Euro Pacific bank is a scam

[GF150]

This is starting to look a bit shady!

and downright fishy ! However, it's been so for some time now as per my understanding.

 

[tacokai]

Hi Peter - good luck with your lawsuit. You have said many times in this forum that because of a NDA (or whatever you called it, some signature from your part), you were not allowed to sue OCIF. But suddenly now you could sue them? what changed?

Indeed a very good question that need to be asked!

 

[Pschiff]

Indeed a very good question that need to be asked!

Indeed a very good question that need to be asked!

Yes, I singed a released. But I had not realized that I only signed as a director related to losses suffered by the bank..So the release doesn't apply to me personally for losses that I suffered as a shareholder. Also, even as to the bank, I signed under duress.

 

[SCHLOSSFINANZ]

you sue because the (in my personal eyes) shady buyer Qenta was not approved by OCIF?
Let me predict what will now happen
the receiver will halt the process to defend this lawsuit until its concluded
he will use EPB depositors money to defend himself, further draining the funds

 

[Pschiff]

you sue because the (in my personal eyes) shady buyer Qenta was not approved by OCIF?
Let me predict what will now happen
the receiver will halt the process to defend this lawsuit until its concluded
he will use EPB depositors money to defend himself, further draining the funds

The Commissioner had already told us she supported the sale to Qenta. I am suing because the IRS convinced her to change her mind. There were other buyers that wanted to buy the bank after it went into receivership. But the OCIF Commissioner would not allow it. This lawsuit will put the receiver under a spot light. I think he is more likely to speed up the process as a result. My lawsuit accuses him of deliberately slowing down the process for personal gain. It would also be illegal to use bank's funds to defend against a lawsuit filed against him personally. I am not suing the bank.

 

[SCHLOSSFINANZ]

You sue him in his official capacity as an OCIF appointed liquidator of EPB. Of course he can use the funds to defend the case.
Secondly what the Commissioner tells you is irrelevant as long as it is not in WRITING as a rule of thumb.
At least here in Europe verbally communicated things from the regulator are useless to say at least sadly...

 

[Pschiff]

You sue him in his official capacity as an OCIF appointed liquidator of EPB. Of course he can use the funds to defend the case.
Secondly what the Commissioner tells you is irrelevant as long as it is not in WRITING as a rule of thumb.
At least here in Europe verbally communicated things from the regulator are useless to say at least sadly...

We have a lot of written evidence too. We will get a lot more in discovery. I don't think he can use bank funds unless a judge gives him permission. He is being sued for violating his fiduciary duty as a trustee. He would violate it more if he were to use bank funds to defend against this action. Also there are eight wittness to what the Commissioner told me.. They will all be deposed. I doubt they will all commit perjury. Especially since there will be a new Commissioner in Jan.

 

[Radko]

We have a lot of written evidence too. We will get a lot more in discovery. I don't think he can use bank funds unless a judge gives him permission. He is being sued for violating his fiduciary duty as a trustee. He would violate it more if he were to use bank funds to defend against this action.

The problem Peter is that after everything that's happened and given how the bank was closed, we cannot trust the Receiver or the Commissioner.

At this point anything is possible, they seem to make their own rules, but let's hope you're right.

 

[Pschiff]

The problem Peter is that after everything that's happened and given how the bank was closed, we cannot trust the Receiver or the Commissioner.

At this point anything is possible, they seem to make their own rules, but let's hope you're right.

Correct. But its been almost 2.5 years now. Even if I didn't sue there is no telling how much longer this would go on. The receiver is making a lot of money from the bank. Since he's clearly been delaying the liquidation, why should he stop now? He can always make up excuses for another 2.5 years. I think the average bank liquidation takes about five years. The receiver know this. The fact that Euro Pacific Bank is not the average bank, and never belonged in receivership in the first place, is likely irrelevent in his mind.

 

[Martin Everson]

The receiver might have to take time off his official duties to deal with a legal case and retain council etc. Surely that will only delay things? Building animosity between both parties might not be a good idea.

I would need to see the court papers to understand on what basis he can be sued on a personal basis when issue is related to actions in his appointed official capacity that are the concern.

 

[Pschiff]

The receiver might have to take time off his official duties to deal with a legal case and retain council etc. Surely that will only delay things? Building animosity between both parties might not be a good idea.

I would need to see the court papers to understand on what basis he can be sued on a personal basis when issue is related to actions in his appointed official capacity that are the concern.

Yes, the lawsuit is against him as the trustee of the bank, as I am suing him personally for violating his fiduciary duty to depositors, other creditors, and the bank's only shareholder. As fat as time is concern, I think most of what he does now is bull s**t anyway. he just needs to run up the monthly bills. The more work he invents for himself to do, the more money he can charge the bank.

 

[Martin Everson]

Yes, the lawsuit is against him as the trustee of the bank, as I am suing him personally for violating his fiduciary duty to depositors, other creditors, and the bank's only shareholder. As fat as time is concern, I think most of what he does now is bull s**t anyway. he just needs to run up the monthly bills. The more work he invents for himself to do, the more money he can charge the bank.

Ok but you yourself are a creditor of the bank I believe [in capacity as a shareholder]? I would think he could use the receivership assets to defend himself against a case brought by one of the creditors in discharging his official appointed duties. Your not suing him on an unrelated party basis. It's related directly to EPB receivership actions and his actions in regards to discharging his professional duties from the basis that you are a creditor.

If however your saying he has not carried out his appointed duties correctly and failed in i.e his professionalism your gonna have a tough time proving that without solid evidence. He can easily argue case is from a creditor in relation to his professional appointed duties and he did nothing wrong. The burden of proof will be on you to prove case with solid evidence otherwise it will be dismissed at first hurdle.

I would need to see the paperwork when its public to understand the full basis of the case out of interest.

Good luck anyway.

P.S Didn't others hire a lawyer and try similiar earlier on? How did that go?

 

[Pschiff]

Ok but you yourself are a creditor of the bank I believe [in capacity as a shareholder]? I would think he could use the receivership assets to defend himself against a case brought by one of the creditors in discharging his official appointed duties. Your not suing him on an unrelated party basis. It's related directly to EPB receivership actions and his actions in regards to discharging his professional duties from the basis that you are a creditor.

If however your saying he has not carried out his appointed duties correctly and failed in i.e his professionalism your gonna have a tough time proving that without solid evidence. He can easily argue case is from a creditor in relation to his professional appointed duties and he did nothing wrong. The burden of proof will be on you to prove case with solid evidence otherwise it will be dismissed at first hurdle.

I would need to see the paperwork when its public to understand the full basis of the case out of interest.

Good luck anyway.

P.S Didn't others hire a lawyer and try similiar earlier on? How did that go?

The evidence is clear that he violated his fiduciary duty from day one. He never tried to sell the bank in its entirety. There where multiple buyers. Selling the bank was in the best interest of everyone. Yet he failed to act in the best interest of everyone, and instead acted solely in the best interest of himself. Also, he blindly followed the OCIF's commissioner's order to liquidate the bank, rather than exploring options that were more favorable to the bank, its customers, general creditors, and sole shareholder.

 

[James123456]

Today: exactly 1 month since "all efforts are geared to commence this liquidation process within the next upcoming weeks"
https://epbprliquidation.com/october-11-2024/
truly embarrassing

 

[Radko]

Today: exactly 1 month since "all efforts are geared to commence this liquidation process within the next upcoming weeks"
https://epbprliquidation.com/october-11-2024/
truly embarrassing

Once again upcoming weeks has turned into upcoming months.

 

[danielboros]

I doubt we will have any more updates this year.

 

[Pschiff]

I doubt we will have any more updates this year.

Yes, they take long vacations here in Puerto Rico. So I agree with you, unless my lawsuits puts some extra pressure on him to get something done.

 

[Martin Everson]

So I agree with you, unless my lawsuits puts some extra pressure on him to get something done.

Good Luck with that but he does not appear to be a man that walked in of the street. He seems someone that knows his way around the law and his profession and is probably well connected.

--- quote start

Mr. Wigberto Lugo Mender, Esq., CPA, is admitted to the P.R. Supreme Court, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the First District and the U.S. District Court for the Judicial District Court of Puerto Rico. He is graduated of the University of Puerto Rico School of Law, Cum Laude. He also has a dual bachelor’s degree in business administration and accounting from the University of PR., Cum Laude.

He has exposure in multiple disciplines and has gained diverse working experience with financing, legal, bankruptcy, estate liquidation and general financial consulting assistance to business of all sizes and in different industries. He has served as attorney in several of private and commercial clients, particularly commercial, insolvency and inheritance matters. Currently appointed as a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee for the Judicial District of Puerto Rico, he has work in liquidation of assets pertaining to bankruptcy estate and an Estate Administrator and Trustee in the Puerto Rico First Instance Court, with involvement in administration of assets in contested proceedings including individuals, partnership and corporations.

Prior to his current work profile, he has worked as Bankruptcy Analyst for the U.S. Trustee Office, U.S. Department of Justice and for Arthur Andersen & Co., in San Juan, Puerto Rico. He has also active as Speaker for several bankruptcy seminars sponsored by the local state CPA board, Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico, the American Bankruptcy Institute and Past Member of the Comision de Quiebras del Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico. He has been designated as Treasurer of Puerto Rico Bankruptcy Bar.

--- quote end

 

[Pschiff]

Good Luck with that but he does not appear to be a man that walked in of the street. He seems someone that knows his way around the law and his profession and is probably well connected.

--- quote start

Mr. Wigberto Lugo Mender, Esq., CPA, is admitted to the P.R. Supreme Court, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the First District and the U.S. District Court for the Judicial District Court of Puerto Rico. He is graduated of the University of Puerto Rico School of Law, Cum Laude. He also has a dual bachelor’s degree in business administration and accounting from the University of PR., Cum Laude.

He has exposure in multiple disciplines and has gained diverse working experience with financing, legal, bankruptcy, estate liquidation and general financial consulting assistance to business of all sizes and in different industries. He has served as attorney in several of private and commercial clients, particularly commercial, insolvency and inheritance matters. Currently appointed as a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee for the Judicial District of Puerto Rico, he has work in liquidation of assets pertaining to bankruptcy estate and an Estate Administrator and Trustee in the Puerto Rico First Instance Court, with involvement in administration of assets in contested proceedings including individuals, partnership and corporations.

Prior to his current work profile, he has worked as Bankruptcy Analyst for the U.S. Trustee Office, U.S. Department of Justice and for Arthur Andersen & Co., in San Juan, Puerto Rico. He has also active as Speaker for several bankruptcy seminars sponsored by the local state CPA board, Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico, the American Bankruptcy Institute and Past Member of the Comision de Quiebras del Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico. He has been designated as Treasurer of Puerto Rico Bankruptcy Bar.

--- quote end

Impressive resume, but he had no prior banking experience at all when OCIF put him in charge of my bank. He was so so incompetent that he blew a 500K pound receivable. All he had to do was gather certain information and provide it to the liquidator, but he couldn't do that one simple task. The bank lost the money.

 

[SCHLOSSFINANZ]

And? Thats totally irrelevant. A receiver is appointed on the sole discretion of OCIF. He is currently receiver of another bank which is in liquidation so he must enjoy the trust of OCIF.