.png){kind=small}
If you once saw Invest US Income Strategy as a golden opportunity for your financial future, you're probably experiencing some distress now. The financial landscape is filled with cautionary tales about this unsuccessful investment option. If you've been led astray by Shah Wealth Management or Cherish Wealth Management, you're not alone, and CP Financial Claims is here to help you navigate this complex situation.
Recognise any of these names? Keep reading.
Invest US Income was presented as a high-reward investment product, but unfortunately, it turned out to be a financial sinkhole. The fallout has led to a range of repercussions for investors, including countless tales of misadvised financial decisions and regret.
Shah Wealth Management and its representative, Cherish Wealth Management, based in Solihull, played a significant role in recommending Invest US Income to potential investors. Cherish’s seal of approval led many to believe Invest US Income was a solid investment.
One investor, known as 'Mr. B', took advice from Cherish Wealth Management in 2015 and invested cash directly in the Invest US Income Strategy Loan. When the investment went south, Mr. B filed a claim against Shah Wealth Management with the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) in 2017.
However, his claim was dismissed as the FSCS contended that loan agreements were not under their jurisdiction.
Unwilling to accept this, Pension Claim Consulting took on Mr. B's case. With meticulous investigation and strong evidence, they even hired a barrister to challenge the FSCS's original decision. Ultimately, the FSCS reconsidered their stance and labeled the Invest US Income Strategy Loan as a 'designated investment.'
This pivotal moment led to Mr. B being awarded £19,047.57 in compensation and paved the way for all claims of a similar nature.
In December 2017, investigations revealed that Cherish Wealth Management was responsible for an astounding £7 million in FSCS payouts. By March 2018, that amount had escalated to £16 million, affecting nearly 1,600 clients. These payouts included £11 million tied to SIPP (Self-Invested Personal Pension) claims and £4.2 million in personal pension transfers.
An array of investments, many of them overseas property ventures, became the epicentre of the problem. These investments, some of which were created by a former director after he parted ways with Cherish, included not only Invest US, but also Lakeview UK Investments, Brisa Investments and Tambaba Investment.
These primarily overseas-based property investments were also advised by the same management firm. The breakdown of the FSCS claims against these firms highlights the magnitude of the issue:
It's crucial to note that these claims only made up a proportion of the total of 1,973 claims over the firm. 1,598 were upheld by that point, 188 claims were still pending and 187 rejected.
Those with successful claims might also receive higher payouts from the FSCS lifeboat fund. With no possibility of recouping losses from unregulated investments, these individuals could find their compensation payments significantly increased.
Although information about this unfolding situation is still limited, as and when we get more information, we will update this page.
If you're entangled in the Invest US Income fiasco, CP Financial Claims is your go-to platform for reclaiming your financial stability. Our seasoned team specialises in mishandled investment claims and is committed to assisting you through the labyrinth of FSCS processes. We have successfully steered numerous clients through similar situations, helping them recover their losses.
Please submit your details below for a free, no-obligation chat with our team! We can go from there - what have you got to lose?
You are not obliged to use our service. It is possible for you to present your claim for free, either to the firm, or person against whom you wish to complain, or to the statutory ombudsman (Financial Ombudsman Service or Pension Ombudsman Service) or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, whichever is applicable to your claim.
