George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. 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.
7. Has Michael Cotter been in contact with Mr Denton of BP?
Good points saintnick and alfresco 👍😮
Email received this morning from Michael Cotter with detials of next week's Zoom meeting. Yes, we are extremely fortunate to have his expert services. Let the justice begin.
If bp are also involved in this I would be gobsmacked. However does seem odd that they haven’t shown their face until very late in the process. If they think we have substantial assets why didn’t they make a bid, and also why no objections at the hearing and allow the AVO to proceed ? Eventually we will find out but if bp are involved and think making a late challenge would cover their tracks they must think we are stupid. I really don’t know what’s going on or what or who to believe
Dusterhater:
6. What percentage will the lawyer take on top of the contributions already made.
Duster - some might be right, if SWP isn't included in the deal then Summit either retrain all their desk jockeys to become rough necks or ship this on smartish to an O&G major.
Come to think of it, playing the victim who had no choice but to purchase COPL from Summit would be a crafty way of avoiding suspicion. A compromise deal as it were.
At this point nothing would surprise me!
If TIA1 is out there, could you do some Cayman's style digging on Yamauchi, Sidnell and social connections to any COPL exec's?
Some may think that BP may be offered first dibs at purchasing the assets in the near future, so they recoup lost monies anyway if that's the case. Hahahaha😮
Got the email too.
CV stacks up and you don’t get to appear on Moneybox etc unless you’ve got contacts and a story to tell.
I’ve got questions when we get on the Zoom calls too. I imagine Richardson and all the shorting crew don’t want to read this positivity on LSE as they would prefer we look elsewhere for our money back.
“ There is no right of appeal and all parties concluded the Hearing as per protocol”
So BP are just going to let this go? They were the 2nd senior lender. What was owed to them $12m?
Very very strange!
He will do very nicely for me, can't see getting any better.
😮
I have no concern with his writing, mine is pretty bad but I understand my competency, and in this regard this is all I require from MC. I feel quite assured and look forward to working with MC and his firm.
I think just reading his background will give you a very good understanding of why he finds this case interesting. He may well be in high demand, however I would say we are starting out as a very good fit, his skills seem to be a perfect fit for us and we, a very good fit for his own CV, as a team we are likely to be a win win.
Note, he has been involved in class action and fraud in the past and wow I am impressed with his media connections, these are exactly the areas we need and would likely NOT get from a run of the mill solicitors firm.
Someone said the other day how the likes of COPL and the others involved like to operate in the shadows, how they dislike the glare of publicity, well I think MC has the connections to blow that shield away for them all.
I feel very upbeat and excitedly welcome the planned zoom calls.
https://www.setfords.co.uk/our-people/profile/michael_cotter/
"Solicitor Advocate and financial services Lawyer, Michael Cotter offers expertise in regulated industries including pensions, financial products and investments.
From complicated regulated-services fraud, to emerging unregulated schemes that target unsophisticated investors, Michael is an experienced litigator advising clients in multi-million pound actions against investment services.
Adept at complicated class-action claims and a professional negligence expert, Michael most recently assisted in the recovery of over £25m to investors as the lead lawyer in the matter against Arck LLP and those connected. Having uncovered the fraud that affected over 250 clients, he took action to successfully assist with the return of millions from the Yorkshire Bank for those victims. This case lead to the prosecution of the directors of Arck LLP following an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.
Michael also assist clients in Judicial Review proceedings against the Financial Services Compensation Scheme and Financial Ombudsman Service.
As a regular media commentator for titles such as The Times, The Financial Times, Money Mail, Professional Adviser and Citywire Michael is at the cutting-edge of evolving markets and industry trends."
Obvious questions are
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) Gurantees no more cash calls after 1st stage or when / if the first £150,000 raised is used.
5) Expected time scales.
These are a few of the questions that I would like put forward.
Thanks all for the hard work to date. 😮
Received information from Michael Cotter, we are very fortunate to have his services & I'm most definitely contributing towards the necessary costs involved.
Same here. Looking forward to the zoom calls.
That said, I’m a bit suspicious about the quality of our lawyer here due to the questionable writing style. Not wishing to be a grammar nazi, I’d expect a high degree of literacy from a lawyer heading up a class action suit with over 450 clients. His writing is atrocious and he clearly doesn’t know what a comma is for or how to use one. These aren’t informal messages between mates, this is a lawyer communicating with clients.
Anyway, I’ll try not to judge a book by its cover. I’ll be on one of the calls.
All good, received this morning!
Not had an email since my details were acknowledged.
Nothing and no answers to questions.
I’ve received the first email from Michael Cotter (and the update one) but I’ve not received anything about the zoom calls which Michael said he hoped to send on Friday (yesterday). Has anyone else received this?
Bob, did you read the email? If you did let’s wait for the teams meetings which was what is required so all can get an understanding.
I'm miles behind. Has it been agreed how much we should contribute to the initial Cotter Assessment?
RB no worries - all good from close to the Borders
So does that mean it’s all done and dusted and SL have the asset?
Apologies, just found it in spam folder.
Denarius
Afraid we have not received that, could you please resend to coplsharewatch@gmail.com
Thanks
Mr Justice Yamauchi spoke at length with Mr Pontin representing BP at the Hearing at the end of which Mr Pontin thanked His Lordship admitting the BP Affidavit and for not construing Mr Pontin's submission as a sleight on the other Counsel in attendance. There is no right of appeal and all parties concluded the Hearing as per protocol. That is what happened and no objections were made.
Ryan, after posting here for just 48hours, please stop repeatedly telling CAG what we should be doing and what our priorities should be. Thanks.