Hamilton Partners UK: 'a boutique over the counter investment brokerage'

 Hamilton Partners: We source and supply high quality certified diamonds

Details of Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd as 

'leading Carbon Credit Commodity Brokers'

Telesales will be responsible for calling new prospective clients 18.4.2012' 
cold calling?

  

Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd, which was set up on 17th November 2011, is a versatile commodities broker now based at 111 Cannon Street, London EC4N 5AR but was previously based at Cantium House, Station Approach, Wallington. They changed their registered office on 14th January 2013. The sole director is Gavin Daniels. Daniels is also a director of Hamilton Partners Nominees and Hamilton Partners Ltd – both set up on 5th April 2013.  The company's share capital is £1. Daniels has also been a consultant to Sales2Sales Ltd.

Hamilton Partners originally offered investments in carbon credits* but are now offering investments in diamonds as the company explains:      

  

'Hamilton Partners UK are a boutique over the counter investment brokerage who are renowned for delivering the most sustainable, sought after commodities which yield the richest returns for their clients and the company. If we reach a quota in terms of allocations allowed (Carbon Credits) then we can't trade any further credits. Our remit is to move with the ever changing markets to deliver diverse, profitable commodities. You clearly know little of investments otherwise you would understand that diversification means to choose a proportion of assets that reduce fluctuations in value (risk).

We are in regular contact with the FCA despite the fact that we work within an unregulated market and offer an open door policy. We protect the interests of both the client and the company. We also follow arigorous compliance process that adheres toAML legislation and Data protection laws in order to ensure this.'

'With access to the most prestigious diamond mines, suppliers and valuation experts, we are able to source the finest clear cut certified diamonds for re-sale or long-term investment.'

Experienced & Junior Diamond Brokers Needed: 

'Solid sales experience, however for the more junior roles, a good attitude and a desire to move into sales would be considered'

Compare and contrast:

Organisations listed on Hamilton Partners site:

Hamilton list five organisations on their site: EGL USA, AGS Laboratories, HRD Antwerp, International Gemological Institute (IGI) and the GIA. In every instance Hamilton Partners claim to have written the text shown on their site. However, in all five cases this is incorrect as Hamilton Partners have falsely claimed authorship of text from the organisations' sites as their own.

        

 One example: HRD Antwerp: '5th March 2013 
Written by Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd'

Actually just copied from the HRD Antwerp site (see below).

Why did Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd not correctly attribute these quotes in the first place? *

False claim 'Written by Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd  

The HRD Antwerp site 

Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd: 'ever changing markets to deliver diverse, profitable commodities'

2012: carbon credits

2013: diamonds (from late February/early March?)

2014: ?
2015: ? 

Update: 21.00 31st July 2013
* Having been found falsely claiming authorship of the profiles of the five organisations shown on their site, Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd have today amended their site to acknowledge the true authorship of these profiles.

Amended attribution: Written by HRD Antwerp Institute of Gemmology  

Instead of thanking me for alerting them to their error over claiming to have written these profiles Gavin Daniels and Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd have this evening accused me of defamation – a general accusation, I note, rather than pointing out specific instances – and claim to have instituted legal proceedings. 

Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd's explanation (31st July 2013):

'We haven't passed off any context as our own, these are official grading laboratories which verify our stones, therefore we offer full transparency of their context so our clients can verify. Therefore to insinuate any different is defamation!'

Rather misses the point: it was Hamilton Partners who claimed falsely to have written these profiles. Two further examples below: 

Explanation provided (11th October 2013) by Riverview Solicitors, law firm engaged by Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd:

'Our client has explained to you that the quotes you refer to which appeared on our client's wbsite were placed purely for information about the diamond grading laboratories Our Client uses to certify diamonds, and were an attempt to ensure clarity about these labs. By default Our Client's whole website displays the text "written by Hamilton Partners", and any confusion caused by the presence of this statement on the information pages referred to was purely accidental. Our client had no intention to mislead visitors to its site, and immediately upon you drawing attention to this oversight Our Client corrected its website accordingly.'   

It does appear a little odd that this 'oversight' ran from 5th March 2013 to 30th July 2013 without anyone from Hamilton Partners Ltd noticing the false claims of authorship. As Hamilton Partners (UK) Ltd 'are in regular contact with the FCA' one might think that the FCA would have stressed the importance of ensuring that there were no misleading statements on their website.    

Although one might give some credit to sole director, Gavin Daniels, and Hamilton Partners for having amended the false attribution, I certainly have no wish to deal with a company that either claims the words of other organisations as its own or for over four months fails to verify that their website, offering investment opportunities, does not carry misleading statements irrespective of whether they happen to be punting carbon credits, diamonds, eco-investments or bio-fuels etc. 

** 

* FCA advice on carbon credits 

As the FCA's advice indicates investments in carbon credits now have an uneviable reputation. Also report on FCA Conference on 1st July 2013.  

Some press comment on carbon credits – here, here and here. 

Daniel Snelling: fraudulent entrepreneur not discouraged by adversity

Daniel Snelling 

(from decanter.com) 

Despite being arrested by the Metropolitan Police in March 2010 in connection with Nouveau World Wines Ltd and Finbow Wines Ltd then subsequently being charged with conspiracy to defraud and money laundering, Daniel Snelling was determined to continue his entrepreneurial career. Evidently fleecing investors of £4.5 million through Nouveau and Finbow wasn't sufficient, Snelling was keen to find other vehicles to thin the wallets of his clients. The vehicles have included eco-investments (Green Leaf Global), Biofuel (Infinity Source), Bulgarian real estate (Sandy Pines with Matthew Hart) and may well also include diamonds.  

Here is an account from someone who worked for Daniel Snelling at Infinity Source in late 2010:   

Hi Jim.

Apologies for bothering you but I've been recently reading your blog regarding Daniel Snelling with great interest as I actually worked for Daniel Snelling in late 2010 when he managed a company called Infinity Source that offered investments in a Biofuel called Jatropha.

I worked there under the false impression that it was a legitimate business. At the time Snelling used the alias Daniel Harris, which I stupidly believed was his real name. I worked for Infinity Source for just under two months but never got paid. I tried chasing the unpaid wages but didn't get anywhere as further investigations revealed that the director Timothy Flynn didn't even exist, as well as their 'head office' in Victoria Street turning out to be a virtual office, and that the company ceased trading in April 2011 after police were called to the office in Poplar Business Park after a fight apparently broke out between former Infinity Source staff and current staff/management over unpaid wages. Police ordered the closure of the office as a consequence. According to the manager of the office block, nobody was arrested, however police were apparently investigating the business for fraud. I was quite shocked as the layout of the business and the way it presented itself didn't seem or look anything like a scam and I was actually working there! What also confused me was that if it was a scam how did they ever expect to get away with it? Although Snelling's ignorance/arrogance later became apparent when reading the details of this court case.

It was only when I saw Snelling's picture in the Daily Mail that I found out his true identity. I gave the Insolvency Service details of Infinity Source but never heard anything back from them. From what I've read in the court case about Snelling's 'Biofuel investment plans' it doesn't sound like anyone actually knew about Infinity Source and/or Snelling's association with it.

I'm pleased with the verdict but sadly Snelling's associates will set up another scam firm and carry on conning people.

The guy that placed me at Infinity Source was a friend of Snelling's called Gavin Daniels (or at least that's what he said his name was). He claimed to run a recruitment company called Sales2sales which turned out to be non-existent as Sales2sales was struck off by Companies House after never filing accounts. 

   

Did any customers of Finbow Wines receive calls from Infinity Source. The chances are that they used the same lists of leads. Despite Infinity Source being a relatively new company their leads lists had scribble marks all over them like they had been called many times before.

I did have some subconscious doubts about the legitimacy of the business, however at the recruitment session Daniel Snelling held at the Hilton Hotel in Canada Water in October 2010, he was just as convincing conning myself and others into dodgy non-jobs, as he was conning investors out of money. 

As well as Daniel Snelling, his girlfriend Kelly Humphreys worked at the office doing admin and secretarial work for Snelling. I also remember Dina Snelling attending the office once but only as a visitor. I didn't know her name or relation to Snelling. Two other senior members of staff that worked there were a 'Mike Harris'* (who was apparently a relation of Daniel as well. One member of staff claimed Mike was his brother. Another claimed Mike was his cousin). Another senior guy used the name 'Joe Clark' although later enquiries with the office block manager claimed he also used the name Joe Prosser. From the photos in news articles, I never saw Simon Dempsey or Rebecca MacDonald at the offices.

Apologies if this is somewhat garbled and confusing but part of this was pre-written to put in the comments section of your blog, however for possible technical reasons, I can't seem to be able to post on your blog.

As I previously said, my main concern is that Daniel Snelling's associates will continue to con investors and gullible employers via other companies. 

Thank you for providing the details of one of the investigating officers in the Nouveau/ Finbow Wines case. I shall contact him in due course.

Regards,

********** 

* Mike Harris may well be Michael Snelling, a younger brother of Daniel. He was one of the sales team at Nouveau World Wines Ltd, where his name was Mike Lancaster, and at Finbow Wines ltd, where his name had changed to Mike James.

FSA advice on investments in carbon credits. 

Nouveau World Wines Ltd/Finbow Wines Ltd: the details of the verdicts

Update: 17.30, 17th July 2013
The jury has been unable to reach a majority verdict on Rebecca McDonald regarding Count 1 –  conspiracy to defraud in relation to Nouveau World Wines – see details below. Previously I listed McDonald as guilty on this count. In fact she is guilty with regard to Count 4: conspiracy to defraud in relation to Finbow Wines Ltd. My apologies for this error. 

***

Here are the details of the charges with the verdicts returned yesterday. The jury is still considering Count 1 in relation to Rebecca McDonald over the Finbow fraud. I understand from Southwark Crown Court that His Honour Judge Michael Grieve has now allowed a majority verdict for this count.
 
Simon Dempsey was found not guilty on the two charges he faced – Counts 2 and 4. Daniel Snelling was found guilty on all four counts, Dina Snelling guilty on the two counts she faced and Rebecca McDonald guilty on Count 1. 

Count 1: Conspiracy to defraud, contrary to common law

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling, Dina Louise Snelling and Rebecca Louise McDonald, between the 1st day of January 2007 and the 30th of August 2009, conspired together and with Kelly Louise Humphreys and others to defraud such persons as could be persuaded to make transfers of funds to Nouveau World Wines Ltd for the purpose of investment in good quality wines on their behalf by dishonestly 

a) making false representations that the funds provided by the investors would be directed to the purchase of such wines as represented;

b) failing to direct the funds provided by the investors to the purcahse of wines as represented;

c) providing documentation to investors about their respective purchases which falsely represented the position, and 

d) diverting funds received from investors from the company bank account for their own purposes.

Verdict: Guilty – Daniel Snelling and Dina Snelling
Update (17.00, 17.7.13): Jury unable to come to a majority verdict with regard to Rebecca McDonald. Julian Christopher, the prosecutor, has decided that it is not in the public interest to hold another trial as McDonald has been found guilty on one count.  The charge will remain on 'file', so cannot be resurrected without leave of Southwark Crown Court or the Court of Appeal.   

Count 2: Converting criminal property, contrary to Section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling and Simon Robert Dempsey between the 21st day of April 2009 and 21st day of May 2009 converted funds to the value of £35,000 which were transferred into bank account number *******  with the National Westminster Bank plc in the name of Simon Robert Dempsey from bank account *******  with the National Westminister Bank in the name of Daniel Thomas Snelling and which, as they knew or suspected constituted or represented Daniel Thomas Snelling's benefit from criminal conduct.

Verdict: Guilty Daniel Snelling; not guilty: Simon Dempsey

Count 3: Converting criminal property, contrary to Section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling between the 17th day of August 2009 and 2nd day of October 2009 together with Kelly Louise Humphreys converted funds to the value of £107,948 which were transferred from the bank account number ***-******-*** with the Hang Seng Bank Ltd in Hong Kong in the name of Daniel Thomas Snelling to the First Direct bank account number ******** in the name of Kelly Humphreys, and which, as they knew or suspected, constituted or represented Daniel Thomas Snelling's benefit from criminal conduct.

Verdict: Guilty Daniel Snelling

Kelly Humphreys, Daniel Snelling's girlfriend, faces a trial at a later date. She has just had a baby.  

Count 4: Conspiracy to defraud, contrary to common law.

Particulars of offence:     

Daniel Thomas Snelling, Simon Robert Dempsey, Dina Louise Snelling and Rebecca Louise McDonald, between the 1st day of April 2009 and the 5th day of March 2010, conspired together and with Kelly Louise Humphreys and others to defraud such persons as could be persuaded to make transfers of funds to Finbow Wines Ltd for the purpose of investment in wine in bulk for the purpose of shipment to countries where they could be sold for a large profit on behalf of the investors, by dishonestly 

a) making false representations that the funds provided would be directed to the purchase of wines for re-sale as represented;

b) failing to direct the funds provided by the investors to the purchase of wines as represented;

c) providing documentation to investors about their respective purchases which falsely represented the position, and 

d) diverting funds received from the investors from the company bank account for their own purposes. 

Verdict: Guilty Daniel Snelling, Dina Snelling, Rebecca McDonald   

Not guilty: Simon Dempsey

Sentencing will be on 9th September not before 12 noon at Southwark Crown Court. Daniel Snelling, Dina Snelling and Rebecca McDonald are on conditional bail until then.

The investigation was carried out by the Metropolitan Police with major roles played by officers DC Andrew Bailey and DC Carl Hughes. Julian Christopher QC was the prosecuting barrister for the Crown. 

 

   

Nouveau/Finbow: breaking news - Daniel Snelling guilty

After more than five days of deliberation the jury has returned its verdicts. Daniel Snelling has been found guilty on all four counts, Dina Snelling on two counts and Rebecca McDonald on one count, while Simon Dempsey was found not guilty on all counts.

I am delighted that the jury took its task very seriously spending more than five days to reach its verdicts. I am also very pleased that fraudster Daniel Snelling has been found guilty on all counts. Although I wasn't in court to hear all the evidence, my impression was that his defence, particularly in relation to Finbow was wafer thin. Investors poured around £2.5 million into the hare brained Finbow scheme but only a maximum of around £45,000 was used to buy wine. Finbow purchased and arranged just three shipments of wine. Of these only two went to Hong Kong and one was sent to Nigeria for reasons that were never, as far as I know, explained. Some investors put staggering amounts of money into the Finbow scheme - £290,000 by one deluded investor.

Investors failed to realise that the guarantee given by Finbow that they would buy back the Italian white wine at the end of a year if it hadn't been sold was worth less than the paper it was written on. Cheap Italian wine will not have any resale value a year on even if Snelling  ever had any intention whatever to fulfil his promise. As Snelling's Finbow email persona indicates – Aston because he drove an Aston Martin – his primary concern was to trouser his clients money. 

It was clear that Snelling was planning further frauds. His sister, Dina Snelling, was sent out to Australia at the end of 2009 to set up an office in Sydney to sell eco-friendly investments. They didn't actually have any investments to offer but Dina knew how many staff were required for their new boiler room.

I hope that Snelling receives an appropriately severe sentence not least for wasting everyone's time by not pleading guilty when charged. Was it arrogance, over confidence that made Snelling think he could bluff it out? The cost of the two month was clearly of no more concern to him nor the disruption to the lives of the jury than the impoverishment of investors in Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines was. 

I wonder and will never know how much Simon Dempsey's brief but well delivered defence speech played in his favour with the jury. Towards the end of the trial Dempsey dismissed his legal team because of the rudeness of his barrister towards the jury. Equally I can't imagine that Dina Snelling's truculent and bolshie tone when cross-examined strengthened her case. 

Snelling worked for the Australian wine investment scam company, Wine Orb, and then for European Fine Wines Ltd (see also EFWines Ltd) in Bromley. Nouveau World Wines Ltd was set up in September 2004 but did not start trading until early 2006 when the company changed its name from Infinite Rockall Services Limited. Daniel Snelling became a director on 20th May 2006.    

The investigation was carried out by the Metropolitan Police with major roles played by officers DC Andrew Bailey and DC Carl Hughes.

Sentencing will be on 9th September at Southwark Crown Court. 

    

 

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines fraud: the jury remains out.

The jury in the Nouveau/Finbow trial (Southwark Crown Court, London) is continuing its deliberations today. The jury has been considering its verdicts since 11am on Monday, although they did not sit on Wednesday. There are four defendants and four counts to consider.

Update: 14.7.2013: Jury will continue their deliberations on Monday. 

Update: 15.7.2013: Jury will continue their deliberations on Tuesday 

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow fraud trial: jury is out

The jury in the Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines fraud trial (Southwark Crown Court) were sent out at 11am on Monday to consider their verdict. They deliberated through Monday and Tuesday. Today the jury is not sitting but will continue their discussions on Thursday.

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines: Thursday 4th July

Closing speeches for Simon Dempsey and Rebecca McDonald

Simon Dempsey, one of the defendants in the Finbow trial, told the judge on Monday that he had decided to dispense with the services of his legal team. He was unhappy with the way that McDonogh, his counsel, was addressing the jury. Dempsey decided to represent himself

His Honor Judge Michael Grieve offered Dempsey the opportunity to have further legal advice and time to prepare his speech to the jury. The judge told the jury not to hold Dempsey's decision to represent himself against him.

Simon Dempsey's speech

Dempsey gave his speech from within the court facing the jury - not from the glassed in dock.

He started by explaining why he had dismissed hid defence team: McDonogh's tone in his speech to the jury was rude and discourteous. Dempsey described himself as old school - holding open doors for people etc. 

He was not involved in any scam at Finbow - there was no scam at the company when he left in October 2009. He met Daniel Snelling for the first time in January 2009. 

To be concluded

Rebecca McDonald

Steve Bailey, her counsel, told the jury that Rebecca McDonald had too much to lose for no gain if she had been involved in a conspiracy to defraud investors. She essentially provided secretarial services with information given to her by Danial Snelling on a 'need to know basis'. She received nothing in addition to her salary – no bonuses, no car, no cosmetic surgery etc.

To be concluded.  

The judge started his summing up in the afternoon. 

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines: the charges

Defendants:

Simon Robert Dempsey

Rebecca Louise McDonald

Daniel Thomas Snelling

Dina Louise Snelling

The case before His Honour Judge Michael Grieve QC is in Court 8 at Southwark CrownCourt, London SE1. In the indictment there are four charges. The defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which are:

Count 1: Conspiracy to defraud, contrary to common law

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling, Dina Louise Snelling and Rebecca Louise McDonald, between the 1st day of January 2007 and the 30th of August 2009, conspired together and with Kelly Louise Humphreys and others to defraud such persons as could be persuaded to make transfers of funds to Nouveau World Wines Ltd for the purpose of investment in good quality wines on their behalf by dishonestly 

a) making false representations that the funds provided by the investors would be directed to the purchase of such wines as represented;

b) failing to direct the funds provided by the investors to the purcahse of wines as represented;

c) providing documentation to investors about their respective purchases which falsely represented the position, and 

d) diverting funds received from investors from the company bank account for their own purposes.

Count 2: Converting criminal property, contrary to Section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling and Simon Robert Dempsey between the 21st day of April 2009 and 21st day of May 2009 converted funds to the value of £35,000 which were transferred into bank account number *******  with the National Westminster Bank plc in the name of Simon Robert Dempsey from bank account *******  with the National Westminister Bank in the name of Daniel Thomas Snelling and which, as they knew or suspected constituted or represented Daniel Thomas Snelling's benefit from criminal conduct.

Count 3: Converting criminal property, contrary to Section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Particulars of offence:

Daniel Thomas Snelling between the 17th day of August 2009 and 2nd day of October 2009 together with Kelly Louise Humphreys converted funds to the value of £107,948 which were transferred from the bank account number ***-******-*** with the Hang Seng Bank Ltd in Hong Kong in the name of Daniel Thomas Snelling to the First Direct bank account number ******** in the name of Kelly Humphreys, and which, as they knew or suspected, constituted or represented Daniel Thomas Snelling's benefit from criminal conduct.

Count 4: Conspiracy to defraud, contrary to common law.

Particulars of offence:     

Daniel Thomas Snelling, Simon Robert Dempsey, Dina Louise Snelling and Rebecca Louise McDonald, between the 1st day of April 2009 and the 5th day of March 2010, conspired together and with Kelly Louise Humphreys and others to defraud such persons as could be persuaded to make transfers of funds to Finbow Wines Ltd for the purpose of investment in wine in bulk for the purpose of shipment to countries where they could be sold for a large profit on behalf of the investors, by dishonestly 

a) making false representations that the funds provided would be directed to the purchase of wines for re-sale as represented;

b) failing to direct the funds provided by the investors to the purchase of wines as represented;

c) providing documentation to investors about their respective purchases which falsely represented the position, and 

d) diverting funds received from the investors from the company bank account for their own purposes.      

**

Proceedings in the case have been delayed – closing speeches have been made on behalf of Daniel and Dina Snelling. The court will sit again tomorrow morning and hear closing speeches for Simon Dempsey and Rebecca McDonald. His Honour Judge Michael Grieve will then sum up and give directions to the jury, before they retire to consider their verdict.    

   

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines trial: closing speeches

Defendants:

Simon Robert Dempsey

Rebecca Louise McDonald

Daniel Thomas Snelling

Dina Louise Snelling

The case before His Honour Judge Michael Grieve QC  is in Court 8 at Southwark CrownCourt, London SE1.

The defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges. 

 

By the middle of last week the trial had moved into the closing speeches with just the judge's summing up and directions to the jury before the jury retires to consider its verdict. 

Prosecution: Julian Christopher QC

Starting his closing speech Julian Christopher invited the jury to take a step back and consider the overview. Was Nouveau World Wines a fraud or was it a question of theft by Sultan Trad and then Reset along with incompetence from Winevaults? Reset was based in Spain with its registered office in Cyprus, an island it couldn't spell correctly on its correspondence. Was it likely that Nouveau World Wines would have the misfortunate to be shafted by its suppliers twice in succession?

In his police interview in March 2010 Daniel Snelling spoke of a 15%-25% mark up on the wines. Now in his evidence to the court he claimed it was much higher – up to 50%. What he told the police in 2010 is more likely to be accurate. The higher mark up now cited by Snelling is an attempt to hide the huge discrepancy between the wine actually bought and the amount that was sold to the investors.

Over the period covered, Nouveau World Wines spent just under £450,000. If Sultan Trad was giving Nouveau credit then at a 20% mark up they would have been extending Nouveau £1 million in credit, while at 50% it would have been £1.5 million credit. 

Regarding the claims of wine lost through inefficiency at Winevaults, the wrong years for Mollydooker and the Greenock Creek Apricot Block "doesn't begin to explain what happened to the 36,000 bottles the investors thought they had bought".

There was a complete lack of any records of what had been bought, what had been sold and how many bottles there were left. Then the false paperwork - invoices from Global Cellars -  created at the end of March and beginning of April 2009 when Mr Streeter from the Companies Investigation Branch was looking into the company. The invoices were adjusted with the prices for the wines lowered. The second set of invoices were created on Dina Snelling's laptop, which had her name as the log in and her fingerprints were found on the laptop.

Christopher said that Dina Snelling and Rebecca McDonald were brought into the conspiracy because being family members they could be trusted by Daniel Snelling. His sister and cousin filled that role perfectly. Bringing in strangers to the administration would have meant that they would discover the truth.

Diana's account of sending two large packages of investors' documentation out to Winevaults in Australia was clearly a fabrication. There was no email traffic between Nouveau and Winevaults when the packages didn't arrive. 

Rebecca McDonald did not set up records when she joined in September 2008. The records were created when Streeter started his investigation. McDonald's account made no sense - she chose a ridiculous system that made amending and updating of the records very laborious.

Finbow

Simon Dempsey, Dina Snelling's boyfriend, was brought in to hide the trail of money from Nouveau to Finbow. The reason given for Dempsey being brought on board was that he could speak French. However, this skill was never used. Investors in Finbow paid out £2 million but only two containers of wine were sent to Hong Kong with each container carrying around £12,000 of wine, while the third container went to Nigeria. Investors paid for around one million bottles of wine.

Finbow was clearly Daniel Snelling's company - he owned it and ran it. However, when interviewed by the police Daniel Snelling claimed that he was only a consultant to Finbow employed because of his network of contacts in France, Italy and the UK. If asked, he would assist in the sourcing of wine and would give advice. Simon Dempsey and Paul Rees were running Finbow. He did not know the politics of the company. The reality was very different - Finbow was Daniel Snelling. 

With Finbow none of the lessons of Nouveau were learnt. No records were kept. If it had been a legitimate business they would have been. 

When Rebecca McDonald left in February 2010 Daniel had to call Dina back from Australia to run the office. He needed someone in place who he could trust.

Dorian Lovell-Pank - counsel for Daniel Snelling

Lovell-Pank began his speech in defence of Daniel Snelling by quoting Confucius "man, who skates on this ice must skate fast". He claimed that Julian Christopher had swept through the case in his closing speech. The prosecution's case was based on the ideal world not the real world that we know. Their case is based on businesses run in a particular way - an ideal model. In the real world there are business failures, mistakes are made, records are not always up to date.

"The whole thing unravelled into an awful mess." "Failure is not the same thing as crime. This was not a criminal enterprise. The defendants are never criminals. The people running these businesses are not crooks."

This took court proceedings up to the close of Wednesday 26th June. I have been unable to get to court since then and will not be back in court before Wednesday 3rd July.