UK 23:11 Friday, 23 October 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
I have not looked at a subsidiary account at Quenron (QPP) for a while but just to save the SFO/Administrator some work in due course here’s another one, Isaas Technology Ltd a company bought in March 2013 for £4.5 million in shares. Hmmmm.
Already a member? Sign in
• All premium articles
• Tom Winnifrith’s Bearcast
• Access to all the entire nearly 13 year archive
• ShareProphets Daily Newsletter
Cancel any time
This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.
Comments
turbograndad
I’m getting angrier&angrier at these take the piss scumbags, its like watching watchdog on the TV, where miscreants know full wello what they have done but these PT psycho’s, er whats up doc, why all the fuss, as their fucking nosses get longer.Thats why we have LOL TV programnes doing the job of cops and regulators, who are at best, appologists, they always get paid the insiders always do, and of course the POS psycho who has no shame knows this. Mr Angry, do you remember him.
alcira16247
Tom
Is there any company acquired by Quindell that is not tainted by director greed and self interest that has overcome its shareholders commercial interests?
The acquisition trail of Quindell seems littered with examples were shareholder’s funds have been used to grossly overpay and therefore unjustifiably enrich the vendors of companies above accepted commercial norms.
Its sad to note that most if not all of these Vendors have been related to Quindell and its founder, Mr Terry, in most cases, these relationships have not been fully disclosed to the market.
I have been looking at two of Quindells early company purchases…… Mobile Doctor’s and Silverbeck Rymer…. there is one person who seems have done extremely well out of those deals….. Mr Jason Cale.
http://public.mobile-doctors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/MDG-Investment-in-MDG-Jul-25-2011.pdf:-
The investment of 1,387,488 shares, representing approximately 8.3% of the issued share capital of Mobile Doctors,
has been acquired from Ubiquity Capital LLP today in exchange for the issue by Quindell of 8,093,680 1 pence
Then:-
http://moneyweek.com/quindell-portfolio-completes-deal-with-silverbeck-rymer-solicitors-121221-0852-51086
Non-Executive Director Jason Cale will acquire 10,23m shares in the company at 16.4p per share. It will increase his shareholding in the organisation together with those held by Ubiquity Capital Partners, a company to which Cale is connected, to 81.49m shares.
So we can see how well Jason has done out of these two deals!
Of course Jason is not just ‘connected’ to Ubiquity Capital, he OWNS it!
( http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/jason-cale/8/a19/54).
And strangely enough, Ubiquity Capital turns out to be the fourth largest FOUNDER shareholder in….. Quindell!
http://www.quindell.com/images/uploads/irdownloads2011/110428addoc.pdf
Ubiquity Capital LLP 53,134,716 3.93%
Was that connection ever disclosed to the market? What about conflict of interests? What about, just buying companies from my mates? Wonder how many shares in Quindell, Mr Cale has now?
So, Tom….. is there a personal relationship rational to this Isaas Technology Ltd purchase, that we know of? As on going on previous form…..erhhh?
Susan
I was speaking to someone recently who knows nothing about QPP or shares and was telling them the story.
They asked what business the company is in and I thought for a second and said FRAUD they are in the fraud ,scams, theft and lies business.
That is their actual business as in that is their ACTUAL business.
The UK Goverment accepts and allows companies to list on its stock markets in order to commit fraud and theft , they have legalised it.
We know it is legal as the many requests for them to stop it or take action have been ignored.
I once had the FCA on one phone and the AIM regulators on the other and one was telling me my complaint was an AIM regulation matter and for me to call them and the AIM regulator was telling me to call the FCA as it was their dept.I told them both that they were both on my phones and introduced them to each other and held the phones together and told them they could discuss their ineptness together as I had to pop out.TRUE!
And yes I have evidence of this call.
With that in mind don’t you think the FT should now create a new sector for such companies and place it just below the “energy” sector and call it the FRAUD and THEFT sector then we can see more easily which one of them is outperforming the sector etc and invest accordingly.
Steve
Tom – those accounts you link. They don’t look audited to me. Look like standard accounts.
If they have been – who are the auditors?
Steve
Jock
Two questions here- can Mr Terry still sit as a director of such subsidiaries?
Note the £279,000 spent on directors remuneration- looks £50k a piece to ‘directors’ for nothing?
Employee wages and salaries 2013 £341,365, (3 employees) 2012:£117,430. (2 employees)
What an earth? Has someone walked in on £230k a year or is it trebles all-round?
This company exists solely for the purposes of fraud, plain and simple
Tom Winnifrith
Steve
I cant see an audit opinion either or name of auditor
t
david
They’re not audited – they’ve claimed exemption – see foot of balance sheet for statement.
Richard
The accounts do not have an audit opinion because, as it states on page 7:
“For the year ending 31 December 2013 the company was entitled to exemption from audit under section 479A of the Companies Act 2006 relating to subsidiary companies, and the directors are satisfied that no member or members have requested an audit pursuant to section 476 of that act”.
Michael
Tom,
There may be a credible explanation for the 2013 accounts of Isaas Technologies as set out by briary on the lse bulletin board. Have you got this one right?
Tom Winnifrith
M
yes I have it 100% correct. The idea that Isaas got a waterfall effect from a booming Mob Drs is laughable. Look at its accounts ( covered here).
These are just more fantasy accounts from a fraud
t
GA
Hi Tom,
Have you seen what this guy briary is saying about you? He’s suggesting you’re a liar. He seems to have a lot of evidence to prove it as well. Would be interested in hearing your view and maybe you could write another article to address his points. Perhaps a BB moron award is warranted for him?
Tom Winnifrith
GA
If I had £1 for every time a BB loon called ,me a liar I’d have retired some time ago. And they all claim to have evidence.
I have not lied. I have time and time again shown fraud at Quindell, the shares are off 90%, the insider dealing chairman has been sacked, the FD is going, the co-broker has quit, Fidelity has dumped. So far I look like I have been bang on the money dont you think?
On the other hand BB loons who have said that I have got everything wrong have lost 90% of their money.
T
GA
Tom, I appreciate what you’re saying but they do present a very detailed rebuttal of your theory. As you state that you’re 100% correct I would have thought you could easily write another article to show why this guy is wrong and you are indeed correct, in particular as your original analysis now looks a little weak in comparison. I’m sure your readers would welcome your view as well.
Dominic Cooper
The “briary” response is just the usual meaningless horseshit you’d expect from a “long and strong” QPPer.
Firstly, the said briary has (without realising it) admitted to committing a contempt of court. Each report the GPs do is supposed to be independant and neutral. That neutrality is lost if the GP knows they only get paid if they give a favourable answer. Briary has admitted to just that (qualifying it by saying that they have a “95% success rate” – well you fucking well would if you make sure all your medical reports say that there is ‘neck pain and cervical spine injury with a prognosis of 9 months post-accident recovery’).
Secondly, just look at the number. He / she / it talks of doing thousands of reports a month. Really? Thousands? The average report would take 15 to 30 minutes. (If done properly the GP is supposed to review the person’s medical history – which would take a lot longer, but the scumbags and spivs a la Quindell and co usually request that this is NOT done, since it may throw up information they do not want to be made public). There are no GPs who do whiplash reports full time – this is a “Job on the side”.
And this “disruptive, ground-breaking technology” is – as far as I can tell – a website with a microsoft word template on it.
The reality is, of course, that Mobile Doctors existed and had a business model. A solicitor would book a medical exam through them, they would subcontract to a doctor somewhere and keep the difference between what they pay the doctor and what the solicitor pays them. Simples.
But back in the day, the solicitor would pay the doctor circa £250 to £600 plus VAT and recover this from the at fault insurer. Nowadays the rules are clear – they were tightened up only eight weeks ago – and the maximum payable is £180 for the first report.
The margins are much thinner and the volume of work has reduced. So where is the profit for Mobile? And if Mobile are making less, how can they afford to pay iSaaS £25 per instruction? And to what end. Why would anyone (and that includes Quindell Legal Services) pay over the odds just so that they can use a medical reporting agency that itself uses iSaaS, when there are plenty of other agencies available. Such as Capita http://www.capitahealthandwellbeing.co.uk/our-services/assistance-and-assessment-services/medical-reporting/solicitors#.VHw5-39Lrsg
Again it just looks like accrual of accrued profit earned by other quindell subsids which have accrued them from QLS which have accrued them from Rob Terry’s head.
Total bullcrap and another red flag, in itself.
Tom Winnifrith
GA
Read Dominic Coopers post. He works in this sector and actually knows what he is talking about. Briary is talking horseshit. Dominic points that out. The accounts as I t above scream that out. I have an olive harvest to get on with so if you are determined ti believe Briary feel free to ignore me & Dom 100%, FYB with Quenron shares and enjoy a life of poverty.
t
GA
Tom,
I’m not sure Dominic’ s reply is entirely accurate. Not being an expert but reading briary’s original post it would seem that Dominic has misinterpreted it.
For instance , the post certainly does not say that briary himself writes thousands of reports. Rather the thousands are written by many people.Also, Dominic quotes a “95% success rate” but the post actually talks about a settlement rate of 95%. Is success and settlement one and the same? I would suggest not.
Also note that the poster does not own any shares in quindell but has direct knowledge of both mobile doctors and isaas. hence why would he be making these things up?
Peter
GA, can you link briary’s post here? So Tom has at least a chance to comment himself. As Tom is repeatedly asked RT/Quindell to answers his questions I would expect him to comment on briary’s post in a professional manner here…
Dominic Cooper
GA
If it looks to good to be true (or too “convenient” to be true) then it almost certainly is. Not 100% certainty, just almost certainly.
Now doesn’t this look too good to be true? Briar is a GP, not a shareholder, doesn’t care about Quindell, but registers himself onto the loons’ own bulletin board in order to post a gushing tribute to QPP. Why? Does not that in itself strike you as odd?
And if it really is true, the next question is WHY?
If ASOS, for example, announce record increase in profits, and back this up with an explanation that they have reduced warehousing costs by subcontracting the operation, they have invested in advertising and PR, and they have developed a niche brand that is contemporary and popular with 30 somethings with disposable income, and they have branched out into high margin, low volume, coature designer items, then you listen and take notice and if it seems to make sense, you check it out further.
If iSaaS, for example, say “we’ve made increased profits to the tune of 100% by use of ‘exciting’ and ‘disruptive’ technology, enchancing productivity by leverage of best-in-class process driven management schemas”, then I think ok, what the fuck does that mean. What is it they do. Why are they so much better at it than everybody else.
And to these questions there are no answers.
Dealing with your specific points I would suggest that the semantic difference between settlement and success is meaningless in this context.
I may have misunderstood the reference to the thousands of reports a month, but the post included the phrases ‘Mobile Doctors were sending myself and my colleagues about 7000 cases every month in 2013.’ and ‘I had dinner with my friend in London with a number of other experts and he said they were doing 5,500 cases on the system each month in July 2013, in addition to the Mobile Doctors work.’
It is clearly ambigous. But that’s not the point. It really isn’t.
Tom Winnifrith
Peter
You have only ever posted here & also emailed me about ME when discussing Quenron. You have never questioned Quindell once. I think that puts you down as a self-confessed moron.
Mr Cooper has done an admirable job in dealing with the proposterous Briary.
In your eyes I have no credibility. Even if the SFO raids Quenron tomorrow you will not admit I was right.
As such you can demand that I answer daft posts by this moron or that paid shrill but I see no point in humouring you. You are long & wrong and nothing I can say will change your mind.
I suggest you read Mr Cooper & also the accounts of Mobile Doctors and try to approach it with an open mind.
T
GA
Dominic,
I’m just interested in understanding what’s really going on. All this rhetoric and stuff gets in the way. You say the post was ambiguous although after one quick read through I clearly understood what was being said. What else is clear to me is that a lot of people have it in for Quindell, in a really personal way, and this weakens their argument (even though they may be correct). That to me is annoying as it’s very difficult to cut through the rubbish to find out what is really going on.
You ask whether it strikes me as odd that briar posts on LSE. Not really.
I’m intrigued by you though – shorter, disgruntled ex employee, competitor, fighter of good causes, …? Humour me will you, why such a vehement dislike of all that is Quindell (except for the fact you don’t think it’s a good business)?