<![CDATA[Axe on Scams forum- Latest Facebook scams, Consumer complaints, Mortgage scams, loan complaints - All Forums]]> http://xscams.com/ Thu, 23 May 2013 12:35:08 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Rapper Eminem Stabbed, Death Hoax Goes Viral on Facebook]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=679 Sun, 19 May 2013 22:55:59 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=679
Such disturbing claims are totally FALSE - several Slim Shady fans have since swarmed the popular social networking site Twitter to debunk the viral (and totally ridiculous) Facebook post. Eminem is indeed still alive and well, working on the upcoming release of his highly-anticipated new album. Did this "death hoax" merely revitalize Em's 2013 "comeback?"

[Image: em-jpg.jpg]

The man in the photo is NOT the "real" Slim Shady - when fans click on the link, it opens up a ton of internet spam. So don't do it...]]>
Such disturbing claims are totally FALSE - several Slim Shady fans have since swarmed the popular social networking site Twitter to debunk the viral (and totally ridiculous) Facebook post. Eminem is indeed still alive and well, working on the upcoming release of his highly-anticipated new album. Did this "death hoax" merely revitalize Em's 2013 "comeback?"

[Image: em-jpg.jpg]

The man in the photo is NOT the "real" Slim Shady - when fans click on the link, it opens up a ton of internet spam. So don't do it...]]> <![CDATA[Cheap apartments renting Scam on Gumtree au and Gumtree nz]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=676 Thu, 02 May 2013 13:34:55 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=676 Reply to your "Immaculate two bedroom apartment in Auckland City" Ad on Gumtree

Good to read from you on your interest on my apartment, which i am leasing out for rent

The apartment is still very much available for rent. Just to give you a
little low down about the apartment and myself. I am an Australian citizen, i inherited the flat from my late father, as being is his child. He was actually residing there only, until his death. Which is why i am offering the flat for lease. I am residing here in Madrid, Spain with my fiance. Who i am about getting married to in less than two months, and presently working at the Hospital Universitario La Paz here in Madrid.

The rent rate is 1200NZD Monthly for the whole apartment. Which i also
think is fair enough considering the location. I just need someone with an
open heart, love and clean to occupy the apartment and put all my worries off concerning the maintenance of the apartment for now.

The flat comprises of 2 Bedrooms, Nice Lounge, Well Fitted Kitchen,
Excellent Decorative Order, Close to Local Amenities.

Just to let you know, the keys are right here with me. But there wouldn't
be any problem with that. As it can be posted to you, after all necessary
agreement has be reached and signed into lease. Also i will like you to
know that is not all about complying with the rent , but your absolute
maintenance of the apartment. Just for the memories of my father. Who
committed so much putting those facilities in place, so i wouldn't want an
violation of my property if finally rented by you.

Quote:Lately these type of Scam email's are very common in Australia and New Zealand, These scammers get details of all those who are looking for accommodation from gumtree and other websites and send such preying email's. With little vigilance you can safe your time and money by going into wrong hands

If you have received any such email then please do not hesitate to share it with xscams Smile]]> Reply to your "Immaculate two bedroom apartment in Auckland City" Ad on Gumtree

Good to read from you on your interest on my apartment, which i am leasing out for rent

The apartment is still very much available for rent. Just to give you a
little low down about the apartment and myself. I am an Australian citizen, i inherited the flat from my late father, as being is his child. He was actually residing there only, until his death. Which is why i am offering the flat for lease. I am residing here in Madrid, Spain with my fiance. Who i am about getting married to in less than two months, and presently working at the Hospital Universitario La Paz here in Madrid.

The rent rate is 1200NZD Monthly for the whole apartment. Which i also
think is fair enough considering the location. I just need someone with an
open heart, love and clean to occupy the apartment and put all my worries off concerning the maintenance of the apartment for now.

The flat comprises of 2 Bedrooms, Nice Lounge, Well Fitted Kitchen,
Excellent Decorative Order, Close to Local Amenities.

Just to let you know, the keys are right here with me. But there wouldn't
be any problem with that. As it can be posted to you, after all necessary
agreement has be reached and signed into lease. Also i will like you to
know that is not all about complying with the rent , but your absolute
maintenance of the apartment. Just for the memories of my father. Who
committed so much putting those facilities in place, so i wouldn't want an
violation of my property if finally rented by you.

Quote:Lately these type of Scam email's are very common in Australia and New Zealand, These scammers get details of all those who are looking for accommodation from gumtree and other websites and send such preying email's. With little vigilance you can safe your time and money by going into wrong hands

If you have received any such email then please do not hesitate to share it with xscams Smile]]> <![CDATA[warnning from Nuevoplayer coders]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=667 Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:48:57 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=667
i just warnning from coders of Nuevoplayer they are big scammers
just they need money and then left you without software and without
support !
In the end when I realized they were scammers they Ban me from them sites]]>
i just warnning from coders of Nuevoplayer they are big scammers
just they need money and then left you without software and without
support !
In the end when I realized they were scammers they Ban me from them sites]]> <![CDATA[Plz help about Theadmatrix]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=666 Sat, 16 Mar 2013 07:02:32 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=666 <![CDATA[Denise Bailey and BFCSA AUSTRALIA]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=665 Mon, 11 Mar 2013 03:38:34 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=665 Australian Mortgage brokers are complicit in mortgage fraud and the possibly loss of thousands of homes in Australia.
Quote
Ms Brailey to ASIC, “I then had to copy and PDF the documents and sanitise them to protect the brokers from being the scapegoats”.
Note* the writers comment - I would take a dirty scapegoat and save my home if he had changed my application or provided false advice that cased the loss of my home and I am sure every member of BFCSC would do the same.
WHY ? Ms. Brailey are you protecting so called these scapegoats (mortgage brokers) if they did wrong they should pay, at least your members may have a hose left standing to live in. But no, you Ms. Brailey are hurting your own followers who have been done by these mortgage brokers even protecting the FBAA or the MFAA . WHY?
The MFAA have taken steps to kick out some of the members who have done fraud on a blatant scale on the public.
The Australian mortgage brokers are the weakest link in this Australian Mortgage Fraud, however Ms. Denise Brailey is protecting them from the fraud they have committed. Concealing a fraud and protecting mortgage brokers from her own members and the Australian public and the government agencies (yes non effective so far). WHY? Put the mortgage brokers heads on a stick and see if the government can protect the banks then.
How is it different Ms. Denise Brailey that you act from the banks or the Australian Government or ASIC for not letting the light of day shine on the evidence for the public to see it all OR TO ACT?This is causing your members further losses and hardship to Australian families right now. These members who have suffered at the hands of a mortgage broker. They may have a direct claim against the brokers (first contact and loan application) for “negligence” if not fraud that advised them or changed the application. Mortgage brokers or financial advisers are insured against “professional negligence” for a couple of million dollars I believe, and this provides a much easier and provable target then the banks. She is really causing harm to her members by protecting the brokers. Ms Brailey, by your own admission you have had no effect on ASIC over all this time, it might be time to change you attack to the low hanging fruit the Mortgage Brokers instead of puffery? Why not?
I am aware of the banks and the lack of government or agency support (ASIC etc) who have not done a thing and all your letters have moved nothing however, Ms. Brailey as stated on her blogs has all this PROOF of brokers changing applications etc so again bring it out - don’t hide like the banks and others from your own members.
Ms. Brailey controls the information flow on her web site. Ms. Brailey changes other peoples posts and also removing people or posts that have a different view to hers to protect the followers of her crusade. So be it is her site. Ms. Brailey stop the crusade and stop calling for a royal commission as you know it’s a uphill push and not going to happen until you start putting brokers in jail first or in the courts. You may then get to the banks as the mortgage brokers will squeal loudly.
Also Denise Brailey recommends to her followers (members) to settle (if any) without the right to seek further damages. Why?
Note ( I AM NOT A MORTGAGE BROKER, BANK EMPLOYEE OR LAWYER OR of ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCY JUST PISSED OFF AT THE SYSTEM AND PEOPLE WHO TRY TO CONTROL )
Below is a direct copy of her post.
Quote from the website of Dense Bailey
“BFCSA we have no secrets but here is a small one for you: I had a very informative meeting with ASIC hierarchy and lawyer in early February. Prior to that meeting, I spent three months going through a massive amount of emails (hard copy) at my expense and time, to highlight the most diabolical instructions from bank business managers to brokers. I then had to copy and PDF the documents and sanitise them to protect the brokers from being the scapegoats.
BDM's from over 20 lenders, including the major banks regularly communicated by either blanket emails to 20,000 broker channel members, or they actually chatted in conversations to their broker teams via email. I was given 1000's of these. In reading these documents and observing the nature of the marketing and the instrcutions given, one can only be advised that a wholesale looting was taking place with Brokers simply asking questions directly to BDMs for individual cases and being coerced and taught how to use "ZIPPY." Brokers did not realise the higher income figures generated by the banks' computers, and which they were taught to write on the Loan Application Form after they came back to the office to do the math fort he client, were in fact an elaborate Bankster scheme to have the brokers take the blame for exaggerated income figures.
Brokers have said they did not know this was illegal as it was the bank's system. Bank Managers saide "our lawyers have been oevr this with fine tooth comb." In some cases BDM's were asssiting brokers in the offices and writing up applications for the brokers to "pump up volume." More on that another day. The point to you is this. I do not believe I am as you said "whinging." I thought I was trying to report a massive and obvious fraud to Parliament. At least the Senators appreciated my efforts and so do the victims.
Of course I have the evidence including copies of 1000 people's files! How many truck loads do you require? Do you really think i would have lied to Parliament: a jailable offence? Do you really belive I made all this up, that I manufactured evidence, that I forged the signatures, that I assisted credit assessors with their handwriting to exaggertae incomes? $100 bllion worth of loans? Gosh I must have been busy!
The emails prove it was not the brokers who genberated the fraud and ASIC admit the Bankers were the engineers. The banks in a cartel model created a monstrous and wonderfully engineered Low Doc Sub Prime scam that even ASIC failed to detect.
If you believe I have not delivered the evidence, then you Sir, were in the room when I met with ASIC, meaning you work for ASIC. You would therefore know I delivered the goods. Perhaps ASIC is gearing up to say we have been through the 200 plus bundle and there is nothing there? Yes we are waiting for that one and will be releasing all documents publicly for everyone to be the judge.
If you were not there, then you have once again no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps one day you will thank me for exposing the scandal, as you may have friends and rellies who have been quietly caught and suffering. If you are truly an insider you would have warned your family, as I did years ago: "do not have a bar of LOW DOC LOANS - THEY ARE A MASSIVE BANKING RORT." As Joe Hockey stated publicly: "I wouldn't trust the non bank lenders." Joe, if I were you I would't trust the Major Banks and Lenders either. Has anyone ever heard of Banksters saying "we're sorry!" Not that I have ever heard ASIC say those words.
I guess a cover-up is as good a reason for a Royal Commission. If you have nothing to hide then why not agree with us on the need for one. Do you really think I asked 1000 people to fudge their own documents? The Loan Applications prove the fraud and the three different sets fo hand-writing means there was a "Mr Nobody" in the room after the bank received the FAX. Oh dear. And why would recdit assessors do this? Same reason they were taught to alter the LAFs if the deal "doesn't fit servicing." That in law they could do this to assist the bank customers.........they say: "we had no idea this was agaiunst the law, we were told the opposite by our Managers."
Perhaps the Australian Banksters Association forgot to tell their members to have regard for the old S25 of the Bankster Code? If we can expose the dealings so far between 1000 people who ahve never met each other and communhciate only via email, and we do so on a shoestring budget, then imagine what we can do if we had ASIC's budget?”
BTW: Doing ASIC's research, investigations and collecting, collating and scanning documents etc is not my job. However, I made the effort. In fact I have been doing just that for past 14 years......for free and in the public interest.]]> Australian Mortgage brokers are complicit in mortgage fraud and the possibly loss of thousands of homes in Australia.
Quote
Ms Brailey to ASIC, “I then had to copy and PDF the documents and sanitise them to protect the brokers from being the scapegoats”.
Note* the writers comment - I would take a dirty scapegoat and save my home if he had changed my application or provided false advice that cased the loss of my home and I am sure every member of BFCSC would do the same.
WHY ? Ms. Brailey are you protecting so called these scapegoats (mortgage brokers) if they did wrong they should pay, at least your members may have a hose left standing to live in. But no, you Ms. Brailey are hurting your own followers who have been done by these mortgage brokers even protecting the FBAA or the MFAA . WHY?
The MFAA have taken steps to kick out some of the members who have done fraud on a blatant scale on the public.
The Australian mortgage brokers are the weakest link in this Australian Mortgage Fraud, however Ms. Denise Brailey is protecting them from the fraud they have committed. Concealing a fraud and protecting mortgage brokers from her own members and the Australian public and the government agencies (yes non effective so far). WHY? Put the mortgage brokers heads on a stick and see if the government can protect the banks then.
How is it different Ms. Denise Brailey that you act from the banks or the Australian Government or ASIC for not letting the light of day shine on the evidence for the public to see it all OR TO ACT?This is causing your members further losses and hardship to Australian families right now. These members who have suffered at the hands of a mortgage broker. They may have a direct claim against the brokers (first contact and loan application) for “negligence” if not fraud that advised them or changed the application. Mortgage brokers or financial advisers are insured against “professional negligence” for a couple of million dollars I believe, and this provides a much easier and provable target then the banks. She is really causing harm to her members by protecting the brokers. Ms Brailey, by your own admission you have had no effect on ASIC over all this time, it might be time to change you attack to the low hanging fruit the Mortgage Brokers instead of puffery? Why not?
I am aware of the banks and the lack of government or agency support (ASIC etc) who have not done a thing and all your letters have moved nothing however, Ms. Brailey as stated on her blogs has all this PROOF of brokers changing applications etc so again bring it out - don’t hide like the banks and others from your own members.
Ms. Brailey controls the information flow on her web site. Ms. Brailey changes other peoples posts and also removing people or posts that have a different view to hers to protect the followers of her crusade. So be it is her site. Ms. Brailey stop the crusade and stop calling for a royal commission as you know it’s a uphill push and not going to happen until you start putting brokers in jail first or in the courts. You may then get to the banks as the mortgage brokers will squeal loudly.
Also Denise Brailey recommends to her followers (members) to settle (if any) without the right to seek further damages. Why?
Note ( I AM NOT A MORTGAGE BROKER, BANK EMPLOYEE OR LAWYER OR of ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCY JUST PISSED OFF AT THE SYSTEM AND PEOPLE WHO TRY TO CONTROL )
Below is a direct copy of her post.
Quote from the website of Dense Bailey
“BFCSA we have no secrets but here is a small one for you: I had a very informative meeting with ASIC hierarchy and lawyer in early February. Prior to that meeting, I spent three months going through a massive amount of emails (hard copy) at my expense and time, to highlight the most diabolical instructions from bank business managers to brokers. I then had to copy and PDF the documents and sanitise them to protect the brokers from being the scapegoats.
BDM's from over 20 lenders, including the major banks regularly communicated by either blanket emails to 20,000 broker channel members, or they actually chatted in conversations to their broker teams via email. I was given 1000's of these. In reading these documents and observing the nature of the marketing and the instrcutions given, one can only be advised that a wholesale looting was taking place with Brokers simply asking questions directly to BDMs for individual cases and being coerced and taught how to use "ZIPPY." Brokers did not realise the higher income figures generated by the banks' computers, and which they were taught to write on the Loan Application Form after they came back to the office to do the math fort he client, were in fact an elaborate Bankster scheme to have the brokers take the blame for exaggerated income figures.
Brokers have said they did not know this was illegal as it was the bank's system. Bank Managers saide "our lawyers have been oevr this with fine tooth comb." In some cases BDM's were asssiting brokers in the offices and writing up applications for the brokers to "pump up volume." More on that another day. The point to you is this. I do not believe I am as you said "whinging." I thought I was trying to report a massive and obvious fraud to Parliament. At least the Senators appreciated my efforts and so do the victims.
Of course I have the evidence including copies of 1000 people's files! How many truck loads do you require? Do you really think i would have lied to Parliament: a jailable offence? Do you really belive I made all this up, that I manufactured evidence, that I forged the signatures, that I assisted credit assessors with their handwriting to exaggertae incomes? $100 bllion worth of loans? Gosh I must have been busy!
The emails prove it was not the brokers who genberated the fraud and ASIC admit the Bankers were the engineers. The banks in a cartel model created a monstrous and wonderfully engineered Low Doc Sub Prime scam that even ASIC failed to detect.
If you believe I have not delivered the evidence, then you Sir, were in the room when I met with ASIC, meaning you work for ASIC. You would therefore know I delivered the goods. Perhaps ASIC is gearing up to say we have been through the 200 plus bundle and there is nothing there? Yes we are waiting for that one and will be releasing all documents publicly for everyone to be the judge.
If you were not there, then you have once again no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps one day you will thank me for exposing the scandal, as you may have friends and rellies who have been quietly caught and suffering. If you are truly an insider you would have warned your family, as I did years ago: "do not have a bar of LOW DOC LOANS - THEY ARE A MASSIVE BANKING RORT." As Joe Hockey stated publicly: "I wouldn't trust the non bank lenders." Joe, if I were you I would't trust the Major Banks and Lenders either. Has anyone ever heard of Banksters saying "we're sorry!" Not that I have ever heard ASIC say those words.
I guess a cover-up is as good a reason for a Royal Commission. If you have nothing to hide then why not agree with us on the need for one. Do you really think I asked 1000 people to fudge their own documents? The Loan Applications prove the fraud and the three different sets fo hand-writing means there was a "Mr Nobody" in the room after the bank received the FAX. Oh dear. And why would recdit assessors do this? Same reason they were taught to alter the LAFs if the deal "doesn't fit servicing." That in law they could do this to assist the bank customers.........they say: "we had no idea this was agaiunst the law, we were told the opposite by our Managers."
Perhaps the Australian Banksters Association forgot to tell their members to have regard for the old S25 of the Bankster Code? If we can expose the dealings so far between 1000 people who ahve never met each other and communhciate only via email, and we do so on a shoestring budget, then imagine what we can do if we had ASIC's budget?”
BTW: Doing ASIC's research, investigations and collecting, collating and scanning documents etc is not my job. However, I made the effort. In fact I have been doing just that for past 14 years......for free and in the public interest.]]> <![CDATA[the arbitrator michael fraser Australia ]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=664 Fri, 08 Mar 2013 10:21:41 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=664 CALL THE POLICE if this idiot micheal fraser contacts you or turns up at your home or place of business.
Make no bones about it, this guy is NARCISSISTIC AND HAS GOD LIKE DELUSIONS!
Micheal Fraser who failed in his own business is trying to start his own TV reality show by stalking you or interfering with you. He attempts to intimidate or blackmail (not very legal), threatens people and also turn up with people with cameras. He has no idea of the legal issues he is not a lawyer and legal proceedings are being taken against him to expose his real agenda. He has no legal background by portrays himself as a savior for a so called free or donation.
This of course is all for his reality TV show he is trying to air. He is a true SCAMMER, big noting himself for his so called TV SHOW.
Anyone that has been contacted by this lunatic can seek intervention orders for any court or police will act and gain an Intervention Order for you.
Intervention Orders
WHAT ARE YOUR RIGHTS AGAINST THIS NARCISSISTIC AND GOD LIKE DELUSIONS TO START WITH?
Sections 359 B of the Criminal Code Queensland states:
"Unlawful Stalking" is conduct-
(a) intentionally directed at a person ( the "stalked person"); and
(b) engaged in on any 1 occasion if the conduct is protracted or on more than 1 occasion; and
© consisting of 1 or more acts of the following, or a similar, type-
(i) following, loitering near, watching or approaching a person;
(ii) contacting a person in any way, including for example, by telephone, mail, fax, email ot through the use of any technology;
(iii) Loitering near, watching, approaching or entering a place where a person lives, works or visits.
(iv) Leaving offensive material where it will be found by, given to or brought to the attention of, a person;
(v) Giving offensive material to a person directly or indirectly;
(vi) An intimidating, harassing or threatening act against, or against property of anyone, including the defendant; and
(d) that-
(i) would cause the stalked person apprehension or fear, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, of violence to, or against property of, the stalked person or another person; or
(ii) causes detriment, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, to be stalked person or another person.
The Maximum penalty for the offence of Stalking is 5 years imprisonment.

He is using people in trouble to gain notice.
Michael Fraser aka The Arbitrator Is delusional with no legal training.
"thearbitrator.co"

If possible take a photo of anyone he is with have it ready for the police.]]> CALL THE POLICE if this idiot micheal fraser contacts you or turns up at your home or place of business.
Make no bones about it, this guy is NARCISSISTIC AND HAS GOD LIKE DELUSIONS!
Micheal Fraser who failed in his own business is trying to start his own TV reality show by stalking you or interfering with you. He attempts to intimidate or blackmail (not very legal), threatens people and also turn up with people with cameras. He has no idea of the legal issues he is not a lawyer and legal proceedings are being taken against him to expose his real agenda. He has no legal background by portrays himself as a savior for a so called free or donation.
This of course is all for his reality TV show he is trying to air. He is a true SCAMMER, big noting himself for his so called TV SHOW.
Anyone that has been contacted by this lunatic can seek intervention orders for any court or police will act and gain an Intervention Order for you.
Intervention Orders
WHAT ARE YOUR RIGHTS AGAINST THIS NARCISSISTIC AND GOD LIKE DELUSIONS TO START WITH?
Sections 359 B of the Criminal Code Queensland states:
"Unlawful Stalking" is conduct-
(a) intentionally directed at a person ( the "stalked person"); and
(b) engaged in on any 1 occasion if the conduct is protracted or on more than 1 occasion; and
© consisting of 1 or more acts of the following, or a similar, type-
(i) following, loitering near, watching or approaching a person;
(ii) contacting a person in any way, including for example, by telephone, mail, fax, email ot through the use of any technology;
(iii) Loitering near, watching, approaching or entering a place where a person lives, works or visits.
(iv) Leaving offensive material where it will be found by, given to or brought to the attention of, a person;
(v) Giving offensive material to a person directly or indirectly;
(vi) An intimidating, harassing or threatening act against, or against property of anyone, including the defendant; and
(d) that-
(i) would cause the stalked person apprehension or fear, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, of violence to, or against property of, the stalked person or another person; or
(ii) causes detriment, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, to be stalked person or another person.
The Maximum penalty for the offence of Stalking is 5 years imprisonment.

He is using people in trouble to gain notice.
Michael Fraser aka The Arbitrator Is delusional with no legal training.
"thearbitrator.co"

If possible take a photo of anyone he is with have it ready for the police.]]> <![CDATA[Lead Auditor Course and Safety Management]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=662 Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:31:55 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=662 The lead auditor course will equip employees to implement health and safety standards in their office. The employee who successfully completes the lead auditor course can plan, prepare, perform and report audit details both verbally and in writing. A well-trained lead auditor can bring to the notice of his employer the kind of safety and health problems the employees are facing.
There are a few institutions providing OSHAS Lead Auditor Course. Other than, the lead auditor course most of the acclaimed institutions also provide NEBOSH Certified Online International Diploma Courses and many more internationally commended courses on workplace health and safety. Safety and Health training courses enable employees to identify hazards at the workplace and deal with them. It trains them to maintain a high-level safety culture at the workplace. In addition to this, the employees will get a wider knowledge on how to manage health and safety risks at any juncture of their life.]]> The lead auditor course will equip employees to implement health and safety standards in their office. The employee who successfully completes the lead auditor course can plan, prepare, perform and report audit details both verbally and in writing. A well-trained lead auditor can bring to the notice of his employer the kind of safety and health problems the employees are facing.
There are a few institutions providing OSHAS Lead Auditor Course. Other than, the lead auditor course most of the acclaimed institutions also provide NEBOSH Certified Online International Diploma Courses and many more internationally commended courses on workplace health and safety. Safety and Health training courses enable employees to identify hazards at the workplace and deal with them. It trains them to maintain a high-level safety culture at the workplace. In addition to this, the employees will get a wider knowledge on how to manage health and safety risks at any juncture of their life.]]> <![CDATA[Intro here]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=654 Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:09:43 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=654 This is jacob fillipen here and I am from California, Well I am new here and I believe that we will have fun on this site and help to each other as well.
So please pause your message here, Really appreciate to you.
Thanks man.]]> This is jacob fillipen here and I am from California, Well I am new here and I believe that we will have fun on this site and help to each other as well.
So please pause your message here, Really appreciate to you.
Thanks man.]]> <![CDATA[Flexible Packaging]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=652 Thu, 29 Nov 2012 04:52:48 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=652
Flexible Packaging]]>
Flexible Packaging]]> <![CDATA[Peter White FBAA Australia]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=650 Wed, 21 Nov 2012 02:22:56 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=650 Peter White and the FBAA board have ignored the complaint and for compensation and went so far as to issue a letter from their law firm to the family to basically “Piss Off”.
The FBAA mortgage broker member against the FBAA code advised the family which put them “outside the national credit code” then provided a first mortgage loan which had no business use whatsoever. The predatory FBAA mortgage broker and private lender asset stripped the family home of over $500k of equity. Then took a family’s home and placed the family into illegal false bankruptcy to silence them from any legal recourse. The FBAA broker did this act by selling the family home to a known “friend” a real estate agent and sold it grossly undervalued.
The FBAA has no regard for its own Code of Conduct, or the conduct of its members or to the Public’s Financial Safety when it issued a letter from its law firm taking no action against the broker and telling the family in summary to “piss off” your bankrupt you have no legal rights to complain or take action and sent a copy to the bankruptcies trustee to further intimidate and silence the family.
The FBAA Broker operating as an FBAA accredited member and using the FBAA logo on his website and advertising material for years to lure the public ran his own private predatory fund and contravened every FBAA code of conduct requirement which is a contract under law. He was never removed from the FBAA. Broke all the rules of the FBAA to the client, while the FBAA collected its fees. Peter White and the board of the FBAA has no interest in upholding his own associations code its integrity or its so-called industry standards.
Peter White and the board of the FBAA have no regard for the public’s financial safety will not act to protect or enforce its own code of conduct why?. The family states the FBAA is a sham and a scam to the public and has no regard to enforce or abide by its own code or standards.
Why does ASIC or any government body even allow the FBAA to fraudulently offer its logo or name to be used in the public domain it’s just a fees exercise and provides a false sense of security to the public. The public are sucked in thinking they are dealing with professional approved people. They are not protected by the FBAA..
The family wants to warn the public - “Don’t Rely on the FBAA Accredited Broker or its Logo” as you could lose your home and financial health and be placed into bankruptcy.
The FBAA Predatory broker knowingly took advantage of the family, lied, cheated, acted dishonestly and advised the family to sign documents that were not required. Then he falsely broke federal bankruptcy law by knowingly providing a false petition of bankruptcy. The family had no funds left, was in total shock of being forcible removed from their home by this FBAA broker and was railroaded in the court system.
Well done Peter White president and the board of the FBAA fraud was done and no action or help.]]> Peter White and the FBAA board have ignored the complaint and for compensation and went so far as to issue a letter from their law firm to the family to basically “Piss Off”.
The FBAA mortgage broker member against the FBAA code advised the family which put them “outside the national credit code” then provided a first mortgage loan which had no business use whatsoever. The predatory FBAA mortgage broker and private lender asset stripped the family home of over $500k of equity. Then took a family’s home and placed the family into illegal false bankruptcy to silence them from any legal recourse. The FBAA broker did this act by selling the family home to a known “friend” a real estate agent and sold it grossly undervalued.
The FBAA has no regard for its own Code of Conduct, or the conduct of its members or to the Public’s Financial Safety when it issued a letter from its law firm taking no action against the broker and telling the family in summary to “piss off” your bankrupt you have no legal rights to complain or take action and sent a copy to the bankruptcies trustee to further intimidate and silence the family.
The FBAA Broker operating as an FBAA accredited member and using the FBAA logo on his website and advertising material for years to lure the public ran his own private predatory fund and contravened every FBAA code of conduct requirement which is a contract under law. He was never removed from the FBAA. Broke all the rules of the FBAA to the client, while the FBAA collected its fees. Peter White and the board of the FBAA has no interest in upholding his own associations code its integrity or its so-called industry standards.
Peter White and the board of the FBAA have no regard for the public’s financial safety will not act to protect or enforce its own code of conduct why?. The family states the FBAA is a sham and a scam to the public and has no regard to enforce or abide by its own code or standards.
Why does ASIC or any government body even allow the FBAA to fraudulently offer its logo or name to be used in the public domain it’s just a fees exercise and provides a false sense of security to the public. The public are sucked in thinking they are dealing with professional approved people. They are not protected by the FBAA..
The family wants to warn the public - “Don’t Rely on the FBAA Accredited Broker or its Logo” as you could lose your home and financial health and be placed into bankruptcy.
The FBAA Predatory broker knowingly took advantage of the family, lied, cheated, acted dishonestly and advised the family to sign documents that were not required. Then he falsely broke federal bankruptcy law by knowingly providing a false petition of bankruptcy. The family had no funds left, was in total shock of being forcible removed from their home by this FBAA broker and was railroaded in the court system.
Well done Peter White president and the board of the FBAA fraud was done and no action or help.]]> <![CDATA[Westpac Bank Australia ]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=649 Tue, 20 Nov 2012 07:44:49 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=649 From a legal blog in Australia With a 72 year old being attacked by Westpac Bank. [/align]

I have recently became a homeowner after having lost 2 homes to my stepson, who has been declared a bankrupt for the 3rd time, however ha borrowed money against my home to buy himself a $94k BMW leaving me with that loan to be repayed to the westpac bank. He built this house for us as he taken two houses and 2 businesses from us, this was supposed to be our house but i had been engaging a lawyer to get it put into my name ,eventhough there was a small amount owing on it $29k which I was willing to pay out ,to get it into my name, which it is now but i am stuck with this loan of $100k, the Westpac bank refuses to negotiate with my lawyer as they never investigated my stepson dealings, I am now forced to sell as the bank is not willing to talk to my lawyer, I have all information from the west pac bank here with all applications for loans that he applied, these applications are full of lies, and the bank still lend him the money to borrow against my house,It killed my husband(his father) 5 years ago . I am 72 years old and am not able to repay this loan.As my lawyer cannot get any result form the Westpac, I am asking for your help, this has been going for the last 2 years, and i am sure that interest is accumilating, forcing me unable to go into an retirement village. I hope that you can investigate the bank, as my lawyer has not been able to get a result]]> From a legal blog in Australia With a 72 year old being attacked by Westpac Bank. [/align]

I have recently became a homeowner after having lost 2 homes to my stepson, who has been declared a bankrupt for the 3rd time, however ha borrowed money against my home to buy himself a $94k BMW leaving me with that loan to be repayed to the westpac bank. He built this house for us as he taken two houses and 2 businesses from us, this was supposed to be our house but i had been engaging a lawyer to get it put into my name ,eventhough there was a small amount owing on it $29k which I was willing to pay out ,to get it into my name, which it is now but i am stuck with this loan of $100k, the Westpac bank refuses to negotiate with my lawyer as they never investigated my stepson dealings, I am now forced to sell as the bank is not willing to talk to my lawyer, I have all information from the west pac bank here with all applications for loans that he applied, these applications are full of lies, and the bank still lend him the money to borrow against my house,It killed my husband(his father) 5 years ago . I am 72 years old and am not able to repay this loan.As my lawyer cannot get any result form the Westpac, I am asking for your help, this has been going for the last 2 years, and i am sure that interest is accumilating, forcing me unable to go into an retirement village. I hope that you can investigate the bank, as my lawyer has not been able to get a result]]> <![CDATA[Australian Banks and Mortgage Bokers FBAA MFAA]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=645 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:08:00 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=645 Australian Mortgage Brokers (FBAA with MFAA) and the Australian Banks the people who you stole and commited FRAUD are coming to get Justice by Legal Action and Damages.

The Australian Newspaper - has exclusively obtained hundreds of internal emails between lenders and mortgage brokers that lift the lid on the extent of aggressive -- and in many cases predatory -- lending practices in the five years leading up to the global financial crisis.
The emails, many of which are from some of the biggest lenders to chains of hundreds of mortgage brokers, show some spruiked imprudent lending practices to mortgage brokers, highlighting loopholes in their own lending requirements. The practices, which have embroiled all ANZ, CBA, NAB, Westpac, Macquarie Bank, and GE Money, as well as mortgage brokers in every state, underpin what is emerging as the Australian version of US subprime problems.
As with the boom-time predatory lending practices in the US -- which triggered the global financial crisis -- The Australian has found low-income earners, the elderly, pensioners and those with limited financial experience have been hit hard by the practices.
Thousands of such borrowers -- tens of thousands by some estimates -- were stung by abuse of low-documentation and no-documentation loans, which required little or no evidence of a borrower's income, but which usually were secured by a person's family home.
The emails show it was standard practice for many major banks and scores of non-bank lenders to aggressively spruik such loans to their mortgage brokers, which dealt directly with unsophisticated or "mum and dad" clients. So-called low-doc loans, created in the 1990s, were used by a very small niche of self-employed people who were unable or unwilling to provide financial information to their banks to secure a loan.
Mortgage brokers had little incentive to ensure borrowers were able to make repayments on loans, as it was not their money.
They had plenty of incentives to ensure loans were granted in the form of upfront commissions of 1.5-2 per cent of the value of every loan written -- about twice the rates earned by their counterparts in the US and Britain.

By the first quarter of 2005, about $500 million worth of low-doc loans were being written weekly in Australia, according to the Market Intelligence Strategy Centre, an analyst.
In the year to June 2007, $8.8 billion of low-doc loans were written. That had fallen to just $2bn in the year to June last year, according to the centre.
During the boom, banks and non-bank lenders were eager to sign up low-doc loans, but apparently not directly, instead leaving that to mortgage brokers.
According to the centre, about 95 per cent of low-doc and no-doc loans were written by mortgage brokers during the boom years.
By contrast, about 40 per cent of full-doc, or standard loans, were handled by brokers in that time, according to the Mortgage and Finance Association of Australia.
Banks and non-bank lenders handled most of the more stable traditional full-documentation loans, but they left brokers, who were highly motivated to approve loans, to sell the vast majority of their high-risk low-doc product to small investors.


Fitch Ratings estimates low-doc and no-doc loans now represent 8-10 per cent of the $1.2 trillion national mortgage market. That's between $96bn and $120bn.
One in 20 loans held by the big banks is low-doc or no-doc, with the figure rising to about one in 10 across the market, as non-bank lenders hold the highest proportion of such loans.
It has now emerged it was standard industry practice for lenders to not even call potential borrowers to check whether they could afford to make loan repayments, or to ensure the information on loan application forms was correct.
A key to low-documentation lending was that borrowers were self-employed, as such it was originally required that such borrowers produce an Australian business number that they had used for at least three years.
From about 2002, as brokers grew increasingly fat on high loan turnover and bankers rich from securitising loans, lenders began further untying the already extremely loose requirements of the low-doc loan. Emails obtained by The Australian show Macquarie, Suncorp, GE Money and RAMS Home Loans Lenders began saying people could access such loans if they had an "ABN for one day".
"Under the PUMA (Macquarie) loan, we will need ABN for one day, don't disclose any assets, liabilities or income, is that any good for you," mortgage aggregator AFG wrote in 2006.
In March 2008, as the global financial crisis was taking hold, Suncorp wrote: "Did you know that at Suncorp we offer a low doc loan up to 70 per cent loan to value ratio with no minimum period for holding an ABN?"
Some lenders went further, writing low-doc loans to borrowers who had provable pay-as-you-go taxable incomes.
In these cases, lenders asked borrowers what income they earned, but not for payslips, tax returns or group certificates to verify claims.
In the case of no-doc loans, borrowers were not even required to state any income.
In some cases, evident in emails obtained by The Australian, brokers who had submitted such information in applying for loans were asked to remove income-verifying documentation.
But not only were ABN restrictions watered down, the lending standards of almost the entire lending business were trimmed
Many banks were in breach of their own code of conduct.
According to the Australian Bankers Association's Code of Banking Practice, 2003, banks must ensure borrowers are capable of meeting loan repayments.
Section 25 of the code states: "Before we offer or give you a credit facility (or increase an existing credit facility), we will exercise the care and skill of a diligent and prudent banker in selecting and applying our credit assessment methods and in forming our opinion about your ability to repay it."
The emails uncovered by The Australian reveal this conduct requirement was widely flouted.
Of a low-doc loan, a Westpac "relationship executive" in the bank's "broker unit" wrote to one broker in February 2006: "It has to be stated what they (the borrower) earn etc on our calculator, but it's not a formal assets and liabilities statement from an accountant.
"We need to ask what they earn etc, but we take what they say without proof."

In a series of precedent-setting legal cases, nine judges before six courts have found in favour of borrowers stung by lenders who failed to ensure borrowers were able to repay before writing a loan.
In almost all cases in which borrowers have lost some or all of the money borrowed, judges have overwhelmingly sided with borrowers and ordered mortgages be extinguished, or drastically reduced, within 30 days.
John O'Donnell and wife Jill were encouraged in 2002 by an unscrupulous mortgage broker to "unlock the equity" in their home by borrowing $500,000 against it, despite the couple earning just $23,000 a year.
The property scheme collapsed and the couple faced repossession of their home, but the NSW Supreme Court ordered three-quarters of that loan extinguished because the couple could not afford the loan in the first place and the lender had engaged in "unconcionable" conduct.
In response to borrower claims, some lenders have tried to distance themselves from low-doc lending procedures, stating mortgage brokers were responsible for checking whether borrowers could repay the loans.
Judges have rejected that claim, as has the ABA.
ABA chief executive Steven Munchenberg said it was OK for lenders to require mortgage brokers to obtain documents, but lenders were regardless required to independently verify such information and verify that borrowers could afford loans.
"Under the legislation and as a matter of common legal principle under the code, you are required to ensure that you have the information and that it is accurate," Mr Munchenberg said.
"Under existing law if it is established that a loan was made and a consumer could not comply with the terms without substantial hardship they could reopen and adjust that transaction. That law has been there since 1996."
"But these emails prove unconscionable and predatory lending practices were happening across the board" .
In contact with more than a 1000’s borrowers stung by predatory lending practices. Such borrowers came from every state and territory, as well as New Zealand, and they all had one thing in common.
She instructed the borrowers to contact their lenders and request copies of their loan application forms. "In every single case they have come back astounded," Ms Brailey said.
"Their incomes are vastly inflated and in most cases there are two, even three different sets of handwriting on the forms."
Other major concerns, which also point directly to imprudent lending, was the writing of 30-year loans to people in their 70s and 80s.
In May 2008, as the global crisis unfolded, Capital First wrote to one broker that "the maximum borrower age is now 70 years".
In the emails, lenders spruik to brokers the availability of "unregulated" loans.
That means loan application forms were ticked for "investment or business purposes" and so were not covered by national credit laws.
This has only just started and its going to get very interesting. The evidence and data presented clears away the last vestige of prudence regarding bank lending and broker conduct.
The courts will have far more to deal with and have the true information from the victims.
Note* from poster.
Under Australian laws which are quite different from U.S. law these Australian banks and mortgage brokers will be lining up at many Australian courts. They will face large payouts from many conned borrowers which may depending on how 2013 economy goes with defaults could be up for 120 billion plus with damages.]]> Australian Mortgage Brokers (FBAA with MFAA) and the Australian Banks the people who you stole and commited FRAUD are coming to get Justice by Legal Action and Damages.

The Australian Newspaper - has exclusively obtained hundreds of internal emails between lenders and mortgage brokers that lift the lid on the extent of aggressive -- and in many cases predatory -- lending practices in the five years leading up to the global financial crisis.
The emails, many of which are from some of the biggest lenders to chains of hundreds of mortgage brokers, show some spruiked imprudent lending practices to mortgage brokers, highlighting loopholes in their own lending requirements. The practices, which have embroiled all ANZ, CBA, NAB, Westpac, Macquarie Bank, and GE Money, as well as mortgage brokers in every state, underpin what is emerging as the Australian version of US subprime problems.
As with the boom-time predatory lending practices in the US -- which triggered the global financial crisis -- The Australian has found low-income earners, the elderly, pensioners and those with limited financial experience have been hit hard by the practices.
Thousands of such borrowers -- tens of thousands by some estimates -- were stung by abuse of low-documentation and no-documentation loans, which required little or no evidence of a borrower's income, but which usually were secured by a person's family home.
The emails show it was standard practice for many major banks and scores of non-bank lenders to aggressively spruik such loans to their mortgage brokers, which dealt directly with unsophisticated or "mum and dad" clients. So-called low-doc loans, created in the 1990s, were used by a very small niche of self-employed people who were unable or unwilling to provide financial information to their banks to secure a loan.
Mortgage brokers had little incentive to ensure borrowers were able to make repayments on loans, as it was not their money.
They had plenty of incentives to ensure loans were granted in the form of upfront commissions of 1.5-2 per cent of the value of every loan written -- about twice the rates earned by their counterparts in the US and Britain.

By the first quarter of 2005, about $500 million worth of low-doc loans were being written weekly in Australia, according to the Market Intelligence Strategy Centre, an analyst.
In the year to June 2007, $8.8 billion of low-doc loans were written. That had fallen to just $2bn in the year to June last year, according to the centre.
During the boom, banks and non-bank lenders were eager to sign up low-doc loans, but apparently not directly, instead leaving that to mortgage brokers.
According to the centre, about 95 per cent of low-doc and no-doc loans were written by mortgage brokers during the boom years.
By contrast, about 40 per cent of full-doc, or standard loans, were handled by brokers in that time, according to the Mortgage and Finance Association of Australia.
Banks and non-bank lenders handled most of the more stable traditional full-documentation loans, but they left brokers, who were highly motivated to approve loans, to sell the vast majority of their high-risk low-doc product to small investors.


Fitch Ratings estimates low-doc and no-doc loans now represent 8-10 per cent of the $1.2 trillion national mortgage market. That's between $96bn and $120bn.
One in 20 loans held by the big banks is low-doc or no-doc, with the figure rising to about one in 10 across the market, as non-bank lenders hold the highest proportion of such loans.
It has now emerged it was standard industry practice for lenders to not even call potential borrowers to check whether they could afford to make loan repayments, or to ensure the information on loan application forms was correct.
A key to low-documentation lending was that borrowers were self-employed, as such it was originally required that such borrowers produce an Australian business number that they had used for at least three years.
From about 2002, as brokers grew increasingly fat on high loan turnover and bankers rich from securitising loans, lenders began further untying the already extremely loose requirements of the low-doc loan. Emails obtained by The Australian show Macquarie, Suncorp, GE Money and RAMS Home Loans Lenders began saying people could access such loans if they had an "ABN for one day".
"Under the PUMA (Macquarie) loan, we will need ABN for one day, don't disclose any assets, liabilities or income, is that any good for you," mortgage aggregator AFG wrote in 2006.
In March 2008, as the global financial crisis was taking hold, Suncorp wrote: "Did you know that at Suncorp we offer a low doc loan up to 70 per cent loan to value ratio with no minimum period for holding an ABN?"
Some lenders went further, writing low-doc loans to borrowers who had provable pay-as-you-go taxable incomes.
In these cases, lenders asked borrowers what income they earned, but not for payslips, tax returns or group certificates to verify claims.
In the case of no-doc loans, borrowers were not even required to state any income.
In some cases, evident in emails obtained by The Australian, brokers who had submitted such information in applying for loans were asked to remove income-verifying documentation.
But not only were ABN restrictions watered down, the lending standards of almost the entire lending business were trimmed
Many banks were in breach of their own code of conduct.
According to the Australian Bankers Association's Code of Banking Practice, 2003, banks must ensure borrowers are capable of meeting loan repayments.
Section 25 of the code states: "Before we offer or give you a credit facility (or increase an existing credit facility), we will exercise the care and skill of a diligent and prudent banker in selecting and applying our credit assessment methods and in forming our opinion about your ability to repay it."
The emails uncovered by The Australian reveal this conduct requirement was widely flouted.
Of a low-doc loan, a Westpac "relationship executive" in the bank's "broker unit" wrote to one broker in February 2006: "It has to be stated what they (the borrower) earn etc on our calculator, but it's not a formal assets and liabilities statement from an accountant.
"We need to ask what they earn etc, but we take what they say without proof."

In a series of precedent-setting legal cases, nine judges before six courts have found in favour of borrowers stung by lenders who failed to ensure borrowers were able to repay before writing a loan.
In almost all cases in which borrowers have lost some or all of the money borrowed, judges have overwhelmingly sided with borrowers and ordered mortgages be extinguished, or drastically reduced, within 30 days.
John O'Donnell and wife Jill were encouraged in 2002 by an unscrupulous mortgage broker to "unlock the equity" in their home by borrowing $500,000 against it, despite the couple earning just $23,000 a year.
The property scheme collapsed and the couple faced repossession of their home, but the NSW Supreme Court ordered three-quarters of that loan extinguished because the couple could not afford the loan in the first place and the lender had engaged in "unconcionable" conduct.
In response to borrower claims, some lenders have tried to distance themselves from low-doc lending procedures, stating mortgage brokers were responsible for checking whether borrowers could repay the loans.
Judges have rejected that claim, as has the ABA.
ABA chief executive Steven Munchenberg said it was OK for lenders to require mortgage brokers to obtain documents, but lenders were regardless required to independently verify such information and verify that borrowers could afford loans.
"Under the legislation and as a matter of common legal principle under the code, you are required to ensure that you have the information and that it is accurate," Mr Munchenberg said.
"Under existing law if it is established that a loan was made and a consumer could not comply with the terms without substantial hardship they could reopen and adjust that transaction. That law has been there since 1996."
"But these emails prove unconscionable and predatory lending practices were happening across the board" .
In contact with more than a 1000’s borrowers stung by predatory lending practices. Such borrowers came from every state and territory, as well as New Zealand, and they all had one thing in common.
She instructed the borrowers to contact their lenders and request copies of their loan application forms. "In every single case they have come back astounded," Ms Brailey said.
"Their incomes are vastly inflated and in most cases there are two, even three different sets of handwriting on the forms."
Other major concerns, which also point directly to imprudent lending, was the writing of 30-year loans to people in their 70s and 80s.
In May 2008, as the global crisis unfolded, Capital First wrote to one broker that "the maximum borrower age is now 70 years".
In the emails, lenders spruik to brokers the availability of "unregulated" loans.
That means loan application forms were ticked for "investment or business purposes" and so were not covered by national credit laws.
This has only just started and its going to get very interesting. The evidence and data presented clears away the last vestige of prudence regarding bank lending and broker conduct.
The courts will have far more to deal with and have the true information from the victims.
Note* from poster.
Under Australian laws which are quite different from U.S. law these Australian banks and mortgage brokers will be lining up at many Australian courts. They will face large payouts from many conned borrowers which may depending on how 2013 economy goes with defaults could be up for 120 billion plus with damages.]]> <![CDATA[Fraud Alert from Japan]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=642 Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:41:48 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=642 Japan Company Trust Organization" www.japancompanytrust.org which is an anti-fraud organization in Japan. This Organization has close connection with Japanese police, and all fraud-attempts are immediately reported to Japanese Police Department. JCTO (Japan Company Trust Organization) watch each firm to make sure that any Japanese company that passes their scrutiny will not victimize any customer.

JCTO verify the company’s profile including registration, license, physical address confirmation, and company's previous record. Companies with criminal record are not eligible for registration. Since Japanese companies are respected for their honesty, fraudulent take advantage of this image of Japanese enterprises. Please warn all companies and individuals DO NOT remit money to any so-called Japanese company without verification at "Japan Company Trust Organization. As a courtesy, please spread this message to as many as possible forums and mass-media to help others to avoid falling victim of fraudulent.]]> Japan Company Trust Organization" www.japancompanytrust.org which is an anti-fraud organization in Japan. This Organization has close connection with Japanese police, and all fraud-attempts are immediately reported to Japanese Police Department. JCTO (Japan Company Trust Organization) watch each firm to make sure that any Japanese company that passes their scrutiny will not victimize any customer.

JCTO verify the company’s profile including registration, license, physical address confirmation, and company's previous record. Companies with criminal record are not eligible for registration. Since Japanese companies are respected for their honesty, fraudulent take advantage of this image of Japanese enterprises. Please warn all companies and individuals DO NOT remit money to any so-called Japanese company without verification at "Japan Company Trust Organization. As a courtesy, please spread this message to as many as possible forums and mass-media to help others to avoid falling victim of fraudulent.]]> <![CDATA[What is Vancouver mortgage brokers ?]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=637 Sat, 20 Oct 2012 05:10:27 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=637
It process that secure home builder property. The home builder can purchase it form bank.

Vancouver mortgage brokers |
mortgage broker surrey |]]>
It process that secure home builder property. The home builder can purchase it form bank.

Vancouver mortgage brokers |
mortgage broker surrey |]]> <![CDATA[What is Vancouver mortgage brokers ?]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=636 Sat, 20 Oct 2012 05:07:54 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=636

It process that secure home builder property. The home builder can purchase it form bank.]]>

It process that secure home builder property. The home builder can purchase it form bank.]]> <![CDATA[Hello there!]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=634 Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:26:06 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=634 ]]> ]]> <![CDATA[Password for every system]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=627 Sat, 22 Sep 2012 16:10:47 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=627 It is necessary when you are doing the business than your system must be password protected because it is necessary for the security of the business but it is very necessary for the online businesses and as well as others business also.Your data and privacy shield could be hack.]]> It is necessary when you are doing the business than your system must be password protected because it is necessary for the security of the business but it is very necessary for the online businesses and as well as others business also.Your data and privacy shield could be hack.]]> <![CDATA[Benefits of Business Growth]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=626 Sat, 22 Sep 2012 16:06:00 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=626 • Improving brand exposure
• Sharing marketing costs
• Developing new markets
• Leveraging partner consumer base
• Building new partner advocates]]> • Improving brand exposure
• Sharing marketing costs
• Developing new markets
• Leveraging partner consumer base
• Building new partner advocates]]> <![CDATA[World Economy]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=625 Sat, 22 Sep 2012 16:04:02 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=625 <![CDATA[How can i start my own business?]]> http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=624 Sat, 22 Sep 2012 16:02:15 +0000 http://xscams.com/showthread.php?tid=624 If you have any idea to start a particular business than you must do the research about that business and check the availability of the resources of starting this business whether you have the sufficient funds to start this or not and check the layman analysis that following all points kept in mind that this business deems fit you.]]> If you have any idea to start a particular business than you must do the research about that business and check the availability of the resources of starting this business whether you have the sufficient funds to start this or not and check the layman analysis that following all points kept in mind that this business deems fit you.]]>