Topic: {ANNOUNCEMENT} WBX Exchange Frozen - page 19. (Read 45404 times)

If he is insolvent he cannot do this without the agreement of all of his creditors - he'd be committing an offence under insolvency law if he did and the payments would be subject to clawback.

A clear statement from Andre about whether he intends to seek the protections of insolvency law would be useful but he's certainly not obliged to provide that information in advance.  While it's not especially costly to pursue money through Qld's Small Claims Tribunal (they deal with claims of up to $25,000), a judgement needs to be enforceable to have value - voluntary or involuntary insolvency proceedings would affect the value of any judgement obtained.  Bear in mind that a debtor can ask the court to order that the judgement be paid in instalments so obtaining a judgement does not guarantee getting the total amount you are owed quickly.

A few people have posted the amount of money they have tied up in WBX in this thread.  If more people did that, it would be possible to get a clearer idea of whether individual actions are worthwhile or whether Andre's creditors' interests would be better served by initiating insolvency action against him now rather than hoping the situation will improve.  Of course Andre may owe significant amounts of money to other creditors too - it's impossible to know that without some kind of action which forces disclosure of his true financial situation.

Andre,

I understand your predicament and am sorry you got scammed, however this doesn't detract from the fact that you have your clients money. You have the responsibility to pay it back regardless of the mess you're in.

The whole situation is bad, everybody will agree. But it will get worse and you have authority to change this by simply arranging to pay back the disgruntled clients that you can for now, and assuring others that they will get their money back in due course.

Many of us now have no further option the longer you make us wait then to raise lengthy and expensive legal action. The choice is yours. In the mean time I will be seeking legal advice.

No I dont buy that his assets have been frozen. I see no proof of this/ I would like to see a scan of the paper work sent to him from the bank that froze his account and posted on the forum. I'm guessing it's the commonwealth bank because I think that's the bank I put money into to fund my account.

So you're basically asking him to take a loan out to pay back whats owed?
I'm not sure there is a single bank on earth that will provide a loan to him at the moment, what with his assets frozen and a potential upcoming investigation.

I'm in precisely the same position as you jaminunit, but be realistic.

I dont do much on these forums but have been into bitcoin for a long time.

I had just put $500 AUD onto the world bitcoin exchange and a few days later all trading stopped. I really want my cash back Andre. Please be an honorable business man.
You will only be successful in anything that you do in the future if you are honorable with your decisions now.

If you are thinking of running off with the relatively small amount of cash that was at your exchange then you will be sorry for the rest of your life because your name will be dirt online. And any future businessman doing his/her due diligence will come across threads like this and more and will most likely not do business with you.

But if you choose to be honorable and pay everyone back then any other business ventures you do in your life will start off with trust as you have shown that you can be trusted and success comes from trust in contacts.

Do the right thing mate.

I've screen-capped some stuff.  I suggest others do the same, and not just stuff on these forums.

For the record, here's a link to Andre's bullshit response to the question I asked in October about the strike-off action by ASIC.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.561244

ASIC does not initiate strike-off action when a company relocates its operations (the circumstances under which they initiate it are quite specific). Andre was lying through his teeth when he wrote that response but the fact that he wrote it proves beyond doubt that he was aware the strike-off action was in progress at least two months prior to the company being deregistered and that he was actively lying prior to the company being deregistered.  

It's possible to stop deregistration of a company that is in strike-off status and doing so should have been a simple matter for a solvent company.


http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/ASIC.NSF/byHeadline/ASIC%20initiated%20deregistration%20of%20a%20company

He has with at least one of these posts been so good as to provide proof of his own fraudulent conduct.

I suspect that there are lawyers, but that doesn't mean they've been retained to help sort out the financial mess - they could well be advising him in respect of breaches of the Corporations Act, the fraud issues and other matters.

The most troubling aspect of this is the failure to appoint an administrator/liquidator/trustee - something which would halt civil legal action and put control of WBX's financial affairs in the hands of a third party.  I'd have done it in a fucking heartbeat in Andre's shoes, if only so that someone else was putting legal pressure on the bank to release the frozen funds.  If the frozen funds are the only thing putting financial stress on the business, then I'd want my creditors to know that and a formal statement of affairs and creditors' report from an administrator/trustee would prove it.

The most surprising thing of all in this is that Andre is still making personal statements about any of the issues involved.  This is one of those situations where lawyers usually tell you to shut the fuck up before you make things worse and make no statements not approved by them.

Just on a seperate note: Andre's lawyers  were not able to talk to a lawyer of my own choice. I several times asked him to give me the contact details of his lawyers but he never sent those. I wouldn't bet that there actually are some lawyers.

Don't talk to someone else's lawyers without obtaining legal advice of your own - they're acting in the other party's interest which may conflict with your own.  

"Taking full responsibility" would mean appointing a qualified third party to sort out this mess in a transparent manner in accordance with well established legal requirements.  That the company did nothing to stop its deregistration despite being well aware of the strike-off action by ASIC doesn't reflect well on their intention to follow established procedures for winding up a business and paying creditors.  That people have not been advised of the name of a liquidator/administrator to contact regarding the money they are owed is of concern - this should have happened even if the company is solvent and going into voluntary liquidation/administration.


The point is that the exchange was a start up but they claimed that the holding company itself had been finding investments for "high net worth" individuals a number of years prior to that.  That they weren't registered for GST in that capacity implies that they had a turnover of less than $75,000 pa and so weren't very good at their business - or they failed to register despite having a turnover of over $75,000 which would mean that they weren't operating legitimately.  The holding company should also have held an AFSL if they were in the investment business and them not possessing one was a red flag regardless of the issue of whether exchanges should hold one - a legitimate investment company requires one.  Andre's LinkedIn profile describes the company as offering financial products and services - something which absolutely requires an AFSL (I screen-capped it just in case he decides to edit it).

Andre does have personal liability, but the question is to what extent.  It's possible for companies to be deregistered prior to liquidation (it's not usual) but there's still a formal winding up process which needs to be followed before ceasing business altogether or operating as a new entity and it appears that process wasn't undertaken.  Liability in respect of that process doesn't fall solely on Andre - if the company was not wound up properly, the other directors are also liable.  Andre is certainly responsible for his actions as a sole trader as well as for his actions as a director of the company, but for those who deposited funds prior to the company being deregistered, the issue of whether to seek recompense from the company during the wind up process or from Andre personally might not be so clear cut.

It's not yet clear whether the as yet unwound up company is insolvent and it's not yet clear whether Andre the sole trader is insolvent.  The fact that the assets and liabilities of the company appear to have been transferred to Andre the sole trader without the proper legal processes being followed makes this messy and it should really be sorted out by an administrator/liquidator.  Andre the sole trader cannot disgorge funds from assets he was never legally entitled to possess - the question of whether any of WBX's current assets belong at law to the as yet unwound up company needs to be determined before the true financial state of WBX in its current form can be worked out.  It's almost certain that this will not be resolved without the actions of the company, the other directors and Andre personally during the lookback period being taken into account.  We don't know the date when Andre began operating as a sole trader.  It may have been before the deregistration date.

I'm not suggesting that people don't pursue their money.  People should be pushing like hell for the appointment of an administrator/trustee even if it means taking involuntary insolvency action.  I'm just cautioning that getting money back could be a hell of a lot more complicated than getting a judgement and filing a bankruptcy notice against Andre personally (a creditor needs to be owed $5000 or more in order to do this).  Lookback may mean that some people will have a cause of action against other directors of the company, too.

Received 7 hours ago via email from Andre:


I don't know if that means I won't be able to post about this in the future, but if I stop responding here, that may be why.

Worth noting a couple of things.

As the company was struck off, Andre was operating as an individual and has the liability personally.  The protections of the Corporations Act and the provisions of insolvency don't work the same.

Issuing a statutory demand (or similar) is relatively cheap, but enforcement gets expensive.  In the other case I'm running in Aus, I've spent roughly $5k on background, and an uncontested (non-court) result should come in under another $5k.  If I have to do the full court stuff, that's $20k, and I still won;t get funds back - but it will at least shut down the guy I'm dealing with.

Not being GST registered is not a flag as getting that much from a start-up exchange on the fees they were charging is unlikely.  You would only go that step if it needs to.

You got pissed off? Imagine how I feel and the rest of your clients.

You accuse me of defaming you. Please specify where I have done so in any of my postings. I will readily post a retraction, clarification or apology.

The last conversation I had with you was (I think) Thursday 16 February when you said my transfer had gone through (I can check and confirm the actual date but it was before 24 Feb). Since then it is impossible to talk to you via phone or email.

The only response from you has been identical cut and paste nonsense to (what seems like) every email in your inbox dated 12 March 2012.

What crap am I digging up? 1) Chris denied being your Technical Lead; 2)there is not WBX team; 3)you told me on the phone, you'd transferred my other withdrawal requests to my Westpac account when you had not.

If you are talking about a fraud investigation or small claims. I'm not digging those up. They are actively being considered.

What I'm trying to do is work out how to get some advocacy and communication going. We aren't talking sheep stations here*. But there are enough people saying you have their money and you are not giving it back to them. Worse you are not telling me enough information to encourage me to wait quietly (or come to your defense).

Andre as you know I am in Australia. I can coordinate the "disgruntled clients of Andre Jensen". I thought you would want to avoid creating an angry group of clients, and instead pursue an orderly resolution of affairs.

I don't think you are a crook or a scammer. I think you ended up in a bad place as the meat in the sandwich. Personally I suspect criminals used EFT to transfer more AUD into the exchange than you have admitted to me. But nothing you have said or done encourages me to hope for an orderly resolution.

*for non-Aussies "sheep stations" are huge land-holdings in the Australian outback - some are bigger than small counties. "Playing for sheep-stations" means playing for big stakes.

Andre,


Please take careful note of what I've put in bold in the quote.

Hi David,

Im allowed to answer this one, You received the deposits via Paul Zigoridis account at your request, please give me other times this has happened please again stop defaming my already crap credibility here.

Here is the Log: David to myself

That's be fine m8 if it's doable on your end.

Or I can just give him codes if you'll bump up his limits so it doesn't cause hangs on his end.



On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:04 AM, WBX Support <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi david,

Sent through the funds mate as re quested reference N02112051695 paul has the same bank as I do so he should see it tomorrow. If you want to process more funds will it be done through this method?

Andre


Support



David Owen Morris <[email protected]> wrote:


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Andre,

I have an alternative solution for you. Could you please deposit these funds asap into accounts belonging to Paul Zagoridis another customer on the exchange. He's willing to help out on this issue and I've included him in this email.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPNQt0AAoJECuWECqljbocVNkH/2N23tydHPObCWskyQ2z4va0
pl4haNusqYivZob7Hkhh2VwBP0QUlK8VDq74PKQZ8aHlkdr+LvOsSW7U4Sycic1P
feey6Ivteb7edjVnU0g/HzeXhijPWgEFys+cBrxyCNhjMnDYBOSrwKq4aO+AylgB
GrHZK1vdj8oedaGgc2iXs6V3+y44c9Ef1Sp/h+0boqz3+CCsL22G2eqgoVJg7r2j
pRVLd+oXwxkO2wPxSrbO+yvcpCvji2AKaCEOEFiaD85I7EEVkMTGThAZF693jk7n
m/yINIJbefo0w/swRL2fz5Utx48gQuiI6NJssx02mDWWBs2VS9H89ZMbkvVZLdM=
=PIoh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:16 AM, WBX Support <[email protected]> wrote:
mate can you ring me personal number +61412185693 i am away from my office

On 10/02/2012, at 11:13 AM, David Owen Morris wrote:

Hi Andre,

Bank of China have no such thing and have made no such request I've just check this with their head Dalian office. This has worked just fine on prior occasions and should still do so.



On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:07 AM, WBX Support <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi david,
Mate we have had a problem with transferring the funds to your account your bank rejected the funds, your bank and our bank have requested a "Account Identification Number" we are trying to transfer the funds to your bank  in CNY , this will save you on fees on your side and so intermediary bank gets involved, all you have to do is ask your bank for this number so we can try processing it again sorry for the delay mate.

Andre

On 03/02/2012, at 4:38 PM, David Owen Morris wrote:

Thanks m8,

That's great news.



On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:00 PM, WBX Support <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi mate,

We have now processed your withdraw requests sorry for the delay mate, dam banks are causing me a lot or problems. I wont charge you the transfer fee.

Andre

Here is the Log:Paul and myself

I have a deposit of >$1200.00 the details will not be available until tomorrow.

Andre can you confirm the amount you transferred to my westpac account for David?

Regards

Paul

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Paul Zagoridis <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks Andre

I'll look out for it tomorrow (Monday)


On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:08 PM, WBX Support <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi paul,
I have done a transfer to your account for david owen.

Andre

Andre's posts imply insolvency which would make you flying out here rather pointless.  When a liquidator/trustee is appointed, claims will have to be made with through them and final distributions (if any) will be made by them at a time determined by them.  If there are any applications in progress for involuntary winding up of the company subsequent to statutory demands or Director Penalty Notices, it is possible for other creditors to join those actions.  It's worth remembering that those with Bitcoins and currency on deposit with the exchange are unlikely to be the only creditors and that any transactions during the "lookback" period prior to insolvency can be clawed back by the liquidator/trustee.  If user funds deposited with the exchange were not quarantined from operating funds, there are other legal implications involved for the exchange owners.  At this point, it would be extremely unwise for Andre to do anything other than maintain a holding pattern without solid legal advice.

I wish people had taken a bit more notice when I commented on the strike off action by ASIC last year and the fact that the company had failed to lodge a change of details with ASIC when they relocated from Victoria to Queensland.  There were a lot of red flags regarding this venture, including them not having a financial services licence (something a supposed investment company - which is what they held themselves out as having been prior to their entry into Bitcoin services - most certainly requires) and not being registered for GST (what investment company for targeting high net worth individuals would have a turnover of less than $75,000).  "Goldcoast, Queensland" is not an address, and their unwillingness to put their actual business address on their website should have been a huge warning sign.  It's like putting your business location down as "West Coast, USA" and should be especially troubling when the official records for your business have your company as being located somewhere else entirely.

Patrick.  As you are owed more than $2000, issuing a statutory demand is an option for you.  The options for responding to a statutory demand are very limited and winding up proceedings can be started if the company does not respond in the required manner and prove its solvency within 21 days.  A statutory demand must be served to the registered office last listed with ASIC.   If the demand is not satisfied within the 21 days or the company does not apply to the Supreme Court to set the demand aside within that period (the period is set in stone by statute and cannot be extended) a legal presumption of insolvency then applies.  Although the company no longer exists as a legal entity, winding up or other insolvency proceedings may not be in progress yet.  If they are in progress, the identity of the liquidator/administrator/trustee must be disclosed to creditors.

People need to stop seeing what they want to see when it comes to Bitcoin ventures and they need to stop ignoring things which should raise huge red flags.  Stop taking bullshit excuses for things sketchy shit at face value.


Are you thinking of the provision applying to financial service providers which stops them from being able to disclose that they are co-operating with an investigation into suspicious activity (and actually allows them to deduct an hourly rate equivalent to that charged by liquidators from the client's account for any staff time spent on co-operating with the investigation)?  WBX doesn't have an AFSL, but I'm pretty sure that the provisions themselves come from AML/CTF legislation so they can probably be imposed in the absence of a licence.

So telling people withdrawals have been processed when in fact they haven't doesn't reek of scamming/fraud. And asking people for non existent information in order to process withdrawals doesn't reek of fraud either. You sure have a funny definition of logic.

Andre was even offered a bailout by Paul backed by me amongst others, this line from Andre doesn't exactly hold water in the light of something like that, as his main responsibility is to his customers in a situation like this.

Furthermore Andre didn't actually halt trading on WBX Chris did, which I applaud him for, as Andre lacked both the balls and simple honesty to do so.

Andre has even stated via email that he isn't willing to even hold any kind of dialogue on this issue. And that this supposedly has been an ongoing issue since November last year just further proving that he can hardly be considered honest on this matter as that would mean that he has been A) putting in own funds and B) playing ponzi like games with client deposits in order to process withdrawals (Paul has at least circumstantial evidence of this as do I).

Maged, how can you seriously claim to be acting in any kind of good faith and with due diligence on this issue in view of these overwhelming and repeated shows of blatant dishonesty? I wasn't asking for a permanent tag, simply for tagging until this matter has been resolved, as Andre's currently lack of honesty on this matter as a whole is extremely disconcerting.