Has anyone used DPR Financial to invest?

[Balanced1]

I'm sorry, but please help me understand here. A crime stoppers "ad" has been posted about DPR being a contibutor to their charity in "2007". Not sure why that's considered a bad thing? David Reeve's wife is on the committee for Crime Stoppers so I am sure they are now aware of the dealings of Daniel. No harm was done there and monies were contributed to a charity. I am also confused as to why Mensch wants to go the "Star". Has Rose Simone of The Record not put in enough time on this that she doesn't deserve this story? We all know this will go National. I'm actually surprised Mensch that you keep requesting people e-mail you that the police haven't e-mailed you stating they are quite up to date on the dealings of Daniel. I think we have to let them do their job. Are you in such a rush to have Daniel behind bars? Many are feeling the same way but please, let the police do their investigation. These he said/she said situations only make them have to spend so much time on the investigation. This doesn't have to be a lynching. The police will do their job! I understand all the anger and upset but please let the police do their job.

[MenschMayer]

Sorry Balanced 1... I do feel urgency. Why you ask? Since I found out about these new websites, MORE PEOPLE ARE GETTING HURT. That is not okay!!!!

Yes, Rose is on it!!! don't worry we luv her too.

[Balanced1]

I do understand your urgency. I guess I need to be more clear. My last post stated the police know and have been watching him. I also mentioned that since they have known this, that if anyone else is hurt and have handed over money to his guy, I hope they are willing to recoup for any losses. Obviousy they are watching how he operates for a reason. The sooner the better, absolutely! I just hope the back and forth and heresay doesn't waste their time as this is taking far too long and no one wants to see anyone else hurt by this.

[defrauded2]

I'm sorry, but please help me understand here. A crime stoppers "ad" has been posted about DPR being a contibutor to their charity in "2007". Not sure why that's considered a bad thing? David Reeve's wife is on the committee for Crime Stoppers so I am sure they are now aware of the dealings of Daniel. No harm was done there and monies were contributed to a charity. I am also confused as to why Mensch wants to go the "Star". Has Rose Simone of The Record not put in enough time on this that she doesn't deserve this story? We all know this will go National. I'm actually surprised Mensch that you keep requesting people e-mail you that the police haven't e-mailed you stating they are quite up to date on the dealings of Daniel. I think we have to let them do their job. Are you in such a rush to have Daniel behind bars? Many are feeling the same way but please, let the police do their investigation. These he said/she said situations only make them have to spend so much time on the investigation. This doesn't have to be a lynching. The police will do their job! I understand all the anger and upset but please let the police do their job.

Balanced, the purpose of printing the Crime Stoppers ad, was in no way meant to belittle the honorable service of Crime Stoppers. It was meant to show the irony of the support. I'm not going to draw any other conclusions.

As for being in a rush to have Daniel behind bars? Yes, of course, the answer is yes. We've waited too long already. Madoff began his term 6 months after his exposure. Kudos to the Americans for swift justice. Remember the FSCO in their Cease and Desist order have labeled Daniel P. Reeve as "ungovernable". If he cannot be governed and if he is in any way, shape or form attempting to obtain funds for any mortgage or for any other reason, he is breaking the law. The mere existence of two new websites that are associated with his name and employing the same staff should be more than suspect and contravene the FSCO order. Now, if the FSCO has no ability to enforce matters, then what's the point of having a regulator if they have no control. WE WANT MORE THAN JUST WORDS. We are looking for concrete action. Plain, simple... point made.

[Balanced1]

I understand the irony of the Crime Stoppers support. You are right, the FSCO does have a cease and desist on him but as Belmont mentioned, they are not a law enforcement agency. If the police have known about his operations, I'm just saying, perhaps they are letting him do this for some reason that makes no sense to us. Madoff, as you said, was sent to jail 6 months after "exposure". This has to be close to 6 months but I'm sure the police want to have all the answers before they do anything so that no stone is left unturned. I want to see justice in this also but I also want to believe in that "justice system".

[defrauded2]

I understand the irony of the Crime Stoppers support. You are right, the FSCO does have a cease and desist on him but as Belmont mentioned, they are not a law enforcement agency. If the police have known about his operations, I'm just saying, perhaps they are letting him do this for some reason that makes no sense to us. Madoff, as you said, was sent to jail 6 months after "exposure". This has to be close to 6 months but I'm sure the police want to have all the answers before they do anything so that no stone is left unturned. I want to see justice in this also but I also want to believe in that "justice system".

I can fully appreciate that there is an extensive investigation, because there are a lot of complaints and hence a big paper trail. Now, on the other hand, hypothetically speaking, say there was only one complaint and hence limited documentation to process. In that situation the perpetrator would have already been charged because the job would have been done by the investigators. However, when you are dealing with lots of victims, the perpetrator can get away with it for much longer because the investigators are slow to process. Hence, there is an incentive for the fraudster to make it as big as possible, because the bigger it is, the longer it takes to get put away. DOESN'T ANYONE HERE THINK THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH OUR SYSTEM? Are we asking too much? Garth Drabinsky was convicted of a serious fraud. Yet, he is still free, on appeal. His case will likely drag on...his sentence not very long. I think victims have a damn good right to be angry and cynical.

[MenschMayer]

http://www.benedictionblogson.com/20...cold/#comments


WHO IS DANIEL P. REEVE? I think the above blog has done a wonderful job asking that question.

[MenschMayer]

Media

December 2008 Windsor Star Easy Street to on the Street
December 8, 2008 Windsor Star DPR evicted
December 13, 2008 Windsor Star Financial services company DPR evicted from Waterloo office
April 9, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Wedding Bell Blues
April 9, 2009 CKCO News Investors demanding answers Jakobstettel Inns, Reeve Hotel and Resorts Inc., Millionaire in You (YouTube)
April 15, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record St. Jacobs inn owes nearly $350,000
April 18, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Waterloo office locked by landlord for non-payment of rent
May 14, 2009 Guelph Mercury Financiers troubles mounting
June 5, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Dream investment evaporates
June 6, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Reeve began as a shoe salesman
June 18, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record New owner sought for Jacobstettel Inn
June 27, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Fraud complaints now criminal investigations
July 24, 2009 Kitchener-Waterloo Record Jacobstettel Inn sold
July 25, 2009 570 News Jakobstettel Inn sold

Blogs and forums
April 20, 2009 “Millionaire Mortgage” Company under review
Facebook Jacobstettel Inn
RedFlagDeals forum

Regulators
FSCO: May 13, 2009 Notice of Proposed Cease and Desist and Temporary Cease and Desist Daniel P.Reeve, Millionaire Mortgage Inc., and DPR Financial Inc. PDF
FSCO: June 4, 2009 Cease and Desist Permanent Daniel P. Reeve, Millionaire Mortgage Inc., and DPR Financial Inc.

Daniel P. Reeve Companies
My Personal Coach Set up June 2009
My Perfect Mortgage Set up June 2009

[MenschMayer]

Madoff family to be sued over missing billions
Sun Sep 27, 2009

NEW YORK (AFP) - Bernard Madoff claims he ran his multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme alone, but close family members face lawsuits this week in a widening probe, the government-appointed trustee told CBS television.

Trustee Irving Picard and his chief lawyer David Sheehan told CBS's 60 Minutes program that Madoff relatives and many so-called victims profited massively.

For example, Madoff's immediate family used the fraudulent investment firm "like a personal piggy bank," Sheehan said, while major investors earned billions of dollars -- possibly in full knowledge that this was a scam.

"We've found that there have been quite a few people who have gotten out more than they put in," Picard said.

Lawsuits are expected to be filed by the trustee this week against Madoff's sons Mark and Andrew, his brother Peter and niece Shana, CBS reported.

The suits are part of a legal onslaught stretching far beyond Madoff, who is serving the first months of a 150-year prison sentence.

Picard is charged with finding where Madoff's billions vanished so that genuine victims -- some left penniless after entrusting everything to the fraudster -- can be compensated.

Just before his arrest and the collapse of his pyramid scheme in December last year, Madoff sent clients a statement claiming his fund was worth about 64.8 billion dollars.

Picard and Sheehan, who rarely talk directly to the media, estimate the scheme in reality contained 36 billion dollars. They say half of this was disbursed before the collapse, while the other 18 billion dollars disappeared.

So far, Picard has snared just 1.5 billion dollars, including revenues from such easy targets as luxury residences in Manhattan, Long Island and Florida kept by Madoff and his wife Ruth.

But now the focus is tightening on Madoff's inner circle.

CBS reported that Picard's team found Madoff's sons and brother took out 80 million dollars in salaries over the last seven years, while Ruth spent millions of dollars from company funds for shopping and other extravagances.

Family members were also investors in Madoff's fake company, raking in fantastic returns, CBS reported. Mark and Andrew, for example, withdrew more than 35 million dollars from accounts opened with almost no original investment.

"Whether or not they have a criminal problem we will pursue them as far as we can pursue them," Picard warned. "If that leads to bankrupting them -- then that's what will happen."

Madoff's family deny complicity, as do the thousands of people who put money into the fund, then received steady returns from what they were told were legitimate investments, but in fact was money stolen from fellow investors.

Sheehan said the family was too close to Madoff's daily work not to have known about the scam.

"My belief is, yes, they knew, and the reason I believe that is they were officers of this -- of these companies, and directors in certain instances as well, and also compliance officers in a very highly regulated environment."

"Clearly they would have to have known what was going on given their own personal transactions, the longevity of what was happening, and the responsibilities as officers," Sheehan said.

Also in the cross-hairs are many of those investors who say they lost money with Madoff.

Some, the officials say, will not only fail to be reimbursed, but may have to pay back profit made during the decades that Madoff's fraudulent business went undetected.

Picard said about half of Madoff's clients received more in returns than they invested originally, making them beneficiaries, not victims.

"At the end of the day, they were in a Ponzi scheme, unfortunately for them. So, all they get (in compensation), at best, is what they put in," Sheehan said.

The trustee's main targets, though, are the heavy hitters who, Sheehan says, "knew exactly what was going on -- and participated in it."

One of those being sued is billionaire investor and philanthropist Jeffry Picower, whose statements from Madoff indicated an astonishing 950 percent return on his investment, amounting to billions of dollars in profits.

"This is a very, very sophisticated guy. He gets a statement like that -- that's off the charts. He doesn't know anything about that?" Sheehan asked.

Another big investor facing a lawsuit, Stanley Chais, withdrew more than a billion dollars in profits from his Madoff account. Both he and Picower deny wrongdoing.

Madoff's high rolling wife Ruth has already been brought to heel.

CBS said she has to report to the trustee any time she spends more than 100 dollars. "She's living very modestly," Picard said.

Sheehan said ultimately the blame should be spread wide.

"I think, as everyone, you know, was participating in this, and just feeding at this trough of greed," Sheehan said.

"What they were looking for was it to continue. They were hoping it was never going to end."

[MenschMayer]

BENE WRITES: Why isn’t FSCO regulating?

No one is going to deny Daniel P. Reeve the right to make a living while he is under investigation. Last I checked this was still a democracy. But last I checked a regulatory agency has denied him the priviledge of making his living in this field and it is their obligation to ensure no one else is harmed. Former investors deserve to be heard, the public deserves to know.

It’s not enough to write a post and stick it on a blog, that’s as hollow as the FSCO order. It takes an email.
You can write the FSCO and ask, where’s the beef?

elicence(at)fsco.gov.on.ca

YOU ROCK BENE!!!!!! good ideas... http://www.benedictionblogson.com/

[MenschMayer]

Bene's Blog made the front page of the Progressive blogger aggregator, go vote, it bumps it up for the rest of the day and gives it a lot more eyeballs.

He did a great job today with his second post. "Why isn’t FSCO regulating?"

please vote: http://www.progressivebloggers.ca/?threshold=2

[MenschMayer]

Is it me, or is Lisa's name gone off the website? INTERESTING!!!!

I think her job title was, 'client relations'. oh, oh...

[defrauded2]

Is it me, or is Lisa's name gone off the website? INTERESTING!!!!

I think her job title was, 'client relations'. oh, oh...

Yup, looks like Daniel took Lisa's name off the website....but that's ok because it is still her voice on the voicemail. If he stopped paying his co-conspirator, perhaps he'd be wise to change the voice on the message. And if he was really smart, he would have used someone else's voice on his slideshows instead of his own!

[Balanced1]

If you go to "mail us" on the website, the address still states "lisa@".

[MenschMayer]

If you go to "mail us" on the website, the address still states "lisa@".

good one Balanced 1 !!!!!