Alert: Fake Bond Review Facebook pages

I have been made aware of two Facebook pages that pretend to be me; a personal profile at bond.review.1 and a group set up by the same account at group no. 722140201642740 (no direct links to avoid boosting them on Google). The account is not run by me, and has used my logo and reposted Bond Review articles without permission, even after being asked to stop. The account has been reported to Facebook.

Bond Review currently has two active channels: this website (and its email / RSS newsletter), and my Twitter profile @BondReview.

There are three ways to initiate contact with me: the Contact link above, the Twitter profile and via the comments on this website.

Anything else should be assumed to be unauthorised and nothing to do with me.

I previously used a Facebook profile to post in a few groups as an individual but have not used this for some months.

10 thoughts on “Alert: Fake Bond Review Facebook pages

  1. When my investment with the high street group came to maturity and I had personal circumstances where I needed the fund to be sent through

    my bank account as soon as possible,
    the high street group and Gary O hara helped me to achieve this. The interest from previous years was paid promptly as well.
    helped me asap

    Like

  2. Funny how after weeks of no comments on High Street Group, I get two within three hours, both praising HSG for releasing funds early.

    And what this one has to do with fake Bond Review Facebook pages I have absolutely no idea.

    Like

  3. Hi Brev,

    This website is really funny, it can get quite heated as well.

    Can you tell us your background? It would add credibility if we know your from a financial services background?

    Thanks

    Like

  4. Readers can judge me on the facts rather than my authority. Trusting authority over facts is how people get suckered.

    Since when did being from a financial background give anyone credibility? Madoff, Lay etc etc had impeccable financial backgrounds.

    Like

  5. Bit harsh brev, I was just giving my view…but as you insist…

    Readers can judge you on the facts? Brev…95% of your articles are your opinions, not facts!

    Brev, in your own typical style you name 2 crooked individuals that happen to have a financial background and then say since when is having a financial background add credibility? Terrible logic but in keeping with your review writing style!

    At the bottom of all of your posts you tell people to seek financial advice? Why if they are all maddoffs and add no credibility?

    Just tell your readers and people who donate what your background is? It helps us put context to what you say!

    Example, if you are a person working for a company trying to wash out competition by putting negative posts, your opinions are not as valid as If your a financial advisor (which you are not) due to the basic errors you make, again that would add credibility.

    Like

  6. Brev…95% of your articles are your opinions, not facts!

    If anything it’s the other way round. Commentary is clearly distinguishable as such and I justify any opinions with reference to the facts, rather than any appeal to authority.

    At the bottom of all of your posts you tell people to seek financial advice? Why if they are all maddoffs and add no credibility?

    The only person suggesting all financial advisers are Madoffs is you. Madoff wasn’t a financial adviser, he was a stockbroker and fund manager.

    Example, if you are a person working for a company trying to wash out competition by putting negative posts, your opinions are not as valid as If your a financial advisor (which you are not) due to the basic errors you make, again that would add credibility.

    Feel free to point out any basic errors made.

    The facts don’t change regardless of my background.

    Like

  7. You said the below:

    “Since when did being from a financial background give anyone credibility? Madoff, Lay etc etc had impeccable financial backgrounds.”

    You pointed this out not me.

    Like

  8. If you can’t tell the difference between “Not everyone from a financial background is credible” and “Everyone from a financial background is not credible” then high-risk unregulated investments are not appropriate for you.

    Like

  9. I have just had a full return on my 18month loan and interest payments on time so for my part I have been very happy with The High St Group but high risk unregulated investments are just that A High Risk. and I should know as I have almost certainly lost a lot of money with Minerva Development Group and Exmount Commercial/Construction both companies still registered with Companies House but not contactable either by phone or post so investing is and can be a snake pit of fraudsters and scam companies I have four such all claiming to get my money back and fortunately my Building Soc. put a block on my wasting good money after bad .Paul.

    Like

  10. “… fortunately my Building Soc. put a block on my wasting good money after bad.”

    I am surprised by this. I believed a person has a right to throw good money after bad if they so wished, so a B.Soc “blocking” it is bizarre.

    Surely, they can “share their concerns” that you might be throwing good money after bad but “block” you doing it? Really?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s