Eduardo de Veer, Aruba-Orco Bank, Aruba Government, Holland Government Apply Business Strategies

Lease Agreement Renaissance-Aqua Spa

For any Bank to put money at risk to this Lease contract language puts Aruba-Orco Bank into a very specific category of Banking Integrity and Ethics. As an established Financial Institution Aruba-Orco Bank seem suspiciously incompetent according to the evidence that has been presented so far in the Aqua Spa case. Could it be that it’s the roll they have been relegated to play to distance them from their acceptance of that Predatory Lease Contract and the eventual suspected illegal selling of that 3 Million Dollar Spa for $40K to Eduardo De Veer? He was the author of that Predatory Lease and who allegedly boycotted the Spa to speed the squeeze process up so he could then take it over in a ready to go finished turnkey brand new state?

Aruba-Orco Bank looks suspiciously like one part of at least a two part suspected criminal business plan. Their job was too probably locate and groom a viable client that had capital and wealth (Collateral) that they could gain access to once they had a signature on the loan contract. Then they could close the business with the help of the Landlord who helps drive the collateral into the Bank’s hands. The second cog of the wheel then is suspected to be Eduardo De Veer the Business owner of the leased property. In this instance Eduardo De Veer personally called and asked the Plaintiffs to build a Spa in his Hotel then demanding that up to 2 million be invested eventually purchased that same Spa for 40K in a suspected sham auction less than 20 months later.

The quiet supporting casts in the suspected con are p[possibly the judicial system, attorneys, accountants and governments of Aruba, Curacao, Dutch Antilles and Holland. The Governmental agencies are strangely silent as the integrity of Commerce and Banking come into question this writer suspects that again the story will be swept under much like the investigation of the Alabama girl, Natalee Holloway. All who are in the money stream of this system wash each other’s hands. It’s a team effort to tap you and your wealth while covering each other’s back. Don’t think you can beat the system as even if they are guilty they still look to control the courts and the Governments all the way seemingly to Holland as they all are aware yet remain silent.

Since the predatory Lease was taking too long to kill the business, it’s suspected that the alleged boycotting by Eddie De Veer Junior was to help speed things along. In the end that didn’t work so the Bank allegedly just came in without warning or legal authority closed it anyway outside of any law or legal proceeding. Then Eddie De Veer terminated the lease and denied access in a suspected criminal move following the closure. Then in a comical turnabout a week later Eddie De Veer told the plaintiffs you have to get back in here now and operate your Spa or we’re going to terminate the lease again? This type of behavior continues by these alleged criminals as the suspicious parties began to figure out they have been caught in a potential criminal act that might expose their alleged con game that seems to be marching its way through Aruba gathering the wealth of anyone whom dares to enter into business or comes into contact with these players.

While the Loan contract specifically states that all disputes arising from the loan shall be handled in Curacao Court, still Aruba Bank has gone outside the contract they produced and presented and the law and are using Aruban court now where they have alleged connections to continue to apply pressure on the Skin Care business of Mena’s here in Aruba all the while the fence is closing in on Aruba-Orco Bank as they are beginning to feel the pressure of the looming verdict.

They have made up to 10 visits to Mena’s and have spent as long as 3 hours at her Beauty Salon disrupting clients and staff, threatening and demanding while the process using a bailiff is just a matter of dropping off papers and getting a signature. Marilyn Koch the bailiff even called police and used them also to threaten and scare the plaintiffs. The plaintiff asked the police to check the validity of the papers and what the bailiff was demanding. After revue the Police told the Bailiff your paperwork is not complete. You have no right to what you are asking for and sent the bailiff off the property. Aruba-Orco Bank continues to harass the business in Aruba even though the Curator and Judge in Curacao have determined they have no legal right to do so. Their attorney has cowered under the pressure from Aruba Bank and is of little help in this manner so far.

If you decide to conduct business in Aruba or the Dutch Antilles this is possibly what awaits you. Plan on at least $100,000 for attorneys who at best are nothing more than an extension of an alleged criminal system and will lie down while they take your money. You will come into contact with what seems to be a Kangaroo type court that protects the alleged operation. You think the courts are working for justice but you may find yourself in a system where they gladly take your money but in the end you will lose as they will just appeal and the courts will wink there eye and wait for the next victim to

arrive into their courts. I think there are good judges in the system. In this case in Curacao it looks as though this Judge Van Schendel is a rock solid has integrity and will seek justice.

Contract wording determines intent. In this particular instance the Lease Agreement is the cornerstone of the risk that was being assessed by the Banking Institution lending the funds. Many other factors including the borrowers business experience, the history of the Landlord and his business approach, the economy and projected growth, the value of the project once completed and its Loan to value ratio. L to V. No Bank lends 1.2 million to a project then in 2 years sells that project to the Hotel that was boycotting them for 76K or less than 6% of their own money they put at risk or 3% of the total investment made? There is suspiciously more to this. It’s suspected the Bank actually worked some kind of a reasonable negotiated price with Eduardo and both settled on a fair price for that World Class Spa under the table. Banks simply don’t give away their Investments for 3% of the invested value 20 months after the loan is originated. Aruba-Orco Bank held the fiduciary position of knowledge, trust, tools and experience to adequately assess and understand all the risks being taken more so than anyone in this contract.

When Sharon Frankel of Aruba Bank asked Emile in late 2010 how could you have signed such a lease agreement had she forgotten she is the Executive Director of the Bank and sat on that board that assessed the risk in that loan application and read that Lease agreement? I suspect it was a attempt to blame the plaintiffs. When Aruba-Orco Bank asked for that Lease agreement so their board could interpret that lease they responded to the plaintiffs that the lease was good but we need to meet and talk about collateral. By their actions they showed their intent to move forward in the face of a lease agreement guaranteed to kill the business. By not discussing the language of the Lease Agreement with the plaintiffs or the risks it brought into play the Bank was saying that the lease and its language was of no concern but the collateral was? In what civilized country are Banks allowed to acquire wealth solely through writing loans to create a Fraud situation to collect collateral?

Look at the numbers below. In 4.1 is enough information for a Bank to just say no to this agreement and activate a law change if they do not exist in Aruba to protect borrowers. To keep it simple the first Million Dollars grossed not net Eduardo De Veer received approximately $280 K. That is before any profit is made or the employees get

paid, benefits and employee taxes are paid, and product is purchased. No business could withstand a 28% chop off the top of the gross much less the net.

How can these contracts have any Bank money being put at risk against them? They are illegal and outlawed in all parts of any civilized Business-Banking Society. No business could survive them. This is beyond gross negligence into a suspected criminal conspiracy. How can Aruban courts look at this and not find some instance where the evidence they are seeing continuously crossing their court docket does not upset their sense of justice?

Here are the critical parts of the Aqua Spa-Renaissance Lease Agreement. There are illegal clauses in this lease where the multimillion dollar spa could end up in the hands of Eduardo for nothing? There is no country on earth that has laws that allows that to take place. No Bank takes on this risk unless they are seeking the collateral.

3. TENANT’S FAILURE TO OPEN

In the event that during the term the Tenant fails to take possession and or to open at the start of the lease agreement, the Leased Premises for business fully fixture, stocked and staffed, then the Landlord shall have the right to collect the rent herein provided plus a fee of NAF 1000,- ( say ; one thousand Netherlands Antilles Guilders ) for each calendar day (with each part of a day counting as a full day ) the Leased Premises is not open for business, without prejudice to Landlord’s right to demand performance and/or Landlord’s right to claim damages/loss of profit.

4. RENT, COMPENSATION, ENTERTAINMENT, ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION

4.1 TENANT shall pay for the first year a minimum base fee of US $ 40.000 (say; forty thousand US Dollars) per year. If gross sales are more than $ 420.000 (say; four hundred and twenty thousand US dollars) the first year fee will be $ 60.000 (say; sixty thousand US dollars) excluding the sales tax, currently 5%. All amounts will be paid in monthly installments, excluding the sales tax currently 5 %. For the following years the minimum base fee will be $ 60.000 (say; sixty thousand US dollars) per year, excluding the sales tax currently 5 %. The monthly installment will be then equal to $ 5.000 (say; five thousand US dollars), excluding the sales tax currently 5 %. In the event the Agreement begins or ends on a partial month basis, then a pro- rate amount shall be due. TENANT shall pay an additional fee (“Percentage fee “) as follows; between zero and $ 420.000 (say ; four hundred and twenty US dollars ) ; ten percent ( 10 % ) of the yearly gross sales, between $ 420.000 (say ; four hundred and sixty thousand US dollars); fifteen percent (15 %) of the yearly gross sales, above $ 560.000 US dollars ; twenty percent ( 20 % ) of the yearly gross sales, excluding the sales tax , currently 5 %. The definition of gross sales for the purpose of this agreement is; all sales generated through the Spa facility excluding sales tax and additional service charges if distributed to employees. At the end of each year reconciliation will take place of the realized gross sales and settlement for the additional fees. (

The monthly fee for Entertainment, Advertising and Promotion amounts during the initial term to USD 1.420,- (say ; one thousand four hundred and twenty US dollars ) excluding the sales tax, currently 5 %. The amount mentioned above will be paid in advance on the first of each month by automatic bank transfer to the account of the landlord commencing as herein provided, without any set off or deduction whatsoever. The prorated “Percentage fee “will be paid within 15 days after months end.

.4.2 In derogation of article 6.43 and article 6.44 of the Civil Code of the Netherlands Antilles, any Payment of the Tenant will be attributed to the outstanding rent.

4.3 In derogation of article 6.43 and article 6.44 of the Civil Code of the Netherlands Antilles, Landlord

is entitled to attribute a payment of Tenant to an outstanding debt.

4.4 The rent and other fees may be adjusted, with the cost of living index factor for the last 12 (say;12 Months)

der·o·ga·tion [ dèrrə gáysh'n ]

1.deviation: a deviation from a rule or law, especially one specifically provided for

2.exemption from rule: an exemption from a law or ruling given to a state

3.disparagement: the act of belittling or criticizing somebody or something

4.5 If Tenant shall fail to pay any of the above at the due date, Tenant shall be obligated to pay a late payment charge equal to 10 % (say ; ten per cent ) of the amount due, with a minimum of NAF 100,- (say ; one hundred Netherlands Antilles Guilders ) whichever is greater, per calendar, per Month from the date when the amount became due until the date of payment.

4.6 In addition to the penalty charge as referred to in section 3.6 on every occasion when an amount due is not paid an interest of 2 % (say; two per cent ) per month will apply from the first date due until the day of payment.

4.7 It is expressly understood that any failure to comply with any and all payments on their due date Constitutes breach of Contract and authorizes the Landlord to evict the Tenant without further recourse by Tenant.

4.8 The acceptance by Landlord of a payment for a lesser amount with an endorsement or statement hereon, or upon any letter accompanying such payment, that such lesser amount is payment in full, shall be given no effect, and Landlord may accept such payment without prejudice to any rights or remedies which Landlord may have against Tenant. In case of a devaluation of the official exchange rate of the Netherlands Antilles Guilder versus the United States Dollar, all the above amounts shall be adjusted accordingly to compensate for the loss of value of the Netherlands Antilles Guilder.

4.9 It is expressly understood that any and all references to payments, fees, penalty charges, or fines in this Lease agreement are excluding sales tax, which is currently 5 %.

5. SECURITY DEPOSIT

5.1 The Tenant shall deposit USD 25.000 (say ; twenty five thousand US Dollars ) including the sales tax, currently 5 % upon signing of contract as security deposit for the full and faithful performance by Tenant of all terms, covenants and conditions of this lease agreement, Landlord shall have the right, but not the obligation, to apply any part of the to cure and default of Tenant, and if Landlord does so, Tenant shall upon demand deposit with Landlord the amount so applied so that Landlord shall have the full deposit on hand at all times during the term of this Lease agreement.

5.2 The deposit will bear no interest.

5.3 The deposit shall also apply to any extension of the lease agreement including any amendments there to.

5.4 Tenant shall not be entitled to set- off any payments against the deposit.

5.5 After any upward review of the rental price or other payment obligations under this lease agreement, Tenant is obliged to deposit at first written request of Landlord for an additional amount adjusted to the new payment obligations, provided however that the additional deposit reflects 5.1 ratio to the base fee as defined in 4.1.

5.6 The security deposit under this lease shall not be assigned or encumbered by the Tenant without the written consent of the Landlord.

5.7 Should Tenant comply with all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Lease and promptly pay all of the amounts due hereunder as they fall due and other sums payable by Tenant to Landlord hereunder, the deposit shall be returned in full to Tenant at the end of the term of this Lease, any extension, or at the earlier termination of this Lease.

5.8 The Landlord shall have the right to transfer the lease and in such case shall also have the right to transfer the security deposit to the new Landlord and Landlord doing the transferring shall be released by Tenant from all liability for the return of such security deposit and Tenant shall look solely to the new Landlord for the return of the security deposit.

6. OPTION TO RENEW THE LEASE

While this lease is in full force and effect, provided the Tenant is not in default in the performance of any of the terms, covenants, and conditions thereof. Tenant shall have the right or option to extend the original term of this lease for a two terms of five (5) years. Such an extension or renewal of the original term shall be upon terms, covenants and conditions to be negotiated. Notice of the Tenant’s intention to exercise the option must be given to the Landlord in writing by registered mail at least six months prior to the expiration date of the original term of this lease. If no notice to exercise the option is given

by the Tenant for the period set forth above, the lease shall terminate at the end of the original term, ipso jure, without any judicial judgment, when the Landlord shall have notified the Tenant by letter that it wishes this dissolution in pursuance of article 3.296 et seq and article 6.265 et seq of the Civil Code of the Netherlands Antilles, without further notice, in which event the tenant is bound to surrender and deliver the leased premises on the expiration date of this lease agreement. The option on the part of the Tenant herein contained for an extension of this lease shall not be deemed to give the Tenant any option for any further extension beyond the first extend.

7. PURCHASES BY HOTEL GUESTS THROUGH ROOM CHARGE

Tenant shall permit Hotel guests to charge purchases to such guests Hotel room accounts providing the following steps shall have taken place.

a. Landlord shall provide Tenant with a POS system, together with all hardware equipment and software programmed into the POS system. Landlord shall remain the owner of such POS system. Tenant hereby acknowledges to have received training and the manual for the proper operation of the POS system.

b. Tenant shall verify that the hotel guest has a valid Hotel id.

c. Tenant shall receive verification of the guests registration at the Hotel and authorization for such guests to charge purchases from the Premises to the guests’ Hotel accounts through the POS system.

d. Upon authorization of the guests purchase through the POS system, Landlord shall pay to

Tenant the full amount of such purchase less an administration charge of five percent (5 %) within five (5) business days of the date of the purchase.

e. It is understood and agreed that no set-off or deduction of the purchase amounts against rent and other compensations due from the Tenant to Landlord shall take place.

f. It is understood and agreed between the parties that any amounts disputed by the Hotel guest or amount deemed by the Hotel Controller to be uncollectible shall be for the account of Landlord.

23.4 If the Tenant ends its use of the Leased Premises prematurely, the Landlord shall be entitled to obtain access to and take over possession of the Leased Premises at the Tenants expense, with no right to compensation accruing to the Tenant.

23.5 Any property not removed shall be deemed to have been abandoned by Tenant and may be retained or disposed of by the Landlord as Landlord shall desire.

23.6 The Landlord shall not be liable to make any payment for items not removed. Items not already removed, may be removed at the Tenants expense.

23.7 Unless otherwise agreed in writing between the Landlord and the Tenant, the Tenant shall in no circumstances be entitled to leave behind any items in the Premises after the end of the lease agreement awaiting a response to the question as to whether an ensuing Tenant is likely to want to take

over these items. If the Tenant fails to comply with this provision, the Landlord shall be entitled, at its own discretion, to have the items in question destroyed immediately, at the Tenants expense, or else to appropriate these items to its own use and, if so desired, to sell them and retain the proceeds of sale and also to have the Premises restored to the condition as specified in article 20.1. The Premises must be inspected by the parties jointly, in good time before the end of the lease agreement or the end of the use. A report of this inspection shall be prepared by the parties and shall record the findings in relation to the condition of the Premises. This report shall also record which work still has to be done at the Tenants expense in relation to repairs apparently required in terms of the report and any maintenance accomplished. The inspection and the preparation and signing of the report shall be affected either by the parties or by their appointed representatives. The parties will not be able to challenge the authority of such representatives after the event.

26. Tenant is barred from claiming damages or loss of profit as a result of the termination of the lease agreement, as referred to in article 23.1

30. NOTICE OF ATTACHMENT, BANKRUPTCY

The Tenant commits himself to give written notice immediately to the Landlord of any attachment made on the immovable or movable goods of the Tenant or parts thereof of any presentation of his bankruptcy petition, if he files a petition for an official moratorium and in case he should be placed under guardianship, and also commits himself to grant inspection of the present agreement forthwith to the bailiff who makes the attachment, the Trustee/Curator or the Administrator.

32. EFFECT OF HOLDING OVER BY THE TENANT

32.1 If expiration or other termination of the term of this lease as provided for in this lease agreement, the Tenant holds over and does not vacate the Leased Premises and/or refuses to hand over the keys of the Leased Premises to the Landlord, the Tenant shall forfeit to the Landlord and immediately payable penalty to the amount of NAF 1.000,- (say ; one thousand Netherlands Antilles Guilders ) per calendar day for …….

Landlord after the expiration or termination of this lease agreement which amount(s) will be immediately payable without any demand or notice of default being made

36. GENERAL PENALTY CLAUSE

If Tenant is in breach of a condition/obligation of the lease agreement, then the Tenant shall, if no other penalty is specified, be liable to pay to the Landlord an immediately payable fine of NAF. 1000,- (say ; one thousand Netherlands Antilles Guilders ) per calendar day for every calendar day ( a part thereof included ) during which the Tenant continues in default. The foregoing is without prejudice to Landlord’s right to demand performance and Landlord’s right to full compensation in so far as the losses exceed the penalty imposed.

Thinking of visiting Aruba? This case is a perfect example of how you can be taken for a spin on a system that will throw you and your finances in turmoil. Aruba is not the USA or Europe. The Bank

and Hotel could appeal this for an additional 10 years. The plaintiffs and their investors have lost upwards of 2 million US dollars that is now locked into this and growing. Aruba-Orco Bank, Eduardo De Veer or the system don’t care as they have the Spa and these people tied up in court forever. Do you and your peace of mind a big favor. JUST STAY AWAY FROM THIS COUNTRY AND ITS SYSTEM, This is just my opinion but YOU’LL BE BETTER OFF.