My quote about medical profession was about the cancer part, but as far as chronic diseases go I should have made a distinction between privately paid medicine ie American system versus Britain which will be more different because it is Gov paid. Gov paid health care will clearly not be interested in holding onto patient's illness for money or extended stays in hospital etc while private healthcare there will be that tendency so my comments was more to do with the American system as my relatives have fallen into that trap. If you want to know what it has been like for Americans, then listen to Dr Den Boer videos esp the Probiotic one. And Dr Peter Glidden, because MD there and here mostly treat the systems have not enough about the source of the problem ie the permant cure.

I didn't base my claim on 'belief' I based it on evidence supplied by TV and utube videos eg 'Seeds of Death' and education. I happen to have enough of a science background to understand that messing around with nature's pre-set formulas can give us a very different product without the certainty of safety compared to the one given by nature or a God, as these were implemented without much testing for long term effects. As for choice; you seem to miss the point that I was making which is that if there are no labelling, how can we pick out the non-GM foods from GM ones ? We have no choice if someone got rid of the labelling so that they can impose their supplies on to the market and that means forcing us all to live with GM foods because they want to make lots of money from it.

May be, but we are still being forced fed with GM foods and I believe there are health risks with GM foods.

Re: Banks, Councils, Companies, education systems, post offices, the food service system and drug industries, Justice system...All are showing similar bullying characteristics due to law changes empowering them to exploit the consumer that way. We really need to get back to basics and understand who are the controllers and what are their objectives ? The one thing we keep hearing is the ' New World Order' so finding ourselves controlled by prejudicial, unfair choices, in almost every sphere in life means that the controllers have implemented their systems already and everyday life is about to get worse according to a utube video I have seen recently by Dr Walter Veiths: New World Order. Bottom line is that if the legal system gets corrupted then most organisations will and the ordinary public suffer. 1) Councils at one time used to care very much about being transparent and accountable procedures to the public, but these days you will notice changes in their procedures which are about giving the public or consumer/customer very little in the way of evidence. Eg if we submit documents at their (One Stop) shop and request them to do an email chase, we no longer are allowed to receive a copy of the email with attachments of our documents as that provides evidence that they sent it off promptly to the right departments etc. 2) Courts have stopped allowing Claimants and Defendants to hand over documents to their reception and receive a 'received' stamp over the receipt or any receipt at all. What does is help them lose documents when it is convenient to fail a case based on missed deadline dates. And there are many more crooked laws that have been brought out to make claims difficult. 3) Banks likewise have stopped giving certain documents or receipts for evidence purposes. Banks can also conspire with mortgage brokers to disallow a mortgage or offer the wrong types of mortgages based on who they want to help and who they want to trap, and whom they want to steel the property away from, rather than whether an individual qualifies for their preferred mortgage. Obviously to pull off such stunts as these there would need to be very close relationships between the broker, the surveyor, the legal teams etc and these events are most likely to occur where there is religious or cultural unity that enables a bit of 'organized crimes' to be pulled off. I say so because my property has been stolen or taken over off me in these ways. I had unfortunately become trapped by taking on a business partner who was part of a group who belong to the same religion so they were culturally close to eachother and they were able to pull it off because they also know the legal system's corruption facilities. And I was prevented from receiving the mortgage that I would have qualified for but the partner must have secretly wanted it instead. And so be not surprised that none of the credit crash offenders have been brought to justice by the legal system, and why the FSA and BCOB, Ombudsmans etc do not work or respond as they should, because they are controlled by the same category of people. 4) Education systems. Asking about race statistics on the examination question paper is surely giving the race discrimination tools /opportunity for a prejudiced examiner to mark according to ethnic names or their race declaration forms ? This never used to be the case until after year 2009. Blocking too the opportunity to check the marking on an examination paper to verify that it was properly marked. 5) Previously Post Offices used to be happy to take in your application form with original tracking dockets over the counter and issue a receipt but today they have been taught not to offer such evidence. So one is left with the risk that if they want they can lose your original document and then deny you sent it. 6) Food Industry : Did you know that we are being forced fed Genetically Modified foods because the very companies who are responsible for GM agriculture won the right to not label foods because most of the public would not choose to buy GM foods ? Check out Utube : 'Seeds of Death' A lot of epidemics of chronic diseases are caused by GM foods. Check out Utube videos by Dr Den Boer; Dr Peter Glidden etc. 7) Likewise, the Pharma Industries would lose billions of Pounds/Dollars if they allowed the medical profession to reveal the truth about cancer cures or that most of your diabetes and other illnesses can be cured by simple changing of diet, so you don't hear of these things on main stream media because the media is also in the hands of the same people. 8) Worse is to come in the New World Order plans as they want to make steeling acceptable. Listen to Dr Walter Veith's videos. The public need to become aware of all the conns and start protesting but it might already be too late as most of these job posts are held by corrupt and greedy people who are the only type of recruits possible to implement the New World Order.

Property Fraud: Shawbrook Bank and Mortgage broker NRG ltd. I would like to contribute my experience to forewarn others of the type of property frauds that exist which snatches your property in an ‘organized way’ or rather what I would describe as ‘organized crime’ which could leave you unexpectedly damaged due to a planned repossession by the organizers. The property industry like any other will have plenty of corruption opportunities in it so the consumer needs a lot more protection than what we have today. It will take up a lot of space to describe my full personal experience I am going to focus on just listing the sort of behaviours people need to look out for. But briefly my situation was that I had some capital to pay for deposits but I was unemployed, however property courses teach us that we can solve this problem by joint venturing or teaming up in a partnership. Quite unexpectedly, I found such a partner but as he trusted his broker due to his own property portfolio achievements, he asked me to trust this broker as well. I offered the partner a free 10% ownership plus no costs to be born for his 10% ownership. Unfortunately the broker was not loyal to this venture ie to me but pretended to be. The broker who carried out the following acts on me is called NRG Ltd, (Mr David Beck) in collusion with his bank contacts at Shawbrook Bank. Mortgage brokers just like any other salesman have plenty of scope to misguide us deliberately into very expensive, complex and unwanted strategies/products which are designed to give them and third parties extra control over you and to steer your acquisition process according to the outcome they desire which can in a many cases be to snatch/grab your property from you because they see profit in it. Brokers can pretend that the options are few when in reality they just don’t want to search for companies with a favourable mortgage product for the client because the broker and his mates wants your property. So they want to direct you only towards the company in which they have their known contacts established because they need their contacts to study your bank balance and arrange for delaying the bank decision for as long as 4/5 months until all your money or financial budgeting is exhausted or out-of date, and you are about to lose your vendor and purchase. 3 Particularly vulnerable are new investors (eg myself) who might not know the loop holes in the process or implications of using a bridge loan, or how a short-term loan contract might be abused to lead to a repossession opportunity for the bank on behalf of those who want the property. But only a disloyal broker will be one who does not explain all these things when offering a complex strategy because they want you to fall into their pit of tricks and traps. 4They will use a false promise or description to lure you /force you into a short-term contract but once you have entered it, all they have to do is come up with a lying excuse not to do their job of executing the tasks which involve delivering their promises or the representations made before the contract. They then pretend they are trying out new applications for you, urge you to spend more money eg on surveys and more for their fees for trying, but at all times they coordinate with their contacts at the bank to refuse the application. These refusals can be identified as false due to the way they rely on a ‘subjectivity’ or arbitrary basis/criterion of judging and not a coherent, evidence based, law based reasoning. 5 What most people will be unaware about is the extent of how far they coordinate with their bank contacts in order to create a repossession situation. In my case this was very simply achieved. They knew I had only so much savings to be able to fund only one set of mortgage, brokerage, legal, survey fees, but they did not want to me to opt for the long-term mortgage ie they had manipulated me into the short-term loan method against my wishes; so this created the on-going process for more application expenses needed to be repeated within the short -term contract, so one become trapped, as one no longer has the money to finish off the strategy. Furthermore, there was a purpose why the bank waited 4 months to issue the short-term loan contract, this is to reach the point when the threat of losing a vendor becomes imminent, which enables them to impose unfavourable loan terms at the 11th hour. After 4 months of waiting, the option to pull out is not the same, it would only happen at the expense of losing the property as the vendor will be too frustrated. This way we are channelled into taking on a risky route that would otherwise never have been taken, had we been told in advance all the missing information and that a bank might take 5 months to decide. This bank is called, ‘Shawbrook’ famously known for their mortgage packages being most expensive. 6 After the first 6 months of ownership, I had received some extra money to finish off the rest of the 3 separate mortgage applications (this strategy was about 3 flats needing to be converted to leases first) the broker started coming up with new excuses not to try. He started saying that the 3 applications were going to be too expensive and that my only hope was to apply for a long term mortgage with the same bank. The question is why has he taken me through a short-term contract to : 1) identify that the 3 residential mortgages would be too expensive compared to a single mortgage when he should have known this from the beginning, and, 2) if the only option is to end up with the same long-term application then why did he not opt for this the first time around and saved me this unnecessary repeat application ? The answer is that they wanted me to be depleted of funds as that is s the surest way of setting the scene for repossession process. This bank then took another 6 weeks to deliver only an indicative offer (meaning it was an uncertain and unconfirmed offer) but after noticing that I had some funds injected to proceed. It struck me as abnormal that a bank who had already received regular mortgage payments from me is now having difficulty doing an internal conversion from one of their own loans into another one of their own loans within reasonable time, knowing that by this stage I will have spent thousands of pounds reaching this uncertain stage which meant the property was still not mine. I did not understand why it was only an indicative offer given that I was promised by the broker that after I had spent 6 months proving myself of keeping up mortgage payments I would qualify for such entitlement better than when I had started out. Furthermore, I was in a partnership arrangement with someone who had a strong income record and a property portfolio themselves, yet I was still not being given the trust that normally would have been given in this situation. It turned out that they wanted to find a new excuse to fail so they asked to inspect all my bank balances and at this stage I started to feel that this short-term loan contract was just an excuse to spy more into someone’s personal situation irrespective of whether it was relevant to judging the mortgage payments or not, which had already been met consistently. There was another long delay, this time it was reaching nearly the end of the contract, infact exactly a week before the end date I was given a ‘declined’ decision based on my bank balances. But they discriminated me in that they said they would be happy to grant the mortgage to the partner only but not in partnership. In other words this decline was to exclude me from the purchase after it was my capital that had paid for all the acquisition costs, repeat applications, renovations and revaluations to the property, so it was in a ready-made state for someone else to takeover. This tactic (of using the indicative offer to hold on to my time waiting to the end of the contract) was to leave me facing a short notice sales decisions, coupled with a large increased interest rate penalty for not paying off a bridge loan within 3 weeks, was deliberate to create a pressure point so as to force me to give up the property to an auction where they can pick it up for cheap or be forced to compromise on sales price so that their secret buyers and agents can pick it up for cheap. After this news, I searched for other property experts to consult, and I was horrified to discover that the 3 mortgage applications were meant to take place at the beginning along with the lease conversions so that a short-term mortgage was not a threat of uncertainty. So I had been well and truly mislead. Yet this broker claimed to have 16 years of experience who had taken my ex-business partner through this process with success for him and others. There were many other clues, evidences which will make this report too long to describe that the broker was in cahoots with the bank to achieve this outcome. Does anyone know the best action on this matter?

Ok I will do that, but what does BBA stand for ?

Thank you, I have already complained to the bank, but they have been passing the buck onto Visa Rules. So when I highlighted some of their internal processing short-comings, they were avoiding those points and trying to refer me to go to the Financial Ombudsman

To prospective consumers: This is my experience of CRE-8 Self-Storage company. I joined this company on 16 Sept2011 to store my things for storage, after comparing prices with Access Self-Storage whose branch was across the road to this company. On an earlier visit to CRE-8 Self-Storage on 10th Sept2011, I was given price quotes for weekly and monthly payments for 20sq ft space and what discounts I could get if I paid 6 months in advance by which was 10% and 20% if 12 months in advance. As they did not have a 20ft sq space they said I could use a 25sq Ft one until one became available. These terms were written on a business card by one of their staff called Mark. I kept the card. At the time the Access Self-Storage rates I had been given were for the 25sq ft and the monthly rate was £82.00 approximately with £10 insurance/mth. CRE-8's weekly price was £15/week which works out at £71.60 per month but a £26 insurance/mth. Unfortunately I did not realize the selling trick, I thought it was cheaper so I proceeded to join by using my Visa debit card on 16th Sept2011 for all 6 months in order to take advantage of the 10% discount. But they sent their first invoice a month later and it said that the monthly gross price was £86.00 which they multiplied by 1.2 (which was vat) and then by 6 for 6 months and then the gross total was charged vat again. The invoice then deducted £137.00 as being the amount of discounts I received for the 6 months to reconcile back to the figure I paid. When I received this first invoice I never paid attention to it, I just wondered how I got such a high looking discount but didn't think that I should challenge them on their numbers because they might have got their calculation wrong. I forgot all about it and each 6 months I continued to pay by card the full amount for the next 6 months. Until,.... 16March 2014 when I had reached a stage where I could no longer afford to pay cash upfront for 6 months. I then enquired on 27th March what their monthly instalment amount would be so I could switch over. But their manager Jason quoted £127. I was shocked because this was not a 10% increase on the monthly figure I was given before I joined. It did not match even their gross invoiced figure of £86 /month. I decided there was something irregular and I decided to leave and I gave them a written notice on 27th March 2014 by email and asking to leave on 31st March and that they could use my deposit to pay for these gone 2 weeks. They immediately wrote back with a reply that I was not allowed to use the deposit to cover the rent and that I have to give 14 days notice at least because that was the contract terms. on 28th March2014 I gave them the 14 day notice and I even agreed to pay their late payment charges of £30 on top. The total they asked for on this email came to £138.00, I accepted that this figure was the result of losing the 10% discount from the monthly rate because I was no longer paying for 6 months in advance. I still had not noticed that their gross invoiced amount of £86 was further grosssed up by 1.2 from the £71.60 and again on the sub-total columns. But when I did not call back to give my card details to pay this amount by 31March (because that was the date I had briefly mentioned that I might pay inorder to avoid the late charges ) because by 28th March I had given notice and was levied with late charges I decided I would take my time until I was ready), they took £198 from my account directly on 3rd April completely unknown to me that they had done so. It was only on 4th April when by chance I went to the bank to draw some money that I noticed an unexpected drop in my balance and that it was from CRE-8. On that very afternoon I called them to request an explanation as to why they had taken such an amount without my permission and knowledge. Their manager replied on 8th April by email saying it was the correct figure and that apparently I had given permission on 2nd April. I was shocked to see such lies made up not only by the numbers but also the claim that I authorized this by card. These behaviours fall squarely as fraud because there was a premeditated intention to take an un-agreed amount without notice and by violation of using my existing card details. Since this time I have had to spend several hours providing my bank with proofs to recover the money from their bank and I also reported it to the police. But they still have not paid me my deposit back and the dispute is still ongoing with the banks. Furthermore I thought banks would have vigorous checks to ensure authorization proof existed before allowing a card payment. I learnt through pursuing this matter that apparently Visa rules were as thin as assuming that if a supplier possessed our card details then it was assumed to be an authorized transaction. I am totally surprised by these shallow criteria because anyone can steel our card details and pretend they had authorisation when infact there wasn't any. On the 2nd of April I was in Liverpool and not in London, and I provided my Train tickets to prove this and also my phone itemised bill would show that there was no phone call to this company from my phone to authorize this. But the bank is still struggling to get the money back.

Council Tax recovery rules seem to have changed a lot in the last 8 years (for worse), because before, we would receive notifications of demand and of court hearings well in advance so that there was time to debate things and agree outcomes, but now it seems they start the summons process very secretly and in my case I received only two week's notice which if one is living in another city can be difficult to plan and attend. Even so I attended the first summons arrangement at the required venue but found that the council's representative approached me to discuss the matter before entering the court hearing. So I was able to show all my documents of affordability and I was granted the reduced instalment arrangement. However when I asked for the same arrangement to be granted for another property on the basis that I could not afford the full tax on that one either, they did not want to make the arrangement because they said I would have to wait for the summons first before they could discuss payment arrangements. This seems to me to be another devious secret policy to make money for private debt collector companies and it had nothing to do with solving the payer's willingness to pay plans. Its as though they want an excuse to increase the cost because it makes money for private company's revenue opportunity (debt collector charges and court charges) rather than ensuring that the tax is recoverable sooner rather than later.

I have always wondered why society needs private debt collectors at all, if once a court has issued an order for recovery of debt, why would any consumer who is owed money ie is the creditor want to increase their costs of collection by using a debt collector ? And as for the debtor, I am sure they do not want to pay more than they have to especially if they are innocent defaulters (ie they are not deliberate fraudsters), then they certainly wouldn't like to incur extra amounts just due to a middleman/ unnecessary third party. I believe the courts could allocate staff to monitor progress or leave it to the creditor themselves to collect their own debt. And if a debtor still does not pay, it should go to the police because it means the debtor wants to steel someone's else's money.

Well Mr Persistence, you have well and truely contradicted yourself because either Tigrent is a trustworthy company by word and deeds or they are not. And if their words are designed to mislead and their deeds do not match their words and I have to carry out external due diligence because their words are not going to be reliable then that would confirm to me that the rest of their services are unreliable and untrustworthy. Then there is the problem that external sources would have to be unbiased and accurate. Who else could give a detailed account of the quality and ethics and reliability of the company and its courses except from students with first hand experience ? Then what happens ? So Tigrent arranges for its existing students who you say are very happy and successful so that new students can take direct first -hand reference from them or check the necessary information with them. This is exactly what their trainers were asked to do for selling the course to new people without syllabuses to win over trust. But hey, these so called successful students have been brain washed into following the Tigrent principle have they not ? If you have a very high opinion of them then why would you advise people to do external due diligence ? If people are to believe your version then they shouldn't need to do external or independent due diligence. Likewise I was told by apparently happy students that all was fine and everything would work out. As for my job seeking efforts, I don't think you have the facts and evidences to support your derrogatory comment which was to say that I seek to steer away from jobs. Likewise your own accuracy is at question if you have to distort my paragraphs in order to draw out both derogatory as well as false conclusions such as the one where you wanted to assume that I don't want to meet mentors and check them out just because I suggested in my paragraph that the mentorship checking out exercise should have been held outside of the 3 day course time. You are basically trying to remove responsibility from companies to comply with the law and that somehow it is acceptible for them to cheat but not acceptible for the consumer to pull out their money when such companies do not deliver their side of a contractual bargain.

Oh, thank you, you have put it back in. Thank you.

Tigrent are on the the American version of the "Ripoff Report" where it reports that 100s of complaints by students have been made against their American branch. Is my experience of their course and failure of the contract supposed to be censored here ?

Is there a reason why my article about Tigrent and that of Mr Persistence's comments has been removed ?

Reply to Mr Persistence : You seem to assume that I did not try to make my inquiries before contract, well I have written that I did and I did not receive HONEST answers to my inquiries and an honest appraisal of my situation in relation to their advertised /acclaimed services, which my physical journey after signing their contract subsequently came to reveal. You seem to repeat in your thread of explanations that I should have the ability to rely on my own research, and I have said that based on my research I joined thinking that I would receive certain amount of services. There were no AU course contents or syllabuses during the dates of my registration so this obviously is not the same as your experience where further down the thread you say that you received loads of information. Perhaps after receiving my solicitor's letters they decided to include a more detailed course contents for new batches of students. I also received a black leather folder upon joining but that only contained more leaflets to do with my package which was the AU preparation booklet, a newsletter , and the First Steps leaflet and the One -to One Mentorship. So no there were no full details that you seem to talk of. Exclusion clauses after contract: Whilst you suggest we should do our own investigation you fail to explain how we should be in possession of all the right information before contract if we only receive the black leather folder which contained these further leaflets and information with the DVDs and CDs after signing ? Not a single trainer or Mentor or the DVds or CDs etc were going to reveal exclusions of services from the mentorship programme, now were they? Isn't it our right to know what services the course fees cover ? If there were no syllabuses and no black folder leaflets or exclusion clauses brought to our attention before signing of contract, how can we make an informed decision ? Futhermore, you seem to assume that everyone's background is the same, well they are not ! I already owned and sold my own property and I have been a landlord for more than 10 years so my judgment of how the AU falls short is simply not going to be the same as yours, is it ? So then, it is of critical importance to give students all the negative information as well as the positives so that they can make proper informed decisions. Now please don't tell me you haven't noticed how Tigrent is programmed to focus only the positives ? You also say you have taken the full package, so this will undoubtly cover more areas, mine doesn't, so my comments are in relation to my package and how I have been ill-advised on that package. Perhaps you got a better treatment because you bought the more expensive package, so please do not assume that just because you received a different treatment that that means Tigrent did not carry out offenses against students who had a reason to complain. Misrepresntation : It doesn't take much brain work to understand that a course that doesn't provide course contents or syllabuses upfront is intending to disadvantage the student. Do they carry out application tests for competencies, or interview students before joining about skills and abilities ? Do they have application forms where they record student objectives ? No they don't because they are not in it for the student but rather a quick grab of the money. Their sales policy is more akin to "grab a sale, bag the money" policy. Your course and personal objectives are going to be different to mine, therefore in the absence of a syllabus or course contents we rely even more on the advice/information from the so called qualified trainers , therefore they have a greater responsibility about how they are selling to us and for what purpose; because I can assure you that I had only a borderline interest and that a decision as to whether I should join or not depended very much on their answers about what services they cover for the price and what they could achieve for me in my condition. Therefore each trainer/representative of Tigrent's course is responsible for giving misleading information since they lead students to believe they should join no matter what. Equally, when I asked if they had a refund facility they simply said, Yes ! ...without saying that it was only for 7 days. I think you have been sent by them to cover for them on this site. I speak for my experiences as I found them. The whole of the Basic training was conducted as though every unemployed person would benefit by joining Tigrent. You also say that you received help with power teams or recommended professionals eg solicitors or builders etc, well I didn't and in my case the Help desk including the UK office Manager confirmed this fact in writing that they do not provide such a service. So once again, your experience might have benefited from my complaints via legal personnel or may be, they improved things for you because you opted for a much bigger package, paying a much bigger fee. And no, our Basic training course did not fill us in on Mortgage types and what income requirements are needed to qualify for one. If I had been given this information or anything like it I would not have had to part with my money. So you need to check your information as to which course you received this information from, because my basic training is not where any mortgage information was given. I only discovered this additional insight once I attended the Mortgage Broker's 30 min “one to one” session after the AU course. So infact you need to double check which course gave you that part of the info. Half -day Mentorship selling exercise on Day 3 of the AU course : I didn't say that I didn't need to test them out , I said that this exercise of meeting them and testing them should have been done outside of the 3 days since the 3 days is already a very short time to fit in all necessary topics. On our session of the AU, I am afraid paragraphs 3 and 4 of the AU curriculum (top right hand side) of page 5 topic contents were entirely missed out. So, very important topics were left out at our expense. The AU written manual was sub-standard too. The AU manual consists of slides with no additional notes or explanations as to what each topic was meant to cover or teach. This is not the standard I expect to receive for an advanced course which cost 12 times as much as the basic. Your comment that I should know I have to look for a job, and that it is not Tigrent's job to give me a job, is a sarcastic comment (undeserved because whateverr I expected is only from their own sales advertising and for which there are written evidences that I can rely on to prove my point) This resonse of yours also highlights your bias rather than logic. You have obviously been sent by them to cover for this public forum and you want to twist what I have said about my experience. I didn't come looking to join their AU, they came hungrily to sell to me, as they do when sniffing out who’s got what cash, and aim to bag that cash as swiftly as possible. No, Mr Persistence, I did not go looking for their AU course. They had to persuade me of prospects relevant to my situation, which it now turns out was false and not part of their services. I found the AU sub-standard in its range and depth of topics covered and inadequate for dealing with some of the real life complexities that I have come accross in my experience of the property market. Your comment on my legal experience: Well it is obvious that you have not encountered the legal system the way I have nor do you keep track of it; and you naively believe that people somehow do not have the ability to mislead and pre-plan their deception for the purposes of making unholy gains. If life were as good as this version of your perspective, there would be no misery, theft, fraud, ill-legal land grabbing, crime etc to suffer from, no murders, genocide and no injustice etc.