Member Info for CF73

Welloiled, thanks for your comments. There hasn't been direct reference made to Cairn. Rather the reference was indirect by reference to Hope and his text about NOMAD looking to potentially investigate FRR following the shareholder meeting and that FRR as a result needed to release an RNS to clarify / confirm. The point for me there was how did Hope know this? (As it shows he'd been in contact with the NOMAD and even seems he'd been encouraging this route - that text now being key evidence!) And, as others point out also, the signalling that he'd been in contact with others who might have been present at the shareholder meeting.

There was much previous talk of our Cairn inadvertantly giving up sensitive information to Hope. With Hope snooping around with the NOMAD and interfering (as evidenced within the Dec 2018 Affidavit), is possible something like this happened.

Thought had crossed my mind that that could be the case Welloiled (if you don't me butting in here). That said, the Dec Affidavit does show that Hope had already been interfering with existing NOMAD (as they were at the time). I'm sure the feelers were out to gather information in case there were to be any further instances of Hope interfering. Still think that we had enough proof of that kind of meddling the first time around. However, evidence of any further interfence would be extremely helpful to say the least.

That's a very reasonable theory HeidHoncho

You essentially end on what is seemingly like a very hopeful positive arr Phulbarry (at least by your own standards).

Just a matter of time. Continue to believe we are headed towards moving this under Belt and Road Initiative.

Stardelta, you just said,

"It's not disguised at all. It's absolutely real. Run a mile if you can stomach the loss."

This is problematic. You are effectievely suggesting folks sell up at a big loss while we are seemingly on the cusp of news that will likely triple the SP from here. That is deeply irresponsible at best. You are not helping the ordinary PI here. Disgraceful!

Good point Spudsoil about assets now appearing to be viable and FRRs work paying off, meaning we have a strong defence - so agree with you there.

RR, agree. Even going by Dec 2018 affidavit, we see that Hope has been more than over-reaching his role. He has been actively messing about with the company. He attempted to default FRR for the loan and then started contacting the NOMAD over that shareholder meeting and suggesting they were looking to investigate FRR and that FRR needed to release an RNS to clarify. On the latter point, how does he know any of this? And if it were the case the NOMAD was concerned, how did he get to know this before other at FRR? In other words, he was goign behind FRR's back.

So we we have two things there were Hope really is trying to strangle the company. And when it is considered alongside the terms of the loan he proposes after refusing ZM's, then you can see what is happening. He is actively trying to take control of FRR assets. This is not in the interests of FRR and shows that he as a director of FRR is not acting in the best interests of the comapny. In fact, he's doing everything he can to make life difficult for FRR.

Spudsoil, a very sesnible, plasusible scenario that! :-)

Flakey, we at least do know he wanted to those shares (as per the trail of emails). So if the comapny were meant to be insolvent, why does he want those shares?

Good point. I hope this is being picked up and argued by FRR (which I am sure it is).

magicpuppy, some valuable points.

Agree we have no evidence that Hope was short selling/Naked short selling (to clarify, he didn't be naked short selling - short selling would be sufficient as this is a very clear breach anyone fiduciary duties if they weer doing it as a director of the respective company).

Certainly more plausible and realistic is that he was providing information to others.

We will see when it comes to the crunch as to why an OoCS was not possible (if one is not reached and we have go before the jury).

Taking a look at the initial affidavit, points 45 to 46/47, what I see evidnece of is Hope using whatever means possible to turn the screw on FRR (relate to which FRR have the evidence), which is a total neglect of fiduciary duties and duty of loyalty.

YA were caught Naked Shorting Selling. This is clea

magicpuppy, some valuable points.

Agree we have no evidence th

YA were caught Naked Shorting Selling. This is clear.

This is one of the intriguing aspects. Has Hope been shorting FRR stock?!

We know shorting is a common tactic to beat down a stock. YA certainly does it and got caught doing a lot worse i.e. Naked Short Selling.

We know TW and Crew were doing it (along with other chancers and opportunists)

So I wouldn't put it past Hope. The challenge is, what would be available if he had been shorting FRR? I think it's more likely that he was passing on information to enable others to do so, including YA and TW and Crew. The challenge again, can we prove it? What evidence would we require?

Looking back at when we caught YA, the question is, we were able to renegotiate a deal much to out benefit after they tried to call default. So they were caught red-handed. However, as many seem to agree, if they'd been caught, why had FRR not gone in tougher? After all, we know the SEC in the US are after YA. I could only deduce that we were able to get something else out of this negotiation. But what?! Information?!

Further to this, if Hope has shorted FRR and cannot agree an OoCS settlement that doesn't include 500 million odd shares (for obvious reasons ie. He would be wiped out on a relist otherwise), then that creates an impasse and the California case is necessary (if Hope has cheated us, I don't exoect FRR to give into to him). If Hope isn't prepared to do any kind of OoCS (or one without shares), then the next question for a Jury at California is why not?!

Certainly, for me at least, there's easily enough evidence against Hope around the matter of fiduciary duties and loyalties. He's taken several different approaches to complicate matters for FRR, including trying default FRR over the loan note interest (after blocking attempts to raise the necessary funds) through to approaching the NOMAD over that shareholder meeting. What it shows is that he really very actively turning the screw on FRR. This is very clear to me. This should be enough. But could there be more evidence still??

Great work tedoby, smilemore and others!!

If Hope's been shorting this, is possible that we have proof. Certainly, there's no explanation or reasons made obvious as to why let YA off so lightly after they were naked short selling FRR stock

Believe there's a strong case against Hope of his breaching his fiduciary duties. Some part of that case I posted earlier this morning. It's strengthened by Hope continuing to try to seize our assets. I'd ask folks to read my post again, where I draw attention to points 45 through to 46 or 47 of the earlier affidavit. Struggle to see why some folks aren't seeing it (in the end, the judges latter comments signalled all this)

Zen, thanks for that really thoughtful considered post. Naturally, we don't how Cayman will exactly conclude but I do believe that Kawaley's latter comments showed the direction he was travelling and his preparedness to change his mind (which I had interpreted him as ultimately doing). However, I agree - and it appears most agree - that we are perhaps better served by a processbeing commenced in California.

[Continued...]

Leading in to Dec 2018, FRR were under a great deal of pressure and things didn’t looking too good. Complicating this, we an see that Hope attempted to rush the process using what have now been determined as spurious means. Personally, as expert as the judge will be, I don’t think they had enough time to process/ digest the case properly and were hurried in to an initial call that seemed to be in favour of Hope/ OMF.

Some interesting discussion and analysis. Much thanks guys!

I posted this a few weeks ago, I know it helped me when thinking about the strength of the case and going back to it again just now has helped me some more:

-----------------------------

Have just spent some time going through some previous court do, specifically, From the ‘First SN affidavit, Nov 2018,’


I found the following interesting. Am sure has been covered at length already but felt it worthwhile to put it out there again.

------------------------------------------

Points 45, 46 & 47

45. The need to make this application has arisen as a matter of urgency. On 10 October 2018, Mr Hope emails FRC’s directors stating that as at close of business that day the grace period would lapse and that “his notes” (the Note) were due and payable in full. He demanded that Mr Mamulaishvili and I transfer shares to OMF in their role as individual guarantors. He continued “As a director, I formally advise the board that we need to make a disclosure to the market of the default first thing tomorrow morning”. FRC is listed and has obligations to make appropriate market disclosures. It takes advice from NOMAD on complying with its regulatory obligations and it was not any part of Mr Hope’s role to advise on those matters.

46. Mr Hope then followed up that email with a text to me in which he stated:

“Just called you. Carin is looking for Zaza/Levan apparently the shares will be suspended and investigated unless they can approve a statement to go out tomorrow AM at 7 regarding no new information at the shareholder meeting.”

47. This text is alarming. It suggests that Mr Hope has been sharing confidential information with third parties, which would be a breach on the disclosure obligations under listing rules. It also appears that Mr Hope was seeking to exert pressure on two of the directors to issue a misleading statement to the market the following morning.

------------------------------------------

We can see a particular sequence of events here. Hope is moving fast to derail FRR. His email (point 45) shows he has started to well overreach his given roles and responsibilities. Indeed, it looks as if his actively encouraging the default and related notification.

However, his text (point 46) goes even further. How does he know Cairn is looking for Zaza/Levan regarding that Shareholder meeting? Who has he been talking to? Why is he going behind the Company’s back?

So, Hope’s comms around two potentially unrelated matters, a) Point 45: loan notes default and b) Point 46: Cairn apparently looking for ZM/Levan over Shareholder meeting, happen in quick succession, showing he is drawing on a number of matters to derail FRR, with the ultimate view of taking control of certain assets.

[Continued...]

...to know hich way this is likely to go...

...guess back to accepting we'll find out when we do...

...keep the faith folks!