We came to the BCSC as investors for help. Why would the BCSC destroy
a perfectly good company and the hard earned money of the shareholders
when its mandate is to protect them?
Even if the BCSC had a valid concern in terms of the leadership of the
Company all five directors offered to resign and have accredited
business people that could be accepted as Directors take over very
early on when the U-Go Brands directorship group first contacted the
BCSC. Why did the BCSC at the very least not consider the possibility
of saving the shareholders money in a viable world class start up?
U-Go Brands could still exist and would likely have been at least a
hundred-million-dollar success for the Province and the shareholders.
KEY QUESTIONS THAT SHOULD BE ASKED FOR THE SAKE OF THE PUBLIC AND OUR
INVESTORS WHO ARE ONE AND THE SAME.
Why was the BCSC deceptive with the investors regarding the Klaus and
SPYru situation and its jurisdiction? Why did the BCSC wait seven
months to inform the investors it could not help them?
Why did the BCSC accept shareholder registration from our lawyers for
our U-Go Brand shareholders and tell us everything was in order for
seven months and then turn around reverse their position?
We asked our lawyers in regards to the need for a prospectus and both
our lawyers and the BCSC agreed that we could move forward with the
paperwork our lawyer at the time presented. Why did the BCSC give
consent knowing the paperwork was not good? Is this not entrapment?
Why does the BCSC turn a blind eye to known scam artists like Sue
Sampat who operate in BC freely?
Why does the BCSC deny the existence of transcripts to hearings it
held when we all recorded our name for the stenographer who was
present the entire time?
Why do most of the BCSCs 'Compliance' regulations for BC companies
have nothing to do with preventing actual fraud but mostly consist of
filling out vast amounts costly paperwork or preventing most of the
average public from investing in these at all?
Why does the BCSC exist as a conflict of interest? How can they
operate within the Rule of Law when regulating the market if they are
only funded by creating regulatory offences that have to be broken in
order to get funding?
SPYRU AND U-GO BRANDS SHAREHOLDERS,
THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY
TO WRITE OUT YOUR COMMENT
Dear SPYru and U-GO Brands Shareholders.
As you are probably aware U-GO Brands and Directors are still embroiled with the BC Securities Commission for their wrongful prosecution of SPYru and U-GO Brands.
For the last three years we have appeared at the BC Securities Panel Hearing and now we are contesting their final Panel decision of about $3,000,000 in fines against U-GO Brands and its Directors.
This is your opportunity to write out your comments about the fact that you have lost your investment in SPYru and or U-GO Brands due to the BC Securities overzealous investigation and prosecution.
We look forward to your comments.
Peter Harris
| |
| THE BC SECURITIES COMMISSION IS NOT OPERATING WITHIN THE LAW |
