CORRESPONDENCE Q.D. AND H P.

Evening Star, Issue 19794, 18 February 1928, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE

Q.D. AND H P.

TO THE EDITOR.' Sir, —I have read with interest and some amusement the letter published in your columns over lire name ot William Lawrence (doubtless misread from Taverner), the managing director of Q.D. and H.P., Ltd. The way in which ho covers up tlio only factor by which the? stability of the company can be gauged—viz., the relationship between its assets and liabilities—reveals an ingenuity worthy of a better cause. Ho is absolutely silent with regard to my statement that, while the amount alleged to be standing to the credit of members in Q.D. is £123.276, and the deposits of members waiting for loans are £83,219, the only permanent asset held by the two companies is tho reserve ol £61,642. It may be possible to accumulate largo fortunes for members on the books of the company, but no matter how great tho total amount standing to subscribers’ credit may he, its value can never be greater than the assets possessed by the company. I made certain calculations in an endeavor to show what progress must bo made by tho scheme to enable it to maintain its present status for a few years. Mr Taverner frankly admits that such progress is improbable, but shelters behind a statement that it is impossible to make the calculations, because tho repayments arc unknown, Ha quite overlooks the fact that 1 had allowed for repayments by way of dividend at the maximum rate. Mr Taverner also endeavors to make capital out of my lack of accurate information with respect to some of tho subsidiary funds. But how is it possible for anyone to get full and accurate information with regard to a company that publishes its balance-sheets in the disjointed manner adopted by Q.D. and H.P., Ltd.? But no amount of transferring money from fund to fund can increase its value. I might as well hope to put 10s in one pocket and draw out £lO after having shifted the money round all my pockets. And while on this subject of information I might mention the experience of one gentleman who wanted more particulars and requested some friends in England to make inquiries. All their communications to the headquarters of the company elicited no response. Is this scheme specially designed to make fortunes for the people of the dominions, -who are too far away to get full particulars? It would appear so, There are a great many other points in Mr Taverner’s letter which could be dealt with, such as the glib way in which he writes of the honorary status of the directors and others w r ho are able to get £125 (if not £250) for their expenses out of the deposit placed in by a member. Also he might have enlightened your correspondent who asked if he is the same Mr Taverner whose pension scheme had an unsatisfactory sequel some years ago. But I feel that if those who have already joined tell their experiences to their friends, particularly those who have had hopes of paying off mortgages on their houses by the short and easy method provided by Q.D. and H.P., more can be accomplished than by a series of letters criticising the senerne. I sincerely hope that any who have put money into it will not keep their disappointment to themselves , and let others be induced to become subscribers. Just one word of warning. The fact that a few subscribers are able to get large dividends on their investments paid out of other subscribers’ money does noi make the scheme sound. There have been people in our local courts for paying large dividends on a similar basis.—l am, etc., Accountant. February 15.