Rowanmoor (CAS-14083-P2K6, CAS-14490-Y3R2 & CAS-62498-N0K3)

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaints are not upheld against Rowanmoor as Administrator, as it was not its responsibility to carry out the level of due diligence suggested by the Applicants, and because it fulfilled the duties it did have in relation to the Schemes adequately. 

The complaints are upheld against RTL because it did not fulfil its duties as a trustee of the Schemes. As a part of these duties, it had a responsibility to consider whether the investments in GPG, Akbuk, TRG, Store First and Park First (the Investments) were appropriate in the circumstances. However, it failed to do so, the investments were not appropriate and thereby its actions caused, in part, the financial loss incurred by the Applicants. 

Complaint summary

Mr H has complained that Rowanmoor failed to perform sufficient due diligence in relation to his proposed investments in Dolphin Capital GmbH (later called Dolphin Trust GmbH, and thereafter the German Property Group (hereon referred to as GPG)) and Akbuk Resort Group (Akbuk). He says these investments were high risk and not suitable for him. He would like Rowanmoor to put him back into the position he would have been in had the investments never occurred. 

Mr N has complained that Rowanmoor failed to perform sufficient due diligence in relation to his proposed investments in GPG and The Resort Group (TRG). He says these investments were high risk and not suitable for him. He would like Rowanmoor to put him back into the position he would have been in had the investments never occurred. 

Mr GT has complained that Rowanmoor failed to perform sufficient due diligence in relation to his proposed investments in GPG, Park First Limited (Park First) and Store First Limited (Store First). He says these investments were high risk and not suitable for him. He would like Rowanmoor to put him back into the position he would have been in had the investments never occurred.