Finance and economics mentoring
New Horizons Paraguay
Ticker tape by TradingView

Euro Pacific bank is a scam

Status
Not open for further replies.
Again, AI generated so before You send itYou read it and adjust it

Here are‌ two escalation letters: one for FinCEN (financial misconduct/fraud) and another for SEC (potential investment‍ fraud/misrepresentation). You can modify them based on your specific case details.


Letter to FinCEN⁠ (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network)​


Subject:​


To: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)
Email: [email protected]
Website Complaint Form: https://www.fincen.gov/financial-institutions
Date: [Insert Date]

Dear FinCEN Investigations Team,

I am writing to⁤ formally report potential financial misconduct and mismanagement of customer funds involving Qenta Inc., which⁣ acquired the assets and liabilities of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank, Inc., a Puerto Rico-based⁢ financial institution currently under liquidation.

Summary of Concerns:​


  1. Failure to Return Customer Funds:
    • Despite acquiring the liabilities of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank, Qenta has failed to return customer deposits︀ for over three years.
    • Customers, including myself, are still awaiting our funds.
  2. Possible Financial︁ Insolvency:
    • There is evidence that Qenta Inc. is on the verge of bankruptcy, raising︂ concerns about its ability to meet financial obligations.
    • The UAE and Swiss subsidiaries involved in︃ the acquisition have been removed from Qenta’s register, leaving no clear accountability.
  3. Risky Asset︄ Transfers by Puerto Rico's Regulator (OCFI):
    • The Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCFI)︅ in Puerto Rico, despite knowing Qenta’s financial risks, continues transferring assets to them.
    • If Qenta collapses, these assets may be lost, and customers will have no recourse to recover︆ their funds.

Formal Request for Investigation:​


Given these serious concerns, I urge FinCEN to:︇

  1. Investigate Qenta Inc. for potential financial misconduct and mismanagement of customer assets.
  2. Review OCFI’s regulatory︈ oversight to determine if they are improperly transferring assets to a financially unstable entity.
  3. Ensure customer funds are protected before further liquidation occurs.

Please confirm receipt of this complaint and︉ provide any relevant case reference numbers. I am willing to provide additional evidence as needed.︊

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Your Qenta/Euro Pacific Account Information (if applicable)]


Letter to the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission)​


Subject:​


To: U.S. Securities and Exchange︋ Commission (SEC)
Website: https://www.sec.gov/oiea/Complaint.html
Date: [Insert Date]

Dear SEC Enforcement Division,

I am submitting a︌ formal complaint regarding potential investment fraud and misrepresentation by Qenta Inc., which acquired the︍ assets and liabilities of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank, Inc., currently under liquidation in Puerto︎ Rico.

Key Issues:​


  1. Misrepresentation of Financial Stability:
    • When acquiring Euro Pacific Bank’s assets in️ September 2022, Qenta presented itself as financially stable and capable of fulfilling customer liabilities.‌
    • However, after three years, Qenta has not returned funds to customers, indicating potential misrepresentation‍ of its financial condition.
  2. Potentially Fraudulent Asset Transfers:
    • Qenta’s financial instability suggests it may have⁠ engaged in fraudulent transfers or asset mismanagement, harming customers.
    • The Puerto Rico financial regulator⁤ (OCFI) is still transferring assets to Qenta, despite warnings of insolvency risks.
  3. Possible Securities⁣ Violations:
    • If Qenta raised funds or made investment offerings based on false financial representations, they may have violated U.S. securities laws.

Request for SEC Action:​


I urge the⁢ SEC to:

  1. Investigate Qenta Inc. for securities fraud and misrepresentation regarding its financial stability.
  2. Assess whether Qenta engaged in improper asset transfers that harmed customers.
  3. Review OCFI’s role in these︀ transactions to determine if they failed in their regulatory responsibilities.

Please confirm receipt of this︁ complaint and provide any reference numbers. I am willing to cooperate and provide further documentation︂ if necessary.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Your Qenta/Euro Pacific Account Information (if︃ applicable)]


Next Steps After Sending the Complaints:​


✅ Track responses from FinCEN & SEC – You may receive a reference number for follow-ups.
✅ Keep all communication records related to your︄ complaint.
✅ Consider escalating to DOJ or CFPB if no action is taken.
 
Again, AI generated

Here are two additional complaint letters, one for the DOJ (Department‌ of Justice – Financial Fraud Division) and one for the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau)‍.


1. Letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) – Financial Fraud Division​


Subject:​


To: U.S. Department of Justice – Criminal Division (Fraud Section)
Website: https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud
Submit Tips: https://www.justice.gov/contact-us
Date: [Insert Date]

Dear U.S. Department of Justice – Financial Fraud Investigations Team,⁠

I am filing a formal complaint regarding possible financial fraud, mismanagement of customer funds, and⁤ regulatory negligence involving Qenta Inc. and the ongoing liquidation of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank, Inc.⁣ in Puerto Rico.

Summary of Allegations:​


  1. Failure to Return Customer Deposits
    • Qenta Inc. acquired⁢ Euro Pacific Bank’s assets and liabilities in September 2022 but has not returned customer funds︀ for over three years.
    • This suggests possible misappropriation, unlawful withholding, or misuse of customer︁ funds.
  2. Possible Financial Fraud & Insolvency
    • There is credible evidence that Qenta is on︂ the verge of bankruptcy and may not be able to meet its obligations.
    • The Swiss and UAE-based companies originally involved in the deal have been removed from Qenta’s register, leaving no clear accountability.
  3. Regulatory Negligence by Puerto Rico’s OCFI
    • The Office of the︃ Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCFI) in Puerto Rico is still transferring assets to Qenta, despite warnings about its financial instability.
    • If Qenta collapses, these assets may be lost, preventing︄ customers from recovering their money.
    • OCFI’s actions may constitute regulatory failure, negligence, or complicity︅ in financial mismanagement.

Formal Request for DOJ Investigation:​


Given the severity of these︆ allegations, I urge the DOJ to:

  1. Investigate Qenta Inc. for possible financial fraud and mismanagement︇ of customer funds.
  2. Review the actions of OCFI to determine if they are improperly transferring︈ assets to an insolvent entity.
  3. Ensure that affected customers are able to recover their money.︉

I am willing to provide additional evidence, records, and testimony as needed. Please confirm receipt︊ of this complaint and provide any relevant case reference numbers.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Your Qenta/Euro Pacific Account Information (if applicable)]


2. Letter to the Consumer Financial︋ Protection Bureau (CFPB)​


Subject:​


To: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
Website: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/
Phone: 1-855-411-2372
Date: [Insert Date]

Dear CFPB Consumer Protection Team,

I am filing a formal complaint︌ regarding the unlawful withholding of funds and failure to meet financial obligations by Qenta Inc.︍, which acquired the assets and liabilities of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank, Inc. in Puerto︎ Rico.

Nature of the Complaint:​


  1. Qenta Inc. has refused to return my funds and those of other customers for over three years.
  2. They acquired banking liabilities but have️ failed to fulfill their obligations to depositors.
  3. Puerto Rico’s financial regulator (OCFI) continues transferring assets‌ to Qenta, despite signs of insolvency.
  4. This is a violation of consumer financial protections‍, potentially including:
    • Unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices (UDAAP violations).
    • Failure to⁠ provide timely access to customer funds.

Action Requested from CFPB:​


I urge the⁤ CFPB to:

  1. Investigate Qenta Inc. for unfair financial practices and withholding of customer funds.
  2. Hold OCFI accountable for failing to protect consumer rights.
  3. Ensure that affected customers, including myself, receive⁣ our rightful funds.

Please confirm receipt of this complaint and provide me with a case reference number for tracking purposes.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Your Qenta/Euro Pacific⁢ Account Information (if applicable)]


Next Steps After Sending the Complaints:​


✅ Submit complaints to DOJ︀ & CFPB through their websites or email.
✅ Keep all reference numbers & responses for legal follow-up.
✅ Consider involving a financial attorney if authorities do not act.
 
The purchase of Euro Pacific Intl. Bank (EPB) liabilities by Qenta Inc. appears improper on multiple legal and regulatory grounds. The key issue is that Qenta is not a regulated‌ financial institution, yet it assumed financial liabilities from a licensed bank under Puerto Rico’s‍ financial laws. Here’s why this transaction raises serious concerns:


1. Qenta Was Not a Licensed⁠ Financial Institution​


Issue:

  • EPB was a licensed International Financial Entity (IFE) in Puerto Rico⁤, subject to banking regulations enforced by the Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions⁣ (OCFI).
  • Qenta Inc. is not a bank, credit union, or licensed financial institution,it is a fintech and digital asset company that focuses on blockchain technology.
  • Despite this, Qenta⁢ assumed customer liabilities, including deposits and precious metals accounts, without being subject to︀ banking laws.

Why It’s Improper:

  • Under U.S. banking laws and Puerto Rico’s IFE Act, the assumption of banking liabilities by an unregulated entity should not have been allowed without specific regulatory approvals.
  • If Qenta lacked a financial institution license, it should not have︁ been entrusted with customer funds and financial obligations.


2. OCFI’s Role in Approving the Sale︂ Was Potentially Negligent​


Issue:

  • OCFI, as Puerto Rico’s banking regulator, approved the liquidation plan︃ and the transfer of EPB’s assets & liabilities to Qenta.
  • If OCFI approved the transfer︄ without verifying Qenta’s financial capacity or regulatory status, it may have failed in its︅ oversight responsibilities.

Why It’s Improper:

  • Regulatory agencies are supposed to ensure that financial liabilities︆ are only transferred to stable, qualified institutions.
  • OCFI should have ensured that Qenta had:
    • A financial institution license.
    • The capital reserves to fulfill customer obligations.
    • The compliance structure to manage financial accounts properly.
  • If OCFI transferred liabilities to an unregulated fintech entity, this︇ could be a case of regulatory negligence or misconduct.


3. The Transaction Potentially Violates︈ U.S. Consumer Protection Laws​


Issue:

  • Customers were never given a choice,their accounts were︉ transferred automatically to an unregulated company (Qenta) without their explicit consent.
  • Qenta has since︊ failed to meet its obligations, making it unclear where customer funds are held or if they are even accessible.

Why It’s Improper:

  • Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act︋ (12 U.S.C. § 5536), financial institutions cannot engage in deceptive, unfair, or abusive practices︌ (UDAAP violations).
  • If customers were:
    • Misled about Qenta’s financial stability,
    • Not given an︍ option to withdraw before the transfer,
    • Denied access to their funds,
    • Subjected to︎ unclear or improper account management,
      Then this could be a case of deceptive financial️ practices, which U.S. regulators (CFPB & FTC) can investigate.


4. Possible Fraudulent Misrepresentation‌ by Qenta​


Issue:

  • If Qenta misrepresented its financial standing to OCFI, EPB, or customers,‍ it could be in violation of U.S. securities laws.
  • The Securities and Exchange Commission⁠ (SEC) has jurisdiction over companies that misrepresent financial capacity in asset transfers.

Why It’s Improper:⁤

  • If Qenta knew it could not meet customer obligations yet proceeded with the acquisition, this⁣ could be a fraudulent transfer.
  • Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934⁢ prohibits companies from misrepresenting material facts in financial transactions.
  • If Qenta’s leadership made false︀ claims about its ability to honor customer accounts, they could be personally liable for︁ fraudulent misrepresentation.


5. Qenta’s Potential Misuse of Customer Assets​


Issue:

  • Since Qenta is︂ not a licensed bank, it is unclear how or where customer assets are being︃ held.
  • If customer funds were commingled with corporate funds, used for investments, or transferred︄ to third parties, Qenta could be violating financial laws.

Why It’s Improper:

  • Under the Bank Secrecy Act (31 U.S.C. § 5318) and anti-money laundering (AML) laws, financial︅ institutions must safeguard customer deposits properly.
  • If Qenta used customer funds for operational expenses,︆ investments, or other activities, this could be misappropriation of funds.
  • The U.S. Department︇ of Justice (DOJ) could investigate this as a financial crime.


Next Steps: What You Can︈ Do About It​


Since the entire Qenta-EPB transaction appears questionable, you may have︉ legal grounds to challenge the deal and demand intervention from regulators.
 
The forced conversion of customer funds into a single currency during liquidation, resulting in‌ losses for customers, raises serious legal and regulatory concerns under Puerto Rico and U.S.‍ financial laws. The legality depends on several factors, including the terms of the⁠ liquidation process, customer agreements, and regulatory oversight.


1. Key Legal Issues with Forced Currency⁤ Conversion​


Unilateral Currency Conversion May Violate Contractual Agreements

  • If customers originally deposited or held⁣ funds in multiple currencies, the bank may have been contractually obligated to return funds⁢ in the same currency.
  • If the receiver unilaterally converted all funds into one currency︀ without customer consent, this could be a breach of contract.

Potential Legal Violation:︁

  • Puerto Rico Commercial Contracts Law (PR Civil Code, Art. 1213) – If the original agreement︂ stated that funds would be held in specific currencies, forced conversion may be a contract breach.
  • Unjust Enrichment Laws – If the conversion benefits the bank/receiver while harming customers,︃ this could be considered unjust enrichment, which is illegal in Puerto Rico.


Devaluation & Losses Could Be Considered a Violation of Fiduciary Duty

  • Liquidators and receivers must act︄ in the best interest of creditors (including customers) during liquidation.
  • If the currency conversion caused︅ unnecessary financial losses, the receiver may have violated their fiduciary duty.

Potential Legal︆ Violation:

  • Puerto Rico Banking Law (10 L.P.R.A. § 1073) – Requires that financial institutions and︇ their receivers act in good faith and protect the interests of depositors.
  • Breach of︈ Fiduciary Duty (Common Law) – If the receiver made decisions that harmed customers while benefiting︉ the institution, this could be legally challenged.


Was the Forced Conversion Necessary?

  • A court-ordered liquidation planmay allow for conversion if:
    • It was necessary to simplify distribution.
    • It was done at fair exchange rates.
  • BUT: If there were no legal requirements to︊ convert funds, the receiver may have acted improperly.

Key Question:

  • Did OCFI approve or︋ order the conversion?
  • If so, what was their justification for doing so?


2. What Puerto︌ Rico & U.S. Regulators Say About This Practice​


Office of the Commissioner of Financial︍ Institutions (OCFI) – Puerto Rico

  • OCFI regulates bank liquidations and requires receivers to follow fair liquidation procedures.
  • If the conversion was unnecessary or unfair, OCFI could be held︎ accountable.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) – U.S. Federal Regulator

  • The CFPB prohibits unfair, deceptive,️ or abusive financial practices (UDAAP violations).
  • If customers suffered financial harm due to the conversion‌ without consent, it could be considered an abusive practice under 12 U.S.C. § 5536‍.

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – If Investments Were Affected

  • If customers held foreign-currency-denominated investment accounts and they were forcibly converted, this could fall under SEC oversight if there⁠ was misrepresentation or financial harm.


3. What You Can Do About It​


✅ Request Documentation on the Conversion Decision

  • Ask the receiver & OCFI:
    • What legal authority allowed them⁤ to convert funds?
    • Did customers agree to this in their original contracts?
    • What exchange rates⁣ were used, and who benefited from the conversion?

✅ File a Complaint with OCFI for Improper⁢ Liquidation Practices

  • Demand that OCFI investigate whether the conversion was necessary & legally justified.
  • If not, they could be forced to reverse or compensate customers for losses.

✅ Escalate to the CFPB & SEC If Needed

  • If Puerto Rico regulators refuse to act, escalate︀ the issue to U.S. federal regulators for a more in-depth investigation.

✅ Consider Legal Action Against︁ the Receiver

  • If you and other customers suffered losses due to the conversion, you︂ may be able to file a lawsuit against the receiver and OCFIfor:
    • Breach of︃ contract
    • Breach of fiduciary duty
    • Unjust enrichment


Conclusion: The Forced Currency Conversion Is Likely Legally︄ Questionable​


  • If customers were not given a choice, it could be a contract violation︅.
  • If the conversion was unnecessary and caused losses, it could be a breach of︆ fiduciary duty.
  • OCFI may be liable if they approved an improper liquidation plan.
 
The receiver, in‍ his recent report, writes himself customers should contact EPB =Qenta and ask about situation. He⁠ even uses the word claims.
I did send an email to EPB for info and⁤ I am also waiting in vain.
It is not us who complicate things. All other⁣ parties are!
 
That is certainly not fair to me. I already lost over $10 million in cash that⁢ I put into the bank. I never took one penny out. I also didn't do︀ anything wrong, and neither did any employee of the bank. So I'm not coming out︁ of pocket another $65 million or so. OCFI, the IRS, the other J5 tax Chiefs,︂ and a few "journalists" are 100% responsible for this situation. So either you guys sue︃ them, or wait for your money. My lawyer is looking into possibly organizing a class︄ action lawsuit on behalf of customers. I also want to get greater clarity into the︅ Qenta situation. I am still waiting to hear from them and the receiver on that.︆ If there is a problem there, than a lawsuit for damages is more viable.
 
That's not true.︍ The bank never made any loans and customer funds were never at risk. There was︎ more than enough cash to make every customer and all creditors whole on the date️ the bank was unnecessarily put into receivership. The only reason I tried to sell the‌ bank was that after the illegal leak of the J5 Investigation, the bank began to‍ lose about $250K per month. I was making up those losses personally every month to⁠ protect customers. In total I put in about $7 million in 2020 - 2022 when⁤ the bank was put into receivership. I have no idea what is happening at Qenta.⁣ I am still waiting for answers to my questions.
 
The opt in option was for people who had no other accounts they could send the⁣ money to, and to make sure the Puerto Rican government did not take it. Their⁢ proposal was that any money that was not withdraw within 90 days would go to︀ the Puerto Rico government. I did not want that to happen.
 
It's the opposite. I only agreed to OCIF's proposal to⁠ expedite the return of customer funds. I was told that if I fought the funds⁤ would be tied up during that process. I wanted them returned to customers ASAP. The⁣ deal with OCIF required all funds to be returned in 30 days. That would have⁢ happened but for Novo bank and the Portugese government. Bu they only froze the account︀ due to the conspiracy between the IRS/J5 to frame the bank for money laundering and︁ tax evasion, with the help of the OCIF Commissioner.. The portugese government claimed that it︂ did not want to allow the proceeds of crime to be reintroduced into the legitimate︃ economy. By the time they realized there was no money laundering or tax evasion going︄ on at the bank, which took over eight months, thee bank no longer had the︅ ability to process wires out of Novo bank, and the Receiver wasn't able to figure︆ out how to do it, despite lots of help from Qenta and the former bank︇ staff who worked there. Not sure if it was his gross negligence, or just incompetence︈ as he had no prior banking experience. I had no role. I was completely shut︉ out of the process.
 
The recourse is to sue the IRS︁ and OCIF. Had they just allowed Qetna to buy the bank, all funds would have︂ been segregated and safe. The bank would have had over $10 million in capital, no︃ debt, and no loans on the books. There was no legitimate reason to reject the︄ sale. The sole purpose of the rejection was to advance the PR stunt that the︅ bank was guilty of facilitating tax evasion and money laundering, to bolster the credibility of︆ the J5 and for the OCIF Commissioner to win their public support to clean up︇ Puerto Rico's banking reputation. The bank's customers where collateral damage. If customers lose money, it︈ can all be recovered in a class action lawsuit against the government conspirators.
 
If the Qenta rumors are true, you have an excellent lawsuit against OCIF and the︅ IRS. They are 100% responsible for this, and their actions were illegal.
 
You need to remember‍ that according to the deal all OPt in funds were to transfer immediately to segragated⁠ individual accounts of customers. But since Novo held up the money, the funds that Qetna⁤ ended up getting were held by Qetna until all funds where recovered, so that Opt⁣ in customers were not put above Opt Outs. They wanted to treat everyone equally. So⁢ it was never the plan that customer funds be commingled with Qenta funds. This was︀ all the fault of the IRS/J5 media campaign to falsely take credit for closing the︁ bank for money laundering and tax evasion.
 
PSchiff this is totally irrelevant. Its a criminal offense to hold clients funds WITHOUT a‌ banking licence - Qenta had none, so you sold the client book to an entity‍ not qualified to buy. Thats your responsability.

And for the sake of your customers can⁠ you please stop spreading your IRS/J5 conspiracy theories because they are NOT proven in court⁤ for the time being.
 
Peter is just ignoring the question, has he discussed with Qenta already. Sure you have‌ money enough to have airline ticket from PR to Houston or should we do it‍ for you.
 
They are not theories. I have⁣ the internal emails between IRS agents and other J5 Chief to prove it. That evidence⁢ is the basis for my lawsuit.
 
Good news. I heard back from the COE of Qenta. He assures me the rumors‌ are not true. All customer funds are with Qenta now, and should all be allocated‍ to customers beginning within 30 days of getting the green light from the receiver. The⁠ process could take a few weeks to compete, but all customers will have the option⁤ of leaving funds in their accounts, or withdrawing them to the financial institution of their⁣ choice.
 
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