Enterprise London Limited

A summary of what happened?

Enterprise London Limited has been identified as a fraudulent entity operating under the guise of a legitimate brokerage firm. Investigations reveal that the company engages in deceptive practices, including falsely claiming registration and licensing, to exploit unsuspecting investors.

Major Concerns and Accusations:

1. False Registration Claims:
   • The company asserts registration at 40 Gracechurch Street, London EC2N 4AY, UK. However, this address corresponds to a different, legitimate company, indicating that Enterprise London Limited is misappropriating these details to appear credible.
2. Lack of Regulatory Licensing:
   • Enterprise London Limited operates without any valid financial regulatory licenses. Despite targeting Russian clients, it lacks authorization from the Central Bank of Russia, rendering its operations illegal and unregulated.
3. Deceptive Marketing Practices:
   • The firm lures investors with promises of bonuses from reputable companies like Apple Corporation, claiming returns of 10% to 50% on initial deposits. Such offers are misleading and designed to entice unsuspecting individuals into investing.
4. Unverified Trading Platform:
   • Enterprise London Limited offers a web-based trading platform with a simplistic interface, lacking transparency regarding its functionality and security measures. This raises concerns about the safety and reliability of the platform for conducting financial transactions.
5. Negative Client Feedback:
   • Numerous clients have reported issues such as account blocks and withdrawal refusals, indicating a pattern of unethical behavior and financial misconduct.

These factors collectively suggest that Enterprise London Limited is a fraudulent operation, exploiting the trust of investors through false claims and deceptive practices. Potential investors are strongly advised to exercise caution and avoid engaging with this entity.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Enterprise London Limited trying to hide?

Enterprise London Limited‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Enterprise London Limited in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Enterprise London Limited may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Enterprise London Limited – A Brokerage Shrouded in Allegations and Deception

Introduction

Enterprise London Limited has emerged as a focal point in the world of financial fraud, presenting itself as a legitimate brokerage firm while allegedly engaging in fraudulent activities. Promising high returns and using sophisticated marketing tactics, the company has attracted unsuspecting investors, only to leave them facing blocked accounts, lost funds, and unanswered queries. This report delves into the allegations, deceptive practices, and legal implications surrounding Enterprise London Limited, shedding light on its operations and the harm it has caused.

1. Overview of Enterprise London Limited

Enterprise London Limited purports to be a global brokerage firm, offering investment and trading opportunities to clients worldwide, with a particular focus on Russian investors.

• Address and Identity:
  • The company claims to operate out of 40 Gracechurch Street, London EC2N 4AY, UK. However, investigations reveal that this address belongs to a legitimate and unrelated business, raising concerns about misrepresentation.
• Target Audience:
  • The firm aggressively markets its services to Russian-speaking clients, leveraging promises of substantial returns on investments to attract individuals with limited financial expertise.

2. Allegations of Fraudulent Practices

A. False Licensing and Regulatory Violations

1. Lack of Regulatory Oversight:
   • Despite its claims of legitimacy, Enterprise London Limited operates without authorization from any recognized financial regulatory body.
   • The company is not registered with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the UK, nor is it licensed by the Central Bank of Russia to target Russian investors.
2. Falsified Credentials:
   • Enterprise London Limited falsely asserts affiliations with regulatory agencies to build credibility. Investigators have confirmed that no such affiliations exist, rendering its operations both illegal and untrustworthy.

B. Misleading Marketing Tactics

Enterprise London Limited employs sophisticated marketing strategies to attract investors, often making promises that are either exaggerated or outright false.

1. Promised Returns:
   • Advertisements claim returns of 10% to 50% on initial investments, accompanied by additional bonuses purportedly backed by reputable companies like Apple Corporation. These claims lack evidence and are designed to exploit investor trust.
2. Bonuses as Bait:
   • The company offers “bonus” schemes that encourage clients to deposit more funds. However, such bonuses often come with hidden conditions that make withdrawals nearly impossible.
3. High-Pressure Sales Tactics:
   • Sales representatives reportedly employ aggressive tactics, calling potential clients repeatedly and pressuring them to invest quickly before “exclusive opportunities” expire.

C. Questionable Trading Platform

Enterprise London Limited provides access to a proprietary web-based trading platform. However, the platform itself raises several red flags:

1. Lack of Transparency:
   • The platform’s operations are opaque, with no detailed explanation of how trades are executed or how client funds are stored and secured.
2. Technical Issues:
   • Clients report frequent glitches, unexplained losses, and difficulties accessing their accounts.
3. Unverified Security:
   • Unlike legitimate platforms that adhere to strict cybersecurity protocols, Enterprise London Limited fails to provide assurances regarding data protection or fund security.

D. Negative Client Experiences

Numerous complaints from clients reveal a consistent pattern of unethical behavior:

1. Account Blocks and Withdrawal Refusals:
   • Clients report that their accounts were blocked or suspended after requesting withdrawals, leaving them unable to access their funds.
   • Withdrawal requests are often ignored, with customer service providing no resolution or timeline.
2. Manipulated Trading Results:
   • Some clients allege that their trades were manipulated, with the platform deliberately engineering losses to deplete account balances.
3. Unresponsive Support:
   • Customer service is virtually non-existent, with inquiries about lost funds or technical issues going unanswered.

3. Legal and Regulatory Actions

Global Scrutiny

Enterprise London Limited has attracted attention from regulatory authorities due to its fraudulent activities:

1. Inclusion on Watchlists:
   • The Central Bank of Russia has warned against dealing with Enterprise London Limited, citing its unregistered status and high risk of fraud.
   • The firm has also appeared on financial watchlists in other jurisdictions, highlighting its international reach and potential threat to investors worldwide.
2. Potential Legal Actions:
   • While no significant lawsuits have been publicly documented to date, legal experts believe that growing complaints and regulatory investigations could lead to enforcement actions.

4. Patterns of Fraudulent Behavior

Enterprise London Limited exhibits several hallmark traits of fraudulent brokers:

• Use of False Identities:
  • By appropriating a legitimate UK address, the company attempts to mask its true nature and create a façade of credibility.
• Targeting Vulnerable Populations:
  • The firm focuses on individuals with limited financial knowledge, using high-pressure tactics to exploit their lack of expertise.
• Evasion of Accountability:
  • Operating without licensing allows Enterprise London Limited to sidestep regulatory scrutiny, making it difficult for victims to seek recourse.

5. Broader Implications

The activities of Enterprise London Limited reflect broader challenges in the financial industry:

Impact on Investors

• Financial Losses:
  • Victims lose not only their initial deposits but also any potential gains, often leaving them in financial distress.
• Emotional Toll:
  • The stress of dealing with unresponsive brokers and losing significant funds can have long-lasting emotional impacts.

Regulatory Challenges

• Jurisdictional Issues:
  • The company’s international reach complicates enforcement efforts, as victims are spread across multiple countries.
• Need for Greater Oversight:
  • The case underscores the necessity of stricter regulations for online brokers and increased public awareness about financial fraud.

6. Conclusion

Enterprise London Limited has built a façade of legitimacy while operating as a fraudulent entity. Through false promises, aggressive marketing, and opaque operations, the company has exploited the trust of countless investors. Its lack of licensing, refusal to honor withdrawal requests, and questionable trading practices paint a clear picture of a predatory operation.

Key Findings

1. Unlicensed Operations:
   • The company operates without any regulatory oversight, rendering its activities illegal.
2. Fraudulent Marketing:
   • Promises of high returns and bonuses are used as bait to lure unsuspecting investors.
3. Client Exploitation:
   • Victims face blocked accounts, manipulated trades, and unresponsive customer support.
4. Regulatory Warnings:
   • Authorities in Russia and elsewhere have flagged Enterprise London Limited as a high-risk broker.

Recommendations

1. Investor Vigilance:
   • Individuals should thoroughly vet brokers and avoid those without proper licensing or transparent operations.
2. Regulatory Crackdowns:
   • Governments must strengthen international cooperation to identify and shut down fraudulent brokers.
3. Public Awareness Campaigns:
   • Educational initiatives can help potential investors recognize the warning signs of financial scams.

Enterprise London Limited stands as a stark reminder of the risks posed by unregulated brokers. Investors must remain vigilant, and regulators must act decisively to protect the public from similar predatory operations.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Enterprise London Limited (or actors working on behalf of Enterprise London Limited), we will inform Enterprise London Limited of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Enterprise London Limited may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Enterprise London Limited, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Enterprise London Limited to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Enterprise London Limited made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Enterprise London Limited is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Enterprise London Limited

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Enterprise London Limited Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Enterprise London Limited used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Enterprise London Limited could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Enterprise London Limited have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Enterprise London Limited is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Enterprise London Limited creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Enterprise London Limited either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Enterprise London Limited, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Enterprise London Limited is in great company ….

What else is Enterprise London Limited hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Enterprise London Limited] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Enterprise London Limited that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.