Guaranteed GICs, no real investments - here's what the evidence shows.
BC's securities regulator has extended a freeze on a firm accused of using new investor money to repay earlier investors.
The British Columbia Securities Commission ruled on July 29, 2026, that a temporary order against Everything Financial Consultants Inc. (EFCI), Everything Financial Group (EFG), and the firm's principal, Peter Cishecki, should stay in place until a full hearing is held and a decision rendered. The commission's panel - Marion Shaw, Warren Funt, and Jason Milne - found the executive director had established a prima facie case of fraud, a threshold that requires evidence sufficient to support the allegation unless disproven, not a final finding of guilt.
The original order was issued July 15, 2026, and the executive director applied the next day to extend it. According to the commission, staff evidence indicated EFCI, EFG, and Cishecki sold debt securities and used new investor money to make principal and interest payments to existing investors, potentially contravening the Act's fraud provisions.
At the center of the case are 32 investment agreements between EFG and investors, with maturity dates starting in September 2026 and a combined value of $9,633,016.85. The products were described to investors variously as term deposits, third-party investments, or GICs, and each carried the same core pitch: a guaranteed return of principal at maturity, a minimum guaranteed rate of return, and the prospect of a higher payout tied to the performance of underlying investments.
The commission said that promise did not hold up. A co-respondent named in the original order, against whom the executive director is no longer seeking an extension, gave sworn evidence that no underlying investments existed and that investor deposits were commingled with EFCI's other funds. Banking records submitted by the executive director showed insufficient assets to repay investors, and the executive director pointed to four instances where deposits from newer investors were used to pay out earlier ones. A video posted to EFG's YouTube channel showed Cishecki promoting similar investment products, and sworn evidence indicated he was responsible for EFCI's business decisions.
"Fraud is the most serious misconduct under the Act," the panel wrote, adding that the evidence appeared to show investors were led to believe their investments were guaranteed "when in fact they were not."
The panel weighed the seriousness of the alleged conduct, the risk of further harm to investors and to market integrity, and the fact that the investigation is ongoing and moving quickly, before concluding that extending the order was necessary and in the public interest.
The extended order bars anyone from trading in or purchasing EFG or EFCI securities, and prohibits EFCI, EFG, and Cishecki from any promotional activity on the firms' behalf, until the matter is fully heard.
For advisors and compliance teams, the case is a reminder to look past reassuring labels like "GIC" or "term deposit" and to ask hard questions when a product promises guaranteed returns plus upside from unnamed underlying investments.
