Thanks for your reply. I hope you are right. It’s really frustrating that we can’t do anything against them
Our valued sponsor
Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
-
- Tags
- euro pacific bank
Yes, the customers are not plaintiffs in my lawsuit. But if I win they can all sue individually or collectively, using my win to prove their case. I win for me is a win for every customers who wishes to pursue a claim.
NO i had no idea Qenta has been issued an IFE license by Puerto Rico. So I don't hink they have one. It anyone thinks they do I would like to see some proof.
well as I researched 2 Qenta companies in Switzerland have been struck off from the register for non compliance.
A serious Fintech would never ever allow that to happen
At the moment Opt-in customers are not customers of Qenta.
In order to be a Qenta customer, you have to download the Qenta App and register to open an account.
So the question is, what is the status of Opt-in customers at the moment?
And can Qenta hold on to the funds once the funds become available?
In order to be a Qenta customer, you have to download the Qenta App and register to open an account.
So the question is, what is the status of Opt-in customers at the moment?
And can Qenta hold on to the funds once the funds become available?
We have talked about Qenta and their background in past and there are stil lots of red flags. i.e the failed merger due to inability to provide audited financials to Coinvestor and then paying terminaton fees to them in stock and not cash 
. The way the Swiss entities were liquidated also. But does Qenta actually have any cash or is it all clever talk from them without providing audited financials or having any actual money. They certainly were unable to provide Coinvestor with any audited financials .
Yes.....does not look good does it?
"The SPAC aaid the decision was based “primarily based on Qenta’s failure to (i) deliver the Closing Company Financial Statements (as defined in the merger agreement) by the applicable deadline and (ii) comply with the Financial Information Obligations.”
It backs the point I made when I asked it would be nice to see Qenta's financials? I am not saying there is anything amiss but...
Qenta CEO has been part of 3 failed companies that we know about. Do people even know which exact Qenta entity in which country received the EPB funds? I ask as if that entity is in a weak jurisdiction and goes belly up [same was as the other entities CEO was involved with] your money is gone folks.
P.S Again without audited financials no one has any idea what has happened to client money that was given to Qenta.
. The way the Swiss entities were liquidated also. But does Qenta actually have any cash or is it all clever talk from them without providing audited financials or having any actual money. They certainly were unable to provide Coinvestor with any audited financials .
Yes.....does not look good does it?
"The SPAC aaid the decision was based “primarily based on Qenta’s failure to (i) deliver the Closing Company Financial Statements (as defined in the merger agreement) by the applicable deadline and (ii) comply with the Financial Information Obligations.”
It backs the point I made when I asked it would be nice to see Qenta's financials?
I am not saying there is anything amiss but...Qenta CEO has been part of 3 failed companies that we know about. Do people even know which exact Qenta entity in which country received the EPB funds? I ask as if that entity is in a weak jurisdiction and goes belly up [same was as the other entities CEO was involved with] your money is gone folks.
P.S Again without audited financials no one has any idea what has happened to client money that was given to Qenta.
So lets recap:
1: Qenta has all opt-in client´s money in their account, as they bought those assets. Opt-in clients may have to face a new separation liquidation process if Qenta goes into liquidation/default themselves, as the assets have been transferred & the opt-in customers in writing accepted to be part of Qenta and take that risk.
2:Schiff ´s following statement makes NO sense: Schiff basically says: “Qenta was necessary after the C&D order, as there could be clients not responding (or not having another personal bank account), and then OCIF would take that money. So Qenta was a necessary default for non-responding clients”. Makes no sense if you think about it and not common practice.
3: Red flags from A to Z with Qenta: They don’t answer any emails, virtual fictitious addresses, “pumping themselves up”, rejected for lack of proper financial conduct (no audited statements as an example), management been involved in numerous bankruptcies, risky and unclear line of business, no mentioning on EPB on their web page, involved in shady jurisdictions such as Ghana etc. etc
4:Opt-in customers took a massive risk trusting Qenta (discussed and shown above), and probably less than 5% (if any) did a proper due diligence.
1: Qenta has all opt-in client´s money in their account, as they bought those assets. Opt-in clients may have to face a new separation liquidation process if Qenta goes into liquidation/default themselves, as the assets have been transferred & the opt-in customers in writing accepted to be part of Qenta and take that risk.
2:Schiff ´s following statement makes NO sense: Schiff basically says: “Qenta was necessary after the C&D order, as there could be clients not responding (or not having another personal bank account), and then OCIF would take that money. So Qenta was a necessary default for non-responding clients”. Makes no sense if you think about it and not common practice.
3: Red flags from A to Z with Qenta: They don’t answer any emails, virtual fictitious addresses, “pumping themselves up”, rejected for lack of proper financial conduct (no audited statements as an example), management been involved in numerous bankruptcies, risky and unclear line of business, no mentioning on EPB on their web page, involved in shady jurisdictions such as Ghana etc. etc
4:Opt-in customers took a massive risk trusting Qenta (discussed and shown above), and probably less than 5% (if any) did a proper due diligence.
Last edited:
From what I can tell Qenta also has some of the Opt out funds, which it needs to transfer back to the bank. OCIF told me that any funds not withdrawn by customers would be forfeited to the Puerto Rico government. Given that Puerto Rico is bankrupt, I was worried that it would be very difficult if not impossible for customers to retrieve their funds. So I thought having all the funds not withdrawn by customers going to Qenta was better than having them go to the Puerto Rico government. It would have been much better for customers had the OCIF Commissioner allow Qetna to buy the bank. Qenta was requited to add $8 million in capital, which would have raised total capital to over $10 million. But due to her secret deal with the IRS to promote the J5, she could not allow the bank to stay in business.
Makes absolutely no sense: "Qenta also has some of the Opt out funds, which it needs to transfer back to the bank"
Do you think Opt-in customers are at any risk of not getting their funds from Qenta after the Receiver sets an official migration date, can Qenta be trusted?
Latest Threads
-
-
-
Switzerland - branch office or local GmbH
- Started by DomOCT
- Replies: 6