BCSC – BCSC Truth Movement

H. RODERICK ANDERSON – A .181 HITTER IN THE BIG LEAGUES?

When one encounters legal issues the normal process is to hire a lawyer to defend against allegations. Many people look to the internet to search for a lawyer that specializes in aspect of law that matches the offence they have been charged with. With respect to security issues and breaches of securities law here in British Columbia – there are a few so called ‘white collar expert lawyers’ at a variety of law firms scattered mainly throughout the Vancouver area. Very easily, one can find these so called experts records in a hearing room by looking at at legal decisions and findings on the British Columbia Securities Commission website or online.

These lawyers reputations and/or accreditations are routinely displayed on websites like www.bestlawyers.com where lawyers can literally be nominated as a “Best Lawyer” by their peers. Their website states, “Recognition by Best Lawyers is based entirely on peer review. Our methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of the quality of legal services. Our belief has always been that the quality of a peer review survey is directly related to the quality of the voters.” (-END-)

Their ‘Process’ of selecting these “cream of the crop” lawyers is clearly outlined on their website:

SOURCE: www.bestlawyer.com

Lexpert – Business of Law appears to be another similar website that hands out accreditations to lawyers in all aspect of law. Their search feature indicates, “The Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory comprises the results of an extensive peer survey. This comprehensive guide to legal talent in Canada identifies both leading lawyers and law firms from across the country.”

H. RODERICK (ROD) ANDERSON OF HARPER GREY LLP

Taking a look at one lawyer in particular, H. Roderick Anderson routinely gets nominated for awards from both Best Lawyers and Lexpert. Most recently (in August 2018) he was recognized as a “Best Lawyer in Canada for 2019″ and in April 2018, Lexpert named him a “2018 Leading Practitioner”. In fact, Lexpert has named H. Roderick Anderson a Leading Practitioner for at least as far back as 2013. He won as well in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. Quite a distinction for a lawyer at any level and I am sure when potential clients go to his firms website and read the News and Knowledge tab, they would come away feeling very confident in his abilty to represent them in a matter before the BCSC. But, lets take a look at Anderson’s track record over those last 5 or so years…

One can easy see Anderson appears to have loss after loss with files argued at the BCSC. And of those losses, at least one of his clients is now in jail. I thought a lawyers job was to win cases and defend their clients in these matters?

Back to websites like bestlawyer.com and Lexpert – we need to question what their criteria truly is. You have a lawyer like Anderson that has won awards (and recommendations) and has only won 18.1% of his cases against the BCSC over the last 5 years. This is equivalent to a baseball player hitting .181 and making the major leagues and then being elected to the all-star game. It would be considered a joke at any level – but not with his peers who have nominated him or the people at Best Lawyer or Lexpert that have supposedly vetted his nominations. How can a lawyer that has only won 2 cases in the last 5 years at the BCSC be considered a Leading Practitioner?

QUESTION: Do agencies like Best Lawyer and Lexpert not have the audacity to truly vet the records of the lawyers that win their awards and recommedations?

Something to think about….that is for sure!

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

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….

And 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:

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

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….

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

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!

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.

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:

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,

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

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?

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

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!

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.

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!

WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING IN THE PROVINCE OF BC?

Christy

As time goes by we are learning so much about the regime in this Province. No reply from Christie Clark’s office, no reply from the FIPPA office with respect to our questions regarding the tardiness of the reply from the BCSC. We did get your typical “there is nothing we can do” letter from Finance Minister Michael De jong’s office which is exactly what we expected! No one is accountable in this Province. We hope people remember this at the time of the next election.

On June 14, 2016, we sent the following letter to the Intake Office (Ms Alison LeDuc) at the FIPPA Office in Victoria, BC. 18 days later, we still have no answers to our questions – let alone even a reply telling us to take a hike! As you can see, our letter is non-aggressive in nature and we have tried to be very polite.

Letter to FOI Office – June 14, 2016

Why are they refusing to reply? Are they protecting fellow government workers at the BCSC? We will keep writing them letters until we have answers! We will go above their heads and get someone who will answer the questions. We will find the truth! We are NOT going away!

IT’S ABOUT TIME YOU PEOPLE WAKE UP AND START DOING THE JOBS YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO!!

FOI REQUEST PROVES OUR BIGGEST FEAR

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!

UPDATE: NO RESPECT FOR FOI DEADLINES

According to the website link for the Office of the Information Information & Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia (“OIPC”), IF the BCSC wanted to extend the time in which they responded to my request under the FIPPA Act, they had to fill out a Time Extension Request and submit that to their office “at least 3 business days before the time limit for responding to the request (as set out in sections 7 and 10 of FIPPA) has expired.” They did not!

We did receive our FOI request on June 8, 2016 – the story of how we received them is truly bizarre and enables us to question the motives and professional misconduct (again) of Staff at the BCSC.

As indicated in a previous blog post, our FOI request was due on June 6, 2016 – and we would assume that means before the close of business.

At 10:48 AM on June 8, 2016, we filed a formal complaint with OIPC demanding to be told when we could expect our FOI request from the BCSC, along with concerns with the blatant lack of respect Staff at the BCSC have shown for the deadlines they must adhere to.

Miraculously, only 30 minutes later at 11:18 AM, an email arrived on our computer from the FOI Analyst at the Commission with the information we requested.

Why do they play these games? We now look to the OIPC staff to determine what sanctions the BCSC will face with regard to this blatant disrespect of their Act. What point is having a deadline if one does not need to abide by them?