Our valued sponsor

Euro Pacific bank is a scam

you still are saying publicly MY BANK, you are in lawsuits against OCIF etc...because it was your bank.
you clearly made mistakes that brought the customers into this situation. you even never said sorry!!
I am sure there can be a case made against you
Yes, it was my bank, as I was the only shareholder. But I was a shareholder in a corporation. So I have no liability beyond the $10 million I already lost. Yes, I am sorry about what governments and the media did to customers of my bank. But none of it was my fault. I obeyed all the laws and tired my best to protect customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piano
quote mssge EPB aug 29 2022 +++++++++We write to inform you that, although Euro Pacific Bank is now in liquidation pursuant to a Consent Order for Liquidation and Dissolution of International Financial Entity entered into with the Puerto Rico Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (“OCIF”), we can now provide you with a positive update on an easy path forward++++
and more +++++Once your funds are transferred, they will be immediately available to spend or withdraw. If the acquiring financial institution does not meet your needs, you can transfer your balance to an alternative financial institution.+++++++++ and also more nice words about Qenta incl the experienced staff and so on on
Yes, all of that would have been true had the Portugese government not frozen the bank's account at Novo bank for over eight months. No one had any idea that would happen, nor could anyone have foreseen that happening. But its OCIF's and the IRS's fault for pretending the bank was shut down for tax evasion and money laundering. The Portugese government didn't realize the IRS was lying and that the bank was shutdown as a PR stunt for the J5.
 
You are absolutely right about the separate agreement, as PS has not been able to reach CEO of Qenta during the past several months.
There was no side agreement. I received no personal compensation for the sale. The bank sold its assets to Qenta. Customers were given the option of gong there too, but the price was the same no matter how many choose to go, even if none choose to go. OCIF had proposed that any unclaimed money be forfeited the Puerto Rico government. I thought Qenta was the better option, as I did not trust customers getting their money bank from a government in bankruptcy.
 
No one has received even a single dollar from this bankruptcy estate so far, and the thread is several years old. I honestly find it surprising how optimistic you all still are.

Interesting as according to PS a few bank customers did get their money back. Saw this on Twitter 3 days ago
At least one person a week ago said here that they got their money back, so you know, you tell me.
 
I was not the Chairman of the board, but I was an unpaid director. As a director I owed a fiduciary duty to shareholders. When the bank was shutdown, I was the only shareholder left.

So you left as Chairman after the bank relocated from St Vincent then? As you were the Chairman then as documents clearly state.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: Optout
So you left as Chairman after the bank relocated from St Vincent then? As you were the Chairman then as documents clearly state.
Yes, I don't recall having that title in St. Vincent. But its irrelevent to the point you were trying to make. The is no difference between the chairman of the board and a member of the board. Neither are personally liable to customers if they experience losses.
 
Yes, I don't recall having that title in St. Vincent. But its irrelevent to the point you were trying to make. The is no difference between the chairman of the board and a member of the board. Neither are personally liable to customers if they experience losses.
If you don't recall being the Chairman of the bank and was asleep at the wheel, then how can people even be confident that the bank had proper management and compliance controls in place? If the chairman or board director has been sleeping and not exercising duty and skill to appoint and oversee the management team of the company, then they will be legally liable for breach of duty. In any case, the orders posted on the receiver's website has shown that the bank has been insolvent for many years and has breached multiple laws and regulations. It shows that the management and board have been incompetent and should have no business running a bank let alone a lemonade stand.
 
If you don't recall being the Chairman of the bank and was asleep at the wheel, then how can people even be confident that the bank had proper management and compliance controls in place? If the chairman or board director has been sleeping and not exercising duty and skill to appoint and oversee the management team of the company, then they will be legally liable for breach of duty. In any case, the orders posted on the receiver's website has shown that the bank has been insolvent for many years and has breached multiple laws and regulations. It shows that the management and board have been incompetent and should have no business running a bank let alone a lemonade stand.
 
It shows no such thing. I had over 60 employees working at the bank. 30 worked in compliance. We had multiple independent audits. The bank was never insolvent. Also, I was always listed as a director, never Chairman of the board. It's irrelevent though as I attended every board meeting. But the board was there to look out for shareholders, not customers. The bank had officers and employees who did that, as well as regulators and independent auditors. No customer every had a problem withdrawing their funds prior to the government taking it over.
 
It shows no such thing. I had over 60 employees working at the bank. 30 worked in compliance. We had multiple independent audits. The bank was never insolvent. Also, I was always listed as a director, never Chairman of the board. It's irrelevent though as I attended every board meeting. But the board was there to look out for shareholders, not customers. The bank had officers and employees who did that, as well as regulators and independent auditors. No customer every had a problem withdrawing their funds prior to the government taking it over.
Well, no customer every had a problem withdrawing their funds but when I did it I've always been asked WHY and what was the purpose of my withdrawal. That's weird, isn't it? Please don't talk about compliance, money laundering etc., that would sound even more weird.