Yes the problem of finding a lawyer that is willing to scrutinise OCIF and the Receiver could be a problem. As you say they get a lot of business from state organisations.
Our valued sponsor
Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
-
- Tags
- euro pacific bank
Yes. There are 2 sides to every story and you are only hearing Peter's version. He has blamed everyone on planet earth except himself and also said he can't be sued. Maybe he's the one you guys should be going after.
How is any of it my fault, other than that the IRS target the bank due to my personal political views.? They audited the bank for two years, and found that it did nothing wrong. The media falsely accused me of being guilty of what the audit exonerated me of, and destroyed the ability of the bank to operate profitably. So i found a highly qualified company to buy the bank, so it could be re-branded, but the OCIF commissioner changed her mind, and put the bank into receivership rather than approve a sale she originally supported. On top of that I had no role in the operation of the bank. I was not an officer, or even an employee. I was a shareholder and board member only. When the bank went into receivership there was more than enough cash on its balance sheet to make all creditors whole, including all depositors.
Peter, I am not going to get in an argument with you. The last time I did that the moderators banned me for a month.
I am talking to the victims only: you are only hearing Peter Schiff's side of the story. So quit believing everything you hear. I do not believe Peter Schiff can be trusted. For example, he attacked Bitcoin for 12+ years and is now selling NFT's.
And I hope the moderators don't ban me again. I am not saying anything mean or nasty. Thank you.
I am talking to the victims only: you are only hearing Peter Schiff's side of the story. So quit believing everything you hear. I do not believe Peter Schiff can be trusted. For example, he attacked Bitcoin for 12+ years and is now selling NFT's.
And I hope the moderators don't ban me again. I am not saying anything mean or nasty. Thank you.
No, we banned for you derailing the thread by posting off-topic messages and provoking users (trolling). As long as you contribute meaningfully and appropriately to the topic at hand, you have nothing to worry about.
If you want to debate the merits of Peter Schiff's stance on crypto, that's better taken in another thread, so that this one can remain focused on updates and discussions around EuroPacific Bank and its ongoing situation.
Btc100K is only here to hate on Peter Schiff and to try to get others to hate him as well, he can go to Twitter to do that, please get rid of him for good, Thanks.
Peter,
To have a collective lawsuit against OCIF, we need to have an evidence any kind, that you have offered all the possible options to the Commissioner to protect customer's savings without using Receiver at all, which was the worst option by all means. Otherwise it will be not easy to start any legal case against OCIF & Receiver. I just need a simple answer either “YES or No“ from your side at this stage.
PS. Euro Pacific had about 8,000 depositors from around the world and held $140 million in deposits.
To have a collective lawsuit against OCIF, we need to have an evidence any kind, that you have offered all the possible options to the Commissioner to protect customer's savings without using Receiver at all, which was the worst option by all means. Otherwise it will be not easy to start any legal case against OCIF & Receiver. I just need a simple answer either “YES or No“ from your side at this stage.
PS. Euro Pacific had about 8,000 depositors from around the world and held $140 million in deposits.
Last edited:
Peter would be the one who could testify about all the options he offered to the Commissioner which would have been so much better for the customers.
I think the amount of money that was deposited in EPB at the time it was closed is half of that. The bank lost a lot of customers after the 60 Minutes Australia allegations were made public.
Yes, I have plenty of evidence, and will testify. I put $10 million of capital into the bank to protect customers, and lost every penny. I offered to put in more, but first the Commissioner first told me that i didn't have to, then later refused to let me. Qenta was going to put in $7 million more, which was millions more than was legally required, but she refused to allow the sale. The Commissioner wanted to put the bank into receivership, even though receivership was completely unnecessary given the financial position of the bank. She chose to appoint a receiver with zero banking experience.
Also, why put a bank into receivership when the owner is willing to add the necessary capital, or it a qualified buyer is willing to do it. Plus, the press conference with the IRS/J5 was completely unnecessary, and resulted in the Portugese Govt. freeze. Then the commissioner dragged her feet on getting the Portugese government to lift it. She knew for many months that the freeze was the result of the false impression she created with her unnecessary press conference. She allowed the IRS/J5 to act as if the Atlantis investigation was a success. It was a complete failure. The IRS did not find a single example of an account that was used for money laundering or tax evasion. It also found that the bank made a concerted effort to prevent such activities from taking place at the bank. The Commissioner could have made that cleat to the Portugese government, but refused to do so. I believe the Commissioner ldid not want to publicly say, or put anything in writing that helped my defamation lawsuit in Australia.
https://qenta-rgts-public.s3.us-wes...3+EPIB+Trustee+Case+Progress+Report_Final.pdf communication we were all looking for I guess.
Those that are opting out will have to wait until the end of October if I read correctly, and those that are opting in will know more by the end of this month IF funds are recovered from the correspondent bank (Novo Bank.)
At least we finally have a planning with some dates. Let's see the first milestone if they stick to it.
Yep. Just read the document. Finally some communication with hard dates. I think most of us are opting out so the end of October 2023 maybe we get our money back. Just informed some friends where I borrowed money to pay for my bills that they also get their money back. Fingers crossed.
So 45 days from June 15th, we will see.
This is the interesting part.
"Under the present circumstances and given the delays and inability to conclude the liquidation process commenced in August 2022, on the terms provided in the Voluntary Liquidation Plan, EPB jointly with the GFST have determined to modify and revert to the alternative procedural provisions detailed in the Consent Order and work on an amended Plan of Liquidation that should cure those issues experienced to this date."
I guess we will know about the new amended Plan of Liquidation soon, and let's see if Novo bank transfers the funds this time around.
Unfortunately YES, there are a lot of IFs that need to happen for us to get our money back, it's hard to have faith on any of this knowing all the problems that have come along since the bank was closed. I will try to be positive and hope that Novo bank transfers the money, that's everything here, everything else is paperwork.
This is the first I am hearing about an amended plan.
Actually its not really amended. I checked with Qetna. Its basically the same plane we had from the beginning. The amendment basically acknowledges that its taking much longer to complete the process than initially thought, and so a few more steps that were not anticipated are now required.
Last edited:
