With regard to the information posted by Paul328, thanks for this info and all information about this organisation "Verdi". This new company is not the only new sham company set up by Verdi, there is certainly one other. However, as you correctly say, the Official Receiver, the Dept of Trade and Companies House already know about this and are investigating. "Verdi Ferrari", in whatever guise it is represented, is operated solely by Karl Verdi (Kuldip Singh Verdi) his companies that have been set up over the years are always dormant, they file dormant accounts, no trading goes through his "companies", he operates as a sole trader but the trail of missing money belonging to his customers is being traced in a number of ways, namely by the Serious Fraud Office and HMRC as well as private investigators. Verdi uses a number of bank accounts, Nat West, Barclays, Habib Bank Zurich, he even still uses bank accounts of companies that have been wound up! Any other information that people can post on Ferrarichat.com will be gratefully received by the ever increasing number of customers who have been defrauded by Karl/Kuldip Verdi. However, with all of us clubbing together to share costs, involving forensic accountants as well, there is nowhere for Karl Verdi to hide any more as his fraudulent activities have now been exposed to the whole world. Information of any bank accounts used by Verdi that past customers know about would be helpful. Personal bankruptcy of Karl/Kuldip Verdi will follow soon.
Request for anyone using Ferrarichat.com. Pistonheads and Club Scuderia have been trying to protect the Verdi name by instantly closing down any Thread or Forum that denigrates the name of Verdi, what are they trying to conceal? They have repeatedly failed to reply to letters, emails etc asking for an explanation why they keep closing down these Forums which have proved to be so successful on Ferrarichat.com, to expose the sort of person Karl/Kuldip Vverdi is. The truth about verdi will also help to protect any more customers suffering the smae fate as those who have been defrauded. So Pistonheads and Club Scuderia, come out of the closet and give us all an explanation!!
+1 Certainly, it would be wrong to post "speculation" and "opinions" as facts, and I noticed that a few of the posts herein have been subtly edited by the mods so as to (presumably) remove any such comments - Very good job..... I see no reason why the other forums are deleting posts - Even if Verdi was a sponsor it seems they're not going to be paying for that any longer! As long as "we" stick to the facts I don't see any reason for any litigation against anyone. Being based in the US isn't really an advantage here as this is the most litigious society of them all..... Kudos to the ever lurking mods!..... Cheers, Ian
I'm not an expert, but my understanding was that the libel laws in the UK are some of the strictest in the world, and the UK has the unfortunate reputation of being the libel capital of the world, and in this respect is much stricter than the US. I also believe that the particular way legal costs are awarded against the loser makes it very risky to defend any action, hence making people very risk averse in what they commit to print, and by extension, what UK based forums are willing to let sit on their forum. Not an ideal state of affairs, but great that Fchat were willing to keep the thread going,
All fair comments. However, I, and I'm sure many others, would love to know why a simple link to this thread opens anyone to any kind of litigation? Further, I'm certain that the "small print" when you register with any of these sites says something along the lines of "all opinions are those of the poster and not the forum owner" etc. Deleting posts that link here is at best cowardly and at worst muzzling free speech. I'm no expert either, but fail to see how such a post could open anyone to legal action (?) I'm with Hincksman - Come on guys, give us your reasons! Cheers, Ian
Iain, In fact case law precedent leaves the owner of a forum open to litigation if a complaint is made and a post not removed. Any clause along the lines of "all opinions are those of the poster and not the forum owner" is irrelevant. Small forums cannot afford to even think about getting involved in the legal costs of being even tangentially involved in litigation, and that's before even trying to get to grips with who would actually be liable in member owned forum. All the paid up members, the committee - who knows. But you can be sure as hell no-one wants to be the one to find out. For fchat I expect Rob Lay would be liable - so it is his choice - for others it is more difficult.
It really is "Ian", but that's OK! Fair enough - Learn something every day. OK - But as long as "we" don't get into random name calling and mud throwing aren't we simply reporting/discussing the facts in the same way as a newspaper? Court records and findings are public knowledge and people discussing such *facts* can't be considered "wrong" surely? Thread deletion coming soon! Seriously, as I said, I'm sure the mods are watching closely and anything "dodgy" is sure to be removed - But again, I don't understand why a link from another site to here gets deleted. Cheers, Ian
Apologies Ian Facts are OK though when offered by someone who is not a member of the community and does so with anonymity it raises questions and is not good. Trouble is that facts are often embellished with other comments and then provoke more uninformed comment. Yes - the mods here have done a good job and congrats to them. I don't recall a link to this place being deleted from CS. It certainly isn't a matter of policy.
Fair comment - We've all witnessed threads go down the toilet in a hurry - Particularly when "newbies" are the instigators. It is indeed a very fine line. I honestly don't know, but from above; Maybe this is untrue - It's certainly an unsubstantiated claim from a newbie as you say, but it seems legit (?) Cheers, Ian
well im more a lamborghini man then ferrari I joined up out of intrest in possible future of buying a ferrari!!!!!!! im not defending any one i just put across my experience so why dont you take a sit down of your high horse!!!! just read the other post and see there are some disputes. but surley there are tonnes of disputes with various companies and this is the first i have seen blow up like this!!!
Not sure what planet you are on. It is not a dispute, it is a wind up order leaving creditors owed 230k. They left their cars sale or return meaning for example the rightful owners left his car for say 60k, the dealer should keep 3K commission. Instead of keeping his 3k commission he kept all 60K. That is hadrly a dispute with several people involved. If it were my forum I would delete your drivel.
yaaaawwwnnnn....but it aint ur fourm isit tho i thought people are entitled to their opinions?? my main gripe is this reflects pretty bad on the workers that work there anyway sod it like i said i see the facts printed and they speak for them selfs but i sure would like to see the actual proof of the money being disputed was that listed in the court winding up pet????
No one is disputing the workers I guess. I am sure they got paid every week unlike people who went through sales. As for the money being disputed mine was pretty much 100% decided according to the court today. What more evidence do you need? As for the others, 4 of them have posted in this thread. I am personally in touch with most of them. I know you are here to defend Karl, so carry on
I know you are here to defend Karl, so carry on [/QUOTE] just to make it clear i aint here to defend him but if thats what people think well thats their opinion then. hope all works out for all involved :-/
dear francis i was banned for commenting about a members 348 which was sold by verdi and he hadnt been paid mark collings posted he spoke to verdi and it was all rubbish and verdi was ok i then asked mark collings if the chap with the 348 didnt get paid would he pay as he was saying it was rubbish about karl the thread was removed and i was banned looks like i9 was not wrong and all that was going on was the cs committee protecting a sponser odf the site over a member who hadnt been paid ps feel sorry for karl as he provided a good service to the ferrari community in the uk
Welcome back steve f. To my knowledge, steve f is on the mark in such issues as quality of character. And other issues in 12 cylindertown.......
Libel laws are there to protect exactly that, libel. In simple terms something that is untrue and used to diminish the reputation of someone in the public eye. Reporting court proceedings has what is called privilege. That is you cant be sued for accurately reporting what has occurred. Defenses to libel again in simple terms are 1. Its all true 2. Public interest 3 Fair comment So, if this and previous companies have been dissolved or liquidated or struck off that is fact. Asking how this is all happening in the circumstances of this case could be public interest or fair comment So, unless someone is saying or REPEATING something which would be libel then they can get on with it The famous quote is 'publish and be dammed' So far, I am quite comfortable sleeping at nigh! If someone wants to sue me, they can get on with it My mates who do media review before publishing legal work, usually ask firstly "can the person allegedly libeled afford to sue?' If not it is usually published So has Verdi sued anyone for libel?? It would be a courageous lawyer who would take that case on! Hope this simple guide helps Paul
Nice to see you are allowed on here Steve How many years ago was that? Did the guy get paid? I don't recall you ever getting banned for posts like that - just continual trolling :-( Answers please.
go peddle your lies somewhere else francis just posted the same on cs and wow its gone you lot dont like the truth thats the problem covering up all the time was you getting a share for protecting francis ?
All true Paul But would any responsible forum management open its members to the possibility? That is the question.
you lot aint responsible you protected a sponser and let your members get ripped off and loss money you should all be sacked
If the forum wanted my advice I would advise to regulate to bare facts in so far as easily ascertainable. In this instance there is a lot which is publicly available I would also be advising of doing some serious checking before accepting advertiing from the company or being seen to get into a possible conflict situation Paul
cs protected verdi but let every man and his dog post about richard lukins and never removed it work it out for yourself
