Tag archives for Rothschild Equity Release

International Property Finance (Spain) Ltd. loses right to file an answer to a claimant’s civil suit

International Property Finance’s bid to have its response writ accepted by a Fuengirola Court has been rejected for being filed late. “IPFSL”, an Rothschild’s offshoot that operated in Spain without regulatory clearance, failed once again to respond within the time limits of civil litigation procedural law.

Strangely enough, “IPFSL” registered its interest in the equity release case on the 19/11/18 but only submitted its response to the claim writ in February 2020, that is, almost 14 months later.

Lawyers acting for the claimant, Lawbird Legal Services SLP, believe Rothschild bank does not wish to have to defend claims filed against a non-regulated dependent entity -a decision largely based on reputational motives- and yet, are trying to delay the case as much as permissible under existing laws.

Co-defendant Swiss Life Luxembourg S.A., where the proceeds of the mortgage where invested through, is also in default and will not be defended in the up and coming trial, to be held within the year.

Rothschild’s Steve Dewsnip in Court over Alleged Sexual Assault


Steve Dewsnip, who once dedicated to his professional life to sign up over one hundred property-grabbing Rothschild Credit Select Series Mortgage Loans, is now being tried for bum-grabbing.

Read further on the following links:

Evening Standard

The Sun

And also on International-Adviser.com:

Ex-Providence director in court over alleged sexual assault

By Monira Matin

Added 17th November 2016

Steve Dewsnip, one of the former directors of the collapsed Guernsey-based Providence Investments Funds, has appeared in court in London accused of sexual assault.

The 49-year-old allegedly fondled a young waitress’s bottom in an exclusive Wembley Stadium suite after an England football match, Harrow crown court heard on Thursday reported The Evening Standard.

Dewsnip, of Castel, Guernsey, pulled the woman towards him, put one arm around her and groped her as she collected glasses following the match in September last year, the jury was told.

“He reached an arm out behind me, pulled me towards him and fondled my bum.

“He pulled me right up next to him and continued with the conversation and did not acknowledge what was happening.

“I felt unable to protest. I was working and we have to be polite and I tried not to make contact with him. It’s very hard to know how to react,” the alleged victim, a full-time student from London, told the jury.

Dewsnip, the founder and ex-chairman of Guernsey FC, was arrested when he returned to the same suite for an England v France friendly international a month later.

He pleaded not guilty and denied the allegation, adding that he had no recollection of touching anyone’s bottom, even accidentally.

The trial continues.

Collapsed Providence funds

Dewsnip resigned from his position as director at Providence in early August just weeks before Guernsey Financial Services Commission (GFSC) ordered the stricken fund to be wound up, deeming it insolvent.

In a further twist, Jersey’s financial services regulator shut down local IFA firm Lumiere Wealth,after an investigation into the sale of Providence Investment Funds to its clients.

As a result, Lumiere Wealth’s founder and managing director, Christopher Byrne was arrested in October, charged with a £1m ($1.2m, €1.1m) fraud linked to the funds.

In September, Providence Global, a majority owner of Lumiere, also came under fire for its links with Miami-based Providence Financial Investments for defrauding investors out of $64m.

In the same month, a group of British expats named Dewsnip in a lawsuit against NM Rothschild over a Spanish property scheme which allowed them to take out mortgage worth up to 75% of the value of their homes. 


State Prosecutor In Favour of Mr. David de Rothschild being Deposed in France

The State Prosecutor whose opinion was sought by the Denia Court on the matter of Mr. Baron de Rothschild Summons has confirmed, in a short writ, that the deposition of the banker may take place in France -via the designated national Court-.

If this is the case, the acting lawyers will be given a date to submit a list of deposition questions, with a translation into French.

It is also possible for lawyers acting for claimants to attend the interrogation.

Lawyers Request Denia Court to Summon Baron David de Rothschild in France

Lawyers acting for victims of the tax-evading Credit Select Loan Series have written to the Denia Court, currently investigating a scenario of potential fraud, demanding that an international “letter rogatory” is issued to the French authorities asking them to summon Mr. Rothschild.

This formal petition was issued as a result of the defendant’s unwillingness to cooperate with the Spanish Courts.

Previous, the same Court had rejected a petition for an EAW (European Arrest Warrant) to be issued.

Staff at Rothschild Offices Madrid Deny Working with Baron David de Rothschild

Staff at the Madrid offices of Baron David de Rothschild have denied knowing who Mr. David de Rothschild is, in spite of the offices bearing the name of the indicted individual. As a result of failed service of process, Mr. Rothschild has been issued with a Domicile and Whereabouts Search (APD in Spanish police jargon), to take effect throughout Spain.

Lawyers acting for claimants in the criminal case have requested that he is notified in his personal address. Should anyone have details of his permanent home or principal establishment, do not hesitate to contact ERVA.


Rothschild Case: Málaga Court Formally Orders Service of Process

The Malaga Mercantile Court 1 Bis, with date of the 7th of May (received by actign lawyers on the 5th June) has formally accepted the claim, its jurisdiction on the matter and service of process on the Spanish addresses provided for N.M. Rothschild & Sons.

Defendant Rothschild could do one of the following now:

  • Accept service of process, appoint lawyers and defend the claim.
  • Attempt to refuse service of process in any of their 2 addresses in Spain (Madrid and Barcelona), demanding the Court to service in their Guernsey offices.
The Courts can then do one of the following:
  • Where service of papers is accepted, the 20 days period will start counting.
  • If they refuse and request that the Particular of the claim are notified in Guernsey, the Court may reject their allegations (most probably) and note their refusal to accept and acknowledge service, continuing the case by default. Alaternatively, the may accept the defendant’s allegations and decide to serve in Guernsey (unlikely).
It is possible that Rothschild will do anything in their hand to delay, obstruct, confuse, protract and hinder the efforts of their victims in exposing their Credit Select Series 4 mortgage loan deceiptful advertising, all the while arguing that, whatever was published on the tax benefits of their product it was “for guidance only”, and not be “relied upon”.

Rothschild Directors Sought by Denia Court

Mark Coutanche and Stephen Dewsnip have been requested to turn up at the Denia Court to be notified of criminal charges being bought against them.

The General Directorate of Police and the Guardia Civil in Madrid have been issued “with Code 1” requests (current address and/or whereabout search warrant) so that they can be notified of ongoing criminal proceedings in Spain.

According to the warrant, the last known address was Paseo de la Castella N 35, 3rd floor, in Madrid, an address that coincides with that of their Madrid offices; it appears that an attempt to deliver a copy of the summons bore no fruits.

The warrant was issued on the 26th November 2013 and ends on the 26th November 2018.

Making service of process difficult has become a useful tool for any lawyer acting for Equity Release banks and NM Rothschild & Sons, a bank known for redifining the meaning of the term “double-standards”, is not going to miss an opportunity to make the lives of their clients-turned-victims a tad more miserable.

N.M. Rothschild & Sons is accused of selling mortgages to Spanish-based pensioners as a tool to defraud the Spanish Tax Office, albeit as a legal product, alongside deliberately concealing crucial data that would prove that their Equity Release product was impractical, from an investment point of view.

Credit Select Series 4: Rothschild could see tens of millions wiped off

Rothschild Bank International


Back in 2008, the Supreme Court in Spain ruled on an interesting case: a Spanish Casino had been lending money to some gamblers (by the way, what a silly thing to do) to bet in their premises. As was expected, the gamblers p****d the money up the wall and refused to return it. The Casino, on the strength of the contract they had made their clients sign, demanded payment of the lent sums, plus interest.

The Supreme Court, in application of the established doctrine that states that contracts that breach mandatory provisions are void, declared the contract unenforceable and dismissed the Casino’s attempts to obtain an order forcing the gambler to return the funds.

The provision that had been violated specifically banned Casino’s from lending money to customers, for the purpose of gambling.

In reaching the decision, the Supreme Court stated that even if administrative laws envisage a penalty for breaches of their own laws, such trangression necessarily has an effect on the validity of the contract, which has to be declare void.

By applying this to Equity Release, it is very possible that where the ER package is declared void, claimants will not only have the right to remove the charge attached to their properties but also, claim the loan that was given to them to invest.

What remains to be seen is whether Courts of law will take into consideration breaches in regulatory mandatory provisions, where these exist  (SLMH, Nykredit/Sydbank, International Property Finance Spain etc.), and apply article 1.306.2, or the tax benefit that was the main objective pursued by the contract.

In the first scenario, an Equity Release victim would be able to remove the mortgage charge from their property and claim the full loan back, before costs, losses etc., and in the second, remove the mortgage and demand the remaining balance on the loan. In both scenarios, the bank could lose tens of millions if the Courts apply, as would be expected, the following article:

Article 1.306:

If the deed which constitutes the unlawful cause should not constitute a crime or misdemeanour, the following rules shall be observed:

1. Where both contracting parties are at fault, none of them may recover what he has given pursuant to the contract, or claim the performance of what the other should have offered.

2. Where only one contracting party is at fault, he may not recover what he has given pursuant to the contract, or demand the performance of what he should have been offered. The other, who was a stranger to the unlawful cause, may claim what he has given, without the obligation to perform what he should have offered.

Ladies and Gentlemen, place your bets!!

On How Rothschild Vets Investment Providers for Credit Select 4 Series

Below is an example of an email sent by an IFA, recommended by tax-defrauding N.M. Rothschild & Sons, in respect to the abject performance of the Rothschild Credit Select Series 4 Equity Release product.

The figures reflect three things:

Confirmation that Rothschild vets all investment service providers before recommending them to their victims, and confirmation that such powers are hardly consistent with Rothschild’s preferred phrase: “WE WERE ONLY THE LENDERS…”

– The inexistent skills of whoever was entrusted with investing the funds.

– The inability of the Rothschild Equity Release product to ever make any progress in respect of providing an income stream, let alone paying the cost of the mortgage (and the IFA).



Dear Mr & Mrs…,

I hope you are well, please find below the quarterly update on your equity release scheme.

Your investment as at 23rd October 2013 was €138,518.70. Your loan balance as at 23rd October 2013 was €331,628.90 the difference between your loan and your investment is €193,110.20. The loan to value is 45.78%, Rothschild will request additional funds from you if this percentage rises above 35%. Loan to value is calculated using 100% of the value of the investment and 35% of the original property valuation.

The current interest rate charged on your loan by Rothschild is 1.723% (including Rothschild margin of 1.50%) ending the 23rd January 2014.

As discussed previously there is a limited choice of approved investments for this scheme and their performances are detailed below:

Investment YTD 2012 2011 2010 2009
Rothschild Cash account 0.15% 0.30% 1.10% 0.45% 0.75%
Optima 2 Closed 1.90% 2.10% 92.00% 5.70%
Optima 4 +0.89% 3.87% 1.30% 86.00% 8.54%
Aspecta Optima 2 -1.31% 2.05% 2.44% 33.00% 5.46%
Aspecta Optima 4 -0.16% 2.65% 1.70% 0.96% 5.86%
Ashburton Replica 22nd Oct +3.19% 6.29% -0.70% 11.71% 11.43%
Premier Balanced Fund  +0.23% 6.20% -7.74% 5.81% 7.77%
Armstrong CRR -1.79% 0.80% -8.20% 5.67% 12.30%
Armstrong DDS 4.33% 7.20% -0.20% 12.30% 31.30%

If you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact


Rothschild Equity Release ex-Happy Customers

The farcical testimonials are testament to the immense deceit rained on unsuspecting punters. We just wonder what happened to them…

Skip to toolbar