OVZA
New Horizons Paraguay
Ticker tape by TradingView

Euro Pacific bank is a scam

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see no proof that all Australian and/or all Dutch customers were contacted by authorities.‌ If it was reported, where is the report? If someone is already investigated of course‍ you could get info from the Bank or the IRS, but that is different from⁠ giving away every single name on a list.

I'm not sure that the BSA and/or⁤ the PA gives the IRS the power to give away information.

The only legit way⁣ the HMRC could obtain the info seems to me was via Mender who was hired⁢ by OCIF who in turn colluded with the IRS. That seems to me a more︀ sensible reason than to say, the IRS needed a win so they didn't allow the︁ sale to Quenta. Maybe they just needed someone who was willing to give the list︂ directly to the HMRC.

I imagine Novo will never pay. They are probably insolvent. If︃ there's a recession or a depression both the money and the assets will be used︄ up by the gov. in Puerto Rico.
 
Some of that profit comes from the interest they are earning⁠ on our money.
 
All the data on the bank's customers was turned over to a grand︇ jury in Sacramento Cal. by order of the U.S. government. We are a PR bank.︈ We had no choice but to comply with the court order. Whoever shared that information︉ with the ATO or reporters broke the law. The grand jury investigation, and all the︊ documents related to it, where supposed to be kept secret.
 
The receiver took over on June 30th 2022. That's the day︃ the of the press conference. There is no way the HMRC would have announced an︄ investigation of UK depositors before than. I don't even think the HMRC expected to find︅ any UK customers evading taxes. They must have known from the IRS investigation that no︆ evidence of tax evasion was found. I think the HMRC announcement of an investigation was︇ part of the PR stunt to pretend the bank was facilitating tax evasion, and that︈ the Atlantis investigation was a success. The head of the HMRC falsely claimed the J5︉ took out Euro Pacific bank to stop tax evasion. So by announcing the investigation of︊ 500 people they implied those people where among those found to be using EPB to︋ evade taxes. It also may have been a bluff to get some people to confess,︌ as the investigation gave them no evidence that any UK citizen evaded taxes.



https://twitter.com/x/status/1784606389140148627
 
That's what it seemed, a bluff for the most part.
UK tax‍ accountants were trying to convince everybody to come forward or risk going to jail (no⁠ one has gone to jail as of today).
 
This all seems to be a joke and some kind of wicked game. We⁠ already know this and the question is why our money are stilll frozen. If I⁤ remember correctly, it was a court order to release them. How can this inept plan⁣ still exist?
 
Hello, everyone,
a lot of people on this forum already joined our group and towegether‌ we hired a lawyer in puerto rico. I recently launched this site:

www.europacific-customers.com

We want‍ as many customers as possible to join this group. The more we are with the⁠ more money we can raise to take legal action against OCIF / the receiver and⁤ other parties involved to get our money back.

As for today we are with about⁣ 25 customers but I think we can reach a 100 at least.
So please check⁢ this website and if you need information sent an email to [email protected]

Would be nice︀ if everyone links this site to their socials!

Regars

Arjen

PS: Thanks to Peter that︁ he recommended this site on his X account
 
Not a⁢ good idea to take legal action against OCIF or the Receiver, you don't have a︀ chance, and then you'll never see the money.
 
The main reason is that I did not want to tie up customer‌ deposits. Had I known this was going to happen I would not have agreed to‍ the liquidation. I may very well file a lawsuit now. If I do I hope⁠ the receiver will allow the bank to join on behalf of customers. I also now⁤ have the evidence to prove that the actions taken against the bank were illegal. I⁣ think the IRS and OCIF know this, which is why they simultaneously removed all references⁢ to the closure of Euro Pacific Bank from their websites.
 
I doubt the Receiver will do anything that‍ could hurt the OCIF.

What has changed during⁤ these two years that you now have the evidence to prove that the whole thing⁣ was illegal?
You already know what the Commissioner will say if the case goes to⁢ trial. She will say that "the bank was insolvent", she said those exact words during︀ the press conference.
Unless you can prove that she told you, just a few months︁ before she closed the bank, that there was no need for you to add more︂ capital, as Qenta was going to take care of that once the sale of the︃ bank was finalized.

I suppose a good lawyer should be able to tell you if︄ you have a chance at getting damages from OCIF.
 
The bank was not insolvent. That was confirmed by the receiver. It had millions more‌ in cash than was owed to depositors, plus no debt and no loans. While it's‍ true that the bank did not have enough regulatory capital, those capital requirements were written⁠ for banks that made loans. Mine made none. More importantly, the bank was never given⁤ a chance to add additional capital. Had OCIF ask us to add capital we would⁣ have. The bank was operating based on assurance made by the Commissioner herself that the⁢ bank's capital was fine pending approval of the sale to Qenta. Qenta had agreed to︀ add $7 million in additional capital once the sale was formally approved. That was millions︁ more than was needed. I offered to put the $7 million in myself while OCIF︂ did their due diligence on the principals of Qenta, but the Commissioner told me that︃ was not necessary (there were about 8 witnesses to the Commissioner's assurance) . Five months︄ later she made a secret deal with the IRS to shutdown the bank using low︅ capital as the excuse. She kept that decision quite for over three months, without once︆ warning the bank that it needed more capital or it would be shut down.

The Commissioner had already told us informally that she supported the sale, but that OCIF still︇ needed to formally vet the buyer. What I know now that I didn't know then︈ is that the IRS illegally colluded with OCIF to arrange the shutdown of the bank︉ over three months before it happened. During those three months OCIF misrepresented to me, the︊ bank, and Qenta that the sale was still being vetted for approval.

Regardless ,even if︋ the bank did not have enough regulatory capital to operate, once the bank's license was︌ suspended, there was no reason to put the bank into receivership. The bank could have︍ retuned all customer deposits on its own. There was no bankruptcy to work out in︎ receivership.

Also, the was no valid reason to hold that press conference, which resulted in️ the Novo freeze. That was all part of the plan to allow the J5 the‌ bank was guilty of crimes the grand jury proved it did not commit. So the‍ Commissioner was not acting in the best interest of customers, but of the IRS and⁠ J5. She sacrificed customers for a J5 PR stunt. Of course, she did not see⁤ the Novo freeze coming, so she had no idea she opened such a large can⁣ of worms.
 
Yes, I can see the possibility of lawsuit⁢ against OCIF based on that information.

I don't know if anyone has ever filed a︀ successful lawsuit against OCIF in the past, but at this point you have literally nothing︁ to lose.
 
More likely the IRS than OCIF. I think the OCIF Commissioner was pressured by the⁤ IRS into making this decision. She was so enthusiastic about the sale to Qetna when⁣ it was first presented to her. Something happended to change her mind and it had⁢ nothing to do with the bank's capital, or a pretend history of non-compliance.
 
I understand the involvement of the IRS, but ultimately the Commissioner made⁣ the decision herself to close the bank. She could have easily said to the IRS⁢ representative that there was no legal basis to close the bank. She could have said︀ to the IRS agent "I can't close the bank because I told them that there︁ was no need for the bank to add more capital as Qenta was already committed︂ to add 7 million".

I see the Commissioner as the main culprit. The press conference︃ was very premature, she should have confirmed whether the bank was insolvent or not, before︄ she accused the bank of being insolvent.
And yes, nothing of what she did was︅ in the best interest of the customers, she had many other options that would've helped,︆ as opposed to hurt the customers and the bank.
 
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

Forums

User Menu

Login
Community platform by JohnnyDoe © 2025 JohnnyDoe
Top Bottom