Stephan Bernstein, CEO of GreenRoc, details the PFS results for the new graphite processing plant. 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.
Nickkdog et al. I e-mailed Johanes today. He kindly provided an outline of his e-mail to FCA. I've just sent my e-mail to the FCA based on the template provided.
Johanes - Please feel free to share my e-mail address with Nickkdog.
Regards,
Bugerov.
Bugerov, Nath123, dianejane01, et al., I have now been in touch with Johanes off site via whatsapp. I encourage you all to consider joining in this exchange by writing to the email Johanes has provided. I think we should share ideas more openly than we might here. In my view, we need to do some writing to relevant UK (and possibly Ausie agencies) to get the word out that there are noteholders who believe they have been dealt with in an abusive and possibly fraudulent manner. I have written to Begbies Traynor, the FCA and others. I encourage you all to do the same. The word needs to get out. Perhaps we can even consider some joint action. What that is I don't know but I for one do not want to take this lying down like a sheep led to slaughter.
@toffmagan,
Feel free to drop me an email. My email is : jojohanes2021@gmail.com
There are few of us now, and trying to sort this out together.
thank you
@toffmagan
Yes, I think so too. It was the investment grade rating and Collateral value attracted many investors all around the world.
They're not gonna get away this time. It is purely fraud!!
Dear All. Just found this thread. I too invested heavily in the 2017 bond series.
I absolutely did not hear about the resolution and was never given a chance to vote.
From just reading this thread, maybe Truva trustees voted on our behalf without our consent. Who knows? All I do know is I feel scammed by these corporate *******s who've taken us for a ride.
Happy to join any group to help.
Let me know if one exists outside of this thread.
Dear All. Just found this thread. I too invested heavily in the 2017 bond series.
I absolutely did not hear about the resolution and was never given a chance to vote.
From just reading this thread, maybe Truva trustees voted on our behalf without our consent. Who knows? All I do know is I feel scammed by these corporate *******s who've taken us for a ride.
Happy to join any group to help.
Let me know if one exists outside of this thread.
@Nickkdog,
Yes, WhatsApp will be the best method. Let's we exchange email first and we take it from there?
My email is : jojohanes2021@gmail.com
Please feel free for anyone to drop me an email
Cheers,
Johanes, I have been thinking that it would be good to find a way to reach out to more Audley Funding noteholders. How do we get the word out? I wonder, how many of us are there who likewise were blindsided by the subordination?
I have also been wondering about an alternative way of getting in touch where we perhaps could share ideas more openly. Whatsapp? its encrypted they tell me. It would mean exchanging phone numbers I guess. Not really sure what might be the best way. I'm open to ideas.
On another thing,
I think it is better to discuss this matter privately rather than in an open forum like this, what do you guys think?
Hi Nick,
Yes we had. And we got mixed responses from FCA. The first reply mentioned they will look into it. and another reply from my colleague who is also a client, said we have to report this to BaFin, since the Notes is listed in Frankfurt.
I would recommend to write to FCA and their email are :
MIUMailbox@fca.org.uk
primary.market.integrity@fca.org.uk
FCA - SFO (Serious Fraud Office) --- they specialized in heavy and complex cases, and choose serious fraud and bribery (as suggested by SFO staff to us)
https://www.sfo.gov.uk/contact-us/reporting-serious-fraud-bribery-corruption/
BAFIN :
https://www.bafin.de/EN/DieBaFin/Kontakt/Kontaktformular/form_node.html
The FCA contacted me and started making enquiries into Audley back in June.
I am awaiting a call back by end of week to hear what progress (if any) has been made.
What I meant in my earlier post is that there is an 8 week period before Begbies Traynor as Administrators will need to publish (publicly I believe) their plan for how NQ Minerals should be administered. That could be to seek to refinance (let us hope!!) or to wind up the company, in which case this could take a long time with who-knows what results.
Still nothing back from my email to Truva Trustees.
Has any contacted or is anyone considering contacting the FCA?
Johanes, Bugerov, et al., I received the same reply from Begbies Traynor as you did. I also wrote to Truva Trustees again on Oct 8 as I have been in contact with them in the past. Part of what I wrote was "Did Truva Trustees receive the April 9, 2020 notice on the date of its issuance? Further, did Truva then inform any noteholders of this April 9 notice?" They have not answered yet. I suspect they are going to hide behind the custodians or registrars and say they were responsible for informing noteholders. About all I can hold hope out for is this statement from BT: "The Joint Administrators will be undertaking investigations into the affairs of the Company." If not a smokescreen, then perhaps they will look into and question. I can not give in to full blown pessimism just yet, although the outlook does look dark. We will know more soon I think as there is an 8 week window from the date of the announced Administration and that day must be fast approaching.
@bugerov,
Yep, got the exact same one this morning too.
Legally we're not direct bondholders. Best would be asking our custodian to send an email to them, but we can also send directly too to see how they (Truva Trustee) respond, even though we may already know what the responses are.
I didn't expect much by way of response from Begbies Traynor, but here is the response I received today:
Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted. The Joint Administrators will be undertaking investigations into the affairs of the Company.
You are not a direct creditor of the Company in Administration so please contact Audley Funding plc (directors@audleyfunding.com) for further information.
It is understood that the Trustee for the Audley noteholders is Truva Trustees Limited so you may wish to contact them also (info@truvatrustees.com).
Kind regards
Adam Shama
for Paul Cooper – Joint Administrator
I'm just wondering if any of us (bondholders) are based in Australia? Because this issue needs to be addressed to Australian regulatory bodies too.
Some of the directors are already back in Australia and while preparing for the next stunt , which is located 1 floor below NQ Minerals ( https://igmining.com/contact/ ) . Fund raising also assisted by Bedford Row Capital using different SPV by the name of ESCHER MARWICK PLC .
How good is that?
Hi,
As disgusted and sick to the pit of my stomach over all this.
I thank you for posting your findings here.
After reading through I can confirm that as a note holder I was never contacted regarding any vote also.
I have been given the run around the mill by all companies involved with no one giving clear answers.
I feel something very under hand has taken place and i hope the administration team can see through all the BS and deliver.
Thanks again for the updates.
Nathan
Hi Bugerov,
I’ve sent a letter of demand to Audley Funding requesting this proof that voting has been informed to all bondholders, and they refused to provide that.
On top of that, I’ve just read their financial report, and they still lose money until June 2021. They haven’t made a single cent of profit since they issued the bond back in 2017 until now.
Link : https://www.nqminerals.com/styhugiw/2020/09/NQMineralsHalfYearly2020RNS-FINAL.pdf
So what we’re facing is a company without financial repayment capacity, and almost no collateral too, since it’s a subordinate on the collateral after ING took the big chunk. In the worst scenario, all debt will be converted to equity, and since NQ’s equity is minus (based on their latest financial statement), all bondholders will end up with nothing.
I hate to say this, and I don’t want to sound pessimistic too, but given the situation, I really don’t see any good outcome, unless we managed to get back the collateral and liquidate it while the collateral (Hellyer Mine) still has value in it. Because as of today, the Hellyer mine is still in operation but the proceed is not to pay the bondholder but instead goes to the company, and the company itself is hemorrhaging cash and over expanded.
So we stick to the bond covenant and the main reason why we all invested in the first time, if NQ Minerals (Audley Funding) can’t pay the bondholder upon maturity, then liquidate the collateral, and we get our money back,as simple as that.
Nick/Johanes et al,
E-mail sent today:
'As a holder of Audley Funding Plc 2017-F2 12% Fixed Rate GBP Secured Notes I read with concern that NQ Minerals Plc were placed into Administration on 9th August 2021. Whilst I appreciate no investment is 100% ‘safe’, I felt some comfort in knowing that I had invested in investment grade notes with senior security over the underlying assets. Indeed, without these risk-reducing factors, I simply would not have invested in them.
I was alarmed to read recent claims on a share discussion forum that the Audley Funding notes had been subordinated as part of debt restructuring in 2020. As I had previously heard nothing about this from Audley Funding nor NQ Minerals, I e-mailed both. I received a response from Audley Funding stating the notes had been subordinated at a meeting at Bedford Row on 1st May 2020. They provided a hyperlink to a letter dated 9th April 2020 from Mr David Lenigas asking noteholders to vote in favour of the debt restructuring to release asset security of existing notes. I never received any such correspondence, so never voted. It goes without saying I would not have voted in favour of a proposal to significantly increase the risk to my investment. Indeed, I find claims incredulous that 95-98% of noteholders allegedly agreed to this proposal.
Of the private investors on the discussion forum, none were informed of the debt restructuring proposal, none received the letter from David Lenigas, and none had voted. I genuinely cannot understand why anyone would vote to damage their own investment and, combined with the lack of awareness, I wonder how many investors were made aware and actually voted.
I respectfully request that Begbies Traynor investigates the minutes of the Bedford Row mtg on 1st May 2020, to:
1. Confirm a vote was taken to subordinate noteholder senior debt of Audley Funding Plc noteholders.
2. Confirm a quorum was present to constitute a legal vote, and
3. Confirm who voted, and did the votes equate to a legally defined quorum?
I ask all for the above because the lack of awareness brings into question whether due process was correctly followed in terms of communicating to noteholders. This further leads to questions in terms of; was quorum achieved of the voting members and who voted and agreed to the proposal?
I would respectfully ask that Begbies Traynor investigate the concerns I have highlighted to ensure the Administrators of NQ Minerals can be totally sure how assets should be assigned.'
HI Nick,
Thank you for the update. I've just tried and the link didn't work. I think Audley funding trying to remove its trace.
Please see below the link I got from my custodian regarding the information passed by Audley Funding on how we need to let go the collateral back in 2020 in order ING to finance NQ Minerals (I managed to save in my google drive )
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yclXvMCJXzyy14wxs47BJWa9Jsptccv0/view?usp=sharing
We've also discussed this with our legal team and they suggested reporting this to the regulator because there's definitely market abuse behavior for this action.
We will definitely right email to Begbies Traynor too, thanks Nick.
Have good one,
Cheers
I have just now written Begbies Traynor, Administrators of NQ Minerals. Here is part of what I wrote: "I am a noteholder of Audley Funding Plc. Over the last month and more, I have been trying to find out how the vote of May 1, 2020 turned out in favour of subordination of the senior debt of the Audley Funding Plc noteholders. I am in touch with a good few noteholders, and not one of them, not a single noteholder that I have contacted, received this notification of April 9, 2020: https://audleyfunding.com/onewebmedia/Audley%20funding%20plc%20-%20series%202017-F2%20-%20Notice%20to%20Noteholders%20-%2009.04.2020.pdf." I also questioned what logic would cause 95 to 98% of noteholders to destroy the value of their assets. It makes no sense.
I concluded by saying this "I respectfully request that Begbies Traynor examines the minutes of the May 1, 2020 meeting at Bedford Row 1 to see that 1) the vote was in fact to subordinate noteholder senior debt of Audley Funding Plc noteholders 2) a quorum was duly assembled to constitute a legal vote and 3) who voted, were there proxy documents and would this number constitute a legally defined quorum.
I ask all this because in the very near term you will be proposing a course of action with regard to the Administration of NQ Minerals Plc. If it is to sell off assets, I think you should know that there are some Audley Plc noteholders who believe the reassignment of senior debt to ING Bank may have been done in a manner that did not follow due process with respect to informing noteholders and in the manner of the vote by the Audley Funding Plc. I would respectfully ask that Begbies Traynor examine this issue so that the Administrators of NQ Minerals can be totally sure how assets should be assigned."
I would ask that any of you so inclined also write Begbies Traynor. Soon is best as they will put out their recommendations very soon.
Yesterday update from London Stock Exchange :
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/IRSH/audley-funding-plc-trustee-announcement/15160440
@nickkdog no worries.
I've emailed them from my advisor, but the response seems to be very slow. I think we need to write to FCA too, don't you think ?
So almost everyone is using Reyker, I think NQ and Bedfordrow really took the timing right and pull that action during Reyker went bust.
The other thing is, the director from ING Bank now works at NQ, I bet this guy related to approval for NQ financing back in 2020.
Nickkdog - thank you for sharing your research and thoughts.
Best wishes... Bugerov.
Johanes et al., Sorry to have been away from the site for a while. I have been doing more digging in the meantime however. Bear with me then as I may need to go on a bit. First I think the statement by Lenigas that 95 -98% (so which was it 95% or 98%)of bondholders voted is very very suspicious. And after looking into him a bit more I wouldn't believe a word that comes from his mouth. I would like to see the particulars or the minutes of the vote at Bedford Row 1 on May 1 where this supposedly unanimous vote took place.
Like others I don't know anyone who received prior notice including the company who introduced me to the Audley bonds. Meanwhile I contacted Hermione Markets who were the master distributor for Audley Funding Plc bonds. I did get good feed back including the following: "Most stockbrokers engage custodians to provide dealing execution and administrative services - Reyker used a company called Jarvis, many stockbrokers use Pershing. Audley are adamant that the proper procedures were followed and that all relevant information was sent out to the custodians. I know this was a problem as many actual investors did not receive any notification about the voting. We did notify intermediaries that the vote was taking place but some did not chase the custodians for the information or notify investors to contact the custodians for the information. I know it is of no benefit, but I have since discovered that many custodians do not as a matter of course forward information - a fact which I (probably like you) find incredible. "
Incredible indeed. Looks like a case of pass the baton. I find it astonishing actually that the UK FSA allows this. I also used Reyker as my broker. In the Administration process their support was very good, however, they never notified me about the NQ announcement of April 9, 2020 or the vote to subordinate on May 1, 20202, nor did the company mentioned Jarvis. The still held my bond at that time. I have written Reyker again to ask about Jarvis.
I have also written Begbies Traynor and intend to do so again. I think it may be important - although to what effect I don't know - to let my concerns known before their plans for NQ Minerals , whether its to wrap it up or seek to refinance, which will need to be published in October. At least for me I would like someone to hear that we noteholders take issue with handing our senior security to ING bank without any of us knowing about it or voting on it.
I would encourage others to write the brokers or custodians and anywhere else to ask what happened, did the custodian /stockbrocker have prior knowledge of the vote, etc. Somehow we need to get the word out that we don't believe proper due process was followed. To me this all is a con, what looks like the old "bait and switch" . We were sold one thing and delivered another as the time to cash in the bond came due, plain and simple in my view. Unethical and perhaps not entirely legal. Again, only my take on