Diary of a Ma$on cabal Target's ...leicestershire: April 2020

14|...|164

AUTHORITIES DOING NOTHING

On 26.03.20 the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) and the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) were both contacted to advise them that, amongst things, that several of their members, also happen to be business associates/directors of Mesa of Lippl.

Nothing so strange here except that accountants/auditors HULL were engaged to conduct the audit @ Lippl clearly a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest as defined by the FRC--Glossary of terms page 18 of 36... ...

Independence—

Freedom from conditions and relationships which, in the context of an engagement, would compromise the integrity or objectivity of the firm or covered persons. Integrity or objectivity (and therefore independence) would be compromised if it is probable (more likely than not) that an objective, reasonable and informed third party would conclude that the threats, arising from any conditions or relationships that exist (taking into account any conflicts of interest that they may cause, or generally be perceived to cause, or otherwise, and having regard to any safeguards implemented), would impair integrity or objectivity to such an extent that it would be inappropriate for the firm to accept or continue to perform the audit or other public interest assurance engagement unless the threats were eliminated or further reduced or unless more, or more effective, safeguards were implemented.

FRC washed their hands of the opportunity to keep the public safe from the seemingly ‘holes in accounts'.

Nor is this the first it seems that this method has been used to ‘keep things between them’ and ‘away from prying eyes’.

The ICAEW gave a reference number—"Our ref:054906”--and said to wait to hear from them.

Nothing been heard from the ICAEW since.

Previously, after reporting the £500k hole in the accounts, and the misrepresentation being confirmed by a forensic accountant and reported on to them, the ICAEW, did nothing about that then either. Seems likely that had the seriousness, the frequency of the ‘misrepresentation and the disregard for the lawful practices been addressed at that time, some of the latest ‘creativity’ would have been prevented.

Similarly, Company X was forced to issue threats before they were able to persuade Mesa that their retaining monies that belonged to the company and not Mesa personally, could have been avoided if the authorities had acted when they were advised of the types of behaviour Mesa was engaging in.

The ‘method’ Mesa uses to avoid the full and proper audit is simple.

Their accountant/auditor ‘business associates’ set up an organisation to practice accountancy and auditing. Mesa ‘engages’ their 'tame auditors sema1’ and 'tame auditors anst 2' to conduct the audit. The audit merely comprises of sending a junior to Lippl; the junior spends a week at Lippl and the sum of their 'audit work' is they obtain a handful of copy invoices before they return to base.

The ‘audit’ is signed off by the ‘tame auditors’ as complete and with the benefit of the financial statements signed off without anyone checking the integrity of the them or any of the ‘transactions’ effected by Mesa, Jago, tame auditors or Boss_Jaro.

No-one is any the wiser.

No-one seems to want to address the obvious.

No-one seems willing to get to the bottom of these matters or the matter of Barbara Z Kahan being used to set up companies when all of these "accountants" are capable of setting up companies and have set them up themselves before. Israeli binary options scammers also use 85-year-old-woman-behind-fake-london-firm-addresses-expose-Barbara Kahan

***

COMPLAINT TO ICAEW REGARDING AUDIT BEING CONDUCTED BY BUSINESS ASSOCIATES TO FAVOUR EACH OTHER AND BURY HISTORY

Anst_tame_auditor

Sema tame auditor

COMPANIES HOUSE DOCUMENTS SHOWING SHARED BUSINESS INTERESTS OF AUDITORS AND AUDITED LTD COMPANY, LIPPL

14|book|155 rtf

The authorities responsible for “protecting the public” from the sort of abuses found within Lippl regarding the Covid-19 debacle and the ‘financial statements’ misrepresentations appear to be following the usual routine—namely the purport to be interested in protecting the public and their money but their actions are seemingly geared up to be and do the opposite.

***

NOTHING TO SEE HERE

Public Health England,^[A] responsible for the Covid-19 situation were contacted regarding the deliberate withholding of information regarding infected people associating with the Lippl employees and their response was to pass the buck^[B]/claim there was nothing to do with them.

The Financial Reporting Council, responsible for misrepresentations “in the public interest” arising from the actions (or inactions) of auditors and audits had the same response.

Funny that none of these things, which are clearly showing wrongdoing and none of it to be followed up by the very organisations whose remit is to ‘protect the public’ from harm and put things right. One could almost believe that these organisations are just a way to lull those reporting wrongdoing in to believing there is a net to catch the perpetrators— engaging the reportee down a long-winded process of taking details, passing out ‘complaint reference numbers’ and taking vast amounts of your working and leisure time in, what transpires, to be nothing short of a pointless exercise when they come back and give the “nothing here we can deal with”. But don’t worry they sign off “if you’re unhappy with our service you can complain by giving us the details and we’ll investigate” bunkum.

Why the ‘Covid-19, Lippl, InPiquet and Mesa’ Secrecy Matters***

I was on the verge of signing off on the ‘deal’ the Union had negotiated (less than two years service) so, I was advised, any offer was a good deal. At the 12/Feb/20 meeting, where I’d been told that Lippl were unable to accept and move past my raising a grievance—for sending me home for coughing^[C]—when the person with a compromised immune system should not have been in the office if they felt they could not cope with the ‘germs’ everyone of the 80+ staff was carrying around. I’d agreed the deal as better than nothing and went home. Deje, Mesa seemed very happy that they’d got rid of me.^[D]

Almost immediately after I found out that Mesa was suppressing information regarding Covid-19 and an employee of a contractor company, InPiquet Rutec, was working in close proximity in a small office with five Lippl people. The contractor company’s owner and family, a close business associate of Mesa, was under the watch of a hospital, having just returned from Italy^[E] with Covid-19 symptoms.

I withdraw from the deal—which had a ‘gagging order’ attached sending this e-mail—

Ref: Covid-19

I have just become aware that around the time I was told to leave the building with a cough by

Boss_Jaro because of "Boss's_Pet immune system is compromised" your business partner/family had returned from a 'category 1 country, Italy, for the pandemic Covid-19, and were being treated for the coronavirus infection. I shall have to let Lama_un and my GP practice know about the circumstances and your friends Facebook posts making light of what is an extremely serious, life-threatening situation. Also, that the knowledge that would help people in making decisions and understanding circumstances was suppressed.

There have been numerous visits to and from Lippl by you, your meetings with Lippl directors

and employees. There has been no advisement of your contact/association with the Covid-19 virus and those affected already— nor the associated risk for those with underlying conditions as advised on the government website — cancer, lung disease etc. My 'family and friends circle' has some of these conditions; it seems we have all been put at unnecessary serious risk, oblivious, with the information being suppressed.

Mesa denied to the Union and me that they were not suppressing evidence and that what I said was incorrect. They repeated these claims to the Union. Shortly after, without apologies and continuing to suppress the information to the wider Lippl employees, they confirmed what I said was correct.

The governing body, MHRA^[F], I first contacted 17^th March 2020, and there was some back and forth. Lippl employees were still in close proximity to contractor employees, Nipa_rt, as they were to all the directors meeting up with Mesa who lived near the covid-19 family. No special measures were being taken within Lippl—they were still manufacturing, producing and sending out health products to the general public.

MHRA, after toing and froing, directed me to send the information over to the NCA ^[G] and needless to say after that nothing was heard and nothing happened.

Mesa, Jago, Boss_Jaro of Lippl taking advantage of the Covid-19 ‘bail-out’^[H] to avail themselves of—what is effectively taxpayers money^[I], to furlough staff; despite Mesa having assets in excess of £5million. Why use your own money when using employees own hard earned cash is a ‘cost-free’ option. Thank you Covid-19 and Rishi Sunak^[J].

***

The secret auditor association

Using someone else’s cash, money and assets is the ‘go-to’ method of operation for Mesa; using it for furloughing staff is not the only time this has happened. But how do they get away with it? It helps that one’s joint director^[K] business associates^[L] are accountants and set up a practice that conduct audits^[M] for you.

Then all one needs is for a no-audit audit to be effected—where nothing is checked or investigated and the financial statements are signed off as audited. All of Mesa’s and Boss_Jaro’s little ‘tweaks’ then disappear in to the history with no-one any the wiser.

None the wiser to the antecedent payments for cars when the brother is not associated with Lippl. The duplicated payments to contractors^[N], the ‘director loans ^[O]’ which are never repaid, the payments to cover debts^[P] accrued outside of Lippl involvement or association which are being serviced to prevent the threats made to Mesa to fit them with concrete boots being made real.

So the 2018/19 audit consisted of no team, no-one experienced and no-one asking questions other than provide them with 15 or so sales ledger invoices and a similar amount of purchase ledger invoices. The lone chap from Mesa’s associates spends the days surfing the internet, chit-charring with Deble all kinds of nonsense and one day spent “in their hotel bed sick”. Then it’s bye-bye and back off up the motorway with nothing more heard about the audit and all the secrets are buried.

So the FRC say “we cannot find anything to investigate” despite being asked three times and their remit, according to their website ^[Q] is to investigate audits and auditors “in the public interest.

The professional organisation ICAEW, say the same.

Begs the question—which we all now know the answer to—these organisations seem hell-bent on ensuring that the public’s money is always taken from them to line the pockets of those best positioned to take advantage of the system.

But not to worry—if you want to complain about how we’ve handled your complaint—you know what to do… …

***

NOT THE FIRST TIME THOUGH IS IT?

One set of business associates Mesa set up a company with as joint directors didn’t take it lying down when Mesa took out loans against joint assets and tried to avoid their colleagues. The loan, against the houses being built and the land, was subsequently discovered and Mesa was challenged and told in no uncertain terms that the money was to be handed over. The seriousness of Mesa’s former associates was made clear when they were threatened with propping up a motorway build if they didn’t. Mesa was very, very scared.

Not scared enough not to do it again though. Or again.

Going into business with someone with manufacturing equipment, Mesa fabricated losses of £500k [only profitable side of the business, manufacturing] by diverting production and sales losses to the manufacturing side and force the director out—keeping their business and equipment for themselves and financially ruining the director. Once gone, and without the director challenging the figures they’d been monitoring closely so knew they were profitable, the manufacturing side becomes profitable once more but this time without the person to thank for that being a shareholder or director.

In December 2019, Mesa, took legal action against another former associate^[R]/business director in another seeming attempt to keep the business and profits and remove the person who makes the profit.

They made a court claim and this time they managed to convince the police to participate in bringing charges. The case was thrown out for a lack of evidence; so how did they manage, and what did they have, that convinced the police that the fault for anything lay elsewhere other than with Mesa?

^[G] Email: communication@nca.gov.uk