London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
jalpa I'm not particularly fond of parrots but if that changes and I acquire one I know exactly what to call it hmmm jjjjj J A L P A get back on yer perch - That's better now who's a pretty pretty boy then ? now give Terry the lowdown on ffff..ffff FRAUD then and I'll give yer a biscuit.
Streuth that three pounds of quivering jelly you've got balanced behind yer police shades seems to have developed some technique for discerning certain facts in a semi logical fashion - but what goes with it is tv ads and a tendency for boring the *rse off anyone looking in yer cage, and listening to yer repetitious sh*te. Don't get me wrong - you have got a brain and yes above average, but it's no way flexible enough. You frame a view and if any new data comes along you twist that to join the dots - in other words to fit into the exact shape of your preconceptions. I on the other hand, the past superior mind, have that flexibility in my thinking to change my view completely. I have a logical solution to who the size eight caped one is - yes tm1978. Given new data and making the presumption my previous was wrong, and tm1978 was not fit into the suit of the MD of Flow Products.
Now who in your locked bird brain opinion is she/he ? If you state no idea - that's fine but I have arrived at a logical assessment of who she/he might now be. What's yer take ? Now tell Terry - and no telly !
I have a further conundrum for you coming up. It will be interesting to see if you don't answer at all or sideswipe but this later one is certainly within yer grasp - it's easy man. Even my caddy Biff could guess a go at it.
Tibbs will sell yer anything that moves and your caveat if it stops - over and out.
The combi boiler!!! A boiler designed to run only on demand and be as efficient as possible....how was a combi ever going to generate enough electricity to cover its cost if a system boiler couldn't??? Nontheless, that didn't deter Flow... there was a fundraise!!!!
Canham has probably been cooking the books, the FKR. Happily stole 21.3 million pounds, and now has to hide the fact that none of that money went into a combi. Another FKNG criminal.
And again, FY Tony. 20 years would be about right for you, you FKR.
Still no news , what’s going on ??
Apologies for the silence, I am travelling and presently find myself in the insufferable traffic jams of the south east of our beleaguered Isle. Yesterday afternoon the M25 was its usual dysfunctional self, stifling the economy and frustrating everyone.
Thank you anyway for your open and frank explanation of your later share dealings in Flow. I can sense the anguish and emotional effect of such a financial loss. I am not so badly wounded as I bought all my shares at an average of 10p and then, later on a few more in my wife's name in the middle teens. At one time, when the price rose to the high 40's I was showing a very handsome profit but failed to take any of it. I did not add to my holding in the later dilutions so the family average is below 13p. The possibility of an RTO is of course very remote but, as you say, the tax loss is fairly attractive to the right budding business. As a one time broker on the London Stock Exchange I am very aware that the most difficult skill to hone is that of being a canny seller! It's always easy to make a case for buying something but being willing to take a good profit is more difficult for some reason.
I am encouraged by the remarks of el.toro in his 10.38 post below. Anyone with tangible evidence of the unreadiness or dysfunctionality of the Flow boiler at the time of the bullish statements from the BoD and senior management, either in RNS form or in statements at share presentations, should be prompted to come forward. Dishonesty for the purposes of personal gain and misleading shareholders is a despicable practice and should be punished.
I wish you good luck going forward.
Only mad dogs English men , as they say ! And surely it’s burnt !!
I have been wondering. Did you eventually sell your shareholdings and establish a specific loss for tax purposes? Or do you still hold the shares as beneficial owner? I still hold all the shares that I bought and have never sold any, so I have a large but as yet un-established loss. I have no particular justification for not having sold the shares but suppose that if, by some miracle, the was an RTO and some whizzy company took over the quote I would still have a (seriously diluted by now) vested interest. It doesn't change the fact that I lost a large sum of money overall and have been duped by untruthful statements and claims by a greedy BoD and senior management
Listen Tony you FKR, maybe people don't give a sh*te about you or waht you have to say. Maybe they have provtall the information they have to the proper authorities. Maybe they are waiting for you to be brought in for questioning. You and that other FKR Canham. The £21.3 million pound man. Now FO, Ahole
You would have a judge in hysterics. Loaning money to invest in Tony Stiff and his "gamechanging boiler that could pay for itself" would have anyone in hysterics. Unbelievable.
"it would have to be an ex-employee or someone who has such confirmatory evidence via an ex-employee or connected person".....you are indeed correct and if that person has furnished reports and other documents that prove the boiler wasn't fit for purpose and the claims made for it were untrue/misleading. Furthermore, given the boiler has never been seen and great personal profit was made, then on the balance of probability it is reasonable to expect victory.
The smaller part of my investment was made up of bank loans to the tune of 30k which I am paying off for another two years - so even more stupid - and for you even harder to believe jalpa.
You've written at length on fraud and your conclusions on evidence just would not hold water in court. You have to have substantive proof of any misfeasance and just saying there was no proper boiler will have the judge in legal hysterics. I have tried to evince extract written proof from ex-employees but no way will they play ball. Others have sworn loudly and provocatively, but none has produced that report or is interested in letting me see any damning written matters. If what they suggest is true, then yes there may well be a case of fraud - but they are not coming up with the goods. If anyone is going to prove fraud then it would have to be an ex-employee or someone who has such confirmatory evidence via an ex-employee or connected person.
As an ex-investor I certainly harbour doubts (based on what I have read from others and my own conclusions) but no sufficient information - and unless someone who worked in the company is willing to come forward and publish privately or otherwise, then there is nothing to be done. tm1978 suggests she has taken action, so in my opinion if what she says is correct, she is either an ex-employee or someone who has links with such. She has made mistakes on here, and insists on keeping in the shadows. Kramer (and myself earlier) threw down the gauntlet to her and she ran off hissing and refusing to meet - so, all highly strange and suspicious. El toro I seem to have tarred you with my large brush, and I must say, although you insist on remaining mute and inactive - you did write reasonably and cordially, so apologies for my earlier, large brush post.
"Unfortunately my over confidence in the prospects of Flowgroup led me to invest all of my av available funds into this one Aim company. I also persuaded my partner to invest half of her available assets"....You seriously expect anyone to believe anyone could be so stupid to do such a thing, and then admit to it?
Unfortunately my over confidence in the prospects of Flowgroup led me to invest all of my av available funds into this one Aim company. I also persuaded my partner to invest half of her available assets.
I had an interesting meet up with Jaydee1 and it lasted a good two to three hours. We spoke about lots of topics - not only the downfall of Flowgroup.
Before this goes pop and vanishes, just wondering why you only comment on Flow popgoestheweasel? You must have a singular interest in it that can't be investing as you AIM exposure is too narrow.....you also aren't investigating on behalf of client so how come the focused comments only on Flow?
The whole in one was the back of my throat. At least I am now using my legs rather than just my fingers billy boy.
Can't believe Tony is still peddling his sh*te! The FKR should be in prison along with Canham and the rest of the thieving BOD. Instead he is on here with his golfing buddy, both going for holes in one! FKRS
1pm is good with me, see you later
In fact any time today is good if anythingunexpected has come up your side.
1pm is fine if you still still ok with you Jaydee
Individual shareholders are at liberty to undertake investigations and proceed as they see fit with the evidence they amass.Bearing in mind an oath or affirmation binds a witness to tell the truth. If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment... for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine. Balance of probability.
There a number of legal companies who could be interested. Especially as the business is likely to be sold, although shareholders will get zero. Therefore the buying company have effectively brought the bod history and you now have a defendant rather than a failed business. There is a minimum number for a class action but the law companies actively seek work and a number have listed on the aim. Would be a long road but who knows. If you can update then that would good.
"you assume that you have GOT an individual defendant. Collective responsibility by the board would be argued and although the buck stops with the CEO"...youve answered your own question.
" pinning something divinitive on him is obviously problematic" you assume its problematic and then state "Look, you know he/they lied through their teeth, I know he/they lied through their teeth"....the boiler was never seen or heard of and the CEO made millions. How definitive can you get? The claim of "caveat emptor" will no doubt be rolled out given the disclaimers in the RNS, but to mislead or lie to investors is way beyond the legal interpretation of caveat emptor when investing in a company that popgoestheweasel stated was "wholesome"....wholesome!! Always good value for laugh popgoestheweasel. The superior mind from Bletchley. Wholeseome!!!!
"put down your keyboard and step up to the plate" you assume we haven't.....an odd statement.
Where your argument falls down is, you assume that you have GOT an individual defendant. Collective responsibility by the board would be argued and although the buck stops with the CEO, pinning something divinitive on him is obviously problematic or it would have happened already. I reported this company to Action Fraud many many months and I know several others did, nada.
Look, you know he/they lied through their teeth, I know he/they lied through their teeth. If you think it's so cut and dried to pursue by simply quoting the Fraud Act, put down your keyboard and step up to the plate. You get a lawyer that will take the case, then I'm a contributor to that fund.
Section 1 creates a general offence of fraud and introduces three ways of committing it set out in Sections 2, 3 and 4.
Fraud by false representation (Section 2);
Fraud by failure to disclose information when there is a legal duty to do so (Section 3); and
Fraud by abuse of position (Section 4).
In each case:
the defendant's conduct must be dishonest;
his/her intention must be to make a gain; or cause a loss or the risk of a loss to another.
No gain or loss needs actually to have been made.
The maximum sentence is 10 years' imprisonment.
Fraud by false representation (Section 2)
The defendant:
made a false representation
dishonestly
knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading
with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.
The offence is entirely focused on the conduct of the defendant.
"impossible to get past the LLC protection they would invoke and would also only be worthwhile if the business had any tangible assets"
There is no "LLC protection" in the UK regarding criminal acts by an individual. In a corporate setting, this is excluded by "abuse of position"
Fraud committed by the individual is a criminal act with personal liability. You cant hide behind anything when committing a crime and the law is specific on this. There is a massive growth in lawyers specialising in fraud and scams.
Fraud Act 2006 states:
Fraud by abuse of position
(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a)occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person,
(b)dishonestly abuses that position, and
(c)intends, by means of the abuse of that position—
(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2)A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act....
Tiddly om pom pom eh?
What about the lies told re fundraising etc? Are there no action points on that front? I'd be v happy to join a group if one was got together....