Euro Pacific bank is a scam

[spartan7510]

Guys keep to topic please . If you want to discuss something off topic like crypto or gold your free to open a new thread.

BTW... Gold was part of EPB portfolio, which had to be liquidated in my case to be able to transfer out. So for me to buy back into the same oz value, I would be at a loss now as a result of funds been held by the correspondant bank. So yes, I do think it is part of the discussion. It was also supposed to be part of the new Quenta offering for customers who chose not to opt out.

 

[btc100k]

Peter,

I am not trying to discredit you. You are doing a fine job of that on your own. Martin Everson said in prior posts in this thread that he believed your bank would fail (post #140) and that you would spin the narrative and blame it on the government (post #176). And that is exactly what has happened.

 

[spartan7510]

Peter,

I am not trying to discredit you. You are doing a fine job of that on your own. Martin Everson said in prior posts in this thread that he believed your bank would fail (post #140) and that you would spin the narrative and blame it on the government (post #176). And that is exactly what has happened.

BTC100k - were you a customer of EPB? Are you currently impacted by funds been witheld by NOVO BANK? If not, please get lost as you are merely trying to troll Peter Schiff and adding no value to this discussion, in this case clearly have alternate motives.

TBDH - Im am quite impressed that Peter has even bothered ot engage with us on this thread and at least reassure us he is involved and working on a solution. The recent updates are more than the OCIF or reciever have provided.

 

[btc100k]

Spartan7510 - No. I was not a customer of EPB.

I noticed that the victims are behaving like the wives who get beat up by their husband. The wife will continue to defend the husband even after he bashes her face in. In a similar manner, the victims on this board are still defending Peter Schiff after he bashed your face in. Radko still wants to invest in his gold fund, even after this huge mess he is in. The GDX/GDXJ offers much lower fees with similar returns and you don't have to worry about Peter Schiff ruining that too.

 

[spartan7510]

Spartan7510 - No. I was not a customer of EPB.

I noticed that the victims are behaving like the wives who get beat up by their husband. The wife will continue to defend the husband even after he bashes her face in. In a similar manner, the victims on this board are still defending Peter Schiff after he bashed your face in. Radko still wants to invest in his gold fund, even after this huge mess he is in. The GDX/GDXJ offers much lower fees with similar returns and you don't have to worry about Peter Schiff ruining that too.

Your a bit delusional, clearly misinformed as well. As already stated, you bring no value to this discussion. Suggest you go troll your trash of Peter Schiff hatred elsewhere. You spurt out opinions and accusations without bringing any substance to the conversation in terms of solutions.
Whats done is done, we cannot change that, only proceed with caution moving forward. If you have a solution on how we can get our money back other than Peter Schiff bashing, Im sure the audience here would like to hear that...

 

[btc100k]

I do have a solution. Pursue legal action against Peter Schiff. The only reason he is posting on this forum is to convince you not to.

 

[spartan7510]

I do have a solution. Pursue legal action against Peter Schiff. The only reason he is posting on this forum is to convince you not to.

That would be pipe dream, again, not a real solution, only a fantasy. On what grounds are you going to sue him?
Most directors/shareholders in companies that are structured correctly have Limited Liability LLP or Ltd and are shielded from legal recourse when business fails. The business itself (in this case EPB) is its own legal entity. The business is in liduidation. Unless you have solid proof of wrong doing, fraud, misleading customers which can be directly tied to descisions made by Peter Schiff (not EPB management taking unilateral descisions) you dont have a chance in hell. So again, what are you going to sue him for?

The issue here is the OCIF and receiver that are the problem and need to be held accountable. I have a published agreement that customer funds would be returned. The OCIF and reciever are in breach of this agreement and would be liable.

 

[Radko]

Spartan7510 - No. I was not a customer of EPB.

I noticed that the victims are behaving like the wives who get beat up by their husband. The wife will continue to defend the husband even after he bashes her face in. In a similar manner, the victims on this board are still defending Peter Schiff after he bashed your face in. Radko still wants to invest in his gold fund, even after this huge mess he is in. The GDX/GDXJ offers much lower fees with similar returns and you don't have to worry about Peter Schiff ruining that too.

I appreciate your suggestions of GDX and GDXJ but I like Peter's Golf fund because of Adrian Day, he made me 63% in 5 months back in 2020 so I'll stick to it, but Martin is correct, this thread is about the future of the deposits held by Novo bank, so if you don't like Peter because he doesn't agree with BTC then start your own thread or join many of the ones already in existence, we are trying to find clarity to this unfortunate situation in which the OCIF played a massive roll not really thinking about the customers, it was a decision that fit her agenda and the IRS, which is unheard of.
Best of luck with BTC, I hope it gets to 100K one day, but I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket.

 

[btc100k]

I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket.

Unfortunately that is what you did by putting your money in a small uninsured offshore bank.
I am not here to troll anyone. I do not believe Peter Schiff is being honest. You guys have an emotional attachment to Peter because you listen to his podcasts, read his tweets, read his books and watch his YouTube videos. Just because he says things you agree with doesn't mean he is right.

I want everyone to get their money back. 100% of it. I think you guys need to put more pressure on Peter Schiff to guarantee he will cover any money that is not recovered. He has plenty of money and can afford it. He said the FDIC was a scam and refused to get insurance for the bank, so let Peter Schiff be the equivalent to the FDIC. He should make everyone whole.

 

[koohl]

Unfortunately that is what you did by putting your money in a small uninsured offshore bank.

I can only agree, if you put your money in such small banks you ask for trouble and losing your money. Sad but true.

 

[Pschiff]

Unfortunately that is what you did by putting your money in a small uninsured offshore bank.
I am not here to troll anyone. I do not believe Peter Schiff is being honest. You guys have an emotional attachment to Peter because you listen to his podcasts, read his tweets, read his books and watch his YouTube videos. Just because he says things you agree with doesn't mean he is right.

I want everyone to get their money back. 100% of it. I think you guys need to put more pressure on Peter Schiff to guarantee he will cover any money that is not recovered. He has plenty of money and can afford it. He said the FDIC was a scam and refused to get insurance for the bank, so let Peter Schiff be the equivalent to the FDIC. He should make everyone whole.

No offshore banks in Puerto Rico have FDIC coverage. My bank did what was advertised. It made no loans, and kept 100% of deposits in reserve. On the day the bank was unnecessarily put into receivership all of the customer's cash was there, plus millions more. I'm not not responsible for losses caused by regulators. Also, Qenta had applied to buy the bank, and add $7 million in additional capital, but OCIF refused to allow the sale. That's not my fault. Other buyers showed up after Qenta was rejected. OCIF refused to even consider any sales. That's not my fault either.

I do have a solution. Pursue legal action against Peter Schiff. The only reason he is posting on this forum is to convince you not to.

There is no basis to sue me. I put over 10 million into the bank but never took a penny out. You could only sue a shareholder to claw back distributions that should not have been made. But no distributions were ever made to me. I was a shareholder in corporation that owned a bank. I have no personal liability unless I committed fraud, which I did not. I was also a director, but my potential liability there is only to shareholders. I am the only shareholder. I can't sue myself. Despite my lack of personal liability i have done all that I can to protect customers.

 

[Radko]

Unfortunately that is what you did by putting your money in a small uninsured offshore bank.
I am not here to troll anyone. I do not believe Peter Schiff is being honest. You guys have an emotional attachment to Peter because you listen to his podcasts, read his tweets, read his books and watch his YouTube videos. Just because he says things you agree with doesn't mean he is right.

I want everyone to get their money back. 100% of it. I think you guys need to put more pressure on Peter Schiff to guarantee he will cover any money that is not recovered. He has plenty of money and can afford it. He said the FDIC was a scam and refused to get insurance for the bank, so let Peter Schiff be the equivalent to the FDIC. He should make everyone whole.

I honestly don't believe most customers know who Peter is, most customers, including me, were looking for a full reserve bank.
And someone should ask the Commissioner of OCIF to explain why she didn't allow the sale of the bank, or why she didn't allow Peter to inject more capital into the bank, any of this options would have been infinitely better for the customers, and on top of that she appointed a Receiver that is costing money to the bank and potentially to the customers, what a way to look out for the customers.

And as far as I know there are over 50 financial institutions in PR and none of them are FDIC, there are only 5 banks in PR that are FDIC, but in the case of EPB, a full reserve bank, being FDIC was unnecessary.

I believe if Trump would have been in office this situation would have been handled differently, and here we are having to deal for the Socialist/Communist government of Portugal to decide, another left-wing government no different than the one in Spain, luckily Italy finally woke up, hopefully France will follow soon, and then Canada as well, sorry this is off topic.
The Commissioner should be held accountable imo.

 

[Pschiff]

I honestly don't believe most customers know who Peter is, most customers, including me, were looking for a full reserve bank.
And someone should ask the Commissioner of OCIF to explain why she didn't allow the sale of the bank, or why she didn't allow Peter to inject more capital into the bank, any of this options would have been infinitely better for the customers, and on top of that she appointed a Receiver that is costing money to the bank and potentially to the customers, what a way to look out for the customers.

And as far as I know there are over 50 financial institutions in PR and none of them are FDIC, there are only 5 banks in PR that are FDIC, but in the case of EPB, a full reserve bank, being FDIC was unnecessary.

I believe if Trump would have been in office this situation would have been handled differently, and here we are having to deal for the Socialist/Communist government of Portugal to decide, another left-wing government no different than the one in Spain, luckily Italy finally woke up, hopefully France will follow soon, and then Canada as well, sorry this is off topic.
The Commissioner should be held accountable imo.

Exactly. Plus, the new president Qenta hired to run the bank was a rock star. She would have been by far the most highly qualified bank president in Puerto Rico. Instead, OCIF appointed a receiver with zero banking experience in any form. The real agenda was not to protect customers. It was to make me look bad, to allow the IRS and J5 to claim some kind of vindication for coming up empty on Operation Atlantis, and to give Nine some "evidence" to defend against my defamation lawsuit.

 

[regi]

Exactly. Plus, the new president Qenta hired to run the bank was a rock star. She would have been by far the most highly qualified bank president in Puerto Rico. Instead, OCIF appointed a receiver with zero banking experience in any form. The real agenda was not to protect customers. It was to make me look bad, to allow the IRS and J5 to claim some kind of vindication for coming up empty on Operation Atlantis, and to give Nine some "evidence" to defend against my defamation lawsuit.

I am sitting, reading and wondering in what sh**ty world my children will have to exist. It is the moment when any new business doesn't make sense. Keeping money in bank is not so simple as it suppose to be. Political soccer lasts and fight for as much money as it is possible to catch too. In the end for those small people in this modern world, like me, the goal is not only to watch competition, market demand, trends. This perfect world fu**ed up itself so much that now I have to be an expert in watching the situation on financial market too. I need to be able to predict where on / off manager is hiding and move my money before the lights will go out. Perspective vision on what will my children have to watch. Probably normal will be what today makes my eyes rolling over.

 

[Pschiff]

Why don' t we hire an advocate in portugal, if this is really where the pb lies ?
Cause no news from Schiff since 2 weeks, and his last message is to say that he is no longer involved. So even he really has hired someone and is sincere, can we really trust him ?
Maybe we should have ours and start a process in portugal ?

The bank's lawyer wrote that he expects news next week. Fingers crossed we get it and its good.

In hindsight no one would have chosen Euro Pacific as their bank, had customers known that the bank wasn't 100% compliant, and had customers known that their funds were going to be transferred to another bank in Portugal, no one in their right mind would have chosen to work with EPB, this has been a disaster that has ruined the lives of many people and many families, and the lack of everything else, no information, no nothing is just insulting, but no one cares!

Not true. When the bank had an account with the Federal Reserve it was able to hold dollars there. But all small banks need to hold foreign currency deposits with larger banks. That's how it works. Also no bank is 100% compliant. All audits typicalyl revel some small inadvertent violation. Bank's fix the "problem" and pay they fine. It's a game. It's how regulators justify their existence. EPB was basically compliant. It only had one government audit over a three-year period The bank was new to Puerto Rico, so was bound to get a few things wrong. The bank had been asking for an audit for two years to find out if it was doing anything wrong. It was only the week after the 60 Minutes program aired that regulators finally decided to audit the bank.

 

[btc100k]

Peter Schiff,

You said that the bank did nothing wrong and now you say:

"The bank was new to Puerto Rico, so was bound to get a few things wrong"

Case closed.

 

[Pschiff]

Peter Schiff,

You said that the bank did nothing wrong and now you say:

"The bank was new to Puerto Rico, so was bound to get a few things wrong"

Case closed.

I never said that. The bank did nothing criminal, and nothing civil that would have gotten any other bank shut down. I owned a broker dealer for over twenty years, and every two years auditors found something wrong. It's nearly impossible to be perfect. If every bank was shut down for any minor mistake, there would be no banks. Also major banks made way more mistakes than EPB, such as Wells Fargo. It paid billions of dollars in fines, but was never shut down.

 

[Radko]

Peter Schiff,

You said that the bank did nothing wrong and now you say:

"The bank was new to Puerto Rico, so was bound to get a few things wrong"

Case closed.

Let's move on from this subject please, let's wait to see if we get good news next week so we can All move on and put this nightmare behind us, have a great Easter weekend everybody.

 

[regi]

The bank's lawyer wrote that he expects news next week. Fingers crossed we get it and its good.

Fingers crossed for better times next week. This nightmare has to be finished. I am mentally exhausted. For the first time my profit and tax return will show loss. For everything including audit I have to pay from my own pocket. A few weeks more and the company will be burried forever.

 

[spartan7510]

The bank's lawyer wrote that he expects news next week. Fingers crossed we get it and its good.


Not true. When the bank had an account with the Federal Reserve it was able to hold dollars there. But all small banks need to hold foreign currency deposits with larger banks. That's how it works. Also no bank is 100% compliant. All audits typicalyl revel some small inadvertent violation. Bank's fix the "problem" and pay they fine. It's a game. It's how regulators justify their existence. EPB was basically compliant. It only had one government audit over a three-year period The bank was new to Puerto Rico, so was bound to get a few things wrong. The bank had been asking for an audit for two years to find out if it was doing anything wrong. It was only the week after the 60 Minutes program aired that regulators finally decided to audit the bank.

When the bank operated out of St Vincent & Grenadines, it was fantastic, customer service was superb as a boutique bank should be. When it moved to Puerto Rico, I noticed the service went downhil from there. Should have been a red flag to call it a day..