"HOUSTON V. HOUSTON ET AL." CONTINUED
|
TD Bank Financial Group ombudsman David M. Fisher was quite verbose (at least initially) in his
correspondence with me. He has a big mouth. With every successive e-mail or letter he'd put his
foot farther into that big mouth of his, he'd dig a deeper hole for himself and his employer. John A.
Graham, on the other hand, the BMO Financial Group ombudsman, possesses the same off-handed
arrogance, but he displays his pomposity in a much more curt manner. He hasn't had much to say
to me at all.
In June 2004, starting with Shirley E. Giroday's theft from the Squamish, BC branch of Bank of
Montreal, I commenced reporting BMO Financial Group's fraud problem to its law department in
Toronto. At the time I didn't know about the ombudsman process so I wrote to their legal people.
BMO Financial Group steadfastly denied any wrongdoing had occurred in its releasing of my funds
to a third party. Lorraine Howard, senior legal counsel with BMO's law department, sent me a
letter saying Bank of Montreal was complying with the instructions of a court order when it released
my funds to Shirley E. Giroday. Attached was a copy of Carey D. Veinotte's January 28, 2002 BC
Supreme Court order. Howard sent a copy of her letter to Giroday as well. For some reason
Howard felt it was appropriate to bring Giroday into my private discussion with the bank. When I
followed up the matter, Howard referred me to the Vancouver law firm Lawson Lundell. Lawson
Lundell was apprised of the problems I've encountered at BMO Financial Group. Peter J. Roberts
of Lawson Lundell said his firm wouldn't react until a suit was filed. BMO Financial Group's
previous President and Chief Executive Officer Tony Comper received full disclosure from me as
well.
I was never informed by BMO Financial Group that it's required by law to have a dispute resolution
mechanism in place. Instead of directing me to its ombudsman, BMO sent me to an independent
law firm to resolve a grievance. Lorraine Howard knew, or ought to have known, that BMO
Financial Group has its own internal ombudsman to deal with these kinds of matters. BMO
Financial Group deliberately sent me down a dead-end road. I report a theft to BMO and they
direct me to a downtown Vancouver law firm for redress. You want your money back? Go talk to
our pit bulls. BMO Financial Group took a hardline - downright hostile - approach to the complaint.
I found out about the legal requirement of all banks to have an ombudsman incidentally when
conducting research on the Internet.
I first wrote to John A. Graham, BMO Financial Group's ombudsman, on October 21, 2006 and
informed him of the thefts at Bank of Montreal and BMO Nesbitt Burns. I demanded that the
assets in the accounts be restored with accrued interest, dividends, distributions, etc. No reply was
received. I prompted him again and eventually received a response dated December 7, 2006. In
the December 7, 2006 letter Graham explained that because the matter had been before the courts
his office is exempted from investigating the issues. He would not look into the theft of $84,548.93
from the Bank of Montreal accounts of Alco Enterprises Ltd. by a Powell River, BC lawyer. Nor
would he investigate the reasons for the liquidation of the Powell River Investments Ltd. accounts at
BMO Nesbitt Burns and the paying of the proceeds, $787,169.07, to PricewaterhouseCoopers.
According to the BMO Financial Group ombudsman, when an account has a court proceeding in its
history BMO Financial Group no longer has to recognize legal compliance, they can do whatever
they want with the money. It's an outrageous position for a bank to take regarding its compliance
obligations, especially if the assets are being held in trust pursuant to the outcome of legal
proceedings. But I've read the same cop-out many times from other regulators too: the matter is
before the courts so the rules have been suspended.
Then the BMO Financial Group ombudsman tried to con me into believing the transactions were
perfectly legal, that the brokerage didn't do anything wrong, it was just obeying a court order when
it released in excess of three quarters of a million dollars of a client's cash to a third party in 2005.
In the letter he goes on to say: "The Bank in complying with the court order on instructions from
the Receiver Manager simply transferred corporate assets into other corporate accounts." That
statement is profoundly absurd in its stupidity. BMO's ombudsman is saying BMO Nesbitt Burns
was obeying a court order when it sold off all the Powell River Investments Ltd. assets and wrote
out a cheque for the proceeds to a third party. You'd think he'd have known better than to put such
a blatant lie in writing. For one thing the transactions didn't occur at a bank, they occurred at a
brokerage. And what I reported was no transfer of assets from one account to another. According
to BMO Nesbitt Burns' own documentation the transaction was a massive cash payment of
someone else's dough to PwC. That's no account-to-account asset transfer. And no court order
exists allowing BMO Nesbitt Burns to deliver a large lump sum of Powell River Investments Ltd.
capital to the Vancouver, BC offices of PricewaterhouseCoopers either.
In response I asked that BMO Financial Group provide me with a copy of the court order the
ombudsman claims it was complying with. In a letter dated January 9, 2007 Graham informed me I
don't have legal authority to receive any information about the accounts, it's none of my business,
even if my name is being used in the commission of the fraud. There was no court order attached
to his letter. To date BMO has not produced a copy of the court order it claims it was complying
with. The reason? They can't. No court order exists. John A. Graham lied about the existence of
a court order allowing BMO Nesbitt Burns to funnel corporate cash from the accounts of Powell
River Investments Ltd. to PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc.
Instead of investigating the various fraud events, BMO Financial Group's ombudsman remitted two
denials of wrongdoing, he made up some excuses about why he wouldn't investigate the matter.
Graham didn't have much to say and what he did say was intended to mislead me. Since receiving
his denials I've reported more than half a dozen additional, individually distinct incidents of
misconduct occurring out of the Comox, BC branch of BMO Nesbitt Burns to BMO's ombudsman.
BMO's ombudsman has not replied to any of the correspondence. On January 9, 2007 BMO's
ombudsman closed the door on me.
BMO Financial Group does not have a functioning ombudsman office.
Julie Marche, who's described herself as Manager, Client Complaints Division, Retail Compliance at
BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc., sent me three letters in response to my demands that the stolen assets in
the BMO Financial Group accounts be restored. She said the same thing in each one: Your name
isn't listed as an authorized individual for the accounts therefore BMO is unable to provide you with
any information about them. A crock. Sending account statements to my disabled father
documenting the repellent incidents of fraud repeatedly happening out of the Comox, BC branch
was something BMO Nesbitt Burns could do without being asked. It's not that BMO can't provide
the information, they can. BMO instead has chosen not to. Assuring me impropriety occurring in
my name will stop and be addressed is a gesture BMO Financial Group won't undertake. When
confronted with problems BMO Financial Group's posturing is defensive and hostile.
I took the matter upstairs to the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments, another
confused, ramshackle office. When they say FOR Banking Services and Investments, they mean it.
It's not for victims of financial services fraud. You'll recall how OBSI blew me off when I reported
the TD Waterhouse problems. They put up the same defense for BMO Financial Group. OBSI is
completely biased in favour of the banks/brokerages.
In December 2006 OBSI was informed of the $85K Bank of Montreal theft and the $787K BMO
Nesbitt Burns theft. Additionally I reported to OBSI that a bogus April 1, 2003 BC Supreme Court
order had been used to tamper with Powell River Investments Ltd. funds at BMO Nesbitt Burns. I
explained how the BMO ombudsman refused to investigate the matter.
Even though I instructed OBSI to communicate with me only by regular mail, Doug Weber, an
OBSI employee, sent me a couple of e-mails looking for more information. I didn't provide OBSI
an e-mail address and I don't know where they got mine from. Weber informed me the BMO
ombudsman had indeed issued findings on the matters (he didn't issue any "findings"), and he
requested a copy of the PwC receivership order restricting PwC access to the assets. The order
clearly states PwC is not permitted to sell any asset in receivership. Weber asked about the status
of the police investigation. Which police investigation is that, Doug? Contact the cops yourself, I
told him. How would I know? I don't know why Weber pestered me for this information. As it
turns out it wasn't necessary. OBSI didn't need any additional info from me to complete their
assessments. Another nosy government employee who can't mind his business.
Four months later, in April 2007, I received a review of some of the BMO Financial Group
misconduct. Shock. The document was shock. A shock statement. It was atrocious, downright
appalling. It was so insulting I could barely read it. Weber started with his compilation of the
background of the case. His facts looked like they'd been compiled by a child, a five-year old.
Among other lies, Weber claimed an order of the court gave my dad's lawyer authority to take
action pursuant to Alco Enterprises Ltd.; Weber claimed my dad signed an indemnity that allowed
Bank of Montreal to pay $85,000.00 from Alco Enterprises Ltd. directly to Shirley E. Giroday;
Weber claimed PwC was appointed receiver April 1, 2003; Weber claimed BMO Nesbitt Burns paid
PwC $787,169.07 pursuant to a court judgment; Weber claimed my father was granted a no-contact
order against me on December 9, 2005 and I could only communicate with my dad through legal
counsel. Excuse me? A no-contact order? Those are fighting words. And what's that got to do
with financial fraud? Who is this guy? Like my e-mail address, I don't know where in god's name
he got these crazy notions from. All were fabricated and false. Was he trying to offend me or is
this person really that stupid? Had Weber jumbled up the facts deliberately as an obstruction tactic?
He sounded like a total lunatic.
Weber's ultimate review, which in his letter he called OBSI's Views, stated that OBSI's mandate
prevents it from investigating matters which have been, or are, before the courts. Hire a lawyer and
appeal the court judgments. OBSI will take no action on the matter.
How does someone respond to filth like that? Why would the government send an offensive
statement like that in the mail? I had to cool down. I shelved the letter for future assessment and
tried to forget about it.
Then I got another incendiary letter from Weber in June 2007, this one a review of the
non-compliant order used fraudulently to sell a company asset. He begins by talking about my
father's health problems, his physical and mental disabilities since suffering a stroke in 1996. That's
germane to fraud at BMO Nesbitt Burns how? Weber then claims I reported to OBSI a court
judgment gave a lawyer authority to take action with respect to the assets of the companies. I told
OBSI no such thing. Where's he getting this nonsense from? My guess is he was repeating the
defense he was hearing from BMO Financial Group.
This time the results of Weber's findings took the form of OBSI's Analysis and OBSI's Position. It
was no longer OBSI's Views. What was OBSI's Analysis? An April 1, 2003 judgment of the court
granted BMO Nesbitt Burns liberty to sell the NCE Petrofund Trust Units held by Powell River
Investments, a company in receivership. The sale of this asset netted $27,980.00 cash in the Powell
River Investments Ltd. brokerage account. And OBSI's Position? OBSI's mandate prevents it
from investigating matters which have been, or are, before the courts. Hire a lawyer and appeal the
court judgments. The file is closed.
All I could see was red. I calmed down, pulled the April 2007 OBSI letter out of the bottom drawer
and wrote a reply to both reviews. I told Weber his assessments were completely invalid since they
were based on his false assertions. I pointed out there's no judgment giving any lawyers authority
over my companies. I asked for clarification regarding OBSI's mandate. Is it really OBSI's official
position that financial institutions have complete discretion to tamper with privately-owned assets in
any way if the owner of the account has been named in a court case? Is OBSI saying legal
compliance no longer has to be recognized when a court judgment exists somewhere in the
background of a bank or brokerage account?
And take a closer look at the April Fool's Day order you're citing to justify the sale of the Powell
River Investments Ltd. asset, I told him. Although the order ostensibly appears to be the result of
an application to the court by PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc., you'll note that neither PwC nor its
agent have endorsed the order. PwC's legal counsel's signature is not on the order anywhere. As
such it's not a valid court order. It's a phony court order. According to the order itself, PwC took
no part in its procurement. PwC was not in court when it was obtained. It's not a legal court
judgment. The appropriate action by BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. when confronted with fake court
orders isn't to blindly cooperate with the crooks, but rather to reject any demands made by third
parties pursuant to the documents and report the matter to the authorities immediately. Is it
necessary for me to point that out to OBSI?
I suggested OBSI consult its legal department and vet the order past counsel. This is simple fraud
prevention we're talking about here. OBSI's attempts to stonewall and cover up securities fraud
with a bogus court order amounts to unlawful obstruction. I demanded OBSI reconsider its position
on the validity of the false document it was citing to justify the sale of the securities. Attached to
my follow-up was a new complaint against BMO Nesbitt Burns.
That was it for OBSI. The doors closed. I blew their house down, not much huffing n' puffing
required. They won't accept any more complaints from me. I've filed half a dozen distinct
grievances with OBSI in the six months since getting Doug Weber's June 2007 letter bomb. OBSI
jumped around like incompetent jackasses then flopped. OBSI hasn't said anther word to me.
The Investments Dealers Association of Canada does not accept brokerage complaints from the
public either. They claim to, the government tells us they do. They don't. I already wrote about
how IDA shut down my TD Waterhouse beef. Same with my BMO gripes.
The first complaint against BMO Nesbitt Burns was filed with IDA December 2006. I reported the
illegal liquidation of all the assets of a company in receivership at BMO Nesbitt Burns and the
payoff of the proceeds to a third party, PricewaterhouseCoopers. No paperwork exists to justify the
transactions. It's full-on no-holds-barred fraud. Two weeks later IDA wrote to say my complaint
had been received and will be reviewed. Another letter came in February 2007 assuring me the
matter was still being investigated. After three months IDA's assessment finally arrived in March
2007. IDA employee Jocelyn Beckett's review consisted of a brief paragraph at the foot of her
one-page letter. Beckett's review? IDA will take no action. The filed is closed. Their excuse? I
didn't open the accounts at BMO Nesbitt Burns.
The Investment Dealers Association of Canada employed the feeble, pathetic excuse that because I
don't have signing authority on my company accounts there exists no problem between BMO
Nesbitt Burns and PwC. IDA said I have to step back and helplessly watch more theft occur.
BMO Nesbitt Burns can liquidate every last dime of my corporate capital, pay it out to PwC, and
IDA won't do a thing to stop it. No wrongdoing occurred at BMO Nesbitt Burns' Comox, BC
branch, the transactions I reported are legal and compliant because I didn't open the accounts. "We
have closed our file and will be taking no further action in this regard" Beckett wrote.
I filed half a dozen subsequent BMO Nesbitt Burns complaints with IDA in the eight months since
they exonerated BMO, every complaint a different incident of fraud, and the replies were always the
same. In a September 18, 2007 letter IDA employee Susan Farrell said IDA would no longer
answer my correspondence.
IDA is not a financial services regulatory agency. IDA does not combat financial crime.