ERVA has received a summary of the interrogation of the Danske Bank staff members from an undisclosed source.
Morten Runo Waaben said that he was just the investor and came into the bank in 2006, at a later stage.
Acting lawyers were not too keen on his side of the story because he was merely the investment manager, and was not involved in the signing up of the claimant. However, his version of how the investment was conducted grossly differs from the truth; he stated that it was Euan Armstrong who instructed how the spread of the investments should be allocated and that in fact, against his own advice, Euan wanted a higher risk approach.
Morten also said that he was aware that Euan was an ‘avid’ investor, with substantial experience.
Henrik Hjerrild Hansen went on to deny any involvement in the sale stating that although he had signing the product at the Notary Public, it was all done via Luxembourg. When lawyers confronted him on his knowledge of what he was really signing at the Notary Office, he said he was aware it was a mortgage loan but little else.
In respect of his involvement with the Danske Office in Spain, he said that his role was merely that of general information to the public about the bank and its services, without providing advice. This is hardly consistent with the their own publicity:
When lawyers asked him about Spanish tax matters, he said he had little clue about this as that was not his role or remit, and again referred the matter to Luxembourg. Lawyers strongly confronted this statement appealing to his own LinkedIn profile, which he has now removed, where he seems ‘the’ expert in Private Banking with Danske, after 40 years of service for this entity.
Finally, the lawyer for the bank, Ole Stenersen, was quite a funny chap although could not help stop lying. In his words, he was no tax expert and could not answer anything about the Capital Assurance Product. He denied knowledge of this set up and referred it to ‘someone else’ within bank. Surprisingly, when his counsel starting asking questions about this same matter, he suddenly had the answers in respect to whether a mortgage loan for tax purposes refers not to the mortgage itself, but to the loan and how it gets invested.
He also gave inconsistent answers about the KPMG letter citing just one paragraph of it whilst, barefacedly, denied the other (one where KPMG states that they never authorized the tax benefits of the product).
ERVA is now hoping that other victims of these thieves will wish to join the case; in connection to this.
It is our determination to impede Danske Bank get away with this and we are truly hoping that this matter will go to trial.
We will not finish this post without mentioning a new participant soon to be exposed, Mr. Soren Glente.
Does it go without saying, or has anyone ever heard of any of these equity release schemes performing as we were told they would ?
For the record:::: Morten Runo stated that I had control of where the money that Danske Bank had use of my mortgage which was being lost very quickly by the Bank was untrue. I had no control over how he and his account managers disposed of my money. Never did I wish to invest in any high risk involvements of my money. In fact on many occasions I asked for explanations as to why the value of the investment was reducing. I was told that there was no problem with the accounts yet the Bank was reducing the value of the mortgage by 55.000 euros per annum on average. So from 2004 until 2011 Danske Bank lost 850.000 euros of my investment of 1.000.000 euros and they then attempted to force me to sell my family property for 900.000 euros so they could have the money they had lost. My property was valued at 1.500.000 euros.
In Court Morten Runo lied about how he advised me on the investments. My life as a yacht captain excluded me from understanding anything about investment or stocks and shares or foreign currency transactions which is what Danske Bank was always pushing at me.
Yet another four years has passed since this Court deposition was made available to the public. Since then Danske Bank has been dicovered as a huge illegal criminal money laundering bank and the chief executives fired. These senior management posts and those who advise the clients should be held in prison until the Courts of the countries involved, especially Denmark, have thoroughly investigated how many laws were broken. Furthermore it is high time Danske Bank is taken to task over the ïnvestments¨ offered to the old age pensioners in Spain and France. Every clause of these investment offers was a lie and this has been proved by the able workings of our principal lawyer, Antonio Flores, of Lawbird, Marbella. Over the last ten years he has searched every detail of these agreements and found them to be totally misleading and misrepresentation. We members of the Equity Release Victims Association now are once again suing Danske Bank for a settlement and offer of recompense for all their thieving and lying