29-12-2021. Denne her sag bør faktisk kunne lukke Jyske Bank, eller gøre så finanstilsynet tager retten til bankdrift fra Jyske Bank, men i kender jeres venner, da i har prøvet dette et utal af gange, for jeg er jo ikke den første Jyske Bank udsætter for bondefangeri “bedrageri”

29-12-2021. 03.03. 

Opdateret 31-12-2021.

 

Happy New Year

As a state and authorities that cover up the Danish bank Jyske Bank committing organized economic crime, you can do nothing to stop me from writing and telling other governments about it, as this is the truth, you all know that I tells the truth, and in as an authority and government, should see and get cleaned up and cleaned up, and cleaned out in the Danish bank, possibly the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority must take the bank’s license for banking operations from the Danish bank Jyske Bank.

 

This case should actually be able to close Jyske Bank, or make the Financial Supervisory Authority take the right to bank operations from Jyske Bank, but you know your friends, as you have tried this countless times, because I am not the first Jyske Bank exposes to peasant captivity “fraud”

The email to the Danish authorities and Jyske bank is below, the introduction.

Min private Facebook, and this Video on Youtube.

 

You may think that this is insane, but I alone am up against Denmark’s most powerful people, who all have only one wish, namely to silence me to death, and cover up that Denmark’s second largest bank Jyske Bank, has exposed me to organized fraud, and false which is done in association, I might ask stupid if Jyske Bank is not a criminal bank, why is there not a single one of you that I have written to, or have shared emails with, who dare to talk to me, more if this is just a small misunderstanding, and Jyske bank and their lawyers lack a conflict management course.

Please Will you be kind and answer and help me, to share my true account of corruption and camaraderie between some of Denmark’s powerful companies, which also use forgery and bribery, which members of the Danish court’s board have chosen to cover together with several large law firms, including employees in DLA Piper lawyersHorten advokater, Kromann Reumert advokater and a Supreme Court judge from the Judiciary, to name just a few.

Not to forget these are the main actors behind me story of the corrupt denmark, Jyske Bank’s lawyers including Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers, and the employees of Lundgren’s partner company as the lawyers who have received a return commission for why they are corrupt and have sympathy for Jyske Bank million fraud, which it has politically decided from the Danish side not to interfere in, since there are strong interests in the authorities and the Danish state and partners with it Danish major bank

 

The Advocate Board attacks the Danes’ legal security, and their chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper Advokater, continues to cover the criminal lawyers who have contributed to Jyske Bank’s Fraud against the bank’s customer. (Customers)
Page 1 of 2.
Letter 03-09-2021. From the lawyer mentioned who has acquitted Lundgren’s lawyers, even though these are corrupt, and took a return commission from Jyske Bank, for subsequently not presenting any of the client’s pleas and allegations against Jyske Bank A / S
and otherwise will not take off anymore.
When Birgitte Frølund from Hjorten Advokater. / Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert Advokater. / Lawyer Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board. / Henrik Hyltoft from the Danish business community. And also the chairman of the Bar Council, Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper Advokater, interprets that what Lundgren’s lawyers and especially their partner Dan Terkildsen have done is not a violation of good legal practice.
Then it must be divided so that others than Lundgren’s lawyers must also accept bribes, in order for their clients’ claims, to disappoint in legal matters.

HUSK DE SOM HAR DÆKKET OVER JYSKE BANKS FORTSATTE SVINDEL MOD STORBJERG ERHVERV I ER SKYLDIGE I VI STADIG UDSÆTTES FOR BEDRAGERI DA I NÆGTEDE AT STANDSE EN ÅBENLYS FORBRYDELSE TAK FOR DET HÅBER I SOVER GODT OM NATTEN / At politiet ignorer politilovens Kap. 2. Paragraf 2. Stk. 3. Syntes åbenlyst være for at dække over Danmarks anden største bank jyske bank, ikke må efterforskes for bedrageri ER DETTE FÆLLES FOR ALLE BANKER ? Men nu nærmer vi os retslokalet og kan der få retten til at sætte jysk bank på plads, nu ledelsen ikke selv magter den opgave / Husk vi retter gerne fejl hvis noget er forkert Anders Dam ved godt at nummeret er 22227713 Så er bande lederen Anders Dam eller andre uenige med noget Så bare kom Anders nummeret er 0045 22227713 / / Jyske Bank Boxen præsentere duellen mellem jyske bank og deres bedraget kunde, hvis jyske bank tør mødes i Boxen Jyske Bank BOXEN navnet på Danmarks nye nationale arena i Herning. MCH Messecenter Herning Jyske Bank har indgået en navnesponsor aftale for multiarenaen,

Side 1 af 2.

Brev 03-09-2021. Fra advokat nævnet der 30-06-2020 har frikendt Lundgrens advokater i afgørelsen 2020-1932. selv om disse Lundgrens tydeligvis er korrupte, og tog mod den returkommission Jyske Bank A/S.

Sincerely, him with the Jyske banking cars.

Carsten Storbjerg

Soevej 5.

3100. Hornbaek

denmark

phone +4522227713

 

If some of you, like Jyske Bank, and Lund Elmer Sandager’s lawyers wrote 1 February 2019, think there are staffable actions to write about Jyske Bank’s criminal activity, why not come then, I have been helpful and shared my emails to also the police and the authority, as well as the court, so the authorities can also help Jyske bank to launch an investigation and investigation of my accusations, which also is concern members of the court.

 

Of course, you also have the opportunity to launch an investigation of Jyske Bank, following my police report from 23 March 2016. and with the addition of information to the report on 23 March 2016. and added charges June 28, 2016, I report several matters of criminal activity to the police, performed by Jyske Bank and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers.


The police wrote on 27 May 2016. and 25 November 2016. that the police would not investigate Jyske Bank for fraud, and the case should be conducted in civil law. SAK-2016-41-3357, as there are several criminal violations of the Penal Code, it is not the victim who must be in charge of criminal crimes, which has been presented but which judge Søren Ejdum has not mentioned in a word in the judgment 21 December 2021.

That it was not until 21 September 2019. I discover that Jyske Bank has bribed Lundgren’s lawyers to prevent me from presenting my allegations with evidence against Jyske Bank is also omitted in the judgment of 21 December.

And the next thing I have to do is to privately bring a case against Jyske Bank for violation of the Real Estate Registration Act §11. as Jyske Bank has exposed me to legal leave, where Jyske Bank against my order has deleted my private mortgage deed, which has happened against my instructions, and without a power of attorney.

 

I ask Lundgren’s lawyers at Partner Dan Terkildsen 20 September 2019. in the email at 02.52 and again in the email at 04.10 whether Lundgren’s lawyers or some of Lundgren’s lawyers work for Jyske Bank or have worked for Jyse Bank.

On 21 September 2019, see that Lundgrens writes on their website that  Lundgrens have given advice to Jyske Bank in trading of 600 million Danish kroner.

As Lundgren’s lawyers at Dan Terkildsen refuse to answer me whether Lundgren has done work for Jyske Bank, even though I as a client first hired Lundgren to lead a fraud and false case against Jyske Bank, I choose on 24 September 2019. at. 20.58 to fire Lundgrens as they are corrupt.

see The reason for firing Lundgren’s here on 24 September 2019.

 

I have subsequently seen that Lundgren’s by Dan Terkildsen and Emil Hald Vendelbo have discussed whether the client’s email of 20 September should be answered, but they must have decided that the Client should know nothing about it, and in the complaint’s appendix 164. Lundgren’s client charges an unknown amount, for having asked questions about Lundgren’s impartiality to his client, about the existence of a collaboration with Jyske Bank, about advice in a transaction for DKK 600,000,000, see Appendix 12 of the complaint.

Lundgren’s lawyers by Emil Hald wendelbo vinstrøm and partner Dan Terkildsen, who himself, 2 September 2019. has made pleading 2. and submitted this to the court without the client’s claims or approval, will not subsequently it be submitted, give a copy of the pleading to the client, even on request 5 septeemper 2019.

Lundgren who has been fired, writes on 23 October 2019. that a lawsuit must be submitted to the court no later than 28 October 2019. why I myself 27 October 2019. must make a process lawsuit, after I discovered that defendant Jyske Bank had paid Lundgren’s lawyers return commission for not submitting my allegations in the case against Jyske Bank.

 

 

I complain about Lundgren’s and Dan Terkildsen 05-06-2020. with links to 27 complaints. Lundgren’s Dan Terkildsen answers on 08-09-2020. I hereby send my concluding remarks on 19-09-2020 with links. to 26 calls. The Bar Council informs it that Lundgren’s partner has not responded. after which Advokat mentioned by Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen from the National Board of Justice and The lawyer ethical rules as Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, from the National Board of Justice and lawyers like Birgitte Frølund from Hjorten lawyers. / Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert lawyers. / Lawyer Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from the Consumer Complaints Board. / Henrik Hyltoft from the Danish business community.

Which the Bar Association’s chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers supports and interprets that Lundgren’s lawyers and their employees have not violated good legal practice.

Conclusion must be that all members and the companies the members are affiliated with work in the same way as Lundgren’s lawyers.

 

Which you can read in the ruling on 30-06-2021. PDF. who acquits Lundgren in all 27 circumstances of the complaint PDF, even though Dan Terkildsen Lundgren’s partner did not respond to a single one of the 26 invitations to the complaint 05-06-2020. PDF.

You are encouraged to take a copy of the page 30-06.2021. here as the decision 2020-1932. has predicate effect on all future cases, a decision that the law firm will not share with their members.

 

I know in the complaint on 5 June 2020. about Lundgren’s lawyers and Dan Terkildsen. “see all appendices from the complaint here” Writes that Lundgren’s lawyers are corrupt, but the chief of police in Copenhagen says that the national police is not illegal.

The police write that it is only illegal to use bribes by a public employee, and it is therefore not illegal for a private company like Jyske Bank to bribe another private company, such as Lundgren’s lawyers for services, which was not to present my case’s claims against Jyske Bank .

I complained to the lawyer board and here the Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen decided which the Bar Association’s chairman Martin Lar from DLP Pipi lawyers and these. what they believe LOYALT is and what is not a violation of good legal practice.

 

I also applied for a free trial, funny note, Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen is also chairman here, and I wonder if a free trial was rejected to stop my case was presented against Jyske Bank, which is a criminal case, which all the authorities have tried to stop me from getting presented.

It must be clear that Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen has unconditionally much power, and with positions as chairman of the Civil Agency and the Bar Council, Kurt Rasmussen can stop many cases he personally does not want to go to court, and here it is clear that Judge Kurt Rasmussen will reject all cases with criminal offenses carried out by Danish banks, which is probably one of the reasons why a criminal case has never been raised and brought against some Danish banks working for the Danish state.


The Danish Judges’ Association.

NOTE

The purpose of the association is to look after the interests of the judges and promote collegial unity. For the legal security of the little one does not exist when the unity goes against societal interests, and here it is about the state’s cooperation with a Jyske Bank that has committed fraud and used forgery, used bribery and most recently exposed the same customer to disrepair.

 

Around the complaint 05-06-2020. over lundgren’s lawyers, as a lawyer mentioned as even with their members who are employees of the court board, has chosen to cover up the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers, again to protect Jyske Bank which is also the Danish state bank, it therefore comes as no surprise that also judge Søren Ejdum chose to acquit Jyske Bank in a compensation case, without mentioning that Jyske Bank has committed fraud and forgery, the case can not be processed in Denmark as Denmark is a corrupt country where the power elite rules by camaraderie who must not comply with the law .

This case is a scandal not only for Jyske Bank and their lawyers, but for Danish society, because when the law does not apply to Danish banks, who is also exempt from having to obey the law.

 

If you want a copy of the extract BS-402/2015-VIB about Den danske Bank, Jyske Bank’s million scams, send me an email at carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com with your information and you will get a LINK to dropbox. KLIK HERE.

Here you will find the verdict in the case BS-402/2015-ViB. Included in text and link.

LINK to the extract BS-402/2015-VIB

💰⚖️💰

 

 

Dansk dommer Søren Ejdum blåstempler bundefangeri, og siger Jyske Bank kan beholde de millioner, Jyske Bank ved brug af svig og falsk samt ond tro har stjålet fra kunde, da det lykkedes for flere ansatte i Jyske Bank at holde kunden i en forvIldelse, læs her hvad Søren Ejdum endtlig mener, og hvad sagens hoved tema omhandler. Hvilket også er delt på TRUSTPILOT 24 -12-2021.

 

Watch all videos here on BANKNYT and link to YouTube videos that can be freely shared here in the LINK.

Here is my YOUTUBE CHANNEL.

 

 

Here you will find the verdict in the case BS-402/2015-ViB. Included in text and link.

LINK to the extract BS-402/2015-VIB

 

Watch all the videos about Jyske Bank here, where there are also links to YouTube.

Watch all videos here on BANKNYT and link to YouTube videos that can be freely shared here in the LINK.

Here is my YOUTUBE CHANNEL.

 

 

Læs mailen 29 december 2021 til Jyske Bank, ledelse, repræsentantskabsamt jeres soldater.

direktion@jyskebank.dk,
lillevang@jyskebank.dk,
johnny.christensen@jyskebank.dk,
clm@jyskebank.dk,
beo@cbs-executive.dk,
ala@70151000.dk,
rina.asmussen@gmail.com,
kn@skovadvokater.dk,
nicolai-hansen@jyskebank.dk,
Casper Dam Olsen <Casper-dam@jyskebank.dk>,
jkh@jyskebank.dk,
kirkeby@jyskebank.dk,
Tina Agergaard <AGERGAARD@jyskebank.dk>,
sw@jyskebank.dk,
martin.nielsen@jyskebank.dk,
Morten Ulrik Gade <MUG@jyskebank.dk>,
Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen <kbn@les.dk>,
Philip Baruch <pb@les.dk>

CC

frank.ryan@dlapiper.com,
simon.levine@dlapiper.com,
andrew.darwin@dlapiper.com,
denmark@dk.dlapiper.com,
info@danskererhverv.dk, fejl i mail
nh@naevneneshus.dk,
mail@kromannreumert.com,
info@horten.dk,
folketinget@ft.dk,
mette.abildgaard@ft.dk,
marlene.ambo-rasmussen@ft.dk,
simon.ammitzboll@ft.dk,
kirsten.normann.andersen@ft.dk,
ida.auken@ft.dk,
liselott.blixt@ft.dk,
anne.sophie.callesen@ft.dk,
henrik.dahl@ft.dk,
uffe.elbaek@ft.dk,
jakob.ellemann-jensen@ft.dk,
stm@stm.dk,
naser.khader@ft.dk,
rosa.lund@ft.dk,
inger.stojberg@ft.dk, nå ja den må af listen
mette.thiesen@ft.dk,
pernille.vermund@ft.dk,
fm@fm.dk,
Justitsministeriet <jm@jm.dk>,
kmj@atp.dk,
kf@nationalbanken.dk,
postkasse@advokatsamfundet.dk,
Postkasse – Klagesagsafdelingen <klagesagsafdelingen@advokatsamfundet.dk>,
bankdata@bankdata.dk,
REU@ft.dk,
SAK@ankl.dk,
post@domstolsstyrelsen.dk,
martin.lavesen@dk.dlapiper.com,
jsj@kromannreumert.com,
hhy@danskerhverv.dk,
“<NSJ@politi.dk>” <nsj@politi.dk>,
saoek@ankl.dk,
pet@politi.dk,
lars.mathiesen@ft.dk

 

Kære Jyske Banks bestyrelse og repræsentantskab samt soldaterne bag, som har stået bag bedraget.

Jeg savner at i svare mig, jeg har skrevet direkte til ledelsen og jeres CEO Anders Dam siden maj 2016, og i har ikke villet svare mig.

Jeg ved i læser mine mails, og at i brugte en af mine mails til jer i bestyrelsen, som i fremlagde for dommeren i sagen BS-402/2015-VIB

 

Hvilket i sendte til retten, for at få fjernet vidner som CEO Anders Dam, Philip Baruch, Morten Ulrik Gade, Birgit Buch Thuesen.

Jeg syntes bare vi skal tale sammen, inden denne her skandale for Jyske Bank, begynder at vokse, for på et eller andet tidspunkt, risikere i at myndighederne holde op med at dække over Jyske Bank, når i Udsætter jeres kunder for svig og falsk, eller bondefangeri.

Denne her sag bør faktisk kunne lukke Jyske Bank, eller gøre så finanstilsynet tager retten til bankdrift fra Jyske Bank, men i kender jeres venner, da i har prøvet dette et utal af gange, for jeg er jo ikke den første Jyske Bank udsætter for bondefangeri “bedrageri”

Kan de danske myndigheder bruge en bank, der har udsat kunder for dokumentfalsk og bedrageri samt har betalt kundens advokater bestikkelse / returkommission for ikke at fremlægge kundens sag mod Jyske Bank. 

I bestemmer selv, jeg fortsætter og lover at jeg bliver ved og ved og ved med at skrive. det er jo sjovt ik. 

Alternitivativt kunne i jo bare tale med mig, i ved ved jeg har beviser for det jeg skriver, at Jyske bank og jeres advokater som Lundgrens og Lund Elmer Sandager har lavet.

 

Jeg har foreslået at du CEO Anders Christian Dam, selv igangsætter en uvildig advokatundersøgelse, men du kan ikke bruge en advokat, som Jyske Bank eller jeres venner har omgang med.

Derefter vil jeg anbefale at bestyrelsen udskiftes, og at du Anders Dam, er den første der skal sætte dit mandat frit, og give afkald på din aftrædelsesordning.

Har vi det ikke sjovt, jeg taler og skriver og i stikker alle sammen hovedet i jorden, og håber på at jeg går over.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH  Jeg går sku ikke over.

Har i som er modtager af denne her mail, kommentar eller nogle rettelser til mine opslag på www.banknyt.dk så ringer i bare

Mit nummer er +4522227713 men i har det jo allerede.

Godt nytår slemme slemme bank.

Alle i #jyskebanks Koncernledelsen er tilbudt at underskrive dette, om ikke at ville fortsætte bedrageri mod kunde, desvære nægtede Sven Buhrækall Kurt Bligaard Pedersen Rina Asmussen Philip Baruch Jens Borup Keld Norup Christina Lykke Munk Johnny Christensen MarianneLillevang Anders Dam Niels Erik Jakobsen Per Skovhus Peter Schleidt nægter alle at underskrive, da de hellere vil bedrage kunde

www.banknyt.dk det øverste af siden her til aften er herunder

I får alle fred resten af året, så giver jeg den bagefter en skalle, da jeg satser på at producere 1.000 videoer i 2022 og dele dem ud, samt mine øvrige tiltag for at advare mod de korrupte banker og advokater virksomheder i danmark.

Kan i hygge jer med mine sjove og morsomme opslag.

De bedste hilsner jeres yndlings offer nr. 1.

Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup


Her er den indsatte del af banknyt som er indsat i mailen, her er billeder og videoer med.

Siden er OPDATERET SENEST 29-12-2021. KL. 01.50. her kan du læse mere om fundamentet i Jyske Bank A/S hvilket ser ud til at værre organiseret kriminalitet. Jyske Bank viser her deres MAGT for at advare andre at kæmpe mod svindel Banken. siden er både på dansk og engelsk.
Even though I am dyslexic and best at investigating, I will in future try to write only in English, as this case may deprive the Danish bank of the right to conduct banking business in Denmark, which is why Danish authorities do not want justice, and go against the law, to cover Jyske Bank’s use of forgery, fraud, exploitation and the use of bribes in order not to have to take the bank license from Jyske bank.

 

Are you a journalist, then here is a good report on corruption, camaraderie between Denmark’s judges, lawyers and banks, which is the hidden form of corruption, it is also about the Danish state covering the criminal banks with which the authorities themselves do business, instead of launching a investigation and criminal prosecution, which in the worst case can be closed Jysk Bank, if the Danish laws and regulations apply to Danish banks.

As a journalist, can you find out why no Danish authorities or lawyers in the Bar Association, the Bar Association, Jyske Bank, Lundgren’s lawyers and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers and more, dare to ask questions to my emails and this website about Jyske Bank, Luns Elmer sandager lawyers and Lundgren’s lawyers

 

I ask you as a journalist to help me make Jyske Bank aware, that I am actually trying to enter into a dialogue with CEO Anders Dam Jyske Bank, I have tried since May 2016, mostly in a fun and funny way, will you write an article that the Board of Representatives and the Board of Directors as well as shareholders in Jyske Bank can spot, as they may not even see that Jyske bank has a problem, with their credibility and honesty.

The Danes’ fight against criminal banking companies, this is just my fight, but there are others who fight against the rot and the bribery carried out in Danish banks, to disappoint in legal matters.

This page is due to Jyske Bank and the bank’s management, for which you can thank CEO Anders Christian Dam.

 

HUSK DE SOM HAR DÆKKET OVER JYSKE BANKS FORTSATTE SVINDEL MOD STORBJERG ERHVERV I ER SKYLDIGE I VI STADIG UDSÆTTES FOR BEDRAGERI DA I NÆGTEDE AT STANDSE EN ÅBENLYS FORBRYDELSE TAK FOR DET HÅBER I SOVER GODT OM NATTEN / At politiet ignorer politilovens Kap. 2. Paragraf 2. Stk. 3. Syntes åbenlyst være for at dække over Danmarks anden største bank jyske bank, ikke må efterforskes for bedrageri ER DETTE FÆLLES FOR ALLE BANKER ? Men nu nærmer vi os retslokalet og kan der få retten til at sætte jysk bank på plads, nu ledelsen ikke selv magter den opgave / Husk vi retter gerne fejl hvis noget er forkert Anders Dam ved godt at nummeret er 22227713 Så er bande lederen Anders Dam eller andre uenige med noget Så bare kom Anders nummeret er 0045 22227713 / / Jyske Bank Boxen præsentere duellen mellem jyske bank og deres bedraget kunde, hvis jyske bank tør mødes i Boxen Jyske Bank BOXEN navnet på Danmarks nye nationale arena i Herning. MCH Messecenter Herning Jyske Bank har indgået en navnesponsor aftale for multiarenaen, 20. oktober 2010. Navnesponsoratet giver mulighed for god eksponering, som vi glæder os til at udnytte, siger ordførende direktør Anders Dam, Jyske bank / Vi kan også mødes på jyskebanktv. Men her har jyske bank blokeret os. / Sven Buhrækall Kurt Bligaard Pedersen Rina Asmussen Philip Baruch Jens Borup Keld Norup Christina Lykke Munk Johnny Christensen Marianne Lillevang Anders Dam Niels Erik Jakobsen Per Skovhus Peter Schleidt / #Bank #AnderChristianDam #Financial #News #Press #Share #Pol #Recommendation #Sale #Firesale #AndersDam #JyskeBank #ATP #PFA #MortenUlrikGade #GF Maresk #PhilipBaruch #LES #LundElmerSandager #Nykredit #MetteEgholmNielsen #Loan #Fraud #CasperDamOlsen #NicolaiHansen #JeanettKofoed-Hansen #AnetteKirkeby #SørenWoergaaed #BirgitBushThuesen / #Gangcrimes #Crimes #Koncernledelse #jyskebank #Koncernbestyrelsen #SvenBuhrkall #KurtBligaardPedersen #RinaAsmussen #PhilipBaruch #JensABorup #KeldNorup #ChristinaLykkeMunk #HaggaiKunisch #MarianneLillevang Finansministeriet Statsministeriet Justitsministeriet Finanstilsynet Finans Bank Banking Aktier Loan Biler Hæderlige Banker #Koncerndirektionen #AndersDam #LeifFLarsen

 

TO THE FREE PRESS.

As a journalist, you can ask the Danish government and Jyske Bank as well, as those who have contributed to the Danish bank Jyske Bank’s organized fraud, what they think about the customers that the Danish bank exposes to fraud making videos like these, and sharing notices and pictures, perhaps you can get a comment on what exists and is on its way to warn you against Danish banks, there is something about it, since all authorities in Denmark do not dare say anything to the victim.

A scandal that several public employees mention this case, which Jyske Bank’s management has not managed to solve, therefore it is still growing, as the victim of Jyske Bank’s million fraud continues to write, to warn others against doing banking with the criminal Danes banks.

Read here in the Link. mail 27 December 2021. to the soldiers in Jyske Bank, as well as to some of the perpetrators behind the criminal Danish bank, such as the board, which the Danish state supports, and covers up that Jyske Bank has committed fraud and used forgery, and also has used bribe.

Mail 27-12-2021. am 03.57. has also been sent to the lawyer board, which the members have chosen to cover up that Jyske Bank has bribed Lundgren’s lawyers not to present a fraud case against Jyske Bank.

The email has also been sent to those, who are fully aware of and aware that Jyske Bank exposes the bank’s customers to financial crime, ie the Danish authorities, including the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority, which gives permission to criminal Danish banks, such as the one where Jyske Bank exposes customers deliberately organized fraud, which is carried out through abuse of power of attorney and exploitation of an existing dependency relationship.

 

As a press, you can contact these authorities yourself, and ask why the authorities cover up this deception organized here as Denmark’s second largest bank “Jyske Bank” is behind. and ask if it is because the Danish state and authorities themselves used Jyske Bank in state and government business, as this could be the reason why the Danish authorities together jointly refuse to relate to the fact that here a customer has presented proof that Jyske Bank by the board has committed continued organized financial crime.

The Danish Financial Supervisory Authorit has turned the blind eye to, such as the parties at Christiansborg, the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Justice Departementet, the central bank of the Kingdom of Denmark, “Nationalbank“, the police, the prosecution, the Judicial Service, the pension funds as ATP, has been called for dialogue, or to bring an insulting case against me for defamation if they disagree, that Jyske Bank has been behind organized crime against the bank’s customers, which I make videos about and write on several websites, such as here at banknyt.dk the front page.

You can also ask Lundgren’s lawyers and their board why Lundgren chose to accept the bribe that Jyske Bank’s management offered Lundgren, so as not to present my fraud case against Jyske Bank, maybe those on Lundgren’s board will explain to you, who is a press employee and journalist, which could be a small misunderstanding, and that Lundgren’s lawyers maybe ere not really corrup, but just can not read Danish. You can find Lundgren’s board here where they can not stick their head in the ground and block me.

To date December 28, 2021. Have none, of the many I have written to, tude answer me, or for that matter say me against, despite the fact that since May 2016 I have written personally and directly to Jyske Bank’s management and CEO Anders Dam, as well as Jyske Bank’s lawyers including Lund Elmer Sandager, as Philip Baruch and Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen.


I have
written, and have presented evidence that Lund Elmer Sandager’s lawyers, have presented false information to the court, which has happened to disappoint in legal matters.


In addition, I have continuously written to the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority and the Danish authorities since May 2018, and also here presented evidence of Jyske Bank’s fraud.

 

Since Jyske Bank already sued on 1 February 2019, I was accused me of committing criminal offenses, and Lund Elmer Sandager, the partner who was a member of Jyske Bank’s Board of Directors, writes that for several years I have been running around with advertisements on my cars, that directly warn you against Jyske Bank.

And I have written that Jyske Bank and the management are behind organized crime, and that Lund Elmer Sandager’s lawyers have contributed to Jyske Bank’s continued financial crime.

Lund Elmer Sandager repeats this in a lawsuit from 2020, something that neither Jyske Bank nor Lund Elmer Sandager dare to relate to, as they know very well that it is Jyske Bank and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers who are lying, also to the court.

Both Jyske Bank, Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers and also the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyer which in the complaint 05-06-2020 has been presented, are all afraid to answer me, and dare not speak out against me, as they all know I have evidence of what I write and say.

 

ALL videos are here with link to youtube and can be freely shared.

If you do business with Danish banks or Danish companies, as well as the Danish state, so be careful, see how the Danish state holds the hand over the largest criminal organizations in Denmark, such as here where the police have a ban on investigating criminal Danish banks, as it is political.

Danish bank declares war on those of the bank’s customers, who do not want to accept that Jyske Bank exposes them to organized fraud. why it is inevitable that Jyske Bank’s management would not one day face a victim, who goes on the counterattack on Jyske Bank’s credibility.

And it’s me, you can just laugh as crazy as you want, over your strength and many friends who are against me, but remember no matter what you do, I will not stop my fight, to stop Jyske Bank no matter if you come to the detriment, remember to choose your matches wisely, this time it is Jyske Bank’s honesty and credibility that is at stake, Jyske Bank has put their decency at stake to get rid of fraud.

That the Danish state and authorities have chosen to cover up Jyske Bank’s fraudulent criminal acts does not change my struggle, but dear all now we enter the second phase, the war on Jyske Bank’s decency, and on the Danish municipalities and municipal institutions.


If I understand that there is not just a single person in Jyske Bank who does not pick up the phone and call +4522227713 and talk to me, it is your choice, I am sending you the latest videos and a copy of the top of Bank news so you can follow, but thought you should know that you from Jyske Bank actually do socially harmful banking business.

 

And it's me, you can just laugh as crazy as you want, over your strength and many friends who are against me, but remember no matter what you do, I will not stop my fight to stop Jyske Bank no matter if you come to the detriment, remember to choose your matches wisely, this time it is Jyske Bank's honesty and credibility that is at stake. Jyske Bank has put their decency at stake to get rid of fraud

 

Dear press in Denmark and the world press, dare you be the first to put a newspaper column for my fight in the corrupt Danish country, where I alone fight to stop the state, ie the Danish authorities in covering up the crime that here the Danish bank Jyske bank has exposed me to, follow my fight where I alone am up against some of the largest criminal companies in Denmark.

And cover the story of the Danish criminal banks and corrupt lawyers, who are supported by the Danish state, where the police have been banned from conducting an investigation into the crime that Jyske Bank exposes customers to.

The Danish National Bank, the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority, the Ministry of State, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Finance, the Government, Denmark’s largest pension funds ATP, PFA, the Police National Board of Justice, the Intelligence Service.

Everyone is familiar with the many serious accusations against Jyske Bank, and not a single one has dared to rule or answer, Jyske Bank’s powerful friends here not even, dared to trick me with an insulting case, why not ?.

Because I am the first to write the truth, and have the evidence for what I write.

You can all in the National Board of Justice, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Finance, denmarks Nationalbank, and the lawyer community, you can all cover Jyske Bank and Lundgren just as much as you can, but that does not change the fact, that Jyske Bank has actively forged documents and made fraud, and bribed Lundgren’s lawyers.

 

Why do you think the police and the prosecution have been banned from investigating my charges and evidence against Jyske Bank, which is to cover up Jyske Bank’s crimes, which I the little man have allowed myself to unravel, now I have come to the spider web there to be mapped, help me.

 

If I have to give Jyske Bank free and good advice, do not believe that you can get away with exposing your customers to fraud in the future, no matter how stupid you think we customers are, you could risk meeting more people like me.

 

The members of the legal community who have a different attitude, of the interpretation of what good legal practice, are at least members and employees of Lundgren’s lawyers, Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers, Hjorten lawyers, Kromann Reumert lawyers, Danish business, the Consumer Complaints Board,

I am aware that there are powerful organizations whose members go against good lawyer practice, such as covering corrupt lawyers, which Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper Denmark also agrees on behalf of the Danish legal community, ie that this is not a violation of good lawyer practice.

 

ASK YOURSELF WHY THIS CHASE 05-06-2020. AND THE DECISION 2020-1932. 30-06-2021. MUST BE KEEPED SECRET.

🙈🙉🙊

Here you can read what Lundgren’s partner Dan Terkildsen responds to the complaint Appendix 233. of 05-06-2020, with 27 complaint points, which are described in a 159 page complaint. The answer is 4 pages long and contains no answer to the 27 complaints.

 

Appendix 241. Bilag 241. side 1-4. af 08-09-2020.

Appendix 241. Bilag 241. Hjælpe bilag til Bilag 1 – 4. A.B.C.DPresented Lundgrens. refer to the Complaint about Lawyer Dan Terkildsen 19-09-2020.

📢

Here are the Complainant’s concluding remarks to the answers that Dan Terkildsen has answered 08-09-2020.

Besvarelse til Lundgrens svar på klage Dato 19-09-2020 Til advokatsamfundet 2020-1932

With 26 Inquiries, which Lundgren’s lawyers / Partner Dan Terkildsen fails to respond to.

Besvarelse til Lundgrens svar på klage Dato 19-09-2020. Til Advokatnævnet 2020-1932. MED LINK TIL NÆVNTE BILAG.

 

Unfortunately, this fraud case is against Jyske Bank, where the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers had to present Jyske Bank’s use of fraud to the court among Denmark’s elite, so of course the Bar Council also chooses to hold the hand over the corrupt and disloyal Lundgren’s lawyers, the lawyer avoids and responds to the individual complaint points, and dismisses the complaint.

30-06-2021.

The decision on Lundgren’s Dan Terkildsen. 2020-1932. front page and page 1 -10. 30-06-2021. THE COMPLAINT is rejected, belongs to the court, so the Bar Council writes that it is not the client who decides their own case, / the case was only presented to 5 members, and not least 20 members. can not see who or which members have assessed, and can therefore not check their relationships up to Jyske Bank, Lundgrens and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers. who are all involved in the bank’s million fraud to some extent. / the power elite has rejected and therefore approves that a lawyer should not look after the client’s interests.

 

When the bar committee has decided to reject 27 “PDF. COPY” complaints about Lundgren’s lawyers and partner Dan Terkildsen when the decision has a precedent, ie precedent effect on complaints of the same circumstances, it can only be because the lawyer mentioned of which Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen as chairman has helped to cover up that Jyske Bank has bribed a member Dan Terkildsen who has been appointed by the lawyer society to arbitration judge, and is strongly politically angaced in the Conservative People’s Party.

 

Why does Jyske Bank not just close itself, rather than help to undermine legal certainty in Denmark.

 

I ask DLA Piper lawyers, whether they all in the top management agree, that their top lawyers from Denmark can rightly support that this is not a violation of good legal practice.

Everyone says that this is not a violation of good legal practice, I therefore ask that in all further up, you who receive my emails, completely agree that none of this below is a violation of good legal practice.

I have written several times to the lawyer’s board chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers, who unfortunately refuse to answer, therefore I ask the top management of DLA Piper lawyers, as I accuse Martin Lavesen of being instrumental in breaking down the legal security of the little one in Denmark along with several others.

Read these notices LINK 14-05-2021. and LINK 13-06-2021. and LINK 12-07-2021. and  LINK 04-08-2021. and LINK 08-09-2021. og regarding your understanding of what is not a violation of good legal practice, and tell if you agree with Martin Lavesen from your Danish department.

Conflicts of interest can make the client unsure, whether the lawyer has sufficient focus on the client.

It is therefore important to avoid conflicts of interest, so that the client can maintain confidence in the lawyer and the lawyer’s efforts.

 

There are basically three things you need to be aware of, when clarifying whether you are in a conflict of interest:

1. Are there conflicting interests (arms carrier consideration)

2. Is confidential information in danger of being disseminated (confidentiality considerations)

3. How does the situation appear? (appearance)

 

The members of the Bar Council by Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen and the Bar Association, as well as the chairman

Martin Lavesen. agrees that it is not a violation of good legal practice, that after I hired Lundgren’s lawyers to present a fraud and false case against Jyske Bank.

 

Subsequently, Lundgren’s lawyers chose to be hired by Jyske Bank to advise in a transaction of DKK 600 million, and then Lundgrens lawyer unfortunately forgot to present some of the matters against Jyske Bank that I had hired Lundgrens to present in cort.

When neither Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, and

Martin Lavesen. ls DLA Piper lawyers. So agree that what your partner 

 

Below maintains as good lawyer practice is also your way of working.

 

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

We ask DLA Piber lawyers in the United Kingdom, and the United States, if they have the same opinion as their Danish department, that this is not a violation of good legal practice.

Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyerssays together with the Danish Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen that.

 

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.

 

Are you all from DLA Piper agree. with our Danish department Martin Lavesen or is it me, who does not understand that DLA Piper lawyers rover each other, when there is corruption involvedbetween banks and lawyers, as between the Danish bank Jyske Bank and Lundgren’s lawyers.

I ask you, as Denmark is only an insignificant small corrupt country.

And don’t worry, I’m getting through all the law firms mentioned here on banking news, no matter how much this scandal grows, my wish is just a just society without bribery and corruption.

Andrew Darwin

Darwin_Andrew_clr - When there is no violation of good legal practice, it is as directly understood as being good legal practice. We ask DLA Piber lawyers in the United Kingdom, and the United States, if they have the same opinion as their Danish department, that this is not a violation of good legal practice. Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers. says together with the Danish Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen that. 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. Are in 3 from  DLA Piper agree. with our Danish department, or is it me who does not understand that lawyers cover each other when there is corruption involved, I ask you, as Denmark is only an insignificant small country.

Andrew Darwin

United Kingdom

 

 

Simon Levine

Simon Levine - When there is no violation of good legal practice, it is as directly understood as being good legal practice. We ask DLA Piber lawyers in the United Kingdom, and the United States, if they have the same opinion as their Danish department, that this is not a violation of good legal practice. Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers. says together with the Danish Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen that. 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. Are in 3 from  DLA Piper agree. with our Danish department, or is it me who does not understand that lawyers cover each other when there is corruption involved, I ask you, as Denmark is only an insignificant small country.

Simon Levine

 

 

 

Frank W. Ryan

Image of Frank Ryan - When there is no violation of good legal practice, it is as directly understood as being good legal practice. We ask DLA Piber lawyers in the United Kingdom, and the United States, if they have the same opinion as their Danish department, that this is not a violation of good legal practice. Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers. says together with the Danish Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen that. 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. Are in 3 from  DLA Piper agree. with our Danish department, or is it me who does not understand that lawyers cover each other when there is corruption involved, I ask you, as Denmark is only an insignificant small country.

Frank W. Ryan

 

 

The Bar Council denmark.

Carsten Storbjerg chose 30-07-2021. To write in an e-mail, with a link to the Bar Council, on an equal footing with Jyske Bank’s Executive Board, to inform about the consequences of the decision, which has precedent effect in similar complaints.

⚖️

HER KAN DU LÆSE MERE OM NÆVNETS MEDLEMMER:

🙈🙉🙊

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 08-12-2020advokatnævnet 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.

 

 

Koncernledergruppe Anders Christian Dam Anders Christian Dam Ordførende direktør Afdeling:Koncerndirektion E-mail:direktion@jyskebank.dk Niels Erik Jakobsen Niels Erik Jakobsen Bankdirektør Afdeling:Koncerndirektion E-mail:direktion@jyskebank.dk Per Skovhus Per Skovhus Bankdirektør Afdeling:Koncerndirektion E-mail:direktion@jyskebank.dk Peter Schleidt Peter Schleidt Bankdirektør Afdeling:Koncerndirektion E-mail:direktion@jyskebank.dk Benny Laibach Pedersen Benny Laibach Pedersen Direktør Afdeling:Kredit E-mail:benny-pedersen@jyskebank.dk Bo Ancher Christensen Bo Ancher Christensen Direktør Afdeling:Forretningsservice E-mail:bac@jyskebank.dk Birger Krøgh Nielsen Birger Krøgh Nielsen CFO Afdeling:Økonomi E-mail:birger-nielsen@jyskebank.dk Carsten Tirsbæk Madsen Carsten Tirsbæk Madsen Adm. direktør Afdeling:JR Direktion E-mail:ctm@jyskerealkredit.dk Erik Gadeberg Erik Gadeberg Managing Director Afdeling:Capital Markets E-mail:gadeberg@jyskebank.dk Erik Qvirin Hansen Erik Qvirin Hansen Direktør Afdeling:Kommunikation og marketing E-mail:eqh@jyskebank.dk Finn Bødker Knudsen Finn Bødker Knudsen Direktør Afdeling:Ejendomme E-mail:fbk@jyskebank.dk Ivan Stendal Hansen Ivan Stendal Hansen Direktør Afdeling:Private Banking E-mail:ivan-hansen@jyskebank.dk Jes Rosendal Jes Rosendal Direktør Afdeling:Jyske Bank Privat E-mail:jes.rosendal@jyskebank.dk Knud Nørbo Knud Nørbo Direktør, HR Afdeling:HR E-mail:noerbo@jyskebank.dk Lars Waalen Sandberg Lars Waalen Sandberg Direktør Afdeling:Forretningskoncepter E-mail:sandberg@jyskebank.dk Peer Roer Pedersen Peer Roer Pedersen Direktør Afdeling:Risiko E-mail:prp@jyskebank.dk Martin Skovsted-Nielsen Martin Skovsted-Nielsen Juridisk Direktør Afdeling:Juridisk E-mail:martin.nielsen@jyskebank.dk Rune Møller Rune Møller Direktør Afdeling:Jyske Bank Erhverv E-mail:rune@jyskebank.dk Klaus Naur Klaus Naur Adm. Direktør Afdeling:JF Direktion E-mail:naur@jyskefinans.dk Hanne Birgitte Møller Hanne Birgitte Møller Funktionsdirektør Afdeling:Koncerndirektionssekretariatet E-mail:hbm@jyskebank.dk

Min private Facebook, and this Video on Youtube.

 

Del Venligst med ledelsen i Jyske Bank.

I ønskes alle sammen en rigtig dejlig jul i den kriminelle organisation.

 

YouTube 25-12-2021.

Her er 4 små søde til CEO @DamAnders fra YouTube 26 december 2021.

1 af 4 Ýoutube video til Anders Dam.- 2 af 4 Youtube besked til Anders Dam. – 3 af 4 Youtube beskeder til Anders Christian dam. – 4 af 4 Youtube videoer til Jyske Banks ledelse og advokater. eller se dem herfra samlet herunder.

If you want a copy of the extract BS-402/2015-VIB about Den danske Bank, Jyske Bank’s million scams, send me an email at carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com with your information and you will get a LINK to dropbox. KLIK HERE.

 

Here you will find the verdict in the case BS-402/2015-ViB. Included in text and link.

LINK to the extract BS-402/2015-VIB

💰⚖️💰

 

 

Dansk dommer Søren Ejdum blåstempler bundefangeri, og siger Jyske Bank kan beholde de millioner, Jyske Bank ved brug af svig og falsk samt ond tro har stjålet fra kunde, da det lykkedes for flere ansatte i Jyske Bank at holde kunden i en forvIldelse, læs her hvad Søren Ejdum endtlig mener, og hvad sagens hoved tema omhandler. Hvilket også er delt på TRUSTPILOT 24 -12-2021.

 

 

Når Berlingske kan beskrive, hvordan den sydamerikanske mangemillionær Genaro Peña placerede sin kæmpeformue i Jyske Bank via en særlig fondsstruktur i Panama og De Britiske Jomfruøer, er det langt fra første gang, Jyske Bank bliver sat i forbindelse med opsigtsvækkende sager på det internationale banking-område. Her er en stribe eksempler fra de senere år: DR-dokumentaren »I skattely« beskrev i 2013, at Jyske Bank i Schweiz var parat til at hjælpe danskere med at skjule formuer for skattemyndighederne. Dengang afviste Jyske Bank blankt, at man rådgav om skatteunddragelse, men erkendte, at det »ikke lød kønt«, på de skjulte optagelser, DR havde lavet. ​I 2014 fulgte DR op med en historie, hvor tidligere ansatte og kunder fortalte, at ansatte i banken aktivt hjalp skattesvindlere med at unddrage sig skat. Dengang gjaldt det Schweiz og Gibraltar. Også dengang afviste Jyske Bank, at banken medvirkede til skatteunddragelse. ​I 2016 kunne Politiken fortælle om et referat fra det Panama-baserede advokatfirma Mossack Fonseca, der beskrev et møde med to ansatte fra Jyske Banks private banking-afdeling på Vesterbrogade i København. Her fremgik det, at Jyske Bank havde skabt 2.000 selskaber i især Gibraltar og Panama for at undgå skat. Men det møde havde Jyske Bank ingen erindring om. Også dengang lød svaret fra banken, at man altid over for sine kunder havde oplyst om deres forpligtelse over for hjemlandets skattevæsen. ​Jyske Banks internationale kunder var desuden et centralt tema i et påbud fra Finanstilsynet fra 2020 efter en hvidvaskinspektion i banken. Her omtalte vagthunden specifikt bankens »internationale private banking-aktiviteter«. ​Tilsynet vurderede i 2018, baseret på en inspektion i 2017, at »bankens iboende risiko for at blive brugt til hvidvask eller finansiering af terrorisme var høj«. Den vurdering var baseret på bankens størrelse og forretningsmodel, der indeholder en række produkter og kunder, der måtte anses som »høj risiko«.

Når Højesterets dommer Kurt Rasmussen tidligere har dækket over, at Jyske Bank har bestukket Lundgrens advokater, ved at ændre forståelse af god advokat skik.
Mon så danskerne overhovedet kan stole på Domstolsstyrelsen ikke er betændt, og det her bare er toppen af isbjerget.

De danske dommere står som magtens elite, og med Kurt Rasmussen har han vist, at også dommere gerne vil dække over de iloyale og korupte Lundgrens advokater, for også at dække over kriminelle banker.
Herunder Jyske Bank A/S og deres bagmænd som blandt andet Anders Christian Dam.

Når danske banker som her Jyske Bank A/S laver dokumentfalsk og bedrageri, for at stjæle kundernes penge, så er det et samfunds problem.

Det er også et samfunds problem, at der findes dommere i Domstolsstyrelsen der dækker over bankers kriminalitet, selv om det måske bare er bestikkelse.

Derfor kommer det heller ikke som en overraskelse at dommer Søren Ejdum beklageligt glemte at referere vidner korrekt, og ikke lod Jyske Banks brug af dokumentetfalsk, bedrageri, udnyttelse, mandatsvig, Ond Tro, Vildledning osv. afbryde forældelsesfrist.

Men det er jo nemt med kammerateri i Domstolsstyrelsen, når dommere spiser af samme tallerken, som de råd de også er blevet placeret i.

Jyske Bank går langt for at vinde, over de kunder som Jyske Bank udsætter for dokumentfalsk og bedrageri, det kan ingen være i tvivl om, og deres venner gør alt for at hjælpe Jyske Bank med ikke at blive straffet for deres strafbare forbrydelser.

For at Jyske Bank kan slippe af sted med million svindel, bestak Jyske Bank også vore tidligere Lundgrens advokater, til ikke at fremlægge nogle af vores “klientens” anbringer mod Jyske Bank.

I min sag mod Jyske Bank A/S har Jyske Bank også betalt Lund Elmer Sandager advokater herunder Philip Baruch og Kristian Ambjørn Buus-Nielsen for at fremlægge falske oplysninger overfor domstolen, samtidig med at Lund Elmer Sandager for Jyske Bank, tilbageholdt sandheden for at få forældelse.
Hvilket Jyske Bank kun gør for at skuffe i retsforhold.

Den bestikkelse Jyske Bank har betalt Lundgrens advokater, er sket under dække af returkommission.
At dommere i Domstolsstyrelsen ikke er upartisk, viser sagen hvor folketingets medlemmer Morten Messerschmidt af dommer Søren Holm Seerup var blevet dømt, hvorefter det blev opdaget at Søren Holm Seerup også var inhabil og forud indtaget.

Jeg har i gennem en meget lang periode, faktisk siden 2016. forsøgt at få Jyske Bank, Lund Elmer Sandager og Lundgrens advokater i dialog. Men de nægter dialog med deres offer.
Jeg har også opforet Jyske Bank, Lund Elmer Sandager og Lundgrens advokater til at anlægge en injurier sag mod mig for BAGVASKELSE, hvis de ikke mener det jeg skriver på www.BANKNYT.dk er sandt. 🙂
Det tør de ikke, de ved jeg sandt og det må man gerne ifølge grundloven.

Jyske Bank har lavet Dokumentfalsk og Jyske Bank har lavet bedrageri, ligesom Jyske Bank har bestukket Lundgrens advokater. Og så har Jyske Bank også laver vanhjemmel ved at overtræde tinglysnings loven.

I ved alle sammen udemærket godt, at jeg har skrevet sandheden, og at jeg har beviserne.
Når i selv internt inde i jeres ministerier og nationalbanken omtaler, at det her er skandale, så har I ret
DET ER EN SKANDALE AT I IKKE VIL IVÆRKSÆTTE EN EFTERFORSKNING AF JYSKE BANKS KRIMINALITET.

Selv politiet nægter at efterforske mig for injurier, da det er politisk og staten, herunder myndighederne som Finanstilsynet, Statsministeriet og Nationalbanken, ønsker ikke sandheden om Jyske Banks bedrageri kommer frem.
Selv om Domstolsstyrelsen og deres medarbejdere ønsker at dække over den kriminalitet danske banker står bag.
Så stopper det ikke min informations kampagne, der skal advare mod at Danmark er et korrupte land.
Jeg er blevet oplyst at min sag mod Jyske Bank er politisk, og ingen ønsker eller tør at kommentere noget, derfor forholder alle advokater eller myndighederne og folketinget sig tavse, da Jyske Bank ikke må udsættes for efterforskning og strafforfølgning.

Det mest passende for staten og Jyske Bank er at domstolene afviser min sag mod Jyske Bank, for at dække over Jyske Banks bedrageri, derfor glemte også Dommer Søren Ejdum at skrive helt af hvad vidner sagde.
Mit navn er Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup Og i kommer bare, hvis i mener jeg udsætter nogle af jer for bagvaskelse.


Judgment in case BS-402/2015-VIB. with the errors and omissions that the judge forgot to present a completely correct rendering of witness explanation, witnesses said in some places something a little different than what is reproduced. This is how it is in the Danish courts, why I expect the court will actually cover up that Jyske Bank has committed fraud, and not relate to the fact that Jyske Bank has made forged documents, to hide the fact that there was no loan, which Jyske Bank has withdrawn millions of Danish kroner interest to exchange interest.

 

Denmark is a corrupt country.

Which the authorities and also members of the court board help to cover, but if the Danish authorities do not agree, then I would like to review my evidence with you.

You all know me, since at least since May 2018 I have shared my evidence with you all, and that with clear evidence, that the Danish bank Jyske Bank has committed a string of criminal offenses.

I have shared my evidence with you, that Jyske Bank has committed forgery, fraud, been in bad faith, used bribes by my former Lundgren’s lawyers, that these lawyrs should disappoint in legal matters.

I have shared with all the Danish authorities, such as the police, and the chief of police in Copenhagen, but no one at all, has dared to meet with me.

There is also not a single one who has the courage to answer some of the many emails I have written to you all, I have asked if the law also applies to the Danish banks, no one will answer.

 

You have all to date, chosen to try to ingure me, but you must know that I will not stop.

This is not about a verdict in my case, as it will probably be presented fore the European Court of Justice, this case is more about the Danes’ legal security when they are exposed to organized fraud by the largest Danish companies, will the authorities then help the weak victim, or will the authorities help the criminal Danish company.

Jyske Bank has committed several criminal offenses, and will clearly not comply with Danish laws and regulations, as the authorities are closely linked to Jyke Bank, and therefore cover the bank, Jyske Bank will not comply with the law.

And again, if Jyske Bank, led by CEO Anders Dam, has not committed a crime, ie committed what is described in the criminal law as criminal acts, then file a defamation case, and sue me for defamation if you dare, you have seen my evidence.

Is it more important for the Danish authorities to cover up Jyske Bank’s criminal acts, one that secures the Danes a society where the law applies to everyone, including Jyske Bank.

You are all welcome to come after me if you dare, or see and have Jyske Bank cleaned up and then put Jyske Bank under stricter supervision until an honorable board has been found that can live up to the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority’s rules.

 

⚠️

 

⚠️

My mail sent 19-12-2021. at 14.47. why are none of the recipients who dare to talk to me, Jyske Bank can probably just be put under stricter supervision, I thought you should act on the information you have received about Jyske bank’s use of exploitation, fraud, forgery and bribery.

 

As this case also involves at least Supreme Court judge Kurt Rasmussen, and indicates that even Danish judges will cover up, the criminal acts that Danish banks are behind, for which there is also bribery to disappoint in legal matters.


Then your friends, or combs if you will, who are involved in the fraud and false i Denmark, I write about here on the page www.BANKNYT.DK


I will write to all of you, you who are employees, of the involved law firms, ie where one of your colleagues has helped to cover up
the organized crime in denmark, and the fact that the corrupt Lundgren’s lawyers were bribed by Jyske Bank A/S, not to present any of my allegations against Jyske Bank.


I would also like to send you all, the same information about what in the opinion of the Bar Council is not a violation of good legal practice, and you will be informed which of the colleagues has been involved in this decision.


A decision and decision that has precedent effect, which is why I believe it is my duty to share this decision with you, “you.” as the Bar Council by Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen and the Bar Association’s chairman Martin Lavesen, will not themselves share this decision 2020-1932. which to that extent shifts the interpretation of what is not a violation of good legal practice.


I promise that in time I will share this complaint and excuse with all lawyers, including the other members of the lawyer board and their colleagues Complaint of 05-06-2020. and who is well-founded and documented, but as the lawyer mentioned by rejection of all 27 matters on 30-06-2021.”LINK. Pdf.dok.” has set a precedent effect for other complaints with the same complaint conditions

 

This case must be shared with the partners that the Danish authorities, and banks usually work with,to inform other countries, that in Denmark there is corruption and bribery that intends to cover the Danish banks that repeatedly violate the penal code and where the authorities will not stop the obvious crime, like here where CEO Anders Christian Dam is one of the culprits.

 

 

Medvirkende i sagen eller kender til sagen og ønsker ikke at rette fejl Fundament hæderlig ærlig åben retter fejl Nykredit jyske bank Advokat advokater strafferet øknomisk kriminelit Lund Elmer Sandager Michael Rasmussen CEO Nykredit Anders Christian Dam CEO Morten Ulrik gade Philip Baruch Mette Egholm Nielsen Birgit Bush Jyske bank erhverv Hillerød Helsingør Århus Aahus København Silkeborg Valby Østerbro Nicolai Hansen Anette Kirkeby Søren Woergaard Danske bank jysk Koncernledelse jyske bank Koncernbestyrelsen Sven Buhrkall Kurt Bligaard Pedersen Rina Asmussen Philip Baruch Jens A. Borup Keld Norup Christina Lykke Munk Haggai Kunisch Marianne Lillevang Koncerndirektionen Anders Dam Leif F. Larsen Niels Erik Jakobsen Per Skovhus Peter Schleidt

SANDHEDEN ER EN GANSKE ANDEN. Jyske bank forsikrer at banken ikke rådgiver i ond tro

jyske Bank forsikrer dig at banken ikke er bedrageriske.
STOL IKKE PÅ JYSKE BANK, LINK. DER ER EN GRUND TIL BILER SOM DISSE, KØRER PÅ DE DANSKE VEJE, JYSKE BANK ER LIGEGLADE, FOR DE KAN INTET GØRER VED DET.

 


Read here the rules of legal ethics, as Lundgren’s lawyers interpret them, along with lawyers from, the Bar Council, and the Bar Association as Kromann Reumert’s lawyers, DLA Piper lawyers, Hjorten lawyers and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers.

19-12-2021. Read here the latest news in the case of perhaps Denmark’s biggest scandal, where Jyske Bank bribed Lundgren’s lawyers, which lawyers in Hjorten, kromannreumert, and dlapiper, together with the authorities have chosen to cover.

 

Pandora’s box is now open, so you can learn more about the Danish bank Jyske bank’s business methods, which include fraud, forgery, exploitation, misdemeanor and bribery, here you can read the email 18-12-2021. to Lundgrens as the corrupt, and Jyske Bank as the one that uses bribes.

 

Read here the rules of legal ethics, which they are followed by Kromann Reumert’s lawyers, DLA Piper lawyers, Hjorten lawyers, and which the Bar Council interprets what is not a violation of good legal practice.

 

Vi du medvirke til et samfund, hvor korruption og kammerateri blandt Danmarks mægtigste, ikke styrer hvem der ikke må efterforskes og retsforfølges når de overtræder straffeloven.

Jeg tænker her på koncernen Jyske Bank A/S som jeg gentagende gange, har opfordret til at fører en injurier sag mod mig Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup. for bagvaskelse, hvis Jyske Bank ikke vil erkende brugen af dokumentfalsk og bedrageri.

 

Her under er lidt af de foreløbige delte videoer, som Jyske Banks ledelse og repræsentantskabet, ved alt om, men ledelsen er bange for kunden og tør ikke svare.

HUSK DE SOM HAR DÆKKET OVER JYSKE BANKS FORTSATTE SVINDEL MOD STORBJERG ERHVERV I ER SKYLDIGE I VI STADIG UDSÆTTES FOR BEDRAGERI DA I NÆGTEDE AT STANDSE EN ÅBENLYS FORBRYDELSE TAK FOR DET HÅBER I SOVER GODT OM NATTEN / At politiet ignorer politilovens Kap. 2. Paragraf 2. Stk. 3. Syntes åbenlyst være for at dække over Danmarks anden største bank jyske bank, ikke må efterforskes for bedrageri ER DETTE FÆLLES FOR ALLE BANKER ? Men nu nærmer vi os retslokalet og kan der få retten til at sætte jysk bank på plads, nu ledelsen ikke selv magter den opgave / Husk vi retter gerne fejl hvis noget er forkert Anders Dam ved godt at nummeret er 22227713 Så er bande lederen Anders Dam eller andre uenige med noget Så bare kom Anders nummeret er 0045 22227713 / / Jyske Bank Boxen præsentere duellen mellem jyske bank og deres bedraget kunde, hvis jyske bank tør mødes i Boxen Jyske Bank BOXEN navnet på Danmarks nye nationale arena i Herning. MCH Messecenter Herning Jyske Bank har indgået en navnesponsor aftale for multiarenaen, 20. oktober 2010. Navnesponsoratet giver mulighed for god eksponering, som vi glæder os til at udnytte, siger ordførende direktør Anders Dam, Jyske bank / Vi kan også mødes på jyskebanktv. Men her har jyske bank blokeret os. / Sven Buhrækall Kurt Bligaard Pedersen Rina Asmussen Philip Baruch Jens Borup Keld Norup Christina Lykke Munk Johnny Christensen Marianne Lillevang Anders Dam Niels Erik Jakobsen Per Skovhus Peter Schleidt / #Bank #AnderChristianDam #Financial #News #Press #Share #Pol #Recommendation #Sale #Firesale #AndersDam #JyskeBank #ATP #PFA #MortenUlrikGade #GF Maresk #PhilipBaruch #LES #LundElmerSandager #Nykredit #MetteEgholmNielsen #Loan #Fraud #CasperDamOlsen #NicolaiHansen #JeanettKofoed-Hansen #AnetteKirkeby #SørenWoergaaed #BirgitBushThuesen / #Gangcrimes #Crimes #Koncernledelse #jyskebank #Koncernbestyrelsen #SvenBuhrkall #KurtBligaardPedersen #RinaAsmussen #PhilipBaruch #JensABorup #KeldNorup #ChristinaLykkeMunk #HaggaiKunisch #MarianneLillevang Finansministeriet Statsministeriet Justitsministeriet Finanstilsynet Finans Bank Banking Aktier Loan Biler Hæderlige Banker #Koncerndirektionen #AndersDam #LeifFLarsen

Bag den kriminelle danske bank står ledelsen for Jyske bank A/S, er en ledelse ved Anders Christian Dam, Niels Erik Jakobsen, Per Skovhus, Peter Schleidt, der står sammen i forening, og som gerne medvirker til at Jyske bank bedrager de af bankens kunder som er muligt, bestikkelse syntes heller ikke at være nogen hindring, Spørg for mig gerne CEO  Anders Christian Dam. Hvorfor Jyske Bank A/S laver dokumentfalsk og bedrageri mod bankens kunder, når det er svindel udført af Danmarks næststørste bank Jyske Bank, så er det et samfund problem, at Jyske Banks bestyrelse og direktion tillige med koncern ledergruppen, har magtfulde forbindelser, der gør hvad de kan, for at den Jyske svindler banken ikke bliver stoppet, må sagsøger jo bare ryste på hovedet over, og så selv fører sin sag, for danskerne ved sikkert allerede at der er stærke kriminelle organisationer i Danmark, og så det kommer måske ikke som en overraskelse for alle, at nogle af de værste er den danske bank Jyske Bank, men nogle skal jo tage kampen op, og det gør jeg siger Carsten, og nej det er bestemt ikke en kamp jeg ønsker, men siden mindst maj måned 2016. har jeg forsøgt at få Jyske Bank, deres bestyrelse, leder, og deres advokater til at tale med mig, dette nægter koncernen, da banken med meget stor sandsynligvis har satset på, at ved retur kommission at kunne bestikke mindst vore tidligere advokater, altså Lundgrens advokater til ikke at gøre mine argumenter og påstande gældende mod Jyske Bank A/S over for domstolen, og for at Lundgrens skulle fører min sag mod Jyske Bank, med henblik på at tabe sagen, samtidigt med at Jyske Bank A/S koncernen har betalt Lundgrens advokater millioner i returkommission for at rådgive Jyske bank, den rådne Bank tror nok vi er en bananrepublik, og de selv bestemmer om Jyske Bank koncernen skal overholde lovgivningen.

SE HER I DISSE VIDEOER NOGLE AF MINE UTALLIGE OPFORDRINGER.

Og svar på hvorfor ledelsen eller andre, ikke tør  svare igen.

Er sandheden ilde hørt.

 

ANDERS CHRISTIAN DAM.

JEG UDFORDER DIG.

 

MEN DU ER VEL FOR FEJ OG BANGE, TIL AT TAGE HANSKEN OP.

 

 

 

 

 


Men jeg ønsker dig aligevel alt held og lykke når du finder ud af at trække dig ud af Jyske Banks bestyrelse.

Se resten på www.banknyt.dk

Med venlig hilsen

Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup

Søvej 5.

3100 Hornbæk

0045-22227713

mail carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com