Member Info for eljay

Delisting doesn't mean you lose ownership, it just means the shares are no long listed for trading on that exchange. Canadian shareholders will still own shares. A share on the AIM is equal to a share on the TSX. Our brokers/custodians make sure of all that. The point of delisting is so they don't have to comply with Canadian regulations, ie they are no longer a Canadian company. I don't really care about that. What I do care about where shares are listed, nor do I care about what regulatory regime they choose to operate under. What I do care about is that first I want control of the company back and the thieves out in rags begging for change in a Somali slum or getting gang-banged in a Peruvian prison and second delisting has caused a massive tax penalty to me (and all Canadians with share in registered accounts).

what link? it's on SEDAR

Here's all the d-bags emails: robinafryer@gmail.com, jpinto@pintoabogados.com, eburnean@iinet.net.au, julianbavin66@gmail.com Every day, go ahead, tell them how you feel.

Just log out and view this page. You don't need to unfilter. He's like a dog barking in the wind. ANYWAY. IRL filled a NI 44-101 withdrawal notice signed by by the robbing friar. I have no idea what it means.

It's about the tax penalties for owning delisted shares in a registered account. If the shares were worth 5c on the day they were delisted, you now owe the tax man 2.5c. They also get removed from the registered account. You still own them. Now you are exposed to all future capital gains taxes when they relist. That could be a lot of money.

oooh I figured it out! It's like he doesn't even exist! Click on filters tab above then type his name in the box and hit the Filter button and voila!

how it that done? I can't find ignore function.

IF Benavides accusations were true, then Pinto/Fryer/Jones are indeed guilty (in Canada anyway) of conspiring to harm shareholders. I can't afford lawyers on my own, so I'm doing my own research to bring the facts to a lawyer to see if a class/derivative action against the 3 of them is feasible. The SHERPA thing is a hitch and reeks of graft on Benavides part. How some BVL clerk and his Insta***** gf become overnight millionaires is a little strange. So maybe Benavides needs to be sued as well. This goes back as far as 2014, pre-Hodges. Moreover, I'm surprised that Benavides himself hasn't filed suit in Canada against them. It tells me he has something to hide. I'm surprised there is not a single shareholder in Canada besides my brother and I with this interest. To me it's open-shut case, they lied, they pay. I can't afford to go it alone but if no other shareholders will join a class action then what's the point? If I won the lottery tomorrow, certainly I'd bring the fire and these d-bags faces will be all over everything that can bring shame. Depressing that only those with money can get justice.

I'm going through old articles and this SHERPA thing keeps coming up. The charges against Benavides were that he had used SHERPA to skim off the bridge loan and had tricked the old board into thinking they would get nothing from COFIDE unless they paid SHERPA lots of money. What DOES SHERPA have to do with anything? Hodges back in June explained that they were getting a fat commission out of this. GS syndicated the loan, what did they get?

I don't care if they reconcile. I care about now, in order of priority 1. Compensation for the tax penalties I face as a result of fraudulent NRs 2. Revenge against Pinto/Fryer/Jones. I want these 3 and anyone else involved punitively punished. HARD. Career ending hard. 3. Making money when relisted. As long as I am a shareholder, if there is anyone that has harmed me in the past involved, I will be chasing them down. I will be at meetings (that are in Toronto) harassing until they get their desserts.

some reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_corporate_law#Derivative_actions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_corporate_law#Derivative_actions

Just had a refresh from the OSC, who btw is looking into any fraudulent claims made in the news releases. The OSC is not "the law" per se so shareholders need to sue if there is wrong-going. I'm surprised no insto would nail them on this so I still wonder what inside information there is, and if an insto shareholder (besides Canaccord) is conspiring with the board then this is VERY interesting. I note RBC jettisoned very quickly just before the delisting. Maybe there are no instos still in play. It appears not a single Canadian shareholder can afford to get a lawyer but here's where I am so far. 1. Minera was delisted from TSX/AIM as a result of non-filing. 2. Board (Pinto/Fryer/Jones) claim that it was because sub (Benavides) refused to provide info (looking for that release) 3. Sub claims they did provide and then Boland did resign, causing the OSC to issue cease trade order (CTO). SO either the info was NOT available and we've all been taken for a ride by team B OR it WAS available and was sandbagged by the board thereby causing a CTO. Motive? In the first I don't get it, but it would mean team B are just jerks and all non-Peruvian shareholders should GTFO. In the second, it means that Pinto/Fryer/Jones did conspire to harm at least some set of shareholders by causing a CTO to be issued. For what? Well that's the big conspiracy theory. It's certainly not good for us. So, I'm hoping we can get a big class/derivative action ship chartered and get on the boat and sail to compensation and punishment for the board island. Chuck Higgins would have his work cut out for him in that case. Discovery would be interesting to say the least.

I don't imagine for a second that Benevides has lawyers in his employ

Oliver Donaldson no longer works at the company. I got a bounce when I sent my monthly taunt to all the jerks involved. Too bad the only one to fall so far is the one that really had no clue.

86.382451%

It doesn't get them off the hook for the delisting and submitting fraudulent press releases. EVERY press release in Eric Olson's name was fraudulent. Every single one. Henry Fitz-0'Hyphenated and Ben D put their names on their in approval. Canaccord is Canadian bucket shop for pumping and dumping small cap stocks on senior citizens but they always run at the first sign of trouble. Running away when the lights come on, like Jaime Pinto, won't absolve them of the negligence and harm they caused.

I have no idea but I'm sure RioTinto could care less about us.

I now have proof in writing that the two chumps at Canaccord plus Pinto/Fryer/Jones and Olson conspired to specifically harm Canadian shareholders by allowing the shares to be delisted. Any Canadians hold shares in their RRSP or TFSA should be getting similar proof from their brokers in the mail. The case is building.

word