Sigrún Davíðsdóttir's Icelog

Remarkable development in Landsbanki Luxembourg

with 171 comments

Landsbanki promised “the most comprehensive protection possible” according to the bank’s documentation. That has proved to be very far from the truth. – As reported earlier on Icelog, a group of Landsbanki Luxembourg clients claim they are wrongfully being targeted by the bank’s administrator Mme Yvette Hamilius to pay back dubious “equity release” loans – and in some cases investments, which the bank made without the clients’ knowledge and/or acceptance.

The Icelandic resolution committees for the three Icelandic banks have used time and resources to investigate alleged fraud in the Icelandic banks. The same doesn’t seem to be done in Luxembourg. Icelog has heard evidence from Landsbanki Luxembourg clients, which give good ground to suspect that Landsbanki:

1 Bought the bank’s own bonds, on behalf of clients, without clients’ acceptance, shortly before the bank failed (and at a time when it was most likely already insolvent)

2 Money was taken from clients’ accounts without proper consent for trading

3 MiFID rules were neither applied correctly nor were the clients made aware of these rules and their implications for the clients.

As far as is known, the Landsbanki Luxembourg administrator hasn’t done anything to investigate – or have the proper Luxembourg authorities investigate – if this was the case or not. If it is indeed the case that Landsbanki Luxembourg accessed and used clients funds in an inappropriate way it would be most interesting to know who ordered it. Was this a concerted action? And who ordered this allegedly inappropriate use.

In spite of these alleged irregularities, Mme Hamilius seems to treat the clients as if nothing was wrong with the loans and is trying to recover them, going after people’s homes when everything else fails. Most of the clients are elderly and the administrator’s actions and her insufficient communication have put these clients under severe stress and duress by the administrator. An administrator’s business if of course recovery – but an administrator also has the duty to report eventual irregularities and to maintain a reasonable level of communications with those hit by the administrator’s actions.

There are already some legal cases related to Landsbanki clients in France and Spain traversing through court systems there. One couple in Spain have already won their case: their home is now debt free and Landsbanki has to pay them €23.000 in compensation. In spite of this, the Luxembourg administrator carries on as if nothing was happening.

Lately, the Landsbanki Luxembourg clients have organised themselves as “Landsbanki Victims Action Group” to put some pressure on Mme Hamilius. They now seem to be making some headway. After issuing a press release on May 7, where they questioned the buisness morale in Luxembourg the local media reported on the Action Group, its plights and a case in France, involving Mme Hamilius. She was interviewed in Paper Jam, a Luxembourg newspaper. Some of her answers there don’t quite fit the reality, seen from the perspective of the clients. The interview was no doubt a reaction to a media action by the clients’ pressure group, reported on in Luxembourg.

But the absolutely most remarkable part of this saga is that on May 8, Robert Biever Procureur Général d’Etat – nothing less than the Luxembourg State Prosecutor – issued a press release, as an answer to the Action Group. It is jaw-droppingly remarkable that a State Prosecutor sees it as a part of his remit to answer a press release that’s pointed against the administrator of a private company. One might think that a State Prosecutor would be unable to comment on a case, which he has neither investigated nor indeed been involved with in any way.

In this surprising move, the Prosecutor puts forth the following claim (in my rough translation; my underlining):

Following a criminal proceeding in France against Landsbanki Luxembourg November 24 2011 for fraud by the Parisian Justice Van Ruymbeke and without the liquidator accepting the merits of the claims, she offered the borrowers an extremely favourable settlement whereby the borrowers will only reimburse that part of the loans which they received for their personal use, excluding funds used for investments. A considerable number of debtors have now accepted the settlement and the repayment is now being finalised. However, a small number of borrowers are trying with all means to escape their obligations. These are the same people who sent out a press releases on May 7 2012.”*

Apparently, Biever takes such an extreme interest in the case that this civil servant can, the day after the Action Group’s press release (and on the same day it appeared in the Luxembourg media) answer with authority and full certainty. The Prosecutor’s statements raise some questions. How can the State Prosecutor say this is an “extremely favourable settlement”? What makes it favourable? According to my information, it’s indeed not the case that most have paid. How does the Prosecutor know how many have accepted the administrator’s offer? Where did the Prosecutor get that information? If that information came from the administrator, did the Prosecutor verify the numbers?

Since the high office of the Luxembourg State Prosecutor takes such an interest in this case there is perhaps hope that Biever’s curiosity is now sufficiently aroused for him to take a further look at what really happened in Landsbanki Luxembourg in terms of unsound business practice and improper use of funds. I can’t think of any European country where a State Prosecutor would wade into a case of this kind to make a comment. If his comment is made to come to the rescue of the administrator, the functioning of the Luxembourg justice system is light years from the justice system in its neighbouring countries.

Luxembourg makes a good living by being a financial centre. No doubt, its authorities want to emphasis, just like Mme Hamilius does in her interview, that in the little country investment is safe. International creditors should rest assured that no matter what, they will get their money back. This credo seems so important that the State Prosecutor sees it as his role to back up a bank administrator under pressure.

There is indeed a lot to defend in Luxembourg. Monday night (May 14) the BBC programme, Panorama, will “reveal how major UK-based firms cut secret tax deals with authorities in Luxembourg to avoid paying corporation tax in Britain.”  – Possibly another worthy case for the Luxembourg State Prosecutor.

*Suite à l’introduction d’une procédure pénale en France contre Landsbanki Luxembourg et à sa mise en examen le 24 novembre 2011 pour escroquerie par le juge d’instruction parisien Van Ruymbeke, le liquidateur sans pour autant reconnaître le bien fondé des poursuites, a proposé aux emprunteurs des transactions extrêmement favorables aux termes desquelles ceux-ci ne remboursent plus que le capital à eux remis pour leur usage personnel, à l’exclusion des fonds destinés aux investissements. Bon nombre de débiteurs ont d’ailleurs déjà accepté cette proposition et les transactions sont en cours de formalisation. Toutefois un nombre infime d’emprunteurs s’oppose à tout remboursement des fonds reçus et essaye de se soustraire à ses obligations par tous moyens. Ce sont ces mêmes personnes qui sont à l’origine du communiqué de presse du 7 mai 2012.”

Follow me on Twitter for running updates.

Written by Sigrún Davídsdóttir

May 13th, 2012 at 11:28 pm

Posted in Iceland

171 Responses to 'Remarkable development in Landsbanki Luxembourg'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Remarkable development in Landsbanki Luxembourg'.

  1. Given that Landsbanki Luxembourg S.A. has been in court-ordered liquidation since 12 December 2008, it is not really surprising that a State Prosecutor would follow the file. Mme Hamilius is a liquidator named by a court and continuing to work under the authority of a court.

    From the press-release of the Victims one learns that the nowadays unhappy debtors were promised at the time mid-term average returns of 9% p.a. on the investments made with their loans. Maybe they should have at least checked whether there was any guarantee in the documentation of the loans and investments before entering into such unusually lucrative agreements and taking the money. In the once again fashionable boring banking, it is a general rule not to invest in shares or bonds with borrowed money.

    But, as we learn in this blog, it seems indeed to be unsusal for debtors in Icelandic banks to be held to account.

    Harry

    14 May 12 at 7:07 am

  2. What rubbish Harry!

    You obvously have not looked at any of the figures! You will soon get some shocks if you dare look!

    Landsbanki in suspended administration seems to have manipulated the figures so that the Security control ratio would go BELOW the required level after the Bank closed it’s doors. Just look at the many examples and hold on to your hair!

    This enabled the failed Landsbanki who had BROKEN THEIR CONTRACTS, to turn the client into a DEBTOR and immediately and inappropriately demand significant sums of money within 30 days!
    Clever isn’t it?

    Why was Landsbanki Luxembourg still eagerly registering loans well into 2008 when it was crashing?
    Is this responsable?

    Was this in keeping with the MiFID Law or does Luxembourg not have to comply?

    There was absolutely no proper accounting or breakdown with FACTS figures and dates, as clients were given outrageous ultimatums by those who had been wreckless and FAILED.

    There were many clients who were demanded payment within 30 days based on a manipulated shortfall of less than 0.5% . Again with NO SUPPORTING DETAIL!

    This was nothing to do with Iceland whatsoever.

    This was to do with LUXEMBOURG and the administration of the failed Bank and its CREATIVE ACCOUNTANTS in Luxembourg, not Iceland.

    Before making accusations against Iceland I would have thought the intelligent thing would be to check how Luxembourg accountants can demand immediate payment of large sums of money with shameful accounting, bullying, false figures and incomprehensible, laughable Banana Republic accounting!

    Luxembourg must STOP blaming Iceland for their own failures. Iceland at least had the courage to take action against those in power and hold them responsable for their failings.

    What has Luxembourg done except display arrogance, Harry?

    Even the Procureur General defends what other countries condemn and spouts off incorrect information in the press. Just take a look at the link.

    I personally, find Iceland far more honourable, Harry!

    make a client whose loan had been registered in February of 2008

    George Ward

    14 May 12 at 8:49 am

  3. I believe the figure was 6% on the documentation that we saw although the Spanish victims were apparently tempted with 9%.

    Let us not forget that through Icesave extremely large sums of money were deposited with this bank by UK councils, Police, Fire Brigades and The Tory party by investment experts who perhaps should have known better. With hindsight one can possibly assume that this bank only survived as long as it did as a result of this injection of cash plus the cash received from the illegal equity scheme featured in this article.

    It seems at long last there is a chance that proper procedure will be followed by the Administrator. To date that has not appeared to be the case.

    Unfortunately a press release can only give a snapshot of the situation and we think that one must be prepared to research in full cases of this sort before making comment.

    Once the true nature of this scheme is exposed we believe that there will be a considerable change of direction by the administrator.

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 9:08 am

  4. George,

    Would you have a link where one could consult these figures?

    Harry

    14 May 12 at 9:48 am

  5. Harry, there are all the documents possible with Mme Hamilius and the creative accountants, in Luxembourg.

    However, Mme Hamilius might not like you to look at the details nor ask too many questions as the client’s questions were brushed aside as ‘NON PRODUCTIVE’ and no justifying documents produced as proof of the disappearance of funds from personal accounts.

    Why would she answer you when she does not answer the clients of the Bankrupt Bank who broke their contrats with us?
    Has anyone heard anything other than ‘Pay up and shut up’?
    If so, please let us know!

    Look at the cases where the loans were registered in 2008! Do you think they could put dates on their account summaries?

    Clients have even been told they invested all their personal money so that when the bank closed they would be debtors. Of course no justification can be made for these fictitious investments so the clients are being given ultimatums to pay ALL the money they did not receive with interest!

    How did Luxembourg manage to find such accountants, Harry?

    George Ward

    14 May 12 at 10:12 am

  6. Harry take a look at:

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-1604614/The-Icelanders-cometh.html

    This will give you some background to this bank and how it came to be run by what appears to be less than scrupulous persons. A bank in the wrong hands, offering less than legal schemes. Don’t forget that there are also many victims in the UK who were sold PPI schemes by”reputable” banks. Banks that have now come to regret that particular scam perhaps.

    Caveat emptor is all very well when the playing field is level.

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 10:29 am

  7. Dear Harry,

    you are a victims of the Landsbanki Bank? Did you invest in Equity Release? It seems not because of your unqualified utterances. You were not treated as a criminal by Hamilius otherwise you were following the same way as the other victims. And how you can say that as clients of this Bank the victims have done this investment very naive. If a bank put so much criminal energy in thier sales as LLUX has done for a normal bank client it would be most difficult to realize the fraud. Please notice : we are not specialist of Scotland Yard. Afterwit is everybody’s wit.

    Don’t denounce the victims because you’d almost think you are an employee of the Liquidator Hamilius. And please before you start your next comment, look at the facts, look at the evidences.

    Gerald Flandrin

    14 May 12 at 10:50 am

  8. I have just read Paper Jam and it says that the Luxembourg administator, Mme Hamilius has lodged a CRIMINAL complaint in Luxembourg, against the pensioners for their press release?

    Can this possibly be true?

    Does that mean the press will be attacked for reporting what is going on in Luxembourg too?

    How can these scams be stopped if the people who report them and the courageous journalists who inform the public get attacked by those in power wishing to keep it under wraps?

    The failed Banks and their low, selfish behaviour should not be protected by any government even if it is a small country, surely?

    Rachael Williams

    14 May 12 at 10:59 am

  9. Why would Mme Hamilius take this action if she has a clear conscience. Surely if all is above board she would have nothing to fear.

    This certainly raises the question that an investigation might be necessary into the practices of this administration. However I would suggest that it has to be independent, and conducted from outside of Luxembourg.

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 11:26 am

  10. Is it not inappropriate that a Luxembourg Attorney General or State prosecutor should intervene immediately, only a few hours after being informed there was a press release of protest from the victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg ?

    How is it possible that the State prosecutor could be in full possession of all of the facts in such a short time?
    Is this normal European practice and is this behaviour acceptable?

    Alexander Edwards

    14 May 12 at 11:29 am

  11. Good point Alexander, this does perhaps suggest that the authorities are working hand in glove with the administrator to conceal the truth. Perhaps the truth means that the contracts are not sound ?

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 12:04 pm

  12. Interestingly, Landsbanki used Cluttons, who are not homologated in Spain to carry our valuations for mortgage purposes (they do not appear to be registered in the “Registro Oficial de Entidades de Tasación del Banco de España”).

    This would come to show how Landsbanki directors operated the Equity Release scheme.

    Antonio Flores

    14 May 12 at 12:41 pm

  13. I understand that this was not the case in France as French Experts were used

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 2:44 pm

  14. Nina, were they really ‘experts’ or were they as ‘expert’ as the Landsbanki Luxembourg FUND MANAGERS who were flahing their Luxembourg visiting cards and boasting about the AAA rating of Landsbanki whilst telling us the Luxembourg Bank was the safest, even when the Bank was drowning?

    The word ‘expert’ has taken on a new meaning, as has the word ‘administrator’ and the word ‘Attorney-General’!

    Luxembourg is teaching us all lessons in how to do things, it would appear!

    I shall be watching the BBC PANORAMA tonight to see what else they can teach the rest of Europe! It should be instructive.

    Rachael Williams

    14 May 12 at 4:09 pm

  15. I cannot comprehend why the Luxembourg Prosecutor should make assumptions without checking the actions of other banks who were equally guilty of such actions. Danske Bank, Nordea and others invested (and lost) their clients money and have taken no action to compensate the victims in any way. It leaves the pensioners with no alternative but to go to the highest court in Spain against these banks. Lately group of the victims through the EQUITY RELEASE VICTIMS ASSOCIATION numbering around 40 demonstrated in front of the Spanish Tax l
    Office in Malaga then denounced that government office for it being aware that these banks were removing pensioners money from Spain to Luxembourg to evade. Spanish Inheriitance Tax. If these banks have conned 600 foreign pensioners into these illegal contracts the Spain could stand to lose upwards of 250 million euros in tax evasion. The next round is to attack the Bank of Spain and inform of the goings on of these Scandinavian banks operating in Spain so illegally

    Euan

    14 May 12 at 6:29 pm

  16. Well Rachael, this is such a bag of worms you are probably right

    Nina Foster

    14 May 12 at 6:34 pm

  17. Some really pertinent comments from a great deal of honest and concerned people. The truth of the matter is that Luxembourg look after their own and unless the European Parliament examines the goings on within the Luxembourg Government and the Cssf (Luxembourg Regulatory Authority) the victims of these fraudulent schemes are between the “rock and the hard place” and will be stone walled forever. Landsbank are not the only bank operating under the umbrella of the Luxembourg tax haven. They should be looking at and investigating such banks as Nordea Bank SA and Dansbank SA who without permission from the Luxembourg Authorities have no treaty with Spain to sell these highly toxic products (Equity Release Schemes) in Spain and France. The FSA have banned these schemes in the UK since 1990 yet these banks still target the British Pensioners in France and Spain and in an effort to get themselves out of this situation have started foreclosure proceedings on their homes. Yet the banks have been responsible for investing the funds at the risk of the policy holders although they have no influence in where these funds are invested. By the way this is the law of Luxembourg.I think Luxembourg in general should be investigate as well as the bsnks. Ian Sherdley.

    Ian Sherdley

    14 May 12 at 7:03 pm

  18. An interesting comment by Antonio Flores which I believe was the case. Cluttons although a large and well respected company in England who have many branches worldwide perhaps were not aware of the Spanish Regulations, in their haste to make money by these valuations. Cluttons of course are Estate Agents and value the properties primarily on market forces thereby it could be said that the valuations they came up with were some what elevated at the time as Spanish property was at an all time high. Perhaps in some respects this suited Landsbank as the more the property was valued at, the more they would be able to put into their “coffers” As we all know property prices have halved over the last two years in Spain and as a result these poor pensioners will be left with nothing. Had a registered property valuer with the Spanish Government been involved then they would have come up with very much lower figures as the land values and building costs are set by the Spanish Government without the effect of market forces. I think the Authorities should investigate this situation as it may be said that this was part of the fraud committed by these banks and not only Landsbank but all the others responsible for selling these schemes.

    Ian Sherdley

    14 May 12 at 7:17 pm

  19. Antonio Flores can you tell me if In Spain Landsbanki had 2 estimates done of the house as we had 2 done ? We had to pay for both but they never gave them to us!
    My wife and I only needed a smal loan but the French banks wouldn’t give one as we have no income other than pension. The Landsbanki managers who saw us,both said we had to take a minimum of 2 million € as this would enable them to make us an income. They took the highest estimate and told us it was a very conservative estimate and the house was worth much more.
    It was the opposite.

    George Ward

    14 May 12 at 8:43 pm

  20. For any doubters out there I have hard evidence of the bank removing client cash to prop up their bond prices in breach of a dealing / investment agreement and without permission and when they were probably technically bankrupt. In the UK this is called fraud and market manipulation. Ms. Hamilius’ actions defy belief and would not stand a chance of happening in any other European country. Luxembourg has much to answer for.

    Adam Pollock

    15 May 12 at 6:28 am

  21. Very interesting George. One other matter to bear in mind as to why the Luxembourg State Prosecutor has come out so quickly in defence of Mme Hamilius is the following. My understanding is that the proceedings of the equity release schemes were placed in an insurance wrapper from where they were invested by the banks. Under Luxembourg law the monies that were part of the insurance have to be kept separate from the bank and should the banks go into administration then the premiums that you paid into the fund should be guaranteed by the Luxembourg Authorities. Perhaps the State Prosecutor realises the enormity of what Landsbank have done and are trying to limit the damage. Perhaps it is time to go to the European Courts and let them sort out these scams. You can get all this info from the internet.

    Ian Sherdley

    15 May 12 at 6:58 am

  22. Thanks Ian. It is clear that the prosecutor jumping in as he did, shows a certain form of hysteria especially when you see that the administrator also shot off to register a formal complaint against the group of retired victims, as if she were heading off a terrorist attack!
    What a shame she did not rectify the serious errors which were being made all this time so that the victims would have been treated correctly?

    Some did not have the insurance package in France.
    However some have had their rent seized and even last year rents were being seized.
    Where would this rent money have gone?
    Were rents seized in Spain?

    George Ward

    15 May 12 at 7:33 am

  23. Another thing which is particularly HILARIOUS especially after having seen the BBC PANORAMA about Luxembourg tax juggling is that the Landsbanki Luxemboug victims whose rents were seized we’re even ordered by the Landsbanki lawyer in France to evidence their Tax returns, that the victims had declared the rent that Luxembourg was seizing!

    ( sorry, it’s not very funny for the victims to whom this happened, but you must admit it is quite extraordinary, coming from Luxemboug!)

    George Ward

    15 May 12 at 7:47 am

  24. Hello,

    I’m a Journalist from Reykjaví Iceland and normally I’m concerned with Tourist Sector on Iceland. So I found the Icelog of Sigrun to hopes of some article of tourism between Iceland and Luxembourg. Let me say I’m totally shocked about what I’m reading here. Sure the Icelandic Banks did so much trouble in the financial world but that it has such a big effects on Luxembourg was totally new for me. I can confirm that the Icelandic Prosecutor and the authorities on Iceland had arrested the bank manager for fraud; even the ex-Premier Minster Haarde is under criminal suspect too. Luxembourg and Iceland have nearly the same population and both have an island position. May be these are reasons why authorities think to act so far away from the current law. Both countries have a big interest in the financial industry and if this sector will get damages you have to set up preparations to rescue but all moderately.
    If I read all these details against the private creditors that makes me anxious because in the opposite to Iceland the arms of liquidator and prosecutor reach to France and Spain. It seems far away from current law and it seems like proceedings which we know form Sudan, Russia, Vietnam, etc. but not in the middle of Europa.
    I remember the situation on Iceland in the beginning. There was the same atmosphere and the authorities started to whitewash the fraudulent practise of the banks and the managers. But today it has changed totally and the government has learned to make every point clear and transparent because they have understand that this will be the best way to get back the confidence of the people and the market.
    I’m not sure that in Luxembourg can get the same clearness because for my opinion the point of no return has passed and the authorities are transfixed to the spot.
    Is nobody there who realizes that this bomb is close for explosion?

    Björk Gudmundsdottir

    15 May 12 at 1:40 pm

  25. Ihave not heard of any rents being seized in Spain but I know there have been in France. We were very worried about this also happening in Spain.

    Alexander Edwards

    15 May 12 at 2:03 pm

  26. Bhork, your comment was very interesting and one of the things that has come out of this era of corruption and Banking fraud, abuse of power and whitewash is that people all over the world are uniting to sing the same protests about what has been going on under the noses of those in Governments and heads of Justice systems and heads of corporations.

    Most people in most civilized countries are saying the same thing. ‘ We have had enough’.
    The difference between Icelandic people and Luxembourg people is now becoming very clear.

    Icelandic people have shown the greatest dignity, courage and determination possible and have tried their very best to protest for change and to bring those responsable for destroying the lives of so many, to justice. I beleieve the world has got more respect for Icelandic people today than it ever has before.
    The Icelandic people are the only ones who have tried to bring those in power to face their responsabilities and not whitewash the terrible things they allowed to happen.
    Luxembourg on the other hand blames other countries and pretends to be clean and innocent of anything and blames other countries and ignoring their rules and laws.
    It looks to most people who see what Luxembourg is able to do, as if the people there do not dare complain about their country losing it’s reputation!

    Icelandic people should be proud of setting an example to the world.

    Rachael Williams

    15 May 12 at 3:11 pm

  27. Hello Rachael,

    as an Icelandic citizen I do not feel proud about this calamity because in Europe Iceland was the ignition of all. But it seems you are right regarding the administrator and the other authorities in Luxembourg. All the information from Sigrun we can take as little stones of mosaic and at least you see a dreadful picture. What I don’t understand is why the liquidator ignore all the endeavors of the victims to make “soft” settlements. Why she must always shows that she is so tough. I’m afraid it’s to late. If I were a victim and Mrs. Hamilius would sent the bailiff to my door and she seized my rent (did she has the authority to seize an payment from my guest ?? That’s sounds very strange because the guest payment has nothing to do with any loan agreement) I would start to fight as the most of the victims have done.
    This treatment, this behaviour seems very strange to me and I can’t believe that has happened in the middle of Europe.

    Björk Gudmundsdottir

    15 May 12 at 5:45 pm

  28. We were all terrified. We did not know if our rent would be seized, if our furniture would be taken as the Bailiff kept coming to some of the French victims’s houses to take photos and we all knew what was happening to these people and if it happened to them the same could happen to us. We did not know what could happen next.

    We have all been following every newspaper in every country and every Landsbanki story for all these years.
    I has been a terrifying worst 3 years and it’s not over Bjork.
    Impossible to talk to the administrator. We have written, we have tried to explain.Even the lawyers who made appointements to see her and went to Luxembourg could not get to talk to her. She just didn’t seem to think that the French lawyers deserved any more respect than she thought the victims deserved respect. It has shocked everyone and of course our lawyers couldn’t believe it.
    I don’t know if the Spanish lawyers got to speak to her but the press is full of stories about how angry those of the French singer were as she just refused to speak to them even though they came to luxembourg specially to see her!
    Incredible!

    Rachael Williams

    15 May 12 at 6:06 pm

  29. I have to say that I am at a loss to understand how, if the story is correct, the court in Paris levied a 50 million euro surety, plus fines against the administrator
    that she has obtained a ruling from the Luxembourg courts that they do not have to pay this surety, or fines. I may have misunderstood this but if it is true can it be possible that the French Judges are going to be happy about this ruling. Does Luxembourg dictate French law ?

    Nina Foster

    15 May 12 at 9:29 pm

  30. From the Prosecutor’s press release, one learns that the French judge has himself suspended the payement of the 50 million euro deposit by the bank (in liquidation) until end of May. The French judge appears to have done so, because the liquidator has, following judgements in French courts, significantly changed her position towards the debtors by offering them a compromise. This deal consists, according to the Prosecutors press release, in the debtors accepting as debt towards the Landsbanki estate only the money they did indeed receive at the time in cash from the bank. The part of the loan invested at the time in a securities portfolio and/or a life insurance would however be waived by the liquidator. What the Prosecutor points out, is that at least some debtors refuse even to acknowledge that the money they received in cash is a debt they have towards the Landsbanki Luxembourg estate.
    For all the frustration with the liquidator former customers of the bank have, one should not forget that she succeeded eventually to have all private deposit holders of the bank to be fully reimbursed. This is a rather exceptional development for a failed bank. For former Landsbanki Iceland customers, a similar outcome was made possible for residents of Iceland through the nationalisation of the local activities of the bank. But Landsbanki Iceland customers in the Netherlands, for instance, will most probably never recover their money if the sum was bigger than the sum covered by the State guarantee scheme.
    I can understand that people who have been hit by the failure of their bank, the realisation that promises made to them were by far to optimistic, that the contracts they signed differed from the promises they were made as well as the crash in real estate values in Spain are in no happy mood. But I am not sure that the Luxembourg judicial system is to blame for all of their misery.

    Harry

    16 May 12 at 7:50 am

  31. Harry you may be right in your comments that the Luxembourg judicial system was not the instigator of the misery, It would seem however that with the current stance of the State Prosecutor he could in fact be responsible for compounding the misery all victims of the equity release schemes, whichever bank is involved.
    I was reading an article yesterday that stated that the cssf had informed the State Prosecutor that Landsbank had a licence to operate these schemes, which I find interesting on a number of accounts. Someone correct me if I am wrong. The Luxembourg Assoc of Bankers have sated (document available) that Luxembourg do not have equity release schemes, therefor how can these be “Passported” to other European countries. My understanding is that if the bank do not have a branch in a particular country then the Luxembourg Authorities I presume the cssf has to write to the regulatory authorities in that country be it France or Spain to register such scheme. I know of one particular case in Spain where the lawyers of one of the banks has informed them that as they do not have a branch office in Spain no treaty exists between Luxembourg and Spain to sell these highly toxic schemes.
    Just to finish off even the Luxembourg Banking Association have suggested that victims should take legal action against the banks operating in Luxembourg.

    Ian Sherdley

    16 May 12 at 10:23 am

  32. Harry, in answer to your post at 7.50 this morning.

    First of all lets just make sure we are all aware of the circumstances surrounding this unfortunate situation that the clients of the failed bank Landsbanki find themselves. Probably with few exceptions they were retired individuals and couples in need of some extra funds to bolster their retirement. They were offered the chance with this scheme to realise with little or no risk coupled with guarantees of “The most comprehensive protection possible” (Landsbanki’s wording not theirs) the opportunity to tap into possibly their biggest asset, their home.
    With the demise of the bank they now find themselves, having been solicited as investors (again Landsbanki’s words) being treated as debtors with no rights of redress. They have been lulled by slick salesmen into joining this scheme and now find themselves fighting to keep their homes. Foolhardy perhaps, but after all the sales talk and attached documentation that showed for instance that the performance growth of clients assets had grown from 1.5 billion to nearly 4 billion in 2 years it was not surprising that they were lulled into making one of the worst decisions of their lives.
    These therefore were not professional investors with a stomach for risk.
    Incidentally there has also to be a consideration to a breach of contract here. I am sure that the small print will keep the administrator in the clear but the scheme was sold with a repayment period of 20 years so most of these victims would have considered that within that time frame the scheme had an excellent chance of working. Not only that but also that it was linked to a life assurance policy that in the event of either partner dying the debt would be paid off. A big factor to consider when you are in your later years.
    Now in response to your latest post.
    We have to be a little wary of the prosecutors press release as he is likely to only tell the truth in a way that suits Luxembourg. The judge in Paris may well have suspended the payment of the 50 million surety, but he has not dismissedthis criminal case. The Administrator has not significantly changed her position towards the debtors (whom I would still consider to be creditors) in that although she has offered some of them a demand to repay the draw down plus interest, to others she is demanding repayment of drawdown plus amounts that stayed in the bank accounts at Landsbanki. These funds were used without authority of the clients for the banks own investment schemes prior to their demise. Not only this but she will not discuss the demands or allow any negotiations on the figures presented. The demand also dictates that the recipient will drop any legal action against the administrator and will not discuss the settlement. Rather one sided !
    We are all too aware of the job the Administrator has to do but surely from the outset back in 2008 she might have approached the problem with a degree of sympathy, tact and understanding and have been prepared to discuss each individual case without using the strong arm tactics that she has used. Don’t forget that these victims did not ask to be placed in this situation. Remember too that in most cases they do not have access to funds to repay without selling their homes and that to do this may well take some considerable time. We are dealing here with elderly individuals that are frightened and feel very alone. She surely has to understand this.
    Regarding the reference to the Luxembourg judicial service and their part in this debacle. It should not be forgotten that the scheme that was on offer through Landsbanki was illegal in France and Spain and therefore there should be in place in Luxembourg protection for all the individuals that were victims of this scheme operated by a Bank which was regulated by Luxembourg.

    We would also be interested to see the documentation that Ian Sherdley refers to in his post today. Is there any chance Ian you can give us a link to this ? Thanks

    Nina Foster

    16 May 12 at 1:56 pm

  33. Ian,

    Would there be a link to the ABBL document? Google is of no help.

    My understading of “equity release” is it being in the end technically first of all a mortgage loan. Added to that might come a life insurance policy. “Equity release” is not necessarily a distinct branch of banking activity.

    As to Luxembourg, there does not seem to be any tradition of such loans on the local market as there is in some Scandinavian countries or the UK. But that is not to say that they would be illegal.

    Harry

    16 May 12 at 2:00 pm

  34. Harry
    I think it is the way the Equity release is structured that is the problem. It is indeed a mortgage loan linked to an assurance vie that I refer to in my earlier post.

    Nina Foster

    16 May 12 at 2:06 pm

  35. Nina,

    One interesting point in the Prosecutors press release is that the current “consensual” position taken by the liquidator is a recent development, linked apparently directly to the action of the French judge. The Prosecutor actually is putting quite some egg on her face.

    I would recommend reading the press release carefully and, just for a try, accepting the idea that the chief prosecutor of a democratic European nation does not put lies into written statements. Even if you believe him to be corrupt, trust at least that he is not stupid.

    As to the customers of the equity release products, I agree that most them are victims of unscrupulous salesmen. But at least some of them, when I consider that certain deals were apparently worth tenths of millions of euros, do probably not merit that description. They were just greedy, just like the bankers they blame.

    Harry

    16 May 12 at 2:18 pm

  36. Harry, I think you might have a point with the 10s of millions of investors but actually what we are talking about here are people that drew done much smaller amounts 2 to 300,000 Euro on house valuations from about 500,000 Euro. They are the bulk of the victims by far.

    The question that I would raise is why did the Prosecutor write the article in the first place ? I cannot imagine the Attorney General in the UK replying to a press release not aimed at them. It just gives the impression that there is something to hide ? Or is it just me and my suspicious mind ?

    Nina Foster

    16 May 12 at 2:33 pm

  37. My name is Georgiana,( American) and I am one of the daughters of Landsbanki victims in France. My brother and all my sisters have been through hell for all these years as we watched our 76 year old step father who does not know how to use a mobile phone nor a computer, who speaks very limited French, struggle to protect our mother and their home with bailiffs telling them if they did not let them in to measure the rooms and do all the asbestos checks etc. they would call the police and break down the gate and force the door.
    This has been going on since 2010 and my mother now has a serious heart problem.
    I know none of this is of legal interest but our mother now refuses to leave the house without someone in it and so they take turns to do the shopping.
    We have had to make sure they had someone with them who speaks French and could understand the complexity of this case and it’s documents each time they have gone to see the lawyer and of course they cannot afford the lawyer so we have been paying for them. This is very humiliating for them as they took this loan as the Landsbanki director told them it would enable them to have an income to help us, their children whilst they were still alive. In May 2008 they were sent an email with an ‘ AVIS DE RISQUÉ’ document they were told to sign but not to date!
    They were told it was supposed to have been signed before the contract was registered and they would not be able to receive any more money until it was done and that it was only a ‘French ‘ formality as they love paperwork!
    My parents have had the Bailiff ringing at the gate to deliver mail that had already been sent by registered mail many times over the years. When we asked the lawyers why they were being put under such terrible stress for no reason, we were told that this lawyer chosen by Landsbanki is a ‘virulent specialist in seizing properties’ in the south of France!

    Does this not show why victims, their families and friends all over the world are so disgusted by the treatment Luxembourg seems to find acceptable and want to be kept ‘confidential’, with all Criminal charges dropped which is what is being asked of them?
    It is more shocking than we can put on any blog or any journalist can put in any article.
    Luxembourg may be clever with big business but it is not clever with decent human beings who should deserve respect and not abuse it seems?
    This is the question that should be answered in Europe isn’t it?
    Thank you Sigrun for enabling a discussion like this. It is so important to listen to what people have to say. People can see they are not the only ones who have gone through this nightmare.

    Georgina

    16 May 12 at 2:41 pm

  38. Nina,

    Your misunderstanding is in the “not aimed at them”. The initial press release by the Action Group severely attacks a court supervised legal process (the liquidation of Landsbanki Luxembourg). The liquidator holds a mandate from court and is under the supervision of court. On the judicial side, it is not the court or a judge who would communicate in response – they never do -, but the office of the prosecutor. So forgive him for considering himself very much “aimed at”.

    Harry

    16 May 12 at 2:44 pm

  39. Nina & Harry. There is no link, the document is a personal email sent to me by the Luxembourg Banking Association when I complained to them about the activities of Nordea Bank SA in Luxembourg and their equity release scheme in Spain. If needed I can send it to you personally we just have to think of a way to keep your details confidential. It is as Nina states a mortgage loan, where the cash is taken out of Spain or France and invested in some financial instrument via a Life Assurance Policy. The purpose is that the funds which initially were in Spain/France were taken off shore into the Tax Haven of Luxembourg. One of the main reasons was that in the event that the policy holder died then the beneficiaries would avoid or reduce their IHT bill, as well as their Wealth Tax. Simply because people were told that one would only have to pay IHT on the difference between the value of the home LESS the mortgage. In Spain this cannot be the case as you cannot indebt yourself to avoid paying this tax. Also as the Insurance Company is not registered with the relevant Authority any Life Insurance Contract must NOT be sold, completed and signed in Spain. Everyone I know about was. In other cases it has been written into the contract by two separate banks that the Life Assurance Contract was signed in Luxembourg when the victims have never been to Luxembourg in their lives. There is an interesting website you should visit http://www.erva.es and you can glean much information on what has taken place in Spain. If you have details of a similar Association in France, perhaps you can let me know and we can liaise and exchange ideas. As people have commented we were sold these schemes by so called reputable banks which we believed 100% The whole scheme reeks of fraud, mis-selling and the mis- management of the investments and now we realise that they could neverhave worked in the first place. This must have been known to the banks at the time.It is interesting to note that The Danish Tax Minister has stated in a recent newspaper article that he is going to investigate the Danish Banks as there appears to be some irregularity. You can learn all of this on the erva.es website.

    Ian Sherdley

    16 May 12 at 2:47 pm

  40. Harry
    Do you think the Attorney General’s or General Prosecutors of ‘Democratic European nations’ take sides so publicly on an issue concerning a liquidation of a Bank which has Serious Fraud squads from various countries making search warrants and Criminal charges in several countries, in order to protect the administrator? I wonder if they would agree that that would be their course of action?

    Perhaps European Pariliament should debate this issue?

    How can the Luxembourg Prosecutor General possibly know what is true and be sure there has been no serious errors which are making hundreds of people very angry? How cn he be sure he has not been deliberately misinformed of all the errors and false figures?
    We were all misinformed so why should he also not be misinformed? He was very overhasty and I do not agree that this would have been accepatble in a ‘Democratic European nation’.

    Hundreds of people of the ages that they are, cannot all be wrong and one administrator always right, can it however good the nation is at ‘creative accounting’!
    Also, having seen recent documentaries and articles on Luxembourg and it’s ‘generosity’ to those large foreign businesses seeking tax avoidance, who does Luxembourg classify us being ‘GREEDY’ or is it just you who thinks we are the ‘greedy’ ones?

    Who is greedy and who is right seems to be the question?

    Rachael Williams

    16 May 12 at 3:12 pm

  41. Rachael,

    You treat Landsbanki Luxembourg and the liquidator as one entity. They are not. The liquidator has nothing to do with the activities Landsbanki is being investigated for. The liquidator’s job, starting in late 2008, is to recover the assets of the estate in order to repay the creditors of the estate.

    What can be disputed, is whether the liquidator does have to take into account that certain claims the estate has towards a number of debtors are the result of misrepresentations or even fraud. As I pointed out, the interesting part of the prosecutor’s press release is that the liquidator had to change its position on this following the intervention by the French judge.

    But I for my part consider it too easy to put as a general rule: “yes I got a loan, but I was promised I would not have to pay anything so I do not have too – and anyway those bankers were crooks.” In some cases, victims have a point. In others they do not.

    As to the press release, is there a factual statement in it that is untrue? Some have argued that the point about the 50 million was wrong. But, it is not.
    You do not like what he writes. Fine. But you apparently only cared about the reputation of Luxembourg once somebody asked you to pay money back.

    Harry

    16 May 12 at 3:50 pm

  42. Harry, you should be writing Fairy Tales!

    I think it is clear that you wish to clarify what the Luxembourg Procureur General put in his hasty press release and it is obvious that he wanted to defend the administrator who has, it appears, made a formal Criminal complaint against the outraged victims, BUT you haven’t answered any questions as you seem to be so busy defending them to perhaps look at them?
    It is all very well to be boasting about Luxembourg protecting some, but it has been very clear for a long time that others were being treated worse than unfairly.
    How can the reputation of a country be upheld if Justice runs in one direction and does not protect the consumer from abuse?
    Of course, there are many more questions than I could ever put here and in France people have different questions from people in Spain, Luxembourg, Belgium, London, Germany, the Netherlands etc.

    My questions are:

    1. How can a country so determined to attract big banks, big businesses and big investors and protect its financial place not see that these very banks and businesses exist because of consumers?

    2. Does the Luxembourg Place not see that the infamous Luxembourg law of 2005 everyone talks about hardly respects the rights of the consumer? The CONSUMER is the one using the banks, the businesses and they deserve as much protection as the big bosses and the directors of the Banks, especially when these same are being taken to Court for very serious criminal charges in many different countries in the world and so much of their dealings went through Luxembourg, as we see it.

    3. Who was the person responsible for putting in place the Luxembourg law of 2005 on financial contracts just when according to the press, the banks internationally were aware they were in trouble and who saw that this incredible law rendering the banks contracts ‘unattackable’ in this way, was confirmed in 2009? Is this what makes you keep on boasting about being exceptional in satisfying the private deposit holders? Who do you think they are?

    4. Do you know how many victims got the Luxembourg State Guarantee Scheme you are quick to point out the Dutch did not get?
    How can you justify the way victims of Landsbanki in Luxembourg who had not drawn down even half of the personal money released for them and who were told they had no right for this money because they were suddenly made debtors, by creative accounting with no justification of where the personal money disappeared to?

    5. Why would an administrator refuse any discussion about these ‘errors’ even when they are supported with documents and emails and polite correspondence and regular phone calls to the administrators office over the years? Is this simply because Luxembourg Law gives no rights to the consumer in such cases and overrides the Criminal Courts of other countries, so the administrator can ride over the blatant errors? We really would like you to explain this to us all Harry as our lawyers seem not able to do so? Believe me Harry, lawyers in many countries are baffled by what has gone on, it is not just us!

    6. This is a VERY IMPORTANT question we are asking between us and that is why in the world didn’t Mme Hamilius and the Luxembourg Judicial system smell the coffee and see there was a serious problem around this bank and that before seizing people’s homes and making demands for 7 times the sum people took, they should consult the Judiciary of their European neighbours who were finding grave fault in the whole scheme and in most things the Bank did and that there were serious Criminal Charges to answer?

    7. Why does Mme. Hamilius whom you esteem so highly as she takes from the ones made ‘debtors’ and gives to those that Luxembourg protects so proudly, in a manner to which meets with your approval, not wish to discuss anything nor provide in many cases, sufficient documentary evidence of what she affirms? What about those who still had funds in their personal accounts and were made into ‘debtors’ by simply saying they had invested all their personal money and lost it? OK, so show us where it was invested, in what, by whom and when and above all, on whose order! Surely Luxembourg accountants should be able to provide Mme Hamilius with the correct details and so inform the puzzled clients and their dumbfounded lawyers?

    8. VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION, Harry; why, in view of all the public outcry about the fraud , the illegal schemes and dodgy business dealings of the top people whose names you must know, the liquidity crisis which apparently was well known at least in 2007 and the official complaints in Criminal Courts in several countries against Landsbanki and its legal failings, did your administrator not STOP, THINK, LOOK and LISTEN, before demanding payment of sums which seemed to be plucked from a magic toy box with no serious documentation? The accountants were most entertained when they saw the ‘accounts’ with no dates on them!

    9. Finally, what in the world made Mme Hamilius wait for nearly 4 years to react to what was so evident to most others? There appears to have always been a very serious problem with Landsbanki Luxmbourg and how can she say she ‘does not know’ why there was a search warrant in Landsbanki Luxembourg?

    10. Is a liquidator not supposed to be very conscious of the legality of the bank and all its products and investments which directly affect those she is determined to seize from and double check on everything to make sure the claims are sound or does Luxembourg practice a variation on the rules in this case too?

    11. Was the position of the administrator not becoming untenable in European courts, outside Luxembourg and was this not what led her to ,’significantly change her position’ and waive the dodgy, apparently illegal sometimes invisible investments which she could have checked on simply by doing a bit of reading outside Luxembourg many years ago? It was all out there in full view of the world.

    12. Harry, can’t you see how much this has cost all of us? Would it not have been better to investigate the facts and figures and try to be fair to BOTH parties and also to Luxembourg and its name, to be less arrogant and not point a finger at other countries and label the consumers of the very Banks you seek to protect as irresponsible people who are sometimes trying by all means to ‘escape their obligations’? Why not ask the question as to whether Luxembourg and the Luxembourg administrator have escaped their obligations to the consumer Europe is supposed to protect and also to the good name of Luxembourg and its own people who cannot be happy at the way hundreds of retired pensioners have been treated like criminals over so many years.

    Thanks Harry for at least having the decency to talk to us! Shame it couldn’t have happened earlier as it would have been more constructive and cost everyone a lot less.

    George Ward

    16 May 12 at 6:00 pm

  43. When you say:

    “You treat Landsbanki Luxembourg and the liquidator as one entity. They are not.”

    I say: Landsbanki Luxembourg is being liquidated in Luxembourg under Luxebourg supervision and under a Luxembourg administrator and I ask how an administrator can carry on blindly seizing victims homes and demanding incredible, unjustified money with date ultimatums immediately without paying any attention to the serious accusations of illegality and fraud that Landsbanki have been under is many countries for years?
    The Landsbanki schemes are likened to the ‘Maddoff scandal’ in most International press and yet your administrator ‘doesn’t know’ why there are massive perquisitons and police raids in the offices she is administrating in?
    Does this not sound ludicrous?

    When you say:
    “The liquidator has nothing to do with the activities Landsbanki is being investigated for.”
    I say:

    In other countries a liquidator has to first check the legality of everything on BOTH SIDES, we have been told. How can you just charge in and not check the figures and the legality of everything?
    If there are unanswered questions about legality, the administrator must tread very carefully and wait and see what is going on and look even more carefully at each indivicual case to see if there has been abuse.
    There are cases of serious error in claculations which we have seen and she refues to discuss.

    All of us have been researching and learning and some of us did not know how to use a computer and decided to learn! Everyone can see the rules of an administrator in Europe.
    An administrator is obliged to be fair as errors will be her responsability won’t they?
    Why does she refuse to look at errors or look at what lawyers are telling her and victims are telling her?
    It is very easy just to pretend everything is OK, set a deadline and order confidentiality when you are refusing to provide correct justifications for money demanded don’t you think!
    What about the French people to lose their home in 2 weeks? Up for auction one day after the ultimatum ends?
    Do you think we are all happy about this? We know the cases and we know the Bowens won their case in Spain and the contracts were declared illegal as the scheme did not have a licence and yet people’s homes are up for auction in another European country which is France where there are such serious criminal charges to answer also in that country?
    Why does your administrator ignore every country, victims who says there is clear evidence of error? Ignore every question of legality of this product when there is a high Court in Paris which has clearly said that the case is for fraud, lack of a correct permit for this product just like in Spain and abuse.
    We all have copies of our documents and most of us have shared our documents and we know what is happening to others in Spain and France.
    We know there is a terrible mess and nothing makes sense in the accounting. We know each others cases and can see over this long time that it is widespread and so can our lawyers as we all contact each other and keep up to date as you can see.

    I think George is right to say that it is time some questions were answered.
    We have only had orders and ultimatums. No questions have been answered, as he says.
    The Criminal Judge in Paris seems to have lots of questions which he thinks like us, need answering otherwise he would not have given a fine of 1.875.000 nor given a 50 million bail and accepted the case, would he? Why did your administrator pay no attention to fundamentals?
    This case has been going on for years with the same question of the legality of the product and yet your administrator took 4 years to see there must be a problem?
    What excuse can there be?
    Also the problem with the procureur general’s comment was he stated there was no fine of 1.875.000 euros following Landsbanki losing their Supreme Court appeal against the 50. million Luxembourg appears to deny?
    We have all seen our documents, have you checked them?

    Why are people’s homes being auctioned in 2 weeks when there is serious error and such serious charges against the whole product and the bank itself as well as what Luxembourg has allowed to happen?
    For this all to be likened to a ‘Maddoff scandal’, you would have thought Luxembourg would have told the amdinistrator to check the cases very carefully?

    These are some more questions from me and maybe some repeated from George’s questons. Thank goodness we have this blog!
    Do you need any documents?

    Rachel Wiliams

    17 May 12 at 10:32 am

  44. Dear Harry,
    I don’t know you personally but I get the feeling that you have the false impression. For my opinion it’s simple minded to say that the victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg have got loans and they have to pay it back kindly. I got the possibility to read one loan agreement of a person who did this Equity Release investment and there you find no word for the case if the Bank will go bankrupt but you can read nearly a page what’s to do when the client will be bankrupt.
    This is a imbalance, that same imbalance as you say the victims have to pay back. Because not the Victims were bankrupt, the Bank is bankrupft and the loand agreement should be running for 20 years and then you can claim a repayment , so the contract.

    by the way so far I have understand 3/4 or more of the loan amount from every victim didn’t left the bank. So the liquidator has already her hands on 3/4 of what she’s going for. And the bank is bankrupt so the bank is guilty and the bank has broken the agreement because of the duration.

    As more I study this case as more I want to say this is a very complex case and simple statements are not very helpful.

    Björk Gudmundsdottir

    17 May 12 at 11:33 am

  45. Hello,

    you all are very busy. I read all this comments and it’s easy to see that Mr. Harry is the only “PRO”. Sorry for Harry.
    It becomes more detailed and more law-technical but it is interesting. For most of the question of G. Ward I want to have the answer too because these question we have discussed with other victims here in France. We can not rellay understand why Mme Hamilius refused the Creditor Status? We did place Investments, so we are investors/creditor! Why Mme Hamilius don’t communicate with us? Why this procedur is so different from other States? Yes, if you have only the Financal-Money-Market which is 47% from the GDP it makes sense to protect this business. But don’t forget, all the 3.500 Investment-Fonds located in Luxembourg will realize how the authority will behave if one or more became struggling against the liquidation. My feeling is that all the victims standing up now, they are intent not to acquiesce in this and they leaving nothing undone to investigate and to make every point public. This is not to damage Luxembourg. They want to get justice .
    Liquidator, Prosecutor , Government and the Grand Duke have to reflect about this because to get a Bad Image cost 5 Sec, to come to Normal you need years or decades.

    Gerald Flandrin

    17 May 12 at 11:58 am

  46. Guten Tag, my brother in law Jürgen is a victims of Landsbanki Luxemburg and please be informed he went sick and Okt. 2011 he got a heat attack. He never was ill or in Hospital. He told us that he has done everything to approach to the Liquidator but it was not possible.
    Now I read your comments and I start to understand what the fact is . I do believe the most of you and your question seems very interesting. Jürgen told me that Frau Hamilius ignore everybody and that he will be a member of the Victims Gruppe because he got the same unworthy treatment from her.
    Can anybidy explain me, why the Liquidator only play the card of repayment of the loan amount? That is not fair because on the account of my Brother in Law are near 90% of the loan amount and he has no more funds to pay on top what Frau Hamilius asked for. I heard that she already started with foreclosure proceedings in France while appeal at court. In Germany that is not possible and I’m sure in France too.
    There are so many questions and it seems that Frau Hamilius wants to make an example to show how tough she is. But she must see, that this is a boomerang for Luxemburg because every detail will come to the surface and then there are quit more questions.

    Marion Waldstädter

    17 May 12 at 12:15 pm

  47. Hi, see her is a big dispute. My colleague sends me this link.
    I’m working for Dainik Jargan and Daily Thanthi in Panaji, India.
    Since last summer I’m living in my uncles house in London. I did some investigation regarding the Rothschild Bank. This bank has sold Equity Release Investments too.
    Finally the Rothschild Bank has released every client of this investment without any payments because the management became convinced that this kind of Investment was not legal. The management awed to get a lot of bad publicity. Apparently the authorities in Luxembourg are intent on doing the hard way. OK, everyone’s opinion bound to be subjective but see all the comments, all the newspaper and also this very detailed and deep argumentation. I’m convinced that these victims are ready to fight and they are full of resolution. I can’t imagine that this is not based on clever organisation and files of documents. Unfortunately I haven’t much knowledge about the law and jurisdiction in Luxembourg but my feeling is the victims have it and use it against the Banksters — see JPMorgan Case (loss in 3 Month 2,4 Bill) – I’m fully understand that people become enraged citizen. I send my personal sympathy to the victims .

    Rajya Singh Kurma

    17 May 12 at 2:58 pm

  48. Hello Rajya
    Have you got any details about the Rothschild Bank releasing their clients from their scheme ?
    Thank you for your sympathy

    nina foster

    17 May 12 at 9:42 pm

  49. Dear all,

    Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying the liquidator is doing a perfect or even a good job. Having tried to follow this story from the beginning, even if from afar, I am aware that communication with stakeholders was messed up right from the start. And, as it appears, the liquidator’s reasoning in law has also been rejected on a number of issues.

    I do definitely not defend Landsbanki Luxembourg nor equity release products, even if for the latter it seems that the general term covers very different forms of loans. But a structure that is based on the general idea that an investment is supposed to have a higher return than the interest charged on a loan, as Landsbanki appears to have sold, is from the outset not to be recommended.

    The current situation will unfortunatly not be handled with a view of what is fair and just. In the end, it comes down to what is in accordance with the law. (It is my understanding that there have been already a number of judgements.) It will come down to what is in the documents signed, on the one hand, and whether, on the other hand, a debtor can make a valid argument that he has been defrauded. And unfortunately for a debtor, the simple fact that the Spanish housing market collapsed can bring him into a legal situation in which a loan that was meant to run for 20 years can be claimed right away because there is a loan-to-value covenant in his loan agreement. A liquidator will have to take this into account. Which is not to say that a liquidator could not take other routes than foreclosure.

    What I tried to do, is point out that the point of view of the Action Group is neither complete nor the only one possible. This blog tries to lift the smokescreen on complex issues. And when I see that Madoff, JP Morgan or fiscal structuring of multinationals are used in arguments I cannot help but pointing out that rather than clarifying things, there is only smoke being added.

    Harry

    18 May 12 at 7:44 am

  50. Good morning Harry,
    good to read that you “definitely not defend Landsbanki nor the ER product”. But – sorry – you go on with the defense.
    Turn back the time to 2007 and have a look to the market of Bonds and Investment-Fonds. Most of them presented in their “Term-Sheets” perfomences between 8- 12% per year. Also today you see TV spots where Investment Fonds promote their Fonds with 8% a year.
    Now you takes it as an excuse for Landsbanki that by siging the contracts the clients were greedy to get 6%-9% !! This was to that time market-based. No chance to bring us into this corner as greedy persons. It’s smells likr immoral this excuse because of only the fact that the Bank is bankrupt and has so broken the contracts and not the clients.
    And the argument that you have to brake it down only to the law may be is discussable but not if a Bank did the bankroller. If there is a break down of real estate market in Spain the owner gets problem because they have no rent anymore ( see Subprime loan in USA). Without incomming rent the owner can not pay the interest of the loan and the bank will seize te property. In our case there is no Real Estate Market Break Down ! In our case no client went bankrupt. In our case the Bank went Bankrupt. So don’t tell us what the situation was or is. We all are in the middle of this situation and we are a part of this situation.
    I stop here, I have to chill before….

    Gerald Flandrin

    18 May 12 at 8:36 am

  51. Good morning Harry. You do seem to be a reasonable, fair man and certainly it is the first time anyone has tried to discuss anything with us so I am sure most people reading this blog will appreciate this and thank you for your time and for caring enough to take a look at some of the terrible things some victims have been made to suffer which we have followed during at least 3 years.
    People have suffered what most feel is a terror campaign as we look at the examples of the dossiers.

    The treatment of victims has not been equal nor fair.

    Far from it. From the beginning until today there is no discussion possible and most of us have from the start recognized a debt but nowhere near what the administrator was demanding as the accounting stinks and the figures were crazy.
    There were no dates and no justification of investment with confusion of accounts and we were being demanded 7 times what took with immediate payment!
    Then we see victims having the bailiffs regularly and even 2 years ago already measuring the homes and preparing for the auction when the victims are in an appeal process andLandsbanki is in Criminal Court?
    This has been terrifying for us all we watched what was happening.
    With no justification of supposed investments, clients of 6 months including the suspect period were just told they had dropped below the security control ratio by 0.4% WITH NO BACKUP of an incomprehensible calculation with NO DATES!

    How did it get conveniently to 0.4 percent shortfall so that the victims would not get the Luxembourg garantee of 20.000 euros and they would be conveniently considered debtors even though they they had only drawn down 1/3 one third of the funds available for their personal use!
    What do you say about this shocking case we have been following?

    Harry, they were saying that if you dropped below the 90% which they made sure even the clients of 6 month did, you had to restore 100% of value within 30 days or else proceedings to recuperate the entire loan and if necessary seize the home. This can only be called gross minipulation and it is important, even if Mme Hamilius does not agree, to look at these cases and not simply say it is not productive which is what she has been doing for years.
    This is why this whole Landsbanki Luxembourg scandal has raged for so long and now grown international.

    I am sorry if I used the example of Landsbanki Luxembourg scandal as being worse than the ‘Madoff’ scandal but if you read international press and not just Luxembourg press, you will see that Landsbanki, right under the Luxembourg nose, has been likened on many ocassions with the Maddoff scandal for years.

    The elderly victims of this Equity release scheme have been so badly treated that they have even been learning how to use a computer to research and also now, to protest.
    The people around us and our families and friends are proud of our protest as they are the ones who have seen us suffer the outrageous treatment under the Luxembourg administration and with the full aproval of Luxembourg Law.
    I must tell you that even the International banks we are seeing to try to get loans are shocked and incredulous at what Luxembourg finds accepatable and the extraordinary demands on us in the circumstances.

    We have been driven to despair and to protest as Mme Hamilius has simply REFUSED all discussion even when there is ample evidence, as in the cases where victims had not drawn down all their money and she simply told them they had ‘invested it and lost it’!
    Can you believe it? No discussion possible and NO JUSTIFICATION of these investments which
    no victim would even make with the personal money released for their personal means as they needed this money which is why they got the loan!

    This whole thing is a variation on a ‘Ponzi scheme’.
    Why is luxembourg happily backing such a scheme and not listening to the victims with wholly legitimate cases proving gross manipulation of figures and facts?
    Was this simply not fixing the figures to be sure
    EVERYONE was a debtor?
    It certainly looks like it!
    How can someone be made 0.4 percent in 6 months before a Banki failed, Harry?

    We have all seen the documents and if you ask lawyers most of them have too as this has been the most talked about case for a long time.

    Harry you must understand that we have always been reasonable people not expecting to be treated as criminals by someone’s conduct which has been classfied by professionals as being ‘rude and arrogant and wrong in far too many cases’.
    Why do you think we have become a growing group of people who are so angry?
    What about the victims whose Equity Release was registered in 2008 when the Bank was already operating well outside the legal liquidity ration and obviously going bankrupt?
    Haven’t you looked at these cases as we have.
    This is apart from not having the proper licence to do equity release based on share trading from retired people with no income in France and Spain.

    What in the world were they doing taking on new victims in 2008?

    We know the serious cases like this as we have seen the documents of many people and perhaps you will begin to understand why Mme Hamilius is demanding we drop the Criminal charges and sign a total confidentiality agreement especially against the administrator who seems to be saying there is nothing to hide and be backed in her actions by the Procureur General.
    Why would no one listen to us before? We are not criminals, Harry.

    Rachel Wiliams

    18 May 12 at 9:11 am

  52. I think it should be made clear. Monies borrowed are not in dispute (unless of course the contracts are proven illegal and then it will be another matter). What is in dispute is the figures being presented by the Administrator.

    To say the amounts are usurious would be an understatement. The victims are being presented with sums that do not equate to the monies drawn down even allowing for the interest charges being levied. What the victims want, and perhaps should have as their right, is the opportunity to discuss the figures and then come to an agreement. It is not the victims that are causing the problem here. They have always been there ready to discuss, it has been the assumption on the part of the Administrator that they wont discuss that has caused this hiatus.

    Jaw Jaw not War War

    Later this weekend I will write with documentary evidence showing the wild way in which these figures have been calculated and leave it to you all to decide what YOU think.

    nina foster

    19 May 12 at 8:44 am

  53. Thanks Nina, this is what we need. We need actual facts and figures from specific cases here so that Harry can see why we are so angry and our lawyers are so shocked. This will enable Harry to check up on the whole dossier and see for himself, unless the files do a disappearing act like our personal money did in so many cases!

    Maybe it is us who should send Harry the relevant documents as Mme Hamilius seems to refuse to discuss anything and might not hand over the documents showing the errors she will not discuss?
    Luckily we all have each others documents and have been discussing this for years across Europe and know what the facts are and which quite obviously the Procureur General does not yet appear to know as Mme Hamilius does not discuss anything she does not want to discuss!

    Rachel Wiliams

    19 May 12 at 9:15 am

  54. How can you explain Harry, why the value supporting the Security ratio was REDUCED between the report produced on 1st October 2008 and the report of 11 of february 2009 both of which related to the 30th of September 2008, by very significant ammounts?

    This is what brought into play the demand for additional funds under the security control ratio maechanism and turned us suddenly into debtors with no right to Luxembourg garantees of 20,000 euros and led to immediate demands for sustantial sums of money or else the procedures to seize the homes would commence 30 days later.

    It has to be noted that the operations of the Banks had been suspended since September 2008 even though we could not get any transfers after the end of July 2008.

    George Ward

    19 May 12 at 3:19 pm

  55. Can the Attorney General know that rents were seized and if so will he try to find out where these rents went to?

    Furthermore, is it within the administrator’s jurisdiction to demand Tax returns to make sure the Landsbanki clients had declared the rents being seized?

    These seem to be important questions?

    Alexander Edwards

    20 May 12 at 12:19 pm

  56. […] : Sigrún Davíðsdóttir’s Icelog :  Remarkable development in Landsbanki Luxembourg J'aimeJ'aime  […]

  57. Harry, can’t you answer any of the questions we are asking?
    You said we were ‘greedy’ but you do not seem to be able to tell us where the money from our personal accounts disappeared to after the bank went bankrupt as it was there in the account up until then?

    Also what do you think of Landsbanki administration demanding immediate payment in 30 days of a created shortfall of 0.4 % with no documentation to prove how suddenly the Security ratio dropped so that these demands for instant payment could be made?

    Where is the proper accounting? How can you explain money disappearing?
    Is it not the job of the administrator to make sure things are done justly and fairly?

    Why will she not admit to the obvious errors all can see, or is it because she has the Attorney General to back her up blindly ?

    It certainly looks like it when you read the articles they put out, doesn’t it?

    Nina, we are eagerly awaiting your info! Hope you can get back to us soon.

    George Ward

    21 May 12 at 1:21 pm

  58. Message for Rajya Singh Kurma. Regarding your comment on the 17 May. You stated that Rothschild Bank Directors had settled with all its clients. Was this in respect of an equity release scheme and if so where was the equity release scheme sold. I presume it was in England and are you aware of the details. Rothschild together with a number of unlicenced IFA’s signed may hundreds up to their Spanish Scheme and these victims are still fighting for compensation and the voiding of their contracts. Unfortunately in Spain there is no body similar to the FSA in the UK that controls such products although we are trying to get the Spanish authorities to intervene. In the UK the FSA are very much in control of these types of contracts and view them somewhat unfavourably. I hope you pick up this message and respond with a brief reply.

    Ian Sherdley

    23 May 12 at 11:32 am

  59. I have been looking through some of the documents from victims in France and Spain of this disgraceful equity release scam brokered by Landsbanki Luxembourg and have to say that I think that whilst the bank was trading they were party to some extremely dodgy banking practices, as has been well documented. However the process of administration appears to be even more outrageous.
    There are couples currently waiting for their houses to be auctioned if they do not pay the hugely inflated settlement figure which bears absolutely no resemblance to the sums originally borrowed. One in particular is to have their home auctioned on the 30th of May. One day after the administrator’s ultimatum date.
    The documents prepared by the administrator and served by their legal bailiffs in France show how with amazing creative accounting they have produced figures that put couples in a position where their loan to value percentage has dropped below the 90% figure by 0.1 % triggering the repayment demand. In the first place to achieve this figure they have discounted the value of their homes by a mere 40% ! I have seen some beautiful homes in quite special places and situated in one of the most desirable regions on the Cote D’Azur and yet the administrator has made the house values drop by 40% when the values are in fact going up! An area that has not been touched by the fall in house prices witnessed elsewhere in France over the last 4 years. Even allowing for a distressed sale I would think the price achieved would be well in excess of the figure used.
    I then looked at the investment schedule attached to particular demands and saw with interest that Landsbanki Luxembourg had taken funds from current accounts apparently I am told without their agreement and invested part in no less than LANDSBANKI ISLANDS FLOAT, and KAUPTHING FLOAT etc. and we all know what happened to them. I was also told that certain of their liquid funds had been transferred the day after Landsbanki ceased trading although I have not seen that evidence. However with all the knowledge we have of affairs at that time it would not be surprising.
    Couples have been subjected to the most deliberate and insensitive actions on the part of the bailiffs working for the administrator. Bailiffs have even been sent to frighten victims and notify them of auction proceedings despite a court order to halt proceedings during negotiations, which is shocking. In France people have also been forced to provide details of their tax returns and also any rents that they had received from their properties were then seized. This does not appear to have happened in Spain. Anyone correct me if I am wrong?
    I have met many of the other couples and like the majority of the victims they are retired and dare I say elderly and they are all fighting to keep their homes. Their aim like the rest of the victims is to seek justice and to bring to the attention of the public and official bodies the disgraceful way that all the victims are being treated because of the failure by Landsbanki to deliver as promised and for their treatment at the hands of the administrator.
    What we have seen has shocked us profoundly as it would anyone who looks at the documents we have before us.

    nina foster

    24 May 12 at 8:36 pm

  60. My name is Sharon and I am an estate agent in the Cannes, Antibes, Mougins area in particular although we do have properties in the St Tropez area.
    We have been contacted by several couples and they talk about there being many more who are having to sell their homes because of this Landsbanki thing.

    We had seen articles in the press about the famous singer Enrico Macias and also how the Lawyers association in Nice lost their money in this Bank scam, but did not know it was involving so many hundreds of people.

    Our clients have told us the estimated values the Landsbanki gave on the villas we are marketing but had no written description or document to show me.
    I agreed to sign the petition and write on this Blog site which they showed me . These people have asked me to try to explain what I see as a professional agent, in the documents I have been shown.

    Firstly, the couples were contacted as they had large villas in expensive and safe areas where property values are the best and most stable in France.

    Secondly, the people whose properties I am selling are retired couples owning a family home large enough to house their families which means the bank have chosen a high but safe price bracket.

    Thirdly, they all told me they were encouraged to take out higher loans than they had wanted and were told, the higher the loan, the more income they would make .

    Several things are wrong.
    I have seen the accounting statements from Landsbanki showing the evaluation fees of the villas simply as outgoing payments.
    The only detail mentioned is the name of the persons who are charging the evaluation fees. They are French names. In one case a company name.

    I cannot believe any French professional would be involved in such estimations with such variations in evaluation of the same house at the same time.
    .
    Someone on here talked about Spain not using professionals and I have no way of telling if the ones I saw the outgoing payments for in France were professional but it does seem highly unlikely although there was one with a company name who charged a third of the price of the others.
    They charge between 1,500 euros to 2,000 euros and there are 2 estimates which are never the same in what I have seen.
    Landsbanki has not given my clients these estimates nor any documentation about them although my clients had to pay for them.
    I can therefore not see how they arrived at their estimates, nor can my client as they have nothing to show for what they paid for. They say they asked time and time again for them but they said they were somewhere in the Landsbanki office they were decorating in Cannes ore lse were in Luxebourg.

    I have come on this blog to tell you that at no time have the houses I am seeing ever gone down 40% in value !
    In one instance, the property values were very different on the same house and were given before the house was renovated which is what I was told the loan was for. The loan had been to renovate the property.

    The documents I saw, showed that the value of the house had been dropped by Landsbanki by 40% in an area where property values are going up and in a villa which had been completely renovated after the estimates were done for the loan. This seems to have been done to lower the asset backing for the loan in order to demand more money from the clients.

    I must say, it is amazing which is why I agreed to write in this blog, as these people cannot use the computer and they want you all to know that you are not the only ones who have had this happen.

    It is clear to me that the figures were manipulated just as you are saying.
    They were manipulated by dropping the values of the properties in a ludicrous way and it seems that Landsbanki made a sudden last minute rush to buy toxic products from Scandinavian countries involved in the Iceland crash, from what I see.

    I feel saddened that these people have been used in this way and that all this has been allowed to happen and that now all these people will lose their homes in one way or another.
    Hope this helps in some way.

    Sharon

    Sharon

    25 May 12 at 9:51 am

  61. So much has been said by so many people who have been caught up in this scandalous fraud and anyone not affected by that scam must be staggered by the revelations. I don’t want to reiterate the facts and figures allready disclosed, it is heartbreaking to hear of so much misery inflicted on decent human beings who only wanted to improve their lives in a manner that was no different to the millions of people around the world who try to make a reasonable profit from a deposit/ investment, not speculative, as has been suggested, by some. The outcome of the challenge against Landsbankis administrator and the bank itself, of course , is speculative. Not because there is doubt to the facts that you are all aware of, but to the immoral defence taken up by Mme. Hamilius, backed up by the State Prosecutor. It is incredible that these two people do not have a conscience with their actions, she is not applying herself to her task as administrator in an honest fashion and the immediate reaction of the State Prosecutor to her denouncment of the LVAG is unprecedented. Where are the Lawyers and Judges within the Judicial system in all this?. Have these two pain inflictors so much clout? that they can stifle so called people of distinction who have taken an oath to preserve the truth, no matter what the implications?? What has become of journalists who normally defend the truth of any story and would in most cases, never step aside, let alone withdraw from a story of such magnitude. How dissapointing to see such cowardice at the expense of a number of elderly pensioners. Some readers, I’m sure’ would say’ it will be impossible to break through the Luxembourg Establishment. It may well be that ordinary people, defending themselves against these conscienceless administrators will have a struggle to create a change in them. Wouldn’t it be satisfying to hear that at least one of either the journalists or the legal system had the courage within Luxembourg to wrench themselves away from the clutches of the Administrator and volunteer to help. Better than that, why hasen’t a European politician asked of the European Union, what is going on in Luxembourg??. The pensioners who are affected by the disgusting tactics of Mme. Hamilius and her State Prosecuting friend are from various country’s within the EU, their plight deserves attention of a representative of that elected body, supposedly to protect and defend ordinary people’s rights. Wake up, all of you, so called, people of distinction, don’t allow yourselves to be stifled by Hamilius and co. and listen to the representatives of the LVGA. If you do not, what hope is there for anyone or any group who have and are, being cheated by a dishonest administration, if you do not, you should be ashamed. JOHN K.

    JOHN KOHLE

    25 May 12 at 1:53 pm

  62. John Kohle, thank you for that last entry, you are so so right. I think it must be time to try an enlist the help of our elected representatives, MEPs so that they can prove to us they have a purpose in life ? Lets go for it, Nina F

    nina foster

    25 May 12 at 2:59 pm

  63. […] has been a lively discussion on Icelog regarding Landsbanki, Luxembourg. For all of you interested in that matter, I strongly advise you […]

  64. Nina, you mention the Equity Release being linked to a Life Insurance like Lex Life which was not registered in Spain apparently, in your earlier comment to Harry.
    However many of the Equity Release schemes
    especially the later ones when they started to see there was a problem, were structured differently and the contracts tightened so the client was more locked in and the Luxembourg bank was in a ‘no lose only win’, situation whatever happened.

    These later Equity Releases were linked only to market trading and this needs a special licence. Landsbanki obviously did not have a special licence in France for this financial scheme which is why the Judge Van Rumbeyke in the Criminal Court took on the case for fraud, lack of licence and more besides and why the Spanish Judge ruled that in the case of the Bowens the loan was illegal and therefore ‘nul and void’.

    This is why some of the contracts were notarized in different ways depending on how close they were to the terminal illness of Landsbanki and it’s demise as the failing Bank needed the Equity Release scheme in order to bring assets into their books so that they could get a huge loan from the Luxembourg Government.

    Big villas were needed,the Spanish market was saturated and people were beginning to see the flaws in Spain, so Landsbanki opened up a flash Bank in Cannes to exploit the Cote d’Azur market and large villas in good areas were hunted out.

    When you told Harry you thought it is the way the Equity release structure which was the problem, I believe you are right but the later ones were linked to market trading when the Bank was failing and the markets were unstable.
    This is why the fact that the Bank was a LUXEMBOURG Bank was pushed and advertised and we were told this Luxembourg Bank was AAA and that we were safer to keep our money in Luxembourg as we were more proteced than anywhere else. I think most people felt that they would be safe with a Luxembourg bank especially a AAA one.
    In fact, we all now know it was quite the opposite!

    George Ward

    25 May 12 at 9:26 pm

  65. George

    Interesting point that I had completely missed. The earlier French victims were linked to Lex Life as you state but this obviously restricted the amount of cash that the bank could control. (Embezzle might be closer but i am sure the small print covered calling it that). I think the difference is that with the latter policies the bank actually raided the current accounts of those investors without authority. What would that be called in normal banking ?

    Surely this can be seen as a CRIME ? What happens if someone steals your bank card ? The bank carries the responsibility, tell me therefore what is the difference ? It all comes down to the same thing, THEFT on a grand scale.

    It also applies I am sure to the Lex Life investments as the holders of that scheme had no idea where their money was being invested but I would bet penny to a pound that it was in part into those other Iclandic banks, the same as the schedules that I have seen.

    I therefore ask this question. Having read Harry’s very useful blogs, WHY has the administrator not looked into this irregularity ? I am sure that if this case had been brought before the FSA in the UK there would by now have been a full enquiry and quite possibly legal action.

    As Harry has stated we are dealing here with two issues.

    1. Did the bank commit a crime by illegally using clients funds for their own ends.

    2. Was it not the job of the administrator to oversee that the clients of Landsbanki were protected under banking law?

    There has absolutely no one interested in protecting the rights of the investors in the Landsbani equity scam ( I should also point out that this is not the only bank that has been caught up in this vile scheme, but more about that later perhaps. Antonio Flores is up to speed on that ). The administrator has been given free range to wreak havoc with the victims.

    Well no more. I am in contact with 100s of the victims and I know that to a man they are going to fight back.
    This is going to be an interesting development.

    nina foster

    26 May 12 at 5:19 am

  66. I have just obtained a copy of a House Of Commons Library Paper dated March 2009. It makes for some very interesting reading particularly when looking at the investments that were chosen by Landsbanki on behalf of their clients. Prelude to the crash 2006/7 reminds us that credit ratings agency Fitch downgraded Iceland sovereign rating from stable to negative and raising questions about the activities and stability of Icelands major banks. 2006/7 was 2 years before one of those very banks then invested clients funds in luxembourg into those very banks in Iceland.

    Surely even the most uneducated of investors would have avoided putting any of their money into those banks. In fact surely the investment team at Landsbanki/Lex Life would have the insider knowledge that to do this would be tantamount to committing financial suicide. Their actions beggar belief.

    This leads me to believe that their actions were orchestrated from a higher level in the bank and that perhaps they were just following instructions. The schedule I referred to in a previous post mentioned funds going in October 2008 into Kaupthing and Landsbanki Islands a total value in the region of 66,000 euro that was completely wiped out at liquidation.

    Come on someone, sit up and look at the facts.

    We have more to come.

    nina foster

    26 May 12 at 2:39 pm

  67. Clearly any future investors should think long and hard before dealing with the Luxembourg banking industry.

    Many of these former customers will become the catalyst of the fall of the Banks of Luxemborg as they have proved that Luxembourg allows its banks to run roughshod and that the Banks feel that they can operate outside the Law and that the French Government are incapable of protecting and supporting its own citizens.

    The message must be- Don’t bank on Luxembourg. Ever.

    ( Where are “EUROPOL?” – Surely they should be interested in a trans european multi million euro fraud ?)

    Jonathan Oakton

    27 May 12 at 11:49 am

  68. I would like Harry and his friends in Luxembourg to know that I am not the only one who has tried for years to pay back what we borrowed plus interest to the administrator.
    We have phoned, we have written, we have got mails sent and our lawyers have done the same.
    The administrator would not discuss anything. Judith Gledhill was willing to listen and seemed like a reasonable person and she saw what was fair and what was not but her tone changed in later phone calls and we all deduced that the administrator had told her no negotiations or discussions were possible.

    We did however keep tring over the years as we did not want all the lawyers, law suits and stress we have had for all these years.
    Our health has suffered and our family and friends have suffered as you all say.

    To pay back what you owe plus interest is fair.
    Why in the world would the administrator not let Judith Gledhill explain that we were honest people not wanting law suits and war with Luxembourg?

    We have all talked to each other and those who phoned to try to negotiate found Mrs Gledhill seemed to nderstand and agree on what was fair.

    Now it is us who are called ‘greedy’, by Harry. What would Harry say if he were ordered to pay 8 times what he borrowed in 30 days? This is not because we did wrong or were crminal. thes is because the Bank was a criminal,wreckless bank.
    Why did the administrator not want any communication or discussion when we were being fair and honest?
    Harry you are wrong to say we are greedy. It is the administrator who was greedy.
    Its difficult to write in this box.

    Frank

    27 May 12 at 5:39 pm

  69. Jonathan, well said, and lets hope that you are right. Unfortunately it seems that it is only by getting public opinion behind the cause that these injustices are righted as we have seen recently in the UK with the bank charges and income protection movements.

    Sadly it takes a catastrophe to do this and then some. If the schemes were monitored correctly maybe they would not happen in the first place. Luxembourg does have a lot to answer for as it appears that only the dishonest flourish. If only it were not so

    Surely they would prefer a better image than the one they have ?

    I cannot write here my opinion of the way the French legal system works.

    nina foster

    28 May 12 at 5:24 am

  70. A lot of the French investment funds were transferred in 2009 with our consent after closure of Landsbanki/Lex Life to Altra Plan who invested them with Jupiter UK.

    We were pleased with this action as it appeared that the administrator was working in our best interests. Little did we know.

    These funds were suddenly seized about 18 months later, without notice, in December 2010 by the administrator without our consent and returned to her coffers. Was this legal ?

    We had been able to monitor the progress of our fund in Altra plan on a daily basis and quite literally one day we logged in to find that there was nothing there. It had been converted into cash and transferred out. Just imagine that. Some Christmas present ! We thought this only happened in the movies.

    We were advised by Altra Plan that it was legal under Luxembourg law as the administrator had a charge over the assets. The contact we had at Altra Plan was quite upset by this action but said there was nothing she could do. (I believe that the Spanish victims, unlike us, had their investments seized at liquidation in 2008 so did not benefit from the knowledge that their investments were safe although as it turned out we were no better off.)

    I have to say that we enjoyed a period of professionalism whilst our fund was at Altra Plan that was completely lacking while it was at Landsbanki the so called wealth managers.

    Justice for the victims please.

    Tom

    28 May 12 at 6:17 am

  71. Yvette Hamilius : « J’ai reçu des menaces par mail. Et j’ai déposé une plainte pénale. »

    I have just seen this published interview in Paperjam with Mme Hamilius and I am amazed to see the above opening headline. I was absolutely appalled on reading this until I got to the last paragraph where we find it actually happened to her on a completely different case. This is either journalism at it’s lowest point, or an effort by Mme Hamilius to try and discredit the victims of this terrible injustice.

    As I understand it most if not all of the victims of this terrible scam are pensioners, some of whom are well into the 80s all of whom have plenty to be unhappy about but it is unlikely that they are going to resort to violence. I have actually been told by many of these victims that they have written to the administrator wanting to discuss the figures but have had no response.

    Is Mme Hamilius merely trying to score some cheap points by then going on to say that she has had death threats as well. I am very glad that she then qualified that by saying it was not in the Landsbanki liquidation, so why bring it into the interview in the first place. After all the interview was arranged in response to the Landsbanki Victims Action Group.

    Come on lets just deal with the facts of this case and get justice for the victims.

    stan

    30 May 12 at 7:30 pm

  72. The headline in paperjam translated into English reads “I have received threats by mail” sorry overlooked that !

    stan

    30 May 12 at 7:35 pm

  73. Hello Stan. I am so glad you brought this up as everyone around us following the Landsbanki scandal in the press was as shocked as you were. It does look like intimidation and isn’t that just what we have been subjected to for all these years?
    First the alleged case of a ‘death threat’ and then to add to it another of a person who allegedly wrote 30 emails in one day.
    If this is harassment then perhaps a closer look should be made to what some of us have gone through for 4 years?
    I would have thought time would have been better spent reading the mails and seeing the desperation people were in as they struggle to be heard, rather than rushing back and forth to make formal complaints to the Police?
    Anyway, Paperjam showed courage as at least they covered this.

    Rachael Williams

    31 May 12 at 6:54 am

  74. Mme Hamilius also mentions in her interview with Paperjam that she has paid a dividend of 100% to creanciers privileges et aussi “Notamment les salaries” which translates to preferential creditors and employees. Are these employees who lost their jobs when Landsbanki collapsed ? If so I believe that there is a large group of ex employees who have not been paid yet, and are currently waiting to be heard at a court case that keeps getting postponed.
    So am I right in assuming that this is another misleading statement ?
    http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/34234277857/

    stan

    31 May 12 at 7:31 am

  75. I am trying to establish what has happened to the couple in the South of France whose house was due to be auctioned on the 30th May. Did I misunderstand something here ? Is there going to be an auction ?

    It is the case of the 76 year old with a wife suffering with a serious heart complaint that had been clients with the bank for only 60 something days before it went into liquidation. I believe that the bank misappropriated their cash funds and invested some of it into other Iclandic banks funds.

    They are being asked to repay two thirds of the monies that they never took. In fact it is being stated, incorrectly, that they requested the funds to be invested that way even though they have correspondence from their account manager telling them their cash was safe, and not to worry right up to the day the bank was shut down. Amazing.

    If anyone knows what is happening please let us know.
    I fear there will be more such cases before long unless something is done by the authorities. I have knowledge of other couples, in their 80s, where in one case the husband suffered a stroke at Christmas from the stress. How will they cope ? They live in fear of the bailiff arriving at their door. This should not be happening to these elderly people. It should not be happening in France.

    It is about time that France stood up to Luxembourg and said enough is enough, and that Luxembourg realized that they can’t just bend the laws to suit their wishes and ride roughshod over the French legal system.

    Nina Foster

    31 May 12 at 9:53 am

  76. I am heartened today to see that there is some justice being dispensed against these these illegal scams, albeit in the UK with the findings in the High Court against Magnus Peterson and his hedge fund Weavering. For the full story go to this link

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-2152358/Hedge-fund-boss-ordered-pay-289m-defrauding-investors.html

    Perhaps this signals the start of justice for all victims of these evil scams. Lets hope so.

    Nina Foster

    31 May 12 at 5:48 pm

  77. Thanks for the link Nina.
    Greedy Banksters and Luxembourg who protects them, should take note as the world is waking up to these scams and the terrible effect they have had on so many victims. The world is in a mess because of them.

    “The judge in the High Court said that he ( Magnus Peterson), may have committed the fraud ‘out of a sense of invincibility, self-belief, and a gambler’s mentality’. ”
    The Daily Mail
    Is Landsbanki Luxembourg not also showing a sense of invincibility, self-belief and a gambler’s mentality since it plundered the vulnerable in order to get a loan from the Government based on illegal activites and was allowed within Luxembourg law to do exactly as it suited the most greedy?

    Rachael Williams

    31 May 12 at 6:19 pm

  78. Well Well Well, now Santander Asset Management have been fined 14 million euro and some organisation called Transworld Financial Services a mere 118 million euro, the latter for operating a boiler room scam.

    Is there no end to this. I am just looking forward to eventually hearing the same judgments with Landsbanki, maybe it wont take too long, after all the evidence is in the public domain with 400 cases to answer.

    Read all about it at:

    http://www.expansion.com/accesible/2012/05/19/empresasbanca/1337432877.html

    Nina Foster

    31 May 12 at 7:18 pm

  79. Bravo Spain! Put Luxembourg to shame for protecting the rotten, arrogant, gambling banksters they protect.

    Frank

    31 May 12 at 8:07 pm

  80. Actually Rachael, what is really interesting about that case against Magnus Peterson of Weavering is that the SFO actually dropped the case against them, why ? It was, and this is the most important thing, THE ADMINISTRATOR that took Peterson to court.

    Now in whose interest was he working for. Do you not feel that this approach is sadly lacking in the Landsbanki Luxembourg equity release case ?

    Time to wake up in Luxembourg, the eyes of the world are starting to watch you very closely.

    Tom

    1 Jun 12 at 5:59 am

  81. Does this not demonstarte that the administrator is working solely to protect the vested interests of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.

    Nina Foster

    1 Jun 12 at 6:23 am

  82. Hello Tom, The Administrator in the case of that Bank and Magnus Peterson was only doing her job as any civilised European Administrator should.

    The first priority of an administrator is to check on the LEGALITY on each side, not to be biased and to check out any possible fraud if such a thing is indicated in any way or if accountants figures are questioned by either side.
    I think that for some reason,the Courts of Luxembourg have allowed their administrator free rein on a galloping horse without checking to see if there was a ‘safe’ jockey in the saddle? WHY? Who knows.

    It does seem that the English Judge would describe it exactly the same in this case too.
    ‘A sense of invincibility’ and ‘self-belief’ coupled with a blind disregard for the opinions, laws and codes of decency of neighbouring countries, perhaps?

    The administrator may be full of ‘self-belief’ for one reason or another, but must be upheld in her actions by the Luxembourg judiciary as we can see by the public outburst of the Attorney General after a couple of hours following a public protest backed by hundreds of people from several European countries.

    No wonder there is seemingly irrational ‘self-belief’ and such blind disregard for those outside her patch!

    Rachael

    1 Jun 12 at 6:23 am

  83. Nina please keep sending the blue click to articles.Thanks. I just wanted to say I think Landsbanki uxembourg is sadly lacking in everythingto respet andc shows the world how a little nation getting too big for its boots should not behave. Arrogant is the word.

    Frank

    1 Jun 12 at 6:32 am

  84. Nina Foster

    1 Jun 12 at 7:03 am

  85. Thanks Nina

    Frank

    1 Jun 12 at 7:44 am

  86. Have been trawling around the net but can’t find any reference to the 50 Million Euro having been paid into the French courts. Can anyone throw any light on this or could the administrator be in contempt of court perhaps if it has not been paid?

    There has also been no information about the couple whose house was going to be seized at the end of May. Any news ?

    Nina Foster

    2 Jun 12 at 2:45 pm

  87. you write:
    “There are already some legal cases related to Landsbanki clients in France and Spain traversing through court systems there. One couple in Spain have already won their case: their home is now debt free and Landsbanki has to pay them €23.000 in compensation. In spite of this, the Luxembourg administrator carries on as if nothing was happening.”

    Can you tell me which court in Spain made this judgement and when?

    Michael Charlier

    3 Jun 12 at 10:03 pm

  88. Hello Michael

    If you write to Sigrun she will forward your email to me and I can then put you in touch with the relevant individuals who will be able to help you.

    Tom

    Tom

    4 Jun 12 at 11:57 am

  89. Yet another of our fellow victims has died of a Landsbanki Luxembourg stress- related death leaving behind a devastated widow and family to fight eviction from their home.
    I would like to offer our sincere condolences and all our support. Luxembourg has a lot of questions to answer and what has happened to us will not be brushed away and forgotten as Luxembourg thinks.
    How many does this make now?

    Alexander Edwards

    5 Jun 12 at 7:51 am

  90. Good morning Michael. Many of us have the document with the Spanish Court ruling as well as all the press releases in Spain and Britain regarding this case.
    I also have many questions as you all do.

    Why have you not seen the Spanish court document?
    After the Procureur General made his inaccurate press release obviousy based on lack of information about the true facts of the case which the administrator does not seem to want to look at we check everything. We look and have each others information, which is why we can follow the pattern of lies and false information.

    Why did Mme Hamilius say in her press release, that there has not been one judgement against Landsbanki nor one judgement giving damages to victims?

    Why did the Procureur then back this misinformation up by saying ‘The only Spanish decision to have had the loan ruled, nul and void is in appeal and a transaction has been reached with the couple’?

    This has made us all furious. We know this is not true as we all know this case.It has has been widely written about in both Spanish and British press as well as other European media. The couple is astonished at this public disinformation.

    The Luxembourg procureur said the administrator had offered ‘extremely favourable settlement’.
    What settlement?
    Many of us have been ordered to pay back money which was still in our account after the Bank closed it’s doors and she wants interest for money which has disappeared!
    How can the Procureur say that is ‘favourable”? Is it favourable to the administrator’s friends? Favourable to Luxembourg who should not have given this terrible bank any loan without checking their solvability?

    Why did the Procureur also DENY there was a fine, when there was a fine as well as the 50 million bail?
    Where did he get his information from and why did he not have the full picture nor check the facts before passing judgement?
    Does a Procureur not have to be told TRUE facts rather than wishful invention?

    I have before me a press release from March 3-9th 2011 from Euroweekly news speaking about this terrible case which Me Hamilius thinks is brushed aside and over.
    It is very clear the couple had won against Landsbanki Luxembourg to the rest of the world though.
    Quote from Euronews:
    ” Mr and Mrs Bowen approached us in a desperate manner, the Bank Landsbanki threatened to take their home and even demanded more money.
    The Bowens will receive 23.000 Euros which is tax-free. They retain their lovely home, and the bank that mislead them will now have to pay all the expenses.”
    ( Euroweekly News)
    This couple as well as several others have been the subject of many press articles and TV interviews as the world becomes more and more aware of what Luxembourg would like to silence. We have the Shillings, the Barlows, Enrico Macias the ones who have died and the ones in hospital being told they must avoid stress. These have all been written about in the press who wants to hear from more victims of these scams.
    The British press has been contacting many of our worst cases of abuse by Landsbanki Luxembourg and other Luxembourg based scam banks.
    There was an article in the Daily Mail about the couple who were only clients for a couple of months before the Bank crash and whose house is up for auction as it is such a shocking case, as well as the one involving the Rothschild Bank. The Daily Telegraph has also shown great interest in these cases stemming in Luxembourg.
    French press has covered the scam bank stories widely in nearly every press and in every TV station since the Top Criminal Judge gave the largest bail in criminal History to a Luxembourg bank!
    The Luxembourg administrator simply says,” I don’t know”, when asked why there are continuing FRAUD raids on Landsbanki Luxembourg offices?

    Is this a Luxembourgish joke, or what?

    Does this administrator not know that a Bank needs various different licences to cover different schemes and that Landsbanki Luxembourg did not have the correct licences for this particular product in the countries she is seizing homes in?

    Why would the top Criminal Judge in France take up a case of Fraud and lack of licence as well as abuse of confidence if there was nothing illegal?

    Is this another Luxembourgish joke?

    What is going on in Luxembourg? It certainly seems to be turning into a laundromat.

    When the Luxembourg Procureur says Landsbanki had all the licences to sell this Equity Release scheme in France and in Spain, he appears to be slapping the highest French judge and the Spanish judge who ruled these schemes illegal, right in the face! What is Luxembourg doing here?
    As my wife says, Surely it is time someone got their brains out instead of the washing powder and duster!
    it seems it is time to check FACTS in Luxembourg and look into the serious cases of abuse and money disappearing from accounts, isn’t it?
    I thank this blog for allowing us to express our anger at all the injustice we are experiencing.
    Thanks from both of us.
    We both hope some answers will follow from the authorities in Luxembourg once they have checked the facts and the Houdini behind the disappearing money act is accounted for. Where has the money gone from our accounts? What are accountants for?

    Charles

    5 Jun 12 at 9:48 am

  91. Firstly all our family are shocked to hear of the death of another of our group of victims. The stress is extreme in the circumstances and the consequences immeasurable. We are so sorry to hear this news.
    Charles I too have the Spanish Court case results before me and we would like to say that we agree with the way you and your wife feel about the astonishing behavior of Luxembourg.
    How can this have the approval of the Justice system? Of course we’re all angry and it’s a good job most can’t write on this blog what we are being asked to write on here on their behalf!
    I must also ask the same question Nina asked.
    Has the administrator paid the 50 million Euro bail?
    So many of the group is wanting us to ask this.
    Anyone know?

    George Ward

    6 Jun 12 at 1:14 pm

  92. This in response to Michael Charlier’s request for details of the Bowen’s successful outcome against Landsbanki in Spain:
    Velez – Malaga 22 de Febrero 2011. Juicio Ordinario Numero 796/2009 – 1 del Juzgado de Primera Instancia Numero 1 de Velez- Malaga.
    The judgement was as reported before. However Mme Hamilius had the right to appeal this judgement which she has done. It is due to be heard in April 2013!! How on earth the State Prosecutor of Luxembourg can go on record by claiming that the case was won on appeal beggars belief.

    Another false claim made by the State Prosecutor was that the majority had agreed to the very favourable settlement offer and it was only the “Action Group” who were making waves. To date out of our group of 120 victims only two have agreed to settle and this is because they want to get their financial affairs in order before terminal illness prevents this.

    On another issue, can anyone throw any light on the missing 50M which should have been paid into the Paris courts by the end of May, has it been paid? If not what action is being taken against the Administrator.

    Michael

    6 Jun 12 at 2:19 pm

  93. Several of us have worked to put this together to help clarify.

    This seems to be the basis of a Landsbanki timetable for us to add to.
    (Our group thought think it helpful to see things in chronological order)

    As shown by the documents before us:

    29 July 2009 France

    Beginning of Criminal Proceedings against the Equity Release scheme contracts of Landsbanki Luxemourg .
    for
    FRAUD, ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE, PROVIDING FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH NO LICENCE
    .and for financial schemes based on market trading:

    21 December Spain 2011 Bowens Civil Court Case heard in Velez-Malaga

    22 February 2011 Spain in Velez-Malaga, The Bowens win their Civil Case against Landsbanki with 100% Judgement in their favour, awarded 23,000 Euros in damages, tax free and all costs paid by Landsbanki. Loan declared illegal, nul and void.

    30 May 2011 France
    Victims from Regions outside Paris were grouped in the same action to be heard in the largest Criminal Court in France by the Judge Van Rumbeyke top Criminal Judge in Paris.

    July 2011 Luxembourg
    LEX LIFE CAPITAL ( 92% subsiduary of Landsbanki Luxembourg) Placed in Liquidation.

    19 September 2011 Paris France
    Landsbanki Luxembourg SA represented by the liquidator Mme Hamilius was heard for:

    a) ILLEGALLY EXCERCING THE ACTIVITY OF PROVIDER OF INVESTMENT SERVICES in 2006 until 2008.
    b) FRAUD for having during 2006 to 2008, in France, deceived, either by abuse of real facts or fraudulent manouvers and operations to the deteriment of the clients and making the borrowers put up solid assets equivalent to the total value of the loan whilst the main part of the funds were held by the Bank which provided the false information concerning the mechanism of the operation and their real solvency.

    21October 2011 Paris
    Mme Hamilius was heard in the presence of the Civil Lawyers representing the victims notably to hear amongst others, the case of ENRICO MACIAS, or M. Ghrenassia, the singer and a long list of other clients in the suit against Landsbanki.
    Boxes of evidence against Landsbanki Luxembourg were presented in Court. Of interest is the fact that Mme Hamilius brought up the fact that Enrico Macias had also signed a contract of COLLECTIVE LIABILITY MANAGEMENT on the 2 June 2008.
    Mme Hamilius also maintained that systematic detailed accounts were sent to each ‘debtor’ of the Landsbanki Luxembourg Equity Release scheme, whereas the victims maintaint the accounts were incomprehensible and had no dates nor separation of accounts so the personal account was mixed up with the investment account as if to create confusion.

    24 November 2011 Paris High Criminal Court
    Criminal proceedings against Landsbanki for the Equity Release contracts for
    FRAUD, ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE, PROVIDING FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH NO LICENCE
    and for financial schemes based on market trading

    Mme Hamilius as administrator for Landsbanki Luxembourg were put under Judiciary Control
    for
    FRAUD, ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE, PROVIDING FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH NO LICENCE and for financial schemes based on market trading

    The Judge places Landsbanki Luxembourg under Judiciary Control and orders a one time payment of 50 Million euros BEFORE 31 January 2012 to be paid to the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris.

    M. le Procureur General confirmed the verdict. (The French Procureur General, not the Luxembourg one)

    12thJanuary2012 Supreme Court appeal made by Mme Hamilius against the caution of 50 million euros
    Me Hamilius goes to Supreme Court appeal and loses and the bail and the charges are upheld and a fine is levied.
    FRAUD, ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE, PROVIDING FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH NO LICENCE and for financial schemes based on market trading
    The Judge upholds the order of the 50 Million euro caution and the placing of Landsbanki Luxembourg under Judiciary Control and orders a one time payment of 50 Million euros BEFORE 31 May 2012 to be paid to the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris

    There was also a fine of 1.875.000 levied by the Judge

    12 January 2012 Luxembourg
    Letters were sent out from Luxembourg administrator’s office to victims making an unnegotiable offer.

    Finally after nearly 4 years, a step towards Justice is made by Mme Hamilius the administrator in the form of an offer seen by us rather as an ultimatum.
    A period of suspension of proceedings begins as clients try to meet the demands of Mme Hamilius in the delay dictated by Luxembourg.

    The period of the acceptation of the offer and the signing of the contract with the confidentiality agreement as well as a promise to drop all Criminal charges against Landsbanki Luxemourg AND the administrator and all those who have anything to do with Landsbanki in liquidation is made by the administrator to end in May 2012.

    16th March 2012
    The promise to suspend proceedings is broken and a Bailiff once again serves one of our friends in France a writ announcing start of auction proceedings on their home on 31st of May at 9.00 am! This,just a day after their deadline ends.

    All of us and our lawyers, were astonished as we saw the French Execution Judge’s order of auction despite the very serious criminal Proceedings and the 50 million euros caution which had not yet been paid and the loss of the Supreme Court appeal in the highest Criminal Courts declaring the scheme illegal.

    31 May 2012 Date the administrator for Landsbanki has to pay off 50 million caution levied by the top Criminal Judge.

    Now this is interesting. If we do not pay, we get our homes seized. If the administrator and Landsbanki Luxembourg does not pay, what happens to them?

    Interesting time frame of major events, isn’t it?

    Charles

    7 Jun 12 at 3:35 pm

  94. I have just been corrected as the Spanish Civil Case which was won, was heard in December 2010 not 2011 as shown in Timetable.

    The result of this case was given on February 22 2011 when the contract was declared illegal,nul and void.
    This shows how ill-informed the Luxembourg Procureur was. It also shows how serious it is that during these 4 years, no one has bothered to actually look at the real figures and check the facts in each case. The administrator has been able to carry on as if there was nothing wrong, illegal or questionable when we have all been protesting about money disappearing and false accounting,breach of contract and fraud year after year.

    Charles

    7 Jun 12 at 3:57 pm

  95. Hello,

    Does anybody know what’s about the 50,0 Mio €? Paid or not paid by LLUX?
    Are there news about the fine of 1,85 Mio € which has to be paid by Mrs. Hamilius?

    Gerald Flandrin

    8 Jun 12 at 6:39 am

  96. At last some custodial sentences handed out to these fraudulent bankers. I refer to todays article on Sigruns blog where she reports that the chairman Jon Thorsteinn Jonsson and the CEO Ragnor Gudjonsson of BYR (a savings society) have both been jailed for 4.5 years. This is from the High Court in Iceland.

    At last we start to see some serious action. Might this mean that there will be similar cases following and if so what effect will they have on the Landsbanki Lux case and the actions that the administrator should have taken. Will this now alter her approach to the 400 victims who are witthout any doubt creditors of the failed bank.

    It is no good for her to sit in her ivory tower and just ignore the facts of the case. There are over 400 people in France and Spain who have been swindled by the likes of these bankers.

    Justice for the victims, NOW.

    Nina Foster

    8 Jun 12 at 6:57 am

  97. Nina, you don’t expect Luxembourg judiciary to follow the courageous and honorable example of a few of Iceland’s judges do you?
    Luxembourg have specially stitched up laws to protect the banks as we can all see. It is a village for bankers with a judiciary not interested in the consumer. We have seen this in action for 4 years now.

    Is this not why the administrator has not even bothered to look into the breach of contract,the fraud, the lack of liquidity of the bank whilst signing off loans to pensioners well into 2008, the lack of proper licenses in other countries making the very schemes illegal?
    What other European Country would allow an administrator to disregard such breaches of the law in neighboring countries?
    What administrator would allow their countries Procureur General to wade into a well-founded protest by consumer victims and not first inform him of the true facts and cases where abuse is glaringly evident?
    The poor Procureur obviously has been told a pack of whitewash by people who are so full of their own importance they do not look at what is happening in other countries outside their village.
    Why are a few being allowed to damage so much?
    Did they think no one would notice or were they hoping the pensioners would all die off and they could satisfy their greedy agenda and please those in power?
    After all, does Luxembourg really care about pensioners who were persuaded to take out loans based on a pck of lies?
    All the Luxembourg ‘Harrys’ couldn’t care less and the faster we all die, the more money they collect for the Luxembourg government who lent to a bank with insufficient liquidity!
    Is this the Luxembourg picture or are we wrong?
    What would the Procureur say if he looked into the cases of the disappearing money from our personal accounts?

    Rachael Williams

    8 Jun 12 at 8:15 am

  98. Charles, having only just read your missive of June 7th 3.35pm I am amazed that there has not been an enquiry launched by the administrator into the legality of this equity loan arrangement.

    Surely there is so much evidence now surfacing that she MUST stop her current action and look into the validity of the loans. It is no good just to say that the victims are debtors and must pay. Their funds have been embezzled, nothing less.

    Will she not leave herself wide open for criminal action in the future for not having taken this approach. I understand that Luxembourg appears to have an attitude that it is always right but I think in time they will find that they are wrong, very wrong.

    We have European courts and courts of appeal that are there to protect the “little man” and I hope that she is ready to stand up and face the judges when that time comes. It is one thing to try to lay down the law from the safety of your own back yard, but a very different picture in the European Courts.

    Stan

    8 Jun 12 at 8:38 am

  99. I think Jonathan’s suggestion about Europol getting involved sounds like the best course of action.
    There is something seriously wrong and it is not about people not wanting to pay back their loans as Luxembourg would pretend. This is very clear.
    This is a trans European multi million euro fraud just as he said.
    Luxembourg just thought they could intimidate the pensioners and the administrator seems to have permission from the judges of Luxembourg to do what she wants with no questions asked.
    Europol would ask questions look at facts and expect answers even if in Luxembourg she is the Queen of the castle.
    Banks are being brought to account. Judges who protect them must also be questioned and be accountable for colluding .
    This will probably happen in Iceland with the judge who let the guilty off in the first hearing only to get a 4 and a half year sentence in the High Court by a judge who respects justice and law.

    Alexander Edwards

    8 Jun 12 at 9:32 am

  100. I hear that the couple whose house was to be auctioned on May 31st now have a deadline to come up with the cash by August 3rd or the auction proceedings will continue as planned.

    I believe they have been ordered not to say anything to anyone about this. What is it that gives the administrator the right to gag an elderly couple just so that they can have an easy ride through the legal process. I believe we should all be allowed to speak out against such dictatorial actions.

    Apparently the fact that they are in this situation has given rise to lenders who know of their predicament and are offering them deals that frankly are tantamount to usury. They are living in complete fear and have even cut off their phone. They have likened it to being circled by sharks. Disgraceful.

    We live in a free society so what are these people trying to do to these victims of an illegal scam ?

    Justice for the victims. NOW.

    Nina Foster

    8 Jun 12 at 11:48 am

  101. This is an old article but let us just remind ourselves what we are dealing with here:

    http://www.guide-epargne.be/forum/iceland-banking-inquiry-finds-murky-article-long-mais-tres-instructif-t2600.html

    Good bit of background and worth a read.

    Nina Foster

    9 Jun 12 at 8:06 am

  102. HSBC Fined £10.5m By FSA For Mis-Selling Investments To Elderly Customers

    Landsbanki ‘illegally’ moved funds just before its collapse – Telegraph

    In our search we also came across these, and it brings to mind one particular victim whose funds were moved the day the bank collapsed and is now facing eviction from their home. One rule for the rich and protected one for the vulnerable. Disgraceful,

    Justice for the victims. NOW.

    Nina Foster

    9 Jun 12 at 8:16 am

  103. Nina Foster

    9 Jun 12 at 8:19 am

  104. This is the priceless Quote!
    “When one of the billionaires behind the collapsed internet bank LANDSBANKI was asked what happened to all the money, his answer was astonishingly nonchalant: “A lot of money goes to money-heaven,” shrugged Björgólfur Thor Björgólfsson, the London based investor who co-owned 41% of Icesave’s parent bank, Landsbanki.
    “They have evaporated. It’s a common misunderstanding to ask; where did the money go.”
    Björgólfur Thor Björgólfsson

    There is enough evidence to show that Landsbanki was in big trouble much earlier than we are all led to believe. Not unlike the Lloyds insurance scandal in the 90s it was dependent on money coming in from unsuspecting investors, duped into passing over their life savings.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8196161/Icelandic-banks-broke-the-rules-before-UK-deposits.html

    Nina Foster

    9 Jun 12 at 8:25 am

  105. Nina please sned all you have. I want to know why the Landsbanki lawyers lied in our documents? They changed us from being RETAIL customers to pROFESSIONAL customers.
    Isn’t this il?legal
    This was a lie made in Court so the Civil Judges would make us lose and claim 7 times more than we had taken.
    How can Luxebourg have such dishonest lawyers/ Pure lies.

    Frank

    9 Jun 12 at 8:45 am

  106. Nina, these articles are important as they set a timeline of what International press was saying for years. Keep them coming.

    It also shows up the ridiculous remark by Mme Hamilius in her press release when asked WHY the fraud squads have spent days with Luxembourg Police raiding Landsbanki administration Offices and she replied on ‘Paperjam’:
    ” DON”T KNOW”.
    Is that not extraordinary? Is she so important in Luxembourg that she does not look at International press for 4 years or more.
    The liquidity crisis in the Luxembourg Banks started in 2007 according to the president of ALEBA, Marc Glesener.
    He said that although ‘officially’ the crisis started in 2008, the crisis was already there in 2007 or before.
    This can easily be verified in the 2009 report by the Banking and finance syndicate of which Marc Glesener was President. Plenty of time for an administrator based in a minute country to know things were wrong in the Luxembourg Banks.
    Landsbanki was not in a legal liquidity ratio in 2007 and 2008 and yet was still taking Equity Release loans amongst others in order to secure the loan from the Luxembourg Government they needed to try to be legal.
    The employees of Landsbanki were treated as badly as us by the administration, it appears.

    Charles

    9 Jun 12 at 9:44 am

  107. To the outsider it looks as if Luxembourg judiciary, Luxembourg Banks, Luxembourg Lawyers and Luxembourg administrators are in one and the same Club which makes up as it goes along and breaks rules such as the European Laws for the protection of the consumer, as they please with the full backing of the Procureur?

    It does not look good and the more you read, the worse it looks.

    George Ward

    9 Jun 12 at 10:30 am

  108. Nina, Charles and George. We have obviously been doing a lot of research into this banking scam. I for one have collected enough damming information over the last 3 years that would be sufficient for any administrator to have to question what was going on in Landsbanki Luxembourg.

    Most of this information is in the public domain and to ignore it is almost impossible.

    Why then if we can obtain this information and demand action why does the administrator in luxembourg not do the same. Surely she would want to be seen as whiter than white ? Does not her job description not dictate this ?

    Stan

    9 Jun 12 at 11:00 am

  109. This is why I think Europol is the answer.
    It is getting clearer by the day that this country which protects the ‘greedy’ as Harry said we were, in fact protects only the powerful and makes it’s own rules.
    We have been treated like criminals as you so rightly say in this blog. They are treating us like criminals to protect the criminals and it is too obvious for words.
    Lawyers have produced false, invented figures and false and invented facts for the Courts of other European countries.
    We have been classified in the Court documents presented in France and Spain against the laws of the MiFED and this as we see it is criminal as it is deliberate disinformation to sway a court decision in the favour of the Landsbanki administration.
    We have been discussing this issue for a long time but the gravity of it is beyond belief.
    Luxembourg obviously thought we were not important enough to bother with and that they could get away with patting the administrator on the back for her cunning recovery tactics.
    I agree that this is a Police matter and Europol is the best place to deal with it.
    Luxembourg must be brought to account for having stood by and allowed this to happen.
    What Iceland is doing Luxembourg must do too.
    A full investigation is necessary.

    Alexander Edwards

    9 Jun 12 at 11:14 am

  110. One of my friends is an international lawyer and he has looked at some clients documents I showed him. He works in Spain and France and told me 2 and more reasons Landsbanki lawyers lied to Civil judges to win and claim a dette.
    1. The Landsbanki Lawyers put in the documents that the clients were ‘professional’ so they looked like rich investors who did not want to pay a dette.
    2. the clients were all classified by the European MiFED law 2007 as ‘Particulier’ or ‘Retail’ in the Landsbanki classification before the bank shut.
    3. After Landsbanki shut,the same client was classified in the Landsbanki Lawers document to show in court as ‘Professional’. This was to fool the Judges in Spain and France.

    4. the calculs were so wrong and some who had a 75% mortgage they said the asset was full value 100%.
    Some they said the house prices had dropped 40% when they had gone up and had been architect restored and the value had gone up much.
    Some they had money go and vanish from accounts and this after the end of Landsbanki. Now they have to pay vanished money and interest.

    I would like to make a list.
    It is not possible not to see the fraud but the Civil court case is only to get a dette paid. Landsbanki classified everyone as not professionals before they broke and as professionals by the Landsbanki lawyers in court.
    Civil court does not look at the legal. Civil court claims a dette.
    Criminal court sees immediately if there is enough evidence to accuse.
    Landsbanki is trying to escape the Criminal case as they are guilty and they know this.
    They want to make everyone stop the criminal case and be quiet about the fraud and the suffering.
    This cannot happen in Europe today. The lawyers are not happy about it.
    There is a problem in Luxembourg.

    Enrico Suarez

    9 Jun 12 at 5:19 pm

  111. I am in total agreement with you here, why have they not been called in already.

    I would also like to know what has happened about the 50 million that was due to be paid at the end of May. Has the administrator managed to side step that ? If so I think there should be a report available to all explaining how that was done. Bit like our disappearing funds, all gone to money heaven.

    Stan

    9 Jun 12 at 6:16 pm

  112. I can now fully understand why many of the lawyers have told their clients that there is little point going to the Luxembourg Court as they would systematically lose against the Bank, whatever the Bank had done.
    The lawyers told many of us that it was a waste of our money and their time and that those lawyers who had tried to see the administrator and made appointments to discuss the cases, were simply ignored.
    We believe, in our group, that a criminal would have been given more rights than we have been given and that a criminal’s lawyer would have been shown more respect.
    There are many press cuttings with articles in which the anger of the lawyers at the way they were treated is clearly expressed and this cannot be put in the press without proof and direct interviews.
    Perhaps Nina could link some for those of us who have not read them.
    The lawyers in Luxembourg seem powerless to react to anything that is going on and it is clear the press has to tread very carefully. What is going on in Luxembourg?
    Can Judges really turn a blind eye to what Luxembourg Banks are being held to account for in other European countries in their highest Criminal Courts and that the product has been judged illegal and fraudulent?

    We have had to pay massive legal bills for 4 years whilst nothing was investigated in Luxembourg and it has been clear for many years that there is a very serious criminal case to answer.
    How can the procureur be said to have been ‘following the file’, as Harry said, when he gets fed false information and is clearly kept ignorant of the true picture of the Landsbanki administration and what the Judge has turned a blind eye to?
    Hasn’t the procureur been kept in the dark, like the Luxembourg press and the Luxembourg people have been?

    Even if the administrator wants to make us all drop the criminal charges against Landsbanki and her administration and forces us to pay money we do not owe in many cases and get away with the horrible damages we have suffered and the immoral treatment we have been subjected to, we should not be threatened and intimidated for trying to get Justice as every human being is entitled to Justice and should not be silenced for speaking the truth.

    We have a right as respectable retired human beings with respectable families across the world, to be heard and have Justice and not to be intimidated, bullied and forced to sign what is wrong, with false information and false accounting.

    George Ward

    10 Jun 12 at 9:56 am

  113. http://www.lessentiel.lu/news/luxemburg/story/30586211

    Perhaps our German fiends can give us a good translation of this article in L’essential

    Nina Foster

    10 Jun 12 at 10:31 am

  114. Incidentally who sits on the committee to whom the administrator has to refer ?

    Nina Foster

    10 Jun 12 at 10:33 am

  115. fisec

    10 Jun 12 at 1:16 pm

  116. Great link Nina, if you speak German! Thanks all the same as it is very important.

    I just got off the phone from a German friend who translated the article in L’ESSENTIEL which Nina linked for us.
    It says that Luxembourg Law got things wrong as they ignored European Law and gave no compensation to the employees of the Bankrupt Luxembourg Bank they were employed by.
    This contravenes European Law.
    These hard working decent people have been treated with the same lack of respect and the same arrogance towards the Laws of Europe and other countries as we all have. Same old story of the last 4 years.

    Is this not exactly what has been happening in our case?
    Does it not look as if Luxembourg Judiciary completely ignores the Laws and rules of other nations and the MiFED European Law for the protection of consumers?
    How can the Landsbanki liquidation lawyers with the stamp of approval of the Judges have been allowed to change the MiFED classifications each client had been given by Landsbanki before it shut, from a ‘Retail’ customer to a ‘Professional’?
    This is very important.
    This crafty switch of MiFED classification has happened to all of us as we were simply switched from one thing to another after bankruptcy to make it easier to win the court cases through lies and cheating.

    Landsbanki Luxembourg administration is a total disaster for all Luxembourg institutions and shows arrogance and neglect of the consumer in favour of those formally accused of fraud and illegal practice in other countries.

    How can those responsable for this abuse of power and position be allowed to continue to abuse decent people of Luxembourg and other European countries?

    What is the ‘Cour de Cassation’ of Luxembourg doing?

    Is it not out of control and ignoring European Laws as if Luxembourg ruled the world?
    Who is in charge of all this mess?
    Nina is right to ask who is on the infamous committee and who in the world is the Judge who breaks European Laws?

    These ex employees of the failed Luxembourg Bank the article speaks of, have every right to ask for damages after what they have been made to go through whilst the Banksters and friends get full protection. It is disgraceful. Were these employees called ‘greedy’ too?

    I too am as angry as George is and I too know what is happening to our friends who are now afraid to talk to us, which is making me even angrier.

    Charles

    10 Jun 12 at 1:42 pm

  117. I’ve just had a thought.

    Surely it is the administrator who made the decision to break European Law and not give any compensation to the Landsbanki Luxembourg employees, or was it a Judge?
    Anyone know?

    Also who gave the order to switch the MiFED classifications of all the Landsbanki clients after the bank went bankrupt?

    Who has taken the decision to make clients pay for money they never received?

    Who has taken the decision to say the clients invested their personal money when there is no paper trail nor permission to do any investmentns with the clients personal money released for their personal use?
    Why have we not been told where this money went and when?
    This is what most of you want us to ask on your behalf.

    This is a very important point Nina made.

    Nina, when you ask about the committee and who is on it, do we not have a right to know who is taking the law into their own hands?

    We must insist we are told who is making these decisions and what gives them this power over what is legal?
    This is all very serious and Nina really has a point here.

    Charles

    10 Jun 12 at 2:33 pm

  118. So at long last it is all starting to unravel.

    Eventually the truth starts to seep out bit by bit. We are a group of some 400 honest people who appear to have been duped not once but twice by people in a position of power. Looks like the poor old employees are in the same boat

    If I now write what I believe and know to be the truth about the dealings of the Bank and subsequently the administrator with the victims I will in all likelihood leave myself open to some form of legal retribution. These are powerful people who will stop at nothing to get their way and shut us up.

    Suffice to say that time will prove that there have been serious manipulations by these people in power and not to our benefit.

    Yes I would really love to see who is on this committee from it’s inception and lets see if there has been any cronyism involved.

    We are on our way !

    Justice for the victims. NOW

    Nina Foster

    10 Jun 12 at 5:10 pm

  119. So now read the translation from LCGB.lu and take note in particular to the last paragraph. Thank you “fisec” for your help. This is starting to prove embarrassing for the powers that be !!! About time too.

    of the case “Landsbanki Bank”: The LCGB-ESFS sued the state for damages
    08/06/2012 Press
    In December 2008, the courts have ordered the liquidation of the Bank Landsbanki Luxembourg SA

    Once appointed, the liquidator, referring to Article L.125-1 (a) of the Labor Code, notified all employees of the company that their employment was terminated with immediate effect following a “bankrupt” found.

    However, following a ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting on applications referred by the Luxembourg Court of Cassation, it was decided that: “it should be noted that the scope of Directive 98/59 covers (…) collective redundancies following a cessation of activities of the institution resulting from a court decision. ”

    In the Court of Justice of the European Union, Directive 98/59/EC (concerning the laws of the Member States of the Union relating to collective redundancies) should also apply to the cessation of activities an institution following a court decision ordering its dissolution or liquidation due to insolvency . This, while in this case, the national legislation of the Grand Duchy provides for termination of employment contracts with immediate effect and not the provisions relating to collective redundancies.

    LCGB-ESFS concludes from this judgment that there was an incorrect implementation of EU Directive 98/59 into national law.

    This incorrect implementation was to deprive employees of Landsbanki Luxembourg SA from any additional compensation (beyond the guarantees in the event of bankruptcy) and negotiating a social plan providing for accompanying measures allowing mitigate the consequences of layoffs.

    Accordingly, the LCGB-SBES has introduced for its members concerned an action for damages against the state to seek redress for the harm they have suffered following the incorrect transposition.

    Communicated by the LCGB-SBES, June 8, 2012.

    Nina Foster

    11 Jun 12 at 7:34 am

  120. The administrator, Judges, Government, whoever is behind the outrageous treatment the EMPLOYEES and retired, non professional CLIENTS of Bankrupt Landsbanki Luxembourg have been subjected to, should be held responsable in European Courts and EUROPOL should be called in immediately.

    We know already full well without doubt that Luxembourg Courts respect and serve only the powerful whether wrongdoing and injustice has happened or not.
    The employees and retired elderly victims are abused, ignored and mowed down mercilessly, whilst no accusations of fraud and false accounting are investigated.

    The Luxembourg laws are there to protect the Banks, but not the employees of those banks who could not function without them, nor the clients of the Banks who could not function without them.

    Is this intelligent? Should Banks not be worried about the way Luxembourg handles things and ignores it’s reputation which is getting so bad it is difficult to put on this blog what more and more people are calling Luxembourg?

    The employees and the retired victims
    have been treated in the same disgraceful way by the same people.
    The Employees of Landsbanki were treated like dirt even though they too had been lied to by the people the administrator, judges and Government are protecting today. We have all been lied to.

    Luxembourg is a disgrace today and they are trying to silence us and force us to DROP CRIMINAL CHARGES through the menace of seizing our homes and putting us in the street.
    What is blackmail in Luxembourg? Is it an offence as it is in other European countries?

    Rachael Williams

    11 Jun 12 at 9:23 am

  121. We noticed when we were looking through all the documents that the clients who became clients of Landsbanki Lux in 2008 have received the worst treatment.
    We think this could be important as it cannot be just an accident.
    Why would the new clients of loans started in 2008 who were only with Landsbanki for a few months be trated worse than everyone else?
    This is a question we must look at. There must be a reason.
    Were the clients of the bank in rupture in Spain, treated equally as the ones in France?
    There is supposed to be equal treatement for all in Spain and France, no?
    How many people had their rent seized in Spain?
    How many people had their rent seized in France?

    Why did a country like Luxembourg who specialises in Tax breaks for big companies and rich people demand to see the tax returns of rent of retired people who took out loans with a bankrupt Luxembourg Bank?
    Did the ones in Spain have to show their tax returns too?

    How many people in France had the Bailiffs for years? How many in Spain?
    We have heard of Bailiff for years but we did not have one in Spain but were still anxious and worried.
    Who had the bailiff in Spain and when did they start coming?
    what does this mean that some got different and the latest customers got worse?
    We must look at these points.They may seem small but they are important?

    Enrico Suarez

    12 Jun 12 at 1:11 pm

  122. Does the administrator in Luxembourg owe its duty firstly to the Judge-commissaire or to the State Prosecutor as any tort liability would fall directly on that person?

    This is the question many are asking today?
    Can Harry or someone who knows, explain as there has obviously been insufficient investigation on the criminal aspects of the Landsbanki Bankruptcy and the administration has not investigated any of the questions other countries have been doing for years now?
    Who is ultimately responsable in Luxembourg, for eventual errors in administration?

    George Ward

    12 Jun 12 at 4:13 pm

  123. We are members of the Landsbanki Victims Group and have been caught up in the scandalous mess for nearly 4 years. The stress and strain it has caused us is immense. We spent over a year checking out and thinking about the scheme before getting involved and realise that the Landsbanki must have been in big trouble before we signed. We finally signed because we were assured that our invested funds would be safe and covered by an insurance wrapper which was totally independent from Lansbanki. The Landsbanki administrator has subsequently seized our funds despite being in an insurance wrapper and we do not understand why this was allowed. If we still had our funds in the insurance wrapper then it would have increased under proper management. In fact, there was nobody managing our funds for a long time which obviously contravened our Contract. We are Lansbanki Victims – no doubt about it. We were not greedy in taking up this scheme, just mislead. WE NEED JUSTICE

    Proctor

    12 Jun 12 at 5:38 pm

  124. Hello Proctor

    Welcome with your story, familiar with most of us I think. The problem here is that we are dealing with many different issues.

    The first being that the bank in it’s original form was purchased and run as their own cash cow by what it appears are some very dishonest people from Iceland.Let us not confuse them with the rest of their nationals who are very lovely people who like us have been duped by people in power.

    The second is that their organisation set up what appeared to be a very plausible scheme, and although some would say optimistic let us not forget that until recently the pension investment market was giving us forecasts of 16% return on our potential pensions. I don’t think 6-8% was excessive.

    Finally as victims of this scam we have not been afforded the protection that the Administrator Mme Hamilius and her staff should have given us. In fact quite the opposite and she they should be brought to account immediately.

    Shame on all involved.

    I agree JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIMS NOW

    Nina Foster

    13 Jun 12 at 7:32 am

  125. Proctor the reason Landsbanki told all these lies about ‘safe Luxembourg with AAA rate Landsbanki’ and told us we would make money enough to pay back interest and make an income is because they did not have any money.
    They were already in illegal bank status. They needed our assets to get money off Luxembourg government as garantee security.
    They must have been friends with the government . The government did not check the legality of the bank.
    Now the government must be friends with administrator so the never checked the legality of the promises, loans, administrators uncontrol and ignorance of other countries.
    In Spain we are so shocked by a Luxembourg administrator demanding thru a bailiff to check old people have paid tax on the rent the administrator takes off these people.
    This is disgusting practice from a administrator of a country helping tax escape.
    This is incredible. This we all think Luxembourg people should know.
    It is to their shame that rich are helped escape and old and desperate are abused and tax controlled.

    Enrico Suarez

    13 Jun 12 at 8:17 am

  126. This is one of the heaviest questions yet George.
    Who is responsible for tort liability in this out of control administration where caution was replaced by blind arrogance for 4 years?
    How could this have been allowed to happen?
    Who in the judiciary gave the administrator such power to do such acts in other European countries whilst they were accused of fraud, lack of license and abuse etc. In several countries?
    Which judge gave this wreckless stamp of approval in the name of Luxembourg Law?

    Luxembourg checking pensioners TAX declarations to make sure the elderly victims of a Luxembourg failed bank have declared the rent Mme Hamilius has seized, has been paid to the French government?

    You would think it is a joke!
    The other thing is how many other pensioners had their rent seized?
    Is this Luxembourg legal procedure and if so was the same treatment given to all the victims?
    We want to know who is on the creditors committee.
    We want to know what is going on and on whose orders and we want to know ,as George said, WHO holds the tort liability for what the administrator has done and ABOVE ALL, what she has NOT done which was her first duty to do.
    The European courts need to know of this abuse of power and Luxembourg interpretation of ‘the law’.

    Enrico is not the only one who is appalled at Luxembourg administrator demanding to see tax returns! Shame on her.
    Luxembourg exists mainly as they allow the rich and powerfully off the hook and yet they bully and terrify the elderly in neighboring countries and treat their own employees like garbage to be disposed of, in their own country.

    How many of our fellow victims have died or acquired serious stress-related illness?
    Who is responsible for the failures of this administration who turns a blind eye to criminal investigations and says she does ‘ NOT KNOW’ why there are massive fraud investigators and Police crawling around Landsbanki and ignores serious accusations of fraud and criminal activity in several countries as if those who were the criminals were the employees and clients of the criminal bank!

    Has this protected Luxembourg?
    No it has NOT!

    Who has this administration protected and why was she allowed to ignore crime and fraud and use bullying tactics to terrorize the elderly for so long with noone

    Charles

    13 Jun 12 at 11:16 am

  127. Sorry . My last question was:
    Who has this administration protected and why was she allowed to ignore crime and fraud and use bullying tactics to terrorize the elderly for so long with no one from the Luxembourg judiciary seeing she was neglecting her first duty of proper care and attention to legality and fairness to all?

    Where was caution?
    Where was equality of treatment?

    Charles

    13 Jun 12 at 11:25 am

  128. Well, Stanford just got 120 years, Madoff got 150 years, how many years did the perpetrators of the Landsbanki scam get ? Nothing.

    Why not? and why should the administrator and her team in Luxembourg be ignored when they too should be facing custodial sentences for their endorsement of this terrible injustice.

    We have all been duped in signing away our assets to criminals who now seek to protect their ill gotten gains through the courts. When will someone in authority wake up and realise that this cannot go on.

    At some point soon there will be a reckoning, I just can’t wait.

    Justice for the victims NOW

    Nina Foster

    15 Jun 12 at 7:39 am

  129. Did you see the 177 resignations from World Banks, Investment Houses and Money Funds which happened over a period of 3 days this March?

    Here we have Global Mass Resignation and is this just a coincidence?

    Or is this because a backlash is coming?

    Do the Banksters and their cover-up friends not know that they and all those who have whitewashed their frauds and crimes are going to be brought to account as they have gone too far?

    Who does Mme Hamilius think she is in the eyes of the world?
    Does she think Luxembourg is proud of her actions towards the elderly retired victims of fraud and lack of actions towards those accused of serious crime in several countries?

    Has Luxembourg not gone too far in their assault of the pensioners and their obstinate refusal to listen to the victims of fraud, malpractice, abuse and illegal financial products protected by Luxembourg Bankers Laws?

    Where is the Judge commissionaire in all this, or is there not such a role in Luxembourg?

    He should be listening to the debtors and their objections and questions.
    The administrator has classified everyone as debtors through creative accounting and figure-fixing. They have a right to be listened to.

    Why has no one in Luxembourg done their job as required by European Law?

    We have a right to a fair hearing in Civil and Criminal matters.
    You cannot seize the lives and homes of people who have been victims of fraud and call this simply ‘Luxembourg Law’, which is what is happening.

    We are being called ‘greedy’ because we want justice and the truth exposed.

    Everyone loses in Luxembourg Court, except the protected fraudulent Banks who get full protection and no investigation into fraud, don’t they? Can this be denied? If so, then please explain?

    We have a right to respect for freedom of expression, of thought and of conscience.

    Why are we being silenced and ordered to drop all Criminal charges or we will lose our homes?

    Is this European Law? I do not think so.

    We have a right to an effective remedy and we have a right to have an administrator of a Tax and Bank Haven listen to the serious errors which have been ignored for 4 years.

    The Landsbanki employees had their rights ignored for 4 years whilst European Law was breached.

    We have had even worse done unto us whilst Luxembourg stands by in all its arrogance and continues as if no others but themselves have any importance?

    Landsbanki had a ‘Ponzi’ type scheme going when it was in insolvency as early as 2006.

    Eyes must look to Luxembourg and not just to Iceland as Luxembourg seems to have the idea that it is immune and does not have to be in tune with Europe and the civilised world.

    George Ward

    15 Jun 12 at 1:55 pm

  130. Here are just some of the Mass Global Resignations etc. which took place over a period of 3 days and there have been many more since.

    Stanford, as Nina said, has just got 120 years.
    Maddoff 150.
    Now we are waiting to see what happens in Iceland on June 21st with Landsbanki/ PWC as they allegedly gave false accounting to project legal liquidity ratios and a misrepresentation of accounts to mislead investors such as ourselves.

    Pretending everything is OK in ‘Bankers Heaven’ is not on the cards today.

    The world is angry.

    I don’t suppose Mme Hamilius knows about that either, so perhaps someone should buy her international press so she can start to ‘know’ what is going on outside Luxembourg?

    177 resignations and far more since then .

    Here are a few:

    4 Goldman Sachs U.K. senior executives

    – Dubai Mercantile Exchange CEO resigns

    – Goldman Sachs Group’s head of European power trading resigns

    – CEO of Japan’s Nikko Asset Management steps down

    – Argentina’s Transport Secretary resigns

    – India’s Cabinet Secretary – premature retirement

    – India’s chief minister resigns

    – US Democratic State Rep. retiring early?

    – UBS Bank’s senior Asia economist quits

    – Chairman of National Bank of Pakistan resigns

    – BGF Emerging Markets Fund’s co-head resigns

    – USA Technologies’ board member resigns

    – Jamaica’s FSC executive director resigns

    – Jamaica’s JMMB executive director resigns

    – Blackstone Group’s Paris office leader to step down

    – Reliance Bancshares chairman resigns

    – Two U.K. Jupiter fund co-managers resign

    – Ex-Citigroup Indonesia banker gets 8yrs prison for client theft

    – CANSO (aviation) director General steps down

    – Ex.director of Texas Railroad Commission resigns

    – US EnviroLogix president/ceo to retire early?

    – Thai president of TCEB resigns

    – Aussie property tycoon resigns as chairman of construction company

    – China’s 8Telecom CFO resigns

    – CEO of Africa’s Tower Resources steps down

    – Aussie mining company Kagara board member steps down

    – CEO of Peruan mining company Antofagasta resigns

    – NZ ZESPRI board member resigns

    Is it not extraordinary that Mme hamilius ‘did not know’ why there have been massive serious fraud office raids in Landsbanki Luxembourg?

    Perhaps she thought she was above being questioned for her lack of caring about what is legal in Landsbanki and what is abuse?

    I wonder what the people of Luxembourg think or are they not allowed to know what she doesn’t want to know?

    We are angry and demand answers and I am writing here on this blog for many people who cannot write what they would like to write themselves!
    I am asking the questions for them on their behalf and they keep coming up with more!

    George Ward

    15 Jun 12 at 2:20 pm

  131. Here is the link to the Price Waterhouse information:

    http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2012/03/11/old-landsbanki-to-sue-pricewaterhousecoopers-for-deliberate-auditing-errors/

    Well done George the public needs to know what is happening here. The innocent are being crushed by the powerful banking community. They planned a campaign to entice elderly investors into their clever scheme thinking all along that they would just cave in and ultimately cough up. Well Madam Hamilius and all your wicked associates we may be old but we won’t cave in.

    People are at last realising that the name Luxembourg is synonymous with corruption, and at the highest level.

    Time for change.

    Nina Foster

    15 Jun 12 at 3:09 pm

  132. Usually when people are sad, they don’t do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change.

    Who as it who said this?

    I know this is true!

    The World needs ANGER.
    the world often continues to allow EVIL because it isn’t angry enough.

    We cannot allow these people to get away with what they thought no one would notice or care about.

    Rachael Williams

    15 Jun 12 at 3:32 pm

  133. I agree, but for how long will Mme Hamilius and her protecting judiciary continue to think Luxembourg is an island too powerful to be held to account and that Landsbanki Luxembourg has nothing to do with the criminal actions of its mother company?

    If our money was being made to disappear to this mother company how can she say it has nothing to do with Landsbanki Luxembourg?
    If Landsbanki Luxembourg had nothing to do with the serious Fraud Office in various countries then why were they in Luxembourg in several Landsbanki addresses?
    For how long will the administrator and her judiciary friends go on saying there was no connection between Luxembourg Landsbanki and Landsbanki.is?

    What about the visiting cards and the paper work joining the 2 very clearly as the mother company and the subsiduary? We all have these before us as many of us are saying.

    These people must be brought to account Rachael, as they have gone too far in too many places with too many people who have ties across the world.

    This story will not be contained in the village, by the big fish in the small pond!

    (A lady called Susan, who asked me to write this last comment!)

    George Ward

    15 Jun 12 at 4:09 pm

  134. Tell me I’m paranoid but recently while we were away we had a break in. It was really strange because they did not take anything at all. Amazing. Not only that but when they left they made sure that the house looked secure from the outside and left everything in perfect order.

    Maybe they planned to come back, or just maybe they were looking for my file of papers that I have collected from the start of the collapse of the bank.

    These papers make interesting reading especially as some of them have now been wiped from the internet by unknown people. Fortunately they were with me plus I also have several sets in safe keeping elsewhere.

    Or maybe it was someone having a look at the property to get a valuation for a forthcoming “closed auction” ?

    You see I do not trust these people one bit. They are dishonest, deceitful wicked and evil and will stop at nothing to achieve their ends. From the start of this equity fraud right up to now it has all been planned.

    Paranoid ? Maybe but I don’t think so.

    Nina Foster

    15 Jun 12 at 5:06 pm

  135. Our friends in France with the imminent auction were told there was someone waiting to grab their home the Landsbanki lawyer was determined to seize.
    Of course things are planned as they think vulnerable people will not fight back.
    Did the bailiff come in to your place to take photos of your belongings too? They knew the photos were of their possessions and not of the walls for measuring up for auction.
    Also their lawyer told them there would be no photos as he had to be notified if there were to be photos taken.
    What did they take photos of in your case?

    George Ward

    15 Jun 12 at 6:00 pm

  136. Well George

    Who knows because I wasn’t there but anything is possible of course. So you don’t think I am being paranoid then ?

    Chances are they did a complete inventory of all our goods and chattels after all they are trying to grab just about everything we possess aren’t they. If it wasn’t so serious it would be funny.

    I have now installed cameras to record anyone who comes near our house so enter at your peril !!

    Nina Foster

    15 Jun 12 at 7:11 pm

  137. Stan

    15 Jun 12 at 10:06 pm

  138. Luxmbourg has a reputation of not investigating fraud or fincancial crimes and ignoring criminal complaints . The more you read, the more you learn.

    Does the Attorney General think that by being inactive and not investigating a single criminal complaint from another country or indeed from Luxembourg itself, he is innocent of collusion?

    Is the administrator the only one responsable or are there judges who are colluding too?
    What is going on in Luxembourg?

    What about Danske, Rothschild, Landsbanki and all the others hiding behind Luxembourg laws which so often contravene European Laws to exploit victims to the maximum under Luxembourg Law?

    Europe cannot stand by in silence any more.

    Luxembourg should not allow administrators to enforce convenience laws judged by colluding friends.

    These judgements are based on fabricated facts and false accounting and the world will not ignore the victims forever.

    Europol must get involved in what Luxembourg is doing and what it is not investigating, by the sound of what we are all reading.

    Alexander Edwards

    17 Jun 12 at 9:12 pm

  139. http://www.sedlabanki.is/?PageID=287&NewsID=2468

    Did I not read on her response to the Press Release that what happens in Landsbanki Luxembourg has no bearing on Landsbanki Islands ? See the above link

    Another point, if there is no connection then how come Judith Gledhill is a director of Landsbanki Islands and strangely is also a director of Landsbanki Luxembourg. No connection there then ?

    Murky waters etc etc

    Stan

    18 Jun 12 at 3:11 pm

  140. Interesting to note that Judith Gledhill was a director at PanEuroLife Luxembourg prior to Landsbanki. Npow here is an interesting connection when you read this article, which you must do.

    http://www.tax-news.com/news/PanEuroLife_Executives_Still_In_French_Gaol_Without_Charges____3437.html

    You must because 11 of the directors of this company were detained in La Sante prison in Paris in 2001 without charge on suspicion of money laundering and tax evasion.

    It’s a pity that Landsbanki didn’t follow the advive in the last paragraph regarding opening an office in Paris. Had they done that then maybe we would not be in this mess.

    So the fraud, and crimes committed against the Victims of Landsbanki is becoming more and more apparent. We now know that Judith Gledhill needs more detailed investigation as she is at the core of this scam.

    Stan

    18 Jun 12 at 3:50 pm

  141. Are all the administrators and all the judges women in Luxembourg?
    I was told even the commitee is full of women judges!

    It must be like a “You Scratch my Back, I scratch yours Back Club”?
    I will read these links and give them to others to understand.
    It is a good reason these women are in a hurry to take the houses and make the victims shut up for sure and also do not forget that the ultimatim says we have to drop ALL criminal charges against Landsbanki and these women.

    They must be very powerful. Yes. But the criminal charges will involve them for not doing the investigation side of the job and only being dictators against the law.
    Hamilius hides behind Judith and which judges are in the commitee and who else as these are the people who are protecting crime and attacking us.
    Where is our money gone?

    Enrico Suarez

    18 Jun 12 at 4:07 pm

  142. Stan

    18 Jun 12 at 4:10 pm

  143. Thanks from all of us here Stan for this research.

    We must all help and I know our friends and family are all researching too.

    This Judith Gledhill information completely contradicts what the Mme Hamilius press interview says in Paperjam, which is hardly surprising in such a cover-up.

    It would seem that Luxembourg Iceland is intrinsically linked to Landsbanki Luxebourg just as we all thought and Mme Hamilius denies.

    Hamilius says it has nothing to do with Luxembourg and she ‘does not know’ why there are fraud investigations around Landsbanki Luxembourg for years!

    I suppose Judith Gledhill doesn’t know anything about Iceland Landsbanki either and yet we have proof to the contrary, don’t we?

    Conflict of interests?

    How many other conflict of interests are there in ‘Buddy Buddy Land’?

    Just because we are old, does not mean that we are stupid.
    Do they think their parents are stupid?
    Do their children and grandchildren think they are stupid?
    This is what June R wanted me to ask.

    It seems that Judith Gledhill and Mme Hamilius are in a desperate hurry to silence us.

    Would they silence their parents and grandparents in the same way and expect their children and grandchildren to?

    Should Serious FRAUD against vulnerable people be covered up by a fraternity of judges in a minute country with a bad reputation?

    We do not think so and we will not go quietly into the street and lose our homes to big bullies, however powerful they are in their pond.

    It seems the administration are in a desperate hurry to blackmail us into signing a transaction or have our homes seized before the Criminal Judges act against Landsbanki.
    It seems they are in a desperate hurry to stop the criminal Judges in other countries from looking into the whitewash work of the administrator and colluding judiciary around her.

    This seems perfectly clear.
    It is as clear as the false figures and false facts Mme Hamilius allowed the Landsbanki lawyers to present in French and Spanish CIVIL Courts.

    The Civil courts do not look at criminal activity or fraud or illegal contracts.

    It is the criminal Courts the administrator has to worry and is very worried about.
    Judith Gledhill and all those who are complicit in this cover-up of true facts, manipulated figures and disappearing money from personal accouts without justification nor permission are incriminated.

    Cover-up of fraud is very serious and how can Luxembourg justify the behaviour of this blind and arrogant administration of this Ponzi fraud?

    What other trick will they pull to manipulate the truth and disfigure the facts?

    George Ward

    18 Jun 12 at 5:23 pm

  144. I found this in the Sunday Times. (This Sunday)

    According to this edition of the Sunday Times,
    Mr Stone, a former portfolio manager at Marble Bar Asset Management,accused RBS subsidiary NatWest and one of its bankers, Paul Aplin, of ‘TURNING A BLIND EYE’ to a fraud carried out by two businessmen, Jolan Saunders and Michael Stubel.

    TURNING A BLIND EYE

    Is this not exactly what Yvette Hamilius, Judith Gledhill and all the hen party of Judges have done in Landsbanki Luxembourg?

    What are the Luxembourg men doing to stop this conspiracy? We saw how the Attorney General was disinformed and ignorant of the true facts so he obviously believes all the women chose to tell him and doesn’t look any further!

    I laughed at Enrico’s comment about the women, but doesn’t he have a point about the female Club with the administrators and judges epecially if they are also on the committee which is supposed to be overseeing decisions concerning us?

    The Court documents say Stone has accused NatWest and Aspin of NEGLIGENCE, DISHONESTY, DECEIT and not least, CONSPIRACY.

    Is this not precisely what the Luxembourg administration and the judiciary have done in the case of the Landsbanki Luxembourg Ponzi fraud?

    Where did our money go?

    We will not be blackmailed by the Luxembourg administrator and her pals. I agree.

    Mr Stone has claimed he and his family lost £19.3 million between 2009 and 2010 and has demanded £24 million in damages.

    All we have been demanding is JUSTICE and not to pay back the money which disappeared and we definately do not owe. This administration wanted to make us into debtors by manipulating the figures.

    We are not the criminals and perhaps the administrators should start looking at themselves in the mirror before attacking us?
    Do they like what they see?

    Rachael Williams

    18 Jun 12 at 5:53 pm

  145. Stan, the thing about Judith Gledhill did not come out?
    The other one in there office is Jetta. Check on Jetta. Who else?
    Landsbanki Iceland must have women in the Luxembourg Landsbanki office.
    This is why Hamilius wants the people to think she has nothing to do with Luxembourg Iceland! Of course she does like Judith Gledhill.

    They are together. Iceland and Luxembourg Landsbanki and this is how the money disappears? Our money went after the Bank broke. It must have gone to Iceland by SWIFT.

    Hamilius is responsable for everyone in there and everything Landsbanki lawyers did.
    She did not tell the Procurador General about the disappeared money and the bad accounting and fraud, I think? No. She will blame others like she blames us.

    Think of tax free Luxembourg telling bailiffs to check the old people had paid tax!
    Just think of this! Luxembourg being TAX POLICE and taking rent off old people!

    This is the only thing that makes everyone laugh in Spain!
    Luxembourg is now TAX POLICE.
    They are Tax Police for old people only!

    Enrico Suarez

    18 Jun 12 at 9:15 pm

  146. For George more research results! and Stan!

    Last night so I could not sleep, I found the name of the Juge-Commissaire who is responsable for the supervision of the administrator and the Landsbanki lawyers.
    BINGO!

    It is Karin Guillaume.

    She must be responsable for controlling Hamilius actions and stopping when necessary. She must check all legal points and conflicts. Is this right?
    Am I wrong?
    Here, in Spain we are told this person must be certain of legality in all aspects of the Mme Hamilius actions.
    Check if admnistrator is ignoring fraud and criminal indictments and Spanish Civil decisions of nul and void illegal contracts as the Bowens/Landsbanki case.

    Ignoring serious Criminal Charges as if nothing is wrong. Look at highst Criminal court in France, IGNORED for years!?
    Not knowing why serious fraud Police Investigation is closing in to Luxembourg. Not knowing? Not possible not to know. We all know.

    We are not Juge Commisaire or Procureur but we all know for 4 years about the fraud and les and falsification of accounts, disappearing money don’t we?

    Why did Karine Guillaume not tell the Procrator General about complaints of disappearing money, fraud, false accounting, manipulation to make clients debtors?
    The evidence we all can see and we are not lawyers!

    Karin Guillaume should have been telling Yvette Hamilius to BE CAREFUL , not GREEDY and check before making serious mistakes, No?

    Luxembourg will pay for their negligence we have been told here. They thought we were too old to talk, look and protest, but we can read and write.

    Sorry it’s in French so someone can tranlate. Not me!

    Please tell us if I have undertood right this Luxembourg Juge-Commissaire Karine Guillaume job?

    Why did Karine not give an interview with Paperjam?

    She should explain her role?

    La Landsbanki Luxembourg S.A. est une filiale de la société de droit islandais Landsbanki Ìslands hf.. Cette dernière a été soumise au régime islandais.

    Par le même jugement, Me Yvette HAMILIUS, Avocat à la Cour, et M. Franz Prost, expert-comptable, réviseur d’entreprises et partner chez la société anonyme DELOITTE S.A. ont été nommés comme liquidateurs. Madame Karin Guillaume a été nommée comme juge-commissaire.

    Enrico Suarez

    19 Jun 12 at 6:43 am

  147. Well Enrico,

    It basically reads that Hamilius and Prost were appointed liquidators, and Guillaume the Judge Commissaire.

    Now here is the interesting angle on this one.

    Not long after these appointments were made Franz Prost resigned from the group. Why I hear you ask. My opinion is that he was pushed out as he would have been too impartial as he worked for the INTERNATIONAL firm of Deloitte who would never ever in a million years sign any of the documents that the present little group of xxxxxxx are doing.

    He knew it would all be illegal in international law I am sure and there was absolutely no way in a million years he or his highly reputable company could be party to this swindle going on.

    Tell me I am wrong, and you won’t because the facts are all there for us all to see. The game is up Luxembourg and your days are numbered as a financial centre.

    Nina Foster

    19 Jun 12 at 9:03 am

  148. Of course Nina, it is all crystal clear and we have been slow to pick up on this. How could they have Prost on board, he is obviously an honest man and wouldn’t fit in. Wonder how they pushed him out, after all it must have been a very lucrative contract for Deloittes ?

    Perhaps they were given a sweetener elsewhere to compensate. That does not really matter. What matters is that the insiders got rid of them and we all know why.

    They are going to LOOSE because they are evil, deceitful and will eventually be exposed for what they are, just wait and see. The clock is ticking……

    Stan

    19 Jun 12 at 9:42 am

  149. Just a short one here from my wife who says
    “the whole thing is like a tangle of dirty laundry in Luxembourg.”
    I thought it was worth sharing!

    Sorry about that! I do think, from what I have heard, that the Juge Commissaire is untimately responsable for the actions or negligences of the administrator, rather than the Attorney General.

    We are phoning intenational lawyers to check it out, but it does look that way which is probably why the Attorney General was kept so badly informed.

    Charles

    19 Jun 12 at 10:29 am

  150. Charles I think that is the only way forward. All this mess must be brought into the public arena. This blog is all very fine but this must now reach a wider audience and at the same time get the weight of the real law behind it. Not Luxembourg law.

    They try to tell you in Luxembourg that to bring a case against them there you have to be resident in Luxembourg !!! How crazy is that. I guess the only other way is to engage a luxembourg lawyer but how do you know what you are going to get. 350,000 inhabitants makes it a pretty small place where everyone is either related or knows one another.

    Guess this means European Courts.

    Nina Foster

    19 Jun 12 at 11:17 am

  151. I just wanted to let you all know that all the papers and information that we have built up since the demise of Landsbanki has been copied several times and been lodged safely, one set with our international lawyers, the rest with independent parties.

    Nina Foster

    19 Jun 12 at 7:59 pm

  152. This is wise as evidence could disappear just like our money did from our personal accounts!

    We were told to copy everything too and I was even told that the lawyers were quietly waiting for the maximum errors to be made.
    They have said the Landsbanki Lawyers were treading so close to the line of legality and getting so full of their own importance that they were giving them a gift for the future!
    Who knows what that means but it does sound as if they have been perfectly aware of the serious ‘errors’ Landsbanki were making all along whilst thinking no one was going to do anything or say anything.
    We may have fallen into a trap but has Luxembourg not fallen into a fatal place for a Financial Place Mme Hamilius does not want to please?

    Is that not what she told the world in her press inteview on PaperJam?

    Charles

    19 Jun 12 at 8:41 pm

  153. Yes I think so as I heard today of another colleague who found the entire contents of his computer had been wiped. He too is fighting this case and you wonder if hackers somehow gained access to his files. Beware they will stop at nothing.

    Nina Foster

    20 Jun 12 at 6:48 pm

  154. Oh I just heard ON rADIO 4 that Mr David Cameron, our esteemed PM thinks that it was MORALLY wrong for Mr J Carr the comedian to have stashed his wealth (on which he will have paid tax) in a tax efficient wrapper in Jersey.

    Did Mr Cameron borrow the MORALLY wrong bit from us I wonder and will he now turn his attention to the FRAUD that has been committed in France and Spain ? I think not.

    Is Luxembourg morally bankrupt, in my opinion yes. The difference between our morally wrong and his is that the law in the UK allowed Mr Carr to legally place his money off shore whereas our scam was illegal in France, Spain and the UK.

    Nina Foster

    21 Jun 12 at 8:54 am

  155. Oh yes missed the fact that Cameron also said it was Morally wrong AND UNACCEPTABLE.

    The same goes for Luxembourg.

    Nina Foster

    21 Jun 12 at 9:03 am

  156. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/reding/victims/index_en.htm

    If you want a laugh read this document. We pay taxes to fund this crap that is totally ineffectual. Protection my foot.

    I just love this opening line:

    “Whatever the crime, victims share basic needs: respect and dignity, protection and support, and access to justice and compensation.”

    So the perpetrators of the crime are treated like the victims and the victims get nothing and certainly not compensation.

    How dare they talk about peoples basic rights, they don’t have any.

    Tom

    21 Jun 12 at 5:02 pm

  157. One of my lot knows one of the Barlow children. The reason they are not communicating is apparently they have been threatened. Their case is so terrible as we well know, that the administration must be fearful of the Luxembourg high authorities getting to know.

    For the small sum they borrowed for a couple of months they are going to lose their home in spite of astronomical lawyers bills like all of us .
    My son heard it will cost 100.000 euros to finance a loan at over 6 percent in order to pay back what vanished from their account with interest. They can’t survive without a loan and they can’t get a loan as at 76 and retired you don’t get a loan when your house is seized and up for auction.

    We must keep contact with them. They know a couple who told them they would end their lives if their loan did not come through and there is little hope it will. We must not listen to this sort of thing.
    We must not give up hope.
    We must keep in touch with each other.
    I am very concerned as we can’t get through to them and they are no longer seeing their lawyers who are no help to them and give them more bills and anguish.
    We need each other so let’s not lose touch like this when things look black. If either of you read this please contact us. We know your case. We know how you are feeling . We know what has happened to you.
    We are all here. Just contact one of us.

    Charles

    21 Jun 12 at 8:56 pm

  158. 2007

    The old ISD Investment Services directive will be replaced by MIFID, which is a major part of the European Union Financial Services Action Plan.

    MIFID provides the following

    Extends the coverage of the current ISD regime too cover commodity derivatives, credit derivatives and financial contracts for differences (CFD’s)

    Introduces additional requirements on investment and asset management firms, mainly on their conduct and internal organisation

    More extensive transaction reporting requirements

    There are two parts of MiFiD legislation

    Level 1 – The directive itself
    Level 2 – Technical implementing measures

    MIFID introduces more detailed requirements covering

    the organisation and conduct of business of investment firms, and how regulated markets and MTFs operate.

    new pre-and post-trade transparency requirements for equity markets;

    the creation of a new regime for ‘systematic internalises’ of retail order flow in liquid equities; and more

    extensive transaction reporting requirements.

    Types of firms to be regulated by the MIFID requirements are

    investment banks;

    portfolio managers;

    stockbrokers and broker dealers;

    corporate finance firms;

    many futures and options firms;

    some commodities firms.

    Most firms that fall within the scope of MiFID will also have to comply with the new Capital Requirements Directive (CRD), which is similar to Basel II, which will set requirements for the regulatory capital which a firm must hold. Those firms newly covered by MiFID will be subject to directive based capital requirements for the first time.

    Firms that will be covered by minimum capital and Basel II regulations, but never did before include

    corporate finance firms;
    many futures and options firms; and
    some commodities firms.
    investment banks;
    portfolio managers;
    stockbrokers and broker dealers;

    Key areas affected by MiFiD

    investment advice regulation is now within the scope of EU regulation

    commodity derivatives are now a financial instrument for the purposes of MiFIDs

    compliance arrangements have been altered for affected firms

    internal systems and controls

    outsourcing

    record-keeping

    systems to manage conflicts of interest have been changed

    safeguarding of client financial instruments or money held by firms

    new client categorisation regime

    best execution – firms will be required to get the best possible deal for their clients, taking not just price into consideration, but cost, speed and likelihood of execution / settlement

    Passporting rights, if a firm sets up in another EU member state, the host country is responsible for ensuring compliance with conduct of business requirements where services are provided within its territory

    Pre-trade equity transparency. A firm must provide published bid and offer quotes in liquid shares for orders below a ‘standard market size’

    Post-trade equity transparency

    Transaction reporting – shift the reporting emphasis to the competent authority of the home/host state of firms and not to the competent authority of the regulated markets on which the instrument is traded

    MiFID will require transaction reports for any instrument admitted to trading on a regulated market including commodity instruments e.g electricity, oil and metals admitted to trading on exchange.

    Tom

    22 Jun 12 at 9:35 am

  159. Charles, I know the Barlow case well. I am so sorry to her of the problems facing the family and the worry.

    Their case is absolutely terrible and I feel that they are being used as scapegoats by the administrator in Luxembourg to possibly satisfy her very large ego.

    I do hope that news will come of them soon, I hear rumour that the pressure is really starting to be levelled against them. Why ? With a measured court appearance in say the UK then I feel sure that this situation would never have arisen and that an amicable mutual settlement would have been reached. After all they have never disputed the money they actually drew down.

    One final point in all of this. The majority of the victims are English so can you tell me why all correspondence is in French despite requests for it to be in English. After all under EU law that is a legal requirement is it not.

    Hang on Barlows you have many many friends.

    Nina Foster

    22 Jun 12 at 9:47 am

  160. FREE EQUITY RELEASE SCHEME TO THE FIRST PERSON TO NAME WHO THIS APPLIES TO:

    “The Psychopath in our Midst”

    Hear the word psychopath and people think of mad axe murders. Of ruthless Hannibal Lector types or shower scene killers from ‘Psycho’. But the truth is you probably met one today, probably where you work.
    Psychiatrists now talk about the successful psychopath, earlier called the industrial psychopath. These are people who meet all the diagnostic criteria, but lead relatively successful, relatively ordinary lives. Sure they lie, cheat and steal. But you don’t have to be a psychopath to do that. And if they are clever, educated and physically attractive they can do terrible damage.
    So how to spot them? Recently researchers have identified two core factors. The first they have called “fearless dominance” and the second “impulsive anti-sociality”. The first reveals itself in an individual’s seeming immunity from worry, stress or nervousness. They are bold and brave and thrill seeking. They have a sort of social zest, a need to take charge, push ahead.
    The second is a general susceptibility to deviance. Massive unreliability, failure to learn from experience and lying. They act on whims and want immediate gratification, whatever the cost.
    But can these two factors be teased out to make the characteristics more obvious to the lay person? One recent study (Personality and Individual Differences, 2008 vol. 45) has done just that. First, the fearless dominance stuff. The psychopath shows clear signs of narcissism. This is manifest in terms of their vanity and exhibitionism. They may be particularly prone to using false and fabricated awards, certificates, or degrees showing their achievement and brilliance. They often have a conceited air of superiority and a manner of natural authority. They are at once anti the authority of others, but also eager to exercise their authority over others.
    Many show exaggerated perceptions of deservingness which is a form of psychological entitlement. They appear to have and like to show off their self-sufficiency. Thus they can have overpowering self-belief. This often foxes others into believing that they must have something to be proud of. They therefore accept that the psychopaths are of superior ability, experience and know how. All these are classic traits of the con artist.
    The second dimension of impulsive anti-sociality is less attractive. Psychopaths are both callous and interpersonally manipulative. They have a long history of an erratic life style and criminal tendencies. Nearly always their school record bears evidence of what is now politely called counter-productive school behaviour. There is often a lot of anger in the successful psychopath. They ruminate on revenge. And they show significant displaced aggression, meaning they see aggression in others when it is essentially in themselves. And of course there is the criminal tendencies stuff: stealing, lying, cheating. Everything from bigamy (surprisingly common) to impersonation. But worse there can be the violence stuff which is associated with the movie based psychopath.
    Some researchers now think there really are two type of psychopath. The stable, extraverted, narcissistic con-artist and the lazy, disagreeable, aggressive criminal. Both are low on social control and ultimately socially toxic. Both are egocentric and conscienceless.
    But the successful psychopath can not only survive but thrive in the business world. They prefer situations of great change and flux with little monitoring. They happily exploit the trust and naivety of good people, cheating them out of everything they have from their fortune to their self-respect.
    The con-artist and the axe murderer. Not quite though that is how the cinema portrays them. The moral: beware the bold, self-confident, smooth talking manager with a shady or unknown past. It may just be the successful psychopath in your midst.

    Stan

    22 Jun 12 at 11:37 am

  161. Charles and Nina, I have just got back from having dinner with two Bankers who were amongst our friends and we were talking about the whole Landsbanki thing.

    Actually they said they were quite ashamed as bankers to hear of what has happened to all these pensioners.

    We spoke of the Barlow case and also the one who is so ill in hopsital.
    They both said there is no way that a pensioner who has no income other than a pension and who is 76 and above all has his home, seized and up for auction could ever get a loan. A bank would not even look at it.

    They said that an administrator of a bank in bankruptcy knows full well that by seizing the home of a pensioner of that age, there would be no possibility of a loan to pay back a sum so far exceeeding what he had drawn down as well as interest on what was drawn down and what has disappeared as well.
    Friends have also said the same.

    This is probably why we have lost touch with them. They have probably been told this as Charles says.
    It is very upsetting and I am going to have trouble sleeping as I cannot understand such cruelty.
    Is it a loan shark who wants 100.000 Euros or what Charles? Do you know?

    Sucessful, powerful Psycopaths must thrive in Luxembourg. It is sickening.
    You are right Stan.
    Very interesting comment.

    Rachael Williams

    22 Jun 12 at 10:03 pm

  162. We had a group meeting with an international lawyer who is also a friend and all of us are feeling the same. The lawyer asked for a clear detail of the case with dates and actions by Landsbanki.
    He sais we must take the problem cases as we have the documents of these and set it simple as a time frame of actions and court case and bailiff visits and Tax declaration demands for these cases .

    The Landsbanki lawyers who seized rent then demand tax returns to see rent is declared are a joke for Luxembourg!
    We were all laughing at that and there have been serious errors in this administration which will not be a joke.
    This will help all cases and all lawyers. We have the Grennassia Enrico Macias, the Bowen winners, the Barlow losers and the others to study as with the others we have.
    My friend sais we have to help the lawyers and time frames is a big help to see clear and save time.

    Enrico Suarez

    24 Jun 12 at 8:02 am

  163. Sounds like you have a positive plan of action, well done. Call me psychic but I do get the feeling that these wretched people have bitten off more than they can chew and that common sense will eventually prevail.

    I think the next few weeks will prove to be very interesting for all.

    Stan

    25 Jun 12 at 5:19 pm

  164. […] logs on Landsbanki Luxembourg are here and here, where I go more in detail through some of the topics related to Landsbanki Luxembourg […]

  165. […] mentioned earlier on Icelog there are two important events concerning Landsbanki Luxembourg: a court case in Spain and actions taken in France by a French […]

  166. Employment in construction accounting will now be an easy deal to seal.
    As a new bee into SAP career you can be involved in testing,
    documentation, training support, and first level production support.
    However, more advanced tasks are completed such as posting financial details and monitoring the
    company’s monetary purchases, loans, and accounts.

    Biran zucker

    27 Apr 15 at 10:59 pm

  167. […] no less, Robert Biever Procureur Général d’Etat sided with the administrator as outlined here on Icelog. The prosecutor, without any investigation, doubted the motives of the borrowers, saying […]

  168. Useful info. Fortunate me I discovered your website by chance, and I am shocked why this twist of fate didn’t took place earlier!
    I bookmarked it.

    Turun Berat Badan

    28 Dec 16 at 4:38 pm

  169. wonderful issues altogether, you just gained
    a logo new reader. What may you recommend about your put up that you made a few days ago?
    Any sure?

    Johnette

    29 Jan 17 at 8:05 am

  170. […] even after the bankers were charged in France. One of many remarkable turns in this case (see here) was a press release issued Robert Biever Procureur Général d’Etat – nothing less than the […]

  171. I see you don’t monetize your site, don’t waste your traffic, you can earn additional cash every month because you’ve got hi quality content.
    If you want to know how to make extra $$$, search for:
    Mrdalekjd methods for $$$

    FirstSadye

    4 Oct 17 at 2:07 pm

Leave a Reply