documents……
Dear me, that could never happen……….. could it?
It may have already happened?
Just saying, what do I know….
Obviously not a lot
Hey I see your Bob StoreEy character still ain’t got it through his head you people are taking the piss outta his name. He even thinks he will be sitting in the sun in Buc Bay all cosey like. I have to ask you all, is this guy one of those sneaks that have signed up with RL and is leaking here? Has a few names he says with his treble or more postings. Anyway your police will be in very soon- I have that from someone who knows. They’ve got their files on a lot of the Ames supporters. Ames & co will all be on the Matt (that’s a play on spellin Bob one-storey) .
Does anyone know what successful business Mrs.Ames ran before coming up with the wonderful idea of HMSSE.
Maybe Bob Story will know?
Wow I now get two e’s instead of none at all. Even worse spelling, or is that some other play on words?
I wuz spellin so ya’d understand. I can spell obnoxious.
Self description perhaps?
Say ya are a popular guy around here. A kind multi storey wupping post.
RS,aka FDNRM , aka Sportingbob is so full of self importance that he thinks people give two farts how his name is spelt! He may be”popular” but all for the wrong reasons. Anyway, it’s his job to disrupt serious discussion about the situation with Harlequin and he will continue to do so . It’s quite pathetic .
And ineffective, sad old duffer.
Stupid gits. I had not posted on this thread for ages until Septic decided to bring my name into it. Now that is pathetic, and so are you two for talking about me. Nothing else to think of today then? And Anon, you obviously think I am important to make a comment about me quoting previous user names, which you even got wrong. Idiot.
Hiya Mr Storey. You seem mighty frustrated. Save ya breath- you’ll need to to blow up yer date later.
Nope, going to watch paint dry, about as interesting as the comments on here
Say ya need a paint job on the cabana already! Have you tried watching porridge set yet? An experience to come. Do ya take sugar?- or salt.
Ya daft old duffer,what did shortlegs promise you?
Even PHIG valuation Bob has sense enough to shut up.
Don’t you Brits have something called a duffer coat? Good for rainy days?
Loving it. All the attention. Must thank Septic for bringing me back into the spotlight. You guys are just sooooo good at feeding my ego. Might even resurrect the Harli Krishna appreciation society again. I feel so blessed having such fans
Blessed are the freak- for they shall inherit the mirth
REnfiled
The Brit definition of ‘duffer’ is an incompetent or stupid person, and it’s frequently applied to an older person. (BS Bob is in his sixties). Some Brits do like the US version of the abbreviation BS though. BULL SHIT!
The coat you refer to is a duffle coat made from thick wool with a hood and wooden toggles and leather loops to fasten it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duffle_coat
I think perhaps the best coat for silly ol’ duffer BS Bob Storey would be a straight jacket. Good for all of those who’ve endured his biased and misleading posts?
@REnfiled. Send me your address, I will send you a copy of my lates CD. Includes new numbers such as ” by the river of Buccament” , “money money money” and a remake of the Barbara Straisland number “guilty (no flipping chance)”
A straight jacket for a bent person- I just love your good ole brit humour. Say you think this storey guy needs a shrink? What! Oh 5ft tall !! so he is a shrink ?
@Mini Harker, he knows exactly what the coat is. The sarcasm just went straight over your head. Stalking on age now, and not even a birthday card. Junior stalker status.
Say your a real bona fide Walter Mitty storey. You and this Ames character have so much in being very common.
Oi, You Burger-Flipper Bob it’s Barbra Streisand
I’ll sue you for getting my name wrong!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
The Short Storey Mountain Quotes
“The more you try to avoid suffering, the more you suffer, because smaller and more insignificant things begin to torture you, in proportion to your fear of being hurt. The one who does most to avoid suffering is, in the end, the one who suffers most.”
― Thomas Merton, The Short Storey Mountain
There are 8 Harlequin Companies Registered in Barbados.Dates ..from 18.4.2007.
According to the Laws of Barbados, a Company can NOT be formed by someone who is “a bankrupt”….so how come?
Are bless REnfield, where has the made up English gone? Now who is the Walter Mitty with your pretend “ya” and “yer”
Are you talking about yourself? Are you suffering?
Its a quote ya moron. Hey I’m just trying to be as suffer-is-stickated as you. You English Storey? Didn’t know ya all had burger flippers in England. Don’t ya call then emulsified beef shitters or something?
Hey Storey you’ve bored me out now. I’m gonna take the Sun Seeker around the bay. Maybe you can join the crew on the east side junkets. I ‘ve gotta feeling you’d look good in a flat cap with a small buoy- sailor.
And I thought it was a cry for help. You do need help don’t you. I’m more of a KFC person myself. Burgers in the UK, more likely to be horse meat.
More of a Sea Rey person myself. Mind you don’t hit some of your own bull shit.
The freak shall inherit the mirth- love it. Think you’ve got this sad story chappy outclassed by a country mile.
He’s American, words like “chappy” and “country mile” will be a bit too old school for him, old boy.
Anonymous
May 26, 2014 at 1:59 pm
There are 8 Harlequin Companies Registered in Barbados.Dates ..from 18.4.2007.
According to the Laws of Barbados, a Company can NOT be formed by someone who is “a bankrupt”….so how come?
Dave Ames, during the term of his bankruptcies appointed members of his family directors instead. It’s as simple as that and quite common in England. There is a time period when a bankrupted person cannot be a director of a company, or hold various official office. MP, solicitor, councillor etc.
It’s been made even easier in recent years for the insolvency law to be manipulated.
David Ames has not been banned from being a director of a company (YET). Unlike his crooked son, Matthew Ames who HAS BEEN JAILED FOR FRAUD, and has been banned from being a director of a company for many years.
An item below was posted on the Regulatory Secure Forum a few hours ago.
So we would like to provide a few answers and allay the fears of those on the secure forum.
(1). We are here to assist ALL PURCHASERS and other UNSECURED CREDITORS with providing information about the Harlequin Companies and its officers, this includes the good folks over on the secure Regulatory Legal Forum. We all have a common goal, to seek the truth and find any solution for the good of those who have lost financially as a result of the gross mismanagement or indeed fraudulent activities by Harlequin and the Ames family.
(2) The Members of the Regulatory Legal Forum are not the only victims in this massive debacle. However we have chosen to share our information with everyone, lets not forget, the due diligence released by Regulatory Legal is public in the most part, with other information coming directly from this site.
(3) Members of the Regulatory Legal Forum are indeed benefiting from some of the very informative posts appearing on this site and the analysis.
(4) No one has upset our feelings.
(5) BFP do not cull their forum and allow anyone to post including members of the RL Forum past and present.
(6) Troll…….. In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
We would not consider our posts as being considered to be trolling, indeed far from it, we are providing and sharing due diligence some of which has not been made available on the RL forum and we are providing an analysis of the due diligence being published, We are also asking some very probing questions of Harlequin.
Lets not forget we all have a common goal here. And that is to seek the truth, and find a possible solution.
(7) The Irony is that for 12 months Regulatory Legal espoused the need for absolute transparency with matters pertaining to Harlequin,
(8) Do Regulatory Legal have an obligation to bring to the attention of the authorities any evidence they may have uncovered that suggests a crime may have been committed? Do they have a moral obligation? And why be concerned with sharing information, the vast bulk of which should have been available to the public anyway had Harlequin or the Ames family operated in a legal and transparent manner.
THERE ARE THOSE CURRENTLY ASSOCIATED WITH HARLEQUIN AND THE AMES FAMILY WHO HAVE ASSISTED IN PROVIDING THE INFORMATION APPEARING ON THIS FORUM, WHETHER THIS BE INFORMATION FROM THE REGULATORY LEGAL FORUM OR FROM OTHER SOURCES. OF COURSE HARLEQUIN WILL VEHEMENTLY DENY THIS, BUT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ALLOW AMES OR THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH HIM ACCESS TO YOUR FORUM.
——————————————————————————————–
Posted by XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX on May 26, 2014 at 3:38am
Within 12 hours of posting on this forum regarding the leak of the DD documents on the BFP site my comment was copied and pasted onto the BFP site together with a crass response directly from BFP.
Was my comment sent to them by a third party or does BFP have access to the forum?
I thought I was free to speak my mind here. What I wrote was carefully considered and edited to avoid being inflammatory. Sorry if I upset your feelings BFP.
I have huge sympathy for all the people that made genuine, straight out of their own pocket, investments with Harlequin.
That is why I feel utterly sick. What we have lost personally has been a huge blow, but for us it was money and a fair amount of sleep. Some investors have lost so much more.
Is that not a big enough picture?
Should the forum be closed as threatened by RL? How then would we communicate without the trolls getting access?
——————————————————————————————
May 26, 2014 at 9:01am
Hi Guys, there will always be some ass……s out there , if they are investors on here SHAME ON YOU ! But we need this forum to keep us sane and communicate with each other , so we know whats going on ! Please DO NOT close it ! XXXXXXX
——————————————————————————————-
May 26, 2014 at 8:34am
Xxxxx,
Anyone who is an investor and has joined the due diligence process has access. Everyone agrees to keep matters confidential. Some people clearly struggle with the concept.
We suggested everyone uses client numbers.
In some ways, it does not matter. It is no surprise the stance taken.
——————————————————————————————–
May 26, 2014 at 12:05pm
It’s not the stupidity that worries me, it’s the malicious intent. There are obviously some people out there that wants this whole thing to fail!
——————————————————————————————
A NOTE ON THE POST ABOVE, IF YOU TOOK TIME TO READ THE POSTS ON ANOTHER BFP THREAD
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOT com/2014/05/23/svg-high-court-registrar-resigns-suddenly-rumours-flying-about-harlequin-connection/
THEN IT WOULD BE APPARENT THAT THE HARLEQUIN BUSINESS HAS FAILED AND IS BEING KEPT AFLOAT SOLELY THROUGH THE USE OF SOME VERY DUBIOUS AND ILLEGAL PRACTICES WITH POSSIBLY THE SUPPORT OF THE ST. VINCENT GOVERNMENT, OR INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ST. VINCENT.
MANY ON THE RL FORUM JUST WANT THEIR MONEY BACK FROM HARLEQUIN. EVEN RL HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS “NOT” WE REPEAT “NOT” EVER GOING TO HAPPEN, NOT NOW, NOT IN THE FUTURE, NOT EVER.
Looks like BS Bobby had to put in an email to Blepharitis and Erysipelas at Harlequin HQ to get help with his posts on here today cos he’s out of his depth again.
Sadly BS they haven’t replied to you have they? I bet they aren’t rinsing out a Lidl wine box like you are. Isn’t is a UK holiday where you are? Why aren’t you out enjoying yourself?
What are the duties of the Registrar of the High Court in SVG?
@ TEHI Just like the TV program, pointless.
Who is BS Booby please Eyes?- is it that daft bloke called R Storey above? He’s out of his league.
Eye Spy – I told you that I married Mrs Broughton in confidence – I had a fattish and her and her daughter Steph are able to satisfy my needs
No I cannot be out of my own league. But I’m out of your league, by a long way.
But no one seems to like you Mr Storey. And as he and everyone else would no doubt say, that American kicked your ass in the clever banter stakes. I see you’ve been outwitted by a few though. Don’t you get fed up?
Poor Robert Storey seems to go through life being picked-on. Has
he ever wondered why.
If you ever watched MASH you will know about the character of Frank.
Some might say that BS presents himself to the world in much the same way as Frank. This classic clip sums it up.
Does it occur to you that I just love winding you up, and you fall for it every time. You just cannot help yourselves can you. Hook line and sinker every time.
Frank often tried that reply…
BS Bob was posting early today or maybe he sat their all night with his laptop waiting to pounce?
But he is so Narcissistic he cant see when people are taking the piss out of him. It’s quite entertaining sometimes. LOL.
I completely agree. That’s what made the character of Frank so entertaining because he had zero self-awareness and Hawkeye and Trapper would run rings round him taking the piss and he just didn’t get it. On the occasions he did get it, he would come out with some statement like, “does it occur to you that I just love winding you up”. If pushed he would go on to pretend to like the attention. The bottom line was that he was a complete arse.
Hello- I’ve been watching this Story baiting- he has some stick and always takes a beating but just cant see it. Frank Storey!! I have to say though I’ve never come across someone who deserves it more. He may have a problem with women! I’m not a doctor but we did have some friends in our dinner circle where one hubby was very unpopular. He wad just odious but didn’t seem to recognise it. Thought to himself he was funny. Well it turned out after a row at friends when she turned on him, his wife only “let” him once a month and that was on a match Saturday when he’d usually been out drinking with his mates all day. His nickname became wilt and he disappeared.
The really funny thing is that you only respond when I post under my name, but you do not respond when I use other IDs. You respond to the posters name not the comment. In order to help you all out I will not post under the Robert Storey ID anymore. Let’s see if you can spot my posts now.
@can understand nothing today, you certainly got that right. So thick that you do not realise the time on the posting is an hour out. What an idiot post. LOL
Bye bye everyone, now play guess the poster!
Mind the door doesn’t slam on yer arse on the way out!
I bet you tried to abbreviate ‘can understand nothing today’! LOL
@JJ – well even Frank Burns had Hot Lips Houlihan to play with!
Jesus Bob, seeing as you put it like that I can understand what you are saying. Please accept my apologies for such a crap post.
Why would anyone post their ID as C**T unless that is what you are?
You’ll have to try harder than that Frank StorEy @ 8:31am
Not man enough are you, you big wuss.
Bob Storey you forgot the full stop when you impersonated JJ
Oh- was that him? I think he has a disorder. Has he wilted and gone now?
No one has ” flounced ” out. He told you he is still around. You are just too thick to spot his other posts, old boy.
No it was me. I forgot to put the full stop back when I changed my ID. Perhaps I should use my real name rather than keep changing my IDs.
MPD (multiple personality disorder) I say, Multiple personality disorder (MPD) is a psychiatric (source hydrat.jpg 5717 bytes) disorder characterized by having at least one “alter” personality that controls behaviour. There does not seem to be any consensus among therapists as to what an “alter” is. Yet, there is general agreement that the cause of MPD is repressed memories of sexual abuse.
Now known as- Frank multiple Storey Disorder (FmSD)
Bob @9:39am
Your use (or should I say misuse) of apostrophes is a dead give away. That and your lax use of the English language.
Oh dear oh dear, “apostrophes”? No my old son, commas or quotation marks, but apostrophes? An apostrophe is a punctuation mark, to show possession or omission. Back to your English lesson, you muppet.
Hey Franky Bob, in your case punch- uation would be more favourable. Haven’t you got an Andy Summers shop too visit or something? Didn’t you say you were going to slink off into the night, go on, give us a snake.
Looks like Bob has put you all in your place this morning.
BS – Serious question… At what stage are you going to realise that your investment in BB is a dead duck and the whole saga was set up to rob innocent people. Will you be happy when they go into liquidation ? Or will you still be on here singing the praises of HP
Oh I’ve just realised, Bob hasn’t said anything about HP on this thread at all. Cannot understand why I thought that. Silly me.
Bob (FmSD) StorEy would argue with a speak your weight machine. A shill for Harlequin to the bitter end.
Well when the machine asked- “anyone here” he got a tad upset. On the non RL regulated thread someone (else who kicked his ass) nicknamed him Coco- Cabana. Should have been Coco no-coabana.
Yeah he’s taken some stick eh! He’ll probably end up on the Jeremy Kyle freak show.
Cabana, banana, bandana, fee, fie, foe, fum, whatever…
– a most boring Englisman
He’s being an shilling arse on TA now.
a shilling arse
Unfortunately BS has done nothing to protect his, or anyone else’s, investment. The really sad thing is that his actions could well have persuaded more people to invest and lose (not loose Bob) their pensions or their (not there Bob) homes.
26 yes 26 posts about Bob today. Things must be really boring for you guys in the sanitarium today.
Now that IS anal – counting posts about bob. But then every arse has its anus horribilus.
@JackaStorEy It’ll take me a while to top that!
The only thing that is anal is you having to have your arse wiped in the sanitarium.
Another 3 posts about Bob.
Things must be very quiet on the HP front today.
But clearly “for the inmates in the sanitarium” is BS so writing posts about yourself doesn’t count you prize prick
Oops got my 1st person and 3rd person mixed up. Silly me. Oh no I missed a full stop and new sentence.
Just beat me to it.
And the previous post under my name wasn’t me so I am guessing that was BS Bobby again. And, no, I really have no clue about what he is bashing on about first and third persons for.
Not the “it wasn’t me gov” post. Not very original.
OK, let’s draw a line under this nonsense. Everyone is agreed that BS has nothing to contribute and is an arse. Enough said.
He is using this now to divert attention from the very important task of rendering the whole Harlequin operation transparent and open to scrutiny.
Bob wasn’t putting anything on this thread until Septic started the sillyness. Then the trolls stepped it up. Aim your comments at them not Bob.
Well Bob could demonstrate that he actually has a comment worth making that is related to this thread. He could tell us his honest opinion of the documents released as part of the due diligence.
Jesus, the bloke is attacked for not commenting, then attacked when he defends himself, then is attacked again for not commenting on something. Make your minds up.
That was BS again posting as Reality.
Bob could demonstrate that he actually has a comment worth making that is related to this thread. He could tell us his honest opinion of the documents released as part of the due diligence.
Septic May 25th 7.16 PM. Where is that guy Robert storey? He was always shooting off his nut here, now vanished…..funny how that works.
Septic started the trolling, and this really is my last post on the matter.
For you, Enough Already, why are you interested in my opinion in the documents as part of the due diligence? Why do you think I have an opinion of them? Why do you think I am interested? Let RL and Harry O Ware fight it out. Absolutely no interest in them at all. Period
Reality Bob– Frankly that’s an Oxy- Moron….Bob
**** BREAKING NEWS ****
Excellent news. Harlequin report that money for 80 more completions is heading its way to Harlequin to be spent on “general trading” (at Harlequin’s discretion in accordance with the Harlequin Business Plan).
These 80 completions are in addition to the one completion already successfully undertaken (according to Harlequin reports).
This completion money will in fact boost the unique and widely renowned Harlequin business model and prove what a success it is.
As we speak, Ames the Bastard is working on apportioning the money and prioritising plastic glasses, Astonish Mould Removal Spray, frozen prawns, divorce and defamation lawyers (currently in negotiations to combine the two to save investors money), paper shredders, 5 star Trip Advisor reviews and one way flights to Columbia in one of the second hand planes gifted to him by his adoring investors – far more favourable tax rates in Columbia.
Now, if he said it was being held in escrow accounts and he frittered it, that’s very naught indeed.
All,
Completion Monies
We are keen to get a picture of investors who have paid monies to Harlequin for completions. We have always advised that investors do not pay further monies to Harlequin direct. Monies should be held in the client account of your independent solicitor in SVG.
We keep hearing a recurring story of people paying monies direct to Harlequin. Not minimal amounts, but tens of thousands of pounds extra. Most investors are under the impression these monies are held specifically for their property. Some have told us that they believe the monies are held in protective escrow accounts.
In one specific instance, our client asked us to request the monies be returned to our client account. This request was denied. We did receive confirmation from Harlequin that the monies were being used for general trading. Our view is that investors are not going to hand over more money for general purposes. They understand their monies are to be used to complete on their property.
Reputedly, there are 90 completions. Millions of pounds could easily have been paid over without any security at all. We have been told one completion has happened. That means that at least 80 people may have handed over more monies. If these monies have been applied to “general trading” then they could have been spent on anything at all. We want to track down these investors and seek assurances from Harlequin.
With our Final Due Diligence imminent, we want to be able to report to investors that any further monies advanced is safe and properly accounted for. We also want to evidence the one reported completion. If you have handed more money across to Harlequin (by paying into their Barclays account in Wickford, Essex) we want to hear from you.
Please call our team confidentially.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
Just for Harlequin staff and DA
Robert Storey is here to disrupt the threads. Who knows if he is here on behalf of Harlequin? Who cares really? He’s been using different identities for some time now on forums to bad mouth any criticism of Harlequin. Collectively they have a harebrained idea that posting tedious and monotonous retorts, homophobic abuse plus disgusting misogynist abuse about female investors, and allegations of pedophilia about investors who dared to speak out against them will deflect the unfavorable naked and nasty truth about Harlequin.
As we all know it has not worked.
What happened to FDNRM ?
Yes Eddie but FrankEly – but doesn’t “abusing” StorEy here make us all paedophiles…….. of a sort! Ho ho I think so
Porrrrr Favorrrr…..mi nombre es Colombia,
Gracias
JackaStorEy could you possibly be talking about foot-freaks?
@EL2 you just could not resist getting the thread back onto Bob. You just could not heed the advice of Jack Bowman. Well done you prat. Just a stalker with nothing to say apart from stupid rhetoric.
It is hard to have sympathy for “investors” who give/put in/donate any more money to Harlequin.
Lots of Harlequin staff crapping themselves, not only will they be out of work the HMRC will bankrupt them all 😉
Mr. Simple Simon Terry is being extremely helpful. Funny old World.
Dan ‘The Boy’ Abrams, surprised Daddy did not have a word about the Master you serve.
Does any body know if Dave Ames actually bought the land in the Marquis estate & does he have planning permission ?
@ Robert Storey 4.43pm
So, having spent the last few years posting your pants off to spin the Harlequin offer in the best possible light, very probably influencing some people to invest, you now declare zero interest in the due diligence that basically tells them they bought a pile of shite.
Exactly how morally bankrupt are you BS?
100% moral dick……..soon to be …just bankrupt
@Enough Already, the DD has not been declared yet. How do you know what will be in the DD? You don’t. Now get over yourself and bore off.
Harlequin have yet to verify the due diligence, until then it’s useless, Simple.
BAH HA HA HA HA!!!
The shit Harlequin come out with.
The company which is the subject of the DD has to verify the DD?
BWAH HA HA HAHAHA!
I know the Harlequin representatives struggle with basic function, but do they actually believe the crap they are told to write?
mmm, let’s see. Who uses the phrase, “bore off”?
Who would spell diligence incorrectly?
Three guesses anyone?
Burger flipping, boxed of wine Bob, sporting man, FDNRM aka a total cock.
Such a sad old fool.
What will he do when Harlequin goes down the pan.
DD like SFO is not reliant on Harlequin or DAame for anything.
one trick- follow them as the stained and sore-ly used wipe he is
Another recent development is HMRC using the Proceeds of Crime Act against an individual who had not declared all his income (Gareth Edward Steed v The Crown [2011] EWCA Crim 75). This was a complex case involving suggestions of illegal activities, but a key point is that failing to notify HMRC of a liability to tax can open the door to a challenge of cheating the public revenue. The result, in this specific case, was a confiscation order for £707,200, even though the tax due on undeclared ‘moonlighting’ earnings had been determined at only £3,558 a year.
In addition to activity initiated by HMRC, there is also the HMRC Tax Evasion hotline, which allows members of the public, including casual acquaintances and relatives, to anonymously report anyone suspected of tax evasion, such as working in the ‘informal’ economy.
Tax Evasion Hotline
A confidential phone line for you to report somebody who is not paying their fair share of tax.
This telephone number ONLY deals with tax evasion reporting. It does not deal with questions about taxes, duty or benefits, including tax credits.
Opening hours
8.00 am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday (If you call before 9.00 am your call may be answered more quickly)
Closed Saturday, Sunday and bank holidays
0800 788 887
… and for those in the Caribbean, that is 011 44 800 788 887
Pointless putting up HMRC hotline numbers because no one will call them. Because no one has any proof that Mr. Ames engaged in Tax Evasion, even RL know their DD is shaky to say the least so they too have produced nothing of any real relevance,
I’ve been told that The Ames family won their application in California, WordPress are appealing the courts decision but my sources say the judge was hugely unimpressed with the defamation against the Ames family.
Any Manchester United fans out there Malcom Glazer died today.
FYI…more please..sounds like BS from BS.
God – I hope that it is a jury trial. The comedy channel will have
material for months. Now I know why Robert defends Ames.
Neither has absolutely any self-awareness.
Don’t you think that was a little bit too quick Bob? You silly old fool.
Buc Bay built on a flood plain with NO insurance. Kids can now go free as well. Please can I complete I want to give you more money.
Holidays to BB advertised at £1,399 all inclusive including flights. There’s no profit margin in that. It stinks of desperation.
Meanwhile over at 4 star Blu you can book a room for US$120(double occupancy) Can’t see much profit there either.
Poster at 8.36, what are you on about? Too quick for what exactly?
Loads of margin to pay 10% returns, build resorts, give refunds, pay for litigation, keep the bunker happy, pay supporters, everything, BB won an award. I valued it at a billion pounds (unsighted to suck man seed)
Rumour has it that RL have told their acolytes (oops, clients) that the trust is dead. Well there’s a surprise.
And they didn’t bother getting valuations done. Another surprise.
£1m trousered for doing naff all. Excellent work chaps!
Plan B seems to be to get Ames to transfer the shares to the punters. RL know that won’t work either, but they haven’t told the acolytes. I wonder why?
That will leave RL to go after the SIPP people. Well that was the end game after all. Let’s wait for the blame game to start.
IMO the trust was always too good to be true which is why I never wasted any energy on it. If there was ever any merit in restructuring HP surely we would have seen rough valuations a long time ago. This would have been very easy to do and could probably have been scribbled on the back of a fag packet in 10 minutes. Instead the commercials have been kept as a closely guarded secret until such a point where they have to be released. Says it all to me.
And all for only £1m!
Who was it who called an Ambulance Chaser?
Oops Fatchett
Beyond contempt!
Isn’t it about time for one or two of the posters that was updating the
happenings in the Bunker and critiquing the RL secure site to give
one of his/her/their lengthy analyses. One went by the name of
REGULATORY LEGAL SECURITY FORUM, COMPLAINTS………
Unfortunate headline for what I think is good news..a local successful Hotelier buys the Amaryllis Property so as to redevelop it.
This was supposed to be the next Harlequin investment..Like the Alamanda Hotel..Thank God the deal , which was boasted about in 2012, never went through….The old Alamanda is nothing but a derelict eyesore, redefining Luxury in the Caribbean!
http://www.nationnews.com/articles/view/job-loss/
From Harlequin Newsletter Sept 2012:
“Our second hotel, blu St Lucia, is now open to
guests and we are expecting H, Barbados to open
next year and a further Harlequin hotel in Barbados to open within the next twelve months”
@Enough Already, any comment on the DD yet? That’s the one which hasn’t been issued yet and will only be on the RL secure site. Glad so see you took the advice to “bore off” ( using quotation marks, not apostrophes) lol
Sorry can’t hear you 😉
The only silence that is deafening is BS’s refusal to comment on the documents revealed by the due diligence exercise. When asked his view he just engages in some infantile smokescreen posts. He claims nobody can spot his posts when he uses other names but The Silence is deafening and Black Ball were both posted by him.
The documents released on the BFP site are NOT part of the DD. Now you prove they are. Surely you are not implying that people use fake IDs on this site. Well I never. Unfortunately you are too think to put names to posters. You have just been caught out again. Lol
That’s a pretty emphatic NOT there. So emphatic that you must be able to prove that they are NOT part of the DD. Care to take us through your proof that the docs are faked.
By definition: are not any and everything relating to Harlequin relevant
in a DD?
@Anon, because the DD has not been released yet, so they cannot be part of something that has not been released. No one has said they are faked.
He’s just as tedious pseudonymously……total loser
@TSID – AKA BS Bob
So are you claiming that the redacted reports are genuine documents or just fabricated by some trouble-maker?
BELOW IS AN INCREDIBLE LETTER FROM DAVID AMES ISSUED TONIGHT, ALLEGING AMONGST OTHER THINGS DECEIT AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION BY RL AND GARETH FATCHETT AND JIM BAKER GETS A DISHONOURBLE MENTION TOO.
Dear Investor,
Harlequin values each and every investor and will neither survive nor deliver investments without the full support and trust of Harlequin’s loyal investor base.
Regulatory Legal (‘RL’) disappointingly but unsurprisingly issued an Interim Executive Summary and Enclosures (‘Report’) to its clients on Friday 23rd May 2014 against the advice of Harlequin. The Report, hosted on a supposedly “secure” RL website, was posted on Barbados Free Press within hours and is now a matter of public record. Harlequin has now considered the content of the Report and we set out a full response below that we urge all investors to read.
However, before we delve into why publishing a summary of the draft due diligence report, sent to Harlequin on 13th May 2014 and reliant on inaccurate and misleading information, was a premature move by RL, we would like to make clear the difficulties that Harlequin has faced in the months leading up to this Report.
September 2013 – January 2014: The initial talks. RL confirmed to Harlequin that an investor-led trust is, in their view, the best way to secure investments by paving the way for external investment. Harlequin agreed to provide all security it could and work in good faith with RL to safeguard investments in this way.
February-April 2014: Harlequin had a series of detailed meetings with RL and its barristers and appointed an independent third party law firm, Pitmans, to advise on drafting fair and balanced Trust documentation to secure investors’ interests in return for a waiver of 5 years, in which Harlequin will raise finance and secure the assets held, including the flagship hotel, Buccament Bay Resort. Harlequin agreed to assist RL in askingall investors to join the trust by paying RL £200 + VAT (by completion of Pink Forms) and to have faith in RL to support the best interests of all investors. The Trust documentation was completed with advice from Pitmans. RL agreed to pay for this necessary advice and input with monies collected from investors.
April 2014 (end): RL informed Harlequin for the first time that it intended to rely on a 300 page due diligence document that it claimed to have been preparing since 2013. The document was to say that, whilst there are problems that need to be sorted out, the only option for investors to yield a return from their investment will be the Trust and entry into a Deed of Waiver.
May 2014: Harlequin was told by RL that entry into the Trust is contingent on RL clients agreeing that they have considered the Due Diligence Report. Harlequin see a draft of the Due Diligence Report that relied on out of date, inaccurate information and was spun in such a way as to mislead investors into thinking that Harlequin is arguably insolvent and they should not enter into the Trust.
The current situation is that Harlequin is still committed to working with RL and entering into the Trust. Since the Report was released, many investors have contacted Harlequin to express grave concerns over RL’s conduct, not to mention the quality of its Interim Report after it received what some are claiming to be circa £1 million in investor fees. A common theme is that the Interim Report is intended to be a killer blow to Harlequin and the hope of future investment returns so they can reap considerable profit from redress claims. There are also fears that Harlequin has been tricked by RL into urging investors to becoming its clients so they can liquidate Harlequin for their own motives. Clearly we would hope that this is not the case, although we understand the concern, especially when the misleading Interim Report was released in spite of RL itself announcing publically that its clients wanted to wait for the finished Report with Harlequin’s full responses. There are other reasons but we will get to some of those later.
In the meantime, please continue reading below for a response to the key points set out in the public information that has been made available relating to Harlequin. RL has indicated that not seeking to amend a section of the Report is an admission by Harlequin to agreeing to that part of the Report; Harlequin would therefore like to make it clear that it does not agree with the Interim Report or the draft Due Diligence Report in its entirety.
Executive Summary – Due Diligence
It is our view that the RL documentation we have seen is strewn with errors and therefore should not have been published in any form until Harlequin had the opportunity to respond. Despite Harlequin not expecting the Trust to be contingent on the due diligence report, Harlequin has always maintained that if a report was to be sent out, it is better to release one final report that all investors can rely upon, with all factual errors corrected and no miscommunication of the facts. It is unfortunate that RL has ignored this sensible approach.
Gareth Fatchett was clearly under an immense amount of pressure from a small number of particularly hostile investors and felt the need to send something out before leaving for his holiday. The unfortunate result is we now have to review the information released in the public domain, respond appropriately, and deal with the fallout which will no doubt further delay Harlequin’s response to the draft report. On 23rd May 2014, Harlequin notified Gareth Fatchett of the probable delay, explaining that 3rd June may be difficult to meet due to the need to seek advice on certain elements from overseas lawyers. Mr Fatchett’s response was:
“You take as long as you need to. We understand that the overseas work can take a little more time.”
We would remind investors that Harlequin only received RL’s draft report on 13th May 2014. On receipt, Harlequin explained it would take at least 3 weeks to go through the draft, collate comments from UK-based and overseas advisors, and report back on any inaccuracies. In truth, we had not expected to find as many inaccurate statements and assumptions as the report actually contained, but every effort is being made to complete the response as quickly as possible.
With this in mind, we wish to make it clear to all purchasers that Harlequin’s response may not be available to RL until later in June 2014. We have little control over the length of time it will take for our overseas lawyers to revert to us on the issues we are putting to them, especially where there are numerous significant errors in the information received, but we will do what we can to ensure the delay is minimal.
Defects/Errors
One of the criticisms that Gareth Fatchett has levied at Harlequin is that we have not identified the defects/errors in the draft report sent to Harlequin.The reason for this is that Harlequin does not want to provide a piecemeal, limited response and instead wants to provide a full and detailed collated response. RL has even gone as far as suggesting that this illustrates there are no such defects. There are too many issues to raise in this statement and we shall let our response speak for itself when finalised; however, by way of example, we can confirm that Mr Fatchett’s own solicitor in St Vincent & The Grenadines has withdrawn his 14 page report which was annexed to the draft Due Diligence Report received by Harlequin earlier this month. This is due to the fact that this alone contained many errors as to the correct legal position on the island. The errors included, but are not limited to, incorrect details of judgments entered against Harlequin, incorrect statements regarding ownership of land and the ability to have land purchased by a third party if not registered. This general misunderstanding of the situation and lack of liaison with Harlequin’s advisors resulted in misconceptions which RL sought to seize on. In fact, any outstanding issues in St Vincent & The Grenadines are agreed to be nothing more than minor conveyancing defects.
Breach of Confidential Information
One of the main issues that Harlequin has with the draft and interim reports from RL is the fact that they both contain confidential information sent to RL by or via Harlequin in accordance with a Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement. Harlequin and its investors have endured the severe harm of “Harlecon” and other libellous outlets, so we enter into such agreements from time to time in good faith to ensure that Harlequin is protected. For the record, Harlecon was set up and run by Jeremy Newman, then a Wilkins Kennedy accountant, and a full apology was received in the settlement of defamation proceedings against Mr Newman and Wilkins Kennedy.
Harlequin has stated, both privately and publically, that it intends to allow the use of relevant documents and information sent to RL under the confidentiality agreement when we have responded in full on the content of the draft due diligence report. Notwithstanding these assurances, RL has not only led investors to believe that consent is going to be withheld but it has published some of the material in breach of the confidentiality agreement.
The Report and, as will soon be clear, the main due diligence report from RL are selective in what they show and the direction in which they try to lead the reader. Much has been made of confidentiality and yet RL has chosen to show some of the material that is clearly confidential but not all. For example, the interim Report discloses the RLB valuation report but not the BCQS valuation report. RL has both and is well aware that the BCQS report supersedes the RLB report.
This cynical and rather unprofessional approach to its obligations under the confidentiality agreement supports Harlequin’s concerns about releasing material to RL, with or without the agreement in place. These documents are now on “Barbados Free Press”, a fringe blogging website we know Gareth Fatchett monitors closely, and are available for the public to view at any time.
One such document is an unsigned draft witness statement by Jim Baker. This statement was prepared by Mr Baker for confidential use in other proceedings. In order to be helpful, Mr Baker confidentially sent the draft to Gareth Fatchett. It is unsigned and not in its final form. As a solicitor, Mr Fatchett will also be aware that a document prepared for one set of proceedings should not be used in any other proceedings without permission of the court. Astoundingly, this confidential, incomplete document was deemed to be an acceptable document to release with RL’s interim Report and has of course found its way onto Barbados Free Press.
RL has requested on numerous occasions to be provided with a full copy of our investor database. We have rejected these approaches for a number of reasons, not least data protection.
We firmly believe that the above demonstrates that Harlequin is correct to be cautious about entrusting commercially sensitive information to RL. It seems that the firm has little regard for its duty of confidentiality towards Harlequin and we can only hope the same duty it owes to its clients is better served.
Accounting Information
In the interim Report and various updates, RL has made a great deal of the importance of Jim Baker’s figures. We agree that Mr Baker’s figures are important, although the information being relied on by RL was prepared in 2012 and is still to date unaudited and cannot therefore be relied on by RL or clients as accurate. We feel it is right to point out that Mr Baker was supposed to be undertaking a review of the figures and delivery of a complete accounts package, which was agreed to be funded by RL. Mr Fatchett and Harlequin acknowledged that some of the accounts needed to be brought up to date for the Resort Development Companies and the intention was for Baker Clarke to carry out the work required to achieve this over a 6 week period, funded by RL from the sums paid by investors.
Sadly, Mr Fatchett had a last minute change of heart on this, citing spurious reasons for his change of mind and leaving Harlequin in a position where there was no funding available for the work and no time to achieve it prior to the release of the Due Diligence Report (Harlequin will however undertake production of the Accounts separately, which will take more time). We are not saying that this was an intentional ploy to enable RL to state that the financial accounting for the Resort Development Companies was poor, but we have to question Mr Fatchett on his motives for promising to fund the exercise and withdrawing the offer at the eleventh hour. To date, Mr Fatchett, when pressed, has failed to give a cogent explanation on this point.
There are plenty of examples of how the Report is selective in how it conveys information. This is clear from the text itself when examined closely. An example of this is where the Report states that it has information from Jim Baker that it cannot disclose but which would put some of the financial data into context regarding how the investor payments have been spent. Despite this, RL has still decided to report on the data it can report on with no context. This is one of the reasons why Harlequin sought to discourage RL from reporting on its findings until it had Harlequin’s response and was able to use all of the data available.
Panorama Letter
It is interesting that RL refers to the Jim Baker spreadsheet as contained in the document that Harlequin sent to Panorama last year. The Panorama letter, which was expected to be a confidential communication between Harlequin and the BBC, was leaked and planted on an anonymous blog, presumably to pressurise Harlequin into waiving confidentiality. This is not a practice that Harlequin endorses or reacts positively to, particularly when disclosure has been agreed on the aforementioned conditions.
The Trust
Harlequin wants investors to understand that, with or without RL, the trust can proceed. Harlequin has been clearly advised that its most valuable property can be securitised and therefore the initial idea of providing such assets to secure investor monies is a reality. We would prefer to continue working with RL but only if the firm can show that it is working with us and not against us and our investors’ best interests. The firm’s recent activity and failure to listen to Harlequin’s reasonable requests to delay reporting until the due diligence report’s errors are rectified do leave us wondering about its true motives. Further evidence of this is demonstrated by RL’s recent biased survey questions, which are clearly designed to elicit the results that it is after.
On the subject of the use of the investor trust payments, investors should understand that RL has received thousands of payments of £200 plus VAT. Harlequin has requested confirmation of the amount collected and full transparency in spending, etc., but unfortunately this information has not been forthcoming from RL. Harlequin feels extremely let down by RL’s perceived misrepresentation as Harlequin directed thousands of investors to RL to enter into Pink Forms and pay monies to join the trust. Harlequin encouraged investors to instruct RL to make the payments on the clear understanding that the firm would be using the payments to pay for professional fees to assist the Harlequin recovery, including, but not limited to:
– valuations at each of the sites (rather than demand and seek to rely on Harlequin’s complete valuations);
– preparation of accounting information;
– financial due diligence report to attract external finance;
– Pitmans’ fees (of which 80% remains outstanding).
What is clear is that RL has received a significant amount of money from Harlequin’s investors on the basis that the money would be used (as confirmed by Gareth Fatchett at investor seminars) to assist in the set up and entry into the proposed Harlequin Investor Trust. It is clear now that this has not been done.
We do know that Regulatory Legal instructed an insolvency restructuring solicitor in Grand Cayman to prepare a report, which begs the question, has Regulatory legal genuinely sought to set up the Trust or was this a smokescreen to generate funds with which to “rescue” Harlequin after forcing it into liquidation?
Harlequin understands that a growing number of investors are losing confidence in RL due to their perceived negative agenda. Indeed, Harlequin is spending a great deal of time attempting to stop investors taking action against RL for return of monies that are now believed to have been obtained under false pretences. As stated above, Harlequin remains committed to working with RL to enter into the investor Trust provided RL can demonstrate that it is equally committed to achieving the same result.
Completions
Harlequin understands that RL is now telling its clients not to proceed with investor completions as Harlequin is using sale monies to assist with the running of its business. Harlequin has indeed put completion monies received to good use by investing in the resorts and the Harlequin business. Such investment has added significant value to the resorts. RL has been fully aware of this since the first meeting in 2013 and only chooses to make an issue of this now. Harlequin has recently completed on its first property at Buccament Bay Resort by transferring legal title to a purchaser and has many more completions in the pipeline. A more detailed statement about this will follow.
Conclusion
The interim Report states that RL “does not see how any investor can make an informed decision without” the financial information showing how the £400m has been invested. Harlequin agrees with this which is why it has always asserted that no report should be published until all of the facts are available for publication. Despite this, RL could not resist the temptation to publish an interim document, which is meaningless without the context required to help investors make the decision as to whether or not to enter the trust.
The advice and conclusions reached in the Report are, in our opinion, naïve and based on misinformation. After all of this time, we cannot fathom why. The Report’s conclusions are alarmist and extend to personal attacks on the Ames family, which is not considered necessary in a supposedly factual report assessing whether or not to enter into an investor trust. We have now reached an impasse with RL that we hope to navigate through. If not, we hope we have proved by this more detailed response that Harlequin is committed to fighting for its investors and providing the best future possible for its investors. As we have said above, the trust can still go ahead with the security intended to be used to protect investors. Whether or not this is with RL is yet to be seen.
Best regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
Wots wrong wiv me wriitn this stuff? Ass long as I donna mention the 50% of investors money disappearing into HMSEE and not into property, and Oh the missing £50 million- wots wong?
DAmes
What a pile of rubbish……rot in hell Dave Ames…rot in hell !!
Ambulance for Mr Fatchett!
Perhaps GF would have been wiser to have regulated his blog with a bit more thought. He allowed his attack dogs to run wild, flit from the RL forum and the BFP blog, causing mayhem. Is he regretting peace breaking out in the desert? Wonder how his SIPP claim will look with a complaint to the SRA hovering over him? Wonder if any of the HP list of posters requested of Word Press will have GF finger prints on them?
Good Grief – They BOTH are not someone you’d invite
home to meet your mother.
Reportedly from Mr Ames..”Harlequin has indeed put completion monies received to good use by investing in the resorts and the Harlequin business. Such investment has added significant value to the resorts.”
Why does he keep referring to “resorts”, when there is only one partially completed resort at Buccament Bay? What significant value has been added to Merricks, Marquis and the ones in Dominican Republic?
And why pray God is he so proud to state that ONE (yes 1) investor, out of some 6000,after more than 7 years has received title to their property at Buccament Bay.
This letter is even more interesting in many ways, than the ‘Interim DD Report, presented by RL.
So any guesses as to who the one investor who has completed is?
BELOW IS AN INCREDIBLE LETTER FROM DAVID AMES ISSUED TONIGHT, ALLEGING AMONGST OTHER THINGS DECEIT AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION BY RL AND GARETH FATCHETT AND JIM BAKER GETS A DISHONOURABLE MENTION TOO.
Dear Investor,
Harlequin values each and every investor and will neither survive nor deliver investments without the full support and trust of Harlequin’s loyal investor base.
OUR COMMENT; ONE LOOK AT THE RL FORUM QUESTIONS THE DELUDED TOAD’S STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS “LOYAL INVESTOR BASE”
BELOW IS ONE OF MANY ATYPICAL COMMENTS.
May 28, 2014 at 9:20am
“I would like to say that i am shocked by this news but to be perfectly honest nothing about this man nor the depths in which he will stoop would surprise me.
Yet again DA makes a massive mistake only succeeding in ensuring investors have even less faith & hammering home the need to remove DA from the hub if there would ever be a going forward plan.”
Regulatory Legal (‘RL’) disappointingly but unsurprisingly issued an Interim Executive Summary and Enclosures (‘Report’) to its clients on Friday 23rd May 2014 against the advice of Harlequin. The Report, hosted on a supposedly “secure” RL website, was posted on Barbados Free Press within hours and is now a matter of public record. Harlequin has now considered the content of the Report and we set out a full response below that we urge all investors to read.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES WERE YOU HOPING TO HIDE THE INFORMATION.???????? AND WE SAY TOUGH SHIT THAT THIS AND THE OTHER DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
However, before we delve into why publishing a summary of the draft due diligence report, sent to Harlequin on 13th May 2014 and reliant on inaccurate and misleading information, was a premature move by RL, we would like to make clear the difficulties that Harlequin has faced in the months leading up to this Report.
OUR COMMENT; WHAT ABOUT COMING CLEAN ON THE DIFFICULTIES THAT HARLEQUIN HAS FACED SINCE THE DELUDED DWARF BEGAN THIS JOURNEY 8 YEARS AGO.
September 2013 – January 2014: The initial talks. RL confirmed to Harlequin that an investor-led trust is, in their view, the best way to secure investments by paving the way for external investment. Harlequin agreed to provide all security it could and work in good faith with RL to safeguard investments in this way.
February-April 2014: Harlequin had a series of detailed meetings with RL and its barristers and appointed an independent third party law firm, Pitmans, to advise on drafting fair and balanced Trust documentation to secure investors’ interests in return for a waiver of 5 years, in which Harlequin will raise finance and secure the assets held, including the flagship hotel, Buccament Bay Resort. Harlequin agreed to assist RL in asking all investors to join the trust by paying RL £200 + VAT (by completion of Pink Forms) and to have faith in RL to support the best interests of all investors. The Trust documentation was completed with advice from Pitmans. RL agreed to pay for this necessary advice and input with monies collected from investors.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES SURELY YOU MEAN MAY RAISE FINANCE RATHER THAN WILL AS YOU STATE ABOVE. GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE FAILED SO MANY TIMES IN THE PAST.
RL STATED THAT THEY AGREED TO PAY FOR THE PITMANS ADVICE FROM THE FUNDS FROM THEIR OFFICE ACCOUNT AND “NOT” FROM THEIR CLIENTS.
THE RL CLIENTS INSTRUCTED RL TO CARRY OUT DUE DILIGENCE AND PAID FOR THIS AND THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY RL.
April 2014 (end): RL informed Harlequin for the first time that it intended to rely on a 300 page due diligence document that it claimed to have been preparing since 2013. The document was to say that, whilst there are problems that need to be sorted out, the only option for investors to yield a return from their investment will be the Trust and entry into a Deed of Waiver.;
OUR COMMENT; THE STATEMENT ABOVE NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY THE AUTHORITIES, AMES IS CLAIMING HERE THAT
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT WERE COLLUDING WITH HARLEQUIN TO SAVE THE BUSINESS AND IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT WAS CONTAINED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE, AMES IS CLAIMING THAT GARETH FATCHETT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED AND ENCOURAGED THE INVESTORS TO JOIN THE TRUST.
THIS IS ALARMING.
May 2014: Harlequin was told by RL that entry into the Trust is contingent on RL clients agreeing that they have considered the Due Diligence Report. Harlequin see a draft of the Due Diligence Report that relied on out of date, inaccurate information and was spun in such a way as to mislead investors into thinking that Harlequin is arguably insolvent and they should not enter into the Trust.
OUR COMMENT; THEY HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
The current situation is that Harlequin is still committed to working with RL and entering into the Trust. Since the Report was released, many investors have contacted Harlequin to express grave concerns over RL’s conduct, not to mention the quality of its Interim Report after it received what some are claiming to be circa £1 million in investor fees. A common theme is that the Interim Report is intended to be a killer blow to Harlequin and the hope of future investment returns so they can reap considerable profit from redress claims. There are also fears that Harlequin has been tricked by RL into urging investors to becoming its clients so they can liquidate Harlequin for their own motives. Clearly we would hope that this is not the case, although we understand the concern, especially when the misleading Interim Report was released in spite of RL itself announcing publically that its clients wanted to wait for the finished Report with Harlequin’s full responses. There are other reasons but we will get to some of those later.
OUR COMMENT; THE INTERIM REPORT WAS BASED ON DUE DILIGENCE, THE DUE DILIGENCE UNCOVERED SOME VERY SERIOUS ISSUES WITH HARLEQUIN, BUT IT WAS AMES WHO DEALT HARLEQUIN THE KILLER BLOW LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS CARRIED OUT THROUGH HIS GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND TOTAL INCOMPETENCE.
In the meantime, please continue reading below for a response to the key points set out in the public information that has been made available relating to Harlequin. RL has indicated that not seeking to amend a section of the Report is an admission by Harlequin to agreeing to that part of the Report; Harlequin would therefore like to make it clear that it does not agree with the Interim Report or the draft Due Diligence Report in its entirety.
OUR COMMENT; WE WOULD NOT EXPECT YOU TO SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT,
Executive Summary – Due Diligence
It is our view that the RL documentation we have seen is strewn with errors and therefore should not have been published in any form until Harlequin had the opportunity to respond. Despite Harlequin not expecting the Trust to be contingent on the due diligence report, Harlequin has always maintained that if a report was to be sent out, it is better to release one final report that all investors can rely upon, with all factual errors corrected and no miscommunication of the facts. It is unfortunate that RL has ignored this sensible approach.
OUR COMMENT; YOU HAVE HAD ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO CORRECT MANY OF THE HISTORICAL ISSUES, YET YOU HAVE ABJECTLY FAILED TO DO SO.
YOU CLAIM THE RL DOCUMENTATION IS STREWN WITH ERRORS, WELL
WE WOULD ASK YOU TO HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, YOU TOTALLY CONTRADICT YOUR SELF IN MANY AREAS OF YOUR PATHETIC LETTER.
Gareth Fatchett was clearly under an immense amount of pressure from a small number of particularly hostile investors and felt the need to send something out before leaving for his holiday. The unfortunate result is we now have to review the information released in the public domain, respond appropriately, and deal with the fallout which will no doubt further delay Harlequin’s response to the draft report. On 23rd May 2014, Harlequin notified Gareth Fatchett of the probable delay, explaining that 3rd June may be difficult to meet due to the need to seek advice on certain elements from overseas lawyers. Mr Fatchett’s response was:
OUR COMMENT; BULLSHIT, YOU HAVE HAD YEARS TO RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST YOU, YES YEARS, THE DUE DILIGENCE ONLY CONFIRMS WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANY FOR YEARS.
“You take as long as you need to. We understand that the overseas work can take a little more time.”
OUR COMMENT; LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE RECORDED ALL YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH GARETH FATCHETT, SO HIS ONLY OPTION IS TO NOW STOP ACTING FOR HIS CLIENTS AND MAKE A FULL REPORT TO THE AUTHORITIES. SEE, MR AMES, IF WHAT YOU STATE ABOUT MR. FATCHETT IN YOUR LETTER IS CORRECT, THEN MR. FATCHETT HAS MISLED HIS CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS, AND GIVEN THE DECENT SOUL THAT YOU ARE, WE KNOW THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE YOUR INVESTORS REPRESENTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS WHOLLY CONFLICTED.
We would remind investors that Harlequin only received RL’s draft report on 13th May 2014. On receipt, Harlequin explained it would take at least 3 weeks to go through the draft, collate comments from UK-based and overseas advisors, and report back on any inaccuracies. In truth, we had not expected to find as many inaccurate statements and assumptions as the report actually contained, but every effort is being made to complete the response as quickly as possible.
OUR COMMENT; WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR WORK OF FICTION, YOU HAVE ALREADY CONTRADICTED YOURSELF IN THIS LETTER, SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT INSTALLMENT OF BULLSHIT YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO CONCOCT.
With this in mind, we wish to make it clear to all purchasers that Harlequin’s response may not be available to RL until later in June 2014. We have little control over the length of time it will take for our overseas lawyers to revert to us on the issues we are putting to them, especially where there are numerous significant errors in the information received, but we will do what we can to ensure the delay is minimal.
OUR COMMENT; WHERE ARE YOU GETTING ALL THE MONEY TO PAY YOUR OVERSEAS LAWYERS, AND OF COURSE IT WILL TAKE YOU A LOT LONGER TO FORMULATE A RESPONSE. BUT IF YOU HAD OPERATED YOUR BUSINESSES IN A PROPER MANNER YOU WOULD NOT HAVE NEEDED THE TIME.
Defects/Errors
One of the criticisms that Gareth Fatchett has levied at Harlequin is that we have not identified the defects/errors in the draft report sent to Harlequin.The reason for this is that Harlequin does not want to provide a piecemeal, limited response and instead wants to provide a full and detailed collated response. RL has even gone as far as suggesting that this illustrates there are no such defects. There are too many issues to raise in this statement and we shall let our response speak for itself when finalised; however, by way of example, we can confirm that Mr Fatchett’s own solicitor in St Vincent & The Grenadines has withdrawn his 14 page report which was annexed to the draft Due Diligence Report received by Harlequin earlier this month. This is due to the fact that this alone contained many errors as to the correct legal position on the island. The errors included, but are not limited to, incorrect details of judgments entered against Harlequin, incorrect statements regarding ownership of land and the ability to have land purchased by a third party if not registered. This general misunderstanding of the situation and lack of liaison with Harlequin’s advisors resulted in misconceptions which RL sought to seize on. In fact, any outstanding issues in St Vincent & The Grenadines are agreed to be nothing more than minor conveyancing defects.
OUR COMMENT; IF MR. FATCHETT’S OWN SOLICITOR HAS WITHDRAWN THE 14 PAGE REPORT CONTAINED HERE
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/7b7493c4a57530d8c394310971b9a686
WHY DID MR. FACTHETT SEE FIT TO PUT IT UP ON HIS FORUM YESTERDAY, AND FURTHERMORE WHY HAS MR. FACTHETT NOT COMMUNICATED THE FACT THAT THE LETTER WAS WITHDRAWN TO HIS CLIENTS AND HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW IT WAS WITHDRAWN. WILLIAMS AND WILLIAMS ACT FOR RL DO THEY NOT? OR DO THEY ACT FOR YOU MR. AMES, PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS ONE.
Breach of Confidential Information
One of the main issues that Harlequin has with the draft and interim reports from RL is the fact that they both contain confidential information sent to RL by or via Harlequin in accordance with a Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement. Harlequin and its investors have endured the severe harm of “Harlecon” and other libellous outlets, so we enter into such agreements from time to time in good faith to ensure that Harlequin is protected. For the record, Harlecon was set up and run by Jeremy Newman, then a Wilkins Kennedy accountant, and a full apology was received in the settlement of defamation proceedings against Mr Newman and Wilkins Kennedy.
OUR COMMENT; FULL APOLOGY EH?????? WE TAKE IT YOU EITHER CANT READ OR YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE JOINT STATEMENT ON THE MATTER, WE ADVISE YOU TO SEEK FURTHER LEGAL ADVICE ON YOUR STATEMENT ABOVE, WE HAVE READ THE STATEMENT AND WE CAN FIND NO FULL APOLOGY.
Harlequin has stated, both privately and publically, that it intends to allow the use of relevant documents and information sent to RL under the confidentiality agreement when we have responded in full on the content of the draft due diligence report. Notwithstanding these assurances, RL has not only led investors to believe that consent is going to be withheld but it has published some of the material in breach of the confidentiality agreement.
OUR COMMENT; WHY THE NEED FOR CONFIDENTIALITY, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE????
The Report and, as will soon be clear, the main due diligence report from RL are selective in what they show and the direction in which they try to lead the reader. Much has been made of confidentiality and yet RL has chosen to show some of the material that is clearly confidential but not all. For example, the interim Report discloses the RLB valuation report but not the BCQS valuation report. RL has both and is well aware that the BCQS report supersedes the RLB report.
OUR COMMENT; IS THIS THE RLB REPORT YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/958b7d8658d86363adc740e671587604
THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON BFP LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE, OR THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON HARLECON, JEEZ WE DID NOT IT WAS CONFIDENTIAL OOOPS SORRY 😦
DOES THE BCQS REPORT ALSO SAY YOU OWN 72 ACRES FEE SIMPLE????
This cynical and rather unprofessional approach to its obligations under the confidentiality agreement supports Harlequin’s concerns about releasing material to RL, with or without the agreement in place. These documents are now on “Barbados Free Press”, a fringe blogging website we know Gareth Fatchett monitors closely, and are available for the public to view at any time.
OUR COMMENT; NOW WE DONT KNOW THAT GARETH FATHCETT MONITORS THIS SITE CLOSELY BUT WE DO KNOW SOMEONE WHO DOES, YES ITS YOU MR AMES THE TURD, SORRY TOAD FROM BASILDON, SEE LINK BELOW, NOT ONLY DO YOU MONITOR THIS SITE BUT YOU HAVE ATTEMPTED TO BLOCK THE PUBLIC FROM VIEWING INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANIES THROUGH YOUR RECENT ACTIONS.
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOT com/2014/05/20/dave-ames-and-harlequin-property-file-legal-papers-against-barbados-free-press-readers/
One such document is an unsigned draft witness statement by Jim Baker. This statement was prepared by Mr Baker for confidential use in other proceedings. In order to be helpful, Mr Baker confidentially sent the draft to Gareth Fatchett. It is unsigned and not in its final form. As a solicitor, Mr Fatchett will also be aware that a document prepared for one set of proceedings should not be used in any other proceedings without permission of the court. Astoundingly, this confidential, incomplete document was deemed to be an acceptable document to release with RL’s interim Report and has of course found its way onto Barbados Free Press.
OUR COMMENT; YOU MEAN THE WITNESS STATEMENT CALLED “WITNESSSTATEMENTFINALON 16414”, THE ONE BELOW
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/0fb4fba61b7f3a71e5063e0d90565406
THIS CAN EASILY BE CHECKED AGAINST THE WITNESS STATEMENT FILED IN THE COURT ACTION OF THE 25 CLAIMANTS AGAINST MR AND MRS AMES, IF ITS NOT THE SAME THEN YOU ARE CORRECT IF IT IS WHATS THE PROBLEM??????????
BUT THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED, WHY DID MR. BAKER GIVE HIS CLIENTS’ THATS YOU AMES, THIS WITNESS STATEMENT TO MR. FATCHETT IF THE STATEMENT WAS INCOMPLETE, WHY DID YOU GIVE HIM PERMISSION TO DO THIS, OR HAS HE JUST BROKEN THE RULES THAT PERTAIN TO HIS PROFESSION? IF YOU GAVE HIM PERMISSION, WHY DID YOU, YOU STATE YOURSELF THAT THE WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD ONLY BE USED IN ANY OTHER PROCEEDINGS WITH OUT THE PERMISSION OF THE COURT.
,
SO IS JIM BAKER NOW IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, IS IGNORANCE A DEFENCE. WHY BLAME RL, YOU OR JIM BAKER GAVE THE DOCUMENT TO RL, SO WHY NOW BLAME THEM.
WE DONT UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING HERE, YOU LOOSING IT AMES OLD CHAP.
RL has requested on numerous occasions to be provided with a full copy of our investor database. We have rejected these approaches for a number of reasons, not least data protection.
OUR COMMENT; GOOD BOY DAVE.
We firmly believe that the above demonstrates that Harlequin is correct to be cautious about entrusting commercially sensitive information to RL. It seems that the firm has little regard for its duty of confidentiality towards Harlequin and we can only hope the same duty it owes to its clients is better served.
OUR COMMENT; IRONIC COMING FORM YOU, WHAT ABOUT YOUR DUTY TO YOUR CLIENTS EH, SORRY THEY ARE NOT CLIENTS THEY ARE AS YOU SO OFTEN PUT IT INVESTORS, SO WHERES YOUR DUTY TOWARDS THEM???????
Accounting Information
In the interim Report and various updates, RL has made a great deal of the importance of Jim Baker’s figures. We agree that Mr Baker’s figures are important, although the information being relied on by RL was prepared in 2012 and is still to date unaudited and cannot therefore be relied on by RL or clients as accurate. We feel it is right to point out that Mr Baker was supposed to be undertaking a review of the figures and delivery of a complete accounts package, which was agreed to be funded by RL. Mr Fatchett and Harlequin acknowledged that some of the accounts needed to be brought up to date for the Resort Development Companies and the intention was for Baker Clarke to carry out the work required to achieve this over a 6 week period, funded by RL from the sums paid by investors.
OUR COMMENT; EH HELLO? WHO FILED UNAUDITED AND THEREFORE BY YOUR OWN WORDS UNRELIABLE ACCOUNTING INFORMATION IN ST. VINCENT?
SEE THE FOLLOWING POST “DUE DILIGENCE PART 10 THE FILED ACCOUNTS AND INCOMPETENCE OR WORSE WHOLESALE CORRUPTION AMONGST THE ORGANS OF THE STATE OF ST. VINCENT POSSIBLY? POSTED ON May 25, 2014 at 1:10 pm
YOU CAN FIND IT HERE ITS THE FOURTH ONE DOWN FROM THE TOP
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOTcom/2014/05/23/svg-high-court-registrar-resigns-suddenly-rumours-flying-about-harlequin-connection/
YOU SAY MR. BAKER WAS SUPPOSED TO BE UNDERTAKING A REVIEW OF THE FIGURES AND DELIVERING A COMPLETE ACCOUNTS PACKAGE??? WE ASSUME THIS WAS TO INCLUDE ALL AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE RESORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES BECAUSE AS YOU CLEARLY HAVE POINTED OUT UNAUDITED ACCOUNTS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON.
AND RL CLIENTS WERE TO PAY FOR THIS, ?????? RATHER ODD, WHY DONT YOU PAY FOR IT, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO THIS AND YOU FAILED FOR 7 YEARS TO FILE ANY AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR YOUR RDC’S WHY SHOULD RL CLIENTS PAY FOR THIS.
AND IS JIM BAKER QUALIFIED OR INDEED CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT SUCH A HUGE EXERCISE IN 6 WEEKS????
GOOD ON YA JIM WE SAY.
Sadly, Mr Fatchett had a last minute change of heart on this, citing spurious reasons for his change of mind and leaving Harlequin in a position where there was no funding available for the work and no time to achieve it prior to the release of the Due Diligence Report (Harlequin will however undertake production of the Accounts separately, which will take more time). We are not saying that this was an intentional ploy to enable RL to state that the financial accounting for the Resort Development Companies was poor, but we have to question Mr Fatchett on his motives for promising to fund the exercise and withdrawing the offer at the eleventh hour. To date, Mr Fatchett, when pressed, has failed to give a cogent explanation on this point.
OUR COMMENT; WHY WAS THERE NO FUNDING AVAILABLE TO TO WHAT YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO? YOU STATED EARLIER THAT GARETH FATCHETT WAS MISLEADING INVESTORS ON THE SOLVENCY OF THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES, SEE OUR EARLIER COMMENT ON THIS ; THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
There are plenty of examples of how the Report is selective in how it conveys information. This is clear from the text itself when examined closely. An example of this is where the Report states that it has information from Jim Baker that it cannot disclose but which would put some of the financial data into context regarding how the investor payments have been spent. Despite this, RL has still decided to report on the data it can report on with no context. This is one of the reasons why Harlequin sought to discourage RL from reporting on its findings until it had Harlequin’s response and was able to use all of the data available.
OUR COMMENT; YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAVE PREVENTED RL FROM RELEASING ALL THE DATA.
Panorama Letter
It is interesting that RL refers to the Jim Baker spreadsheet as contained in the document that Harlequin sent to Panorama last year. The Panorama letter, which was expected to be a confidential communication between Harlequin and the BBC, was leaked and planted on an anonymous blog, presumably to pressurise Harlequin into waiving confidentiality. This is not a practice that Harlequin endorses or reacts positively to, particularly when disclosure has been agreed on the aforementioned conditions.
OUR COMMENT; THE NEXT TIME YOU SHOULD THINK MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT WHO YOU TRY TO SHAFT, WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND, AND THE PANORAMA LETTER MAKES NO MENTION OF JIM BAKER OR INDEED THAT IT IS CONFIDENTIAL.
ANYWAY WHAT KIND OF FOOL WOULD SEND “CONFIDENTIAL” INFORMATION TO A PROGRAM INVESTIGATING THEM FOR WRONGDOING. AND WHY IS EVERYTHING YOU SEND “CONFIDENTIAL”???
The Trust
Harlequin wants investors to understand that, with or without RL, the trust can proceed. Harlequin has been clearly advised that its most valuable property can be securitised and therefore the initial idea of providing such assets to secure investor monies is a reality. We would prefer to continue working with RL but only if the firm can show that it is working with us and not against us and our investors’ best interests. The firm’s recent activity and failure to listen to Harlequin’s reasonable requests to delay reporting until the due diligence report’s errors are rectified do leave us wondering about its true motives. Further evidence of this is demonstrated by RL’s recent biased survey questions, which are clearly designed to elicit the results that it is after.
OUR COMMENT; RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS, NOT BY YOU, YOU ARE THE ENEMY, IT IS BECAUSE OF YOUR GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND INCOMPETENCE THAT RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED.
YOU ARE FULLY AWARE OF THE TERM CONFLICT OF INTEREST, YET YOU WILL ONLY WORK WITH RL IF THEY WILL WORK WITH YOU NOT AGAINST YOU, WELL SORRY MATEY, THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS,
AS STATED THEY ARE ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS TO SEEK THE BEST POSSIBLE RECOVERY FOR THEIR CLIENTS GIVEN HOW YOU MANAGED TO FUCK THINGS UP SO EASILY.
YOUR BEST INTERESTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF RL’S CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS AS YOU CALL THEM.
On the subject of the use of the investor trust payments, investors should understand that RL has received thousands of payments of £200 plus VAT. Harlequin has requested confirmation of the amount collected and full transparency in spending, etc., but unfortunately this information has not been forthcoming from RL. Harlequin feels extremely let down by RL’s perceived misrepresentation as Harlequin directed thousands of investors to RL to enter into Pink Forms and pay monies to join the trust. Harlequin encouraged investors to instruct RL to make the payments on the clear understanding that the firm would be using the payments to pay for professional fees to assist the Harlequin recovery, including, but not limited to:
OUR COMMENT; THIS IS RICH COMING FROM YOU, YOU OF ALL PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR TRANSPARENCY FROM RL ON HOW THEY HAVE SPENT THEIR CLIENTS MONEY, LOL GO DO ONE YOU HYPOCRITE.
– valuations at each of the sites (rather than demand and seek to rely on Harlequin’s complete valuations);
– preparation of accounting information;
– financial due diligence report to attract external finance;
– Pitmans’ fees (of which 80% remains outstanding).
OUR COMMENT; EXCUSE US????? YOU ARE ASKING THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST £400 MILLION TO ASSIST YOU IN PAYING FOR THE VALUATIONS OF YOUR RESORTS WHICH YOU HAVE ALWAYS STATED ARE RISING IN VALUE, SO SURELY IF YOU STATED THAT PURCHASER PROPERTIES WERE RISING IN VALUE YOU HAVE HAD REGULAR PROFESSIONAL VALUATIONS CONDUCTED. YES NO?????
YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD YOUR ACCOUNTS UP TO DATE AS YOU WENT ALONG, NOW WAIT FOR 7 YEARS TO JIM BAKER TO COBBLE TOGETHER SOMETHING IN THE 11TH HOUR AND TO GET SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY HIM TO DO THIS……
YOU KEEP TELLING US YOU ARE ON THE VERGE OF OBTAINING EXTERNAL FINANCE, SO EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED YOUR INVESTORS TO PAY FOR THE DUE DILIGENCE REPORT TO ATTRACT EXTERNAL FINANCE. LOL STOP DIGGING THE HOLE YOU IDIOT.
NOW PITMANS FEES COULD CAUSE GF A LITTLE PROBLEM.
What is clear is that RL has received a significant amount of money from Harlequin’s investors on the basis that the money would be used (as confirmed by Gareth Fatchett at investor seminars) to assist in the set up and entry into the proposed Harlequin Investor Trust. It is clear now that this has not been done.
We do know that Regulatory Legal instructed an insolvency restructuring solicitor in Grand Cayman to prepare a report, which begs the question, has Regulatory legal genuinely sought to set up the Trust or was this a smokescreen to generate funds with which to “rescue” Harlequin after forcing it into liquidation?
Harlequin understands that a growing number of investors are losing confidence in RL due to their perceived negative agenda. Indeed, Harlequin is spending a great deal of time attempting to stop investors taking action against RL for return of monies that are now believed to have been obtained under false pretences. As stated above, Harlequin remains committed to working with RL to enter into the investor Trust provided RL can demonstrate that it is equally committed to achieving the same result.
OUR COMMENT; HANG ON HERE A MINUTE, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT RL HAVE TAKEN PURCHASER MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES?????? OH YEAH YOU ARE….
ANYWAY THIS IS WHERE RL HAVE TO WALK AWAY FROM AMES, IT IS CLEAR THAT AMES CLAIMS THAT RL WERE WORKING WITH HIM, YET PURCHASERS THOUGHT THAT RL WAS WORKING FOR THEM, INDEED RL REFER TO PURCHASERS AS THEIR CLIENTS, WHAT AMES IS REALLY DEMONSTRATING HERE IS A MASSIVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND THAT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED BY THE AUTHORITIES, THE INDEPENDENCE OF RL AND GARETH FATCHETT HAS CLEARLY BEEN QUESTIONED HERE ALBEIT INADVERTENTLY AND AMES SIR, YOU ARE MAKING SOME VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST GARETH FATCHETT, WE ALSO ASSUME YOU HAVE THE RECORDINGS OF YOUR CONVERSATIONS TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.
IN ESSENCE WE BELIEVE YOU ARE HOLDING A GUN TO GARETH FATCHETT’S HEAD AND NOW EXPECT HIM TO DO YOUR BIDDING.
AKIN TO BLACK MAIL, WELL MORE FOOL TO GARETH FATCHETT IF HE CANNOT ROBUSTLY DEFEND THE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS YOU MR. AMES ARE MAKING.
Completions
Harlequin understands that RL is now telling its clients not to proceed with investor completions as Harlequin is using sale monies to assist with the running of its business. Harlequin has indeed put completion monies received to good use by investing in the resorts and the Harlequin business. Such investment has added significant value to the resorts. RL has been fully aware of this since the first meeting in 2013 and only chooses to make an issue of this now. Harlequin has recently completed on its first property at Buccament Bay Resort by transferring legal title to a purchaser and has many more completions in the pipeline. A more detailed statement about this will follow.
OUR COMMENT; SORRY WE ARE TOTALLY CONFUSED HERE, YOU HAVE ACHIEVED ONE COMPLETION SO WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ????????????? SORRY YOU HAVE TOTALLY LOST US HERE……TOTALLY……..
Conclusion
The interim Report states that RL “does not see how any investor can make an informed decision without” the financial information showing how the £400m has been invested. Harlequin agrees with this which is why it has always asserted that no report should be published until all of the facts are available for publication. Despite this, RL could not resist the temptation to publish an interim document, which is meaningless without the context required to help investors make the decision as to whether or not to enter the trust.
OUR COMMENT; WE ALREADY KNOW THAT £200 MILLION OF THE £400 MILLION WENT TO YOUR WIFE AND SONS COMPANY INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE RESORTS, SO REALLY WE DONT NEED TO KNOW MUCH MORE NOW DO WE……………
The advice and conclusions reached in the Report are, in our opinion, naïve and based on misinformation. After all of this time, we cannot fathom why. The Report’s conclusions are alarmist and extend to personal attacks on the Ames family, which is not considered necessary in a supposedly factual report assessing whether or not to enter into an investor trust. We have now reached an impasse with RL that we hope to navigate through. If not, we hope we have proved by this more detailed response that Harlequin is committed to fighting for its investors and providing the best future possible for its investors. As we have said above, the trust can still go ahead with the security intended to be used to protect investors. Whether or not this is with RL is yet to be seen.
OUR COMMENT; YOU LETTER HAS DONE NOTHING BUT DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU ARE A TOTALLY DELUDED FANTASIST, A LIAR, A HYPOCRITE AND TRUE TO FORM YOU HAVE CONTINUED TO DROP EVERYONE ELSE IN IT, REGULATORY LEGAL AND JIM BAKER NOW FOLLOW THE LONG LIST OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND COMPANIES YOU HAVE SOUGHT TO DESTROY.
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT NOW HAVE MANY QUESTIONS TO ANSWER, NO DOUBT IF THEY DO NOT TOE THE COMPANY LINE, YOU WILL SEEK RETRIBUTION THROUGH THE USE OF RECORDED CONVERSATIONS PERHAPS,
EITHER WAY THE TRUST IS DEAD, YOU ARE FINISHED, ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD NOW PUT THEIR TRUST (NO PUN INTENDED) IN YOU. YOU SOW WHAT YOU REAP YOU TWISTED BITTER DELUDED FOOL YOU.
Best regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
In denial to the bitter end.
What was it Carol Ames said in her statement last year? “The company is or is unlikely to become able to pay its debts.” Says it all really.
Well there aren’t many surprises in the communication above.
When the organization doing the DD says one thing and the company being reported on says another then what can an external person do to determine which is likely to be most accurate?
All you can do is look at the evidence of the performance and competence of the company and ask which report is a most convincing explanation of the facts that can be verified externally.
I know which I would believe on that basis but it is for every individual to make their own judgement on this.
Oh dear what a bitter riposte. Compiled at 2 am this morning and full of hate and bile. Posted on every thread to do with HP. What nice people you are.
Give it a rest BS Storey at 7:40am (or whatever time it is in your world of pedantic nonsense) you are complicit in this mess.
I feel flattered that you think that posts are from me. Believe it or not there are others who post on here. And you still have not worked put that the post timings on here run 1 hour out. Go and have a lay down. Bless.
Aye Bob, someone has put that long post form
DUE DILIGENCE 14 THE END GAME, ALL WE CAN SAY IS JESUS CHRIST, YES JESUS CHRIST
On the RL blog…..what you going to do!!!
You must feel the urge for some frantic damage limitation?
Godammit you promised you’d slink off StoerEy. Its a big 303 from me. Now the rest of you- What’s the toss here? Ames or Fatchett? Or do your own thing maybe?
@REnfield,
Fatchett.
90% of Harlequin’s investors SHOULD NOT have handed over any money. The more who get out, the better chance of the company pulling through.
Ames is delusional. His CORE problem is he is not substantive – he does not substantiate his claims with factual evidence. This is most recently displayed with the PHIG “valuation” email and the latest email.
The FACTS for Harlequin are actually quite promising – they have built a resort, handed over title for a property & have a line of other resorts ready to go with funding. Current resort will be worth ~£50m (you can only sell something for the price someone’s willing to pay for it), and by consensus on TripAdvisor, seem to be attracting a customer base. If they receive funding, they should be able to get the business back on track to be a decent investment in about 7 years.
The PROBLEM is these “facts” are overshadowed by the sheer incompetence of Ames, and his insistence of including his family in matters (as opposed to an elected board of directors). As a result of the constant stream of bad judgement, pie-in-the-sky ideas & consistent LACK OF BUILDING, the people who put money in are getting very twitchy; hence the “anonymous defamation” that seems to follow the company like a bad smell.
If Ames is to get out of this, he’ll end up a permanent resident of the Caribbean, after taking “retirement” in a few years. Even then, he’ll be lampooned with litigation
The rest is clear- but I don’t get this bit?
“Fatchett.
90% of Harlequin’s investors SHOULD NOT have handed over any money. The more who get out, the better chance of the company pulling through”
Are you saying that without Ames AND Fatchett this all has a future?.
@REnfield,
I meant that Fatchett over Ames (What’s the toss here? Ames or Fatchett?)
Most of the people who invested in Harlequin did so because it was presented as a “no risk” investment. That’s why so much pension & re-mortgage money went into the company (and hence why there’s so much poison floating around it).
The fact is that if the investment was presented correctly (with company registration information / corporate structure, financial information, valuations, current run rates for resorts, REAL information on the “leadership” of the company (how many times they went bankrupt), etc), they would not have taken in so much investment.
That is why all the investors are blaming Ames, although it’s probably not his fault entirely; and why he thinks he has “done nothing wrong”. The people who invested needed a 2/3 year investment which will be low-risk, but have longevity. Harlequin has longevity (if it can survive), but is high-risk because of all the variables yet to clear up.
If the investors had been presented with all the variables BEFORE investing, there wouldn’t be as much of a problem, as they would have understood the FACTS that Harlequin’s model, although probably sound, needs a LOT of time to move forward.
So what I was suggesting was people entrust Fatchett’s “redress” claims over any “trust” attempt by Ames. This may seem bad at first, but will relieve the strain on the company, thus providing cash investors will more of a chance of a return.
BELOW IS THE RESPONSE FROM RL AND GARETH FATCHETT TO THE TOXIC TURDS MISSIVE LAST NIGHT.
AT LEAST RL RESPONDED IN A TIMELY MANNER AND DID NOT NEED A GAZILLION MONTHS TO RESPOND
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT RESPONDED VERY QUICKLY TO THE GARBLED RAMBLINGS OF THE TOXIC TOAD. SEE BELOW.
Harlequin Update
Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 29, 2014 at 10:25pm
All, We have received the update. We are not surprised at the content nor the tone. We produced a detailed Interim Report for investors to consider.
Our Interim Report is just that. It could be amended if we were persuaded on material matters. Some minor matters were drawn to our attention via our SVG lawyers. Report amended and posted. Hardly unfair conduct.
The same applies to the other elements of our report. We will amend if necessary.Being lectured on accountability and transparency from a firm who refuse to allow investors to understand where £400m has been spent is galling.
We did not want to rely on the BBC Panorama figures. We would have preferred to use the James Baker figures, but we were not allowed to. We did not post the BBC Panorama response on BFP. We did copy it and put it to Harlequin that the figures were accurate. No response.
We had discussed paying for the RDC accounts to be brought up to date. That would have meant RL having access to all the underlying information (bank accounts etc). At that point, we were told we could pay, but we could not see the data.
Only a fool would have proceeded with the goodwill gesture at that point.
The suggestion we have not paid Pitmans fees is wrong. Pitmans client is Harlequin Hotels &Resorts (UK) Limited.
Not Regulatory Legal Solicitors. We were asked to pay £10k plus VAT as a contribution. This we have done. Any further payment would be on a goodwill basis from us. We are not feeling lots of goodwill at present.
We have consulted insolvency practitioners in the UK and abroad. Why would we not do that ?
We state in our report that Harlequin is arguably insolvent. We do not just make these statements lightly. We have no intention to buy or be part of any buying group. We are a solicitors practice, not a hotel operator !
We expected a backlash. We are not going to be deflected from our task which is to present the facts to clients. If a client wants to believe the “everything is brilliant” mantra, so be it. We will stick to our position and argue robustly and fairly. Investors would expect no less.
I agree wholeheartedly with some of your man points. On others I think the jury’s out. Nice to see some constructive comments. Ta
Looking at the DD report from RL….it’s all over…cash investors should realize this by now….especially the early investors who have seen promised completion dates just slip by for resorts that have not even started. Merricks resort for example is a sad sight .. Two “show” homes and a small guard hut totally neglected and vandalized…everything totally overgrown, anything of value stolen from the site and not even a decent road built to the resort site. After 8 years! Disgusting and shameful. Of course we all know it’s the Government’s fault, or the builder, or those nasty websites . A due diligence report should include progress photos of this and the other resorts that were sold to people “off plan”.
Last comment to anon. This one to All. Well said Gareth Fatchet
And how are RL going to represent the cash investors? Have they disclosed that yet? How many cash investors paid over £240?
NOT TO SOUND DISRESPECTFUL BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO RAISE A FEW POINTS WITH THE FOLLOWING;
“The FACTS for Harlequin are actually quite promising” – they have built a resort, COMMENT; ACCORDING TO RL c.1700 UNITS HAVE BEEN SOLD AT BUCCAMENT BAY, WITH c. 150 COMPLETE, SOME 8.5% OF THE FIRST RESORT HAS BEEN BUILT.
handed over title for a property & have a line of other resorts ready to go with funding. OUR COMMENT; WHAT FUNDING???? Current resort will be worth ~£50m -OUR COMMENT; OR USD $ 50 MILLION OR IF HARLEQUINS’ VALUATION IS CORRECT £ 149 MILLION (you can only sell something for the price someone’s willing to pay for it), and by consensus on TripAdvisor, seem to be attracting a customer base. OUR COMMENT; LOOKING AT THE RL FORUM THE AVERAGE OCCUPANCY SEEMS TO BE 30%
If they receive funding, they should be able to get the business back on track to be a decent investment in about 7 years. OUR COMMENT; NOT THEY BUSINESS, A BUSINESS OF SORTS, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE BUSINESS.
I find it amusing that HP are now saying they can’t confirm information about THEIR OWN business until mid June. A business that they have been running for nearly a decade! Surely this information is readily available, but very worrying if it isn’t. Haven’t HP been involved in the DD process for months now, so surely RL’s release hasn’t come as a surprise? Wasn’t the DD supposed to be released in March? So by the time June comes round it will already be nearly 3 months late. Though I’m sure in June a new reason will be found to drag it into July…..Aug…..all very predictable. What a joke.
Of course you will get a quick reply from GF, he has to do something while floating in the pool with his rubber ring on.
@Anon
No disrespect taken.
COMMENT; ACCORDING TO RL c.1700 UNITS HAVE BEEN SOLD AT BUCCAMENT BAY, WITH c. 150 COMPLETE, SOME 8.5% OF THE FIRST RESORT HAS BEEN BUILT.
– Yes, you must understand I was writing from the perspective of Ames v Fatchett etc.
OUR COMMENT; WHAT FUNDING???? Current resort will be worth ~£50m -OUR COMMENT; OR USD $ 50 MILLION OR IF HARLEQUINS’ VALUATION IS CORRECT £ 149 MILLION
– $50m sure. £149m no.
– Funding from a financial institution which is not presently there
OUR COMMENT; LOOKING AT THE RL FORUM THE AVERAGE OCCUPANCY SEEMS TO BE 30%
– And the RL forum has what bearing on the occupancy rates for a resort? These are occupancy rates circa 2013 (from Tailormade):
Revenue 2013 (Blu & Buccament Bay)
https://anonfiles.com/file/47d3185777300710552756788ad49ad6
Blu Occupancy & Affiliates
https://anonfiles.com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccament Bay Occupancy & Affiliates
https://anonfiles.com/file/a61debf9f00de9f4dbf338ae19e24dea
I don’t know if it’s popular or not; but I can see some genuine TripAdvisor reviews (lots of fake ones). The genuine ones seem to say the resort is tired, but is in a great location
OUR COMMENT; NOT THEY BUSINESS, A BUSINESS OF SORTS, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE BUSINESS.
– You probably mean “their” business? If so, I would say they have to kill the RDC’s, create a central company in UK called Harlequin Hotels & Resorts (ltd / plc) and have an appointed BOD. Some sort of share restructure with cash investors (probably means going public) (considering SIPPs can be salvaged with Fatchett). Remove mortgage contracts & publish run rates for hotels. Financier will take time, but if that is in place, they will come
@It’s all about the SIPPs
It’s going to be about suing all the agents soon, and a class action against the Ames family – nobody told you that?
Sorry forgotten about the senior management and accounts regulators bodies.
To throw a career away for Harlequin, how odd.
Yes these class actions, freezing orders, etc have been a huge success. Tell me again how many investors have had their money back
Don’t know where my comment went, so here it is again…
@Anon,
No disrespect taken.
COMMENT; ACCORDING TO RL c.1700 UNITS HAVE BEEN SOLD AT BUCCAMENT BAY, WITH c. 150 COMPLETE, SOME 8.5% OF THE FIRST RESORT HAS BEEN BUILT.
– Yes, but was referencing in context of Fatchett v Ames etc (I.E “Harlequin” actually have an asset & is moving forward…. slowly)
OUR COMMENT; WHAT FUNDING???? Current resort will be worth ~£50m -OUR COMMENT; OR USD $ 50 MILLION OR IF HARLEQUINS’ VALUATION IS CORRECT £ 149 MILLION
– $50m yes. £149m no
– Funding which can come from financial institution. Ames has lied about current funding, but doesn’t mean it will never come
OUR COMMENT; LOOKING AT THE RL FORUM THE AVERAGE OCCUPANCY SEEMS TO BE 30%
– How does the RL forum give any bearing on the occupancy of Buccament Bay? 99% of them have never visited the resort, let alone stayed there long enough to give an accurate observation of occupancy. Here are some stats for their occupancy rates from Tailormade c. 2013:
Buccament Bay & Blu Revenues
https://anonfiles DOT com/file/08f3bb53c4f0e980d76f731e165b3cc0
Blu Occupancy 2013
https://anonfiles DOT com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccameny Bay Occupancy 2013
https://anonfiles DOT com/file/21c82da8667322f8d1f4240cc29d067b
OUR COMMENT; NOT THEY BUSINESS, A BUSINESS OF SORTS, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE BUSINESS.
– I guess you mean “their business”? You could actually make a decent go of it I think, with several caveats. They need to create central company called Harlequin Hotels and Resorts (ltd / plc) in the UK (paying UK taxes). They need to appoint elected BoD (not “Ames Family”…). If Fatchett can get redress for the SIPP investors, the cash investors can be given shares in new PLC – creating real framework for financing to occur to fund the planned resorts.
Don’t know where my comment went, so here it is again…
@Anon,
No disrespect taken.
COMMENT; ACCORDING TO RL c.1700 UNITS HAVE BEEN SOLD AT BUCCAMENT BAY, WITH c. 150 COMPLETE, SOME 8.5% OF THE FIRST RESORT HAS BEEN BUILT.
– Yes, but was referencing in context of Fatchett v Ames etc (I.E “Harlequin” actually have an asset & is moving forward…. slowly)
OUR COMMENT; WHAT FUNDING???? Current resort will be worth ~£50m -OUR COMMENT; OR USD $ 50 MILLION OR IF HARLEQUINS’ VALUATION IS CORRECT £ 149 MILLION
– $50m yes. £149m no
– Funding which can come from financial institution. Ames has lied about current funding, but doesn’t mean it will never come
OUR COMMENT; LOOKING AT THE RL FORUM THE AVERAGE OCCUPANCY SEEMS TO BE 30%
– How does the RL forum give any bearing on the occupancy of Buccament Bay? 99% of them have never visited the resort, let alone stayed there long enough to give an accurate observation of occupancy. Here are some stats for their occupancy rates from Tailormade c. 2013:
Buccament Bay & Blu Revenues
https:// anonfiles DOT com/file/08f3bb53c4f0e980d76f731e165b3cc0
Blu Occupancy 2013
https:// anonfiles DOT com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccameny Bay Occupancy 2013
https:// anonfiles DOT com/file/21c82da8667322f8d1f4240cc29d067b
OUR COMMENT; NOT THEY BUSINESS, A BUSINESS OF SORTS, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE BUSINESS.
– I guess you mean “their business”? You could actually make a decent go of it I think, with several caveats. They need to create central company called Harlequin Hotels and Resorts (ltd / plc) in the UK (paying UK taxes). They need to appoint elected BoD (not “Ames Family”…). If Fatchett can get redress for the SIPP investors, the cash investors can be given shares in new PLC – creating real framework for financing to occur to fund the planned resorts.
Don’t know where my comment went, so here it is again…
@Anon,
No disrespect taken.
COMMENT; ACCORDING TO RL c.1700 UNITS HAVE BEEN SOLD AT BUCCAMENT BAY, WITH c. 150 COMPLETE, SOME 8.5% OF THE FIRST RESORT HAS BEEN BUILT.
– Yes, but was referencing in context of Fatchett v Ames etc (I.E “Harlequin” actually have an asset & is moving forward…. slowly)
OUR COMMENT; WHAT FUNDING???? Current resort will be worth ~£50m -OUR COMMENT; OR USD $ 50 MILLION OR IF HARLEQUINS’ VALUATION IS CORRECT £ 149 MILLION
– $50m yes. £149m no
– Funding which can come from financial institution. Ames has lied about current funding, but doesn’t mean it will never come
OUR COMMENT; LOOKING AT THE RL FORUM THE AVERAGE OCCUPANCY SEEMS TO BE 30%
– How does the RL forum give any bearing on the occupancy of Buccament Bay? 99% of them have never visited the resort, let alone stayed there long enough to give an accurate observation of occupancy. Here are some stats for their occupancy rates from Tailormade c. 2013:
Buccament Bay & Blu Revenues
anonfiles DOT com/file/08f3bb53c4f0e980d76f731e165b3cc0
Blu Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccameny Bay Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/21c82da8667322f8d1f4240cc29d067b
OUR COMMENT; NOT THEY BUSINESS, A BUSINESS OF SORTS, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE BUSINESS.
– I guess you mean “their business”? You could actually make a decent go of it I think, with several caveats. They need to create central company called Harlequin Hotels and Resorts (ltd / plc) in the UK (paying UK taxes). They need to appoint elected BoD (not “Ames Family”…). If Fatchett can get redress for the SIPP investors, the cash investors can be given shares in new PLC – creating real framework for financing to occur to fund the planned resorts.
There are people on the RL forum who have just wonderful expertise to get to know the occupancy rates. You only have to look at Christopher David’s CV to see the depth of talent on the RL forum. Lol
The last paragraph above is an idea. But where do the investors who have/are completing on a BB property? Where would they fit into any new PLC?
Must be wi-fi in prison, you can show ya daddy soon.
To all Harlequin Cabana Huggers but particularly the Nuneaton Burger Flipper (alias Storey -” the completed one”). Get ready for the great liquidation party. Lol. Ha, Ha, Ha, etc etc.
Hey Mr Sipps- you have some points. So what’s you’re plan and CV. We need to explore all the angles man
Yeah all about SIPPS. Do you have a plan and resume we can follow. We need fresh thinking here
A plan? He’ll no. There are far more intellectual mugs, sorry investors, than me. If I was that clever I would be in a swimming pool with my rubber ring.
Have you noticed how all of the attacks by BS (like the one at 7.40 this morning) are ad hominem in nature? They never mount an attack on the substance of the argument or provide any supporting evidence themselves, they just attack the people.
@SIPPs
But where do the investors who have/are completing on a BB property? Where would they fit into any new PLC?
Don’t know; nor do I know where the inter-company debt would feature. Considering most of the debt is from INVESTOR DEPOSITS (most of whom cannot afford a mortgage… part of the reason they need to get out actually), I would imagine it rather difficult to create a new entity with such a bad past
Having said that, if you look at the documents:
Buccament Bay & Blu Revenues
anonfiles DOT com/file/08f3bb53c4f0e980d76f731e165b3cc0
Blu Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccameny Bay Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/21c82da8667322f8d1f4240cc29d067b
You will see that blu & Buccament Bay are producing revenue (according to Tailormade c. 2013). This means the company is a going concern, and could suit re-structing to offer equity & land security (all of which is currently owned by Ames).
So what’s you’re plan and CV
This train has surely got several more stops before it stalls. It would be a mistake for any one person to think they can move it on their own – too many vested interests.
The simple fact is Harlequin will only grow if it BUILDS & OPERATES RESORTS. This is the crux of the issue. So much has been diverted from building that the company cannot pay its debtors, as it has not built enough revenue-generating assets. If Harlequin did not flitter away £200m+ on things other than building, it would be a completely different story. But alas
Therefore, any “plan” to attract finance would HAVE to focus on the goal of building & operating resorts. No interest payments. No dodgy builders. No litigation. Bricks & mortar. Whilst the trust does this in part, it more or less treats the investment as “debt” (which will have to be repaid in the future. I.E when the waiver ends) – whereas an equity based system would turn it into trade-able capital. Essentially, an equity based system would have to change the model from “owning” rooms to providing a share of revenue from the resorts (I.E a “real” investment).
With this in mind, the question then turns to whether the company is actually able to be “rescued”, as its balance sheet is rather lopsided towards the £400m “invested”. The answer will be to get rid of as much of that liability as possible.
There are two ways to do it:
– Complete more resorts (so “investors” can take title)
– Write off the liability somehow
A hope would be if Fatchett is able to provide a route for SIPP redress. If he can do this, it will take out half of the liability, as redress voids your investment. That leaves the cash investors. They could be accommodated in a single corporate structure, as mentioned in a previous post.
They will not receive interest payments, nor a fast build deadline; but it will give them equity in the business, and voting rights on how the business is operated. This alone is very powerful (as it means the equity can be traded), but also means the “investment” will be a “real” investment, in they’ll receive returns based on their share of the company. I don’t know how it will work specifically, but I believe it can be done.
It’s my opinion that Harlequin will need £50m / $80m to get any real results.
Some problems with this idea would be how you would cater share holders AND completions. And how you’d also manage any financing options that are currently on the table
One idea you may take regarding the completions would be this:
If an investor “completes”, they still pay Harlequin a management fee, and receive only 50% of the room rates. This means Harlequin (the company) is still receiving an income from the asset. This income, if channelled through a central corporate structure, would go into dividends for the shareholders. So maybe you could cater the shareholders AND completions?
I’d be interested to see what the RL forum says about that idea.
@Anon, have you ever heard the expression, “what goes around comes around” . “They just attack the people” lol. No kid, not seen that on here before, have you.
@Anon – Even if the SIPP investors receive insurance restitution then
the insurer “holds the paper”. And they can be pretty aggressive players
in seeking redress. It changes HD’s chance of continuing not one iota.
@Anon 5.59. There may be some mileage in what you are saying. The trouble is RL have stirred up the crowd on its blog to such an extent that they all just want their money back. The SIPP people will probably be satisfied but the cash investors are being cast adrift, and they will not be very receptive to any suggestion that keeps them still tied into HP.
Dave what should I write next for you? It make me have a little sex wee, so masterful.
@ Anonymous
May 30, 2014 at 5:59 pm
Lets look at the Hotel Arrival Production Report Produced.
St Vincents & Grendines > Buccament Bay Resort
Property Group = Harlequin Hotels, Booking Month = JAN 2013, Arrival Year = 2013
The sheet shows the avg room rate as being 657.19 per night, so the avg room rate for 7 nights is 4600. The rate is not expressed in any particular currency, we will for the purposes of this example state the rate in £ Stg.. If two people have stayed in this room we need to deduct the flight costs from this. The avg flight cost from London to Barbados was £700pp Economy. The avg return flight from Barbados to St. Vincent is £190pp Total £1780
The net room rate before room tax is therefore £2820.00
Deductions SVG room tax @10% £282.00
Total £2,538.00
Other Deductions
Fixed Operational Costs
Below based on 60% Occupancy
Insurance per room per night £8.00 x 7 = £56.00
Local Staff Costs per room per night £16.00 x 7 = £112.00
Electricity £15.00 x 7 = £105.00
Water £2.00 x 7 = £14.00
Maintenance £5.50 x 7 = £38.50
Management £36.00 x 7 = £252.00
Security £4.00 x 7= £28.00
Satelite TV and Phone £1.20 x 7 = £8.40
Laundry £1.50 x 7 = £10.50
Total £624.40
Food and Beverage pp £40.00 x 7 = £280 x 2 = £560.00
Pat Cash/ Soccer School/ Singing School/ Cricket Coaching/ Sunset Tours/ Non Motorised Water Sports / Free Spa Treatments £35 x 7 = £245.00
Total Other Deductions £1429.00
Total Net £2,538.00 – £1,429.00 = £1,109.00
Note; whilst we do not know what currency the Tailormade data is in, we have assumed it is £ Sterling.
However 7 night stays all inclusive can be obtained for Buccament Bay for £1,349.00pp Incl of all Flights, transfers and taxes.
£385.00 per room per night this compares to the avg £657.00 room rate per night contained in the Tailormade document
Given that flight costs and Other Deductions tend to be fixed,
An all inclusive rate of £385.00 per room per night. or £2,695.00 per 7 days – total deductions as per above £3,478.50 tends to suggest that at these rates the hotel will have a net loss of £783.50 per room per week.
BELOW IS AN INCREDIBLE LETTER FROM DAVID AMES ISSUED TONIGHT, ALLEGING AMONGST OTHER THINGS DECEIT AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION BY RL AND GARETH FATCHETT AND JIM BAKER GETS A DISHONOURABLE MENTION TOO.
Dear Investor,
Harlequin values each and every investor and will neither survive nor deliver investments without the full support and trust of Harlequin’s loyal investor base.
OUR COMMENT; ONE LOOK AT THE RL FORUM QUESTIONS THE DELUDED TOAD’S STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS “LOYAL INVESTOR BASE”
BELOW IS ONE OF MANY ATYPICAL COMMENTS.
May 28, 2014 at 9:20am
“I would like to say that i am shocked by this news but to be perfectly honest nothing about this man nor the depths in which he will stoop would surprise me.
Yet again DA makes a massive mistake only succeeding in ensuring investors have even less faith & hammering home the need to remove DA from the hub if there would ever be a going forward plan.”
Regulatory Legal (‘RL’) disappointingly but unsurprisingly issued an Interim Executive Summary and Enclosures (‘Report’) to its clients on Friday 23rd May 2014 against the advice of Harlequin. The Report, hosted on a supposedly “secure” RL website, was posted on Barbados Free Press within hours and is now a matter of public record. Harlequin has now considered the content of the Report and we set out a full response below that we urge all investors to read.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES WERE YOU HOPING TO HIDE THE INFORMATION.???????? AND WE SAY TOUGH SHIT THAT THIS AND THE OTHER DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
However, before we delve into why publishing a summary of the draft due diligence report, sent to Harlequin on 13th May 2014 and reliant on inaccurate and misleading information, was a premature move by RL, we would like to make clear the difficulties that Harlequin has faced in the months leading up to this Report.
OUR COMMENT; WHAT ABOUT COMING CLEAN ON THE DIFFICULTIES THAT HARLEQUIN HAS FACED SINCE THE DELUDED DWARF BEGAN THIS JOURNEY 8 YEARS AGO.
September 2013 – January 2014: The initial talks. RL confirmed to Harlequin that an investor-led trust is, in their view, the best way to secure investments by paving the way for external investment. Harlequin agreed to provide all security it could and work in good faith with RL to safeguard investments in this way.
February-April 2014: Harlequin had a series of detailed meetings with RL and its barristers and appointed an independent third party law firm, Pitmans, to advise on drafting fair and balanced Trust documentation to secure investors’ interests in return for a waiver of 5 years, in which Harlequin will raise finance and secure the assets held, including the flagship hotel, Buccament Bay Resort. Harlequin agreed to assist RL in asking all investors to join the trust by paying RL £200 + VAT (by completion of Pink Forms) and to have faith in RL to support the best interests of all investors. The Trust documentation was completed with advice from Pitmans. RL agreed to pay for this necessary advice and input with monies collected from investors.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES SURELY YOU MEAN MAY RAISE FINANCE RATHER THAN WILL AS YOU STATE ABOVE. GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE FAILED SO MANY TIMES IN THE PAST.
RL STATED THAT THEY AGREED TO PAY FOR THE PITMANS ADVICE FROM THE FUNDS FROM THEIR OFFICE ACCOUNT AND “NOT” FROM THEIR CLIENTS.
THE RL CLIENTS INSTRUCTED RL TO CARRY OUT DUE DILIGENCE AND PAID FOR THIS AND THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY RL.
April 2014 (end): RL informed Harlequin for the first time that it intended to rely on a 300 page due diligence document that it claimed to have been preparing since 2013. The document was to say that, whilst there are problems that need to be sorted out, the only option for investors to yield a return from their investment will be the Trust and entry into a Deed of Waiver.;
OUR COMMENT; THE STATEMENT ABOVE NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY THE AUTHORITIES, AMES IS CLAIMING HERE THAT
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT WERE COLLUDING WITH HARLEQUIN TO SAVE THE BUSINESS AND IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT WAS CONTAINED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE, AMES IS CLAIMING THAT GARETH FATCHETT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED AND ENCOURAGED THE INVESTORS TO JOIN THE TRUST.
THIS IS ALARMING.
May 2014: Harlequin was told by RL that entry into the Trust is contingent on RL clients agreeing that they have considered the Due Diligence Report. Harlequin see a draft of the Due Diligence Report that relied on out of date, inaccurate information and was spun in such a way as to mislead investors into thinking that Harlequin is arguably insolvent and they should not enter into the Trust.
OUR COMMENT; THEY HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
The current situation is that Harlequin is still committed to working with RL and entering into the Trust. Since the Report was released, many investors have contacted Harlequin to express grave concerns over RL’s conduct, not to mention the quality of its Interim Report after it received what some are claiming to be circa £1 million in investor fees. A common theme is that the Interim Report is intended to be a killer blow to Harlequin and the hope of future investment returns so they can reap considerable profit from redress claims. There are also fears that Harlequin has been tricked by RL into urging investors to becoming its clients so they can liquidate Harlequin for their own motives. Clearly we would hope that this is not the case, although we understand the concern, especially when the misleading Interim Report was released in spite of RL itself announcing publically that its clients wanted to wait for the finished Report with Harlequin’s full responses. There are other reasons but we will get to some of those later.
OUR COMMENT; THE INTERIM REPORT WAS BASED ON DUE DILIGENCE, THE DUE DILIGENCE UNCOVERED SOME VERY SERIOUS ISSUES WITH HARLEQUIN, BUT IT WAS AMES WHO DEALT HARLEQUIN THE KILLER BLOW LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS CARRIED OUT THROUGH HIS GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND TOTAL INCOMPETENCE.
In the meantime, please continue reading below for a response to the key points set out in the public information that has been made available relating to Harlequin. RL has indicated that not seeking to amend a section of the Report is an admission by Harlequin to agreeing to that part of the Report; Harlequin would therefore like to make it clear that it does not agree with the Interim Report or the draft Due Diligence Report in its entirety.
OUR COMMENT; WE WOULD NOT EXPECT YOU TO SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT,
Executive Summary – Due Diligence
It is our view that the RL documentation we have seen is strewn with errors and therefore should not have been published in any form until Harlequin had the opportunity to respond. Despite Harlequin not expecting the Trust to be contingent on the due diligence report, Harlequin has always maintained that if a report was to be sent out, it is better to release one final report that all investors can rely upon, with all factual errors corrected and no miscommunication of the facts. It is unfortunate that RL has ignored this sensible approach.
OUR COMMENT; YOU HAVE HAD ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO CORRECT MANY OF THE HISTORICAL ISSUES, YET YOU HAVE ABJECTLY FAILED TO DO SO.
YOU CLAIM THE RL DOCUMENTATION IS STREWN WITH ERRORS, WELL
WE WOULD ASK YOU TO HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, YOU TOTALLY CONTRADICT YOUR SELF IN MANY AREAS OF YOUR PATHETIC LETTER.
Gareth Fatchett was clearly under an immense amount of pressure from a small number of particularly hostile investors and felt the need to send something out before leaving for his holiday. The unfortunate result is we now have to review the information released in the public domain, respond appropriately, and deal with the fallout which will no doubt further delay Harlequin’s response to the draft report. On 23rd May 2014, Harlequin notified Gareth Fatchett of the probable delay, explaining that 3rd June may be difficult to meet due to the need to seek advice on certain elements from overseas lawyers. Mr Fatchett’s response was:
OUR COMMENT; BULLSHIT, YOU HAVE HAD YEARS TO RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST YOU, YES YEARS, THE DUE DILIGENCE ONLY CONFIRMS WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANY FOR YEARS.
“You take as long as you need to. We understand that the overseas work can take a little more time.”
OUR COMMENT; LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE RECORDED ALL YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH GARETH FATCHETT, SO HIS ONLY OPTION IS TO NOW STOP ACTING FOR HIS CLIENTS AND MAKE A FULL REPORT TO THE AUTHORITIES. SEE, MR AMES, IF WHAT YOU STATE ABOUT MR. FATCHETT IN YOUR LETTER IS CORRECT, THEN MR. FATCHETT HAS MISLED HIS CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS, AND GIVEN THE DECENT SOUL THAT YOU ARE, WE KNOW THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE YOUR INVESTORS REPRESENTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS WHOLLY CONFLICTED.
We would remind investors that Harlequin only received RL’s draft report on 13th May 2014. On receipt, Harlequin explained it would take at least 3 weeks to go through the draft, collate comments from UK-based and overseas advisors, and report back on any inaccuracies. In truth, we had not expected to find as many inaccurate statements and assumptions as the report actually contained, but every effort is being made to complete the response as quickly as possible.
OUR COMMENT; WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR WORK OF FICTION, YOU HAVE ALREADY CONTRADICTED YOURSELF IN THIS LETTER, SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT INSTALLMENT OF BULLSHIT YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO CONCOCT.
With this in mind, we wish to make it clear to all purchasers that Harlequin’s response may not be available to RL until later in June 2014. We have little control over the length of time it will take for our overseas lawyers to revert to us on the issues we are putting to them, especially where there are numerous significant errors in the information received, but we will do what we can to ensure the delay is minimal.
OUR COMMENT; WHERE ARE YOU GETTING ALL THE MONEY TO PAY YOUR OVERSEAS LAWYERS, AND OF COURSE IT WILL TAKE YOU A LOT LONGER TO FORMULATE A RESPONSE. BUT IF YOU HAD OPERATED YOUR BUSINESSES IN A PROPER MANNER YOU WOULD NOT HAVE NEEDED THE TIME.
Defects/Errors
One of the criticisms that Gareth Fatchett has levied at Harlequin is that we have not identified the defects/errors in the draft report sent to Harlequin.The reason for this is that Harlequin does not want to provide a piecemeal, limited response and instead wants to provide a full and detailed collated response. RL has even gone as far as suggesting that this illustrates there are no such defects. There are too many issues to raise in this statement and we shall let our response speak for itself when finalised; however, by way of example, we can confirm that Mr Fatchett’s own solicitor in St Vincent & The Grenadines has withdrawn his 14 page report which was annexed to the draft Due Diligence Report received by Harlequin earlier this month. This is due to the fact that this alone contained many errors as to the correct legal position on the island. The errors included, but are not limited to, incorrect details of judgments entered against Harlequin, incorrect statements regarding ownership of land and the ability to have land purchased by a third party if not registered. This general misunderstanding of the situation and lack of liaison with Harlequin’s advisors resulted in misconceptions which RL sought to seize on. In fact, any outstanding issues in St Vincent & The Grenadines are agreed to be nothing more than minor conveyancing defects.
OUR COMMENT; IF MR. FATCHETT’S OWN SOLICITOR HAS WITHDRAWN THE 14 PAGE REPORT CONTAINED HERE
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/7b7493c4a57530d8c394310971b9a686
WHY DID MR. FACTHETT SEE FIT TO PUT IT UP ON HIS FORUM YESTERDAY, AND FURTHERMORE WHY HAS MR. FACTHETT NOT COMMUNICATED THE FACT THAT THE LETTER WAS WITHDRAWN TO HIS CLIENTS AND HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW IT WAS WITHDRAWN. WILLIAMS AND WILLIAMS ACT FOR RL DO THEY NOT? OR DO THEY ACT FOR YOU MR. AMES, PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS ONE.
Breach of Confidential Information
One of the main issues that Harlequin has with the draft and interim reports from RL is the fact that they both contain confidential information sent to RL by or via Harlequin in accordance with a Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement. Harlequin and its investors have endured the severe harm of “Harlecon” and other libellous outlets, so we enter into such agreements from time to time in good faith to ensure that Harlequin is protected. For the record, Harlecon was set up and run by Jeremy Newman, then a Wilkins Kennedy accountant, and a full apology was received in the settlement of defamation proceedings against Mr Newman and Wilkins Kennedy.
OUR COMMENT; FULL APOLOGY EH?????? WE TAKE IT YOU EITHER CANT READ OR YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE JOINT STATEMENT ON THE MATTER, WE ADVISE YOU TO SEEK FURTHER LEGAL ADVICE ON YOUR STATEMENT ABOVE, WE HAVE READ THE STATEMENT AND WE CAN FIND NO FULL APOLOGY.
Harlequin has stated, both privately and publically, that it intends to allow the use of relevant documents and information sent to RL under the confidentiality agreement when we have responded in full on the content of the draft due diligence report. Notwithstanding these assurances, RL has not only led investors to believe that consent is going to be withheld but it has published some of the material in breach of the confidentiality agreement.
OUR COMMENT; WHY THE NEED FOR CONFIDENTIALITY, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE????
The Report and, as will soon be clear, the main due diligence report from RL are selective in what they show and the direction in which they try to lead the reader. Much has been made of confidentiality and yet RL has chosen to show some of the material that is clearly confidential but not all. For example, the interim Report discloses the RLB valuation report but not the BCQS valuation report. RL has both and is well aware that the BCQS report supersedes the RLB report.
OUR COMMENT; IS THIS THE RLB REPORT YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/958b7d8658d86363adc740e671587604
THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON BFP LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE, OR THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON HARLECON, JEEZ WE DID NOT IT WAS CONFIDENTIAL OOOPS SORRY 😦
DOES THE BCQS REPORT ALSO SAY YOU OWN 72 ACRES FEE SIMPLE????
This cynical and rather unprofessional approach to its obligations under the confidentiality agreement supports Harlequin’s concerns about releasing material to RL, with or without the agreement in place. These documents are now on “Barbados Free Press”, a fringe blogging website we know Gareth Fatchett monitors closely, and are available for the public to view at any time.
OUR COMMENT; NOW WE DONT KNOW THAT GARETH FATHCETT MONITORS THIS SITE CLOSELY BUT WE DO KNOW SOMEONE WHO DOES, YES ITS YOU MR AMES THE TURD, SORRY TOAD FROM BASILDON, SEE LINK BELOW, NOT ONLY DO YOU MONITOR THIS SITE BUT YOU HAVE ATTEMPTED TO BLOCK THE PUBLIC FROM VIEWING INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANIES THROUGH YOUR RECENT ACTIONS.
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOT com/2014/05/20/dave-ames-and-harlequin-property-file-legal-papers-against-barbados-free-press-readers/
One such document is an unsigned draft witness statement by Jim Baker. This statement was prepared by Mr Baker for confidential use in other proceedings. In order to be helpful, Mr Baker confidentially sent the draft to Gareth Fatchett. It is unsigned and not in its final form. As a solicitor, Mr Fatchett will also be aware that a document prepared for one set of proceedings should not be used in any other proceedings without permission of the court. Astoundingly, this confidential, incomplete document was deemed to be an acceptable document to release with RL’s interim Report and has of course found its way onto Barbados Free Press.
OUR COMMENT; YOU MEAN THE WITNESS STATEMENT CALLED “WITNESSSTATEMENTFINALON 16414″, THE ONE BELOW
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/0fb4fba61b7f3a71e5063e0d90565406
THIS CAN EASILY BE CHECKED AGAINST THE WITNESS STATEMENT FILED IN THE COURT ACTION OF THE 25 CLAIMANTS AGAINST MR AND MRS AMES, IF ITS NOT THE SAME THEN YOU ARE CORRECT IF IT IS WHATS THE PROBLEM??????????
BUT THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED, WHY DID MR. BAKER GIVE HIS CLIENTS’ THATS YOU AMES, THIS WITNESS STATEMENT TO MR. FATCHETT IF THE STATEMENT WAS INCOMPLETE, WHY DID YOU GIVE HIM PERMISSION TO DO THIS, OR HAS HE JUST BROKEN THE RULES THAT PERTAIN TO HIS PROFESSION? IF YOU GAVE HIM PERMISSION, WHY DID YOU, YOU STATE YOURSELF THAT THE WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD ONLY BE USED IN ANY OTHER PROCEEDINGS WITH OUT THE PERMISSION OF THE COURT.
,
SO IS JIM BAKER NOW IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, IS IGNORANCE A DEFENCE. WHY BLAME RL, YOU OR JIM BAKER GAVE THE DOCUMENT TO RL, SO WHY NOW BLAME THEM.
WE DONT UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING HERE, YOU LOOSING IT AMES OLD CHAP.
RL has requested on numerous occasions to be provided with a full copy of our investor database. We have rejected these approaches for a number of reasons, not least data protection.
OUR COMMENT; GOOD BOY DAVE.
We firmly believe that the above demonstrates that Harlequin is correct to be cautious about entrusting commercially sensitive information to RL. It seems that the firm has little regard for its duty of confidentiality towards Harlequin and we can only hope the same duty it owes to its clients is better served.
OUR COMMENT; IRONIC COMING FORM YOU, WHAT ABOUT YOUR DUTY TO YOUR CLIENTS EH, SORRY THEY ARE NOT CLIENTS THEY ARE AS YOU SO OFTEN PUT IT INVESTORS, SO WHERES YOUR DUTY TOWARDS THEM???????
Accounting Information
In the interim Report and various updates, RL has made a great deal of the importance of Jim Baker’s figures. We agree that Mr Baker’s figures are important, although the information being relied on by RL was prepared in 2012 and is still to date unaudited and cannot therefore be relied on by RL or clients as accurate. We feel it is right to point out that Mr Baker was supposed to be undertaking a review of the figures and delivery of a complete accounts package, which was agreed to be funded by RL. Mr Fatchett and Harlequin acknowledged that some of the accounts needed to be brought up to date for the Resort Development Companies and the intention was for Baker Clarke to carry out the work required to achieve this over a 6 week period, funded by RL from the sums paid by investors.
OUR COMMENT; EH HELLO? WHO FILED UNAUDITED AND THEREFORE BY YOUR OWN WORDS UNRELIABLE ACCOUNTING INFORMATION IN ST. VINCENT?
SEE THE FOLLOWING POST “DUE DILIGENCE PART 10 THE FILED ACCOUNTS AND INCOMPETENCE OR WORSE WHOLESALE CORRUPTION AMONGST THE ORGANS OF THE STATE OF ST. VINCENT POSSIBLY? POSTED ON May 25, 2014 at 1:10 pm
YOU CAN FIND IT HERE ITS THE FOURTH ONE DOWN FROM THE TOP
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOTcom/2014/05/23/svg-high-court-registrar-resigns-suddenly-rumours-flying-about-harlequin-connection/
YOU SAY MR. BAKER WAS SUPPOSED TO BE UNDERTAKING A REVIEW OF THE FIGURES AND DELIVERING A COMPLETE ACCOUNTS PACKAGE??? WE ASSUME THIS WAS TO INCLUDE ALL AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE RESORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES BECAUSE AS YOU CLEARLY HAVE POINTED OUT UNAUDITED ACCOUNTS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON.
AND RL CLIENTS WERE TO PAY FOR THIS, ?????? RATHER ODD, WHY DONT YOU PAY FOR IT, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO THIS AND YOU FAILED FOR 7 YEARS TO FILE ANY AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR YOUR RDC’S WHY SHOULD RL CLIENTS PAY FOR THIS.
AND IS JIM BAKER QUALIFIED OR INDEED CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT SUCH A HUGE EXERCISE IN 6 WEEKS????
GOOD ON YA JIM WE SAY.
Sadly, Mr Fatchett had a last minute change of heart on this, citing spurious reasons for his change of mind and leaving Harlequin in a position where there was no funding available for the work and no time to achieve it prior to the release of the Due Diligence Report (Harlequin will however undertake production of the Accounts separately, which will take more time). We are not saying that this was an intentional ploy to enable RL to state that the financial accounting for the Resort Development Companies was poor, but we have to question Mr Fatchett on his motives for promising to fund the exercise and withdrawing the offer at the eleventh hour. To date, Mr Fatchett, when pressed, has failed to give a cogent explanation on this point.
OUR COMMENT; WHY WAS THERE NO FUNDING AVAILABLE TO TO WHAT YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO? YOU STATED EARLIER THAT GARETH FATCHETT WAS MISLEADING INVESTORS ON THE SOLVENCY OF THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES, SEE OUR EARLIER COMMENT ON THIS ; THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
There are plenty of examples of how the Report is selective in how it conveys information. This is clear from the text itself when examined closely. An example of this is where the Report states that it has information from Jim Baker that it cannot disclose but which would put some of the financial data into context regarding how the investor payments have been spent. Despite this, RL has still decided to report on the data it can report on with no context. This is one of the reasons why Harlequin sought to discourage RL from reporting on its findings until it had Harlequin’s response and was able to use all of the data available.
OUR COMMENT; YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAVE PREVENTED RL FROM RELEASING ALL THE DATA.
Panorama Letter
It is interesting that RL refers to the Jim Baker spreadsheet as contained in the document that Harlequin sent to Panorama last year. The Panorama letter, which was expected to be a confidential communication between Harlequin and the BBC, was leaked and planted on an anonymous blog, presumably to pressurise Harlequin into waiving confidentiality. This is not a practice that Harlequin endorses or reacts positively to, particularly when disclosure has been agreed on the aforementioned conditions.
OUR COMMENT; THE NEXT TIME YOU SHOULD THINK MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT WHO YOU TRY TO SHAFT, WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND, AND THE PANORAMA LETTER MAKES NO MENTION OF JIM BAKER OR INDEED THAT IT IS CONFIDENTIAL.
ANYWAY WHAT KIND OF FOOL WOULD SEND “CONFIDENTIAL” INFORMATION TO A PROGRAM INVESTIGATING THEM FOR WRONGDOING. AND WHY IS EVERYTHING YOU SEND “CONFIDENTIAL”???
The Trust
Harlequin wants investors to understand that, with or without RL, the trust can proceed. Harlequin has been clearly advised that its most valuable property can be securitised and therefore the initial idea of providing such assets to secure investor monies is a reality. We would prefer to continue working with RL but only if the firm can show that it is working with us and not against us and our investors’ best interests. The firm’s recent activity and failure to listen to Harlequin’s reasonable requests to delay reporting until the due diligence report’s errors are rectified do leave us wondering about its true motives. Further evidence of this is demonstrated by RL’s recent biased survey questions, which are clearly designed to elicit the results that it is after.
OUR COMMENT; RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS, NOT BY YOU, YOU ARE THE ENEMY, IT IS BECAUSE OF YOUR GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND INCOMPETENCE THAT RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED.
YOU ARE FULLY AWARE OF THE TERM CONFLICT OF INTEREST, YET YOU WILL ONLY WORK WITH RL IF THEY WILL WORK WITH YOU NOT AGAINST YOU, WELL SORRY MATEY, THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS,
AS STATED THEY ARE ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS TO SEEK THE BEST POSSIBLE RECOVERY FOR THEIR CLIENTS GIVEN HOW YOU MANAGED TO FUCK THINGS UP SO EASILY.
YOUR BEST INTERESTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF RL’S CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS AS YOU CALL THEM.
On the subject of the use of the investor trust payments, investors should understand that RL has received thousands of payments of £200 plus VAT. Harlequin has requested confirmation of the amount collected and full transparency in spending, etc., but unfortunately this information has not been forthcoming from RL. Harlequin feels extremely let down by RL’s perceived misrepresentation as Harlequin directed thousands of investors to RL to enter into Pink Forms and pay monies to join the trust. Harlequin encouraged investors to instruct RL to make the payments on the clear understanding that the firm would be using the payments to pay for professional fees to assist the Harlequin recovery, including, but not limited to:
OUR COMMENT; THIS IS RICH COMING FROM YOU, YOU OF ALL PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR TRANSPARENCY FROM RL ON HOW THEY HAVE SPENT THEIR CLIENTS MONEY, LOL GO DO ONE YOU HYPOCRITE.
– valuations at each of the sites (rather than demand and seek to rely on Harlequin’s complete valuations);
– preparation of accounting information;
– financial due diligence report to attract external finance;
– Pitmans’ fees (of which 80% remains outstanding).
OUR COMMENT; EXCUSE US????? YOU ARE ASKING THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST £400 MILLION TO ASSIST YOU IN PAYING FOR THE VALUATIONS OF YOUR RESORTS WHICH YOU HAVE ALWAYS STATED ARE RISING IN VALUE, SO SURELY IF YOU STATED THAT PURCHASER PROPERTIES WERE RISING IN VALUE YOU HAVE HAD REGULAR PROFESSIONAL VALUATIONS CONDUCTED. YES NO?????
YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD YOUR ACCOUNTS UP TO DATE AS YOU WENT ALONG, NOW WAIT FOR 7 YEARS TO JIM BAKER TO COBBLE TOGETHER SOMETHING IN THE 11TH HOUR AND TO GET SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY HIM TO DO THIS……
YOU KEEP TELLING US YOU ARE ON THE VERGE OF OBTAINING EXTERNAL FINANCE, SO EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED YOUR INVESTORS TO PAY FOR THE DUE DILIGENCE REPORT TO ATTRACT EXTERNAL FINANCE. LOL STOP DIGGING THE HOLE YOU IDIOT.
NOW PITMANS FEES COULD CAUSE GF A LITTLE PROBLEM.
What is clear is that RL has received a significant amount of money from Harlequin’s investors on the basis that the money would be used (as confirmed by Gareth Fatchett at investor seminars) to assist in the set up and entry into the proposed Harlequin Investor Trust. It is clear now that this has not been done.
We do know that Regulatory Legal instructed an insolvency restructuring solicitor in Grand Cayman to prepare a report, which begs the question, has Regulatory legal genuinely sought to set up the Trust or was this a smokescreen to generate funds with which to “rescue” Harlequin after forcing it into liquidation?
Harlequin understands that a growing number of investors are losing confidence in RL due to their perceived negative agenda. Indeed, Harlequin is spending a great deal of time attempting to stop investors taking action against RL for return of monies that are now believed to have been obtained under false pretences. As stated above, Harlequin remains committed to working with RL to enter into the investor Trust provided RL can demonstrate that it is equally committed to achieving the same result.
OUR COMMENT; HANG ON HERE A MINUTE, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT RL HAVE TAKEN PURCHASER MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES?????? OH YEAH YOU ARE….
ANYWAY THIS IS WHERE RL HAVE TO WALK AWAY FROM AMES, IT IS CLEAR THAT AMES CLAIMS THAT RL WERE WORKING WITH HIM, YET PURCHASERS THOUGHT THAT RL WAS WORKING FOR THEM, INDEED RL REFER TO PURCHASERS AS THEIR CLIENTS, WHAT AMES IS REALLY DEMONSTRATING HERE IS A MASSIVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND THAT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED BY THE AUTHORITIES, THE INDEPENDENCE OF RL AND GARETH FATCHETT HAS CLEARLY BEEN QUESTIONED HERE ALBEIT INADVERTENTLY AND AMES SIR, YOU ARE MAKING SOME VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST GARETH FATCHETT, WE ALSO ASSUME YOU HAVE THE RECORDINGS OF YOUR CONVERSATIONS TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.
IN ESSENCE WE BELIEVE YOU ARE HOLDING A GUN TO GARETH FATCHETT’S HEAD AND NOW EXPECT HIM TO DO YOUR BIDDING.
AKIN TO BLACK MAIL, WELL MORE FOOL TO GARETH FATCHETT IF HE CANNOT ROBUSTLY DEFEND THE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS YOU MR. AMES ARE MAKING.
Completions
Harlequin understands that RL is now telling its clients not to proceed with investor completions as Harlequin is using sale monies to assist with the running of its business. Harlequin has indeed put completion monies received to good use by investing in the resorts and the Harlequin business. Such investment has added significant value to the resorts. RL has been fully aware of this since the first meeting in 2013 and only chooses to make an issue of this now. Harlequin has recently completed on its first property at Buccament Bay Resort by transferring legal title to a purchaser and has many more completions in the pipeline. A more detailed statement about this will follow.
OUR COMMENT; SORRY WE ARE TOTALLY CONFUSED HERE, YOU HAVE ACHIEVED ONE COMPLETION SO WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ????????????? SORRY YOU HAVE TOTALLY LOST US HERE……TOTALLY……..
Conclusion
The interim Report states that RL “does not see how any investor can make an informed decision without” the financial information showing how the £400m has been invested. Harlequin agrees with this which is why it has always asserted that no report should be published until all of the facts are available for publication. Despite this, RL could not resist the temptation to publish an interim document, which is meaningless without the context required to help investors make the decision as to whether or not to enter the trust.
OUR COMMENT; WE ALREADY KNOW THAT £200 MILLION OF THE £400 MILLION WENT TO YOUR WIFE AND SONS COMPANY INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE RESORTS, SO REALLY WE DONT NEED TO KNOW MUCH MORE NOW DO WE……………
The advice and conclusions reached in the Report are, in our opinion, naïve and based on misinformation. After all of this time, we cannot fathom why. The Report’s conclusions are alarmist and extend to personal attacks on the Ames family, which is not considered necessary in a supposedly factual report assessing whether or not to enter into an investor trust. We have now reached an impasse with RL that we hope to navigate through. If not, we hope we have proved by this more detailed response that Harlequin is committed to fighting for its investors and providing the best future possible for its investors. As we have said above, the trust can still go ahead with the security intended to be used to protect investors. Whether or not this is with RL is yet to be seen.
OUR COMMENT; YOU LETTER HAS DONE NOTHING BUT DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU ARE A TOTALLY DELUDED FANTASIST, A LIAR, A HYPOCRITE AND TRUE TO FORM YOU HAVE CONTINUED TO DROP EVERYONE ELSE IN IT, REGULATORY LEGAL AND JIM BAKER NOW FOLLOW THE LONG LIST OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND COMPANIES YOU HAVE SOUGHT TO DESTROY.
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT NOW HAVE MANY QUESTIONS TO ANSWER, NO DOUBT IF THEY DO NOT TOE THE COMPANY LINE, YOU WILL SEEK RETRIBUTION THROUGH THE USE OF RECORDED CONVERSATIONS PERHAPS,
EITHER WAY THE TRUST IS DEAD, YOU ARE FINISHED, ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD NOW PUT THEIR TRUST (NO PUN INTENDED) IN YOU. YOU SOW WHAT YOU REAP YOU TWISTED BITTER DELUDED FOOL YOU.
Best regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
BELOW IS THE RESPONSE FROM RL AND GARETH FATCHETT TO THE TOXIC TURDS MISSIVE LAST NIGHT.
AT LEAST RL RESPONDED IN A TIMELY MANNER AND DID NOT NEED A GAZILLION MONTHS TO RESPOND
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT RESPONDED VERY QUICKLY TO THE GARBLED RAMBLINGS OF THE TOXIC TOAD. SEE BELOW.
Harlequin Update
Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 29, 2014 at 10:25pm
All, We have received the update. We are not surprised at the content nor the tone. We produced a detailed Interim Report for investors to consider.
Our Interim Report is just that. It could be amended if we were persuaded on material matters. Some minor matters were drawn to our attention via our SVG lawyers. Report amended and posted. Hardly unfair conduct.
The same applies to the other elements of our report. We will amend if necessary.Being lectured on accountability and transparency from a firm who refuse to allow investors to understand where £400m has been spent is galling.
We did not want to rely on the BBC Panorama figures. We would have preferred to use the James Baker figures, but we were not allowed to. We did not post the BBC Panorama response on BFP. We did copy it and put it to Harlequin that the figures were accurate. No response.
We had discussed paying for the RDC accounts to be brought up to date. That would have meant RL having access to all the underlying information (bank accounts etc). At that point, we were told we could pay, but we could not see the data.
Only a fool would have proceeded with the goodwill gesture at that point.
The suggestion we have not paid Pitmans fees is wrong. Pitmans client is Harlequin Hotels &Resorts (UK) Limited.
Not Regulatory Legal Solicitors. We were asked to pay £10k plus VAT as a contribution. This we have done. Any further payment would be on a goodwill basis from us. We are not feeling lots of goodwill at present.
We have consulted insolvency practitioners in the UK and abroad. Why would we not do that ?
We state in our report that Harlequin is arguably insolvent. We do not just make these statements lightly. We have no intention to buy or be part of any buying group. We are a solicitors practice, not a hotel operator !
We expected a backlash. We are not going to be deflected from our task which is to present the facts to clients. If a client wants to believe the “everything is brilliant” mantra, so be it. We will stick to our position and argue robustly and fairly. Investors would expect no less.
Dave it’s over, ask Simple Simon
No, No Lets keep it going too much at risk!!
Why have these long winded posts been put on here twice? And on different threads? What’s the point of that.
Perhaps the posts are indeed very important, the spat between RL and Ames may be all a game. Those on the RL site seem to be lapping it up, but I for one now believe there is a lot more to this.
I have on no authority – good, bad, or otherwise – that the
sole person to close was Sean Ghent.
Catching up – and Laarrd have mercy, what a lot there is to catch up on.
Amid all of the claim and counter claim over DD, payment of fees, inward investment, fair or not conduct, conflicts of interest etc etc is there any information about the actual running of the resort at BB or Blu Hotel? Just minor things like occupancy rates (seasonal and year on year) management reports, schedule of dilapidation’s, replacements and renovation. Analysis of market trends in the sector, overview of competitors products, profit generated by guest stay etc etc – nothing important of course, just the usual day to day business of running a hotel. Has someone (anyone?) who knows anything about Caribbean hotel management been consulted?
If I was an investor about to hand over more money to become the freeholder of a unit I would want someone who understood why the above just might be important to be analyzing and advising on my options. I’d want to know exactly what my ongoing liabilities might be in respect of costs associated with running the resort/hotel and I’d damn sure want to know what the competition has been up to while the months and years have dragged by with apparently little or no progress in resolving the current impasse.
Of course one could just rely on the ‘build it and they will come’ concept, but quite why a work of fiction about deadmen getting out of their graves to play baseball has any relevance to modern hotel management escapes me.
Buccament Bay & Blu Revenues
anonfiles DOT com/file/08f3bb53c4f0e980d76f731e165b3cc0
Blu Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/1db5a0fd046455eaa4e779fa13d5c892
Buccameny Bay Occupancy 2013
anonfiles DOT com/file/21c82da8667322f8d1f4240cc29d067b
RESPONSE
@ Anonymous
May 30, 2014 at 5:59 pm
Lets look at the Hotel Arrival Production Report Produced.
St Vincents & Grendines > Buccament Bay Resort
Property Group = Harlequin Hotels, Booking Month = JAN 2013, Arrival Year = 2013
The sheet shows the avg room rate as being 657.19 per night, so the avg room rate for 7 nights is 4600. The rate is not expressed in any particular currency, we will for the purposes of this example state the rate in £ Stg.. If two people have stayed in this room we need to deduct the flight costs from this. The avg flight cost from London to Barbados was £700pp Economy. The avg return flight from Barbados to St. Vincent is £190pp Total £1780
The net room rate before room tax is therefore £2820.00
Deductions SVG room tax @10% £282.00
Total £2,538.00
Other Deductions
Fixed Operational Costs
Below based on 60% Occupancy
Insurance per room per night £8.00 x 7 = £56.00
Local Staff Costs per room per night £16.00 x 7 = £112.00
Electricity £15.00 x 7 = £105.00
Water £2.00 x 7 = £14.00
Maintenance £5.50 x 7 = £38.50
Management £36.00 x 7 = £252.00
Security £4.00 x 7= £28.00
Satelite TV and Phone £1.20 x 7 = £8.40
Laundry £1.50 x 7 = £10.50
Total £624.40
Food and Beverage pp £40.00 x 7 = £280 x 2 = £560.00
Pat Cash/ Soccer School/ Singing School/ Cricket Coaching/ Sunset Tours/ Non Motorised Water Sports / Free Spa Treatments £35 x 7 = £245.00
Total Other Deductions £1429.00
Total Net £2,538.00 – £1,429.00 = £1,109.00
Note; whilst we do not know what currency the Tailormade data is in, we have assumed it is £ Sterling.
@BBaywatch
These basic questions around the sustainability of the resort businesses have rarely been asked because everyone seems obsessed only with the build phase. It’s so obvious that the real value of any unit is solely related to its profitability within a resort.
The business model for ops has never been very clear. The original intention was not to offer AI but this was changed when BB went live. This completely shifted the goal posts with respect to the 50:50 net room rate share because the amounts left after catering costs had been deducted might be tiny.
You raise the interesting point about how losses will be dealt with. Anyone thinking of completing needs to be sure they won’t be burdened with the legal responsibility to share any loss made by the resort.
@ Anonymous 7.04am
Shouldn’t your end figure of £1109 be multiplied by 60% to take account of the occupancy rate? And although you have included a figure for routine maintenance I don’t think this would go anywhere near a complete redecorate and furnishings and fitting replacement every two years (as expected at a 5* plus resort).
@anon
You’ll have to ask Henry OWare – he is the one who posted the overview of accounts. Someone posted the Tailormade stats – which is top line only.
I think trying to estimate bottom line is an uphill battle; too many variables. For example, what about insurance costs for the resort? Surely that flood rose its premium somewhat?
And plus, I remember the numbers quoted by Tailormade were all in USD (IE nightly rate was $x)
Dear Investor,
Following speculation and confusion recently circulated by Gareth Fatchips who is working with the Irish builder to damage your investment; regarding our ongoing mission to fulfil our promises to purchasers and facilitate completions on properties within the first phase of Buccament Bay Resort, I thought it was a good time to outline how completion monies are being used and the benefits they are bringing to Harlequin, its developments, and our investors.
Contracts and Completion
When investors bought property from Harlequin, they were issued with a standard preliminary contract which stated that 95% of the purchase price was to be paid during the build by way of stage payments, with a final 5% payable on completion, which is why properties were sold off-plan well below market value.
As you are aware, phase one of Buccament Bay Resort is ready, open and trading, and therefore anyone looking to complete at Buccament Bay Resort in line with the preliminary contract is expected to pay Harlequin the balance of 95% prior to completion. It has been widely known in recent times that completion balances have given the Harlequin business the impetus required to push the business forward in difficult times. At no time has Harlequin mooted or suggested that Harlequin operates an escrow account or that funds will be held in an escrow account as suggested by others. On the contrary, Harlequin needs to utilise 95% of completion funds (final 5% due on transfer of title) for investment in the business and continued development.
If Harlequin simply held completion monies in a separate account, the business would stagnate. Completion monies are therefore put to good use by opening more properties, improving facilities at our hotels to drive revenue and ultimately rental returns, and contributing to the general running of the business. Completion monies are driving the business forward and causing a ripple effect of productivity and progress that grows with each completion balance received.
So far this year we have achieved the following at Buccament Bay Resort with the help of completion funds:
Cabanas
30 new units have opened, each one developed to a 5 star standard.
Conferencing facilities
Four new conference rooms have opened. As you saw earlier in the year, the Caricom Conference was held at Buccament Bay Resort for 300 delegates, many of whom stayed on resort, which generated revenue and PR. We already have four more conferences booked before the end of this year.
Bamboo
The restaurant has been refurbished, upgraded and reopened.
Safran
The restaurant has been upgraded and reopened.
Ginger & Co.
We have purchased and are awaiting delivery of new kitchen equipment so the new restaurant can be opened later this year.
Landscaping
We are in the process of fitting new fencing along the river bank and extending the landscaping around the 30 new cabanas.
Back of house
In a drive towards improved economy, ecology and sustainability, we are in the process of opening our own vegetable garden and similar facilities, which will supply produce for the resort.
Laundry
We have now opened a brand new laundry, which is one of the most advance laundries of any hotel in the Caribbean and are continuing to expand on this to improve the standards of cleaning services in the hotel. We are also in the process of creating a dry cleaning plant to offer additional services to guests.
Lastly, at blu, St Lucia
Due to the continued success of the hotel, we have opened 12 new rooms and upgraded the restaurant.
As you can see, completion monies have been spent on the hotels by making more properties available for investors to complete on and guests to occupy, as well as developing new or enhanced facilities. There can be no doubt that this significantly increases the valuation of both sites, and we expect this investment to generate increased revenues and enable Harlequin to meet its investors’ goals.
I recently had meetings in St Vincent with lawyers representing Harlequin and purchasers currently in the process of completing. I am pleased to report that progress is continuing and we have reason to believe there will be circa 100 investors with legal title on a Buccament Bay Resort property by the close of 2014.
It is essential for Harlequin’s restructuring process and the success of all investments that completions continue so that the momentum remains and funds are pumped back into our developments. With the support of external funding, this process will create a snowball effect that will enable Harlequin to develop and open hotels at an accelerated rate and provide purchasers with rental returns.
We have more completion opportunities available at Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia, so if you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available, please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can begin working towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:
01268 24 24 60
ddalligan@harlequinhotelsandresorts.com
vstenning@harlequinhotelsandresorts.com
Regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
Dave, Dave, I really have put people mind at rest with my latest update.
They will be happy now, don’t worry.
Erm, tricky subject Mr. Ames, but about my unrealistically high salary you pay me, you appear to have had one of those banking errors again.
Can I ask Postman Dan for a special loan?
Dear Dan,
Love the update mate, make me sounds dead, like clever an businessman like.
Say all about SIIPS have no plan or resume! I thought reading your stuff you had an opinion and are qualified to judge! That’s disappointing. Are you that Stevens guy been on other posts?
Why should the completion money go into an Escow account. Investors are being asked to pay the completion money due, the remaining 70%. The last 5% maybe as that is the legal title which is down to the lawyers doing their job in SVG. Who is Stevens?
We are not surprised that Ames and indeed Regulatory Legal have never produced the Tailormade spread sheets,. they demonstrate a terrible occupancy rate for what is considered the “HIGH” Season in the Caribbean. Mid December to Mid April. The occupancy rate shown is 9.29%, it is even worse when you include the Apartments, 6.2%
Further analysis demonstrates that for the month of January 2013 Saga holidays sold 55% of the rooms sold yet only accounted for 34% of the revenue.
We then look at “Bookings In Year” again Saga Holidays accounts for 29% of bookings but only 13.47% of revenue.
Then look at “Total Bookings for Year” Saga Holidays accounts for 20.6% of the room occupancy but only 9.65% of the revenue.
Another interesting statistic that can be gleaned from the document is that of the rooms sold in the “Bookings For Year” column (12.64% / 4613 room nights out of 36,500 available room nights in a year,) 21.63% / 998 of these were sold at over £800 per night per room. We are surprised by this given that Buccament Bay is being marketed to investors as a luxury destination marketed at the “HIGH” end of the business.
There were in reality only two types of rooms at the date the spread sheet was produced, Sea View and Garden View yet the disparity in the avg room rate is massive, ranging from an avg of £299.27 to £1274.67 a 433% difference.
Given that there are only two types of accommodation available and basing the exercise on return flights from the UK the following table has been compiled.
Bookings For Year
Note the Avg Room Rates are all inclusive and include Flights.
36500 room nights available
4613 room nights sold 12.64%
Room Nights Sold Breakdown
Avg Room Rate £200-£299 20.62% 950 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £300-£399 2.00% 94 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £400-£499 2.60% 120 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £500-£599 11.73% 541 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £600-£699 20.42% 942 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £700-£799 21.00% 952 Rooms
Sub Total 78.37% 3,599 Rooms
Revenue % Generated 68.56% £2,021,595.11
Avg Room Rate £800-£899 5.40% 263 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £900-£999 12.30% 569 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £1000-£1099 2.53% 117 Rooms
Avg Room Rate £1100-£1199 Blank
Avg Room Rate £1200-£1299 1.40% 65 Rooms
Sub Total 21.63% 1,014 Rooms
Revenue % Generated 31.44% £926,484.88
BCQS have ascribed a Value of c £148 Million to the Buccament Bay Resort as it stands, to do this they would have had to have recognized a net profit of some £14.8 Million a year for Buccament Bay.
Harlequin from the figures produced by Tailormade in 2013 generated turnover of £2,948,079.99 on sales on 12.64% of available rooms sold.
c39% of the £2,948,079 is for flights, £1149,750.00
Balance £1,798,329
c15% of this £1,798,329 has to be deducted for travel agent fees and SVG Room tax.
Balance £1528,579.65
If we allow for a 70% occupancy of the Hotel per year and using the Tailormade figures, the turnover for Buccament Bay would be c.£8,465,231.00 per year.
From this figure we have to deduct operational costs, insurances and food and beverage costs.
For the hotel industry the international norm is a 7.5% net profit and a 9.4% gross profit. Net profit is after all expense including taxes,while gross profits sales less cost of goods.
If we take international norms for Hotel Profits, Harlequin would be making c £ 634,892.32 profit a year. Thus giving the Resort a Value of
£6,348,923.00 a little different to the value of £148 Million given to it by BCQS.
The following document although produced in 2006 makes for interesting reading, especially given the returns that Ames was promising investors at the time.
http://www.caribbeanhotelandtourism.com/cshae/docs/Tax-and-Tourism-Study.pdf
@ It’s all in the SIPPs
May 31, 2014 at 11:50 am
The Harlequin contracts state that the 70% is due on completion, a unit can only be deemed complete by Harlequin once both the physical building is constructed and any impediments to its legal transfer to a purchaser can be demonstrated as having been removed.In the UK we would not pay the balance owing on the property until the day of exchange of contracts so why should it be any different when dealing with Ames in St. Vincent.?
A study from 2006 has no relevance. The information is out of date and misleading.
@Anon, it’s what is known as stage payments. Common in the building industry. It was laid out clearly in the contracts. In fact HP could have chased these payments earlier.
I thought you knew nothing All about SIIPS. I have a feeling your a switched on chappy as you call them. Say now- why don’t you give us all the plan? Weren’t you posting on the old RL site! Your style kinda tings a bell. Are you on the secure site! I hope so- you can give over the plan to RL an the guys there.
Yes I thought I recognised SIPPS as well
Yes he was handing out stick to everyone but especially the ones who seemed to know what they were on about! So maybe we need this SIPP chappy as you call him Enfield!
From Saga`s website it appears they are only offering a combined St Vincent (Buccament Bay) and St Lucia Holiday, 15 days…..dont see any separate offers for BB….wonder why?
@ It’s all in the SIPPs
May 31, 2014 at 12:36 pm
On the contrary Ames was stating anticipated returns to investors as far back as 2006, the date of the document, the basic mantra from Ames has not changed in the intervening period, neither has there been a seismic change in the thrust of the data contained in the document.
The hotel sector in the Caribbean has not been revolutionised since the date the document was produced, nor has there been a seismic shift (for the better anyway). Unless of course we are talking about redefining Luxury in the Caribbean.
@Anon, it’s what is known as stage payments. Common in the building industry. It was laid out clearly in the contracts. In fact HP could have chased these payments earlier.
Yes I fully understand the concept of stage payments, but you seem to fail to understand the Harlequin model, whether that is intentional or otherwise.
On the issue of the stage payments, Ames entered into what he called separate finance agreements with purchasers who elected to defer the payment of stage payments until completion, it would therefore have been next to impossible for Ames to have “legally anyway” chased the stage payments any earlier then as agreed with purchasers in the finance agreement, this agreement being on completion of the property.
And once the property is complete if Ames cannot demonstrate and prove that he is legally entitled to hand that property over to you, why should you and why would you hand over any money?
He has to prove to you that he can legally transfer title, otherwise what are you paying him for, are you paying him in the hope that he will use the money to try and get you title of your property after the fact???????
Lets not forget that Ames originally took deposits from investors on the pretence that he owned the land outright, with no incumbrances. All the cases against Ames to date, both those that have been successfully concluded for purchasers and those currently before the courts include clauses for misrepresentation.
Because St Lucia is crap. Without using the lure of BB no one would go there. This is what you were implying isn’t it?
The Sipp Chappies argument seems to be based around the fact that purchasers owe Ames money regardless by virtue of their contracts, what a load of &*^”%$%.
Good response Anon
Bestat Travel Uk today shows this offer for July 2014…BB all inclusive, includes Virgin Atlantic Flights, transfers from Barbados, 2 persons, GBP 473 per night(two people) , garden suite.Good god, there is no profit in that for BB, is there?
DUE DILIGENCE 15 THE END GAME, SO GARETH FATCHETT HAS MISUSED CLIENT FUNDS, SEE OUR COMMENTS, ITS OVER, IT NOW HAS TO BE. GOODNIGHT
May 30, 2014 at 8:27 pm
BELOW IS AN INCREDIBLE LETTER FROM DAVID AMES ISSUED TONIGHT, ALLEGING AMONGST OTHER THINGS DECEIT AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION BY RL AND GARETH FATCHETT AND JIM BAKER GETS A DISHONOURABLE MENTION TOO.
Dear Investor,
Harlequin values each and every investor and will neither survive nor deliver investments without the full support and trust of Harlequin’s loyal investor base.
OUR COMMENT; ONE LOOK AT THE RL FORUM QUESTIONS THE DELUDED TOAD’S STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS “LOYAL INVESTOR BASE”
BELOW IS ONE OF MANY ATYPICAL COMMENTS.
May 28, 2014 at 9:20am
“I would like to say that i am shocked by this news but to be perfectly honest nothing about this man nor the depths in which he will stoop would surprise me.
Yet again DA makes a massive mistake only succeeding in ensuring investors have even less faith & hammering home the need to remove DA from the hub if there would ever be a going forward plan.”
Regulatory Legal (‘RL’) disappointingly but unsurprisingly issued an Interim Executive Summary and Enclosures (‘Report’) to its clients on Friday 23rd May 2014 against the advice of Harlequin. The Report, hosted on a supposedly “secure” RL website, was posted on Barbados Free Press within hours and is now a matter of public record. Harlequin has now considered the content of the Report and we set out a full response below that we urge all investors to read.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES WERE YOU HOPING TO HIDE THE INFORMATION.???????? AND WE SAY TOUGH SHIT THAT THIS AND THE OTHER DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
However, before we delve into why publishing a summary of the draft due diligence report, sent to Harlequin on 13th May 2014 and reliant on inaccurate and misleading information, was a premature move by RL, we would like to make clear the difficulties that Harlequin has faced in the months leading up to this Report.
OUR COMMENT; WHAT ABOUT COMING CLEAN ON THE DIFFICULTIES THAT HARLEQUIN HAS FACED SINCE THE DELUDED DWARF BEGAN THIS JOURNEY 8 YEARS AGO.
September 2013 – January 2014: The initial talks. RL confirmed to Harlequin that an investor-led trust is, in their view, the best way to secure investments by paving the way for external investment. Harlequin agreed to provide all security it could and work in good faith with RL to safeguard investments in this way.
February-April 2014: Harlequin had a series of detailed meetings with RL and its barristers and appointed an independent third party law firm, Pitmans, to advise on drafting fair and balanced Trust documentation to secure investors’ interests in return for a waiver of 5 years, in which Harlequin will raise finance and secure the assets held, including the flagship hotel, Buccament Bay Resort. Harlequin agreed to assist RL in asking all investors to join the trust by paying RL £200 + VAT (by completion of Pink Forms) and to have faith in RL to support the best interests of all investors. The Trust documentation was completed with advice from Pitmans. RL agreed to pay for this necessary advice and input with monies collected from investors.
OUR COMMENT; MR AMES SURELY YOU MEAN MAY RAISE FINANCE RATHER THAN WILL AS YOU STATE ABOVE. GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE FAILED SO MANY TIMES IN THE PAST.
RL STATED THAT THEY AGREED TO PAY FOR THE PITMANS ADVICE FROM THE FUNDS FROM THEIR OFFICE ACCOUNT AND “NOT” FROM THEIR CLIENTS.
THE RL CLIENTS INSTRUCTED RL TO CARRY OUT DUE DILIGENCE AND PAID FOR THIS AND THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY RL.
April 2014 (end): RL informed Harlequin for the first time that it intended to rely on a 300 page due diligence document that it claimed to have been preparing since 2013. The document was to say that, whilst there are problems that need to be sorted out, the only option for investors to yield a return from their investment will be the Trust and entry into a Deed of Waiver.;
OUR COMMENT; THE STATEMENT ABOVE NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY THE AUTHORITIES, AMES IS CLAIMING HERE THAT
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT WERE COLLUDING WITH HARLEQUIN TO SAVE THE BUSINESS AND IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT WAS CONTAINED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE, AMES IS CLAIMING THAT GARETH FATCHETT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED AND ENCOURAGED THE INVESTORS TO JOIN THE TRUST.
THIS IS ALARMING.
May 2014: Harlequin was told by RL that entry into the Trust is contingent on RL clients agreeing that they have considered the Due Diligence Report. Harlequin see a draft of the Due Diligence Report that relied on out of date, inaccurate information and was spun in such a way as to mislead investors into thinking that Harlequin is arguably insolvent and they should not enter into the Trust.
OUR COMMENT; THEY HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
The current situation is that Harlequin is still committed to working with RL and entering into the Trust. Since the Report was released, many investors have contacted Harlequin to express grave concerns over RL’s conduct, not to mention the quality of its Interim Report after it received what some are claiming to be circa £1 million in investor fees. A common theme is that the Interim Report is intended to be a killer blow to Harlequin and the hope of future investment returns so they can reap considerable profit from redress claims. There are also fears that Harlequin has been tricked by RL into urging investors to becoming its clients so they can liquidate Harlequin for their own motives. Clearly we would hope that this is not the case, although we understand the concern, especially when the misleading Interim Report was released in spite of RL itself announcing publically that its clients wanted to wait for the finished Report with Harlequin’s full responses. There are other reasons but we will get to some of those later.
OUR COMMENT; THE INTERIM REPORT WAS BASED ON DUE DILIGENCE, THE DUE DILIGENCE UNCOVERED SOME VERY SERIOUS ISSUES WITH HARLEQUIN, BUT IT WAS AMES WHO DEALT HARLEQUIN THE KILLER BLOW LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS CARRIED OUT THROUGH HIS GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND TOTAL INCOMPETENCE.
In the meantime, please continue reading below for a response to the key points set out in the public information that has been made available relating to Harlequin. RL has indicated that not seeking to amend a section of the Report is an admission by Harlequin to agreeing to that part of the Report; Harlequin would therefore like to make it clear that it does not agree with the Interim Report or the draft Due Diligence Report in its entirety.
OUR COMMENT; WE WOULD NOT EXPECT YOU TO SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT,
Executive Summary – Due Diligence
It is our view that the RL documentation we have seen is strewn with errors and therefore should not have been published in any form until Harlequin had the opportunity to respond. Despite Harlequin not expecting the Trust to be contingent on the due diligence report, Harlequin has always maintained that if a report was to be sent out, it is better to release one final report that all investors can rely upon, with all factual errors corrected and no miscommunication of the facts. It is unfortunate that RL has ignored this sensible approach.
OUR COMMENT; YOU HAVE HAD ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO CORRECT MANY OF THE HISTORICAL ISSUES, YET YOU HAVE ABJECTLY FAILED TO DO SO.
YOU CLAIM THE RL DOCUMENTATION IS STREWN WITH ERRORS, WELL
WE WOULD ASK YOU TO HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, YOU TOTALLY CONTRADICT YOUR SELF IN MANY AREAS OF YOUR PATHETIC LETTER.
Gareth Fatchett was clearly under an immense amount of pressure from a small number of particularly hostile investors and felt the need to send something out before leaving for his holiday. The unfortunate result is we now have to review the information released in the public domain, respond appropriately, and deal with the fallout which will no doubt further delay Harlequin’s response to the draft report. On 23rd May 2014, Harlequin notified Gareth Fatchett of the probable delay, explaining that 3rd June may be difficult to meet due to the need to seek advice on certain elements from overseas lawyers. Mr Fatchett’s response was:
OUR COMMENT; BULLSHIT, YOU HAVE HAD YEARS TO RESPOND TO THE ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST YOU, YES YEARS, THE DUE DILIGENCE ONLY CONFIRMS WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANY FOR YEARS.
“You take as long as you need to. We understand that the overseas work can take a little more time.”
OUR COMMENT; LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE RECORDED ALL YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH GARETH FATCHETT, SO HIS ONLY OPTION IS TO NOW STOP ACTING FOR HIS CLIENTS AND MAKE A FULL REPORT TO THE AUTHORITIES. SEE, MR AMES, IF WHAT YOU STATE ABOUT MR. FATCHETT IN YOUR LETTER IS CORRECT, THEN MR. FATCHETT HAS MISLED HIS CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS, AND GIVEN THE DECENT SOUL THAT YOU ARE, WE KNOW THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE YOUR INVESTORS REPRESENTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS WHOLLY CONFLICTED.
We would remind investors that Harlequin only received RL’s draft report on 13th May 2014. On receipt, Harlequin explained it would take at least 3 weeks to go through the draft, collate comments from UK-based and overseas advisors, and report back on any inaccuracies. In truth, we had not expected to find as many inaccurate statements and assumptions as the report actually contained, but every effort is being made to complete the response as quickly as possible.
OUR COMMENT; WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR WORK OF FICTION, YOU HAVE ALREADY CONTRADICTED YOURSELF IN THIS LETTER, SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT INSTALLMENT OF BULLSHIT YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO CONCOCT.
With this in mind, we wish to make it clear to all purchasers that Harlequin’s response may not be available to RL until later in June 2014. We have little control over the length of time it will take for our overseas lawyers to revert to us on the issues we are putting to them, especially where there are numerous significant errors in the information received, but we will do what we can to ensure the delay is minimal.
OUR COMMENT; WHERE ARE YOU GETTING ALL THE MONEY TO PAY YOUR OVERSEAS LAWYERS, AND OF COURSE IT WILL TAKE YOU A LOT LONGER TO FORMULATE A RESPONSE. BUT IF YOU HAD OPERATED YOUR BUSINESSES IN A PROPER MANNER YOU WOULD NOT HAVE NEEDED THE TIME.
Defects/Errors
One of the criticisms that Gareth Fatchett has levied at Harlequin is that we have not identified the defects/errors in the draft report sent to Harlequin.The reason for this is that Harlequin does not want to provide a piecemeal, limited response and instead wants to provide a full and detailed collated response. RL has even gone as far as suggesting that this illustrates there are no such defects. There are too many issues to raise in this statement and we shall let our response speak for itself when finalised; however, by way of example, we can confirm that Mr Fatchett’s own solicitor in St Vincent & The Grenadines has withdrawn his 14 page report which was annexed to the draft Due Diligence Report received by Harlequin earlier this month. This is due to the fact that this alone contained many errors as to the correct legal position on the island. The errors included, but are not limited to, incorrect details of judgments entered against Harlequin, incorrect statements regarding ownership of land and the ability to have land purchased by a third party if not registered. This general misunderstanding of the situation and lack of liaison with Harlequin’s advisors resulted in misconceptions which RL sought to seize on. In fact, any outstanding issues in St Vincent & The Grenadines are agreed to be nothing more than minor conveyancing defects.
OUR COMMENT; IF MR. FATCHETT’S OWN SOLICITOR HAS WITHDRAWN THE 14 PAGE REPORT CONTAINED HERE
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/7b7493c4a57530d8c394310971b9a686
WHY DID MR. FACTHETT SEE FIT TO PUT IT UP ON HIS FORUM YESTERDAY, AND FURTHERMORE WHY HAS MR. FACTHETT NOT COMMUNICATED THE FACT THAT THE LETTER WAS WITHDRAWN TO HIS CLIENTS AND HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW IT WAS WITHDRAWN. WILLIAMS AND WILLIAMS ACT FOR RL DO THEY NOT? OR DO THEY ACT FOR YOU MR. AMES, PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS ONE.
Breach of Confidential Information
One of the main issues that Harlequin has with the draft and interim reports from RL is the fact that they both contain confidential information sent to RL by or via Harlequin in accordance with a Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement. Harlequin and its investors have endured the severe harm of “Harlecon” and other libellous outlets, so we enter into such agreements from time to time in good faith to ensure that Harlequin is protected. For the record, Harlecon was set up and run by Jeremy Newman, then a Wilkins Kennedy accountant, and a full apology was received in the settlement of defamation proceedings against Mr Newman and Wilkins Kennedy.
OUR COMMENT; FULL APOLOGY EH?????? WE TAKE IT YOU EITHER CANT READ OR YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE JOINT STATEMENT ON THE MATTER, WE ADVISE YOU TO SEEK FURTHER LEGAL ADVICE ON YOUR STATEMENT ABOVE, WE HAVE READ THE STATEMENT AND WE CAN FIND NO FULL APOLOGY.
Harlequin has stated, both privately and publically, that it intends to allow the use of relevant documents and information sent to RL under the confidentiality agreement when we have responded in full on the content of the draft due diligence report. Notwithstanding these assurances, RL has not only led investors to believe that consent is going to be withheld but it has published some of the material in breach of the confidentiality agreement.
OUR COMMENT; WHY THE NEED FOR CONFIDENTIALITY, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE????
The Report and, as will soon be clear, the main due diligence report from RL are selective in what they show and the direction in which they try to lead the reader. Much has been made of confidentiality and yet RL has chosen to show some of the material that is clearly confidential but not all. For example, the interim Report discloses the RLB valuation report but not the BCQS valuation report. RL has both and is well aware that the BCQS report supersedes the RLB report.
OUR COMMENT; IS THIS THE RLB REPORT YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/958b7d8658d86363adc740e671587604
THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON BFP LONG BEFORE THE DUE DILIGENCE, OR THE ONE THAT APPEARED ON HARLECON, JEEZ WE DID NOT IT WAS CONFIDENTIAL OOOPS SORRY 😦
DOES THE BCQS REPORT ALSO SAY YOU OWN 72 ACRES FEE SIMPLE????
This cynical and rather unprofessional approach to its obligations under the confidentiality agreement supports Harlequin’s concerns about releasing material to RL, with or without the agreement in place. These documents are now on “Barbados Free Press”, a fringe blogging website we know Gareth Fatchett monitors closely, and are available for the public to view at any time.
OUR COMMENT; NOW WE DONT KNOW THAT GARETH FATHCETT MONITORS THIS SITE CLOSELY BUT WE DO KNOW SOMEONE WHO DOES, YES ITS YOU MR AMES THE TURD, SORRY TOAD FROM BASILDON, SEE LINK BELOW, NOT ONLY DO YOU MONITOR THIS SITE BUT YOU HAVE ATTEMPTED TO BLOCK THE PUBLIC FROM VIEWING INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AND YOUR COMPANIES THROUGH YOUR RECENT ACTIONS.
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOT com/2014/05/20/dave-ames-and-harlequin-property-file-legal-papers-against-barbados-free-press-readers/
One such document is an unsigned draft witness statement by Jim Baker. This statement was prepared by Mr Baker for confidential use in other proceedings. In order to be helpful, Mr Baker confidentially sent the draft to Gareth Fatchett. It is unsigned and not in its final form. As a solicitor, Mr Fatchett will also be aware that a document prepared for one set of proceedings should not be used in any other proceedings without permission of the court. Astoundingly, this confidential, incomplete document was deemed to be an acceptable document to release with RL’s interim Report and has of course found its way onto Barbados Free Press.
OUR COMMENT; YOU MEAN THE WITNESS STATEMENT CALLED “WITNESSSTATEMENTFINALON 16414″, THE ONE BELOW
https ://anonfiles DOT com/file/0fb4fba61b7f3a71e5063e0d90565406
THIS CAN EASILY BE CHECKED AGAINST THE WITNESS STATEMENT FILED IN THE COURT ACTION OF THE 25 CLAIMANTS AGAINST MR AND MRS AMES, IF ITS NOT THE SAME THEN YOU ARE CORRECT IF IT IS WHATS THE PROBLEM??????????
BUT THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED, WHY DID MR. BAKER GIVE HIS CLIENTS’ THATS YOU AMES, THIS WITNESS STATEMENT TO MR. FATCHETT IF THE STATEMENT WAS INCOMPLETE, WHY DID YOU GIVE HIM PERMISSION TO DO THIS, OR HAS HE JUST BROKEN THE RULES THAT PERTAIN TO HIS PROFESSION? IF YOU GAVE HIM PERMISSION, WHY DID YOU, YOU STATE YOURSELF THAT THE WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD ONLY BE USED IN ANY OTHER PROCEEDINGS WITH OUT THE PERMISSION OF THE COURT.
,
SO IS JIM BAKER NOW IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, IS IGNORANCE A DEFENCE. WHY BLAME RL, YOU OR JIM BAKER GAVE THE DOCUMENT TO RL, SO WHY NOW BLAME THEM.
WE DONT UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING HERE, YOU LOOSING IT AMES OLD CHAP.
RL has requested on numerous occasions to be provided with a full copy of our investor database. We have rejected these approaches for a number of reasons, not least data protection.
OUR COMMENT; GOOD BOY DAVE.
We firmly believe that the above demonstrates that Harlequin is correct to be cautious about entrusting commercially sensitive information to RL. It seems that the firm has little regard for its duty of confidentiality towards Harlequin and we can only hope the same duty it owes to its clients is better served.
OUR COMMENT; IRONIC COMING FORM YOU, WHAT ABOUT YOUR DUTY TO YOUR CLIENTS EH, SORRY THEY ARE NOT CLIENTS THEY ARE AS YOU SO OFTEN PUT IT INVESTORS, SO WHERES YOUR DUTY TOWARDS THEM???????
Accounting Information
In the interim Report and various updates, RL has made a great deal of the importance of Jim Baker’s figures. We agree that Mr Baker’s figures are important, although the information being relied on by RL was prepared in 2012 and is still to date unaudited and cannot therefore be relied on by RL or clients as accurate. We feel it is right to point out that Mr Baker was supposed to be undertaking a review of the figures and delivery of a complete accounts package, which was agreed to be funded by RL. Mr Fatchett and Harlequin acknowledged that some of the accounts needed to be brought up to date for the Resort Development Companies and the intention was for Baker Clarke to carry out the work required to achieve this over a 6 week period, funded by RL from the sums paid by investors.
OUR COMMENT; EH HELLO? WHO FILED UNAUDITED AND THEREFORE BY YOUR OWN WORDS UNRELIABLE ACCOUNTING INFORMATION IN ST. VINCENT?
SEE THE FOLLOWING POST “DUE DILIGENCE PART 10 THE FILED ACCOUNTS AND INCOMPETENCE OR WORSE WHOLESALE CORRUPTION AMONGST THE ORGANS OF THE STATE OF ST. VINCENT POSSIBLY? POSTED ON May 25, 2014 at 1:10 pm
YOU CAN FIND IT HERE ITS THE FOURTH ONE DOWN FROM THE TOP
http ://barbadosfreepress.wordpress DOTcom/2014/05/23/svg-high-court-registrar-resigns-suddenly-rumours-flying-about-harlequin-connection/
YOU SAY MR. BAKER WAS SUPPOSED TO BE UNDERTAKING A REVIEW OF THE FIGURES AND DELIVERING A COMPLETE ACCOUNTS PACKAGE??? WE ASSUME THIS WAS TO INCLUDE ALL AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE RESORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES BECAUSE AS YOU CLEARLY HAVE POINTED OUT UNAUDITED ACCOUNTS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON.
AND RL CLIENTS WERE TO PAY FOR THIS, ?????? RATHER ODD, WHY DONT YOU PAY FOR IT, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO THIS AND YOU FAILED FOR 7 YEARS TO FILE ANY AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR YOUR RDC’S WHY SHOULD RL CLIENTS PAY FOR THIS.
AND IS JIM BAKER QUALIFIED OR INDEED CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT SUCH A HUGE EXERCISE IN 6 WEEKS????
GOOD ON YA JIM WE SAY.
Sadly, Mr Fatchett had a last minute change of heart on this, citing spurious reasons for his change of mind and leaving Harlequin in a position where there was no funding available for the work and no time to achieve it prior to the release of the Due Diligence Report (Harlequin will however undertake production of the Accounts separately, which will take more time). We are not saying that this was an intentional ploy to enable RL to state that the financial accounting for the Resort Development Companies was poor, but we have to question Mr Fatchett on his motives for promising to fund the exercise and withdrawing the offer at the eleventh hour. To date, Mr Fatchett, when pressed, has failed to give a cogent explanation on this point.
OUR COMMENT; WHY WAS THERE NO FUNDING AVAILABLE TO TO WHAT YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO? YOU STATED EARLIER THAT GARETH FATCHETT WAS MISLEADING INVESTORS ON THE SOLVENCY OF THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES, SEE OUR EARLIER COMMENT ON THIS ; THE HARLEQUIN COMPANIES ARE INSOLVENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. THEY ARE UNABLE TO PAY THEIR DEBTS AS THEY FALL DUE. WHERE IS GARETH FATCHETT AND RL MISLEADING INVESTORS HERE???
There are plenty of examples of how the Report is selective in how it conveys information. This is clear from the text itself when examined closely. An example of this is where the Report states that it has information from Jim Baker that it cannot disclose but which would put some of the financial data into context regarding how the investor payments have been spent. Despite this, RL has still decided to report on the data it can report on with no context. This is one of the reasons why Harlequin sought to discourage RL from reporting on its findings until it had Harlequin’s response and was able to use all of the data available.
OUR COMMENT; YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAVE PREVENTED RL FROM RELEASING ALL THE DATA.
Panorama Letter
It is interesting that RL refers to the Jim Baker spreadsheet as contained in the document that Harlequin sent to Panorama last year. The Panorama letter, which was expected to be a confidential communication between Harlequin and the BBC, was leaked and planted on an anonymous blog, presumably to pressurise Harlequin into waiving confidentiality. This is not a practice that Harlequin endorses or reacts positively to, particularly when disclosure has been agreed on the aforementioned conditions.
OUR COMMENT; THE NEXT TIME YOU SHOULD THINK MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT WHO YOU TRY TO SHAFT, WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND, AND THE PANORAMA LETTER MAKES NO MENTION OF JIM BAKER OR INDEED THAT IT IS CONFIDENTIAL.
ANYWAY WHAT KIND OF FOOL WOULD SEND “CONFIDENTIAL” INFORMATION TO A PROGRAM INVESTIGATING THEM FOR WRONGDOING. AND WHY IS EVERYTHING YOU SEND “CONFIDENTIAL”???
The Trust
Harlequin wants investors to understand that, with or without RL, the trust can proceed. Harlequin has been clearly advised that its most valuable property can be securitised and therefore the initial idea of providing such assets to secure investor monies is a reality. We would prefer to continue working with RL but only if the firm can show that it is working with us and not against us and our investors’ best interests. The firm’s recent activity and failure to listen to Harlequin’s reasonable requests to delay reporting until the due diligence report’s errors are rectified do leave us wondering about its true motives. Further evidence of this is demonstrated by RL’s recent biased survey questions, which are clearly designed to elicit the results that it is after.
OUR COMMENT; RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS, NOT BY YOU, YOU ARE THE ENEMY, IT IS BECAUSE OF YOUR GROSS MISMANAGEMENT AND INCOMPETENCE THAT RL HAVE BEEN ENGAGED.
YOU ARE FULLY AWARE OF THE TERM CONFLICT OF INTEREST, YET YOU WILL ONLY WORK WITH RL IF THEY WILL WORK WITH YOU NOT AGAINST YOU, WELL SORRY MATEY, THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS,
AS STATED THEY ARE ENGAGED BY THEIR CLIENTS TO SEEK THE BEST POSSIBLE RECOVERY FOR THEIR CLIENTS GIVEN HOW YOU MANAGED TO FUCK THINGS UP SO EASILY.
YOUR BEST INTERESTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF RL’S CLIENTS, YOUR INVESTORS AS YOU CALL THEM.
On the subject of the use of the investor trust payments, investors should understand that RL has received thousands of payments of £200 plus VAT. Harlequin has requested confirmation of the amount collected and full transparency in spending, etc., but unfortunately this information has not been forthcoming from RL. Harlequin feels extremely let down by RL’s perceived misrepresentation as Harlequin directed thousands of investors to RL to enter into Pink Forms and pay monies to join the trust. Harlequin encouraged investors to instruct RL to make the payments on the clear understanding that the firm would be using the payments to pay for professional fees to assist the Harlequin recovery, including, but not limited to:
OUR COMMENT; THIS IS RICH COMING FROM YOU, YOU OF ALL PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR TRANSPARENCY FROM RL ON HOW THEY HAVE SPENT THEIR CLIENTS MONEY, LOL GO DO ONE YOU HYPOCRITE.
– valuations at each of the sites (rather than demand and seek to rely on Harlequin’s complete valuations);
– preparation of accounting information;
– financial due diligence report to attract external finance;
– Pitmans’ fees (of which 80% remains outstanding).
OUR COMMENT; EXCUSE US????? YOU ARE ASKING THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY LOST £400 MILLION TO ASSIST YOU IN PAYING FOR THE VALUATIONS OF YOUR RESORTS WHICH YOU HAVE ALWAYS STATED ARE RISING IN VALUE, SO SURELY IF YOU STATED THAT PURCHASER PROPERTIES WERE RISING IN VALUE YOU HAVE HAD REGULAR PROFESSIONAL VALUATIONS CONDUCTED. YES NO?????
YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD YOUR ACCOUNTS UP TO DATE AS YOU WENT ALONG, NOW WAIT FOR 7 YEARS TO JIM BAKER TO COBBLE TOGETHER SOMETHING IN THE 11TH HOUR AND TO GET SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY HIM TO DO THIS……
YOU KEEP TELLING US YOU ARE ON THE VERGE OF OBTAINING EXTERNAL FINANCE, SO EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED YOUR INVESTORS TO PAY FOR THE DUE DILIGENCE REPORT TO ATTRACT EXTERNAL FINANCE. LOL STOP DIGGING THE HOLE YOU IDIOT.
NOW PITMANS FEES COULD CAUSE GF A LITTLE PROBLEM.
What is clear is that RL has received a significant amount of money from Harlequin’s investors on the basis that the money would be used (as confirmed by Gareth Fatchett at investor seminars) to assist in the set up and entry into the proposed Harlequin Investor Trust. It is clear now that this has not been done.
We do know that Regulatory Legal instructed an insolvency restructuring solicitor in Grand Cayman to prepare a report, which begs the question, has Regulatory legal genuinely sought to set up the Trust or was this a smokescreen to generate funds with which to “rescue” Harlequin after forcing it into liquidation?
Harlequin understands that a growing number of investors are losing confidence in RL due to their perceived negative agenda. Indeed, Harlequin is spending a great deal of time attempting to stop investors taking action against RL for return of monies that are now believed to have been obtained under false pretences. As stated above, Harlequin remains committed to working with RL to enter into the investor Trust provided RL can demonstrate that it is equally committed to achieving the same result.
OUR COMMENT; HANG ON HERE A MINUTE, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT RL HAVE TAKEN PURCHASER MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES?????? OH YEAH YOU ARE….
ANYWAY THIS IS WHERE RL HAVE TO WALK AWAY FROM AMES, IT IS CLEAR THAT AMES CLAIMS THAT RL WERE WORKING WITH HIM, YET PURCHASERS THOUGHT THAT RL WAS WORKING FOR THEM, INDEED RL REFER TO PURCHASERS AS THEIR CLIENTS, WHAT AMES IS REALLY DEMONSTRATING HERE IS A MASSIVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND THAT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED BY THE AUTHORITIES, THE INDEPENDENCE OF RL AND GARETH FATCHETT HAS CLEARLY BEEN QUESTIONED HERE ALBEIT INADVERTENTLY AND AMES SIR, YOU ARE MAKING SOME VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST GARETH FATCHETT, WE ALSO ASSUME YOU HAVE THE RECORDINGS OF YOUR CONVERSATIONS TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.
IN ESSENCE WE BELIEVE YOU ARE HOLDING A GUN TO GARETH FATCHETT’S HEAD AND NOW EXPECT HIM TO DO YOUR BIDDING.
AKIN TO BLACK MAIL, WELL MORE FOOL TO GARETH FATCHETT IF HE CANNOT ROBUSTLY DEFEND THE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS YOU MR. AMES ARE MAKING.
Completions
Harlequin understands that RL is now telling its clients not to proceed with investor completions as Harlequin is using sale monies to assist with the running of its business. Harlequin has indeed put completion monies received to good use by investing in the resorts and the Harlequin business. Such investment has added significant value to the resorts. RL has been fully aware of this since the first meeting in 2013 and only chooses to make an issue of this now. Harlequin has recently completed on its first property at Buccament Bay Resort by transferring legal title to a purchaser and has many more completions in the pipeline. A more detailed statement about this will follow.
OUR COMMENT; SORRY WE ARE TOTALLY CONFUSED HERE, YOU HAVE ACHIEVED ONE COMPLETION SO WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ????????????? SORRY YOU HAVE TOTALLY LOST US HERE……TOTALLY……..
Conclusion
The interim Report states that RL “does not see how any investor can make an informed decision without” the financial information showing how the £400m has been invested. Harlequin agrees with this which is why it has always asserted that no report should be published until all of the facts are available for publication. Despite this, RL could not resist the temptation to publish an interim document, which is meaningless without the context required to help investors make the decision as to whether or not to enter the trust.
OUR COMMENT; WE ALREADY KNOW THAT £200 MILLION OF THE £400 MILLION WENT TO YOUR WIFE AND SONS COMPANY INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE RESORTS, SO REALLY WE DONT NEED TO KNOW MUCH MORE NOW DO WE……………
The advice and conclusions reached in the Report are, in our opinion, naïve and based on misinformation. After all of this time, we cannot fathom why. The Report’s conclusions are alarmist and extend to personal attacks on the Ames family, which is not considered necessary in a supposedly factual report assessing whether or not to enter into an investor trust. We have now reached an impasse with RL that we hope to navigate through. If not, we hope we have proved by this more detailed response that Harlequin is committed to fighting for its investors and providing the best future possible for its investors. As we have said above, the trust can still go ahead with the security intended to be used to protect investors. Whether or not this is with RL is yet to be seen.
OUR COMMENT; YOU LETTER HAS DONE NOTHING BUT DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU ARE A TOTALLY DELUDED FANTASIST, A LIAR, A HYPOCRITE AND TRUE TO FORM YOU HAVE CONTINUED TO DROP EVERYONE ELSE IN IT, REGULATORY LEGAL AND JIM BAKER NOW FOLLOW THE LONG LIST OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND COMPANIES YOU HAVE SOUGHT TO DESTROY.
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT NOW HAVE MANY QUESTIONS TO ANSWER, NO DOUBT IF THEY DO NOT TOE THE COMPANY LINE, YOU WILL SEEK RETRIBUTION THROUGH THE USE OF RECORDED CONVERSATIONS PERHAPS,
EITHER WAY THE TRUST IS DEAD, YOU ARE FINISHED, ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD NOW PUT THEIR TRUST (NO PUN INTENDED) IN YOU. YOU SOW WHAT YOU REAP YOU TWISTED BITTER DELUDED FOOL YOU.
Best regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
THE RESPONSE FROM RL AND GARETH FATCHETT TO THE TOXIC TURDS MISSIVE LAST NIGHT.
May 30, 2014 at 8:30 pm
BELOW IS THE RESPONSE FROM RL AND GARETH FATCHETT TO THE TOXIC TURDS MISSIVE LAST NIGHT.
AT LEAST RL RESPONDED IN A TIMELY MANNER AND DID NOT NEED A GAZILLION MONTHS TO RESPOND
RL AND GARETH FATCHETT RESPONDED VERY QUICKLY TO THE GARBLED RAMBLINGS OF THE TOXIC TOAD. SEE BELOW.
Harlequin Update
Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 29, 2014 at 10:25pm
All, We have received the update. We are not surprised at the content nor the tone. We produced a detailed Interim Report for investors to consider.
Our Interim Report is just that. It could be amended if we were persuaded on material matters. Some minor matters were drawn to our attention via our SVG lawyers. Report amended and posted. Hardly unfair conduct.
The same applies to the other elements of our report. We will amend if necessary.Being lectured on accountability and transparency from a firm who refuse to allow investors to understand where £400m has been spent is galling.
We did not want to rely on the BBC Panorama figures. We would have preferred to use the James Baker figures, but we were not allowed to. We did not post the BBC Panorama response on BFP. We did copy it and put it to Harlequin that the figures were accurate. No response.
We had discussed paying for the RDC accounts to be brought up to date. That would have meant RL having access to all the underlying information (bank accounts etc). At that point, we were told we could pay, but we could not see the data.
Only a fool would have proceeded with the goodwill gesture at that point.
The suggestion we have not paid Pitmans fees is wrong. Pitmans client is Harlequin Hotels &Resorts (UK) Limited.
Not Regulatory Legal Solicitors. We were asked to pay £10k plus VAT as a contribution. This we have done. Any further payment would be on a goodwill basis from us. We are not feeling lots of goodwill at present.
We have consulted insolvency practitioners in the UK and abroad. Why would we not do that ?
We state in our report that Harlequin is arguably insolvent. We do not just make these statements lightly. We have no intention to buy or be part of any buying group. We are a solicitors practice, not a hotel operator !
We expected a backlash. We are not going to be deflected from our task which is to present the facts to clients. If a client wants to believe the “everything is brilliant” mantra, so be it. We will stick to our position and argue robustly and fairly. Investors would expect no less.
I don’t get it- I thought this SIPPs guy was in you good books. He looks like the guy lambasting other CV’s and plans here and on the old RL blog thing, but I though he was respected. I’ll have to read up a bit and get the hang of where this is all going. All I know for sure is this Ames guy isn’t the one to be following or trusting
Harlequin Completions
Dear Investor,Following speculation and confusion recently circulated by others regarding our ongoing mission to fulfill our promises to purchasers and facilitate completions on properties within the first phase of Buccament Bay Resort, I thought it was a good time to outline how completion monies are being used and the benefits they are bringing to Harlequin, its developments, and our investors.Contracts and Completion When investors bought property from Harlequin, they were issued with a standard preliminary contract which stated that 95% of the purchase price was to be paid during the build by way of stage payments, with a final 5% payable on completion,which is why properties were sold off-plan well below market value.
As you are aware, phase one of Buccament Bay Resort is ready, open and trading,and therefore anyone looking to complete at Buccament Bay Resort in line with the preliminary contract is expected to pay Harlequin the balance of 95% prior to completion. It has been widely known in recent times that completion balances have given the Harlequin business the impetus required to push the business forward in difficult times. At no time has Harlequin mooted or suggested that Harlequin operates an escrow account or that funds will be held in an escrow account as suggested by others.
On the contrary, Harlequin needs to utilise 95% of completion funds (final 5% due on transfer of title) for investment in the business and continued development. If Harlequin simply held completion monies in a separate account, the business would stagnate. Completion monies are therefore put to good use by opening more properties, improving facilities at our hotels to drive revenue and ultimately rental returns, and contributing to the general running of the business.
Completion monies are driving the business forward and causing a ripple effect of productivity and progress that grows with each completion balance received.So far this year we have achieved the following at Buccament Bay Resort with the help of completion funds: Cabanas 30 new units have opened, each one developed to a 5 star standard.Conferencing facilities Four new conference rooms have opened. As you saw earlier in the year, the Caricom Conference was held at Buccament Bay Resort for 300 delegates, many of whom stayed on resort, which generated revenue and PR.
We already have four more conferences booked before the end of this year.
Bamboo
The restaurant has been refurbished, upgraded and reopened.
Safran
The restaurant has been upgraded and reopened.
Ginger & Co.
We have purchased and are awaiting delivery of new kitchen equipment so the new restaurant can be opened later this year.
Landscaping
We are in the process of fitting new fencing along the river bank and extending the landscaping around the 30 new cabanas.
Back of house
In a drive towards improved economy, ecology and sustainability, we are in the process of opening our own vegetable garden and similar facilities, which will supply produce for the resort.
Laundry
We have now opened a brand new laundry, which is one of the most advanced laundries of any hotel in the Caribbean and are continuing to expand on this to improve the standards of cleaning services in the hotel.
We are also in the process of creating a dry cleaning plant to offer additional services to guests.
Lastly, at blu, St Lucia Due to the continued success of the hotel, we have opened 12 new rooms and upgraded the restaurant.As you can see, completion monies have been spent on the hotels by making more properties available for investors to complete on and guests to occupy, as well as developing new or enhanced facilities.
There can be no doubt that this significantly increases the valuation of both sites, and we expect this investment to generate increased revenues and enable Harlequin to meet its investors’ goals.
I recently had meetings in St Vincent with lawyers representing Harlequin and purchasers currently in the process of completing. I am pleased to report that progress is continuing and we have reason to believe there will be circa 100 investors with legal title on a Buccament Bay Resort property by the close of 2014.
It is essential for Harlequin’s restructuring process and the success of all investments that completions continue so that the momentum remains and funds are pumped back into our developments. With the support of external funding, this process will create a snowball effect that will enable Harlequin to develop and open hotels at an accelerated rate and provide purchasers with rental returns.We have more completion opportunities available at Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia,
so if you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available,please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can begin working towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:01268 24 24 60
ddalligan@harlequinhotelsandresorts.com
vstenning@harlequinhotelsandresorts.comRegards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
@Financial Analysis Poster
Excellent Analysis!
I have looked that Tailormade document (again, surprised this did not appear in the prelim dd; perhaps it’s part of the “NDA” finances only Harlequin are privy to – RL unable to reproduce them because they’re not related to the trust)
The occupancy rate shown is 9.29%, it is even worse when you include the Apartments, 6.2% – HOW DID YOU FIGURE THIS OUT?
36500 room nights available
4613 room nights sold 12.64% – OCCUPANCY?
Then look at “Total Bookings for Year” Saga Holidays accounts for 20.6% of the room occupancy but only 9.65% of the revenue. GENERALLY MEANS THEY’VE BEEN SELLING CHEAP? IF YOU LOOK @ THEIR AVG RATE, IT’S ~300PN. LETS GO 2 ACHIEVED AS MUCH REVENUE WITH SMALLER THROUGHPUT
Harlequin from the figures produced by Tailormade in 2013 generated turnover of £2,948,079.99 on sales on 12.64% of available rooms sold.; YEP
If we take international norms for Hotel Profits, Harlequin would be making c £ 634,892.32 profit a year. Thus giving the Resort a Value of
£6,348,923.00 a little different to the value of £148 Million given to it by BCQS. – £148M IS NONSENSE. BUT ID SAY ITS STILL WORTH $50M TO THE RIGHT BUYER (AN ESTABLISHED HOTEL GROUP)
@Anon
May 31, 2014 at 1:06 pm
Ames has mis-sold pure and simple. Due Diligence report proves it.
@Anon
May 31, 2014 at 1:11 pm
SIPP investors *do* owe Ames money. They owe 70% of the contract WHEN THEIR UNIT IS COMPLETE. Just because they are SIPP investors does not mean they don’t owe any more… Every contract is on the premise that their 30% is a deposit; the 70% remaining due when their unit is complete. Unless the SIPP investors get the contracts changed, or achieve redress, they’ll owe Harlequin money.
But it still doesn’t fix the core of the problem – how to get Harlequin building again.
.
May 31, 2014 at 1:39 pm
Harlequin Completions
Dear Investor,Following speculation and confusion recently circulated by others regarding our ongoing mission to fulfill our promises to purchasers and facilitate completions on properties within the first phase of Buccament Bay Resort, I thought it was a good time to outline how completion monies are being used and the benefits they are bringing to Harlequin, its developments, and our investors.Contracts and Completion When investors bought property from Harlequin, they were issued with a standard preliminary contract which stated that 95% of the purchase price was to be paid during the build by way of stage payments, with a final 5% payable on completion,which is why properties were sold off-plan well below market value.
As you are aware, phase one of Buccament Bay Resort is ready, open and trading,and therefore anyone looking to complete at Buccament Bay Resort in line with the preliminary contract is expected to pay Harlequin the balance of 95% prior to completion. It has been widely known in recent times that completion balances have given the Harlequin business the impetus required to push the business forward in difficult times. At no time has Harlequin mooted or suggested that Harlequin operates an escrow account or that funds will be held in an escrow account as suggested by others.
On the contrary, Harlequin needs to utilise 95% of completion funds (final 5% due on transfer of title) for investment in the business and continued development. If Harlequin simply held completion monies in a separate account, the business would stagnate. Completion monies are therefore put to good use by opening more properties, improving facilities at our hotels to drive revenue and ultimately rental returns, and contributing to the general running of the business.
Completion monies are driving the business forward and causing a ripple effect of productivity and progress that grows with each completion balance received.So far this year we have achieved the following at Buccament Bay Resort with the help of completion funds: Cabanas 30 new units have opened, each one developed to a 5 star standard.Conferencing facilities Four new conference rooms have opened. As you saw earlier in the year, the Caricom Conference was held at Buccament Bay Resort for 300 delegates, many of whom stayed on resort, which generated revenue and PR.
We already have four more conferences booked before the end of this year.
Bamboo
The restaurant has been refurbished, upgraded and reopened.
Safran
The restaurant has been upgraded and reopened.
Ginger & Co.
We have purchased and are awaiting delivery of new kitchen equipment so the new restaurant can be opened later this year.
Landscaping
We are in the process of fitting new fencing along the river bank and extending the landscaping around the 30 new cabanas.
Back of house
In a drive towards improved economy, ecology and sustainability, we are in the process of opening our own vegetable garden and similar facilities, which will supply produce for the resort.
Laundry
We have now opened a brand new laundry, which is one of the most advanced laundries of any hotel in the Caribbean and are continuing to expand on this to improve the standards of cleaning services in the hotel.
We are also in the process of creating a dry cleaning plant to offer additional services to guests.
Lastly, at blu, St Lucia Due to the continued success of the hotel, we have opened 12 new rooms and upgraded the restaurant.As you can see, completion monies have been spent on the hotels by making more properties available for investors to complete on and guests to occupy, as well as developing new or enhanced facilities.
There can be no doubt that this significantly increases the valuation of both sites, and we expect this investment to generate increased revenues and enable Harlequin to meet its investors’ goals.
I recently had meetings in St Vincent with lawyers representing Harlequin and purchasers currently in the process of completing. I am pleased to report that progress is continuing and we have reason to believe there will be circa 100 investors with legal title on a Buccament Bay Resort property by the close of 2014.
It is essential for Harlequin’s restructuring process and the success of all investments that completions continue so that the momentum remains and funds are pumped back into our developments. With the support of external funding, this process will create a snowball effect that will enable Harlequin to develop and open hotels at an accelerated rate and provide purchasers with rental returns.We have more completion opportunities available at Buccament Bay Resort and blu, St Lucia,
so if you are an existing purchaser and have balancing funds available,please contact Dan Dalligan or Vinny Stenning so we can begin working towards the realisation of your investment. Their contact details are as follows:01268 24 24 60
ddalligan AT harlequinhotelsandresorts DOT com
vstenning AT harlequinhotelsandresorts DOT com
Regards,
Dave Ames
Chairman
RL Clients + SIPP providers = the majority
Posted by Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 30, 2014 at 9:35am
Harlequin cannot move without us advising positively. We will be meeting SIPP providers to share our output.SIPP providers may not like us asking them questions, but they trust us to do a proper due diligence more than relying on Harlequin’s PR output.Mr Ames – you have nowhere to go unless you do a deal with us and our investors.
New Joiners -reverse Midas effect
Posted by Regulatory Legal Solicitors on May 30, 2014 at 10:22pm ON THEIR SECURE SITE
All, We have seen a significant number of new sign ups on our old site. Google takes you there if you search.This can only have been prompted by the Harlequin update of last night.Just goes to show that investors will think independently and make their own minds up.Have a good weekend.
NOW LETS LOOK AT WHAT THEY SAID IN THEIR UPDATE SENT OUT AT 10.34pm on the 30/05/2014
All,
We have seen a significant number of new members join the site this week. It has been a very busy week. Members on the secure due diligence site have been digesting the Interim Reports we produced. The Interim Reports make some high level findings which we feel Harlequin will struggle to recover from. We are going to seek to help them recover, but only on terms which help investors.
Next week, Harlequin have promised us their response to our reports. We will more than happily issue any clarifications etc. After all, due diligence is a dynamic process. We do hope they stick to their own timetable as time is not on our side.
We also announced the second winning FOS adjudication. The early cases are coming through now. We are preparing the lodge more cases to take advantage of these wins. After all, who would not want their money back ?
We would urge every investor to read the due diligence. Our greatest concern is that people sign up for an arrangement with Harlequin without understanding whether or not they can actually carry it out.
We all know we need a solution. The month of June 2014 will be the make or break month. Most of our investors want us to re-shape the trust process in the light of the Due Diligence. We need to have the Harlequin responses to enable our shaping process to be as tailored as possible.
Our team remains available for you to speak to. – 01384 889900. Many investors are joining the due diligence / trust process to ensure they get the actual position, rather than the Harlequin PR.
Regulatory Legal Solicitors
THE OLD SITE IS OPEN TO ANYONE THE NEW SITE TO HARLEQUIN PURCHASERS AND A FEW OTHERS APPARENTLY 🙂
SO WHICH SITE? AND WHAT IS MEANT BY THE RL COMMENT IN LIGHT OF THE HARLEQUIN ATTACK ON THEIR GOOD NAME “The Interim Reports make some high level findings which we feel Harlequin will struggle to recover from. We are going to seek to help them recover,”
EVEN YOUR CLIENTS ARE FINDING THE ABOVE BIZARRE,
RL Update Posted by XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX on May 31, 2014 at 9:20am
“Good morning RL Read your update and very surprised that investors /clients want to reshape the Trust. With everything I read in the DD, it certainly doesn’t inspire me to go with the Trust. Of course this is only my opinion,however, with everything that is wrong, lands not registered, might / might not be owned, taxes, stamp duties unpaid, I couldn’t find section whether BB was actually insured against flooding as it’s on a floodplain, encumbrances on lands that is owned, there are just so many unknowns. All these problems would need to be sorted and paid for as a priority. Where would the money come from, with no finance available thus far. No proof of where our money has gone. Has everyone read the DD before backing this reshaped Trust? I was one of those people who backed the Trust for months, from day one, but knowing what I know having read the DD it just beggars belief.
Very concerned about this state of affairs.”
I think anyone trusts anyone more then they trust Ames. By anyone I mean those that have an IQ over 65 and haven’t been “bribed” What the great ALL BOUT SIPPS say. Him with the CV and plan- I hear.
Dras-tick. About SIPPs has noting. He’s criticises others (some with impressive CV’s and good posts) but just talks vitriol and questionable rubbish. Think he is in D Ames camp / pocket?
I see that Pat Cash is over on The Grauniad talking about his ‘family values’.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/may/30/pat-cash-my-family-values
He says, “If it wasn’t for my kids, I might have killed myself. I suffered from severe depression from the age of 19 until 35. It’s no secret I experimented with drugs when I was younger, but the real issue was why I felt the need to. It was down to the stress I was under playing for my country, the expectations I put on myself and the expectations people put on me. I ended up checking into rehab for depression. Things got better when I retired from playing professionally. I am setting up a foundation for young athletes that will have a large mental-health element to it.”
Perhaps someone who has lost their life savings and is facing ruin as a consequence of investing in a property scheme, endorsed by a celebrity sportsman, gone wrong, might like to pop over there and ask him for some advice on how to cope with the resulting depression?
Very well said view from mount.
RL ain’t bothered in the slightest.
They have redress, pink money and a deal to offer.
To make their deal, they will need a few “Ghosts of Christmas Past”….
Really- how does ghosts of CMAS past fit in with “aint bothered”? Sorry mate just dont get it
Re Harlequin Completions 1.42 pm…….This letter makes it sound like several completions have taken place…if so, how is it that only one (1) investor is supposed to have received legal title to his/her property? Also, the projects discussed hardly seem to be multimillion dollar ones…for the sake of transparency, and perhaps to be a bit more believable,why
not provide a breakdown of those expenses, which , after all , were made with investors` money. How is it that over the past year, there has been no construction at BB, as has been confirmed by locals and guests at the resort itself. and yet magically, 30 new fully outfitted cabanas have appeared?Wow! Not saying that anything stated is untrue, but why not share some more details with the Investors, who are so important to the survival of Harlequin.
From Mr Ames`s letter: “Harlequin values each and every investor and will neither survive nor deliver investments without the full support and trust of Harlequin’s loyal investor base.”
Anonymous- does any of it matter?. Hasn’t it all gone far past Ames and his corrupt little overseas empire.
Bloody hell, just been out for a night drinking cider with me in-laws, good job we all have the same aim in this mess.
Ha, nice one
Some who drink cider seem to share the same Orchard as Ames, funny how the truth will eventually come out,
Dave sorry to mention this but, erm we do actually have a real completion Fuccament Bay…….. those pesky lot at RL have checked and say it’s all a Pants Scheme.
Can you have a with your special mate to fix it 😉
Have you fixed the banking error yet? Just that the Mrs. needs to go to Harvey Nics
Over my head- just like the cider trees! What ya on Anon?
Oh ta, at last, a post I like. H Nics- tidy and so near the station.
SO completion monies have funded 30 new units and all the new refits etc.. All this after the DD ( As the spend is not highlighted in the DD is it ) and All that build and work for so little money ? So how come the rest of the units cost so bloody much to build ? …. Silly little man you are going to spend a long time in jail.
Lie Lies and more Lies Ames, do you really think people believe all this tripe.
Career in ruins? If this was one of those American cop shows DA would be ‘cutting’ a deal with the DA.
But not the DA we all love 😉
That’s 3 DA, spooky
DA, that’s the little one, will shaft his legal team at the drop of a hat. Has the dirt on them?
The person who completed on Buccament Bay according to a source close to Harlequin was Bob the bee keeper.
There is a suprise…. What a mug !!!
Bob the bee keeper- is that Short StorEy again?
And with that Geezer you have just proved to the world what an ignorant tosser you are!
How many times has RS written that he is through with this thread
…but alas, there he goes again.
Anyone remember Dan Quayle ? Running mate in a Presidential election. Dim as you like. Just repeated what his master told him.
Wonder why DA is being paid double ?
Yes Anon, to point out to Geezer that believe it or not there is more than one person called Bob in the world. Tried to be clever, but now looks stupid.
Does anyone remember Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf?
Side kick and PR guru [failed] to Saddam Hussein and better known for his grandiose and fanciful broadcasts as Comical Ali.
Just checked the spelling of his name and guess what? He was also known as ‘Baghdad Bob’! http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/jokes/bljoke-iraqinfominister.htm
Ya couldn’t make it up. LOL
I prefer the analogy with Bob Geldof, that would be Saint Bob. Thank you
It appears that the toxic turd lost his application in California, the loons have returned as a result, very brave of them I see.
🙂
What a conceited and arrogant post from Robert Storey at 6:21
6:15 for the pedants who give a shit
I would imagine working in a senior capacity for Harlequin would have a negative impact on your CV.
Especially if you had over stepped certain boundaries. The toxic one will not be around to protect you.
A purchaser on the RL secure forum has asked the following question in their post see below ****
“and also can you please let us all know who put the information on BFP…or admit who done it because y0u are jeopardising my investment and if doing so then they should be removed from this site and action should be taken against them……”
Eh hello, the reason you have joined the RL is to try and recover something, given that its gone, all gone. Look what RL said on the matter on May 25th on their secure forum.
And as for conflict of interest, well now that you mention it, look out for our shocker on this being posted shortly.
As for who is putting up the information from the Secure RL site, well that should be blatantly obvious, “We are”….. but in no way does is jeopardize your investment,
Regulatory Legal Solicitors ·May 25, 2014 at 12:49pm
Paul,Those cautions are worth nothing against a liquidator.They only stop Harlequin (as is) dealing with the land.You are being hopeful if you believe Harlequin will pay anything. Look around you, people will tell you they have tried.£400m in / £400m gone.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
**** Xxxx Xxxxxxx ·May 30, 2014 at 11:37am
What the hell is going on?…..
This is going to enbd up like one big slagging match….and I did not sign up to or pay £480 + vat for this.
There appears to be a conflict of interest now with RL both representing investors who are trying to find a solution to secure our investment and RL it appears representing clients who are suing Harlequin….Please confirm this is not happening in any way shape or form…and also can you please let us all know who put the information on BFP…or admit who done it because y0u are jeopardising my investment and if doing so then they should be removed from this site and action should be taken against them……With regards to Harlequin and their patronising letter to all investors and the dismissive manner in which they address RL and the justice for all investors is apalling……As Harlequin will probably not address my questions to them direct I will use this platform to communicate with them.
It is very simple, you have all of our contact details (as we have invested our money in your property scheme)…send us direct the information of how you spent our money on building the resorts…very straight forward….no issue of security – you are sending striaght to the people who matter.
You have had over 7 years to have the correct information be made available to not only an accountant but any potential investor would expect to see the same information…You should be providing us unconditionally the information that we expect to make an informed decision and above that any additional information that hasn’t been investigated or been requested…You should be doing everything in your power to reassure us, be transparent with us,above and beyond the call of duty to allay any fears we have …..this should have been done as a matter of course…Why on earth are you expecting RL or to be honest us to pay your accountant to do his job in providing this information which he already has and should be made available to us. The interim report and the final report should be for our eyes only and not for you to comment on we paid for it….It was for us to digest and then either contact you direct to discuss x, y, and z issues or the issues would ahve been addressed by our lawyers….Do you think anyone (especially the ones who want the resorts to be built) will sign a waiver for 5 years before we read a due diligence report on how you have spent or not spent our money on the developments….only to find critical information which would hold you personally accountable only to be tied in to something which protects you????
With regards to the commissions and agents….I would be of the understanding that a commission would be paid if the sale of the property within the resort would ahve to be fully completed….yes…no? As the majority of the properties have not been completed in the alotted time and are now in breach of the contract…this would mean in simplest terms that a full refund would ahve to be issued….Harlequin failed to honour their part and so did the agents….maybe the part that went to agents should be returned a sthey did not fulfil their part of the sale.I am going to address more points but my anger and disgust in this whole scenario will smash this computer if I don’t stop…..Finally can someone tell me with regards to the freedom of information act…….can I simply request to see the James Baker information under the act without question as the accounts should be in the public domain by now ?
can I simply request to see the James Baker information under the act without question as the accounts should be in the public domain by now ?
Nope!
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/freedomInformation/freedomInfo.shtml
“I would imagine working in a senior capacity for Harlequin would have a negative impact on your CV.”
Response: They won’t be working with any of our companies moving forward. This whole escapade has gone on too long for *any* UK Harlequin employee to not be implicit
@Heed the words. Lighten up you muppet. Obviously you give a shit otherwise you would not have posted such a silly comment. ITS A JOKE!
@From the secure site “and you please let us know who put this information on BFP” Yes Gareth, please tell us. Your site information is supposed to be encrypted, impossible to re post without knowing who did it. Perhaps you do know, but it suits not let on. Is the cease fire still holding?
“representing clients who are suing Harlequin”
They are not suing Harlequin. They’re litigating with companies, agents & other parties who will help recover the monies (namely SIPPs, insurers, FSCS, FOS, etc). Suing Harlequin will be a no-win battle.
Gareth won’t put on BFP – there are far too many holes in the bucket to require him to do that. Whoever put the docs up needs a medal. They’re the REAL heroes of this
Hey that Frank StorEy guy is a real shit eh. I’m new here but I know someone with mental problems when I “see” them. Frank- I suggest you get help man. What makes you so angry? Maybe its a lack of something, but even if you really are ugly and short like they say there’s ladies or men that will help for a small fee. Google massage in your area man.
What are you on Geezer? This a thread about HP not your stupidness.
Oh No Frank StorEy- it’s all about you- its your one hinge on interaction with fellow Homo Sapiens !. Geezer sussed you out in 5 minutes. No one likes you- go away like you promised shorty, and then yes we can get on the HP topic
Do you two just follow each other about. Perhaps you are passing the keyboard back to each other. If you don’t want me to post then stop referring back to me. Re Geezers post of 2.38. It’s simples really. Just like you two. Geezer sussed nothing out at all. Now go back to holding hands like good little friends.
These two bob ( no pun intended to StorEy) phoney awards HP keep posting about BB. It makes NO difference Ames because to many lies and untruths have fast tracked you to jail. NO investors believe anything you post – PERIOD
Yup StoerEy’s a first class anker. Shuffle orf to ones cabana Frank.
I concur- an odious idiotic misfit Frank
This is so funny. Dras Tickt cannot even spell my mis spelt name lol.
Stop using my name in vain.
Doh what an idiot I is.
You certainly are if you can’t spell – the situation is drastic.
Geezer 7.44
You are funny,stop making me laugh.
I’m confused on this part of DA statement.
“When investors bought property from Harlequin, they were issued with a standard preliminary contract which stated that 95% of the purchase price was to be paid during the build by way of stage payments, with a final 5% payable on completion, which is why properties were sold off-plan well below market value.”
100 units have been completed for quite a while. What has been the delay of handing over the units. It makes sense for a financially struggling company to crack on and free up to £10 million from completions. I know the mortgage problem will stop some “investors” but surely out of 6000 a few hundred were cash people. Why? Is it that more than 100 purchasers have already paid up front and DA didn’t want to lose the income(if any). Even scarier paying 95% and still not having title until the last 5% paid. What a contract, Heads I win, tails you lose.
Who will be the first to move authorities or liquidators.
Don’t flush your career down the pan, Dan.
I just bumped into a solicitor who has been struck off for over stepping the line.
This can’t be denouement……somethings got to be happening !!!
ODFO Bobstorey. You posted some time ago implying that you stayed at B Bay. We know from your posts that you were there for a very short time [readers about two hours he was on a cruise] and you complained about the rain and having to pay for your ‘dinner’. Why didn’t Dave Ames make sure that you were nicely accommodated, especially seeing as you had paid cash for your cabana and as you have claimed were receiving rental income from it. You’ve lost Frank- its all over. Sign on ehe x
Hear here
In the past couple of days several rave reviews have appeared on
Tripadvisor. I am having trouble dealing with a total disconnect that
arises. I have visited BB several times (at all stages of construction)
but never as an overnight guest. Because of the location (flood-plain) and
artificial beach (God only knows what ecological disasters are occurring
on the sea-floor), it amazes me that seemingly savvy world travelers
can post such widely different observations. Could some guests be discreetly given discounts upon check-out to post rave reviews?
Just a thought…
It is strange. Trip advisor can of course be challenged if anyone wishes t go to the trouble.
The ridiculously extravagant reviews usually coincide with bad news elsewhere in the empire. They all seem to work of a similar script which usually mentions more staff members by name than the average Oscar acceptance speech. Other indicators are references to ice cold towels on arrival and the wonderful towel animal shapes made by the chamber staff
And dont forget those “to die for ” steaks at Jacks….
I think you’re all being very unfair. I have only seen pictures of the towel animals and have been blown away by them. I can only imagine how mind blowing they must be to see up close. Just imagine if……if……the towel animals were made from ice cold towels! That would just be overwhelming for me and would more than explain the incredible reviews.
Those must be the the ‘filet mignon’ flown in from the Miami cold store, along with all the rest of the chill-cook airline style food.