Search
Most Recent
AdSurfDaily Agape agent American Integrity Aronson asset sales Attorney av bar reg baker bank bank of america Bankruptcy baumann bermudez black diamond blackwell bridge loan bull cattle CD celebrity cftc charity china China Voice church cityfund claims claims process clawback commission commodities commodity pool computer program congress Crown Forex currency death sentence denver diamond bar disgorgement Distribution Dodd-Frank donnan Dreier dunhill e-bullion elderly E-M Management SEC england Fairfield family FBI FDIC Fees female ponzi scheme financial advisor fine FINRA football forex fraud fufta fugitive Full Tilt gift card guilty plea GunnAllen hawaii Heckscher HSBC india invers forex janvey John Morgan JP Morgan kansas ken bell kenzie las vegas lawsuit lawyer libya Lifland machado Madoff Marian Morgan metro dream homes mets milberg millers a game Morgan European Holdings mortgage multiple schemes NCAA Net Winner new jersey notes objection Oxford Patrick Kiley paul burks PermaPave Pettengill Petters Picard poker Ponzi ponzi scheme ponzi scheme database ponzi scheme list Prime Rate profitable sunrise prosun pta puerto rico Rakoff real estate receiver receivership regulation relief defendants religion remission repeat offender restitution Rothstein RRA sec sentencing simmons sipa sipc snelling standing stanford stettin subpoena td bank telexfree treasury bonds treasury strip Tremont Trevor Cook UBS UFTA uga utah venture advisors Wachovia wilpon wire fraud woman zeek zeek rewards zeekler zeekrewards
Social
Recent SEC Releases
Wednesday
Sep042013

Zeek Victims Face Sept 5th Deadline To File Claims

Victims of the $600 million ZeekRewards Ponzi scheme have approximately 24 hours to timely submit a claim to ensure they are afforded a chance to participate in the funds recovered by the court-appointed receiver.  According to receiver Kenneth D. Bell, victims of the largest Ponzi scheme in North Carolina's history face a midnight deadline on September 5th in order for their submission of a proof of claim to be considered timely.  While Bell recently indicated that over 100,000 claims had been submitted thus far, previous estimates pegged the total number of victims as at least 800,000 - meaning hundreds of thousands of potential claims could be at risk of being permanently lost.

The Court approved the Receiver's proposed claims process on May 8, 2013, giving investors until September 5, 2013 to submit claims for review and approval by the Receiver. According to the Update, significant effort was required just to provide the required notice to potentially interested parties.  Due to the sheer amount of potential claimants (the Receiver estimated there were approximately 2.2 million unique User IDs), the Receiver attempted to send 1.7 million emails notifying individuals of their rights under the claims process.  Of these 1.7 million emails, approximately 1.3 million were successfully delivered.  Of the approximately 420,000 emails that were not delivered, the Receiver ended up sending more than 330,000 postcards to physical mailing addresses, as well as over 7,000 postcards to financial institutions that could feasibly hold claims.  

The Receiver opened an online claims portal on May 15, 2013, which was to serve as the central mechanism by which investors could submit claims.  In a recent update, the Receiver indicated he had received nearly 54,000 claims to date.  Including claims marked as "in progress" on the Claims Portal, the aggregate amount of potential claims submitted thus far is approximately $355 million.  This amount slightly exceeds the total amount of funds recovered to date by the Receiver, which is currently approximately $325.1 million.

After the claims portal closes, the Receiver plans to seek court approval of the next phase of the claims process, including the proper method to determine claims and how to deal with claimants who object to the Receiver's claim determination.  It is expected that once the Receiver issues his claim determinations to the respective claimants, he will then seek approval for an interim distribution of a to-be-determined amount.  

The Receiver has posted a list of frequently asked questions on his website here.

The ZeekRewards Claims Portal is here.

 

Tuesday
Sep032013

Authorities Charge Two South Florida Lawyers For Aiding Rothstein Ponzi Scheme

[This article originally appeared on Forbes.com on Friday, August 30, 2013]

Two South Florida lawyers were arrested today and charged with fraud-related charges for allegedly participating in the massive Ponzi scheme run by disgraced Florida attorney Scott Rothstein.  The arrests of Chrstina M. Kitterman and Douglas L. Bates by Internal Revenue Service agents are sure to add new life to continued speculation that Rothstein was not alone in taking in more than $1 billion in a giant Ponzi scheme that would later bankrupt his 70-attorney law firm.  Kitterman and Bates made their first appearances in federal court, and details remain sparse concerning the charges each will face.  Both attorneys were previously named by Rothstein in deposition testimony as having provided assistance in perpetrating parts of his fraud.

Rothstein was arrested in December 2009 after his return from Morocco, where he had been since October after learning the country refused to extradite criminal suspects to the U.S.  Upon returning, Rothstein was charged with operating a $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme that involved the sale of discounted stakes in high-dollar pre-suit settlements of sexual-harassment and whistleblower lawsuits.    While investors were told that they could collect the full amount when the case settled, the reality was that there were no such cases.  Instead, Rothstein masterminded an elaborate Ponzi scheme that catapulted him into a position as a powerful lawyer in the south Florida community, and he flaunted this newfound wealth by buying expensive cars, real estate, and boats.

After his arrest, Rothstein quickly changed his not-guilty plea to a guilty plea, and began cooperating with authorities.  While Rothstein hoped that this cooperation would result in a lighter sentence, a Florida federal judge latersentenced sentenced him to a 50-year term – 10 years more than prosecutors’ recommended sentence.   The sentence was the longest for any Florida Ponzi schemer, and ranked below only the 150-year sentence given to Bernard Madoff and the 110-year sentence handed down to Allen Stanford – both of whose schemes were multiple times larger than Rothstein’s.

In an effort to reduce his sentence, Rothstein continued to cooperate with authorities after the sentence and promised to name those who had provided him assistance.   Indeed, Rothstein painted a tantalizing picture for prosecutors by fingering other lawyers and law enforcement officers.  At several depositions, Rothstein readily offered up others, including Kitterman and Bates.  Kitterman, who formerly worked at Rothstein’s firm, Rothstein Rosenfelt Adler (“RRA”), was said to have impersonated an official of the Florida Bar during discussions with an investor in Rothstein’s scheme.  Rothstein also testified that Bates agreed to sign his name to a letter threatening a discrimination action against a company Rothstein represented in order to inflate his legal bills.

In addition to Kitterman and Bates, Rothstein has also implicated several other RRA lawyers as well as a vice-president at TD Bank.

Monday
Sep022013

Alleged Ponzi Schemer Dies; $10+ Million Still Owed to Victims

A former Sunday school teacher who allegedly used his tax preparation service to dupe victims in a $10 million Ponzi scheme has passed away - just months after a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee warned victims that a 3% - 4% recovery was likely.  Jack Brown, owner of Soddy Daisy-based Brown's Tax Service ("BTS") and frequent preacher/Sunday school teacher at the Sale Creek Church of God, saw his business forced into involuntary bankruptcy in late 2012 amid mounting concerns from clients who had invested over $10 million with him.  While Brown had initially refused to cooperate, recent reports suggested that he had been cooperating with bankruptcy trustee Jerry Farinash.

Using his relationship with clients of BTS, as well as his connections through his Sunday School teaching position, Brown began promising annual returns of up to 15% that were purportedly attainable as a result of his God-given gift as a successful stock day trader.  The investments were memorialized through promissory notes, and while the first promissory note was issued in 1989, the pace quickened in 2003.  By 2012, Brown and BTS had raised more than $10 million from investors.

However, mounting concerns began to materialize in late 2012 about the solvency of Brown's operation.  These concerns were confirmed when a local attorney filed a petition to have BTS placed in bankruptcy, alleging that Brown had been operating a Ponzi scheme that had just collapsed.  Rather than using investor funds to day-trade as promised, Brown was accused of misappropriating millions of dollars to purchase lakefront property that was lavishly outfitted with an indoor gymnasium, a golf simulator, a full bar, various games, several vintage automobiles, and even the authentic floor from the Boston Garden sports arena.  In bankruptcy filings, Brown claimed only $1.4 million in assets while representing a yearly income of less than $30,000.  

After the appointment of a bankruptcy trustee, Brown initially refused efforts to cooperate, citing his failing health.  According to the trustee, Brown "refused to answer questions which would not be protected under the Fifth Amendment" while also claiming that his health has deteriorated to the point where he is movable only by ambulance.   This lack of cooperation soon changed in March 2013, when Brown, appearing at a creditor's meeting telephonically from his hospital bed, confessed to operating the scheme.  However, Brown maintained through his attorney that there was no money to return, because all the victims had not only been paid back, but some had profited handsomely from the scheme - hinting that the victims knew they were not paying taxes on their gains.  

In the months following Brown's confession, the bankruptcy trustee accused Brown's son of participating in the scheme in what was called a "family Ponzi scheme."  Additionally, Brown's wife has since invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination numerous times.  

Thursday
Aug292013

Court Denies Investment Fund's Ponzi Loss Claim Based on Sophistication

Many red flags were waving in 2008. As set forth in detail in the Receiver’s response, there were many indicia that would lead a sophisticated institutional investor to question the prudence of investing in Valhalla. Not only had Nadel been disbarred from the practice of law in New York for dishonesty and fraud, but many judgments were outstanding against him in Sarasota County, Florida, along with divorce proceedings that alleged his defrauding of numerous individuals. With respect to Valhalla, a person disclosed in the private placement memorandum was Michael Zucker, the subject of a cease and desist order. Based on the record in these proceedings, there is no doubt that institutional investors like the Genium entities were placed on inquiry notice and cannot show good faith. 

[Editor's Note: In the interests of full disclosure, the author currently is part of the legal team representing the Receiver in this case and was involved in the instant proceedings.]

In what is believed to be a first in Ponzi scheme jurisprudence, an investment fund that purportedly lost over $1 million in a massive Ponzi scheme has been prohibited from participating in the ensuing claims process based in part on its sophistication and failure to spot "red flags."  In a decision Thursday afternoon, a federal district judge in the Middle District of Florida ruled that the submission of an incomplete proof of claim, as well as the failure to spot the "many red flags" surrounding the investment, could serve as the basis for denying the claim of a Swiss investment entity.  The decision could potentially have widespread ramifications in the niche area of Ponzi scheme litigation, especially in schemes involving a large amount of institutional investors.

The claim was originally submitted during the court-approved claims process stemming from the $330 million Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Arthur Nadel.  While a timely claim was submitted, the claim form was filled out by a Swiss bank that failed to disclose the beneficial (or legal) owner of the investment.  While the Receiver later asked the claimant to submit this information, this request was explicitly refused.  This information was important in evaluating the claim, for it was possible that the claimant (i) could have had multiple accounts; (ii) could have received other funds or transfers from the scheme not specifically tied to their investment, such as commissions; and (iii) could have been an insider or co-conspirator.  When attempts to obtain the information failed, the Receiver recommended denial of the claim, which was later affirmed by the court.

After the court approved the initial denial of the claim, an unrelated investment fund "purchased" the underlying claim, which has been known to occur in larger Ponzi schemes.  The purchasing entity continued to maintain that the claim was timely, and disputed that the original claimant was a sophisticated investment professional.  The Court ruled otherwise, finding that the investment fund was not similarly situated to the hundreds of innocent victims.  

The ruling is important for several reasons.  First, it may mark the first time that a "net loser" instititutional investor had a claim for their losses denied based on their sophistication.  Importantly, there was no "smoking gun," such as an incriminating email or letter; rather, simple due diligence such as a public records search would have shown that the fraudster had been disbarred for fraud, had several money judgments against him, and had previously filed an affidavit claiming he was indigent. An increased adoption of this standard could spur institutional investors to change their due diligence procedures when selecting an investment - especially when those investment procedures previously involved simply choosing funds with high returns.  Second, the ruling confirms that an investor's good faith may be considered in the claims process, and an investor may not blindly make an investment when numerous "red flags" should have put them on notice of the possible illegitimacy of the scheme. Going forward, the decision is likely to be cited for the proposition that institutional investors and non-sophisticated investors are not necessarily "similarly-situated" claimants.

The entire decision is available here:

Claim Order by jmaglich1

Wednesday
Aug282013

TD Bank Sued In New South Florida Ponzi Scheme

A south Florida attorney who disappeared before being arrested on federal bank fraud charges has been accused of perpetrating a million-dollar Ponzi scheme in a recently-filed lawsuit that also includes TD Bank, N.A. as a defendant.  Timothy McCabe, 55, disappeared in early April after being accused of unethical behavior by the Florida Bar, and authorities later discovered that several million dollars was missing from his law firm's trust account.  While McCabe sent cryptic messages alluding to committing suicide, he later returned to face criminal charges.  Now, a recently-filed lawsuit accuses McCabe of misappropriating funds to support a $1.2 million Ponzi scheme.  Also named in the lawsuit is TD Bank, which has already paid out hundreds of millions of dollars since being implicated in another south Florida Ponzi scheme - the infamous $1.4 billion Ponzi scheme perpetrated by disgraced Florida attorney Scott Rothstein. 

McCabe was a partner at Lake Worth law firm McCabe and Samiljan LLC ("M&S"), which advertised itself as a real estate and foreclosure defense law firm.  M&S also served as a title agent for Old Republic Title Insurance Company ("Old Republic"), assisting in the issuance of title insurance policies and serving as a closing agent in real estate transactions.  McCabe was also a managing member of City Title, LLC ("City Title").  

The lawsuit alleges McCabe used his position as principal of City Title and as a signatory on the M&S Escrow Trust account to commingle incoming funds, which often included the deposit of checks in the M&S Trust Account held at TD Bank that were directed to City Title.  McCabe is also alleged to have diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars intended for the satisfaction of client mortgages for unauthorized purposes, including the sustenance of an "investment club" McCabe operated that is alleged to have been nothing more than a Ponzi scheme.  

The complaint asserts Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization ("RICO") charges against McCabe and numerous other defendants, including McCabe's law partner, Old Republic, and M&S.  The Complaint also accuses TD Bank of failing to exercise proper supervision over the M&S Trust Account by allowing McCabe to improperly deposit checks into the account that were made payable to other parties.  TD Bank has been embroiled in numerous lawsuits relating to its role in Scott Rothstein's $1.4 billion Ponzi scheme, which has resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements and one jury verdict.  

A copy of the lawsuit is here.