ian cass

The True Car Finance Scandal - Episode 1 In this first episode I play you the smoking gun extracts from the actual recording of my call with the FCA on 24th February 2016! What if someone told the FCA all about the unlawful incentivised car finance commission arrangements in February 2016. What if on that same call in February 2016 someone told them all that and urged them: "So, there will be no withholding of facts here, because millions have been subject to this scam. Millions! So if the FCA doesn't act and doesn't disclose it, you are going to allow a) more millions to be conned in the same way in the future, and b) prevent proper redress for the people have been conned in the past. The FCA has to do something. The FCA has to make the public aware what's been going on.” Don't take my word for it play the video and listen for yourself. Now ask yourself why the FCA did nothing until 2024. I have all of the answers and the evidence and will reveal it all in new episodes...... Think you know the true car finance scandal. Think again. @kalyeena @andyverity @BBCHelenCatt @paullewismoney @jameshurley @stugoo17 @TransparencyTF @appgonifandffs @APPGbanking @WB_UK @Siobhain_Mc @hbaldwin @Meg_HillierMP @BobBlackman @Bobby_Dean @thatginamiller @LauraTrottMP @Nigel_Farage @GBNEWS @reformparty_uk @kevinhollinrake @PeacheyK @mrdanwalker @NineLivesMedia @MaltinPR @MariaW_B @EllieSmitherman @piersmorgan @PeterStefanovi2 @ruddick @JP_Biz @jclarkjourno @POLITICOEurope @groupaction @GMB #carfinance #rachelreeves #scandal #commissions #supremecourt #fraud #fca #ombudsman #ombudsman

IMPORTANT - Today sees Mary Robinson MP present the Whistleblowing Bill to Parliament. Possibly one of the most significant & necessary new pieces of legislation in the UK. Scandals (including and especially the Post Office scandal), criminality and corruption largely occur for two reasons: 1. The dishonest wilful intent of some and 2. The fearful silence of others This bill seeks to remedy the second of those issues, which in turn will reduce the first. Please email your MP's and urge them to support this bill (information on how to below) . The Bill calls for an Independent 'Office of the Whistleblower', and that which makes this Bill so important. Others, and especially those with questionable or other agendas or interests, don't want such an independent office, just new laws. New laws without an independent body will not address the core issues, or do anything to protect whistleblowers or encourage employees to speak up. IMPORTANT: What is the point in bringing in a new law when UK employers routinely breach the ones that already exist, and regulators fail to enforce the laws and codes that already empower them to act against firms causing detriment to whistleblowers? And, in the case of the FCA, are going to even greater dishonest lengths by covertly separating 'protection' from 'whistleblowing'? In 2016 the FCA introduced a new code SYSC18. This code makes it an offence for any firm to cause detriment to a whistlebower and gave the FCA powers to act against that firm and provide the whistleblower with protection from detriment. This was their call to arms to protect whistleblowers. Or at least that's what the FCA purported it to be and what they fed the media. However, data proves that since 2016 when these new powers came into effect, 70% of financial services employees who 'blew the whistle' suffered detriment by their employer for having done so. Conservatively that equates to more than 700 whistleblowers per year suffering detriment. WHEREAS, over the same period the FCA failed to take any action against any firm for having caused detriment to a whistleblower. Enough is enough. A new law without an independent Office of the Whistleblower solves nothing, and will be little more value to employees or the UK than the paper on which existing and redundant laws are written. But it's not just financial services. Name any industry or profession, and you will find the same regulatory and oversight 'failures', and the same willingness to turn a blind eye to whistleblower detriment. All too often because the regulator or public body in question is also exposed or embarrassed by that which is reported by whistleblowers, creating a conflict of interest and the perfect and most vicious of circles for employees. What action has been taken against the Post Office, Fujitsu or others regarding suppression of testimony, manipulation of testimony, the aggressive use of NDA's or SLAPP's against employees, victims or those independent parties tasked with investigating? All of which is part of the mechanism of any scandal and cover up, and the effect of which intimidates employees who are speaking up, and deters others from doing so. The Office of the Whistleblower creates an Independent public body free from the conflicts and agendas that are a big part of the problem. If you watched the ITV Drama "Mr Bates vs the Post Office" or are following the Post Office (or any other) Scandal or the Post Office Public Inquiry and are shocked by what you see, there is affirmative action you can take. Write to your MP (you can find your MP and their email address here members.parliament.uk/findyo… ) Urge your MP to support this Bill. You can and will make a difference. You might not have been a victim of this or other scandal, but this is about preventing the next one. A next one that you or a loved one might be a victim of. @TransparencyTF @APPGbanking @appgonpbandffs @AWhistleblowing @APPGInvestFraud @PostOffInquiry @stugoo17 @CastletonLee @PaulMar72224296 @chrish9070 @nickwallis @PrivateEyeNews @RevRichardColes @carolvorders @ElCShaikh @PostOffice @BBCNews @itvnews @TomWitherow @Janetsk20073533 @RichardMoorhead @Karlfl @BBCNewsnight @BBCPanorama @forensicgod @MartinSLewis @WB_UK #PostOfficeScandal @MaryRobinson01 @BaronessKramer #PostOfficeInquiry #injustice #MrBatesVsThePostOffice #MrBates #MrBatesvsPostOffice #perjury #fraud #miscarriageofjustice #whistleblower #whistleblowing #whistleblowers #PIDA #Officeofthewhistleblower #whistleblowerbill #detriment #scandal #corruption #FCA

How the FCA produces and distributes the 'desired false narratives' for their Annual Public Meeting and press officers.... Email from Toby Hall, lawyer and one of Andrew Bailey's henchman, dated 6th September 2018, ahead of the APM that took place on 11th September 2018. This gives an insight as to how the FCA preps its executives for the APM (Annual Public Meeting). Bailey's office produce their desired narratives specific to issues they know might come up, and designate those to deliver them if the question arises. That designated as 'background' is the 'off the record' dishonest stuff only to be circulated internally and to Parliamentarians & journalists. Extraordinary number of false and/or misleading representations here: 1. Hall states that I... "brought an unsuccessful Employment Tribunal case against Lloyds" FALSE. As a litigant in person up against Addleshaw Goddard and their appointed Counsel, I won a judgement of 'Unfair Dismissal' and was awarded the maximum amount at that time, £76,500. The whistleblower element of that claim was not successful, but new evidence proves that there was a 'miscarriage of justice' in respect to that element of the claim, and that this was due to unlawful concealment, fraud and perjury by Lloyds in those 2015 proceedings, and also breaches of PIDA and other UK law by the FCA in 2015. 2. When Mr Hall refers to: "We investigated your complaints about the FCA in detail and we concluded that they were not justified" he knows this to be as false a representation as those complaint responses were, and made them whilst in possession of the evidence that I only obtained in 2022, all of which was concealed from me by the FCA in 2017, and that proves my complaints were actually entirely corroborated by an FCA expert in October 2016. Hall and others in Bailey's office had deployed the 'Intercept and Divert' protocol (recently deemed unlawful by the ICO) against me so as to have all of my incoming emails diverted to Bailey's office. This enabled them to conceal the findings of the FCA expert, pervert and falsify the narratives and even order the FCA Complaints Investigator to process and censor the FCA's response to my DSAR, to withold any of my personal information that exposed her December 2016 complaint response for the fraud that it was. 3. Hall confirms that in 2017 I had brought to the FCA's attention the Boiler Room called 'Amyma', that was marketing and selling the Blackmore Bond fraud and Ponzi scheme. Hall confirms in this email dated September 2018: "Amyma, an unauthorised firm which has recently become an AR (Appointed representative) of Equity For Growth Limited". Hall also confirms: "he [me] repeated his concerns recently, noting the firm is still operating and promoting products including Blackmore Bond" WHEREAS, Nikhil Rathi claimed in his letter to the Treasury Select Committee of December 2022: "There are also allegations that the FCA ignored intelligence relating to Amyma Ltd, which was involved in introducing investors to Blackmore's mini-bonds..... we do not agree with the assertion that we ignored intelligence about Amyma received in 2017.....In March 2019, the FCA took steps which led to the removal of Amyma's website. Following this, Amyma's Appointed Representative status was terminated in September 2019." How can the action taken in 2019 to remove the AR status of Amyma be the result of my intelligence presented in 2017, when they FCA only gave them this bloody status in 2018 more than a year after my reports? 4. See how the 'background' part is used to present the smears, and with intent to spread them. The objective being to discredit anyone that dares to challenge or expose the FCA, and dissuade journalists and parliamentarians from engaging or publishing anything to do with the person being smeared. I wonder who is producing the false desired narratives now? There was certainly no shortage of them at the most recent APM. @TransparencyTF @appgonpbandffs @APPGbanking @AWhistleblowing @APPGMortgage @APPGInvestFraud #defamation #FCA #fraud #ponzi #blackmore #rathi #bailey #governor #bankofengland

My formal Protected Whistleblower Disclosures made to FCA Chair Ashley Alder and FCA whistleblower team on 24th May 2023 (Part 1), to which there has been no response or even acknowledgement. I will share additional extracts from it over the coming days. IMPORTANT: In my protected whistleblower disclosures I include sufficient information and evidence to support my disclosures, BUT inform Mr Alder that I have substantially more to prove them and seek his engagement with me so that I can present all of my evidence and 'walk' him and the FCA through it, establishing the chronology, the truth and the facts. NEVER give The FCA, or the Police for that matter, all of your evidence. They are then in a position to refuse any and all engagement with you and claim they've reviewed everything, they see no wrongdoing and will not investigate or engage further. Make your disclosures and/or allegations, provide a sample of the evidence you have, and refer to the additional evidence you have, meaning they cannot possibly refuse to engage or claim to have investigated without having met with you and afforded you the opportunity to spell it all out with your additional evidence. This Part 1 has added significance for IRHP victims and mortgage customers generally, and touches on some of the issues featured in Andy Verity's book "Rigged", particularly 'lowballing'. These disclosures expose some of the methodology that the banks used to both execute the 'lowballing' and to profit from it. TO: Ashley Alder Chair., Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) By email to: chaircorrespondence@fca.org.uk (and subsequently to MP’s) May 24th 2023 Dear Mr Alder, I appreciate that you have only been ‘in office’ so to speak at the FCA for a short time, and that you will be busy with a variety of issues, tasks and the understanding of the scale of the role you have taken on. As I understand it, statutory obligations specific to your role is to be ‘independent’ and to hold the FCA CEO accountable. To that end, I am formally escalating the following Protected (Whistleblower) Disclosures to you personally, and the FCA whistleblower team, to give you full and independent oversight of the disclosures and their handling by the FCA. I am also copying in various MP’s, who as you know are also ‘Prescribed Persons’, and to ensure further independent oversight in respect to the FCA’s handling of these disclosures. I also formally request the opportunity to meet with you in your capacity as Chair of the FCA so as to discuss these disclosures further and to present to you the evidence I have specific to them. I refer you to the fact that all of the issues I am presenting to you involve, to some or significant extent, my former employer Lloyds Banking Group (LBG). I was a Director of Foreign Exchange Trading at LBG, and during my employment made various protected ‘whistleblower’ disclosures under PIDA (Public Interest Disclosure Act). As you will be aware whistleblower protection and all rights is afforded to former employees, and the same obligations for regulators in terms of how they treat reports and disclosures etc, also applies to former employees. However, I am escalating these disclosures to you as Chair of the FCA, due to various wrongdoing and unlawful conduct by the FCA and various FCA departments, including and especially the CEO’s office, in respect to me and prior disclosures and reports made by me, and that are now the subject of various legal proceedings including my recent application for Judicial Review, and reports to police of breaches of the Suicide Act 1961 and Fraud Act 2006 by various persons within the FCA. All of which are only now exposed by new evidence and ‘personal information’ obtained in 2022 but that had been unlawfully witheld from me by the FCA. I want to make it perfectly clear that the issues presented to you in this letter does not involve any of the reports and disclosures, or any of the subject matter, within those abovementioned reports and disclosures to which the abovementioned proceedings apply. You will however understand why it is entirely inappropriate for me to escalate these matters via those other channels and departments, given the industrial scale failures, dishonesty and unlawful conduct that has occurred, and whilst these proceedings related to them are ongoing. The other reason why you are the only appropriate person or office within the FCA to escalate these matters to, is because two of them apply to issues in which the FCA has been significantly involved [LIBOR and IRHP related issues], and where my evidence raises multiple serious concerns as to the FCA and FCA CEO’s conduct in respect to them. The third issue falls absolutely and squarely within the ‘sole’ responsibility of your office; ‘The Independent Investigation of the FCA IRHP Review’. As you will be aware it was the FCA Chair and Non-Executive Directors who instructed the Independent Investigation and who therefore ‘own’ the investigation and responsibility for it. I will not go into exhaustive detail in this letter in respect to each protected disclosure. Instead, please consider this as the initial ‘Skeleton’ Protected Disclosures, where I include summaries of the disclosures below under three headings. As we proceed, I will gradually share the substantial cache of evidence that I have specific to each disclosure, and request meetings whereby I can properly present the evidence and significance. 1. LIBOR a) There has been much reporting of LIBOR manipulation and serious concerns raised as to various ‘investigations’ including that undertaken by the FCA, and various prosecutions. However, the disclosures I am presenting to you feature significant wrongdoing that has never been the subject of disclosure or reporting, and more importantly for consumers, nor has there been appropriate focus on the various and substantial damage done to consumers and business that was a consequence of this wrongdoing, and certainly no appropriate remedy for those damaged. Furthermore, the evidence that I now have to prove these issues has never been disclosed to the public, and yet it is clear that the banks involved, including my former employer LBG, HSBC [and others] and the FCA must have been in possession of this evidence and aware of the wrongdoing and damages involved. I enclose two documents with this letter that are a just a tiny sample of the evidence that I now have. They are: APPENDIX A – Memo authored by Angela Knight of the BBA APPENDIX B – Transcript of a recorded call that took place the day after the Angela Knight memo was sent out to the panel bank members, between an LBG and HSBC trader where they discuss the memo and co-ordinate & execute unlawful collusion and manipulation of USD LIBOR. The further evidence I have demonstrates how victims were damaged by the manipulation of USD LIBOR, especially those victims that were expressly and dishonestly informed by their banks that the underlying instrument of their borrowing, and their IRHP that was a condition of their borrowing, was an altogether different and UK benchmark. Many were told that the underlying instrument for their borrowing and Anciliary Products specific to that borrowing was the Bank of England Base Rate. b) The second LIBOR issue does overlap with the issue outlined above in section a), but is specific to types of LIBOR manipulation [GBP and USD] that has not previously been exposed or disclosed at all. This manipulation had significant consequences for various parties and, again, including those that were damaged by the manipulation of USD LIBOR, and who were expressly and dishonestly informed by their banks that the underlying instrument of their borrowing and their IRHP that was a condition of their borrowing, was an altogether different and UK benchmark. I have obtained a recording of a conference call that was convened by John Ewan Director of the BBA, and to which all LIBOR panel banks ‘dialed in’. (This includes the same two traders from LBG and HSBC that feature in Appendix B mentioned above) Mr Ewan convenes the conference call immediately following allegations in the media as to LIBOR manipulation. As ‘regulator’ of BBA you would expect Ewan to be challenging the panel banks as to whether any of the manipulation claimed in the media was actually occurring. He doesn’t. Indeed, he essentially accepts the validity of the allegations, and instead seeks positions and arguments from the Panel banks with which he can deny or defend against those allegations in the media. However, during the call the various panel bank members reveal that they are manipulating GBP LIBOR by two methods not previously disclosed to public or victims: i) The banks are borrowing in USD, converting the USD to GBP via an FX Swap, and using the resulting ‘net’ borrowing cost for the purpose of their GBP LIBOR submissions. This was always entirely prohibited under LIBOR rules. The intent was twofold; Firstly, to produce GBP LIBOR submissions that were far below what the true rate would have been had they borrowed in GBP [aka ‘Lowballing’], and to the significant benefit of the bank, over stating their credit worthiness and stability. Secondly, to generate significant additional revenue and ‘margins’ on customer borrowing as a result of the significant ‘arbitrage’ opportunity that existed with U.S. interest rates having been slashed and UK interest rates remaining largely unchanged from late 2007 until March 2009. I do not propose to go into significant detail at this time, but a significant consequence of this is the damage done to UK customers [U.S. Markets and consumers were also damaged, but will be addressing that with U.S. authorities separately]. In the first instance all of these UK customers borrowed GBP and were dishonestly informed by their banks that the underlying instrument of their borrowing and their IRHP, that was a condition of their borrowing, was an altogether different and UK benchmark. I.E. GBP LIBOR or Bank of England Base Rate. None of the substantial greater profit margins on borrowing enjoyed by the banks via this ‘Lowball arbitrage’ were disclosed, or passed on, to customers. Indeed, the customers were told that the only ‘margin’ they were subject to was the additional ‘margin’ being applied by the bank over and above the UK instrument rate that the bank falsely claimed was the underlying instrument. In the second instance, I have a sample of customers that all borrowed GBP and were all told that the underlying instrument was a UK Benchmark, being the Bank of England Base Rate or GBP LIBOR, and that the same benchmark was the underlying instrument for the IRHP. WHEREAS, each have now obtained evidence from their banks, after many years seeking it, that prove the existence of USD denominated products related to their borrowing, hard credit lines in the name of the customer that the customer had no knowledge of, and statements showing that the bank was increasing credit lines that were denominated in USD, due to FX price movement, proving the customers were exposed to another risk that they did not have prior to entering in to this supposedly GBP borrowing agreement. ii) The banks were manipulating the value of the ‘market amount’, a core LIBOR principle. It was demanded and understood that all LIBOR submissions must be determined by the rate at which the ‘market amount’ could be borrowed. On the conference call one bank trader states that this has always been £150m-£200m and is set in stone. And of course it is, because the LIBOR rate is as much a measure of liquidity as it is the cost of borrowing, and so to amend the market amount would be to falsify and manipulate the rate and the level of liquidity. However, on the call various panel bank members confirm they have been producing LIBOR’s based on their cost of borrowing a much lower amount, and suggest that it is appropriate to reduce the value of the understood ‘market amount’ in light of credit and liquidity issues. There are no circumstances where this would be appropriate. It is clear and evident that customers were damaged by being deprived of any benefit that was derived by their bank from the so called lowballing and these various other practises I outline above, whereas they were also damaged when rates were collusively manipulated higher with intent to conceal the prior unlawful ‘lowballing’, when any additional cost was passed on to the customer, even in respect to risks and exposures that had not been disclosed to them. It is clear that customers were damaged, but they have been deprived of information and evidence by their banks and those with oversight responsibility, concealing the damage from them, and depriving them of their rights to remedy and justice for this damage. I am sure that I do not need to remind you that the banks were also leveraging this damage caused by way of this wrongdoing, and creating further damage, when dealing with customers and the consequences of the IRHP’s they were sold, as you will see below. Part 2 to follow and features my protected whistleblower disclosures specific to 'The Mechanism of Margin', and how the banks falsified the sales process for toxic IRHP's, and how The FCA manipulated both the IRHP Review AND the 'Independent Investigation into The FCA IRHP Review' undertaken by John Swift KC, so as to further the falsified narratives being presented by the banks in a desperate attempt to 'package' the offences as 'mis-selling' instead of the fraud that this was. (See attached the 'Angela Knight Memo' and extracts from the transcript of the call between an LBG trader and HSBC trader regarding the Knight memo and their efforts to manipulate the USD LIBOR rate higher so as to conceal the lowballing.) @TransparencyTF @AWhistleblowing @APPGbanking @appgonpbandffs @jameshurley @Ian_Fraser @CarshaltonArt @andyverity @BBCNews #fraud #irhp #FCA #judicialreview #whistleblower