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.
Like I said, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this information. However the contact is credible and seemed sincere. I understand your statement, over the past few years there are thousands of newly sanctioned individuals and jurisdictions that may well have not been sanctioned prior to the liquidation, but could be now. I was also told that the commissioner is taking a personal interest to hurry up the two bank liquidations (may not be EPB), and its a subject "close to her heart". I did not believe that part of the conversation at all.︀
IF there is a pending investigation the liquidator is bound by law not to disclose it to anyone otherwise he may obstruct the court of justice. Thats a criminal offense in most jurisdictions...
There is no investigation. OCIF does not know of one and neither does Qenta. There was one that went one for over two years before a criminal grand jury conducted by the IRS and eight-month investigation by the Portugese government. Both investigations found nothing are over. None of the supposed J5 investigators found anything either. Those started in 2018. So its been seven years and they found nothing.
Why don't you upload the dismissal from the US investigation and the decree from the judge in Portugal here then?
Qenta is a private company and not privy to such information. OCIF is a governemnt entity and you are not part of OCIF so you can't know 100% for sure. I am also baffled that in your function as a pure shareholder with no executive role in EPB as you claim always you have access to all these things.
Please also bear in mind that with labelling OCIF and J5 as "corrupt" you dont' help the depositors of EPB at all.
Qenta is a private company and not privy to such information. OCIF is a governemnt entity and you are not part of OCIF so you can't know 100% for sure. I am also baffled that in your function as a pure shareholder with no executive role in EPB as you claim always you have access to all these things.
Please also bear in mind that with labelling OCIF and J5 as "corrupt" you dont' help the depositors of EPB at all.
I am the sole share holder at this point. I was also also on the board. The government never issues a dismissal of a criminal investigation. They just end the investigation internally and move on. If they found any evidence of crimes there would have been charges filed. They were none. The Portugese government had 8 months to find any evidence of money laundering. If they could not do so within that time frame Portugese law required the freeze to be lifted, which it was. You need to understand that this whole thing was a fraud. I have already filed my first lawsuit against the︀ IRS for covering up their crime. A second lawsuit against OCIF and the IRS is︁ being drafted. Stay tuned.
Also why would they IRS issue an official dismissal when their︂ plan was to frame the bank for crimes their own investigation proved it did not︃ commit?
Also why would they IRS issue an official dismissal when their︂ plan was to frame the bank for crimes their own investigation proved it did not︃ commit?
You seem not to understand how AML investigations in Europe work. If you want to do good for your depositors you really should stop your crusade against the government and transfer your shares in EPB to a well known law firm as a trustee and forfeit your ownership and repayment rights from the liquidation for the benefit of the depositors (with a net worth of 100 Mio USD it won't hurt you much). This would speed the repayment up. You will not get a cent and a vindication from what you allege the IRS, J5 and OCIF did.
Ah and I agree to you what︀ 60 minutes did was totally wrong, so please don't think I am not consenting with︁ all your arguments btw.
Do you really think sueing the OCIF will uncover anything. The︂ financial regulator has power and if he deems a shareholder not "fit and proper" to︃ hold shares in a regulated financial instutation he can change his mind. And how you︄ unreasonable you sometimes act in your comments it might partly make total sense.
Ah and I agree to you what︀ 60 minutes did was totally wrong, so please don't think I am not consenting with︁ all your arguments btw.
Do you really think sueing the OCIF will uncover anything. The︂ financial regulator has power and if he deems a shareholder not "fit and proper" to︃ hold shares in a regulated financial instutation he can change his mind. And how you︄ unreasonable you sometimes act in your comments it might partly make total sense.
I have no control over the bank. It has already been put into receivership. One of the problems is the trustee hand-picked by OCIF to run the bank had no prior banking experience. I offered to take control of the liquidation of the bank myself in the beginning, but OCIF insisted on receivership. There is nothing I can do personally to accelerate the return of customer funds other than complaining about the process in public, which I have done. I have also encouraged the parties that do have control to work faster. So stop blaming me for things that are completely out of my control.︀ Blame OCIF, the IRS, the J5, the receiver, and the media. What I will prove︁ in court is that not only was the shut down of the bank completely unnecessary,︂ but criminal.
Technically you are still a shareholder, only your voting rights have been taken away from you by OCIF.
So you could transfer your shares to a law firm holding them in trust and giving up your status as creditor in the liquidation.
With this your 10 Mio USD share capital will be totally absorbed by repaying the depositors.
This would give the depositors the possibility to recoup maybe 80-90% of their last account balance.
EPB TAPPED regulatory capital, that was a mistake solely by EPB and that made it possible for OCIF for regulatory enforcment and to put it finally into liquidation.
You have to understand that OCIF in the past was a super weak regulator not really having a︀ good oversight of all these IFEs in PR.
They never really supervised properly all the︁ banks. So they had to clean up the industry by pressure from the federal government.︂
Look at the Bancredito case for example.
I personally believe that going on a crusade︃ with them will just waste money and time and harm the fragile relationship with OCIF.︄
So you could transfer your shares to a law firm holding them in trust and giving up your status as creditor in the liquidation.
With this your 10 Mio USD share capital will be totally absorbed by repaying the depositors.
This would give the depositors the possibility to recoup maybe 80-90% of their last account balance.
EPB TAPPED regulatory capital, that was a mistake solely by EPB and that made it possible for OCIF for regulatory enforcment and to put it finally into liquidation.
You have to understand that OCIF in the past was a super weak regulator not really having a︀ good oversight of all these IFEs in PR.
They never really supervised properly all the︁ banks. So they had to clean up the industry by pressure from the federal government.︂
Look at the Bancredito case for example.
I personally believe that going on a crusade︃ with them will just waste money and time and harm the fragile relationship with OCIF.︄
You don't understand how receivership works. I have no power to do anything, especially transfer my shares. OCIF has to approve any transfer of ownership, and they will not do that. EBP did not do anything wrong with capital. I offered to add $7 million in capital, and the OCIF Commissioner herself told me not to. She told me that the bank was fine to operate with the capital it had. Following that assurance the bank was never informed that the Commissioner had changed her mind, and that more capital was needed. Had OCIF ever asked for more capital, it would have been provided. Low︀ capital was not the reason for the action, it was the excuse. Even if I︁ had added the capital, despite being told by the Commissioner not to, she would have︂ come up with a different excuse to shut down the bank. That is what the︃ IRS and the J5 wanted.
This is progress: IRS sued by economist after his bank was shut down
I would rather see the guilty be punished then get any of my money back after all the lives they have destroyed.
I would rather see the guilty be punished then get any of my money back after all the lives they have destroyed.
Finally you have decided to take action, I fully support the decision.
The one that you have the best chance of winning is against the OCIF. The Commissioner is the key person, she is responsible for everything that's happened to your bank.
The one that you have the best chance of winning is against the OCIF. The Commissioner is the key person, she is responsible for everything that's happened to your bank.
Yes, I have a major law firm ready to file a massive civil rights lawsuit against OCIF. There was zero legal justification for the Commissioner's action, and I can prove she told multiple lies to justify her reckless action. The bank's customers should use the evidence I have to file a class action lawsuit. I may not file, even though I could potential win a judgment of over $100 million. But I don't want the people of Puerto Rico to have pay for the crime committed by one corrupt government official, who may have been pressured to do so by corrupt IRS agents. I live︀ in Puerto Rico, so I may just expose the corruption for the benefit of the︁ island, but not hold the innocent citizens accountable. I wish I could sue the IRS.︂ But I've been told I can't sue the U.S. government for the crimes committed by︃ their employees. It's sovereign immunity. State and Territory employees are liable for civil rights violations.︄ But federal officials are immune. I can added the IRS agents as part of the︅ conspiracy to deny me multiple constitutional rights. But its Puerto Rico that get hit with︆ the bill.
In my long standing career in banking and the financial industry I never heard such a conspiracy theory LOL.
You ran a shady bank in a shady jurisdiction where every Dick and Harry got a banking licence and now you complain.
Amazing. I feel deeply sorry for the depositors and "fanboys".
How do you want to collect any compensation? Ever heard of immunity?
Are you passing your judgment to the depositors or are you collecting that for your own benefit?
Here is now what happens to your FOI lawsuit. The US will ask the other J5 countries if they agree to disclousre and they will︀ citing
"national security interests" - lawsuit dismissed voila!
Why don't you sue the liquidator with︁ an FOI lawsuit in your capacity as shareholder, that would be much more productive.
You ran a shady bank in a shady jurisdiction where every Dick and Harry got a banking licence and now you complain.
Amazing. I feel deeply sorry for the depositors and "fanboys".
How do you want to collect any compensation? Ever heard of immunity?
Are you passing your judgment to the depositors or are you collecting that for your own benefit?
Here is now what happens to your FOI lawsuit. The US will ask the other J5 countries if they agree to disclousre and they will︀ citing
"national security interests" - lawsuit dismissed voila!
Why don't you sue the liquidator with︁ an FOI lawsuit in your capacity as shareholder, that would be much more productive.
It's not a conspiracy if II have all the evidence, both factual and circumstantial, to prove its true. For some reason you can't accept the fact that government employees can be corrupt and break laws to advance their own careers. There is far more common in government than the private sector.
Mr Schiff with all due respect no government employee tasked with EPB will gain anything in his career...
Banking regulation is DISCRETIONARY and as I pointed out you will not gain anything from your lawsuit.
Have a look at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64868852/united-states-v-vazquez-garced/
the criminal prosecution of the former Governor of PR in regard to the "Bancredito case".
If national security interests are at play there is no discovery.
Banking regulation is DISCRETIONARY and as I pointed out you will not gain anything from your lawsuit.
Have a look at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64868852/united-states-v-vazquez-garced/
the criminal prosecution of the former Governor of PR in regard to the "Bancredito case".
If national security interests are at play there is no discovery.
No, this was all done by one OCIF official, the Commissioner. She likely has political aspirations and in exchange for her action she won the praise of not only IRS Chief Lee, but tax chiefs from Australia and the U,K. The press conference to announce the closure of the bank was the highlight of her career. It was all staged. A PR stunt. I already have all the evidence to prove it. I will get even more if I win my FOIA lawsuit against the IRS. They are break the law to avoid handing me extremely incriminating evidence.
I would file the lawsuit, if you win you will prove that everything was just a conspiracy and there was no legitimate reason to close the bank, and it will send a very strong message.
Whatever money you get, it will be up to you to decide what to do with it, you can always give it to charity.
Whatever money you get, it will be up to you to decide what to do with it, you can always give it to charity.
That would pretty much be a win in my book.
I would support a class action lawsuit if I haven't had lost all my money two years ago. We could just give back any damages awarded to Puerto Rico - legal costs. I doubt that anyone actually cares or hopes for more than getting back what is rightfully theirs.
I think discovery would reveal a lot so︀ I'm pretty sure they will fight tooth and nail to not let it happen.
Every decision of OCIF was based on how to maximize the harm done to customers. They︁ could have chosen a different path at every intersection and didn't because they wanted to︂ get rid of us.
I would support a class action lawsuit if I haven't had lost all my money two years ago. We could just give back any damages awarded to Puerto Rico - legal costs. I doubt that anyone actually cares or hopes for more than getting back what is rightfully theirs.
I think discovery would reveal a lot so︀ I'm pretty sure they will fight tooth and nail to not let it happen.
Every decision of OCIF was based on how to maximize the harm done to customers. They︁ could have chosen a different path at every intersection and didn't because they wanted to︂ get rid of us.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.