The noose gets tighter !!!!!

The loophole is not there, lack of investigation and action is the issue. Numerous complaints and numerous rulings against Garner but no enforcement.
 
There is no loophole, pension fund managers use their discretion and market knowledge to invest, some investments are good, some bad, but that is the way fund management has always worked and for most folk that is the only way your pension grows above inflation. If you are in a company pension scheme you can usually opt for low/medium/high risk investment of your money, it is simple speculation, but even low risk investments can go tits up.
 
kommando said:
The loophole is not there, lack of investigation and action is the issue. Numerous complaints and numerous rulings against Garner but no enforcement.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the issue IMHO.

Garner was a master of bluff and ‘smoke and mirrors’ the higher the circles he revolved in, the more govt ministers and royalty he was pictured with, the more folk were prepared to dismiss the negative stories and say “well he can’t be as bad as they say can he”?!

Well, at least thats how it was with me!

A classic con really.
 
Fast Eddie said:
And therein lies the issue IMHO.

Garner was a master of bluff and ‘smoke and mirrors’ the higher the circles he revolved in, the more govt ministers and royalty he was pictured with, the more folk were prepared to dismiss the negative stories and say “well he can’t be as bad as they say can he”?!

When he got the Govt money and said there would be an apprentice scheme for 100 people, and then no sign of it happening, that was a strong sign as to what the real reasons for getting the money were....
Click to expand...
 
At the end of the day putting Garner in the slammer makes you feel better but it doesn't do diddly for the poor souls who got hosed. If the taxpayer gives the pensioners their money you still have to ask 1. where did the money go? and 2. who are those who were supposed to be guarding the hen house? The last lot are the ones who should have their assets stripped for not doing
their job.
 
Not 100% sure, but why the taxpayer foot the bill? Yes, these people were scammed and conned mercilessly, but I thought any scheme involving pension money has to have the investor's permission?
 
EstuaryBoy said:
Not 100% sure, but why the taxpayer foot the bill? Yes, these people were scammed and conned mercilessly, but I thought any scheme involving pension money has to have the investor's permission?
Click to expand...
Taxpayers ALWAYS foot the bill when government is involved, because taxpayers FUND the government.

The system stinks to hell and back. I'm just glad I'm getting my pittance OUT of (federal) government, and no longer paying IN.
 
EstuaryBoy said:
Not 100% sure, but why the taxpayer foot the bill? Yes, these people were scammed and conned mercilessly, but I thought any scheme involving pension money has to have the investor's permission?
Click to expand...
If you scroll back it was Garner who promised to increase the yield of people's pensions pot, returning it after 5 years. It was all outrageous lies. He never returned any money to those pensioners as far as I am aware.
He was basically running a Ponzie scheme.
 
I too will be in that happy state in a couple of years..... But, the 'pension' money involved here was private investment I believe, nothing to do with Govt. or taxpayer...
 
Bernhard said:
If you scroll back it was Garner who promised to increase the yield of people's pensions pot, returning it after 5 years. It was all outrageous lies. He never returned any money to those pensioners as far as I am aware.
He was basically running a Ponzie scheme.
Click to expand...
Yes, Bernhard.... They were ripped off by a con man. But they didn't have to invest....
 
EstuaryBoy said:
Yes, Bernhard.... They were ripped off by a con man. But they didn't have to invest....
Click to expand...
No one is disputing the first bit, the second bit, it shows how easy it was to pull the wool over someone's eyes. . . . . and yes no action was taken until the pension authorities were made aware of it, then they moved to little, to
slow. . . . .
 
Bernhard said:
No one is disputing the first bit, the second bit, it shows how easy it was to pull the wool over someone's eyes. . . . . and yes no action was taken until the pension authorities were made aware of it, then they moved to little, to
slow. . . . .
Click to expand...
What's the old saying? 'If it's too good to be true..... it probably isn't'
'Caveat Emptor'
 
EstuaryBoy said:
I too will be in that happy state in a couple of years..... But, the 'pension' money involved here was private investment I believe, nothing to do with Govt. or taxpayer...
Click to expand...
The purchase of the castle and racing ventures were funded by a misguided government "loan", funded by (who else) the hapless taxpayers.
 
At the time it was probably seen as an investment in a flagship British industrial opportunity....
But way back I was offered 'alternative' pension schemes based on speculation, and I'm afraid some things I just won't gamble with....
 
grandpaul said:
The purchase of the castle and racing ventures were funded by a misguided government "loan", funded by (who else) the hapless taxpayers.
Click to expand...
This thread is about the pension fiasco. The fact that U.K. govt loaned cash to a start up industry doesn’t make them liable for the company owners pension fraud !
 
The apprenticeship scheme did get under way, how successful it was is another story but does anyone remember Olivia in the service team? She worked her way through the apprenticeship.

The constant references to 'pensioners' losing their money is getting really tiring, a bit like listening to the same bigoted Brexit arguments for the past 4 years. Imagine the scenario if SG's plans had got off the ground! Some you win, some you lose.
 
MxMartin said:
The constant references to 'pensioners' losing their money is getting really tiring, a bit like listening to the same bigoted Brexit arguments for the past 4 years. Imagine the scenario if SG's plans had got off the ground! Some you win, some you lose.
Click to expand...
It is doubtful that the pension fund con was ever intended to “get off the ground” as a long term business.
He may have expected to be facing criminal proceedings, with money salted away somewhere.

The pension references may sound dull to you, but they are the best illustration of what Garner is: a ruthless criminal.
 
Very early on the Spondon guy noted that Garner equated turnover with profit, ie a customer spent £1 then he had £1 profit and ignored expenses, typical of sales only focused people. If he really thought that way then there was never a snowball's chance in hell he could even run a proper profitable business. He was and still is a confidence trickster with a Walter Mitty complex.
 
kommando said:
Very early on the Spondon guy noted that Garner equated turnover with profit, ie a customer spent £1 then he had £1 profit and ignored expenses, typical of sales only focused people. If he really thought that way then there was never a snowball's chance in hell he could even run a proper profitable business. He was and still is a confidence trickster with a Walter Mitty complex.
Click to expand...
Yes, these guys see the customer’s £1 and think: “I’m keeping that.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top