banking.TOP

Our valued sponsor

EmiratesSetup
SWISSMONEY Iban Accounts with Sepa
EmiratesSetup

Euro Pacific bank is a scam

#1,561
Radko said:
A collective action would accomplish exactly what? I'm not sure that would make any difference, and most likely the Receiver will end up dragging the whole process even more, plus he will spend more money, our money.

Those customers that have hired a lawyer in Puerto Rico, what have they managed to get in exchange for the $10K that they have supposedly paid?

It's obvious by now that OCIF doesn't care about anything, they don't answer to anyone, they make their own rules and that's it, the rest of us have to live with the consequences.
Click to expand...
I dont know, this should be discussed with them first, i did not join because i had the same concerns expressed here and because the number of participant too low was keeping a head price too high for me.
But if we join in mass or in a substantial number i think it could be sustainable for everybody and could be effective at least in putting some pressure on them.
So why dont we get in touch again with them to see what is going on and what this attorney is bringing on table?
True fact is that he could be in the same social circle as the receiver and both working around same objective in keeping us quiet and milk the cow but could be also
an honest professional trying to push for a solution and keep his clients informed on what is really going on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radko
#1,562
Giorgiogori said:
I dont know, this should be discussed with them first, i did not join because i had the same concerns expressed here and because the number of participant too low was keeping a head price too high for me.
But if we join in mass or in a substantial number i think it could be sustainable for everybody and could be effective at least in putting some pressure on them.
So why dont we get in touch again with them to see what is going on and what this attorney is bringing on table?
True fact is that he could be in the same social circle as the receiver and both working around same objective in keeping us quiet and milk the cow but could be also
an honest professional trying to push for a solution and keep his clients informed on what is really going on.
Click to expand...
A local lawyer is not going to rock the boat too much as he/she have their own income stream to protect. Cross swords with the powerful and you may just fall on that sword. It's the same 'whatsApp' group at the end of the day. There is no case law (esp in Puerto Rico) to suggest that the untouchables take any challenge from local lawyers seriously.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: ATNTESTING
#1,563
Optout said:
A local lawyer is not going to rock the boat too much as he/she have their own income stream to protect. Cross swords with the powerful and you may just fall on that sword. It's the same 'whatsApp' group at the end of the day. There is no case law (esp in Puerto Rico) to suggest that the untouchables take any challenge from local lawyers seriously.
Click to expand...
We all know it is a muddy legal ground but if we take it like this one way is just like being at their will.
I dont think there is no rule of law in Puerto Rico and i dont think a lawyer is necessarily so indignus in his profession.
A lawyer can have a social circle in common with people involved in this issue and therefore could possibly adopt some "solomonic attitude" but there are also facts to be represented and discussed.
So why dont we get in touch with the group that hired this lawyer and see what are the options they were given (if any)?

Eventually we need to round the number and it would be sustainable for everybody.

I dont know if EPB/Peter Schiff have a lawyer on top of this also on behalf of the depositors, for sure is in everybody interest to start the funds distribution but legally postures can be very different.

Dont you think?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radko
#1,564
Giorgiogori said:
We all know it is a muddy legal ground but if we take it like this one way is just like being at their will.
I dont think there is no rule of law in Puerto Rico and i dont think a lawyer is necessarily so indignus in his profession.
A lawyer can have a social circle in common with people involved in this issue and therefore could possibly adopt some "solomonic attitude" but there are also facts to be represented and discussed.
So why dont we get in touch with the group that hired this lawyer and see what are the options they were given (if any)?

Eventually we need to round the number and it would be sustainable for everybody.

I dont know if EPB/Peter Schiff have a lawyer on top of this also on behalf of the depositors, for sure is in everybody interest to start the funds distribution but legally postures can be very different.

Dont you think?
Click to expand...
I appreciate your reference to 'silomonic attitude' and was hoping that this would be visible by know considering the time that this matter has been on the treadmill. Having a life-long interest in human behaviour (over 50 years), I have become skeptical regarding any 'professional and honest' conduct emanating from this crowd. Bear in mind that EPB is but a tadpole in this pond.
 
#1,566
Optout said:
I appreciate your reference to 'silomonic attitude' and was hoping that this would be visible by know considering the time that this matter has been on the treadmill. Having a life-long interest in human behaviour (over 50 years), I have become skeptical regarding any 'professional and honest' conduct emanating from this crowd. Bear in mind that EPB is but a tadpole in this pond.
Click to expand...
I totally understand you being skeptical but what alternative do we have?

ATNTESTING said:
I heard long before this group hired a lawyer that other individual did the same. So far no result. They don't commit to anything.
Click to expand...
How do you know this? Are you aware of what is going on and of their perspectives?
 
#1,567
Maybe someone can explain what the lawyer that was hired has achieved so far for the money he was given? Don't throw good money after bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radko and Optout
#1,572
I dont think anything would work but legal ground.
The bank is in liquidation and there is an obligation to refund the depositors.
The funds are to be preserved and there is a due diligence on this.
The only way to check if due diligence is compliant is by accessing the balances/expenses sheets and only a legal request to access those documents can shed light.
Going there in person or raising concern on social platform will not do.

So, there are two options:

1) Wait for them and be at their will
2) Put pressure on legal ground.

Good point raised from @Martin Everson, does anybody from the group that hired the lawyer can explain what the legal action looks like so far?
That could help all of us skeptical to join if it is bringing some perspective results and strenghten the effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATNTESTING and MikeDem
#1,573
Giorgiogori said:
The only way to check if due diligence is compliant is by accessing the balances/expenses sheets and only a legal request to access those documents can shed light.
Click to expand...

Peter Schiff is the owner of the Bank, I don't understand why he is not being informed of everything that's happening so he could inform us.

Maybe the Receiver is doing all he can, maybe is not his fault, maybe he has hired a lawyer in Portugal. The problem is that we don't know what's going on, so before taking any kind of action we must know the facts, then we could decide whether to wait or take action.
 
#1,574
Pschiff said:
That's why I tried so hard to keep the bank out of Receivership. I also got OCFI to agree to let me help with the liquidation. But when I tried to help I got shot down by the Receiver, and none of the bank's counter parties would work with me as I was not the trustee. I even agreed not sue sue OCIF to make sure the clients got their money back quickly. The original plan was to return all funds in 30 days to opt outs, then transfer the balance to Qenta. That got blown up by Novo bank, which told the Portugese government the bank was shut down for money laundering and tax evasion. So they froze the account for 8 months to conduct their own investigation, which also found nothing. Seven governments investigated the bank and found nothing. But it got shut down anyway.
Click to expand...
Hi Peter,
I understand that it is very frustrating to be falsely accused and then on top lose a lot of money as a consequence. It is extremely unfair, but unfortunately, this is where we are.

But former EPB account holders have their lives put on hold, we are taken hostages, some with all their savings and businesses as well. We cannot move on with our lives until we get the money back.
Now looking forward, I want to know, what is in your opinion the best way forward from here? sit back and wait more? or is there any pressure that can be put on these people by US authorities? by Newspaper/media campaigns?, Lawyers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: roark43, ATNTESTING and Radko
#1,575
Pschiff said:
That's why I tried so hard to keep the bank out of Receivership. I also got OCFI to agree to let me help with the liquidation. But when I tried to help I got shot down by the Receiver, and none of the bank's counter parties would work with me as I was not the trustee. I even agreed not sue sue OCIF to make sure the clients got their money back quickly. The original plan was to return all funds in 30 days to opt outs, then transfer the balance to Qenta. That got blown up by Novo bank, which told the Portugese government the bank was shut down for money laundering and tax evasion. So they froze the account for 8 months to conduct their own investigation, which also found nothing. Seven governments investigated the bank and found nothing. But it got shut down anyway.
Click to expand...

So would that not constitute a breach of agremeent with the OCIF and now allow you to sue them? The agreement to return customer funds was supposed to be within 3 months as I recall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Optout and Radko
#1,576
spartan7510 said:
So would that not constitute a breach of agremeent with the OCIF and now allow you to sue them? The agreement to return customer funds was supposed to be within 3 months as I recall.
Click to expand...
It's like "give me all your money and I'll promise you whatever you want." The most important thing now is that we are the victims taken over a year ago and no one takes care of us.
 
#1,578
Giorgiogori said:
I think we should try to act independently, knowing what Peter Schiff can do, wants to do or intends to do is valuable and extremely helpful but we should not rely exclusively on his actions
Click to expand...

We already have legal group representation, so have failry detailed knowledge of what is going on internally, but someone needs to put pressure on OCIF, that is where @Pschiff comes in, if it is what he says it is, then he should have grounds for a breach of agreement for failure to return cusotmers funds in a timely manner, add to that the failure of the reciever to recover the $500k due back to EPB to cover operating expenses from currency matters. all this negligence falls back to the OCIF for selecting such an inexpereienced, incompetent and corruprt reciever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeDem and Radko
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum Announcement

Latest Threads

SWISSMONEY Iban Accounts with Sepa
Offshore Bank Accounts
The KingDom Bank
Top Bottom
Back