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.
Don't email the receiver. If he has to read them he will just have an excuse to bill the bank more money. I don't think the emails will do anything to speed up the process. Its more likely they will slow it down even further. Better to email OCIF I think.
I think a customer lawsuit against OCIF in federal court is winnable. I︁ would testify. But there would be a large cost, and it would likely take years︂ to play out. So would it be worth it? I can't sue OCIF myself.
I think a customer lawsuit against OCIF in federal court is winnable. I︁ would testify. But there would be a large cost, and it would likely take years︂ to play out. So would it be worth it? I can't sue OCIF myself.
@Pschiff unfortunately customers don't know
1. What︀ the reasons for the continued delays are . We vaguely know something about software but︁ is there anything else?
2. We don't know if the Receiver is actually doing anything︂ to fix any of the above problems.
3. We don't know if the Receiver is︃ honest and focused on the task he is being paid to do or whether he︄ is intent to defraud customers.
So it's understandable that customers want more information . The︅ Receiver has not communicated with customers for months, so officially we have been kept in︆ the dark which is appalling and doesn't reassure customers.
If @Pschiff can answer the above︇ questions then maybe we don't need to call or email the Receiver but I for︈ one at the moment don't have much confidence in the Receiver and believe we may︉ need to hire a lawyer in Puerto Rico to keep the Receiver honest and on︊ task.
1. What︀ the reasons for the continued delays are . We vaguely know something about software but︁ is there anything else?
2. We don't know if the Receiver is actually doing anything︂ to fix any of the above problems.
3. We don't know if the Receiver is︃ honest and focused on the task he is being paid to do or whether he︄ is intent to defraud customers.
So it's understandable that customers want more information . The︅ Receiver has not communicated with customers for months, so officially we have been kept in︆ the dark which is appalling and doesn't reassure customers.
If @Pschiff can answer the above︇ questions then maybe we don't need to call or email the Receiver but I for︈ one at the moment don't have much confidence in the Receiver and believe we may︉ need to hire a lawyer in Puerto Rico to keep the Receiver honest and on︊ task.
The Qenta︃ team is already trying to get the Receiver to move faster. They also want this︄ transaction to close. I have tired as well, and complained to my lawyer, who also︅ tries to get the receiver to move faster. I think OCIF would like this resolved︆ so they can take credit for protecting customers and returning their deposits. It certainly doesn't︇ look good to have a bank in receivership this long.
I share your frustration with︈ the receiver. Before i found a buyer for the bank, the Commissioner assured me that︉ if I couldn't find a buyer, she would never put the bank in receivership. That︊ she would allow me to liquidate it on my own. That was due to a︋ conversation we had about my concerns over the extra time and cost that a receiver︌ would impose. Also, when I first told her about the deal to sell the bank︍ for Qetna, she was very supportive of the sale, and thanked me for finding such︎ a well-qualified buyer.
She than not only changed her mind about the sale, but about️ putting the bank into Receivership as well. i don't know for sure what made her change her mind so abruptly, but something must have happend, and I feel it involved the IRS, other J5 nations, and 60 Minutes Australia. The benefit to OCIF of this action was that it allowed the Commissioner to improve Puerto Rico's global reputation for being lax on money laddering and tax evasion, and win public praise from a top IRS official. But unfortunately it back fired, and Puerto Rico's banking reputation is worse then ever, thanks to the public misperception that her actions resulted from the J5 money laundering and︀ tax evasion investigation, and the stories about open investigations of bank customers, all of which︁ are likely a waste of time, as the bank did an excellent job of preventing︂ customers from using their accounts for elicit purposes.
Had the Commissioner publicly defended the bank︃ against the false allegations, first made by 60 Minutes Australia, and then repeated in other︄ publications, I think it would have ended up much better for everyone. But she changed︅ her mind, and "decided" it was better for OCIF to go in another direction.
I share your frustration with︈ the receiver. Before i found a buyer for the bank, the Commissioner assured me that︉ if I couldn't find a buyer, she would never put the bank in receivership. That︊ she would allow me to liquidate it on my own. That was due to a︋ conversation we had about my concerns over the extra time and cost that a receiver︌ would impose. Also, when I first told her about the deal to sell the bank︍ for Qetna, she was very supportive of the sale, and thanked me for finding such︎ a well-qualified buyer.
She than not only changed her mind about the sale, but about️ putting the bank into Receivership as well. i don't know for sure what made her change her mind so abruptly, but something must have happend, and I feel it involved the IRS, other J5 nations, and 60 Minutes Australia. The benefit to OCIF of this action was that it allowed the Commissioner to improve Puerto Rico's global reputation for being lax on money laddering and tax evasion, and win public praise from a top IRS official. But unfortunately it back fired, and Puerto Rico's banking reputation is worse then ever, thanks to the public misperception that her actions resulted from the J5 money laundering and︀ tax evasion investigation, and the stories about open investigations of bank customers, all of which︁ are likely a waste of time, as the bank did an excellent job of preventing︂ customers from using their accounts for elicit purposes.
Had the Commissioner publicly defended the bank︃ against the false allegations, first made by 60 Minutes Australia, and then repeated in other︄ publications, I think it would have ended up much better for everyone. But she changed︅ her mind, and "decided" it was better for OCIF to go in another direction.
It's more than obvious by now that the Receiver is not equiped to handled the liquidation of EPB, the fact that the freeze was lifted more than 3 months ago and funds haven't been returned shows how incompetent he is. He's had plenty of time to prepare for whenever the freeze would be lifted but he couldn't even anticipate that in order to process the wire transfers he would need a software (EastNet) to be able to engage with Novo bank, which is literally ridiculous.
The question is obvious, why do we have to pay the consequences of having a useless Receiver?
I don't have︀ any money left as all my savings were or are, who knows, deposited at EPB︁ or Novo, if I had any money left I would not hesitate to take legal︂ action against OCIF.
The fact that the Receiver is not even honest or transparent at︃ keeping customers informed shows that he is operating without any type of oversight, this is︄ like leaving a thief in charge of a jewelry shop.
Someone show tell the Receiver︅ how disgusted we are with his handling of this whole situation and the more complaints︆ we send to OCIF the better.
The fact that he is thinking about transferring all︇ funds from Novo to a bank in California after exchanging the funds into USD without︈ asking customers says a lot. If he were to ask me I would then want︉ to opt-out, as I'm only option to go to Qenta so I can transfer my︊ funds which are mostly in USD to another financial institution (I wouldn't stay with Qenta︋ even if they paid me.)
Is there anyone here who believes that we will get︌ our money back by the end of this montn? I don't! Hope I'm wrong
The question is obvious, why do we have to pay the consequences of having a useless Receiver?
I don't have︀ any money left as all my savings were or are, who knows, deposited at EPB︁ or Novo, if I had any money left I would not hesitate to take legal︂ action against OCIF.
The fact that the Receiver is not even honest or transparent at︃ keeping customers informed shows that he is operating without any type of oversight, this is︄ like leaving a thief in charge of a jewelry shop.
Someone show tell the Receiver︅ how disgusted we are with his handling of this whole situation and the more complaints︆ we send to OCIF the better.
The fact that he is thinking about transferring all︇ funds from Novo to a bank in California after exchanging the funds into USD without︈ asking customers says a lot. If he were to ask me I would then want︉ to opt-out, as I'm only option to go to Qenta so I can transfer my︊ funds which are mostly in USD to another financial institution (I wouldn't stay with Qenta︋ even if they paid me.)
Is there anyone here who believes that we will get︌ our money back by the end of this montn? I don't! Hope I'm wrong
So far @Pschiff has been️ the only source so far to shed any light on what has actually been happening.
I agree that the Receiver shows a total disregard so far for customers, which in itself shows his unsuitability for the task on top of the fact that he wasn't ready to act once the freeze was lifted. Or was he deliberately not ready which is even more damning.
But even @Pschiff does not appear to know everything that the Receiver knows. That's why customers need to keep pressing the Receiver. The Receiver is not working alone. He has other staff that can directly communicate with customers and provide far︀ more transparency.
Sadly when there's no transparency it undermines confidence and makes everyone believe they︁ have something to hide. And yes OCIF appear to be showing no oversight over the︂ Receiver.
I agree that the Receiver shows a total disregard so far for customers, which in itself shows his unsuitability for the task on top of the fact that he wasn't ready to act once the freeze was lifted. Or was he deliberately not ready which is even more damning.
But even @Pschiff does not appear to know everything that the Receiver knows. That's why customers need to keep pressing the Receiver. The Receiver is not working alone. He has other staff that can directly communicate with customers and provide far︀ more transparency.
Sadly when there's no transparency it undermines confidence and makes everyone believe they︁ have something to hide. And yes OCIF appear to be showing no oversight over the︂ Receiver.
Would it not be︂ better to 'target' the Commissioner (OCIF) as she appointed the Receiver and should therefore answer︃ for the incompetence that we are experiencing as a result of her poor choice. The︄ Receiver is really showing her up so by emphasizing the reputation damage he is causing︅ her may be a better card for us to play?
Yes definitely complain to OCIF. I have already done so and followed it up with a conversation with OCIF.
Here is the email address to complain to OCIF:
[email protected]
One complaint they could ignore but many complaints might be more difficult.︀
Here is the email address to complain to OCIF:
[email protected]
One complaint they could ignore but many complaints might be more difficult.︀
I fully agree!
Ultimate she is responsible for everything that has and is happening, however in the Cease and Desist order she wrote "we have appointed a very experienced Receiver to liquidate EPB" and it's obvious by now that this is︀ false.
I believe Peter is wrong in the sense that I don't believe OCIF cares︁ one single bit whether we get the money in the next month or in the︂ next year, the Commissioner is only concerned with her own reputation, a lot of the︃ statements she made during the press conference were totally false, like when she said "the︄ bank is insolvent," and if you read the C&D order posted on the OCIF's website︅ you'll also read a lot of false statements, she has no problem lying just to︆ portray an image of honesty and integrity, supposedly everything she did was done "to protect︇ the interest of the customers" which at this point is laughable.
Ultimate she is responsible for everything that has and is happening, however in the Cease and Desist order she wrote "we have appointed a very experienced Receiver to liquidate EPB" and it's obvious by now that this is︀ false.
I believe Peter is wrong in the sense that I don't believe OCIF cares︁ one single bit whether we get the money in the next month or in the︂ next year, the Commissioner is only concerned with her own reputation, a lot of the︃ statements she made during the press conference were totally false, like when she said "the︄ bank is insolvent," and if you read the C&D order posted on the OCIF's website︅ you'll also read a lot of false statements, she has no problem lying just to︆ portray an image of honesty and integrity, supposedly everything she did was done "to protect︇ the interest of the customers" which at this point is laughable.
Don't blame Qenta. They are trying their best to︁ help. OCIF and the Receiver have been the road blocks. Qetna has devoted a lot︂ of resources to this. When the sale to Qetna was blocked by OCIF, they really︃ did us a favor by taking on the cost of employing the banks staff, and︄ accepting the accounts by those who did not request their money back. Had Qenta not︅ volunteer to do that, OCIF had intended to seize all the accounts of those who︆ did not request their money back in 30 days. I did not want that to︇ happend as I was worried that the effected customers would have a very hard time︈ trying to retrieve their funds.
Had the bank not been put into Receivership,︆ and the sale to Qetna been allowed, euro accounts would not currently be charged negative︇ rates. All of these rate hikes occurred while the bank was in receivership. Also Novo︈ is taking advantage of the situation by not paying any interest to the bank on︉ its euro deposits.
Had the bank not been put into Receivership,︆ and the sale to Qetna been allowed, euro accounts would not currently be charged negative︇ rates. All of these rate hikes occurred while the bank was in receivership. Also Novo︈ is taking advantage of the situation by not paying any interest to the bank on︉ its euro deposits.
Yes, the funds are still at Novo in Portugal. I believe the bank is charging those rates. I'm not sure if Novo is still charging negative rates to the bank, as the bank was just passing on those charges to customers. I have no access to any of those systems myself, so can't say for sure.
Whatever the case may be, EPB/Receiver is the only one in the entire world that︆ is charging negative rates on Euro deposits, no other bank in the world is doing︇ this, it's called Stealing!
Here we are, June 6th 2023, and all that we know︈ is that almost a year ago customers woke up one morning and found out that︉ they had lost access to their funds, many deadlines have been given since then, and︊ many excuses have been given for the delay, i.e. a freeze that was lifted back︋ in February, and customers still can't access their funds.
I hope the bank's lawyer is︌ actively working with the Receiver to try to speed up the process, and some type︍ of update with a definitive deadline would be appreciated.
As of right now it seems︎ that we will never get our money back, and if we do, we have no️ idea how much of the money will be returned to customers as the Receiver's fees are piling on (I often wonder what is it that the Receiver does on a daily basis as the weeks go by and nothing happens.)
Here we are, June 6th 2023, and all that we know︈ is that almost a year ago customers woke up one morning and found out that︉ they had lost access to their funds, many deadlines have been given since then, and︊ many excuses have been given for the delay, i.e. a freeze that was lifted back︋ in February, and customers still can't access their funds.
I hope the bank's lawyer is︌ actively working with the Receiver to try to speed up the process, and some type︍ of update with a definitive deadline would be appreciated.
As of right now it seems︎ that we will never get our money back, and if we do, we have no️ idea how much of the money will be returned to customers as the Receiver's fees are piling on (I often wonder what is it that the Receiver does on a daily basis as the weeks go by and nothing happens.)
The receiver has been billing the bank about $10,000 per month for his "services" I︇ have no idea what he is actually doing to earn that money. I know his︈ incompetence blew a $500,000 receivable the bank would have collected from Currency Matters. I have︉ requested a complete audit of all monies that have been paid out of the bank's︊ account. I am still waiting to receive it. EPB is no longer in operation. It︋ exists only to return funds to customers and transfer balances to Qetna. We are all︌ just waiting on the Receiver to accomplish these tasks, and offering to help in any︍ way we can.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.