SCAM WARNING !!!!!!! Reichman Partners DO NOT USE !!!!!!!

Exposer

Recruit
Messages
5
They are not accusations they are FACTS! you are illegally promoting regulated activities gold and property investments that must be authorised - You are breaking Financial Laws - FACT. Your IronFX investment directs to a jurisdiction outside the UK/EU so it is not regulated by FCA. You will happily take thousands and thousands off people (that is if you actually do have any clients) and you cannot explain where this money goes or how these investments work! That is a SCAM.

@RockerOne where is this IronFX investment regulated please?
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/4XDROID1

When click on Nitron Systems it takes through to IronFX and says this IronFX website is not directed at EU residents. What jurisdiction is this investment regulated by, is it regulated by the FCA?
Black is either an idiot or he is a scammer in my option. Sidya, I dont know because he hasn't provided any info yet and cant say why 79 distribution are basically a ghost name where the company doesnt actually exist.

But i also see a bit of mistruth alert1 so wanted to get it straight- physical gold isnt a regulated activity and never has been. Physical property isnt a regulated activity and never has been. gold bullion companies arent regulated because its physical sale and same with property like sales agents and introducers or estate agents. None of them or the assets need to be regulated, same as in art, diamonds, classic cars. Anything physical has and never will be regulated and arent regulated activities.
The only time a gold company and property company should be regulated is if its a financial company like shares, stock, futures, loans, mortgage. but if its just sales of the physical assets then no its not required to be regulated and its not a regulated activity.

As for fx- again it depends. if its just deliverable fx ie currency exchange you dont need to be regulated but if its anything else like trading etc then yes you do.

back to danny black- are you still selling this gold investment or not? Sidya- why cant and havent you given us the simple information we asked about- if theres nothing to hide tell us here at FPA-
*minimum cost to buy
*does the gold go straight to the investors or is it stored overseas
*does the investor get all the gold they order at once like normal companies
*why are 79 distribution a ghost company who doesnt have any footprint online or registration
*what security measures are in place to protect investors
*how is the gold discounted
*why doesnt the ppm website have any reference to the investment
 

oscarra

2nd Lieutenant
Messages
1,220
Main concern with the guy from very beginning is his involvement with IronFX, this breed blew 165 millions of clients funds, seems he still don’t catch it....
https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-whistleblower-corner.53703/

People getting involved with such crooks will be loser, need’s to be clear for once !

..on his last post 92 he mentioned Gold Bonds…., has Mr. Black ever traded Bonds, maybe he invested in a good printer………. Bonds are of course regulated best called paper gold ( tricky stuff.....
 

TheAlert1

Sergeant
Messages
221
Black is either an idiot or he is a scammer in my option. Sidya, I dont know because he hasn't provided any info yet and cant say why 79 distribution are basically a ghost name where the company doesnt actually exist.

But i also see a bit of mistruth alert1 so wanted to get it straight- physical gold isnt a regulated activity and never has been. Physical property isnt a regulated activity and never has been. gold bullion companies arent regulated because its physical sale and same with property like sales agents and introducers or estate agents. None of them or the assets need to be regulated, same as in art, diamonds, classic cars. Anything physical has and never will be regulated and arent regulated activities.
The only time a gold company and property company should be regulated is if its a financial company like shares, stock, futures, loans, mortgage. but if its just sales of the physical assets then no its not required to be regulated and its not a regulated activity.

As for fx- again it depends. if its just deliverable fx ie currency exchange you dont need to be regulated but if its anything else like trading etc then yes you do.

back to danny black- are you still selling this gold investment or not? Sidya- why cant and havent you given us the simple information we asked about- if theres nothing to hide tell us here at FPA-
*minimum cost to buy
*does the gold go straight to the investors or is it stored overseas
*does the investor get all the gold they order at once like normal companies
*why are 79 distribution a ghost company who doesnt have any footprint online or registration
*what security measures are in place to protect investors
*how is the gold discounted
*why doesnt the ppm website have any reference to the investment
The Gold Bond investment is a minimum of $25,000 to buy physical gold and earn monthly interest on your holdings, predicted 15-17% ROI paid back each month from month on a 2 year fixed term with 3 years of audited accounts available. The gold is either stored in a Brinks vault or delivered to the client. The property investment is very misleading in that it says Approved by an FCA Regulated Corporate Advisor and that all money received is cleared via an FCA regulated platform. This is a minimum £2000 investment with annual dividends paid to shareholders. These are both regulated investment activities, Gold Bonds and Property Shares?

Astute Property Acquisitions Corporation Limited.png


Reichman Partners - Gold Bonds.jpg

Reichman Partners - Property Bond.jpg
 
Last edited:

DannyBlack

Reichman Partners Representative
Messages
28
Black is either an idiot or he is a scammer in my option. Sidya, I dont know because he hasn't provided any info yet and cant say why 79 distribution are basically a ghost name where the company doesnt actually exist.

But i also see a bit of mistruth alert1 so wanted to get it straight- physical gold isnt a regulated activity and never has been. Physical property isnt a regulated activity and never has been. gold bullion companies arent regulated because its physical sale and same with property like sales agents and introducers or estate agents. None of them or the assets need to be regulated, same as in art, diamonds, classic cars. Anything physical has and never will be regulated and arent regulated activities.
The only time a gold company and property company should be regulated is if its a financial company like shares, stock, futures, loans, mortgage. but if its just sales of the physical assets then no its not required to be regulated and its not a regulated activity.

As for fx- again it depends. if its just deliverable fx ie currency exchange you dont need to be regulated but if its anything else like trading etc then yes you do.

back to danny black- are you still selling this gold investment or not? Sidya- why cant and havent you given us the simple information we asked about- if theres nothing to hide tell us here at FPA-
*minimum cost to buy
*does the gold go straight to the investors or is it stored overseas
*does the investor get all the gold they order at once like normal companies
*why are 79 distribution a ghost company who doesnt have any footprint online or registration
*what security measures are in place to protect investors
*how is the gold discounted
*why doesnt the ppm website have any reference to the investment
They are not accusations they are FACTS! you are illegally promoting regulated activities gold and property investments that must be authorised - You are breaking Financial Laws - FACT. Your IronFX investment directs to a jurisdiction outside the UK/EU so it is not regulated by FCA. You will happily take thousands and thousands off people (that is if you actually do have any clients) and you cannot explain where this money goes or how these investments work! That is a SCAM.

@RockerOne where is this IronFX investment regulated please?
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/4XDROID1

When click on Nitron Systems it takes through to IronFX and says this IronFX website is not directed at EU residents. What jurisdiction is this investment regulated by, is it regulated by the FCA?
It is not illegal to promote/ Market companies, I help small companies that need help with liquidity. Companies at there grassroots. In the United Kingdom we have a government scheme that was started back in 1994 called the Enterprise investment scheme (EIS). It offers investors tax relief and also any profits made are completely tax free. I help stimulate small to medium size companies I am doing a great thing for the economy. I pay to advertise on various platforms certainly not FPA as it is biased towards companies that advertise on here. And also my projects except from 4XDROID have no correlation to FX. antiquax2 who originally posted this so called scam alert has been tracked down as he does this to other companies. I found him through another review on google and contacted the company the Lady who answered said that he was a bit of a weirdo and when he was a customer to her cleaning company the staff did not want to go to clean his apartment because of his very strange behaviour. I have started court proceedings against this sad individual. As i have previously stated i run a small company. I was naive to the problems with IronFx and am genuinely sorry to hear that investors lost money in 2016. I know that they were fined by CYCEC and they are regulated by the FCA. So I am sure if they doing anything incorrect they would be called to account by the regulatory bodies. All you have done is pick on a small company and tried to ruin my future. I thank you all for that!!! Karma is a great thing!!
They are not accusations they are FACTS! you are illegally promoting regulated activities gold and property investments that must be authorised - You are breaking Financial Laws - FACT. Your IronFX investment directs to a jurisdiction outside the UK/EU so it is not regulated by FCA. You will happily take thousands and thousands off people (that is if you actually do have any clients) and you cannot explain where this money goes or how these investments work! That is a SCAM.

@RockerOne where is this IronFX investment regulated please?
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/4XDROID1

When click on Nitron Systems it takes through to IronFX and says this IronFX website is not directed at EU residents. What jurisdiction is this investment regulated by, is it regulated by the FCA?
It is not illegal to
 

DannyBlack

Reichman Partners Representative
Messages
28
A true professional should be capable of using civilized language.
Black is either an idiot or he is a scammer in my option. Sidya, I dont know because he hasn't provided any info yet and cant say why 79 distribution are basically a ghost name where the company doesnt actually exist.

But i also see a bit of mistruth alert1 so wanted to get it straight- physical gold isnt a regulated activity and never has been. Physical property isnt a regulated activity and never has been. gold bullion companies arent regulated because its physical sale and same with property like sales agents and introducers or estate agents. None of them or the assets need to be regulated, same as in art, diamonds, classic cars. Anything physical has and never will be regulated and arent regulated activities.
The only time a gold company and property company should be regulated is if its a financial company like shares, stock, futures, loans, mortgage. but if its just sales of the physical assets then no its not required to be regulated and its not a regulated activity.

As for fx- again it depends. if its just deliverable fx ie currency exchange you dont need to be regulated but if its anything else like trading etc then yes you do.

back to danny black- are you still selling this gold investment or not? Sidya- why cant and havent you given us the simple information we asked about- if theres nothing to hide tell us here at FPA-
*minimum cost to buy
*does the gold go straight to the investors or is it stored overseas
*does the investor get all the gold they order at once like normal companies
*why are 79 distribution a ghost company who doesnt have any footprint online or registration
*what security measures are in place to protect investors
*how is the gold discounted
*why doesnt the ppm website have any reference to the investment
This site is full of miss truths. The fact of the matter is you are all using anonymous profiles. Who are you all?? You are **** weasels and get a sick buzz out of trolling! Take a serious look at yourselves. I have nothing to hide, my company is a privately registered at companies house. I pay corporation taxes, personal taxes, marketing etc etc the list goes on. I put my face to my company. If I was running a scam don’t you think that I would be anonymous like you **** weasels???? Ask yourself that ****ing question!!
 

TheAlert1

Sergeant
Messages
221
It is not illegal to promote/ Market companies, I help small companies that need help with liquidity. Companies at there grassroots. In the United Kingdom we have a government scheme that was started back in 1994 called the Enterprise investment scheme (EIS). It offers investors tax relief and also any profits made are completely tax free. I help stimulate small to medium size companies I am doing a great thing for the economy. I pay to advertise on various platforms certainly not FPA as it is biased towards companies that advertise on here. And also my projects except from 4XDROID have no correlation to FX. antiquax2 who originally posted this so called scam alert has been tracked down as he does this to other companies. I found him through another review on google and contacted the company the Lady who answered said that he was a bit of a weirdo and when he was a customer to her cleaning company the staff did not want to go to clean his apartment because of his very strange behaviour. I have started court proceedings against this sad individual. As i have previously stated i run a small company. I was naive to the problems with IronFx and am genuinely sorry to hear that investors lost money in 2016. I know that they were fined by CYCEC and they are regulated by the FCA. So I am sure if they doing anything incorrect they would be called to account by the regulatory bodies. All you have done is pick on a small company and tried to ruin my future. I thank you all for that!!! Karma is a great thing!!

It is not illegal to
It is illegal if you are knowingly & willingly promoting & mis-selling scams and making a profit from it!

Instead of wasting time and money pursuing antiquax2 in court maybe you should use that for business advice & due diligence on your financial partners instead!! No-one is trying to ruin a genuine company or your future! it's not personal it would be exactly the same if it was anyone else and looked to be a scam.

@RockerOne still hasn't said if the IronFX investment is regulated by the FCA? the myfxbook link goes to a non EU/UK part of IronFX so you have directed clients to sign up to a part of IronFX that might not be covered by the FCA and so would not be called to account by the FCA! @yacoubsidya has launched a new Advance Purchase of Discounted Gold (APDG) with a ghost company called 79distribution and still hasn't given any details here on this investment. (https://www.marketscreener.com/news...ase-Gold-Bullion-at-an-Effective-D--30176712/)


MPIfG Discussion Paper 16/5 Financial Fraud A Literature Review
Page 53-58 onwards:
https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2281585/component/file_2281583/content

4. Fraudulent financial mis-selling

The term fraudulent financial mis-selling54 is used here to refer to the deceptive and manipulative marketing, selling, or advising of a financial product or service to an end user, in the knowledge that the product or service is unsuitable for that specific end user’s needs. Contrary to financial statement fraud and financial scams, mis-selling cases do not necessarily involve false representations of facts. At the heart of fraudulent financial mis-selling are deceptive sales practices in which the seller of a financial product or service or the financial adviser advising on it makes misleading and highly speculative statements with regard to the future performance of the products or service or fails to communicate in a “fair and balanced manner” the suitability of the financial product or service for the specific end user. All too often both deceptive practices occur.

Similar to the other forms of fraud discussed here, the heart of any fraudulent mis-selling practice is an illegal exploitation of an information asymmetry that exists between transacting parties. In the case of mis-selling, however, an additional dimension comes into play with regard to this information asymmetry. It involves not only an asymmetry in access to financial facts relevant to the transaction, but also an asymmetry of more general financial expertise, that is, the capability of interpreting the available information and extracting meaning from that information with regard to the future performance of a financial product.

54 According to one observer, what the industry euphemistically calls “mis-selling” in fact involves “institutionally endorsed manipulation, deception and sometimes fraud” (Ericson/Doyle 2006: 994).

4.1 General characteristics

The modus operandi of mis-selling practices

Fraudulent mis-selling practices are generally perpetrated by agents who fulfill a double role as sales agent and adviser in financial transactions. In its most innocent form, misselling involves cases in which such agents – direct salesmen, brokers, financial advisers, broker-dealers – provide their clients with unsuitable advice because they lack the advisory competence required by regulations. A more devious and fraudulent form of mis-selling, and of primary concern in this section, involves cases in which sales agents and financial advisers abuse their role by deceptively inducing clients to engage in financial contracts that, given full information and devoid of behavioral and cognitive biases, they would not have engaged in. Especially in the retail financial market, the relative ignorance and lack of financial literacy of most consumers puts the sales agents at a considerable informational advantage. Mis-selling agents exploit this informational advantage by providing their clients with biased advice or utilizing aggressive and manipulative marketing strategies. Such strategies might involve hidden costs and unrealistic projections of the future performance of financial products and frequently rely on complex and unusual contract structures (Paterson/Brody 2014: 2).

Often, mis-selling practices involve financial products that have a relatively far-off horizon and therefore are associated with high levels of uncertainty. In many cases these are financial products that provide insurance against possible life- or market-events in a relatively distant future. Examples of such products are pension saving plans, life insurance plans, interest rate swaps, or foreign exchange swaps. Because the benefits of such products for the consumer only become clear long after the transaction has taken place, determining whether a certain product is beneficial for the consumer involves a lot of guesswork and speculation. Using misleading promotional materials, high pressure sales techniques, and inaccurate or suggestive statements, mis-sellers overemphasize beneficial scenarios, while underemphasizing those that are less beneficial to the buyer. In doing so, they misleadingly provide potential buyers with a “veneer of certainty” (Ericson/Doyle 2006) with regard to the benefits of the products.

Although mis-sellers typically target relatively “unsophisticated” investors55 – most often retail consumers or small and medium enterprises buying loans and insurance policies – at times mis-selling practices have targeted more sophisticated market players as well.

55 In the US, as well as in most other countries with developed financial markets, regulators employ a two-track regulatory system in which they distinguish between “sophisticated” and “non-sophisticated” or “unsophisticated” investors. Under such a regulatory regime, sophisticated investors (mostly institutional investors and big corporations) are largely exempted from protective regulation, allowing them to engage in tailored contracts that help them to fulfill needs stemming from their specific investment strategies (see Markham 1995). Unsophisticated investors (mostly retail consumers and small and medium enterprises), are protected against exploitative practices by a relatively paternalistic regulatory regime that relies on legal concepts

As will be revealed towards the end of this section, derivatives have proven to be especially useful instruments for investment bankers attempting to “out-mathematize and sweet-talk” (Goldmann 2010: 195) supposedly sophisticated clients into deals they really don’t understand.

The illegality of fraudulent mis-selling practices

It is a fine line between aggressive but legal sales practices and fraudulent mis-selling. In many cases, determining whether aggressive sales practices have reached the level of illegality hinges on the relationship between the transacting parties. By prohibiting market participants from making misrepresentations, general fraud laws criminalize some of the behaviors involved in fraudulent mis-selling practices, such as sales agents’ failure to disclose certain fees or commissions. However, apart from the general fraud laws, the law in most jurisdictions provides several legal concepts addressing those dimensions of mis-selling that deal with misleading speculations and the creation of false impressions.

First, legal and regulatory frameworks usually pose a variety of fair dealing requirements and ethical business conduct standards on actors active in specific industries.56 Second, depending on the nature of this relationship, regulatory frameworks may subject the sales agent or adviser to so-called suitability requirements. Suitability requirements, which are used by regulatory frameworks in different countries and across different sectors57 such as securities, commodities, insurance, banking, dictate that the seller or adviser of a financial product has a responsibility to guarantee that the product is suitable for the specific end user. For the seller, this responsibility implies the obligation both to know the specific risk profile of his client and to make suitable recommendations based on this profile. Third, regulatory frameworks might subject sales agents and financial advisers to a fiduciary duty in their dealings with their clients. Under a fiduciary duty, which is a higher standard compared to the suitability requirement, the selling or advising agent has to act in the best interest of the client. As is the case with the suitability requirement, a fiduciary duty implies an obligation for the sales agent or adviser to actively inquire about the specific risk profile of the client before making any recommendations or conducting any transactions with the client. such as fiduciary standards and suitability requirements.

56 For example, through the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the US Congress directed the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to promulgate rules requiring certain large financial institutions to “act fairly” with their counterparties in the context of OTC derivatives transactions (see Scopino 2014).
57 For a discussion of the suitability doctrine in financial regulation in different jurisdictions and across different sectors, see the report of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision Joint Forum (Joint Forum 2008). For the specific case of the US, see Mundheim (1965), Engel and McCoy (2002: 1318–1334), and Gibson (1998).

Whether the abovementioned legal concepts apply in a certain transaction often depends on the extent to which the different parties in the transaction are considered to be sophisticated investors58 and whether the party that acts as a seller or broker has discretionary authority or gives advice or recommendations concerning the purchase of the product or does both. If no discretionary authority is involved and if no advice is given, that is, if the broker or sales agents merely serves as an order clerk executing a certain transaction on behalf of the client or acts as a counterparty in an arms-length transaction, then the broker or seller is usually not subjected to seller liability under a fiduciary duty or suitability rules (see Mundheim 1965; Stoneman/Schulz 2002: 67–81). It might come as no surprise, then, that those who are accused of mis-selling practices often deny responsibility by invoking caveat emptor, 59 that is, a defense in which blame is attributed to the victim (Ericson/Doyle 2006: 996).

Characterizing the literature on fraudulent mis-selling practices

A review of the literature reveals that fraudulent mis-selling practices are widespread in the financial services industry and can pertain to wide variety of financial products or services. According to one observer, product mis-selling is the “stand-out systemic problems in the UK retail financial markets” (Ferran 2012: 249). However, given the persistence of mis-selling in the financial service industry, it is indeed surprising that to date this kind of behavior has been subject to scholarly scrutiny so seldom (Ashton/ Hudson 2013: 9). Only a few mis-selling episodes have been thoroughly investigated, and a coherent academic literature on fraudulent mis-selling in the financial industry has not yet materialized. Instead, accounts of fraudulent mis-selling practices as conceived in the context of this paper are spread over many different literatures, the most relevant of which are probably the financial economics literature on financial advice60 (e.g., Inderst/Ottaviani 2009; Ackermann 2011; Mullainathan/Noeth/Schoar 2012; Hackethal/Haliassos/Jappelli 2012; Mitchell/Smetters 2013), the business literature on marketing ethics (e.g., Falconer 2005; MacLean 2008; Taek Yi/Dubinsky/Un Lim 2012; Ashton 2015; Mulki 2015), and the legal literature on consumer protection and consumer financial literacy (e.g., White/Mansfield 2002; Rutledge 2010; Campbell et al. 2011; Paterson/Brody 2014). Despite the lack of a coherent body of literature on the phenomenon, some general themes can be identified.

58 Determining whether certain classes of investors – e.g., local governments, institutional investors, corporations, small and medium enterprises – should be considered sophisticated is often a contentious issue and has been subject of considerable debate amongst legal scholars (e.g., Markham 1995; Roberts 1996; Rosenthal 1996).
59 Caveat emptor is a term derived from Latin meaning “let the buyer beware.”
60 The emerging body of literature on financial advice reports on the increasing importance of financial advisors in a changing financial landscape, characterized by the emergence of new distribution channels for financial products and services and the compensation models of sales agents therein. Although this literature scrutinizes practices that could very well be described as misselling, problematizes conflicts of interest that result in biased advice, and ultimately questions the economic value of such advice, most of the work does not ponder the illegality of such practices.

Increased financial autonomy and lack of financial literacy

One recurring theme in the literature concerns the increased financial autonomy of consumers. It is suggested that, as a consequence of the general trends towards the privatization of social security, consumers have become more and more responsible for taking care of their own financial affairs and increasingly see themselves forced to make a number of highly consequential financial decisions throughout their lifetime61 (Campbell et al. 2011; Ericson/Doyle 2006; Erturk et al. 2007; Joint Forum 2008). However, it is noted that consumers typically have no more than limited experience in making such critical financial decisions and that it is difficult to acquire experience (Campbell et al. 2011: 92). This lack of financial literacy has resulted in a pool of vulnerable consumers who can be easily exploited by providers of financial services whose primary aim is profit maximization. A similar development can be observed in the wholesale market. The increasing complexity of financial products, especially derivative products, has undermined the capacity of what are considered to be sophisticated investors, such as institutional investors and (semi-)public entities, to fully understand and appreciate the risks associated with the products they invest in.

Changing distribution channels and biased financial advice

A second recurring theme concerns the changing distribution channels through which financial products are sold to consumers (Black/Nobles 1998; Inderst/Ottaviani 2009; Boot 2011; Jackson 2008). In this regard, scholars have especially underscored the increasing importance of agents acting as intermediaries between buyers and sellers. In many cases, these agents – brokers, sales agents, or advisers – fulfill a double task; they both act as advisers for financially illiterate consumers and prospect for new customers on behalf of the seller of the financial product – either because they are employed or receive side payments from the seller. Scholars have argued that when agents face such a “multitask problem,” the risk of biased advice and mis-selling is particularly acute. The steeper the incentives provided to the agents, the more acute the danger of mis-selling (Inderst/Ottaviani 2009; Beyer/de Meza/Reyniers 2013). For financial regulators, these side payments and double roles pose a significant dilemma (Jackson 2008).

Product innovation, product line management, and consumer confusion

Third, different scholars have pointed out the fact that, in handling their financial affairs, consumers – and small and medium enterprises for that matter – encounter an everwidening menu of increasingly complex financial products (Boot 2011; Ashton 2015).

61 For example, the privatization of pension systems, the increase in the number of life insurance plans, and the rise in homeownership have all forced consumers to make long-term and highly consequential financial decisions.

Product innovations, it has been suggested, might now have a much darker motivation: they might be intended to fool market participants and seek rents through the exploitation of information asymmetries, rather than to fulfill economic goals related to the financial sector’s social functions (Bavoso 2015). In addition to questionable product innovations, scholars have also noted the way in which certain product line management practices that are popular amongst financial firms might facilitate mis-selling. Practices such as “tying,” “bundling,” and “cross-selling,” whereby multiple financial services or products are offered in combination, have been said to at times coerce consumers into buying certain products, limit their apprehension of the variety of products on offer, and undermine their ability to compare product providers and make suitable purchase decisions (Renda et al. 2009). “Churning,” a product-line management practice whereby financial firms frequently change their product line in order to increase sales, has been said to facilitate mis-selling because it frustrates financial consumers in their attempt to learn about financial products (Ashton 2015: 444). Some scholars have suggested that such product management practices are popular amongst financial service firms exactly because they engender confusion amongst consumers. Obfuscation, they argue, is a deliberate strategy pursued by financial firms with the aim of increasing the proportion of poorly informed consumers from whom rents can be extracted (Carlin/Manso 2011). As will be revealed below, a common denominator in different mis-selling episodes is indeed the presence of an excessive variety of products that share one characteristic: complexity in conjunction with the obscurity of costs (Boot 2011: 169–170).
 
Last edited:

oscarra

2nd Lieutenant
Messages
1,220
Powder Boy should be reported to the Uk Taxman, after all he is contributing to the country’s economy ;)

Now in concern of threatening Fpa members, he is not going to walk away here ….no way !

…it simply shows IronFx dirty Lawyers strategy, remember the suckers ending up in Jail for bribery, corruption at highest levels…..ok let’s dig out some old stuff
 
Top