Fraud Alert: Fake Credit Fraud Marcus Dodd, + Grant Wilfort / i act as fraud everyone a barrister representing most of our clients in a related litigation. c/o mccurrach uk limited 74 waterloo, bux

1 uk, GB

Fraud alert: fake credit fraud marcus dodd, + grant wilfort
I act as fraud everyone a barrister representing most of our clients in a related litigation.
C/o mccurrach uk limited 74 waterloo, bux
In november of 2016, we signed contracts (Attached) with marcus dodd of finance & law consulting limited for the issuance of a eur 40 m sblc. He sent us an invoice (Attached) and we wired the requisite fee of eur 50k (Attached). Funding was supposed to occur within 3-banking days so the beginning of december but yet the excuses began instead…, everything was supposed to begin in january for funding by the end of the month. We decided to wait patiently until the end of april but gave them two additional extension (May and june). I sent a cease and desist and ordered my funds back. Mr. Marcus dodd said my money was sent to his partners as they were the instrument issuers and grant wilfort was the funder (Monetizer). Abc74 limited).
Grant wilfort 11/25
Transmission fee has been received and payed for swift to be issued on tuesday. However, due to the client's inability to keep with the stipulated timelines stated in the executed contract, i have been adviced by my lawyers that a minimum of 4% be placed in their escrow here in london prior to swifts being issued. An escrow agreement will be drawn up between myself, the client and the lawfirm which will serve as escrow agent. The contract will state that the 4% must be released by the escrow agent to me within two days after receipt and verification of sblc. While the balance is paid 21 days later.

Out of the 4% placed in escrow, each representative get their 1% commission each, while i receive my balance of 4% in 21 days. If the representatives prefer to receive their 1% commision each in 21 days, then only 2% may be placed in escrow. Client pays me balance of 4% in 21 days and then pays the representatives their 1% commission each
I hope you can stand in my position to consider:

1. Doa does not require us to pay 2% or 4% leasing fees in advance. Therefore, receiver is not obliged to pay leasing fees in advance, which is an agreement between both parties.

2. If the receiver needs to pay half of the leasing fees in advance (4%), he must declare in advance, not after signing the doa, otherwise, the receiver can either change from 6 + 2% to 2 + 0.5%?
3. To be honest, in fact, empire tri- gold co., ltd. Is one of the state-owned enterprises of the chinese government and operator is the senior banker( guo qingming ) of the people's bank of china. They will not pay you any leasing fees in advance, but they will pay you 6 + 2% of the leasing fee within 14 days ( or even earlier).

4.In order to avoid more sequelae and even bring about legal means, i sincerely recommend that you do not create interference, you should fulfill this primitive obligation and commitment, otherwise ,the provider will not only be forced to return 50, 000 euros, but also will be forced (Diplomatic or legal means) to pay 2% pentanty, we do not like to see this sad results 。

If you are willing to send mt-760 according to doa within three banking days (Before next tuesday), we would like to pay 6 + 2% into your account as soon as possible after receiving mt-760!
Not in accordance with contract fulfillment, is really a scam

Not in accordance with contract fulfillment, is really a scam

Dec 08, 2016

Post your comment