Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 08:36:50 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Scam Report Against CryptoXchange $100k USD  (Read 20253 times)
repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 06:31:06 AM
 #201

To get adequate service for a statutory demand, postal delivery isn't sufficient.

This is not true.  The ATO - for instance - serves all of their statutory demands by mail to the address on record with ASIC, as do many businesses which issue statutory demands on a regular basis.  This is one reason why not keeping your details current on the ASIC registers is potentially catastrophic.  It's also why it's a good idea to list your lawyer or accountant's office for service of notices because statutory demands are not issued through courts and many people ignore them assuming that they're just a letter of demand because they don't realise their significance.

Where issuing a statutory demand through a lawyer can be tricky is the requirement that the affidavit be sworn by someone who has personal knowledge of the circumstances of the debt -this is obviously somewhat more difficult if the lawyer cannot get the client into their office to swear the affidavit as any deficiency in the affidavit will make render the statutory demand invalid.

Caveats are messy and easily set aside unless you have a true "interest in land".  The onus is on the caveator to prove that such an interest exists and that the caveat is being used for a proper purpose.  Trying to obtain a caveat in relation to the personal property of a company director in regard to a company debt which has not been proven (as opposed to an interest held by a mortgagor, a spouse, a joint property owner, a property purchaser, etc) is asking for the caveat to be set aside with an award of costs against the person who sought it.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
1481143010
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481143010

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481143010
Reply with quote  #2

1481143010
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
AfricanHunter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 157


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 07:19:03 AM
 #202

AML / CFT / KYC is very important in Australia, there is a lot more to this than is shown, we are doing what we legally have to do

Care to show what's not shown?
Have you received a court order or a police order telling you to seize this money or freeze this account?
Here's the thing with AML law: CryptoXchange legally can't tell someone that they're being investigated.
And why telling him that the money's on the way if it isn't? The same way he's refusing to send you notarized documents, it seems by the pictures you've avoided sending him wire receipts.
Because the money was on the way. It was the bank that flagged the transaction, after the wire request was submitted.

Why can't he provide receipts then. Some evidence to feast our eyes upon.
Because the wire never left the bank - it was only ever a request, and the bank denied it.

Image 16. If Crypto thought he was laundering why would he ask the OP to help him get cheap coins, why try to engage in a joint venture with the OP's business?
Because stolen coins are cheap and Ken apparently knows how to properly launder the coins so that he can make some nice, hot, cash.

How can you determine if coins are stolen?

Thinking about doing business with johnniewalkerhttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=72227?
First read this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131841.0

Also, Join the National Rifle Association to protect 2nd Amendment Rights http://membership.nrahq.org/default.asp?campaignid=XR020022
LordGreynick
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 127


View Profile
December 06, 2012, 12:24:00 AM
 #203

To get adequate service for a statutory demand, postal delivery isn't sufficient.

This is not true.  The ATO - for instance - serves all of their statutory demands by mail to the address on record with ASIC, as do many businesses which issue statutory demands on a regular basis.  This is one reason why not keeping your details current on the ASIC registers is potentially catastrophic.  

ATO and ASIC are able to. Your own lawyers aren't.

I've been down this road many times and I've had people have judgments overturned due to inadequate service. Fortunately, once their heads come up (by way of their lawyers) we serve the lawyers. Fixed.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!