These people are fraudsters. Absolutely, 100%, no question.
The evidence cited in these threads is accurate, is independent and can be easily verified. The poster called Financial Analyst has taken the allegations one by one and proved them conclusively. Do not accept Sinclair James’ claims that these comments are nonsense made up by a one man vendetta. In response, Sinclair James / Trinitas Advisory have offered no evidence – because they have none.
Instead, they have tried to divert attention by smearing an ex-employee who they (wrongly) think is the only person who could have disclosed so much accurate insider information. The information comes from multiple sources and can be checked by anyone who has an analytical mind. They have told us that we should admire Michael Whiting for being an entrepreneur willing to take risks. These risks were never taken with his own money, as he pocketed eye-watering commissions up front.
The risks were laid entirely on his clients; by pushing illegal and catastrophic products, laundering money into companies where he had personal interests, often by forging client signatures. If you are in any doubt that they were laundering money back to themselves, just go to Philippine Metals Inc filed accounts, where Whiting was the Treasurer: http://www.sedar.com/GetFile.do?lang=EN&docClass=5&issuerNo=00008673&issuerType=03&projectNo=01612209&docId=2698459. This was just one company which was receiving client money through Whiting’s Ascenta funds. Section 8, Related Party Transactions shows how much was being paid back to officers of related companies (including Ascenta, for “investor relations”) in salaries, fees and commissions.
Despite making regular payments of investor funds to these officers, the company never made any sales. Prize Mining Corp is another company that received client money through Ascenta, paid large sums back to related officers and never made any sales. You can check their accounts on the same site. Sinclair James is continuing these scams under different names.
The Mauritius based company is now TAM International, replacing Ascenta, and it too places money entirely at its own discretion. TAM’s model is to guess the future, rather than spread risk over a balanced portfolio. This is the same strategy which lost clients their money previously. Valuations were not independent, were inflated and collapsed quickly.
Like Sinclair James, Trintitas Advisory is not registered to do business and is pushing illegal products. If you try to take action against TAM International when these funds collapse you will have no more protection than the investors in Ascenta. They are not FCA covered and will remind you that you allowed them to invest at their own discretion. They will tell you they do not give advice and you should chase the matter with your IFA.
If your IFA is Trinitas you will be unable to link it to its officers. They have been very careful to remove traceability. There is none on their website. Do you have any official documents where the officers are named?
Probably not. If you do take action they will use the normal methods for evading justice in the Philippines. My insider sources inform me that there are longstanding complaints which they have circumvented in this way. It is expensive but necessary, since Thailand has issued arrest warrants for similar crimes.
What can you do? One option is to complain to the SEC now (http://www.sec.gov.ph/message-us-4/). At least, this is inexpensive. They are inefficient and there is no guarantee they will act, but a large volume of complaints might stir them.
They are most interested in evidence that the IFA was trading illegally (Buy/Sell instructions, etc). It may be worth contacting the British Embassy, since the majority of scammers in Asia are British and are an embarrassment to the UK Government. The British Embassy in Thailand was instrumental in getting arrest warrants issued there. If you really have solid evidence you may consider fraud action through a lawyer.
This is more expensive and is also liable to abuse, through paying off local officials. The main risk to Sinclair James is that their alternative methods of avoiding justice could be met by alternative methods of imposing it.