Dear Advocate Board and Advocate Society.
I forgot to share the email January 23 with you.
Postkasse – Klagesagsafdelingen
email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Danske Bank Welcoming <firstname.lastname@example.org>
email@example.com, REU@ft.dk, firstname.lastname@example.org, Justitsministeriet <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Morten Ulrik Gade <MUG@jyskebank.dk>, Philip Baruch <email@example.com>, Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
I have shared the email here.
mail-i-ask-and-ask-jyske-bank- and-the-danish-state-and- authorities-at-the-danish- government-to-help-please- read-it-all-and-understand-i- just-want-dialogue-and-then- do-something-else-thi/
As I writs for several of your members, for having helped Jyske Bank with financial crime, which is described and documented in the complaint against Lundgren’s lawyers.
The case is growing and I am now aware, that in Denmark there is corruption and camaraderie which is above the law.
In a way, I hang out your chairman Kurt Rasmussen on bankingnews, who is a Supreme Court judge, on behalf of a lawyer mentioned, to cover up the disloyal and corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers, in order to cover up Jyske Bank’s crimes again.
Which your chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper Advokater has also chosen to support.
If you have any questions about my postings, or something you want corrected on www.banknyt.dk, everyone is still offered a serious review, both of my claims but also of my evidence.
appendix-list-to-the- complaint-against-lundgrens- lawyers-for-being-bribed-not- to-submit-their-clients- claims-against-the-jyske-bank- group/
I have put the lawyer Marie-Nielsen from the Danish bank on, as she has greatly helped to cover up Jyske Bank’s organized crime, by working against Lundgren’s client.
If lawyer society chairman Martin Lavesen or lawyer is mentioned chairman, want to comment on my list of what it is not a violation of good legal practice, or perhaps even want to confirm that this is good legal practice.
It is not a violation of good legal practice: that it is only the lawyers who decide what a client may be presented with claims 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 all court records with the client.
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 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. that is, 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 allegations 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.
So you are all welcome to hold a meeting with me where we can go through the whole complaint 2020-1932. and your decision.
Here is the link to the complaint that the lawyer mentioned wants to be swept under the rug, to stop the victim from getting justice.
Læs nu klagen 05-06-2020. samt Lundgrens afgivet svar 08-09-2020. og klagers afsluttende bemærkninger med OPFORDRINGER. 19-09-2020. Lundgren vil ikke svare på nogle opfordringer og udebliver 08-12-2020. advokatnævnet ved kun 5 medlemmer, uden oplyste navne afviser klagen 30-06-2021. Nævnet mener ikke at Lundgren har været i loyale eller i interessekonflikt, da det ikke er klienten der bestemmer deres anbringener.
Here are 10 law firms that all must agree on the decision, and the understanding of what is not a violation of good law practice see above.
Horten advokater ved Birgitte Frølund. / Lund Elmer Sandager advokater ved Henrik Høpner. / Herbst Thoregaard Advokater ved Linda Hebo Lange. / Quistgaard Advokatfirma ved Anders Quistgaard. / Bech Bruun Advokatfirma. ved Lars Lindencrone Petersen. / Kromann Reumert advokater ved Jens Steen Jensen. / Stage advokatfirma ved Gert Dyrn. / Paragrafadvokaterne ved Søren Vasegaard Andreasen. / Leoni Advokater / ved Lars Kaasgaard, and Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers. says together with the Danish Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen that it is the lawyer who decides what the client may bring before the court and that the client is not entitled to a copy of the pleadings.
I write the truth in my diary www.BANKNYT.dk and have something you want added or corrections, so feel free to call me, as I only want the truth about Danish society to come out.
But if I have made a mistake, talk to me, your total silence is a sign that this is a very serious problem, and not only for Jyske Bank, you are all helping to cover up a bank that has made forged documents and fraud as well as used bribery.
And a briefing to Danish banks on what their new lawyer Mette Marie Nielsen has done for Jyske Bank and Lundgren’s lawyers.
My name is Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup
Soevej 5. 3100 Hornbaek
———- Forwarded message ———
Fra: Carsten Storbjerg <email@example.com>
Date: søn. 23. jan. 2022 14.49
Subject: I ask and ask Jyske Bank and the Danish state and authorities at the Danish government to help, please read it all and understand I just want dialogue and then do something else, this is an extended hand to CEO Anders Christian Dam.
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Morten Ulrik Gade <MUG@jyskebank.dk>, Philip Baruch <email@example.com>, Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, Justitsministeriet <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <REU@ft.dk>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dan Terkildsen Lundgren Advokater <DAT@lundgrens.dk>
Dear all in the Jyske Bank Group and your many friends in the Danish state, the Danish authorities, the government and in the legal community, the Bar Council, as well as your lawyers in Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers, Lundgren’s lawyers.
How long time will you fight against me, and refuse dialogue with me, in order to find out if it is me Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup from Soevej 5. 3100 Hornbaek Denmark who has made a mistake and writes something about you on www.banknyt.dk which is not true.
Morten Ulrik Gade • MUG@jyskebank.dk
Philip Baruch • email@example.com
Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen • firstname.lastname@example.org
Justitsministeriet • email@example.com
Dan Terkildsen Lundgren Advokater • DAT@lundgrens.dk
This page is about Denmark being largely controlled by corrupt lawyers as Lundgrens, and criminal banks as Jyske Bank, and incompetent judges like Kurt Rasmussen who chose to cover up the crime of the powerful friends, it started 17 May 2016, where I first wrote directly to Jyske Bank Anders Christian Dam, and wrote I think I am exposed to a huge fraud, it should turn out that I was right, but that also the management of Jyske bank want the bank to deceive the customers the bank could I did not know, this little battle has developed to promote information that the Danish state by cooperating with criminal banks, and that the state covers this matter, by counteracting the victim of banks’ crime can get help, and that I as a victim of organized crime in Denmark myself must fight this unequal struggle, against this Danish bank which the Danish state and the authorities as well as the government cover.
See the pictures of Jyske Bank cars here on Google, advertisements about Jyske Bank’s crime, which since 2016. have been read on the running advertisements which mainly run in North Zealand and Copenhagen, without any comment from Jyske Bank and authorities and Denmark’s Nationalbank, as it is the truth about corrupt Denmark. HERE ON THIS LINK.
FREE ADVERTISING FOR DANISH BANK JYSKE BANK. PICTURES MAY BE REPRODUCED WITH SOURCE INFORMATION JYSKE BANK WWW.BANKNYT.DK
And in this LINK. Can you find more video advertisements that are a warning against trading with Danish bank Jyske Bank, where CEO Anders Christian Dam makes it clear that Jyske Bank will not stop cheating and deceiving the bank’s customers.
The Danish state does not think that the organized crime, that is committed in Denmark by large Danish companies
should be stopped, therefore I will on this page warn other nations against Denmark, as companies in Denmark like Jyske Bank for the Danish state, may commit fraud and forgery, and use bribery without the Danish authorities’ involvement.
I have repeatedly called on Jyske Bank and their lawyers, and ask them to defend themselves, but they do not dare.