THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION – THE REGULATOR WHO REGULATES THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS!

-ORIGINALLY POSTED IN MARCH 2017- 

As recently reported by http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca  – it appears that the British Columbia Securities Commission (‘BCSC”) physically regulates corporations that they have physically invested into via their public sector pension and retirement operator (the British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (“BCIMC”).

On the website operated by BCIMC it states, “With a global portfolio of more than $121.9 billion, bcIMC is one of Canada’s largest institutional investors within the capital markets. We invest on behalf of public sector clients in British Columbia. Our activities help finance the retirement benefits of more than 538,000 plan members, as well as the insurance and benefit funds that cover over 2.3 million workers in British Columbia.  Based in Victoria, British Columbia and supported by industry-leading expertise, we offer our public sector clients responsible investment options across a range of asset classes: fixed income; mortgages; public and private equity; real estate; infrastructure; and renewable resources. Our investments provide the returns that secure our clients’ future payments and obligations.”  

As you can see (below) in a portion of the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report, we see that the BCSC holds just over $20.3 million in bcIMC investments.

In the section below – again taken directly from the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report (and supposedly written by Brenda Leong) the writer outlines the BCSC mandate with respect to their investments.   One can immediately notice there is no disclosure that they regulate their own investments.  In the wording (underlined in red) we can see they indicate “Our investment policy allows us to buy units of the following bcIMC pooled funds….”  but again fail to acknowledge anything that can/and should be considered offside.

And in the underlined section above we see that in “their” opinion, their “investments do not expose the BCSC to significant credit or material market risk because we invest in liquid, high quality money market instruments, government securities, and investment-grade corporate debt securities.” 

IS THIS BECAUSE THEY REGULATE THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS AND THAT THEY WOULD NEVER SANCTION COMPANIES IN WHICH THEY HAVE INVESTED?

Turning our attention now back to the bcIMC website, we have found their end of March 2016 Investment Inventory List (Click on link).  At a simple glance, we see hundreds and hundreds of names of companies – some are well known and others many have never heard of.  There are literally companies from all over the world and some are located right here in British Columbia.

Here is where it gets interesting, there are names on this list that the BCSC has battled (or is currently battling) as it combats securities fraud, mis-representations, excess fee’s violations and other regulatory issues.

But that is all fine – I imagine there will be people that say, “Who cares, I am sure the IF one of these companies committed some sort of a securities crimes or had some sort of regulatory issue – I am sure the BCSC would conduct themselves in a professional manner…”

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the BCSC vs HSBC , known as 2016 BCSECCOM 185 – a matter that presented itself to the BCSC.  It seems that a division of HSBC had over-charged their own clients excess fees “Due to inadequate controls and supervision, it did not apply this policy consistently, which resulted in some clients paying extra fees.”   For their trouble, the Respondents (who’s head office is the Worlds’ 6th largest bank worth $2.4 TRILLION dollars) had to pay $300,000 CDN and costs of the investigation of $20,000.  And they had to pay just under $7.1 million of the fees the OVERCHARGED back to their clients. CASE DISMISSED!!

It is important to look at the timing of this matter – it was during a stretch of time AFTER former Executive Director Paul Bourque was fired or quit and BEFORE present BCSC Executive Director Peter Brady was put into the position.   You guessed it – BCSC Chair Brenda Leong approved this Settlement Agreement.

This definitely needs a closer look by a government watchdog organization!  Why is there no disclosure in the BCSC financial overview that the public reads that they in fact regulate companies in which they have investments into.

Bizarre days indeed at the BCSC!

17 MONTHS AND COUNTING….COWARDS AT BC SECURITIES COMMISSION REMAIN MUTE!

For 17 months now I have been posting in this blog – some of the posting have been direct and to the point.   I have challenged staff at the BCSC to refute anything they have read, I have reached out and tried to contact staff at the BCSC and challenged them to answer very simple questions.  We have even had some of the former investors contact the BCSC and and the cowards running their offices will not even respect these requests.    We have posted some very unflattering things about BCSC Chair Brenda Leong, Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat, the complete failures of Lead Investigator Elizabeth “Liz” Chan, and the actions of other BCSC Staff including Colette Colter, Alan Keats, Peter Brady and Paul Bourque.    And yet through it all, they have remained completely silent.  They have not even had there very expensive legal representatives contact me to have me take down this blog…

Why?    Because everything I am saying is accurate and they do NOT want to challenge me in a real courtroom.   They truly are run by a group of misfits that do not have the best interests of investors at heart – despite this being part of their mandate.

We have recently been in contact with another group that was railroaded by the BCSC and their story is even worse than ours – stayed tuned for more!

 BCSC Chair Brenda Leong

Executive Director Paul Bourque (Former)

    C. Paige Leggat

 Elizabeth “Liz” Chan

 Executive Director Peter Brady

DOES BCSC’S LAWYER OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE PROVE HE IS SPINELESS??

ORIGINALLY POSTED ON DECEMBER 5, 2016

In a former post in this blog a few weeks ago, we told a story of one of our former investors calling the BCSC to ask questions regarding our matter.  Unfortunately, whomever she spoke to at the Commission hung up on her before she could get ANY answers to the questions she had for them.

Today, we thought we would try to get answers from Staff Litigator Mr. Olubode Fagbamiye (the Staff Litigator that worked directly on my file) from essentially day 1.  He was one of the lawyers (the other being C. Paige Leggat) that was present during the hearing and he was certainly there during the period of time we presented our settlement Offer that would have seen the investors participate in the successful Deercrest property (without involvement from Staff at West Karma Ltd.).

As you will see in the video below, we did not waste Mr. Fagbamiye’s time and asked him 3 very direct questions.     It is almost laughable his replies (or lack there of) to our repeated questions.

IT IS OUR OPINION THIS VIDEO CONFIRMS EVERYTHING WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THE ENTIRE TIME.   AND IT REMAINS OUR OPINION BY FAILING TO RESPOND TO OUR QUESTIONS THE BCSC (AND THEIR STAFF) ARE COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT IN RUNNING THE SECURITIES INDUSTRY IN THIS PROVINCE!  

Shame on them all!   Especially this incompetent spineless amoeba that happened to work on our file (manipulating the evidence and not taking a valid settlement offer to the Executive Director).

 

For all former investors in both FCC and DCF, we encourage you to watch the video – now more than every you need to contact (phone, mail, email, fax) and get these questions answered.

They cannot ignore all of you!   As you can see, Fagbamiye’s phone number is 604-899-6790 and the main line is 604-899-6500.   Call them today – record the call or have someone witness the call for you.    Email them weekly if you need to!

It is time they are held accountable for THEIR actions in the West Karma matter.

 

 

WHY DOES THE BCSC DOES NOT BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST RESPONDENTS?

I have had people ask me recently why they BCSC did not pursue criminal charges against me (and several other of their many allegations over the years).   In actuality, the BCSC bark is much stronger than its bite.   For many accused fraudsters life continues as if nothing even happened – they simply move to another profession or move out of the Province in which they were charged.   It is in these situation that former investors fell even more helpless and that there truly is no recourse against the wrongdoing.

It is our opinion that the crux of the matter is that the BCSC (and their counterparts in other Provinces) prefer it this way – for a couple of different reasons:

First, they are complete egomaniacs that want to control every inch of an investigation – they are able to throw whatever they want at the wall and hope it sticks.   In a criminal investigation the level of proof (before a judge will issue a warrant)  and even hear allegation in a court room is far greater.   Investigators, including the complete and udder failure Elizabeth “Liz” Chan and her boss at the time Lori Chambers are able to run around with their badges and have relatively no experience – remember Chan was a simple Chartered Accountant when she started at the BCSC.   How does a CA end up with a badge?   She was trained to add numbers up and wasn’t even able to do that right – how can she have conduct on a file as an investigator??

And secondly, and more importantly, they are able to bring many bogus allegations against Issuers WITHOUT having to really prove anything.   They do NOT have to appear in front of a judge or jury and need to only prove their case on the “balance of probabilities” (51%) in front of their own peers – rather than in a courtroom where a far greater case must be presented to prove their allegations.  Respondents really don’t stand a chance and the process certainly is not fair to all parties – despite this being a mandate on the BCSC’s website.

The BCSC is run internally where Respondents must go against an Executive Director, lawyers and a Panel of appointed Commissionaires whom are ALL paid by the same internally run BC Securities Commission.   During our hearing, it was an almost daily event to see the lawyers walk out with Chan and get in the elevator.  One can almost be certain that they had private meetings to discuss strategy during the days of the hearing – this would NEVER happen in a criminal case with real lawyers and judges.   During the hearing, when we asked the Panel Chair about this his reply was, “We are not even going to entertain that comment…”.   He completely swept my question under the rug as they did with many of my comments.

And let’s not forget the investors – as we blogged in the past, the BCSC can’t even collect on these fines.   They have levied fines of OVER $340 million dollars and have only collected a small fraction over the years as you can see here in this blog.   What a complete joke this system is – completely broken and in need of an overhaul starting at the top with Brenda Leong!  Investors deserve better!

BRENDA LEONG – THE COWARD AT THE HELM OF THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION??

DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT!!

Again we are truly seeing what kind of a person BCSC Chair Brenda Leong truly is – this week she responded to our Freedom of Information request in what can only be described as a continued act of cowardice.     She had another opportunity to put much of our discontent to bed and she once again has decided to continue playing the game.   That is fine – we are going NOWHERE!

 BCSC Chair Brenda Leong

Our latest FOI requests was simple – we wanted to know why she was not responding to our repeated request to answer questions including why her staff (complete and udder failures of lawyers Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat) did not take our Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and whether or not she felt they manipulated key evidence in our hearing.

As you will see below she has decided to hide under her rock….despite her job description literally stating…

This was finally a chance for her to defend the actions of her Staff and to show these same staff that she will defend them against any and all allegations of wrongdoing.    Fagbamiye appears to be simply too dense to even understand this woman (his boss) does not have his back.

Leong’s reply is as follows:

Between Leong and Executive Director Peter Brady – it is very clear this organization is failing the people of the Province of British Columbia.  Investors have a right to know answers to our questions and they continue to hide from answering these questions….

 

BCSC’S LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE COWARDS WHEN ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING HIS ACTIONS!

In a former post in this blog a few months ago, we told a story of one of our former investors calling the BCSC to ask questions regarding our matter.  Unfortunately, whomever she spoke to at the Commission hung up on her before she could get ANY answers to the questions she had for them.

Today, we thought we would try to get answers from Staff Litigator Mr. Olubode Fagbamiye (the Staff Litigator that worked directly on my file) from essentially day 1.  He was one of the lawyers (the other being C. Paige Leggat) that was present during the hearing and he was certainly there during the period of time we presented our settlement Offer that would have seen the investors participate in the successful Deercrest property (without involvement from Staff at West Karma Ltd.).

As you will see in the video below, we did not waste Mr. Fagbamiye’s time and asked him 3 very direct questions.     It is almost laughable his replies (or lack there of) to our repeated questions.

IT IS OUR OPINION THIS VIDEO CONFIRMS EVERYTHING WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THE ENTIRE TIME.   AND IT REMAINS OUR OPINION BY FAILING TO RESPOND TO OUR QUESTIONS THE BCSC (AND THEIR STAFF) ARE COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT IN RUNNING THE SECURITIES INDUSTRY IN THIS PROVINCE!  

Shame on them all!   Especially this incompetent spineless amoeba that happened to work on our file (manipulating the evidence and not taking a valid settlement offer to the Executive Director).

 

For all former investors in both FCC and DCF, we encourage you to watch the video – now more than every you need to contact (phone, mail, email, fax) and get these questions answered.

They cannot ignore all of you!   As you can see, Fagbamiye’s phone number is 604-899-6790 and the main line is 604-899-6500.   Call them today – record the call or have someone witness the call for you.    Email them weekly if you need to!

It is time they are held accountable for THEIR actions in the West Karma matter.

 

AMATEURS ACTING AS PROFESSIONALS AT THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION! TAKE A LOOK!

The Respondents sent their time-sensitive SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL to Staff on November 7, 2013.   Finally, after 7 fucking weeks of waiting, the Respondents were very eager to receive the reply from the Litigator at the BCSC.     As the attachment was opened, eagerness turned to frustration as Staff indicated they did not even take the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director for approval (or even a review/negotiation).  The reason the offer was time sensitive is the builder and lender were anxious to move the project forward in a timely fashion.

There was NO reason ever given why Staff took this amount of time to reply.  Staff bozo (C. Paige Leggat) then had the audacity to tell me (in an email) that the only person at the BCSC that could approve a Settlement Offer was the Executive Director (at that time Paul Bourque).    She would not take it to him…what a garbage human being!  The poor investors!

    STAFF LITIGATOR C. PAIGE LEGGAT

Instead Leggat indicated the only way she (they) would take a Settlement Offer to the Executive Director is IF I pleaded guilty to their long list of allegations and agreed to pay $5.8 million dollars in fines and disgorgement.   The BCSC website indicates all Settlements must be paid in full at the time the Settlement Agreement is agreed to – this was impossible for the Respondents, let alone the FACT that many of the allegations in the Notice of Hearing were NOT accurate.

ON WHAT PLANET DOES A PERSON HAVE TO PLEAD GUILTY TO ALL ALLEGATIONS OUTLINED IN A NOTICE OF HEARING AND THEN PAY A “RANSOM” OF NEARLY $6 MILLION DOLLARS JUST TO GET THEIR SETTLEMENT OFFER NEGOTIATED?   THIS IS BORDERLINE EXTORTION!

The parties could have avoided a long, lengthy, expensive hearing IF Staff Litigators and the Executive Director would have even looked at the proposal and actually thought about the investors.   In hindsight, it appears that the BCSC did not have the investors best interest at stake as their website promotes – nor was it a fair system for all parties.  Please read for yourself, the reply from Staff and ask “WHY DID THE BCSC NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EVEN REVIEW THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEN SO MUCH WAS AT STAKE FOR THE INVESTORS?”   

We encourage anyone affected by the Settlement Offer not even being put onto the Executive Directors desk for a review to contact the BCSC at 1-604-899-5600 during regular business hours.  Maybe you can get an answer – the Respondents have certainly not been able to do so.

[Click on the link…]

December 30, 2013 – LEGATT to RESPONDENTS

DID BC SECURITIES COMMISSION ALL BUT ADMIT THEY DIDN’T PROTECT INVESTORS INTERESTS?

On May 11, 2016, we sent a letter to BCSC Chair BRENDA LEONG and requested she provide (to us) any correspondence between her Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) and the Executive Director ( Paul Bourque ) regarding the Settlement Offer we were trying to bring forward that would possibly have brought funds back to the former investors in FCC and DCF.

As you see in this letter FOI Request #1617-0005 – Reply from BCSC – June 16, 2016.pub , Ms. Leong indicates there are no records matching my request.   We don’t even want to begin to understand why there would be NO correspondence between lawyers/clients when millions of dollars could have been at stake for the investors – how is this even possible??

Not having internal correspondence between relevant parties (considering what was at stake for the former investors) reeks of unprofessionalism by Staff and certainly does not give any confidence they truly had the best interest of the investors during all relevant times.  

That being said, Leong is either lying or (for whatever reason) there truly are NO records of correspondence between her star lawyers and their higher ups.   Either way, this translates into a huge problem for the BCSC.    Here’s why….

Assuming she is not lying, as per the Code of Ethic’s on the  Law Society of British Columbia’s website , a lawyer must present ANY settlement offer it is presented to their client to avoid hearing.  Staff DID NOT do this as they have admitted this in letters to the Respondents.   In a file of this magnitude, and with the numerous attempts by us to settle – there is not one internal document related to the settlement offer that was presented?   We truly find this hard to believe but if true – these are the people that are “protecting the capital markets in BC”???    Time for a WAKE UP CALL BRITISH COLUMBIA!!

And if she is lying then this becomes a bigger problem as she has been appointed to that position by elected government officials – more than likely Finance Minister Michael De jong or Premier Christy Clark.

In the first scenario above, we have the facts:

  • The Respondents submitted a Settlement Offer to the Commission on November 7, 2013 – Staff did not respond until December 30, 2013.
  • When  Staff did reply, they stated they had NOT taken the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and would only do so IF we plead guilty to ALL allegations AND paid approximately $5.8 million in fines and disgorgement.
  • As of June 16, 2016, we now have it in writing that there in NO communications whatsoever between Staff and the Executive Director with respect to any discussion regarding the Settlement Offer.

As we were preparing this latest blog post – something remarkable just became VERY apparent….what is happening down at the BCSC???

Paige Leggat  (Source: mypersonaltrainervancouver.com)

C.Paige Leggat – Staff Litigator                                                                              RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2014

teresa-mitchell-banks    (Source: mingpaocanada.com)

Teresa Mitchell-Banks  – Director of Enforcement                                          RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2015

paul-bourque         (Source: cbc.ca)

Paul C. Bourque –  Executive Director                                                                  RESIGNED IN 2016

These are the 3 major parties that would have been responsible for negotiating, accepting or denying the settlement agreement WITH the investor in mind.

PLEASE….FORMER INVESTORS IN FCC AND DCF – HELP US GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.   AGAIN, THIS SETTLEMENT OFFER WAS NOT EVEN PRESENTED TO THE ONLY PERSON THAT COULD HAVE ACCEPTED IT ON YOUR BEHALF!      

******CONTACT THE BCSC AND FIND OUT WHY!******

604-899-5600 or email them at: inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca 

IF THEY DON’T ANSWER YOU, GO ABOVE THEIR HEADS AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL MLA OR OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL!  ITS VITAL! 

JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONER (THE BCSC) “PROVES” THEIR CASE USING WRONG NUMBERS! PANEL MEMBERS FALL FOR IT!

Here is an example of what happens when you allow a government entity to be the judge, jury, and executioner in a case where evidence can be submitted and proven on the ‘Balance of Probabilities”.   Sloppy investigative work seems to be the forte of the British Columbia Securities Commission.    Let’s take a look….

In November 2007, the Developer of the Falls Resort approached me and asked if I knew of anyone that might purchase a unit in the Deercrest Townhomes, located on the property.    He had Unit 101 that was available for sale and the Respondents indicated they would ask around.   I called one of the investors in Edmonton and asked if he wanted to buy and he indicated he would.

Shortly there later, a commission cheque in the amount of $24,292.75 arrived made payable to West Karma Ltd.    I placed the cheque into the WKL bank account and NEVER wrote a cheque to myself personally.   Looking at the bank account statements for WKL for the following 10 days, $20571.61 was spent directly on business expenses for WKL and FCC and the balance were used for personal expenses.

THESE WERE NOT INVESTOR FUNDS YET PAID FOR BUSINESS RELATED DIRECTLY TO THE WKL AND FCC.

That’s fine – people place funds into their business accounts on a regular basis as shareholder loans.     IF the BCSC’s Executive Director (and his Staff) wanted to bring accurate allegations in their Notice of Hearing they needed to complete a proper accounting and bring in a proper number into the allegation….but let’s see what Lead Investigator Elizabeth Chan had to say during the cross examination during our hearing in April 2014:

Q Can we put up, pull up Exhibit 00240? Can you please read this letter for the panel?

A Just the body of the letter, like, —

Q Just —

A — after the “re” line?

Q Just lead the letter please, from who it’s addressed to, and who it’s from and the body of the letter, sure, please.

A Okay. So, I don’t think this is a document that I obtained. Uhm, it says:

West Karma Ltd., BC
Dear Sirs/Mesdames:
Re: Sales of 101-51096 Falls Court, Chilliwack, BC (the “Property”) by Blackburn
Developments Ltd. (the “Seller”) to -REDACTED-  (the “Buyers”) effective November 23, 2007 (the”Completion Date”). As notary for the seller, we enclose our firm trust cheque drawn in your favour, in the amount of $24,292.75 representing payment in full for the Commission with respect to the above transaction. Please provide our office with a receipt for payment at your earliest convenience. We trust you find the foregoing and enclosed to be in order, however, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the writer or Shirley MacKillop of this office.
Yours truly, Simpson & Simpson. And the name there says, “R. Dean Simpson” and the letter, the date, November 23, 2007.

Q Thank you. And have you ever seen this document before?

A Uhm, I didn’t obtain this document during the course of my investigation, but I did see it in the binder of materials of materials contained in documents that you were intending to rely on.

Q That’s the first time you saw it though?

A Yes.
Source: Hearing Transcript, April 11, 2014 (pages 23-25)

Former BCSC Investigator Elizabeth (“Liz”)Chan

This is the testimony of Staff’s most important witness – a Certified General Accountant with a degree from the University of British Columbia in Bachelor of Commerce?    That she never saw items going into the bank account that were relevant IF they wanted to bring an accurate number into the hearing room.   Elizabeth Chan is a highly paid Senior Investigator with the BCSC – it is HER job to find out the numbers used in the Notice of Hearing are accurate!   There is NO excuse for the sloppy work Staff completed in this matter!

How is this even possible is the onus was on the Executive Director to bring in clear and compelling evidence to prove the allegations in the Notice of Hearing?   Was the Respondents not entitled to a fair hearing with accurate numbers as the BCSC boasts on their website?   This is what happens when you allow an absolute failure to run rampant down at the BCSC….

WHY DOES THE BCSC’S STAR LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE CONTINUE TO HIDE?

It has now been over 9 months since we contacted Mr. Fagbamiye by phone (and then by letter) and he continues to hide from answering simple questions that would allow the former investors in both FCC and DCF to hear first hand whether or not staff at the BC Securities Commission acted in bad faith when preparing legal documents in our matter AND whether or not they erred in not taking the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director of the BCSC (whom we were told was the ONLY person at the BCSC that would be able to accept our settlement offer.

Mr. Fagbamiye (as we have seen for months now) appears to be a coward and will not answer our questions – despite even telling me to put my questions down on paper and that he would answer them accordingly.    And on Saturday, we tried AGAIN in vain to get Fagbamiye to answer our questions…

Mr. Fagbamiye is hiding something and we need to get to the bottom of it once and for all.   I am calling on all former investors in FCC and DCF to call, write, email, fax, text, etc. Fagbamiye and ask him to answer these questions.

They are going to have to answer them sooner or later – the walls at the BCSC are NOT going to allow them to not answer these questions for much longer.   Our story is getting bigger by the day and as certain politicians that are appearing to aid the staff at the Commission are replaced – those that have acted in bad faith are going to be exposed.

TO ALL STAFF AT THE BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION…

For over 15 months now I have tried to get answers on behalf of the the former investors in both Falls Capital Corp and Deercrest Construction Fund with respect to my allegations that wanna-be lawyers Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat manipulated the key document relied upon in the hearing that took place in April 2014.  Leggat’s personal friend has told me that she left the commission because of my allegation that she manipulated the document – and didn’t want to deal with any possible ramifications.    That’s that definition of a coward!

   C. Paige Leggat 

In addition, I (along with a few of the former investors) have contacted Staff (namely Executive Director – the flip-flopping Peter Brady) in an attempt to find out why the Settlement Agreement sent to Fagbamiye and Leggat was not even put in front of the only person that could have accepted it…instead the scumbag Leggat indicated they only way I could enter into a Settlement Agreement was if I admitted ALL allegations the clowns at the BCSC brought forward during their PATHETIC investigation in 2012 and 2013 – by the elusive Elizabeth “Liz” Chan, which led to allegations being brought forward by the Executive Director Paul Bourque.

In a comedy of errors – Leggat, Chan, and Bourque have all left the BCSC or have been fired!

Elizabeth “Liz” Chan

Paul Bourque

To all Staff at the BCSC – you are all cowards and it will be my absolute pleasure telling my story over the next few months!!

You have a leader in Chair Brenda Leong that will not even defend her Staff and deny my allegations to be accurate.    She is a phony and it is my hope that she is kicked to the curb by the new government in the near future.   What is she hiding and why will she not reply to our emails – including those from the former investors – the ones that she is suppose to be protecting.

 Brenda Leong

 

BCSC INVESTIGATOR ELIZABETH “LIZ” CHAN ASSUMES…BCSC PANEL ALLOWS THIS TO HAPPEN!

Staff had the onus to bring valid, compelling evidence before the Panel. Wharram (who has no legal training) had Investigator Elizabeth Chan admit that she assumed vital details that caused the Executive Director to issue portion of the Notice of Hearing against Wharram…

Yet the same Panel ruled the Executive Director proved “on the Balance of Probabilities” that the allegations were accurate.    How is the compelling evidence?

The following attachment are part of the written Submissions on Liability the Respondents wrote in defense of this portion of the allegations.

Click on the link… Chan Assumes

IS BC SECURITIES COMMISSION CHAIR BRENDA LEONG FAILING THE PEOPLE OF BC?

DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT!!

Again we are truly seeing what kind of a person BCSC Chair Brenda Leong truly is – this week she responded to our Freedom of Information request in what can only be described as a continued act of cowardice.     She had another opportunity to put much of our discontent to bed and she once again has decided to continue playing the game.   That is fine – we are going NOWHERE!

 BCSC Chair Brenda Leong

Our latest FOI requests was simple – we wanted to know why she was not responding to our repeated request to answer questions including why her staff (complete and udder failures of lawyers Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat) did not take our Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and whether or not she felt they manipulated key evidence in our hearing.

As you will see below she has decided to hide under her rock….despite her job description literally stating…

This was finally a chance for her to defend the actions of her Staff and to show these same staff that she will defend them against any and all allegations of wrongdoing.    Fagbamiye appears to be simply too dense to even understand this woman (his boss) does not have his back.

Leong’s reply is as follows:

Between Leong and Executive Director Peter Brady – it is very clear this organization is failing the people of the Province of British Columbia.  Investors have a right to know answers to our questions and they continue to hide from answering these questions….

C. PAIGE LEGGAT, PAUL BOURQUE, TERESA MITCHELL-BANKS, LIZ CHAN ALL FIRED (OR QUIT) BCSC!

On May 11, 2016, we sent a letter to BCSC Chair BRENDA LEONG and requested she provide (to us) any correspondence between her Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) and the Executive Director ( Paul Bourque ) regarding the Settlement Offer we were trying to bring forward that would possibly have brought funds back to the former investors in FCC and DCF.

As you see in this letter FOI Request #1617-0005 – Reply from BCSC – June 16, 2016.pub , Ms. Leong indicates there are no records matching my request.   We don’t even want to begin to understand why there would be NO correspondence between lawyers/clients when millions of dollars could have been at stake for the investors – how is this even possible??

Not having internal correspondence between relevant parties (considering what was at stake for the former investors) reeks of unprofessionalism by Staff and certainly does not give any confidence they truly had the best interest of the investors during all relevant times.  

That being said, Leong is either lying or (for whatever reason) there truly are NO records of correspondence between her star lawyers and their higher ups.   Either way, this translates into a huge problem for the BCSC.    Here’s why….

Assuming she is not lying, as per the Code of Ethic’s on the  Law Society of British Columbia’s website , a lawyer must present ANY settlement offer it is presented to their client to avoid hearing.  Staff DID NOT do this as they have admitted this in letters to the Respondents.   In a file of this magnitude, and with the numerous attempts by us to settle – there is not one internal document related to the settlement offer that was presented?   We truly find this hard to believe but if true – these are the people that are “protecting the capital markets in BC”???    Time for a WAKE UP CALL BRITISH COLUMBIA!!

And if she is lying then this becomes a bigger problem as she has been appointed to that position by elected government officials – more than likely Finance Minister Michael De jong or Premier Christy Clark.

In the first scenario above, we have the facts:

  • The Respondents submitted a Settlement Offer to the Commission on November 7, 2013 – Staff did not respond until December 30, 2013.
  • When  Staff did reply, they stated they had NOT taken the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and would only do so IF we plead guilty to ALL allegations AND paid approximately $5.8 million in fines and disgorgement.
  • As of June 16, 2016, we now have it in writing that there in NO communications whatsoever between Staff and the Executive Director with respect to any discussion regarding the Settlement Offer.

As we were preparing this latest blog post – something remarkable just became VERY apparent….what is happening down at the BCSC???

Paige Leggat  (Source: mypersonaltrainervancouver.com)

C.Paige Leggat – Staff Litigator                                                                              RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2014

teresa-mitchell-banks    (Source: mingpaocanada.com)

Teresa Mitchell-Banks  – Director of Enforcement                                          RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2015

paul-bourque         (Source: cbc.ca)

Paul C. Bourque –  Executive Director                                                                  RESIGNED IN 2016

These are the 3 major parties that would have been responsible for negotiating, accepting or denying the settlement agreement WITH the investor in mind.

And lets not forget the flunky investigator Elizabeth “Liz” Chan – she was either terminated or quit in April 2014 – the same month she admitted to assuming during her cross examination.

Elizabeth Chan – Lead Investigator

PLEASE….FORMER INVESTORS IN FCC AND DCF – HELP US GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.   AGAIN, THIS SETTLEMENT OFFER WAS NOT EVEN PRESENTED TO THE ONLY PERSON THAT COULD HAVE ACCEPTED IT ON YOUR BEHALF!      

******CONTACT THE BCSC AND FIND OUT WHY!******

604-899-5600 or email them at: inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca 

IF THEY DON’T ANSWER YOU, GO ABOVE THEIR HEADS AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL MLA OR OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL!  ITS VITAL! 

DID “GUTLESS” LAWYERS C PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE MANIPULATE EVIDENCE?

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Panel Chair instructed both parties to complete Written Submission on Liability.  These documents argued the points brought up during the hearing and gave the parties the ability to prove (or disprove) the allegations brought forward in the Notice of Hearing.

One of the key documents involved in the hearing was the Offering Memorandum(s) (“OM’s”) used by the Respondents to raise capital.  For those that invested with the Respondents, you will remember this document as one you were given at the time you invested.    The BCSC (and other securities jurisdictions) allow an OM Exemption when raising capital in the securities market.

On May 16, 2014, the Respondents received the Executive Directors Submissions on Liability and began reviewing the points brought forward by Staff.  We read them from cover to cover a couple of different times and soon noticed something very particular….

Unfortunately, at paragraph #10 of their submissions, Staff resorted to physically changing the appearance of the document.   We feel they did this to suite their theory (and main allegation) that the Respondents did not forward the MAJORITY of the funds to the Developer.   This was the big $5.45 million fraud allegation that was ultimately dismissed by the Panel.   Let’s take a look at paragraph #10 as it appears in their submissions….

Staff's Submission on Liability - paragraph 10And now, for those of you that don’t have the FCC or DCF Offering Memorandums in front of you, this is how the document looked – keep in mind this document was relied upon at all times to raise capital for the projects, and Staff were suppose to have the onus of proving the case as alleged in the Notice of Hearing:

FCC OM's as they Actually Appear Continue reading DID “GUTLESS” LAWYERS C PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE MANIPULATE EVIDENCE?

BCSC LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE CONTINUES HIS COWARDICE SILENCE??

If ONLY Olubode Fagbamiye was this quiet in the hearing room…..

It looks like the definition of a CHICKEN SHIT COWARD continues to be the BCSC’s junior litigator Olubode Fagbamiye!   In repeated request for Fagbamiye to answer our questions, he continues to cower and hide from answering any of them (or even denying our allegations).    As you are aware, we sent him a formal letter on December 7, 2016 after our phone call to his office.  During the phone call on December 5, 2016 he specifically says to write the questions down and communicate via written correspondence.   Was he just saying that to get off the phone?  It now appears so!

According to our friends at http://bcsccriminalcharges.blogspot.ca , this would put Fagbamiye in breach of a “Statutory Requirement for a government department to reply to all written correspondence within 14 days…”.    If true, how does this continue to happen at the British Columbia Securities Commission?   How are they above the law?

Mr. Fagbamiye – how does it feel to look in the mirror and know that you are part of the issues that continue to haunt the BCSC?  How does it feel to be such a coward and fail miserably at your job?

Can someone working at the BCSC go down the hall way and make sure he is awake?   Perhaps he naps throughout his days and has issues with getting his job done?   Who knows?

This continues to get more and more ridiculous!  Wake up Fagbamiye!!

DID ALBERTA SECURITIES COMMISSION GIVE WALTON INTERNATIONAL A FREE PASS?

What a last couple of weeks it has been for Walton International – the Alberta Securities Commission suspended Walton’s registration which prohibits them from selling any more of their investments.  And then they hired Ernst & Young to take them through the CCAA process in an attempt to re-organize their debt.   This sounds almost identical as the League Assets story we discussed last summer in this blog post.     One can conclude the Walton matter will have the same ending!   How can a company make hundreds of millions of dollars selling land be broke after 25+ years of being in business?  Rumor on the street is the company is being gutted and those (at the top) have already cashed out their millions…

WAS THIS ALL PREDICTABLE?

Back a few years ago I came across a Sales Representative that worked at Walton International at a Calgary Flames hockey game.  After chatting for a few minutes he suggested I look at his investment opportunity – it was a parcel of land down by Spruce Meadows (in the southern tip of Calgary).    Although I was not interested in the investment, I agreed to meet with him at his office a short while later.

I remember their office being really nice and it seemed like they had a ton of staff.  After receiving a brief sales pitch I was sent on my way with an envelope full of paperwork.   Some time later, I opened the envelope and (as part of the package) discovered a letter from a lawyer named Donald Boykiw from the fancy Bennett Jones LLP law firm.

The letter is short and cuts to the point – it indicates that Boykiw is writing to inform Walton that the Alberta Securities Commission had reviewed Walton’s business practice of selling undivided interest in land to purchasers and that this review had been done as a result of sanctions against Walton’s prime competition in Alberta land banking.    Boykiw goes on to state, “I would also advise that the Commission staff member who was involved in this matter has further advised that the ASC’s enforcement counsel would not be recommending any changes to the current forms of referral arrangements for both the mortgage referrals from Westmount Mortgage Corporation and the land referrals from Cordex Realty.   We have also received a follow-up call from the registration counsel at the Alberta Securities Commission indicating that they ave also completed their review of such referral agreements and were not proposing any changes.”    A copy of the letter:  

The significance of this letter is simple – Walton International’s business model sees them allegedly buying farm land for as little as $400 per acre and turn around only days later and sell it for up to 7000% increases to investors from all over the World – and the gang down at the ASC gave them a clean bill of health while sanctioning others in the same line of work.    And don’t forget – this happened during Ralph Klein’s duration as Premier of Alberta who’s daughter physically worked at Walton’s head office.

For those people that do not know who Walton International are (or were) – they purported to be the largest land banker (and then later land developer) in the nation.    They had many projects throughout Canada and the United States.   They had come under fire in some circles for paying huge upfront commission to their sales people and for having lavish spending sprees on chartered boats and trips for Staff.   In one instance, it was reported they had chartered a large ship and had the expensive Self-Help Guru Anthony Robbins as a guest to get their staff motivated to sell their product.

Facts are – may people have been reporting on Walton’s demise for years.   A simple google search has found us endless reports from press from all over the World suggesting Walton’s business plan had some distinct cracks and was leaking severally.   An article in the Ottawa Citizen from March 2013 suggests the land banking project in Ottawa was in trouble.

What happened in Singapore when they had several complaints about many Land Banking firms – even Walton International?   Out comes the huge Public Relations wheel and they brought an entire news crew to see their operations in Canada….

This video is so biased towards Walton but comes across as some bi-partial news telecast – We wonder how much more they raised after this video made the rounds…

Would this all have been avoided IF the ASC had not given them that clean bill of health back in 2002 – that they used as a sales aid for their sales people???  Shame on the ASC!   This story is going to be huge when the cards ALL come falling down – and this letter is going to be used in any case against the ASC!   How are they going to be able to protect the Walton Investors when they are complicit in allowing Walton to exist – even going as far as giving legal advice that their sales people used to close the unexpected investors?

 

BIASED ALBERTA SECURITIES COMMISSION GIVES LEGAL ADVICE TO WALTON INTERNATIONAL?

What a last couple of weeks it has been for Walton International – the Alberta Securities Commission suspended Walton’s registration which prohibits them from selling any more of their investments.  And then they hired Ernst & Young to take them through the CCAA process in an attempt to re-organize their debt.   This sounds almost identical as the League Assets story we discussed last summer in this blog post.     One can conclude the Walton matter will have the same ending!   How can a company make hundreds of millions of dollars selling land be broke after 25+ years of being in business?  Rumor on the street is the company is being gutted and those (at the top) have already cashed out their millions…

WAS THIS ALL PREDICTABLE?

Back a few years ago I came across a Sales Representative that worked at Walton International at a Calgary Flames hockey game.  After chatting for a few minutes he suggested I look at his investment opportunity – it was a parcel of land down by Spruce Meadows (in the southern tip of Calgary).    Although I was not interested in the investment, I agreed to meet with him at his office a short while later.

I remember their office being really nice and it seemed like they had a ton of staff.  After receiving a brief sales pitch I was sent on my way with an envelope full of paperwork.   Some time later, I opened the envelope and (as part of the package) discovered a letter from a lawyer named Donald Boykiw from the fancy Bennett Jones LLP law firm.

The letter is short and cuts to the point – it indicates that Boykiw is writing to inform Walton that the Alberta Securities Commission had reviewed Walton’s business practice of selling undivided interest in land to purchasers and that this review had been done as a result of sanctions against Walton’s prime competition in Alberta land banking.    Boykiw goes on to state, “I would also advise that the Commission staff member who was involved in this matter has further advised that the ASC’s enforcement counsel would not be recommending any changes to the current forms of referral arrangements for both the mortgage referrals from Westmount Mortgage Corporation and the land referrals from Cordex Realty.   We have also received a follow-up call from the registration counsel at the Alberta Securities Commission indicating that they ave also completed their review of such referral agreements and were not proposing any changes.”    A copy of the letter:  

The significance of this letter is simple – Walton International’s business model sees them allegedly buying farm land for as little as $400 per acre and turn around only days later and sell it for up to 7000% increases to investors from all over the World – and the gang down at the ASC gave them a clean bill of health while sanctioning others in the same line of work.    And don’t forget – this happened during Ralph Klein’s duration as Premier of Alberta who’s daughter physically worked at Walton’s head office.

For those people that do not know who Walton International are (or were) – they purported to be the largest land banker (and then later land developer) in the nation.    They had many projects throughout Canada and the United States.   They had come under fire in some circles for paying huge upfront commission to their sales people and for having lavish spending sprees on chartered boats and trips for Staff.   In one instance, it was reported they had chartered a large ship and had the expensive Self-Help Guru Anthony Robbins as a guest to get their staff motivated to sell their product.

Facts are – may people have been reporting on Walton’s demise for years.   A simple google search has found us endless reports from press from all over the World suggesting Walton’s business plan had some distinct cracks and was leaking severally.   An article in the Ottawa Citizen from March 2013 suggests the land banking project in Ottawa was in trouble.

What happened in Singapore when they had several complaints about many Land Banking firms – even Walton International?   Out comes the huge Public Relations wheel and they brought an entire news crew to see their operations in Canada….

This video is so biased towards Walton but comes across as some bi-partial news telecast – We wonder how much more they raised after this video made the rounds…

Would this all have been avoided IF the ASC had not given them that clean bill of health back in 2002 – that they used as a sales aid for their sales people???  Shame on the ASC!   This story is going to be huge when the cards ALL come falling down – and this letter is going to be used in any case against the ASC!   How are they going to be able to protect the Walton Investors when they are complicit in allowing Walton to exist – even going as far as giving legal advice that their sales people used to close the unexpected investors?

BRENDA LEONG (THE HEAD OF THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION) CONTINUES TO HIDE!

DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT!!

Again we are truly seeing what kind of a person BCSC Chair Brenda Leong truly is – this week she responded to our Freedom of Information request in what can only be described as a continued act of cowardice.     She had another opportunity to put much of our discontent to bed and she once again has decided to continue playing the game.   That is fine – we are going NOWHERE!

 BCSC Chair Brenda Leong

Our latest FOI requests was simple – we wanted to know why she was not responding to our repeated request to answer questions including why her staff (complete and udder failures of lawyers Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat) did not take our Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and whether or not she felt they manipulated key evidence in our hearing.

As you will see below she has decided to hide under her rock….despite her job description literally stating…

This was finally a chance for her to defend the actions of her Staff and to show these same staff that she will defend them against any and all allegations of wrongdoing.    Fagbamiye appears to be simply too dense to even understand this woman (his boss) does not have his back.

Leong’s reply is as follows:

Between Leong and Executive Director Peter Brady – it is very clear this organization is failing the people of the Province of British Columbia.  Investors have a right to know answers to our questions and they continue to hide from answering these questions….

 

BC SECURITIES COMMISSION BRINGS INACCURATE NUMBERS INTO HEARING ROOM!

In November 2007, the Developer of the Falls Resort approached me and asked if I knew of anyone that might purchase a unit in the Deercrest Townhomes, located on the property.    He had Unit 101 that was available for sale and the Respondents indicated they would ask around.   I called one of the investors in Edmonton and asked if he wanted to buy and he indicated he would.  The sale was completed a few days later.

Shortly there later, a commission cheque in the amount of $24,292.75 arrived made payable to West Karma Ltd.    I placed the cheque into the WKL bank account and NEVER wrote a cheque to myself personally.   Looking at the bank account statements for WKL for the following 10 days, $20571.61 was spent directly on business expenses for WKL and FCC and the balance were used for personal expenses.

THESE WERE NOT INVESTOR FUNDS YET PAID FOR BUSINESS RELATED DIRECTLY TO THE WKL AND FCC.

That’s fine – people place funds into their business accounts on a regular basis as shareholder loans.     IF the BCSC’s Executive Director (and his Staff) wanted to bring accurate allegations in their Notice of Hearing they needed to complete a proper accounting and bring in a proper number into the allegation….but let’s see what Lead Investigator Elizabeth Chan had to say during the cross examination during our hearing in April 2014:

Q Can we put up, pull up Exhibit 00240? Can you please read this letter for the panel?

A Just the body of the letter, like, —

Q Just —

A — after the “re” line?

Q Just lead the letter please, from who it’s addressed to, and who it’s from and the body of the letter, sure, please.

A Okay. So, I don’t think this is a document that I obtained. Uhm, it says:

West Karma Ltd., BC
Dear Sirs/Mesdames:
Re: Sales of 101-51096 Falls Court, Chilliwack, BC (the “Property”) by Blackburn
Developments Ltd. (the “Seller”) to -REDACTED-  (the “Buyers”) effective November 23, 2007 (the”Completion Date”). As notary for the seller, we enclose our firm trust cheque drawn in your favour, in the amount of $24,292.75 representing payment in full for the Commission with respect to the above transaction. Please provide our office with a receipt for payment at your earliest convenience. We trust you find the foregoing and enclosed to be in order, however, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the writer or Shirley MacKillop of this office.
Yours truly, Simpson & Simpson. And the name there says, “R. Dean Simpson” and the letter, the date, November 23, 2007.

Q Thank you. And have you ever seen this document before?

A Uhm, I didn’t obtain this document during the course of my investigation, but I did see it in the binder of materials of materials contained in documents that you were intending to rely on.

Q That’s the first time you saw it though?

A Yes.
Source: Hearing Transcript, April 11, 2014 (pages 23-25)

This is the testimony of Staff’s most important witness – a Certified General Accountant with a degree from the University of British Columbia in Bachelor of Commerce?    That she never saw items going into the bank account that were relevant IF they wanted to bring an accurate number into the hearing room.   Elizabeth Chan is a highly paid Senior Investigator with the BCSC – it is HER job to find out the numbers used in the Notice of Hearing are accurate!   There is NO excuse for the sloppy work Staff completed in this matter!

How is this even possible is the onus was on the Executive Director to bring in clear and compelling evidence to prove the allegations in the Notice of Hearing?   Was the Respondents not entitled to a fair hearing with accurate numbers as the BCSC boasts on their website?

This is just one example of many proving the BCSC brought a number into the hearing room that was NOT accurate.   This would have never held in a REAL court room.    Shame on the BCSC!

BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG (AND HER CRONIES) REMAIN SILENT….FOR OVER 365 DAYS!

TO:  ALL STAFF AT THE BCSC

On May 18, 2016, and every day since that we have written on this blog, we have challenged you to answer simple questions regarding the matter we had before the BCSC.   To date, NOT one of you have bothered to reply, or even defend our allegations against the BCSC Staff.   For that, one could say you are very spineless and act without merit and we think you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

The BCSC appears to have two sets of rules and will only reply to something that supports their set agenda.   In addition, it appears they have the newspaper reporters in their pockets because not one of the slimy writers will write a story against the “government machine” in fear of wrinkling the wrong feathers.  They had NO problem reporting on day 1 of our hearing when the case was presented by the BCSC, reported a very biased one-sided story and did not cover the balance of the hearing when we presented our case and had 94% of the allegations (dollar amount) thrown out by the Panel.   

To ANYONE who doubts what is being said in this blog and that we are not telling the truth, we say this….

“Why isn’t one of the most powerful government agencies in BC, with unlimited funds to fight legal battles, suing us for defamation?  After sending out letters from your lawyer to Peter Harris and Christopher Burke – Why are you not suing them for defamation after threatening to do so?”    

In our opinion, there are 2 reasons for them cowering up and putting their heads in the sand:

1.  They are not able to sue for Libel/Defamation because we are not saying anything that is not true.  Our blog posts contain facts and have not exaggerated the events or allegations made against their Staff.  We have merely presented questions to the grossly incompetent BCSC Chair Brenda Leong and the person who appointed her, Premier Christy Clark.  Neither of these women will respond to our repeated request.  Items like BCSC staff manipulating evidence, not presenting the settlement offer, and the BCSC staff bringing assumptions into the hearing room ARE factually correct.  The have no reply because they have NO defense.     

2. Secondly, they do not want to argue against us, offer us another hearing, or answer our simple questions because they know the moment they do – they will be incriminating themselves and going down a road they definitely do not want to take.   THEY DO NOT WANT THE TRUTH TO COME OUT IN A REAL COURTROOM.   It would appear they don’t want to step outside their domain and have a real judge (outside of their precious Kangaroo Court) telling the world what is happening within their walls.  They will not answer Former Investors questions as to why they did not accept the Settlement Offer because they know the former investors will NOT like their answers and more than likely sue them for acting in bad faith.  And don’t forget (as posted earlier in this blog), we applied, through a Freedom of Information request, all correspondence from staff litigators to/from the Executive Director with respect to the Settlement Offer.    There was NOTHING – these bozo’s (Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye / C. Paige Leggat and Executive Director Paul Bourque) didn’t even have a discussion with one another regarding the investors opportunity to recoup some (if not all) of their funds!   Incompetent!   

Now, we will issue you three FORMAL CHALLENGES:

CHALLENGE #1:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO HAVE YOUR FLASHY LAWYERS  SEND US A LETTER DEMANDING WE SHUT DOWN OUR BLOG FOR BEING INACCURATE AND/OR SLANDEROUS;  

CHALLENGE #2:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO SUE US FOR DEFAMATION/LIBEL IF FOR ONE MOMENT OUR ALLEGATION OF BCSC STAFF ACTING IN BAD FAITH (WHEN MANIPULATING EVIDENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US) IS NOT TRUE;

CHALLENGE #3:   FINALLY, WE CHALLENGE YOU TO FORMALLY ADDRESS THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL (AS OUTLINED EARLIER IN THIS BLOG) THAT THE FCC AND DCF INVESTORS WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM. 

IF YOU IGNORE US OR DO NOT HAVE YOUR COUNCIL COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US IN THE NEXT 14 DAYS – WE WILL ASSUME THE ALLEGATIONS WE HAVE MADE AGAINST YOU TO BE VALID AND TO BE NON-CONTESTED.  WE WILL PUBLISH YOUR RESPONSE (OR LACK OF) IN THIS BLOG 15 DAYS FROM NOW.  

 We are begging for you to finally act – it has now been over 365 days (and counting) since my blog started and you have all had your head in the sand.   It is time people hear the truth.   We want to go to court against you so we can start the process of people hearing the truth consisting a facts and not some slanderous, biased press release issued by your incompetent staff, followed up by being rail-roaded by your inept lawyers in the hearing itself, and then having employees that work in the same office as the litigators making a decision as some “independent” panel.    Don’t forget, we have have a witness  (brought in to testify FOR the BCSC) agreeing with our side; and the Panel still found that Staff proved this allegation.   It is easy to conclude you people are all incompetent and possibly corrupt!

This is a telling time – the people are waking up and standing up to government agencies all over the World – specifically ones that appear to be corrupt!    The BCSC is an agency that desperately needs an overhaul.  It (like many of the agencies Clark’s government has touched) appears to be tainted.

Eagerly awaiting your reply Brenda Leong!   When are you going to wake up from that deep slumber?   How do you justify taking that $500,000 per year in salary when you don’t do your job?   And finally, how can you not support your shitty staff when people are accusing them of wrongdoing?   Spineless?  How do you think your staff truly feel about you abandoning them?   Word on the street is that many of your staff cannot stand you – and think you are in far over your head in the competence department!

We couldn’t agree more….

BAWK….BAWK…BAWK…..BCSC’S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PETER BRADY CONTINUES TO HIDE!

I AM STILL WAITING…DON’T BE SO SPINELESS LIKE YOUR BOSS….

HEY PETER BRADY!   ONE OF MY FORMER INVESTORS (GERRY S) SENT YOU AN EMAIL BACK IN MARCH 2017 REQUESTING YOU ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS…..

WHY WON’T YOU REPLY TO HIM?   CHICKEN SHIT?

I DARE YOU TO ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS!!  WHAT ARE YOU HIDING?

DID THE ASC GIVE LEGAL ADVICE TO WALTON INTERNATIONAL – BENNETT JONES LLP SAYS SO!

What a last couple of weeks it has been for Walton International – the Alberta Securities Commission suspended Walton’s registration which prohibits them from selling any more of their investments.  And then they hired Ernst & Young to take them through the CCAA process in an attempt to re-organize their debt.   This sounds almost identical as the League Assets story we discussed last summer in this blog post.     One can conclude the Walton matter will have the same ending!   How can a company make hundreds of millions of dollars selling land be broke after 25+ years of being in business?  Rumor on the street is the company is being gutted and those (at the top) have already cashed out their millions…

WAS THIS ALL PREDICTABLE?

Back a few years ago I came across a Sales Representative that worked at Walton International at a Calgary Flames hockey game.  After chatting for a few minutes he suggested I look at his investment opportunity – it was a parcel of land down by Spruce Meadows (in the southern tip of Calgary).    Although I was not interested in the investment, I agreed to meet with him at his office a short while later.

I remember their office being really nice and it seemed like they had a ton of staff.  After receiving a brief sales pitch I was sent on my way with an envelope full of paperwork.   Some time later, I opened the envelope and (as part of the package) discovered a letter from a lawyer named Donald Boykiw from the fancy Bennett Jones LLP law firm.

The letter is short and cuts to the point – it indicates that Boykiw is writing to inform Walton that the Alberta Securities Commission had reviewed Walton’s business practice of selling undivided interest in land to purchasers and that this review had been done as a result of sanctions against Walton’s prime competition in Alberta land banking.    Boykiw goes on to state, “I would also advise that the Commission staff member who was involved in this matter has further advised that the ASC’s enforcement counsel would not be recommending any changes to the current forms of referral arrangements for both the mortgage referrals from Westmount Mortgage Corporation and the land referrals from Cordex Realty.   We have also received a follow-up call from the registration counsel at the Alberta Securities Commission indicating that they ave also completed their review of such referral agreements and were not proposing any changes.”    A copy of the letter:  

The significance of this letter is simple – Walton International’s business model sees them allegedly buying farm land for as little as $400 per acre and turn around only days later and sell it for up to 7000% increases to investors from all over the World – and the gang down at the ASC gave them a clean bill of health while sanctioning others in the same line of work.    And don’t forget – this happened during Ralph Klein’s duration as Premier of Alberta who’s daughter physically worked at Walton’s head office.

For those people that do not know who Walton International are (or were) – they purported to be the largest land banker (and then later land developer) in the nation.    They had many projects throughout Canada and the United States.   They had come under fire in some circles for paying huge upfront commission to their sales people and for having lavish spending sprees on chartered boats and trips for Staff.   In one instance, it was reported they had chartered a large ship and had the expensive Self-Help Guru Anthony Robbins as a guest to get their staff motivated to sell their product.

Facts are – may people have been reporting on Walton’s demise for years.   A simple google search has found us endless reports from press from all over the World suggesting Walton’s business plan had some distinct cracks and was leaking severally.   An article in the Ottawa Citizen from March 2013 suggests the land banking project in Ottawa was in trouble.

What happened in Singapore when they had several complaints about many Land Banking firms – even Walton International?   Out comes the huge Public Relations wheel and they brought an entire news crew to see their operations in Canada….

This video is so biased towards Walton but comes across as some bi-partial news telecast – We wonder how much more they raised after this video made the rounds…

Would this all have been avoided IF the ASC had not given them that clean bill of health back in 2002 – that they used as a sales aid for their sales people???  Shame on the ASC!   This story is going to be huge when the cards ALL come falling down – and this letter is going to be used in any case against the ASC!   How are they going to be able to protect the Walton Investors when they are complicit in allowing Walton to exist – even going as far as giving legal advice that their sales people used to close the unexpected investors?

FOI REQUEST SENT REGARDING THE SILENCE THAT DEFINES BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG!

As most that follow this blog know, we have been trying to get BCSC Chair Brenda Leong to come out from under the rock she is hiding under and answer candid questions regarding the actions of her Staff down at the good ole’ British Columbia Securities Commission.    We are 3 days away from the one-year anniversary of our initial email sent to her – and to date, she has not once responded to many of the emails we have sent her since May 11, 2016.

 BCSC’s BRENDA LEONG

We have questioned for months now why she will not respond – to either acknowledge our complaint or to even defend her Staff.   Staff at the BCSC must really question whether or not she has their backs in a situation like this.  She will not defend their actions and has essentially turned her back on them for months now.   Hard to believe bu this woman makes nearly $500,000 per year – and it is her responsibility to defend the actions of her staff – mainly the junior BCSC litigator Olubode Fagbamiye and former BCSC Litigator C. Paige Leggat (Leggat is the lawyer who resigned or was terminated shortly after our allegation was brought to light in our Submission on Liability in the Spring of 2014.

Today, we sent the following Freedom of Information request to the BCSC in an attempt to finally get her to answer our questions – and to see if she has any sort of decency in dealing with our complaint finally after these unacceptable delays. Have a look….   

Do you think she will respond in her professional capacity as the Chair of the Board who “represents the Commission effectively as its primary public representative”?   Or as the Chief Executive Officer who “effectively manages the relationships among the board, the commission, industry, investors, other regulators, and the public”?

Time will tell Brenda, time will tell!   C’mon out from under that rock!

FOUR BCSC STAFF MEMBERS FIRED OR QUIT THAT HAD CONDUCT ON OUR MATTER!

On May 11, 2016, we sent a letter to BCSC Chair BRENDA LEONG and requested she provide (to us) any correspondence between her Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) and the Executive Director ( Paul Bourque ) regarding the Settlement Offer we were trying to bring forward that would possibly have brought funds back to the former investors in FCC and DCF.

As you see in this letter FOI Request #1617-0005 – Reply from BCSC – June 16, 2016.pub , Ms. Leong indicates there are no records matching my request.   We don’t even want to begin to understand why there would be NO correspondence between lawyers/clients when millions of dollars could have been at stake for the investors – how is this even possible??

Not having internal correspondence between relevant parties (considering what was at stake for the former investors) reeks of unprofessionalism by Staff and certainly does not give any confidence they truly had the best interest of the investors during all relevant times.  

That being said, Leong is either lying or (for whatever reason) there truly are NO records of correspondence between her star lawyers and their higher ups.   Either way, this translates into a huge problem for the BCSC.    Here’s why….

Assuming she is not lying, as per the Code of Ethic’s on the  Law Society of British Columbia’s website , a lawyer must present ANY settlement offer it is presented to their client to avoid hearing.  Staff DID NOT do this as they have admitted this in letters to the Respondents.   In a file of this magnitude, and with the numerous attempts by us to settle – there is not one internal document related to the settlement offer that was presented?   We truly find this hard to believe but if true – these are the people that are “protecting the capital markets in BC”???    Time for a WAKE UP CALL BRITISH COLUMBIA!!

And if she is lying then this becomes a bigger problem as she has been appointed to that position by elected government officials – more than likely Finance Minister Michael De jong or Premier Christy Clark.

In the first scenario above, we have the facts:

  • The Respondents submitted a Settlement Offer to the Commission on November 7, 2013 – Staff did not respond until December 30, 2013.
  • When  Staff did reply, they stated they had NOT taken the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and would only do so IF we plead guilty to ALL allegations AND paid approximately $5.8 million in fines and disgorgement.
  • As of June 16, 2016, we now have it in writing that there in NO communications whatsoever between Staff and the Executive Director with respect to any discussion regarding the Settlement Offer.

As we were preparing this latest blog post – something remarkable just became VERY apparent….what is happening down at the BCSC???

Paige Leggat  (Source: mypersonaltrainervancouver.com)

C.Paige Leggat – Staff Litigator                                                                              RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2014

teresa-mitchell-banks    (Source: mingpaocanada.com)

Teresa Mitchell-Banks  – Director of Enforcement                                          RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2015

paul-bourque         (Source: cbc.ca)

Paul C. Bourque –  Executive Director                                                                  RESIGNED IN 2016

These are the 3 major parties that would have been responsible for negotiating, accepting or denying the settlement agreement WITH the investor in mind.

And lets not forget the flunky investigator Elizabeth “Liz” Chan – she was either terminated or quit in April 2014 – the same month she admitted to assuming during her cross examination.

Elizabeth Chan – Lead Investigator

PLEASE….FORMER INVESTORS IN FCC AND DCF – HELP US GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.   AGAIN, THIS SETTLEMENT OFFER WAS NOT EVEN PRESENTED TO THE ONLY PERSON THAT COULD HAVE ACCEPTED IT ON YOUR BEHALF!      

******CONTACT THE BCSC AND FIND OUT WHY!******

604-899-5600 or email them at: inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca 

IF THEY DON’T ANSWER YOU, GO ABOVE THEIR HEADS AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL MLA OR OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL!  ITS VITAL! 

DOES BCSC’S C. PAIGE LEGGAT THINK SHE’S THE BOSS DURING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS?

Only a couple of weeks before the extremely expensive hearing began at the BC Securities Commission, we again tried to settle by sending a proposal to their lawyer.   Staff Litigator C. Paige Leggat again indicated the ONLY way she would consider taking the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director was IF I agreed to all allegations in the Notice of Hearing and paid a fine and disgorgement of $5.8 million.

    Lawyer C. Paige Leggat 

This was the final straw and ended up costing the FCC and DCF Investors any participation in the real estate project that was part of the Settlement Offer.

WHY WOULD THE COMMISSION (WHO’S MANDATE IS TO HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE BC CAPITAL MARKET) NOT EVEN DISCUSS WITH THE RESPONDENTS THIS OFFER?

Settlement Emails – March 21-24, 2014 – (CLICK HERE)

The wording in these latest emails is comical – Leggat has the gall to imply that “we” had been in settlement negotiations for the last few months.   This is absurd – as she blocked EVERY attempt the Respondents made to settle and bring something back to the table for the investors in FCC and DCF.

And from looking at the Code of Ethics for ANY lawyer in the Province of British Columbia – it is clear that they must take any and all offers to settle to their client.  In this case – that would be the Executive Director at the BCSC.  At the time, this would have been Paul Bourque.

Paul Bourque – former Executive Director of the BCSC

This is YOUR regulator people!   Call them and find out why they did not even enter into discussion with the Respondents – Call 604-899-6500 and ask for someone to explain this to you!!   Unfortunately you cannot ask for C. Paige Leggat as she miraculously resigned shortly after we accused her of manipulating evidence in the Executive Director’s Written Submissions on Liability!    Maybe you could ask for the Director of Enforcement at the time – Ms. Teresa Mitchell-Banks – oh sorry, you can’t –  she was terminated in November 2015 under what seems to be mysterious circumstances to say the least.

Teresa Mitchell-Banks

What a complete GONG SHOW this organization appears to be!  Who’s in charge?  When are they going to wake up?

NEW BOMBSHELL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE A BCSC PANEL INVOLVING BC LIBERAL PARTY!

If evidence brought forward by investigators at the BCSC is accurate, active lawyer and current Richmond MP Joe Peschisolido may have been complicit in fraudulent signatures being placed on legal documents causing his office to release funds to alleged fraudster Paul Oei.    Vancouver Sun reporter Sam Cooper reports today from the BCSC hearing….

Richmond MP – Joe Peschisolido

The article indicates witnesses at the Oei hearing (currently being conducted at the BCSC) have testified that signatures on legal documents (prepared by Peschisolido’s office) were used to transfer funds to different bank accounts owned by Oei – and that these signatures were not authentic.     According to the Lawyer Directory on the Law Society of BC website,  Peschisolido is an ACTIVE lawyer currently bound by their rules and code of ethics.  That beings said, I think we all know the type of people running the roost down at the Law Society.

If the allegations against Peschisolido is  true – is this legal?   Calls made by us today to Lynne Knights at the Law Society of BC were not accepted.    Do you think she is going to try and cover this up by ignoring the facts – as we allege in our complaints to her office last month?

We can see in an earlier article from April 12, 2017,  reporter Sam Cooper writes, In separate but related B.C. Supreme Court civil actions, some of the Chinese investors involved in the case allege losses and have sued Oei and his wife, Loretta Lai, as well as Peschisolido and Peschisolido’s law firm. In legal responses, Peschisolido and Co. have denied that the law firm did anything wrong in the case. Lai and Oei have also denied any wrongdoing.”

How can he claim nothing was wrong when his firm has allegedly prepared the legal documents and was allegedly involved with releasing the funds to Oei and his assorted business accounts?

WAKE UP PEOPLE!  This is an elected official and there needs to be an investigation into him and his company without delay.   Elected politicians need to be held accountable just as others – and should not be able to just stand on their soap box and claim innocence without an investigation.

Our only hope is that the people of Richmond remember this during the next election – how can they not?

COMPLAINT FILED WITH BC CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMMISSIONER REGARDING BCSC’S ACTIONS

From the blog of http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca/ :

Thursday, 13 April 2017

Complaint Filed With the BC Conflict Of Interest Commissioner Re Corrupted BCSC

To the attention of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner:

To the Attention of:
Conflict of Interest Commissioner
First Floor 421 Menzies Street
Victoria BC V8V 1X4
I would like to launch an official complaint regarding the BC Securities Commission and numerous conflicts of interest that it is entangled in. These issues are serious issues that effect all Canadians and investors globally.
I will start with the primary complaint however there are several levels of conflict of interest that exist at the BC Securities Commission. Taken as a one off they may not be so concerning however when the larger picture emerges it is clear the BC Securities Commission operates in such a conflict of interest that it has compromised both its purpose and its legal integrity.
Conflict of Interest #1 – BC Securities Commission Owns Securities in BC Investment Management Corporation.
The BC Securities Commission cannot properly do its job and ensure a fair marketplace, it cannot hold Tribunals and render any meaningful judgments when it itself may stand to gain financially from deciding one way or another when judging a financial securities case.
Here is the evidence regarding the holdings of the BC Securities Commission in BCIMC.
The source can be seen here at the BCSC website.
More on the BCSC and its BCIMC Holdings Below.
 
The BC Investment Management Corporation holds hundreds of financial securities, many companies which may be and/or are in direct competition with other public and private companies operating in BC and Canada owned by Canadians, British Columbians and the rest of the shareholding public around the world. These investors all expect to invest in a sound market where the rule of law is prevalent and the financial securities regulator operate as free from conflict of interest as possible.
The BCSC may claim that it does not directly own any public and/or private equities in the securities markets, it simply owns commercial paper through BCIMC however this is still a clear cut conflict of interest. How can the BCIMC and any of its potential holdings not get preferable treatment from the BCSC when the BCIMC controls the pension funds of the BC Securities Commission?!
Here is the link to the list of holding of the BCIMC.
How can the BC Securities Commission make any rulings in the financial sector that are not in some way compromised by the holdings of the BCIMC?
Conflict of Interest #2 – The BC Securities Commission is Self Funded and Compromised Due to Its Inherent Need to Fund Itself.
The BC Securities Commission exists as a corporation that is self funded. It is the financial regulator for the securities markets in BC and must maintain the integrity of the markets and assure a fair and dynamic marketplace. It cannot do so when it exists by creating rules and regulations which must be broken in order for it to create revenue for itself.
See below on how the BCSC is funded.

Source –
Since the BCSC is self funded would it be more inclined to skip due process and adherence to the rule of law when making a case?
We certainly think so given this email below.

  Source –
Keep in mind although the BCSC claims the right to operate as it sees fit it must still adhere to the rule of law and the fundamentals of justice. There is no protection under Section 170 or any other part of the Securities Act that allows the BCSC remedy for its actions.
This has been demonstrated here.
How can the BC Securities Commission be trusted to act in a fair and unbiased manner when making any legal rulings if its very financial well-being may depend on it ruling in a manner that favours itself over justice?
These are just a couple examples of the BC Securities Commission and its complete disregard for the rule of law and justice, I will not at this time cover the full extent of the crimes of the BCSC.
The purpose of this complaint is to outline the conflicts of interest at the BCSC that encourages and perpetuates the ongoing criminal activities of the BC Securities Commission.
Conflict of Interest #3 – The BC Securities Commission is supposedly a Self Regulating Organization (SRO)
Again this is unbelievable. How this is not a considered a conflict of interest is very puzzling and concerning.
Hold on for this one..
So a financial regulator (the BCSC) that is actually a corporation that owns ‘securities’ in another corporation (the BCIMC) that owns investments inside the jurisdiction that the financial regulator is tasked with regulating. This financial regulator also happens to have to fund itself and police itself while supposedly maintaining a fair marketplace. When one has a complaint about the actions of the BCSC staff which is often criminal that complaint is submitted to the BCSC who somehow always find that no wrong has been done despite all evidence to the contrary. Did the mob think this racket up?
How Conflicts of Interest Compromise the Mandate of the BC Securities Commission.
The supposed mandate of the BCSC and the reality of how it actually operates are two complete different things. The previously mentioned conflicts of interest are not the only ones at the BCSC, the issues facing our thoroughly corrupted financial regulators are vast and complex. Many of the underlying issues however stem from the fact that these conflicts of interest exist, the BCSC operates in the manner of an extortion racket. It uses its supposed powers and the fact that it is an SRO that is also self funded to extort the people of BC with its often compromised judgments in its sham of a Tribunal process. These conflicts of interest have encouraged the BCSC to completely throw out the rule of law.
The following are a couple of links containing evidence that furthers these claims.
Would conflicts of interest encourage BCSC employees to lie in order to make a case?
Why would the BCSC refuse a Settlement offer that could have protected shareholders of a BC company from losing their investments?
Why would the BCSC try to hide this case from the public?
The BCSC is deceptive and operates in a criminal manner, the conflicts of interest that surround it play a large part in this racket.
To much of the public the mandate of the financial regulator for the province of BC is seemingly straight forward and understandable, at least according to its website.
See below exerts from the BCSC itself.
The BCSC cannot properly fulfill this mandate to ensure a fair marketplace while these conflicts of interest exist. Nor can the BCSC adhere to the Taxpayer Accountability Principles it claims that it cares about.
Its time for a full scale investigation into every aspect of the BCSC and how it conducts its ‘business’.Thank you very much for your time on this matter, you may contact me with any questions or for more info.
Regards
Christopher Burke

UPDATE: CBC DOES HUGE STORY ON THE ADVISOR/ADVISER FIASCO THE REGULATORS IGNORE!

Searching through the web and even YouTube, it doesn’t take long for some very powerful videos to surface – none more compelling than the work of a gentleman named Larry Elford, who lives in Alberta.    His videos seem well researched and spot on for many of the difficulties the BCSC (and the other 12 provincial regulators) seem to be dealing with on a regular basis.

Government Regulators Help “Launder” Your Money…Gone!

Securities Commission Distraction

The “Douche-iary” Investment Advisor

Trust Me I am an Advisor…(And I…AM Lying…Twice)

We think you get the idea…

The System is broken and needs an overhaul.   We used several sales agents that told us they were financial planners, brokers, and/or advisors/advisers.   In our dealings with them (from 2007-2010), it was very apparent that many of them only cared about the commission being offered and not about the best interest of their clients – some of which were even family members.

We thought we would take a moment to see the current status of most of financial experts who raised capital for either (or both) of the FCC or DCF offerings.     Bear in mind, the Respondents only met approximately 12-15 (out of 250) of the investors in FCC and DCF.

You can verify the information below by visiting the Canadian Securities Administrator (“CSA”) website.    Here we go…

DUKE, James (Jim) – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA  (Owner of Duke Wellington)

RICK UNRAU – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA

ROD BURYLO – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA 

LANG, David K – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA

WING, Fredric – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA (Former Partner/Founder at Strategic Brokerage Services West LP (“SBS West”), instrumental in bringing the Falls project onto the shelf at SBS in 2009 as well as an avid golfer)

CHAN, Alex – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA  (Former Partner/Founder at SBS West, has CHS – Certified Health Insurance Specialist; CFP – Certified Financial Planner; CPCA – Certified Professional Consultant on Aging; EPC – Elder Planning Councilor; CFSB – Certified Financial Services Broker).

HEINRICH, Adam S – REGISTERED WITH THE CSA (Sent a very long list of questions during his due-diligence of the Falls project – very professional and detail orientated)

ANDREWS, Miriam – REGISTERED WITH THE CSA – (Introduced by SBS West Staff.   Came to Falls property and completed her own due diligence before placing funds into project.  Very Professional)

MACKAY, Robin – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA – (Introduced by SBS Staff. Owner of Drake Wellington in 2010).

McARTHUR, Ian (Peter) – REGISTERED WITH THE CSA – (Introduced by SBS Staff.   Asked several questions in his review of the project – very professional.)

LAI, Loretta – REGISTERED WITH THE CSA 

TOEWS, Jeff – REGISTERED WITH THE CSA (Registered under Raintree Financial and currently calls himself the CEO and Strategic Wealth Planner at Drake Wellington.)

PAQUETTE, Susan – NOT REGISTERED WITH THE CSA 

Just looking at this very simple list – it appears (in our experience) the sales people that have been registered with the CSA were far more diligent in their preparation of putting clients money into the Respondents projects – with exceptions of course.

It would be interesting to see how they currently spell ADVISOR/ADVISER

…something to think about!!

UPDATE:   April 11, 2017   – We have come across this story from CBC today!   Kinda tells it all does it not?  (Click on the link)

http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/909827651762

DID BC POLITICIAN JOE PESCHISOLIDO KNOWINGLY ASSIST IN ALLEGED FRAUD?

In a mind-boggling first day of testimony in the highly publicized hearing into Paul Oei – staff for the BCSC brought forward various documents “tracing funds from the trust ledgers of Peschisolido and Co., to the various bank accounts of Canadian Manu, to the personal bank accounts of Oei, among other destinations.”

It is so apparent that MP Joe Peschisolido had to have know something was not right – one would think that not too many lawyers would not recognize something was up when they started sending millions of dollars to personal bank accounts?

Joe Peschisolido (Source: Vancouver Sun)

Peschisolido is a lawyer that formally had a business practice in Richmond, BC – and is now a big shot Member of Parliament down in Ottawa.   Looking at a October 13, 2016 Vancouver Sun article, we see that Peschisolido seems to flip back and forth between political parties with little to no loyalty to any of them.

Paul Oei’s hearing started on April 10, 2017 and is scheduled sporadically over the next 3 weeks.    In day one of the hearing, staff for the BCSC showed investigators discovered several cheques that alerted them something was not right inside the Oei’s companies and payments into their respective bank accounts.  The Vancouver Sun writes, “In one example, the panel saw a CIBC cheque that was written to Canadian Manu in the amount of $3 million. Oei told an investigator that the Chinese investor intended $1.5 million of the total to be invested in Cascade, the panel heard. And according to Oei, the investor had intended the remaining $1.5 million “as a gift” for Oei and Oei’s wife, the investigator said in testimony Monday.”

That’s an interesting defense – one in which one would think the Panel of the BCSC has never heard before.   Interesting to see if the BCSC will be able to prove their case?  Even more interesting will be rather or not any legal recourse will head back at Peschisolido and others inside the BC Liberal Party.

Joe Peschisolido and Paul Oei (Source: Vancouver Sun)

Stay tuned – more to come as always!

WHY ARE STAFF AT THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION QUITTING OR BEING FIRED?

On May 11, 2016, we sent a letter to BCSC Chair BRENDA LEONG and requested she provide (to us) any correspondence between her Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) and the Executive Director ( Paul Bourque ) regarding the Settlement Offer we were trying to bring forward that would possibly have brought funds back to the former investors in FCC and DCF.

As you see in this letter FOI Request #1617-0005 – Reply from BCSC – June 16, 2016.pub , Ms. Leong indicates there are no records matching my request.   We don’t even want to begin to understand why there would be NO correspondence between lawyers/clients when millions of dollars could have been at stake for the investors – how is this even possible??

Not having internal correspondence between relevant parties (considering what was at stake for the former investors) reeks of unprofessionalism by Staff and certainly does not give any confidence they truly had the best interest of the investors during all relevant times.  

That being said, Leong is either lying or (for whatever reason) there truly are NO records of correspondence between her star lawyers and their higher ups.   Either way, this translates into a huge problem for the BCSC.    Here’s why….

Assuming she is not lying, as per the Code of Ethic’s on the  Law Society of British Columbia’s website , a lawyer must present ANY settlement offer it is presented to their client to avoid hearing.  Staff DID NOT do this as they have admitted this in letters to the Respondents.   In a file of this magnitude, and with the numerous attempts by us to settle – there is not one internal document related to the settlement offer that was presented?   We truly find this hard to believe but if true – these are the people that are “protecting the capital markets in BC”???    Time for a WAKE UP CALL BRITISH COLUMBIA!!

And if she is lying then this becomes a bigger problem as she has been appointed to that position by elected government officials – more than likely Finance Minister Michael De jong or Premier Christy Clark.

In the first scenario above, we have the facts:

  • The Respondents submitted a Settlement Offer to the Commission on November 7, 2013 – Staff did not respond until December 30, 2013.
  • When  Staff did reply, they stated they had NOT taken the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director and would only do so IF we plead guilty to ALL allegations AND paid approximately $5.8 million in fines and disgorgement.
  • As of June 16, 2016, we now have it in writing that there in NO communications whatsoever between Staff and the Executive Director with respect to any discussion regarding the Settlement Offer.

As we were preparing this blog post – something remarkable just became VERY apparent….what is happening down at the BCSC???

Paige Leggat  (Source: mypersonaltrainervancouver.com)

C.Paige Leggat – Staff Litigator                                                                              RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2014

teresa-mitchell-banks    (Source: mingpaocanada.com)

Teresa Mitchell-Banks  – Director of Enforcement                                          RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2015

paul-bourque         (Source: cbc.ca)

Paul C. Bourque –  Executive Director                                                                  RESIGNED IN 2016

These are the 3 major parties that would have been responsible for negotiating, accepting or denying the settlement agreement WITH the investor in mind.

And let’s not forget the former BCSC Investigator Elizabeth Chan – the flunky who had conduct over our file and admitted to assuming information she supplied to her superiors was/or could be factual.

Elizabeth Chan – Former BCSC Senior Investigator                                               RESIGNED OR TERMINATED IN 2014

PLEASE….FORMER INVESTORS IN FCC AND DCF – HELP US GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.   AGAIN, THIS SETTLEMENT OFFER WAS NOT EVEN PRESENTED TO THE ONLY PERSON THAT COULD HAVE ACCEPTED IT ON YOUR BEHALF!      

******CONTACT THE BCSC AND FIND OUT WHY!******

604-899-5600 or email them at: inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca 

IF THEY DON’T ANSWER YOU, GO ABOVE THEIR HEADS AND CONTACT YOUR LOCAL MLA OR OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL!  ITS VITAL! 

OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE OF THE BCSC = CHICKEN SHIT??

It looks like the definition of a CHICKEN SHIT COWARD continues to be the BCSC’s junior litigator Olubode Fagbamiye!   In repeated request for Fagbamiye to answer our questions, he continues to cower and hide from answering any of them (or even denying our allegations).    As you are aware, we sent him a formal letter on December 7, 2016 after our phone call to his office.  During the phone call on December 5, 2016 he specifically says to write the questions down and communicate via written correspondence.   Was he just saying that to get off the phone?  It now appears so!

According to our friends at http://bcsccriminalcharges.blogspot.ca , this would put Fagbamiye in breach of a “Statutory Requirement for a government department to reply to all written correspondence within 14 days…”.    If true, how does this continue to happen at the British Columbia Securities Commission?   How are they above the law?

Mr. Fagbamiye – how does it feel to look in the mirror and know that you are part of the issues that continue to haunt the BCSC?  How does it feel to be such a coward and fail miserably at your job?

Can someone working at the BCSC go down the hall way and make sure he is awake?   Perhaps he naps throughout his days and has issues with getting his job done?   Who knows?

This continues to get more and more ridiculous!  Wake up Fagbamiye!!

WHY WON’T LYNNE KNIGHTS OF THE LSBC INVESTIGATE BCSC LAWYER OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE?

Staff at the Law Society of British Columbia have made it very clear they have no intention of assisting us in our plight to get answers from the Staff at the British Columbia Securities Commission.  They too, have decided to keep their heads in the sand and the fact they will not even investigate our complaint would lead us to believe they too are in on this massive cover-up!

In a recent letter sent to us – the Law Society acknowledge they have received our candid emails sent in December 2016 and the early part of January 2017 but indicate they would like to be removed from our email list.

This is most unfortunate considering they exist because of instances like this – they are there to make sure their lawyers act accordingly as defined in their Act and their Code of Professional Conduct.   One can easily see that they have a portion of their office that is there to investigate complaints regarding lawyers in the Province of BC.   We have a complaint and these people have elected to not do an investigation!   What a joke!

And to be clear, we formally complained about the actions of Staff in 2015 (specifically Staff manipulating the evidence in our case and why Staff did not take our Settlement Proposal to the Executive Director of the BCSC).  That was then – this is now!

Our latest letters focused on the fact that the BCSC’s Cracker Jack Lawyer (Olubode Fagbamiye) has not responded to our numerous letters demanding answers to our simple questions.    This is completely separate from our initial complaint but it appears some flunky named Lynne Knights of the Law Society of BC, is easily confused or she had not read the emails I sent to her.    And we can see that she has opened files in the past – a complaint of a non-practicing lawyer that killed a neighbors rabbits was opened by Knights in 2010.   I guess our complaint just doesn’t make the sniff test down at the Law Society these days – or the bozos at the Commission are immune from accusations of wrongdoing!  This whole system at the Law Society is broke and needs to be fixed!   And it should start with the immediate termination of the incompetent Lynne Knights!

The Law Society of BC’s website boldly states, “The legal profession takes seriously its commitment to maintain high ethical standards.”  but they will not investigate a complaint from a citizen concerned with the actions of one of their members?    This reeks of “protecting their own at any cost” or they are just another agency run by a bunch of misfits.

For any of the former investors in FCC or DCF that want to contact Ms. Knights directly to lodge a complaint about Mr. Fagbamiye, please do so at her email address:

lknights@lsbc.org

She can’t ignore all of us!

THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION – THE REGULATOR WHO REGULATES THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS?

As recently reported by http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca  – it appears that the British Columbia Securities Commission (‘BCSC”) physically regulates corporations that they have physically invested into via their public sector pension and retirement operator (the British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (“BCIMC”).

On the website operated by BCIMC it states, “With a global portfolio of more than $121.9 billion, bcIMC is one of Canada’s largest institutional investors within the capital markets. We invest on behalf of public sector clients in British Columbia. Our activities help finance the retirement benefits of more than 538,000 plan members, as well as the insurance and benefit funds that cover over 2.3 million workers in British Columbia.  Based in Victoria, British Columbia and supported by industry-leading expertise, we offer our public sector clients responsible investment options across a range of asset classes: fixed income; mortgages; public and private equity; real estate; infrastructure; and renewable resources. Our investments provide the returns that secure our clients’ future payments and obligations.”  

As you can see (below) in a portion of the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report, we see that the BCSC holds just over $20.3 million in bcIMC investments.

In the section below – again taken directly from the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report (and supposedly written by Brenda Leong) the writer outlines the BCSC mandate with respect to their investments.   One can immediately notice there is no disclosure that they regulate their own investments.  In the wording (underlined in red) we can see they indicate “Our investment policy allows us to buy units of the following bcIMC pooled funds….”  but again fail to acknowledge anything that can/and should be considered offside.

And in the underlined section above we see that in “their” opinion, their “investments do not expose the BCSC to significant credit or material market risk because we invest in liquid, high quality money market instruments, government securities, and investment-grade corporate debt securities.” 

IS THIS BECAUSE THEY REGULATE THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS AND THAT THEY WOULD NEVER SANCTION COMPANIES IN WHICH THEY HAVE INVESTED?

Turning our attention now back to the bcIMC website, we have found their end of March 2016 Investment Inventory List (Click on link).  At a simple glance, we see hundreds and hundreds of names of companies – some are well known and others many have never heard of.  There are literally companies from all over the world and some are located right here in British Columbia.

Here is where it gets interesting, there are names on this list that the BCSC has battled (or is currently battling) as it combats securities fraud, mis-representations, excess fee’s violations and other regulatory issues.

But that is all fine – I imagine there will be people that say, “Who cares, I am sure the IF one of these companies committed some sort of a securities crimes or had some sort of regulatory issue – I am sure the BCSC would conduct themselves in a professional manner…”

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the BCSC vs HSBC , known as 2016 BCSECCOM 185 – a matter that presented itself to the BCSC.  It seems that a division of HSBC had over-charged their own clients excess fees “Due to inadequate controls and supervision, it did not apply this policy consistently, which resulted in some clients paying extra fees.”   For their trouble, the Respondents (who’s head office is the Worlds’ 6th largest bank worth $2.4 TRILLION dollars) had to pay $300,000 CDN and costs of the investigation of $20,000.  And they had to pay just under $7.1 million of the fees the OVERCHARGED back to their clients. CASE DISMISSED!!

It is important to look at the timing of this matter – it was during a stretch of time AFTER former Executive Director Paul Bourque was fired or quit and BEFORE present BCSC Executive Director Peter Brady was put into the position.   You guessed it – BCSC Chair Brenda Leong approved this Settlement Agreement.

This definitely needs a closer look by a government watchdog organization!  Why is there no disclosure in the BCSC financial overview that the public reads that they in fact regulate companies in which they have investments into.

Bizarre days indeed at the BCSC!

 

 

 

 

 

SAME OLD REGURGITATED BULLSHIT FROM THE BCSC’S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PETER BRADY

SHAME ON YOU BCSC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PETER J. BRADY!

On March 8, 2017, one of the former investors in FCC emailed the British Columbia Securities Commission, pleading with them to answer questions pertaining to the Settlement Offer that was presented by the Respondents before the hearing in April 2014.  This was the same Settlement Offer that we discussed in our March 7, 2017 blog post .

    Peter J. Brady

SOURCE:  smallbusinessbc.ca

Despite our sending the BCSC our Declaration at 10:43 AM on the morning of March 8, 2017, Mr. Peter Brady has once again used the same old regurgitated bullshit response in his reply email to Mr. Schacher.   And lets be clear – Mr. Schacher received the reply AFTER we had sent our email to Staff at the Commission (including Mr. Brady) our permission to freely and openly discuss the Settlement Offer with the former investors.

Brady appears to be a two-time BCSC career guy that has bounced back and forth between his cushy government position and the private sector.    Brady makes well over $300,000 per year in his latest roll at the Commission and its time he starts earning that paycheck – ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AND STOP PLAYING THESE BULLSHIT GAMES!   Case in point…

What are they hiding?  They won’t talk to me – they won’t talk to the former investors?   Who will they talk to?   Can one not conclude they are a bunch of overpaid, over-zealous cowards at this point?

The BCSC Staff cost the investors any opportunity to participate in the Deercrest project and WE want to know why they did this.    They should have maintained their corporate mandate and had the interest of the investors at heart – they should have at least ‘entertained’ the Settlement Offer and then chose to accept it or decline it.  Better yet – they SHOULD have told the investors about it and allowed them to accept or decline it!     WHY DID THEY NOT DO THIS?

We need more of you to contact them?  We need to find out why!  They cannot ignore all of you!    Please send correspondence to them immediately!   We need answers BEFORE we can move on with our lives!

NOTICE TO ALL FORMER INVESTORS AND THE STAFF AT THE BCSC

****PUBLIC RECORD****

Executive Director PETER BRADY at the BCSC has indicated to a former investor that he is NOT able to discuss the Settlement Offer brought forth by the Respondents BEFORE the hearing that would have seen the investors participate in the Deercrest project with NO involvement from Wharram or the other Respondents.   In his email to the investor, he cites a confidentiality clause that permits him from discussing the details of our Settlement Offer.   In that we (as a Respondent that WROTE the Settlement Offer) have been ignored by the Staff at the BCSC for many months now – we are hoping the former investors in FCC and DCF will now be able to get answers from the good people at the BCSC.

Today, as at 10:43 AM, I have sent the following email to the Commission:

The declaration sent to the BCSC is as follows:

We wish the former investors well in attempting to get answers from the BCSC – answers that believe it or not – we (the Respondents) have not been able to get from them.     They have been silent for far too long and it is time they answer why they did not  even internally discuss the settlement (that would have helped the former investor recoup funds lost in the investment).   As we blogged (click on link) in the past, the BCSC did not even have a discussion with respect to the settlement offer – they only wanted me to plead guilty to ALL allegation and pay fines and disgorgement in the amount of $5.8 million dollars!

Thank you all for your support!

BCSC’S C. PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE WON’T ACCEPT SETTLEMENT OFFER?

Recently, many of you have asked to see proof of the Settlement Offer that we had sent to the British Columbia Securities Commission in November 2013 – some 5-6 months BEFORE the hearing.

As we have indicated in the past, the BCSC had made an order in June 2013 indicating we had to resign from any and all companies that relied upon securities regulations.   They seized 5 bank accounts that had approximately $63,000 in them.    This too, occurred BEFORE we had the hearing.

By November of 2013, Primex (the Lender) was becoming very impatient and needed the Deercrest property to move forward one way or another.    I approached Kerkhoff Construction and they agreed (with many other terms) to allow the investors in both Falls Capital Corp and Deercrest Construction Fund to participate as non-voting shareholders.  This would have seen the investors participate in net profits of the Deercrest property as it was developed.

As you will see below, the Settlement Agreement focused on the well-being of the former investors and allowed light at the end of the tunnel in terms of possibly seeing funds put back into their control.

As of the summer of 2016 – the Deercrest property has completed and sold the 12 partially completed  units and have begun the necessary steps of completing the remaining 40-50 units that will occupy the site.   From what can be easily determined – the property would currently have very little debt and the remaining units will have substantial profits.   The investors would have received 35% of this profit until to projects completion.   The market has exploded in Chilliwack and the units are in very high demand.

We sent the BCSC our Settlement Offer on November 7, 2013 – and they did not even respond until December 31, 2013 – some 7 weeks later.    And again – the Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) indicated they would not take the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director (the only person that could accept the Settlement Offer) – instead, they said they would need me to agree to ALL of the allegations and pay fines and disgorgement of over $5,800,000.   This is extortion!    No where in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does it indicate a person must plead guilty to all allegations before a court will entertain a settlement.  In fact, we would think there is protection of actions like this in one would read it.

Our Settlement Offer looked like this:

NOTE:  ^ This document contained a typo – the shares allotted to the former investors was 35% – not 25% as mentioned above.

Former Investors – do you think it is OK that the Staff at the BCSC did not even take the Settlement Offer to their boss?   Or do you think that the BCSC should have done something to uphold their mandate which is to “uphold investor confidence”?     BCSC Mission Statement (Click here)

If for one minute you do NOT think this is OK – we think you should contact them at inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca or at their main switchboard at 604-899-6500.   Ask for Peter Brady (Executive Director), Brenda Leong (Chair), or Douglas Muir (Director of Enforcement).    Don’t expect a phone call back as they seem to be hiding under their desks – afraid to answer these very important questions.

Of note – one of the former investors did have contact with Peter Brady a while back and he would not answer her questions – citing that there was a confidentiality clause that prohibits him talking about any case to a Third Party.  As this directly affects the former investors – I would suggest that this is NOT a Third Party situation…

THAT BEING SAID, ANY OF THE FORMER INVESTORS THAT WOULD LIKE ME TO SIGN A DOCUMENT INDICATING YOU HAVE FULL AUTHORITY TO DISCUSS THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ANY BCSC STAFF MEMBER LET ME KNOW AND I WILL ARRANGE TO HAVE IT PREPARED!   

Does anyone find it extremely ironic that they cite not being able to talk to the investors about their and our matter – but then they will not talk to me either?   They are a complete joke run by incompetent people!

HOW A LONE RESPONDENT BEAT THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION AT THEIR OWN GAME!

Many of you have recently asked how I (with NO legal assistance) was able to have the majority – some 94% of the allegations against me dismissed by the Panel.    You have to remember that during the hearing I was by myself with no help whatsoever.   Staff for the Commission had two lawyers, an assistant, a law library, RCMP officers, Court Ordered Summons, and other Staff members (that lurked in the gallery) for the time leading up to the hearing, during the hearing, and after the hearing – all to strengthen their case.  In addition, the hearing days would go to roughly 4 PM daily and I had to face rush hour traffic on the 90-120 minute drive home every day.   The hearing lasted 7 days from April 7 – 16, 2014.

For those that do not know the standard procedure – at the conclusion of the oral hearing the Panel instructed both parties to submit Written Submission on Liability with the Executive Director releasing their’s first, then ours, then the Executive Director has an opportunity to reply to our submissions.

On May 16, 2014, the Executive Director via their Staff Litigators issued their Submissions on Liability – again this was a summary of their case against me and I was to defend myself against whatever was in this document.   This is the same document at PARAGRAPH #10 that we allege that Staff (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) manipulated evidence in an attempt to persuade the reader into believing their theory of the allegations against us.    Their document is here:

Executive Director’s Submissions on Liability-2014-05-16

Now. for the first time, I am going to release the Respondent’s Submissions on Liability document that I wrote after the hearing to fight my side of the matter and to fight against the bullshit story the Executive Director desperately tried to prove.   It is our opinion that our writing this document (and exposing the bogus attempts by Staff) that allowed the BCSC Panel to dismiss the $5.45 million fraud they tried to pin on us.    Our document is here:

FINAL – July 6, 2014 – Submissions on Liability

Understanding that it is a long read, we encourage you to read it a couple of times – again this document was completed with NO legal assistance and completely blew the Staff’s $5.45 million fraud allegation out of the water!   Even though the damage was done via their slanderous press release that caused the Vancouver Province to run with the headline, “INVESTORS MILLIONS EVAPORATE” – despite that being the farthest thing from the truth.

People have asked me how I was able to have the most significant allegations against me thrown out by the Panel – my answer is always the same – “I told the truth and exposed (in our opinion) an attempt by Staff at the Commission to deceive the Panel by manipulating the evidence to suit a theory that was NOT correct.”

Thank you for your support!  You know who you are!

BCSC INDICATES THEY ARE FINALLY READY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS – GREAT NEWS!

Fantastic news coming from the official BCSC Twitter account today.   We are very pleased that the BCSC indicates they have an “Inquiries Group” that is “here to answer your questions and concerns related to the securities industry”.  

We are extremely please that finally someone down at the BCSC has taken the time to appoint this team that will answer the public’s questions and alleviate concerns.   


Truly a fantastic day!  I am expecting correspondence from them quickly!  Stay tuned – I will keep you posted!

BCSC’S BRENDA LEONG FINALLY RESPONDS TO FOI REQUEST…. 132 DAYS AFTER IT WAS SUBMITTED!

Proving once again the complete incompetence of the Chair of the British Columbia Securities Commission, Brenda Leong has finally responded to our Freedom of Information request from October 18, 2016 – some 132 days ago!

 BCSC’s Brenda Leong

As we blogged last fall, we had inquired as to the job status of the inept Elizabeth “Liz” Chan – the self-described Senior Investigator at the Commission that was the lead investigator in our matter.  We had noticed that she was not on a list of BCSC employees that was put out by the local Vancouver Sun.

We submitted to the FOI office at the BCSC our request and have repeatedly received the run-around by Staff at the BCSC for months now.  With respect to these delays, it is abundantly clear that Staff at the BCSC (including Associate General Counsel Alan Keats) appear to have delayed getting this information to us within legal time frames administered under the FIPPA Act.   I mean really – how does it take 132 days to do what should have taken 30 days.

This is the BC Government again – showing that the applicable laws are just simply words in their mind – and that they have no intentions of playing by the rules and regulations!   Time for a switch down on Georgia Street and over at the Legislation building in Victoria.   One can only hope….

CHILLIWACK PROGRESS REPORTER PAUL HENDERSON COMMITS LIBEL VIA TWITTER

A couple of days ago we entered into a “Twitter War” with Paul Henderson – a local deadbeat writer for the Chilliwack Progress.     We have written previously regarding our discontent with the way he (and others) handled the “reporting of our story” during our issues with the BCSC.  To be clear, we just simply wanted a reporter to report the story from both sides WITHOUT biased opinions.   We still don’t think this was too much too ask.

Today, when I checked my Twitter account I received the following post from Henderson:

Of course I replied back to him….lol!

There you go – it appears Henderson feels its appropriate to attack a person and accuse them of something they did not do WITHOUT having any proof that I tried to hack into his Facebook account?  On what planet does he think this is OK?  This is a clear cut case of Libel and he seems to think he is above that.    Henderson made this post public on my Twitter feed which is most unfortunate.

Moments after I posted my reply he blocked me from his Twitter account – kinda says it all don’t you think?  Another spineless keyboard tough guy that wants to promote his own agenda – no matter the facts.

Seems to be too much of that going on nowadays – what happened to the good ole days where reporters reported on stories – and did not try to spew their own bullshit opinions that really no one wants to hear or read.

Paul Henderson’s Former Employer’s Building (Circa 2015)

 

 

HOW CAN TYLER OLSEN AND PAUL HENDERSON CALL THEMSELVES INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST?

In the time leading up to the investigation by the BCSC into my company, we had met Chilliwack Times journalist Tyler Olsen (“Olsen”) on a couple different occasions – he was always civil and we talked about different things including a common bond we had in hockey – namely the Chilliwack Bruins – a WHL hockey team that played in Chilliwack from roughly 2006-2011.

tyler-olsen          Tyler Olsen (Reporter)

Source:  Facebook

When the BCSC brought forward their allegations on June 14, 2013, understandably Olsen wrote a very negative article which he took from the biased press release sent out by the BCSC.   Olsen did make contact with me and asked if I wanted to make a comment with regard to the allegations.   I provided him a letter that indicated the allegations were just that – allegations and that we were very much focused on a settlement of some sort that would see the investors in FCC and DCF still participate in the project at the Falls.    This should sound VERY familiar to many of you reading this knowing that we did everything to get the Staff at the BCSC to accept the Settlement Offer.  See earlier post in this blog for proof.

I didn’t see/hear from Olsen again until the first day of the hearing (April 7, 2014) when I noticed him lurking around the hearing room like a human parasite.

After that first day of the hearing, he approached me as I was exiting the hearing room – I remember wondering why a little 2nd rate reporter from a small newspaper would travel all the way to Vancouver and he replied he had been hired freelance by the Vancouver Province to further update the story – that he had written on the previously June.

We talked as we entered the elevator and I asked him directly if he was going to cover the rest of the hearing and he said that the Province had only paid him to cover the first day of the hearing that was scheduled for 10 days.   I told him that was unfortunate because the fraud allegations against me in the amount of $5.45 million were extremely inaccurate and I told him about the Settlement Offer that I had desperately tried to get ANYONE at the Commission to even review (let alone except).    I asked him to please come back to my hearing and report on the extensive cross-examination I had planned for the flunky BCSC investigator Liz Chan – I told him that I thought I was going to be able to get to the bottom of her accounting of the $5.45 million fraud and that I would do so by conducting an extensive cross-examination of Chan.   He said that he would need to be “paid” to do that.   I literally remember thinking the guy was a complete scum bag for saying something so very inappropriate.

By this time, I was beginning to see the slant this bozo was going to put on the story – I mean, how can you write an article that is not biased if you only know ONE side of the story based on a slanderous press release put out by the BCSC and refuse to listen to both sides unless you are paid?

As we walked through the lobby on the ground floor of the building – we finished our conversation and he says, “Oh, I forgot something and I have to go back this way…”.   I didn’t give it much thought and continued on my way out of the building.

As I walked out the front door and entered the sidewalk – some scum bag photographer (named Arlen Redekop) from the biased media walked up to me and started taking my picture.   Again, it became more and more abundantly clear the slant/angle these people were going to take and I expected the worse…

VANCOUVER, BC: March 9, 2010 -- Arlen Redekop staff photo in Vancouver on Monday, March 8, 2010. ( Glenn Baglo / PNG ) ( PNG )
VANCOUVER, BC: March 9, 2010 — Arlen Redekop staff photo in Vancouver on Monday, March 8, 2010. ( Glenn Baglo / PNG ) ( PNG )

On the second day of the hearing, I made my way to Vancouver and just as I entered the hearing room I received a phone call from a friend asking me if I had seen the paper – I said I had not and he told me I was on the front cover with a headline that stated “Investors Millions Evaporate”.   I read the article and it was pathetic – he actually made fun of the way I presented my opening statement by opening the article with, “Just like his investors’ millions, Rodney Jack Wharram’s way with words seemed to evaporate Monday at the start of a hearing that could see him banned from the B.C. investment industry.  Wharram, who is representing himself at the B.C. Securities Commission hearing, frequently stumbled over his words as he faced allegations around $9.3 million he is alleged to have raised from investors between 2007 and 2010.”  I was nervous as I had NEVER been in a hearing room before (as a defendant) and I certainly did not know what to expect but I certainly did not stumble over words and I was NOT at a loss for words. Reviewing the transcripts of that day – I asked the Panel Chair several questions regarding procedure as I did not understand many aspects of presenting my evidence.    Considering I only spoke for about 5 minutes that entire day, I fail to see his logic in his reporting.

Second rate journalism is the ONLY way to describe his wording.   When the findings came out in February 2015, the Vancouver Province completely scrub the article written by Olsen – and who can blame them?  This is because the headline and story they (and the BCSC) tried to go with was NOT accurate.  To this day, the only place you can find it is here.  It is pretty ironic that they decided to go with this headline on the front page of the paper and then have an unrepresented defendant blow most of the allegations out of the water, including the money aspect.   Facts are – Investors Millions DID NOT evaporate as they tried to stuff down their readers throats.   It must have been very embarrassing for them ALL!

Fast forward to February of 2015, Olsen either lost his job with the local Chilliwack Times (or was transferred) to to an associated paper in Abbotsford, BC.   His replacement (in Chilliwack) was another so-called investigative journalist named Paul Henderson (“Henderson”).  My issues with Henderson are simple – he NEVER once tried to contact me for my side of the story before he wrote a very slanderous article in December 2015 – after the BCSC issued their decision.

The day this article hit the papers, a friend called me and informed me of the story – I immediately went to the Chilliwack Times to confront him.  I asked why he was not telling both sides of the story and that we had 94% of the dollar amount of the fraud allegations dismissed.  I explained I did not have a lawyer and tried to explain to him what was happening down at the BCSC with Staff not even presenting the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director – this alone could have protected the investors in the project which IS their mandate!

He went back and edited a small portion of the article that hit the on-line edition of the Chilliwack Times – his story that went physically to press was different than the one that was on the internet – complete gong show!  He couldn’t even co-ordinate that properly – which again leads to questioning his professionalism.

I reached out to Henderson one final time (in May 2016) after I started this blog and asked if he was willing to meet – he made up some excuse of being too busy and said he could meet some time later the following week…I never heard back from him.  Like I said, I feel I have every right to question his professionalism.

Paul Henderson   

Source:  Facebook

A simple search of the internet and one can easily find a very derogatory photo which contains a comment regarding Henderson.   What a terrible thing to have written about you – whether it is true or not.  Albeit, one may conclude the graffiti (on his office wall)  was more than likely done by someone in retaliation for some biased article he wrote in an attempt to sell papers – it questions why citizens would go to this extent to write something so horrible about this man.

paul-henderson1   Graffiti outside the Chilliwack Times 

Source: Facebook

In closing, we look at the facts and it is no wonder that the state of “media” is the way it is in this country when we see two reporters like these two who have no desire to get BOTH sides of a story before they go to press with their slanted theory of events.   When I went to Henderson’s office to confront him, he even spun what I said to him in private (off the record) into his story – and when I confronted him on that – he said, “nothing you said to me was private”.

A real investigative journalist should want to get to the bottom of a story and give independent details to inform their reader so that reader can form their own opinion – again, its no wonder people are not reading newspapers the way they use to.  Which leads to the likely reason why so many of these ‘propaganda spewing regurgitating robots’ are losing their jobs across the country.

NEW BCSC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PETER BRADY CONTINUES TO PLAY OLD GAME!

Recently, we had one of our former investors reach out to ANYONE at the BCSC in an attempt to have her questions answered with respect to the Settlement Offer that would have benefited ALL former investors in FCC and DCF.

As per our suggestion in a previous blog post, she eagerly sent an email to the BCSC’s and awaited a reply.  As you will see in the following emails in this blog, she certainly did NOT get the replies that one would think she would be entitled to – considering what was at stake AND the mandate of the BCSC to protect the investors in the jurisdiction of British Columbia.

In the first email below, you first see newly appointed Executive Director Peter Brady attempt to answer (or as we will call it – deflect) her questions.   Of note, he does reply,

“…However, I can assure you that our policy is to consider all settlement offers…”

We will remind ALL readers that we tried desperately to get our Settlement Offer into the hands of the Executive Director (at the time it was Paul Bourque) but in written correspondence, the lawyers (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) acting for the BCSC said they would only present the settlement offer to the Executive Director IF Wharram admitted all wrong-doing alleged in the Notice of Hearing and paid fines and disgorgement of $5.8 million.   peter-brady-email-december-9-2016

Mr. Brady dances very swiftly around answering the questions – some of which have NOTHING to do with what was inside the settlement offer.   The investor is NOT asking the terms of the settlement agreement – she was simply asking IF there was one and why staff litigators did NOT show it to the Executive Director at the time.   I really don’t think she cared about the “terms” of the settlement offer.

Now, she decided that she did not like the answer she received from Mr. Brady so she decided to email him again – and AGAIN Mr. Brady abruptly shuts down ANY questions regarding the settlement offer and hides behind some sort of confidentiality policy the commission may or may not adhere to.  His response is as follows:

peter-brady-email-december-15-2016

Do any of you now see that these people are hiding something?  ALL former investors in FCC and/or DCF have a right to know why a settlement offer that was presented by Wharram to the BCSC that would have benefited you in NOT none of your business.   These people are hiding behind one of the biggest mistakes made in the history of the BCSC.

In closing – they won’t answer me and I am not part of some confidentiality policy and NOW they wont answer  one of the investors?    Who are they accountable to?  Who will they answer?

peter-brady BCSC Executive Director Peter Brady

Source:  Small Business BC

At least we know now what type of man newly crowned Mr. Peter Brady truly is – he fits in with the rest of the spineless amoeba’s down at the good ole BC Securities Commission.

Answer the question Mr. Brady – Why did Staff not take the Settlement Offer (that would have seen the investors in FCC and DCF prosper) to the Executive Director for even a review; instead of trying to extort $5.8 million in fines and disgorgement from Wharram? 

Former Investors – contact the BCSC and demand an answer to this question – it may have caused you the ability to receive a portion (if not all) of your money back out of the Falls project.   Contact them – 604-899-6500!

DID BC SECURITIES COMMISSION STAFF PLAY “DIRTY POOL” WITH RESPONDENT DURING HEARING?

The hearing into our matter started on April 7, 2014  – on March 24, 2014 (only 2 weeks earlier), Staff sent correspondence to numerous investors in FCC and DCF asking for them to fill out an Investor Impact Statement (“IIS”).    Along with this request, in many instances investors were sent links to the very slanderous press release where the Respondents were WRONGLY accused of not advancing the majority of the funds to the Developer – some $5.45 million dollars.

The problem with sending the IIS in March was the Respondents had not even stepped foot in the hearing room – and we would like to have thought we were innocent until proven guilty – not the other way around! But it does not appear this is the case when one goes up against the BCSC.

And the problems with the IIS statements as a document are MANY – first of all there is NO disclaimer indicating the allegations have yet to be proven.  The document literally using wording such as “the offence” and “the securities violation” in their questions.   This is PRE-LOADING an investors response – putting it in their minds that the Respondents committed the allegations. Take a look:

Investor Impact Statement – Blank

Imagine your being an investor who had just been told that someone you placed money with had committed a $5.45 million fraud, bought his wife a grocery store, and had personal vehicles restored – and then being asked to fill out a document asking you how you felt?   Many of the IIS we received were very one-sided with angry language.   We must admit, we would feel the same way if we only knew half of the story or were told untruths by the government regulator.

There is NO reason to do this before the hearing –  there are many days/weeks/months  to obtain them after the Findings document was made public by the Panel.   Speaking of the Panel, we argued in our written submissions that there should be little to no weight put on the IIS for the very reasons outlined in this blog.    What did they think?

We were pleased they agreed with us!  But we think that the Panel missed the point raised in our submissions.   The investors that appeared at the hearing appeared to be bitter and were angry at the one-sided story they had been told.  This affects the way the hearing was “heard” by the Panel and created a bias in the hearing room that was very difficult for the Respondent to overcome.   There is NO doubt that the press release and inciting the investor to immediately put their thoughts down on paper influenced our hearing.   How could it not?

But it just shows again how strong Staff at the BCSC thought their case was against the Respondents when it was not.   It’s items like this that really show the pathetic methods ensuring they gain the victory in a hearing room – not appearing to care about ethics.

Inciting the investors to turn against the Respondent BEFORE the hearing is as low as it can get and truly shows this agency feels they are above the law when preparing for a hearing.

ATTENTION: BCSC STAFF WHISTLE BLOWER!

Thank you again for reaching out to us….

As for your questions/comments, our answers are as follows (answered in order in which we received them):

  1.  No, that is not an option for obvious reasons;
  2. Possibly – but we will have to meet you face to face to discuss in detail and this is dependent on the details to be discussed at the meeting;
  3. Yes!!!;
  4. Yes..but again, we would like to meet in person to discuss;
  5. Brenda Leong, C. Paige Leggat, Olubode Fagbamiye, Paul Bourque and Teresa Mitchel-Banks;
  6. No;
  7. Yes.

We look forward to hearing back from you in the same manner.

Regards,

RW

RESPONDENT CHALLENGES BC SECURITIES COMMISSION TO TAKE HIM TO COURT!

TO:  ALL STAFF AT THE BCSC

On May 18, 2016, and every day since that we have written on this blog, we have challenged you to answer simple questions regarding the matter we had before the BCSC.   To date, NOT one of you have bothered to reply, or even defend our allegations against the BCSC Staff.   For that, one could say you are very spineless and act without merit and we think you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

The BCSC appears to have two sets of rules and will only reply to something that supports their set agenda.   In addition, it appears they have the newspaper reporters in their pockets because not one of the slimy writers will write a story against the “government machine” in fear of wrinkling the wrong feathers.  They had NO problem reporting on day 1 of our hearing when the case was presented by the BCSC, reported a very biased one-sided story and did not cover the balance of the hearing when we presented our case and had 94% of the allegations (dollar amount) thrown out by the Panel.   

To ANYONE who doubts what is being said in this blog and that we are not telling the truth, we say this….

“Why isn’t one of the most powerful government agencies in BC, with unlimited funds to fight legal battles, suing us for defamation?  After sending out letters from your lawyer to Peter Harris and Christopher Burke – Why are you not suing them for defamation after threatening to do so?”    

In our opinion, there are 2 reasons for them cowering up and putting their heads in the sand:

1.  They are not able to sue for Libel/Defamation because we are not saying anything that is not true.  Our blog posts contain facts and have not exaggerated the events or allegations made against their Staff.  We have merely presented questions to the grossly incompetent BCSC Chair Brenda Leong and the person who appointed her, Premier Christy Clark.  Neither of these women will respond to our repeated request.  Items like BCSC staff manipulating evidence, not presenting the settlement offer, and the BCSC staff bringing assumptions into the hearing room ARE factually correct.  The have no reply because they have NO defense.     

2. Secondly, they do not want to argue against us, offer us another hearing, or answer our simple questions because they know the moment they do – they will be incriminating themselves and going down a road they definitely do not want to take.   THEY DO NOT WANT THE TRUTH TO COME OUT IN A REAL COURTROOM.   It would appear they don’t want to step outside their domain and have a real judge (outside of their precious Kangaroo Court) telling the world what is happening within their walls.  They will not answer Former Investors questions as to why they did not accept the Settlement Offer because they know the former investors will NOT like their answers and more than likely sue them for acting in bad faith.  And don’t forget (as posted earlier in this blog), we applied, through a Freedom of Information request, all correspondence from staff litigators to/from the Executive Director with respect to the Settlement Offer.    There was NOTHING – these bozo’s (Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye / C. Paige Leggat and Executive Director Paul Bourque) didn’t even have a discussion with one another regarding the investors opportunity to recoup some (if not all) of their funds!   Incompetent!   

Now, we will issue you three FORMAL CHALLENGES:

CHALLENGE #1:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO HAVE YOUR FLASHY LAWYERS  SEND US A LETTER DEMANDING WE SHUT DOWN OUR BLOG FOR BEING INACCURATE AND/OR SLANDEROUS;  

CHALLENGE #2:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO SUE US FOR DEFAMATION/LIBEL IF FOR ONE MOMENT OUR ALLEGATION OF BCSC STAFF ACTING IN BAD FAITH (WHEN MANIPULATING EVIDENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US) IS NOT TRUE;

CHALLENGE #3:   FINALLY, WE CHALLENGE YOU TO FORMALLY ADDRESS THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL (AS OUTLINED EARLIER IN THIS BLOG) THAT THE FCC AND DCF INVESTORS WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM. 

IF YOU IGNORE US OR DO NOT HAVE YOUR COUNCIL COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US IN THE NEXT 14 DAYS – WE WILL ASSUME THE ALLEGATIONS WE HAVE MADE AGAINST YOU TO BE VALID AND TO BE NON-CONTESTED.  WE WILL PUBLISH YOUR RESPONSE (OR LACK OF) IN THIS BLOG 15 DAYS FROM NOW.  

 We are begging for you to finally act – it has been 266 days (and counting) since my blog started and you have all had your head in the sand.   It his time people hear the truth.   We want to go to court against you so we can start the process of people hearing the truth consisting a facts and not some slanderous, biased press release issued by your incompetent staff, followed up by being rail-roaded by your inept lawyers in the hearing itself, and then having employees that work in the same office as the litigators making a decision as some “independent” panel.    Don’t forget, we have have a witness  (brought in to testify FOR the BCSC) agreeing with our side; and the Panel still found that Staff proved this allegation.   It is easy to conclude you people are all incompetent and possibly corrupt!

This is a telling time – the people are waking up and standing up to government agencies all over the World – specifically ones that appear to be corrupt!    The BCSC is an agency that desperately needs an overhaul.  It (like many of the agencies Clark’s government has touched) appears to be tainted.

Eagerly awaiting your reply Brenda Leong!   When are you going to wake up from that deep slumber?   How do you justify taking that $500,000 per year in salary when you don’t do your job?   And finally, how can you not support your shitty staff when people are accusing them of wrongdoing?   Spineless?  How do you think your staff truly feel about you abandoning them?   Word on the street is that many of your staff cannot stand you – and think you are in far over your head in the competence department!

We couldn’t agree more….

CLICK!! BCSC’S OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE HANGS UP THE PHONE WHEN ASKED QUESTIONS!

Today, we attempted to call BCSC Litigator OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE and he hung up the phone like a scared little parasite…

I thought I had seen it all – this might just take it all for the win!   I bet you he nearly jumps out of his seat every time his phone rings!!  What a joke – this is the type of spineless amoeba that the Law Society of BC continues to protect?

It is official – the BCSC (and its Staff) are the laughing stock of Vancouver!!   I mean really – hanging up the phone – I thought only 15 year old little girls did that!!   LOL!

Talk to you soon Mr. Fagbamiye!!

IS THE LAW SOCIETY OF BC PROTECTING BCSC’S OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE?

Staff at the Law Society of British Columbia have made it very clear they have no intention of assisting us in our plight to get answers from the Staff at the British Columbia Securities Commission.  They too, have decided to keep their heads in the sand and the fact they will not even investigate our complaint would lead us to believe they too are in on this massive cover-up!

In a recent letter sent to us – the Law Society acknowledge they have received our candid emails sent in December 2016 and the early part of January 2017 but indicate they would like to be removed from our email list.

This is most unfortunate considering they exist because of instances like this – they are there to make sure their lawyers act accordingly as defined in their Act and their Code of Professional Conduct.   One can easily see that they have a portion of their office that is there to investigate complaints regarding lawyers in the Province of BC.   We have a complaint and these people have elected to not do an investigation!   What a joke!

And to be clear, we formally complained about the actions of Staff in 2015 (specifically Staff manipulating the evidence in our case and why Staff did not take our Settlement Proposal to the Executive Director of the BCSC).  That was then – this is now!

Our latest letters focused on the fact that the BCSC’s Cracker Jack Lawyer (Olubode Fagbamiye) has not responded to our numerous letters demanding answers to our simple questions.    This is completely separate from our initial complaint but it appears some flunky named Lynne Knights of the Law Society of BC, is easily confused or she had not read the emails I sent to her.    And we can see that she has opened files in the past – a complaint of a non-practicing lawyer that killed a neighbors rabbits was opened by Knights in 2010.   I guess our complaint just doesn’t make the sniff test down at the Law Society these days – or the bozos at the Commission are immune from accusations of wrongdoing!  This whole system at the Law Society is broke and needs to be fixed!   And it should start with the immediate termination of the incompetent Lynne Knights!

The Law Society of BC’s website boldly states, “The legal profession takes seriously its commitment to maintain high ethical standards.”  but they will not investigate a complaint from a citizen concerned with the actions of one of their members?    This reeks of “protecting their own at any cost” or they are just another agency run by a bunch of misfits.

For any of the former investors in FCC or DCF that want to contact Ms. Knights directly to lodge a complaint about Mr. Fagbamiye, please do so at her email address:

lknights@lsbc.org

She can’t ignore all of us!

MANIPULATING EVIDENCE PART OF BCSC STANDARD PROCEDURE? YOU DECIDE!

At the conclusion of our hearing, the Panel Chair NIGEL CAVE instructed both parties to complete Written Submission on Liability.  These documents argued the points brought up during the hearing and gave the parties the ability to prove (or disprove) the allegations brought forward in the Notice of Hearing.

One of the key documents involved in the hearing was the Offering Memorandum(s) (“OM’s”) used by the Respondents to raise capital.  For those that invested with the Respondents, you will remember this document as one you were given at the time you invested.    The BCSC (and other securities jurisdictions) allow an OM Exemption when raising capital in the securities market.

On May 16, 2014, the Respondents received the Executive Directors Submissions on Liability and began reviewing the points brought forward by Staff.    Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye and C. Paige Leggat prepared the document on behalf of the Executive Director.

We read them from cover to cover a couple of different times and soon noticed something very particular….

Unfortunately, at paragraph #10 of their submissions, Staff resorted to physically changing the appearance of the document.   We feel they did this to suite their theory (and main allegation) that the Respondents did not forward the MAJORITY of the funds to the Developer.   This was the big $5.45 million fraud allegation that was ultimately dismissed by the Panel.   Let’s take a look at paragraph #10 as it appears in their submissions….

Staff's Submission on Liability - paragraph 10And now, for those of you that don’t have the FCC or DCF Offering Memorandums in front of you, this is how the document looked – keep in mind this document was relied upon at all times to raise capital for the projects, and Staff were suppose to have the onus of proving the case as alleged in the Notice of Hearing:

FCC OM's as they Actually Appear

Staff (in paragraph 10) took Section 1.2 on page 5 of the FCC OM, merged it with Section 2.2 which is 2 pages later.  They then highlighted both portions they manipulated (in yellow) to give an appearance that they were from the same section.  In the first highlighted yellow box it states, “The Corporation is raising funds pursuant to this Offering for the purpose of lending the majority of the funds raised hereunder for the purpose of meeting its financial contribution obligations as set forth in item 2.2.3 below (the “FCC” Loan”).   The catch here though is they placed the portion from 2.2 above section 1.2 in their submissions.  Section 2.2 includes the word ‘hereunder’ which the reader would automatically think was the second yellow highlighted box.   The second box then uses the words “majority of proceeds” and “financial obligations”.   They complete their manipulation by omitting the title “Use of Net Proceeds” all together.

For those of you that do not understand the significance of these actions of Staff, we will try to explain it this way…originally when the Executive Director brought forward the allegations of fraud, they took a simple grade 2 math equation (the amount of the cheques written to the developer AND the amount of commission paid to sales people were subtracted by the total amount of funds raised).   They did not consider ANY other of the valid business expenses incurred by the corporation that were allowed under the OM’s.   In their allegations, they stated the Respondents did not advance the majority of the funds to the Developer which was wrong!    The Respondents (who did not have a lawyer) proved this allegation to be wrong by repeatedly asking the Lead Investigator (the flunky Elizabeth Chan) questions during the cross examination.   It is VERY apparent that Staff relied on basic, summary evidence that was only a small portion of the actually story – these were very complex, intertwined companies and Staff had all the information (bank records, credit card statements, etc.) but failed to bring strong compelling evidence to the hearing.

To this day, we are not sure why Staff’s Bigshot Litigators felt they needed to manipulate the evidence they had before them.  We have had people speculate that once the hearing was over they realized their case was not as strong as they had once thought so they needed to resort to something like this.   That maybe because the Respondents were self-represented, they thought they might be able to sneak this past.

Either way, this shows the playing field one faces when going against an internally run regulator.    Nobody seems to be accountable – as an example, during the hearing the Respondents asked repeatedly (IN FRONT OF THE PANEL) for the litigator (Olubode Fagbamiye) to explain his actions to which he did not even acknowledge the question.    We still question WHY the Panel Chair did not stop the proceedings and ask the litigator IF my our allegations were true and/or WHY they did this.    The Commission for intense and purposes appears to be a Kangaroo Court – where the judge, jury and executioner all work in the same office space.

Interesting enough, right after the Respondents submitted their Reply Submissions on Liability (in July 2014  where we accused them of manipulating the document) the other Staff Litigator who’s name is on the document (C. Paige Legatt) resigned.    She resigned and we have never had the chance to ask her whether or not she takes credit for manipulation.     Again, what are these people hiding?  Complete scumbags!     If they would have come in with a reasonable number there is a great chance we would have been able to negotiate a settlement and could have had our investors participate in the Deercrest development without any involvement from us.

Shame on the BCSC!!

 

SPINELESS BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG DOES NOT PROTECT HER STAFF?

Imagine working at the BCSC and being accused by a former Respondent of acting in BAD FAITH – and they imagine that your boss does not even have the gall to stand with you in denying any of these allegations.

This appears to be the case currently unfolding at the BCSC – we have lodge complaint after complaint regarding the actions of Staff Litigators Olubode Fagamiye and C. Paige Leggat.  Our allegations are that they manipulated key evidence when writing their Submissions on Liability in May 2014.

BCSC Chair Brenda Leong has been made aware of our allegations (and we have confirmation that she received the complaints) but yet in over 9 months she has yet to even respond to our correspondence.

This leads us to believe she is incompetent in doing her job or she just simply does not care about her Staff.   In that C. Paige Leggat resigned and/or was fired only days after my allegations and formal complaint to the Law Society of British Columbia – one can also conclude we are right and they are too chicken shit to go down this road with us.

Leong failing at her JOB is something we hope is remembered the next time her $500,000 per year salary is renewed by the BC government!

Ignoring emails questioning her Staff has been going on for months.   What kind of a boss does not (at least) defend her Staff?   She has literally left them out to dry!   It appears Ms. Leong only cares about her own agenda down on Georgia Street.    Shame on her!

We feel it is time she comes out of the little hole she is hiding in and deal with the many questions she is facing regarding the actions of her Staff!

letter-to-brenda-leong-september-9-2016

Brenda    BCSC’S CHAIR BRENDA LEONG

Source: Chen Zhiqiang

ATTENTION: WHISTLE BLOWER STAFF MEMBER AT THE BCSC!

A while back one of you contacted me regarding so called “confidential” information you said you knew about regarding my hearing – in your wording you indicated that “Staff at the BCSC acted in bad faith while preparing for our hearing in April 2014.”   And that you (after reading this blog) had information regarding this that you thought I should be made aware of.

First of all – Thank you very much for contacting me – it is nice to see there might just be someone at the BCSC with ethics!

You indicated you would like to meet and discuss things in person and said that you would contact me again – PLEASE do so in the same manner and I promise your confidentiality will remain in tack if that is your wish.    I would very much like to meet with you as per your suggestion.

I look forward to hearing from you ASAP!  Do not let these alleged practices (mentioned in your message) continue at the BCSC!   One could very easily conclude that many people (specifically the FCC and DCF investors) were possibly affected by the actions of certain BCSC Staff members during the relevant time.

RW

DID BOZO’S AT THE BCSC BRING IN ACCURATE NUMBERS INTO HEARING ROOM?

In November 2007, the Developer of the Falls Resort approached me and asked if I knew of anyone that might purchase a unit in the Deercrest Townhomes, located on the property.    He had Unit 101 that was available for sale and the Respondents indicated they would ask around.   I called one of the investors in Edmonton and asked if he wanted to buy and he indicated he would.

Shortly there later, a commission cheque in the amount of $24,292.75 arrived made payable to West Karma Ltd.    I placed the cheque into the WKL bank account and NEVER wrote a cheque to myself personally.   Looking at the bank account statements for WKL for the following 10 days, $20571.61 was spent directly on business expenses for WKL and FCC and $5,801.49 was used for personal expenses.

THESE WERE NOT INVESTOR FUNDS YET PAID FOR BUSINESS RELATED DIRECTLY TO THE WKL AND FCC.

That’s fine – people place funds into their business accounts on a regular basis as shareholder loans.     IF the BCSC’s Executive Director (and his Staff) wanted to bring accurate allegations in their Notice of Hearing they needed to complete a proper accounting and bring in a proper number into the allegation….but let’s see what Lead Investigator Elizabeth Chan had to say during the cross examination during our hearing in April 2014:

Q Can we put up, pull up Exhibit 00240? Can you please read this letter for the panel?

A Just the body of the letter, like, —

Q Just —

A — after the “re” line?

Q Just lead the letter please, from who it’s addressed to, and who it’s from and the body of the letter, sure, please.

A Okay. So, I don’t think this is a document that I obtained. Uhm, it says:

West Karma Ltd., BC
Dear Sirs/Mesdames:
Re: Sales of 101-51096 Falls Court, Chilliwack, BC (the “Property”) by Blackburn
Developments Ltd. (the “Seller”) to -REDACTED-  (the “Buyers”) effective November 23, 2007 (the”Completion Date”). As notary for the seller, we enclose our firm trust cheque drawn in your favour, in the amount of $24,292.75 representing payment in full for the Commission with respect to the above transaction. Please provide our office with a receipt for payment at your earliest convenience. We trust you find the foregoing and enclosed to be in order, however, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the writer or Shirley MacKillop of this office.
Yours truly, Simpson & Simpson. And the name there says, “R. Dean Simpson” and the letter, the date, November 23, 2007.

Q Thank you. And have you ever seen this document before?

A Uhm, I didn’t obtain this document during the course of my investigation, but I did see it in the binder of materials of materials contained in documents that you were intending to rely on.

Q That’s the first time you saw it though?

A Yes.

Source: Hearing Transcript, April 11, 2014 (pages 23-25)

This is the testimony of Staff’s most important witness – a Certified General Accountant with what appears to be a cracker jack degree from the University of British Columbia in Bachelor of Commerce?    That she never saw items going into the bank account that were relevant IF they wanted to bring an accurate number into the hearing room.   Elizabeth Chan is a highly paid Senior Investigator with the BCSC – it is HER job to find out the numbers used in the Notice of Hearing are accurate!   There is NO excuse for the sloppy work Staff completed in this matter!

How is this even possible is the onus was on the Executive Director to bring in clear and compelling evidence to prove the allegations in the Notice of Hearing?   Was the Respondents not entitled to a fair hearing with accurate numbers as the BCSC boasts on their website?

For the allegations to be proven by the Executive Director of the BCSC…

Former BCSC Executive Director – Paul Bourque

…Staff had to prove “on the balance of probabilities” that they had made their case.  One could conclude that bringing in a WRONG number into a hearing room would all but destroy their case –  but not at the KANGAROO COURT know as the BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION! 

What a bunch of CLOWNS!  Time to drain the swamp of these BOZO’S!

CROOKED CHRISTY CLARK’S GOVERNMENT HIT AGAIN BY NEGATIVE PRESS!

Crooked Christy Clark continues to get negative comments from major new outlets regarding her “PAY TO PLAY”functions – this time from Canada’s Globe and Mail.

In the article it states, “While these “pay-to-play” events have been denounced across the country, Ms. Clark has been steadfast in her support of them. And why wouldn’t she? Her party benefits enormously from the current rules. Last year alone, the Liberals took in more than $12-million in donations, with the vast majority coming from corporations and the rich.”

It truly is sad that people of this Province are not doing something about this – she has lost at virtually every level – take the latest BC Hydro fiasco out lined in this article.

Okay, let’s get this straight – B.C. is currently paying millions of dollars to independent power producers to NOT produce power because there’s such an oversupply.  Meantime, BC Hydro is busy building a $9 billion dam while arguing that B.C. needs more power?    Does this make sense to anyone?  Even the biggest Liberal people I know are not agreeing with this!     WAKE UP PEOPLE!

This is also the same government that pays the failing BCSC Chair BRENDA LEONG nearly $500,000 per year to run the BCSC.   Brenda Leong can only be seen as failing at her job when her staff have collected under $200,000 of the nearly $350,000,000 in fines they have ordered over the years.   That only .0004590 cents on the dollar.   If you or I had this little success doing our jobs we would be terminated instantly!

    Brenda Leong

 

 

IS THE BCSC’S OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE TOO CHICKEN TO RESPOND?

It looks like the definition of a CHICKEN SHIT COWARD continues to be the BCSC’s junior litigator Olubode Fagbamiye!   In repeated request for Fagbamiye to answer our questions, he continues to cower and hide from answering any of them (or even denying our allegations).    As you are aware, we sent him a formal letter on December 7, 2016 after our phone call to his office.  During the phone call on December 5, 2016 he specifically says to write the questions down and communicate via written correspondence.   Was he just saying that to get off the phone?  It now appears so!

According to our friends at http://bcsccriminalcharges.blogspot.ca , this would put Fagbamiye in breach of a “Statutory Requirement for a government department to reply to all written correspondence within 14 days…”.    If true, how does this continue to happen at the British Columbia Securities Commission?   How are they above the law?

Mr. Fagbamiye – how does it feel to look in the mirror and know that you are part of the issues that continue to haunt the BCSC?  How does it feel to be such a coward and fail miserably at your job?

Can someone working at the BCSC go down the hall way and make sure he is awake?   Perhaps he naps throughout his days and has issues with getting his job done?   Who knows?

 

 

 

DID BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG EXPUNGE DOCUMENTS IN 2016 MATTER?

Our friends at bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca have recently uncovered a doozy and allege that “someone” at the BCSC seems to have expunged documents in the summer of 2016.

Taken directly from their blog site, they report:

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

WHAT ARE YOU HIDING BRENDA LEONG – WE KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER

 Hi Brenda,

Hows it going at the BC Securities Commission today?

 I was hoping you could help me find a file..
 

B.P. and R.P. vs BCSC, its that case where the Appeal Court Judge found that the BCSC had made misrepresentations and acted contrary to public interest by judging hundreds guilty without trial and publishing their names.
It seems to have been erased from your records.. do you know who would do such a thing or why they would do it? 
 Some people might say it doesn’t exist but we have evidence that it does/ or did exist and happen.
 
Why does your agency claim to be transparent and ethical when this is a complete lie?
See file attached..
 
How come we cant find any record of this on your website any longer? 
What are you hiding? -END-
Again, the ruling by the Appeal Court of BC judge was profound in that the judged found the BCSC “acted contrary to public interest by judging hundreds guilty without trial and publishing their names.”.  
This isn’t that hard to figure out – someone at the BCSC does not want the public to have access to this ruling by the Appeal Court of BC so they appeared to have somehow managed to have the record removed (expunged) from official court records in BC.
If this is fact – the people at the BCSC (or whomever order the records to be expunged) have broken the law!  Perhaps it wasn’t BCSC Chair Brenda Leong but she surely would have to know about this – right?

BCSC’S BRENDA LEONG AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE AFRAID TO ANSWER QUESTIONS?

The Gong Show at the “BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION” continues with NO reply to our repeated requests for our questions to be answered.

If we had legal representation the BCSC would have to reply to the lawyer requesting answers – but because we are self-represented they feel they don’t need to reply?   COWARDS!

UPDATE: NY TIMES DOUBLES DOWN ON THEIR CROOKED CHRISTY CLARK STORY!

As we reported last week, the actions of Crooked Christy Clark’s government have garnered international headlines – specifically with a New York Times reporter who called British Columbia the “Wild West”.

This week, David Ball (a reporter from Metro News in Vancouver) contacted the NYT and interviewed reporter Dan Levin.    Ball article states, “New York Times reporter Dan Levin never expected his visit to British Columbia to earn him rebuke from the province’s leaders.

Q: The fact that the New York Times is looking at us has made you a bit of a celebrity here.

A: The New York Times looks at the whole world. It’s a free press. There are amazing things about Canada, but unfortunately what’s happening in B.C. is not one of them. Checks and balances are important, and hopefully this will spur British Columbians and other Canadians to take a closer look at how their governments behave.”

 

Why does nobody in this Province seem to care what Clark’s government continues to do?   Why do they seem to have free reign over shoddy business dealings, crazy travel expenses, and a “pay-to-play” system of doing business.

It is time we wake up people!

BCSC’s SPINELESS LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE CONTINUES TO HIDE UNDER HIS ROCK!

It has now been over 5 weeks since we contacted Mr. Fagbamiye by phone (and then by letter) and he continues to hide from answering simple questions that would allow the former investors in both FCC and DCF to hear first hand whether or not staff at the BC Securities Commission acted in bad faith when preparing legal documents in our matter AND whether or not they erred in not taking the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director of the BCSC (whom we were told was the ONLY person at the BCSC that would be able to accept our settlement offer.

Mr. Fagbamiye (as we have seen for weeks now) appears to be a coward and will not answer our questions – despite even telling me to put my questions down on paper and that he would answer them accordingly.    And on Saturday, we tried AGAIN in vain to get Fagbamiye to answer our questions…

Mr. Fagbamiye is hiding something and we need to get to the bottom of it once and for all.   I am calling on all former investors in FCC and DCF to call, write, email, fax, text, etc. Fagbamiye and ask him to answer these questions.

They are going to have to answer them sooner or later – the walls at the BCSC are NOT going to allow them to not answer these questions for much longer.   Our story is getting bigger by the day and as certain politicians that are appearing to aid the staff at the Commission are replaced – those that have acted in bad faith are going to be exposed.

NY TIMES REPORTS ON CROOKED CHRISTY CLARK AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST?

CROOKED CHRISTY CLARK has made the BIG TIME! – in a recent article in the New York Times, reporter Dan Levin writes, “As the premier of British Columbia, Christy Clark is on the public payroll, pulling down a salary of 195,000 Canadian dollars in taxpayer money. But if that were not enough, she also gets an annual stipend of up to 50,000 Canadian dollars — nearly $40,000 — from her party, financed by political contributions.   Personal enrichment from the handouts of wealthy donors, some of whom have paid tens of thousands of dollars to meet with her at private party fund-raisers? No conflict of interest here, according to a pair of rulings last year by the province’s conflict-of-interest commissioner — whose son works for Ms. Clark.”

Who has had enough of this vial piece of garbage?   It is time to #DRAINTHESWAMP in the Province of British Columbia!  Treason, breach of trust, fraud – you name it!  Throw the book at her!

DOES THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION PROMOTE VIGILANTE JUSTICE?

As indicated in an earlier blog – as part of an FOI request, we asked the BCSC to provide a copy of the original Fraud Fighter video they launched on November 6, 2014 as part of their renewal of their “award winning” campaign against securities fraud.

Jean #3

As you will see, at the time we were very concerned with the overall message sent out to the average investor – the video shows a character “Jean” doing a punch of stupid gymnastic moves in a park and ends with her going to the residence of “David” where it implies she physically attacked him.

Now, before you watch the current version, we want you to watch the version we saw for the first time on Nov 6, 2014 (and that was just obtained via a FOI request) – this was AFTER our hearing but before final oral submissions were made on November 21, 2014 in our matter.

ORIGINAL VIDEO:      https://youtu.be/rzoz-E4T1u8    (Please watch now)

As  said, this video was launched by BCSC Chair Brenda Leong at a conference – a copy of her speech where she calls the video “fun” and “entertaining” can be found here:

Brenda Leong Speech – November 6, 2014

On November 21, 2014, we appeared in front of the Panel at the hearing and before we began our arguments we opened with the following:

WHARRAM: Before I begin today I would like your permission to read a brief statement I’d like to make for the record. Can I do that?

THE CHAIR: I don’t know what you’re about to say, so I don’t really have any comment about that, so carry on.

WHARRAM: In the last week I’ve been approached at my residence by nothing short of what I would call a hoodlum. The hoodlum in no certain terms told me they wanted their friend’s money back that I scammed. I have made a police report of the incident with a Constable Nishin (phonetic) of the Chilliwack RCMP and have been issued a police file number. Recently I had an opportunity to watch what the British Columbia Securities Commission in another glamorous press release calls an entertaining video. In the video the main character, the mother of a victim of fraud, attacks an alleged fraudster with physical violence that I will call a vigilante act. The video is a sick, pathetic attempt to make the people of BC aware of securities fraud. This would be equivalent of the Vancouver Police Homicide Department making an entertaining video promoting family members of murder victims to attack an alleged perpetrator. On November 6, 2014 Brenda Leong, the chair of the British Securities Commission, calls the fraud fighter video fun in a speech that she did at the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s 2014 national conference. I’m concerned if anything happens to my family or myself, I think this video is — and if anyone hasn’t seen it in this room I encourage you to see it, it is actually sick, made me sick to my stomach when I first seen it. I just want to bring it to the panel’s attention, public’s attention. I think it’s important that people like myself are protected out there. Thank you.”

Source: November 21, 2014 Hearing Transcript

By the time we got back to Chilliwack at about 6 PM that night the video had been scrubbed with a message saying a new version would be available shortly.     A few days later, the following video was put up on the BCSC’s YouTube page where it remains today.   This is a pathetic waste of money…of time…and shows what the people at the BCSC seem to stand for – encouraging people to take the law into their own hands is NEVER warranted.   It is hard to believe that in an office full of lawyers not one of them said, “Hey, I think this is a little much, maybe we shouldn’t have characters taking the law into their own hands and attacking others at their home.”    

 Here is the revised version that was slapped together and re-posted back onto their YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aWiyj65aIk

What an extreme waste of money!

The overall theme at the BCSC is becoming more and more apparent on a daily basis – and it is time that people in this Province wake up to their actions!   Call the BCSC and find out who was responsible for producing this horrible video campaign – you have a right to know!

604-899-6500 in their main line!

WHY DID THE BCSC NOT CONTEMPLATE SETTLEMENT OFFER TO PROTECT INVESTORS?

When reading this simple email to Staff Litigator Legatt, it becomes apparent the frustration the Respondent was feeling for the process at the BCSC.    Facts are, they were forcing us into a corner buy telling us to put our Settlement Offer on paper and then would not even take it to the only person that could make the decision.   The process appears to be a game – a game that is so rigged against the Respondents (and the former investors) that it is impossible to make headway.

The email sent to Legatt on January 16, 2014 pleaded with her to at least point the Respondent in the right direction to having the hearing avoided and having the investors participate in the real estate project.   Time was running out and I was not able to wait another 7 weeks (as was the case in the last email correspondence).    We eagerly awaited another response from her…

[Click on Link…]

January 16, 2014 – RESPONDENT to LEGGAT

BCSC INVESTIGATOR ELIZABETH (“LIZ”) CHAN KNOWINGLY USED FALSE INFORMATION?

In November 2007, the Developer of the Falls Resort approached me and asked if I knew of anyone that might purchase a unit in the Deercrest Townhomes, located on the property.    He had Unit 101 that was available for sale and the Respondents indicated they would ask around.   I called one of the investors in Edmonton and asked if he wanted to buy and he indicated he would.

Shortly there later, a commission cheque in the amount of $24,292.75 arrived made payable to West Karma Ltd.    I placed the cheque into the WKL bank account and NEVER wrote a cheque to myself personally.   Looking at the bank account statements for WKL for the following 10 days, $20571.61 was spent directly on business expenses for WKL and FCC and $5,801.49 was used for personal expenses.

THESE WERE NOT INVESTOR FUNDS YET PAID FOR BUSINESS RELATED DIRECTLY TO THE WKL AND FCC.

That’s fine – people place funds into their business accounts on a regular basis as shareholder loans.     IF the BCSC’s Executive Director (and his Staff) wanted to bring accurate allegations in their Notice of Hearing they needed to complete a proper accounting and bring in a proper number into the allegation….but let’s see what Lead Investigator Elizabeth Chan had to say during the cross examination during our hearing in April 2014:

Q Can we put up, pull up Exhibit 00240? Can you please read this letter for the panel?

A Just the body of the letter, like, —

Q Just —

A — after the “re” line?

Q Just lead the letter please, from who it’s addressed to, and who it’s from and the body of the letter, sure, please.

A Okay. So, I don’t think this is a document that I obtained. Uhm, it says:

West Karma Ltd., BC
Dear Sirs/Mesdames:
Re: Sales of 101-51096 Falls Court, Chilliwack, BC (the “Property”) by Blackburn
Developments Ltd. (the “Seller”) to -REDACTED-  (the “Buyers”) effective November 23, 2007 (the”Completion Date”). As notary for the seller, we enclose our firm trust cheque drawn in your favour, in the amount of $24,292.75 representing payment in full for the Commission with respect to the above transaction. Please provide our office with a receipt for payment at your earliest convenience. We trust you find the foregoing and enclosed to be in order, however, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the writer or Shirley MacKillop of this office.
Yours truly, Simpson & Simpson. And the name there says, “R. Dean Simpson” and the letter, the date, November 23, 2007.

Q Thank you. And have you ever seen this document before?

A Uhm, I didn’t obtain this document during the course of my investigation, but I did see it in the binder of materials of materials contained in documents that you were intending to rely on.

Q That’s the first time you saw it though?

A Yes.
Source: Hearing Transcript, April 11, 2014 (pages 23-25)

This is the testimony of Staff’s most important witness – a Certified General Accountant with a degree from the University of British Columbia in Bachelor of Commerce?    That she never saw items going into the bank account that were relevant IF they wanted to bring an accurate number into the hearing room.   Elizabeth Chan is a highly paid Senior Investigator with the BCSC – it is HER job to find out the numbers used in the Notice of Hearing are accurate!   There is NO excuse for the sloppy work Staff completed in this matter!

How is this even possible is the onus was on the Executive Director to bring in clear and compelling evidence to prove the allegations in the Notice of Hearing?   Was the Respondents not entitled to a fair hearing with accurate numbers as the BCSC boasts on their website?

IS THE BCSC’s GENERAL COUNSEL ALAN KEATS A LIAR? BCSC CONTINUES TO HIDE THE TRUTH!

As you can see from correspondence in this blog post from a month ago – BCSC Associate General Counsel ALAN KEATS indicated he would finally reply to my Freedom of Information request within 30 days.    His 30 day window ended today at the close of business. Holidays or not, this bozo had an obligation to keep and once again, staff at the BCSC have no respect for any rules and/or regulations they must adhere to.

It is so apparent that leadership at the BCSC is lacking – and that there is no-one being held accountable as the BCSC enters 2017.  How does it possibly take over 60 days to tell me if a person still works at the BCSC – and if they don’t still work at the commission – when was their last day?   And how moronic are they to not know we already know the employment status of flunky former investigator Elizabeth “Liz” Chan?

When is this all going to end?  It is truly time we #draintheswamp in this province!  These people are so deficient in their actions – and are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to run to regulate the securities market?

HEY BCSC LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE! IT’S TIME TO WAKE UP!

Spineless BCSC Litigator Olubode Fagbamiye continues to prove he is one of the biggest cowards working at the British Columbia Securities Commission as he repeatedly refuses to respond to our questions regarding his very unprofessional conduct while working on our matter…..

My goodness Mr Fagbamiye – on what planet do you think your actions are OK?   How can you repeatedly hide behind those walls in your office?    Do you not have any desire whatsoever to stand behind the work you completed on behalf of your employer?   How can you possibly feel good about yourself when you think of your actions – both back in 2014 and today?

Never was it my intention but searching  your name (on the internet) now leads directly to negative results from this blog – are you not ashamed of being called a coward in public?  Your family must be so proud of you!

Only you can stop this – pull your head out of the sand and answer me!   What are you hiding?

AS 2017 APPROACHES WE ISSUE CHALLENGE TO BRENDA LEONG’S STAFF AT THE BCSC!

A while ago, we posted a challenge to Brenda Leong and the Staff at the BCSC – but they refused to accept the challenge and instead hid like cowards in their big fancy office building!  

As 2017 quickly approaches, we again place the same challenge on their lap in an attempt to FINALLY get answers to our questions.   Maybe this time they will find the courage to answer very simple questions regarding our matter – or in turn sue us for defamation/libel in an attempt to silence what we call “the truth”…

TO:  ALL STAFF AT THE BCSC

On May 18, 2016, and every day since that we have written on this blog, we have challenged you to answer simple questions regarding the matter we had before the BCSC.   To date, NOT one of you have bothered to reply, or even defend our allegations against the BCSC Staff.   For that, one could say you are very spineless and act without merit and we think you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

The BCSC appears to have two sets of rules and will only reply to something that supports their set agenda.   In addition, it appears they have the newspaper reporters in their pockets because not one of the slimy writers will write a story against the “government machine” in fear of wrinkling the wrong feathers.  They had NO problem reporting on day 1 of our hearing when the case was presented by the BCSC, reported a very biased one-sided story and did not cover the balance of the hearing when we presented our case and had 94% of the allegations (dollar amount) thrown out by the Panel.   

To ANYONE who doubts what is being said in this blog and that we are not telling the truth, we say this….

“Why isn’t one of the most powerful government agencies in BC, with unlimited funds to fight legal battles, suing us for defamation?  After sending out letters from your lawyer to Peter Harris and Christopher Burke – Why are you not suing them for defamation after threatening to do so?”    

In our opinion, there are 2 reasons for them cowering up and putting their heads in the sand:

1.  They are not able to sue for Libel/Defamation because we are not saying anything that is not true.  Our blog posts contain facts and have not exaggerated the events or allegations made against their Staff.  We have merely presented questions to the grossly incompetent BCSC Chair Brenda Leong and the person who appointed her, Premier Christy Clark.  Neither of these women will respond to our repeated request.  Items like BCSC staff manipulating evidence, not presenting the settlement offer, and the BCSC staff bringing assumptions into the hearing room ARE factually correct.  The have no reply because they have NO defense.     

2. Secondly, they do not want to argue against us, offer us another hearing, or answer our simple questions because they know the moment they do – they will be incriminating themselves and going down a road they definitely do not want to take.   THEY DO NOT WANT THE TRUTH TO COME OUT IN A REAL COURTROOM.   It would appear they don’t want to step outside their domain and have a real judge (outside of their precious Kangaroo Court) telling the world what is happening within their walls.  They will not answer Former Investors questions as to why they did not accept the Settlement Offer because they know the former investors will NOT like their answers and more than likely sue them for acting in bad faith.  And don’t forget (as posted earlier in this blog), we applied, through a Freedom of Information request, all correspondence from staff litigators to/from the Executive Director with respect to the Settlement Offer.    There was NOTHING – these bozo’s (Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye / C. Paige Leggat and Executive Director Paul Bourque) didn’t even have a discussion with one another regarding the investors opportunity to recoup some (if not all) of their funds!   Incompetent!   

Now, we will issue you three FORMAL CHALLENGES:

CHALLENGE #1:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO HAVE YOUR FLASHY LAWYERS  SEND US A LETTER DEMANDING WE SHUT DOWN OUR BLOG FOR BEING INACCURATE AND/OR SLANDEROUS;  

CHALLENGE #2:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO SUE US FOR DEFAMATION/LIBEL IF FOR ONE MOMENT OUR ALLEGATION OF BCSC STAFF ACTING IN BAD FAITH (WHEN MANIPULATING EVIDENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US) IS NOT TRUE;

CHALLENGE #3:   FINALLY, WE CHALLENGE YOU TO FORMALLY ADDRESS THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL (AS OUTLINED EARLIER IN THIS BLOG) THAT THE FCC AND DCF INVESTORS WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM. 

IF YOU IGNORE US OR DO NOT HAVE YOUR COUNCIL COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US IN THE NEXT 14 DAYS – WE WILL ASSUME THE ALLEGATIONS WE HAVE MADE AGAINST YOU TO BE VALID AND TO BE NON-CONTESTED.  WE WILL PUBLISH YOUR RESPONSE (OR LACK OF) IN THIS BLOG 15 DAYS FROM NOW.  

 

 We are begging for you to finally act – it has NOW been 223 days (and counting) since my blog started and you have all had your head in the sand.   It his time people hear the truth.   We want to go to court against you so we can start the process of people hearing the truth consisting a facts and not some slanderous, biased press release issued by your incompetent staff, followed up by being rail-roaded by your inept lawyers in the hearing itself, and then having employees that work in the same office as the litigators making a decision as some “independent” panel.    Don’t forget, we have have a witness  (brought in to testify FOR the BCSC) agreeing with our side; and the Panel still found that Staff proved this allegation.   It is easy to conclude you people are all incompetent.

This is a telling time – the people are waking up and standing up to government agencies all over the World – specifically ones that appear to be corrupt!    The BCSC is an agency that desperately needs an overhaul.  It (like many of the agencies Clark’s government has touched) appears to be tainted.

Eagerly awaiting your reply Brenda!   Time for you to wake up…or time for the people of this Province to have you immediately replaced by a competent business executive.

 

DID BCSC LAWYERS C. PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE EXTORT A RESPONDENT?

The Respondents sent their time-sensitive Settlement proposal to Staff on November 7, 2013.   Finally after 7 weeks of waiting the Respondents were very eager to receive the reply from the Litigator at the BCSC.     As the attachment was opened, eagerness turned to frustration as Staff indicated they did not even take the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director for approval (or even a review/negotiation).  The reason the offer was time sensitive is the builder and lender were anxious to move the project forward in a timely fashion.   There was NO reason ever given why Staff took this amount of time to reply.

Instead Staff indicated the only way they would take a Settlement Offer to the Executive Director is IF pleaded guilty to their long list of allegations and agreed to pay $5.8 million dollars in fines and disgorgement.

The BCSC website indicates all Settlements must be paid in full at the time the Settlement Agreement is agreed to – this was impossible for the Respondents, let alone the FACT that many of the allegations in the Notice of Hearing were NOT accurate.

ON WHAT PLANET DOES A PERSON HAVE TO PLEAD GUILTY TO ALL ALLEGATIONS OUTLINED IN A NOTICE OF HEARING AND THEN PAY A “RANSOM” OF NEARLY $6 MILLION DOLLARS JUST TO GET THEIR SETTLEMENT OFFER NEGOTIATED?   THIS IS BORDERLINE EXTORTION!

The parties could have avoided a long, lengthy, expensive hearing IF Staff Litigators and the Executive Director would have even looked at the proposal and actually thought about the investors.   In hindsight, it appears that the BCSC did not have the investors best interest at stake as their website promotes – nor was it a fair system for all parties.  Please read for yourself, the reply from Staff and ask “WHY DID THE BCSC NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EVEN REVIEW THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEN SO MUCH WAS AT STAKE FOR THE INVESTORS?”   

bcsc-5-questionsWe encourage anyone affected by the Settlement Offer not even being put onto the Executive Directors desk for a review to contact the BCSC at 1-604-899-5600 during regular business hours.  Maybe you can get an answer – the Respondents have certainly not been able to do so.

BCSC LITIGATOR OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE – YOUR WISH IS MY COMMAND!

As most of you saw, on December 5, 2016 we called BCSC litigator Olubode Fagbamiye in his office and asked a series of very simple questions.    And unfortunately, many of you that have been waiting for months for these questions to be answered were extremely disappointed when Fagbamiye literally walked away from the phone’s receiver without utterly barely a word.

Before he turned coward, he did ask me to put my thoughts down on paper and that he would reply via written correspondence.    We wrote him the following letter, and too date, have not heard a peep from this sorry excuse for a lawyer…

letter-to-olubode-fagbamiye-december-7-2016

One of the problems we have with this whole matter is that IF I was a lawyer and was contacting the Commission with questions, comments, or concerns they would reply almost immediately.   In that we are self-represented somehow the Commission feels they don’t need to respond?   The BCSC has known for months (and even years) that we are self-represented – they should be MANDATED to respond considering what is at stake for the investors in our case – and in many others.

Mr Fagbamiye, we can see you view our blog on a regular basis and we know you are reading this!   Why are you such a coward?  What are you hiding?  And why have you not protected the investors (by at least forwarding on the Settlement Offer that may have helped the investors) to the Executive Director for his review?    

You should be extremely ashamed of your actions!   People are starting to see what really happened and are going to demand answers from you – time for you to get you head out of the sand….

bcsc-staff-meeting

IS BCSC LAWYER ALAN KEATS JUST ANOTHER BOZO DOWN AT THE COMMISSION?

On October 18, 2016, we sent a Freedom of Information (“FOI”) request to the BCSC in an attempt to determine the employment status of the former BCSC Investigator Elizabeth “Liz” Chan (“Chan”).   You can see in a previous post in this blog, we were uncertain of her employment status at that time.

foi-request-october-18-2016

We have since determined that Ms Chan left the BCSC in April 2014 and went to work at the offices of the Chartered Professional Accountants of BC.    She left there in August of 2015 and her currently employment status is unknown.

As you can see above, the FOI request asked a VERY simple question – whether Chan still worked at the commission, and if she did not, we asked when her employment ended.   That’s it!

We waited the standard 30 business days for a reply from the FOI division at the BCSC – on November 29, 2016, we we received the following email from a Mr. Alan Keats (Associate General Counsel at the BCSC).   As you can see it appears Mr. Keats wants to kick the can down the road a little further before he will answer simple questions that does not endanger the third party – the flunky investigator Ms Elizabeth Chan. 

letter-from-keats-november-29-2016

Another 30 days before they will answer something as simple as to whether an employee still works at the Commission?  Really?   My goodness, these people can’t be for real.  Talk about lawyers really putting in extra billing justify their wages.     As you can see by our response – we are on to Mr Keats game and have called him out in no uncertain terms.

letter-to-keats-november-30-2016Just in recent weeks we have the following:

BCSC Chair Brenda Leong – will not respond to emails and request for information.

BCSC Litigator Olubode Fagbamiye – will not respond to questions over the phone.  Said to send written correspondence.

BCSC Associate General Counsel Alan Keats – will not answer simple FOI request in a timely fashion.

Does anyone see a pattern here?   It appears to many that the BCSC (and their staff) are hiding from any confrontation that will see any bit of truth come to fruition.   They don’t want you to know the truth – as one would think MANY of them would be standing in the unemployment line.

We are not going anywhere – the numbers are up on our blog as we now have 100’s of people per day viewing our blog.   We have former investors that have contacted the BCSC and have received comments back from Staff.  Once again, we see a failure in ANY questions being answered with regards to events at the Commission that have contributed in many investors losing an opportunity to recoup some of their investment back.

 

LESS THAN 4% OF FINANCIAL ADVISERS ARE REGISTERED TO SELL SECURITIES IN CANADA?

In an unbelievable article recently published in the Lethbridge Herald, less than 4% of Canadian men and women are properly registered to sell securities in Canada.   The Small Investor Protection Association (“SIPA”) claimed that an astonishing “96 per cent of Canada’s ‘financial advisors’ are evading provision of the their province’s securities legislation.   They’re not registered as financial ‘advisers’ offering impartial advice in their clients’ best interest.” 

The numbers are staggering – the article adds, “With nearly 122,000 Canadian men and women registered to sell securities, the consumers’ organization says just 4,076 were legally registered (by September) as an “advising representative” or an “adviser.” That “e” is the legal distinction.    All the rest are simply sales “advisors,” the report says. They’re paid to sell the financial products their employer prefers.”

And it seems is doesn’t matter what province in Canada you are located.   Nationwide, the report points out, “Seven out of 10 Canadians believe they are working with a financial expert with a legal obligation to look out for their best interests, but many are wrong, and the organization warns it can cost some Canadians half their life savings.”

“They can profit from the greater rewards of selling you substandard or higher-fee investments because they are salespersons, not professional advice givers with the agency duty and legal obligation to look out for your best interests.”

Also taken from the article, Lethbridge resident Larry Elford, who retired from the investment industry so he could warn the public about its practices, says “no Lethbridge-area investment agents are registered as “advisers.”    He has checked in his home city (a city in Southern Alberta with a 2016 population of nearly 100,000 people) and concludes, “there are currently none in Lethbridge area who possess the registration required to call themselves an ‘Adviser’”.

That simple spelling variation, he says, allows them to “remain outside the jurisdiction of Alberta’s securities legislation.” What’s worse, he suggests, “neither the province’s securities officials nor the provincial government seem interested in increasing consumer protection for Albertans saving for their retirement. The Alberta Securities Commission is on record of ignoring this violation of Alberta law, in favour of paycheques as high as $700,000 to those at the top of this regulatory agency.”

But surely the Government agencies in place to protect the investors are stepping up to the plate to do something about this frightening situation?    According to Elford they are NOT – and they have not been for a very long time.   Again, talking purely of his experience in Alberta, he goes on to state, “And neither the New Democrats nor the Progressive Conservatives saw the need for change, I have spoken to Alberta finance ministers as far back as Shirley McClellan, right up to Joe Ceci of today’s government,”  He adds, “Each one has simply taken the stance of not wanting the public to be made aware of these violations of law, as well as violations of Albertan’s financial security.”

We have questioned this subject previously in this blog – they system is broken and until ELECTED politicians get rid of this double standard in the securities markets Canadians are at risk.    Only citizens of this incredible country are going to be able to change this because it appears the current regiments are NOT interest in protecting investors.

What an joke the Securities Agencies in this country have become – we have to start asking how these people can year after year allow Canadians to lose millions and millions of dollars.    Most of them boldly claim they are self-sufficient and don’t rely on tax payers for operational funding.  After collecting fees from transactions of thousands of unregistered financial planners of course they are not – why do they not have to play by the rules?

It is time to start following the money – these agencies are NOT interest in protecting the fine people of this country and it appears collecting fees (money) is placed far ahead in priority.    Shame on them!

Source:  Lethbridge Herald

 

WHY WON’T SPINELESS OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE OF THE BCSC ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS?

ORIGINALLY POSTED ON DECEMBER 5, 2016

In a former post in this blog a few weeks ago, we told a story of one of our former investors calling the BCSC to ask questions regarding our matter.  Unfortunately, whomever she spoke to at the Commission hung up on her before she could get ANY answers to the questions she had for them.

Today, we thought we would try to get answers from Staff Litigator Mr. Olubode Fagbamiye (the Staff Litigator that worked directly on my file) from essentially day 1.  He was one of the lawyers (the other being C. Paige Leggat) that was present during the hearing and he was certainly there during the period of time we presented our settlement Offer that would have seen the investors participate in the successful Deercrest property (without involvement from Staff at West Karma Ltd.).

As you will see in the video below, we did not waste Mr. Fagbamiye’s time and asked him 3 very direct questions.     It is almost laughable his replies (or lack there of) to our repeated questions.

IT IS OUR OPINION THIS VIDEO CONFIRMS EVERYTHING WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THE ENTIRE TIME.   AND IT REMAINS OUR OPINION BY FAILING TO RESPOND TO OUR QUESTIONS THE BCSC (AND THEIR STAFF) ARE COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT IN RUNNING THE SECURITIES INDUSTRY IN THIS PROVINCE!  

Shame on them all!   Especially this incompetent spineless amoeba that happened to work on our file (manipulating the evidence and not taking a valid settlement offer to the Executive Director).

 

For all former investors in both FCC and DCF, we encourage you to watch the video – now more than every you need to contact (phone, mail, email, fax) and get these questions answered.

They cannot ignore all of you!   As you can see, Fagbamiye’s phone number is 604-899-6790 and the main line is 604-899-6500.   Call them today – record the call or have someone witness the call for you.    Email them weekly if you need to!

It is time they are held accountable for THEIR actions in the West Karma matter.

 

 

EXTORTION PART OF THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION’S MANDATE?

The Respondents sent their time-sensitive Settlement proposal to Staff on November 7, 2013.   Finally after 7 weeks of waiting the Respondents were very eager to receive the reply from the Litigator at the BCSC.     As the attachment was opened, eagerness turned to frustration as Staff indicated they did not even take the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director for approval (or even a review/negotiation).  The reason the offer was time sensitive is the builder and lender were anxious to move the project forward in a timely fashion.   There was NO reason ever given why Staff took this amount of time to reply.

Instead Staff indicated the only way they would take a Settlement Offer to the Executive Director is IF pleaded guilty to their long list of allegations and agreed to pay $5.8 million dollars in fines and disgorgement.   The BCSC website indicates all Settlements must be paid in full at the time the Settlement Agreement is agreed to – this was impossible for the Respondents, let alone the FACT that many of the allegations in the Notice of Hearing were NOT accurate.

ON WHAT PLANET DOES A PERSON HAVE TO PLEAD GUILTY TO ALL ALLEGATIONS OUTLINED IN A NOTICE OF HEARING AND THEN PAY A “RANSOM” OF NEARLY $6 MILLION DOLLARS JUST TO GET THEIR SETTLEMENT OFFER NEGOTIATED?   THIS IS BORDERLINE EXTORTION!

The parties could have avoided a long, lengthy, expensive hearing IF Staff Litigators and the Executive Director would have even looked at the proposal and actually thought about the investors.   In hindsight, it appears that the BCSC did not have the investors best interest at stake as their website promotes – nor was it a fair system for all parties.  Please read for yourself, the reply from Staff and ask “WHY DID THE BCSC NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EVEN REVIEW THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEN SO MUCH WAS AT STAKE FOR THE INVESTORS?”   

bcsc-5-questions

We encourage anyone affected by the Settlement Offer not even being put onto the Executive Directors desk for a review to contact the BCSC at 1-604-899-5600 during regular business hours.  Maybe you can get an answer – the Respondents have certainly not been able to do so.

[Click on the link…]

December 30, 2013 – LEGATT to RESPONDENTS

TYLER OLSEN AND PAUL HENDERSON CALL THEMSELVES INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST?

In the time leading up to the investigation by the BCSC into my company, we had met Chilliwack Times journalist Tyler Olsen (“Olsen”) on a couple different occasions – he was always civil and we talked about different things including a common bond we had in hockey – namely the Chilliwack Bruins – a WHL hockey team that played in Chilliwack from roughly 2006-2011.

tyler-olsen          Tyler Olsen (Reporter)

Source:  Facebook

When the BCSC brought forward their allegations on June 14, 2013, understandably Olsen wrote a very negative article which he took from the biased press release sent out by the BCSC.   Olsen did make contact with me and asked if I wanted to make a comment with regard to the allegations.   I provided him a letter that indicated the allegations were just that – allegations and that we were very much focused on a settlement of some sort that would see the investors in FCC and DCF still participate in the project at the Falls.    This should sound VERY familiar to many of you reading this knowing that we did everything to get the Staff at the BCSC to accept the Settlement Offer.  See earlier post in this blog for proof.

I didn’t see/hear from Olsen again until the first day of the hearing (April 7, 2014) when I noticed him lurking around the hearing room like a human parasite.

After that first day of the hearing, he approached me as I was exiting the hearing room – I remember wondering why a little 2nd rate reporter from a small newspaper would travel all the way to Vancouver and he replied he had been hired freelance by the Vancouver Province to further update the story – that he had written on the previously June.

We talked as we entered the elevator and I asked him directly if he was going to cover the rest of the hearing and he said that the Province had only paid him to cover the first day of the hearing that was scheduled for 10 days.   I told him that was unfortunate because the fraud allegations against me in the amount of $5.45 million were extremely inaccurate and I told him about the Settlement Offer that I had desperately tried to get ANYONE at the Commission to even review (let alone except).    I asked him to please come back to my hearing and report on the extensive cross-examination I had planned for the flunky BCSC investigator Liz Chan – I told him that I thought I was going to be able to get to the bottom of her accounting of the $5.45 million fraud and that I would do so by conducting an extensive cross-examination of Chan.   He said that he would need to be “paid” to do that.   I literally remember thinking the guy was a complete scum bag for saying something so very inappropriate.

By this time, I was beginning to see the slant this bozo was going to put on the story – I mean, how can you write an article that is not biased if you only know ONE side of the story based on a slanderous press release put out by the BCSC and refuse to listen to both sides unless you are paid?

As we walked through the lobby on the ground floor of the building – we finished our conversation and he says, “Oh, I forgot something and I have to go back this way…”.   I didn’t give it much thought and continued on my way out of the building.

As I walked out the front door and entered the sidewalk – some scum bag photographer (named Arlen Redekop) from the biased media walked up to me and started taking my picture.   Again, it became more and more abundantly clear the slant/angle these people were going to take and I expected the worse…

VANCOUVER, BC: March 9, 2010 -- Arlen Redekop staff photo in Vancouver on Monday, March 8, 2010. ( Glenn Baglo / PNG ) ( PNG )
VANCOUVER, BC: March 9, 2010 — Arlen Redekop staff photo in Vancouver on Monday, March 8, 2010. ( Glenn Baglo / PNG ) ( PNG )

On the second day of the hearing, I made my way to Vancouver and just as I entered the hearing room I received a phone call from a friend asking me if I had seen the paper – I said I had not and he told me I was on the front cover with a headline that stated “Investors Millions Evaporate”.   I read the article and it was pathetic – he actually made fun of the way I presented my opening statement by opening the article with, “Just like his investors’ millions, Rodney Jack Wharram’s way with words seemed to evaporate Monday at the start of a hearing that could see him banned from the B.C. investment industry.  Wharram, who is representing himself at the B.C. Securities Commission hearing, frequently stumbled over his words as he faced allegations around $9.3 million he is alleged to have raised from investors between 2007 and 2010.”  I was nervous as I had NEVER been in a hearing room before (as a defendant) and I certainly did not know what to expect but I certainly did not stumble over words and I was NOT at a loss for words. Reviewing the transcripts of that day – I asked the Panel Chair several questions regarding procedure as I did not understand many aspects of presenting my evidence.    Considering I only spoke for about 5 minutes that entire day, I fail to see his logic in his reporting.

 

Second rate journalism is the ONLY way to describe his wording.   When the findings came out in February 2015, the Vancouver Province completely scrub the article written by Olsen – and who can blame them?  This is because the headline and story they (and the BCSC) tried to go with was NOT accurate.  To this day, the only place you can find it is here.  It is pretty ironic that they decided to go with this headline on the front page of the paper and then have an unrepresented defendant blow most of the allegations out of the water, including the money aspect.   Facts are – Investors Millions DID NOT evaporate as they tried to stuff down their readers throats.   It must have been very embarrassing for them ALL!

Fast forward to February of 2015, Olsen either lost his job with the local Chilliwack Times (or was transferred) to to an associated paper in Abbotsford, BC.   His replacement (in Chilliwack) was another so-called investigative journalist named Paul Henderson (“Henderson”).  My issues with Henderson are simple – he NEVER once tried to contact me for my side of the story before he wrote a very slanderous article in December 2015 – after the BCSC issued their decision.

The day this article hit the papers, a friend called me and informed me of the story – I immediately went to the Chilliwack Times to confront him.  I asked why he was not telling both sides of the story and that we had 94% of the dollar amount of the fraud allegations dismissed.  I explained I did not have a lawyer and tried to explain to him what was happening down at the BCSC with Staff not even presenting the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director – this alone could have protected the investors in the project which IS their mandate!

He went back and edited a small portion of the article that hit the on-line edition of the Chilliwack Times – his story that went physically to press was different than the one that was on the internet – complete gong show!  He couldn’t even co-ordinate that properly – which again leads to questioning his professionalism.

I reached out to Henderson one final time (in May 2016) after I started this blog and asked if he was willing to meet – he made up some excuse of being too busy and said he could meet some time later the following week…I never heard back from him.  Like I said, I feel I have every right to question his professionalism.

paul-henderson   Paul Henderson

Source:  Facebook

A simple search of the internet and one can easily find a very derogatory photo which contains a comment regarding Henderson.   What a terrible thing to have written about you – whether it is true or not.  Albeit, one may conclude the graffiti (on his office wall)  was more than likely done by someone in retaliation for some biased article he wrote in an attempt to sell papers – it questions why citizens would go to this extent to write something so horrible about this man.

 

paul-henderson1   Graffiti outside the Chilliwack Times 

Source: Facebook

In closing, we look at the facts and it is no wonder that the state of “media” is the way it is in this country when we see two reporters like these two who have no desire to get BOTH sides of a story before they go to press with their slanted theory of events.   When I went to Henderson’s office to confront him, he even spun what I said to him in private (off the record) into his story – and when I confronted him on that – he said, “nothing you said to me was private”.

A real investigative journalist should want to get to the bottom of a story and give independent details to inform their reader so that reader can form their own opinion – again, its no wonder people are not reading newspapers the way they use to.  Which leads to the likely reason why so many of these ‘propaganda spewing generic robots’ are losing their jobs across the country.

DID THE ALBERTA SECURITIES COMMISSION DROP THE BALL WITH DOUGLAS VERMEEREN?

Did the Alberta Securities Commission (“ASC”) protect the investors in a recent matter they allowed to be “settled” without going to a hearing?  Allegations of misleading/untrue statements to investors, illegal trading, and FRAUD were brought forward in a November 2015 Notice of Hearing against Douglas Vermeeren of Calgary, Alberta.

Looking at the math in the Vermeeren  Settlement Agreement, we see he raised $735,000 from 43 unsuspecting investors.      David Linder (the Executive Director for the ASC) went on to state that Vermeeren “co-mingled funds in the Respondents personal bank account and corporate accounts controlled by the Respondent.  Some funds from these accounts were used for personal expenditures and to pay investors.  The Respondent did not keep adequate accounting records making it difficult to determine the precise scope of the fraudulent use of the investors funds.”   Furthermore, later in the same document, Linder goes on to state, “Some of the Investors funds were used for third-party lending.”

Of the $735,000 raised, only $382,971 (a mere 52%) was paid back to the investors – leaving a balance of $352,029 not returned.

HERE IS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO SHAKE THEIR HEADS – the ASC went on to negotiate a settlement of only $120,000 for ALL wrongdoing plus charge him a meager $10,000 to cover the cost of the investigation into his businesses.    They went on to issue him a 10-year ban from securities market but allowed him, “in his personal capacity, and for the benefit of his family to trade in or purchasing in exchange listed securities…”

Let’s get this straight – this man was alleged to have committed fraud, took $735,000 from the public, paid back only 52% of the money to his investors – and then only has to come up with $130,000 and sit on the sidelines for 10 years?  The investors are out 48% of their money but the ASC gets their $130,000?  What happened to the other $352,000 the investors are out?   Who is protecting these people and who is going to get their money back?

This is insane! It appears the ASC are run just the same as their sister-affiliation to the west – the “wonderful” BCSC.   They do not have the best interest of the investors – this is very clear!

Looking back at another matter before the ASC, we see that this is NOT the first time ASC Executive Director David Linder has been very liberal giving out punishment  – we blogged back in June 2016 that the ASC handled another matter regarding the business dealings of League Financial in an atrocious manner  – where investors reportedly lost $370 MILLION and the people behind the company were fined a dismal $250,000 by the ASC.

Alberta really is the WILD, WILD WEST!

NOTE:  Looking quickly into Vermeeren, we see he is jet-setting to places in both the USA and the United Kingdom applying his trade – stopped in Alberta but still going strong in other areas it would appear.  We wonder if he still has the same book keeping skills this time around?

https://youtu.be/rzOn4F3lyMQ

https://www.facebook.com/douglas.vermeeren

 

DOES STAFF AT THE BCSC PROMOTE VIGILANTE JUSTICE? YOU DECIDE!

As indicated in an earlier blog – as part of an FOI request, we asked the BCSC to provide a copy of the original Fraud Fighter video they launched on November 6, 2014 as part of their renewal of their so-called “award winning” campaign against securities fraud.

Jean #3

As you will see, at the time we were very concerned with the overall message sent out to the average investor – the video shows a character “Jean” doing a bunch of stupid gymnastic moves in a park and ends with her going to the residence of “David” where it implies she physically attacked him.

Now, before you watch the current version, we want you to watch the version we saw for the first time on Nov 6, 2014 (and that was just obtained via a FOI request) – this was AFTER our hearing but before final oral submissions were made on November 21, 2014 in our matter.

ORIGINAL VIDEO:      https://youtu.be/rzoz-E4T1u8    (Please watch now)

As  said, this video was launched by BCSC Chair Brenda Leong at a conference – a copy of her speech where she calls the video “fun” and “entertaining” can be found here:

Brenda Leong Speech – November 6, 2014

On November 21, 2014, we appeared in front of the Panel at the hearing and before we began our arguments we opened with the following:

WHARRAM: Before I begin today I would like your permission to read a brief statement I’d like to make for the record. Can I do that?

THE CHAIR: I don’t know what you’re about to say, so I don’t really have any comment about that, so carry on.

WHARRAM: In the last week I’ve been approached at my residence by nothing short of what I would call a hoodlum. The hoodlum in no certain terms told me they wanted their friend’s money back that I scammed. I have made a police report of the incident with a Constable Nishin (phonetic) of the Chilliwack RCMP and have been issued a police file number. Recently I had an opportunity to watch what the British Columbia Securities Commission in another glamorous press release calls an entertaining video. In the video the main character, the mother of a victim of fraud, attacks an alleged fraudster with physical violence that I will call a vigilante act. The video is a sick, pathetic attempt to make the people of BC aware of securities fraud. This would be equivalent of the Vancouver Police Homicide Department making an entertaining video promoting family members of murder victims to attack an alleged perpetrator. On November 6, 2014 Brenda Leong, the chair of the British Securities Commission, calls the fraud fighter video fun in a speech that she did at the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s 2014 national conference. I’m concerned if anything happens to my family or myself, I think this video is — and if anyone hasn’t seen it in this room I encourage you to see it, it is actually sick, made me sick to my stomach when I first seen it. I just want to bring it to the panel’s attention, public’s attention. I think it’s important that people like myself are protected out there. Thank you.”

Source: November 21, 2014 Hearing Transcript

By the time we got back to Chilliwack at about 6 PM that night the video had been scrubbed with a message saying a new version would be available shortly.     A few days later, the following video was put up on the BCSC’s YouTube page where it remains today.   This is a pathetic waste of money…of time…and shows what the people at the BCSC seem to stand for – encouraging people to take the law into their own hands is NEVER warranted.   It is hard to believe that in an office full of lawyers not one of them said, “Hey, I think this is a little much, maybe we shouldn’t have characters taking the law into their own hands and attacking others at their home.”    

 Here is the revised version that was slapped together and re-posted back onto their YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aWiyj65aIk

What an extreme waste of money!

The overall theme at the BCSC is becoming more and more apparent on a daily basis – and it is time that people in this Province wake up to their actions!   Call the BCSC and find out who was responsible for producing this horrible video campaign – you have a right to know!

604-899-6500 in their main line!

ELIZABETH CHAN CGA OF VANCOUVER, BC – THE GREAT WHODINI?

What can only be described as BIZARRE, we have recently came across some of the craziest information thus far into our exposure of the Staff at the BCSC…

Last week, we decided to lodge a formal complaint with the Ethics Commissioner of the Certified Professional Accounts of British Columbia (“CPABC”) with respect to Elizabeth Chan’s actions (or lack of actions) in her role as the lead investigator in our matter.  It is our opinion that she was the person that completed a significant portion of the accounting in which other Staff (including Executive Director Paul Bourque) relied upon when bringing the allegations of the $5.45 million fraud.    Her math was horrendous and was proven to be in the hearing room as the Panel threw out some 94% of it in their decision.

Investigator Chan WAS a Certified General Accountant (“CGA”) at the time and they are held to what appears to by a very high level.   A simple review of the Chartered Professional Accountants Act / CPA Code of Professional Conduct (the “Act”) we easily find:

cga-code-of-professional-conduct-aug-2016

Our assertion is that Investigator Chan knew (or ought to have known) that she was giving her superiors the wrong information when the brought allegations (in the exact dollar amount) that she prepared.   She admitted on the stand that she was the one who prepared the documents presented at the hearing – she had to have known they were “false or misleading”.   We think Investigator Chan is the scumbag that intentionally brought wrong information that formed the allegation of the $5.45 million fraud.

In cross-examination, she admitted several times to knowing of other key information that she neglected (or simply omitted) from the work she prepared.  According to the Act (in which she MUST adhere to) she is in complete breach of the Act.

Now, this is where the story gets truly bizarre!   When we were researching and trying to determine where we could lodge our complaint of Investigator Chan we came across a document on the internet titled “2014-2015 Report to the Public” that was prepared by the CPABC.   By clicking on the link above you will see on page 11 (under the complaints section) the name of Liz Chan and Ed Tanaka.   Liz Chan is designated as a Director, Ethics and Mr. Tanaka is designated as a Director, Ethics & Documentation.

On September 24, 2016, we sent the complaint letter ( letter-to-cpabc-elizabeth-chan-redacted ) to their office for their review and comment.   Only a few days later, we found out that the complaint officer Liz Chan is none other than the Elizabeth Chan (from the BCSC) who we were lodging our complaint about.   We came across Liz Chan’s bio in another publication  and can confirm this is her from the picture and the wording of the bio.

bcsc-liz-chanSource: Joomag.com

So, we now have a complaint into an office where Liz Chan works about a Elizabeth Chan who use to work at the BCSC?   We can’t make this stuff up!   We followed up with a phone call to the CPABC offices and the receptionist indicated she had never heard of an Liz Chan (or even an Elizabeth Chan) in that office.   From what we can tell Chan started working at the CPABC office in April 2014 (the same month as our hearing) and was terminated/or quit sometime thereafter – many months ago.  By reviewing the member look-up option on their site, we can see that Chan still holds her designation as a CGA in the Province of BC.

We did receive an email from a Nancy Lis (from the CPABC office) indicating she did receive our complaint and will formally respond this coming week.   We very much look forward to hearing back from them and to see if they are going to go after one of their own.

As the World Turns down at the Commission – as we said yesterday, why the mass exodus from the Commission?   This is the 4th person that had a part in bringing the false allegations of a $5.45 million fraud against the Respondents that has been fired or resigned from the BCSC.  If it looks like a rat….smells like a rat…it is more than likely a rat!

One theory, is that the superiors at the BCSC were outraged by the work of Chan that lead to a $5.45 million fraud being unproven by a Respondent that did not even have a lawyer.   They spent A LOT of time and money on bringing the case to hearing and did not get their big fancy $20 million in fines and restitution – somebody had to take a fall and why not the person who had conduct on the file??

We need answers – and they cannot come quick enough!  But in the meantime, we can’t help but wonder why Elizabeth Chan or Liz Chan (or whatever she decides to call herself this time) cannot seem to keep a job…and we certainly wonder how she will act when she cannot hide behind the power of her badge any longer….

EDIT NOTE:  Since we wrote the blog on November 3, 2016, sources confirm Ms. Chan left the CPABC offices in August of 2015.  Where she works currently remains a mystery!  

 

 

IS BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG (AND HER ENTIRE STAFF) COWARDS?

To all Staff of the BCSC!

15 days ago I issued a challenge to a very quiet BCSC Chair Brenda Leong or ANY one of her spineless employees to answer some VERY direct questions including:

“Why isn’t one of the most powerful government agencies in BC, with unlimited funds to fight legal battles, suing us for defamation?  After sending out letters from your lawyer to Peter Harris and Christopher Burke – Why are you not suing them for defamation after threatening to do so?”    

We then issued 3 FORMAL CHALLENGES directly to you:

CHALLENGE #1:   WE CHALLENGED YOU TO HAVE YOUR FLASHY LAWYERS  SEND US A LETTER DEMANDING WE SHUT DOWN OUR BLOG FOR BEING INACCURATE AND/OR SLANDEROUS;  

CHALLENGE #2:   WE CHALLENGED YOU TO SUE US FOR DEFAMATION/LIBEL IF FOR ONE MOMENT OUR ALLEGATION OF BCSC STAFF ACTING IN BAD FAITH (WHEN MANIPULATING EVIDENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US) IS NOT TRUE;

CHALLENGE #3:   FINALLY, WE CHALLENGED YOU TO FORMALLY ADDRESS THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL (AS OUTLINED EARLIER IN THIS BLOG) THAT THE FCC AND DCF INVESTORS WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM. 

We concluded at the end of the post that failing to reply back would lead to assumptions that the allegations we made against you to be VALID and NON-CONTESTED.

WE HAVE HAD NOTHING – COMPLETE AND UDDER SILENCE FROM THE BCSC! 

Since we posted that blog post 14 days ago, we have discovered that Senior Investigator Elizabeth Chan was no longer employed by the BCSC as of April, 2014.    This is the same Invesigator Chan that spoke to many of the former investors in both FCC and DCF.    This is the same Investigator Chan that admitted on the stand during the hearing that she assumed evidence to be true during her investigation into our companies.  This is the same Investigator Chan that prepared summary “grade 2” calculations that the Executive Director (Paul Bourque) relied upon when bringing allegations of a $5.45 million fraud against Wharram and his companies.   This is the same Investigator Chan who sent emails to several of the former investors (BEFORE we got a day in court) pointing them to look at a bogus press release that was simply NOT true – that caused many of you to turn your back on Wharram.   This is the same Investigator Chan who worked directly with Staff Litigator C. Paige Leggat in bringing their bogus case to a hearing room.

Now back to the DATE that Investigator Chan ceased being employed by the BCSC – our sources confirm she was done in April 2014.    Do any of you remember when the hearing was?   It was April 7 – 16, 2014.     Elizabeth Chan ceased working for the BCSC in the same month as our hearing!    It is NOT hard to connect the dots here:

Paige Leggat

STAFF LITIGATOR C. PAIGE LEGGAT – Resigned/Terminated in November 2014

paul-bourque

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PAUL BOURQUE – Resigned/Terminated in June 2016

teresa-mitchell-banks

TERESA MITCHELL-BANKS – Terminated in November 2015

INVESTIGATOR ELIZABETH CHAN – Resigned/Terminated in April 2014

It is NOT far fetched to believe that after the $5.45 million fraud allegation was essentially thrown out for LACK OF COMPELLING EVIDENCE – that the “higher ups” at the Commission were pissed off at the people completed the work.   And remember their case was blown out of the water by Wharram who had never set foot in a hearing room before and had NO legal assistance.   These paid professionals definitely had egg on their face as their case was VERY poorly investigated and tried in the hearing room.

NOW THINK ABOUT THIS FOR A MOMENT – These are the 4 KEY PEOPLE that worked (or made MAJOR decisions on our matter) – whom have all been terminated or have resigned.   This is a disgrace at a very high level.

To ALL Former Investors – read between the lines here – these people are the ones that did not even look at the Settlement Offer that would have seen you participate in the Deercrest project – and NONE of then are currently working at the BCSC.   The Deercrest property is a complete success with all units sold for very high numbers.   The owners are making money.   You would have made money!

And now we have these complete incompetent bozo’s at the Commission not responding to repeatedly requests for answers as to why they have conducted themselves this way!   As I have said in other posts in this blog – you, as a former investors in FCC or DCF, have a right to these answers.  They cannot ignore ALL of us or put us off forever.   These people are NOT above the law and will NOT be able to hide behind the flimsy BC Securities Act forever.

Please contact them and ask them these five questions – do NOT take NO for an answer:

bcsc-5-questions

Thank you ALL for your support!  We sincerely appreciate the kind words and encouragement.

Regards,

RW

 

BCSC STAFF MUST ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS…DO NOT LET THEM HANG UP ON YOU!

As most of you know, we have recently encouraged former investors to contact the BCSC and ask them 5 questions  that we think are very important for Staff at the Commission to answer.  The answers to the questions (in the link above) are the right of everyone that was affected by the actions of both the Respondent and the Commission in our matter.  We feel we have answered many of the questions asked of us by the former investors in this blog – IT IS NOW TIME THE COMMISSION DOES THE SAME THING!

Recently, we received a phone call from one of our former investors indicated that they had contacted the Commission in an attempt to get answers to their questions.    To their shock and disbelief, the person they talked to at the BCSC said they would not comment on “past hearings” and then physically hung the phone up on them.

bcsc-staff-meeting

Is this what we want from these government appointed civil servants?   They answer to the PEOPLE, not the other way around.

She did not get the name of the person she talked to – only that it was a woman.   Please people – remember this – when you call them please make sure you get the particulars of the phone call including the time, date, and WHO you spoke to.    IF you can, tape record the call or have someone in the room with you that can take notes of what is being said.

Additionally, you can email them at the inquiries@bcsc.bc.ca  email account – and while you are at it, CC the email to all of the following (surely someone there can answer questions):

AGarrone@bcsc.bc.caahamilton@bcsc.bc.caARichardson@bcsc.bc.caBAdema@bcsc.bc.cableong@bcsc.bc.caCColter@bcsc.bc.ca); COMMSEC@bcsc.bc.cadmackay@bcsc.bc.cadmcfadden@bcsc.bc.caeaddleman@bcsc.bc.cafinreport@bcsc.bc.cajtorrance@bcsc.bc.cajwhately@bcsc.bc.caldonders@bcsc.bc.calevans@bcsc.bc.calliu@bcsc.bc.calrose@bcsc.bc.caMAsfaw@bcsc.bc.camcastillo@bcsc.bc.ca mchen@bcsc.bc.camdcook@bcsc.bc.campivnenko@bcsc.bc.ca mpwong@bcsc.bc.caOFagbamiye@bcsc.bc.caolam@bcsc.bc.ca); pbourque@bcsc.bc.ca;pbrady@bcsc.bc.capcouper@bcsc.bc.caPFasihi@bcsc.bc.ca>; pleggat@bcsc.bc.caRDifonzo@bcsc.bc.carkirwin@bcsc.bc.carleon@bcsc.bc.carsik@bcsc.bc.cascorrigallbrown@bcsc.bc.casmccolm@bcsc.bc.casneale@bcsc.bc.cassharma@bcsc.bc.cavarmstrong@bcsc.bc.cawting@bcsc.bc.caEMak@bcsc.bc.caLStreu@bcsc.bc.ca;

NOTE:  Brenda Leong (at bleong@bcsc.bc.ca ) is the Chair of the Commission – we have been emailing her for months now and she will not reply – so one can expect to NOT hear anything back from her.   She is probably out spending her $500,000 per year salary or producing videos that promote vigilante justice!

If the BCSC does not reply back to you within 14 days, feel free to let us know.  We think it is VERY important to document this all for various reasons – including the next election.   Brenda Leong was appointed to her post by BC Premier Christy Clark -who, ironically enough, has failed to answer any questions about the BCSC in the numerous letters we have sent to her.

BCSC STAFF SHAWN McCOLM AND ROY LEON SERVED LEGAL DOCUMENTS IN CHILE MATTER

It appears more discontent is heading the way of the Staff running the BCSC.   In what can only be described as a very embarrassing video for Staff at the BCSC, the Principles behind Mountain Star Gold entered the offices of the BCSC in Vancouver with their legal representatives from Chile and a group of their investors – and issued legal documents alleging Staff (Roy Leon – Senior Compliance Officer and Shawn McColm – Staff Litigator) were involved in fraudulent activity with regards to Mountain Star.   Implicit in their allegations are actions of big wigs at Barrick Gold, including former Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper.

bcsc-mccolm-and-leon

Source:  YouTube

As with many other current situations – the people of the World are waking up and standing up to corruption in government run agencies.   As we have said before, the Staff at the BCSC are not above the law and MUST be held accountable for some very poor decisions made in the recent past.  This story is going to get bigger and bigger considering who’s in play.

Not a good time to be at the BCSC!

 

CHALLENGE TO BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG AND/OR HER STAFF

TO:  ALL STAFF AT THE BCSC

On May 18, 2016, and every day since that we have written on this blog, we have challenged you to answer simple questions regarding the matter we had before the BCSC.   To date, NOT one of you have bothered to reply, or even defend our allegations against the BCSC Staff.   For that, one could say you are very spineless and act without merit and we think you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

The BCSC appears to have two sets of rules and will only reply to something that supports their set agenda.   In addition, it appears they have the newspaper reporters in their pockets because not one of the slimy writers will write a story against the “government machine” in fear of wrinkling the wrong feathers.  They had NO problem reporting on day 1 of our hearing when the case was presented by the BCSC, reported a very biased one-sided story and did not cover the balance of the hearing when we presented our case and had 94% of the allegations (dollar amount) thrown out by the Panel.   

To ANYONE who doubts what is being said in this blog and that we are not telling the truth, we say this….

“Why isn’t one of the most powerful government agencies in BC, with unlimited funds to fight legal battles, suing us for defamation?  After sending out letters from your lawyer to Peter Harris and Christopher Burke – Why are you not suing them for defamation after threatening to do so?”    

In our opinion, there are 2 reasons for them cowering up and putting their heads in the sand:

1.  They are not able to sue for Libel/Defamation because we are not saying anything that is not true.  Our blog posts contain facts and have not exaggerated the events or allegations made against their Staff.  We have merely presented questions to the grossly incompetent BCSC Chair Brenda Leong and the person who appointed her, Premier Christy Clark.  Neither of these women will respond to our repeated request.  Items like BCSC staff manipulating evidence, not presenting the settlement offer, and the BCSC staff bringing assumptions into the hearing room ARE factually correct.  The have no reply because they have NO defense.     

2. Secondly, they do not want to argue against us, offer us another hearing, or answer our simple questions because they know the moment they do – they will be incriminating themselves and going down a road they definitely do not want to take.   THEY DO NOT WANT THE TRUTH TO COME OUT IN A REAL COURTROOM.   It would appear they don’t want to step outside their domain and have a real judge (outside of their precious Kangaroo Court) telling the world what is happening within their walls.  They will not answer Former Investors questions as to why they did not accept the Settlement Offer because they know the former investors will NOT like their answers and more than likely sue them for acting in bad faith.  And don’t forget (as posted earlier in this blog), we applied, through a Freedom of Information request, all correspondence from staff litigators to/from the Executive Director with respect to the Settlement Offer.    There was NOTHING – these bozo’s (Staff Litigators Olubode Fagbamiye / C. Paige Leggat and Executive Director Paul Bourque) didn’t even have a discussion with one another regarding the investors opportunity to recoup some (if not all) of their funds!   Incompetent!   

Now, we will issue you three FORMAL CHALLENGES:

CHALLENGE #1:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO HAVE YOUR FLASHY LAWYERS  SEND US A LETTER DEMANDING WE SHUT DOWN OUR BLOG FOR BEING INACCURATE AND/OR SLANDEROUS;  

CHALLENGE #2:   WE CHALLENGE YOU TO SUE US FOR DEFAMATION/LIBEL IF FOR ONE MOMENT OUR ALLEGATION OF BCSC STAFF ACTING IN BAD FAITH (WHEN MANIPULATING EVIDENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US) IS NOT TRUE;

CHALLENGE #3:   FINALLY, WE CHALLENGE YOU TO FORMALLY ADDRESS THE SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL (AS OUTLINED EARLIER IN THIS BLOG) THAT THE FCC AND DCF INVESTORS WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM. 

IF YOU IGNORE US OR DO NOT HAVE YOUR COUNCIL COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST US IN THE NEXT 14 DAYS – WE WILL ASSUME THE ALLEGATIONS WE HAVE MADE AGAINST YOU TO BE VALID AND TO BE NON-CONTESTED.  WE WILL PUBLISH YOUR RESPONSE (OR LACK OF) IN THIS BLOG 15 DAYS FROM NOW.  

 We are begging for you to finally act – it has been 152 days (and counting) since my blog started and you have all had your head in the sand.   It his time people hear the truth.   We want to go to court against you so we can start the process of people hearing the truth consisting a facts and not some slanderous, biased press release issued by your incompetent staff, followed up by being rail-roaded by your inept lawyers in the hearing itself, and then having employees that work in the same office as the litigators making a decision as some “independent” panel.    Don’t forget, we have have a witness  (brought in to testify FOR the BCSC) agreeing with our side; and the Panel still found that Staff proved this allegation.   It is easy to conclude you people are all incompetent.

This is a telling time – the people are waking up and standing up to government agencies all over the World – specifically ones that appear to be corrupt!    The BCSC is an agency that desperately needs an overhaul.  It (like many of the agencies Clark’s government has touched) appears to be tainted.

Eagerly awaiting your reply Brenda!   Time for you to wake up!

HOW IS BCSC CHAIR BRENDA LEONG IN TOP 3 COMPENSATED EXECUTIVES IN BC?

Recently, a message come across our desk showing the 2015-2016 Compensation Disclosure for the top 60 executives in the Province of British Columbia.   Shocked, we discovered the BCSC Chair Brenda Leong now ranks 3rd in the Province with compensation of a whooping $499,251, behind only the former President and CEO of the University of British Columbia ($576,054) and the astonishing salary of the CEO of BC Investment Management ($2,506,056).

As you have read previously in this blog, the BCSC have issued over $340,000,000 in fines and have only recouped (since 2013) a incredibly small $156,061.34 from Respondents found to have been in breach of securities laws in the province. This is not even .0004590 cents on the dollar!  Tell us again how this government organization is protecting the people of this wonderful province of British Columbia?   These are your government officials that have put these people in charge – if you or I had this little success doing our jobs we would be terminated instantly!

Now we question – HOW DOES BRENDA LEONG COMMAND A SALARY OF $500,000 PER YEAR WHEN FAILING MISERABLY IN DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF HER JOB?    When looking at the list, we can see several Executives in charge of BC’s universities that are making far less than 1/2 of what Leong brings into her home.  How is this possible?   And who has made this decision to pay her this enormous salary?   WAKE UP CHRISTY CLARK!

And to give you an idea of how much she is overpaid – ONLY 0.7% of BC’s WORKFORCE MADE MORE THAN $250,000 IN 2015-2016.   She is making double that!

As mentioned, it is time for change with these failing regulators and certainly time to look at the grossly over payment to a woman that is NOT doing her job – including standing up for her Staff and answering damn emails questioning her Staff’s actions.

This is very unfortunate!

bc-salaries-final

Source:  Integrity BC Facebook Page (as at October 14, 2016)

BCSC INVESTIGATOR ELIZABETH CHAN ADMITS TO ASSUMING KEY EVIDENCE BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Despite  BCSC Lead Investigator Elizabeth (“Liz”) Chan admitting she assumed that the Respondents were raising capital, the Panel accepted her testimony and found this portion of the BCSC allegations to have been proven.

And this is despite the FACT that the BCSC brought in a witness that agreed with the Respondent – that the funds were a loan and NOT an investment.

Staff had the onus to bring valid, compelling evidence before the Panel. Wharram (who has no legal training) Chan admit that she assumed vital details that caused the Executive Director to issue portion of the Notice of Hearing against Wharram…

Yet the same Panel ruled the Executive Director proved “on the Balance of Probabilities” that the allegations were accurate.    How is the compelling evidence?

The following attachment are part of the written Submissions on Liability the Respondents wrote in defense of this portion of the allegations.

We would formally like to ask BCSC Chair Brenda Leong, new Executive Director Peter Brady, any member of the Panel, and ANYONE else at the BCSC how you can be so incompetent and allow the quality of work Chan has exhibited during her investigation.   Who’s in charge of the hen house?

Click on the link… Chan Assumes

LAWYER C. PAIGE LEGGAT TRIES TO EXTORT THE RESPONDENTS INTO ADMITTING ALLEGATIONS?

The Respondents sent their time-sensitive Settlement proposal to Staff on November 7, 2013.   Finally after 7 weeks of waiting the Respondents were very eager to receive the reply from the Litigator at the BCSC.     As the attachment was opened, eagerness turned to frustration as Staff indicated they did not even take the Settlement Agreement to the Executive Director for approval (or even a review/negotiation).  The reason the offer was time sensitive is the builder and lender were anxious to move the project forward in a timely fashion.   There was NO reason ever given why Staff took this amount of time to reply.

Instead Staff indicated the only way they would take a Settlement Offer to the Executive Director is IF pleaded guilty to their long list of allegations and agreed to pay $5.8 million dollars in fines and disgorgement.   The BCSC website indicates all Settlements must be paid in full at the time the Settlement Agreement is agreed to – this was impossible for the Respondents, let alone the FACT that many of the allegations in the Notice of Hearing were NOT accurate.

ON WHAT PLANET DOES A PERSON HAVE TO PLEAD GUILTY TO ALL ALLEGATIONS OUTLINED IN A NOTICE OF HEARING AND THEN PAY A “RANSOM” OF NEARLY $6 MILLION DOLLARS JUST TO GET THEIR SETTLEMENT OFFER NEGOTIATED?   THIS IS BORDERLINE EXTORTION!

The parties could have avoided a long, lengthy, expensive hearing IF Staff Litigators and the Executive Director would have even looked at the proposal and actually thought about the investors.   In hindsight, it appears that the BCSC did not have the investors best interest at stake as their website promotes – nor was it a fair system for all parties.  Please read for yourself, the reply from Staff and ask “WHY DID THE BCSC NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EVEN REVIEW THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEN SO MUCH WAS AT STAKE FOR THE INVESTORS?”   

bcsc-5-questions

We encourage anyone affected by the Settlement Offer not even being put onto the Executive Directors desk for a review to contact the BCSC at 1-604-899-5600 during regular business hours.  Maybe you can get an answer – the Respondents have certainly not been able to do so.

[Click on the link…]

December 30, 2013 – LEGATT to RESPONDENTS

AND THE LIBERAL TRIFECTA IS COMPLETE!

At the beginning of the week, we blogged alleged fraudster, Paul Oei was in tight with BC Premier Christy Clark, yesterday it went up the ladder to MP Joe Peschisolido, and today we have reached the pinnacle with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Reporter Sam Cooper from the Vancouver Sun/Province now reports  Oei’s company was the listed sponsor for a July 2015 Richmond Chamber of Commerce lunch featuring Trudeau.

paul-oei5

Paul Oei  with soon-to-be Prime Minister Justin Trudeau                            Source: Vancouver Sun Media/Facebook

According to Cooper, “Photos obtained by Postmedia show Paul Oei breaking bread with Trudeau at the luncheon’s head table, and introducing Trudeau to the sold-out crowd. Oei and Trudeau embraced before the future prime minister addressed a packed room of Richmond business and political figures.”

It leaves one to question why Trudeau is out west “breaking bread” with Oei in July 2015 when according to records, Oei’s legal problems with his investors started sometime in (or sooner) June 2014 – some 13 months earlier.    It is more than likely this lawsuit started the subsequent investigation by the Brenda Leong and her people at the BCSC.

We are left wondering why Justin’s handlers do not conduct reviews of people (he will have direct contact with) at social events of this magnitude.

 

 

 

NOT A GOOD TIME TO BE A LIBERAL IN CANADA? PESCHISOLIDO NAMED IN LAWSUIT

In a story that keeps unfolding, a Federal Liberal Party member has been named in a lawsuit surrounding the allegations of fraud against Mr, Paul Oei.   In a recent article in the Vancouver Province reporter Sam Cooper now indicates that Federal MP Joe Peschisolido (who before being elected to Parliament in 2015 was a lawyer) represented Oei at the time when the alleged fraud occurred.  And as a result, Peschisolido has been named in the lawsuit filed by former investors indicating Peschisolido was negligent with their funds being held in trust when he released them to Oei.   It is important to note that neither Oei or Peschisolido have had their day in court and the allegations have not yet been proven.

paul-oei4

Joe Peschisolido (left) and Paul Oei                                                                       Source:  Facebook/Vancouver Province

According to his website at http://www.pcbslaw.ca,  Peschisolido founded his firm in 2006 (the same year he was called to the bar) with an emphasis on… 1. Asian companies establishing presence in Canada, 2. Buying and selling business in BC Canada,  3. Investing in Canadian companies,  4. Foreign direct investments into BC Canada,  5. BCPNP investment and skill immigration,  6. Corporate Intellectual Property Protection,  and 7. Corporate advisory, commercial transactions, mergers / acquisitions, joint ventures and capital raising. 

Wow, what an interesting area of law to focus on!   And then while you are at it become a elected Member of Parliament.  Could this be a “ONE-STOP SHOP” for all your investment/fundraising needs?  At a glance – Peschisolido reeks from here to high heaven!

As we indicated yesterday – this story is about to explode!!

CHRISTY CLARK (AND FELLOW BC LIBERALS) IN TIGHT WITH ALLEGED FRAUDSTER?

Talk about egg on your face……

On September 26, 2016, the British Columbia Securities Commission brought allegations of fraud against a prominent Vancouver business man, Paul Oei.  The Vancouver media went immediately to press with the story and displayed a picture of Mr. Oei and his wife they found on the internet.  We assume that the writer of the article (Sam Cooper) went to the internet and googled Mr. Oei’s name extensively.

When we googled Mr. Oei’s name; one of the first pictures we came across was shocking to say the least.  In the photo of Mr. Oei,  we find local BC Liberal Party MLA John Yap, and none other than “Crooked” Christy Clark with her arm around him….presenting Mr. Oei with some sort of an award at a high-end gala.

Why would Cooper not print this picture of Oei with the Premier Clark and Yap if he really wanted an audience for his story?  The Premier and an MLA in a photo op with an alleged fraudster and this would not be news worthy?

 

christy-and-paul

Source: RHF YouTube page

It is alleged Mr. Oei, via one of his corporations, defrauded investors of $6.9 million dollars.  The BCSC is going to set dates for a hearing at a later time.   In a Richmond Hospital Foundation YouTube video (that was deleted today from YouTube) it shows Mr. Oei donating $50,000 to the foundation in 2012.

The fact that the Richmond Hospital Foundation has scrubbed the YouTube video only hours after the BCSC went public with their allegations would suggest they are not willing, ready, or able to stand by this man whether the allegations are accurate or not….and shows they are immediately distancing themselves from him during what will undoubtedly be a very difficult time in his life.

We can only assume that the allegations against Mr. Oei (the specific number of $6.9 million and allegations of money spent on personal items including donations) were investigated much more efficiently (and accurately) by the Commission investigators than in our matter – and we sincerely hope the investigations into Oei was NOT completed by the alleged inept Lead Investigator Liz Chan!!   Otherwise, they are going down a very slippery slope SPECIFICALLY blaming someone for something they may not have done.   Mr. Oei appears to be very well connected in the Vancouver community and will undoubtedly receive support from many – perhaps even Christy Clark and MLA John Yap – as he mounts his defense.

UPDATE: As at 11:00PM 27/09/2016

Surprisingly….Reporter Sam Cooper has NOW made the connection between Oei and Christy Clark and MLA John Yap with a very damning update to his original story.   Judging from the picture in his update, it would appear Premier Christy Clark very much appreciated Mr. Oei’s generous donations….just look at that million dollar smile!

This story is about to explode on the BC Liberals!  Just think of how ironic this is –  BC Leader Christy Clark appoints personnel at the BCSC who in turn appoint Staff to investigate alleged fraudsters who in turn show up at her fundraisers to give her money?   Truly mind-blowing!

STORY HERE

paul-oei3

Source:  MLA John Yap Twitter account/Vancouver Sun

 

QUESTIONS FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE BCSC!

We have been contacted by former investors of FCC and DCF and have been asked questions regarding the Settlement that was presented to the Staff Litigators.    They want to know why the Settlement Offer we talk about earlier in this blog was not accepted by the BCSC – and why Staff insisted that the only way they would allow a Settlement to occur was IF we agreed to ALL the allegations in the Notice of Hearing, issued on June 14, 2013….and then agreed to pay nearly $6 million in fines and restitution.    The lawyer who made these statements was C. Paige Leggat – a simple $100,000 a year lawyer who resigned after we alleged they manipulated the main document in the hearing.

To all of you that have made contact with us – please call or email the Executive Director of the BCSC at the number/email located below and ask them these 5 questions:    bcsc-5-questions

It is time these people answer why the investors are not currently receiving money from the development of the Deercrest Townhomes.  You are entitled to answers from these people!   They are public servants!

deercrest-unit

Deercrest Unit in 2016

WHY DOES BRENDA LEONG REFUSE TO SUPPORT HER STAFF?

Again, we have reached out to the Chair of the BCSC (alleging wrong doing of her Staff) and she will not respond!

Neglecting her JOB is something we hope is remembered the next time her $500,000 per year salary is renewed by the BC government!  Ignoring emails questioning her Staff has been going on for months.   What kind of a boss does not (at least) defend her Staff?   She has literally left them out to dry!   It appears Ms Leong only cares about her own agenda down on Georgia Street.    Shame on her!

You can say what you want about me but at least I would have defended my Staff against allegations of wrong-doing (if I truly believed they were false allegations).

We feel it is time she comes out of the little hole she is hiding in and deal with the many questions she is facing regarding the actions of her Staff!

letter-to-brenda-leong-september-9-2016

Brenda    BCSC’S CHAIR BRENDA LEONG

Source: Chen Zhiqiang

DID BCSC STAFF LAWYERS C. PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE MANIPULATE EVIDENCE?

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Panel Chair instructed both parties to complete Written Submission on Liability.  These documents argued the points brought up during the hearing and gave the parties the ability to prove (or disprove) the allegations brought forward in the Notice of Hearing.

One of the key documents involved in the hearing was the Offering Memorandum(s) (“OM’s”) used by the Respondents to raise capital.  For those that invested with the Respondents, you will remember this document as one you were given at the time you invested.    The BCSC (and other securities jurisdictions) allow an OM Exemption when raising capital in the securities market.

On May 16, 2014, the Respondents received the Executive Directors Submissions on Liability and began reviewing the points brought forward by Staff.  We read them from cover to cover a couple of different times and soon noticed something very particular….

Unfortunately, at paragraph #10 of their submissions, Staff resorted to physically changing the appearance of the document.   We feel they did this to suite their theory (and main allegation) that the Respondents did not forward the MAJORITY of the funds to the Developer.   This was the big $5.45 million fraud allegation that was ultimately dismissed by the Panel.   Let’s take a look at paragraph #10 as it appears in their submissions….

Staff's Submission on Liability - paragraph 10And now, for those of you that don’t have the FCC or DCF Offering Memorandums in front of you, this is how the document looked – keep in mind this document was relied upon at all times to raise capital for the projects, and Staff were suppose to have the onus of proving the case as alleged in the Notice of Hearing:

FCC OM's as they Actually Appear Continue reading DID BCSC STAFF LAWYERS C. PAIGE LEGGAT AND OLUBODE FAGBAMIYE MANIPULATE EVIDENCE?

“REGULATORS HAVE DROPPED THE BALL” SAYS FORMER COMMISSIONER

Interesting read from the Insurance and Investment Journal after they had conducted an interview with the former Commissioner of the Ontario Securities Commission, Glorianne Stromberg.   Ms. Stromberg does not hold back and gives her thoughts on the current state of the Canadian Securities Administrators.

““I don’t want to be unduly critical of the regulators, but they have dropped the ball,” she says, adding, “Their mandate is investor protection and yet the investor, the individual investor, is the last person on the totem pole that they ever think about”

She goes on to add, “They hold themselves out as offering advice, but it’s all a sales transaction. Their compensation structures are designed to force those so-called advisors or representatives to deal in those products (proprietary products or those underwritten by the company), or they’re without a job. They’re setting up irreconcilable conflicts of interest on all sides of every transaction.” It’s a situation she says most investors know very little about. “Then they talk about managing conflicts. ‘There’s nothing wrong with conflicts.’ But you know what? There is. There’s a lot wrong with them.”

Despite the article being written in November 2012, it still rings true in today’s Canadian Securities markets.  The system truly is broken and in need of a large overhaul.

IS ANYONE LISTENING?

We find many different articles across the internet that different individuals (both everyday citizens and members of the press) have written with regards to their opinion of the BCSC.  We found this one today…

Strangulation by regulation: The death knell for B.C. jobs

An open letter to all members of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia from the Venture Capital Markets Association | August 13, 2015

Venture capital is all about speculative investing, innovation and determination for discovery leading to jobs

B.C. has a well-earned reputation for raising venture capital, particularly with companies involved in mineral exploration, where B.C. companies have accounted for about 60% of worldwide activity. Many of the major mines in the world were discovered by Vancouver-based junior exploration companies raising risk capital from speculators. All significant mines in B.C. were initially financed by equity raises subscribed by speculators.

This industry is now in a death spiral because regulators are effectively killing the B.C.-based support industries that have been responsible for creating thousands of jobs in B.C. and around the world.

This industry is now in a death spiral because regulators are effectively killing the B.C.-based support industries that have been responsible for creating thousands of jobs in B.C. and around the world. The exploration financing mechanism based in Vancouver, at one time generating over $300 million annually, is in full retreat.

This strangulation by regulation is led by:

  • BCSC—the B.C. Securities Commission
  • IIROC—the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada
  • CMRA—the Capital Markets Regulatory Authority
  • the banks that control the major stock exchanges (TSX, TSXV) and have shifted the business focus from risk capital equity raises to wealth preservation

The BCSC, in its current form, is a well-meaning but destructive force:

  • a Crown corporation supposedly reporting to B.C.’s minister of finance
  • receives no financial support from the provincial treasury
  • generates income from fees and fines set by its regulations
  • returns no funds to the provincial treasury
  • 80% of its funds go to salaries and premises
  • “growth” is achieved by creating new regulations and new fee structures
  • contracts out its obligations of oversight of brokerage firms to Ontario’s IIROC
  • rules set by IIROC are killing Canada’s independent brokerage industry, with no regard for investors who may choose some “high-risk/high-reward” speculation

Who is mis-calling the shots?

The BCSC leaders comprise lawyers, a retired economics professor and an accountant—a major absence of expertise in the industries that built British Columbia. There is nobody representing venture capital or mining exploration, when in fact those industries should be controlling their futures.

The irrelevant national regulator

Efforts to create a national regulator have too many obstacles to be of help in this struggle for venture capital to survive the current regulator-generated problems.

Stock exchanges

The TSX and TSXV are Toronto-based and bank-controlled. The TSXV has evolved into a bureaucratic, dysfunctional organization, operating as an unelected board of directors, inflicting its own set of moving target rules on its listed issuers.

Brutalization and extinction of the retail investor

Piling on of regulatory and pseudo-regulatory bureaucracies forces issuers to raise millions of dollars for payment of regulation costs in addition to the constructive capital they require. The BCSC and the Alberta Securities Commission are empowered to regulate the TSXV, but choose not to do so.

Ontario rules

Further compounding the problem, the TSXV continues to list hundreds of non-compliant companies with negative working capital, damaging efforts by others to go forward.

The vision

B.C. is capable of re-establishing itself as a major venture capital centre and must do so or B.C. will lose its position as the world centre of mineral exploration:

  • A restructured, leaner BCSC should report to a new independent board controlled by members who reflect the industry
  • The BCSC should take responsibility for, and control of, its obligations
  • IIROC should be replaced with a BCSC-empowered industry board
  • The BCSC should become pro-active
  • Become responsive to the brokerage industry
  • Actively seek a public exchange to locate in the province
  • Budget for marketing B.C. as a world centre for venture capital
  • Market listing in B.C. to international venture capital centres
  • Focus educational programs on how venture capital works
  • Push to expand the passport system with other jurisdictions

VCMA Advisory Board:

Don Mosher, B&D Capital Inc, don@venturefunding.biz

Joe Martin, Cambridge House International Inc, jmartin@cambridgehouse.com

Brian Ashton, Eagle Advisory Group, brianashton16@gmail.com

Tony Simon CPA CA, Seguro Consulting Inc, tony.whistler@gmail.com

Lawrence Page QC, Manex Resource Group Inc, lpage@mnxltd.com

John Kaiser, Kaiser Research Online, jkaiser@kaiserresearch.com

The Venture Capital Markets Association

Read ‘Scrap IIROC, fix the BCSC’: The Venture Capital Markets Association offers a plan to save junior financings.

STILL NO REPLY FROM “CROOKED CHRISTY CLARK”

For what ever reason, BC Premier Christy Clark continues to keep her head in the sand and refuses to respond to our numerous emails.   We sent another Email to Christy Clark – August 2, 2016 and she will not respond.   What is she hiding?

Christy Clark Meme

We do have a significant meeting this week with someone who indicates they will listen.   We will keep you posted!

Thanks to all that have sent messages of support!

UPDATE: BCSC VIGILANTE VIDEO OBTAINED THROUGH FOI REQUEST

As indicated in an earlier blog – as part of an FOI request, we asked the BCSC to provide a copy of the original Fraud Fighter video they launched on November 6, 2014 as part of their renewal of their “award winning” campaign against securities fraud.

Jean #3

As you will see, at the time we were very concerned with the overall message sent out to the average investor – the video shows a character “Jean” doing a punch of stupid gymnastic moves in a park and ends with her going to the residence of “David” where it implies she physically attacked him.

Now, before you watch the current version, we want you to watch the version we saw for the first time on Nov 6, 2014 (and that was just obtained via a FOI request) – this was AFTER our hearing but before final oral submissions were made on November 21, 2014 in our matter.

ORIGINAL VIDEO:      https://youtu.be/rzoz-E4T1u8    (Please watch now)

As  said, this video was launched by BCSC Chair Brenda Leong at a conference – a copy of her speech where she calls the video “fun” and “entertaining” can be found here:

Brenda Leong Speech – November 6, 2014

On November 21, 2014, we appeared in front of the Panel at the hearing and before we began our arguments we opened with the following:

WHARRAM: Before I begin today I would like your permission to read a brief statement I’d like to make for the record. Can I do that?

THE CHAIR: I don’t know what you’re about to say, so I don’t really have any comment about that, so carry on.

WHARRAM: In the last week I’ve been approached at my residence by nothing short of what I would call a hoodlum. The hoodlum in no certain terms told me they wanted their friend’s money back that I scammed. I have made a police report of the incident with a Constable Nishin (phonetic) of the Chilliwack RCMP and have been issued a police file number. Recently I had an opportunity to watch what the British Columbia Securities Commission in another glamorous press release calls an entertaining video. In the video the main character, the mother of a victim of fraud, attacks an alleged fraudster with physical violence that I will call a vigilante act. The video is a sick, pathetic attempt to make the people of BC aware of securities fraud. This would be equivalent of the Vancouver Police Homicide Department making an entertaining video promoting family members of murder victims to attack an alleged perpetrator. On November 6, 2014 Brenda Leong, the chair of the British Securities Commission, calls the fraud fighter video fun in a speech that she did at the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s 2014 national conference. I’m concerned if anything happens to my family or myself, I think this video is — and if anyone hasn’t seen it in this room I encourage you to see it, it is actually sick, made me sick to my stomach when I first seen it. I just want to bring it to the panel’s attention, public’s attention. I think it’s important that people like myself are protected out there. Thank you.”

Source: November 21, 2014 Hearing Transcript

By the time we got back to Chilliwack at about 6 PM that night the video had been scrubbed with a message saying a new version would be available shortly.     A few days later, the following video was put up on the BCSC’s YouTube page where it remains today.   This is a pathetic waste of money…of time…and shows what the people at the BCSC seem to stand for – encouraging people to take the law into their own hands is NEVER warranted.   It is hard to believe that in an office full of lawyers not one of them said, “Hey, I think this is a little much, maybe we shouldn’t have characters taking the law into their own hands and attacking others at their home.”    

 Here is the revised version that was slapped together and re-posted back onto their YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aWiyj65aIk

What an extreme waste of money!

The overall theme at the BCSC is becoming more and more apparent on a daily basis – and it is time that people in this Province wake up to their actions!   Call the BCSC and find out who was responsible for producing this horrible video campaign – you have a right to know!

604-899-6500 in their main line!

SHAME ON YOU CHRISTY CLARK!

Email to Christy Clark – July 18, 2016

As you see by the link above, we reached out to the Premier of British Columbia, Ms. Christy Clark, in another attempt to see if she would get to bottom of our allegations against the BCSC.   We continued to be very courteous towards Ms. Clark and show her respect towards what must be a very difficult time – this despite her office not responding to any attempt we have made to get answers.   Answers that are very important to the 250 investors (and their families) that put hard earned dollars in with our companies.    As we have stated before, we are NOT deflecting away from some of our actions but there is a BIG difference between the allegations that the BCSC brought forward and reality.

This BC government wants the people of BC to think they are doing a wonderful job – this Tweet from the BC Finance Minister late last week boasts they have successfully manufactured a $730 million dollar surplus for the fiscal 2015/2016 year.

Surplus

But, unfortunately for this same BC Liberal government, lets look at some other facts released on the same day as Mr. De jong’s rhetoric propaganda hit the street…

TOP 10 FACTS THE BC GOVERNMENT CHOSE NOT TO HIGHLIGHT IN TODAY’S RELEASE OF THE 2015-16 PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

1. The provincial debt has risen from $45.15 billion in 2011 to $65.29 billion in 2016. But at least the budget is balanced. 🙂

2. The BC government’s contractual obligations have risen from $80.17 billion in 2011 to $101.4 billion in 2016.

Christy
3. John Dyble, Premier Christy Clark’s former deputy minister and head of the public service, was bumped out of his spot as the highest-paid public employee in the B.C. government by Craig James, Clerk of the B.C. Legislature.

Dyble who had held the spot for three years in a row took home $323,416 last year, while James earned $331,825 up from the $257,988 he was paid for the fiscal year ending 31 March 2013.

4. The long-term debt for the Transportation Investment Corporation, operators of the Port Mann bridge, has taken a wee jump from $2.029 billion in 2013 to $2.885 billion in 2016. The corporation lost $82.466 million last year.

What the government should really do is put these folk in charge of another major infrastructure project, like the Massey Tunnel replacement. Oh, right, they already have. 🙂

5. On top of their salaries, the provincial cabinet billed an additional $308,405 in capital city living allowances. Premier Christy Clark was the lowest at $1,216 and top spot went to Peter Fassbender at $20,064.

Before jumping to the conclusion that Clark is a bargain, keep in mind she commutes daily to Victoria when the legislature is in session (by air).

6. The cabinet billed $929,486 for travel last year, with three breaking the $70,000 mark: Bill Bennett ($72,682), Mike de Jong ($78,090) and John Rustad ($80,122).

7. Deputy ministers pulled down $8,625,809 in salaries last year and billed $864,417 in travel. In 2011, they earned $8,580,383 and billed $786,168 for travel.

Top three travellers were Wesley H. Shoemaker ($46,043), Athana Mentzelopoulos ($49,878) and David J. Nikolejsin ($55,416).

8. The number of full–time equivalent (FTE) employees at taxpayer–supported Crown corporations and agencies (see thread for list) rose from 4,423 in 2011 to 4,803 in 2016. It had been 3,764 in 2006.

9. The government paid out $3,823,728 in severance settlements last year and $537,721 in grievance settlements.

10. Bob Plecas was paid $76,402 for his report on the Ministry of Children and Family Development last year

Maximus BC Health was paid $62,371,509 to administer the MSP billing system.

And Canada’s Big 5 accounting firms did alright: Grant Thornton ($714,664), Pricewaterhousecoopers ($1,263,841), Ernst & Young ($1,507,877), KPMG ($2,625,347) and Deloitte ($25,674,832).

Source:  IntegrityBC Facebook page (July 21, 2016) 

Speaking of Facebook, we also came across this page this week – just by glancing over a small portion of the page we think it is safe to say MANY people are fed up with the BC Liberals!!   Glad to see many are waking up to some of the horrible decisions being made in this Province and that the propaganda they are trying to spew (surplus, great economy, etc.) are being exposed!

We understand running a Province like BC is a monumental task and that Ms. Clark is more than likely pulled daily into many different directions.   However, the facts of the matter are we have hundreds of former investors in our company that are now forced to sit on the sidelines because the BCSC came to the table with an allegation that was factually inaccurate.    They have not addressed our allegation that Staff at the BCSC manipulated evidence to prove their case and they did not even look at our Settlement Agreement (see other postings in this blog) that would have seen these same investors participate in a valid real estate project WITHOUT the involvement of WKL, FCC, DCF or myself personally.

This is NOT acceptable by ANY public servant!  Time to WAKE UP, Christy!

 

OPPORTUNITY FOR JOHN HORGAN LOST IN NEXT ELECTION!

Because we were NOT getting replies to our letters from BCSC Chair Brenda Leong, Premier Christy Clark or Finance Minister Michael De jong’s offices – we decided to write to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. John Horgan) hoping that he would have the courage to get the answers we were looking for.    Horgan is the leader of the British Columbia New Democratic Party and an MLA for the constituency of Juan de Fuca.

We thought as Leader of the Opposition, he would be more than willing to assist in getting us answers from the BC Liberal Party – after all, is this not one of the roles the Leader of the Opposition would be in charge of?   Our letter can be found here:

Letter to John Horgan – July 4, 2016 – REDACTED

But, unfortunately, Horgan looks like he would rather keep his “head in the sand” and not get involved in representing the people of BC in matters they incur with the BC Liberals and the BCSC.    I do know he has received the 3 emails I have sent to him as we do receive Auto Replies to our emails indicating they have received our emails:

EMAIL Replies from Horgan Office

Looking at his Facebook page, we can see that since June 27, 2016 (the last 2 weeks) he has shown public support for:

  1. First Nations
  2. The Pride Movement / Transgender Rights
  3. BC Housing Prices
  4. The Muslim Community
  5. Supported the Williams Lake Stampede Parade

Why is there no support for the hundreds of people affected by the Staff at the BCSC not doing their jobs properly?   Why not even a simple reply telling us you would look into it?

Is Mr. Horgan just another “all talk politician with no bite?”  We are beginning to think so.   After looking at Alberta’s recent crash (blamed by most as the fault of Premier Notley)  remind me again why any one would vote NDP in the upcoming election?

WILL LEONG STILL BE ON DE JONG’S CHRISTMAS CARD LIST?

On July 7, 2016, we received an email addressed to BC’s Finance Minister – the Hon. Michael De jong.   The email was written by the former Director (Peter Harris) of U-Go Brands – a company that has had issues with the BCSC for the past 2-3 years.

BC-Finance-Minister-Mike-De-Jong     Finance Minister Michael De jong

Source:  Apnaroots.com

It is very apparent that Mr. Harris just wants to have a conversation with BCSC Chair Brenda Leong to discuss the issues surrounding his treatment from the Staff at the BCSC.   He has sent dozens of emails, has tried to call her, has filed formal charges with the RCMP, and has tried to get politicians (the Hon. Christy Clark, Mr. De jong, and even Prime Minister Justin Trudeau) to hear his voice.   But to no avail!

Her ignoring him has led to frustration which has seemed to boil over with his July 7 email to BC Finance Minister.

After reading Mr. Harris’s scathing email, we decided to write an email to Brenda Leong – after all, it appears all the issues people are currently having with the BCSC revolve around her decision to not respond to people that are looking for answers from her regarding the actions of her Staff.    While Mr. Harris emails are of a different tone and demeanor than ours, the message is still the same – WE ALL JUST WANT ANSWERS!   We feel our emails have been polite, candid, and to the point but to date, she has failed miserably to do this portion of her job.

Mr. Harris’s email is found here – along with my email to the same parties that Mr. Harris CC’d his email to:

Hon. Michael De jong emails – July 7, 2016

NOTE: We have redacted some of the wording of Mr. Harris’s email for legal reasons.  We have no business and/or knowledge of the allegations made by Mr. Harris against Mr. De jong’s personal life.

GLOBE AND MAIL NAILS IT!

In a recent article in Canada’s national newspaper, the Globe and Mail,  they candidly discuss self-regulation (and the problems incurred) with such agencies in Canada – this would include the BCSC.

We will cut and paste of portion of the article and highlight some very important sections.  The article states inter alia…

“The Real Estate Services Act gave the Real Estate Council the mandate to “uphold and protect the public interest in relation to the conduct and integrity of its licensees.” But the real estate profession is not the only profession that was given the right to self-regulate its members.

In B.C. alone, foresters, lawyers, architects, land surveyors, engineers, social workers, chiropractors, dentists, nurses, opticians, optometrists, physical therapists, doctors, psychologists, veterinarians, notaries and other professions have governing bodies established by legislation that are required to license their members, regulate their professions and exercise their powers in the public interest, rather than in the specific interest of their members.

But what is the public interest? In short, it’s putting the interest of the public ahead of the specific interest of the people and the profession being regulated. By virtue of the practices described in the independent report on B.C.’s real estate industry, the public interest was not being protected by the council, despite the group’s legal obligation to do so. The government rightly acted to restore public confidence in an industry where there was a loss of public trust.

“The real estate sector has had 10 years to get it right on self-regulation and they haven’t,” Ms. Clark said. “The point of regulation is to protect people, to protect consumers.”

This action may be a shot across the bow for other regulatory bodies in Canada that are charged with the licensing and regulation of their professions, as well as disciplining their members when there is misconduct. Every self-regulated profession needs to keep in mind that the public interest must be given paramount attention. Otherwise, they risk the same fate as the Real Estate Council of B.C.”         -END OF ARTICLE-

We find Christy Clark’s comments very profound (highlighted above) – we wonder if we can hold her to these words – “THE POINT OF REGULATION IS TO PROTECT PEOPLE, TO PROTECT CONSUMERS”.

We agree Christy – we agree!!

WILL THE CHILEANS COME KNOCKING ON DOORS IN BC?

Today we received an emailed Press Release from Mr. Brent Johnson (“Johnson”) – he is the President and CEO of Mountainstar Gold Inc. and has had MANY issues with the BCSC as well.   We have written previously in this blog with some of the details on their matter.

The email touches on a very important “win” they have incurred after some 5 years of litigation.  This new decision by a Chilean court overrules all past decisions and as Johnson states, “…ends corrupt behavior of the bureaucrats in the Chilean government.”

HERE’S THE KEY WITH RESPECT TO THE CANADIAN CONNECTION 

Why this is a huge win here in Canada is because lawyers in Chile are now indicating they WILL be calling any and all witnesses, including many Staff at….you guessed it….the infamous BRITISH COLUMBIA SECURITIES COMMISSION.

Johnson indicates Romolo Di Fonzo (Lead Investigator at the BCSC) and Shawn McColm (Senior Compliance Counsel at the BCSC) are up first and will have their subpoenas shortly – forcing them to appear in Chile to answer many hard questions regarding their actions.   He then promises “…about six more (staff) from the BCSC which include Brenda Leong, the Chair of the Commission” and other VERY high profile Canadians will then be subpoenaed to appear in front of the same court.

Does this explain why Paul Bourque (the former Executive Director of the BCSC who took a job in Ontario) and Teresa Mitchell-Banks (former Director of Enforcement at the BCSC whom was fired and seems to have dropped of the face of the earth), among others, have all left the BCSC?   Who knows – there seems to be so many secrets down on Georgia Street.

This has ALL the makings of finally shaking up the perceived issues at BCSC – if the allegations from Mountainstar are proven in a Chilean Court the BCSC will be rocked to their foundation.   And when they fall, inquiries will surely be launched into other matters – including our allegation that Staff at the BCSC manipulated evidence in their written submissions.

Staff are ONLY allowed to hide  behind the BC Securities Act (immunity from prosecution)  IF they act in good faith while completing their job assignments.   Manipulating evidence in an attempt to make a defendant look guilty is CERTAINLY not acting in good faith!

Well….Mr. Fagbamiye, are we ever going to go out for that beer so you can tell me why you did it???   I will even let you buy on your BCSC expense account!

GOVERNMENT AGENCY PROTECTING GOVERNMENT AGENCY!

What happens when you complain to the Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia (“OIPC”) regarding the actions of the BCSC? NOTHING!   And what happens when the OIPC office even admits in writing that the BCSC did not respond to the FOI request in the time allowed under the FIPPA Act?   NOTHING!

As some of you have probably read earlier in this blog, the FOI Staff at the BCSC has until June 6, 2016 to reply to our request for information.   They dated their letter June 7, 2016 and sent it to me on June 8, 2016 – after I had officially complained to the OIPC office via email.

On June 14, 2016, we sent a formal complaint wanting to know what was the penalty for breaching the FIPPA Act in British Columbia.    After weeks of not hearing back, we again sent another email (a second request) on July 3, 2016.   These emails can be found here:

Emails to FOI Office – June 14, 2016 and July 3, 2016

Today (July 5, 2016) we received an email back from the OIPC office which thankfully confirmed everything we complained about – they even conclude that Staff at the BCSC did not respond in the time allocated of 30 days.

However, as you can see, they conclude their letter by stating,

“With respect to your request that BCSC’s non-compliance be recorded, our letter to you dated June 9, 2016 is our confirmation that BCSC did not meet its statutory obligation to respond within the timeframe required by FIPPA. If BCSC had complied with FIPPA our office would not have written that letter.

In summary, the OIPC is unable to levy any punishment in this matter and no further action will be taken.”

Letter from FOI Office – July 4, 2016

As always – it seems there are always two sets of rules in this Province!   Why do they have the FIPPA Act if Staff at the BCSC are able to bend, twist, and outright mismanage its content?    When they don’t want to disclose information under a FOI request they sure point to the Act as a reference without delay!  Why is it different when we point the finger at them?

Patrick Egan (Director in Investigations) even admits in his letter the OIPC “is unable to levy any punishment in this matter…” and we want to know why? IF YOU DON’T HAVE A REMEDY FOR THOSE THAT BREACH THE FIPPA ACT…MAYBE IT’S TIME YOU DO!    Have you ever thought about that?? Maybe it is time for changes….and those that breach the FIPPA Act are held accountable.

It is now unfortunate –  the wording in Egan’s letter allows future breaches by government agencies to do so knowing there in NOTHING the OIPC office can (or will) do about it!   What a shame!

TIME TO WAKE UP BC!!