Capital letters

Affinity was set up on December 24 to raise up to £3m for purposes including investing in debt and equity of growth companies worldwide as well as in property.

Subscribers had to put in 70% of their money at 1p a share with the balance at 4p a share. Using a mathematical formula, Affinity would be worth 3p a share (or three times the lower priced shares) on its launch on to the lightly regulated AIM.

Then Affinity would have cash, and no liabilities. But to stop the share price falling, all the original investors would agree not to sell for three months other than giving the shares to charity.

Because each 1p share becomes 3p, a £20,000 investment becomes £60,000. A top-rate taxpayer giving £60,000 to charity can then claim £24,000 in Giftaid tax relief. The charity then has shares in a cash shell.

But after the prospectus was printed, the Stock Exchange toughened rules for cash-only "investing" companies, ruling out Affinity's listing. So the deal is off and all money has been returned.

Although at first glance, Enterprise, as an unregulated firm, should not have asked you to invest, it can send out material like this to investment professionals and experienced investors. You had previously asked for more than one copy of details of a previous scheme so it was assumed you fitted one of these "exempt" categories.

Enterprise will now write to say your name has been withdrawn from its mailing lists and to apologise for any distress.

Wrong to profit from tsunami

I donated £100 to the Tsunami appeal within days of the disaster, using a credit card. But my HSBC card bill showed it had taken an extra £1.47 for "cash". It seems very unfair for banks to profit from charitable appeals.

RW, Derbyshire

- Contact HSBC - you did not leave your address with Capital Letters. The bank says that in common with other card companies, it treats charitable donations as purchases, not cash and does not profit from them. It wants to refund the £1.47 charge.

Mis-sell firm misinformed

I received an unsolicited letter from a Bradford firm, Consumer Compensation Ltd (CCL), which said: "Our records show you made an endowment mis-selling complaint, which was rejected by a large organisation."

It then offered me help for 20% of any compensation. There is only one problem - I had already settled my mis-selling complaint with my building society. So where did CCL get these erroneous details?

BF, Fife

- CCL was established last August to provide compensation services for endowment victims. It is controlled by Masarat Naz and Mohammad Shahid, of Bradford.

Capital Letters spoke to an R.M. Shaw who describes himself as a "regulatory complaints consultant." He said he had passed his Financial Proficiency Certificate but would not say at what level or where he had previously worked except to say it was for "one of the largest organisations whose name never appears on a report's cover."

It seems your name and address came from a firm called GCI, which sells lists of names. Initially, Mr Shaw was reluctant to give details of GCI, but later said it was in Harrow.

Mr Shaw told Capital Letters he had already apologised to some people for the letter and would not use it again.

Floored by Belgravia

In October 2001, I signed a contract for wooden flooring with Belgravia Interiors. The downstairs neighbours at our Victorian conversion flat were happy with this (it can be noisier than carpet).

But there were delays in fitting - Belgravia blamed skilled labour shortages. By October 2002, nothing had been done and new neighbours moved in downstairs. They objected to the flooring.

I had paid a £1,680 deposit against the £2,218 total - more than required to speed up the job. I did not want to argue with the new neighbours so I asked Belgravia for a cancellation and refund.

I realised it had incurred costs and I was willing to pay these. I even offered to take delivery of the materials rather than cash - I could have cut my losses by selling them.

I was told that any form of refund was out of the question. It was company policy. Since then, I have had no response from them. Can you help?

RC, London

- Belgravia claimed to bring "nature into your home." In your case, all you have had is hot air for your money. What you proposed - a repayment of the deposit, with Belgravia retaining a part to fund its costs - was eminently fair. But Belgravia did not want to play.

Capital Letters tried several times to contact Belgravia. One line was permanently engaged; the other just rang.

It now transpires the Thame address is boarded up with local agents trying to let it. Neither Belgravia, nor sister firm Hardwood Flooring Direct, is a limited company.

There are good reasons for this. Mark William Bretton, 44, the owner of both firms, was declared bankrupt in May 1998 and has never been discharged. As such, he could not be a company director.

But this did not stop him setting up Hardwood Flooring Direct Ltd, using a false name.

In December 2004, he was disqualified from acting as a director for five years. But his style was already hobbled. In November 2004, he was sentenced to eight months imprisonment at Oxfordshire crown court for the false name offence.

You paid by cheque, not credit card so you have few rights. Your only, very faint, chance of a refund is to contact the Official Receiver in Reading who is now handling Bretton's affairs.

· We welcome letters but cannot answer individually. Write to: Capital Letters, Jobs & Money, The Guardian, 119 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3ER or email capital.letters@guardian.co.uk. Do not send original documents but do enclose a daytime phone number. Information is general and offered without any legal responsibility. Always take professional advice if in doubt.