Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video 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.
The insurance picks up the tab if we can get it lloydy. Not Cotter.
Rbm. I still have not received the email. Is this still ongoing?
Think about this from Stas:
“you have to consider what happens in the case of a loss, who's going to be left with the fees that the opposition would wish to collect!”
It says everything in my opinion.
Lloydy
What I'm saying stas is we are stll at initially assessment stage. I am currently involed in a nwnf. Mr Cotter will need kings councel opinion before we get a yes or no and insurance. My opinion is we are paying for an initial case assesment and nothing more. We are just hopeful of having a case and may loose our fee if we haven't.
Thanks also for all you work /research and time you have put in. Much appreciated.
Folks, there are three zoom calls available this week, at three at different times in order to offer flexibility. Clearly, this guy WANTS to answer your questions, not hide from them. He probably knows what 90%+ of your questions will be, he’s an expert in his field.
It’s pretty clear that none of us on this board are experts in such legal cases, in fact it’s pretty clear that some haven’t a clue. Therefore, if you want all your questions answered factually, simply join one of the calls. If it’s not for you, that’s fine, your decision.
However, ‘debating’ such points when there is clearly no expert present to deliver any facts is pointless. With the first call due to take place in just 48hrs time, all that’s being displayed here is impatience or disruptive mischief.
Both a sad waste of a lovely Sunday.
Montofino your understanding of nwnf is I believe outdated. It is I believe normal practice to ask for fees to support external costs otherwise you can end up with very little indeed from a nwnf.
Additionally, my understanding is you generally do not get all your costs back from the opposition if you win, often maybe up to 70% or so. however again these are questions to be put to MC. I expect a win means all the fees of Cotter are covered (the base fee) plus a success fee paid which is often a percentage of the base fee, sometimes up to 100%.
I think for Cotter to support this he will be expecting a very very high chance of a win otherwise he would not go ahead, you have to consider what happens in the case of a loss, who's going to be left with the fees that the opposition would wish to collect!
I also read the email, hence the £15 admin comment.
Anyway, i'll wait for the Tues call as this is in danger of becoming a circular discussion and Finwit's 4 additiinal HNWI's adding another £2m loss to the pot will skew the figures once they join the group.
What might give some perspective to the number is what an average contribution would be based on the average loss of £25k. That would also likely increase people's willingness to join in as it should be under £300. We need everyone to support MC's efforts.
Ryan
I agree with a lot of your points however I honestly believe it is best for cag if the results are known before moving forward. This way all copl holders past and present are as one. I do find it unusual that fees for councel are being asked for. My knowledge of nwnf is that the case is assessed by the lawyer to which there will be a fee based on time/complexity. After that the Nwnf contract is offered if there are resonable chances of success. Usually at 25% of compensation plus all costs which should be retrieved from the other side if successful. Mr Cotter it seems to me wants kings councel opinion at home and Canada to assess the case. If it comes back at 50/50 this case wont get off the ground unless there is pre court deal we also would not be indemnified against losses. We could loose our money again here but we must go for it.
Obviously you don't get my question or you just don't want to get my question 😲🤔. I am fully aware and understanding of what the email says 😮
Exactly as Stas just stated and as I wrote.
Sorry if my writing style looks aggressive to you but I can’t fathom why you didn’t read the same email as I did and understand the tiers?
It’s clear that small loss individuals will pay just admin. Those with a few grand loss will again pay a reduced fee.
Anyway each to their own. Nobody is forcing you to recover your loss. You can walk away, join the action group that Cag have worked hard on, or try to go alone with your own legal representation.
I’ll take the group - strength in numbers.
Why not just read the email.
"On first review, the average investment size is in excess of £25,000.00, therefore I propose in order to fund the first stage of the action, we will have a banding in order to be a part of the group and fund the initial action, the banding will be between £100.00 plus VAT and £550.00 plus VAT , that is to say, no-one will pay more than that to be a member of the group and receive the benefit of the above and also, my specific on-going advice on receipt, to be delivered via a series of Zoom calls and other contact at your request.
Please note, I have seen a handful of investors who have invested less than £1000.00 please note if this is the case, you will not be charged a sign-up fee, you will merely incur a small fee (less than £15) in order so that I can verify your identity (as required by my regulator) via anti-money laundering software. "
They were waiting on the whole Summit court session to finalise before signing up to the action.
Maybe a weighted average contribution would be more appropriate, cut off at £1k or less were those below just pay the £15 admin fee.
My loss is in the ten's of thousands so i get duster's point about HNWI's in for hundred's of thousands also paying the same fee as myself.
Also, do we have our own KC in that group?
If not i'd
Don't twist things finwit - I just asked a simple question - will payment increase I'd some drop out and will will know before we make any payment 😲
Of course I want these scum bags brought to justice - I don't get why your getting shirty about my thoughts 🤔😮
And why have these hnw investors that you are aware of not registered as yet 🤔. Hmmmmm🤔😮.
Bizarre reply??
I didn’t say don’t put your thoughts out there, I said join the call and get your answers.
‘Upto £500’ - is that not what I just said? Some pay £500 some pay less?
I never had you down as someone that wouldn’t want us all to take action against these shysters.
Starting to not like your tone 😮
The email said pay up to £500 PER SHAREHOLDER.
if I want to put thoughts out thee I will 😲
Have a nice day. 😮
Absolutely get your point.
I suspect those who have lost small amounts won’t be paying the full £500. Often these Class actions have a tier to contributions with a max cap (that max cap might be £500 who knows?).
There’s strength in numbers as that triggers the media so lawyers often do a freebie for the lowest loss people. It’s not their first rodeo whereas for most of us it is. I’m sure they’ll know what to expect our questions to be and be prepared to give us all the confidence.
Otherwise don’t join it.
Yes I get your point but these are my thoughts that I thought may be worth sharing before the meeting so can be discussed here.
Finwittrader also I have lost a considerable amount ( for me) here but not as much as £500k so these 4 individuals will only pay up to £500 legal request - maybe they could afford to contribute larger amount 🤔. Just saying 😮
Duster. Why don’t you just join the Zoom call as you’re guessing on the outcome.
Ask your questions, listen to Michael Cotter speak and go from there. I know of at least 4 HNW individuals who have lost over £2m combined who are going on the call as they’ve not registered yet.
Ultimately people can choose. Walk away and take it on the chin. Join the fight and see your money returned.
Expressions of interest of circa 500 shareholders but how many will actually pay the proposed up to £500 per shareholder legal bill request 🤔. I would think many would, however many of us when it actually comes to payment time may think again and say no as it's risking further funds on this and have lost enough already or may not be able to afford the payment as lost saving to this fraud.
My point being if shareholders drop out then will the up to £500 request likely to be increased 🤔
Will all those shareholders willing to pay be registered before any payment is made, so as then we will know exact numbers of shareholders signing up and cost to each shareholder 🤔😲
We were all hopeful that there might be multiple bidders and that the officers would promote the company properly in the data room and in the subsequent Q&A that were held with Copl’s team (AM / PK etc). However the minimal acceptable level of promotion was done along with massive obfuscation so no bids arrived and Summit took all.
Art carries on being the man in the field and I’m certain will be announced in an advisory role to the new owners asap.
So Michael Cotter and his team now move to the next phase. Recovery of our losses and the civil action. All evidence provided so far by the investigators will be formally passed to them and formally to the authorities. We don’t need to spell out on here again what we know. The digital paper trail and the recordings.
The organised insider action and shorting. The supporting social media action organised and actioned. There isn’t a Copl shareholder who doesn’t know the story almost verbatim.
So ‘Ryan’. Your little fishy crew can flap as much as you like. You can try to convince posters on here that it’s a pointless exercise. You can tell them there’s other options but frankly we are all sick of your lot playing roughshod and now it’s our turn.
We are coming. We won’t stop. It’s already too late for you and Cotters team will work to their pace and their drum beat and you can only sit and wait until that door knocks loudly.
Expect us!!
Discussions have been going on with Michael Cotter for many weeks and his list of expressions of interest now totals over 500 shareholders. There are no constraints on which parties Michael Cotter may lodge claims against. Meanwhile, Summit has used its lien on the assets to claim them. Once Summit acquires the assets I.e. extracts them from COPL, they will own them and have discretion about what they wish to do next subject to any legal constraints.
Ryan you are starting to show your true colours one thinks.
Unless you have no understanding of 'no win, no fee' and or you don't listen to past detail as having been given here multiple times by RBM. The no win no fee has and is the same as it has always been, no fee relates to Michael Cotter and his firms representation, as I am sure you well know.
It has always been the case that external fees to his costs will exist such as external council, these you cannot work around or did you expect MC to stump up these fees for us. You do seem to be trying hard to cast doubts where there are none, however, this forum is wise to the aliases that pop up here having been registered years ago yet never having posted, just to be rolled out when needed to try and cause friction.
I think this is likely what AFC is referring to but no doubt he can tell you himself, but wow isn't it amazing that someone that has apparently lost thousands, been here for over 3 years only now decides to post, as if the No win no fee was the most important thing to ever discuss. I guess the 99% drop in the share price in the past, or the massive shorting, or the resignation of several CEO's etc. none of those were important enough to comment but heh, a well qualified lawyer that might defend the shareholders being defrauded by a load of crooks, seems to be a concern to you, I wonder which side you bat for.
I am heavily supportive of Michael Cotter, oh yeah bring it on.