Peter Mueller, CEO of Ad Pack Pro, faces a stalled criminal investigation in Switzerland. Basel Public Prosecutors Office opened the inquiry in May 2017 after roughly fifty victim complaints detailed losses from the alleged Ponzi scheme. The case hit a wall when Ad Pack Pro's parent company, OneVision Holding AG, managed to freeze crucial evidence seized by authorities, blocking access to vital information.

Ad Pack Pro initially launched as a straightforward Ponzi scheme in 2015. It later introduced an "adcredit" version around March 2016, a common tactic for such operations to appear legitimate. The core pitch remained simple: investors would put in 25 EUR with the promise of receiving 30 EUR in return. This model, often disguised as advertising revenue sharing, relies entirely on a continuous influx of new investor funds to pay off earlier participants, making it inherently unsustainable and prone to sudden collapse.

The scheme predictably collapsed in January 2017, leaving numerous investors with significant losses. Victims quickly reported their experiences to Swiss authorities, leading to the formal criminal investigation initiated by the Basel Public Prosecutors Office. Investigators sought to meticulously trace the complex financial flows, identify all beneficiaries, and establish the full scope of the alleged fraudulent activity across multiple jurisdictions.

Progress on the investigation halted abruptly when OneVision Holding AG, the Switzerland-registered parent company of Ad Pack Pro, successfully secured a court order to freeze the evidence prosecutors had already seized. This action effectively prevented investigators from analyzing critical digital records, bank statements, investor databases, and internal communications. These documents are fundamental for proving the scheme's fraudulent nature and identifying those responsible. The precise legal basis invoked by OneVision Holding AG for this initial freeze, and the Swiss court's reasoning for granting it, have not been fully disclosed in public reports, adding to the case's complexity.

Prosecutors challenged the evidence freeze, appealing to the Compulsory Enforcement Tribunal. This body subsequently reversed the initial freeze, which should have granted authorities renewed access to the crucial evidence. However, OneVision AG immediately filed an appeal against this reversal, escalating the dispute to Switzerland's Federal Court. This protracted legal battle over the very access to evidence has consumed years, preventing the Basel prosecutors from advancing any substantive aspects of the fraud allegations against Mueller and his co-conspirators. The legal entanglement highlights the sophisticated tactics sometimes employed by alleged fraudsters to delay or derail investigations.

Peter Mueller has consistently maintained that Ad Pack Pro did not operate as a Ponzi scheme, asserting the business was "run seriously." This public stance directly contradicts the nature of the criminal investigation and the numerous victim complaints. He previously issued legal threats against the publication "Daily Exposed" after it characterized Ad Pack Pro as an "adcredit Ponzi." His refusal to acknowledge the scheme's structure or its collapse as fraudulent activity has added to the frustration of victims and investigators alike.

In the aftermath of Ad Pack Pro's failure, OneVision Holding AG, the initial Swiss corporate entity, was reportedly abandoned. A new corporate structure, OneVision Europe BV, subsequently emerged, this time incorporated in the Netherlands. While Peter Woerz is listed as the head of this new Dutch entity, Mueller continues to hold a position as its Managing Director. This deliberate shift in corporate registration from Switzerland to the Netherlands introduces additional layers of jurisdictional complexity, potentially hindering cross-border enforcement and asset recovery efforts for Swiss authorities.

The full financial impact on investors remains largely unquantified, with the total amount of funds allegedly misappropriated by Mueller and his associates still unknown. When Swiss media outlets attempted to question Mueller about the failed scheme and the ongoing investigation, he declined to comment, stating he "wasn't ready to answer any questions." The pending decision from the Swiss Federal Court regarding the evidence dispute will be critical in determining whether the Basel Public Prosecutors Office can finally resume its efforts to bring the Ad Pack Pro case to resolution.