Posts tagged "Leave.EU"

Letter to the Prime Minister

05/07/2018 Posted by News 0 thoughts on “Letter to the Prime Minister”

Timeline of Leave.EU

21/06/2018 Posted by News 0 thoughts on “
Timeline of Leave.EU

We have seen a number of important revelations come to light recently about Nigel Farage, Arron Banks, Andy Wigmore, and their various businesses and organisations including Leave.EU, Eldon Insurance, Big Data Dolphins, and others. With so many different stories coming to light, it can be difficult to keep track. We decided to compile a comprehensive timeline of the events we think are significant. 

Take a look and let us know what you think. 

23 June 2016: EU Referendum

8 November 2016: Trump is elected.

9 June 2018: News breaks that Banks met with Russians, including Ambassador Yakovenko and various Russian businessmen, many more times than he has previously revealed. The information came to light due to emails given to The Times and The Guardian. Banks changes his mind and says he will testify to DCMS.

Arron Banks and Andy Wigmore appear before the DCMS committee

13/06/2018 Posted by News, Press Releases 0 thoughts on “Arron Banks and Andy Wigmore appear before the DCMS committee”

The Fair Vote Project was set up in response to evidence brought forward by pro-Brexit whistleblowers relating to the misuse of data and alleged overspending in the recent Brexit referendum. The Fair Vote Project does not have a position on Brexit. It is a pro-democracy group motivated by ensuring that votes are fair and in order to be sure of this, in light of recent allegations, it is calling for immediate electoral commission reform.

The Fair Vote Project and its Director, Kyle Taylor, are defendants in a Mississippi, USA lawsuit against Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins, companies registered in the UK with clear and self-declared links to Mississippi, USA. Based on testimony given by Brittany Kaiser and interview recordings given by Andy Wigmore, evidence suggests that British citizens’ data is being stored and used for political and commercial purposes at a state university.

The claim of this suit does not mean that Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins did necessarily transfer UK data to Mississippi to use for political gain, it is simply an attempt to find out if they did.

Kyle Taylor, Director of The Fair Vote Project, said “The Fair Vote Project has said from the beginning that some things are bigger than Brexit, like preserving our democratic principles.

We sought the claim in Mississippi based on verbal accounts given by Kaiser and Wigmore. If the preservation order wasn’t being fought by Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins then the matter could have been cleared up already. We have not said that what Kaiser and Wigmore stated happened for certain, we are simply trying to find out. If there was no wrongdoing why fight the case so vehemently?

Our motivation is clear – in the past few months, troubling evidence has been brought forward that suggests our democracy is not functioning freely and fairly. The Fair Vote Project is seeking to strengthen our democratic processes, hold those who may have cheated in our elections to account and ultimately make sure UK democracy is fit for the digital age.”

Shocking Revelations in Mississippi

05/06/2018 Posted by News, Press Releases 0 thoughts on “Shocking Revelations in Mississippi”

Mississippi court case reveals Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins used insurance data of millions of UK citizens to conduct data modeling learned from Cambridge Analytica

The Fair Vote Project’s suit against Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins in Mississippi, USA is set to enter a second day following extended testimony in what turned out to be a day full of revelations.

The case was separated into two hearings – the first to determine jurisdiction and the second to hear the motion to preserve data. Yesterday’s jurisdictional hearing went on for a grueling five hours of intense testimony, much longer than anticipated. One of the main witnesses called, Vanessa Sena, Project Manager for the Mississippi project at Eldon Insurance, was questioned for hours about the relationship Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins had, has, and will have with the University of Mississippi.

The defendants attempted to suggest they did not have a significant enough relationship with the University to be under their jurisdiction for this legal matter despite having a signed lease agreement for thousands of square feet of office space in the University’s “Insight Park,” years of well-documented meetings and the release of 2017 audio interviews with Andy Wigmore, a once director of Eldon Insurance, boasting about already conducting Cambridge Analytica-style data experiments in Mississippi with British Eldon Insurance data.

Eldon Insurance Project Manager Victoria Sena’s main defense against these evidenced allegations was to say that Andy Wigmore is a “PR guy” who was attempting to hype the abilities of the Eldon and Big Data Dolphins. This claim was contradicted when she then suggested that Big Data Dolphins was undertaking data modelling learned from meetings with Cambridge Analytica in the UK, not Mississippi, exactly like Wigmore described in the tapes. If true, millions of UK citizens could be currently having information about their lifestyle, their credit check and other information taken for insurance purposes used in sophisticated data modelling projects planned for political gains.

The Fair Vote Project immediately made the ICO and DCMS Select Committee aware of this claim in its ongoing effort to protect British citizens’ and residents’ data from misuse.

Kyle Taylor, lead plaintiff and Director of the The Fair Vote Project, said “it was a surprising first day of testimony. To hear Eldon and Big Data Dolphin’s primary defense be that Andy Wigmore was simply a PR guy is not enough against the myriad evidence and is a desperate attempt to grasp at straws. Wigmore was a listed director until he resigned less than two weeks after Brittany Kaiser gave testimony that these companies were involved in offshoring UK citizens’ data to Mississippi.

Perhaps the most shocking revelation was that these companies may be currently misusing personal data in the UK. People should have the right to know how their data is being used and to refuse if it’s not something they want to be a part of. I’m sure many people in the UK would not be comfortable with their insurance data being used to build Cambridge Analytica-style personality models.

I look forward to giving my own testimony as we work to hold these companies to account and defend the rights of citizens in controlling their own personal data and preserve the sanctity of our democratic processes.”

BREAKING: ICO show support for The Fair Vote Project data protection case and DCMS select committee publishes tapes vital to the claim

05/06/2018 Posted by News, Press Releases 0 thoughts on “BREAKING: ICO show support for The Fair Vote Project data protection case and DCMS select committee publishes tapes vital to the claim”

Brittany Kaiser, former Cambridge Analytica employee, said while giving testimony to the DCMS select committee that Cambridge Analytica, Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins were storing and using British citizen’s data at a facility in Mississippi at Ole Miss University.


In response to this revelation, The Fair Vote Project immediately sought legal counsel in Mississippi and pursued a preservation order over this data so that the companies in question could not tamper with it.


The Fair Vote Project was recently granted a temporary injunction and prepares tomorrow to testify in Mississippi in the hope of being granted a permanent injunction. If this injunction is obtained, it could set a precedent and open the door to other cases where individuals can seek to repatriate illegally held data.


The Information Commissioner’s Office has said it strongly supports The Fair Vote Project in its pursuit of this data and that the ICO itself would like to investigate the data in question:


“Preservation and access to this data is of significant importance to the ICO’s current investigation. For this reason, and in light of potential uncertainty as to whether the data will remain preserved beyond the hearing on 5 June 2018, the ICO lends its support to Fair Vote Project’s claim for permanent injunctive relief.”


Dr. Emma Briant, the academic who has brought forward audio recordings of Andy Wigmore (Director of Communications for Leave.EU) suggesting UK citizens’ data was illegally stored in Mississippi, will be giving evidence tomorrow as well. In advance of tomorrow’s session, Damian Collins and the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee have published Dr. Briant’s primary evidence for all to see as a result only of The Fair Vote Project’s efforts in Mississippi.


Kyle Taylor, Director of the The Fair Vote Project, said “I’m glad to be in Mississippi to testify in this landmark case which could set a new precedent in data protection law. We welcome the support from the ICO and hope to be able to aid them in their investigation into use of personal data and analytics by political campaigns which is unprecedented in its scale. With the ICO’s support and the new evidence released for our case by the DCMS Committee, it is more important than ever that a permanent injunction is obtained and Eldon Insurance is properly and thoroughly investigated.”


The Fair Vote Project was set up to tackle the issue of data misuse, voter manipulation and lack of transparency in elections head-on. We are committed to ensuring the institutions that protect our democratic processes are fit for purpose in a digital age.


The Fair Vote Project took the decision to publish the whistleblower evidence for everyone to see. The evidence we have so far can be seen on our website, because the public deserve to know the truth about what’s happening in our democracy.


See Dr. Briant’s audio recordings here

Fair Vote Project’s temporary injunction EXTENDED

21/05/2018 Posted by News, Press Releases 0 thoughts on “Fair Vote Project’s temporary injunction EXTENDED”

The Fair Vote Project obtains an extension of preservation order of British citizens’ data possibly being held in Mississippi


A former senior Cambridge Analytica employee told MPs’ that she believed prominent figures who backed Leave misused private data from Eldon Insurance Services Ltd and UKIP to influence the outcome of the Brexit referendum.


Brittany Kaiser said during her testimony that Arron Banks, who owns Eldon, and Andy Wigmore had said they wished to create “their own Cambridge Analytica” at the University of Mississippi using her proposals.

This alleged misused data is possibly being stored on a server at the University of Mississippi. Keeping U.K. data outside of the EEA without consent or proper protections is a violation of the Data Protection Act.


Hinds County Chancery Court Judge Dewayne Thomas last Friday extended a temporary injunction against Eldon Insurance Services Ltd and Big Data Dolphins Ltd, meaning they cannot destroy, alter or transfer any data currently being held.


How did Eldon and Big Data Dolphins come to lease server space in Mississippi?


Phil Bryant, Mississippi Governor, fostered a relationship with Arron Banks and Nigel Farage. Bryant says that he was informed that Eldon needed somewhere to undertake research and so he connected them with the University of Mississippi.


The Information Commissioner’s Office and the DCMS select committee are aware of the preservation order and the ongoing legal process.


Eldon, a UK-based company, was present during the hearing.


Kyle Taylor, Director of The Fair Vote Project, said “Eldon Insurance appear to have sent a representative to the hearing – what is there on that server that is so important that someone travelled all the way from Bristol to Mississippi to try and stop us from obtaining an extended preservation order?


If there’s nothing to see here as their lawyers claim why all the fuss to stop us from accessing this server to make sure?


The Judge’s decision to grant us an extension shows that he believes there is reasonable grounds to suspect British citizens’ data is indeed being held unlawfully in Mississippi.


We need to know for certain if this is the case and what it is was used for – Kaiser’s testimony seems to point to the strong possibility that the data was used in ways that are anti-democratic and that may cast doubt over the Brexit referendum result but also the ability of our democracy to function freely and fairly in the digital age.”

This story is just developing. Make sure you join us to receive updates as we learn more about what exactly Cambridge Analytica and Leave.EU did.

Temporary Injunction Granted re: Leave.EU

18/05/2018 Posted by News, Press Releases 0 thoughts on “Temporary Injunction Granted re: Leave.EU”

The Fair Vote Project has successfully obtained an order to prevent evidence being deleted that links Cambridge Analytica to the Leave campaign.

A former senior Cambridge Analytica employee told MPs’ that she believed CA and Leave.EU took data from UKIP and combined it with user data from a series of US-based companies with the expressed purpose of manipulating the outcome of the Brexit referendum. The amount of British citizens who had their data stolen is currently unknown.

Keeping U.K. data outside of the EEA without consent or proper protections is a violation of the Data Protection Act.

A temporary injunction order has been obtained by The Fair Vote Project in the United States to ensure that evidence of wrongdoing – if there is any – is preserved and that the relevant authorities can investigate. Eldon Insurance and Big Data Dolphins have been served summons.

Alexander Nix and Cambridge Analytica have continually denied ever working on the Leave campaign despite Arron Banks tweeting that he was proud to have worked with the company and making reference to a large social media machine deployed during the campaign.

Whistleblower testimony and the injunction obtained by The Fair Vote Project may finally prove once and for all that CA was intimately working on the Brexit referendum despite Cambridge Analytica’s obfuscation.

Kyle Taylor, Director of The Fair Vote Project, said:

“Cambridge Analytica has done nothing but try to pull wool over our eyes. Without this injunction I have no doubt they and their co-horts would have sought to destroy any evidence linking them to at least one of the Leave campaigns. We have no idea how much UK citizens’ data may have been transferred to the US, but it could be millions. This could have proven the decisive factor in the outcome of the referendum.”

This story is just developing. Make sure you join us to receive updates as we learn more about what exactly Cambridge Analytica and Leave.EU did.

Cambridge Analytica: Then and Now

18/05/2018 Posted by News 0 thoughts on “Cambridge Analytica: Then and Now”

In recent weeks, we’ve seen a barrage of information come to light about the now disgraced and shut down SCL Elections/Cambridge Analytica. As evidence of SCL/CA’s roles in misusing data to manipulate elections around the world has come to light, it’s been enlightening to see the way they talk about who they are and what they’ve done.

Now, Cambridge Analytica insists that they are a standard data analytics and market research company, using traditional tools to assist candidates and campaigns. But this has not always been the case.

The Fair Vote Project looked at captures of Cambridge Analytica’s website from 2016 as well as an article written by Alexander Nix himself in February 2016 and compared them to CA’s recent press releases and their webpage which attempted to “set the record straight” on what exactly CA did.

Connection between SCL and CA

We know that SCL Elections and Cambridge Analytica are related entities but the exact relationship  is unclear. This is increasingly important as the authorities work out exactly how SCL and Cambridge Analytica may have misused Facebook data collected through Aleksandr Kogan’s GSR app or misused other data from other sources.


2 February 2016: Alexander Nix claims SCL Group is what CA is known as in Europe, suggesting they are entirely the same entity. People who worked with them at the time, namely Aleksandr Kogan and Jeff Silvester, co-founder of AIQ, publicly claimed that they knew that CA and SCL were related but did not know exactly how.


April 2018: Cambridge Analytica says SCL was the "precursor" to CA.
29 March 2018: CA claims SCL is an associated entity

These may seem like small quibbles. But it’s vital that we understand the connection between CA and SCL, as the companies could be hiding information about having access to and responsibility for intellectual property and data.

For example, Dr Kogan said in Parliament that he “never had a contract with Cambridge Analytica,”  only SCL Elections. However, CA’s information site now says that:

April 2018: Cambridge Analytica says they licensed data from Dr Kogan, even though Dr Kogan insists he never had contact with CA, only SCL.

Dr Kogan himself wasn’t clear on the distinction between SCL Elections and Cambridge Analytica. With such unclear definitions of the boundaries between companies, it is uncertain which company is responsible for and in possession of data and information relating to people from the UK as well as people from all over the world.

With their recent bankruptcy filings, it’s clear that SCL and CA are inextricably linked. What does this mean for the intellectual property and data that may have been shared between the companies? What are they hiding?

CA’s Impact on Elections


In February 2016, CA published the following on their website concerning their work for the Ted Cruz campaign in the primaries:

2 February 2016: CA promoting that the 2016 race is a battle between big data companies.

In Alexander Nix’s own article from the same time, he explicitly attributes Ted Cruz’s success (and Donald Trump’s failure) to data analytics:

2 February 2016: Nix attributing Cruz's success to his superior data analytics game. Cambridge Analytica worked for Trump in the general election.....and the rest is history.

CA’s own website from late 2016/early 2017 heavily promotes the importance of behavioural and psychological testing:

January 2017: CA publicised their claim that they had 5,000 data points per person far and wide after they helped Trump win the election. They've never been transparent about what exactly these 5,000 data points are or where they got this information.
January 2017: CA promoting behavioral microtargeting.


In recent months, CA has majorly backtracked on the influence they had in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election and what exactly they did to win:

29 March 2018: CA downplaying their impact in 2016 election.
10 April 2018: An early version of CA's PR site CambridgeFacts insists on the disappointment of the Facebook data CA got from Dr Kogan's GSR app. They also downplay the importance of market psychology, something they have been promoting as the future of marketing and campaigning for years.

Throughout the 2016 campaign and in 2017, CA emphasised their state of the art technology and use of behavioural and psychological targeting. But on CambridgeFacts, CA scales back, insisting they used the same tactics as Obama and Clinton.

April 2018: CA downplays their uses of advanced microtargeting, insisting they did not use "personalilty models" despite what they touted during and after the election.

CA and Leave.EU

CA has insisted multiple times that they did not do any work on the 2016 referendum. Leave.EU has also picked up this line in recent months. This is markedly different to what both organisations said in 2016 and 2017.

The sharp change in both organisations’ statements is suspicious. While Facebook and the Electoral Commission found no evidence of activity between the two but neither examination was exhaustive. Why won’t Cambridge Analytica and Leave.EU own up to the work they did together?

With Leave.EU found to be in serious breach of electoral law, it’s vital we understand just what they did so it never happens again.


2 February 2016: Nix saying CA was working with Leave.EU.
3 March 2017: Arron Banks confirming Leave.EU worked with Cambridge Analytica.


April 2018: CA denying they did any work in EU referendum, a very different message from February 2016.
27 Feb 2018: Arron Banks begins backtracking on working with CA, saying Leave.EU declined CA's offer because it was illegal.

Cambridge Analytica has proven time and again to be dishonest and untrustworthy. With SCL and Cambridge Analytica shutting down and declaring bankruptcy, it’s more important than ever to understand the inner workings of the organisation.

As much as they are trying to backtrack now, we have seen the impact of their work. They have promoted their ability to target and change minds and behaviours. With this type of power and influence, we must ensure that we are properly protected against manipulative tactics.

The same people at the helm of SCL and CA have started a new company: Emerdata. What is going to stop them from doing it all over again?