We have no Cash Plus money, says Dubai bank

[evanovitch]

We have no Cash Plus money, says Dubai bank


Sunday, February 07, 2010


Following is a synopsis of the Judgement of Justice Sir Anthony Colman, as provided to the Observer by Trustee in Bankruptcy Hugh Wildman:

On 11 November, 2009, Justice Sir Anthony Colman handed down his judgement in relation to the proceedings in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Court commenced by the Trustee against Carlos Hill, Bertram Hill and Hill Group Limited, to freeze accounts and assets alleged to be held in the DIFC. A local freezing and disclosure order was obtained on 27 September 2009 ex parte. At the subsequent hearings, Justice Sir Anthony Colman discharged this freezing and disclosure order.

Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd was joined to this case for the purpose of providing disclosure of information and documents relating to accounts alleged to be held in the DIFC by Carlos Hill, Bertram Hill and Hill Group Limited.


WILDMAN... we are still pursuing a course which we believe will shed light on the existence of accounts by Carlos Hill and the Hill Group abroad
WILDMAN... we are still pursuing a course which we believe will shed light on the existence of accounts by Carlos Hill and the Hill Group abroad 1/1

The disclosure order against Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd had initially been granted ex parte and on the basis of an unsolicited email sent to the Trustee by a Mr Ali Saed, who claimed in the e-mail that he was a former employee of Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd and that he had information that accounts in the name of Hill Group Limited existed at Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd.

The Trustee arranged an air ticket for Mr Saed to fly to Dubai from Canada to assist his office with its investigations in this regard on the understanding that Mr Saed would travel to Jamaica with the necessary information. However, upon his arrival in Dubai, I (Wildman) did not hear from Mr Saed.

Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd filed evidence during the course of the proceedings, which confirmed that it is not licenced to open accounts to hold client monies or assets in the DIFC, therefore, it does not hold any accounts in the DIFC. Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd also confirmed that Mr Saed was not a former employee and brought to the attention of the DIFC Court serious errors and anomalies in the information contained in Mr Saed's email.

At the DIFC court hearing on 14 October 2009, Sir Anthony Colman discharged the disclosure order against Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd and refused to grant my application to extend the order of disclosure. Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd has been removed as a party to the Proceedings and has no further involvement in this matter.

On 11 November 2009, Justice Sir Anthony Colman handed down his written judgement in this case, in which he made the following findings:

1. The unsolicited email from Mr Ali Saed was almost certainly bogus and could not justify the making of the Freezing and Disclosure Order.

2. The information the Trustee received from Mr Saed of accounts linked to Carlos Hill, Betram Hill and Hill Group Ltd alleged to be held in Dubai and thought to hold US$25 million was not correct. <span style="font-weight: bold">The probability is that Mr Saed was perpetrating a fraud on my office for the purpose of obtaining an air ticket from Canada to Dubai.</span>

3. It is clear that the evidence of the business activities of Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd is true and that Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd does not provide bank account facilities and does not hold monies or assets of clients. Therefore, on the whole of the evidence in this case there was a failure to satisfy the standard proof that Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd held bank deposits or assets or information as to the property of or relating to Cash Plus to justify the granting of the disclosure order and further there was insufficient evidence to amend the disclosure order.

4. The Trustee failed to give full and frank disclosure at the Without Notice application and failed to make all due and proper enquiries to establish the scope and limitation of the DIFC license of Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd, namely that Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd does not hold client accounts or assets in the DIFC. The Trustee's omissions have caused allegations to be made for which there was no reliable evidence and has made it necessary for Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd to come to the DIFC Court to put the record straight and disengage from the proceedings.

On the basis of the above findings, Sir Anthony Colman ordered that:

• The Disclosure Order against Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd is discharged.

• Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd is entitled to be paid its costs by the Trustee on an indemnity basis.

• Julius Baer (Middle East) Ltd will cease to be a party to the proceedings.

• I take all reasonable steps to procure that this brief synopsis of the judgement is published in the Jamaica Observer.

You can read the full text of Sir Anthony Colman's judgement at the Judgements and Orders link on the DIFC Court’s website at www.difccourts.complinet.com.

Hugh Wildman, Trustee in Bankruptcy and Liquidator of Cash Plus Limited and Receiver of Cash Plus — Subsidiaries and Affiliates

February 2, 2010

[evanovitch]

Scammed in Dubai

Scammed in Dubai
Published: Wednesday | February 10, 2010


Dennie Quill, Contributor
SCORES OF Cash Plus investors were broadly optimistic about the prospects of getting a payout last Christmas based on pronounce-ments by the trustee in bankruptcy. In fact, following Hugh Wildman's press conference, many started to think about getting their ruined finances back into shape during the most joyous season of the year.

Amid the euphoria that greeted the announcement, there were many sceptics, like myself, who did not for a second believe that there was any money to be had from Dubai.

However, hundreds of people believed Mr Wildman was on solid ground when he announced that some US$25 million that had been stashed away in a Dubai bank by Cash Plus principals had been found. Now, less than four months later, there are all sorts of reasons to be puzzled by the action of the trustee.

Irresponsible actions

<span style="font-weight: bold">Who could have thought that the learned trustee acted on the basis of an unsolicited email </span> ( <span style="font-style: italic"> a dat di d cross mi mind wen mi read di original report </span> when he began his expedition into Dubai? Who could have imagined that Mr Wildman paid the informant's airfare from Canada to Dubai without even ascertaining his bona fides? As it turns out, the man was never employed to the financial institution, as he claimed. This was no model of collaboration, as we are now learning. The trustee was scammed because the informant disappeared after he arrived in Dubai. This raises the question about the timing of Mr Wildman's press conference in October 2009. Was it called after receiving the unsolicited email? If that was the case, it would have been premature. Was it called after the man failed to show for the planned rendezvous in Dubai? Then one would have to call the trustee's actions irresponsible.

A London court was scathing in its criticism of the manner in which the trustee went about his business. It appears - from the findings of Justice Colman, himself a highly regarded commercial lawyer - that he did not think the trustee exercised enough prudence and sound judgement in carrying out his job. First, he thought if a modicum of due diligence had been done it would have led to the discovery that the well-respected Julius Baer merchant bank is not permitted to take deposits. Second, a well-placed telephone call to Julius Baer would have helped to determine whether, in fact, Ali Saed was ever employed there. This explains why the judge ordered the trustee to pay the merchant bank's fee on an indemnity basis, that is to say 100 per cent of the legal fees incurred by Julius Baer. This was tantamount to a punitive order designed to send a message to the trustee in bankruptcy.

Who will pay the fees?

So, in addition to the informant's airfare and the trustee's legal fees, one must now pile all legal fees incurred by Julius Baer. Who will pay these fees? Another disturbing cost to the taxpayers of Jamaica? Mr Wildman? Cash Plus? This is not small potatoes. I submit that all of this could have been avoided with careful due diligence. While I appreciate Mr Wildman's exuberance and energy in pursuing his task, one expects, as the name trustee suggests, he would do his job with prudence, diligently carrying out his objective of protecting the interest of creditors away from the glare of publicity. In the scheme of things, a high-powered prosecutor with a penchant for public announce-ments is not really what this job demands.

By their very nature, pyramid schemes are built on the principle of taking from Peter to pay Paul. Cash Plus appeared to have operated on that basis. These schemes are unsustainable. Additionally, Cash Plus was investing in everything from hardware to media. So is there really any money stashed outside Jamaica? By now, the accountants working in tandem with the trustee should be able to tell the country just how much money has been spirited away and exactly what are the assets of Cash Plus. Is there evidence of missing money?

Scores of small investors who got sucked into the Cash Plus scheme are eager to get back their money and one expects that the trustee in bankruptcy would pursue all available channels to ensure that funds are found and assets are liquidated, but his approach must be tempered and balanced.

<span style="font-style: italic">Dennie Quill is a veteran journalist. Send feedback to [email protected]</span>