Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail on Sunday’s ace investigator, fighting readers corners, revealing the truth that lies behind closed doors and winning victories for those who have been left out-of-pocket. Find out how to contact him below.
J.M. writes: Some years ago, I was scammed by a company called Rare Earth Metal Exchange Ltd, which sold me metals that turned out not to exist. Now I have received a letter from the Chartered Trading Standards Institute in London, claiming to be handling a reimbursement scheme. They are asking for a fee of £25. Am I being scammed again?
Tony Hetherington replies: The demand for £25 is almost certainly just a foot in the door. Transfer your payment to their bank account and you will then be asked for ever increasing amounts to cover legal fees, taxes, and anything else the scammers can dream up to squeeze more and more money out of you.
So yes, it is a scam. The Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) is a genuine professional organisation for people who work in Trading Standards. But the letter you received is a fake, despite using the real letterhead and address. The giveaway is that the letter uses the CTSI’s address in central London, but a phone number – 020 8123 8264 – which suggests outer London.
That said, someone has gone to quite a bit of trouble. They know you lost £10,000 in the rare earth metals swindle, and they have your contact details. They advise: ‘If you have not yet returned your Proof of Creditors Debt Form, we urge you to act promptly to enable us to submit your financial claim in order for you to receive your capital reimbursement settlement.’
Helpfully, the crooks have sent you what looks like an official form, showing that the CTSI is supposedly holding £9,234,929 which it has seized in the wake of a High Court action following the closure of Rare Earth Metal Exchange Ltd.
All that glisters: This scam company closed as far back as 2012
But again, there is a giveaway red flag that warns it is a fraud. The crooks reassure you that the money is safe, because it is held – all £9 million of it – in a NatWest Isa! Isas holding £1 million are rare – rarer than rare earth metals in fact. But discovering an Isa worth £9 million would be like finding a unicorn with Elvis Presley on its back.
Not only that, but Rare Earth Metal Exchange Ltd never held £9 million in all of its very short life. It cheated investors by selling metals such as dysprosium and neodymium, which are used in industry, for many times their real worth, while claiming they would rocket in value. Rare earth metals are not really rare. The title just means that they are scattered, rather than being found in bulk in one place.
The scam investment company closed down in 2012. At first, liquidators were slightly optimistic. It looked as if there really was a stockpile of rare earth metals held in a secure store. But when they brought in experts to carry out tests, they found that some of the secure stock was actually counterfeit.
The price was a scam, and so was the product. The eventual outcome was that assets owned by Rare Earth Metal Exchange Ltd were worth just over £100,000, while claims from creditors amounted to £3.6 million. So, no £9 million in a NatWest Isa or anywhere else.
I asked officials at the CTSI what they thought of this. Disappointingly, they told me that this scam using their name has been going on for about two years.
Even more disappointingly, when I asked how many people so far had been arrested and prosecuted for posing as Trading Standards staff, they told me: ‘CTSI is not aware that anyone has been charged or prosecuted for this.’ They added: ‘We are very frustrated that scammers are continuing to use the organisation’s name for nefarious purposes.’
Personally, I find it even more frustrating that after two years, nobody has been nicked.
The end of this tale is that you have now had a final call from the crooks, asking why you had not replied to their letter.
When you told them you had contacted me and The Mail on Sunday, the phone went dead. If only all scams could be stopped that easily.
Scottish Widows won’t say why my direct debits are going unpaid
J.B writes: I asked Scottish Widows how I could make regular contributions towards my daughter’s pension policy.
Following their guidelines, I set up monthly direct debits, but then received notifications that payments had not been successful.
I called Scottish Widows after each notification but was unsuccessful as I was met with privacy laws.
Tony Hetherington replies: In all, you were told four times by Scottish Widows that attempts to collect the direct debits had failed. However, each notification referred to your daughter’s bank account, and not to your own from which the direct debits should have been collected.
Scottish Widows would not discuss this with you as the pension plan was not yours, but finally agreed it would review the situation if your daughter emailed a request. She emailed, but since then you have heard nothing, and your daughter is afraid her bank may start charging for all the rejected direct debits.
I asked Scottish Widows to look into this, and it became clear that it should have moved faster to sort things out as soon as you first made contact about the failed direct debits. A spokesman said: ‘We are sorry for the poor service Mr B and his daughter experienced.’
A fresh direct debit is now in place, with the first payment due a few days ago on January 1, so check your bank statement to make sure it went through without a hitch. Scottish Widows has also credited your daughter with £150 to back up its apology.
If you believe you are the victim of financial wrongdoing, write to Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail, 9 Derry Street, London W8 5HY or email tony.hetherington@mailonsunday.co.uk. Because of the high volume of enquiries, personal replies cannot be given. Please send only copies of original documents, which we regret cannot be returned.
Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on them we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money, and keep it free to use. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to affect our editorial independence.
