Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. 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.
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.
Many any thanks RBM
Monty , there are a few things here that still don’t quite add up to me, I asked Rodney probably 4 times yesterday what was he hopeful about but this seems to have been brushed under the carpet, the line is now we cant appeal and the class action is the only option.
If I question anything about the cag I just seem to be shot down and now with this fish nonsense.
Finwitt now says today there are 4 investors with 2 million invested between them who have been waiting on the outcome of the avo but potentially will now join ? If I’d invested that much surely you’d be doing everything possible to stop this in the first place not just sitting and watching ? James goozee, is he involved, cos apparently he lost millions ? I’ve checked out Michael cotter and he seems to have been involved in the Yorkshire bank case but that was 10 years ago, what has he done since? Anything of worth.
These are all genuine questions and I will join the zoom call and make my own mind up, but it would be better for the cag to answer queries constructively rather than passive aggressively.
Jack, we will request a summary communication. I’m not aware that an acknowledgment is required, you simply pick your call and follow the joining instructions.
I would like to ask a question is it imperative that everyone makes these zoom calls as I feel some won't be able to due to certain circumstances and will those people get the information that they need to go forward, ie from someone on this board on here or for an email from Mr cotter
Also do we need to acknowledge the second email or do just wait for for forver instructions
Many thanks
EMC, some have already sent questions already, for those very reasons, Stas20 sent in quite along list for example. If you have anything specific, send it to MC in advance.
As we are now imo in danger of getting into wild speculation, I am going to start with my list of questions - we can add to these if needed and send them to MC for consideration prior to the calls.
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?
MF
I’m not aware of other issues. Please email what you’ve sent to MC to coplsharewatch@gmail.com and I’ll take it up with him directly.
RMB / Rod - With anything like 500 people accessing the Zoom meetings surely it is appropriate to list some questions/ suggestions beforehand and give these to Mr Cotter to address. Some people may not be confident in asking a question in front of a large audiance. Others may have a large number of questions. Some will wish to ask follow up questions on Zoom. Give as many people as possible a fair chance to ask a question. What do you think? If so, where do we post our questions?
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 😮