[For news on NWT Mint, see http://about.ag/NWTMint.htm]
[For research on bullion dealers, see http://BullionDealerData.com]




Forum
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


 
Poll Results
 
 Should you be considered a Secured Creditor?
 Yes 5 71%
 No 2 28%
 View Voters
Multiple choice poll. Total votes: 7. This poll has been closed.


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
JG

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 991
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxster
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm as capable of logic as anyone else.


Well said. I think that's what we are all working on here.

And Bullion Direct hasn't even addressed your situation -- if you shipped metal to them, and they were storing it for you, what happened to it? The whole "We thought we didn't have to purchase it" line about Section 6.7 doesn't apply here.

0
tboll

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 299
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JG
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxster
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm as capable of logic as anyone else.


Well said. I think that's what we are all working on here.

And Bullion Direct hasn't even addressed your situation -- if you shipped metal to them, and they were storing it for you, what happened to it? The whole "We thought we didn't have to purchase it" line about Section 6.7 doesn't apply here.



To the contrary...
Products that have been delivered to BullionDirect®?s storage facility (bear in mind that BD's "storage" facility is their metal recieving and shipping depository, so any metal coming in for storage or for selling, is coming into their storage facility and until they send it to the recipient, the title is in BD's name and we have agreed to let them use it, whatever the heck "use" means) for Customer will be held in safekeeping on a fungible basis and Customer will receive title to an undivided share of the Products so held. Notwithstanding the passage of title to Customer, BullionDirect® may use such Products, in fungible form, held for Customer. Customer understands that such usage of the Products in this form may result in gains or losses, which will inure solely to the benefit of BullionDirect®

It would seem that "fungible" is really key and how much leniency the judge/law gives to "use".  If fungible means, gold must stay gold and silver must stay silver, then the sum total of all mailed in metal that has not been transferred out to it's new owner should still be in the vault.  All sums of money paid for the purchases of undelivered metal, should be in some sort of bank account awaiting DRAW (purchase and delivery).  If the law allows them to "use" the metal as metal and the currency as currency, then what constitutes a reasonable & legitimate use?

Lastly, did the change in terms allow them to sell all the metal they had stored prior to 2012?  I think they will argue that because the terms were revised so that they did not have to purchase the metal until delivery request and they will claim that all account holders agree to the new condition, that they could then sell off all the metal and not be obligated to convert it back to metal until it was requested.

JG,  you know I'm playing devil's advocate here.   AndyG's had started a thread to try to second guess (anticipate) what BD's defense was going to be so that customers could be ready to tear it apart.  Nemo has suggested that using the offensive front would be the way to go.  I'm not a lawyer and I have no idea which approach is better.  But I think it would be prudent of us to anticipate what they are going to say in an effort to avoid civil or criminal action against them.
0
JG

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 991
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tboll


Well said. I think that's what we are all working on here.

And Bullion Direct hasn't even addressed your situation -- if you shipped metal to them, and they were storing it for you, what happened to it? The whole "We thought we didn't have to purchase it" line about Section 6.7 doesn't apply here.



To the contrary...
[//QUOTE]

You're referring to 6.7 in general, which may or may not apply (we may need to ask nemo exactly what "for customer" means). But I do not believe the Bensimon Declaration covered how BD treated such metal.

But again, it seems like most of these arguments are really outside the bankruptcy (e.g. if fraud occurred), and do not change how creditors (or owners) are treated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tboll
Lastly, did the change in terms allow them to sell all the metal they had stored prior to 2012?


Wait, you mean they didn't start business in 2012?

Yes, that's one of the holes that the Bensimon Declaration does not cover. And in fact he may have shot himself in the foot there: by saying that management used the 2012 terms to allow them to not purchase metal, it implies that not purchasing metal BEFORE the change in terms would not have been allowed. But it is clear that metal doesn't exist either.

Playing devil's advocate is probably the best game that can be played here.

0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.