Læs den danske orgniale tekst her.

UPDATED LATEST 07-05-2022. KL. 10.30 the page and posts are in both Danish and English. Frontpage copy www.storbjerg.dk

Welcome to my diary, which deals with corruption and organized crime in Denmark, where Danish banks are behind it.

Once I’ve edited this page, I might want to replace the front page here with the content shared here. LINK DK. / LINK ENG. READ IT ALREADY NOW, AND ASK YOURSELF WHY THE DANISH STATE, AND THE GOVERNMENT, COVER CRIMINAL DANISH BANKS. and of course with link to previous front page 06-05-2022. HERE.

The page will be updated, and refined

Anders Christian Dam, Jyske Bank A/S, Lund Elmer Sandager, Lundgrens and Others.

Immediately seems to be stunningly indifferent to what the bank’s customers like Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup, write and since 2016. have written about Jyske Bank’s various crimes, such as that Jyske Bank knowingly and dishonestly, in bad faith, and has demonstrably committed fraud against the bank’s customers , which was carried out by means of the Forgery of documents and misuse of the bank’s access to the land registry and by misuse of the void power of attorney, which Jeanett Kofoed Hansen has done for Jyske Bank, as part of the fraud Nicolai Hansen started with Lars Aaqvist when Jyske Bank started with raising interest rates on a loan of DKK 4,328,000. as Jyske Bank’s employees tricked the later sick customer into believing they had been taken home.

But Jyske Bank is deliberately lying and exposing the customer to gross fraud, and Jyske Bank will of course just sue me Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup if Jyske Bank has not done what I have been writing continuously since 2016.

In addition, Jyske Bank can use evidence that Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup on video says Jyske Bank A/S makes a fraudulent document false misuse of power of attorney and also uses bribery if Jyske Bank A/S does not believe that Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup is right in what he says , as here on YouTube videos, and writes for example here on the page Banknyt, Jyske Bank and their many assistants have repeatedly been called upon to accuse CARSTEN of INJURIES AND BACKWASHING OF JYSKE BANK A/S

So Dear CEO Anders Christian Dam, you can write to the police and ask the police to investigate my allegations against Jyske Bank A/S for organized crime if you dare, if you know my evidence for Jyske Bank’s various crimes against the bank’s customers like mine company, are good then you do Anders Christian Dam, best in keeping quiet, and hide while you and Jyske Bank expose their customer to peasant captivity, with the help of camaraderie.

That Jyske Bank and their many aides, together with the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority and the many Danish authorities, are fighting to cover up Jyske Bank’s extensive and organized crime, which has been carried out jointly, simply shows that Denmark as a state also has a credibility problem and is an attack on the Danes’ legal security reaches large Danish companies such as Jyske Bank and exposes their customers to organized fraud.

I repeat here again This is for you CEO Anders Christian Dam, Jyske Bank, Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers, Lundgren’s lawyers if not in as I mention below.

Nicolai Hansen, Jeanett Kofoed Hansen, Lars Aaqvist, Casper Dam Olsen, Anette Kirkeby, Morten Ulrik Gade, Birgit Buch Thuesen, Philip Baruch, Anders Christian Dam, Per Skovhus, Niels Erik Jacobsen, Peter Schleidt as the management is responsible for initiating my inquiries about Jyske Bank’s various crimes, and there are several, as from the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers, where at least these mentioned.

Dan Terkildsen, Mette Marie Nielsen, Emil Hald Vendelbo Winstrøm, Sebastian Lysholm Nilsen, Jens Grunnet-Nilsson have all helped to counteract justice and help to present the client’s plea against Jyske Bank.

Which was after Jyske Bank Bestak Lundgren’s lawyers, for not presenting the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank.

As I write has contributed to Jyske Bank’s organized crime, directly or indirectly, then come and say I am lying, but do not incite my inquiries.

And note that not a single one of you, to whom I have continuously written about Jyske Bank’s extensive and outspoken crime, has dared to respond to a single inquiry.

ATP, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, former Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Police,

The National Police, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Public Prosecutor, the Ministry of Justice, Denmarks Nationalbank, the National Board of Justice, the Real Estate Agents, the Ministry of Finance, the Danish Business Authority, the Politicians, the Legal Affairs Committee, the Prime Minister’s Office, and other partners to the Jyske Bank Group, Danish pension funds and shareholders in Jyske Bank.

Advokat samfundet by chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers, who do not believe it comes to the public by the fact that the Bar Board has rejected 27 complaints about Lundgren’s lawyers, including that Jyske Bank by bribery commission has bribed Lundgren’s lawyers to oppose the client’s plea against Jyske Bank fore the court.

In other words, when Jyske Bank paid Lundgren’s lawyers bribes to counteract legal certainty, the lawyer mentioned by the Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen, who is chairman of the Bar Council, does not think this is a problem, nor does the lawyer mentioned by Jens Steen Jensen and Birgitte Frølund, Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard and Henrik. Hyltoft also does not believe that Lundgren’s lawyers have violated good legal practice, in some of the 27 complaints, including receiving a return commission where Lundgren’s lawyers became incompetent and corrupt and acted deeply disloyal to their client, and hid that Lundgren’s lawyers had been bought and paid by defendant Jyske Bank.

You can read the complaint here in the link and see all the documents, and gain an understanding of what the lawyer council at the Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert, Birgitte Frølund from Horten Attorneys, Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board and Henrik Hyldetoft from DANISH BUSINESS EVERYONE THINKS ARE NOT VIOLATIONS OF GOOD LAWYER CUSTOMS.

WHAT IS A DECISION 2020-1932. AS MARTIN LAVESEN FROM DLA PIPER LAWYERS DO NOT WANT THE PUBLIC TO GET INSIGHT I.

That Jens Steen Jensen and Birgitte Frølund, together with Kurt Rasmussen, have denied that it is a violation of good legal practice for Jyske Bank to pay Lundgren’s lawyers around DKK 20 million to advise Jyske Bank on trading for DKK 600 million. 🤫, when Lundgren’s lawyers of the small client shortly before, had hired Lundgren’s lawyers by partner Dan Terkildsen to present the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank, which Lundgren’s lawyers avoided and at the same time kept the client completely out of the case against Jyske Bank, such as in that Lundgren’s lawyers would not hand over the client a copy of court books, and that Lundgren’s lawyers also hid and withheld several lawsuits for the client, both lawsuits that Lundgren’s lawyers themselves 02-09-2019. made and lawsuits that defendant Jyske Bank presented to the court, this was after Jyske Bank itself employed Lundgren’s lawyers, after which Lundgren’s lawyers deliberately and dishonestly kept bran either completely out of the case against Jyske Bank.

18-08-2019. Writing to Lundgren’s and cutting it out of cardboard, I ask if Lundgren’s lawyers agree with me, but Lundgren’s lawyers never reply to any of my emails and letters concerning my / client’s plea against Jyske Bank.

🗣️

23-08-2019. If the client writes an SMS to Lundgren’s lawyers by Emil Hald Vendelbo Winstrøm, you may not present anything without the client’s approval.

🗣️

Here is just one of many different explanations of what the case against Jyske Bank is about, letter and email 27-08-2019. Is common to all my inquiries, and review of the client’s plea against Jyske Bank, Lundgren’s lawyers fail to answer, but Lundgren’s lawyers refuse to answer at any time.

And Lundgren’s lawyers go directly against the client’s instructions, about nothing to present without the client’s approval, which is why Lundgren’s lawyers present their Proceedings 2. 02-09-2019. Against Jyske Bank, without a single one of the client’s pleas having been included, and afterwards Lundgren’s lawyers refuse to give the client a copy of this pleading 2. which Lundgren’s lawyers have presented against the client’s instructions, the client therefore does not know what Lundgren’s lawyers are doing.

All this is the overall lawyer board by the Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen who is chairman of the Bar Council and Jens Steen Jensen and Birgitte Frølund, Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard and Henrik Hyltoft completely agree, ie that the plaintiff / client does not know what the client’s lawyer does, nor does the plaintiff / client know that the client’s law firm also works for defendant Jyske Bank, in a case involving a transaction for DKK 600,000,000.

The Advocate Board believes that this has not affected Lundgren’s Advocate partner company and their impartiality to bring a case against Jyske Bank for actual million fraud.

The worst thing is that also the lawyer society’s chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers, backs lawyer mentioned up that the client has nothing to have said in their cases, it is the lawyer who decides what the client may be presented and what the client’s plea is.

Danish corruption and camaraderie are deeply ingrained in the Danish legal community, which is why finding a reputable lawyer is quite difficult.

I am aware that Rødstenen lawyers may have been paid by return commission or by camaraderie, Rødstenen lawyers have helped Jyske Bank not to present the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank.

On the other hand, I am aware that Lundgren’s lawyers are corrupt and disloyal, and that Lundgren’s lawyers have contributed to Jyske Bank’s various crimes by counteracting the client’s plea against Jyske Bank.

I am also aware that both Jens Steen Jensen and Birgitte Frølund have very close connections to Jyske Bank’s management, and also Kromann Reumert lawyers, where Jens Steen Jensen is a partner, have worked for the defendant Jyske Bank.

The same applies to the law firm, where Birgitte Frølund is a partner in Hjorten lawyers, and also Hjorten lawyers have worked for defendant Jyske Bank, it is therefore strange that neither Jens Steen Jensen nor Birgitte Frølund have said they were incompetent, in a case that is really about corruption, which is when Jyske Bank has bribed Lundgren’s lawyers not to present the client’s plea against Jyske Bank.

The Danish Advocate Society and Advocate Board are governed by camaraderie by worst drawer.

Only after the client discovers that Lundgren’s lawyers and their lawyers had fallen on the client’s back, Lundgren’s lawyers are fired.

In other words, Lundgren’s lawyers were fired on 25-09-2019. after the client discovered that Jyske Bank had bribed Lundgren’s lawyers, here you can read a brief dismissal of the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers who did not present any of the client’s allegations against Jyske Bank, the client / plaintiff must therefore 27-10-2019. make a preliminary pleading 3.

🤝

It was as with Rødstenen lawyers in Aarhus who tried to raise the case against Jyske Bank behind the cliff, this was a lie and was stopped, Rødstenen lawyers also withheld information that Rødstenen lawyers had not presented the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank, and Rødstenen lawyers would not answer the client’s question as the client asks Rødstenen lawyers.

Some of what has been written for Rødstenen lawyers, here email 12-02-2016. / email 14-02-2016. / email 19-04-2016.

Have you submitted my claims against Jyske Bank, Rødstenen lawyers will not answer the client, the client who had hired Rødstenen lawyers to lead the case against Jyske Bank, can not be informed whether Rødstenen lawyers have submitted the client’s plea against Jyske Bank, the client must therefore have a new lawyer to write to Rødstenen lawyers, and asks if Rødstenen lawyers have presented the client’s plea against Jyske Bank.

To which Rødstenen lawyers respond, the client’s other lawyer, that Rødstenen lawyers have not presented the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank, which 2 lawyers have agreed with me as the client, and Rødstenen lawyers say it has been agreed at a conference call.

But unfortunately this was a big lie, Rødstenen lawyers have never agreed with their client, ie me to raise the case against Jyske Bank.

First Rødstenen lied lawyers, and tried to raise the case against Jyske Bank behind the cliff, then I hire as plaintiff Lundgren’s lawyers, who subsequently turn out that Lundgren’s lawyers are deeply corrupt, shortly after Lundgren’s lawyers are bribed by Jyske Bank, to not to present the client’s fraud and false plea against Jyske Bank.

Appendix 220. Appendix 220.A. MP3. 18-10-2017 RØDSTENEN BY lawyer Thomas Schioldan Sørensen – Rasmus claims that it has been agreed to withdraw the case against Jyske Bank. Usandt.

Appendix 189. Appendix 189. 12-12-2017. at 12.50. Rødstenen informs Lawyer Peter Sørensen that Rødstenen has not presented the client’s claims.

Appendix 190. Appendix 190. 15-12-2017. at 09.54. Rødstenen writes fraud can not be presented civilly, and withdraws the State Attorney SAK-2016-41-3357.

Appendix 191. Appendix 191. 20-02-2018. at 13.07. To Thomas Schioldan Sørensen, hope you get justice and good luck in the future.

Appendix 192. Appendix 192. 20-01-2018. at 14.33. Rødstenen Thomas Schioldan Sørensen states that the client will find a new lawyer.

Maybe this is the case or is rotting and corruption and or camaraderie among Danish lawyers just a normal way for the big Danish law firms to work.

Everything I write here, you can read in the complaint 05-06-2020. of Lundgren’s lawyers, by looking at the appendices.

🤝

Subsequently, the plaintiff finds an honorable lawyer who 04-05-2020. presents Procedural Notice 3. and then on 23-12-2020. Presents the honorable lawyer, Procedure 4. Has the plaintiff had his allegations presented and placed against the criminal Jyske Bank.

Lundgren’s lawyers would also not give the client a copy of pleading 2, 02-09-2019. which did not contain any of the plaintiff’s claim against Jyske Bank, even though the client requests partner Dan Terkildsen for a copy 05-09-2019. Lundgren’s does not even bother to answer the client, but neither is this a violation of good lawyer practice, the client has no rights as the lawyer board has decided that only the lawyer decides, and here Lundgren’s lawyers would not want the client to know what Lundgren’s lawyer partner company made, the client also did not know that Lundgren’s lawyers had been hired by defendant Jyske Bank in a case for millions, and even if the client writes 20-09-2019. and asks Dan Terkildsen whether Lundgren’s lawyers work for Jyske Bank, or have worked for defendant Jyske Bank, which Lundgren’s lawyers will not answer the client either, even though the client writes 20-09-2019. and asks Dan Terkildsen whether Lundgren’s lawyers work for Jyske Bank, or have worked for defendant Jyske Bank, which Lundgren’s lawyers will not answer the client either, the plaintiff therefore does not know that Lundgren’s lawyers are deeply incompetent and corrupt.

which Neither Kurt Rasmussen, Jens Steen Jensen, Birgitte Frølund, Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard, Henrik Hyltoft or Martin Lavesen say. in their opinion IT is not a violation of good lawyer practice.

Steen Jensen, Birgitte Frølund is herself closely associated with Jyske Bank, and has been a lawyer for Jyske Bank in large cases. Just as their companies Kromann Reumert and Horten lawyers have also represented Jyske Bank in large cases.

The lawyer ethical rules as Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, from the National Board of Justice and lawyers like Birgitte Frølund from Horten Lawyer. / Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert Lawyer. / Lawyer Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board. / Henrik Hyltoft from the Danish business community. And as a lawyer mentioned chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper Lawyer. interprets what is not a violation of good legal practice.

When there is no violation of good legal practice, it is as directly understood as being good legal practice.

The Bar Council and rules of interest conflicts.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: that it is only the lawyers who decide what a client may be presented with allegations and places.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: that it is only the lawyers who decide what evidence a client may have presented to the client’s claims and affidavits.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That the lawyer changes the client’s claim, if a client claims something is untrue, false, or invalid, then the lawyer may want to change the client’s claim to the opposite.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not respond to the client’s inquiries.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not share plaintiff’s pleadings with the client.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not share defendant’s pleadings with the client.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not share court records with the client.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not provide the client with a copy of all court records, even if the client requests the lawyer to do so.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not hand over to the client a copy of all court records, even if the client requests both the lawyer but also the court for IT.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: that although lawyers have confirmed orally, “or with admission” to their clients, that these lawyers do not present anything to the court, without the client completely agreeing with the lawyer, lawyers may subsequently make claims, which is not comparable to the client’s claims.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers change the client’s position, even if the client has written to the lawyer, you may not present anything to the court without my “client” having approved it.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers change the client’s position, even without informing the client about it. So lawyers do not have to share any of what the lawyer presents.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers call witnesses other than those the client has told, even without informing the client anything about it.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: For lawyers to remove the client’s witnesses, even without informing the client anything about it.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers make the litigation root, by submitting appendices.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers mislead the client.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers write services on a client, such as taxi bills on a client, even if it does not concern the client.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not answer the client’s questions concerning whether other lawyers from the same law firm may have worked for the same company against which the client’s lawyer is employed to present a fraud and false case.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers do not answer their clients’ questions, and that the lawyer subsequently takes a fee / payment for not answering what their clients ask.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That lawyers hide from their clients that the court has written to the lawyer, the court will disregard the client’s own submitted written testimony, with the client’s claims and appendices supporting the client’s explanation, which the client himself sent to court , after the lawyer himself forgot to present the client’s allegations.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That a lawyer encourages a client to continue to perform acts that the other party’s lawyer in a case has written to the client’s lawyer is a criminal act.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: That a lawyer withholds letters from the client in which the client is accused of committing a criminal act, since lawyers do not have to inform the client that the client is accused of violating the penal code.

It is not a violation of good legal practice: To breach the duty of confidentiality by in legal matters, not to hide email addresses that have been sent Bcc. and which the client wants hidden.

Lawyers are welcome to charge for tasks not performed.

In short, the Advocate Board / Bar Association, June 30, 2021. by 5 members of the Advocate Board has decided.

THAT it is good lawyer practice:

The client cannot decide for himself what the client’s claims against a defendant are about, it is only the lawyer who fully decides for himself what claims the client has, which is seen as a violation of my human rights. The decision 30-06-2021. In the complaint 2020-1932. From 05-06-2021. Is decided by:

Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen. Birgitte Frølund from Horten lawyers. Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert lawyers. Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board. Henrik Hyltoft from the Danish business. Which is supported by the chairman of the Bar Council Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers.

The customer there in Jyske Bank who is exposed to organized economic crime in Denmark’s second largest Banks, is up against both the authorities including the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority and the Danish state as well as the government which by Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and the other politicians in Denmark does not want Jyske Bank to be held responsible and punished for the bank’s obvious use of forgery and misuse of power of attorney abuse of the bank’s access to the right of registration and other crime, which has been done jointly and therefore aggravating circumstances.

THE FACTS ARE.

It is undisputed that at least these have helped to cover up the fact that Jyske Bank A / S has bribed Lundgren’s lawyers not to present the client’s plea against Jyske Bank, in order to disappoint in legal matters, Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert lawyers, Birgitte Frølund from Horten lawyers, Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board, Henrik Hyltoft from the Danish business, assisted by Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has repeatedly provided false information in legal matters.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has paid Lundgren’s lawyers a bribe / return commission to disappoint in legal matters.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has repeatedly lied to customers.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has abused a power of attorney.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has falsified document.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S repeatedly has lied to the customer.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has made a legal basis.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has committed fraud.

It is undisputed that Jyske Bank A/S has committed mandate fraud.

Here you will find the participants behind Jyske bank A / S and the bank’s many offenses, as well as the people who have been involved in attacking me as a customer of Jyske Bank, which can only have been to get an unreported financial gain that has been a crucial loss of wealth for me.

Without at least these people Nicolai Hansen, Jeanett Kofoed Hansen, Lars Aaqvist, Anette Kirkeby, Casper Dam Olsen, Morten Ulrik Gade, Birgitt Buch Thuesen, Philip Baruch, Kristian Ambjørn Buus Nielsen, and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers and Dan Terkildsen, Emil Hald Vendelbo Winstrøm , Sebastian Lysholm Nilsen, Jens Grunnet-Nilsson and Mette Marie Nielsen who are currently employed as lawyers at Danske Bank A/S

OPSLAG 21-02-2022 Facesbook. Divided into more posts like here. Corrected.

The Danish state throws the first bomb in the war on the Danes’ legal security, by covering up the criminal Jyske Bank.

🌋

24-02-2022. DANSK. and 24-02-2022. ENGELSK.

🌏

23-02-2022. I fight against camaraderie and corruption in Denmark.

🌍

Read my story about corrupt Denmark, where the state supports criminal banks.

22-02-2022. THE DANISH AUTHORITIES AND THE DANISH GOVERNMENT COVER UP JYSKE BANK’S FINANCIAL FRAUD CRIMES.

🌍

COMPANY AND A GOOD HISTORY FROM REAL DENMARK, CAN BE PURCHASED YOU CAN CONTACT CARSTEN STORBJERG SKAARUP HERE +4522227713.

ALSO IF YOU ARE A JOURNALIST, AND WRITE ABOUT THE ORGANIZED CRIME WHERE THE STATE AND GOVERNMENT COVER THE CORRUPTION THAT EXISTS AND GOVERN DENMARK.

With Denmark’s biggest scandal case, against Danish fraud bank, in the case where also the Danish state is involved 23-02-2022.

Get my exclusive story about the organized crime that the Danish state covers. Feel free to buy the company that is suing Jyske Bank, and help to give Jyske Bank and the danish state a big slap in the face, and tell them that the Danish state covers criminal Danish banks.

🌐

The Danish state dropped the first bomb, over small innocent bank customers, who say that Jyske Bank should not be able to survive a mutual attack on the Danish bank Jyske Bank if the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority and politicians do not cover up Jyske Bank’s organized crime.

Signs.

Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup.

Soevej 5. 3100 Hornbaek.

I guarantee that what you can read about the Corruption and crime that the Danish bank Jyske Bank is behind is true.

Phone number +4522227713

Mail Carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com bankingnews.press@gmail.com banknyt@gmail.com