Download
La isla de Man es un pequeño territorio ‘offshore’ entre Irlanda e Inglaterra. No pertenece a la UE, pero sí al Reino Unido, que le proporciona defensa y política exterior. Pese a contar con solo 75.000 habitantes, ha demostrado tener orgullo. Al menos uno de sus jueces, que ha amenazado a un grupo de jubilados británicos que pleitean en Marbella contra una de sus empresas, Old Mutual Isle of Man, a la que acusan de timarles con un producto financiero complejo —otro más— vendido a jubilados británicos en la Costa del Sol. Según el juez, si siguen adelante en España, se enfrentan a penas de prisión o al embargo de sus bienes en el Reino Unido, y lo mismo sus abogados e incluso el personal del juzgado.
La Costa del Sol es el paraíso de las estafas a británicos. Decenas de miles de expatriados viven en su burbuja, sin conocer el idioma ni las leyes españolas, y a menudo se fían de compatriotas y de sus productos financieros. Algunos han sufrido el rigor de la piqueta española, otros contrataban hipotecas inversas con Rothschild que han acabado en los tribunales y otros dejaban sus ahorros en manos de Naughty Nigel, un pícaro jugador de póquer que decía invertir en bolsa con un ojo de águila… Hay infinidad de ejemplos.
La Costa del Sol es el paraíso de las estafas a británicos. Decenas de miles de expatriados viven en su burbuja, sin conocer el idioma ni las leyes
Otros invirtieron en Old Mutual Isle of Man, una compañía aseguradora que les vendía un producto financiero complejo desde Man, un territorio ‘offshore’ con miles de empresas. Cuando la inversión fue mal, recurrieron a los tribunales españoles, que han condenado a bancos y chiringuitos financieros a devolver el dinero en cuanto el nivel del cliente era el de un inversor medio.
Así lo hicieron una pareja de expatriados, periodista y fisioterapeuta, afincados en Marbella. El 31 de julio pasado presentaron una demanda reclamando la nulidad del seguro de vida con Old Mutual en un juzgado de Marbella. Su abogado, Juan Martínez Soler, del despacho Lawbird en Marbella, alegaba que la Isla de Man no es territorio de la UE y que aunque el contrato estipulaba que las diferencias se resolverían allí, esa cláusula es nula, como tantas abusivas en estos contratos.
En la demanda esgrimían que Old Mutual nunca estuvo autorizada en España a operar como agente de seguros pese a que los ofrecía desde una oficina en Marbella a través de mediadores como ASF Europe Alliance. Según el escrito, “la información disponible al público en lo relativo a las autorizaciones para operar en España es objetivamente falsa”. ASF Europe Alliance, que los comercializaba, está registrada como una empresa de publicidad, pero ni la CNMV ni la dirección general de seguros tenía constancia de ellos, según aportaron los demandantes.
Estos habían contratado en 2011 una póliza llamada ‘executive investment bond’, una póliza de vida en que, al fallecer el asegurado, los beneficiarios del seguro reciben lo invertido más un 1%. En total, invirtió allí 688.000 libras esterlinas (unos 780.000 euros), de las que fue retirando 490.000 libras, por lo que le reclama las 198.000 libras (207.000 euros) que le faltan. En la demanda, los inversores sostienen que no entran a valorar cómo movió el dinero Old Mutual —eso sería “como intentar establecer la mala praxis de un falso cirujano”— sino en que no tenía ningún permiso para operar en España. Reclaman que el contrato era abusivo, al imponer un juez en la Isla de Man y no en Marbella para dirimir las disputas.
Además, la ley de seguros establece que “serán nulos de pleno derecho” los contratos realizados por entidades no registradas, como sería el caso de Old Mutual en España. El juzgado de Marbella admitió a trámite la demanda y comenzó el lento peregrinar que tienen estas cosas. Hasta ahí, sería un caso más de británicos reclamando en la Costa del Sol un dinero perdido en extrañas inversiones ‘offshore’ (hay bancos daneses y empresas con sede en Gibraltar en pleitos parecidos).
La ley de seguros establece que “serán nulos de pleno derecho” los contratos realizados por entidades no registradas
Pero el pasado enero el guion dio un giro inesperado. Old Mutual presentó su propio escrito en un tribunal de la Isla de Man para paralizar las actuaciones judiciales en España. Y les dieron la razón. El 31 de enero, el alto tribunal de la Isla de Man emitió un aviso penal en el que avisaba al matrimonio que, de seguir su demanda en España, podrían verse condenados “por desacato, ser encarcelados, multados o tener sus bienes embargados”.
No solo eso, sino que el juez avisaba de que lo mismo le podría ocurrir a “cualquier otra persona que conociendo esta orden ayude” a los demandantes. En último extremo esto incuso se aplica al personal de Justicia español. “Es absurdo, la Isla de Man amenazando al tribunal español con acciones penales. Es lo nunca visto”; razona Antonio Flores, director de Lawbird. El juzgado de Marbella analiza ahora la competencia sobre el caso.
Un portavoz de Old Mutual afirmó por correo electrónico que no intentan disuadir a nadie del pleito, pero que debe realizarse en la Isla de Man: “Old Mutual International no intenta evitar que los pleitos sigan. El juicio solo afecta a dónde debería verse la demanda, y el alto tribunal de la Isla de Man ha ordenado que sea en la Isla de Man. Cualquier riesgo posterior surge del rechazo continuado a cumplir una orden del Tribunal Supremo. Este rechazo es lamentable, pero no tiene nada que ver con Old Mutual International”.
El barón David de Rothschild, heredero del famoso linaje industrial y durante años presidente de la banca Rothschild, fue interrogado por escrito por un juez de Dénia (Alicante) que le investiga por publicidad engañosa. Lo hizo el pasado 22 de julio, aunque la comisión rogatoria con la respuesta no llegó al juzgado español hasta el 19 de diciembre. Decenas de jubilados británicos y alemanes acusan a la banca Rothschild de venderles un producto financiero para evadir el impuesto de sucesiones con el que pueden perder sus casas. El barón respondió una y otra vez que no sabía cómo funcionaba el negocio en España. “No conozco ese producto”, responde en un cuestionario repleto de evasivas.
Los jueces españoles siguen elevando el tiro contra la banca. El titular del juzgado de instrucción número 1 de Dénia, Pedro Pablo Abad Ortiz, prosigue con la instrucción de una querella contra la banca Rothschild por publicidad engañosa. Jubilados británicos y alemanes en la costa han ido contra el banco por un producto financiero complejo. Simplificando, Rothschild les daba una hipoteca sobre la casa, ese préstamo era invertido y con los intereses ganaban dinero y además eludían el impuesto de sucesiones si uno de los cónyuges fallecía, porque estaba hipotecado fuera de España.
Así comercializó unas 130 hipotecas que, a una media de 600.000 euros, suman unos 70 millones de euros, según estima Antonio Flores, abogado de los demandantes, para dar un orden de magnitud. Flores tiene sede en Marbella y especializado en defender a extranjeros en la costa. Con la crisis financiera, esas inversiones fueron mal y los jubilados vieron después que debían poner dinero para mantener unas casas que ya tenían pagadas. Unos emprendieron pleitos por vía civil, que ganó Rothschild, y otros siguen en curso, pero este va por la vía penal por publicidad engañosa. “Es importante, puede pasar que vaya a juicio si no da la cara alguien. Él es el máximo director de la empresa. Es la persona que tiene que aprobar que se den esos millones en préstamos”, señala Flores.
“Yo no estuve implicado personalmente en los contratos de Credictselect series 4. Para responder a este cuestionario, me han indicado desde NMR [NMR Rothschilds & Sons] que jamás ha propuesto fondos de inversión ligados a los contratos de esos préstamos”, señala el barón en su respuesta a un cuestionario por escrito. La comisión rogatoria a Francia fue enviada en marzo de 2016. En sus respuestas, que ocupan 17 páginas, abundan las evasivas: “La pregunta no está clara”, “a fin de contestar a este cuestionario, NMR me ha indicado que…”.
“Yo no estuve implicado personalmente en los contratos”, respondió el barón por cuestionario
Según las respuestas de David de Rothschild, los préstamos se daban a “individuos que tenían un inmueble que no estaba sometido a ninguna hipoteca, que declaraban tener otros activos y que eran expatriados [británicos o de otras nacionalidades]”, pero esa hipoteca nunca se dio para reducir el impuesto de sucesiones. Según él, era solo “un préstamo garantizado por el inmueble”, y quien lo pedía seleccionaba “las inversiones de acuerdo con el consejo de su asesor”. A la pregunta de si conoce a Stephen Dewsnip, señalado como uno de los artífices del esquema en España, responde: “Yo no lo conozco personalmente, pero me han informado desde NMR para contestar a este cuestionario que fue administrador de RBI [Rothschild Bank International Limited]”.
Este firmó como presidente de Rotschild Channel Islands un artículo en el que presentaba este sistema como un atajo contra el impuesto de sucesiones. Fue repartido en reuniones en la costa española, según los denunciantes. “Yo no he autorizado la publicidad de este producto porque no he estado jamás implicado personalmente en los contratos de préstamo”, responde el barón al juez de Dénia. Más adelante, responde que NMR no publicitaba la reducción del impuesto de sucesiones.
El barón, a la televisión francesa: “Me sorprendería mucho que se hubiera hecho algo ilegal”
Los demandantes, en cambio, han alegado que siempre se usaba la marca Rothschild y han aportado folletos en los que con el logo del banco se les vendía como una forma de eludir el impuesto de sucesiones. Sin embargo, ladirección general de Tributos contestó a una consulta que no era legal eludir el impuesto de sucesiones hipotecando un bien en el extranjero. Esa hipoteca en el extranjero “no es deducible a efectos del impuesto de sucesiones” y hacerlo “supone una infracción tributaria sancionable”.
“Nadie en el seno de NMR ha estado implicado de ninguna manera en la gestión de esos fondos de inversión”, señala el barón. Su defensa es afirmar que ellos solo daban la hipoteca y que la inversión del dinero —lo que falló y amenaza con llevarse las viviendas— era algo independiente. Hasta ahora, los tribunales españoles han dando la razón en vía civil a Rothschild o los casos siguen en tramitación, pero el caso de Dénia va por vía penal por publicidad engañosa.
El asunto ha llegado a la televisión francesa. El pasado mes de diciembre, la cadena France 2 emitió el reportaje ‘Rothschild, el poder de un nombre‘. Acudieron a la Costa del Sol a entrevistar a afectados por esta hipoteca. En el vídeo (minuto 55), la periodista le enseña al barón la publicidad con el logotipo de Rothschild en que se anunciaban los préstamos. Aparentemente molesto, David de Rothschild replica: “Eso no se podría hacer sin la participación de cierta gente en España que consideraba que era buena idea […] Me sorprendería mucho que se hubiera hecho algo ilegal”.
Avec ce “Document de Complément d’enquête”, plongez dans l’univers très fermé des Rothschild. Un nom légendaire et une dynastie associée à l’argent et au pouvoir depuis deux cents ans et sept générations. Trois de ses représentants ont accepté de lever le voile sur l’empire familial.
Links
Los papeles de Panamá son un auténtico quién es quién de la abogacía y la asesoría fiscal en España. Porque aunque las empresas están en lugares soleados, y los fondos a menudo en bancos en Suiza, todo se gestiona desde despachos con orlas de abogados en Madrid, Barcelona o Marbella. Bufetes como Feliú, De Miguel y Del Valle, salpicados en casos de blanqueo en España, aparecen de forma reiterada en los documentos de Mossack Fonseca como intermediarios. Los grandes, grandes despachos llevaban aparentemente más cuidado para hacer negocios con Mossack.
En 1985, un industrial vasco abrió la sociedad Cornfield Investments Limited en la Isla de Jersey. Lo hizo con Mossack Fonseca a través del despacho Feliú, según los papeles a los que tuvo acceso el diario alemán ‘Süddeustche Zeitung’ y que publican un centenar de medios -en España, El Confidencial y La Sexta- en colaboración con el Consorcio Internacional de Periodistas de Investigación (ICIJ).
[Especial los papeles de Panamá: destapamos a Mossack Fonseca, la gran trama de las sociedades ‘offshore’]
El 7 de noviembre de 1989, Alejandro Feliú Vidal, Alejandro Feliú Marqués y Miguel Feliú Bordoy reciben un poder notarial de Cornfield. Los Feliú pertenecen a un despacho de abogados de Mallorca con un relevante historial de blanqueo y delito fiscal. El 26 de abril de 2007, la policía irrumpió en el despacho en una operación contra el blanqueo y el fraude fiscal. Era un caso sin muchos precedentes, en el que Anticorrupción no solo actuaba contra los defraudadores fiscales sino también contra los abogados que facilitaban la creación de sociedades en paraísos fiscales.
Días después, las alarmas saltaron en las oficinas de Mossack Fonseca. El departamento de ‘compliance’, encargado en teoría de vigilar que no se incumpla la ley, escribe un correo alertando de que hay que dar de baja a Feliú. Pero el hombre de Mossack en España, Jaime Ingram, quita hierro al asunto. “El señor Ingram me indica que sobre el tema del Bufete Feliú, lo que existe al momento es un ‘pequeño escándalo’, pero que sin embargo eran noticias que debíamos tomar con reserva”, señala en un correo. El propio Ingram, que no ha querido hablar para este reportaje, da más adelante una versión aún más suave: “Es una firma conocida a la que el Gobierno ha tomado como ejemplo para dar un escarmiento”.
Anticorrupción pedía hasta 30 años de cárcel para cada uno de los Feliú. Pero estos confesaron, asumieron la culpa, pagaron y se quedaron sin ingreso en prisión. El Estado ya ha ingresado 20 millones de euros en multas por el fraude, también en bienes, a consecuencia de la operación Relámpago de 2007, según publicó ‘El País‘.
Los Feliú -en el bufete no han contestado a los mensajes y llamadas de este diario- no solo manejaban Corfield Investments. Según la documentación de Mossack Fonseca, antes de ser suspendidos habían intermediado en nueve empresas: ocho en las Islas Vírgenes Británicas y otra en Panamá. Todas tenían nombres inanes, fácilmente olvidables, intercambiables entre sí: Tern Holdings SA, Blane Corporation, Belan International Group Corp., Leban Corporation, Nabel Corporation, Sea Medow International, Sea Time Services limited, Lampera II Limited y Palma Consulting LTD.
El hombre de Mossack en España defendió al Bufete Feiú: “Es una firma conocida a la que el Gobierno ha tomado como ejemplo para dar un escarmiento”
Con la caída de Feliú, nuestro empresario -El Confidencial ha decidido de momento no publicar su nombre, por no ser un personaje público- eligió otro bufete renombrado: De Miguel Abogados, fundado por Luis de Miguel, esta vez en Madrid. Entonces su nombre aún no figuraba en rojo en Hacienda, pero eso no quiere decir que no tuviera su historia. En 1993 escribió un libro profético: ‘Objetivo, sin fronteras fiscales: los paraísos fiscales y la inversión extranjera en España’. Y pocos años después comenzó a trabajar con Francisco Correa, cabecilla de la Gürtel. De Miguel fue administrador único de Orange Market e Easy Concept,y tuvo cargos en Special Events y TCM, entre otras sociedades de la red. Era una pieza clave en la trama, considerado el arquitecto financiero de la Gürtel.
Según un informe de Anticorrupción del 6 de mayo de 2010, en su despacho había documento sobre “las estructuras de blanqueo ‘offshore’ (paraísos fiscales) con sociedades ubicadas en Antillas Holandesas y la Isla de Nevis”.
De Miguel se movía bien. Conoció personalmente a Ramón Fonseca en la conferencia de The International Tax Planning Association en San Petersburgo en junio de 2004, según la documentación de Mossack. Días después se reunió con una representante de Mossack -esta lo describió como “muy cordial y de muy buena apariencia”-. “Usa compañías en Nevis y Madeira. Yo sugerí usar Samoa y Niue, que no están en la lista española de paraísos fiscales”, dice la nota interna de Mossack. La reunión terminó de manera optimista: “Creo que tenemos un 100% de probabilidades de hacer negocios con esta firma, porque al señor De Miguel le gustó la idea de usar Niue en vez de Nevis”. Como acababa el plazo para presentar la renta, la conversación con De Miguel se vio constantemente interrumpida por clientes que le llamaban con dudas.
Por alguna razón, De Miguel sigue usando Nevis, una isla del Caribe. En 2010, tras el fallecimiento de nuestro industrial, cuando Cornfield Investments pasa a sus hijas, De Miguel escribe a Mossack ordenando liquidar la sociedad y traspasar los activos a Limarno, una sociedad de Nevis. Para entonces, el abogado De Miguel ya estaba de barro hasta las cejas. Al igual que con Feliú, Hacienda y Anticorrupción le habían echado el ojo. En 2006, el juez Baltasar Garzón había ordenado entrar en su despacho en Madrid dentro de la operación del BBVA-Privanza, y encontró una serie de clientes a los que De Miguel ayudaba a evadir impuestos.
“En España no hay cultura de fiducia, de fiarse de alguien que te crea las sociedades ‘offshore’ sin un papel. Como no te fías del testaferro, siempre hay un documento en una caja fuerte que te relaciona. Así que cuando la policía entra en uno de estos despachos, ya lo tienes todo”, explica una fuente de Hacienda.
La Agencia Tributaria ha logrado condenas para algunos letrados como cooperadores en el fraude
Así cayó De Miguel. En abril de 2013 fue condenado por la Audiencia Nacional a 21 años de cárcel por ayudar al empresario vasco Juan Ramón Reparaz a defraudar a Hacienda 16 de los 25 millones de euros que el empresario no declaró entre 1999 y 2006. Lo hacía mediante sociedades interpuestas en Panamá, Belice, Irlanda, Reino Unido y España. La sentencia fue confirmada por el Supremo en 2014 y ya está en prisión.
Su hijo, Eduardo de Miguel, dirige el despacho ahora, y asegura que ha cambiado radicalmente de actividad. Afirma que no sabe nada de Cornfield ni de Limarno. Suena creíble. “Tengo 30 años y el despacho ha cambiado”, explica por teléfono.
El abogado no fue condenado como cómplice, sino como “cooperador necesario”, un grado más. Eso implica que es como si fuera autor del delito. No es la única causa en la que aparece su nombre. El 17 de febrero de 2014, la Audiencia de Madrid le condenó a dos años de prisión por fraude fiscal por defraudar 197.669 euros y falsedad continuada en documento mercantil. Además, según ha sabido El Confidencial, tiene pendiente otro juicio por delito fiscal que pospone alegando problemas de salud de su abogado.
Feliú y De Miguel son solo dos de las decenas de despachos españoles que aparecen como intermediarios en las relaciones de españoles con el bufete panameño. Ilustran cómo con frecuencia los tentáculos de Mossack Fonseca en España tienen toga, una orla de licenciado en Derecho en la pared y un despacho de abogados de esos de sofás de cuero y suelo de parqué.
El bufete Pretus de Barcelona es cliente destacado de Mossack y también estuvo implicado en un caso de blanqueo. Como Francisco Javier del Valle. Ambos son viejos conocidos de los tribunales españoles. Cameron anunció ayer una ley para perseguir a despachos y bancos que ayuden a evadir impuestos, aunque en España hace años comenzó a actuar contra los casos más flagrantes. Todas las fuentes del sector coinciden en que los casos de Feliú y De Miguel, Pretus y Del Valle corrieron como la pólvora entre los despachos de abogados. “Hay mucha gente esperando que prescriban los casos para respirar”, cuenta un abogado.
Otro de los que aparecen como intermediario en una gran cantidad de sociedades es el despacho Roca Asociados. Rafael Roca es un penalista experto en temas fiscales que ha defendido, entre otros, a Gonzalo Prado, acusado de ocultar dinero en el HSBC de Ginebra y cuyo nombre aparecía en la lista Falciani, o a los directivos de Verbatim condenados por fraude fiscal. Roca aparece en un lista de Mossack como intermedirio en 115 sociedades, de las que 22 permanecen activas. Hay empresas en Islas Vírgenes, Samoa, Panamá y Niue. Roca no ha querido hablar para este reportaje. En algunos casos, el trabajo de los abogado puede ser para traer una sociedad en la amnistía fiscal, lo que no les implicaría en ninguna irregularidad.
“Para abrir una sociedad en Panamá, no hay secreto profesional entre abogado y cliente que valga”
A menudo actuaban confiados en que la confidencialidad cliente-abogado se extendía a esos casos, pero eso ya no es así. Nielson Sánchez Stewart, abogado especializado en temas de blanqueo, advierte de que no se aplica en estas situaciones: “El secreto profesional es algo al servicio del cliente, no del abogado. Además, es solo para la defensa jurídica o la asesoría. Pero para abrir una sociedad en Panamá, no hace falta ser abogado. La puede abrir cualquiera, así que ahí no hay secreto profesional que valga”.
En caso de sospechas de blanqueo, los abogados están obligados a denunciar al Servicio de Prevención de Blanqueo de Capitales (Sepblac). Sánchez Stewart destaca que no todo el que crea una sociedad en Panamá comete delito fiscal, y da un caso recurrente en el litoral. “Si viene un extranjero de 90 años que se quiere comprar una casa en Marbella, igual le recomendaría que lo hiciera mediante una sociedad en el extranjero”. Los residentes del norte de Europa temen como a la peste el impuesto de sucesiones español. “Lo que hace Mossack Fonseca hay que mirarlo caso a caso”, añade Sánchez Stewart.
El abogado Flores: “Mossack te ofrece la fiducia, la creación de sociedades ‘offshore’ de principio a fin”
Antonio Flores, abogado en Marbella, de Lawbird, especializado en atender a clientes extranjeros, da una visión más descarnada: “Te ofrecen la fiducia, la creación de sociedades ‘offshore’ de principio a fin. Usaban acciones al portador, de forma que nunca sabes de quién es la sociedad”. Flores añade que a menudo se vendían sociedades a clientes que no las necesitaban. “Pagaban entre 1.500 y 4.000 dólares al año a veces para usar una sociedad y comprar una casa en España, pero eso no les reportaba ventajas fiscales. Hemos tenido casos en los que hemos tenido que recuperar esa sociedad”. Señala que a veces los abogados les recomendaban esa operación porque cobraban una comisión.
En la lista de abogados que han trabajado con Mossack hay muchos de la costa. Como Vicente Tur Órtola, un letrado de Benissa (Alicante), que ha creado 13 sociedades con ellos: siete en Panamá y seis en Niue. De ellas, solo queda una activa: Warwick Investments. “En relación con Warwick Investments INC, su actividad es la de tenedora de acciones y promotora, en todo lo relacionado en el sector inmobiliario español”, dice Tur a Mossack en un correo electrónico en abril de 2014.
Por teléfono, Tur Órtola reduce la importancia: “Warwick está inactiva. La creamos para un inglés que venía a comprarse una casa en la costa. La casa la vendió y mantiene la sociedad porque cuesta unos 600 dólares al año, pero le voy a decir que la cierre”. Tur habla franco y directo antes de que estalle el escándalo de los papeles de Panamá: “Mossack Fonseca eran abogados que hacían de todo. No sé cómo les irá. Ha habido un montón de reformas legislativas y eso no da más de sí”. Tur admite que ha trabajado con Mossack.
Un intermediario afirma que Mossack ofrecía servicios a la clase media que ahora solo están al alcance de las empresas multinacionales
En los papeles de Panamá aparecen también menciones a los grandes bufetes españoles, pero se nota que llevan mucho más cuidado. Abogados de Cuatrecasasfiguran como apoderados en una sociedad de Panamá, pero la documentación demuestra que forma parte de una inversión en gimnasios en Colombia por parte de una empresa brasileña. Hay algo tangible detrás, no solo movimiento de impuestos.
En 2004, una enviada de Mossack realizó una ronda por despachos españoles y de cada reunión realizó un pequeño resumen. De una cita con dos socios de Uriasale sin grandes perspectivas de negocio: “Creo que tenemos pocas oportunidades de hacer negocio con ellos”, aunque estos sí tratan con bancos de Andorra y con compañías de Suiza, Reino Unido, Malta, Chipre y Madeira. La misma conclusión saca de una reunión en 2005 con Garrigues.
Dos abogados consultados coinciden en que Mossack Fonseca permitía crear sociedades a la clase media alta, pero que últimamente el negocio estaba de capa caída. La amnistía y las reformas legales habían ido a la base de su negocio. Ahora, señala, eso solo lo pueden hacer grandes multinacionales. Y esas no iban a Mossack.
Barry Gill, a British expat who has retired in Spain, claims to have lost more than £1m as a result of failed investments and a “scam” equity release scheme he undertook following advice from a firm which was not regulated to give financial advice.
Mr Gill alleges that he was advised to take out a £900,000 mortgage on a £1m Spanish villa he owned outright.
He said David Driver, OIB’s managing director, had told this would help him reduce his inheritance tax bill.
However, it has since emerged that the Spanish government views such arrangements as fraudulent.
Antonio Flores, a lawyer at Lawbird in Spain, who is now representing Mr Gill among a number of other OIB customers who are looking to pursue legal action against it, said: “OIB was operating illegally and was not registered to provide advice. Clients bought into speculative schemes to alleviate inheritance tax but many people have ended up losing their homes.
“There has been a lot of unregulated financial advice going on along the coast here and a lot of British people have lost a lot of money.”
Mr Driver, who arranged the IHT avoidance scheme for Mr Gill and others, returned to Britain in 2012. Today he appears to be back in business running a financial firm called Jorvik Investment Services, based in York, which sells regulated investments to financial advisers.
According to its website, the firm “will only entertain investments that offer the comfort and security that comes from being properly regulated”.
However, according to the register of authorised firms and individuals held by the FCA, neither Mr Driver nor Jorvik is regulated.
Mr Driver declined to comment on the matter.
Have you been the victim of a scam, or a rogue adviser, or have you seen anything suspicious? Email: katie.morley@telegraph.co.uk
7:20AM BST 18 Apr 2015
When Malcolm and Fiona Straw handed their life savings to their financial adviser to invest in 2007, they were confident their money was being placed in good hands.
They met Robin Rogers, at one time an authorised UK financial adviser, through their local golf club in Marbella, Spain. A number of Mr Straw’s golfing friends had spoken very highly of him.
Mr Straw, an ex-property developer, and his wife, a former teacher, retired in 2007 having sold a flat for €100,000, and they asked Mr Rogers for help investing the proceeds. They wanted to generate an income to replace the €7,000 yearly rent. They invested another €50,000 in 2012.
Despite his credible appearance, Mr Rogers was working for a firm called Offshore Investment Brokers (OIB), which was not authorised to sell investments. He invested the Straws’ money in two highly risky unregulated funds, which suffered substantial losses. Mr Rogers withheld their statements and misled them into thinking their capital was safe. In fact, the €7,000 they drew each year was eating what remained of their money, and by 2014 nothing was left.
Their unfortunate story serves as a timely warning to savers here and abroad, as sales of inappropriate investments are expected to rocket this year as one of the unintended consequences of the new pension freedoms, which give over-55s unfettered access to their retirement funds.
The Government and other, legitimate advisers are warning savers to be on “red alert” for salesmen pushing “too good to be true” investments, which could include shares in car parks, “carbon credits”, foreign property, fine wines and a range of other assets – loosely categorised as “unregulated” funds.
To gain “regulated” status, both investments and advisers must meet standards laid down by the appropriate regulator, which in Britain is the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
Malcolm and Fiona Straw’s fund lost 96pc of its value
If money remains within a pension it is almost certainly overseen by a regulated firm, conferring protection for the investor. Once the cash is withdrawn – and an estimated £24bn will be withdrawn over the next year – it is at risk of rogue “advisers” pushing unregulated investments.
Telegraph Money has found evidence of such investments being marketed through cold calling, home visits, golf club social events, “pension review” websites and by salesmen claiming connections to bona fide, regulated financial advisers.
According to the FCA, around 75pc of unregulated investments result in losses for private investors. But the people selling them are well trained to ensure they sound very attractive. Typically they make promises of “guaranteed yields” or high income payments, something many retired people desperately need.
In November last year, Mr Rogers visited the Straws’ family home and reassured them that their savings were worth a healthy £94,000. But then, when one of their income payments came through in chunks instead of a single lump sum, they had misgivings.
Several years previously they had received two warning letters about the balance in one of their investments, as it had suspended payments because of “liquidity issues”. But they said Mr Rogers told them this was a mistake and urged them to destroy the papers.
He also said the staggered payment was a mistake, and that he’d applied for “compensation” for lost interest.
The investment was held within a bond provided by Old Mutual Wealth, a properly authorised, and entirely legitimate, business. It confirmed to Telegraph Money that between September 2007 and December 2014, when the Straws’ money was invested, one of their funds, an unregulated collective property investment called Glanmore, lost more than 96pc of its value. Another, a fund called the Protected Assets Trust, which invested in traded insurance policies, fared much better, but still failed to make any returns in the period.
In December the couple were horrified to receive a “surrender valuation” letter from Old Mutual, the company holding the investments, showing that their fund was worth £15,723 after charges of £4,762 had been deducted.
No longer able to get hold of Mr Rogers, and feeling increasingly desperate, the Straws complained to Stein Group, a subsidiary of a larger regulated firm, Blacktower Financial Management, which acquired OIB in 2012.
They met the director, Stuart Langan, who looked into their affairs and admitted that Mr Rogers had been at fault. But Mr Langan claimed that his firm was not responsible for their losses as Mr Rogers was a subcontractor, rather than an employee.
He claimed to have suspended Mr Rogers, although at the time of going to press he remained listed on Stein Group’s website as a “key member of staff”.
Mr Langan told Telegraph Money: “I have responsibility over Robin Rogers, but I do not have responsibility for him, or for the things he did, prior to working for me. Stein only bought servicing rights of OIB so we are not liable for the Straws’ losses – what it says [about Stein Group acquiring OIB] on our website is a mistake.”
Mr Rogers did not return our emails.
Our investigation unearthed a number of other pensioners who have also suffered major losses as a result of advice given by OIB.
Another British man, Barry Gill, claimed to have lost more than £1m as a result of failed investments and a “scam” equity release scheme he undertook following advice from the firm. He said he had invested £250,000 and that OIB had again split it between Glanmore and the Protected Assets Trust.
Mr Gill (pictured left) alleged that he was advised to take out a £900,000 mortgage on a £1m Spanish villa he owned outright. He said David Driver, OIB’s managing director, had told this would help him reduce his inheritance tax bill. However, it has since emerged that the Spanish government views such arrangements as fraudulent.
Antonio Flores, a lawyer at Lawbird in Spain, who is now representing a number of OIB’s customers who are looking to pursue legal action against it, said: “OIB was operating illegally and was not registered to provide advice. Clients bought into speculative schemes to alleviate inheritance tax but many people have ended up losing their homes.
“There has been a lot of unregulated financial advice going on along the coast here and a lot of British people have lost a lot of money.”
Mr Driver, who arranged the IHT avoidance scheme for Mr Gill and others, returned to Britain in 2012. Today he appears to be back in business running a financial firm called Jorvik Investment Services, based in York, which sells regulated investments to financial advisers.
According to its website, the firm “will only entertain investments that offer the comfort and security that comes from being properly regulated”.
However, according to the register of authorised firms and individuals held by the FCA, neither Mr Driver nor Jorvik is regulated.
Mr Driver declined to comment on the matter.
Have you been the victim of a scam or a rogue adviser, or have you seen anything suspicious? Email: katie.morley@telegraph.co.uk
Julia Hilling (91) and Peter Cosgrove (84). / GARCÍA-SANTOS
More than 20 British retirees resident in Spain are taking legal action against the Rothschild financial services group, accusing it of fraudulent advertising for complex financial packages designed to avoid paying inheritance tax on their homes, which they now stand to lose. A court in Denia has since summoned Baron David Rothschild, the chairman of Rothschild bank, to answer questions in relation to its investigation into the alleged fraud.
Between 2005 and 2008 independent financial advisers operating in areas such as the Balearic Islands, Alicante and Malaga, sold pensioners loans that would release equity on their homes and see the cash invested in a fund, allowing them to enjoy inheritance tax benefits. The products were provided by a variety of banks, mainly in Scandinavia, but also by Rothschild.
The investment banking company sold around 130 of these products, which were distributed in Spain through the bank’s Credit Select Series Mortgage loan. Rothschild says that the activity was carried out by its Guernsey-based entity in the Channel Islands, outside the jurisdiction of the UK government or UK regulators.
Peter Cosgrove was warned that 80 percent of the value of his home would be lost if it were left to a friend
Among those who stand to lose their homes are Julia Hilling, aged 91, and Peter Cosgrove, 84, who retired to the Malaga resort towns of Fuengirola and Mijas in the 1980s. Hilling says she signed up to the Credit Select Series Mortgage loan in 2006 on the understanding that it would reduce inheritance tax on her home – in doing so, she was effectively remortgaging her property.
The following year, Cosgrove says he was contacted by a supposed financial advisor who warned him that as he did not have any family to leave his property to, 80 percent of the value of his home would be lost if it were left to a friend. “I thought that was ridiculous,” he says.
The investments proved worthless, due in large part to the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the financial crisis
The solution, says Cosgrove, was to take out a loan with the Rothschild Bank using his home, which cost him €75,000, and to then invest the money from the loan, which would bring him in around €5,000 annually for the next decade. He would be able to pay back the loan with the interest from his investments. In the event that he died before the loan was repaid, there would be no inheritance tax, as the money had been invested outside Spain.
Cosgrove signed, but says he had no idea that what he was actually doing was taking out a €290,000 loan, and putting his house, which had already been paid for, up as collateral. Others who signed similar agreements borrowed as much as €1 million.
A cartoon from an ad related to Spanish inheritance tax.
One of the law firms representing around 15 people pursuing Rothschild for compensation have pamphlets issued by the bank to sell its Credit Select Series Mortgage loans, which clearly focus on them as a way to avoid paying inheritance tax in Spain. “They made Spain seem like the Soviet Union, with taxes that were all about confiscating your money,” says Salvador Martínez Echevarría of Cremades y Calvo Sotelo, a law firm based in Marbella.
“Too many expats have learned the hard way that Spain’s inheritance tax doesn’t work the same way as their own country’s. This affects anybody who owns a property in Spain, not just residents: the upper limit on inheritances is 81.6 percent. The solution is to reduce the amount of your assets exposed to this […] a mortgage is a very effective way of reducing the total value of your Spanish property exposed to inheritance tax,” reads one Rothschild brochure being used in the lawsuit against the firm.
Cosgrove says that he received €13,200 in advance, but that his investments soon proved worthless, due in large part to the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the subsequent financial crisis that hit markets around the world. He found himself having to pay a mortgage on a property he thought he already owned. “Three months after I signed, I was told that I owed €3,000 and that I was in default.” A few months after that he stopped paying altogether.
Rothschild was not the only bank selling financial packages to people who did not understand them. Norwegian and Islandic banks were also seeking out Scandinavian retirees along the Spanish coast, warning them about Spain’s inheritance tax, which sets a maximum of 34 percent for property left to family members, but can reach as high as 81.6 percent for the super wealthy who have no family.
Cosgrove and Hilling say that they saw Rothschild’s involvement in the financial packages as a guarantee of their legitimacy. The bank was set up in 1798 by a German Jewish family, and over the centuries has become synonymous with high finance.
So far, none of the 130 people who signed up for the mortgage have had their homes repossessed, while Rothschild says that it is prepared to negotiate a solution. It points out that it only provided the loan, and was not involved in the investment side of the deal, which was carried out by financial intermediaries based in Spain, most of whom were British.
In an emailed response, the investment banking company says: “Rothschild provided a small number of mortgages in Spain acting solely as a lender.” It adds that it advised borrowers to take independent legal advice before going through with the loan: “All the loans were signed in the presence of a notary public to make sure that the signatories understood the contract. Rothschild did not provide advice. Rothschild believes that it met its legal and regulatory obligations at all times.”
The bank points out that it only provided the loan, and was not involved in the investment side of the deal
But one of the international financial advisers involved, Adrian Church, says that Rothschild was behind the loans: “If they say they had nothing to do with it, let’s just say they’re being economical with the truth.”
Antonio Flores, a Malaga-based lawyer representing around a dozen of the people who took out loans through Rothschild has managed to get a court in Denia to investigate Rothschild for fraudulent advertising.
Flores says Rothschild offered a product, the Credit Select Series Mortgage Loan, that was sold to pensioners as a legal means to reduce the value of their otherwise unencumbered homes, for Inheritance Tax mitigation purposes, but that the Tax Agency, on the contrary, has ruled that such scheme constitutes fraud.
“In short, independently of what happened to the investment, Rothschild advertised a loan aimed at reducing inheritance tax, which is a breach of tax law,” says Flores.
A British poker ace who disappeared from Spain after allegedly stealing more than £2.5 million from investors is living in fear that hitmen are coming to kill him at his bolthole in Berkshire.
Playboy Nigel Goldman, who is being investigated by authorities in Spain and the UK, fled his Costa del Sol mansion in November.
His whereabouts were then exposed when a newspaper tracked him down to a modest house in the picturesque village of Kintbury, where he lives under the alias Howard del Monte.
But the 56-year-old, who counts James Hewitt and Sir Mark Thatcher among his social circle, is now convinced gang bosses want him dead.
Scroll down for video
Fearing for his life: Nigel Goldman, from Birmingham, who is wanted by Spanish police after vanishing from his luxury Costa del Sol mansion amid a major cash probe
Goldman, who drove a red Ferrari, has been found living in a modest home in the picturesque village of Kintbury, Berkshire under the alias of Howard del Monte.
He told The Sunday People: ‘There is a bullet out there with my name on it. A guy came to the door a few days ago but I refused to open it.
‘He shouted that I was “a dead man” and from an upstairs window I saw him pull a gun out of his pocket.
‘It was terrifying. I know he was sent to murder me. I called the police but he drove off ad high speed before they arrived.’
Goldman said he now fears someone will come back to ‘finish me off’.
Goldman is being investigated by the Guardia Civil and Action Fraud, the UK’s fraud and internet crime reporting centre.
Earlier this year the only trace of Goldman since he vanished in Marbella was a text message to a former employer three weeks ago which read: ‘I did not set out to be a thief.’
Spanish police were probing claims that the broker from Edgbaston in Birmingham, left people empty handed and unable to access their bank funds.
Nigel Goldman, who is being hunted by police for allegedly stealing from investors, was found living in a semi-detached house in Berkshire
From the Costa del Sol to Berkshire: Nigel Goldman is being hunted by police for allegedly stealing more than 3million euros from investors
Goldman’s lavish lifestyle seems to have been scaled down with his Ferrari being replaced with a Vauxhall Zafira
Police were unable to trace him after they received complaints about his Tangier-based company, International Financial Investment.
Ex-pat newspaper The Olive Press, based in Spain, tracked Goldman down using details on his eBay account Bensons Emporium.
He uses the site to buy and sell coins, stamps and antiques.
It was reported his lavish lifestyle seems to have been scaled down with his red Ferrari being replaced with a Vauxhall Zafira.
But a neighbour said: ‘Everyone in the village knows he’s Goldman, whatever name he goes under.’
Geoff Whitton, originally from Cornwall, is trying to locate €20,000 he says he handed to Goldman.
The 49-year-old writer said: ‘If he’s a legitimate businessman, why hasn’t he contacted me?
‘I gave €10,000 in May, 2012, and €10,000 two months later. Goldman made me a profit for two months, then a loss for the same amount.
Goldman is said to have moved in the same social circles as cad James Hewitt (left) and Sir Mark Thatcher.
‘For the next one-and-a-half years, I was in limbo. He’d say, “Just trust me and you will receive a profit in October 2013”.’
Goldman, who enjoys swigging champagne and smoking expensive cigars, has a history of dishonesty, in his own book, ‘High Stakes: How I Blew £14 million’ published in 2006, he confesses being sent to prison twice for fraud.
A review on his book reads: ‘Goldman seems to show little remorse – and more than a little contempt – for the victims whose money he lived off so handsomely.’
Despite his past, Goldman is claiming that he, and others, have been duped this time and believes his brokers were running a Ponzi scheme with everyone’s money.
From the Costa del Sol to this sleepy Berkshire village Kintbury
A Ponzi scheme is an investment operation that pays returns to its investors from existing capital or new capital paid by new investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organisation running the operation.
Goldman has admitted in writing to owing as much as £658,000 (€800,000). However a lawyer acting for investors who claim to have lost cash is stating that he is chasing €3 million, a figure rising daily.
Flashy Goldman made his name at some of the world’s biggest poker tournaments around the world, winning thousands.
Lawyer Antonio Flores, said: ‘So far we have spoken to victims in Almeria, Malaga and Jaen. In our most recent estimate it looks like reaching €3 million.
‘The first thing he did right was openly admit to all his wrongdoings and say he paid for it and was a new man.
‘That was a success. People could not talk about his past, people actually felt sorry for him. It is large scale, police have not yet issued an arrest warrant, but they are not far from doing that.’
Goldman offered investments in a host of commodities including bullion, stocks and shares although he is not a regulated financial advisor due to his criminal convictions.
Roger Parks, a neighbour and friend of Goldman said that he even tried to get him to invest, although he chose not to, he said: ‘I have known him for 35 years.
‘When he showed me the prospectus for International Financial Investments at his palatial rented home in Elviria a few months ago, I couldn’t stopped laughing.
‘By the way, has anyone else noted the initials of his company spell IFI, as if “iffy”?’
A spokesman for Action Fraud confirmed complains had been lodged with the organisation about Goldman.
If those complaints are upheld, information gathered will be passed to either the Metropolitan Police or Fraud Investigation Bureau.
Nigel Goldman
A MAN previously convicted of fraud who owes investment clients a small fortune is living quietly in Kintbury after his champagne lifestyle in Marbella turned sour.
It is claimed he owes millions to creditors in Spain after his high-rolling investment scheme crashed and is now being investigated by Spanish and British police.
But Howard del Monte – formerly known as Nigel Goldman – has claimed in an exclusive interview with the Newbury Weekly News that he never intended for anyone to lose out, and branded some of the more lurid international press reports about him “lies”.
Speaking from his rented cottage in Kintbury, he said he had been hounded by the international press, national reporters and private detectives in recent months and weeks and still fears extradition to Spain.
By his side was loyal partner Suzanne Couling, a former Inkpen resident who met Mr Del Monte during an 11-year sojourn in Spain.
He was a well-known and colourful figure in the Marbella area for many years – where he had rebuilt his life following two prison terms for fraud whilst living in the UK – and persuaded many expats to invest in his investment companies.
Mr del Monte, originally from Birmingham, said this week: “It’s totally untrue that I owe £13 million, or more. The writ in Spain is for 650,000 euros and I very much regret that anyone had to lose money.”
The self-styled poker wizard, who also dealt in gold and coins, said his latest adventures began in 2008 when he won a trading competition on Talk Radio Europe’s previous guise REM, in which he turned 100,000 euros into 2.7 million.
After that, he said, would-be investors beat a path to his door pleading: “Make me rich, too.” Mr del Monte said: “I was approached by many expats, but because of my convictions under the Companies Act of 1948 for offences in the 1980s, the only way client funds could be handled was by trading through an off-shore entity.
“Everyone got good dividends between 2008 and 2012. ”
Speaking from his Kintbury home, Mr del Monte insisted he warned clients that their investments represented a gamble and that there were no guarantees.
When the crash came, it came in spectacular fashion he claimed. He said: “It all went wrong over a 24-hour period – very badly wrong. My portfolio was completely wiped out. I had only taken my eye off the ball for an hour but sometimes that’s all it takes.”
In August last year, said Mr del Monte, the Spanish tax authorities hit him with a bill at the same time as they froze all his accounts, including those of his clients. Despite vowing “never to return” to the UK in his autobiography, High Stakes, in which he also talks of amassing a £14million fortune, Mr del Monte was left with little choice but to come back to his home country.
He said: “I was totally unable to operate. I decided to come back to the UK. I was out of money, selling personal assets to pay clients.”
He claimed he was sympathetic to those clients who had lost out but insisted: “I was always careful to ensure people weren’t investing life savings and that they could afford to trade. But the Spanish press have started a campaign against me.”
Asked if, with hindsight, he would have handled the fallout differently, Mr del Monte said: “The mistake I made was coming back without explaining fully what had happened and why I was leaving. I could have handled that much better.”
He left Spain at the end of last year and was located this month by expat newspaper The Olive Press through his and Ms Couling’s joint ebay account. According to the paper, multiple complaints have been lodged about Nigel Goldman to Action Fraud UK – the UK’s national fraud and internet crime reporting centre.
Marbella-based lawyer Antonio Flores, currently representing a British expat couple who claim that Mr Goldman owes them around 640,000 euros, said he first became aware of Mr Goldman last October. Mr Flores added that although he is only representing one client, he said he is aware of “10 or 12” official complaints that have been made against Mr Goldman to the Marbella National Police since December 2013. He also said he believes Mr Goldman to owe “£2m – £2.5m” in total.
Mr Flores said he believed official paperwork was being compiled by the Spanish police. A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police told the Newbury Weekly News that they were not aware of any complaints against Mr Goldman and said it would be the responsibility of the Spanish authorities to issue a European Arrest Warrant should they feel it necessary.
The story of Mr del Monte residing in Kintbury has been picked up by several national newspapers and has got tongues wagging in the village.
One resident, who did not want to be named, told the Newbury Weekly News he was aware of a new face in the village who was calling himself ‘Howie’. “You can find Howie in the Blue Ball every Wednesday, Friday and Sunday nights playing poker,” he said, but added that he knew nothing of Mr del Monte’s past.
For the full exclusive interview with Mr del Monte, see today’s Newbury Weekly News.
2004-2014 © Lawbird Legal Services SLP. ALL Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
CIF: B92528876 - Tomo: 3519 - Libro 2431 - Folio 197 - Hoja MA-69308
