6 ms·

Search for $1B Stolen from Moldova Leads to Ex-Council Flat in Scotland

101 points by nols 11y ago

scintill76 11y ago
> But they have never been to the Seychelles, and official Seychelles ink stamps used to register Fortuna United at Companies House in the UK were not sent from the islands. > Zirnelyte says suitable stamps can be bought on the online auction site eBay. How is a stamp from eBay an "official Seychelles stamp"? Does it just mean the stamps officially used by the Seychellois shell companies to "sign" things, rather than by the government of Seychelles? The way it was said sounds very fraudulent to me (even for a shell company mill), as if they forged the Seychelles registration docs. The image shown appears to be two bland stamps with the same design, each with a company name and a shared address in Seychelles (and from Googling the address, it looks like that's another company registration agent.)
- plextoria 11y ago
  The stamps in questions are corporate stamps, not government's: http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2390/production/_85940190_scan.jpg http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2390/production... You can have those made anywhere.
TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
Scottish companies law is devolved. I should hope the Scottish Parliament could tighten up the rules on SLPs. Interestingly "money laundering" is reserved, though.
- arethuza 11y ago
  Actual creation of company law legislation still seems to mainly be done at Westminster but company registrations are done separately in Scotland and there appear to be some differences like these SLPs: http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Justice/law/damages/company http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Justice/law/damages/company
ruxkor 11y ago
Here is a short video introduction, if you were not aware of the scheme: https://youtu.be/KxsylnDO15w https://youtu.be/KxsylnDO15w
- downandout 11y ago
  So the $1 billion is actually just a small portion...this video says the total is $20 billion. Amazing.
arethuza 11y ago
Interesting that a "Scottish Limited Partnership" doesn't appear to be the same thing as a Scottish LLP: http://www.brodies.com/node/1614 http://www.brodies.com/node/1614
zaroth 11y ago
In search for a cool pilfered billion, they haven't even made it past the first thin veil of LLPs? What does it even mean to say that Fortuna Limited "has the rights to the billion dollars which disappeared last year"?
- arethuza 11y ago
  It says that Fortuna is "owed" that money, presumably in exchange for some goods or services, that would be an interesting invoice to see!
- retube 11y ago
  Yeah - exactly my question - that's what this whole escapade hinges on but absolutely no details
michaelt 11y ago
Prime Minister David Cameron told a conference in Singapore in July: "We are one of the most open and welcoming economies anywhere in the world and I want Britain to be that country. But I want to ensure that all this money is clean money. There is no place for dirty money in Britain." Based on this and other reports, it sounds like Cameron has a lot of work to do. With motoring offences in the UK, if a car is fined the owner identifies the driver so the driver can be fined - and if the owner claims they "don't know who was driving", the owner gets the fine. So you can't dodge a fine or get a lesser fine by "forgetting". We should apply the same logic to white collar crimes. If lawyers or corporate service providers are setting up companies with fake details, acting as directors then claiming they "don't know who controls the company", whatever punishments are due to the company's owners should transfer to whoever touched it last.
- arethuza 11y ago
  "There is no place for dirty money in Britain." Quite right - that's what the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are for.
  - louthy 11y ago
    And the City of London Corporation [1][2][3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation [2] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corpora... [3] http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/02/london-corporation-city http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/02/london-corporati...
- jt2190 11y ago
  > But barrister Jonathan Fisher, QC, one of Britain's > leading experts in this area of law, says that legally, > nominees would be as responsible as > any other director for any wrongdoing.
  - misnome 11y ago
ZoFreX 11y ago
If you're interested in this sort of thing I can highly recommend a subscription to Private Eye magazine, which has been investigating dodgy shell companies and who they are really connected to for years. (If you've never heard of Private Eye, it combines irreverent humour and hard-hitting investigative journalism, and has been the first to break many of the biggest stories in the British press)
amitparikh 11y ago
In Delaware, 1209 North Orange Street is the address of over 200,000 businesses including Silicon Valley giants like Google and Apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_Trust_Center_(CT_Corporation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_Trust_Center_(CT_C... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thrives-as-a-corporate-tax-haven.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thri...
shubb 11y ago
I'm a little concerned to see company registration services demonized. I used one for my own company. Like a domain registration they also usually provide anonymity by declaring themselves as your office address. That's legitimate too as many contractors don't have an office and don't want thier home address published publicly on the uk companies register. That isn't a fraud. The BBC makes much of the weird ownership structure, but it is not that crazy. The structure described, 2 companies that basically represent people owning a company that basically does work is a tax efficiency. If the co owners own it directly and take thier money as pay not dividend, they pay more tax. If they take it as dividend not pay, it is split by ownership not hours worked. Better for both directors to be companies that charge the main company per hour for work done and then extract the dividend from those personal company seperately. I wouldn't do it as it has some problems like disguised employment but if compliant it is a tax efficiency not an evasion, and not a criminal activity. I dunno, it's like saying a secure document destruction company is suspicious. It's just a company that provides a service that most users need to do normal productive business.
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  I think you've misunderstood. An IT contractor is generally the director of their company, and there aren't generally any nominee directors. In this case the two people providing the company registration services are actually nominee directors of the company (the same company that received the billion dollar stolen wire transfer!)
  - shubb 11y ago
    Literally the same? Well shit they are probably criminals then
    - cpncrunch 11y ago
      Yes, read the article.

101 points by nols 11y ago

> But they have never been to the Seychelles, and official Seychelles ink stamps used to register Fortuna United at Companies House in the UK were not sent from the islands. > Zirnelyte says suitable stamps can be bought on the online auction site eBay. How is a stamp from eBay an "official Seychelles stamp"? Does it just mean the stamps officially used by the Seychellois shell companies to "sign" things, rather than by the government of Seychelles? The way it was said sounds very fraudulent to me (even for a shell company mill), as if they forged the Seychelles registration docs. The image shown appears to be two bland stamps with the same design, each with a company name and a shared address in Seychelles (and from Googling the address, it looks like that's another company registration agent.)

plextoria 11y ago
The stamps in questions are corporate stamps, not government's: http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2390/production/_85940190_scan.jpg http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/2390/production... You can have those made anywhere.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago

Scottish companies law is devolved. I should hope the Scottish Parliament could tighten up the rules on SLPs. Interestingly "money laundering" is reserved, though.

arethuza 11y ago
Actual creation of company law legislation still seems to mainly be done at Westminster but company registrations are done separately in Scotland and there appear to be some differences like these SLPs: http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Justice/law/damages/company http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Justice/law/damages/company

ruxkor 11y ago

Here is a short video introduction, if you were not aware of the scheme: https://youtu.be/KxsylnDO15w https://youtu.be/KxsylnDO15w

downandout 11y ago
So the $1 billion is actually just a small portion...this video says the total is $20 billion. Amazing.

arethuza 11y ago

Interesting that a "Scottish Limited Partnership" doesn't appear to be the same thing as a Scottish LLP: http://www.brodies.com/node/1614 http://www.brodies.com/node/1614

zaroth 11y ago

In search for a cool pilfered billion, they haven't even made it past the first thin veil of LLPs? What does it even mean to say that Fortuna Limited "has the rights to the billion dollars which disappeared last year"?

arethuza 11y ago
It says that Fortuna is "owed" that money, presumably in exchange for some goods or services, that would be an interesting invoice to see!
retube 11y ago
Yeah - exactly my question - that's what this whole escapade hinges on but absolutely no details

michaelt 11y ago

Prime Minister David Cameron told a conference in Singapore in July: "We are one of the most open and welcoming economies anywhere in the world and I want Britain to be that country. But I want to ensure that all this money is clean money. There is no place for dirty money in Britain." Based on this and other reports, it sounds like Cameron has a lot of work to do. With motoring offences in the UK, if a car is fined the owner identifies the driver so the driver can be fined - and if the owner claims they "don't know who was driving", the owner gets the fine. So you can't dodge a fine or get a lesser fine by "forgetting". We should apply the same logic to white collar crimes. If lawyers or corporate service providers are setting up companies with fake details, acting as directors then claiming they "don't know who controls the company", whatever punishments are due to the company's owners should transfer to whoever touched it last.

arethuza 11y ago
"There is no place for dirty money in Britain." Quite right - that's what the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are for.
- louthy 11y ago
  And the City of London Corporation [1][2][3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation [2] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corpora... [3] http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/02/london-corporation-city http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/02/london-corporati...
jt2190 11y ago
> But barrister Jonathan Fisher, QC, one of Britain's > leading experts in this area of law, says that legally, > nominees would be as responsible as > any other director for any wrongdoing.
- misnome 11y ago

ZoFreX 11y ago

If you're interested in this sort of thing I can highly recommend a subscription to Private Eye magazine, which has been investigating dodgy shell companies and who they are really connected to for years. (If you've never heard of Private Eye, it combines irreverent humour and hard-hitting investigative journalism, and has been the first to break many of the biggest stories in the British press)

amitparikh 11y ago

In Delaware, 1209 North Orange Street is the address of over 200,000 businesses including Silicon Valley giants like Google and Apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_Trust_Center_(CT_Corporation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_Trust_Center_(CT_C... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thrives-as-a-corporate-tax-haven.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thri...

shubb 11y ago

I'm a little concerned to see company registration services demonized. I used one for my own company. Like a domain registration they also usually provide anonymity by declaring themselves as your office address. That's legitimate too as many contractors don't have an office and don't want thier home address published publicly on the uk companies register. That isn't a fraud. The BBC makes much of the weird ownership structure, but it is not that crazy. The structure described, 2 companies that basically represent people owning a company that basically does work is a tax efficiency. If the co owners own it directly and take thier money as pay not dividend, they pay more tax. If they take it as dividend not pay, it is split by ownership not hours worked. Better for both directors to be companies that charge the main company per hour for work done and then extract the dividend from those personal company seperately. I wouldn't do it as it has some problems like disguised employment but if compliant it is a tax efficiency not an evasion, and not a criminal activity. I dunno, it's like saying a secure document destruction company is suspicious. It's just a company that provides a service that most users need to do normal productive business.

cpncrunch 11y ago
I think you've misunderstood. An IT contractor is generally the director of their company, and there aren't generally any nominee directors. In this case the two people providing the company registration services are actually nominee directors of the company (the same company that received the billion dollar stolen wire transfer!)
- shubb 11y ago
  Literally the same? Well shit they are probably criminals then
  - cpncrunch 11y ago
    Yes, read the article.