Quick advice on...RSS feedsShares links
About this siteThis is Money is proud to be approved by the Plain English Campaign
EVERY week, Tony Hetherington replies to readers' letters, adding comments, advice and the results of his enquiries.
OTHER STORIES
FTSE LATEST
LATEST ON...
A round-up of the financial crisis
FREE FINANCIAL MAIL
£12.50 SHARE DEALING
Buy and sell UK stocks and shares for a flat fee of just £12.50 (or £20 for certificate trades).
BANK STRENGTH
Measuring bank and building society strength...
If you think you are a victim of financial mismanagement, or want advice before investing, write to Tony Hetherington, Financial Mail, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TS. Sorry, but he cannot give personal replies. Please send only copies of documents - if these are relevant to your enquiry. We regret that they cannot be returned.
J.M.M. writes: Midas Films plc asked me to invest in a film called Charlie last March. After several phone calls I was persuaded to invest £2,000. However, the last update was on November 1 and when I tried to call Midas recently I found that its phone number was no longer in service. This alarmed me, so I wrote to the company but had no reply. Am I the real Charlie?
MIDAS Films is breaking the law, which is oddly appropriate given that the movie Charlie is about south London scrap dealer and gangster Charles Richardson.
Richardson was jailed for 25 years in 1966 after displaying a penchant for torturing people he didn't like.
The company says Eighties pop star Luke Goss has been cast in the title role, with ex-EastEnders star Anita Dobson as his mum and Leslie 'Dirty Den' Grantham as a dodgy businessman. Anita Dobson's agent tells me she spent a couple of days filming last year for her cameo role, but this is where hard information dries up.
Even the Midas website is desperately outdated, talking about how shooting will start in 'September 2002'.
In fact, I uncovered more information about the company than its film.
Midas Films seems to have been set up to make one movie and has no track record. What it does have is a long list of shareholders, including you, who appear to have chipped in over £1 million. But I wonder whether you knew that you have 'B' shares in Midas, while the bosses have 'A' shares, which cream off 30% of any profits?
The shareholder list is probably longer than I realise. Midas is almost a year behind with filing information at Companies House, which is illegal.
Equally illegal is the fact that its company secretary quit in August 2001 and has not been replaced. A few months ago Midas Films came close to liquidation. Its accounts were seriously overdue and in October it was about to be struck off. It was reprieved when accounts reached Companies House.
The figures are so out of date as to be almost meaningless, but for the record, in the year to September 2001, Midas lost £617,000 and its own accountants could not be sure that the figures painted a true picture as they had been denied information and explanations that they needed.
The two men recorded as owning the lion's share of Midas are Timothy William Ireland of east London and James William Edward Longhurst of Bristol.
Longhurst was a director, but quit in December, leaving just Ireland, who may find himself facing prosecution alone for the company's failings.
I invited Midas Films to comment on your worries and on its lawbreaking. It did not do so. My suggestion is that you ask the Department of Trade & Industry to investigate at once.
Midas has been selling shares to the public on the one hand while breaking the law on the other. I share your concerns as to what has happened to your money.
Bring this firm to book for debt you don't owe
Miss G.S. writes: A letter from a debt recovery firm, addressed to me in my previous name, thanked me for a payment but drew attention to the fact that my account was still in arrears. However, I made no such payment and know nothing about the account! I have written twice, pointing out that I have no debts, but neither letter has been answered. I am worried I may get a visit from unpleasant people, or that my credit record may be damaged.
DOCUMENTS you sent me show that Reliable Collections Limited of 36 Hilton Street, Manchester, wants a minimum of £143. This suggests that you in fact owe far more.
Absurdly, the letter does not say who the debt collectors represent. I have twice invited the managing director of Reliable Collections to comment. The silence has been deafening.
So, complain to the Office of Fair Trading about the conduct of Reliable Collections. The OFT licenses debt collectors and should investigate complaints about its misconduct.
And, contact Experian (0115 976 8747), the credit reference agency, and ask to see your file. This may identify whoever alleges you owe money, and you can then ask them to delete the claim, or in the case of a dispute you can add a statement of your own.
Finally, whoever pays Reliable Collections might want to reconsider the wisdom of employing a firm which demands money without naming the supposed creditor.
