Banco Santander robbed buying Extro Bank?

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

One of the items from John Christmas’ Parex Bank whistleblowing list from 2004 was that Parex secretly owned a bank in Russia.

Christmas claimed that Parex owned and operated Extro Bank. For example, the Parex Credit Committee approved the loans that Extro Bank extended. Latvian State Controller Inguna Sudraba was on that committee.

The fraud claim is backed up by an email written by Parex vice president james brown. The claim is also backed up by a Skype conversation (below) with former Parex manager Christa Rubstein. She also confirms in the conversation that Parex paid employee compensation illegally.

Even though three witnesses wrote that Parex owned Extro Bank, the auditors at Ernst & Young did not care at all and ignored the huge fraud.

Therefore, Parex was able to sell Extro Bank to Banco Santander. Santander is one of the largest banks in Europe and has millions of shareholders in Spain and the United Kingdom.

According to emails (below) from a private investigator who contacted Christmas, Banco Santander got “robbed” in the purchase. The loss could have been 40 or 50 million euros.

Law enforcement is not interested at all, as usual. Also, the media is not interested.

Continue reading →

Declaration by John Christmas, Parex Bank whistleblower

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

John Christmas was the whistleblower from Parex Bank. He gave fraud information to Ernst & Young in 2004. He gave fraud information to the Latvian government in 2005. He was terrorized with threats and fled from Latvia. Ernst & Young and the Latvian government ignored the information.

The Parex fraud grew much larger and caused the Latvian Financial Crisis in 2008.

Now in 2012, there still has never been any investigation of the whistleblowing by Latvian (or European) authorities even though the fraud occurred in Latvia (and Europe).

This is a declaration written by John Christmas in January 2010. The declaration was written at the request of Varu Tautai. A translation (with a few errors) used to be online at VaruTautai.lv. Most of the information in the declaration has been censored in the Latvian media.

One note: In January 2010 when the declaration was written, it appeared that the FBI and United States Department of Justice were not going to use the information that they received from Christmas in October 2007. However, in April 2010 it was revealed that the information was used in the USA versus Daimler settlement. The FBI was back in communication with Christmas immediately after the announcement of the settlement.

Declaration

BaFin, Deutsche Bank, Parex Bank

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

Parex Bank whistleblower John Christmas provided fraud information to the German regulator BaFin in May 2006. BaFin gave the information to the Latvian authorities even though Christmas explained that they already had the information.

BaFin could have confirmed that some of the fraud information was true in a few hours. However, BaFin chose to do nothing. As a consequence, Deutsche Bank will lose millions of lats. Also, German taxpayers are bearing some of the burden of bailing out Latvia.

The email below shows that BaFin received information about Parex from Christmas and gave the information to the Latvian authorities. The article below shows that Deutsche Bank owned some of the 52.8 million lats (twice as many dollars) subordinated debt of Parex.

pdf of email from BaFin to Christmas:

BaFin email

pdf snapshot of Deutsche Bank article from 11 April 2012:

Deutsche Bank Baltic Course

link to Deutsche Bank article if the Latvian government hasn’t censored it yet:

http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/finances/?doc=25008&underline=dnb+nord&ins_print

Mizuho Corporate Bank and Parex Bank

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

This email indicates that Parex Bank whistleblower John Christmas provided fraud information to Mizuho Corporate Bank in 2005 and the relationship manager at MCB reacted by getting angry.

MCB decided to lend much more money to Parex after learning that the bank’s financial statements were false. The total amount of syndicated lending increased to approximately 800 million euros and the London office of MCB organized most of it.

When the assets of Parex Bank disappeared in 2008, the Latvian government forced Latvian taxpayers to repay the syndicated loans instead of letting MCB suffer the loss. This decision was the direct cause of the Latvian Financial Crisis.

The Latvian media is completely silent about this issue.

Mizuho Corporate Bank

UK FSA, Ernst & Young Global, Parex Bank

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

The UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Ernst & Young Global knew that Parex Bank was a fraud already in 2007. They also knew that whistleblower John Christmas was being terrorized with murder threats.

However, the FSA and E&Y chose to ignore the information and sit and watch while Parex borrowed approximately one billion euros in London through syndicated loans and bond issuances.

The money disappeared and now ordinary Latvian taxpayers must pay back the creditors with bailout funds from the European Union.

Nobody is being prosecuted anywhere.

FSA and E&Y knew

VIP Avia and Parex Bank

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

Parex Bank used to have a subsidiary called VIP Avia. In the early 2000′s, consultant ABN AMRO advised Parex not to have this frivolous subsidiary, the function of which was providing private jets for the Parex oligarchs.

Parex did not react by selling the subsidiary. Instead, Parex changed its balance sheet to show VIP Avia as a loan to an unrelated party instead of a subsidiary.

This reaction was illegal. However, Latvian authorities refuse to prosecute the responsible people from Parex and Ernst & Young.

John Christmas blew the whistle on this fraud in 2004/2005. Dienas Bizness newspaper published an article about this fraud in 2009.

pdf snapshot from 18 March 2012:

DB VIP Avia

link, if not yet censored by Latvian authorities:

http://www.db.lv/citas-zinas/vip-avia-ierosinats-arpus-tiesiskas-aizsardzibas-process-134233

Guntars Vitols of Parex Bank threatened whistleblower

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

In late 2005, John Christmas learned that the Latvian State Revenue Service (VID) would look at the Parex Bank fraud information. This was great news, because the Latvian Prosecutors Office, Latvian financial regulator, Latvian central bank, Latvian Ministry of the Economy, and other government agencies refused to investigate.

Christmas knew that a senior person in the VID was the mother-in-law of the former President of Parex Asset Management, Guntars Vitols. Vitols spoke often about how much he hated the liars at Parex, and therefore it seemed possible that he wanted revenge.

Christmas asked Vitols to tell what he knew about tax evasion (paying employee bonuses in unreported envelopes stuffed with American hundred-dollar bills) to the VID. Christmas suggested going to the American FBI if the Latvian government did nothing.

Vitols apparently went to Parex and warned them that Christmas might go to the FBI instead of telling what he knew to VID.

Christmas received the warning from Jekaterina Ecina immediately afterward. Parex had sent thugs to look for Christmas.

Fortunately, Christmas was outside of Latvia and therefore safe. He reported the threats to the Latvian government with only one result: Vitols contacted Christmas and said that Christmas should expect a phone call from a prosecutor who will explain that Christmas must renounce the whistleblowing or else get prosecuted.

A prosecutor did not call, however Vitols himself called back. This time, Christmas was ready with a recording device. Vitols tried to convince Christmas to sign a false confession that the whistleblowing was not true, threatening arrest by Interpol and prosecution in Latvia otherwise.

In the transcripts and recordings below, Vitols (acting as an intermediary for Parex Oligarch Viktor Krasovitsky and the Latvian Prosecutors Office) communicates this illegal threat to Christmas.

It is possible to confirm from the recordings that Vitols himself was witness to at least two of the material frauds at Parex. He was witness to tax evasion (bonuses paid in envelopes). And, he was witness to the unreported issuance of stock options (he said “stock agreement” once and “stock option” later).

Continue reading →

Krisjanis Karins, Einars Repse, Ilmars Rimsevics, Janis Maizitis, Janis Kazocins

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

Krisjanis Karins was Latvian Minister of the Economy at the time John Christmas blew the whistle on Parex Bank. Karins was one of the recipients of the original whistleblowing letter from 2005, together with Einars Repse (Minister of Defense), Ilmars Rimsevics (Governor of the Bank of Latvia), and Janis Maizitis (General Prosecutor).

All of these gentlemen ignored the whistleblowing and therefore hold reponsibility for causing the Latvian Financial Crisis. However, Latvian newspapers refuse to inform the Latvian people and therefore the same men are still running Latvia in 2012.

When Christmas began receiving murder threats from Parex, Karins told Christmas to report the problem to Janis Kazocins at the Latvian Constitutional Protection Bureau. Kazocins also ignored the problem and sat and watched while the national economy was destroyed. He also remains in power today.

Karins email

SAB email

Valters Kronbergs, Ernst & Young, Parex Bank

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

When John Christmas learned in August 2004 that the financial statements of his employer, Parex Bank, were false, he blew the whistle as required by law. He gave a long list of frauds to Ernst & Young Baltics partner Valters Kronbergs. If Ernst & Young had withdrawn its audit opinions, as required by law, then the Latvian Financial Crisis never would have happened. Latvia would have a thriving economy today, like its neighbor Estonia.

Unfortunately, Kronbergs reacted to the whistleblowing by sometimes denying that the whistleblowing took place and sometimes getting angry at the whistleblower. The auditors refused to investigate the frauds and continued to sign Parex annual reports until 2009, after the nationalization.

Many more Parex frauds have been revealed in recent years, but the Ernst & Young auditors don’t care. They refuse to withdraw their opinions.

Below is an email in which Kronbergs denied the whistleblowing. It is a simple matter to analyze the wording of this email and determine that he was lying.

And, this paragraph is from a businessman who wrote to Christmas after seeing Kronbergs. While Kronbergs was denying that the whistleblowing occurred in emails, he was telling people that Christmas was a horrible person for being a whistleblower.

“Where are you? Still in Spain? What are you up to? I understand that you are not too popular in some quarters in Riga, especially dangerously – Parex – and some of the ex-pats [Valters Kronbergs] you apparently included in your assault on Parex? So I heard, but that does not mean any of it is true or otherwise.”

Kronbergs denial

FKTK refused to act

Posted on March 28, 2012 by admin1

The Latvian Financial and Capital Markets Commission (FKTK) received details of material frauds at Parex Bank from whistleblower John Christmas in May 2005. The FKTK refused to act. As a result, the Republic of Latvia suffered a financial and demographic crisis when the corrupt government forced the taxpayers to bail out Parex in October 2008. Now in March 2012, Christmas is still waiting for the FKTK to begin to investigate the Parex frauds. He has been unable to enter Latvia since the whistleblowing even though he is a citizen of Latvia. He has been repeatedly threatened with death for many years and Latvian authorities refuse to investigate.

FKTK email

FKTK letter