Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
- Status
I don't agree. The closure of the EPB account was the objective achieved by those who wanted it closed. Because it is distasteful and unacceptable to us does not mean that a social media campaign won't work. In fact it actually proves the opposite of what you say.
It doesn't appear that you have applied your mind to what I'm saying as it does not conflict with Qenta's comment but let me leave it there as I was merely responding to a question about what can be done other than running to a lawyer. I do tend say "what can we consider doing' in addressing a problem rather than focussing on what 'cannot be done'. In order to make︀ progress one needs to think out of the box at times. I made my point︁ and let me leave it there.
No.
Do you honestly think the public is gonna care about a bunch of people who decided to use an offshore bank in a bankrupt banana republic?︀
It is frustrating and I get it. The bottom line is people will get their︁ money back at some point after whatever is delaying the process gets resolved. This could︂ be anything from legal and technical issues to a foreign criminal investigation and the receiver︃ is assisting and unable to say anything about it. He is gonna care very little︄ about what you say to him or about him or who you send after him.︅ His hands will be tied and ultimately he cannot be held responsible for not communicating︆ to you all the facts due to the nature of such investigations.
Do you honestly think the public is gonna care about a bunch of people who decided to use an offshore bank in a bankrupt banana republic?︀
It is frustrating and I get it. The bottom line is people will get their︁ money back at some point after whatever is delaying the process gets resolved. This could︂ be anything from legal and technical issues to a foreign criminal investigation and the receiver︃ is assisting and unable to say anything about it. He is gonna care very little︄ about what you say to him or about him or who you send after him.︅ His hands will be tied and ultimately he cannot be held responsible for not communicating︆ to you all the facts due to the nature of such investigations.
I think that the harsh reality is that only EPB customers care about this. No one else: media, society in general, the regulator, the receiver, the courts. It affects none of the locals in Puerto Rico and hardly anyone in Portugal. No one has any stake in this.
Media attention isn't going to benefit anyone, unless you can find several sympathetic EPB customers to tell their sob story in media. But I doubt EPB had any customers that would fit that bill.
Media attention isn't going to benefit anyone, unless you can find several sympathetic EPB customers to tell their sob story in media. But I doubt EPB had any customers that would fit that bill.
I agree, for the public we are just a bunch of guys trying to evade︃ tax, general public normally has 0 understanding of business and entrepreneurship or anything more complicated︄ than a pay check. So low profile is better, working from inside is better.
Thats true, i think the only way to put them pressure and stay informed is a kind of collective "class action" and agree with @Martin Everson on fact that the choice of a law firm
in Puerto Rico is not an easy one, neither advisable. Maybe a US firm would be a safer option?
I think︀ on this Peter Schiff may give us some insights?
in Puerto Rico is not an easy one, neither advisable. Maybe a US firm would be a safer option?
I think︀ on this Peter Schiff may give us some insights?
For the receiver this is true but considering they are appointed by an institution, there should not be some legal ground to
put some pressure on them? Could be useful i think, to let them know that depositors are ready to hit that ground in case there should be no solution.
put some pressure on them? Could be useful i think, to let them know that depositors are ready to hit that ground in case there should be no solution.
Hi everyone 🙂 I just found this group. Considering there is virtually no news from EPB or anyone connected to the bank for the past 2 months, it does appear that this will continue to drag on & on indefinitely. I was half hoping that someone with a good understanding of the complex-dodgy legal proceedings would have led the way but alas it seems we are all in the dark and nobody is coming to help either. P Schiff should at least be giving us some more insight as it was on the back of his rep that we all signed up for his bank.
I am in favour of signing up for a specialised legal team if this is still︀ on the table. Anyone driving this _
I am in favour of signing up for a specialised legal team if this is still︀ on the table. Anyone driving this _
We are not the only ones suffering the consequences of OCIF's actions.
OCIF says "the Trustee is the person in charge".
"Currently, there are more than ten international financial institutions that have had to cease operations in the last two years, and although some have completed their liquidation process, others have left thousands of foreign clients unaware of what will happen to their deposits, creating doubts about the security of these entities. In the case of Nodus, the money of some 4,000 clients is at risk."
https://www.theweeklyjournal.com/to...cle_873b3ca4-bc55-11ee-a2ef-e77dbe831d55.html
OCIF says "the Trustee is the person in charge".
"Currently, there are more than ten international financial institutions that have had to cease operations in the last two years, and although some have completed their liquidation process, others have left thousands of foreign clients unaware of what will happen to their deposits, creating doubts about the security of these entities. In the case of Nodus, the money of some 4,000 clients is at risk."
https://www.theweeklyjournal.com/to...cle_873b3ca4-bc55-11ee-a2ef-e77dbe831d55.html
Wow. So litigation, uncollected funds and missing assets in that case are delaying the process. For EPB who knows now what the delay actually is. 😕.
Yes, Novo bank cited false media reports that the bank was closed due to money laundering and tax evasion in a SAR they sent to the Portugese government following the wire requests we submitted to return funds to opt out customers. Based on the false statements in that letter, the Portuguese Government︀ froze the account. I tried to get the Puerto Rico government to clear up the︁ confusion, but they refused to do so. They eventually did send a letter but by︂ the time they did the 8 months was almost up anyway. I think OCIF was︃ under pressure not to publicly say anything to refute the false narrative that the bank︄ was shut down for money laundering and tax evasion, to help the Australian media company︅ defend against my defamation lawsuit, and so the J5 could keep pretending that its failed︆ Atlantis investigation was a success. During that 8 month delay, they bank lost its ability︇ to easily send out the wires. The incompetent Receiver refused to follow the former bank︈ staff's directions on how to get the wires sent out. The staff moved to Qenta︉ in preparation for the transfer of the Opt in accounts.
I own the bank in name only.️ I have no control over anything, and have lost every penny of the $10 million I personally contributed to the bank's capital. There is nothing I can do. Also, based on my agreement I am not even able to publicly disparage OCIF. So doing that is up to the customers. OCIF is the real reason for the delay and was the cause of the problem, though OCIF was likely pressured by the IRS, the J5, and the Australian media to take the actions that it did.
I've done︀ what I can and I have provided information to the group that hired a lawyer.︁
The bank kept up with all the legal requirements. It did nothing wrong.︊ It was the regulators that were in the wrong. Its also possible that the IRS︋ targeted the bank because it was 100% reserve and allowed customers to keep their deposits︌ in gold. I am still trying to get the U.S. Congress to look into the︍ IRS's role in blocking the sale of the bank to Qetna and forcing OCIF to︎ unnecessarily put it into receivership.
Yes we are all victims. Qenta had agreed to pay me $25 million in cash and stock for the bank. They had also agreed to add $7 million in cash to the bank's capital. OCIF refused to allow the transaction. So I lost that $25 million,︀ and customers lost access to their funds. I also lost the $10 million in capital︁ I invested, and Mark Anderson, my partner and the bank's president was the biggest victim.︂ He lost his life due to the stress.
I own the bank in name only.️ I have no control over anything, and have lost every penny of the $10 million I personally contributed to the bank's capital. There is nothing I can do. Also, based on my agreement I am not even able to publicly disparage OCIF. So doing that is up to the customers. OCIF is the real reason for the delay and was the cause of the problem, though OCIF was likely pressured by the IRS, the J5, and the Australian media to take the actions that it did.
I've done︀ what I can and I have provided information to the group that hired a lawyer.︁
The bank kept up with all the legal requirements. It did nothing wrong.︊ It was the regulators that were in the wrong. Its also possible that the IRS︋ targeted the bank because it was 100% reserve and allowed customers to keep their deposits︌ in gold. I am still trying to get the U.S. Congress to look into the︍ IRS's role in blocking the sale of the bank to Qetna and forcing OCIF to︎ unnecessarily put it into receivership.
Yes we are all victims. Qenta had agreed to pay me $25 million in cash and stock for the bank. They had also agreed to add $7 million in cash to the bank's capital. OCIF refused to allow the transaction. So I lost that $25 million,︀ and customers lost access to their funds. I also lost the $10 million in capital︁ I invested, and Mark Anderson, my partner and the bank's president was the biggest victim.︂ He lost his life due to the stress.
Hi Peter, thank you for your insights, do you think that a sort of "class action" moved by us hiring a lawyer in puerto Rico could help to unblock the situation
or better to wait since it looks like there are "political" reasons behind that may keep the legal ground muddy even for an independent attorney?
or better to wait since it looks like there are "political" reasons behind that may keep the legal ground muddy even for an independent attorney?
- Status