LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE FSA WILL GO AHEAD
The Cameron Farley Action Group is now close to being in a position to instruct lawyers in the case of CF Clients v FSA.
Following various lines of investigation into legal matters relating to the FSA’s actions with CFL and our invested funds, more and more legal professionals have looked at this case and have offered their opinions on it. The responses are similar regardless of where we go for advice now. The general consensus from professionals in the field is that:
There is a case, a strong one, and one which CAN be won.
We would add to that, its one that WILL be won no matter what it takes. Even if court action was not an option (which of course IT IS) then the court of public opinion and common sense could also hear this case and we believe we would win there too once the media publicise the disgusting treatment and losses we have suffered at the hands of the FSA’s semi-impotent injunction which did just about enough to ’scare the crows’ and ensure our money was meddled with but NOT SECURED and possibly even traded away by the FSA or under their knowledge to teach us all a lesson for having the ‘gaul’ to invest our hard-earned money in something they earned no ‘regulatory fees’ from.
How dare we suggest such a thing? Well the reason such a thing CAN be suggested is because it is so far unproven what happened to our money. If anyone had the decency to tell us where our money went and why the Gain platform funds were not seized by the FSA when the injunction was ordered, then we could hazard a more educated guess at WHAT HAPPENED to our money. But in the absence of any such explanation our minds are left to wander and not without good reason considering the FSA’s real role in the financial and economic worlds.
Remember the first statutory objective of the FSA is:
Market Confidence: Maintaining confidence in the Financial System
One possible interpretation of that ‘objective’ is:
The banks are the foundation of our economy, some say they have more control on a country than its government. Regardless of whether that’s true or not nobody can deny their huge importance in the economic stability of a country – so long as everyone uses them. If everyone chose to put their savings in investments or schemes which didn’t reside with the banks, our economy could collapse and not just in theory either. Government revenues from banks are enormous. So it makes perfect sense that the Government would want to entice, convince or maybe even fool people into believing that the banks are the only option when looking for a ’safe’ place for your cash.
The only exception is ‘Regulated’ Investments other than banks, which is a bit like the Uncle that nobody speaks to but he brings in cash for the family (FSA) so he is ok to see at Christmas when he gets drunk and scares the children 
The FSA is the Government’s custom-designed, finely-tuned tool for doing exactly what is outlined above. It therefore makes perfect logical sense that the FSA would indeed have a motive to put people off unregulated investments. Did they do this? We don’t know, nobody knows. But the fact is it is what MANY people are thinking and as mentioned earlier, if they choose not to furnish us with more detailed explanations of what happened then they only have themselves to blame for people’s suspicions and doubts about their motives behind what really is a World Class balls up from the perspective of ‘Protecting Consumers’.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the sole member of the Company that is the FSA. The Deputy Governor for Financial Stability of the Bank of England is an ‘Ex-Officio’ Board Member of the FSA. Anyone who doesn’t believe the FSA is an instrument used by the Government to control the economic structure in the UK and keep it weighted heavily towards the banks is either kidding themselves or is an employee of the FSA!
The current legal opinion is very encouraging and most of the hard work has been done in finding the right legal team to take this forward. We have several firms interested but based on recent discussions we now have two teams which seem the best two to choose from.
One is definitely capable and more than willing to take this forward. The other will report back in the next two weeks and based on that response a decision will be made as to which is best suited to progress this case for us. Updates will be made here on our website so please keep a close eye on the site over the next few weeks. A search on Google for FSA Legal Action will lead anyone to our site, and perhaps this is the reason behind some of the games which appear to have begun. To those who may understand what this means – glad we finally have your undivided attention! But we won’t be put off, not by ANYTHING nor ANYONE. Our case will go on as long as people have empty bank accounts and no answers or even a dialogue with the FSA.
Where wrong has been done, right must be done and relevant actions must be taken to “put right the wrongs” for every Cameron Farley client.
If a Judge is what it takes, so be it. If front page news is what it takes, so be it. In fact, whatever it takes, so be it. We are a group of people who have lost everything and the only way to remove the anger and determination of these people to succeed in this fight is by reimbursing them for the losses they have suffered, plus fair and reasonable compensation for the knock-on effect of those damages which are increasing as time goes on. Tick tock, tick tock.
The Financial Services and Markets Act places specific legislative powers in the hands of the FSA. With those powers come at least a little bit of responsibility, although it appears this can be ducked quite often when needed – but not this time. This Act of Law places 4 Statutory Objectives upon the FSA in the way they conduct their business. The third of those 4 objectives is…
‘CONSUMER PROTECTION - Securing the appropriate degree of protection for consumers’ – Could there ever be an easier case to prove?
These objectives imposed on the FSA are confirmed in law and incumbent upon them in everything they do. Hands up who feels protected by the FSA in the case of Cameron Farley Limited? What, NOBODY?!!! Well unfortunately for the FSA when you fail in your Statutory Objectives, you CARRY THE CAN FOR IT.
The Police have powers to shoot and kill people. If they shoot the wrong person – they get sued and they PAY UP. Hospitals have authority to cut heads open and play with the brains inside. If a Hospital does brain surgery on the wrong patient – they get sued and they PAY UP. The analogy is not totally balanced however. As the Police would never shoot dead the wrong person by anything other than ACCIDENT. A Hospital would not operate on the wrong patient by anything other than ACCIDENT.
Can the FSA even attempt to argue that what they did was an accident? They had knowledge of ALL issues involved. They had prior knowledge of Stephen Farley’s past history and had reason to be so concerned about him or his company that they instructed him to cease all trading. They then watched him continue trading for many months afterwards without doing ANYTHING to protect consumers or even to inform them of their demand for him to cease trading. If people had known about this, would they have invested? Of course not, that would have been “Consumer Protection” - but they didn’t breathe a word.
They had knowledge of the Gain Platform. They had knowledge of the funds held on that platform. What part of all this sounds like an accident to the average person reading? No accidents here, its either deliberate foul play or completely useless and incompetent actions – either way costing many hundreds of people a lot of their hard-earned money. And either way – it needs to be PUT RIGHT.
I am pleased to say that whilst this all sounds logical and quite simple, it needed to be confirmed by professionals specialising in this area of UK Law. This has been done and we now expect our case to gather momentum as specific plans for the Legal Action begin to be drawn up in the coming weeks.
Furthermore the media will now be used to make sure this story begins to get coverage so that the world can see just how ‘effective’ the FSA is at ‘Protecting Consumers’.
To be continued…….
