Another land banking company bites the dust

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#11
1,500 investors here reportedly poured S$70m into projects linked to UK-based company

ECOHOUSE SCAM

SINGAPORE — Hundreds of investors here, who ploughed millions of dollars into the hands of a developer claiming to be working with the Brazilian government on a social housing programme, were left fearing the worst after the Brazilian Embassy said yesterday that its government had no dealings with the company.

In fact, it was not even aware until recently, when complaints from Singapore investors mounted, that the United Kingdom-based company operated in Brazil.

EcoHouse, which has abruptly shut down its Suntec offices, is neither affiliated with the Brazilian national housing programme nor registered as a partner of its state-owned bank.

“In view of allegations by Singapore investors regarding EcoHouse Group, a company linked to executives in the UK, the Embassy of Brazil would like to state that the Embassy had no prior knowledge of the existence of EcoHouse’s operations in Brazil,” the embassy said in response to TODAY’s queries.

Some of the investors had approached the embassy. After contacting several agencies within the Brazilian government, the embassy found that there was “no record of any agreement with any company bearing the name ‘EcoHouse’ related to ‘Minha Casa, Minha Vida’ (Brazil’s national housing programme), or any other federal programme”.

The embassy added that “Bosque Residencial” in Natal, State of Rio Grande do Norte — one of the housing developments offered by EcoHouse for investment — is not listed in the records of Brazil’s state-owned bank, Caixa Economica Federal.

On its website, EcoHouse claims that it was chosen by the Brazilian government as “the only UK company to date officially authorised to build developments under Minha Casa, Minha Vida”, which aims to provide three million homes for the country’s growing middle class.

The company was founded in 2009 by Mr Anthony Armstrong Emery. Various media reports have put the number of Singapore investors in EcoHouse projects at between 800 and 1,500. Up to S$70 million had reportedly been ploughed into three housing projects.

Some investors have begun legal action against EcoHouse to recover their capital investments, which amounted to a minimum of £23,000 (S$47,810) per unit.

EcoHouse had promised a 20 per cent fixed rate of return for a 12-month investment contract, but many investors said they have not received their returns or their capital despite their contracts reaching maturity.

The company was recently put on the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s (MAS) Investor Alert List, which lists unregulated companies that may have been wrongly perceived as being licensed or authorised by the MAS.

Reports have been filed against the company with the police and the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD). On whether EcoHouse is under probe, a CAD spokesman would only say: “It is inappropriate to comment on police investigations, if any.”

In response to TODAY’s queries sent on Tuesday, EcoHouse chief operations officer Deen Bissessar said yesterday that the closure of its offices in Suntec Tower 2 was part of measures to “consolidate into our Brazil operation and managing global affairs from our global headquarters in London”.

He added that “the position remains unchanged” and the company is trying to “improve the situation with regard to construction and payments”.

“We absolutely remain committed to our clients and if that was not the case, we would simply shut all doors — which is something we have no intention of doing,” added Mr Bissessar. The company was unable to respond to queries about the Brazilian Embassy’s comments yesterday by press time.

The developer’s registered address with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority is in Cecil Street. When TODAY visited the premises, it was occupied by MC Corporate Services Private Limited.

For companies regulated by the MAS, investors could seek redress at the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre. However, such a recourse is not available for EcoHouse investors.

The Brazilian Embassy has urged potential investors considering putting their money in Brazil’s property market to carry out due diligence when they encounter any developers claiming to have projects supported by the Brazilian government.

Consumer watchdog CASE advised consumers to be mindful of the high risk involved when investing in overseas properties.

CASE executive director Seah Seng Choon pointed out that the laws in other countries are different from Singapore’s and investors may not enjoy the same degree of protection. “Seeking redress in the event of dispute can be cumbersome and in most cases consumers are not able to get their money back,” he said.
Reply
#12
The authorities continue to choose staying in the sideline and gullible Singaporeans continue to fall for them despite the so many Ponzi schemes that that already exploded ...
Reply
#13
The G is on reactive mode for financial investment.

However, on the other hand, investors fell to the Get Rich Quick Scheme is also need to blame for their "greed". 明知山有虎,遍向虎山行。

The scam-er exploit this human weakness and set up trap for them to fall. This scam-er always find loop hole in the system to conduct their dirty business.

Hence, as investor, we just have to do our due diligent. This include public listed company where management integrity is questionable.

(15-08-2014, 08:47 AM)MrValue Wrote: The authorities continue to choose staying in the sideline and gullible Singaporeans continue to fall for them despite the so many Ponzi schemes that that already exploded ...
Reply
#14
Never learn ? New suckers born everyday !
“risk comes from not knowing what you’re doing.”
I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars: I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over.
Reply
#15
i am puzzled by this line:
"The developer’s registered address with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority is in Cecil Street. When TODAY visited the premises, it was occupied by MC Corporate Services Private Limited."
Reply
#16
(15-08-2014, 07:03 AM)Ray168 Wrote: MAS puts EcoHouse on watchlist
Published on Jul 08, 2014

THE Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has placed EcoHouse Group - an overseas property development firm which specialises in the construction of investor-funded housing for Brazilian families - on its Investor Alert List (IAL).

The IAL is a list of unregulated entities that may have been wrongly perceived as being licensed or authorised by MAS.

Since September 2011, EcoHouse has attracted more than 1,500 local investors, with a total investment sum of S$65.55 million, to its Brazilian property development projects.

But in March this year, The Business Times reported that some investors here had failed to receive any cash payouts from EcoHouse, despite their investment contracts reaching their maturity dates.

Based in Natal, Brazil, EcoHouse was founded in Britain in 2009 by Anthony Armstrong Emery after the Brazilian federal government launched a programme to cut Brazil's housing shortage by building millions of low-priced homes for the country's growing middle class.

According to EcoHouse's website, its community homes are financed by private investors. For a minimum investment of £23,000 (S$46,000) per housing unit, it offered investors a 20 per cent fixed rate of return for a 12-month contract.

EcoHouse also claims to be one of the few foreign developers to be authorised by the Brazilian government to develop houses for the federal home-building initiative, which qualifies it to receive subsidies and tax incentives. In return, it agrees to offer homes for sale at a pre-agreed, competitive price.

p.s. moderator - I could not find the thread Ecohouse. Is it deleted after receiving lawyer letter from them?

IIRC the thread was deleted due to legal entanglements. I have remarked in the thread that this scam don't even make sense: "Highly profitable" & "Public Housing" does not even click. It really shows how fascinated Singaporeans are with properties (at that point in time).

At least the gold scam with the UOB certificates is much more sophisticated and convincing.

To OT a bit, if VB had decided not to delete the thread, we could reasonably win any suit if affidavit has to be filed. But then again, highly unlikely any of us have skin in the scam to care, not to mention the moderators. Yet people been visiting VB to get much better insight and info about it. This is the conundrum that we face which is not dissimilar to the first TT Durai defamatory suit to the blogger, which we all know later to be the fact even after the blogger was forced to apologised openly.

The societal norms is such that if there is no rebuttal it is ASSUMED to be the truth, regardless of what the facts are.

As a believer of constructive criticism (ie criticism with viable alternative), my humble suggestion is that the subordinate courts actually administer a sort of an OPEN affidavit website where individuals can represent themselves through submission of facts and circumstances, with sensitive info either transmitted securely to each party or under seal. Usually in my own experience, when facts are presented actively, the losing party will withdraw, and the public can draw their own conclusion. The societal pressure could help to discipline online comments which I find at times to be a menace. This also serves as a fact finding sessions for both parties to gauge their chances of success.

In the event it is still unsettled, the online affidavit can be used as evidence for court proceedings.

This would be a inexpensive way for individuals to represent themselves, including Roy Ngerng, though I disagree with him.

(15-08-2014, 09:07 AM)Ray168 Wrote: The G is on reactive mode for financial investment.

However, on the other hand, investors fell to the Get Rich Quick Scheme is also need to blame for their "greed". 明知山有虎,遍向虎山行。

The scam-er exploit this human weakness and set up trap for them to fall. This scam-er always find loop hole in the system to conduct their dirty business.

Hence, as investor, we just have to do our due diligent. This include public listed company where management integrity is questionable.

(15-08-2014, 08:47 AM)MrValue Wrote: The authorities continue to choose staying in the sideline and gullible Singaporeans continue to fall for them despite the so many Ponzi schemes that that already exploded ...

You can see this thread what MAS is finally doing
http://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-4469-...l#pid89472
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply
#17
Just curious , is this landbanking company Walton still around? Seem to have survive a long time. Didn't hear it blow up.
Reply
#18
Malaysia can stop these companies from conning their people but why not Singapore ?
“risk comes from not knowing what you’re doing.”
I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars: I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over.
Reply
#19
remember in Singapore, laws and regulations appears to be favouring the rich... rich gets richer even though that is a forgone globally but somehow, rules here tend to tilt to favour the rich...

Remember the penny Trio... u telling me nothing shows up on SGX, MAS alerts meh... till now I still cannot understand how the Trio got allow to go out of hand and cause so much pain...

All but conspiracy by consters...

Bottomline, make honest $, make less but sow more karma...

GG
Reply
#20
I remembered some early investors registered as VB members and vouched for the success of their investment, mentioning their visit to Brazil and seeing the physical buildings under construction.

I can't imagine how these early investors feel now, especially if they had managed to influence their relatives and friends to invest along with them.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)