Case details for ANTONIO SOARES



Date of Birth: / /

Date Order Starts: 5 / 4 / 2019

Disqualification Length: 5 Years 0 Month(s)

CRO Number: CIB47396

Last Known Address: 44 District Road, Wembley, , , LONDON, HA0 2LG

Conduct: On 28 February 2013, Mr Soares agreed to be appointed as a director of the Company in the knowledge and understanding that (a) he would take no management role in the Company and (b) his appointment was necessary to enable the Company to open a bank account in the UK without which the Company would not have been able to operate and collect payments from customers. This allowed the Company to trade with a lack of commercial probity. In that:-

  • He permitted the Company to use his home as a registered office address and received mail and cheques for the Company, but made no enquiry into the Company's activities;
  • He failed to take a management role in the Company and/or ensure that he was kept fully informed of the business conducted by the Company and the manner in which the Company's business was conducted;
  • He remained a signatory on the Company’s bank account after the termination of his appointment as a director of the Company and facilitated cashing of cheques from customers;
  • The Company traded using objectionable, misleading and improper sales techniques and business practices, such as o Calls were made to prospective customers who were registered with the telephone preference service. o The calls made lacked transparency as the callers failed to make it clear who they were, on whose benefit they were calling or the commercial basis for their calls, often presenting themselves as health care workers. o The callers gave customers perceived to be medical advice. There is no evidence that any of the sales representatives had any medical training or that there are any health benefits of the products. o The callers applied inappropriate, high pressure and/or manipulative sales techniques o The Company targeted vulnerable members of the public. o The mark up charged by the Company to customers was between 1085% and 3026% and different prices for the same products were charged. o Customers had not been told or had not fully understood how much was going to be charged to their debit/credit o The Company’s policy and practice in respect of refunds is inconsistent. 

    This information is correct as at 18 / 3 / 2019

    If you believe this page contains any errors, please email with details of the error that you have found.