Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Breaking down the Tan Sri Syed Yusof Bin Tun Syed Nasir v Zavarco Judgement and why shareholders have been misled and deceived...

What was the importance of this judgement in the first place?

If this court action had succeeded, then Tan Sri  Syed Nasir, past director, chairman and alleged majority shareholder of the Vasseti Group, would have been allowed to vote at a General Meeting.  

Why does he need to vote?

To remove the current board of directors who they claim went rogue. Now, without his shares there is a real danger that there are insufficient shares in order to win the vote to ultimately eject the current board of (rogue) directors. 

Why are we so angry with this judgement?

Very simply, because we've all been misled and lied to... 

The question that you need to ask yourself is, would you have committed to this investment if you had known that Tan Sri Syed Nasir had decided not to personally invest his money to buy 30% of the company.  Our answer is a resounding  NO...  there is not a chance any of us would have committed our funds to Vasseti if we had known the truth... 

Here are several extracts from the judgement and the judge's comments,

"Mr Nasir was interviewed by The Star in Malaysia which ran the story under the headline "Syed Yusof buys into Vasseti [ZB], which is launching its broadband service today" and began: "Kuala Lumpur: Businessman Tan Sri Dyed Yusof Syed Nasir has bought a 30% stake in Vasseti Berhad [ZB]..." This was in line with evidence given to me by Dato Singh who said: "I think Tan Sri invested a lot of money in the company". Dato Singh said this was what he was told at the time (Day 3 p 49 line 12 to p 50 line 23). But Mr Nasir's evidence was that he invested no money in ZB; his 4 million ZB shares were paid for by Mr Sidhu (Day 1 p 32 lines 10-19). When it was put to him that the journalist at The Star had been misled into thinking that he had such confidence in ZB that he had put his own money into it, Mr Nasir said "Well, you know, I mean, it's fully paid, of course it's like your own money, you know, but there is an arrangement of course, you know, will come. This is part of the exercise that for the company to move on." He was asked if it was "part of the image" and said, "Image, yes." This seemed to me to show a willingness to allow people to be misled on an important point which damaged his credibility as a witness."

The Judge concluded the following,

"I conclude that Mr Nasir is not a reliable witness and that where he makes assertions which are not corroborated by contemporaneous documents or other more reliable witnesses I should treat them with care. I conclude from the evidence that he took very little interest in any of the details of the matters he is asked to give evidence upon; that his recollection is unreliable; and that his evidence is not a truly independent recollection but coloured by the context in which he is talking."
My impression from Mr Nasir's evidence and from Mr Sidhu's evidence was that Mr Nasir's contribution was his name, his contacts, and his prestige. He was given shares and a directorship so that he appeared to the outside world to be a major shareholder and director but only the appearance of this mattered; it was not necessary that he should actually be an investor and, in reality, everything was done and decided by Shailen and Mr Sidhu. This ties in with the news report and the (wrong) information given to Dato Singh that Mr Nasir had been willing to pay for his own shares in the business. It was all about appearances, but the appearances did not have to reflect the reality.

"Dato Singh said in cross-examination that he had been told that Mr Nasir "had invested a lot of money" in ZB. This was not correct, as shown by the evidence including the evidence of Mr Nasir: Mr Nasir invested no money in ZB."

So shareholders there you have it, the beginning of the end and part of the reason as to why our investment is now lost.  Tan Sri Syed Nasir had nothing to lose and therefore probably didn't care if the company succeeded or not.  

Later in a separate post, we will demonstrate why we believe, the past board of directors could not have cared-less about your investment and probably the eventual success of the company, which as we later will find out was built on more lies.

To read the judgement again, please click here...




Friday, February 9, 2018

We are back ....

Dear Vasseti Zavarco Shareholders,

Our last post was published during November 2017 and it featured the release of a long-awaited Judgement for Tan Sri v Zavarco.

There has been little to say about the last released judgement from the UK,  other than the people that you thought or hoped where trustworthy turned out to be a bunch of outright fucking liars and were happy to mislead everyone including a British Judge, who saw straight through their bullshit.

Two things need to happen,

1. Accountability, the people here who have misled and deceived investors need to be held fully accountable for the loss of investors funds.

2. The need for a full Police investigation on all past & present board of directors of Vasseti Zavarco.

Stay Tuned.




Friday, October 20, 2017

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Day 2 Tan Sri Syed Yusof Bin Tun Syed Nasir v Zavarco PLC...

Dear Shareholders,

It's a clear message from the courts in London that this is a full-on trial, as it enters its second day. 

As soon as we have any news from the courts we will of course post it.


Tuesday, October 17, 2017

Breaking News -Tan Sri Syed Yusof Bin Tun Syed Nasir v Zavarco PLC in London Chancery Courts today...

Dear Shareholders,

Tan Sri Syed Yusof Nasir, past Chairman and one of the largest investors in Vasseti/Zavarco - click here is in the Chancery Courts in London today to face down Zavarco PLC.

As soon as we have more news we will post it.


Thursday, October 12, 2017

PINNED POST - Updated 8th August - No further news and we continue to watch all the courts.

UPDATE 8th August - No further news and we continue to watch all the courts.

UPDATE 16th June - ADDED THE UK COMPANIES COURT SEARCH. SEE BELOW.


In the UK -

Peter Blomqvist, a Zavarco PLC shareholder, has been trying to call a General Meeting to remove the current board of directors at Zavarco PLC. Below I have set out the public notices for the General Meetings and all their corresponding links.

Gazette notice 2319060 General Meeting Zavarco PLC Postponed 15th April 2015.

Gazette notice 2345789 Zavarco PLC General Meeting Postponed 19th May 2015.
                        Zavarco PLC Annual General Meeting Postponed 30th June 2015.

Gazette notice 2376931 Zavarco PLC General Meeting Postponed 31st July 2015.

Gazette notice 2622170 Zavarco PLC General Meeting Postponed 7th Oct 2016.

New Link to Law Pages.com - click here  

What to do - Type "ZAVARCO" in the case name box.
LEAVE the court list box as "all high court lists"
Click Search

It will show the complete history of Zavarco cases gone through the UK Courts to date.


UK Judgements -

Peter Blomqvist had just over 5% of the company (Zavarco PLC). This gave him the right to call a General Meeting, but during March 2015 the current directors at Zavarco PLC issued a further 7 billion shares, which had the effect of dilution on all the shareholders. Therefore Peter Blomqvist and his shareholding were diluted below 5%. This was assumed to be a deliberate action so that he could not call a General Meeting to replace the current board of directors.   

Peter Blomqvist took the fight to the UK courts to try and remedy this. Here are the Judgements with their corresponding links. 

Note - They are all worth reading they give some of the backstory.

Blomqvist v Zavarco PLC & Others 2nd of July 2015 Case No.2692.

Blomqvist v Zavarco PLC & Others 17th of May 2016 Case No 2692 & 2693

You will note from the following blog post the fight continues to hold a General Meeting -

Nov 21st, 2016 Blomqvist v Zavarco PLC Case No 2692 

UK Police -

We have been informed that another Zavarco PLC shareholder from the UK has spoken with and taken advice from the City of London Police regarding the fraud, but we are told that the shareholder is waiting for the litigation to conclude before continuing matters formally with the Police.

Germany -

Zavarco PLC (fka Vasseti UK PLC) was floated on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and was delisted during May 2015.

Several complaints have been filed with the stock market regulators BaFin for fraud and we are told that an investigation is ongoing.

As far as we know the German Police are not involved.... yet.  However, I guess it's just a matter of time as the story unfolds, and the evidence builds in the UK courts then I dare say it will be turned over to the German authorities so that they can review it and bring prosecutions against the Zavarco Board of Directors for their part in this fraud against the Frankfurt Stock Exchange.

Malaysia -

In the High Court of Malaysia at Kuala Lumpur Judgements

May 2015 - Ranjeet Singh Sidhu v Open Fibre Sdn Bhd, Zulizman Abidin, Roslina Binti Ibrahim, Shailen Popatlal, Ku Hasniza Hashim. Case No- 28NCC-379-05/2015.

Ranjeet Singh Sidhu (Past group director and who was a majority shareholder but no longer) raises a legal action in Malaysia to try and wind up Open Fibre Sdn Bhd. Open Fibre is at the heart of the fraud. 

June 2015 - Ranjeet Singh Sidhu, Tan Sri Syed Mohd Yusof Bin Tun Sted Nasir v Zavarco PLC & many others. Case No- 22NCC-179-06/2015.

RSS and Tan Sri Syed Nasir both file a lawsuit against literally all the people alleged to be involved in the fraud. It is important to note that this lawsuit carries a notice to strike out (not good). We believe this would correspond with this blog post  - click here. Again we are not sure if the action to strike out was successful. On the whole, this is not good ...

Jan 2016 - In the Court of Appeal of Malaysia, Peter Blomqvist and Others. 

Judgement was in favour of the defendants. The Judge ruled that the UK was, in fact, the correct place for the case to be heard. 

I would highly recommend reading all these judgements if you want to understand some of the alleged backstory.

There are other legal actions popping up from time to time in Malaysia, but we have no further info on them at this time.

28th Nov 2016 Case No 24NCC-35-01 2015 Zavarco v Vascory Land KKK.  Ongoing.

28th Oct 2016 Case No 22NCVC-131-03 2015 Zavarco v Past Directors. Ongoing.

Media coverage -

Jose Barrock at the Edge newspaper in Malaysia covered the story last year in the below link -

Shareholder dispute at Zavarco PLC

Malaysian Police -

We are led to believe that complaints have been filed with the Malaysian Police regarding the fraud. Whether or not any investigation has actually begun is yet unknown at this point.


If you think we have missed anything, then please let us know. 

Have a great week ... RR