Whats become increasingly clear to me is that the scale of these schemes are far greater than I previously thought,

as is the time and resources required to have any impact, its

There are potentially significant risks associated with pursuing the information trails and identifying the facilitators of these scams. I have already had a Dos attack on my IP address (which is a hacker trying to collapse my internet access (and/or penetrate my firewall) by flooding my internet router with fake IP packets), which would be a result of the research and data scraping that I’ve been doing.

I couldn’t work out why my internet access was ridiculously slow, fortunately my mate in London who is a cyber security expert spotted it and is putting some additional layers of security in place (if they had succeed in breaking through the firewall they would have

the complexities of addressing them

will be time and labour intensive and will almost certainly under-whelmingly fall short achieving the outcome of recovering your investment. It should result in the triggering of a regulatory process (if it hasn’t already commenced) which over time should result in some form of action

that helped facilitate the fraud (the investment), received a benefit, money laundering (by providing instructions to others), failing

benefited from the

promotion of the Ponzi investment (its fraud (the investment), the money laundering (

making those that facilitated and benefited from the fraud (certainly in the short term and likely to be watered down over time).

(certainly within the short term).

I cannot emphasise the importance of looking forward a few steps, preempting the options for each of those steps, taking a view on the time and resources required resources and time and what outcomes can be expected and how they al

This is where the importance of "6"

what follow on actions will be required, the time and resources required and consider

about what can be achieved at each stage

to k options, the time and resources required for these options and tak

at each step,

and taking

a hard view on the likely outcomes of each scenarios , estimating the time and resources required for each of those scenarios and b

level of resources that will be required to achieve any material outcome.

Further complicating the decision process is that its impossible to determine

and the uncertainty as to formthat outcome will

acknowledging that th

The importance of predicting, accepting and agreeing to further action cannot be underestimated.

the following actions

The importance of predicting this, having the follow on actions already in process as part of a larger plan cannot be un

determining the follow on actions that are to be undertaken in the event that there

discussing

Hence the importance of discussing the options evaluating and determining the follow on actions (points 4&5) , the outcomes of which will be less predictable, certainly some of the actions may be without precedent but have the capacity of providing new insights and information trails that could go along way to uncovering the core of the network that facilitate these investment frauds on international scale.

It is at this stage that

What has become acutely clear

is the magnitude of work that is required to

This is why accepting the likely outcome will be ineffective and agreeing to and preparing to take follow actions (point 4&5) is important. It is here where things are not so predictable and

• As we will discuss, the follow on actions may be equally ineffective (in recovering the investment).
• Without the outcome being quite as clear as in particular the outcomes for the UK and other jurisdictions are going to be unpredictable.
• But it is through these processes that very valuable information and data can be uncovered. this is when part of the puzzle start dropping into place and exposing those behind

For example

• If its agreed that we should proceed with making a demand for repayment.
• As I will propose in the meeting is to issue demands directly to;
  • the Australian representative;
  • formally on the UK Company "Maxim Capital Limited"
  • with a copy delivered to Andrew Lim at his Singapore address.
• To facilitate this, requires some further preparation;
  • Letter of demand (Australia) & Letter of demand (UK) - While I’ve done some preliminary work on this including
    • Australia: review ASIC and Corps law, requirements re: establishing a branch office, rights and obligations of lenders etc.
    • UK: Serving statutory demand, rights of creditors to stop Company being struck off, ability to pursue directors directly, reciprocal rights between UK and Singapore)
  • depending on who delivers the demands if you do it yourself or engage a lawyer to do it, determines what else is required to deliver the demand
    • Engaging a lawyer would require at the very least;
      • Compilation of all relevant documentation, establishing who the parties are, effectively joining the dots for them.
      • At this point it would likely be cost and time prohibitive and ineffective.
    • Lenders making the demand.
      • Need to be cautious to the form the demand is presented (not to impinge on any governing laws regarding demand and repayment of debts),
      • ensure that there is sufficient confidence that the loan exists and the parties are responsible.
      • Preempt how the parties receiving are likely to act and incorporate counter measures in the demand
• • Likely out come;
  • • Australia - either do nothing, deny responsibility or pass blame/responsibility back.
    • UK - May be noted, may even get a reply stating that the company has failed to file accounts and will be struck off soon. refer to companies act, seek legal advice, appoint liquidator etc
    • Singapore - likely to throw in the bin, or might be stupid enough to state in writing the the resigned as CEO in late 2015 so its nothing to do with him.
    • Consequences of these outcomes;
    • • By this point you have been more proactive than anyone else.
      • Generally its this point that complaints are made to the relevant regulator (by only a few, most don’t do nothing).
      • with no full picture, each regulator will go at their own pace and undertake their review within the restriction of their jurisdiction.
      • There is evidence that ASIC will overtime make some participants accountable, the process will take time and diminish the ability to put in place a plan proactively deal with these type of investment frauds
      • Equally there is little evidence of satisfactory outcomes for investors, (other than to be called up by ASIC for a shakedown of information by them).
• 
  
• Follow on actions
  • As we will discuss, the follow on actions may be equally ineffective (in recovering the investment).
  • Without the outcome being quite as clear as in particular the outcomes for the UK and other jurisdictions are going to be unpredictable.
  • But it is through these processes that very valuable information and data can be uncovered. this is when part of the puzzle start dropping into place and exposing those behind
  • 
    
  • that are the jigsaw pieces that will
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• Scenarios/Outcomes
  • The importance of predicting the outcome and having a consensus on how to progress things after
  • 
    
  • 
    
  • (4) & (5) (likely outcome and what options to continue)
  • The above would with the full knowledge that the Australian representative will either do nothing, deny or pass blame back, and the serving of the demand on the UK Company will be done without any easy precedent to follow.
  • 
    
  • 
    

(there is no easy solution here. However the technologies that are evolving for cyber-security and more traditional banking fraud ca

but using a staged app

‘strategy/plan’ for a platform

For example,

/basis for doing so and consequences/expected outcomes.