See also notice of 19 December 2021. concerning lawyers in Lundgrens, Kromann Reumert’s and DLA Piper as well as Hjorten.

Mail 18-12-2021. kl.19.39.

Finanstilsynet@ftnet.dk

CC:

Justitsministeriet <jm@jm.dk>,
fm@fm.dk,
REU@ft.dk

Glemte at sætte finanstilsynet på denne her mail, i er tilsynsmyndighed for at de danske banker, overholder loven.

 

Vedhæftet og også sent 18-12-2021. time. 18.50

Dear Lundgren’s partners, it’s been a long time since I last asked you to pay back my money, and get your organization cleaned up for corruption and camaraderie, and the case is raised to a higher level.

Merry Christmas everyone, follow my fight for a Danish society without corruption and camaraderie to keep your hand over crime

 

Lundgrens Advokatpartnerselskab

Tuborg Boulevard 12

Dk-2900 Hellerup.

Dear Lundgren’s lawyers

December 18. 2021.

 

This email is for

The entire Lundgren Board of Directors and all partners in Lundgren’s lawyer partner company.

Also especially to Jyske Bank and your top managers.

atv@lundgrens.dk,
ths@lundgrens.dk,
tkr@lundgrens.dk,
shi@lundgrens.dk,
sdr@lundgrens.dk,
pem@lundgrens.dk,
pcc@lundgrens.dk,
pbn@lundgrens.dk,
pmo@lundgrens.dk,
nri@lundgrens.dk,
nwk@lundgrens.dk,
ngh@lundgrens.dk,
nbs@lundgrens.dk,
mg@lundgrens.dk,
mma@lundgrens.dk,
mki@lundgrens.dk,
lkj@lundgrens.dk,
kra@lundgrens.dk,
djur@lundgrens.dk,
Dan Terkildsen Lundgren Advokater <dat@lundgrens.dk>,
csc@lundgrens.dk,
ama@lundgrens.dk,
afw@lundgrens.dk,
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:

denmark@dk.dlapiper.com,
info@danskererhverv.dk,
nh@naevneneshus.dk,
mail@kromannreumert.com,
info@horten.dk,
bfr@hjorten.dk,
jsj@kromannreumert.com,
HHY@danskerhverv.dk,
martin.lavesen@dk.dlapiper.com,
fm@fm.dk,
Justitsministeriet <jm@jm.dk>,
kmj@atp.dk,
kf@nationalbanken.dk,
postkasse@advokatsamfundet.dk,
Postkasse – Klagesagsafdelingen <klagesagsafdelingen@advokatsamfundet.dk>,
bankdata@bankdata.dk,
SAK@ankl.dk,
pet@politi.dk,
reu@ft.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,
mette.thiesen@ft.dk,
pernille.vermund@ft.dk

 

On Tuesday we move to the next level, with others you want this case closed before.

 

You decide for yourself

How much your war must grow in order for you, to keep the money Jyske Bank has fraudulently stolen from me or my company.

 

And that under the pretext that it was, among other things, interest rates on loans that never has existed, which you succeed, in lying about, even when you by Morten Ulrik Gade and Philip Baruch presented false information to the court.

 

Dear Lundgren’s partners, it’s been a long time since I last asked you to pay back my money, and get your organization cleaned up for corruption and camaraderie, and the case is raised to a higher level.

 

You all know, that I have written in public, and since September 2019. said and written that Lundgren’s lawyers are corrupt, since you had been employed to present a fraud and false case against the Danish bank Jyske Bank. Which you unfortunately forgot to present the Danish courts, after which Jyske Bank bribed Lundgren’s lawyers hidden as a return commission, which you can read much more about at www.banknyt.dk

The complaint about lundgrens can be read in its entirety here with appendices.

Banknyt.dk 05-06-2020.

Klage over Lundgrens advokat partner Dan Terkildsen.

 

 

I have also found out that in Denmark, judges also cover corrupt lawyers, as Lundgrens. Such as here where Supreme Court Judge Kurt Rasmussen, in his office as a member of the lawyer mentioned, chose together with, Lawyers Birgitte Frølund from Hjorten lawyer. / Jens Steen Jensen from Kromann Reumert lawyer. / Legal Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard from Forbrugerklagenævnet. / Henrik Hyltoft from Danish business. And as a lawyer mentioned chairman Martin Lavesen from DLA Piper lawyers from DLA Piper lawyer interpret, what is not a violation of good legal practice.

Which i have shared in these 2 posts on banking news

Banknyt.dk 08-09-2021.

De advokatetiske regler som kurt Rasmussen. Birgitte froelund. Jens Steen Jensen. Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard. Henrik Hyltoft forstaar dem hvilket stoettes af Martin Lavesen.

and.

Banknyt.dk/14-09-2021.

Mail nu ved i alle sammen at jyske bank koncernen staar bag brugen af dokumentetfalskog bedrageri samt top advokater og hoejesteretsdommer ved kammerateri har valgt at daekke over de

 

When I write. you the Bar Council cover over the corrupt lawyers Lundgren’s lawyers, which was also meant to cover up the criminal Danish bank Jyske bank, what are you thinking then.

 

Please all of you, who are lawyers and receive this email here.

Kindest correct me, if I have misunderstood the lawyer, the board has decided this below, is not one is a violation of good lawyer 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 allegations and places.

–

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

–

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

–

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

–

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

–

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

–

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

–

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

– 

It is not a violation of good legal practice: that 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 claims and appendices supporting the client’s explanation, which the client himself sent to court , after the lawyer himself forgot to present the client’s allegations.

–

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

–

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

–

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

 

 

Lawyers are welcome to charge for tasks not performed.

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

TO:

The client cannot decide for himself, what the client’s claims against a defendant are about, it is only the lawyer who fully decides for himself, what claims the client has, which is seen as a violation of my human rights.

The decision 30-06-2021. In the complaint 2020-1932. From 05-06-2021.

Is decided by:

Kurt Rasmussen. Birgitte Frølund. Jens Steen Jensen. Rikke Skadhauge Seerup Krogsgaard. Henrik Hyltoft. Which is supported by the chairman of the Bar Council Martin Lavesen.

 

The signer is Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup. Søvej 5. 3100 Hornbæk.

 

The Lawyer Board has decided 30-06-2021. to reject this here appeal from Constitution Day 2020. 2020-1932. Supported by the board’s chairman Martin Lavesen.

After which interpretation of what is not a violation of good lawyer practice is written above on the page.

 

 

THE CHASE

What happens, is that Lundgren’s lawyers, subsequently after i have hired Lundgren’s lawyer partner company at Dan Terkildsen, to present my claims against the Jyske Bank Group, including that the Jyske Bank Group has made forgery and fraud by several employees.

My case concerning Jyske Bank’s use of evil belief, Fraud and False which at least 6 employees in Lundgren’s lawyer partner company had been presented.

FACTS are:

After I hired Lundgren’s lawyers, to present my case against Jyske Bank, Lundgren’s lawyer partner company became contacted, by some from the management of Jyske Bank, I suspect that CEO Anders Christian Dam and Philip Baruch are among, the brains to bribe Lundgrens.

 

Jyske Bank offers in the spring of 2018. Lundgren’s lawyers to provide the Jyske Bank Group with trading advice for around DKK 600 million.

 

Which was after I had hired Lundgren’s lawyer partner company, to present my case against the Jyske Bank group, including Jyske Bank’s use of the document false and fraud, this Lundgren’s lawyers had to present in civil law as fraud and false, together with the Jyske Bank group in evil faith has made power of attorney abuse and lied to me, and also lied to the court.

 

After which at least 6 people from Lundgren’s lawyers, including Dam Terkildsen, together, chose to oppose me and my company’s fraud and false case against Jyske Bank was presented to the court.

 

Therefore i have also written and it repeatedly, as well as with shared videos that Lundgren’s lawyers, have been bribed by Jyske Bank, or paid by return commission, for not presenting any of the client’s / any of my claims against Jyske Bank.

 

Lundgren’s lawyers have both at the board, and your partners since 2019 / 2020. been able to answer me.

But you have chosen to ignore all my inquiries, which is why I am writing to you all again.

 

 

I ask you again to repay the money 100,000 dkk plus interest, that I have transferred to Lundgren’s lawyers, to present my case against Jyske Bank, which Lundgren’s lawyers failed to do, and since Jyske Bank hid as a return commission, Lundgren’s lawyers was paid in bribes, for not to present my allegations against Jyske Bank, and Lundgrens tried to disappoint in legal matters, by wanting to appear at the main hearing 2 September 2019. without having presented my allegations.

 

Which Lundgren’s lawyers hid when Dan Terkildsen, would not hand me copies of all the pleadings, and both the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s pleadings.

 

I have here in the year 2021. closed the company’s account in Jyske Bank, and ask this time that Lundgren’s lawyers make sure to transfer the 100,000 dkk plus interest to my lawyer, which I may have to present my case against Jyske Bank.

 

 

My new lawyer is Claes Balle, which I had to put into my case after, i discovered that Lundgren’s lawyers had been bribed, by Jyske bank, and therefore counteract that my claims were presented in the Danish courts.

 

If you think I have misunderstood something, then you must say, so that misunderstandings can be corrected.

Or you can choose to deny what I write, you can threaten me, or sue me for defamation of Lundgren’s reputation.

 

 

I’m not afraid of either Lundgrens, Lund Elmer Sandager or some in Jyske Bank, you will only come if you dare to deny, that I write the truth.

 

 

YOU CAN READ THE CASE IN THIS EXTRACT LINK HERE.

LINK CHASE BS-402/2015-VIB. See fil

 

I know that Philip Baruch from Jyske Bank and Dan Terkildsen on 2 November 2018, held a meeting at Lundgren’s office, is this meeting something you will tell me about, as I subsequently this meeting, between Lundgren’s and Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers.

 

For reasons I can not be informed, Lundgres would not subsequently hand over all pleadings, nor was I allowed to present any arguments in my case against Jyske Bank, which Jyske Bank has also paid Lundgren’s millions hidden as return commission.

I have been informed by the Danish police, that it is not illegal for bribery to take place between private companies in Denmark, as between Jyske Bank AS and Lundgren’s lawyers, for a service which meant that Lundgren’s lawyers did not present my case against Jyske Bank AS.

 

This does not seem right, but I am the little one who has gone up against the second largest Danish bank, Jyske bank, with which the Danish state does bank business, and probably therefore no Danish authority will interfere when this bank violates criminal law in a long strip of criminal offenses.

www.google.com

Jyske bank repraesentantskabet.

Jyske bank koncernledelse

 

 

As before, I would like to call on Lundgrens to clean up again, and fire those who have opposed the presentation of my case against Jyske Bank, of which Dan Terkildsen is a large part.

But if, like Lundgren’s, everyone in the overall management is a direct contributor to, Lundgren’s lawyers did not present my case against Jyske Bank, and if  Lundgrens general is behind that Partner Dan Terkildsen opposing me as a client, to help defendant Jyske Bank , since they have bribed Lundgrens.

 

You can choose to launch an investigation and clean up, or you can stick your head in the ground and hope no newspapers dare to write about the corruption and arson in Denmark of which Lundgren’s lawyers are a part.

When we on Tuesday 21 December at 11.00 moves up to the next level, as I do not think Jyske Bank’s management or the Board of Representatives wants to stop the bank’s fight, to keep interest and more, of loans that have never existed, just because Jyske Bank’s employees all management has lied and hidden it, for that would disappoint in legal matters.

 

 

Inserted with text that is not included in the mail.

---

I am preparing for a major battle.

That is also about warning abroad against trusting Danish banks, like Jyske Bank, and also warning against Danish lawyers like you Lundgren’s lawyers, as you are corrupt.

 

The case here is that the Danish state, and the authorities as well as the Danish National Bank know everything about Jyske Bank committing criminal acts, which no one will help to rectify, as Jyske Bank will then have to have at least one prosecution.

 

This is a huge scandal for Denmark.

See.

Banknyt 17-12-2021.

Warning  against relying ondanish banks and with information that danish authorities cover the organized crime that danish banks are behind read the extract which is in danish and lear.

 

 

From the shared in Dropbox

 

Hej Storbjerg.

Storbjerg Skaarup (carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com) inviterede dig til at se filen “EKSTRAKT BS 402 2015 VIB.pdf” i Dropbox.

 

Storbjerg har også sendt en besked:
“15-12-2021. (kopi kommer i mail) Kære Jyske bank – Nicolai Hansen, Jeanett Kofoed-Hansen og Casper Dam Nielsen. 

nicolai-hansen@jyskebank.dk 

jkh@jyskebank.dk

 casper-dam@jyskebank.dk 

Jeg har ikke delt ekstrakten ed jer tidligere, og da jeg agter at indkalde Jeanett Kofoed-Hansen i landsretten, vil jeg gerne have du har sat dig ind i sagen, efter som Nicolai Hansen 16 november i Viborg byret sagde det nok var dig der har rettet i et bilag K. efter dette var udløbet, og at du brugte samme dato, 10-07-2008. selv om datoen måtte være efter 06-05-2009. –

Her kan i læse lidt om jer selv, i min seneste trustpilot anmeldelse af Jyske Bank, hvor i diskret er nævnt. hvis i her rettelser, eller i mener jeg har glemt noget, så kom frisk. 

http://banknyt.dk/14-12-2021-trustpilot-anmeldelse-jyske-bank-21-december-2022-kommer-der-dom-i-sagen-bs-402-2015-vib-viborg-byret-dommen-bliver-anket-enten-af-jyske-bank-eller-mig/- –

Vi skal også have klarlagt om det er dig Jeanett Kofoed-Hansen der 15 eller 16-04-2009 tinglyste et pantebrev på 4.328.000 dkk hvilket var en overtrædelse af tinglysningsloven, da det skete uden lovhjemmel, uden fuldmagt, uden lov eller aftale, Philip Baruch fremlagde 5 november 2018, dette dokument, og flere andre viser du har påført en underskrift som vidne, uden at have set mig underskrive, og du underskrev sikkert også den 15-04.2009. for at vidne at min underskrift 10-07-2008 var ægte, i forbindelse med at du, og eller andre i Jyske bank forsøgte mod min instruks at optage et låne, hvilket var kasseret og tilbuddet udløbet. –

Kære Jeanett Kofoed-Hansen læs processkrifterne i ekstrakten som jeg har fået en hæderlig advokat til at fremlægge. – Omkring denne lidt kedelige sag, som jeg mere syntes er en skandale, så er i jo alle nævnt i min fortælling på www.banknyt.dk og i har været enten indirekte eller direkte medvirkende til bedrageri mod min person eller selskab. 

Hvis du er uenig at du Jeanett Kofoed Hansen for Jyske Bank A/S har lavet fuldmagtsmisbrug, dokumentfalsk, og har været en del af det Jyske Bank der har udsat mig for mandatsvig, så bedes du svare denne mail deling, og det inden 10 dage, hvorefter jeg vil oprettet en siden for hver af jer, som har deltaget i Jyske banks bedrageri mod min person og selskab, og med hver af jer mener jeg alle der er nævnt på www.banknyt.dk –

Jeres advokater Lund Elmar Sandager kæmper ikke for at modbevise dette, da det rent faktisk har fundet sted, hvorfor jeres advokater Martin Skovsted-Nielsen, Morten Ulrik Gade, Philip Baruch, Kristian Ambjørn Buus Nielsen alene kæmper for at få sagen forældet, således Jyske Bank A/S kan beholde de penge Jyske Bank ved mandatsvig / svig har hævet på min og selskabets konto, hvilket i sammen i forening har været medvirkende til, det som jeg har skrevet er bedrageri. –

Men hvis nu ingen af jer, mener i har været medvirkende, hverken direkte eller indirekte til at lave på dokumentfalsk, lave fuldmagtsmisbrug, har lavet mandatsvig, og hvad jeg ellers har skrevet på www.banknyt.dk Så da Jyske Bank sammenblandede flere virksomheder til samme konti, både samtidig og overlappende, det som Nicolai Hansen 16 november 2021 i Viborg Byret forklarede med, at lånet til en virksomhed fulgte, her i mit tilfælde grunden Bybjergvej 43. 45. 47. og Nicolai forklarede så at da grunden blev overdraget / solgt, så ændrer Jyske Bank bare i brevhoved, og wupti så flyttede Jyske Bank et selskabs gæld, over til et andet selskab. – Hvilket med mit ringe kendskab til lovgivningen som Jyske Bank skriver de selv overholder, så vil jeg sige dette er en overtrædelse af bogføringsloven, hvilket jeg da håber man lære om inden, man bliver ansat i en bank. Som Jyske Bank. – Så igen derfor, hvis nogle i Jyske Bank eller Lund Elmer Sandager advokater mener at i er udsatte for injurier og bagvaskelse så opfordres i alle sammen også Nicolai Hansen, Jeanett Kofoed-Hansen og Casper Dam Nielsen. At i søge hjælp hos jeres advokater, da jeg jo skriver i for Jyske Bank A/S har lavet kriminalitet, altså i har overtrådt straffelovens bestemmelser, hvorfor i er at betegne som kriminelle, jeres advokater og ledelse har dog stærke kræfter, og deres kammerater har ikke ville efterforske Jyske Bank for udførelse af kriminalitet, da Jyske Bank ikke må efterforskes og retsforfølges, hvilket skyldes at banken har staten og kommunale virksomheder som kunder. – Alt sammen har jeg også tidligere delt med Nationalbanken, Finansministeriet, Statsministeriet, Justitsministeriet, Finanstilsynet, og aktionærer som ATP, hvor der er tråde til også staten samt advokatsamfundet, der stor for at advokatnævnet har dække over, at jyske Bank har bestukket Lundgrens advokater til ikke at fremlægge min sag mod Jyske bank, dette kan i også læse i ekstrakten, under klage og bilag. –

I bedes derfor alle sammen læse ekstrakten grundig, som her deles eller igen deles, og evt. anmode jeres advokater fra den juridiske afdeling om en kopi, for om i skulle være udsat for bagvaskelse. Jeg har siden 2016 skrevet om Jyske banks ulovligheder på www.banknyt.dk hvilket i har bistået sammen i forening med, dette har både Philip Baruch og derefter Kristian Ambjørn Buss Nielsen kommenteret, uden dog at handle, og skrive direkte til mig om det. Jeg formoder derfor, at i godt ved jeg skriver sandheden også på mine Jyske Bank biler, og på mine hjemmesider.

Google.com search ?

I kan grine så meget i vil, men dette her handler om Jyske Banks troværdighed, og om hvor ligeglade jeres banks ledelse og bestyrelse er med loven, da det ikke har konsekvens for jer at overtræde nogle love eller regler. –

Da jeg var det for 3 år siden skrev via Havkatten, at jeg ønskede at vi fik lukket sagen i mindelighed, var det en mulighed, jeg inventeret dengang Nicolai Hansen til frokost i Hornbæk og ventede faktisk ved et bord i nok et par timer, men jeg fik lov at vente forgæves, efterfølgende blokerede også Havkatten min Facebook profil. Derefter fulgte Jyske Bank efter og blokerede mig på twitter, på Jyske Bank og Jyske bank tv, bare for at jeg ikke måtte kunne skrive der. ..

Da jeg jo ikke er typen der bare giver op, har jeg også her, for et par dage siden skrevet til direktionen, ledelsen samt jeres advokater og alle i reprætantselskabet. Jeg deler 21-12-2021. her seneste mail til jer alle.

http://banknyt.dk/10-12-2021-mail-til-jyske-banks-direktoer-ceo-anders-christian-dam-bestyrelsen-og-repraesenteret-delt-med-statsministeriet-justitsministeriet-finansministeriet-nationalbanken-finanstilsynet-re/

Mailen til jer alle er igen blot en opfordring til dialog, og at vi skal stoppe krigen, der ellers kun vokser i omfang, Jyske bank kan ikke være bekendt at udsætte deres kunder som staten, samt de offentlige myndigheder og institutioner, for at skulle være nødsaget til at skulle dække over Jyske banks forretningsmetoder, for at myndighederne fortsat kan tillade sig at bruge Jyske Bank som bank, da staten jo ikke ville kunne tillade sig at bruge en bank der laver dokumentfalsk og bedrageri, herunder har lavet udnyttelse og mandatsvig. – –

Jeg har også delt med Søren Woergaard sw@jyskebank.dk 

og Anette Kirkeby 

kirkeby@jyskebank.dk da det er dem, som sammen med Casper Dam Olsen sendte mig til den grønne slagter i 2013, et møde jeg dog overlevede. Jeg ved ikke om det er Tina Agergaard 

agergaard@jyskebank.dk der har lavet vanhjemmel, som jeg har skrevet om, og også fremlagt bevis for at Jyske bank også har lavet, jeg ved blot at jeg skrev direkte til Tina, at hun ikke måtte slette det pantebrev på 3.000.000 dkk som jeg lagde til sikkerhed i den omtalte sag, jeg her deler ekstrakten BS-402/2015-VIB for. –

Jeg deler også denne her deling, og meddelelse med jeres overordnede, CEO Anders Christian og den øvrige ledelse 

direktion@jyskebank.dk også til Niels Erik Jakobsen, Per Skovhus, Peter Schleidt, samt med anmodning, at blive udleveret til resten i bestyrelsen, samt delt med jeres stærke advokater, der ikke har vist redelighed på nuværende tidspunkt. – Deler her med juridisk@jyskebank.dk 

og Martin Skovsted-Nielsen 

martin.nielsen@jyskebank.dk 

chef for Morten Ulrik Gade mug@jyskebank.dk , der jo var sammen med Kristian Ambjørn Buss-Nielsen kbn@les.dk i Viborg Byret alle rets dage 15. 16 og 23 november, Kristian har overtaget sagen efter advokaten Philip Baruch pb@les.dk der i 2015 og igen 2016, samt også i 2018 fremlagde flere falske oplysninger for at skuffe i retsforhold. –

Om det bliver sidste gang jeg skriver inden 21. december, det ved kun guderne, men jeg ønsker at i begynder at opfører jer som en redelig bank, og at i får ryddet op og vi få lukket denne her lidt for morsomme sag, inden den begynder at kede jer, og også mig  . Min sag er ikke hemmelig, og Jyske bank har som min advokat ikke tavshedspligt, ved henvendelsen omhandlende alt der er fremlagt på hjemmesiderne 

www.banknu.dk 

www.banknyt.dk 

www.ny-bank.dk 

www.slange.dk osv. – Med venlig hilsen Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup Søvej 5. 3100 Hornbæk +45 22227713 Mail. 

Carsten.storbjerg@gmail.com

 

LINK CHASE BS-402/2015-VIB. See fil

God fornøjelse!
Dropbox-teamet

Når stat og myndighederne giver fanden i danskernes retssikkerhed, for at dække over en kriminel organisation som Jyske Bank A/S, så er det en skandale.

Nok Danmarks farligste mand Anders Christian Dam, særligt for danskernes retssikkerhed, der samme med de magtfulde venner, blandt store advokat virksomheder og organisationer, kæmper sammen med Jyske Banks ledelse, for at slippe af sted med Jyske Banks mange svig forbrydelser.

Men Anders Dam risikerer i stedet at lukke Jyske Bank A/S grundet måden han som hersker har fået Jyske Banks fundament til at rådne, sammen med Niels Erik Jakobsen, Per Skovhus og Peter Schleidt.

Anders Christian Dam Ordførende direktør

Telefon: 89 89 20 01
E-mail: direktion@jyskebank.dk

 

See a previous front page on www.banknyt.dk here in this LINK

 

Banknyt.dk 25-11-2021.

Gl forside banknyt velkommen udskiftes efter hoved forhandling af sagen bs-402/2015-vib i byretten inden fortsaettelse i landsretten.

 and.

Banknyt.dk 17-08-2021.

Forside velkommen bank nyt udskiftes med opslaget 14-08-2021.

 

And here you can watch a video channel on youtube, dealing with perhaps Denmark’s biggest scandal in recent times.

 

Youtube channel.

Here you have a Youtube channel, with Jyske bank and Lundgrens as well as Lund Elmer Sandager lawyers who are mentioned.

 

---

Everyone who is the recipient of this email, is more than welcome to answer me, and or correct me, as I do not want to inform the outside world that the Danish bank, Jyske Bank has committed fraud and forgery, mandate fraud, power of attorney abuse, has bribed Lundgrens lawyers, have made misdemeanors, and much more if it is just a matter of mistakes, misunderstandings or something else.

 

If you Lundgrens want to talk to me, and admit that you forgot to present my claims, and want to repay my money, 100,000 dkk that I have transferred, in order for you to present my case against Jyske Bank, which you unfortunately forgot, while in chose to take care of Jyske Bank’s interests over mine.

Then you can contact me here.

Carsten Storbjerg Skaarup

Soevej 5. 3100 Hornbaek

+4522227713

 

Subject to typing and spelling errors as I am dyslexic.

Kind regards

Carsten was previously a client of Lundgren’s lawyers.