Hello all,
First I would like to apologise for the delays in responding to you emails, etc. it has become very difficult to keep up with all investors as the numbers grow. As stated in an erlier email, I am now trying to find assistance to assemble a committee as well as some assistance on blog updates, etc. It is just becoming too big for 1 person. The response has been immediate and I will try my best to get this organized soon.
Also, I have been contacted by a reporter with the Winnipeg Free Press looking for a York Rio Resource investor(s) within the Manitoba area. He has stated that he will likely be able to do a story on the ‘unfortunate situation’. Please contact me at yorkrio.investors@gmail.com if you are able to speak with the reporter, we really need this.
I have sent this information out in emails to all the investors who have left their contact information with me, however, do to the growing number of investors, some of the emails are being rejected. I will work on correcting this matter.
The reason I no longer post much of my news updates to the blog is the simple matter of ‘slander’ and/or ‘defamation of character’ etc on a public forum. I am already a victim of fraud and do not wish to fall victim to slander law suits. After all, Victor follows this blog as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Thanks for the update.
Frankly I'm not too keen either in being sued for libel especially since in almost a year there has been nothing concrete other than a cease trade.(I am not going to invest more money to defend myself with a lawyer.)
All the finger-pointing and speculation hasnt resulted in any money being returned. One investor or ten investors doesnt seem to make much of a difference here. And, without question, the nature of some of the comments seem to be brought on by frustration.
I now see that there are 2 companies trying to contact investors to make an "offer" for their shares. This blog seems to have attracted them by way of our public frustration. Fortunately the ASC has nipped one in the bud.
I would like to see the other company Penn pursued as quickly by the OSC also. There is a trail of telephone numbers, emails, and addresses being left!
Yes..I am very frustrated and wish that there was an avenue to pursue with at least these"savior companies" while we again wait for the OSC for next spring.
This is a total joke.
One year later and more inspector closeau looking for the pink panther?
the salesmen working for the consulting companies now sell the lists they had.
what a waste of money and time and energy!
If there ever was a scam then we would have gotten some money back by now.
As usual bad news travels faster than good news.
Even unsubstantiated bad news.
So far there hasnt been 1 scintilla of proof. No wonder the consulting companies' salespeople see a "golden"opportunity to really defraud investors.
In the end no monies will be available as the one and a half year investigation will eat anything up.
At which point there will be a critical blog of who, why and
what was accomplished by our highly paid, fragmented civil servants that have a "mandate"to protect the capital markets.
Just in case anyone/anywhere would be interested to know: Victor York has NEVER once ever used an "aka".
Anyone that has been reflecting that in blogs and the press and in any government website can and will be subject to any and all legal action governing libel and defamation.
Just because someone states something it doesnt mean it to be true.
It would be prudent at the least to check and confirm your sources before assuming the last information received was correct.
No investor,no commission investigator, no federal or provincial body has had Victor York as having aconfirmed "aka".
If this blog is really supposed to reflect true facts then it should do that once they are confirmed not assumed.
Yes Jason Seabrook is the aka for Adam Sherman as well as others. But NOT Victor York.Not1 singletime anywhere.
Ask yourself why would it be of any benefit to purport that when it wasn't true.
Anonymous, are you suggesting that because a crime has already happened, the 'criminals' should not be brought to justice? Free to continue on their merry way and allowed to continue. So, I guess you also feel that once a murder has been committed, why bother chasing down the murderer, it's too late and a waste of tax-payers' money? And Larry, is the matter of AKA's important, are you not losing sight of the real issues here. I wonder if you would feel the same if it was a close family member who was harmed.
Okay Let's go to securities 101:
No crime was committed.
In a REAL court you must have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. But in a REGULATORY commission all that needs to be "shown" is a probability. The bar is dropped way lower because the commissions are not held to a higher standard.
The markets in Canada are driven by firms that have registered salesman handling porfolios and lose potential clients to non-registered firms that do not psy the fees to get licenses for the salepeople. In both cases the investor must rely upon their monies increasing but this doesnt always happen.
The commissions cannot bite the hand that feeds them, They must show something, anything that purports wrongdoing. Take some time and read a top securities lawyer..Janice Wright..she and many others are very knowledgable.
the many securities commissions NEED to swirl the waters and cause as much rage as possible and use the fact that they are there just for the investors.
really?
what about the investment firms that lose billions of dollars but are okay until it' too late?
what about securities investigators that pass on knowingly false investors and cry scam before they even investigate.
if i was getting 150 thou a year and a pension and travelling expenses i might be doing the same thing to keep my job too!
How smug and naive can one be to actually believe that anything that a government official tells you is 100% honest without having had to prove what they say.
Sorry, but I actually have never seen anything in the way of either allegations or proven allegations.
Bottom line - Is there even a legitimate Company? All the red tape is just that.
As far as the bottom line:
There WAS a legitimate company.
The company is still legitimate today and has never been charged by the OSC.
Years of bank statements, original signed contracts for mining rights,filings with the commissions and related documents have been with the OSC. They have interviewed dozens of people and seized $2.8 million form one of the consulting companies in B.C.
When it all is over the 2.8 million will go straight to the "cost of the investigation".
Also: In the real world when charges are laid the prosecutor will have to prove their case.
In the world of commissions they NEVER have to prove their case. ALL rights under the Canadian Charter are removed.
The investigtor making $135 thou a year works for the commission.
The commission lawyers work for the commission. The matter is heard in front of the commission and decided upon by the commission.
There is no impartial and fair system in play.
The majority of all cases result in the "accused" being told not to be in control of a canadian company for 2 years or 4 or 5 years or "life".
Any penalties or fines are not enforcable. This is why the real boiler room operators never cooperate with the securities commissions and most either do not show up, or relocate elsewhere.
I, personally, know of one individual that "owes" them $720,000. and has no care whatsoever as to paying them anymore than they care to "collect".
The commission's job is to look good in their websites and spend monies chasing down whomever they feel has unregistered salespeople or doesnt adhere to their filing policies.
Unfortunately the salespeople working for the 2 consulting companies were hired, paid by,trained and worked for the consulting companies.
The filings also clearly indicated to all the commissions the names and addresses of the consulting companies that received 72% of each dollar raised.
I am fortunate in that I am able to research the matter first-hand, one on one and have reviewed more documents than I first thought would be made available.
And as to that matter of "aka"
Yes--it is a very obvious matter:
when you go out of your way at the OSC to pass on false information to the other commissions knowingly there is a motive here--to give the impression of fraud from the top down.That was never the case. Why do you not think that the only commission that does NOT show Victor York having an "aka" is the OSC in any of their documents?
Furthermore there are a variety of matters that are ongoing which are detrimental to that commission.
When the matter is finally concluded there will not be one single investor that is pleased with this matter as to how they were used....not by the company but by others.
Yes there is a scam here. But not perpetuated by York-Rio.
Start looking and stop depending on others' opinions that are not founded on fact.
And , yes, the commisions and the investigator also read this blog and ay in fact add to it too.
Mr. Victor York was in 'fact' Mr. Giorgiadis prior to changing his name to York.....That is a fact. People who knew him then, knew him as Giorgiadis and now also know him as York.
Is that not true?
Victor York Has used the name LEGAlly SINCE 1956 AND HAs NEVER ONCE reverted to any other name.
Not on his public school records and junior high school records or his high school records or his university records or his employment with Revenue Canada(verified by the RCMP),or his driver's licenses or his marriage certificate, or all of his employment and banking.
NOT ONE SINGLE INVESTOR HAS EVER KNOWN VICTOR YORK AS OTHER THAN VICTOR YORK.
OR any one else!
The purpose of showing Victor York as having an alias is VERY obvious--EXCEPT THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE SINGLE EXEPTION OF HAVING EVER USED AN ALIAS.
However , it certainly helps the OSC to pass on a change of name, legally, to purport an "alias".
Yes..............he DID use a different name BUT ONLY TO 1956.
no school records or government records or any invesors have ever known him as Victor York after 1956
but then again it DOES help to show that he "used" an "AKA" for the commission's purpose. It DOES show a fraudulent intent. Except he never did use it.
Ask the people purporting that where he did use it and get ready for stalling and excuses.
YOU WILL NEVER SEE THE USE OF an "AKA".
Why would they pass that "information on to a group of angry investors?
To help develop their case because the salesman DID use aka's when working for the consulting companies.
To then purport an AKA for Victor York helps their case. Which really was NO case at all.
THE search warrant was for Brilliante Resources. And was never for York Rio.
To date the account the bank accounts Brillinte has and remains
frozen. Why has the OSC never once ever frozen any York-Rio accounts until today?
Because york-rio has never done anything to warrant their accounts to be frozen.
The ONLY conclusion is that the OSC did NOT freeze the York-Rio Bank accounts because they never had ANY PROOF OF WRONG-DOING.
The blogs of scams and wrongs and "aka" were passed 0n to upset investors so that the commissions had some measure 0f "having something " with.
Do call up the writer/investigator to ask them what actual confirmed usage of an "aka".
Their response will not be what any investor wants to hear:
The matter is ongoing.
We cannot reveal any information.
Actually the real answer should be:
Victor York did change his name (legally)and has never once used his previous birthname. However in passing false and libellous information to Alberta And Saskatchewan and British Columbia it DOES and HAS done it's purpose:
to augment it's very weak investigation and use the investors to get not only upset but to be open to suggestions of wrong doing York-Rio called upon to give verbal video testimony March 2010.
I agree with you 100 % .
I WAS contacted by the OSC and asked them questions that they could not answer to my satisfaction.
Okay, Okay, Okday, enough already..how is brilliante (the other boiler room company) not connected to York Rio, just happened to be sharing space, yeah, right! Brilliante are run by all family members of Mr. York (georgiadis), nephew, son-in-law.......and what about the other staff members on York Rio, all family members, long term girlfriend, girlfriend's daughter, c'mon, give me a break! Real legit! Filler, tons of filler, all orchestrated by the brilliant, conceited, boastful Mr. York!
Okay--Instead of "fillers" or unsubstantiated innuendos---here are some hard facts:
York-Rio hired and paid by cheques 2 consulting companies.
The amounts paid were reported as consulting fees to the securities commissions together with the names of the consulting companies and their addresses. The consulting companies hired, fired, trained and paid those salesman not York-Rio.The consulting companies paid their own leases as well as the costs of the offices. The securities commissions "preferred" that the amounts paid to the consulting companies be reflected as commissions instead. York-Rio has not done so.
York-Rio reported ALL of it's investors' names, addresses and amounts invested to those securities commissions. (boiler rooms avoid reporting anything toany commissions let alone over a period covering 4 and a half years.
2.8 million was seized from a B.C lawyer's trust account being held for the consulting company in the spring of this year.
The OSC investigator never indicated in any records or on their site any usage of a "aka" by Victor York. Akas were shown for a variety of employees that worked for the consulting companies though. Only when the other securities commissions decide to reflect this false information did the matter of an "aka"become rwelevant.
Brian Aidelman is the owner of Brilliante. Brilliante never filed any reports to the commissions.
Jason Georgiadis worked for the consulting company and was paid for by the consulting company.
His involvement in Brilliante had nothing to do with York Rio.
Brilliante raised 160 thou in the 5 week period ending Oct 21 2008.
The search warrant named ONLY Brillainte and the bank account of Brilliante was seized.
Why ONLY that bank seizure and not York-Rio then and still not now?
Were the investors advised of the 2.8 million seized in B.C.?
Who gets those monies?
If the matter was as "clear-cut" a year ago then why is it going to March 2010?
Has the OSC located and interviewed the consulting companies' owners that received 72%of all monies raised?
Were those monies seized?
Where in heaven does "anonymous" even get "facts" that are not facts at all.?
Instead of wasting time let's stick to the real facts as much as some people may not want to hear them.
They say:"Good news travels fast but bad news travels faster."
After reading the comment by "anonymous" posted October 13 it is obvious that the author is rather personal. And rather than provide some factual input we are being led around again away from the facts. Larry's comments cause me to think past any spin.
Whenever a government official turns our attention away from themselves we should ask why.
Our monies are also invested heavily in them. And we all know that a government official would never lie to anyone. So..where is our money, wayne?
Phillip Sydney said it best:
"Weigh not so much what men assert, as what they prove."
and to the powers in Ontario that believe themselves the self-appointed gatekeepers of Canada:
per Edmund Burke:
"The greater the power the dangerous the abuse."
OSC investigator visited the offices of Vancouver lawyer Robert Palkowski
Spring 2009.
Monies seized :$2.8 million from the consulting company that did the work.
Anybody get any monies yet?
Who is it being held for?
BCSC would have some of the details.
Still trying to piece this together.
Hopefully it doesnt go all to the "cost" of the investigation and nothing left. As usual.
I had the pleasure of speaking with the BCSC and amongst other things it would appear that a National Securities Regulator may not be an entirely bad way of handling matters that affect provinces outside of ontario.
Google shows:--The View on the Street..Jeffrey MacIntosh.--
He led the task force to Modernize Securities Legislation in Canada.
The current situation DOES leave much to the powers in Ontario, regardless of whether or not a company has a majority of investors outside of Ontario.
In the case of York-Rio it does yet Ontario is in the driver's seat.
It would be preferable to have B.C.take some control,given that the monies were seized in B.C. from the consulting company(also registered in B.C.).
Has anyone received any reimbursement from the OSC?
Post a Comment