FSCA wants to slap Mirror Trading International with a R100 million fine

Jan

Who's the Boss?
Staff member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
13,172
Mirror Trading International faces R100 million fine

The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has issued a warning to the leadership of Mirror Trading International that it plans to levy a fine of R100 million against the scheme for violating South Africa's financial regulations.

Mirror Trading International (MTI) was a South African network marketing scam that claimed to offer automated trading services — initially in forex and later in cryptocurrency derivatives. It accumulated billions of rand worth of bitcoin during 2019 and 2020.

Chainalysis named MTI the biggest cryptocurrency scam of 2020 in the most recent edition of its Crypto Crime Report.

Court documents, which MyBroadband has seen, gave the last estimate of the funds that flowed through MTI as 29,421.03379 bitcoin — close to R15 billion at current local exchange rates.

Acting Justice Alma de Wet granted a final liquidation order against MTI at the end of June.

In a letter signed by Brandon Topham, divisional executive of investigations and enforcement at the FSCA, the sector regulator stated that MTI violated several different laws in three distinct periods of its existence.
 
tenor.gif
 
Please tell me we get to see FatMarks lose her cars and house in the process? Watch how quickly they able to "find" Johan then.
 
A little too late. I can already see RAG saying: "See we told you a liquidation was a bad idea, the R100m will come out of YOUR money"
 
A little too late. I can already see RAG saying: "See we told you a liquidation was a bad idea, the R100m will come out of YOUR money"
You want to play the Ponzi game you have to pay the Ponzi price
 
Ok, Keep it Simple & Straight forward, no corruption on the return path:So lets say the R100m realise, who gets that money, lets look at the flow path of the money:

1--MTI Promises....Investers Invest(Hopes up)...>....Some investers get rich, .....<...."Some Not"....

Loosers=The "Some Not".....<.......

2-MTU-Fine R100m ....>...Government due to rules....Big Halt-?

Loosers Clement:I want my money back, like.
So how did the "Some Not" losers as taxpayers beneftted from the FSCA rules thats suppose to have prevented this, just want to make sure the losers does not loose yet again while money has flow back from MTI-??
 
Woooo nelly,what a WHOPPER
Hope that gets clawed back from the Management
HOW IS THIS SITE STILL UP???


also #neverforget

1625671565076.png

1625671585536.png
1625671817596.png

1625671602457.png
 
Ah yes, that'll make 100 mil magically appear then. Thanks for clearing that up LMAO
I didn't say it could make the payment, I said it was responsible. If it can't make the payment it'd declare bankruptcy (although on this case it is already liquidated). If office holders are proved to have been criminal in their activities they may also be held jointly liable in their personal capacity, but that would require a separate judgement.
 
But the company is under administration! Does this mean that anyone claiming from the administrators would be next after the fine being paid?
I'm not sure in what order creditors would fall in line. We all know the company has basically zero assets of its own, so I hope they find a way to go after management. Also, if the Sept case rules the funds deposited by "members" were indeed investments in the company then all these funds come into play too.
 
Back
Top