Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Nuts in November: Nadine Qs 48-54; A Fool And Their Money

There will be relapses. New and extra trivial questions could be asked. But we're thinking it's time to move the story along a bit. Where's the beef? The casual nepotism, the practiced CV mangling, the apparent soft selection ... these are not the beef. Here is the beef:

  • Question 48: We've asked before. But do tell us more about Paul David Dorries? Perhaps you can begin with an answer to this request. That is your Paul Dorries isn't it? We'll call it Question 48:

  • Question 49: And while we're at it we'll call this one Question 49. You must be very proud of Paul David Dorries leaving behind his Copper Mining history and retraining as an investment adviser? Presumably he did retrain and did get accreditation and a licence?:

  • Question 50: And this intriguing follow up can be Question 50. Seems he isn't actually accredited or any of that red tape pallaver? Can you help? Are these assertions about Paul's methods true do you think?

  • Question 51: Can you please confirm when Paul David Dorries first started dabbling with stocks and shares and spread betting? Did he practice with your own money before taking money in trust from others?

  • Question 52: Any idea of how much of other people's money Paul David Dorries has lost while he's been in this business?

  • Question 53: Any idea of how much of Dorries money if any Paul David Dorries has lost while he's been in this business?

  • Question 54: Any idea whether allegedly untrained, allegedly unaccredited, allegedly unlicenced spread betting and investment "friends" like Paul David Dorries get commissions and fees whatever happens to the bets?


    Tim said...

    a) I assume these questions posed using a sock-puppet/SPA were the work of someone from NOTW, working on a story that has since been spiked. Would that be a safe assumption, do you think?

    b) I fail to see the relevance of this beef if it is no longer hot and/or injected into Ms Dorries, unless there's more to Question 51 than you're telling us.

    Chris Paul said...

    Answers (of sorts) for Tim:

    (a) (i) not a sock puppet or SPA as all posters at these sites need to create iDs and not use own emails;
    (ii) despite the first context NOT a journalist and NOT working for NOTW in any way;
    (iii) researcher or investigator is more like it and they use the same ChamberInt iD elsewhere though no major Google return;
    (iv) also "old Africa hand" and "squirrel monitor" would be fair;
    (v) NOTW probably didn't so much spike it as get lazy and one of the informants I think took ball away to a different, er, court.

    (b) (i) innuendo innuendo that is where you put your suppository;
    (ii) mmmm Q51 answer is certainly longer than say from time "divorce" (or whatever) was awarded by Mail Newspapers;
    (iii) PDD didn't start dabbling with widows' £00,000s as some sort of consolation for Nads' cock and bull separation though I'm not ready to give my current estimate on start date just yet.

    Lots more Qs to come, and some things only fall into place when more are asked. Strangely enough not getting any answers, not coming in the front door anyway.

    tory boys never grow up said...

    Doen't appear that there has been any Paul Dorries registered with the FSA to provide investment advice (in any of the products which they regulate) since 2001. See the FSA register here


    So perhaps another question is what did he offer investment advice upon?

    Anonymous said...

    Tim Ireland questioning another blogger about whether it's okay to ask question after question....