The collapse of Hannes Tulving

In September I bought a '41D Walker from a dealer in FL. No big deal...nice coin.
But the story behind the slab is interesting and significant to anyone who buys bullion. Many of you already know about this guy, but it's worth repeating. In addition to the Coin Week article, I found this recent link (Sept 11,2015) on the CFTC website. The obvious message of course is: BUYER BEWARE!
Coin Week March 2014
http://www.coinweek.com/bullion-report/tulving-company-collapse/
CFTC website
http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7228-15

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I live relatively close to this operation and I'm thankful I didn't cross paths with this guy. Never saw basement slabs of his though. That's like buying a Madoff Rolex lol

 

Its sad how the bullion market specifically, and the coin market generally, seems to attract shady dealers. It always has. Maybe its a function of so many people's belief in the "investment" aspect of them, large cash transactions, IDK. All I know is always be very suspicious of all bullion dealers, try to only do business with reputable players, and NEVER fall for the sucker proposition that they will "handle the storage for you". Most of the worst stories in bullion I hear either entail dealers with very delayed shipping, or dealers offering to do me a favor and store my bullion "in a very secure vault" for me for "free". Either go to a show and take possession immediately or only use respected sellers who ship fast, and stay on top of them.

Its sad one must be very worried when buying bullion, but that is the world we live in.

 

In the words of President Reagan: "Trust but verify";

 

Quite some time ago I dealt with 2 wonderful people that owned and operated their own coin shop. Just a local shop, the only one in town. They have since retired and sold the business, which still survives but I no longer live in the area. One of these 2 guys, who I dealt with for years in my younger days, told me something that took time for me to understand. He said that in this business (coins, bullion and related items) you could lose your shirt overnight no matter which way the metal market went. Think about that for a minute.

Assuming he was correct, which I believe he was, if he could lose everything in 1 night no matter if precious metals went up or down, why would anyone want to do this for a living? Because you can make a lot of money if you know what you are doing. These guys helped everyone. From a young child just starting to show interest in collecting coins to the well seasoned collector. Their inventory had lower priced coins so you could plug that hole in your Whitman's folder. They also had graded coins that coins thousands. If you were a very good customer, as I was, they would buy precious gems, including diamonds, for you, for a lot less that market values. They had a great but limited inventory. They knew there business.

They were family oriented and a part of the community. I once bought a 1916-D Mercury Dime in XF for $325.00 and a week later I bought a 1909-S VDB in Fine for another $325.00. Yes, it was years ago but I wish these guys were around today or at the very least, someone like them. This business has changed, as has everything else in our life time. This bullion and coin business does attract individuals with a devious nature, ones that are only there to prey on you if you let them. It also attracts a lot of folks who have good intentions but if you don't know what you're doing....you'll lose money and so will their customers.

The bottom line is, Buyer Beware! Check it out before you spend money. We all know that PT Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute" but only a few of us know that the Bible says "A fool is easily parted from his money".

 

It is actually an old Russian proverb that Reagan deftly used to impress Mikhail Gorbachev.

 

I am glad to have not had to deal with the losses some had to accept over his current situation.

With that being said, I believe it was a combination of 2 things that did the consumer in.

1) The price of silver and gold slid, knocking A dent into his inventory pricing. The article states at one point before he started showing signs of trouble, He had a known amount of 600,000 oz of silver in stock and on hand. I do not think they made mention of gold levels in his inventory, but one can assume he was highly vested in gold also. Any shift, even the slightest would be dramatic and cause turmoil.

2) The amount of loss is too great to swallow and this is when "criminal behavior" kicks in. Judging from the amount of good things people had to say about him and his company regarding shipment of goods and making good on his sales, at one point and time he was running an honest business with focus on customer satisfaction. I believe he got so far behind that filling peoples orders with the money of people making new purchases took a toll. He simply just "gave in" to defeat and created his exit strategy by course of fraudulent means.

So I guess in summary, he was the good guy once upon a time. The blows he had to absorb made him into the criminal he now is today. With that being said it does not make it right, but I think his choice in going about survival was planned and executed just the way he wanted it. It just goes to show that the more you are involved in high risk situations, the more likely you will be highly disappointed at one time or another.

 

Hmmm, the 2013 effect. Didn't think of that for some reason but it makes sense and makes me think of insurance and if a bullion dealer can get insured for severe drops. I know Lloyds will insure anything for a price but are there any companies anyone knows of that will cover a hard asset pm inventory from severe market losses?

 

I know that my home owners insurance (who shall remain nameless) will not write a rider policy to cover bullion theft, even if it's in a safe.

 

The posted article is legally know as "hear say", and the author(s?) can't be held liable for the content, but as a "firsthand" party I know to be inaccurate in several aspects.

A legally liable article written by another believed objective "firsthand" witness, for objective viewing, is available at the following internet address:

http://about.ag/tulving.htm

JMHO

 

If the guy has agreed to plead guilty to wire fraud I know I am not interested in reading nit-picking about government agency press releases.

 

I believe you'll find that the majority of successful large volume businesses have at one time or another been the victim of government accusations/harassment. The "choices" provided are where the lesser of evils is to relinquish property, and plead guilty to something less desirable than serving prison time.

I know of few successful firms that haven't met the might of "big brother". I, and many of my associates have dealt with the intrusion of government employees who can enter your business/home without warning, confiscate possessions, and threaten without any recourse, or judicial action.

I'm glad to hear that you've survived in a shelter where the realities of government intrusion haven't had an effect on your life. I've been a party to several actions of the government where unannounced virtual "storm troupers" entered businesses, confiscated assets, and charged the firms with violations which required a "plea" in lieu of a prison sentence.. I believe you probably wouldn't want to discuss the subject with Wesley Snipes, Willie Nelson, Martha Stewart, Nicolas Cage, and many others

I hope that you never have the opportunity to realize the effects of a formal "structuring" (dealing in cash) charge by the government. I believe you'll find the charge results in automatic minimum prison sentence without plea option or judicial hearing, with automatic forfeiture of all assets.

It is interesting to hear that one would naively accept a government charge, followed by a plea, as an absolute indictment, and admission to guilt.

I guess some aren't candidates for the Elder Law or Prisoner's Rights projects.

JMHO

 

You take a plea of guilt if you agree you are guilty (does not matter of what), not to avoid prison sentences. If you are innocent you fight your case in a court of law and PROVE this with evidence, just as the prosecution has to PROVE you were guilty of wrong doing before bringing charges against you.

I do understand that the justice system is broken and can fail at times, but that usually is not the case. Tulving is guilty and he will plead to it. From my understanding, he was guilty of the same type of thing in the 1980's also.

When you try to get over on unsuspecting people who trusted you with their hard earned money, you deserved to be held accountable for the poor decisions that you chose. He figured the only way out was to rob the unsuspecting now and deal with the consequences later.

Its a shame because what I have read about him was pretty solid. People were still siding with him months after not receiving their purchases, so to me, that speaks volumes about how he handled his business at one point and time. People just could not fathom that their money was gone. Regardless how trustworthy he was, 1 time is all it takes.

They say you can live your life while doing thousands of goods, but, people will only remember the 1 bad. The problem is that when going into something, a person may have the best on intentions to be honest but when they are faced with a difficult situation, they re-evaluate those intentions and try to find the best way possible to soften the blow. Money changes people and always will dictate what someone will do for it. Cliche as it may sound, it is the root of all evil and will spoil a perfect apple if given the right circumstances to do so.

Jmho

 

I wish you were correct in your suppositions, but having been intimately involved, and a claimant in numerous Numismatic firms bankruptcies, I suggest you research the judicial processes, and Goggle "May 9, 2011: Ex-cons make a killing"

You might also review the reportings for the National Gold Exchange bankruptcy, which reportedly is still active 2 decades after initial efforts, with the primary Principal entering a plea ~5 months ago.

Another firm is Northwest Territories GOLD & SILVER exchange corp., and many more that survived the investigative processes unscathed, protected by the corporate and LLP shields. Several that I know of are still actively preying on naive clients.

You may find that some of these incidents led to the generation of the Minnesota bullion statutes, which has since resulted in the incarceration of prosecuted criminals, and the current activities to prosecute others who've violated residents.

JMHO

 

I suggested that challenging individuals to my posts please do internet research before posting statements as fact.

Since there's seemingly a limited inclination to research, opting instead to subjectively challenge, I've done some research upon which I can supply links that must be typed manually with my computers in this venue. I prefer that a challenger initiate some constructive effort.

According to "the Bureau of Justice Statistics", of 75573 cases legally disposed in Federal Court by trial or plea, 95% were disposed by a guilty plea.

In Minnesota, where a low rate of incarceration is reported, a study revealed a 90% criminal case resolution by plea.

I suggested that critics of my posts who aren't familiar with government power to seize assets without judicial process, Goggle "structuring". This is an automatic secretive reporting process, required by Federal felony laws, requiring "banks" to subjectively report clients who regularly withdraw or deposit cash, regardless of the amounts. By mandate of the Federal government, clients/depositors can't be informed of the reporting process.

If charged with "structuring", I believe you'll find that bank deposits and other assets can be seized, regardless of how the assets were acquired or reported. An automatic minimum sentence can be applied to the accused. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that government agencies ARE allowed to do this WITHOUT a hearing before a judge, even though the seizure means your left with no resources to defend yourself.

I believe you'll find my stated posts to be factual if you simply research same, and read objective internet posts by others.

JMHO

 

Before we delve deeper, I would ask one question:

You are charged with a crime you did not commit....

You have 2 options

1) Take a plea deal to lighten the load of the punishment you would receive if you would have been found guilty in a trial.

2) Go to trial and provide evidence supporting your side of things to prove your innocence.

I do agree the government has its unjust seizure laws, but that is irrelevant to the Tulving case. How can you take a "plea bargain" to a lesser offense if you have not been charged with anything at all? This is the only way you are offered a plea bargain. Innocent people do not accept plea bargains, criminals do.

The only way your post gains relevance is by saying his monies and assets were seized due to this "structuring" law, in which case he would have not had the means to continue fulfillment of orders. Then you have to ask yourself "why was that not reported?" The government stepping in and seizing that amount of P.M. and monies, surely someone would have reported this.

If this was in fact the case, he is still liable for prosecution because he was accepting orders he knew he could not fulfill.

I am by no means a lawyer, but I am fairly educated on how the system works. If a plea bargain is issued that means only 1 thing:

A criminal charge has been issued and to save time and money on an elaborate case that would more then likely take forensic accounts years to come to some sort of a conclusion, they offer a plea bargain.

If no crime was commited then there is no basis for a plea deal. What would you plea to?

 

Simply being reported of suspected structuring doesn't automatically get someones funds frozen or assets seized. But being investigated and the government finding evidence of purposeful structuring to avoid reporting requirements usually will. But that doesn't give the government the rights to the funds permanently they still have the burden of proof to legally show the persons guilt. They will investigate and the person who ends up being investigated will also have their chance to defend themselves in a court of law. It's probably a very small number of people who get reported that end up being suspected of a crime after the government does the initial investigation.

https://www.ffiec.gov/bsa_aml_infobase/pages_manual/regulations/31CFR1010_100.pdf

https://www.ffiec.gov/bsa_aml_infobase/pages_manual/OLM_107.htm

http://www.fincen.gov/whatsnew/pdf/CTRPamphletBW.pdf

https://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/irm_04-026-013.html

Also the governments case regarding this seems pretty clear

http://www.justice.gov/usao-wdnc/victim-witness-assistance/united-states-v-hannes tulving

http://www.justice.gov/usao-wdnc/file/478051/download

 

It is a futile exercise to "debate" the "letters of the law" in an unrelated subject forum with a lay-person that has apparent limited knowledge of legal process. If you were one of my students having an interest in learning "due-process" I would cite germane precedents and statutes.

I've posted a link to an over-view by an independent investigator of this case, which I believe is a knowledgeable objective overview by an informed individual. Please read the content of that link before blathering on with your believed incorrect pre-conceived assumptions. You may absorb a minimal understanding of the process applied in this case, and the reasons for the transpired events.

I spend many Pro Bono hours to help individuals deemed innocent of potential charges, in assisting to initiate Pro Se type actions/pleadings. Simply stated, the efforts/outcome are dependent upon many variables, including actions of adversary, jurisdiction, etc..

Thanks for your insights/understandings.

JMHO

 

Well Presented!! You are generally correct in your "Devils Advocate" rebuttal, as I, in the most extreme scenario of this legislation.

JMHO

 

I respect the knowledge and information you are bringing to the table and I would rather leave the legal jargon to the qualified. I understand what you are trying to prove with your links and comments, but yet again, it does not pertain to this particular case. He has admitted guilt by agreeing to plea bargain and that is what this whole conversation is about. You sound more than qualified to see this yet we seem to still be going down different paths here.

On that note, I respectfully withdraw from the discussion. I appreciated the information provided!