Fraudster Daniel Snelling ordered to pay £714,588.28

Daniel Snelling

Many thanks to Mr Gilchrist for bringing this to my attention. Daniel Snelling convicted in July 2013 for fraud and money laundering for running the Nouveau World Wines and Finbow wine investment scams. 

'Last week (15th May 2015) Daniel Snelling was treated to an excursion from his prison cell. He was brought back to Southwark Crown Court to appear in front of the judge, who sentenced him to jail in 2013. The judge's message to Snelling was clear - "Cough up the rest of the loot or get banged up for longer!"'

Court News UK (15th May 2015):
“ SNELLING: FINE WINES CONMAN ORDERED TO PAY BACK £700K 

A crooked businessman who persuaded hundreds of elderly investors to hand over their life savings in a £4.5million fine wine scam has been ordered to repay £714,000.

Daniel Snelling, 40, seduced investors into ploughing thousands of pounds into Australian plonk billed as 'the best money could buy' from Nouveau World Wines. 

Working with his sister Dina Snelling, 37, and their cousin Rebecca McDonald, 44, he promised to sell the wine at huge profits after three years in 'premium' storage.

Daniel Snelling used his ill-gotten gains to enjoy an 'extravagant' lifestyle including renting flash cars and luxury homes and enjoying numerous holidays to Australia.

Dina indulged in cosmetic surgery and received 'travel expenses' for trips to Oz.

Daniel Snelling, jailed for seven and a half years in September 2013, returned to Southwark Crown Court for a confiscation hearing.

Judge Michael Grieve QC said: 'I make a finding by agreement that Mr Snelling's overall benefit arising out of these proceedings under the confiscation order, proceedings following his conviction, is £1,814,248.

'The realisable amount is £714,588.28, of which £100,000 constitutes hidden assets.' Judge Grieve ordered the confiscation amount of £714,588.28 should be paid in compensation to the victims of the fraud.

Snelling must now cough up the cash within six months or face a further three and a half years in jail.....”

The full script of the court report can be found on this link:

http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/newsgallery/?page=5&news_id=40869

Nouveau World Wines/Finbow Wines: breaking news – Daniel Snelling jailed 7.5 years, Rebecca McDonald: 3 years

Daniel Snelling gets 7.5 years jail

His Honour Judge Grieve QC sentenced Daniel Snelling to 7.5 years imprisonment on conspiracy to defraud and money laundering. He also banned Snelling from acting as a director for 15 years and issued a five year serious crime prevention order against him. Taking the four counts individually Snelling was sentenced to a total of 17 years. However, as they will run concurrently he will only serve 7.5 years, which was the most serious sentence and given on conspiracy to defraud in relation to Finbow Wines Ltd.

This crime prevention order will come into force on Snelling's release from prison and essentially mean that his life will be under surveillance: having to disclose emails, his financial affairs, buying internet domains, etc. to the police. This should make it difficult for Daniel Snelling to reoffend at least for the first five years after his release from prison. It is likely to have more affect than his ban as a director as shadow directors are commonly used and there is nothing to stop a banned director running a partnership as this does not contravene the ban as Stephen Cleeve demonstrated by flogging worthless plots of agricultural land through European Land Sales.    

Rebecca McDonald was sentenced to three years for conspiracy to defraud in relation to Finbow. Snelling and McDonald can be released on licence once they have served half their sentences.

In his remarks His Honour Judge Grieve QC rejected Dorian Lovell-Pank's plea on behalf of Snelling that the clients of Nouveau and Finbow were sophisticated investors. Grieve said that many of them were 'elderly and vulnerable'. He did accept that Nouveau World Wines Ltd was originally a legitimate company but soon became fraudulent. Given Daniel Snelling's track record, including working for Wine Orb in Australia as well as for Andrew Dunne at Countrywide, I find this an unlikely proposition, although it may well have become increasingly fraudulent as time went on. 

Judge Grieve said that Snelling had used the proceeds to fund an extravagant life-style – expensive rented flats in Docklands, prestige cars including an Aston Martin, frequent travel and even more frequent wads of cash. He also said that Daniel Snelling was largely responsible for the predicament that Dina Snelling and Rebecca McDonald now find themselves in.   

In sentencing Rebecca McDonald Judge Grieve cited her role as book keeper at Finbow, which included providing a false audit trail. He accepted that she probably wasn't knowingly involved from the start of Finbow – "an out and out fraud" – and that her involvement may have only have lasted a couple of months. He accepted that she was previously of "impeccable character" and that apart from her salary she did not benefit materially from the fraud. He also accepted that the chance of her reoffending was "very remote". 

There was considerable surprise and shock amongst Rebecca McDonald's 20 or more supporters when her sentence was announced. I had thought that she might get a suspended sentence but it may be that the minimum sentence that can be given for conspiracy to defraud makes this impossible.

It is difficult to see that McDonald's sentence is proportional in the light of the 7.5 years given to Daniel Snelling, however, McDonald's sentence does send out a message that if you suspect you are involved in a fraud get out quickly and report your suspicions through Action Fraud, for example.

In the light of McDonald's three years on one count of conspiracy to defraud,  it looks likely that Dina Snelling could be facing five years or more when she is sentenced on 11th October on two counts of conspiracy.

I have to wonder why Daniel Snelling thought it was a good idea to plead not guilty and go through all the long trial, when an early guilty plea would have meant a reduced sentence.                 

      

 

Nouveau World Wines/ Finbow sentencing fiasco

Daniel Snelling

In a surprise development the sentencing of Daniel Snelling on all four counts in the Nouveau World Wines Ltd/Finbow Wines Ltd fraud and Rebecca McDonald in respect to conspiracy to defraud in relation to Finbow Wines Ltd has been adjourned until tomorrow afternoon – around 2pm at Court 3.

A crowded Court 3 at Southwark Crown Court was stunned when His Honour Judge Grieve QC announced around 3.45pm that sentencing would have to be delayed because all Southwark courts could not continue beyond 4pm today due apparently to a community event. There were shouts of "you must be joking" from the public galleries, which included some 20 family and friends present to support Rebecca McDonald.

The sentencing hearing started a little after 2pm and by just after 3.30pm the Judge had heard submissions from the Crown and pleas of mitigation from counsel for Daniel Snelling and Rebecca McDonald. The court then rose for the judge to consider these submissions. His Honour Judge Grieve returned ten minutes later to make his bombshell announcement. He apologised profusely for the anguish this delay will cause the defendants but the circumstances were beyond his control.  

This very unfortunate delay was obviously particularly distressing for Rebecca McDonald. 

Dina Snelling was not present in court – she has been suffering from severe depression and was admitted briefly to hospital last week. She will be seeing a psychiatrist on 19th September. Dina Snelling will be sentenced once the judge receives the psychiatrist's report –  the sentencing date has been fixed for 11th October.

In relation to Daniel Snelling the Crown has applied that he be banned from serving as a UK director  – the maximum ban is 15 years. Also that a Serious Crime Prevention Order be issued against him and for this to apply from the time of his release from prison. Under a Serious Crime Prevention Order Snelling would have to reveal all of his financial transactions to the police. 

The process of issuing confiscation orders against the Snellings and McDonald has been set in train. 

The trial date for 32-year-old Kelly Humphreys, Daniel Snelling's girl friend. It is estimated to last three to four weeks. Humphreys is charged with three counts: conspiracy to defraud in relation to both Nouveau World Wines Ltd and Finbow Wines Ltd as well as money laundering (Count 3 – see charges here). 

Humphreys was originally due to stand trial with the others but was severed from the trial as she was pregnant.
             

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 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. 

Nouveau World Wines/ Finbow 24th-25th June: Rebecca McDonald's evidence

24th June 2013

Rebecca (Becky) McDonald gave evidence to her defence counsel: Steve Bailey. She had started on Friday - I was not present in court for this. 

Much of her evidence was taken up with going through invoices and payments made by Finbow Wines with Rebecca McDonald giving details of the various payments. I assume that a similar exercise had been conducted by her counsel with payments made during McDonald’s time with Nouveau World Wines. She started there in September 2008.  

McDonald explained that she was involved with accounts covering sales and clients but not after-sales. She had no way of knowing how much wine had been bought, not involved in buying wine and she had no influence over company decisions.

 Among the invoices was one to Eurodirect in July 2009 for the purchase of 6000 leads to be used for the start up of Finbow Wines Ltd. 

McDonald believed that Finbow’s ‘Buy Back Guarantee’ was genuine. She was “horrified to hear a recording of ‘manipulative bullying’ sales tactics. Had she known of this in September 2009 she “would have walked away – would have resigned”.

 She was “horrified that some investors had paid in £150,000 and had nothing to show for it but had no idea” that this was happening. McDonald thought that enough wine was being bought – “thousands of bottles of wine sufficient to cover the wine bought by investors”. She had nothing to do with the brokers.

 McDonald was taken through a number of invoices and payments to Paul Kelly and his various companies by her counsel. The invoices showed that Kelly was arranged to pay the rent for some people in Finbow including Daniel Snelling and xxxxxx as well as for various cars including a Porsche, which she queried, a Range Rover, a Q 5 (Audi) and a TT Audi. Kelly charged a commission which varied between 10%-15%.

McDonald had a BMW, which she bought seven years ago in a one-off payment of £13,000 before she joined Nouveau/Finbow. Her mortgage payments came out of her salary of £30,000 a year and she received no bonuses.

McDonald explained that often she had to make the transfers before receiving an invoice from Paul Kelly and that she often had to chase him on several occasion to obtain and invoice. “I tried my hardest to keep a track of what was going out.” In October 2009 she created a series of spread sheets detailing payments for cars, rents etc and set them at the end of every month to Daniel and to xxxxxx.

Asked about a company called M to M Ltd, McDonald replied that this “was part of Daniel’s wider plans”.  She was acting under instructions from others in the company and in December 2009 had no concerns over the company’s credibility.  Bailey asked her about a series of duplicate invoices – one showing payments required for cars, rents etc. with a second one for wine for the same amount. McDonald said that she had not seen the invoices for wine. She had no idea who had put the second invoices into the file but that these invoices could have been filed by other people in the office. 

At the end of January 2010 McDonald decided that she could no longer continue to work for Finbow and on 29th January sent a letter to Paul Rees, then Finbow’s director, saying she was resigning with immediate effect but would work out her one month notice period. ‘It had been a real pleasure working with you’ (Rees).McDonald explained that she was not comfortable with the amount of money going out of the company. “I was spending more time in the bank than in the office. It was impossible to keep on top of it. She had not spoken to Daniel because he was stepping back from the company.McDonald was then questioned by Simon Dempsey’s counsel. Her previous employment had been with KPMG where she had worked for 14 years as a PA to one of the senior partners managing his diary. She was line manger for support staff. There was no accountancy involved. She earned £34,000 a year. At Nouveau/Finbow her salary was £30,000.

In January 2010 large amounts of cash were going out Finbow. “Money was being spent like it was going out of fashion….so much cash was going out”. Back in October she hadn’t questioned it because there was “a lot of money coming in”. “The month to month bills were being covered.” In January 2010 much more cash was going out of the company than was coming in. McDonald became concerned – “this is not right”.      

Tuesday 25th

Cross-examination by Julian Christopher
McDonald explained that she started at Nouveau in September 2008 to help Dina Snelling with the admin. At the time “there were no records to speak of – no proper paperwork in place”. Her job was to sort out the paperwork. She shared an office with Dina Snelling and had a chat with Dina about recordkeeping but no detailed discussion.  McDonald dealt with the paperwork that was there. She did not deal with records of how much wine was bought and had nothing to do with the stock of wine. McDonald set up a system for recording investors’ purchases. 

Christopher asked her about the CIB (Companies Investigation Branch) investigation by Mr Streeter in March and April 2009. He suggested that the records had been created to answer Streeter’s questions about how much wine had been bought by investors and how much had been purchased by the company. Rather than being created in September 2008, they were created in March 2009. McDonald said that this was not correct. She had set up the system in September 2008 and that it was a work in progress. There was reference to a document that post-dated Streeter’s investigation but McDonald agreed that an earlier version would have been shown to him. Christopher asked why only clients with surnames A-K were recorded and that for many investors listed the column referring to stock in Winevaults was blank. McDonald did not know. She didn’t think that she had put those columns into the document and after she had created the template she had passed it over to Dina for it to be kept up to date. Christopher also asked her why the filing system adopted was so cumbersome for new names of investors.  

During Streeter’s investigation she had asked Daniel Snelling for details of inventory at Winevaults but he did not produce it. Only a few big investors had their own accounts at Winevaults. The rest of the wine was in the Nouveau World Wines account at Winevaults. When Daniel Snelling returned from Australia in early May 2009 he said that he had been shafted and that only half the wine that Nouveau World Wines had ordered had actually been purchased. McDonald said she believed that Daniel was referring to Sultan Trad here.She had no dealings with the Global Wine invoices. Dina Snelling’s evidence was that Becky had been involved. She had no dealings with Riddingtons (accountants in Sidcup), over wine stocks – Daniel Snelling handled this.

-->

McDonald was asked about a complaint from investor Peter Podmore that involved an exchange of emails on 4th and 9th March. Podmore was querying why some of the wines that he had bought were not in storage at Winevaults in Sydney, Australia. He was threatening to expose Nouveau through a blog post and was demanding a full return of his money. Podmore had been in contact with Winevaults.

On 9th March Dina Snelling sent an email to Winevaults that there was 'a discrepancy' over Podmore's paperwork. McDonald was copied into this email. The same day Dina sent an email to Podmore telling him that ‘there is a discrepancy’ in you wine stocks and ‘until I hear from Winevaults themselves I can’t give you the information you require’. McDonald was not copied into this email. Christopher said that Winevaults were being told one thing and Podmore another.   

On the advice of Riddingtons Nouveau World Wine was put into liquidation. McDonald explained that Finbow was always part of Daniel’s plans. Although Simon Dempsey was the director, it was Daniel’s company. He was running the company and owned it. The advice from Riddingtons was that Daniel Snelling might to barred as a director because of what had happened to Nouveau World Wines.

Use of false namesWhen Finbow was starting up McDonald was asked to change the name she used in the office in order to hide the connection with Nouveau World Wines - not to link Finbow and Nouveau.

She declined to use a false name but did use her second name Louise rather than Rebecca. Others in the company did change their false names for the changeover from Nouveau to Finbow. Michael Lancaster (Michael Snelling) became Michael Jones. Lucy Jones (Dina Snelling) became Harriet Harbridge, while Daniel Snelling was known as Aston. McDonald said the use of false names did not concern her - she was used to the traders using them. Christopher asked whether Dina Snelling was an opener at Finbow.  He remarked that Dina Snelling had kept the name Lucy Jones during the time of Nouveau World Wines for the sake of 'consistency'. Now the change of name was to "avoid consistency".