A Moldovan bank is fighting tooth and nail to keep $13 million stolen from a massive Ponzi scheme, even as evidence shows government investigators were closing in on the criminals who stashed it there.
VictoriaBank says a North Carolina court has no right to order it to hand over the Zeek Rewards money. The bank claims the Zeek Receiver should have gone through Moldovan courts instead. That argument might hold water—except for one glaring problem: Moldova's own government was already investigating the PaymentWorld accounts holding the cash.
According to court documents, Moldova's National Center for Anticorruption froze PaymentWorld's VictoriaBank accounts on May 13, 2014. A local district court extended that freeze for 30 days just three days later. By May 30, authorities launched a formal criminal investigation. On June 2, another court order froze the accounts indefinitely.
VictoriaBank complied with every freeze order. The bank knew exactly what it was dealing with: a company under criminal investigation by two governments, connected to an $850 million Ponzi scheme. Yet it kept PaymentWorld's accounts open and operational for nearly two more years.
Then came the real mystery.
On November 2, 2015, VictoriaBank closed PaymentWorld's deposit accounts and drained the current accounts to nearly nothing. Five accounts in different currencies went to zero or near-zero balances. The bank transferred money out of accounts that were supposed to be indefinitely frozen. No activity since.
VictoriaBank's chief legal officer, Corneliu Popovici, signed an affidavit explaining all this to the court. His defense essentially boils down to: we're a well-regarded bank, we followed the freeze orders, and anyway, the American court shouldn't be involved.
What he doesn't explain is how a frozen account gets drained and closed.
Other players in this saga have already caved. Payza isn't fighting the Receiver. PaymentWorld isn't contesting the case. Payza has even filed its own lawsuit against PaymentWorld to recover funds. Everyone's moving toward returning stolen money to victims.
Everyone except VictoriaBank.
The bank stands alone—the only entity actively blocking $13 million in stolen Ponzi proceeds from going back to people who lost their life savings. Even Moldova's government, which investigated these accounts, isn't mounting a legal defense. VictoriaBank is.
🤖 Quick Answer
What was VictoriaBank's legal argument regarding the Zeek Rewards funds?VictoriaBank contended that a North Carolina court lacked jurisdiction to order repatriation of the $13 million. The bank argued the Zeek Receiver should have pursued legal remedies exclusively through Moldovan courts, asserting that domestic judicial channels were the appropriate venue for resolving the frozen assets dispute.
What evidence contradicted VictoriaBank's jurisdictional claim?
Moldova's National Center for Anticorruption had already frozen PaymentWorld's VictoriaBank accounts on May 13, 2014, with a local district court extending the freeze. This demonstrated Moldovan authorities were actively investigating the accounts, undermining the bank's assertion that domestic courts were unavailable or unwilling to address the matter.
🔗 Related Articles
- FFST Group Review: “Placing orders” click-a-button Ponzi
- KOK Play Review: KOK token 200% ROI Ponzi scheme
- Daniel Filho criminal case moved back to Massachusetts
- DexCar Ponzi scheme shut down by Italian authorities
- Alex Reinhardt trying to reboot collapsed Ponzi as Ultima