Member Info for dougb189

Why on earth would I want to entertain a poster that claims he/she knows that this has been a fraud for 7 years and whom can then only support this belief by throwing repetitive hysterical arguments which have then seen him achieve the square root of Sweet FA. ?!

Has your hysterics then seen any response from any police forces or from the SFO or is it all then just totally aggressive fantasy ? You have achieved absolutely sweet FA.

If you then can not behave or control yourself on a joint effort where ALL the shareholders are trying to find a resolution to this never ending saga, why on earth should you be trusted with knowing the origins of further possible forged documents ? That would likely be on a par with asking the barking mad dog to look after one’s passport.

The only persons that then need to know that a possible further forged document is available for legal approaches is : the witness whose identity is kept confidential; the legal teams that an EGM will be liaising with; the relevant authorities and of course Amit, who may or may not remember the said figures needed to set up his ‘trust fund’.

So just keep barking bud as I’m fairly confident that shareholders will eventually find a resolution, without your somewhat hysterical assistance.

The document is amateurish so recipient is likely to feel too embarrassed to confess to having received this, which then suggests that without his or her commitment to being a witness, that Amit could then easily state this was forged by a.n.other.

The amateur forgery then roughly ties in with interpretation given to the SFO & others, that there seemed to be due diligence in the original development with its star witness being Dr. Morgan and her position of Aberdeen University Dean for enterprise & innovation. That this due diligence then appeared to occur in the development of software algorithms & the collecting of further data thru the German uni hospitals.

There then also appeared to be due diligence done in the deal making process Q1 2020 till November 2022. We know that in Sept 2020 the share book was at c.975M shares and that in Sept 2024 the share book was then at c.998M shares. So relatively few shares *cough* allegedly sold during this period. This then supported an argument of due process; with less funds required after initial development costs & only corporate meetings required thru the selling phase.

As stated to the SFO & to the police, from mid 2023 till present day, there is a clear recklessness with the truth coming from Amit. The above document then supports possible recklessness 12 months prior to this. If a witness comes forward.

The J&J document IMV suggests Amit was under severe pressure from Pi’s. In the summer of 2022 he then very likely imo produced the above document. And from its amateurish content, this was then the first of several similar such documents.

The more recent documents from February 2024 then purport to suggest that a US financial company (with a large footprint) was then setting up & developing the trust fund accounts where it was implied that once they had received $950,000 from Amit that they would then proceed to contact all private investors & the brokers. Similar documents then showed Amit ‘’reaching out” to get the process on track.

These later docs are then far better produced, with only the one very small error being seen in the last document. It is then stated by the US company that they have had no dealings or arrangements whatsoever with either Amit or Cloudtag.

In the words of Police Scotland this is likely to be a very elaborate fraud. They are now liaising with a 2nd UK police force.

The question for shareholders is when did this go off the rails ?

2017 & de-list or perhaps 2020, with failure to IPO or perhaps 2022, failure to possibly make a deal or perhaps 2024 with failure to distribute by persons unknown the payments from a possible deal. I have therefore again asked SFO to review Amit’s books on the slim chance that $279.5M is being concealed.

An EGM would imv now likely reveal fraud of deceit so I now wonder if Amit’s estate could provide c.£15M to then see Pi’s get their funds returned. I think so. An EGM would allow Pi’s to get the bal

Pheckkk.

So can now delete 10:42

There is an almighty squeeze about to land solely on Amit’s head.

Speak tomorrow Tim.

The squeeze is on both of them.

‘so if he is lying and continues to lie he will dig himself a much deeper hole’ which is the gist of the current play.

To access bank accounts will require court order, subpoenas or warrants, etc., so no lawyers can then just simply walk in & access.

But the police & other suitable regulatory authorities can if there is then sufficient cause.

“..ps If I believed or had evidence that deals had been done and Amit had received the monies and was refusing to distribute it, then i would absolutely be all for joining ….”

And so you now have the opportunity to then look for evidence via an audit of the company books, yet you fail to then take part, as you believe the likelihood of any funds existing is zilch and therefore does not warrant the risk of contributing £100 to seek the truth behind that belief…

‘Can you/Tim confirm what type of damages you could envisage going to court for if it transpires it was all a con ‘

I’ve no idea what damages might be worth or what the value of Amit’s estate is.

I imagine though it is worth slightly more than £20,000 so that 200 shareholders might then see the return of their £100, if that is your concern.

I would be satisfied that IF it was then all a con that he was then interviewed by Major General Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi.

That applies for commodities fraud. We are not chasing why The Onitor or the IPO failed. We are chasing why there has been company notices since giving multiple false statements of ‘distribution has commenced’.

You then are looking at Fraudulent Misrepresentation and The Tort of Deceit:

Negligent and innocent misrepresentation have actions enshrined in the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

The law on fraudulent misrepresentation has been developed through common law and tort, namely the tort of deceit.

The elements of the tort are:

The defendant made a representation which was false.

The defendant knew that the representation was untrue, or the defendant was reckless as to its truth or falsity.

“Would the crime of "fraud of deceit" only apply to those that have bought additional shares?”

No, it would apply to everyone :

If this is then just a con, then everyone that owns a share has been wronged, everyone has suffered equally, everyone has been harmed. Several investors walked away because of the harmful toxicity that was generated*

And that includes those like myself who invested in 2016/17 and then initially wrote the investment off, courtesy of Amit’s recklessness. It was initially written off and then 3 years later company notices were issued that clearly states $275M in payments were forthcoming.

At that point everyone who owns a share then has an interest in following Amit’s posted notices.

* (hence why i suspect that cloudtag emails do not get looked at in many shareholders inboxes & that further emails should be sent).

Could be an online EGM (St.Vincent counsel likely to do the overseeing) and there be 850 angry shareholders online, all in masks, all holding cricket bats… lol

It ain’t too shabby bud as i’m guessing that probably equates to around one third of the people who read on here. Most peeps are inherently narrow minded. So not a bad result.

Reckon though that there is a significant % of shareholders who walked away from this years ago simply on account of the amount of toxicity. There were several from my peer group who simply refused to get embroiled in this again.

That then has me wondering if there is merit in sending out further group emails to all known contacts but designed such that there is then just a simple, straightforward and honest brief synopsis of what the various Pi’s believe to be likely happening ie. it is considered likely to be either a con or a fraudulent delay or even a ’sincere’ delay generated eg by NDA’s or UK brokers or perhaps say, even of a distribution agent behaving in a similar vein to Amit.. recklessly. And that several shareholders have gotten talks initiated with interested legal beagles, covering all jurisdictions.

I would perhaps be looking at further group emails but without all the bullet points, in targeting those shareholders who walked away from all the toxicity that they’d seen & heard over the past 7 years. Perhaps suggest there might even exist a harmonious group effort across all divides to now try establish wtf is going on…

Lol bud, i was hearing that there’s quite a good batsman around SW1, who’s been paying someone a social visit.

No less than he deserves.

Thanks Tim.

& I was just wondering if you had any plans for 2025…

‘..I'm 100% sure there isn't..’

Either way Antha if there is or there isn’t , i do believe that we are now in a win-win situation : if (A) it is all a con, then the crime of fraud of deceit gets aired, which comes with porridge time for Amit & claims for damages or (B) the fund/s do exist but then gets seen to be fraudulently delayed to Amit’s or another’s personal benefit, that too earns porridge time or (C) if there is a sincere delay, then shareholder action can put someone more competent in charge.

I know that some peeps were asking for a Class Action (as in the US & where everyone gets a slice of pie) but in the UK the system is set up as a Group Action and that only entertains those shareholders that Opt-In.

It then becomes quite beneficial if there is only say one shareholder chasing damages and he or she then manages to get the Litigation Funding Companies interested in the story..

I believe the Litigation Funding Companies prefer to see a minimum group of around 20 involved but that all those that opt-in will get a piece of Amit’s estate, assuming that it is all a con.

UK counsel thought the story was already quite good and that even without an EGM there is reasonable interest being shown.

Lol but hearing that an American journalist is also quite keen on the story.

Wiser men than me currently fine tuning a legal approach.

Would have opted for a simple approach, which is to just ask all shareholders if they do or do not support a resolution for a 3rd party audit of the finances to determine what funds have passed thru the books & been forwarded to the alleged distribution agent.

When we have then established whether this is (a) a fraud of deceit or (b) a fraudulent delay or (c) a sincere delay, we can then regroup and take the appropriate next steps.

Last i heard there were 16 bullet points & 7 objectives, which imv is perhaps too technical and which would likely see shareholders raising further questions. There is though likely to be some good value in this such that shareholders can see the various options available looking ahead, with or without an EGM. I am just keen to see Amit being interviewed but i’ve been politely asked to throttle back. Will concede to this if it is to all shareholders benefit, which is then my current interpretation.

I like the idea that for c.£100 each, participants can then force Amit to face them via an EGM meeting & with legal counsel overseeing his behaviour.

The only data that supports the missing $229.5M is tied to two notifications:

1. That ABH was then able to request the buyer to cancel payment, so that he may negotiate an increase in the fee of 2%.

2. That it originates from a client centred on ‘healthcare’.

The 1st notice had you looking last October for a very close personal or close professional link to the buyer as no one else could possibly entertain such an extremely irrational request.

The 2nd notice is of the buyer being tied to a ‘healthcare’ background.

Unfortunately that then too closely matches elder brother Shlomo’s investment fund Hobart Healthcare. Last year then saw Hobart Group suddenly acquire & provide $50M to bail out Impulse Dynamics after the fund managers took them to court to get their $46M returned.

Which then suggests that reasonable caution should be taken, if expecting the $225M to eventually materialise. The buyer has still not paid for this, as per company notices.

The current belief is that the $225M likely originates from Shlomo’s investment platform Hobart Healthcare. And if so.. Why would he spend such an extravagant amount ? One might start looking closer to the tax benefits of ‘recirculating’ funds. Only guessing though..

If an EGM is then facilitated & there are sufficient supporters for a vote to push thru a resolution that seeks an external emergency audit of the company finances, shareholders should at least then get to find out if the licence fee of $50M was transferred to the distribution agent as stated in company notice 10th April 2024. A good result there gives the shareholders a significant start to assist in making further enquiries specifically to the missing $229.5M

The shareholders can be roughly split into two main groups:

One group believe this to be further deceit from Amit Ben-Haim & that the funds simply do not exist. This hypothesis is then supported by a total lack of any 3rd party acknowledgement of any buyers having spent either $50M or of $225M nor is there any proof of existence of a paying agent/s. The argument of fraud of deceit is further supported by the numerous company notices which have been found to be false & then repeated multiple times.

A second group exists who believe that there is substance to the existence of fund/s. Within that second group there is then a significant division with some believing that distribution has been held up on account of eg. NDA clauses or of a bad-actor distribution agent or that a UK broker had messed up the share register or that the paying portal was not up to the task or that the delays were incurred due to legal actions against ABH. That in their view there has been sincere cause for the delays.

A small group have then suggested that the payments likely exist but that there is fraudulent activity occurring such that distribution is delayed. The hypothesis of fraudulent delay in payments then developed further :

US court records from the Securities & Exchange Commission in New York then revealed that whilst the distribution of Cloudtag $50M fee suffered delays there then appeared to be a simultaneous contribution of $50M by elder brother Shlomo Ben-Haim’s Hobart Group to offset the financial woes in his Impulse Dynamics that then saw SBH raise $46M in funding from fund managers on the false promise of launching an IPO. The moment the $46M funds were received & SBH then reneged on the IPO, resulting in the fund managers seeking return of their funds via the court & almost half of Impulse Dynamics boardroom resigning in disgust.

There were also an additional two newspaper reports found which highlighted that in 2011 Shlomo Ben-Haim was stated to behave with “gangster-like” tendencies in his business dealings, then in 2013 the ‘State [Israel] sues Shlomo Ben-Haim for use of stolen Israeli technologies’.

The argument of fraudulent delays, supported by the above documentation was then forwarded to the SFO who then phoned enquiring of further information. There was then a flurry of company notices ‘compliance process approved’ ‘agent details will be posted’ and then after the noise had died down, it appears that Amit went back to hiding under his rock & reverting once more to notices of ‘distributions have commenced’.

As yet & no shareholder can then be 100% correct that their beliefs are true.

As yet there is insufficient evidence.

“.Let's build a kitty and get this into a court room like it should have been years ago.”

Does £100 each, sound plausible?

A significant amount of back room work ongoing.

Hopefully there’s a notice from & for Pi’s within the next 2 days.

13:35 “That's a very good idea of raising an EGM and trying to remove Amit although with his substantial shareholding (if he's got any left) that may be difficult, he's guaranteed to fight against it tooth & nail as ctag is his own personal money pot.”

And IF the EGM route is taken, then all shareholders will get to use their vote, inclusive of Amit on the resolutions raised.

Good news is that an additional approach could soon be aired as now have a London office with a commercial disputes partner specialising in ‘technology disputes and shareholder / board disputes’ being interested in coming aboard.