Euro Pacific bank is a scam

[Andrew Cobb]

The Receiver responded to the email I sent him and OCFI where I told him the $5m cancellation fee and unjust enrichment was not to be accepted. He seems to think Customers do not agree with my concerns or my request to stop Qenta by freezing customer assets and clawing them back ASAP.

 

[Pschiff]

Those assets could have depreciated in value during the last 3 years, so customers took all the risk but Qenta is the only one that is going to benefit, very sh

The Receiver responded to the email I sent him and OCFI where I told him the $5m cancellation fee and unjust enrichment was not to be accepted. He seems to think Customers do not agree with my concerns or my request to stop Qenta by freezing customer assets and clawing them back ASAP.

View attachment 9337

Thanks for sharing this with me. This is very disturbing news. The receiver must not be allowed to give in to Qenta's outrageous "request" It would not just violate his fiduciary duty, but I think it would make him an accomplice to a crime. If any customers are telling him they approve Qenta's offer, its because Qenta lied to them about what they were offering. In their email to customers, Qenta wrote that they would return the assets as they were originally received. That clearly implies that they would return the gold and silver they received. But they wrote the receiver that their offer was not to return the gold and silver they received, but to return the cash value of those assets when they were received in Sept. 2022. The difference is about $25 million. Plus, Qenta did not inform customers that it was also requesting a $5 million dollar termination payment from the bank, a refund of the $500K it paid the bank for the assets, to keep for itself the bank's own mutual fund positions, and to charge the bank almost $400K to wind down the subsidiaries it received. It doesn't take a team of legal advisors to understand this. Also, the receiver is wrong to claim that the precious metals are not part of the liquidation process he is overseeing.

 

[Radko]

Thanks for sharing this with me. This is very disturbing news. The receiver must not be allowed to give in to Qenta's outrageous "request" It would not just violate his fiduciary duty, but I think it would make him an accomplice to a crime. If any customers are telling him they approve Qenta's offer, its because Qenta lied to them about what they were offering. In their email to customers, Qenta wrote that they would return the assets as they were originally received. That clearly implies that they would return the gold and silver they received. But they wrote the receiver that their offer was not to return the gold and silver they received, but to return the cash value of those assets when they were received in Sept. 2022. The difference is about $25 million. Plus, Qenta did not inform customers that it was also requesting a $5 million dollar termination payment from the bank, a refund of the $500K it paid the bank for the assets, to keep for itself the bank's own mutual fund positions, and to charge the bank almost $400K to wind down the subsidiaries it received. It doesn't take a team of legal advisors to understand this. Also, the receiver is wrong to claim that the precious metals are not part of the liquidation process he is overseeing.

See if you can talk to the Receiver and explain him everything.

 

[Andrew Cobb]

Thanks for sharing this with me. This is very disturbing news. The receiver must not be allowed to give in to Qenta's outrageous "request" It would not just violate his fiduciary duty, but I think it would make him an accomplice to a crime. If any customers are telling him they approve Qenta's offer, its because Qenta lied to them about what they were offering. In their email to customers, Qenta wrote that they would return the assets as they were originally received. That clearly implies that they would return the gold and silver they received. But they wrote the receiver that their offer was not to return the gold and silver they received, but to return the cash value of those assets when they were received in Sept. 2022. The difference is about $25 million. Plus, Qenta did not inform customers that it was also requesting a $5 million dollar termination payment from the bank, a refund of the $500K it paid the bank for the assets, to keep for itself the bank's own mutual fund positions, and to charge the bank almost $400K to wind down the subsidiaries it received. It doesn't take a team of legal advisors to understand this. Also, the receiver is wrong to claim that the precious metals are not part of the liquidation process he is overseeing.

I responded asking him to clarify the part 'precious metals deposited in a subsidiary which is not part of the liquidation process undertaken by the undersigned'. Here is part of my response -

I do not expect the Receiver to response, so I CC'd my email to OCIF.

 

[Pschiff]

I responded asking him to clarify the part 'precious metals deposited in a subsidiary which is not part of the liquidation process undertaken by the undersigned'. Here is part of my response -

View attachment 9338

I do not expect the Receiver to response, so I CC'd my email to OCIF.

The receiver's claim that the gold and silver is not part of the liquidation he is overseeing is completely false. That is why Qenta is asking him for permission to keep half the gold and silver for itself. The Purchase and Assumption Agreement was terminated. So there are no more Opt.in customers. They accounts were never migrated to Qenta. The gold and silver, as well as the liability to customers for that gold and silver, still belongs to the bank. Both the assets and the liability were transferred to Qenta based on the Purchase and Assumption Agreement being completed. But since that agreement was terminated, the gold and silver, and the liability to customers are still owned by the bank even if temporarily controlled by Qenta. The receiver is in control of the bank and must takle back control of those assets. He must protect them from what Qenta is trying to do. He absolutely owes a fiduciary duty to the bank and its customers regarding that gold and silver.

 

[danielboros]

Why not call the FBI? Freeze the assets befiore they could be solld. I would if I had anything at hand other than hearsay.

 

[Pschiff]

The receiver's claim that the gold and silver is not part of the liquidation he is overseeing is completely false. That is why Qenta is asking him for permission to keep half the gold and silver for itself. The Purchase and Assumption Agreement was terminated. So there are no more Opt.in customers. They accounts were never migrated to Qenta. The gold and silver, as well as the liability to customers for that gold and silver, still belongs to the bank. Both the assets and the liability were transferred to Qenta based on the Purchase and Assumption Agreement being completed. But since that agreement was terminated, the gold and silver, and the liability to customers are still owned by the bank even if temporarily controlled by Qenta. The receiver is in control of the bank and must takle back control of those assets. He must protect them from what Qenta is trying to do. He absolutely owes a fiduciary duty to the bank and its customers regarding that gold and silver.

Also, if the receiver agrees to settle this dispute with Qenta by paying Qenta $35 million dollars, Qenta will have a legal claim to that money. So while the receiver is suggesting that customers sue Qenta, they will have a far stronger claim against him and OCIF.

 

[Radko]

Also, if the receiver agrees to settle this dispute with Qenta by paying Qenta $35 million dollars, Qenta will have a legal claim to that money. So while the receiver is suggesting that customers sue Qenta, they will have a far stronger claim against him and OCIF.

I think we need to wait for the Receiver to make a formal announcement, but you are the only one who can talk to him.

 

[Pschiff]

I think we need to wait for the Receiver to make a formal announcement, but you are the only one who can talk to him.

You are wrong. I have not spoken to the receiver for years. He refuses to communicate with me. I send him lots of emails which I hope he reads, but he never replies. The problem with waiting is that if he signs a deal with Qenta before he tells us what he did, it will be too late to undo the damage. So if he settles Qenta's bogus claim by paying Qenta $35 million dollars, that comes right out of the pockets of the bank's customers. It will be hard to get that money back from Qenta. There was speculation that Qenta sold the gold and silver and spent the money. But they did not, as that would have been illegal. But if the receiver gives Qenta the legal right to spend that money by giving it to them in a legal settlement, as Qenta has requested and which he is apparently considering, then Qenta will absolutely spend it.

 

[Radko]

You are wrong. I have not spoken to the receiver for years. He refuses to communicate with me. I send him lots of emails which I hope he reads, but he never replies. The problem with waiting is that if he signs a deal with Qenta before he tells us what he did, it will be too late to undo the damage. So if he settles Qenta's bogus claim by paying Qenta $35 million dollars, that comes right out of the pockets of the bank's customers. It will be hard to get that money back from Qenta. There was speculation that Qenta sold the gold and silver and spent the money. But they did not, as that would have been illegal. But if the receiver gives Qenta the legal right to spend that money by giving it to them in a legal settlement, as Qenta has requested and which he is apparently considering, then Qenta will absolutely spend it.

I guess we are at the mercy of the Reciever's decision.

 

[Pschiff]

I have sent him at least a dozen emails explaining this. I sent so many as I keep learning new information. He has not replied to a single one.. But he is on notice that Qenta's claim is bogus, that the gold and silver are absolutely the bank's assets that he is managing, as are the liabilities to pay the identical quantity of gold and silver to the bank's customers, and that if he chooses to give those assets to Qenta, that he will be liable for that loss.

See if you can talk to the Receiver and explain him everything.

 

[Radko]

I have sent him at least a dozen emails explaining this. I sent so many as I keep learning new information. He has not replied to a single one.. But he is on notice that Qenta's claim is bogus, that the gold and silver are absolutely the bank's assets that he is managing, as are the liabilities to pay the identical quantity of gold and silver to the bank's customers, and that if he chooses to give those assets to Qenta, that he will be liable for that loss.

Thanks for trying to help!
What a mess...

 

[Pschiff]

I guess we are at the mercy of the Reciever's decision.

Yes, but if he decides to needless give away tens of millions of the bank's assets, he will be liable to customers for that action. Qenta may also be liable in an unjust enrichment lawsuit, but who knows how much of that money will be spend before we win a judgement. It's better to prevent the Receiver from giving Qenta all of that money in the first place.

 

[SCHLOSSFINANZ]

It was four years ago. It's clear that their financial situation deteriorated a lot over the past year or two, I think since that SPAC fell through.

Again what DD you did? You keep evading that question. Its simple.

 

[larrycarvalho]

Could anyone help me with the docs we need to send ?

what this is ? Copy of UBO (Ultimate Beneficiary Owner) Identifications ? Should i send copy of doc from the ultimate beneficiary owner ? Whats the difference between this and Copy of Two Legible and Valid Identifications: ?
In addition to this, he requested documents must contain the "Apostille" of the Ministry of ForeignAffairs of your jurisdiction of residence to be processed. The "Apostille" of the Ministry of ForeignAffairs is required by the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Federal Regulations ofthe United States. This could be Haya apostille ?

 

[Alpinist]

Now for use I understand why Qenta decided to terminate opt in boarding.

Most of the opt in clients have taken their funds away from Qenta asap once they will arrive there. I guess they read this forum like Receiverr does : )

This way the Qenta makes a good profit doing nothing the past 3 years .

Very smart move indeed.

 

[Pschiff]

Again what DD you did? You keep evading that question. Its simple.

I told you I did DD. I accepted mostly stock when I initially sold the bank to Qenta. OCIF also did their own extensive DD on Qenta. But Qenta is not the problem. Qenta sent a letter to the receiver canceling the purchase. They admitted that they are holding about $80 million in assets that they received from the bank. They could easily be transferred back to the bank in one day. But Qenta is only offering to return about $40 million of those assets. They want to have the receiver agree to let them keep the other $40 million, as they have alleged unsubstantiated and unproven losses that they claim resulted from the receiver's failure to compete the transaction. The receiver is under no obligation to accept that outrageous offer. Instead, he should demand the immediate return of all the assets Qenta was transferred based on a purchase that it cancelled. All Qenta is entitled to is the $500K it paid for the assets. It can't hold those assets hostage to its other claims. If Qenta feels it has other claims, which I don't think it does, it needs to asset those claims in an arbitration in NY court against the bank and prove it. So it's the receiver who is the problem, far more than Qenta, as is OCIF for appointing him. Instead of asking what DD I did on Qenta, ask what DD OCIF did on the receiver before appointing him, especially considering that he had zero banking experience when he was picked for the job.

By the way, in its letter to the receiver, Qenta only admitted to holding about $50 million of assets. That's because in their letter to the receiver, they did not list the quantity of gold, silver and mutual funds that they received from the bank. Instead Qenta only listed the dollar value of the gold, silver, and mutual funds on the date they were originally received.

 

[SCHLOSSFINANZ]

When do you start to understand that a bank liquidator DOES NOT NEED banking experience by law???
Ask FINMA (Switzerland), FCA (UK), AMF (France) for example!!!
A liquidator needs to be a lawyer in the respective jurisdiction and this guy is a PR lawyer.
It's sad but that is the current situation law wise. Makes no sense at all.

You brought Qenta, you sold to Qenta that is your ULTIMATE responsibility.

 

[Pschiff]

I told you I did DD. I accepted mostly stock when I initially sold the bank to Qenta. OCIF also did their own extensive DD on Qenta. But Qenta is not the problem. Qenta sent a letter to the receiver canceling the purchase. They admitted that they are holding about $80 million in assets that they received from the bank. They could easily be transferred back to the bank in one day. But Qenta is only offering to return about $40 million of those assets. They want to have the receiver agree to let them keep the other $40 million, as they have alleged unsubstantiated and unproven losses that they claim resulted from the receiver's failure to compete the transaction. The receiver is under no obligation to accept that outrageous offer. Instead, he should demand the immediate return of all the assets Qenta was transferred based on a purchase that it cancelled. All Qenta is entitled to is the $500K it paid for the assets. It can't hold those assets hostage to its other claims. If Qenta feels it has other claims, which I don't think it does, it needs to asset those claims in an arbitration in NY court against the bank and prove it. So it's the receiver who is the problem, far more than Qenta, as is OCIF for appointing him. Instead of asking what DD I did on Qenta, ask what DD OCIF did on the receiver before appointing him, especially considering that he had zero banking experience when he was picked for the job.

By the way, in its letter to the receiver, Qenta only admitted to holding about $50 million of assets. That's because in their letter to the receiver, they did not list the quantity of gold, silver and mutual funds that they received from the bank. Instead Qenta only listed the dollar value of the gold, silver, and mutual funds on the date they were originally received.

Qenta should have listed the current market value, but they counted on the receiver not understanding how much those assets had appreciated. If they listed the current market value of the mutual funds and metals, they would have informed the receiver they held $80 million of assets, not $50.

 

[Pschiff]

Qenta should have listed the current market value, but they counted on the receiver not understanding how much those assets had appreciated. If they listed the current market value of the mutual funds and metals, they would have informed the receiver they held $80 million of assets, not $50.

But of the $50 million asset value stated, Qenta only offered to return $38 million to the bank. But its really $38 million out of $80. Qenta wants to retain the other $42 million.