It looks like the definition of a CHICKEN SHIT COWARD continues to be the BCSC’s junior litigator Olubode Fagbamiye! In repeated request for Fagbamiye to answer our questions, he continues to cower and hide from answering any of them (or even denying our allegations). As you are aware, we sent him a formal letter on December 7, 2016 after our phone call to his office. During the phone call on December 5, 2016 he specifically says to write the questions down and communicate via written correspondence. Was he just saying that to get off the phone? It now appears so!
According to our friends at http://bcsccriminalcharges.blogspot.ca , this would put Fagbamiye in breach of a “Statutory Requirement for a government department to reply to all written correspondence within 14 days…”. If true, how does this continue to happen at the British Columbia Securities Commission? How are they above the law?
Mr. Fagbamiye – how does it feel to look in the mirror and know that you are part of the issues that continue to haunt the BCSC? How does it feel to be such a coward and fail miserably at your job?
Can someone working at the BCSC go down the hall way and make sure he is awake? Perhaps he naps throughout his days and has issues with getting his job done? Who knows?
This continues to get more and more ridiculous! Wake up Fagbamiye!!
Staff at the Law Society of British Columbia have made it very clear they have no intention of assisting us in our plight to get answers from the Staff at the British Columbia Securities Commission. They too, have decided to keep their heads in the sand and the fact they will not even investigate our complaint would lead us to believe they too are in on this massive cover-up!
In a recent letter sent to us – the Law Society acknowledge they have received our candid emails sent in December 2016 and the early part of January 2017 but indicate they would like to be removed from our email list.
This is most unfortunate considering they exist because of instances like this – they are there to make sure their lawyers act accordingly as defined in their Act and their Code of Professional Conduct. One can easily see that they have a portion of their office that is there to investigate complaints regarding lawyers in the Province of BC. We have a complaint and these people have elected to not do an investigation! What a joke!
And to be clear, we formally complained about the actions of Staff in 2015 (specifically Staff manipulating the evidence in our case and why Staff did not take our Settlement Proposal to the Executive Director of the BCSC). That was then – this is now!
Our latest letters focused on the fact that the BCSC’s Cracker Jack Lawyer (Olubode Fagbamiye) has not responded to our numerous letters demanding answers to our simple questions. This is completely separate from our initial complaint but it appears some flunky named Lynne Knights of the Law Society of BC, is easily confused or she had not read the emails I sent to her. And we can see that she has opened files in the past – a complaint of a non-practicing lawyer that killed a neighbors rabbits was opened by Knights in 2010. I guess our complaint just doesn’t make the sniff test down at the Law Society these days – or the bozos at the Commission are immune from accusations of wrongdoing! This whole system at the Law Society is broke and needs to be fixed! And it should start with the immediate termination of the incompetent Lynne Knights!
The Law Society of BC’swebsite boldly states, “The legal profession takes seriously its commitment to maintain high ethical standards.” but they will not investigate a complaint from a citizen concerned with the actions of one of their members? This reeks of “protecting their own at any cost” or they are just another agency run by a bunch of misfits.
For any of the former investors in FCC or DCF that want to contact Ms. Knights directly to lodge a complaint about Mr. Fagbamiye, please do so at her email address:
As recently reported by http://bcsecuritiescommissionasham.blogspot.ca – it appears that the British Columbia Securities Commission (‘BCSC”)physically regulates corporations that they have physically invested into via their public sector pension and retirement operator (the British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (“BCIMC”).
On the website operated by BCIMCit states, “With a global portfolio of more than $121.9 billion, bcIMC is one of Canada’s largest institutional investors within the capital markets. We invest on behalf of public sector clients in British Columbia. Our activities help finance the retirement benefits of more than 538,000 plan members, as well as the insurance and benefit funds that cover over 2.3 million workers in British Columbia. Based in Victoria, British Columbia and supported by industry-leading expertise, we offer our public sector clients responsible investment options across a range of asset classes: fixed income; mortgages; public and private equity; real estate; infrastructure; and renewable resources. Our investments provide the returns that secure our clients’ future payments and obligations.”
As you can see (below) in a portion of the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report, we see that the BCSC holds just over $20.3 million in bcIMC investments.
In the section below – again taken directly from the BCSC’s 2015-2016 Annual Service Plan Report (and supposedly written by Brenda Leong) the writer outlines the BCSC mandate with respect to their investments. One can immediately notice there is no disclosure that they regulate their own investments. In the wording (underlined in red) we can see they indicate “Our investment policy allows us to buy units of the following bcIMC pooled funds….” but again fail to acknowledge anything that can/and should be considered offside.
And in the underlined section above we see that in “their” opinion, their “investments do not expose the BCSC to significant credit or material market risk because we invest in liquid, high quality money market instruments, government securities, and investment-grade corporate debt securities.”
IS THIS BECAUSE THEY REGULATE THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS AND THAT THEY WOULD NEVER SANCTION COMPANIES IN WHICH THEY HAVE INVESTED?
Turning our attention now back to the bcIMC website, we have found their end of March 2016 Investment Inventory List (Click on link). At a simple glance, we see hundreds and hundreds of names of companies – some are well known and others many have never heard of. There are literally companies from all over the world and some are located right here in British Columbia.
Here is where it gets interesting, there are names on this list that the BCSC has battled (or is currently battling) as it combats securities fraud, mis-representations, excess fee’s violations and other regulatory issues.
But that is all fine – I imagine there will be people that say, “Who cares, I am sure the IF one of these companies committed some sort of a securities crimes or had some sort of regulatory issue – I am sure the BCSC would conduct themselves in a professional manner…”
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the BCSC vs HSBC , known as 2016 BCSECCOM 185 – a matter that presented itself to the BCSC. It seems that a division of HSBC had over-charged their own clients excess fees “Due to inadequate controls and supervision, it did not apply this policy consistently, which resulted in some clients paying extra fees.” For their trouble, the Respondents (who’s head office is the Worlds’ 6th largest bank worth $2.4 TRILLION dollars) had to pay $300,000 CDN and costs of the investigation of $20,000. And they had to pay just under $7.1 million of the fees the OVERCHARGED back to their clients. CASE DISMISSED!!
It is important to look at the timing of this matter – it was during a stretch of time AFTER former Executive Director Paul Bourque was fired or quit and BEFORE present BCSC Executive Director Peter Brady was put into the position. You guessed it – BCSC Chair Brenda Leong approved this Settlement Agreement.
This definitely needs a closer look by a government watchdog organization! Why is there no disclosure in the BCSC financial overview that the public reads that they in fact regulate companies in which they have investments into.
SHAME ON YOU BCSC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PETER J. BRADY!
On March 8, 2017, one of the former investors in FCC emailed the British Columbia Securities Commission, pleading with them to answer questions pertaining to the Settlement Offer that was presented by the Respondents before the hearing in April 2014. This was the same Settlement Offer that we discussed in our March 7, 2017 blog post .
Peter J. Brady
Despite our sending the BCSC our Declaration at 10:43 AM on the morning of March 8, 2017, Mr. Peter Brady has once again used the same old regurgitated bullshit response in his reply email to Mr. Schacher. And lets be clear – Mr. Schacher received the reply AFTER we had sent our email to Staff at the Commission (including Mr. Brady) our permission to freely and openly discuss the Settlement Offer with the former investors.
Brady appears to be a two-time BCSC career guy that has bounced back and forth between his cushy government position and the private sector. Brady makes well over $300,000 per year in his latest roll at the Commission and its time he starts earning that paycheck – ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AND STOP PLAYING THESE BULLSHIT GAMES! Case in point…
What are they hiding? They won’t talk to me – they won’t talk to the former investors? Who will they talk to? Can one not conclude they are a bunch of overpaid, over-zealous cowards at this point?
The BCSC Staff cost the investors any opportunity to participate in the Deercrest project and WE want to know why they did this. They should have maintained their corporate mandate and had the interest of the investors at heart – they should have at least ‘entertained’ the Settlement Offer and then chose to accept it or decline it. Better yet – they SHOULD have told the investors about it and allowed them to accept or decline it! WHY DID THEY NOT DO THIS?
We need more of you to contact them? We need to find out why! They cannot ignore all of you! Please send correspondence to them immediately! We need answers BEFORE we can move on with our lives!
Executive Director PETER BRADY at the BCSC has indicated to a former investor that he is NOT able to discuss the Settlement Offer brought forth by the Respondents BEFORE the hearing that would have seen the investors participate in the Deercrest project with NO involvement from Wharram or the other Respondents. In his email to the investor, he cites a confidentiality clause that permits him from discussing the details of our Settlement Offer. In that we (as a Respondent that WROTE the Settlement Offer) have been ignored by the Staff at the BCSC for many months now – we are hoping the former investors in FCC and DCF will now be able to get answers from the good people at the BCSC.
Today, as at 10:43 AM, I have sent the following email to the Commission:
The declaration sent to the BCSC is as follows:
We wish the former investors well in attempting to get answers from the BCSC – answers that believe it or not – we (the Respondents) have not been able to get from them. They have been silent for far too long and it is time they answer why they did not even internally discuss the settlement (that would have helped the former investor recoup funds lost in the investment). As we blogged (click on link) in the past, the BCSC did not even have a discussion with respect to the settlement offer – they only wanted me to plead guilty to ALL allegation and pay fines and disgorgement in the amount of $5.8 million dollars!
Recently, many of you have asked to see proof of the Settlement Offer that we had sent to the British Columbia Securities Commission in November 2013 – some 5-6 months BEFORE the hearing.
As we have indicated in the past, the BCSC had made an order in June 2013 indicating we had to resign from any and all companies that relied upon securities regulations. They seized 5 bank accounts that had approximately $63,000 in them. This too, occurred BEFORE we had the hearing.
By November of 2013, Primex (the Lender) was becoming very impatient and needed the Deercrest property to move forward one way or another. I approached Kerkhoff Construction and they agreed (with many other terms) to allow the investors in both Falls Capital Corp and Deercrest Construction Fund to participate as non-voting shareholders. This would have seen the investors participate in net profits of the Deercrest property as it was developed.
As you will see below, the Settlement Agreement focused on the well-being of the former investors and allowed light at the end of the tunnel in terms of possibly seeing funds put back into their control.
As of the summer of 2016 – the Deercrest property has completed and sold the 12 partially completed units and have begun the necessary steps of completing the remaining 40-50 units that will occupy the site. From what can be easily determined – the property would currently have very little debt and the remaining units will have substantial profits. The investors would have received 35% of this profit until to projects completion. The market has exploded in Chilliwack and the units are in very high demand.
We sent the BCSC our Settlement Offer on November 7, 2013 – and they did not even respond until December 31, 2013 – some 7 weeks later. And again – the Staff Litigators (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) indicated they would not take the Settlement Offer to the Executive Director (the only person that could accept the Settlement Offer) – instead, they said they would need me to agree to ALL of the allegations and pay fines and disgorgement of over $5,800,000. This is extortion! No where in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does it indicate a person must plead guilty to all allegations before a court will entertain a settlement. In fact, we would think there is protection of actions like this in one would read it.
Our Settlement Offer looked like this:
NOTE: ^ This document contained a typo – the shares allotted to the former investors was 35% – not 25% as mentioned above.
Former Investors – do you think it is OK that the Staff at the BCSC did not even take the Settlement Offer to their boss? Or do you think that the BCSC should have done something to uphold their mandate which is to “uphold investor confidence”? BCSC Mission Statement (Click here)
If for one minute you do NOT think this is OK – we think you should contact them at firstname.lastname@example.org or at their main switchboard at 604-899-6500. Ask for Peter Brady (Executive Director), Brenda Leong (Chair), or Douglas Muir (Director of Enforcement). Don’t expect a phone call back as they seem to be hiding under their desks – afraid to answer these very important questions.
Of note – one of the former investors did have contact with Peter Brady a while back and he would not answer her questions – citing that there was a confidentiality clause that prohibits him talking about any case to a Third Party. As this directly affects the former investors – I would suggest that this is NOT a Third Party situation…
THAT BEING SAID, ANY OF THE FORMER INVESTORS THAT WOULD LIKE ME TO SIGN A DOCUMENT INDICATING YOU HAVE FULL AUTHORITY TO DISCUSS THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ANY BCSC STAFF MEMBER LET ME KNOW AND I WILL ARRANGE TO HAVE IT PREPARED!
Does anyone find it extremely ironic that they cite not being able to talk to the investors about their and our matter – but then they will not talk to me either? They are a complete joke run by incompetent people!
Many of you have recently asked how I (with NO legal assistance) was able to have the majority – some 94% of the allegations against me dismissed by the Panel. You have to remember that during the hearing I was by myself with no help whatsoever. Staff for the Commission had two lawyers, an assistant, a law library, RCMP officers, Court Ordered Summons, and other Staff members (that lurked in the gallery) for the time leading up to the hearing, during the hearing, and after the hearing – all to strengthen their case. In addition, the hearing days would go to roughly 4 PM daily and I had to face rush hour traffic on the 90-120 minute drive home every day. The hearing lasted 7 days from April 7 – 16, 2014.
For those that do not know the standard procedure – at the conclusion of the oral hearing the Panel instructed both parties to submit Written Submission on Liability with the Executive Director releasing their’s first, then ours, then the Executive Director has an opportunity to reply to our submissions.
On May 16, 2014, the Executive Director via their Staff Litigators issued their Submissions on Liability – again this was a summary of their case against me and I was to defend myself against whatever was in this document. This is the same document at PARAGRAPH #10 that we allege that Staff (C. Paige Leggat and Olubode Fagbamiye) manipulated evidence in an attempt to persuade the reader into believing their theory of the allegations against us. Their document is here:
Now. for the first time, I am going to release the Respondent’s Submissions on Liability document that I wrote after the hearing to fight my side of the matter and to fight against the bullshit story the Executive Director desperately tried to prove. It is our opinion that our writing this document (and exposing the bogus attempts by Staff) that allowed the BCSC Panel to dismiss the $5.45 million fraud they tried to pin on us. Our document is here:
Understanding that it is a long read, we encourage you to read it a couple of times – again this document was completed with NO legal assistance and completely blew the Staff’s $5.45 million fraud allegation out of the water! Even though the damage was done via their slanderous press release that caused the Vancouver Province to run with the headline, “INVESTORS MILLIONS EVAPORATE” – despite that being the farthest thing from the truth.
People have asked me how I was able to have the most significant allegations against me thrown out by the Panel – my answer is always the same – “I told the truth and exposed (in our opinion) an attempt by Staff at the Commission to deceive the Panel by manipulating the evidence to suit a theory that was NOT correct.”