Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
R K

Forex Trading Website Disappears With $1Bn Of Clients Money

Recommended Posts

A cautionary tale.

They even have made up testimonials, but I believe that's fairly standard practice by internet marketing businesses

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-13/forex-investors-may-face-1-billion-loss-as-trade-site-vanishes.html

Mandal says he decided to withdraw some money in March. In an e-mailed response, Secure said he’d have to wait. It cited issues with the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, which is a Treasury Department rule that applies to U.S. citizens using foreign accounts -- a law that was irrelevant to Mandal, who’s a U.K. citizen. The March 5 e-mail said Mandal would get the money in a few days.

“Thank you for your patience,” it said.

Mandal says he wasn’t yet suspicious. He got another e-mail from Secure on April 30.

“Our Technical Department is currently working on system updates,” it said. “Our company sincerely apologizes for any temporary glitches that may occur.”

The next day, the website went offline. It never returned. Neither did the Mandals’ investment. As far as he knows, their entire $60,000 has disappeared forever.

Secure crafted a tangled financial web to harvest and hide investor money by setting up companies with different names incorporated in Belize, the British Virgin Islands and the U.K. Secure asked clients in e-mails to wire money to bank accounts held by those firms.

By using related companies, Secure obscured the paper trail of investor funds that would end up with the firm.

The only public evidence that authorities have looked into Secure Investment comes from Panama. In July 2013, the website of Panama’s securities regulator, SMV, warned that the company wasn’t licensed or authorized to trade currencies.

The regulator also said Secure Investment listed a false Panama City address as its headquarters.

The office addresses that Secure’s website listed in Hong Kong, London and Sydney were also phony. All of those were at sites run by international office leasing company Regus Plc. (RGU) London-based spokesman Andrew Brown researched his company’s records and found that Secure never used any of those locations.

One testimonial is from a bearded man wearing a jacket and tie. After introducing himself as Michael, he praises Secure in an 80-second video. He says he’s pleased with his return on investment.

“Every year, I’ve watched my ROI grow,” he says. “I’m getting closer and closer to my retirement goals. They take all the stress out of it.”

Michael is actually Al Eddy from Chattanooga, Tennessee. Eddy, 42, who has recorded video endorsements for a fee, says he was hired by an intermediary for Secure and paid $20 to perform as Michael. He says he’s never invested with Secure, nor traded forex nor even purchased a share of stock. Nothing he said in his endorsement is true, Eddy says, adding that he no longer does testimonials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, the CEO doesnt sound like a 'sterling' in the video...

The last 'sterling' to hit the headlines...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Sterling

Real name: Donald Tokowitz

If someone has a nice trustworthy English sounding name, and speaks like he comes from, well, somewhere that isnt england...probably best to run a mile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is somewhat disturbing that the people who get reeled into these things are usually doctors or similar. If access to my money was denied me, and stuff like this being the excuse...

It cited issues with the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, which is a Treasury Department rule that applies to U.S. citizens using foreign accounts -- a law that was irrelevant to Mandal, who’s a U.K. citizen.

I'd look into what that law actually is. Frankly if I was registered with this doctor, I think i'd look for a new one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is somewhat disturbing that the people who get reeled into these things are usually doctors or similar. If access to my money was denied me, and stuff like this being the excuse...

It cited issues with the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, which is a Treasury Department rule that applies to U.S. citizens using foreign accounts -- a law that was irrelevant to Mandal, who’s a U.K. citizen.

I'd look into what that law actually is. Frankly if I was registered with this doctor, I think i'd look for a new one.

Doctors are perfect for this type of thing, earn good money but have little time for due diligence.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgy forex dealings. Who would have thought it.

Bet they never even traded at all.

Love all the Twitter scams going on at the moment. Wanna scam? Get on Twitter. :lol:

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgy forex dealings. Who would have thought it.

Bet they never even traded at all.

Love all the Twitter scams going on at the moment. Wanna scam? Get on Twitter. :lol:

Seems that way doesnt it. Just deposited the funds around the world, spent a bit of money on a plausible looking website, produced a/c statements from time to time a la Madoff, then refused withdrawals.

Like RBS/Barclays etc but without the bank of england endorsement. That licenece makes all the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same would have happened with RBS, NatWest, Halifax, Lloyds, Barclays, Northern Rock, Bradford and Bingley, Alliance and Leicester etc. if the government hadn't stepped in to bail them out with taxpayer money.

Very true....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Corrine Stockheath, of Surrey?

No he was a bit of a numpty really, and a very small cog by all accounts.

Just do some Googling on 'the syndicate' 'frank kern' on a few others, and take a look at the Salty Droid website.

Basically you create 'social proof' on a vast scale but forming a syndicate of fellow scammers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Corrine Stockheath, of Surrey?

Grant Shapps made it perfectly clear she is genuine. Anyway, that was a long time in the past and he's answered all those questions.........( :lol: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the regulators.

It should get Mr Mason going again.

Which regulator? The BVI, Panamanian or Belivian? There is a reason for residing in these murky backwaters.

Who is this Mr Mason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which regulator? The BVI, Panamanian or Belivian? There is a reason for residing in these murky backwaters.

Who is this Mr Mason?

There are regulators (so called) and rules in the countries that these companies operate in (apart from the countries of registration/residence). If they don't apply to those fraudsters and outright rip-off merchants then the regulators should introduce them it's so blatant and crooked. Mind you they don't even seem to properly regulate the home grown fraudsters in the banks for example so it's likely a case of dream on.

If overseas registration/residence is their get out then perhaps if they operate in the UK they should be fully registered and resident in the UK before they can operate in in the UK - or something like that.

Mr Paul Mason (see recent thread on HPC) - but it's a fair question.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are regulators (so called) and rules in the countries that these companies operate in (apart from the countries of registration/residence). If they don't apply to those fraudsters and outright rip-off merchants then the regulators should introduce them it's so blatant and crooked. Mind you they don't even seem to properly regulate the home grown fraudsters in the banks for example so it's likely a case of dream on.

If overseas registration/residence is their get out then perhaps if they operate in the UK they should be fully registered and resident in the UK before they can operate in in the UK - or something like that.

Mr Paul Mason (see recent thread on HPC) - but it's a fair question.

It's not that simple. Often they will be registered in country A, but receive funds into country B bank account. Regulators in country B probably not even aware until complaints start coming in....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that simple. Often they will be registered in country A, but receive funds into country B bank account. Regulators in country B probably not even aware until complaints start coming in....

I wasn't suggesting it's simple but that it's possible. The UK regulators and regulations are as ineffective as they and the government etc want them to be.

These days UK people seem to be by design the financial prey for any dodgy operators anywhere in the world - as well as those based in the UK.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.