Please post Date, Time, Heading of any news released in any official format by Stanelco than you deem relevant to above proposed report.

Thanks in anticipation.

Greekman.

Thanks Greek.

Hmmm, yes thanks Greek,................LSE, is that an abbreviation of Let Stanelco Exaggerate?

Possibly. In my last job the CPS was referred to as The Criminal Protection Society.
(See the Talk To Yourself Thread).

Just noticed this thread, well done Greek, in my view if you don't ask you won't get! Maybe also send a copy of the letter to the top corporate holders, you never know who may be willing to add support and weight.

Hi Explosive,

Thanks. I believe the corporate holders would be reluctant to back a complaint at this stage, as it would be an admission that they had got it wrong. My feeling is they will wait till the final moment (a possible suspension of dealings) before they act. That is not to say they will still be holders by then.
I am not saying this will happen but you never know.
All IMHO of course.

Confirming report was sent Sat 21st by recorded delivery.

Nothing to do with Stanelco complaint but may be of interest. You can win sometimes....I have just received a small amount of compensation from Halifax (won't go into the boring details) after threatening them with the FSA, now waiting for a reply from the Law Society re a complaint against a solicitor (connected to the Halifax complaint). So some you do win.

Well done Greek, it's good to know that the 'big boys' don't always get their own way!

Kim,

See the Talk to yourself thread in about 15 mins. It takes some believing.

.

Update.

Received acknowledgment from the FSA.

Thank you or your letter dated, etc,

If the UKLA finds that a company has contravened the listing rules, it is possible for it to be sanctioned by means of a censure, the details of which may be published. Information, such as you have provided us, is a valuable contribution to our work. However, for statutory and policy reasons the UKLA's investigations are strictly confidential and, unless they result in a public censure, the UKLA does not comment on specific cases.

We thank you for etc, etc.

The above is obviously the usual proforma type letter.

There is NO mention that I will receive any update, if No action is to be taken. I would have expected this to be mentioned.

Watch this space.

Update.

No further contact from FSA. (I did not expect anything yet).

Just to keep everyone informed.

Whilst I agree that those who have acted incorrectly should be brought to account, I am not so sure complaints against the Company and possible public censure of the company will help us.

Possibly the reverse. it could bring into disrepute the Company and the management, which is completely changed except for the new(ish) FD and dear old Liz.

Mind you, a public censure would not be a final glittering entry she would welcome on her CV. And she should have had the knowledge available to stop irresponsibility - or resign in protest.
But she did not, thereby giving credence to how the company behaved.

I believe the merits of doing this were discussed earlier in this thread.

My feeling again, FWIW, is that the company would not be damaged for the very reason you point out above, Tony.

i.e. Since the period when the announcements complained about took place 'the company and management is completely changed except for the new(ish) FD and dear old Liz.'

I don't see that 'dear old Liz' is a good enough reason to hold back, however 'dear' you think she is. If there are victims in this story and there has been any wrongdoing she'll have to join the many other victims - those of us, including yourself, who lost a lot of money.

Investors deserve some answers - if the FSA decide there is nothing to answer, fine, Thats our answer - as investors we were stupid and not conned. If we were conned, however, we should be told.

Hi Toneyrelaxes,

As Oblomov has stated, this has been discussed earlier so it might be worth a read back. But I do agree that any inquiry into a company by any sort of regulatory body can (if that report comes to light) have a detrimental effect. Even if nothing comes of said inquiry, the no smoke without fire brigade etc.
But to reiterate briefly......If we allow companies to trade with impunity, where will bad practice end.
The FSA do make it clear that most of their inquiries start due to info from outside.
As to there being a different management, whist I agree that most of my complaint basis is regarding the past (management) there are still many questions that need to be answered. Cig filters, Greenseal, Wrap to name but 3. I have no idea where issues are with these although several time scales dates have long past.
If there are serious issues updates should have been forthcoming.
They may as well have said, We have a 12 month trial with *****, or we are in serious negotiations with some major companies re ***** and after the mentioned dates, deadlines we will inform our shareholders if the news is good but we won't bother if its bad.
It was suggested that to inform re serious problems would impede sales, but my answer was and still is....Any potential buyer does due diligence on the products they are interested in, as well as the company. Perhaps that is why take up by Walmart is so slow, almost to a full stop.

I am hoping re several updates in the results, but all I am expecting is much of the same stalling techniques, more fog, no clarity. If I am wrong (and I truly hope I am) I will be the first to admit it.

I will be on Hols the first 2 weeks in Sept, so will post on return, even if the update is No Update from the FSA.

Lets hope I come back to good results and a recovery in the SP.

Regards all, Greek.

Well back from Hols.
No update re SEO complaint.
Just read the results. Looks like as said, stalling techniques.
The problem is that whatever they say, we have heard similar before.

Quick update. Now into Oct and still nothing from the FSA.

Will only post once a month, or if/when I receive a reply.
Not holding my breath.
I think the chances of any reply from the FSA, or SEO making it big time are about the same.
Both appear to have no interest in their customers/shareholders.
Pathetic.

Greek,

Will the FSA not give you an idea of when you can expect a reply? The Financial Ombudsmen does and even sends a monthly update, even if it does only say they haven't reached the case it does tell you they haven't lost the file!

Hi Oblomov,

They informed me that unless their investigation (if they have one) results in a public censure, the UKLA will not comment on specific cases.
This is due to statutory and policy reasons of confidentiality, (their words not mine).
So if there is no public censure, thats that, I presume I will hear nothing further.

The above gives no cause for openness, or confidence in the system.
Now if I was a representative of a large city institution, or someone with a name, I wonder if the same criteria would apply.

And the FSA is supposed to be open and forthright.

I'm sure you agree that we are all equal. It's just that some are more equal than others.

Note... I have penciled in to re contact the FSA in December so I can at least draw a line under what is increasingly looking like a waste of time.

Thanks for your (and all others) continuing interest.

Regards Greek.

Hi Greek,
Knowing the FSA very well, they will do precisely nothing.
They are spread too thin, trying to police far too much, in areas they know almost nothing. With this in mind, they focus their efforts on the easy stuff. Like the CSA chasing fathers who are easy to catch and ignoring the rest, or local coppers doing nothing about burglaries, but devoting half their force to speeding motorists.
This is the problem with having targets set. Ones natural instinct is to ensure the targets are met, regardless of whether wider objectives are achieved, but that is another subject.
The chances of censure are nil. If SEO can show they have systems in place so that rules are not usually broken, then nothing will happen. If systems are in place that are faulty, they will be asked to fix them. That is all.
There is so much wool in the heads of the FSA that it is childs play to pull it over their eyes.
Bunch of jobsworths with no clue at all about the real world outside Canary Wharf.
(Can you tell I have little time for them)?

Hi.

I have also had dealings in the past, and fulling agree with you re the easy stuff.
I also believe they are not fully independent of outside authority. Their remit may state they are, but like you say, in the real world!
No doubt if a case worker causes too many waves, they are quickly reigned in.
Several years ago I was in a profession that had dealings with Social Workers.
A case worker transfered to the area, who within a few weeks sorted out so many child abuse cases by not taking no for an answer. Many of these cases involved serious obvious physical abuse, but previous case workers had not seen the children involved because parents had given many excuses why their children could not be seen (similar to those that reach the news, such as the Crombie case to name but 1).
This worker after a few months was moved yet again to another area, presumably to satisfy the don't upset too many people brigade, and things drifted back to normal.