[JayZ]

I've said this before - someone needs to petition for the Canbet companies in the UK wound up so the Insolvency Service comes into play. I can't do it as you need to be a debtor of at least £750 to issue the petition. It also costs £1530 to do it, but maybe a few people would chip in for that. Of course this could be money chasing rainbows as there is no guarantee that a case would proceed, in the same manner as ASIC has decided.

[GuybrushT]

I've said this before - someone needs to petition for the Canbet companies in the UK wound up so the Insolvency Service comes into play. I can't do it as you need to be a debtor of at least £750 to issue the petition. It also costs £1530 to do it, but maybe a few people would chip in for that. Of course this could be money chasing rainbows as there is no guarantee that a case would proceed, in the same manner as ASIC has decided.

Many people here suggests many options, but is hard to tell which is the best. So I think we must consult a person that deals with law - a lawyer. We will not do a lot if we do it by our self. :/

And if we hire a lawyer, and sue the bastards, we MUST have all the documents that can help. So if we must buy some, we must agree we will buy it, and decide how to collect the needed money between us. So much work, but it should be done. We will get nothing if wait asic's or similar institutions do it for us. They don't care...

[mojobullfrog]

This is an extremely disappointing outcome. I really thought ASIC would have found enough to mount a worthwhile case.

That was the only real chance of getting some degree of justice.

I see no prospect for joy in any kind of civil action.

ASIC have come under a lot of criticsm lately and this only adds to my skepticism about their standing as Australia's company regulator. They seem about as effective as the UK Gambling Commission - and that's saying something! It's hard not to wonder exactly how impartial their own investigation was (make of that what you will.)

There is however, one bit of evidence that would decide Peter & Graeme's fate and might make ASIC take notice.

[simply]

Shari, any update from ASIC's lead investigator?

[Optional]

For what it is worth, here is my suggestion to those interested in taking this further.

Draft a brief letter explaining that there is several hundred people already in group contact and each with small claims against a bookmaker. Ask if the firm might be interested in representing the group on either a pro bono or contingency basis where they are willing to cover expenses during the course of the matter.

Send that letter by regular mail to every law firm and University law dept in the UK. At least make sure you send it to any you can find identified as representing any sort of gambling related company or that are known to take on public interest matters against the govt.

You might find someone who sees it as interesting matter due to the international side. Maybe a firm simply interested in fighting for better regulation for whatever reason. Or even one that sees it as a publicity generator. Or a law faculty that will see it as a useful project case for their students.

I suggest the UK as that is the main seat of the activity and the claimants. A UK law firm can very easily employ an Australian agent if they feel action is needed in that country.


That won't cost anyone more than a few stamps and personal time. And requires no group commitment or mucking about. Just someone to choose to do it.

[GuybrushT]

I'm trying to figure HOW ASIC closed the case, and I cannot.

They wanna say us that collecting money illegally (offering reload bonuses when you already don't pay other customers - clear Ponzi scheme), give to customers fake "technical issues" excuses, and then just disappear, without ANY explanation (I don't remember they gave us any notice they are bankrupt (they cannot be after all that deposits they've received, without withdrawals been paid), they just gave us lame excuses to receive additional time).

It was a classic "take the money and run" situation, and ASCI is fine with that?!

[GuybrushT]

For what it is worth, here is my suggestion to those interested in taking this further.

Draft a brief letter explaining that there is several hundred people already in group contact and each with small claims against a bookmaker. Ask if the firm might be interested in representing the group on either a pro bono or contingency basis where they are willing to cover expenses during the course of the matter.

Send that letter by regular mail to every law firm and University law dept in the UK. At least make sure you send it to any you can find identified as representing any sort of gambling related company or that are known to take on public interest matters against the govt.

You might find someone who sees it as interesting matter due to the international side. Maybe a firm simply interested in fighting for better regulation for whatever reason. Or even one that sees it as a publicity generator. Or a law faculty that will see it as a useful project case for their students.

I suggest the UK as that is the main seat of the activity and the claimants. A UK law firm can very easily employ an Australian agent if they feel action is needed in that country.


That won't cost anyone more than a few stamps and personal time. And requires no group commitment or mucking about. Just someone to choose to do it.

Good idea. But the letter must be wrote very well, with EVERY fact and proof we have. Hopefully someone her is able to write it, maybe all the users together. But is not easy to coordinate that.

[Optional]

I'm trying to figure HOW ASIC closed the case, and I cannot.

They wanna say us that collecting money illegally (offering reload bonuses when you already don't pay other customers - clear Ponzi scheme), give to customers fake "technical issues" excuses, and then just disappear, without ANY explanation (I don't remember they gave us any notice they are bankrupt (they cannot be after all that deposits they've received, without withdrawals been paid), they just gave us lame excuses to receive additional time).

It was a classic "take the money and run" situation, and ASCI is fine with that?!

ASIC are not like a general police organisation, they only regulate Australian business activity.

If they can't see a breach of any laws they have jurisdiction over, or don't have enough evidence. There isn't much they can do.

And the less they say, the more likely the file has not been permanently closed.

[GuybrushT]

ASIC are not like a general police organisation, they only regulate Australian business activity.

If they can't see a breach of any laws they have jurisdiction over, or don't have enough evidence. There isn't much they can do.

And the less they say, the more likely the file has not been permanently closed.

To tell the true, I never understood why ASIC was contacted. Canbet was licensed in the UK, not Australia (even if owners are Australian). So I hope that the reason of they closing the case is the lack of jurisdiction.

[Optional]

Good idea. But the letter must be wrote very well, with EVERY fact and proof we have. Hopefully someone her is able to write it, maybe all the users together. But is not easy to coordinate that.

Well, imho the letter definitely should not contain all the information you have. It should be as brief as possible with just the pertinent points that might be of interest to someone in a legal firm vetting the incoming mail each day.

The fact the group is in contact already. That is relates to a group of small claimants. That it could involve negligent regulation and that it involves the bookmaking industry I think are the main key things you want to get across off the top of my head. Maybe that Australian authorities have been interested enough to open an investigation as well so they can see an international angle exists.

Basically the first person that reads it needs to be easily able to decide if anyone in that firm would actually be interested in finding out more, so they create a file with the letter and pass it on.

If you make them read multiple paragraphs and pseudo legal guesses about what we think is evidence or should be done, that letter is more likely to end up in the miscellaneous tray to be looked at when there is time.

You just want to get enough interest so they will want to come to ask for the details. Not force those details on them up front.

[RyDLloyd]

I've said this before - someone needs to petition for the Canbet companies in the UK wound up so the Insolvency Service comes into play. I can't do it as you need to be a debtor of at least £750 to issue the petition. It also costs £1530 to do it, but maybe a few people would chip in for that. Of course this could be money chasing rainbows as there is no guarantee that a case would proceed, in the same manner as ASIC has decided.

I am owed £3000+ and will happily do this if we can club together the money and someone who knows what they are doing can provide me with some guidance. My only worry is that this is money down the drain as I can see from the accounts last filed that Canbet are of negative net worth, which means even on winding up there will be no assets to distribute between us as the debtors.

[shari91]

To tell the true, I never understood why ASIC was contacted. Canbet was licensed in the UK, not Australia (even if owners are Australian). So I hope that the reason of they closing the case is the lack of jurisdiction.

ASIC was contacted because several people already have judgements against Canbet in the UK and have received nothing. There are no assets, no money, nothing to collect. They didn't even have a UK office other than a rented mailbox. Canbet was merely a subsidiary of an Australian business and whatever money is left is sitting here in Australia. The parent company never operated in the UK; they operated in Australia - that's why those people couldn't go after IGAS in the UK and why we had to go after them here. IGAS has the money (well now its directors do as it's been liquidated), not Canbet. You can keep suing Canbet but there's nothing to get from it. That's why ASIC was/is involved.

@simply I called back today and was told the person I need to speak with was unavailable until Monday so I'm going to call back then.

[shari91]

Also my post above was not meant to dissuade anyone from trying to still go after Canbet in the UK. To be honest, after 5 months of spending quite a lot of time on this issue I'd be more than happy to be told that the focus was going to shift totally to the UK and my help was no longer needed. But before spending more money on this beyond what I've spent and more importantly what others have spent already getting judgements against Canbet, we need to be clear that this has gone past simply going after Canbet or IGAS now. Canbet has no $ and IGAS is in receivership. You need to go after the directors of the parent company of Canbet and I don't even know if the UK Insolvency Service would have scope or jurisdiction to do that considering these are two Aussies who are protected by the articles of incorporation of their business in another country. It is only them who potentially have your funds now. Not a company and that's why ASIC suggested rather strongly I pursue them in civil court if I can't come up with more documentation.

[GuybrushT]

Also my post above was not meant to dissuade anyone from trying to still go after Canbet in the UK. To be honest, after 5 months of spending quite a lot of time on this issue I'd be more than happy to be told that the focus was going to shift totally to the UK and my help was no longer needed. But before spending more money on this beyond what I've spent and more importantly what others have spent already getting judgements against Canbet, we need to be clear that this has gone past simply going after Canbet or IGAS now. Canbet has no $ and IGAS is in receivership. You need to go after the directors of the parent company of Canbet and I don't even know if the UK Insolvency Service would have scope or jurisdiction to do that considering these are two Aussies who are protected by the articles of incorporation of their business in another country. It is only them who potentially have your funds now. Not a company and that's why ASIC suggested rather strongly I pursue them in civil court if I can't come up with more documentation.

As I read it, we can kiss our money goodbye. Incredible. Most of us worked the last few years not for ourself, but for those 2 bastards. Because they took years and years of our hardly earned incomes.

P.S. How much an Australian hitman usually cost?

[Fred87]

new profile picture on facebook wife peter lord along with it. Should be celebrating happiness with our money

[GuybrushT]

Shari, if I understand right, in theory we could only try a civil action, and go after the private money of those two thieves. And the only chance to get it is to prove they've stole it from us intentionally (that it was planned, for example a Ponzi scheme they conducted when offering reload bonuses, even if unable to pay previously requested withdrawals), and not because of bad managing of Canbet (in that case as I understand they cannot be forced to pay from their own funds, because no law was broken and they had only a limited responsibility).

Is that right?

Because let's face it, is clear they couldn't lose so much money with bad management (is suspected they own an 8 digit sum). How? All their customers won their bets all the time and there were so much winnings that they were unable to cover them? No logic, is clear the money was transferred somewhere else INTENTIONALLY!

[GuybrushT]

new profile picture on facebook wife peter lord along with it. Should be celebrating happiness with our money

Is incredible. Usually thieves like him still the money, and hide somewhere. In this situation is clear they intentionally stole our money, we know who they are, we know where they are, and we cannot do anything. Nice future prospective for internet gambling, they show to every potential thief how to stole money to internet bettors. If they've done that, why someone else can't?

[Optional]

Also my post above was not meant to dissuade anyone from trying to still go after Canbet in the UK. To be honest, after 5 months of spending quite a lot of time on this issue I'd be more than happy to be told that the focus was going to shift totally to the UK and my help was no longer needed. But before spending more money on this beyond what I've spent and more importantly what others have spent already getting judgements against Canbet, we need to be clear that this has gone past simply going after Canbet or IGAS now. Canbet has no $ and IGAS is in receivership. You need to go after the directors of the parent company of Canbet and I don't even know if the UK Insolvency Service would have scope or jurisdiction to do that considering these are two Aussies who are protected by the articles of incorporation of their business in another country. It is only them who potentially have your funds now. Not a company and that's why ASIC suggested rather strongly I pursue them in civil court if I can't come up with more documentation.

Well that makes my suggestion about basing it from the UK probably not very good.

[GuybrushT]

Well that makes my suggestion about basing it from the UK probably not very good.

Reading what Shari said, going against Canbet or IBAS has no point. Peter Lord and Graeme White must be sent to court. So Australia it is.

[Fred87]

Is incredible. Usually thieves like him still the money, and hide somewhere. In this situation is clear they intentionally stole our money, we know who they are, we know where they are, and we cannot do anything. Nice future prospective for internet gambling, they show to every potential thief how to stole money to internet bettors. If they've done that, why someone else can't?

They canceled the facebooks when they were made ​​public, only the woman has reactivated

[JayZ]

It was Canbet Sports Bookmakers UK Ltd that people were doing business with, not IGAS, nor individuals directly, and this company was registered in England, not Australia. Limited companies are a specific tool so that the individual doesn't have personal liability under normal circumstances. Certain acts 'lift the corporate veil' however and make the individuals personally responsible. This is normally a high risk strategy since it is needed to be proved that the directors operated fraudulently. This also applies if it can be shown that the directors kept the business gaining debt when there was no hope of it not finishing insolvent. Canbet SB UK has never been put into liquidation though, although accounts are I think now well overdue.

[Namechanger]

What is the link for her facebook page ?

[eddie701]

Hello, Canbet sportsbookies UK Limited.

A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business


Do people get it now.

intelligence.live@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk send complaints to here.
A few individual complaints is not enough. Dont leave it to the other person to do it.


Australia is dead...gone...
Jurisdiction is in the UK. And it always had been.

We just had been down the wrong road.

Optional is on the ball here, forget Australia.

[eddie701]

Here is a template, people can change to their liking.

Dear Sir/Madam
I would like to report a crime of fraudulent activity by a UK licensed bookie called Canbet.
Canbet sports bookies UK Ltd.
Building 3 Chiswick, High Road
London
W45YA

From early Oct 2013, Canbet claimed that there was a problem with their IT banking software.
That they could not get the money back to their customers. Yet they could take in deposits
By 28 different ways. Canbet claimed that they were working around the clock, manually processing withdrawals, yet very little people were getting paid. Some times as little as 2 people a week were paid.
We believe that this is a lie as Canbet excuses changed over time and to many broken promises
about payments. During this time Canbet were actively sending out emails to the public inviting them to join, with up to a 100% deposit bonus. Pyramid scheme comes to mind.

A lot of Canbet customers complained to The Gambling Commission during this time.
And a lot of customers are angry with the Gambling Commission for letting Canbet trade for
3 months without paying their customers.
The Gambling Commission response was that they could do nothing unless we received confirmation that we were not going to get paid.
On the 31/12/13 Canbet stopped trading. Customers received emails off canbet telling us that to contact another company in India with our complaints.
On the 1/1/14 the Canbet directors set up other businesses in Austrailia.
Here is one http://www.igasgroup.com/iasiaracingcomingsoon.html
On the 6/1/14 TGC received an audit for Canbet saying that they could cover their liabilities.
We believe the Canbet directors, Mr Peter Lord and Graham White acted fraudulently
During their time as Directors of Canbet. Over £1,300,000 or more of customers money has not been repaid.
All County Court judgements have been ignored by Canbet.
A lot more information can be found on www.sportsbookreview.com

Kind regards Your name

[shari91]

It was Canbet Sports Bookmakers UK Ltd that people were doing business with, not IGAS, nor individuals directly, and this company was registered in England, not Australia. Limited companies are a specific tool so that the individual doesn't have personal liability under normal circumstances. Certain acts 'lift the corporate veil' however and make the individuals personally responsible. This is normally a high risk strategy since it is needed to be proved that the directors operated fraudulently. This also applies if it can be shown that the directors kept the business gaining debt when there was no hope of it not finishing insolvent. Canbet SB UK has never been put into liquidation though, although accounts are I think now well overdue.

Yes it was Canbet that everyone was dealing with. That's the problem. There is nothing any organisation in the UK can do to recover any funds unless they can somehow miraculously go after Peter and Graeme although ASIC has even said they can't at the present. They surrendered their license back in April and even going back to Dec/Jan when people were getting judgements against them, there wasn't even so much as one person working a desk somewhere that they could serve papers to/try to claim funds from. The highest court in the UK could issue a judgement against Canbet but there is no money there to recover in the UK and there never was. That's why people ended up in this dilemma and we had to turn to Australia to try to assist. They purchased the license, the website and the database from the Reads and operated the exact same business model that the Reads did with the exception being the Reads never scammed all their customers.

We've said it repeatedly in here: They were smart and whether or not they purposely purchased Canbet with the intention to scam, who knows, but in the end they're able to walk away from it without consequence because there's nothing the UK can do. How are they going to get money from a company that doesn't have any money and not only that, their parent company is in receivership in another country? The only way to get it is to go after the directors of that parent company and the UK can't help with that. Even then this is going to be a longshot but for starters, at least they'll be able to be served with papers and if they don't turn up have a judgement against them that matters. They've already laughed at the judgements in the UK because it affects their life not one bit.

Again though, this isn't my cash so you guys need to do whatever you feel is the best strategy going forward. I'm just suggesting before anyone shells out any more $ other than what some of us have already spent, people stop to remember that we've been through this 5+ months ago and that's why the UK was abandoned. You can get a judgement against my company in Spain for example. How are you going to make a director of the company pay it when they've never had money there nor even lived there and are protected by the articles of incorporation of their business?

[shari91]

Hello, Canbet sportsbookies UK Limited.

A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business
A UK based business


Do people get it now.

intelligence.live@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk send complaints to here.
A few individual complaints is not enough. Dont leave it to the other person to do it.


Australia is dead...gone...
Jurisdiction is in the UK. And it always had been.

We just had been down the wrong road.

Optional is on the ball here, forget Australia.

What do you think is going to happen if yet another judgement is made against Canbet in the UK?! Who are they even going to serve papers to? Where do you think the $ would come from to pay it if they could somehow catch Peter or Graeme at Heathrow to serve them?!

I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall at this point so I'm out. I wish you all the best in getting your $ back but I can't keep repeating myself just for the sake of it at this point. I've put in too much work and spent too much money and personal time to keep saying the same thing over and over. It's just getting frustrating now when people aren't remembering that we went through this multiple times already. Good luck with it all. xo

[eddie701]

Here is the reply from companieshouse.gov.uk.

Dear Mr O'Sullivan

Thank you for your email of 17/02/2014 regarding the company Canbet UK Limited - 4559609

I have checked our records for details of the company mentioned and can confirm that the company is registered with us as a limited company. Please note that Companies House is unable to vouch for the validity or legitimacy of the company or any offers etc that they make. Our role, laid down by Parliament is as a Registry. We accept company documents and place them on the Public record, if they meet the basic checks that we carry out. Current parliamentary legislation only allows Companies House to register and display information to the public. It does not provide us with investigative powers that would allow us to become involved in matters such as those raised in your e-mail. If your complaint involves the conduct of a company or its officers you should contact the Insolvency Service. The Insolvency Service is an Executive Agency of the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). The Company Investigations team within the Insolvency Service has the power to investigate limited companies where information received suggests corporate abuse; this may include serious misconduct, fraud, scams or sharp practice in the way a company operates. To complain about a limited company that is still trading: Tel: 0845 601 3546 By post: Intelligence Hub Intelligence & Enforcement Directorate Investigation and Enforcement Services Insolvency Service 3rd Floor Cannon House 18 Priory Queensway Birmingham B4 6FD Email: intelligence.live@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency The Insolvency Service will usually take on any complaint that provides good reason for an investigation and where there is both a public interest in investigating and the prospect of follow up action resulting. If you believe that you are a victim of such a scam or fraud, you should report this matter to your local police and provide them with as much information as you can. Important information on current scams can be found on our website via the following link http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/miscellaneous/misc1.shtml Alternatively, you can visit the fraud alert website at www.met.police.uk/fraudalert or the FBI website at www.ic3.com I hope this information has been of help to you.
Yours sincerely Rosalind Tew Proof and Fraud

[eddie701]

The Company Investigations team within the Insolvency Service has the power to investigate limited companies where information received suggests corporate abuse; this may include serious misconduct, fraud, scams or sharp practice in the way a company operates.

[Hareeba!]

The only possible hope is to get a judgement for fraud against the directors and then pursue them for your money.

That just can't be achieved in the UK.

It has to happen in the country where the directors reside and hopefully have the means to pay, i.e. Australia.

And if ASIC don't see sufficient evidence to pursue such a conviction, you really are up against it.

[GuybrushT]

The only possible hope is to get a judgement for fraud against the directors and then pursue them for your money.

That just can't be achieved in the UK.

It has to happen in the country where the directors reside and hopefully have the means to pay, i.e. Australia.

And if ASIC don't see sufficient evidence to pursue such a conviction, you really are up against it.

But ASIC suggested us ti try that way, so I think is worth trying.

[Namechanger]

Somebody should contact the Australian PM and ask him how he feels about having a couple of multi million pound fraudsters living in his country seemingly immune from any action against them.

[GuybrushT]

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/05/...he-little-guy/

Double standards as gutless ASIC targets the little guy

"The corporate regulator is too scared and incompetent to take on large companies, but has come down hard on the man who sent out a fake press release to expose the stupidity of finance journalists."

So nothing strange ASIC closed the Canbet case. No use of them anyway. :/

[GuybrushT]

Thread over? No one except me wants to fight back?

[JayZ]

The only possible hope is to get a judgement for fraud against the directors and then pursue them for your money.

That just can't be achieved in the UK.

It has to happen in the country where the directors reside and hopefully have the means to pay, i.e. Australia.

And if ASIC don't see sufficient evidence to pursue such a conviction, you really are up against it.

It seems the line of initiation of a criminal case in Australia may be over from what has been said above, unless I am reading things incorrectly.

As has been said many times, civil proceedings against the companies can't recover anything as the companies have no remaining assets. It has to be off the back a criminal investigation to make the liability personal rather than corporate. In the UK if there was enough evidence for the Insolvency Service to consider there is a case to answer then extradition would be applied for. Any subsequent financial recovery could also be enforced in Australia through use of the Foreign Judgment Act.

Mind you, this would take an awfully long time, even if successful.

[GuybrushT]

It seems the line of initiation of a criminal case in Australia may be over from what has been said above.

As has been said many times, civil proceedings against the companies can't recover anything as the companies have no remaining assets. It has to be off the back a criminal investigation to make the liability personal rather than corporate. In the UK if there was enough evidence for the Insolvency Service to consider there is a case to answer then extradition would be applied for. Any subsequent financial recovery could also be enforced in Australia through use of the Foreign Judgment Act.

Mind you, this would take an awfully long time, even if successful.

Last 2 days I've read a lot about UK and Australian law. If these all happened in one country I think it would be resolved time ago. It's a clear "corporate veil lifting" case. I think it can be proved a fraud by directors, and in that case their personal assets can be used to pay us back. I just must understand what happens when 2 nations are involved. One thing is sure, I don't want to give up as most people from this thread. If needed I will sue them by myself, if people here don't agree on a collective action.