Euro Pacific bank is a scam

Status
Not open for further replies.
Below from ChatGPT

Typical duration of a TRO:

Federal court (U.S.) – A TRO generally‌ lasts up to 14 days, but the judge can extend it once for another 14‍ days (so max 28 days in most cases).

State courts – Rules vary by state,⁠ but many follow a similar 14-day limit (some states may allow shorter or slightly longer⁤ periods).

After the TRO expires, the court usually holds a hearing to decide whether to⁣ issue a Preliminary Injunction, which can last until the end of the case.
 
Yes that is why that is the first important step towards a︀ Preliminary Injunction.
 
Mr de Jockstrap lacks the sophistication of a Bernie Madoff, or the clever financial engineering‌ of an SBF. He should spend more time studying the greats!

(All tongue-in-cheek, Brent –‍ not an allegation of criminal conduct. 😉 )
 
The Receiver should be informed about this,‍ trying to take advantage of vulnerable customers who are in need of money, disgusting!
 
I had that hearing scheduled, but it never took place as‍ Qenta seccesssully argued that I had no standing to seek the TRO. Had the Recevier⁠ joined the action, as I tried mulipole times to do, the injunction would have been⁤ issed. The judge agreed we would pevail on the merrits, but the wrong party borught⁣ the action.. He said it should have been the Receiver, not me.
 
Will that⁣ not be the same process again when the new lawsuit for the customers start?
This time the case no judge can dismiss the case for no standing …
 
The customers have standing to sue Qetna to recover their⁠ property that Qenta is refusing to return. The judge ruled I lacked the authority to⁤ demand that Qenta return the bank's property to the bank. He did not rule agaisnt⁣ the merrits. In fact, he concluding that the action would prevail on the merrits if⁢ the Receiver brought the action instead of me. But the Receiver refuses to do it.︀
 
Well .. The reciever is not working so fast. Maybe it’s better that we make⁢ Qenta return the assets directly to customers as intended.
 
Just curious to hear the opinion of less involved but competent people @Martin Everson , @SCHLOSSFINANZ , what is your view please, specially regarding the opt-ins? the receiver seems he‌ doesn't want to take care, so class action from customer directly to Quenta?
Thanks
 
You don't get it. Qenta doesn't want to return the money to customers. It wants to‍ keep as much of that money for itself.
 
Even if we manage to get Qenta to return the assets, they‍ will go to the bank, which is being controlled by the Receiver.

As I said⁠ before, no one is going to get anything until the Reciever says so.
 
Yes I get that. They are trying to make people accepts very bad deals.
That’s why‍ we got to sue them to make them return the assets, correct?
 
When I read the recievers notice it seems like he say that we need to⁤ pursue our assets directly at Qenta.

Does this not mean that our claim is at⁣ them and they are supposed to send them to the customers directly because our assets⁢ are not a part of the liquidation?
 
Peter, so far Qenta hasn't said that they don't want to return the money. Whenever the‌ Receiver sets an official migration date, if then Qenta doesn't return everything immediately, then we‍ can say for sure that Qenta is stealing the money, or if they don't return⁠ the full value of the assets.

Same goes for the Silver, it doesn't matter who⁤ is controlling it, the Receiver or Qenta, no one is going to get it until⁣ the liquidation process is over.
 
Assets go back to the bank only if the Receiver or a court directs it.⁤ Peter’s motion sought that remedy; it wasn’t granted. A class-action win would obligate Qenta to⁣ deliver assets to us, not to the bank.
 
Yes I understand⁤ what the Reciever said is confusing. He made it sound as if we can demand⁣ that Qenta returns our assets right now, but that's not how I see it.
That's why Qenta is offering a cash deal to those that don't want to wait until⁢ the liquidation process is over.
 
Yes. But if the Receiver did that it would be so much⁠ easier and quicker. In fact, I think the court would just order the assets returned⁤ to the bank. Had the Receiver joned my intital lawsuit that would have already been⁣ done. So at this point it would just be a matter of inforcing the court⁢ order. I have never seen a greater example of gross neglegence that what the Receiver︀ is doing. I actually think its worse than what Qetna is doing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

JohnnyDoe.is is an uncensored discussion forum
focused on free speech,
independent thinking, and controversial ideas.
Everyone is responsible for their own words.

Quick Navigation

User Menu