Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Financial Conduct Authority wins appeal case against Capital Alternatives

Posted on 31 March 20153 April 2018
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Email this to someone
email

The Court of Appeal has upheld a February 2014 High Court ruling in which the Financial Conduct Authority won their case against Capital Alternatives and other firms. The FCA accused the firms of “promoting and/or operating collective investment schemes (CISs) in the UK illegally and without our authorisation”.

Some of the defendants appealed the High Court decision of February 2014. The appeal was heard on 27 and 28 January 2015. The Appeal Court ruled in the FCA’s favour.

Under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 it is illegal for unauthorised persons to carry out collective investment schemes. The Appeal Court Judgment states:

“It is a criminal offence for an unauthorised person to carry on a regulated activity in the UK (section 23) and, subject to exceptions, it is an offence for such a person in the course of a business to communicate an invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity, which includes establishing or operating a CIS (sections 21 and 25 and Schedule 2). By section 26 an agreement by an unauthorised person in the course of carrying on a regulated activity is unenforceable and entitles the other party to recover money or property transferred or compensation for loss. But under section 28 the court has power to allow the agreement to be enforced if satisfied that it is just and equitable in the circumstances of the case. Section 382 (d) of FSMA enables the court to require persons who have contravened the Act, or been knowingly concerned in a contravention, to make appropriate restitution to investors who have suffered loss. Those who have operated and/or promoted the schemes may also be liable to prosecution under s 397 of FSMA in respect of what the FCA claims were misleading statements which led investors to invest.”

The two court decisions are available by clicking on the links:

  • February 2014: High Court decision
  • January 2015: Appeal Court decision

The FCA case against Capital Alternatives focussed on two of the “investments” under Renwick Haddow’s Capital Organization network of companies:

  • African Land (also known as Agri Capital) which offered investments in rice farm harvests in Sierra Leone – run by African Land Limited.
  • Reforestation Projects (also known as Capital Carbon Credits) which offered investments in carbon credits intended to be generated from land in Sierra Leone, Brazil and Australia – run by Reforestation Projects Limited.

The full list of the defendants is here.

More than 2,000 people handed over a total of almost £17 million to Capital Alternatives and related companies under these two schemes.

In its press release about the Appeal Court ruling, the FCA notes that,

If this decision is not appealed further then the FCA can proceed with any remaining aspects of the case which still need to be ruled on by the Court.

And it explains that the Court “may order the defendants to pay us compensation that will then be paid to investors in the schemes”. The FCA provides no further information and states that, “We will update this page when we know more”.

The FCA advises that investors in these schemes do not need to take any action “in relation to the FCA’s case at this stage”, and adds, “We will give you further information when it is available”.

The FCA posts this warning:

We are aware that some investors may have been approached by third parties offering to assist them in disposing of their investments with African Land or Capital Carbon Credits, in some instances these individuals claim to work for, or on behalf of, the FCA. You should be extremely cautious if you are approached, particularly if you are asked to make a payment in advance.

FCA advises contacting its Consumer Helpline (0800 111 6768) if you are “approached by an unauthorised firm or individual”.

A company called Regulatory Legal Solicitors is pursuing compensation claims for some investors in these schemes. Tobias Haynes of Regulatory Legal Solicitors told the website Professional Adviser,

“The judgment is welcome news for investors and the regulator no doubt. It provides clarity with regard to what constitutes a UCIS [unregulated collective investment scheme], bringing many schemes into regulation and potentially offering redress that would otherwise be unavailable.
 
“The decision also brings new hope for direct and SIPP investors who did not have the benefit of advice.”

 

Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Email this to someone
email

Related

4 thoughts on “Financial Conduct Authority wins appeal case against Capital Alternatives”

  1. estelle says:
    6 April 2015 at 11:49 pm

    I am amazed Mr Haddow scams people for £18 million plus any no one steps up to the plate to stop him!

  2. MANMOHAN SINGH SIHRA says:
    3 June 2015 at 4:42 pm

    INVESTORS DO MAKE MISTAKES FOR NOT TAKING PROPER ADVICE ONCE THE FCA ARE INVOLVED IT DOES HELP I FEEL THE INVESTORS AS MYSELF SHOULD BE COMPENSATED AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE MEANS EVEN IN STAGES WOULD BE HELPFUL

  3. Happy says:
    4 June 2015 at 12:53 pm

    It seems African Land have appealed to the Supreme Court http://www.africanland.org/
    They reckon they will know by the end of August if the latest appeal will be allowed to go ahead.

  4. Lu says:
    27 March 2016 at 10:17 am

    An update from FCA

    https://www.fca.org.uk/news/consumers/capital-alternatives-court-investment-schemes

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

REDDisms

“It’s too much to expect the people who run big Wall Street firms to speak plain English, since so much of their livelihood depends on people believing what they do cannot be translated into plain English.”

— Michael Lewis, The Big Short, 2011

Recent Posts

  • Peru cancels its World Bank FCPF Carbon Fund programme
  • The World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s latest hot air scam: Retroactive credits
  • Some questions for Frithjof Finkbeiner, founder of Plant-for-the-Planet
  • Why has the Financial Conduct Authority not taken down the website of the clone scam “Good Investment Advisors”?
  • Greenpeace on Carbon Dioxide Removal and REDD: “The experience has been more often negative than positive”

Recent Comments

  • Chris Lang on Why has the Financial Conduct Authority not taken down the website of the clone scam “Good Investment Advisors”?
  • fred bloke on Bill Gates: “Now some of these offsets are very complicated. Ah, you know, trees for example . . .”
  • fred bloke on Why has the Financial Conduct Authority not taken down the website of the clone scam “Good Investment Advisors”?
  • Chris Lang on Some questions for Frithjof Finkbeiner, founder of Plant-for-the-Planet
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Some questions for Frithjof Finkbeiner, founder of Plant-for-the-Planet

Issues and Organisations

AB 32 Boiler rooms Bonn California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer Sustainable Forest Management The Nature Conservancy Ulu Masen UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Luxembourg Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2021 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!