Keller Finance

A summary of what happened?

Keller Finance is an entity that has been identified as a clone of a legitimate firm authorized by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Clone firms are fraudulent operations that impersonate genuine companies to deceive investors. The FCA has issued warnings about Keller Finance, highlighting its use of the following details to scam individuals:

• Name: Keller Finance (Clone of FCA Authorized Firm)
• Address: Tower 42, 25 Old Broad St, Cornhill, London, EC2N 1HN
• Telephone: +447443209484, +443300016969
• Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
• Websites: KELLERFIN.VIP, www.kellerfin.com, https://mobtrader.kellerfinancelimited.trade/

These fraudulent entities often use the details of legitimate firms to appear credible and lure unsuspecting investors.

Major Concerns and Complaints Against Keller Finance:

1. Regulatory Warnings: The FCA has explicitly warned that Keller Finance is a clone firm, meaning it is not authorized to provide financial services in the UK. Engaging with such unauthorized firms can lead to significant financial losses.
2. Client Complaints: Numerous individuals have reported issues with Keller Finance, including difficulties in withdrawing funds and unresponsive customer service. Some users have alleged that the firm imposes unreasonable fees and taxes as prerequisites for fund release, leading to suspicions of fraudulent activities.
3. High Minimum Deposit Requirements: Keller Finance requires a minimum deposit of $5,000 to open an account, a threshold significantly higher than industry standards. This high entry barrier has been criticized for potentially exploiting novice traders, compelling them to commit substantial funds without adequate assurance of the broker’s reliability.

Keller Finance has been identified as a clone firm by the FCA, operating without proper authorization and engaging in deceptive practices. The major concerns include regulatory warnings, client complaints about fund withdrawals, and high minimum deposit requirements. Prospective investors are advised to exercise caution and conduct thorough due diligence before engaging with Keller Finance, considering the serious concerns and allegations associated with the broker.

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 Keller Finance trying to hide?

Keller Finance‘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 Keller Finance in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Keller Finance may be trying to remove from the internet –

Keller Finance: A Deep Dive into Allegations of Fraud, Client Complaints, and Regulatory Warnings

Keller Finance has come under significant scrutiny for its alleged fraudulent practices and deceptive operations in the financial trading sector. Identified by regulators as a clone firm—a fraudulent entity impersonating a legitimate business—Keller Finance has been accused of exploiting unsuspecting investors through a sophisticated web of deceit. This investigation unravels the allegations, client complaints, and regulatory actions that have cast a long shadow over Keller Finance’s operations.

The Clone Firm Scam

Keller Finance is classified as a clone of a legitimate financial entity authorized by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Clone firms often steal the identity of genuine companies, including their names, addresses, and registration numbers, to appear credible. This facade lures potential investors into a false sense of security, leading them to deposit significant funds under the belief that they are dealing with a legitimate business.

The FCA, a prominent financial watchdog, has explicitly warned the public about Keller Finance, citing it as unauthorized to provide financial services in the UK. Despite these warnings, Keller Finance has continued to operate through various websites, emails, and contact numbers designed to mimic a genuine firm.

Client Complaints and Allegations

1. Withholding Funds

One of the most significant and recurring complaints against Keller Finance is its refusal to allow clients to withdraw funds. Numerous reports from victims reveal a pattern where initial investments appear profitable, but when clients attempt to withdraw their earnings, the firm imposes exorbitant fees or additional conditions. Many investors claim that even after meeting these requirements, withdrawals are either delayed indefinitely or denied outright.

2. High-Pressure Sales Tactics

Several victims allege that Keller Finance employs aggressive marketing strategies, including cold calls and persistent follow-ups, to pressure potential clients into depositing large sums of money. These representatives often use high-pressure tactics, promising substantial returns and exclusive trading opportunities, particularly targeting novice investors unfamiliar with trading risks.

3. Unexplained Fees and Hidden Charges

Clients have reported unexpected deductions from their accounts in the form of unexplained fees or additional taxes. These charges are often justified by the firm as standard trading costs or compliance-related expenses, but victims claim they were never informed of these fees during the account setup process.

4. Unresponsive Customer Support

A recurring theme in client reviews is the lack of support once funds are deposited. Many victims describe the customer service as unresponsive or dismissive, particularly when addressing withdrawal requests or disputes over unauthorized charges.

Regulatory Warnings and Sanctions

The FCA has issued a public warning against Keller Finance, identifying it as an unauthorized entity impersonating a legitimate firm. This warning serves as a red flag to potential investors, urging them to avoid dealing with Keller Finance at all costs.

Despite these warnings, Keller Finance has managed to evade stricter enforcement by operating under multiple aliases and using offshore servers to host its websites. Its presence across different jurisdictions complicates efforts by regulators to shut down its operations entirely.

Digital Footprint and Allegations of Manipulating Online Reputation

Keller Finance’s online presence is heavily curated, with promotional material and paid reviews portraying the firm as a credible and successful trading platform. However, independent review sites and complaint forums reveal a starkly different reality. Victims often leave scathing reviews detailing their experiences, only for these reviews to be flagged or removed under questionable circumstances.

Some clients allege that Keller Finance actively works to suppress negative feedback by reporting reviews to platform moderators or using legal threats to intimidate victims into silence. While there is no direct evidence of Keller Finance engaging in large-scale internet censorship, these tactics contribute to an environment where accurate information about the firm is challenging to find.

High Minimum Deposit and Risky Practices

Keller Finance requires a minimum deposit of $5,000 to open an account, a figure significantly higher than industry norms. This high barrier to entry is seen by critics as a deliberate attempt to extract substantial funds from clients upfront. Combined with the firm’s use of high-leverage trading—a strategy that amplifies both potential gains and losses—this practice disproportionately affects inexperienced traders, many of whom suffer significant financial losses.

Legal Actions and Lack of Transparency

Despite the gravity of the allegations, there are no publicly documented lawsuits against Keller Finance, likely due to its offshore registration and the difficulty victims face in pursuing legal action against a clone firm. The firm’s lack of transparency further compounds this issue, with limited publicly available information about its ownership, regulatory affiliations, or corporate structure.

A Broader Pattern of Deception

Keller Finance’s activities fit into a broader pattern observed among fraudulent trading platforms and clone firms. By leveraging the credibility of legitimate financial entities and targeting individuals unfamiliar with financial regulations, these firms create a facade of legitimacy while operating in ways that maximize profits for themselves at the expense of their clients.

Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale

Keller Finance represents a cautionary tale about the risks of engaging with unregulated or offshore brokers, particularly those flagged as clone firms. The allegations against Keller Finance—including fraudulent withholding of funds, high-pressure sales tactics, and misleading marketing—underscore the importance of conducting thorough due diligence before entrusting funds to any financial institution.

Regulators continue to warn the public about Keller Finance’s operations, but the firm’s ability to evade enforcement highlights the challenges of policing fraudulent actors in a globalized financial market. For now, Keller Finance remains a stark reminder of the risks facing investors in the modern trading landscape, where trust and transparency are often in short supply.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Keller Finance may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Keller Finance, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Keller Finance 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 Keller Finance 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 Keller Finance is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Keller Finance

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 Keller Finance Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Keller Finance 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. Keller Finance 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 Keller Finance 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. Keller Finance 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 Keller Finance 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, Keller Finance either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Keller Finance, 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. Keller Finance is in great company ….

What else is Keller Finance hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Keller Finance] + {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 Keller Finance 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.