The below statement has been made by an Hamilton’s ex-employee who has confirmed his willingness to cooperate in a potential Court case against Rothschild.
For legal reasons, his name and other personal circumstances have been removed.
It’s credibility can be proven by reference to other almost identical statements, promotional literature and other means of proof;there is total consistency in the “modus operandi”, names, premises on which the product was sold, alibis used by the bank to attempt to excuse any liability etc.
In 2002 moved to Spain.
We bought a home in Estepona and took a couple of months to settle in.
I responded to an advert in the SUR in English, for FPC ( Financial Planning Certificate) qualified advisers for Hamiltons based in La Cala de Mijas. I contacted Hamiltons and met with the owner Dean Murphy and the manager Peter Hardy.
The interview went well with the two individuals extolling the virtues of an IHT avoidance scheme funded by Rothschilds and the Premier Investment Company based in the Isle of Man.
The basics were simply a debt in the form of a mortgage with Rothschilds was created to mitigate the amount of any inheritance on death of the property owner. Any beneficiary would inherit the value of the asset less any debts and therefore reduce any IHT demand, which was said to be very onerous in Spain.
The mortgage funds would be placed in an offshore investment fund out of the reach of the Spanish Tax authorities. The fund had an historic performance well in excess of the mortgage charge rate, so technically the investment return paid the mortgage and any surplus growth would be added to the fund or the borrower could draw down any surplus to supplement income.
This was not a new Rothschilds scheme, the product has been in the Rothschilds portfolio for many years, there is mention of this scheme all over the internet dating back years.
I was offered a job and required to attend a training session, which was attended by Steve Dewsnip Director Rothschilds Guernsey and Charles Walton Premier Fund managers IOM.
During this meeting I became aware from statements made that the scheme had been put together by Charles Walton the fund manager with Premier (who subsequently became the fund manager for all the other funds which followed the switch from premier to the many other funds, none of which made the returns quoted to clients)
Charles Walton was a long time friend of Dean Murphy.
Dean had worked in Dubai where he operated an investment company serving ex pats who lived and worked in the tax free environment of Dubai. During this time he had met Charles Walton.
I was informed that the IHT scheme had been put together by Charles Walton and he had approached Rothschilds as a funder along with Surrendalink Mortgages as an alternate funder.
Charles Walton explained the scheme in detail, how the money was relased from the property by way of a mortgage and the funds would then be invested offshore outside the reach of Hacienda.
THE CLIENT HAD NO CHOICE REGARDING THE INVESTMENT FUND. THE FUND WAS VETTED AND APPROVED BY ROTHSCHILDS AND THE LOAN WOULD ONLY BE GRANTED ON THE STRICT UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FUNDS WOULD BE INVESTED WITH THE FUND DICTATED BY ROTHSCHILDS.
We were never given a choice of funds to pass on to clients.
When the fund was changed due to poor performance, we could not sell the new fund until Rothschilds had approved the fund. HOW CAN THEY SUBSEQUENTLY CLAIM THEY DID NOT GIVE INVESTMENT ADVICE……………ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, THEY DICTATED THE FUND FROM THE OUTSET.
My argument has always been that the funds were placed into experienced investor accounts in the Isle of Man, with no regard to the clients knowledge of experienced investor funds.
Steve dewsnip then took over the meeting extolling the history of Rothschilds and the fact that they had survived on reputation and would not do anything to tarnish that reputation of the bank. We would never read the headline “Rothschilds evicts Spanish resident”, it just would not happen.
There were at least 10 people in the training room who heard this statement, in my case I attended 3 meetings with Steve Dewsnip/ Charlie Walton where this statement was made.
I will also state for the record that whilst there was several members of the sales force who were financial services experienced and qualified in the UK, there were other sales people who had no experience in Financial Services experience who were trained in house on this product.
The scheme seemed genuine and was supported by opinions from Ernst & Young in Madrid and Uria & Menendez, Abogados in Madrid.
We were given point of sale material which included these opinions all given to support the scheme.
We were given qualified appointments, met with clients in ther home, instructed them of the IHT liability in the event of death, informed them of the scheme to mitigate IHT, signed them up and handed the paperwork into Hamiltons who sent it off to Rothschilds.
Once approved we were required to meet with the clients and convey them to the lawyers in Malaga, lawyers appointed by Rothschilds, the client was given no choice ( this would not be allowed in the UK) The Notary would attend the lawyers office and Notarize the loan documents.
The clients never saw any money it went from the bank straight into the investment fund.
The issue in every case was the poor performance of the investment fund. With one poor choice being followed by another then another then another, none of which were in the clients control. Every time the fund crashed Hamiltons sought leave of Rothschilds to switch the fund.
In the UK if you move a fund, you are paid a commission, I would think Hamiltons were earning commission time after time, switch after switch.
If the funds had performed we would not now be talking. I have always maintained that the way to the table with Rothschilds is to pursue the Investment advice route.
Barclays Bank were recently fined £30 million and ordered to compensate all investors who took advice on a Barclays nominated fund that had an elevated element of risk, when the client were risk averse.
The clients could only invest where Rothschilds dictated, they nominated the fund, approved the fund, they must be liable for the fund performance and the current situation culminating in repossession.
This is a true statement, let me know if you require any further information
Regards
We welcome any further ex-Hamiltons or Ex-Henry Woods sales reps to come forward with a statement, each of which represents a nail in the coffin for the Equity Release obnoxious products.
What a revelation. Not so much with the content of the deceipt what Rothschild sold this product on, but that at last someone on the inside has confirmed what we knew all along. Erva, its members and Rothschild vicims have posted many comments on this subject in the past, in relation to their sales patter. So whoever you are our heart felt thanks for your bravery in writing this letter. I really hope that other ex Hamiltons employees will do the same.
What a lovely man you are Mr.X. There seems little doubt now that Rothschild have been lying over and over again. How many posts have we seen on this web site where Rothschild have denied and denied any involvement in this obnoxious product. As Mr.X wrote, if this product had been launched in the UK then like Barclays they would be facing huge fines as well as having to reimburse all their clients, with interest. Then of course they knew full well that they could not introduce this type of scheme into the UK as it had already been outlawyed by the Financial Watch Dog. It beggars belief that they can still keep on denying their involvement.
From reading this letter it seems to me that Hamiltons are as much at fault as Rothschild. If Dean Murphy (Hamiltons) and Charles Walton (Premier Fund Manager) had been friends for such a long time, is there any doubt that they dreamed this up together. Then, our now football manager Steve Dewsnip (ex Director Rothschild) was roped into the scheme, I bet making a tidy bonus as a result. Who knows what the true story is, perhaps Dewsnip was also conned by the other two rogues. No matter, if that was the case then Rothschild have to carry the can as Dewsnip was their employee. So Rothschild you have been finally rumbled, so play the “white man” and get these unfortunate ex pat pensioners out of the preverbial.
What is so sad about all this are the vicims that have had their properties taken from them or have been threatened that this will happen. We are all aware that we were all duped by the banks & IFA/agents into signing these contracts to mitigate IHT & Wealth Taxes, as Mr X explained in his letter. Irrespective of this, the banks new or should have known that in the event of a downturn in the financial sector the investments would not be able to pay the interest on the mortgage loan let alone provide a return to supplement their pensions. They would also have known that as a result they were entitled to take the homes of their victims. They must also have known the age of their clients and that there would be no way that their victims would ever be able to recover their lives in the event of the fund failing. This in itself is despicable, which is why the courts ( as in the case of Barclays ) have ruled time and time again against these banks for selling such products especially in the UK. If this was an all singing & dancing product introduced to help pensioners release equity from their only asset, their home, then why indeed have they not released their equity release scheme in the UK. As was mentioned in one of the comments, they could not as it was outlawed in England. Yet they still chose to launch it in Spain. Of course Rothschild are not the only culprits. Other banks such as Danske Bank, Nordea Bank (both operating out of Luxembourg) Nycredit, Landsbanki, Barclays Bank to mention just a few are equally at fault. In all these cases they sold this product by instilling fear in their prospective clients of punitive IHT for their beneficiaries in Spain. Now we know this is not the case in fact it makes no difference where your beneficiaries live, they could live in upper Mongolia, however they would have to pay IHT on the total value of the property. It matters not that you have tried to cheat the tax man out of his lawful tax, you just cannot, mortgage your property and take this money out of Spain in order to reduce your taxes. I am sure we would all like to thank Mr.X for his sense of honour in exposing the Rothschild lie. No doubt he was taken in with the sales patter of Dewsnip (Rothschild) Murphy (Hamiltons) Walton (Premier) perhaps some of the other salesmen would also have a change of heart and come forward with your story. It would be a fitting start to their New Years Resolution.
As you are all aware erva have been quite scathing in its comments about banks, their CEO’s, Officers and employees, so much so, that many members were concerned that they could be construed as libel or defamatory. We have maintained all along that we do not publish anything that we cannot back up with documentary evidence, which is first cleared with our lawyers. We have offered in the past to delete anything from the web pages should the banks can prove to us that the information we have posted is false. We posted some four weeks ago a challenge to all the banks and employees was made. We invited their respective lawyers to write to us requesting an appology and to remove any item from the web site and take out action in the courts for libel. I can report that we have not heard a whisper from any one, there have been no contact and no writs to appear in court. I guess the silence speaks for itself. By their silence one can only assume that they accept that every post and comments are based on fact and truthful in every respect.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/barclays-spanish-unit-fined-mis-rating-bonds-103107516–sector.html
Interesting to read all the responses to the post. I would agree that the scheme was flawed from the beginning even without the inducement of mitigating taxes. The above link may explain a little to all equity release victims. Bearing in mind the age of the banks clients who wanted NO – LOW risk, by the nature of the investments be they funds or managed capital plans, they could only possibly produce positive results by high risk investments. I believe that the banks knew this but ignored the fact.
http://erva.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Uria-Menendez-ship-rothschild.pdf
The advice given to Rothschild on IHT is shown in the link above. Interesting that had Rothschild taken any notice of it they would never have contemplated selling this obnoxious product in Spain. Clearly for everyone to see it states in Paragraph 6. ” A CAREFUL ANALYSIS SHOULD BE MADE ON THE DEDUCTIBILITY OF THE DEBT. IT MAY NOT BE DISCARDED THAT THE SPANISH TAX AUTHORITIES MAY TRY TO CHALLENGE THE DEDUCTIBILITY OF A LOAN GRANTED TO A NON RESIDENT FOR IHT PURPOSES UNDER THE ARGUMENTS THAT (i) THE DEBT HAS BEEN ” SIMULATED” FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSES OF REDUCING THE SPANISH IHT LIABILITY OR (ii), BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF CONNECTION OF THE DEBT TRANSACTION WITH SPAIN, THE SPANISH ELEMENTS OF THE DEBT HAVE BEEN ARTIFICIALLY INCORPORATED TO THE DEBT IN ORDER TO QUALIFY IT AS “LOCATED, EXERCISABLE OR FULFILLED” IN SPAIN. In spite of being warned by this law firm that there could be serious implications with this, Rothschild and their cronies decided to ignore this advice. As can be seen from the letter by Mr. X (ex employee) of Hamiltons after his many training sessions with Steve Dewsnip (Rothschild Director) Dean Murphy (Hamiltons) & Charles Walton (Premier) they still informed him to sell this product on the basis of IHT savings. We at erva can see this as clear as the nose on our face. Comments from our Rothschild victims would be welcome.
Whilst the IHT advantages were explained to us by Peter Hardy of Hamiltons, his main selling point to us was the income we would receive.
As time has gone by I have come to believe there were no errors in what has happened to us and other victims, it was a deliberate swindle by Rothschild.
As bankers they would have known this scheme could not possibly perform as they suggested for all the reasons we now know like nursery rhymes.
It went wrong when the market crashed and property prices dropped like stones.
Had prices continued to rise pre crash, Roths would have foreclosed on everyone pronto and pocketed their ill gotten gains.
This was a crime of intent to defraud and making pecuniary gain by deceit.
All the banks were at it, the illustrious Roths is no better than any other sheister.
Not really a mortgage loan?,You are a liar Dewsnip and proud of it by the looks of things. Shame on all involved.
http://erva.es/2012/11/21/nordea-bank-luxembourg-equity-release-solution-for-those-affected-by-spanish-tax/
Once you have read and digested the above, go to this link and compare the advice given in the NORDEA GUIDE TO WEALTH AND TAX PLANNING IN SPAIN. You will notice that an entire paragraph is missing from their advice. They in fact make no mention that their scheme is a “SIMULATION” and that their mortgage loan is accepted by the Spanish Tax Authorities. Clearly one can see from the advice given by Uria & Menendez Lawyers – Madrid, as well as the many Directives in Spanish Law on IHT & Wealth Tax Legislation this is not the case. One could perhaps argue that Nordea Bank, Luxembourg, have in fact been mis- lead by their own tax lawyers in Barcelona and if that is the case then Nordea Bank should be suing their lawyers. We do have course have a number of reports from these tax lawyers in Barcelona and when asked to explain their rationale and law appertaining to their reports, they refused to do so, referring us to Nordea Bank. When Nordea Bank were asked the same question they neither denied or admitted the contents of the report and then complete silence. The next interesting thing Nordea Bank’s lawyer in Madrid,who is intent on foreclosing on many of our members, in fact they have already foreclosed on at least one that we are aware of, was the lawyer with Uria & Menendez, the lawfirm that produced the report referred to in the last comment by the erva team. One must assume that he is also aware of the published report, yet still he carries on his foreclosure quest on behalf of Nordea Bank. Perhaps he has not explained the law to his client yet in the hope that he can still claim his huge fees not sure how much but probably in excess of 200 euro an hour. Perhaps Nordea Bank will pick up this comment and start to make some enquiries. I hope they realise that they will need to compensate everyone when they lose this battle and lose it they will, perhaps sooner than they think. Only a couple of weeks left before they have to convince the Mercantile court in Malaga that all their literature, brochures and sale material conforms to the regulations.