We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
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.
Good evening crl123, what's the screenshot for please? I have/had a holding , any news would be good.
Farsdak
Sorry
Colin.lawrence@talk21.com
Enclose screenshot of shareholding.
Group
Open to all holders.
crl123- I agree with you , how can I join your group?
How do we join please send the link via email
What's the point? If it's a going concern then that'll tip it over into not being one. If it's not a going concern then there's no money, so you'll be going after bod directly, their assets are hardly likely to be worth enough to give us more than 1% of the latest valuation. However nobbling any future career as a director is no bad thing.
fairdealer, yes i agree . The SEC filings provided much of the info I used. Wrt other agencies. if /when we move to liquidation I will lodge a detailed complaint with the SEC and FCA expecting nothing from the UK but hoping the yanks hold the BOD to account. What I have not done is summarised the broken promises and misleading info wrt trials because I am relatively new and small shareholder here . So if anyone can evidence wrong doing there that would be great.
Taverham, well done on your enquiries.
I have been convinced for many weeks, there are/is evidence to support serious Maladministration. Some of this evidence maybe relatively easy to discover, there is also confidential documentation that DP and Co have not released. They may have disclosed to the Administrators, under duress.
Providing information to the Administrators is all very well but ultimately this matter will need to be referred to the SFO who have powers of entry and extraction of documents and tangible evidence, something the Administrator do not have as a tool. The Administrators basic concerns are to retrieve funds to satisfy Creditors, any Law breaking will be for other Agencies to investigate.
An action on the Corporate level, rather than Individuals, will drag on for possibly a year or 2. Meanwhile some shareholders will be hanging on to the hope there will be a distribution.
Fairdealer, I have trawled through conditions of the OF loan and the various rns statements released by the company and imv investors have a slam dunk case in that they have been misled by the directors in some of the rns statements. The info i have uncovered has gone via the shareholder action group to both Sharesoc and Interpath in a detailed and cross referenced piece. Clearly the outcome of the Admin process will dictate next steps.
Oofy, the BOD have not only allowed this to happen but have actively caused it to happen most likely because they found themselves in a tight financial corner and step by step went down the slippery slope from bulling up prospects of the company to withholding vital info and finally fraudulent misrepresentation imv.
Finally anyone who wants to join the shareholder action group should seek out CRL via his posts here or on Telegram.
The fact that the suspension and administration dropped out of the blue shows how risky AIM can be. Perhaps Oliviera knew the reality but the BoD managed to hide it from others, including some professional investors. It is a pity that AIM can be riskier than crypto, and that management can get away with driving a company irresponsibly into the ground. Perhaps Duncan was only interested in tinkering in his laboratory and cared nothing for the shareholders that he deceived into sponsoring his hobby.
I’ve had only a cursory look at this but I can’t understand how a Board of Directors of a public company can have allowed the current position to develop.
It seems to me there are some odd-looking developments, against the interests of small shareholders, in a number of AIM companies and on the LSE generally. It might be an idea for aggrieved shareholders here to have a look at what’s happening at POG (Petropavlovsk). In addition, the police maintain a site called “Action Fraud” for people to report suspected fraud. You’d need to get your ducks in a row first but it’s free and it’s the police.
Good luck with it. I don’t think it’s going to be the last.
The reaction of Interpath is not surprising. They have NO interest in protecting SH's interests as when pressed they have made it pretty clear there is unlikely to be any distribution to PI's.
Interpath already know the value of assets and cash at bank and so long as sufficient funds are available to satisfy Creditors, they (Interpath) have a residual amount to absorb into their coffers.
They are being obstructive in regards claims aginst Individuals probably due to co-operation of Directors is required.
Claims against the Board as an entity will fail whereas directed against the Individual named Directors has a greater chance of success, providing details of maladministration, possible deceit in a public office, are factually supported.
As sunnyca as already stated, and others, the object of the excerise is to ensure named Directors are barred from holding such positions in the future.
I am firmly of the view the Directors either knowing or otherwise Breached the Loan Agreement with Oxford Finance, which then led to the appointment of Adminsitrators. There must be ample documentary evidence to be unc0vered regarding Oxford's warnings of Loan recovery action. Documents which were not rightly released to the Market and Shareholders.
AIMO
imo opinion the administrators are only there to make money for themselves - more than £500k to date and £650/hr is ridiculous!
Duncan and the BoD must never hold such positions ever again.
Interpath are resisting invididual legal claims, saying only they as the company can take action. I have presented them with Article 10 against which they have taken legal advice which imo is contentious. Interpath today stated they are only interested in repaying creditors and going concern was unlikely. I don’t personally believe much of what they say, but it is clear they have NO plan to reimburse shareholders and do not see the company as surviving. The legal route seems to me the only option now.
The Shareholder Action Group represents over $12m invested. I ain’t gonna see that dissolve without a fight .
Sunnyca- can i use your lawyer would he be able to take more than one individual claim against 4d