The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen 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.
Will Cathy Hume at least be contacted to give a statement or release all the emails that were sent by concerned share holders over the past 2 years. We were ignored and communications broke down why? she’s the perfect person to integrate.
Has anybody been in-touch with our Ex shareholders communications, Cathy the snake Hume and find out what shes doing with her shares ? did she join the group ? considering she was paid in shares for her services and declared she hasn't sold any in a grovelling email to us shareholders i would think she’d jump at the chance.
Stas, thinking about it logically those 450 shareholders would have already posted their proof of shareholding to the CAG weeks ago, hopefully each shareholding was viewed and checked at the time, the CAG then passed those 450 email addresses to Mr Cotter who then invited them to the three Zoom meetings, if that isn't deemed enough then the only way around it is to maybe sign an NDA or something beforehand.
Great list of questions by the way.
Thanks Stas. Have the CAG announced the total % of shares we own as a group ? is it over the 5% ?
NSTiger my question today at 11.49, I added it to the questions I had already passed to MC. Reposted below for you.
14. In the normal course of events, legal / client privilege would lend itself to confidentiality, in this case with 450 shareholders involved, it may be reasonable to assume that within those ranks we may have an infiltrator from the opposition, how do we maintain confidential advantage?
How do we make sure that members of the BOD or personal working from the other side don't have representation at these zoom calls and future meetings ? A little share holding keeps will allow moles in the camp will it not ?
Confirm questions and answers via email to members of the group 😮
WWK - good idea - if people have questions then add to the list and forward to the Lawyers. hopefully he will answers all relevant questions at the Zoom meeting and perhaps would be good to confirm questions via email to all members of the group.
RBM, CAG, Dusterhater, Alfresco, Antha, Stas20 and others,
We all seem to be asking similar questions and I've collated the ones I came across here in this post and added mine at the end, which echo others. I suspect everyone will be keen to participate, so the Zoom calls could get a little messy; I suggest we send the questions to MC before so he has time to prepare effective answers.
1). % chances of positive outcome for shareholders
2) If winning result then when % chance of actually funds being retrieved from culprits so as to compensate shareholders.
3). When does no win no fee kick on
4) Guarantees no more cash calls after 1st stage or when / if the first £150,000 raised is used.
5) Expected time scales.
6. What percentage will the lawyer take on top of the contributions already made.
7. Has Michael Cotter been in contact with Mr Denton of BP?
1. How much work have you conducted to date to know if we have a strong legal case?
2. Can you explain all the upfront costs?
3. Are there other fees (later down the line) that might need to be paid, on top of the 100 – 550 charges such as disbursements / expenses etc?
4. In the case of a win am I correct in that we would need to pay;
a. Your CEC costs?
b. Do you also envisage a success fee, what is the success fee, is it a percentage of the base fee, if yes what percentage?
c. Do you also expect to get a cut of the awarded damages on top of the above?
d. What percentage would you expect shareholders to receive against their original investment?
e. What percentage of your costs could we recoup from the opposition?
5. In the case of a loss are fees to be paid to the other side, who pays them or do we take insurance against this?
6. Will there be multiple cases, e.g. against Anavio, then against Directors individually, how will the case be structured?
7. Under what jurisdiction will we be fighting this case?
8. Assuming we win the initial case, is there a possibility to further fight for punitive damages (what about in the US this is COPL America that owns the assets). Punitive damages are for me almost more important due to the;
a. time spent,
b. stress
c. sleepless night,
d. distress for both me and family,
e. missed opportunity etc.
9. I note CEC (Barry legal) had a US attorney (Daniel Shier..) on his team is this still the case, can he be of help. – who will be on our team?
10. How do the various actors and support networks fit into the mix between CEC and Setford?
11. What plans does MC have as regards Media.
12. The CAG and the support base of 450 shareholders can be powerful to support, what can we do to support you further?
13 His background-how many similar cases has he been involved with and success rate (%)?
14 How does he rate our case 1-10 and why?
15 Even if we win the court case what about the money? And further costs?
16 Fees-how many stages might there be and costs for each? In more than one jurisdiction?
17 Timescales for our/similar cases?
Hi RBM (who is RMG!!! Sorry) Thanks Emc
Rb I can assure you I have been reading this board virtually every day for 4 years so I know what’s been going on. I understand your suspicions of any new posters and I have seen everything on here myself however I am a genuine investor who just wants justice here and my money back or whatever I can get back, so will happily join the zoom call and take it from there. Unless there is some miraculous turn around between now and June 17th then this looks like the only option we have.
RMG thanks.
@Stas thanks for sharing your questions - they cover mine.
Emc
Stas I stand corrected - when you put it like that - I didn't think my comment through properly 🤔😲
Great post earlier stas regarding questions put forward 👍
I appreciate we have guys like yourself on our side👍
RBM.
I posted my holding a while ago but I increased it after my initial posting to you.
Do I need to forward my revised holding and how might it affect any future final settlement if I leave things as they are now?
Again a million thanks for the sterling work of CAG.
God knows where we'd be without it
"Stas - not sure that matters anymore - after facts are facts no one can change them now"
duster we seriously disagree on this one, we would be more than foolhardy to advertise any strategy we may have as regards our fight, yes what has happened is fact but how we present that can be absolutely damning and indefensible or made to look circumstantial.
Just as when going into court to prosecute a murderer, it may be absolutely undeniable that someone was murdered, but the sentence can be very different if you can prove it was premeditated as opposed to reactionary to an event etc.
Maybe not the best analogy but you get my drift, giving anything away, even a hint that helps the opposition formulate a defence would in my opinion be negligent to the extreme and most unwise.
I could be proved wrong, but I don’t believe most genuine COPL shareholders are questioning CAG’s honest and integrity. They’ve been asking questions of us long, long before Thursday of last week and probably have a better understanding. If what we are doing is not for you, fine, good luck going forward.
Rb / Stas, given what’s gone on it is likely that most shareholders are questioning absolutely everything that has gone on here including the cag. Even giving you my email address has me questioning, If everything you say is genuine I apologise. The website put together is fantastic, I’m just frustrated with the whole shebang and how this has played out and been allowed to happen, does the london stock exchange not have any warning signs when a share drops 99% within a few months to check nothing underhand is going on, why was the shorting by Anavio not picked up sooner by the authorities, this was a main market stock. The whole thing beggars belief.
Stas - not sure that matters anymore - after facts are facts no one can change them now - these scum bags can read what we got on them and sweat imo - they probably want to settle up quicker, so not to worried about confidentiality - only my opinion though 🤔😮
Ryan/Monty, please both email me at coplsharewatch@gmail.com and I’ll personally answer your questions.
CAG has worked tirelessly for COPL SHs, please don’t question our honesty or integrity, that’s wholly undeserved.
Actually I would ask one further question of MC. which I think is of high importance.
14. In the normal course of events, legal / client privilege would lend itself to confidentiality, in this case with 450 shareholders involved, it may be reasonable to assume that within those ranks we may have an infiltrator from the opposition, how do we maintain confidential advantage?
Stas - you raise a good point, not casting shade on you Ryan but, how does MC effectively communicate his strategy and answer genuine queries from shareholders without giving that info to the oppo?
Seems anyone who has a shareholding gets entry, i can name a few i wouldn't want on these calls.
Ryan even if Rodney was able or wiling to answer your question, I would advise against it. Your alias comes across as suspicious as does your timing and your line of questioning, I would think nothing less also from the people we would look to go up against.
Me too Monty.
I can’t believe how badly we have been lied to by Richardson, Anavio and AM. It’s a shocker.
Looking forward to my money being recovered and seeing shills took to the cleaners
Thanks Ryan. See you on the call.
Must admit i feel the same Ryan. End of the day we have no other options. I am dissapointing with the lack of honesty.