I had about 10 grand in gold at the bank, probably closer to 15 now. It is not much, but If I get it back (from Quenta) I wouldn't mind putting it all in a class action lawsuit. If we let this slide they will just keep doing it to other people. One agency in one country is bad enough, but now you have a whole syndicate going after people.
Our valued sponsor
Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
-
- Tags
- euro pacific bank
Once we have served the primary defendants I will post the lawsuit online, so everyone can read exactly what happened.
Hi Peter,
You say you are not sure and you doubt that this will delay the liquidation and not sure if coustomer deposits will be used by Reciever to cover legal fees? . According to the receiver we are only weeks away from beginning the actual liquidation and return of funds....
My question is : are you not jeopardizing the return of deposits to customers by filing this lawsuit now? could you not just wait with this for a few weeks, until the process is approved ?
I don't think so. I hope we are weeks away, but I don't trust the receiver. But if anything my lawsuit should put added pressure on him to return the funds. But i needed to file. First, there is only a one-year stature of limitations for my claim. My argument is that I idid not discover hard evidence of the conspiracy until April of this year, when I got the IRS emails in response to my FOIA request. Also I wanted to file before the election. I want the incoming PR governor to know I'm suing the prior administration, not her's. So I filed the day before the election.
Also, what have your read that leads you to believe we are weeks away from having deposits returned. I have been given no information personally to verify this.
He wrote that efforts are geared to commence the liquidation process. What does that mean? How far into the liquidation process before funds are actually returned to customers.? What needs to be done in the process to make the liquidations possible? Also, weeks can mean any number of weeks. It could mean two. But maybe it means five. No idea.
That's BS. OCIF already approved the liquidation plan. I wore in myself over 2.5 years ago, and the Commissioner already signed off on it. he is just using that as an excuse to delay the process further.
Maybe, I dont know but this is what it says :
"Opt-Out customers should be informed that the notices required by the Office of the Commissioner of
Financial Institutions have not been sent, as we are still reconciling the assets and customers’ accounts
participating in this process. Once this reconciliation concludes and is approved by the Office of the
Commissioner of Financial Institutions, we will then be able to set an official migration date, of which
customers will be informed."
Last edited:
Yes, seems like bull s**t to me. Here is the original liquidation plan approved by OCIF. I was basically forced into agreeing to this as a result of the conspiracy between the IRS/J5 and the OCIF Commissioner that I had no hard evidence of until April of this year.
The reason this plan didn't work is that the press conference to close the bank, comments made by former IRS Chief Jim Lee, and the media coverage, and the J5 press release after the press conference, resulted in Novo bank coming to the false conclusion that the bank was closed for money laundering and tax evasion. Novo bank then informed the Portugese government of its concern. The government then frozen the bank's Novo account for 8 months. By the time it was unfrozen, due to the receiver's lack of any prior banking experience, and his failure to follow instructions from bank employees or Qenta, which I think was gross negligence more than mere incompetence, the bank lost its ability to process wire instructions to Novo Bank. The fact that Novo Bank and the Portugese Government falsely concluded that the bank was closed for money laundering and tax evasion was not an accident. It was the deliberate intent of the IRS?J5 an the media to create that false impression. That was the goal of the conspirators, and the only reason the bank was closed and put into receivership. It had nothing to do with protecting customers. it was all about framing the bank and me for crimes they knew we did not commit. The customers were sacrificed to achieve that goal. The IRS Chief and OCIF Commissioner lied to make this happen. That is the basis of my lawsuit.
For the last 2.3 years we've been told that the main problem was Novo bank not releasing the funds, finally back in August Novo bank transferred all the funds. It's been more than 3 months since the Receiver received the funds and here we are, still waiting.
This is starting to look a bit shady!
This is starting to look a bit shady!
it doesn't just look shady, it is shady. Novo bank not releasing the funds was the problem for a long time. But now there are other problems. It's all out of my control. The receiver controls the whole process, and makes more money the longer it drags out. You will read when I post my lawsuit that I offered to liquidate the bank myself, without a receiver. I offered to put move money into the bank to further protect customers. But the OCIF Commissioner rejected my offer. She insisted that the bank go into receivership under the control of a inexperience and conflicted trustee. Had I been in control I would have completed the process as quickly as possible. The faster the liquidation, the more money left over for me. I was not gong to charge the bank for my services. I was going to provide them for free. So my incentive would have been a quick liquidation. The receiver's incentive is to drag the process out for as long as he can get away with it to maximize his monthly fees. So far he's done a great job. I warned the OCIF Commissioner about this risk. But making the bank look bad was more important to her than the quick return of customer funds. Before the IRS got involved, the Commissioner assured me that if I could not find a buyer for the bank, that she would let me liquidate it myself. That under no circumstances would she appoint a receiver. Some how the IRS got her to change her mind.
I think you have a very good case against the Commissioner, she is the one to blame for everything that's happened.
She will have to explain why she did what she did, and the Judge will decide if it was legal.
We, the customers, have paid a huge price, and we're still paying for her actions with no end in sight.
Latest Threads
-
-
-
Georgia - possibility of putting crypto gains and foreign capital gains on tax return
- Started by JohnDebo
- Replies: 1
-
Crypto Card (Vendor Payments 10,000Euro a month) - Provider- Started by wellington
- Replies: 2
-
Friend money transfer via company
- Started by kristiencrimson
- Replies: 9
