AT THE BEGINNING A VICTIM’S STATEMENT 600 Victims means 600 individual cases, 600 fighters, 600 files with evidences and 600 times emotional distress. As we have learned the Luxembourg’s public has taken notice about this Landsbanki Luxembourg Liquidation because of the one celebrity, the well known Singer Enrico Marcias. We have understood that this focusing of this celebrity has taken influence the public opinion. But we are far away to accept this point. 599 victims are normal EU-pensioners, 65 – 80+ years old, worked a life time in normal jobs as employees or small-businessman, paid the education of their children and paid tax every year. Their only dream was a little holiday home in the sun for the retirement. Very average people like you and me. Unfortunately we became Victims of this bankrupt Bank LLUX and unfortunately the media and those who take advantage of that accidentally a Celebrity is a Victims too reduce us 599 to “little Enricos” with the same attitude and view to a celebrity. 599 victims are not wealthy, have not big villas of Million of €, we do not have best connection to top lawyers, ministers, mayors, MOPs, etc etc. We fight because we want JUSTICE and we fight because of our lifes and the lifes of our families. We are real Victims and this has to be respected.
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. What‘s about The case LANDSBANKI LUXEMBOURG learned us, how a country can be closely inter- wined with the Finance Industry and how regarding weighting between of legal dealing with Victims and possible damages by the State‘s economy the legal laws and the consumer rights may be bend or ignored totally (see MIFID). You can‘t do this all alone in a big apparatus of state so that you might can imagine who must be involved. You can learn additionally how quick and without hesitation this apparatus hides any kind of self-control and takes acceptance of continue the fraudulent action of a bankrupt bank and also shows dormancy at the solution and transparency of this case. Briefly and succinctly Landsbanki Luxembourg = 100% daughter company of Landsbanki Island Suspect Period = 08.April 2008 (Under observation of BCL, EZB and CSSF) Funds transfer refused by Bank Suspension payment = 10.Oct. 2008 (Stop of any dealing, Take over by Liquidator) Liquidation = 12.12.2008 (Liquidator started clearing of the LLUX) Clearing = since 10.Oct. 2008 all accounts are “frozen”; clients do not have any access; clients get no continual account- statements; accounts were emptied without authorisation of the account holder; no accountable justification of investments; refusal of statement where or if the assets are transferred; clients get treated only as “DEPTORS” although they have to invested 75% of the loan amount to LLUX (see Loan agreement); Liquidator refuse any conversation/ discussions with clients; Lawyers were rudely send home; Liquidator set up public auction proceedings for the clients properties; negotiations with clients were consequently refused by Liquidator; more than 80 civil lawsuits were denied by the Court of Luxembourg => Winner is Liquidator, Loser the clients.
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. Complaints and Civil Lawsuits In total there are ca. 600 Victims of this Equity Release Investment of LLUX. There are around 200 civil lawsuits against LLUX in Luxembourg, France and Spain. We know only 2 civil lawsuits which were won by Victims. One was won by from default, the other one is in appeal. All other civil lawsuits were ruled against the clients through Luxembourg Courts or they are currently not yet heard. Regarding Criminal Complaints there are several Complaint against Luxembourg, LLUX and Y. Hamilius (see chart beneath). -Ca. 65 Victims have lodged a complaint in Feb. 2012 at the Grand Jury d‘ Instance de Paris concerning fraud and fraudulent investment, misselling, lack of licence, deception, abuse plus continuing of criminal action. -180 Victims lodged at 28.Nov.2012 a complaint in Luxembourg for of deliberate Fraud of Investment, absence of licence, abuse, mis-selling, breach of consumer rights (MIFID), wilful default of protections of investors, unjust enrichment of exchange rate basis, money laundering, etc. -One complaint is lodged against the State of Luxembourg at the EU Court because of refusal of the Prosecutor of Luxembourg to pay the caution of 50,0 Mio € to the French Tribunal - A 2. complaint is lodged in France regarding the LLUX internal used „security cover ratio (SCR)“ which seem to be illegal and is not legal by the MIFID rules and law of protection of investment - In Spain a complaint is lodged against NORDEA Bank regarding Equity Release Investment. -The State Prosecutor of Iceland sued the Manager of Landsbanki and arrested them. House search were done in Luxembourg at LLUX.
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. Why these are criminal acts? Therer are more other point to mention which are relevant. But thereof comes the question : Why no one of all the authorities realized one or all of these points?. Why they prefer to look away? Let me mention it beforehand : the case LLUX is very complex and extensive. Here some points of the complaints: 1.As early as 2006, and in particular at LandsbankI Iceland had very high levels of liquidity problems because Hedge Funds had removed extremely much capital from Iceland Banks through currency speculation. 2.“Fresh money / fresh funds” should acquired through new emissions of Landsbanki Bonds 3.Parallel the biggest shareholder who was to the same time the biggest debtor – Father & Son Björgoflsson removed more than 2,5 Billion € out of banks accounts. Both Björgolfsson were associated with the Russian Mafia 4.The leak of liquidity alerted the ECB, CBL and CBI and the management in Iceland has taken the decision to sell the Bonds to LLUX clients. LLUX got the order to sell this product. 5.It was deliberate fraud because a) the LLUX salesman sold more than the up to 50% of the whole clients portfolio into these LBI-Bonds although a internal bank rule allowed to put only max. 5% of the portfolio in one product and b) it was happened at Supect Period, which was well known by the salesman. There are e-mail evidences which shows that salesman wanted to calm the clients. E-mail said „Your money is safe, no danger at all“. 2 weeks later the Bank was bankrupt. 6.Charge to Y. Hamilius because of continue the criminal act because she had knowledge about all this charges to the bank’s fraudulent actions (see SIC report) and she didn’t introduce a investigation by the prosecutor and she blocked all initiatives to do so. Until today Y. Hamilius don’t see any fraud at all. 7.Y. Hamilius didn’t respect and counteracted against the court order which claims the exchange of all accounts from any other currency to EURO with reference day 12.12.2008. Many loan accounts are currently are still performed in other currencies (e.g. CHF). This disregard has produced enormous damaged in millions of Euros. But Y. Hamilius put these damage amounts on the bill and presented this as claims to the victims. She cashed 2 x the money. 8.Landsbanki Luxembourg has had never a Bank licence in France nor Spain to deal with Investment products or even to deal with normal bank products. In Spain it was not allowed to open a office as a Bank. 9.At any time it was impossible ( so experts) to fulfil the promise of LLUX Equity Release – Investment will repay the loan + interest + little pocket money -. These promises were essentially responsible for the clients to approach and to sign these contracts. 10.Money laundering 11.Since the period of liquidation -12-12.2008- Bank account statements which were sent by Y. Hamilius to the clients were not correct and showed only the debt situation and kept secret the assets side. This is deliberate misleading. 12.Without any permission or knowledge of the account holder, Portfolios and assets were transferred to the disfavour of the Victims. The accounts were emptied completely and the account holder don’t know where these funds are now.
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. Salient points by chronological sequence Suspect Period Suspesion Payment Liquidation Deadline 14.May 2010 Ultimatum 30.Jan.2012 Responsibility : Liquidator Hamilius + Judge Karin GuillaumeLandsbanki Lux Changing court rules to deadline Deadline expiration That decalres Victims to debtors Begin Media Campaign No public statement why Franz Prost has quit his job as a liquidator of LLUX The best Weapon : The court changed current rule of claims with deadline of 14. May 2010. At interview of Y. Hamilius from Jan 2013 she said „Victims missed the train !“. Most of the victims got knowledge about this deadline after the 14. May 2010.They were not informed personally. This legal policy stroke most of the victims were declared only as debtors Franz Prost quit his job. He saw criminal acts LLUX part of LOVE LETTER Collaterals (s.Anne Sibert) CBL granted 3,5 Brd. € loan Father & Son Bjorgolfsson Sell illicity Mio of EURO To thier own Off-Shore Comp. Y. Hamilius started Y. Hamilius sent Ultimatum and claims to Victims Ultimatum: No negotiations, Unrealistic respite Unrealistic deadlines Incorrect claims Withdrawal ” Creditor” Back out French complaint “Offer” is a future vehicle to show a “Good Will” Each word of the ultimatum is unrealistic. The maturity of victims denied this ultimatum Until the SUSPECT PERIOD, actually to SUSPENTION PAYMENT the Bank was acting in full responsibility. By any signs of Fraud or Criminal Acts the Liquidator has to start investigation and to invoke the Prosecutor and require an investigation. In the moment they doesn’t start investigations it should be against the current law and means that there will be a concealment
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. The role of Y. HAMILIUS Well known, good network, very redoubtable : Yvette Hamilius, Liquidatorin Facts Spring 2009 : Y. Hamilius took over the job as a Liquidator in case of LLUX ->Liquidator Franz Prost (Deloitte) has given notice. He became doubts. Until today no communication with victims. Every attempt has been ignored. Rigorous enforcing the interests (which?) e.g. the -legal- change of existing court rules that allowed victims to file claims immediately before the distribution of the liquidation assets. There was no time limit. Change according to the court order 24.Feb. 2010: Claims may only be submitted with term of 90 days up to 14.May 2010. Everything was then loss of rights and assets. The decision was published only in some newspapers. Affected were not notified in person and the most victims learned of it when it was already too late. The action was legal, but you have to wonder whether this was appropriate in view of such a large wound up with only international customers who do not read on that special one day the Icelandic newspaper, Figaro and El Pais. In the Internet age, a notification e- mail would have been quicker and cheaper. One can conclude that Y. Hamilius here had the intention to get rid of that train about 60 +% of the creditors, which he did. Y. Hamilius has taken legal steps against the victims aggressively and perfidious, because she initiate seizure of rental income, delivery of attachments of claims through a bailiff during ongoing investigations and court proceedings Y. Hamilius tried to declares the victims to offenders by suggest by court that the victims are Professional Investors and they knew what they have done Y. Hamilius do not take into account the age of the victims who are 60, 70, 80+ and so she stressed them in all interest worth been protected like health wise and mental. This ruin the victims life. From day ONE liquidator Hamilius has pursued all EqRe-victims with undue hardship and aggressiveness. She never takes account that the Bank is guilty. It has been learned that: the Bank is bankrupt, not their clients. Y. Hamilius is the executor of this bank, who is blame for the situation of the victims. Not the other way around. But Y. Hamilius pursuit the victims as guilty ones. There is no sense of guilty. You only act so if you know there is someone who protects you. Y. Hamilius is acting as the representative of judiciary : it looks like =>without sense of proportions,, without notice of victim’s human dignity, it feels like =>cold – hard hearted – power-mad
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. Outside complaint and Court Legal considerations and strategic discipline are necessary for the court level. But many details outside the courtroom raises questions: At a big liquidation process as LLUX you have normally 2 liquidators : 1 x with juridical background and 1 x economical background. In the moment that Liquidator Franz Prost resigned his job as liquidator why the judge Karin Guillaum did not appointed a new one? Why there was and is no control regarding the acts and proceeding of LLUX? Why we can not see or get anything in written officially ? Why all is TOP SECRET? Why no transparency ? Why judge Karin Guillaum appointed 02. Apr. 2009 person as members of the Creditor Committee who has nothing to do with the victims or never seen by victims nor taken care about their interest? Until today there is no contact between them. Conspicuous the member of this committee are from ICELAND like Ms. Brynhildur Sverrisdottir and Mr. Pall Skualson and companies like Marlibra Star Foundation. Until today no one of the victims know who they are, whom they represented, for what they stand for. It could be possible that they are straw men ???? Anyway the victims are not invited and not represented. No introducing, no contact, no exchange of insights of fraud. Was this the goal? Do the victims not have the rights to be part of this? In case of increasing the problems of LLUX and criminal aspects why the politician looks not take notice. They have received information about this by writ and personally. It must be clear by every one that damages are already there and that this damage will increase. It is not longer a file LLUX nor a file Hamilius, it could be easy a file LUXEMBOURG. Why the liquidator and the judge are always be at one with. Why the result of their decisions are always negative for victims ? What’s behind? Who has given the orders? In any case, this aim must be worth it, because otherwise you would have long since taken up with the victims and searched for solutions, as normal liquidators do. Every day's delay makes the damage bigger. The strategy to deny the status of Creditor to the victims from day one gets Y. Hamilius the advantage to simplify the case by court extremely : Clients has taken la loan, he must pay back now. Over the last 4 years she has pointed out this procedure by court and to the judges to make believe the victims are wealthy and only fighting for their money.
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. Complain as target –> Which question we can take? What kind of intention we can see? Where the political process starts? Why no control, no transparency ? Why changing an existing court rules to a deadline? There was no need to do Why no 2. liquidator (economy) Why this inadequate hardship against the victims and why no communication Why no official list of Creditor were published Why all indications of Fraud are ignored Why they denied the Status CREDITOR to the victims Why no Politician reply on our information about this grievances Why until today the CSSF did not investigate nor took care about this fraudulent case Why Ombudsman Lydia Err invoke of running proceeding to do not act Why Liquidator gave “offer” only after 4 years and Press Release Why Prosecutor R. Biever protects H. without any request by someone Why BCL granted Billion loans to LLUX few days before the collapse Why you can call it unilateral if 100+ civil lawsuits in Luxembourg were denied Why authorities doesn’t bother about the missing Bank licence of LLUX Why no authority, no Politician realize the damages of Luxembourg H. did until now Court proceedings and evidences
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. What does the rigid attitude of Luxembourg means for the victims? Make clear that 95% of the victims have age 65+ years, they are pensioners and have very less experiences with Internet and modern communication (Face Book, Blogs, Twitter,ect). For all of them the the rigid attitude of responsible representatives of the State Luxembourg have not only consequences in juridical direction. So far known 40 victims died, many heart attacks were to register and the majority of all victims sorrow for serious health problems. The Liquidator would say that this is not a result of the case LLUX and would straight reject it but it is also fact that we can not exclude it. It is much more likely if you take serious the psychological pressure over the years and the fear to lose one’s shirt. For 70-80+ years old Victims the extraordinary charges are : Fear of loss of properties, assets which are the sum of a labour life To entrust with advocates and legal system and foreign languages from foreign countries You have to deal with legal system, laws and rules of 3 countries : France, Luxembourg, Spain may be EU too Fear and shame to confess their heirs that all fortune of a labour life are in danger Your “Plan of Life” of your 3. stage of life/pension is totally destroyed and you feel be left with no future (remind 70+, 80…) Loss of monthly income which was promised by LLUX and was a main pillar of the pension and decision to take Eq.Re Frustrated feeling regarding the complete inability of act of assets because the all power of control is taken away from the victims Enormous pressure and confusion because that the victims should be not a creditor. You have to manage all the disadvantages Enamours psychological pressure because you could die and leave behind a completely mess to heirs and posterity You feel treated like a “Criminal” and you know this will never stops because it’s the liquidator’s advantage You feel fear and hopelessness regarding the Luxembourg’s jurisdiction in case LLUX Fear to be worn down and unheard because the bankruptcy LLUX has a political impact which result you cannot pre-estimate You endures treatments which are close to blackmail, threats and you endure behaviour of Luxembourg as convicted criminals You feel helplessness and injustice if Y.Hamilius claims funds which are not reasonable (e.g. interest) and on the other side she not even has put your assets on fixed deposit account; no she reduce always you funds by “interest” and makes it smaller day by day Fear and frustration because you have to hold your property / collateral in good condition re the market value because this is the only chance to repay the fanciful claims of Luxembourg. Here you have to put add money into the case that you don’t have. We can find a lot more of these aspects of “out-of-court-feelings” but it should be seen very clearly that the authorities of Luxembourg take no notice to these human and innocently points. May be they have not enough information or this case was never be an issue for them until today (not recognise the high potential of impact for Luxembourg) but this is not an excuse to treat innocent victims of an bankrupt bank as criminals and to accept any absent of investigation by hearing loud voices : “ We EU citizen and want justice and we see fraudulent action in this case”
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. What are the victim’s goals? JUSTICEREPARATIONRECOGNITION JUSTIC is the word re the question “What are you fighting for?”. It’s a deep feeling to feel humbled and criminalized. JUSTICE stand for the powerlessness we feel re the cold and pugnacity which we receive from the authorities Luxembourg. Sleepwalk into this bankruptcy is a life-threaten- ing issue for the generation 65+. When you realize the total loss of the result of your labour life you become panic. That’s hard enough. But then you get a liquidator who do not doesn’t care a straw about this destinies and who will cash your last shirt. But that is psychologically not to absorb. That’s why the victims first order is JUSTICE To be astonished that the current result of 4+ years treatments is a ice- cold calculus of Luxembourg’s interest Our claim is to get RECOGNITION as creditors and victims. Furthermore we claim recognition of psychological and monetary pressure that was unfolded to occupy our houses and lives. We are EU citizen without previous convictions but we were feel treated by the liquidator as criminals and were prejudged. WE are the VICTIMS and the LANDSBANKI BANK is BANKRUPT, not the other way around. Luxemburg has to pay respect to this main aspect and to act as a EU –Founder-State and a shining example. If Luxemburg don’t give RECOGNITION to the victims and goes ahead with policy of ignoring the damages will increase and question will come whose answers become very painful for Luxembourg. The Status Quo is: We talk about criminal complaint at Criminal Courts in France and Luxembourg. In case a criminal proceeding will be opened the victims are plaintiff and you can expect a penalty for the defenders. Important point you have always to remind if you want to start out-of-court settlement. Beneath all facts and emotions there is a solution for both parties with keep face for both. In Bank business they call it NETTING: 1.Hand out all collaterals to the victims 2.Victims get pay back all expenses of defence 3.All cash, all portfolio will be hand out to the liquidator 4.All loan and pledge agreements are null and void 5.Mutual agreement that there are no claims furthermore in future. 6.The “private payments” to the victims will declared to penalty for LLUX. 7.Continuing the complaint re the Liquidator
Group of Victims of Landsbanki Luxembourg i.L. What’s about MORAL? Until now we didn’t examine the aspect of MORAL. But it’s legal to asked for : “where the aspect is, where it will likely be applied, what is the measure of moral?” MORAL is the cement of an society, even so in Luxembourg. Let’s ask: Bank is bankrupt WHY Appearance HAMILIUS Everything lost ! You can say : that’s Capitalism => Hard Luck!!! Complaints LLUX + Hamilius Liquidator media war Finance-juggling by Central Banks and Robbery of Banks by owners and biggest shareholder => still “Hard Luck”? Who is the bankrupt? The Bank is the Bankrupt, not the victims. Why they were treated like bankrupts? Targeted and deliberate ignorance about consumer rights and EU laws. Ruthless prosecution and criminalization of victims. That has nothing to do with HARD LUCK !!! But why? What’s the motive? Why this bias? Threat of complaint for discrimination and slander to the victims. An authority who has so much experiences as Y. Hamlílius has knows that it is a big mistake to threaten in public. That’s sounds like a confession. You only can do that if you feel save by a protected hand above you If Luxembourg allowed to bend self-made rules and laws to favour of the States to get advantage by the damages of EU-Citizen and is not able to exercise control then the question of MORAL will stuck in your throat. How can it be that Luxembourg’s focus goes only in direction Finance Industry and has not the instinctive feeling for citizens destinies. No wonder that such a behaviour against victims creates fury by citizen against Banks & Co. Landsbanki, ICESAVE, LIBOR Crises, etc. etc. are more food for the increasing fury in Europe. Trust of regulation through the Governments (in favour of the voters) is ZERO. Fury is not a good breeding ground of Hope and trust. Luxembourg can you afford this? Luxembourg has a moral guilt and responsibility