Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
- Status
New information that I just obtained through my lawsuit against the IRS to force them to comply with the FOIA has borne fruit. While the IRS is still illegally withholding hundreds of pages of incriminating documents, what has been disclosed is shocking. The documents confirm that, but for the illegal interference of the IRS, my bank never would have been shut down. The OCIF Commissioner would have approved the sale to Qenta as planned, and no customers would have been denied access to their deposits for even one second.I
t was IRS agents who came up with the plan to close the bank and announce the action at a press conference, to create the false impression that my bank was︀ guilty of tax evasion and money laundering, for the sole purpose of using the action︁ as a publicity stunt to bolster the public image of the J5, which, thus far,︂ did not have any actual enforcement successes.
So, they wanted to use OCIF and the︃ media to pretend that their failed investigation of my bank was their first success. The︄ investigation was a failure because the bank was not actually committing any of the tax︅ or money laundering crimes it had been investigated for.
So, to save face, they got︆ the OCIF Commissioner to come up with a pretense to close the bank. Then, all︇ J5 partners issued press releases and disseminated misleading information to their media partners to create︈ the false impression that my bank was guilty of money laundering and tax evasion, and︉ take credit for shutting it down.
https://x.com/PeterSchiff/status/1867919549590376463
t was IRS agents who came up with the plan to close the bank and announce the action at a press conference, to create the false impression that my bank was︀ guilty of tax evasion and money laundering, for the sole purpose of using the action︁ as a publicity stunt to bolster the public image of the J5, which, thus far,︂ did not have any actual enforcement successes.
So, they wanted to use OCIF and the︃ media to pretend that their failed investigation of my bank was their first success. The︄ investigation was a failure because the bank was not actually committing any of the tax︅ or money laundering crimes it had been investigated for.
So, to save face, they got︆ the OCIF Commissioner to come up with a pretense to close the bank. Then, all︇ J5 partners issued press releases and disseminated misleading information to their media partners to create︈ the false impression that my bank was guilty of money laundering and tax evasion, and︉ take credit for shutting it down.
https://x.com/PeterSchiff/status/1867919549590376463
Interesting information you have given but how does any of this help customers get their money back? That should be top priority above self interest.
exactly. In fact its just slowing the process. Maybe Peter Schiff can elaborate why Qenta and Mr de Jong were rejected to buy EPB?
Maybe because
- he was not disclosing audited financials of his group
- had business interests in sanctioned and grey listed jurisdictions?
Therefore was not deemed fit and proper to hold a bank.
(I am just quoting info from 9fraud.com) see
https://9fraud.com/ocif-denial-of-transfer-of-control-letter/
His swiss company was struck off in November︀ from the register in Geneva
http://app2.ge.ch/ecohrcinternet/extract?lang=FR&companyOfsUid=CHE-211.843.050
Maybe because
- he was not disclosing audited financials of his group
- had business interests in sanctioned and grey listed jurisdictions?
Therefore was not deemed fit and proper to hold a bank.
(I am just quoting info from 9fraud.com) see
https://9fraud.com/ocif-denial-of-transfer-of-control-letter/
His swiss company was struck off in November︀ from the register in Geneva
http://app2.ge.ch/ecohrcinternet/extract?lang=FR&companyOfsUid=CHE-211.843.050
That's false. De Jong resubmitted his financial is the form OCIF required. He never did business in a sanctioned county. That was a case of mistaken identity which was cleared up with OCIF. He was︀ never deemed unfit. The evidence shows that OCIF was prepared to approve the sale until︁ the IRS intervened. They wanted the sale rejected and the bank shutdown to use it︂ as a PR stunt to bolster the internaiotnal reputation of the J5. I can't do︃ anything to get the receiver to move faster, or to get OCIF to push him.︄ I tried many times, then gave up. This lawsuit is all I can do. It︅ is exposing the illegal nature of what happened. The customers have an excellent lawsuit if︆ they want to file one. I can't file on their behalf. So I am doing︇ what I can on my end, not only to recover my personal losses, which are︈ far larger than customers losses, but to expose the illegal nature of what the J5︉ did, not just to me, but to all of the bank's innocent customers.
Stop attacking people might help oh wonder.
I have been involved in several banking liquidations and constantly attacking everyone is just slowing the process
Worldcheck only shows one guy with that name so pretty unrealistic that its a mistaken identity case.
I have been involved in several banking liquidations and constantly attacking everyone is just slowing the process
Worldcheck only shows one guy with that name so pretty unrealistic that its a mistaken identity case.
ever heard that fit and proper checks are DISCRETIONARY? You can't force them to accept your buyer...
Qenta was far more qualified than the Receiver they appointed to run the bank, who had no prior banking experience. But there were other buyers too. OCIF refused to consider any of them. One group was lead by a former OCIF Commissioner and included several former OCIF executives. They were willing to contribute more capital, and guarantee the protection of all customers. But the OCIF Commissioner made a deal with the IRS to shut the bank down, even though a shut down was︀ unnecessary given all the better alternative available. I don't understand why you are upset with︁ me. I did nothing wrong. Neither did any of the bank's employees. All the wrongdoing︂ was done by the IRS, the J5, and the OCIF Commissioner. So direct your anger︃ and frustration at them, not me.
My line of argument is sound. Why else would the OCIF Commissioner have turned down the sale to Qenta after having enthusiastically supporting it? If the bank needed more capital, why did OCIF never ask the bank to supply it.? Why did the OCIF Commissioner turn down my offer to add $7 million in capital in Nov of 2021? Why was there a press conference to announce the closure of the bank, when OCIF had never called a press conference in its history? Why was IRS Chief Jim Lee even there, or the other J5 Chiefs, if OCIF acted independently, and they had nothing to︀ do with that action? Why does the J5 still refer to my bank as "the︁ bank they had suspected of facilitating money laundering and tax evasion." They actually starting investigating︂ the bank in 2018. So its been 7 years. If there was any evidence to︃ confirm those suspicions, you would think they would have found it by now.
Regarding Peter Schiff comments:
1) he was obviously wrong when he stated above that he was suing the receiver in his “personal and professional capacity”. Martin , who also read the published lawsuit asked Peter why he made this inaccuracy on purpose but never got an answer from Peter
2: Peter, like most very wealthy men his age likely has a significant ego and is therefore sure that “because of the significant spotlight” now put on the receiver because of the lawsuit he “will likely speed up the liquidation “. I think Peter is terrible wrong here and the most likely case now is that︀ the receiver will stall further as officially he “can’t initiate any liquidation while there is︁ an ongoing lawsuit concerning the bank “
3: it is a shame that Peter always︂ claims he doesn’t know what the current status is about the liquidation . He knows︃ management of qenta intricately and could just call them . Of course Peter doesn’t reveal︄ everything he knows !
4: it sounds fishy to me that Peter after 2.5 years︅ “suddenly “ finds out that he could in fact sue Ocif in “his capacity as︆ a shareholder and not as a director “. And even more that he decides to︇ sue just a few weeks after the receiver announced (on October , 11th ) that︈ initiating the liquidation was to happen “in the upcoming weeks “.
Don’t get me wrong︉ . I admire Peter in many ways . But he doesn’t have 100% the same︊ interest as the customers and he is a good sales man !
1) he was obviously wrong when he stated above that he was suing the receiver in his “personal and professional capacity”. Martin , who also read the published lawsuit asked Peter why he made this inaccuracy on purpose but never got an answer from Peter
2: Peter, like most very wealthy men his age likely has a significant ego and is therefore sure that “because of the significant spotlight” now put on the receiver because of the lawsuit he “will likely speed up the liquidation “. I think Peter is terrible wrong here and the most likely case now is that︀ the receiver will stall further as officially he “can’t initiate any liquidation while there is︁ an ongoing lawsuit concerning the bank “
3: it is a shame that Peter always︂ claims he doesn’t know what the current status is about the liquidation . He knows︃ management of qenta intricately and could just call them . Of course Peter doesn’t reveal︄ everything he knows !
4: it sounds fishy to me that Peter after 2.5 years︅ “suddenly “ finds out that he could in fact sue Ocif in “his capacity as︆ a shareholder and not as a director “. And even more that he decides to︇ sue just a few weeks after the receiver announced (on October , 11th ) that︈ initiating the liquidation was to happen “in the upcoming weeks “.
Don’t get me wrong︉ . I admire Peter in many ways . But he doesn’t have 100% the same︊ interest as the customers and he is a good sales man !
The reason I waited as long as I did to sue is that︋ it took me a long time to get the evidence upon which to base the︌ lawsuit. The IRS violated FOIA laws to prevent me from getting that information sooner. Also︍ since its been almost 2.5 years and no money has been returned, its hard to︎ imagine that my lawsuit can make it any worse. Just so you know the main️ reason I agreed to the liquidation plan was to make sure customers got all their funds quickly.
This was my thought also.
Lets just hope that all tools are not downed and all work does not grind to a halt while the legal case surrounding the receivership and liquidation is dealt with. It could be at least 2030 before the legal process and appeals processes are exhausted before people see any money.
Lets just hope that all tools are not downed and all work does not grind to a halt while the legal case surrounding the receivership and liquidation is dealt with. It could be at least 2030 before the legal process and appeals processes are exhausted before people see any money.
That's ridiculous. There is no reason why my lawsuit would slow down the liquidation process. If anything it will speed it up, as the Receiver will want to show progress. The longer it takes him to finish the liquidation, the worse he will look︀ in the eyes of a judge or jury. The best thing he can do to︁ defend himself in my lawsuit is return customer funds as quickly as possible and finish︂ the liquidation process that was supposed to be completed in 90 days.
He was making progress albeit not to your liking unfortunately. Throwing a legal case︀ into the mix for doing their court appointed role is not a wise or mature︁ action sadly.
- Status