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.
Another question is that since the bank was barred form using USD the cash is still held in the currency that we had originally such as pounds sterling and has not been converted to USD?
No, all the cash was converted to U.S. dollars by the Receiver years ago. I advised against that but he moved the funds to a U.S.. bank that only held dollars. So unfortunately everyone who had euros, pounds or other currencies will get back less than what they had in deposits due to the FX losses.
Thanks Peter for being so helpful and reassuring as at least there is someone there helping us.
I am happy to receive USD but obviously don't know what exchange rate they were using for my claim amount? The exchange rate from Pounds was particularly︀ bad around November 2022. I hope that wasn't the time of conversion to USD ?︁
No point in converting back to £ again however now its done.
Do you know︂ roughyl where this exchange as done to USD?
I am happy to receive USD but obviously don't know what exchange rate they were using for my claim amount? The exchange rate from Pounds was particularly︀ bad around November 2022. I hope that wasn't the time of conversion to USD ?︁
No point in converting back to £ again however now its done.
Do you know︂ roughyl where this exchange as done to USD?
The liquidation value only included the cash. It did not include the precious metals, now worth about $50 million, or the mutual funds, now worth about $8 million. Qenta only listed the precious metals and mutual funds at their Sept. 2022 liquidation values, as Qenta was attempting to keep all the appreciated value for itself.
The initial️ closing is contingent on “all regulatory approvals having been obtained and remaining in full force and effect,” which never occurred. So ownership never transferred to Qenta, just custody. Qenta has to return all transferred asset it received back to the bank. The liabilities to customers have remained with the bank the entire time as the Purchase and Assumption Agreement never completed any closing events. I have an adversarial relationship with Qenta at this point. I am trying to get them to return the bank's assets and they are refusing to do so. Not are they do anything to make those assets available to customers.
Peter, would you agree that we should send in our claim details especially if we only have cash, before the 4th August and request to change to opt-out or do you think there's no point and we should wait for further instructions?
Yes, I am trying to represent the bank on behalf of the customers as the sole shareholder and signatory on the Asset Purchase and Assumption Agreement. Hopefully I can handle this on my own. I'm covering legal costs now personally. Nothing I'm doing is being charged to the bank.
I'm a bit confused about which documents if any hvae to be notarised and/or apostilled. THe liquidation document request, indicates that the utility bill needs to be certified (I assume notarised or can it just be sigend by a lawyer or accountant)︀ and says not to email the documents but submit them through the protal, but the︁ compliance documentation chceklist says all documents must be apostilled and should be sent by email.︂ Contradictory information
Only the Receiver knows the exact exchange rate, although the funds were transferred from Novo bank to the Receiver back at the beginning of August of 2024, so maybe the exchange rate is from around that time, maybe...
I'm only︂ sending the utility bill notarized, and I'm sending all the documents to the email address︃ provided.
I'm only︂ sending the utility bill notarized, and I'm sending all the documents to the email address︃ provided.
Yes, but I sent an email to the Receiver asking him if Opt-ins could be allowed to Opt-out, and he said that in order to give me an answer, I would have to send all the documents first. So even though I'm Opt-in, I am sending all my documents this weekend.
Given what's happened with crooked Brent De Jong, the Receiver should be asking that all customers (Opt-ins & Opt-out) send their documentation.
Given what's happened with crooked Brent De Jong, the Receiver should be asking that all customers (Opt-ins & Opt-out) send their documentation.
Let’s be honest about the Opt-IN scheme that always had (and has) fraudulent elements:
(1) As most Opt-IN clients were naïve, no one asked for due diligence, including seeing the signed purchase agreement deal (Schiff/Qenta), which was only shown much later (nice move from Qenta/Schiff!!!).
(2) Supposedly, the Opt-IN concept was made (official story, obviously not the true story) because “otherwise the PR state would take money from clients not answering.” Well, what would Qenta do? Obviously, the same! Even dumber is the argument: "for client not having a bank account in their home country".
(3) Very convenient move: Clients who did not reply before the opt-IN/OUT deadline automatically became Opt-IN! Very smart calculated move! As then Qenta (Schiff) would︀ control more ASSETS. And they knew there would be many clients NOT responding and never︁ demanding their money, for numerous reasons: source of funds from questionable activity, too little money︂ to bother, deceased people, etc. etc – and most other clients would not demand appreciation︃ of assets (interest rates etc). Whoever controlled assets would make a killing.
In this whole︄ saga, there is the official story (“we are here to help”), and there is reality!︅
(1) As most Opt-IN clients were naïve, no one asked for due diligence, including seeing the signed purchase agreement deal (Schiff/Qenta), which was only shown much later (nice move from Qenta/Schiff!!!).
(2) Supposedly, the Opt-IN concept was made (official story, obviously not the true story) because “otherwise the PR state would take money from clients not answering.” Well, what would Qenta do? Obviously, the same! Even dumber is the argument: "for client not having a bank account in their home country".
(3) Very convenient move: Clients who did not reply before the opt-IN/OUT deadline automatically became Opt-IN! Very smart calculated move! As then Qenta (Schiff) would︀ control more ASSETS. And they knew there would be many clients NOT responding and never︁ demanding their money, for numerous reasons: source of funds from questionable activity, too little money︂ to bother, deceased people, etc. etc – and most other clients would not demand appreciation︃ of assets (interest rates etc). Whoever controlled assets would make a killing.
In this whole︄ saga, there is the official story (“we are here to help”), and there is reality!︅
OPT INs decided to keep their precious metals because they didn't believe the story that the assets would be returned in a reasonable time frame (because of corruption, incoptetence and malice against Schiff) . If that means we were naive. Sure you can believe that. Qenta is trying to steal the 40 mill that was made by the decision of those naive clients. The purchase agreement was published by Schiff. Qenta, the receiver and OCIF haven't published it to this day!
OPT IN was an option to keep the gold/silver and so that anyone who didn't show up could keep their account. If you showed︀ up you could just OPT OUT. Normally that money would have been lost so having︁ a safety net that was not risk free was preferable to having no net whatsoever.︂
Hindsight is 20/20 . Choices and intentions should be considered in the context that they︃ were made.
Qenta is not Schiff by the way.
OPT IN was an option to keep the gold/silver and so that anyone who didn't show up could keep their account. If you showed︀ up you could just OPT OUT. Normally that money would have been lost so having︁ a safety net that was not risk free was preferable to having no net whatsoever.︂
Hindsight is 20/20 . Choices and intentions should be considered in the context that they︃ were made.
Qenta is not Schiff by the way.
There was no ulterior motive. I had no financial interest︆ in Qenta, and it made no difference to me how many customers opted in or︇ opted out. The purchase price was the same regardless of how many customers opted in.︈ The $1.25 million Qenta was supposed to pay went entirely to the bank, not to︉ me. So it provided depositors with added protection. It was hard to find any other︊ firms wiling to take the accounts given the false allegations of money laundering and tax︋ evasion. EPB customers were considered high risk. I am very upset at the way things︌ turned out with Qenta. That's why I am doing all that I can to help︍ get all the assets transferred to Qenta back to make sure they are returned to︎ customers.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.