Our valued sponsor
Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
-
- Tags
- euro pacific bank
Hi @Pschiff. I’m a customer and I would really appreciate the idea mentioned above going forward. We, as clients, really need some movement on this, it’s been too long without any progress, and your support would really help us and it will benefit all parties, lawyers and your self. Thank you @JoeOhNo for proposing this idea. Count me in.
Hi Peter, can I ask what kind of information you may find?
is it regarding the Gold/Qenta situation ?
and what in your opinion is holding back the process ?
It would be nice with an understandable status report - the level of information here is shocking and disrespectful to clients.
EPB had a long history of non-compliance and even its own auditors had doubts about it's ability to operate in 2019.
It has been insolvent for many years and they were fined many times for not renewing their license.
Very long reading, but provides clear timeline of the way the whole thing was run.
Orders here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/vuoyh8a2b6kbskb/Euro_Pacific_International_Bank_-_Orden.pdf/file (Could not attach due to filesize being too large).
Around page 10 provides the financial position. Around $4m in customer deposits went missing in 2020, so it was not a full reserve bank.
It has been insolvent for many years and they were fined many times for not renewing their license.
Very long reading, but provides clear timeline of the way the whole thing was run.
Orders here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/vuoyh8a2b6kbskb/Euro_Pacific_International_Bank_-_Orden.pdf/file (Could not attach due to filesize being too large).
Around page 10 provides the financial position. Around $4m in customer deposits went missing in 2020, so it was not a full reserve bank.
Hello @john8899,
Can you explain why auditors had doubts about EPB in 2019 if OCIF began their investigation in mid 2020? Who are these auditors? What did they say? Where did they say it and when?
History of non-compliance being a cause of anything seems like a far fetch when OCIF didn't even investigate.
4 mill missing is nothing for a bank or even for someone like PS. They could have easelly injected that money if they were allowed to. The bank was more stable than any other bank as far as reserves go if only that much was missing. Most banks have not been destroyed in circuimstances a thousand times worse than what you had at EPB. Like SVB or even Novo.
There has been 0 care given to depositors back then and even now. Clearly EPB was not closed to defend them. What matters is not what you say but what you do, because what regulators says are just hogwash.
Can you explain why auditors had doubts about EPB in 2019 if OCIF began their investigation in mid 2020? Who are these auditors? What did they say? Where did they say it and when?
History of non-compliance being a cause of anything seems like a far fetch when OCIF didn't even investigate.
4 mill missing is nothing for a bank or even for someone like PS. They could have easelly injected that money if they were allowed to. The bank was more stable than any other bank as far as reserves go if only that much was missing. Most banks have not been destroyed in circuimstances a thousand times worse than what you had at EPB. Like SVB or even Novo.
There has been 0 care given to depositors back then and even now. Clearly EPB was not closed to defend them. What matters is not what you say but what you do, because what regulators says are just hogwash.
Did you download the document and read it? It says around page 10 and 11. There are some figures of the financial situation.
Please download the file and read first as it provides a full timeline of events since the bank was created.
If 4 million of customer deposits went missing, then it was not a full reserve bank is it not? How can a full reserve bank have missing money if no money was made on loans? Where did the money go? Who took it?
The next year it was $13m missing, so what happened there?
I can't download that file. I have waited 10 min to get it. The server is probably very far from me so even if I have good bandwith it won't download, but I'm pretty sure I have seen a document like that in the past. I remember translating something from spanish as well.
The reason is simply that running a bank costs money and the monthly fees of the depositors did not cover all of the expenses. There was also a run on the bank in around 2020 due to the world wide IRS media campign so most of the depositors left and so most of the income has left as well which caused a downward spiral. Over time it could have been reversed if the regulators stopped their defamatory accusations that they never followed through with in the end. Obviously no business can sustain itself without customers.
If the issue was that EPB did not have the 100% reserves, then putting that money back in should have solved that problem, but they were not allowed to do that. It is like complaining about someone not being able to jump a fence after you crushed their legs.
The auditors confirmed that bank was insolvent in 2019, so the conspiracy that the bank went insolvent after IRS investigated is false.
Even if the bank did not have enough money to cover costs, customer funds need to be segregated. How can customer funds be withdrawn and used to pay for anything the people in charge wants? So, if the bank provides a low interest or zero interest loan to the directors or CEO as part of their pay / compensation package, should it be allowed to use customer deposits to do so? If so, what if the director / ceo is unable to pay? Do you see why customer deposits should not be mixed with other funds in the bank? They should be separate!
Uploaded to another site: https://filebin.net/fq3e088jq3eqmx8h
Even if the bank did not have enough money to cover costs, customer funds need to be segregated. How can customer funds be withdrawn and used to pay for anything the people in charge wants? So, if the bank provides a low interest or zero interest loan to the directors or CEO as part of their pay / compensation package, should it be allowed to use customer deposits to do so? If so, what if the director / ceo is unable to pay? Do you see why customer deposits should not be mixed with other funds in the bank? They should be separate!
Uploaded to another site: https://filebin.net/fq3e088jq3eqmx8h
Yes regulators claimed EPB was "insolvent" because a large chunk of money was in European Banks and not on hand as cash in Puerto Rico. That is the definition of nonsene. Calling a bank that is on average at least 4 times more liquid than any other banks makes little sense when you think about it.
Sure, segregating customer funds would be a good rule so why not enforce that rule instead of killing the bank and making hundreds of people destitute? Do you see why blowing up a bank on a whim is not good for depositors?
Sure, segregating customer funds would be a good rule so why not enforce that rule instead of killing the bank and making hundreds of people destitute? Do you see why blowing up a bank on a whim is not good for depositors?
Where and when was this assertion made? This is the first time I've heard of this.
If funds were not segregated, then it is very dangerous for customers, the operating capital of a bank is not the customer deposits. The management has already been given a lot of opportunity to do the right thing many years ago, even before the 2020 relevations, but they refuse to the right things and got shutdown and customers lost everything.
Pretty sure PS said it here, but the liquidator also confirmed that ultimately no money was missing and that every depositor will be reimbursed in full. Obviosuly a meager 4 mill missing would not make any bank "insolvent". If I recall correctly the problem was that EPBs deposits in banks were treated as loans for said banks making EPB to be categorized as some technical definition of insolvency.
Whether EPB did the right thing or not is irrelevant when it comes to the responsibility of the IRS and OCIF in this case. You can't just say that everything regulators do is correct simply because the regulated do bad things. The regulators didn't just punish EPB, but the depositors as well while falsely claiming that they were protecting depositors.
If the issue was that deposits were not segregated then OCIF could have made an ultimatum stating that if the money is not put back and segregated in the future than they will shut down the bank. Instead they just shut down the bank. Whatever their agenda was they didn't care about the depositors not then and not now and not in the future.
sorry but you write total nonsense. Taping regulatory capital is also forbidden and EPB did exactly that knowingly!
Document seems to agree with what NYT published and what I mentioned here years ago....lol. How unbecoming of a "full reserve bank" to be using client funds.
The reason most people are in this situation with EPB is because they put fanaticism aka being a "fan" of someone ahead of common sense and caution. Fans (aka fanatics) will defend the indefensible most times.
We are going round in circles and people are not interested in knowing the facts but just taking the view point of someone they are a fan of even when it goes against their own interests. All very sad.
Look at my messages. I have literally said that EPB was short by millions and that clearly was wrong and that that should not have happened. I said that multiple times including now. As far as I remember, being insolvent was not necessarely related to that specifically, but if I am wrong what difference does it make? Nothing. If it was because of the 4 mill than that was the cause. It changes nothing. Why not just put in the missing money, change management and start auditing every year instead of every decade? Why is that such devilish idea?
What I am suggesting is that the punishment was too severe for the mistakes that were made. There are several banks that knowingly washed drug money and many more banks that have gone bankrupt that were not punished nearly as quickly or as harshly as EPB was, and consequently most of the damage to the clients was avoided by treating the nuclear option as a last resort instead of the opening strike.
If this makes me a fanatic, so be it.
Because running a bank is not running a kebab shop. You can't say ahh sorry I inject new capital and then all is fine to the regulator! You clearly have ZERO banking experience.
No the punishment was not too severe as PS is a flamboyant guy telling all other people that he is right and others are wrong. PR is a banana republic (even PS admits that here now) and nobody with a clear mind would incorporate a bank there.
But it was the cheapest and loosest regulated jurisdiction - so wonder why EPB moved there.
No the punishment was not too severe as PS is a flamboyant guy telling all other people that he is right and others are wrong. PR is a banana republic (even PS admits that here now) and nobody with a clear mind would incorporate a bank there.
But it was the cheapest and loosest regulated jurisdiction - so wonder why EPB moved there.
Why not? they don't want to be in a well regulated country.
Latest Threads
-
Anyone has experiences with getting Greek driving license?
- Started by Schwellkopp
- Replies: 0
-
Cyprus to implement WHT on LTJ and BTJ from Jan 1st 2026
- Started by mrpayments
- Replies: 2
-
Best agent or accounting service 2025 for a HK LTD and e-commerce activity
- Started by Mimimel
- Replies: 1
-
-
Looking for someone who can create payment processing history for us, for a subscription business.
- Started by os0281
- Replies: 2
