Milestone in the continuing fight against fraud. The battle started in 2008 against the administration of Landsbanki and is still continuing 14 years later. Eventually justice will be served. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/bloomberg/bnp-paribas-loses-swiss-franc-loan-case-at-france-s-top-court/47479744
This content was published on March 31, 2022 – 09:22
BNP Paribas SA’s personal finance unit lost a case at France’s highest court in its dispute over swiss-franc mortgages marketed between 2008 and 2009.
France’s Cour de Cassation said that the bank had not given enough information to its customers about the loans’ mechanism, according to the decision published Wednesday that partially overturned an earlier ruling. The loans, which were denominated in Swiss francs but redeemable in euros, saw repayments shoot up when the Swiss currency became a haven after the 2008 financial crisis.
The Paris-based bank has faced a number of adverse rulings related to the loans, known as “Helvet Immo,” sold to about 4,600 clients representing 800 million euros ($891 million).
Last year, the EU Court of Justice ruled that banks can’t tie consumers to strict repayment limits for foreign-currency loans that include unfair terms. In 2020, the lender was ordered to pay 127 million euros to clients after being charged in France for misleading marketing practices.
“We take note of the decisions,”a spokeswoman for BNP Paribas Personal Finance said. “It is up to the referring courts to apply them in the different affairs they are treating.”
Wednesday’s decision said that the customers’ complaints were not subject to statute of limitations, allowing other loan takers to bring their individual matters to the French courts.
About 2,600 concerned loan takers are suing the bank on these loans, Charles Constantin-Vallet, a lawyer for the victims told Bloomberg. BNP Paribas may eventually have to pay them around 250 million euros in compensation, though the total compensation could be much higher if other victims decide to go to court, he said.
©2022 Bloomberg L.P.
ERVA have reported again on two more successes in Spain against the robbing banks that plague us.
International Property Finance (Spain) Ltd. loses right to file an answer to a claimant’s civil suit
International Property Finance’s bid to have its response writ accepted by a Fuengirola Court has been rejected for being filed late. “IPFSL”, an Rothschild’s offshoot that operated in Spain without regulatory clearance, failed once again to respond within the time limits of civil litigation procedural law.
Strangely enough, “IPFSL” registered its interest in the equity release case on the 19/11/18 but only submitted its response to the claim writ in February 2020, that is, almost 14 months later.
Lawyers acting for the claimant, Lawbird Legal Services SLP, believe Rothschild bank does not wishto have to defend claims filed against a non-regulated dependent entity -a decision largely based on reputational motives- and yet, are trying to delay the case as much as permissible under existing laws.
Co-defendant Swiss Life Luxembourg S.A., where the proceeds of the mortgage where invested through, is also in default and will not be defended in the up and coming trial, to be held within the year.
Nykredit and Landsbanki rejected again in bid to remove cases from Spanish Courts.
Nykredit and Landsbanki, desperate to avoid Spanish judges examining their corrupted mortgage loans -sold as benign “equity release” tax-avoiding legal instruments- have seen their motions to relocate the cases to friendly Danish and Luxembourg Courts totally rejected.
Court number 2 in Marbella denied relief to Nykredit Realkredit on the basis that all contractual documents were signed in Marbella, despite the bank resorting to the classic cheat clause confirming key contracts were all fictitiously signed in Denmark (when clients had never been there before). But clumsily too, the bank had inserted a clause in the mortgage contracts signed before a Spanish Notary with an express submission to Spanish Courts.
For its part, Landsbanki classic but doomed strategy of attempting to have notoriously biased Luxembourg judges deal with Equity Release cases was equally ejected, citing a 2014 Malaga Appeal Court ruling that meticulously examines the financial transaction and deems Spanish Courts as the only ones competent to resolve the dispute.
Acting lawyers Juan Martínez Soler from Lawbird Legal Services, acting vs. Landsbanki, and Victor Bazaga Ceballos and Roberto Lopez, from Bazagalegal, acting vs. Nykredit, expressed their satisfaction at the correct and just rulings.
Landsbanki and Jyske Bank are refused to have their cases heard in Luxembourg and Denmark
Landsbanki in liquidation (perpetual it seems) and Jyske Bank are trying everything within their reach to have their cases extracted from Spanish Court and dealt with unfamiliar and likely bank-friendly jurisdictions, such as Luxembourg and Denmark.
However, Spanish Courts will have none of that and have confirmed, on appeal too, that at least 9 cases brought by lawyers
on behalf of equity release victims- -Lawbird Legal Services represented by Juan Martínez Soler in this case- against Landsbanki will be entirely ventilated in Spain and, equally, in no less than 3 cases brought against Jyske Bank will also be heard before Spanish judges.
The main argument Spanish banks are invoking is an exclusive jurisdiction clause tied up to the place of location of the property, known in latin as ” La Lex loci rei sitæ “
A Judge nullifies 12 equity release mortgages worth 6 million Euros
The sale was conducted through commission-driven financial advisors based in Estepona, Marbella and Fuengirola.
Court of First Instance 11 in Bilbao has ruled that twelve mortgage loans valued at 6 million Euros, granted to British families mostly in the Malaga province between 2004 and 2007, should be declared void.
The Court dealt with this case as all loans were granted at a Bilbao Notary Public and the representatives of the lender, SL Mortgage Funding nº1 Limited (SLMF), were also based in the Basque city, according to Lawbird Legal Services S.L.P.
These loans were sold to attain a reduction in potential inheritance tax, inasmuch as the mortgage would reduce the taxable value of the property, but also as a means to supplement the modest pensions received by the owners of the properties.
Chester-based SL Mortgage Funding nº1 Limited (SLMF) had not applied for the necessary regulatory permits to legally raise funds from the public and provide an investment service, activities reserved and regulated by the Bank of Spain and the CNMV (financial regulator).
In spite of not having any of the above authorizations, SLMF would lend but at the same time retain most of the proceeds of the loan, which would then be invested by them.
The ruling declares that “infringing the protocols set by the relevant administrative authority to supervise the disputed product is a regulatory violation that exceeds that of a mere breach of banking laws, such as misselling, so profusely dealt with recently in relation to the massive sale of complex financial products.”
The Judge held that in this case, the breach of public policy “is far more serious for it makes a mockery of a whole system of financial and banking supervision designed to prevent abuses to consumers and protect the stability of the sector”, and likens this behaviour “civil fraud”, which is any proposal that contravenes mandatory regulations or has a false or forbidden reason.
The sale of this product was conducted via commission-earning financial advisory firms (Hamiltons Financial Services, Henry Woods Investment Management and others), based in Estepona, Marbella and Fuengirola.
SLMF also recommended a network of lawyers that created an appearance of seriousness, downplaying the extent of the lack of licensing requirements of the bank and the product.
According to Lawbird Legal Services S.L.P., for the claimants, the ruling confirms that operating in breach of mandatory banking and financial regulations makes the suspect a “boiler room”, -even if the company was legally operating in their own country- and allows the victims to rid themselves of a nightmare lasting for over 10 years.
The Judge concludes that the nullity and voidness should be made applicable to all contracts and agreements executed between the clients and the bank, applying the laws of contractual termination in odd fashion –albeit most favourable- as clients “will be able to claim what consideration they gave under the contract without having to return was given to them.”
On Luxembourg’s contribution to financial instability
APRIL 29, 2016 0
Rothschild Bank Now Under Criminal Investigation After Baron David De Rothschild Indictment
Last year, Baron David de Rothschild was indicted by the French government after he was accused of fraud in a scheme that allegedly embezzled large sums of money from British pensioners.
It has taken many years to bring this case against Rothschild and his company the Rothschild Financial Services Group, which trapped hundreds of pensioners in a bogus loan scheme between the years of 2005 and 2008.
One by one the pensioners lost their money and pressed charges against the notorious banker, beginning a case that would take many years to get even an indictment.
In June, Paris-based liaison judge Javier Gómez Bermudez ruled that Rothschild must face a trial for his crimes, and ordered local police to seek him out in his various mansions that are spread throughout the country.
“It is a good step in the right direction. The courts are now in agreement with us that there is enough evidence to interrogate Baron Rothschild. The first thing they will have to do is find him. Once they have done that they can begin to question him. It is a real breakthrough moment for everyone involved,” lawyer Antonio Flores of Lawbird told the Olive Press after the ruling.
“In short, independently of what happened to the investment, Rothschild advertised a loan aimed at reducing inheritance tax, which is a breach of tax law,” he added.
While news of a single Rothschild being indicted is certainly noteworthy, a particularly important announcement was made this Friday.
The French government announced that it has launched an investigation into the entire Swiss branch of the Rothschild’s banking empire.
According to Bloomberg,
The Swiss unit of Edmond de Rothschild said it’s the subject of a French probe regarding a former business relationship managed by a former employee.
“Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) SA is actively participating in the criminal investigation under way,” the Geneva-based bank said in an e-mailed statement on Friday. “The bank denies all the allegations that have been made against it.”
Edmond de Rothschild, a private banking and asset management firm established in Paris in 1953, oversees about 150 billion euros ($164 billion) and is led today by Baron Benjamin de Rothschild and his wife Ariane. The Swiss unit traces its roots to the acquisition of Banque Privee in Geneva in 1965.
The company has no further comment at this time, according to the statement. Officials in Geneva weren’t immediately available to respond to a telephone call from Bloomberg News on Friday.
The Rothschild empire has been instrumental in helping move the global elite’s wealth from traditional tax havens like the Bahamas, Switzerland and the British Virgin Islands to the U.S.
Last month, the Free Thought Project reported on the above the law tax haven established inside the United States by the Rothschilds.
After opening a trust company in Reno, Nev., Rothschild & Co. began ushering the massive fortunes of the world’s most wealthy individuals out of typical tax havens, and into the Rothschild run U.S. trusts, which are exempt from the international reporting requirements.
The Rothschild banking dynasty is a family line that has been accused of pulling the political strings of many different governments through their control of various economic systems throughout the world.
Historically, there is ample evidence to show that the family has used insider trading to bilk money from both private and public funds.
During the Battle of Waterloo in the Napoleonic wars, Nathan Rothschild was responsible for one of the oldest cases of “insider trading,” which led to the Rothschild family robbing a whole nation blind. In 1815 when the battle of Waterloo took place, there were no quick methods of communication like we have today so messengers were used for communication in times of war. The Rothschild’s took advantage of this by having spies on the frontlines of the battle who would return information to the family faster than the messengers used by the military.
When the British won the war, Nathan Rothschild, was of course, the first to know, and he immediately went to the stock exchange and started selling stocks while putting out the rumor that the French had won the war. This created a panic on the floor of the stock exchange and investors all over England began frantically selling their stocks. With the price of all stocks plummeting Rothschild was able to buy out the whole English market for a fraction of its cost. When word returned that the English had actually been victorious, the value of the market soared, and overnight Nathan Rothschild expanded his family’s wealth, and cemented their position as one of the richest families in the world.
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/rothschild-bank-criminal-investigation-baron-david-de-rothschild-idictment/#cDduJvUvPd81bCG8.99
15th September 2015
It is with regret that we report the passing of four members of our group, total to date 39.
We have been asked to withhold their names for family reasons and our thoughts go out to all the families at this sad time.
This financial scandal started in 2008 with the bankruptcy of Landsbanki Luxembourg, seriously affecting the lives of hundreds of pensioners and other victims around Europe facing the difficult battle to obtain Justice from Luxembourg . Sadly four more victims have not lived to see the conclusion of our determined efforts.
It is widely believed that the Administrator, Madam Hamilius, has done everything possible to obstruct proper proceedings with the objective of delaying the conclusion of this sad affair as this brings her in more money as the years go by and protects the Bank and bankers.
The administration team is well aware of the average age of the victims of what is considered premeditated fraud, mostly well over 80 years, so for her it is just a waiting game, offering maximum protection to the Luxembourg Finance Centre in such disrepute today.
As events unfold and the truth is exposed outside Luxembourg, we hope to find that the Luxembourg bankruptcy administration’s efforts to obstruct the truth, have been in vain as justice prevails.
Luxembourg should be ashamed for having condoned these disgraceful actions for so long and for having caused such unnecessary suffering to so many people.
From the ERVA website erva.es September 2015
The Lies of The Premier Group (Isle of Man) Limited Uncovered
The previous post published on ERVA explains that Michael Richardson, founder of the above 2 companies, does not hide the fact his 2007 company -The Premier Group (Isle of Man) Limited- is the successor of the BVI-based Premier Balanced Distribution Inc.
But now, the Financial Supervision Commission has confirmed that not only did one take over from the other but that they are, in essence, the same firm.
An FSC officer has confirmed, unofficially, the following:
- The BVI company’s website was www.thepremiergroup.biz, the same as the 2007 company.
- The email address firstname.lastname@example.org, used by the previous company, is currently in use by the 2007 company.
- Until December 2007, the 2007 company used the BVI company’s telephone and fax numbers: +44 (0) 1624 838110 y Fax and 44 (0) 1624 836785.
- The 2007 company used the green BVI company logo/branding (above) on its website until…May 2010: that’s 3 years after it was incorporated. This is the logo used in the 2004 promotional literature that CAINS says “has nothing to do with its client”.
- The Daily Telegraph, among others, confirmed in 2005 that The Premier Group was based in…the Isle of Man.
For CAINS Advocates though they are two totally separate companies with no connection whatsoever, according to their “independent” report filed with the Bilbao Courts. CAINS says the following in its report:
Nothwithstanding that Cains acts as Isle of Man legal adviser to the The Premier Group (Isle of Man) Limited, we shall act objectively and our statements shall take into account all circumstances which may prove to be favourable as well as those that may cause harm to any of the parties of the proceedings previously stated.
CAINS is employed by the 2007 The Premier Group (Isle of Man) Limited and were also the appointed counsel for the BVI company and they therefore should and could have known that their statement is at best inaccurate and misleading and at worst, fraudulent.
This breach constitutes serious professional misconduct and failure to comply with the principles, rules and regulations of the legal profession in the Isle of Man.
This is a good start to 2015 with the indictment of some of those involved in the selling of the evil, dishonest and fraudulent EQUITY RELEASE SCHEME by Landsbanki Lux, endorsed by Luxembourg. We sincerely hope that this is the beginning of the end of the reign of terror brought to bear on all the unsuspecting and trusting pensioners in Europe that were sucked into this scam. It looks like these villains are to face some serious prison terms if found guilty.
The High Court in Paris has formally indicted a number of former employees of the almost-defunct Landsbanki for offences set forth and punishable by Articles 313-1, 313-3, 313-7 and 318-8 of the French Criminal Code. The individuals are the following:
- Thoroddsen Gunnar
- Jensen Torben Bierregaard
- Lindfors Olle
- Failly Vincent
- Nielsen Morten Juul
- Anthony Henry Robert
- Marcerou Pascal
- Gudmundsson Bjorgolfur
The French Court considers that these individuals may be liable, prima facie, for “fraud, breach of trust by an individual engaged or providing assistance on a regular or ancillary basis in transactions involving the property of third parties for which it recovered funds or securities”.___________________________ALARMING JUDICIAL COWARDICE from LUXEMBOURG confirms LUXLEAKS is ESSENTIAL for European citizens and consumers.THE LUXEMBOURG COURT RULING
Landsbanki: The VICTIMS’ DESPAIR
06.01.2015 by Veronique Poujol, Paperjam, LuxembourgLuxembourg judiciary refers victims to France and the Spain.The Chamber of the Council of the Court of appeal, sitting behind closed doors, ruled the complaints made by the Group of victims Landsbanki Luxembourg bank against the classification of their complaint for false accounting and criminal conspiracy the to be not founded. So there remains the charge of money-laundering against the liquidator, but the Prosecutor remains opposed to the initiation of any investigation.The Group of victims of Landsbanki, suffered a new setback in the hands the Luxembourg justice system, just a few days before Christmas.On 17 December, the Chamber of the Council of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, of investigating judge Stéphane MAAS dated October 21, refusing to pursue any investigation into the false accounting or conspiracy.The complaint with civil parties totalling 106, was lodged against members of the banking network of Landsbanki, intermediaries who had scoured the Mediterranean coasts of France and Spain seeking retired owners of real estate to mortgage against toxic equity release loans. The complaint was also lodged against the liquidator of the Bank, lawyer Yvette Hamilius.Last July, the Court of appeal requested the opening of an investigation into money laundering believing there was enough evidence to demonstrate that the marketing of the toxoc Equity Release products had been using dishonest methods falling classified as fraud. In seeking to recover these assets, the liquidators could be seen to be money laundering.NO REASON TO REVOKE THE LIQUIDATORSDespite this decision of the Court on 10 July 2014, prosecutors refused to incriminate Me Yvette Hamilius and took a decision not to investigate, as was shown in the commercial judgment of November 14, dismissing the complaints and requests made by the Group of Victims for the removal of the liquidator.“The Suspicion thrown on the liquidator in relation to any money-laundering charges, does not warrant a removal from office” affirmed the judges.As for the accusations of false accounting and criminal conspiracy against the intermediaries and managers of Landsbanki, the judgment of 17 December is not good news for hundreds of victims.
Indeed, the Court of Appeal confirmed the order rendered by Judge MAAS. The judge had declared inadmissible the complaints made by the Civil parties, inadmissible.” There is no need to pursue the case regarding the offences of false accounting and criminal conspiracy given the failure of the civil parties to present evidence of personal individual damage.”The victims, said the investigating judge, did not suffer personally in direct causal relationship because of the criminal offences of false accountancy and criminal conspiracy.
Stéphane Maas confirmed the views of the State Prosecutor which on 20 October 2014 concluded that the civil parties had not justified
“Any personal damage or even a possibility of prejudice.MISREPRESENTATION OF THE TRIPLE A RATINGThe victims had argued that the falsification of accounts and false statements had created a misleading appearance of solvency and financial stability of the Bank and had generated trust encouraging signature of equity Release contracts. If the victims had known about the, share and stock manipulations of the Bank and the fragility of the guarantees offered to the central banks of Iceland and Luxembourg to obtain loans and maintain a note triple A rating, they would not have contracted such loans.But while acknowledging that a triple A credit rating is
“a key test” for investors in the estimation of risk and that the triple A of Landsbanki,
“contributed to the confidence of victims”, the chamber of the Council of the Court of appeal considers, however that
“It has not been proved that this triple A rating was a determining factor in subscribing to the Equity Release scheme”.Its marketing, was based on rate of return and tax advantages, the Bank having, “displayed exceptional benefits from exceptionally high yield and safe investment and promised the Spanish inheritance tax advantages”, which supports the judges’ politically correct language.In short, the Bank encouraged Tax Fraud, but the responsibility is to be imputed entirely onto the customers (consumers).VICTIMS REFERRED BACK TO FRENCH and SPANISH JUDICIARYThe appearance of financial solidity which was boasted by the Luxembourg bank in its advertisements in Spain is according to the Court,
“Only one element among others that can characterize the fraudulent manoeuvres Landsbanki Luxembourg is accused of and whose criminal file contains the evidence.However, even if fraud was committed by the Bank to artificially maintain its stock at high prices and falsely maintain it’s solvability to deceive the Central Banks, in order to borrow money from them and subsequently have false accounting impacting on the veracity of accounts,
the Judges affirmed that :« False accounting which could affect the banks’ accounts, could not cause direct and personal damage to the civil parties» ,
as the judges then threw out the victims back to the respective judiciary in France and Spain.“The economic and moral harm (…).” ” could only (sic) be caused directly by the qualified fraud, facts pursued by internationally competent French and Spanish judicial authorities “, says the Court of appeal.“With regard to the offence of criminal conspiracy lodged by the group against the broker intermediaries and managers of Landsbanki, the reasoning of judges can be resumed in the same usual refrains to be heard, repeatedly in Luxembourg:
This offence by itself could not be the source of a “direct and personal damage.”The group can expect nothing from the Luxembourg justice system, other than a possible surprise on the basis of the money laundering case which is still pending, and it is in France and Spain that the Judicial match should now be played, when the Bank was in Luxembourg.