Financial Institutions

Subscribe to Financial Institutions via RSS

This is the 2nd post in my series about private investigators & what they can & cannot do legally when searching for assets.  It is also the 10th post in my Divorce & Hidden Money series.  The Huffington Post article “Uncovering Hidden Assets In Divorce Litigation” observes that information obtained by “surreptitious means” might be used by one divorcing spouse against the other.  Obtaining information through a surreptitious search can be critical to recovering assets in a broad range of criminal & civil cases.  Depending on the circumstances, surreptitious searches might involve wiretaps; bank searches; law enforcement databases; and physical surveillance.  These surreptitious means have however, sometimes been abused by private investigators, attorneys & others in the following ways:

WIRETAPS– As stated in testimony at a 1967 U.S. Senate hearing ‘private bugging in this country can be divided into two broad categories, commercial espionage and marital litigation.’ ¹  Former attorney Mary Nolan handled divorce & family law matters for nearly 30 years before pleading guilty to the wiretapping & tax fraud charges at counts 1-4 &/or 6 of her 2012 criminal indictment.  An amended judgment showed Ms. Nolan was sentenced to serve 24 months in prison, 3 years of supervised release, etc.  Ms. Nolan’s sentencing memorandum said her cases frequently involved allegations that husbands were hiding assets.  The prosecutor’s sentencing memorandum meanwhile, claimed Ms. Nolan had employed a private investigator “to install eavesdropping devices in cars used by her clients’ spouses for use in their divorce proceedings.”

BANK SEARCHES– Some private investigators try to surreptitiously search banks in the U.S. for accounts secretly opened by divorcing spouses, debtors, etc.  These investigators may claim they search through computer research; insiders; or information brokers.  Private investigators cannot ordinarily search banks legally because of privacy and other U.S. laws, as explained by the post available here.   The Court has also noted “it is more likely than not that the only way that information brokers can obtain private financial information from banks is through the use of deception and trickery, including impersonation of account holders.”  Commonwealth v. Source One Associates, Inc., No. CIV. A. 98-0507-H, 1999 WL 975120, at *6 (Mass. Super. Oct. 12, 1999) aff’d sub nom. Com. v. Source One Associates, Inc., 436 Mass. 118, 763 N.E.2d 42 (2002).
Continue Reading Private Investigators: A Surreptitious Search For Money Hidden In Divorce & Other Cases

At Carmelite Chambers International Fraud & Assert Recovery Conference, I met Advocate & English Barrister Stephen Baker of Baker & Partners from St. Helier, Jersey.  During the Conference, Mr. Baker presented his slideshow with case studies about recovering suspected corruption proceeds or other assets.

Some of Mr. Baker’s slides reveal how foreign bank accounts; multiple jurisdictions and nominees, (i.e. intermediaries), could be used as elements in suspected laundering schemes:

One topic Mr. Baker’s slideshow covers is the investigation of the late Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha.  As Baker & Partners’ webpage explains: “Baker & Partners were central to the successful Jersey investigation into the alleged laundering of the proceeds of the corrupt Nigerian Dictator General Abacha’s crimes through Jersey. This investigation has already resulted in over USD $160,000,000 being returned to Nigeria.”


Continue Reading Searching For Corruption Proceeds & Other Assets On The Island Of Jersey

This is the ninth post in the “Divorce & Hidden Money” series.  By failing to disclose any offshore assets, one divorcing spouse may cheat the other out of child support, alimony or other court awards.  A spouse cheated this way might however, file requests for judicial assistance, (a.k.a. requests for legal assistance, letters of request, or letters rogatory), in a foreign country to collect evidence from witnesses residing there.  

Evidence collected from the foreign witnesses may prove a divorcing spouse concealed bank accounts, businesses, real estate or additional assets offshore.  The post highlights a request for judicial assistance in the U.S. filed by Helga Glock, (“Ms. Glock”), former wife of billionaire Gaston Glock, (“Mr. Glock”), inventor of the Glock pistol.   It features a January 31, 2010 letter Mr. Glock allegedly wrote to his family discussing his plans for them.  The post also discusses accessing Swiss bank account information and updates Helga Glock Claims Gaston Glock Started Concealing His Assets, published January 1st.    

THE LETTER TO MR. GLOCK’S FAMILY

After her divorce from Mr. Glock in Austria on June 27, 2011, Ms. Glock made a  March 18, 2013 request for judicial assistance, (“the Request”),  in the case called In Re: Application of H.M.G., Index No. 13-cv-02598.  The Request included a January 31, 2010 letter, (“the Letter”), Mr. Glock allegedly wrote to his family.  If genuine, the Letter gives a glimpse of Mr. Glock’s dealings with Ms. Glock and their children who worked in the family’s gunmaking business.  The Letter mentioned “the Privatstiftung”, a trust/Austrian private foundation Mr. Glock, Ms. Glock and others reportedly set up as co-settlors.  Some of the key points Mr. Glock allegedly made at the Letter were:

  • “In 1999 I decided to restructure the Glock Group and secure it for all succeeding generations to come through the  Privatstiftung (trust).”

  • “I guarantee the agreed upon payments to the beneficiaries for a lifetime.  I therefore expect appreciation, compliance and acceptance and the respect I deserve as a father.”

  • “I am working on a ‘Glock code of conduct’ which will be implemented and will require all employees and family who access the benefits to adhere to.”

  • “I will not allow any interference with my life long business endeavors.  Therefore, all employed family members will withdraw from the company’s operations.”

(Click On The Image To Read The Letter & Its English Translation)

 


Continue Reading Divorce & Hidden Money: Helga Glock’s Search For Gaston Glock’s Assets

Identifying and immobilizing assets in a timely fashion can be paramount to asset recovery cases ranging from an ultra- high net worth divorce to a forced collection proceeding against a debtor.

The abstract about “Suspending Suspicious Transactions” ¹ similarly mentions the “timely identification and immobilization” of  assets.  The abstract discusses this with regard…

This is the eighth post in the “Divorce & Hidden Money” series.  Like “Four Asset Concealment Tools” and “Four Ways Assets Can Be Secretly Transferred”, the post reveals methods a spouse may use to hide marital assets and keep more than his/her fair share of the marital estate.

Credit/Debit Cards- Using a credit or debit card which draws from a secret foreign bank account is one way divorcing spouses can secrete and/or launder assets.  This method is so common that the IRS established its Offshore Credit Card Program to detect tax cheats maintaining undeclared foreign accounts.

A ‘Zebra’ Strategy (a.k.a Commingling)- A divorcing spouse may conceal marital assets by commingling them with business or other assets.  This ‘zebra’ strategy of mixing assets, is mentioned by the article Cayman Bank Records Seized.   The article discusses Germany’s recent seizure of records and says that some Coutts Trust Company customers “followed a ‘zebra’ strategy of mixing legally declared and taxed accounts containing smaller amounts with undeclared accounts containing larger sums.”

Asset Protection Services- One promotor of these services is Capital Asset, Inc.  Its website claims that forming companies in Nevada, or Wyoming, or Delaware is preferable because: “Do you know that partnerships, corporations, LLCs in most states make you completely visible? If a judge can see your assets, he can seize them.”  Divorcing spouses may hire a promotor of asset protection services to establish such companies which can then be used to open bank accounts or maintain assets with anonymity.

Continue Reading Divorce & Hidden Money: Four Methods Spouses Sometimes Use To Conceal Assets

I will present my program “The Ins & Outs Of Recovering Assets Via Whistleblowers & Other Tipsters” in London at 11:40 AM June 23, 2014, during the Carmelite Chambers International Fraud & Asset Recovery Conference.   “The Ins & Outs Of Recovering Assets Via Whistleblowers & Other Tipsters” highlights how whistleblowers sniff out vast sums of money hidden through laundering and other asset concealment schemes.  I open the program by discussing the fact pattern of a divorcing husband hiding tens of millions of dollars from his wife and domestic tax authorities, by using shell companies, multiple jurisdictions, etc.

The program features Washington, DC attorney Jack Blum who will talk about the IRS Whistleblower Program.  Mr. Blum has been an expert witness for the U.S. Department of Justice and the Internal Revenue Service.  Mr. Blum additionally served as associate counsel, or assistant counsel, or special counsel to three U.S. Senate committees or subcommittees; and been quoted by or mentioned in thousands of newspaper and magazine articles around the world.

Since he resigned at the end of 2008, as “Of Counsel” to Baker & Hostetler’s Washington, DC office, Mr. Blum practices part-time for a select group of clients.  Just one of Mr. Blum’s clients is whistleblower Rudolf Elmer.  As described by “Swiss Banker Blows Whistle on Tax Evasion”, Mr. Elmer provided tips to the IRS, a U.S. Senate subcommittee and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, about suspected tax cheats with offshore bank accounts.  At a January 17, 2011 Frontline Club Press Conference, Mr. Elmer also supplied WikiLeaks with this same kind of information.  Mr. Elmer’s whistleblowing led to his criminal prosecution by Swiss authorities, on charges that he violated Swiss bank secrecy law.Continue Reading Carmelite Chambers International Fraud & Asset Recovery Conference

The search for the true identity of Bitcoin creator Mr. Satoshi Nakamoto is discussed by “Will the Real Satoshi Nakamoto Please Stand Up” and at a video:

Mt. Gox which was once the world’s largest Bitcoin currency exchange, is also in the news.  It made bankruptcy filings in Japan and the U.S. and reportedly lost virtual currency valued at $473 million.

Perhaps most important, is that Bitcoin and other virtual currency can be a major money laundering threat.  This is true because with anonymity, determined criminals may exchange their illicit monies for virtual currency.   As a USA Today editorial explains “drug dealers, tax cheats, money launderers and terrorists do have uses for such a currency. Bitcoin gives them a way to try to hide money or move it to places undetected.”

Moreover, a criminal’s hidden money would presumably be even harder to detect if that criminal used virtual currency like Bitcoin along with the kind of virtual office and internet bank mentioned at Wyomingcorporations.us.
Continue Reading Bitcoin & Other Virtual Currency As A Money Laundering Threat