Wine Name:

Tuesday, 26 June 2018

Twelve By Seventy Five Limited – exchange DRC for an unsaleable investment

Twelve By Seventy Five Ltd, now run by sole director Sultan Rashid, pride themselves on their expertise:  

 'We ensure your portfolio is expertly and reliably managed for the best results and keep in touch with you through portfolio valuations and market forecasts.'

'We provide unique and personal advice on how to make a good financial return within this market.'  

 'We ensure your portfolio is expertly 
and reliably managed for the best results'

For whom, please?

'Perfect wine portfolio?'

Sell us your DRC and we will give 
you a dead duck wine investment 

A good financial return? For whom I have to wonder ...... having been contacted by BV, whose father was persuaded to exchange his portfolio of DRC wines for variants of “Excellence de Belliard” wines, which have proved be a dead duck investment – what a surprise!

 From the Twelve By Seventy Five website 
DRC 2002 cited but curiously no mention of Excellence de Belliard 

Sultan Rashid's Linkedin profile
'My companies goal is to create a straight forward, transparent, personally tailored to the client Wine Investment Brokerage. After working my way up to Senior broker at a previous company I saw a gap in the market. This gap in the market is a wine investment company that solely has the clients best interests as number one priority. This is the future of wine investment.

My passion is inventing new, more innovative ways for people that are new or familiar to the industry to get the best understanding and profits from there investments, with a broker they can trust and rely on to have there (sic) best interest as paramount.

Open letter to Mr Sultan Rashid, Director, Twelve By Seventy Five Limited from BV:

Without Prejudice, save as to costs

I set out below my family’s experience of investing through Twelve By Seventy Five Limited (TBSF). All statements of fact can be evidenced.  


In early 2014 my (now late) father held significant holdings of DRC and other well-known investment grade wines.

At this time, he was contacted by Mr Riccardo De’Nardis, a co-director, along with yourself, of newly formed wine brokerage, Twelve By Seventy Five Limited (TBSF). 

Mr De’Nardis had been involved in the sale of the DRC portfolio to my father (in his previous role at Capital Vintners) and used this former contact to introduce my father to TBSF.

During the next three years my father was advised by, and traded through, TBSF. This led to his existing portfolio being systematically sold to TBSF and reinvested (primarily) in variants of “Excellence de Belliard” wines, purchased from TBSF, at an invoiced value amounting to some £390,000.

These wines have proved to be basically unsaleable:

  • No other broker I have offered them to has been remotely interested in making any offer for them.
  • One broker informed me they were “about as illiquid as it is possible to be” in terms of investment.
  • TBSF has had two failed attempts to sell small tranches of the portfolio, once before my father’s death and once subsequent to it.  

  • TBSF have not been able to recommend any other credible disposal route.

This is despite my father being led to believe that the investments were to be short term in nature; to quote a member of your staff, “flipped” for a quick profit.  In light of these facts I can only conclude that TBSF either offered catastrophically bad (negligent) advice to my father, or deliberately set out to defraud him.  

Recovery To date

Subsequent to my father’s death in February 2017 I reconciled all the transactions he had made with TBSF to both bank statements and to the wines present in his warehouse accounts.

This exercise identified a number of “administrative anomalies”, which led (over time) to the recovery of £32,000 from TBSF. 

Subsequent to this, TBSF agreed to help sell the portfolio off.  However, this did not go well and in Summer 2017 I finally lost patience with TBSF’s increasingly implausible excuses for failing to sell a small tranche of the Belliard portfolio. I therefore formally confronted Mr De’Nardis with my conclusion that the value of the wines had been significantly misrepresented to my father by TBSF (either fraudulently or negligently).

After prolonged exchanges, during which Mr De’Nardis left TBSF suddenly and handed over to you, we eventually reached a “settlement agreement” during Summer 2017, involving the return of the wines to TBSF for a payment of £275,000 spread over two years.  However, you ultimately refused to sign it, claiming to have problems with your business and personal banking arrangements.

Subsequent to this we have managed to agree two additional payments, against threats of a court process being initiated, amounting to £28,000.  This leaves our outstanding claim at £330,000.

Current Situation

TBSF’s accounts to January 2017 show that the two directors at that time, Mr De’Nardis and yourself, were able to take £657,000 in directors’ loans from the business.  The business does not have significant capital, nor any borrowings, so this implies some profitable and highly cash generative trading has taken place.  No direct link to your dealings with my father can be proved from the information available, but I set out below an example of one en-primeur deal TBSF did with him, for which the wines landed in his warehouse account in March this year:

10 cases of L'EXCELLENCE DE BELLIARD PAUILLAC 2015 12X75CL (en primeur) :

Stated in-bond value           £ 10,000

Invoiced value                    £ 21,000

Uplift                                 £ 11,000

The sales invoice does not disclose any such uplift, but I assume that this is your “margin” on what is basically a risk-free transaction for your business.

Subsequent to Mr De’Nardis’ departure, you are now the sole director.  You no longer mention banking issues but continue to claim to be unable to offer any kind of immediate settlement (despite the money potentially available from the repayment of the directors’ loans).  You recently indicated willingness to sign a new settlement agreement but then refused to respond when sent a draft for signature.  In the meantime, it appears that TBSF is changing focus, to work on new ventures, namely “The Wine Drinker” and “Two Thirsty Bulldogs”, and your responses to my emails are often long delayed and incomplete.

This has now been going on for well over a year and needs to be resolved, one way or another.  I have therefore given up on privately discussing this matter with you.  This letter is the first step in a series of escalations I plan to make to bring this issue to a conclusion.  However, I remain open to constructive proposals in relation to how this might be achieved

Yours sincerely

(name withheld to protect my father’s identity)

June 2018


My view:
What appalling account of an elderly man being misled – either because Twelve by Seventy Five run then by Sultan Rashid and Riccardo De’Nardis had no idea about wine investment despite their claims of expertise or they set out to relieve BV's father of his DRC wines, that are certainly of investment potential, and replace them with variants of “Excellence de Belliard”, which nobody wants to buy. So either gross incompetence or very sharp practice at best.

investdrinks is aware that another client of Twelve By Seventy Five has made a complaint to Action Fraud. I understand that this client, an elderly woman – is this a coincidence or do Twelve-By-Seventy-Five Ltd target the elderly – is down by around £100K on wine that is owed to her. Just two clients are owed £430,000 by Rashid's Twelve-By-Seventy-Five Ltd.

Sultan Rashid has two new ventures* (The Wine Drinker and Two Thirsty Bulldogs), to which I will certainly be giving a very wide berth: 

 His ex-partner Riccardo De’Nardis set up a new company – Dens Global Ltd – on 12th July 2017. I will also be avoiding this company. 

'deformation of character'
* Sultan Rashid objects to the mention of his two new ventures and has threatened me with legal action if news of Rashid's new ventures are no removed from this post:

'You are right with me taking over the company and many changes have taken place since me doing so. The fact you mention my two new companies is deformation of character and I ask for you to remove this ASAP, otherwise I will have no choice to get my lawyers involved and sue you for this. Like i mentioned I have no issue with you mentioned TBSV, due to this situation being directly affiliated with this company. 

If this The wine drinker and Two thirsty bulldogs are not removed from your blog within 24 hours I will have no other option than to take action.' 

Extract of email sent by Sultan Rashid on 26.6.2018 @11.35
I have asked Rashid how mention of two companies that he has formed through UK Companies House and cited on his company's website and emails is 'deformation (defamation) of character'. I await Rashid's reply with interest.    


Friday, 22 June 2018

Montevino Partners/ Spirited Ventures – police warning of possible recovery fraud

 PS Escrow – about us

 Claiming 15 years experience but website 
set up in May 2018

A warning from Hertfordshire Police's Serious Fraud and Cyper Unit has recently been sent to clients of the now failed Montevino Partners/Spirited Ventures warning of possible recovery fraud by PS Escrow mediation in Dubai:

I am confident that the Dubai company has no connection with PS Escrow Inc in Los Angeles.  

Police warning: 

20th June 2018

Dear Sir/Madam,


My apologies for contacting some of you out of the blue. I was the officer asked to look at a complaint made by some customers of Montevino Partners/Spirited Ventures that the companies were responsible for committing a fraud. Although one member of staff, Mr Michael MOORE was clearly a fraudster, and has been convicted of fraud, I could not prove that Montevino Partners/Spirited Ventures was a fraudulent vehicle or that it committed a fraud (as opposed to being a badly run business).

The reason I am contacting some of you for the first time, is that I have been made aware that some former investors have been contacted by a male claiming to be a David Halliday of Pearson Stone (PS Escrow) company in Dubai, and offering to buy back wine for well over the purchase price, and offering compensation.

The company website and e-mail domain appears on research to have been registered on 08/05/2018, and if you have had a chance to look at the website, you will have probably noticed it is rather a thin site, and contains such odd turns of phrase as

“We cannot operate a robotic service or offer a naive on-line facility as this would not aid our client’s greatest. We deal with transactions that require an unmeasurable amount of care and precision and as such do so with our client’s interest at the basis.”

I have spoken with Action Fraud, who have confirmed that have already received a complaint of fraud against this company with regards to “Park First Limited” investments, and appear to have been offering similar compensation – at a cost. I can not confirm that Pearson Stone Escrow Mediation is a fraud, however I strongly suspect that this is a Recovery Fraud (please see the action fraud information on this type of fraud by either clicking on the link ( or for the more cautious of you go to the Action Fraud website and search for “Recovery Fraud”), and would recommend you are cautious if this company or a similar company contacts you – just because the telephone number appears to be in Dubai, it is very easy to buy access to a virtual telephone number that can be based anywhere in the world.

If you have paid money/given wine to this company and not received what you were expecting, I would urge you to report the matter to Action Fraud.

If you have any questions please feel free to give me a call.




cyber crime web image v1 (portrait)
( TEL: 01707638417
2 FAX: 01707638472

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Crimson Fine Wines – two directors banned 20 years in total


Craig Cooper and Jefferey Kushner, the two directors of Crimson Fine Wines Ltd, which was closed in the public interest on 17th August 2015 in the High Court in London, have been banned from acting as directors of UK companies for a total of 20 years. 

The company was incorporated was incorporated on 21st February 2011 with Craig Cooper and Jeffrey Kushner as directors. Cooper was only very briefly a director resigning on 23rd March 2011. However, as Kushner is resident in Canada, it was Cooper who ran the company. 


Crimson's explanation of the advantages of wine investment:

Crimson Fine Wines investment pitch did indeed turn out to be a 'story' with unfortunate investors owed £989,258 in unpurchased wine. 


Press release from The Insolvency Service:

'Directors’ conduct in fine wine investment scam leaves sour taste 

Two directors of a company that traded in fine wines have been disqualified for a combined 20 years, following an Insolvency Service investigation. 

Customers who thought they were investing in fine wines investment scheme have been left out of pocket by nearly £1 million.

The investigation by the Insolvency Service found that Crimson Fine Wines Limited, based initially in London and then in Sittingbourne in Kent, used cold calling tactics and then failed to purchase or allocate wines to customers who had paid for their investments. The scheme offered investors returns over 12 months to five years, at a time when they claimed the property market and shares were less attractive.

The Secretary of State for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy accepted disqualification undertakings from Craig Cooper and Jefferey Kushner, preventing them from acting as directors for 11 and 9 years respectively.

Kushner was the listed director of Crimson Fine Wines Limited but lived in Canada, and allowed Cooper, who had previous experience in the industry, to run the operation.

As a result of this failure, at the time of liquidation of Crimson Fine Wines Limited there was insufficient wine held in the bonded warehouse to satisfy customers’ claims.

Additionally, Cooper used the company’s bank account for his own personal benefit, used his own personal bank account for the receipt of company funds and was paid at least one third share of £114,106 in dividends. Kushner was negligent in failing to monitor the company account, allowing it to be used for non-commercial benefits, but also received at least one third share of £114,106 in dividends.

Customer claims in the liquidation totalled £989,258, of the overall debts on liquidation of £1,080,724.

Karen Jackson, Official Receiver, said:

One of the main purposes of the Company Directors Disqualification Act is to ensure proper standards of conduct of company directors are maintained and to raise those standards where appropriate.

These disqualifications should serve as a reminder that the Insolvency Service will investigate unacceptable conduct by company directors.

The Insolvency Service will take action against directors who do not take their obligations seriously and abuse their position.

Notes to editors

Jeffrey Kushner’s date of birth is December 1980 and he resides in Ontario, Canada.
Craig Cooper’s date of birth is January 1983 and he resides in Chatham, Kent.

Crimson Fine Wines Ltd (CRO No. 07537346) was incorporated on 15 January 2008 and latterly traded from Sears Business Centre, 3-9 Station Street, Sittingbourne, United Kingdom, ME10 3DU.

Cooper was initially appointed as the company’s co-director with Kushner from incorporation on 1 February 2011. Cooper then resigned as a director at Companies House on 22 March 2011 but continued to act as a director until the company went into liquidation on 17 August 2015. The estimated deficiency at the date of Liquidation was £1,080,724.

On 18 July 2017, the Secretary of State accepted a Disqualification Undertaking from Craig Cooper, effective from 8 August 2017, for 11 years.

On 25 May 2017, the Secretary of State accepted a Disqualification Undertaking from Jeffrey Kushner, effective from 15 June 2017, for 9 years.

A disqualification order has the effect that without specific permission of a court, a person with a disqualification cannot:

  • act as a director of a company
  • take part, directly or indirectly, in the promotion, formation or management of a company or limited liability partnership
  • be a receiver of a company’s property
Disqualification undertakings are the administrative equivalent of a disqualification order but do not involve court proceedings.
Persons subject to a disqualification order are bound by a range of other restrictions.'