I guess having it on YouTube makes it more real.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Just like TUC made BofA the exclusive target of a bank robbery and a frivolous lunacy lawsuit. Thanks for wasting my tax dollars on this, TUC, and more than likely driving up the interest rate on my BofA credit card. Is this how you plan on rescuing the financial market?TUC offer cliffnote wrote:(1) make BofA its "exclusive agent" for the "processing" of its "certified drafts on a worldwide basis".
Idiot bank robbers don't dictate how much a bank keeps on deposit. The idiots running the bank do...and I'm sure there's some federal regulations dictating minimum amounts required. And where will this magical $15.5 billion (with a "b") come from? Is TUC going to provide it or will BofA have to come up with it on their own?TUC offer cliffnote wrote:(2) Keep $15.25 billion on deposit at BofA.
So BofA has to pay them 1% for the "opportunity" to process their drafts for them, as well as keep their $15.5 billion on deposit for them - which probably requires additional manpower, storage, recordkeeping, etc. "Hi, I'd like to pay you 1% commission for the opportunity to spend money on you."TUC offer cliffnote wrote:(3) Give BofA a 1% commission on all of their "certified drafts".
By putting them out of business much the way an MLM runs a person further into debt.TUC offer cliffnote wrote:(4) Make BofA part of the solution to the world's "urgent financial crisis".
Nah, dumb as most bankers are, none of them are stupid enough to go along with anything TUC might think up. Most of them understand the difference between stuff that might put you in prison and stuff that will put you in prison.Considering all the dumb things I've seen small and mid-sized banks do, I bet TUC could have found a legitimate bank willing to go along with their scam -- or a bank weak enough to be bullied by their strong-arm tactics
I'm sure by now BOA has a number of lawyers and PI's digging up every scrap of evidence they can on these folks so when the hammer falls nobody connected with TUC will escape.TheSaint wrote:Of all the stupid things TUC has done, the one that gets me the most is that they honestly think they can bully Bank of America.
TUC has $15 billion in fake assets.
Bank of America has over $1.3 trillion in real assets.
BoA wouldn't kowtow to TUC even if their money wasn't fake.
Meanwhile, there's a nationwide lending crisis that's revealed an epidemic of greed, hubris, and incompetence at many American banks.
Considering all the dumb things I've seen small and mid-sized banks do, I bet TUC could have found a legitimate bank willing to go along with their scam -- or a bank weak enough to be bullied by their strong-arm tactics.
That's a good bet.Evil Squirrel Overlord wrote: I'm sure by now BOA has a number of lawyers and PI's digging up every scrap of evidence they can on these folks so when the hammer falls nobody connected with TUC will escape.
San Francisco Italian isn't mafia. Gianini has a god-like reputation in the Bay Area. He loaned money instantly to anyone who wanted to rebuild after the 1906 earthquake, and funded the Disney movie "Snow White" after all. How cool is that?CaptainKickback wrote:Eyyyy....remembah, da Bank of America was originally da Bank of Italy an' founded by A.P. Gianini. Doze TUC people could end up supporting the Florida gator farm industry.....if youze catch my drift........ Capeesh?
There was a time when I would have believed that. But then things like this happen.. wrote:Nah, dumb as most bankers are, none of them are stupid enough to go along with anything TUC might think up. Most of them understand the difference between stuff that might put you in prison and stuff that will put you in prison.Considering all the dumb things I've seen small and mid-sized banks do, I bet TUC could have found a legitimate bank willing to go along with their scam -- or a bank weak enough to be bullied by their strong-arm tactics
I know you think I'm for all the criminals but in that last article the writer makes a whole lot of assumptions based on third hand information and a lot of unsubstantiated assertions of wrong doing. Nothing but "he is doing this or that" with nothing whatsoever to back it up, For instance...Leftcoaster wrote:There was a time when I would have believed that. But then things like this happen.. wrote:Nah, dumb as most bankers are, none of them are stupid enough to go along with anything TUC might think up. Most of them understand the difference between stuff that might put you in prison and stuff that will put you in prison.Considering all the dumb things I've seen small and mid-sized banks do, I bet TUC could have found a legitimate bank willing to go along with their scam -- or a bank weak enough to be bullied by their strong-arm tactics
More to read here and here. The latter makes for one hell of a read.
How does this guy know these things? Unless he has someone right next to this guy feeding him information all of that has to be "I heard form a guy that knows a guy that nows a guy that heard him say" kind of stuff. Maybe Spiller is doing things illegal, I have no idea, but this guys proof is weak at best, more like gossip. He even admits what he called their previous ponzi scheme paid all of the investors and even gave them more confidence to invest again. He doesn't even have proof or letters of anyone that has been screwed from what I see. Its like a conspiracy theory where someone links many bits of unrelated information together to conclude a giant conspiracy is taking place. Seems he spent a whole lot of time assembling gossip and only proved what was already known, that is he didn't use the correct form on a DHL envelope with diamonds in it correctly reporting the value, but did pay the tax anyway.and he regularly boasts about not paying income taxes. He is reportedly taking in a whole bunch of money and not paying the IRS a dime. Apparently he once bragged that he has never filed an income tax return in his life. He is using several social security numbers to conduct transactions and to avoid federal authorities. At one point he used the social security number of his newborn son Caullin to rent or buy a property in Maine. And, he has used the social security number of Irene Kapland to open bank accounts (without her knowledge, identity theft) and is using those accounts to receive wire transfers that are supposed to be "investments." He apparently just takes the money and spends it.
This was more about the connection Credit Union. Yes a great deal of what the author wrote would require verification, but the musings about the CU are interesting. If you through North York Credit Union into google, most of the hits are to Egold type websites. Why is that, I wonder?SteveSy wrote: I know you think I'm for all the criminals but in that last article the writer makes a whole lot of assumptions based on third hand information and a lot of unsubstantiated assertions of wrong doing. Nothing but "he is doing this or that" with nothing whatsoever to back it up, For instance...
Yes. Lots of circumstantial evidence, I agree. I was more interested in the CU example as being illustrative of a small-medium size financial institution being subverted.How does this guy know these things? Unless he has someone right next to this guy feeding him information all of that has to be "I heard form a guy that knows a guy that nows a guy that heard him say" kind of stuff. Maybe Spiller is doing things illegal, I have no idea, but this guys proof is weak at best, more like gossip. He even admits what he called their previous ponzi scheme paid all of the investors and even gave them more confidence to invest again. He doesn't even have proof or letters of anyone that has been screwed from what I see. Its like a conspiracy theory where someone links many bits of unrelated information together to conclude a giant conspiracy is taking place. Seems he spent a whole lot of time assembling gossip and only proved what was already known, that is he didn't use the correct form on a DHL envelope with diamonds in it correctly reporting the value, but did pay the tax anyway.
I was working in SF when the buyout took place. There was rumored to be a memo from the NC execs in charge of the transition that they didn't want to work with "anyone with a San Francisco accent." It was pretty shocking stuff for the SF business world.BBFlatt wrote:It, like one of its chief competitors, Wachovia is headquartered in Charlotte NC. I doubt any of the California people have much influence on its operation these days.
I'd say these guys have had their fifteen minutes of fame, and now it's time for those dumb enough to have been part of it to pay.Notice was provided to each of these parties [see DE 42], however United Cities, and Messrs. Gardner, Cruz and Marrero, failed to appear at the September 2, 2008 status conference. At the status conference, counsel for The Bank of America informed the Court that Mr. Marerro remains in custody in the Middle District of Florida on federal charges. Agents of the United States Secret Service appeared at the status conference, apparently hoping to find Mr. Cruz, and informed the Court that they had an arrest warrant for Mr. Cruz, but had been unable to locate him. As for Mr. Gardner, Plaintiff’s counsel provided the Court with a copy of an email Mr. Gardner sent her that morning, stating that he was having difficulty retaining counsel and requesting a 60-day continuance of the contempt hearing. Mr. Gardner has not filed a motion for continuance of the contempt hearing with this Court, and his email did not provide any information that would justify this Court postponing contempt proceedings for another two months. More to the point, Mr. Gardner did not appear at the September 2, 2008 status conference, which is a violation of Court order.
It is hereby ORDERED that The United Cities Group, Inc. and Gladstone Gardner,
Angel Cruz and William Marrero appear before this Court on Tuesday, September 23, 2008
at 1:30 p.m. at the United States District Court, David W. Dyer Federal Building and
Courthouse, 300 N.E. First Avenue, Courtroom VII, Miami, Florida, to show cause why
they should not be held in contempt of court for violation of Temporary Restraining Order
[DE 22], and the Preliminary Injunction [DE 28, 40]
I don't get it, how can someone be that dumb? I honestly can not understand how any of them thought they could do what they did and there wouldn't be severe repercussions for doing it. Even if they really thought what they were doing was legal under some secret code, what made them think B of A or the government would just let them do it, after all they're committing a massive fraud according to TUC. Why would the bank or the government all of a sudden follow the law as they saw it? It's as if they think they have discovered the super secret magic incantation or something. "Ah ha! We discovered the magic words, you are now under my control." I think its likely they're sharing some new drug causing severe psychosis that we haven't publicly heard of yet.wserra wrote:I'd say these guys have had their fifteen minutes of fame, and now it's time for those dumb enough to have been part of it to pay.
I think the next page is the part they think is really uber-secret for those bank officers:CONFIDENTIAL - FOR BANK OFFICERS ONLY!
(Bank name and address)
Re: Processing TUC Drafts
(Account holder name and address)
Draft amount $nnn,nnn.nn
Gentlemen,
You have received an Official Bank Draft guaranteed by certified funds drawn on The United Cities Private Bank (TUC Bank). Processing Drafts and Acceptances of an asset for recoupment should be a matter of standard operating procedure for you. However, in the abundance of caution, we offer the following:
Pursuant to $3-104(f) of the UCC a draft is the equivalent of a check for purposes of processing and may be securitized or monetized by direct deposit in a commercial checking, time, thrift or savings account pursuant to Title 12 of the United States code, Section 1813(L)(1) and when deposited it becomes the equivalent of money as outlined under Section 1813(L)(1).
Please credit your clients account and offset your records to reflect full settlement and closure of the account and provde a satisfaction of mortgage for their records.
TUC Bank will take no further action regarding this Draft and consider the matter closed.
Such a deal - so good that they offer the same deal to the Treasury Department of the United States and the Federal Reserve!Please take notice that TUC Bank is currently allowing banks that are currently part of the Federal Reserve System (member banks) pursuant to the Jurisdiction of the UCC, to earn a One Percent (1%) transaction processing fee per transaction, on all TUC Bank certified drafts transacted on behalf of any TUC Bank account holder. This program is in place for any and all transactions submitted to the member banks by way of a TUC instrument. Should you elect to accept this offer, please contact TUC Bank for further instructions.
Note the date of the due installment (that's the actual text of one of the letters) - April - in other words, this borrower apparently turned to TUC to resolve a delinquency/default that was in the fifth month.Dear Customer:
Your check in the amount of $256946.66 was returned to us by your financial institution for the following reason: other.
* Your loan remains due for the 04/01/08 installment.
* The amount due is $256946.66
You may be assessed a late charge if an installment is not received before the late charge assessment date. Depending on your loan product, interest may continue to accrue until replacement funds are received.
Please remit your replacement funds using the attached coupon to Bank of America (address). If you have any question regarding this notice, please contact us at 1.800.xxx.xxxx. We thank you in advance for addressing this matter promptly.