Boiler Room Scams

No, don't talk with them, they are the same - I saw the price -page is gone- I think then the account is gone in the same way. But, you know, the same beneficiaries are used by different cheaters. Its possible, that you are lucky and price... is using another "broker-name"with the same account-details.
That Soltera Mining page is a fake, if there is any company called like this, is not the one which keeps this page. Anyway ,try to make a recall and if the account is closed, you've to use a special lawyer ( and FBI- account is in the states)- don't look in the net, 'cause some are faked ,too. Mail me, you find my adress ,if you look properly.
 
anley said:
Any company with the word 'Global' in its name, especially a financial one is a company best avoided.

Case in point Argos Global Equities.

But then people don't like me saying things because I'm too cynical.

Lucky for me, otherwise I might have fallen for the sales patter and bought a chunk of New Millenium Medical (NMM) - bwahahahahaha
Click to expand...


GB GLOBAL Mining AG. Chamerstrasse 44 Hunenberg Switzerland. Google the address and the company.
 
pboyles said:
You dont think Sven has fallen for something similar do you with Swiss Commodity Holding AG? Dodgy website, no contact details, say they have 97 billion of a portfolio, shares will be worth millions when they float etc etc.

Man behind Notts County deal has £2m assets frozen | Football | The Guardian
Click to expand...


Now heres a surprise, seems the 'investors' are having trouble getting their money out of this company.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op...e-notts-county-sven-goran-erikss&cat=business
 
The importance of below link (The International Bar Association article) cannot be overemphasized to all victims fallen prey to boiler rooms!

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisp...

I urge everybody to read it. Essentially what it says is that whereas historically banks saw their duty of care was exclusively to their customers (i.e. account holders)it is now being accepted by the judiciary that banks have an equal duty of care to third parties (i.e. non-customers)that are either defrauded or potentially defrauded by a bank's customer. The first sentence of this article expresses this very well:

"Recent Canadian judicial decisions have established that a bank owes a duty of care to non-customers once it has actual knowledge of, or is willfully blind to, the use of its services for fraudulent purposes. In Ontario in particular, the possibility is still open that a bank may owe such a duty even where it does not have actual knowledge (or is not willfully blind or reckless to the existence) of a fraud".

It is indisputable that boiler rooms could not operate without bank accounts and thus it is clear that such fraud could be stopped almost overnight if banks took more care in checking out prospective new account applicants. And that is the key: If a bank fails to carry out proper checks and this failure results in non-customers being defrauded then the bank has failed in its duty of care to these non-customers and so has to accept some if not all responsibility for their losses.

I would encourage all boiler room victims to at least communicate with the boiler room's bank by writing a "Mareva Letter". The article clearly describes what the letter should contain. The paperwork from the boiler room will always do the job as it ties the boiler room to the bank by naming the collecting agent (the beneficiary) who is of course a customer of the bank (i.e. an account holder). There is no way that a bank can dodge this and once it has received such a letter it has to do something. The point to seize on is the bank's vetting procedures for new account applicants. Certainly from what I have seen the typical boiler room's collecting agent should never have passed the first hurdle given today's strict anti-money laundering regulations.
 
LivingInHope said:
I have fallen for an investment scam in Soltera Mining Corp by Price Webb Associates. My money was wired to Keybank in the USA. Has anyone got any suggestions on how to initiate proceedings to try and get at least some of my cash returned. Could it be worth contacting Keydata to advise they are unwittingly taking part in a money laundering operation as a first step? Any suggestions most welcome. Thanks
Click to expand...

This posting on this subject boiler rooms is crucial. The importance of this link (The International Bar Association article) cannot be overemphasized to all victims fallen prey to boiler rooms!
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisp...

I urge everybody to read it. Essentially what it says is that whereas historically banks saw their duty of care was exclusively to their customers (i.e. account holders)it is now being accepted by the judiciary that banks have an equal duty of care to third parties (i.e. non-customers)that are either defrauded or potentially defrauded by a bank's customer. The first sentence of this article expresses this very well:

"Recent Canadian judicial decisions have established that a bank owes a duty of care to non-customers once it has actual knowledge of, or is willfully blind to, the use of its services for fraudulent purposes. In Ontario in particular, the possibility is still open that a bank may owe such a duty even where it does not have actual knowledge (or is not willfully blind or reckless to the existence) of a fraud".

It is indisputable that boiler rooms could not operate without bank accounts and thus it is clear that such fraud could be stopped almost overnight if banks took more care in checking out prospective new account applicants. And that is the key: If a bank fails to carry out proper checks and this failure results in non-customers being defrauded then the bank has failed in its duty of care to these non-customers and so has to accept some if not all responsibility for their losses.

I would encourage all boiler room victims to at least communicate with the boiler room's bank by writing a "Mareva Letter". The article clearly describes what the letter should contain. The paperwork from the boiler room will always do the job as it ties the boiler room to the bank by naming the collecting agent (the beneficiary) who is of course a customer of the bank (i.e. an account holder). There is no way that a bank can dodge this and once it has received such a letter it has to do something. The point to seize on is the bank's vetting procedures for new account applicants. Certainly from what I have seen the typical boiler room's collecting agent should never have passed the first hurdle given today's strict anti-money laundering regulations.
(y)
 
jamijoy said:
Hey.

I'm new to this site.
I've invested money in Atlantic International Partnership. (AIP)
And own stocks in SHZ, according to them atleast.

Does anyone know anything about this company?
Cant find post/threads anywhere about that these people are fraud/scam.

www.atlanticinternationalpartnership.com

Best regards, Jamijoy
Click to expand...

This posting on this subject boiler rooms is crucial. The importance of this link (The International Bar Association article) cannot be overemphasized to all victims fallen prey to boiler rooms!
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisp...

I urge everybody to read it. Essentially what it says is that whereas historically banks saw their duty of care was exclusively to their customers (i.e. account holders)it is now being accepted by the judiciary that banks have an equal duty of care to third parties (i.e. non-customers)that are either defrauded or potentially defrauded by a bank's customer. The first sentence of this article expresses this very well:

"Recent Canadian judicial decisions have established that a bank owes a duty of care to non-customers once it has actual knowledge of, or is willfully blind to, the use of its services for fraudulent purposes. In Ontario in particular, the possibility is still open that a bank may owe such a duty even where it does not have actual knowledge (or is not willfully blind or reckless to the existence) of a fraud".

It is indisputable that boiler rooms could not operate without bank accounts and thus it is clear that such fraud could be stopped almost overnight if banks took more care in checking out prospective new account applicants. And that is the key: If a bank fails to carry out proper checks and this failure results in non-customers being defrauded then the bank has failed in its duty of care to these non-customers and so has to accept some if not all responsibility for their losses.

I would encourage all boiler room victims to at least communicate with the boiler room's bank by writing a "Mareva Letter". The article clearly describes what the letter should contain. The paperwork from the boiler room will always do the job as it ties the boiler room to the bank by naming the collecting agent (the beneficiary) who is of course a customer of the bank (i.e. an account holder). There is no way that a bank can dodge this and once it has received such a letter it has to do something. The point to seize on is the bank's vetting procedures for new account applicants. Certainly from what I have seen the typical boiler room's collecting agent should never have passed the first hurdle given today's strict anti-money laundering regulations.
(y)
 
wilvanbil103 said:
Way to go Kathleen!
I recently informed the compliance dept of HSBC in Hongkong that one of their accounts is used by a boilerroom (Phillipsmason) transfer agent after I was contacted by this boiler room to buy bogus shares. So far, no feedback from HSBC except an automated confirmation of receipt.
The weak point of the boiler rooms is the bank account and this is the place to apply pressure!!
Click to expand...


This posting on this subject boiler rooms is crucial. The importance of this link (The International Bar Association article) cannot be overemphasized to all victims fallen prey to boiler rooms!
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisp...

I urge everybody to read it. Essentially what it says is that whereas historically banks saw their duty of care was exclusively to their customers (i.e. account holders)it is now being accepted by the judiciary that banks have an equal duty of care to third parties (i.e. non-customers)that are either defrauded or potentially defrauded by a bank's customer. The first sentence of this article expresses this very well:

"Recent Canadian judicial decisions have established that a bank owes a duty of care to non-customers once it has actual knowledge of, or is willfully blind to, the use of its services for fraudulent purposes. In Ontario in particular, the possibility is still open that a bank may owe such a duty even where it does not have actual knowledge (or is not willfully blind or reckless to the existence) of a fraud".

It is indisputable that boiler rooms could not operate without bank accounts and thus it is clear that such fraud could be stopped almost overnight if banks took more care in checking out prospective new account applicants. And that is the key: If a bank fails to carry out proper checks and this failure results in non-customers being defrauded then the bank has failed in its duty of care to these non-customers and so has to accept some if not all responsibility for their losses.

I would encourage all boiler room victims to at least communicate with the boiler room's bank by writing a "Mareva Letter". The article clearly describes what the letter should contain. The paperwork from the boiler room will always do the job as it ties the boiler room to the bank by naming the collecting agent (the beneficiary) who is of course a customer of the bank (i.e. an account holder). There is no way that a bank can dodge this and once it has received such a letter it has to do something. The point to seize on is the bank's vetting procedures for new account applicants. Certainly from what I have seen the typical boiler room's collecting agent should never have passed the first hurdle given today's strict anti-money laundering regulations.
(y)
 
Hi Dru, did you do what we were telling you some weeks ago. We tried to contact and help you, but you didn't answer. You could have already your money back.
Again : go to your bank and do a recall, thats all. DO it !!!!! It takes few weeks and your money is back.
 
Hi guys
Bit of help needed. I have come home for visit to find out my mother has been targeted by greenerearthgroup and carbon trace solutions.Normally she is very careful but the man happened to mention her british and american tobbaco. Shares left to her by her mother.She has paid 2ooo pounds i really need advice on what to do next.

Thanks

Kirsty





anley said:
Watch out for these scammers everyone -

Euromax Capital in London

CPI International - Clayton Pressman Ivy International - I think they're selling Carbon Credits which is a well known scam these days.

Carbon Trace Solutions based in Poland

MARKIT Environmental Registry

If in doubt about ANYTHING please post a message on this board. If we're nasty to you don't worry one bit, as it's for your own good, ie we'll 100% guarantee you keep hold of your cash, and we don't charge for our advice :)
Click to expand...
 
Now Watch This Drive said:
What to do next? First, realise that the money has been stolen and she's not getting it back. Then call the City of London police (Operation Archway).

Then warn her that since she fell for it once, she will almost certainly be targeted again, so be on her guard and have nothing to do with cold-calling scumbags. Legitimate people do not operate by flogging toot over the phone to old ladies.
Click to expand...

That's right. I have heard of people making complaints to the bank and being able to get the money back though I have seen no proof this can be done. It still may be worth a try. Was the money sent to a bank in the UK or overseas?

Make sure to report it to Op Archway.
 
You should also change her phone number regardless of how inconvenient it is. They are going to keep coming back to her and they will bleed her dry if they get a chance. The average loss in the UK is about £20,000, often because people get scammed 6 or 7 times after the initial loss.
 
pboyles said:
That's right. I have heard of people making complaints to the bank and being able to get the money back though I have seen no proof this can be done. It still may be worth a try.
Click to expand...

I've proof that a money recall (via bank) worked for a handful of people (yeah, all fell for the same boiler room). (The money was in Cyprus in our case.) So anyone should try this. If the money transfer isn't that long ago it should work without problems (at least that's our experience). In my case it even worked for an transfer which was two month old! (Yes, I was very, very lucky. I got back *all* my money. Not everyone is that lucky.)

PS: If one really needs "evidence" contact me by PM.
 
Definitely worth a try then. If the banks have started to cooperate on these issues then the boiler rooms will be hit hard. Won't be a day too soon.

I assume you were able to do this without incurring any further costs.
 
Spot on pboyles. The banks in most countries do have a duty of care to there clients. Appproaching the bank with as much information as possible is the best idea and then contact the local police organisation.I know of many success stories where the client of a scam has retreived there money, by going tothe bank directly.!! Goodluck
 
Beware of anyone trying to flog "Nazca Mining" - yes you are thinking "Chariot of the Gods" and this wonderful gold mining opportunity is just as likely to be true.
It is sad really as these third world near basket case economies like Peru, need all the investment they can get.

Some poor devil, over on the motley fool web site, has already been scammed so the scam has been going for a month or two by now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
38,000 names on boiler room scam list
Replies
4
Views
5K
shadowninja
shadowninja
W
Boiler Room Scams - Now for the next one!
2
Replies
21
Views
5K
matswest
M
S
Boiler rooms and scammers.
2 3
Replies
56
Views
21K
kenmar 1952
K
P
boiler room scams
Replies
11
Views
3K
anley
A
P
Hong Kong Financial Trading Authority
Replies
5
Views
4K
pboyles
P
Top