Just to add a bit more meat to what I said. In order to prove mal-practice within the fund you'd have to go to law and much as I should like to see any dishonesty brought to book, I know that the only winners in law suits are the lawyers! It would be extremely difficult to prove anything without specialist help I fear. One or two things I do know: the British Real Estate Fund, was intended to be higher risk than Glanmore using 70-80 gearing (which by the way is what many people accept when buying their home!). The Glanmore fund invested mainly in so called second tier commercial property. The favourable growth figures you quote will be for prime London property which is attractive to foreign buyers and which has some support from the banks. The second tier has lagged badly from lack of bank lending with is essential for the market to operate. In addition Glanmore has had to accept unattractive interest rate contracts forced on them by the banks and I believe this what is partly hampering the value. The fund was described as low risk years back but this is a subjective word. One might have regarding a bank as low risk until one had seen that two major banks went bankrupt and had to enagage government help in England! Nowadays I would spread my little remaining money across several banks to reduce the risk. As you see the rules change! When several accidents have happened on a stretch of road it is then called and Accident Black Spot! Not before! The collapse of the English pound shows that nothing is low risk!! I'd love to identify something totally secure of my retirement funds (what's left of them) but such simple doesn't exist!

Now something to please you or infuritate you. Please give David Icke's web site a "hearing". Ask yourself why the bankers tell the government what to do, why tighter controls on banks consistently fail. You might find some interesting material there and please believe me David is NOT mad whatever some people say and however much you dismiss some of his views!

http://www.davidicke.com/

The Glanmore Property Fund:

Without Prejudice:

Its time to get together and stand up and be counted.
Glanmore at are it again, now they have reduced the valuation downwards again, now standing at just over £14 a share. From the high's of £79 this is scandalous. Its time to take the directors to court and make them accountable for their bad management decisions. Its time to engage a forensic auditor and specialist firm of lawyers specializing in matters of this type. The more shareholders that come forward the bigger the claim can be and this attracts the top flight law firms to be interested in Glanmore.

The fund has slipped from £79 per share to £14. The managers and directors of this fund keep saying that they are acting in the best interest of all shareholders. I believe this not to be so and ask you to look at.

1.)Why has their share price fallen to such lows.
2.)Was the original share prices from 1998 through 2007 manipulated by the managers to get funds into this fund.
3.) Although the manager claims the valuations are completely independent, are they really completely independent or has the valuers been given specific criteria in which to form their valuations.
4.) Why has the Glanmore fund been sold twice since its inception by the main three directors of Cardales.
5.) Did these three directors received substantial sums in the millions of pound when sold.
6.) Why when in the last 12 months UK commercial property fund have bounced back making on average 14.5% increase in their share prices , why does The Glanmore Fund continue on its downward slope.

The decisions by the directors not to accept an offer from CRIEF at over £16.50per share was wrong. If they had accepted an offer the shares would now be worth substantially more than the current price of £14.

As a commercial landlord of 25 years, I know that with rental reviews of upward only and generally offering a 3 year review over a 21 year period. That valuations of commercial properties are based on the rental return. In good times, that equates to 12 times rental value in bad at worst it is 8 times. So for the fund to drop to such lows, gross negligence by the managers and directors should be considered. Whilst at the same time charging fees for sales at 5% of value and 1.5% annual charge. This is gross incompetence or as said, something much worse. I think a forensic audit would prove that these manages and directors have not acted in a proper and fit manner nor have they acted in the best interests of shareholders. Its time to take action against the directors and drag them through the London Courts, this is possible. Particularly when I have documented evidence that Glanmore originally marketed this fund as LOW risk and currently show it as HIGH risk. I invested when it was being sold as LOW risk. I want my money back. I didn't invest in a risky market in a risky county, I invested in a sound market in secure country.

The managers are to blame here and its their heads which should roll and not our bank balance or pension pot.

PeterMoc: Your comments make sense but like for like, we have been screwed by Glanmore. The fund may survive but your money cannot recover to the level of your previous investment. If they would have fire sold 17 Millions worth of property 3 years ago, most would have been paid out and been able to get on with our lives, but Glanmore directors are protecting their fat pay cheques and not allowing us to move forward. They are holding us to ransom, for sure, under liquidation we may have received more 3 years ago ,than what we are likely to receive in the end with these current managers.

Take a look at their British Real Estate Fund and you will see what I mean. Valuation 0.

I'm in the fund too! Lost £45000! However I try to be objective. I accept all the arguments about managers creaming off value and as we all know the banksters have played a major role in ruining us all. There are parasites everywhere not least the lawyers - the only ones who win in litigation!

The fund has lost about 80% of value. Now let's look at a typical Spanish property where values have dropped some 50% in four years. Let's suppose that you had bought such a property for €250,000 (plus costs!) in 2005 - we did - and you had a 50% mortgage (€125000). Today you battle to get an offer around €130,000. What's the net worth? Just €5000! after paying off the bank. Loss 96%!!!! An extreme example but it shows what has happened. The fund has had to negotiate severe terms with the banks to get off the hook and this must partly contribute to the lousy values now. I continue to be moderately optimistic that the fund will survive but until the banks start lending the commercial property market will be paralysed.

Gearing amplifies loss as well as gain as this example shows. If you have 100% mortgage you can walk away!

I have found a firm of London Solicitors who are looking into my position with Glanmore. One thing they are keen on is rallying more people together should they feel that we do have a case against them. They work on a no win no fee arrangement after a barristers opinion has been sought. I guess the reason they want more people is so that the claim is more than just my investment they want millions to make it worth their while. I am looking for individuals to help me seek justice against Glanmore. Please contact me if interested.

Hi Pollen8. Have you read the funds audited accounts. They can be read on http://www.glanmore.com/.

I am a shareholder in a company that is being wound up. One obstacle is Glanmore where an investment is held through AEGON who say they cannot realise the holding. The solution to shareholders of the company being wound up is to put sealed bids in for the Glanmore holding and for AEGON to transfer the holding.

The last valution of the holding was circa £8K (Oct 2010). I would appreciate your views whether to stay clear or what value would you think reasonable.

Seems that emails are not available to other users.

Hello Calpespain,

I posted a Glanmore comment last year on July 9 to which you kindly replied. I have some interesting information that I would only divulge by private email. I notice that you suggest to Maize to click on your profile name to find your email address.

However, when I do that there is only the date of your joining and the date of your last post displayed. Any suggestions?

LeGuen

Have entered my email onto my profile.

I did click on your profile name which opened your profile but your email does not appear. I could try putting my email into my profile.

Maize:

What a pity that the contents of previous postings were deleted. I'll try to higlight, copy and save it as a reference.

maxsteam: you say:One issue that I am unsure about is that their web site states that "The Glanmore Property Fund is a specialist UK commercial property fund" and not a Guernsey fund. Am I looking at the same fund?

The fund is a UK property fund but regulated and registered in Guernsey.

One very fundamental investment principle is that, for safety, you should spread your investment around various funds. There is nothing wrong with puttting something into a property fund but it would not be prudent to advise someone to put everything there.

The performance of the Glanmore Property Fund as given on their latest fact sheet show that the main losses of value happened between 1 and 2 years ago. For comparison, the TR Property Investment Trust has lost about 65% of it's value from its high about 4 years ago.

One issue that I am unsure about is that their web site states that "The Glanmore Property Fund is a specialist UK commercial property fund" and not a Guernsey fund. Am I looking at the same fund?

Maize:
Yes you are right, from 30th June 2007 when the share price was £79.533 to today at £15.274 thats a loss of 80.795% from that high.

No, I am not involved in any financial markets, this was part of my pension pot which I was going to totally remove from Skandia in January 2008 after my Christmas Holidays. But upon my return I was met with the lock up of the Glanmore Fund. It has taken me two and a half years to feel mentally strong enough to start to see if I can get some sort of redress either against Skandia or Glanmore. I feel, it will have to be Skandia initially as they hold my bond and should have protected me or acted better in their judgement of allowing me to place the funds with Glanmore.

I wait to see your opinion when it arrives. I also feel that its possibly better not to show this forum too much of what you find as this allows Glanmore or Skandia access in advance to possible action or to cover their backs further.

I will attempt to leave my contact details under my username profile, click upon it and see if you can see a method to contact me there.