Mark Addison @MarkAddy121

Interesting that @AliMirajUK says why would Burnham open a wound from 2007, where tens of billions were stolen from SME's, when @andyburnham was behind the Hillsborough Act we are told & the Hillsborough incident was 1989. Are we suggesting that banks should just keep those billions from fraud, theft & deceit because "it was a long time ago"? What happened to British Justice, did someone tear up the Fraud Act 2006, when we weren't looking... @johnmcdonnellMP @premnsikka @labourlewis @TransparencyTF @appgonifandffs @EmilyBuchanan1 @efgbricklayer @ArturNadol7566 @BankConfidenti1 @james_glanville @mickmor16921994 @CarshaltonArt @bleating_lamb

@linadreaamy 98

BANK ORDERS SECRET FRAUD REPORT THEN DESTROYS THE WOMAN WHO WROTE IT Imagine this. Your employer asks you to dig into a fraud. You do the job properly. You find a £1 billion problem and evidence that senior people knew about it and sat on it. Congratulations, you just made yourself the most inconvenient person in the building. That is the Sally Masterton story, and it is somehow still not common knowledge. In 2013 Masterton, a forensic accountant working in the high risk division at HBOS, was asked to write what became known as the Project Lord Turnbull report. It alleged that HBOS executives had concealed a large scale fraud running through the bank's Reading branch before Lloyds Banking Group @LBGplc took the bank over in 2008 and 2009. In 2017 six people connected to that fraud were jailed for a combined 47 years, after a court heard how money stolen from small business customers paid for kickbacks, prostitutes and holidays in Barbados. Masterton gave evidence to the police investigation into the fraud. She was then put on leave and left the bank in 2014 under circumstances nobody explained properly at the time. For years Lloyds insisted she wrote the report off her own back, without the bank's knowledge. Then in 2018 MP Kevin Hollinrake @kevinhollinrake released the report publicly through the All Party Parliamentary Group on Fair Business Banking, and the story fell apart in public. Lloyds admitted it had actually asked her to write the report in the first place. Masterton settled with Lloyds twice. The second settlement, in November 2018, came with a formal apology and an admission that she acted with integrity and good faith throughout. Lloyds also appointed retired High Court judge Dame Linda Dobbs to investigate what the bank knew and when. The National Crime Agency @NCA_UK ran its own evidential review and the FCA @TheFCA confirmed it was looking at the case too. So a bank asked an employee to investigate its own fraud, got an answer it didn't like, spent years denying it had asked the question, then quietly settled once parliament forced the report into daylight. In 2020 Masterton won the Blueprint UK Whistleblowing Prize. Victims of the fraud are, as far as anyone can tell, still waiting on a compensation scheme that isn't run by the same bank accused of covering it up. This is what accountability looks like when the institution gets to mark its own homework. Whistleblowers like Masterton are the only reason any of us know this happened at all. Sources: @FT @CityAM

@UTDIMole Mario Kempes

Another huge thank you to @premnsikka @johnmcdonnellMP @TransparencyTF @stevemiddi1 and all those who had a hand in this evening meeting about insolvency practitioners. Particular thanks goes to @MLorrM who shared the journey with me to my lodgings while sharing our experiences.

@utdmax0 Owen Hargreaves

@ArturNadol7566 @financialombuds It is about time all our elected MPs start to understand the size of the problems victims of financial crime face trying to obtain justice and restitution and take the opportunity to bring in the constitutional changes needed to fix the issues the victims continue to identify.

@Ronieutd Steve Manaman

Meet James Purnell. Andy Burnham's chief of staff. He supported Iraq invasion; ex chair of Labour Friends of Israel; said that Winter Fuel Allowance and free bus passes should not be sacred; supported PFI, lie-detector tests for benefit claimants. Next? theguardian.com/politics/2026/…

For those of you interested in the abuse of Insolvency practices by banks & others to remove compensation/litigation 'risks' from victims of fraud & malpractice @premnsikka has kindly arranged an event in Parliament on 7 July at 6:15 where I and some others will be speaking about our concerns. Those of you who asked me already have tickets reserved. The link is gmq1yvsq.r.eu-west-1.awstrack.me/L0/https:%2F%2… @BankConfidenti1 @TransparencyTF @appgonifandffs @AlliMiddleton1 @johnmcdonnellMP @labourlewis @NeilForPoole @Steffanaquarone @IanByrneMP @BambosMP @EmilyBuchanan1 @MLorrM @ArturNadol7566 @jameshurley @CarshaltonArt @mickmor16921994 @efgbricklayer @james_glanville @BomberMorgan @nw_nicholas @EthicalDavid @hungrybankrupt

The Complaints Commissioner stated that my complaint against financial services regulator FCA for failing to act on massive HSBC fraud, was one the worst he dealt with.

Today I'll give a few examples of the corruption I witnessed. The Sunday Times killed a two page story about Cameron's involvement in covering up HSBC fraud. Shortly after, the editor Camilla Cavendish was given a job at No10 followed by a peerage.

JERSEY JAILED THE MAN WHO TRIED TO SAVE ITS CHILDREN Stuart Syvret @StuartSyvret was Jersey's Health Minister. In 2007 he started asking uncomfortable questions about what was happening to children in the island's care homes. He said he was sacked for whistleblowing. Jersey said he was sacked for his behaviour. That's the kind of framing you get when the institution decides the story. Syvret had been collecting his own evidence since 2006. In May 2008 he made a formal complaint to police claiming senior civil servants had perverted the course of justice by covering up abuse in care homes. So what happened to him? His house was raided. His computers and papers were taken. He was hit with a superinjunction, a secret gag order that was later exposed by UK Parliament, and imprisoned three times in connection with his efforts to expose what he described as horrific crimes across the island. The Independent Jersey Care Inquiry eventually confirmed that children in care on the island endured 553 offences between 1947 and 2004. Most occurred at the notorious Haut de la Garenne children's home. The inquiry concluded that survivors were left with devastating and life-long consequences. A constant theme in the inquiry report was the "Jersey Way" - a culture of ignoring and downplaying uncomfortable issues, which allowed abuse to continue without full investigation. One UK judge called Syvret "a thorn in the side of the Jersey establishment." A Liberal Democrat MP accused Jersey's judiciary of misusing the Data Protection Act to silence critics. Syvret eventually left Jersey fearing for his life, having received death threats for years. He ended up in an undisclosed location in the United States. His conclusion, years later: the obstructions to the original police investigation were "astonishing." And those who blew the whistle paid the price while the system stayed intact. Think about that. The man who raised the alarm about child abuse on a British Crown Dependency got jailed, gagged, and exiled. If this case matters to you, share it. These children deserved better than this. Sources: @BBCJersey @BBCNews @JEPnews @guardian

@ArchRose90 Thousands of SME owners believe they were stripped of wealth, businesses and retirement savings through the RBS GRG scandal. For many victims, the damage remains unresolved and the search for justice continues.

I am proud to have formed a cross‑border whistleblower/legal collaboration with @Wftproof focused on exposing a common OTC‑derivative‑driven collateral fraud pattern, SME asset stripping, mortgage fraud and the deliberate constraining of banking inquiries in Ireland and the Netherlands, which we have carried into UK parliamentary advocacy on “hidden credit liabilities.” Our work combines Bais’s “Worst Bank Scenario” thesis on collateral (repo) shell games in OTC derivatives with Morris’s significant & substantiated protected disclosures from the Irish Banking Inquiry and subsequent SME‑focused advocacy in the UK and Ireland. @ArturNadol7566 @stevemiddi1 @CormacLucey @Cormacbutler @JMcGuinnessTD @SimonHarrisTD @MichealMartinTD @PearseDoherty @EUCssrMcGrath @michaelmurph_y @andyverity @LucyRigby @johnmcdonnellMP @premnsikka

Hidden Credit Lines Scandal: From Irish customers’ files research. A Q&A What disclosures were made? Key risks, mark-to-market liabilities, or credit implications were not explained at all - let alone adequately explained. Some mention of “break costs” when asked but staff said minimal if asked.

@labourlewis Too many victims of RBS GRG, fixed mediations and failed compensation schemes were also left without proper justice or full recovery of their losses. Many lost businesses, homes, pensions and years of their lives, while banks moved on untouched.Accountability should apply to all

There are three types of people in the world. The first group does what the authority tells them without questioning it. Often because they strangely believe that the authority knows best and is benevolent. The second group doesn't actually want to do what the authority commands, but they're afraid of the consequences if they don't obey. These two groups have been behind every tyranny in history—every single one—because without them, tyrants couldn't rule; they're simply not strong enough. The third group is growing and says: 'I see what you're doing, but I'm not going along with it.' This group has ended every tyranny in history.

Today I read a judgement emanating from our Court of Appeal. As a legal professional, it truly sickened me. 🔹Supernatural and derisive imagery was applied to the defendants’ arguments. It was and is unnecessary. 🔹Unnecessarily pejorative characterisation of pleadings 🔹Several passages imputing bad faith on the part of lay litigants 🔹Colloquial pejoratives 🔹One paragraph is the most concentrated and the most striking 🔹Within the same paragraph the judge expressly acknowledges “the first defendant’s entitlement to be treated with respect and courtesy” and, in the same breath, deploys “daft”, “anyone with a titter of wit”, and “ridiculous”. The juxtaposition is itself as revealing as it is cringeworthy. 🔹Characterisation of non-parties associated with the defendants - described as “a mob”. Why? 🔹The word is repeated and is not qualified by reference to evidence of any mob-like conduct whatsoever. 🔹A more neutral formulation (“a group”, “the persons who re‑entered”) was available to the judge. 🔹Many editorial asides that are completely unnecessary to the legal reasoning more fitting to a judge of such seniority; 🔹The rhetorical disposal of the appeal in three words prior to any analysis. 🔹Embarrassing and not for the lay litigants 🔹The cumulative footprint is substantial. 🔹Rhetorical or pejorative material appears in at least eighteen numbered paragraphs. 🔹The appellants’ arguments were approached with a settled view, in a manner inconsistent with the appearance of impartial appellate adjudication. 🔹Having been at the receiving end of this when indeed underlying fraudulent activities were being conducted, I’m extremely concerned. 🔹Robust reasoning is one thing. Courts are no doubt entitled to be firm but litigants are entitled to be heard without being mocked. 🔹Is this the register we want from our appellate courts?

Yesterday’s refereeing was one of the best I’ve seen in a long time. For the first 15 minutes, the ref fell for Arsenal’s shenanigans: blowing a foul for every slight fall and every little touch. Then, all of a sudden, he clocked their dirty antics and took complete control of the game. He stopped buying their silly theatrics: Mosquera time wasting, Havertz falling at every slight touch, Saka wasting time for the corner, Arteta touchline tantrums, Madueke diving. I can go on and on Arsenal have become so used to getting away with this cunning stuff from Premier League refs that they seemed genuinely shocked when it didn’t work. I’m glad the referee refused to be intimidated and stood his ground. That’s how you referee a final. You might con your way to a Premier League title, but you can’t do it in the UCL. Either you play like real men or go home