Patisserie Valerie and Shell Legal Cases

Shareholders in café company Patisserie Valerie were wiped out in 2018 after the accounts were shown to be fictitious and the company collapsed. It has now been announced that a trial date of four people alleged to be involved in the fraud has been set for March 2026. See https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/2026-trial-date-for-patisserie-valerie-criminal-case/5117808.article

Is it not astonishing that it has taken so long to bring the case to court? Compare that with the recent case of FTX/Alameda Research in the USA where Sam Bankman-Fried was prosecuted and found guilty in just a few months. This demonstrates what is wrong with the English legal system for dealing with fraud cases. Justice delayed for years is no justice and is no deterrent to criminal action.  

Another recently reported legal case is that oil company Shell is suing Greenpeace for £1.7 million after “activists” boarded an oil platform that was in transit off the Canary Islands. Shell incurred substantial costs as a result.

Comment: as a Shell shareholder I fully support the company actions. I think more such lawsuits should be pursued against organisations such as Greenpeace and Just Stop Oil who clearly have substantial resources which are financed by the ill-informed and take part in criminal activities in pursuit of their goals.

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Sam Bankman-Fried Found Guilty

Yesterday Sam Bankman-Fried was found guilty of fraud in a New York Federal court over the collapse of FTX. This was the second largest crypto-currency exchange before it ceased trading with a shortfall as much as $10 billion in its accounts. Billions of client money had been lent to Alameda Research a proprietary crypto trading firm, also controlled by Bankman-Fried who could not repay it.

Bankman-Fried tried to talk his way out by giving evidence in his defence that he had consulted lawyers and they said it was OK to use client funds, allegedly.

This verdict is hardly surprising. I have been reading the book “Going Infinite”, subtitled “The rise and fall of a new tycoon”, by Michael Lewis. Clearly there were few controls in the business of FTX and people were hired with no experience – lack of financial knowledge or experience was seen as an asset!

The gullibility of the public to new get rich quick schemes is well demonstrated in the history of FTX. The UK Government has recently announced plans to regulate crypto markets which should surely be done as soon as possible.

The book mentioned is essential reading for anyone who wants to dabble in cryptocurrency and highlights some of the stupidities associated with Bankman-Fried.

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Demonstrations and Breaches of the Peace

The police have suggested that they cannot act against people who organise demonstrations against Israel or Hamas and which might include “chanting” of slogans.

This is surely nonsense because you can be arrested for “behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace”. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_the_peace

The police undoubtedly have powers to halt demonstrations that may turn violent or which incentivise people to disturb the peace. So why are they reluctant to use them?

This is yet another example of the police being feeble and reluctant to take action when confronted by people willing to cause disruption for the sake of publicity.

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

IBP Special Administration and Thames Ventures VCT 1

I have a very small holding in Thames Ventures VCT 1 (TV1). This is the remnant of holdings in other VCTs originally invested from 1997 onwards and which have generated a total return of minus 58% to date according to Sharescope although I doubt that is accurate due to multiple consolidations and name changes. I would have sold the holding long ago if it was not for the roll-back of capital gains roll-over relief that would have been incurred.

Now we learn that TV1 held some of its listed shareholdings with IBP Markets Ltd which has been put into Special Administration by the FCA “due to concerns whether there were appropriate systems and controls in place to ensure adequate protection for client monies and client assets at IBP”. About 20% of VCT1’s assets are held by IBP.

More information here: https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/gnw/thames-ventures-vct-1–tv1/special-administration-of-the-company-s-custo-/7824992

and here: https://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/restrictions-placed-ibp-markets-limited-and-firm-enters-special-administration

Needless to say this is all bad news. Are the assets still there, and what will the administration of IBP cost and will it be charged against the assets? Those are key questions. Also how long will it take to complete the administration and have the assets released – too long is no doubt the answer.

The whole future of TV1 is also brought into doubt by these announcements. The investment management was transferred recently to Foresight Group who have experience of taking on dead ducks but with net assets of £91.9 million according to the last annual report and the reputational damage from these events some vigorous decisions are clearly required.

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Diversity and Inclusion Consultation

Both the FCA and PRA have issued a public consultation, to which you can respond, on the subject of introducing a regulatory framework for reporting of diversity and inclusion in firms (CP23/20). The FCA suggests that “greater levels of diversity and inclusion can improve outcomes for markets and consumers. In particular by helping reduce groupthink, supporting healthy work cultures, improving understanding of and provision for diverse consumer needs and unlocking diverse talent, supporting the competitiveness of the UK’s financial services sector”. But they provide no significant evidence of that.

What they are proposing is an obligation on larger organisations to provide masses of data on the sexual orientation, ethnic status, even religious adherence of employees.

Proposals set out for firms include requirements to:

  • Develop a diversity and inclusion strategy setting out how the firm will meet their objectives and goals.
  • Collect, report and disclose data against certain characteristics.
  • Set targets to address under-representation.

Will there be targets set in due course for the number of bisexual employees? What utter nonsense.

Basically it means a whole mass of new bureaucracy which I personally consider a complete waste of time. The FCA and PRA have more important matters to deal with. Even responding to these consultations I consider a waste of time so I will not do so. But if you have an urge to do so please go here: https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-and-pra-propose-measures-boost-diversity-and-inclusion-financial-services

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Good Articles in Latest ShareSoc Informer Newsletter

Are you fed up with reading about the antics of media personalities in the national press? I know I am. For some more intelligent and useful material, ShareSoc has just published its latest Informer Newsletter on stock market events.

It does include a couple of short articles from me which is not unusual but other interesting ones cover:

  • Can AI give me an edge by Marcus Breese. His conclusions seem to be similar to mine, i.e. probably not as AI cannot be relied upon to give the right answers.
  • A report on the “digital only” AGM of Marks & Spencer by Cliff Weight. Amusing to see my former colleague Gavin Palmer turned up physically regardless. It’s clear that digital-only meetings are unsatisfactory in several regards. Hybrid events are surely preferable.
  • Some comments on the Flint Interim Report on digitisation which is quite rightly called “a betrayal” as the recommendations therein might remove shareholder rights and defeat shareholder democracy.
  • A note on the threat to investors in SIPPs if the manager goes into administration based on events at the Hartley Pensions manager. This certainly needs pursuing.

In summary, an exceedingly useful newsletter and shows how ShareSoc is doing a great job at representing retail shareholders’ interests.

Roger Lawson (Twitter https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

A Political Manifesto

A few years ago I penned some policy suggestions for a new political party. I just had a clear out of some of my old files and thought it was worth publishing as it’s still very topical.

Reference Policy Suggestions My suggestions for policies in those areas and others are below:

Finance

1.       The personal taxation system is way too complicated and needs drastically simplifying. At the lower end the tax credit system is wide open to fraud while those on low incomes are taxed when they should not be. The personal tax allowance, both the basic rates, and higher rates, need to be raised to take more people out of tax altogether.

2.       The taxation of capital gains is also now too complicated, while tax is paid on capital gains that simply arise from inflation, which are not real gains at all. They should revert to being indexed as they were some years ago. For almost anyone, calculating your own tax that is payable is now way too difficult and hence requiring the paid services of accountants using specialist software.

3.       Inheritance tax is another over-complex system that wealthy people avoid by taking expert advice while the middle class end up paying it. It certainly needs grossly simplifying, or scrapping altogether as a relatively small amount of tax is actually collected from it.

4.       The taxation of businesses is inequitable with the growth of the internet. Small businesses, particularly retailers, pay a disproportionate level of tax in business rates while their internet competitors often avoid VAT via imports. VAT is now wide open to fraud and other types of abuse such as under-declarations, partly because of the EU VAT arrangements. VAT is in principle a simple tax and the alternative of a sales tax would create anomalies but VAT does need to be reformed and simplified.

5.       All the above tax simplifications would enable HMRC to be reduced in size and wasted time in form filling by individuals and businesses reduced. Everyone would be a winner, and wasted resources and expenditure reduced.  

6.       The taxation of company dividends on shares is now an example of the same profits being taxed twice – once in Corporation Tax on the company, and then again when those profits are distributed to shareholders. This has been enormously damaging to those who receive dividends and the lack of tax credits has also undermined defined benefit pension funds. The taxation of dividends should revert to how it once was.

7.       The regulation of companies and financial institutions needs very substantial reform with much tougher laws against fraud on investors. Not only are the current laws weak but the enforcement of them by the FCA/FRC is too slow and ineffective. Although some reforms have recently been proposed, they do not go far enough. Individual directors and senior managers in companies are not held to account for gross errors or downright fraud, or when they are, they get off too lightly. We need a much more effective system like they have in the USA, and better laws.

8.       Shareholder rights as regards voting and the receipt of information have been undermined by the use of nominee accounts. This has made it difficult for individual shareholders to vote and that is one reason why investors have not been able to control the excesses in director pay recently. The system of shareholding and voting needs reform, with changes to the Companies Act to bring it into the modern electronic world.

9.       The pay of directors and senior managers in companies and other organisations has got wildly out of hand in recent years, thus generating a lot of criticism by the lower paid. This has created social divisions and led partly to the rise of extreme left socialist tendencies. This problem needs tackling.

10.     Governance of companies needs to be reformed to ensure that directors do not set their own pay, as happens at present, but that shareholders and other stakeholders do so. Likewise shareholders and other stakeholders should appoint the directors.

11.     Insolvency law needs reform to outlaw “pre-pack” administrations which have been very damaging to many small businesses. They are an abuse of insolvency law.

Transport

1.       Way too much money is spent on rail transport and trams which cannot be justified on any cost/benefit analysis. HS2 is just one extreme example of this. Meanwhile the road system does not receive enough investment – this has resulted in traffic congestion, wasted time which is damaging to the economy and lots of poorly maintained roads (e.g. potholes). Only 25% of direct tax on vehicles is spent on the roads.

2.       Public transport should generally pay for itself. In London alone there is a subsidy of £1 billion per year on buses which is totally unjustified. Many of these subsidies are given to people who could afford to pay for their travel, even when they are receiving social security benefits.

3.       Road safety has flat-lined due to an excessive focus on speed reduction and the perversion of the law by the use of police waivers to force people to take useless “education” courses. Policies have been distorted to enable the police to make money from drivers, while improving the roads, better education and other policies to reduce road casualties have been ignored.

4.       Charging of drivers via road pricing to reduce congestion should be opposed (as it does not work and is just a money-making taxation scheme). Likewise Clean Air Zones where drivers are taxed for driving some vehicles, all of which were legal when purchased, should be stopped and the whole focus of environmental legislation should be reviewed. EU regulations in this area have made illegal air pollution levels when there is no real evidence of danger from them. ULEZ and CAZ schemes are just a way to raise taxes with little real benefit on health grounds and no cost/benefit justification.

5.       Likewise the EU has mandated speed limiters (ISA – Intelligent Speed Adaptation) for all vehicles in future which will delay vehicles and not contribute to road safety, while generating millions of speeding fines on innocent drivers. There should be a commitment not to follow the EUs lead on such legislation.

Education

1.       Education should be free for all those who can justify they will benefit from it. At present too many people go to university who will be unlikely to benefit from it and they should be redirected to lower cost vocational courses.

2.       Loans to support students taking courses should be interest free.

3.       There needs to be a much stronger focus on technology education in the UK as only people with such education will contribute positively to the economy.

4.       There needs to be more emphasis on the use of technology in teaching to improve the productivity of that profession which has basically not changed in hundreds of years. The use of on-line resources can assist and would enable teachers to be more productive and hence be paid more.

Environmental, Climate Change, Population and Housing

1.       There should be more attention paid to the real science of environmental impact rather than the hysteria of left-wing campaign groups.

2.       Mrs May’s commitment to a zero-carbon economy, which is financially unaffordable, should be scrapped because there is no practical way to achieve it and it is based on very dubious scientific analyses.

3.       The population of the UK needs to be controlled, if not reduced, to improve living conditions and ensure a healthy economy. This can be achieved by tougher limits on immigration (along with better enforcement of existing rules), and encouraging the population to procreate less.

4.       Housing costs, and the inability to find suitable accommodation, are major problems for the young. Controlling/reducing population would help but other measures need also be considered including the financing of more social/rented housing.

Local Councils and London

1.       The funding of local authorities, and some of their important functions such as providing social care, needs to be reformed. At present they are too dependent on central Government funding which means obligations are often put on them without the funds to cover the cost.

2.       There are wide variations between the efficiencies of different local councils with many being wasteful. They should have guidelines and limits on how they spend their money, laid down by central Government, to avoid waste.

3.       London is a particular problem where it has become dominated by populist Mayors (both Labour and Conservative) and where elections are driven by national politics rather than local issues. The most recent Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has been pursuing a “gerrymandering” policy of increasing immigration to gain more people that are likely to vote for him, thus making London even less acceptable as a place to live than it has been for years. Crime, transport and housing are all in a major crisis. I suggest the position of the Mayor, and the Greater London Authority be scrapped as Mrs Thatcher did with the GLC when Ken Livingstone became so damaging. In other words it should revert to central Government control, with the local boroughs having more control over their own affairs. That would no doubt be popular with London borough councillors.

4.       Transport for London should be taken out of the control of the Mayor be made an independent body with an objective of making it a profit centre rather than a consumer of enormous subsidies. They should also lose control of the road network (the TLRN) where they currently have a perverse incentive to make the road network unfit for purpose so that more people use public transport from which they gain income.

I hope you find the above useful.

Yours Roger W. Lawson, M.B.A., M.B.C.S. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added. 

Digitisation Task Force Proposals

Sir Douglas Flint has published his Interim Report from the Digitisation Task Force – see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digitisation-taskforce. This covers many important issues for private investors such as the use of nominee accounts, the scrapping of paper share certificates (dematerialisation) and many other important issues. You can read the comments I have submitted here: https://www.roliscon.com/_files/ugd/8ec181_18053a9b5cfa4eb788731a82aafb3a57.pdf.

I would encourage all private investors to send in your own comments.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

You Can’t Replace Striking Staff

The High Court has ruled that allowing agency staff to replace striking workers is unlawful. This is yet another example of legal challenges to decisions by Government.

The High Court has ruled that Government legislation introduced last year which said employers can use agency staff to fill in for striking workers during industrial action is unlawful. The Government decision was challenged by a judicial review from a number of trade unions. So we now have a situation where doctors or nurses, that are required to keep patients alive, but who have gone on strike cannot be replaced. Likewise for other essential workers such as railway staff.

The challenge was based on lack of public consultation, but this is surely madness. I hope the Government attacks this little publicised decision. Workers may have a moral right to withdraw their labour but employers should also have a right to replace them when it is essential to maintain a public service.

See: https://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/employment/395-employment-news/54453-high-court-rules-using-agency-staff-to-cover-strikes-unlawful for more details of the legal decision.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Banking Made Difficult and Savings Rates Inadequate

Having a bank account into which you can pay money, or from which you can pay money out, is essential in the modern world. You can become a non-person if a bank closes your account. You can be cut off without notice and effectively instantly impoverished by a bank even if you have been a customer of theirs for many years and have a perfect credit record.

This has been happening to many people lately and not just to Nigel Farage. If you are judged to be a “Politically exposed person” (PEP) then you might have great difficulty opening a bank account and will certainly have to answer many questions about your activities and sources of funds. Just being related to a PEP is enough it seems to raise eyebrows and start an inquisition. Simply being involved in politics or having the wrong opinion on controversial subjects is enough it now seems to cause difficulties and result in a Kafkaesque proceeding.

In addition banks are closing accounts without giving clear reasons and without notice, although they dispute this. These problems have arisen recently because banks have become paranoid in adhering to FCA rules about “knowing your customer”.  

You may think this problem is not a common one. But it is. For example I am related to a Member of the House of Lords and she had this to say:

“Yes. Total nightmare with Nationwide, They just sent a rather ill spelt text about a year ago to say they were going to cut us off If we did not give them a huge amount of information in 24hrs. They wouldn’t say why, after to-ing and fro-ing for 6 weeks or so it was all sorted out and got profuse apology but meanwhile I removed all our cash immediately because of the threat to freeze the account. There’s been a great stink in the Lords because we’re all in the same position and finally the banks seem to have started to behave slightly better.

Nationwide had set up a new unit to pursue anybody with any likelihood of being a politically exposed person, It seems to be full of teenagers who couldn’t read or write so we thought it was spam. It wasn’t. Eventually sorted out but it was a year before I put any money in Nationwide again.

But it’s been dreadful for some people, totally unjustified”.

The other complaint about banks recently is that they raised mortgage rates in line with changes in interest rates but have not improved their savings rates on instant access accounts. The FCA have published a note on tackling this issue – see https://www.fca.org.uk/news/statements/fca-sets-out-expectation-fair-and-competitive-saving-rates.

It urges people to change banks to improve competition but will people do that if the process of opening an account is subject to tedious scrutiny and subsequent risk of closure?

The Treasury is apparently looking into this issue but bearing in mind this problem has been known about for many months, don’t expect any action soon.

Postscript: The latest news is that even Chancellor Jeremy Hunt was denied a Monzo account.

There surely needs to be some regulation of banks’ actions in this area.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.