Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
Information for Crozier Clients
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 2:14:21 PM

By: To: Roielf

Can you please provide email address. For some reason Rsteeninfo@legalRsteen.sw did not work for me.


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 1:52:26 PM

By: Crozier Customers STOP

I am in the process of working with a few clients from Bank Crozier. I have a large amount of information that will help you as clients make a informed decision.

Through the work and due dillegance of a few clients, this information has been sent to me. Understand this information will clearly show some items you as other clients will want addressed.

I give my promise and word as a legal proffesional that this will be released widely to all offshore publications. I recemend you wait till close of business on monday to make your decision. The information will help you make a informed decision.

Roielf Oberstienwich

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 12:41:54 PM

By: Okke Ornstein

This whole affair reminds me very much about what happened with the Paritate Bank of Latvia a couple of years ago. They too had done God knows what with client funds and then became insolvent. Contrary to Crozier, they let depositors vote between several options about what to do next as I recall it, and they certainly didn't attempt to move funds out of reach of, well, pretty much anyone who would want to touch it - to Nevis of all places.

How do we know what really happened with depositors' money? Was it really unfortunate investments in the stock market, or did they put money in schemes a la "the Vault" in Costa Rica? The fact that Crozier banked for PILL is not very reassuring I would say.

Is someone investigating this already? I haven't read anything substantial on the subject other than what was burried in the sports section as someone here rightfully said. Marchant clearly isn't interested in exposing this thing and we can hardly blame him because Johansson is his friend. But this is a big story waiting to be told.

Okke Ornstein

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 9:38:04 AM

By: why not equal?

Hello !

Question is if 90% are
Why bigger should suffer more?


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 6:36:03 AM

By: hello?

How in hell can anyone that have any kind of sense think that a liquidation is better than a re-construction??? Look at other bank in the Caribbean that has been liquidated, it takes years to get even one dollar, if your lucky you might get a few cents, as the liquidators only object is to be in the bank as long as possible to be able to charges enormous fees.

I heard from a good source that 90% of the clients is not even affected, only 10% of the us has over 10000 dollar.

I agree those negative messages must be from individuals that like to destroy for everybody else.

I trust Bank Crozier, and a YES is best for everybody, it is very clear!


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 5:52:50 PM

By: Aj Deerey

He is a attorney in Sweden and has offices in Barcelona and England.

He also is a client of Bank Crozier (I think) , The problem is his email addy got cut off the end I believe.

I am trying to find it - I had it at one time. All I read was that he was posting some new information. You guys seem to take things to the extreme.


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 4:37:15 PM

By: Cyrille Emery

To Wintonian:
I dont understand your position and I am not trying to mislead anyone on this issue!
Does it bother you that I attract the attention on how the banking system should normally be operating???
1) A bank is a financial institution which receives money from depositors. The latter have the RIGHT to be protected from any misuse of their funds, loss and dilapidation of them. That is why a system of Licence and Supervision have been put into place. Of course depositors are free to opt out of the protection by going into unlicensed or unregulated banks...If you adopt this option, then you'd better leave this forum and dont complain if you are taking for a ride by any offshore financial institution.

2) The ECCB is the central bank for all Caribbean countries which include Grenada and St Lucia, members of the ECCB. The ECCB is in charge of monetary policies and also of the SUPERVISION of banks operating in its jurisdiction, to the exception of the offshore licensed banks (art 41 of the ECCB Act).
All banks listed on the ECCB website are regulated and supervised by the ECCB and have to comply with all the international requirements edicted by IMF, World Bank and Basle Banking Committee... These are very stringent requirements ! I have not heard yet that any of the bank listed on ECCB site have had their licence revoked or being in need of restructuration....

3) The offshore licensed banks are exempt from the ECCB Act (article 41) which means they can carry on the business of bank pretty much as they like...Some are closed by the licensing country when the fraud is too obvious or where there is a reputational hazard or where it is not possible to continue regular banking operations...
BC would never have obtained a banking licence in Spain, Luxemburg with the current structure.They have not tried either as far as I know... They are not even allowed to operate as a bank in the countries where their customers are coming from...Does this simple fact not ring an alert bell to you.

Do I want a run on the bank? Certainly not but the concerns I voice, along with others, should resonate to the ears of Grenada authorities that have the responsiblitiy and OBLIGATION to avoid this!
Do I want BC to succeed in the restructuration? for the sake of customers I wish they could! But with the Nevis trust they are a far cry, to my opinion, from this.
You dont share this opinion, fine by me. Give me a reason why it should succeed this way instead of attacking my credentials!

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 4:16:34 PM

By: Rick

I completely agree. They want me to sign something that has absolutely no information about the trust or if GIFSA approved the reconstruction?

I tried calling GIFSA today but they ask me to call back in an hour and that the people I wanted to talk to were and Bank Crozier. I called back but nobody answered.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 4:11:23 PM

By: New document

Hey !

How about document you got. Do you see more info about Trust:

Where it will be located
Who will manage it
Who will be supervisor
Who will have control over it
How our funds will be protected etc

I dont see it. Dont you think we need more into ?!

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 3:14:09 PM

By: David Marchant

Re. "I haven't read anything substantial on the subject ..."

There are articles about this, at least one of which is "substantial", in our Story Library.

David Marchant

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 2:55:56 PM

By: hahaha....

hahaha...... -do you not understand that Rsteeninfo@legalRsteen.sw (not a real email address), is a competitor of Bank Crozier that would love to see the bank fails.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 3:11:44 AM

By: rene

if you really think bc was/is a "legitimate" bank simply sign the paper they submitted- and:

wait and see!!!

funny to see all these clients depositing huge amounts of money on a tiny caribbean island simply because a bank is "first in offering internet access"!

again: there are more than enough reputable international banks offering professional services OFFSHORE - they are called ubs, baer, cs, deutsche bank, barclays, natwest, vp-bank, bons etc. etc. etc.

... and they all are NOT active on grenada

good luck


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 9:40:40 PM

By: AJ

I have no clue as to what is going on but ............

I also have met with the bank Officials and the operators and the staff of the bank.

I have found them all to be honest and business like. Will this come back to bite me in the ass? time will tell.

As for bashing David? What does that really do? He just runs this joint!

Lets just work together and pull this mess out. Peter is a very very bright guy and I fell he is going to make this work. This is not advice! Make your own decision. but just a view.

This is a old offshore bank (for offshore banks) and it is very important to him. He is not in this banking business for just the money. He loves what he does he made this bank and it is his creation. Do you think he is not going to try and save it.

Give him and chance and if he fails - Feel free to bash the hell out of me for being wrong


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 8:53:29 PM

By: David Marchant

In parting, I do not have the time nor the desire to carry on a 'discussion' with you or anyone about justifying my actions. It is boring for people to read and serves no useful purpose.

This Message Board is intended to be a place where mature people can responsibly exchange information relevant to financial due diligence.

There are plenty of other Message Boards which cater to the lunatic element and allow anyone to post anything about others.

In an attempt to keep this Message Board focused on what I consider to be important, I will delete any messages I consider to be malicious, frivolous or irrelevant and ban the IP addresses of the most serious offenders.

David Marchant

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 8:03:47 PM

By: David Marchant

The 'unknown reasons' are that, based on my considerable experience of you, you are a compulsive liar, driven by malice, hopelessly incompetent when it comes to handling and distributing information and not a journalist in any proper sense of that word.

You are possibly the least reliable source of information that I know and I do not feel comfortable with you publishing negative information about others - whoever they are - on this Message Board because I consider it probable that it is inaccurate and you have an ulterior motive for publishing it.

An indication of how careless you are with information is your implication that the most recent OffshoreAlert story was simply based on an interview with Peter Johansson. That is not accurate and is a sign that you have either not read the article or have a remarkable inability to comprehend information. The controller of the bank was also interviewed for the story, which is what credible journalists do, i.e. obtain information from all sides and report it fairly and accurately.

You can also download a complaint and ruling against Bank Crozier from this site. Just because you can't afford or are unwilling to pay for information does not mean that such information is not available.

Also, there are several articles about the bank going back several months, many of them containing negative references about it from people like Lincoln Fraser. And there was a thread where people were discussing the solvency of Bank Crozier on this Message Board well before it was taken over.

There are plenty of other Message Boards around which will allow anyone to publish anything. I'm sure they will publish your information.

David Marchant

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 7:44:13 PM

By: Okke Ornstein

Re: "There are articles about this, at least one of which is "substantial", in our Story Library."

This is a big story about the collapse of a well known offshore bank and we have not more than one "substantial" story based on an interview with the head of that bank (who, no doubt, has already prepared his own golden parachute as is the rule in cases like this).

Surely, if any other bank or financial institution would collapse or be found insolvent and then attempt to move funds out of reach of anyone to Nevis, David Marchant's newsletter and web site would be publishing on the affair non-stop. Here we have one "substantial" article in all these months this has been going on.

I'm not blaming Marchant, because as I said, Johansson is his friend and it wouldn't be good form to stab him in the back. But it's strange to see people here begging for Marchant to cover the story and he refuses or burries it in the sport section or the cooking supplement.

Similarly, he deletes everything here on a multi-million dollar fraud, San Cristobal, another story he refuses to cover or even look into for some unknown reason. Maybe he has friends there too?

Okke Ornstein

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 7:40:17 PM

By: action

Cyrille Emery seem to be an intelligent person, with pretty neutral view of this situation, but she do not seem to know much about this specific bank.

I honestly think that we can trust Crozier much more that you can trust the authorities in this case. I have meet with people at Crozier, and believe me, they are very professional, and I feel that they are honest (to be bankers anyway), do not forget that these guys has been around forever, I do not think they would risk the Crozier name and screw up the trust fund, do not forget that they underwrite the trust up to 100%.

Bank Crozier is not the typical bank being discussed in this forum.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/28/2003 7:08:24 PM

By: worried

Hi I'm a client with the St. Lucia branch, and my deposits are currently 20k+. I can understand how some of you guys(Grenada clients) seem to agree that the Nevis trust idea is a good one since at least you'll get some of your money back which is always better than nothing and I know where you guys are coming from. But don't you guys think it's a bit unfair for us in St. Lucia, since it's the Grenada branch not remitting back what's rightfully our's that we're now not operational and facing solvency. Wouldn't it mean that if the money gets moved to Nevis that we at St. Lucia will never see any of that money? We at St. Lucia haven't even been told or seen seen the plan that you guys(Grenada) have been offered, which leaves me as a depositor wondering what the hell is going on?

I could be way off base here, but it sounds like there's nothing in it for us(St. Lucia) if funds are moved to Nevis. Can someone please help calm my fears and tell me what I'm missing from the big picture.

Thank you!

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 1:53:30 PM

By: Daniel

Please update me about AddTrust too. Actually hard to say why this type of company would need 3 mil. investment.

Did anyone sign documents already?


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 11:23:31 AM

By: LP

I would be grateful for any relevant information. Thanks in advance.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 10:55:35 AM

By: Add Trust - Bank Crozier

Im actually a depositor at Crozier and in fact are based in Malmoe. I will check the company in question as much as I can do.

Anyone interested in getting this info?

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 10:51:49 AM

By: Sooltauq

Recalling a couple of warnings about Grenada banks:

FIBG Scandal Continues

We had thought that the scandal involving First International Bank of Grenada – one of the worst banking frauds since the BCCI and BNL fiascos – was finally over.

Yet, no sooner than FIBG was placed into receivership than some of the people involved with FIBG applied to the Grenada government for yet another banking license.

OffshoreAlert first broke the story involving FIBG and its scam artist founders a couple of years ago. Yet, corruption within the Grenada government and legal actions by FIBG, kept FIBG alive and scamming people through this summer.

FIBG was in fact part of a larger fraud involving the International Deposit Insurance Corporation, or IDIC. This was a Nevis company without any substantial assets, which claimed from time to time that it had more hard cash than the U.S. Federal Reserve, and “guaranteed” the deposits of FIBG and a couple of other banks.

There is no doubt that FIBG was totally bogus, being capitalized by a “precious gem” that has never been identified. And almost everybody associated with FIBG has records of past misconduct (“scammers of a feather scam together”).

FIBG and IDIC were/are nothing but total and complete scams. But the even bigger scam might be the entire island nation of Grenada, which is quickly becoming “scam central” and approaching par with Nigeria as the predominant fraud centre.

Grenada is so bad that you should presume that any person or company that you do business down there is a fraudster, because the odds are they are. No self-respecting person or business would associate themselves with Grenada, and any legitimate business would redomicile itself to avoid the criminal taint of the island.

The problem is, simply, that the Grenada government is (like so many Caribbean governments of the past) both incompetent and corrupt – being very willing to swallow a bribe to allow a scam to keep operating.

So, just don’t do business with anybody or anything in Grenada. Don’t even think about it.



Grenada Finally Acts Against FIBG

Readers of The Adkisson Analysis (, Matt Blackman’s Goldhaven (, and David Marchant’s Offshore Alert ( are familiar with the First International Bank of Grenada (FIBG). FIBG is an offshore bank, initially capitalized with a single alleged gemstone, that promised investors returns of up to 250% on certificates of deposit. FINALLY, the government of Grenada has taken over FIBG’s operations as of August 17th. The story here is not that the government acted, but rather — what took so long? FIBG’s first auditors, Wilson & Co., warned the Prime Minister in March of 1999 that FIBG’s assets were “bogus and fictitious” and that the entire Grenadian offshore sector needed a serious overhaul.

Grenada’s former Accountant General Garvey Louison has been appointed to investigate the bank and assume control over bank operations. Finance Minister Anthony Boatswain, who appointed Louison, said he knew the bank was experiencing a “shortage of funds,” but he did not say how it would affect investors. Well, maybe it will affect them in that most of them will never see their principal, much less their promised interest?

FIBG depositors can view a “Proof of Loss & Claims Form” at the Web site of the International Deposit Indemnity Corporation (, the supposed insurer of FIBG deposits, which was last year was kicked out of Nevis and turned away by Dominica (neither of which countries even have insurance legislation) and now simply calls itself a “West Indian corporation.” Of course, IDIC is not accepting any of these claims forms, but the reason is not, the IDIC says, “that IDIC is a scam,” but rather that “IDIC was never intended to be a quick fix, but rather would/will have to liquidate bank assets in the event of failure. This is a process that takes time and one that for practical reasons can only be used as a last and final solution.” What would IDIC and any interested parties likely receive upon liquidation of FIBG? A ruby and accompanying appraiser’s certificate if they’re lucky.

Louison’s letter of August 22nd to the present and former directors of FIBG (available for viewing at along with other documents relating to FIBG) claims that “many millions of dollars” of depositors’ monies have been transferred to four bank directors, including Brink, directly or through IBCs and other entities set up for that purpose. Louison also notes that CDs for “many millions of dollars” have been issued “without any proper assets being in place which are immediately available to meet such claims.” Further, apparently many millions of dollars have been diverted to Uganda.

A Grenadian government spokesperson said that the government was continuing to investigate the bank in coordination with the FBI. The investigation reportedly includes the possibility of money laundering. Surprise.

Bank owner Van A. Brink resigned from his bank directorship in 1999 and reportedly has been spending much of his time in Uganda. Before embarking on his career as a Grenadian banker, Brink lived in Oregon as Gilbert Allen Ziegler until he declared bankruptcy in 1994, bought a Grenadian passport and changed his name. Brink’s response to Louison’s letter (“alleged letter” Brink calls it) was posted to the IDIC Web site on August 28th.

Brink obtained FIBG’s banking license in 1998. Apparently not interested in lying low — pun fully intended — FIBG reported gross income last year of $26 billion, about the same as the revenue reported by Bank One Corp., of Chicago, the fifth-largest bank in the U.S. According to Louison’s letter, on the last available balance sheet, FIBG claimed to have $62 billion in assets! So, either there’s going to be a 62 billion dollar fire sale to pay depositors’ principal and interest, or FIBG will end up in the Quatloos! Cyber-Museum of Scams and Traps. My guess is the latter.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 10:43:10 AM

By: Sooltauq

Has anybody taken a look at the website of the company that Crozier is blaming it's "liquidity crisis" on:

Anybody know who the directors of this company are, and whether they have any relationship to Crozier management?

At the very least, this was a totally unsuitable investment for a thinly-capitalized bank. At the worst, there seems to be the possible smell of the same sort of fraud that we have seen in the Silly-Con Valley the last several years, i.e., venture funds making speculative investments into amorphous internet companies with the underlying intent being to funnel wealth indirectly through the internet company to the pockets of the venture fund's owners.

Was AddTrust ever a real deal, or simply a closet with a phone and a fancy website that talks in high-sounding tech terms without articulating exactly how they intend to make money?

That such a thinly-capitalized bank as Crozier should make such a large investment constituting such a large portion of its own capital into a speculative start-up is inherently suspicious.

Worth somebody on that side of the Atlantic looking into; company claims to be based in Malmo.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 3:25:36 AM

By: rene

So Cyrill, Rene, OlHap and Sooltaq can all feel nice and smug because they did not become depositors in Bank Crozier.

_____ quite unfair, dear david
_____ i'm informed about your constant promotion of bc-services... and i never ever attacked you personally assuming that you would ever anything wrong by offering their services to your clients - but:
_____ i also made it clear to you AT LEAST TWO YEARS AGO that we never do any business with any financial institution no at least associated to an INTERNATIONAL GROUP of REPUTABLE bankers
_____ we therefore NEVER open and manage accounts for our clients (don't forget: IT'S THEIR MONEY, not ours! - we have to be much more prudent with client funds than with our own assets... so it's absolutely inacceptable you calling "us" intermediaries, brokers, agents etc. etc. not behaving in a professional way!) on any aammnn-bank

No matter that they are apparently ignorant of all the facts - Sooltaq even getting the facts confused between Grenada and St Lucia.
_____ he doesn't get anything confused... read his comments again - best think a saw on this topic... and he is not a depositor for sure!

Never mind, they should really get on with whatever they actually know about, and leave the BC problems to the depositors, most of whom are not as stupid as this crowd thinks.
_____ really not?
_____ anybody signing the trust documents bc submitted transferring all rights to "trustees" and moving the whole structure to funny nevis is - sorry for saying that! - a pure and stupid idiot
_____ it's that easy!

It is time that these people stopped believing their own bullshit. It is not inevitable that an offshore bank is crooked. It is not inevitable that a bank in a jurisdiction that has, in the recent past suffered from a batch of undesirable regulators. It is possible that those running a bank wish to run a good business and grow a successful enterprise.
_____ not inevitable that an offshore bank is crooked... really?
_____ not inevitable that they choose the worst, most corrupt and least regulated jurisdiction they could have choosen... really (and not planned?)?

These critics are not doers and makers. They are middle-men who prey on the ignorance of their clients to make a buck. Or advisors who give advice and take no responsibility for it.
_____ o.k. - we are nondoers and nonmakers... we simply sell bank licenses on melchizedek and anjouan and are constantly involved in money laundering scandals all over the universe
_____ really, david?

Their irresponsible comments are doing the depositors interests no good at all, and they have fallen into the trap of writing the sort of stuff that they so often criticise others for. The problem is one for the depositors to ponder and decide upon.
_____ if they believe what people like you support they'll loose any control on their assets... that's for sure!

Let us hope that BC does not become the latest victim of the drive by megaliths to destroy the small players.
_____ there are many small - but internationally active, reputable and regulated within a jurisdiction with minimal standards! - banks being quite successful as independent entities... and they will be in the future!

take care... and - please: stay cool


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/30/2003 8:14:03 PM

By: Sooltauq


The Spokane Valley man may be misleading investors, said a prominent tax attorney in Irvine, Calif. "These bank debenture programs are a scam. If they are above a certain size, they have to be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. They never are," said Jay Atkisson.

These journalists weren't the best.

(1) They misspelled my name;

(2) They mis-identified me as a "tax attorney" (which I am not -- in fact, I really haven't practice law to any significant degree since 1998 although I keep my Oklahoma and Texas licenses current and occasionally lecture to the ABA);

(3) They totally botched the explanation of what a "private placement" is, which is what the GPG scammer claimed gave him an exemption from selling these securities to U.S. persons. Basically, and depending on the state, a "private placement" exception may exist to registration for the sale of a very few securities (and often limited to qualified or accredited investors) -- usually at most two or three people, depending on the state (and unless, of course, you "blue sky" it by registering the offering with the state but not the SEC). The reporters got it screwed up and quoted me as to the size of the programs which isn't the test at all.

Oh well.

Anyhow, I don't have any evidence that Crozier was complicit in the GPG scam or GPG's selling of bank debenture programs, other than of course being very lax in who they were doing business with as nearly all Caribbean banks around that time were.

My crystal ball says to expect word on the GPG promoters soon.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 9:46:53 PM

By: Rick

Has anyone got any info from GIFSA about the Crozier reconstruction?

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 9:16:38 PM

By: jcolvin - screwy bank deb programs involving BC and GPG

The following article from the Spokane Spokesman Review indicates that Bank Crozier was used by a HYIP scammer as part of an odd bank debentures trading scheme. It is unclear whether there was any knowledge of or participation in the scheme on the part of the bank.

Young `broker' found prosperity
Bill Morlin and Karen Dorn Steele Staff writers
2 July 2000

Just four years out of high school, Jerry A. Martin Jr. of Liberty Lake says he's achieving financial success.
He's buying a $250,000 house overlooking the first hole at MeadowWood Golf Course. He drives a shiny black 1999 BMW, worth $50,000, and has a 20-foot boat in his three-car garage.
His gold necklace sparkles, and he smiles a lot when asked about his secret to wealth at age 22.
He owes his financial savvy, Martin said, to opportunities he encountered through Global Prosperity.
He bought a $1,250 "educational tape" package from Global a year ago and will soon attend one of the company's three-day seminars in Cancun, Mexico, to learn more.
Global, he said, taught him about offshore banking, foreign trusts and ways to move assets out of the country to make him "judgment proof."
Martin said he intends to become a vendor at Global's seminars in Cancun to promote his "Martin Investment Firm."
He claimed to be a licensed securities broker, but Washington state Securities Division regulators say neither he nor his company is registered to sell securities or offer financial advice.
Asked about that, Martin later said, "Oh, I'm in the process of filling out the papers right now."
Martin said he has learned about making vast amounts of money through offshore bank debenture trading. He uses Swedish-owned Bank Crozier Limited, licensed in 1997 to operate in Grenada.
Investors "loan" Martin Investment cash, which is aggregated to purchase bank debentures in the offshore bank, Martin explained.
He transfers the investors' funds out of the United States to an international limited liability company (LLC) he formed through contacts he made through Global Prosperity. He refused to identify the LLC.
"It's a loan to my international LLC," Martin said. "Once the money comes back into the United States, to our investors, it's a loan repayment, so it's not taxable income."
One client who made a $30,000 investment saw it blossom to $130,000, Martin said, but he left his money with Martin Investment. Martin did not provide the name of anyone who actually has redeemed profits from his debenture offer.
The Spokane Valley man may be misleading investors, said a prominent tax attorney in Irvine, Calif.
"These bank debenture programs are a scam. If they are above a certain size, they have to be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. They never are," said Jay Atkisson.
Martin provided an official-looking "ICC-500" statement, describing bank debenture trading. Martin said ICC stands for the International Chamber of Commerce, which he said regulates such transactions.
But Lis Brawnbill, an analyst with the criminal investigation division of the ICC in Essex, England, said the document is a fake.
"It's not for loans or investments," she said, "but to facilitate international trade. They are misleading potential investors."
Martin says the ICC and the world's richest people and banks don't want U.S. citizens to learn the truth about foreign investments.
"Most people don't even have the foggiest idea that these things even exist," he said. Those who are knowledgeable about offshore banking and international companies "are not allowed to give out any information and deny their existence," Martin said.
"There are some people in this world who have figured it out, who've been invited into this exclusive group," he said.
"I don't want to sound like I'm bragging, but after the amount of success I've had people should see that I'm on to something."

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 8:53:32 PM

By: JColvin - Public Info re AddTrust

29 January 2003
Swedish News Digest

Swedish IT company Addtrust AB filed for bankruptcy on January 28, 2003, it was reported on January 29, 2003.
The company has 25 employees and offices in Berlin, Stockholm and Malmo, southern Sweden. Addtrust was founded in February 2000. The company is headquartered in Malmo. (Editor's note: Addtrust previously had offices in France, the UK and Greece. Among the company's business partners are IT companies Cisco Systems, Microsoft, Netscape Communications, Technology Nexus AB, Scandtrust, Sign On AB, Sun Microsystem and XponCard.) No further details were available.

Swedish Anoto Appoints CFO.
124 words
5 November 2002
Swedish News Digest

Swedish high-tech company Anoto Group has appointed Peter Liss chief financial officer (CFO) as of November 4, 2002, it was reported on the same day.
Liss was a chief executive officer of Swedish IT company AddTrust AB. Liss has been employed at different management positions with Swedish companies Kinnevik, TV1000, Viasat AB and M&M Medical AB. [Editor's note: Anoto posted a pre-tax loss of 363 mln crowns ($39.6 mln/40.1 mln euro) for the first nine months of 2002 versus a pre-tax loss of 282 mln crowns ($30.7 mln/31.1 mln euro) for the first nine months of 2001.]

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 5/29/2003 2:45:49 PM

By: Crozier - AddTrust - Information

As it is holiday in Sweden now its very hard to get in contact with authorities but below is what I got so far.

It seems that AddTrust indeed had some great and big clients. They were very active and again, the clients were well respected companies both national but also international.

In June 2001 AddTrust signed a deal with Nexus to partner with their solutions. The deal was worth between 30 to 50MIL SEK (The USD was equivalent to about 10 SEK at that time). The agreement meant that an initial order were placed from AddTrust to Nexus worth 30MIL SEK. I guess that money came from Crozier as its equivalent to 3MIL/USD at that time.

Nexus did also buy a part of AddTrust at the same time.

It seems that during this period until the bankruptcy January 31 2003 and Nexus had a claim at that time towards AddTrust that was 14MIL/SEK (1 USD is now standing in about 7,80 SEK)

The stock for AddTrust and the development can be viewed at

During 2002 the trouble was increased at AddTrust and during that summer substantial debt had been built up although the rest of the market picked up and the fact that AddTrust had very good clients but its hard for me to say as I havent seen the costs for running the company nor know how the company has been runned by the management.

I hope this is worth something for the people at this board.

It seems like a classic case of IT-dreams and big money.


Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.