The one stop source for breaking news, expert analysis, and podcasts on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares

Join ShareProphets at less than 2p per article

> All the big AIM fraud exposés

> 300 articles and podcasts a month

> Hot share tips

> Original investigations by our experienced team

> No ads, no click-bait, no auto-play videos

Find out more

Quindell does not realise that its defence blog against me is now a key part of the prosecution case

By Tom Winnifrith | Wednesday 5 November 2014

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Quenron sent its first lawyers letter demanding a grovelling apology signed by me but written by the fraudsters, a promise never to write about it again and a retraction of all my articles on 19 August.  As you may have noticed, I have told Quindell where to stick that letter and I want it to serve Court papers on me as that will start the process of disclosure. As of today, after two and a half months no papers have been served despite me upping the ante with specific allegations backed by proven factual evidence of both accounting and securities fraud.  Quindell really does not want disclosure to get underway does it. Shall I give you an example of why?

Having established that the 18 million shares it issued on 2 September 2013 were not issued to who Rob Terry said they had been issued to and that he lied about why the shares should have been issued at all as he engaged in securities fraud, would Mr 2+2 can =5 like to reveal a few details about the c 9 million shares issued by Quenron in October 2013?

In its 2013 annual report Quenron claimed that these shares were issued as part of the QPS deal like the 2 September 2013 shares. However Quenron was only contractually obliged to issue an additional 3.1 million shares and that was not until January 2014 (see RNS 2 Sept 2013) and this was only if QPS met its performance targets which we know that it did not. So given that Rob Terry lied about who the 2 September 18 million shares were issued to in the RNS of that date and why they were issued a valid part of the disclosure process will be to  establish to whom the 9 million shares were issued and why? One suspects that Mr Terry does not want to answer that question for all too obvious reasons.

With Quenron shares now back at 123p its press office has been pushed by various morons as to why it has not served legal papers on me. I gather that its response is:

The Company stands by its rebuttal dated 19 Aug on QPP website and maintains it rejects all allegations including the latest securities fraud accusation + more from Mr TW. They will not comment further, only they reject everything he has said in the past and just recently, they will not issue an RNS ref the matter, they are concentrating on running the business

Jolly good stuff Quenron but if that is the case why threaten libel action in the first place? Moreover Quenron seems to think that its amateurish statement of 19th August is part of its defence but in fact it is a key document for the prosecution.

Firstly it identifies Mark Ford of TMC Southern as a key member of the Quenron management team in 2011. On that basis TMC was under AIM rules a “related party” which begs the question as to why TMCs dealings with Quenron were not disclosed in the 2011 annual report. Quindell has thus admitted that its 2011 Annual Report missed out a huge matter because as we know TMC made $£5.6 million from flogging Quindell shares which Quindell had gifted it and then used all that cash to meet invoices ( or nothing) from Quindell.  Thus instead of reporting a cash outflow from operations of £100,000 Quenron was – at a stroke – able to report a cash inflow of £5.5 million but that inflow came only from the flogging of Quenron shares by TMC. This is a panama pump accounting fraud.

The Mark Ford admission in the defence document has in fact confirmed the industrial scale of accounting fraud in 2011 and how Quindell hid it.

As importantly it is the defence document that revealed that the 18 million shares Quenron said it issued to vendors of QPS on 2 September 2011 were in fact issued to a wholly different party, the owner of Skillwise (a company worth £68.40). We were thus able to establish that the person who on 2nd September bought the Country Club off Quindell for £1.95 million in cash ( plus £20,000 stamp duty) was the same day issued Quindell shares worth a net post tax £1.97 million.

I was only able to prove up this Securities fraud because of the statement put out by Quenron on 19 August.

It is quite amazing that Quindell’s shareholders are buying into the line that Quindell does not need to deal with the hard evidence that it has committed both accounting and securities fraud because a statement has been issued some 10 weeks ago when in fact it is that statement itself which proves up both types of fraud.

Come on bitchez let’s get serious – I want to see you in Court you fraudsters.

Tom Winnifrith will be presenting on !Quindell, the End game when and why" on Monday 10 November at Real Man in Clerkenwell. The evening starts at 6 PM and there is free boze and pizza. To book your place email your name and address to [email protected]

Filed under:

Never miss a story.

This area of the site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.

More on QPP



  1. So let’s get this straight / spell it out to the ‘Followers of Quenron’ (a new religion which makes Scientology look well-balanced).

    Quenron happily ‘sued’ Gotham for libel in full knowledge that, Gotham as a USA based entity which is smart with its money wouldn’t file a defence to the writ never mind turn up in court. Cost £5,000 for drafting the writ and pursuing summary judgement in court. RNS on ‘libel court victory!’.

    But it’s ‘business as usual’ or ‘..running the business..’ and hence too busy to spend the money on suing TW on his accusations that the company and its directors are fraudsters and liars?

    Of course, I get it now! When they say ‘..running the business..’ they’ve forgotten to include the words ‘ order to swindle as much money out of shareholders, employees / subcontractors and anyone else who gets too close..’? Or maybe Tom is mistaken?

  2. I wonder what some of the shareholders in the Innovation group think as they see Terry losing a lot of the money he gained in TIG, as the qpp share price continues to fall.

    You will recall, at the time he was pitching Innovation as a buy, Terry and his mates were in the process of shorting their positions with a “hedge”.

    I wonder whether Terry sees the irony in watching his fortunes taking a turn for the worst at the hands of the short markets. I also wonder about how Terry will tell his wife, will she shed a tear for their misfortune. Answers on the back of a used envelope, why waste a good postcard.

    No doubt when this goes tits up, Terry will surface somewhere else, and who know the clown qpp1000 will probably follow him,if of course he has any money left.


    Good summing up of Quindell’s actions so far….. and can you imagine what the reaction would be of say, Sir Richard Branson or Lord Sugar, to similar attacks and allegations to their integrity and that of their businesses? I would hazard a guess at their actions being somewhat more robust, than those of Mr Robert Terry!

    Eh! What about the RNS just released, Tom? One of the strangest I’ve ever read, loaning shares to buy shares??? Sounds well fishy! Hope you’ll be making a comment/bearcast, Tom?

  4. Scott Sanderson

    Tom, isn’t the nomad responsible for issuing shares, so Cenkos is at fault as much as Quindell?

  5. Scott

    The Nomad verifies an RNS re share issue. if a company tells it lies it cannot be at fault at point of issue but having been shown that its client lied it then becomes culpable if it does nothing as Cenkos has done


  6. Scott Sanderson

    Tom, that doesn’t fit;
    If QPP state in a RNS that 1m shares are to be issued to company A, then Cenkos will ‘verify’ that RNS and as it’s their nomad responsibility to issue shares they will, as instructed in the RNS, issue shares to company A.

    So how does Cenkos issue them to company B?
    Thanks in advance

Enter your comment below. Fields marked * are required. You must preview your comment first before finally posting.

Site by Everywhen