Ticker tape by TradingView
Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
such as using customers/custody money for own dealings? and if i am correct in USA these are serious jail terms?
I do not think De Jongh would take that risk?
I do not think De Jongh would take that risk?
I sent out 9,000 emails. I don't have a list of just Opt-in. About half were opened, which is a lot. But most have not replied. I will hope that more will join over time. Qetna admitted to having $19 million in cash. The receiver has about $50 million. That seems like enough to settle all claims, assuming we get all 19 million from Qetna, plus the gold and mutual funds.
That's why they should have just kept the case in arbitrration i filed. No publicity, just a confidential breach of conrtact arbtitraion. But by getting my action dismiss on standing, they foced the litigation into the public sphere, with hundreds of irate customers suing Qenta to get their money back.
I emailed the trustee but my email bounced back. I then emailed [email protected] using a different email address. I have just had an email from Qenta, 2 hours later, with the same offer to sign an NDA as the others. I get the feeling that the liquidator is working with Qenta and must have passed my other email address on to him.
the 2nd email to the receiver went through. It might be that email address that some servers don't like
I have repeatedly warned Qenta to stop sending our these solicitation emails to get custoemrs to sign NDAs to learn of Qenta's offer to sell their claims to an undislcosed third party. These emails are dilberarly misleading and mispresent the facts. Qenta also refers to claims customers have against the bank. Opt-in customers have claims agaisnt Qetna, not the bank, which they will soon pursue in federal court.
Qenta writes to customers claiming they are prevented from returning funds direclty to customers, but for some reason they are not prevented from selling those claims to an unknown thrid party, who can return you funds, only at a discounted amount. Well if nothing prevents them from selling your claim, nothing prevents them from just retuning your money. In truth, the Receiver wanred them they can't sell your assets and they must comply with your instructions as to what to do with them.
They are conveniently omitting in these communications that the route of directly returning customers' assets to them︀ in kind is entirely possible; that even though Qenta have the technical ability to do︁ this, they are choosing not to; and omitting the reasons why they are choosing not︂ to. Of course if they were transparent about these things, giving each customer a truly︃ informed choice, no-one would fall for such terms.
Yes, that's why this is likely constitutes fraud. I think anyone fooled by this can still sue Qenta to get back what they give up. But I won't not encourage anyone to test this. I'm just concereed that someone who isn't on this baord, or︀ reading my emails, might fall for this con.
Ive had an email back from AXOS 3 weeks back confirming they received my documents but nothing from Qenta.
Same here.. though first email from Qenta was received today, two days after I send the "claim" letter to Qenta. But also wondering why the receiver isn't making anything public. I understand that this guy has to be the one to actually return the money to me now...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.