Articles Posted in Ponzi Scams

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is charging Increase Investments Inc., Spirit Investments, and Scott Bottolfson with securities fraud. The CFTC contends that the defendants solicited about $14 million from 30 individuals for investments in two commodity trading pools that traded options on commodity futures and commodity futures contracts. Increase and Spirit allegedly ran the pools. The commission is seeking restitution for the investment fraud victims, fines, the return of ill-gotten gains, trading and registration bans, and permanent injunctions against future violations of federal commodities laws.

The CFTC contends that from 2002 through August 2010, Bottolfson made false and misleading statements to draw in prospective investors. He is accused of promising a 20% fixed-rate return and making it appear as if the commodity futures investments were not only guaranteed, but also that they protected, risk-free, and profitable.

Investors went on to sustain about $845,000 in trading losses. About $2.97 million had been placed in the commodity pool trading accounts. The CFTC is accusing Bottolfson of allegedly misappropriating about $11 million of investors’ money to pay pool participants their “profits,” as well as cover some of his personal expenses.

U.S. District Judge David Hittner has postponed the criminal trial of Texas financier R. Allen Stanford so that he can undergo detoxification from his medication addiction. Three psychiatrists had testified that he is incompetent to stand trial after getting hooked on anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medications.

Stanford, the ex-head of Stanford Financial Group, is accused of running a $7 billion Ponzi scam. He, his companies, and other ex-executives, allegedly bilked investors through Stanford International Bank Ltd’s sale of certificate deposits. Stanford has been indicted on 21 criminal counts of wrongdoing. The US Securities and Exchange Commission also has a Texas securities fraud case against Stanford. Others who were named defendants in that case: Stanford International Bank (SIB), which is located in Antigua, Stanford Group Company (SGC), an investment adviser and broker-dealer located in Houston, Stanford Capital Management, an investment adviser, Stanford Financial Group chief investment officer, Laura Pendergest-Holt, and SIB chief financial officer James Davis.

Stanford has been in federal custody without bail because he is considered a flight risk. According to Stanford’s criminal defense team, prison doctors gave him the meds.

Psychiatrist Victor Scarano, who was retained by Stanford’s team, was among those who testified. He said that for a year Stanford has been taking 3 milligrams of clonazepam daily and that this has caused the 60-year-old to feel drowsy and suffer from lack of energy. He has also had a difficult time concentrating on his tasks. Usually, the normal dosage for this anti-anxiety drug is 1 milligrams a day and for no more than two weeks. Stanford is also taking the anti-depressant mirtazapine.

Scarano contends that Stanford sustained a traumatic brain injury when a prisoner assaulted him in September 2009. The psychiatrist believes that Stanford will need anymore from three to six months to kick his anti-anxiety drug addiction. Meantime, federal prosecutor Andrew A. Warren has suggested that Stanford faked his symptoms.

Prosecutors believe that Stanford can receive the treatment he needs while in federal prison, but Stanford’s criminal defense team wants him hospitalized at a private facility in the Houston area. His lawyers want his criminal trial delayed for two years so that they have enough time to prepare his defense.

Related Web Resources:
Read the SEC’s complaint (PDF)

Judge orders Stanford get drug treatment, Houston Chronicle, January 11, 2011
Financier Is Described as Addicted to Medicine, NY Times, January 7, 2011
Stanford Group. Co., Stockbroker Fraud Blog, February 22, 2009
Texas Securities Fraud, Stockbroker Fraud Blog Continue Reading ›

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel has ordered Securities America Inc. and broker Randall Ray Talbott to pay an investor nearly $1.2 million in damages over the sale of allegedly fraudulent Medical Capital notes. Claimant Josephine Wayman had charged the respondents with a number of actions, including securities fraud, deceit, breach of fiduciary duty, industry rules violation, financial elder abuse, and negligence. Ameriprise Financial Inc. owns Securities America.

The award includes $734,000 in compensatory damages, $250,000 in punitive damages, and $171,000 in expert witness and legal fees. Punitive damages are not common in FINRA arbitration awards.

Dozens of other claimants are pursuing securities claims against Securities America over the sale of private placements prior to the financial collapse in 2008. The securities divisions of Montana and Massachusetts are among those suing the broker-dealer. Meantime, Securities America has said that Medical Capital Holdings Inc., which issued the private placements, is the one that should be held liable for investors’ financial losses.

From 2003 to 2008, dozens of independent broker-dealers sold private Medical Capital notes, with Securities America considered the biggest seller at nearly $700 million. The private placements raised $2.2 billion. Unfortunately, many of the medical receivables that were supposed to be underlying the notes were in fact non-existent. Medical Capital has been accused of running a Ponzi-like scam and using newer investors’ funds to pay promised returns to older investors. Securities America has said that it did not act inappropriately when selling the MedCap notes.

Medical Capital is bankrupt and $1.1 billion of investors’ funds are gone. In 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Medical Capital with securities fraud.

Related Web Resources:

Securities America and Rep to Pay Over $1 Million in FINRA Fraud Case, AdvisorOne, January 5, 2011
Arbitrators hit Securities America, rep with $1.2 million in damages, legal fees over MedCap, Investment News, January 3, 2011
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Continue Reading ›

Three individuals, Judith Welling, Robert Mick, and Charles Mederrick, have filed a purported securities class action against the Securities and Exchange Commission over financial losses related to investments they made in Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. In their amended complaint, the plaintiffs are seeking damages sustained because of the “grossly negligent acts of the Defendant in connection with the SEC’s deficient review of complaints and information” that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme. Mick, Welling, and Mederrick contend that their investments, which they made over a 16-year period, caused them to suffer “catastrophic” consequences.

In their complaint, the plaintiffs accuse the SEC of “repeatedly and grossly failing to adequately apprise itself” of the facts related to the Madoff Ponzi scam allegations despite the fact that for years there had been numerous complaints. Last year, the SEC’s Inspector General put out a 457-page report detailing the agency’s failure to detect Madoff’s fraud scheme despite the signs.

The class action lawsuit is on behalf of those who invested in Madoff Investment Securities between November 1992 and December 2008 and have filed administrative damage claims seeking to recover damages for the SEC’s alleged negligence. The class could be comprised of more than 100 victims. The plaintiffs’ securities fraud lawyer says that to his firm’s knowledge, this is the first class action filed against the SEC over its handling of Madoff.

Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scam defrauded many institutional and individual investors. Some of these investors lost everything.

Related Web Resources:
SEC Hit With Class Action Alleging Gross Negligence in Oversight of Madoff, BNA Securities Law Daily

Madoff Investors Sue SEC for Incompetence, Daily FInance, November 12, 2010

Bernie Madoff’s $50 Billion Ponzi Scheme, Forbes, December 12, 2008

Continue Reading ›

The U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut has rejected defendants Stewardship Investment Advisors LLC and Marlon Quan’s challenge to the appointment of Poptech LP as the lead plaintiff in a class securities fraud lawsuit filed by investors. The plaintiffs are accusing the investment firm and Quan of violating federal securities law antifraud proscriptions by allegedly misrepresenting that the fund would employ certain investment strategies. The fund is also accused of investing the majority of its assets in a Thomas Petters-operated Ponzi scam. Poptech, not long after filing its class securities lawsuit, published notice in Business Wire stating that there wasn’t a dispute that the notice appropriately notified members of the proposed class about the pending action and the purported class period.

In their challenge, the defendants argued that the notice did not satisfy Private Securities Litigation Reform Act requirements, including failing to completely and “adequately” notify proposed class members of all the claims asserted in the complaint, not providing enough details about the defendants’ alleged misrepresentations, and failing to “adequately facilitate” additional action and inquiry by potential members. The court, however, found that the PSLRA requires just a “reasonably detailed summary” of claims made.

Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LTD LLP Founder and Securities Fraud Lawyer William Shepherd had this to say about the ruling: “If this Court’s decision survives appeal, it could be helpful to victims of securities fraud. Some courts have carried ‘pleading securities fraud with particularity’ to extremes before discovery could even begin. Also, while these pleading requirements apply to class action litigation, many judges have been requiring absurd pleading requirements in all types of securities actions. Hopefully, fewer defrauded investors will be thrown out of court in the future based on pleading technicalities.”

Continue Reading ›

M37 Investments LLC, M25 Investments Inc., Jeffery Lyon, and Scott Kear Sr. have settled for $16.2 million Commodity Futures Trading Commission charges involving the alleged defrauding of over 200 individuals in a foreign currency scheme. Many of the investment fraud victims were senior investors. The Texas securities fraud agreement was reached between the parties in district court.

The CFTC contends that the defendants solicited about $8 million from approximately 213 individuals to trade off-exchange leveraged foreign currency,
commodity futures contracts, and forex options. The commission says that between December 2007 and September 2009, investors in Texas, West Virginia, Maryland, and Mississippi, and other states were solicited for the trades. Many of the seniors who were targeted were solicited through their churches.

The defendants are accused of guaranteeing investors renewal bonuses, if they reinvested, in addition to guaranteed interest payments on investments. The investors were also allegedly told that “profitable trading” would garner returns. Unfortunately, what ended up happening is that most of the investors’ funds didn’t go toward trading and what was traded resulted in substantial losses.

CFTC says that the few funds that M35 and M25 paid to investors was money that had come from other clients. Because of this, CFTC contends, the two firms ended up running Ponzi scams. The agency also is accusing the defendants of covering up the securities fraud with monthly statement accounts that gave clients the false impression that they were making the 2% monthly interest that they had been promised.

Jointly and severally the defendants will pay $7.404 million in restitution. The two companies will jointly and severally pay a fine of $7.1 million. Lyon’s fine is $375,00 and Kear will pay $1.4 million.

Related Web Resources:

Federal Court Orders More than $16.2 Million in Customer Restitution and Monetary Penalties against Texas Defendants Scott P. Kear, Sr., Jeffery L. Lyon and their Firms in CFTC Anti-Fraud Action, CFTC, October 27, 2010
Read the Complaint (PDF)

Texas Securities Fraud, Stockbroker Fraud Blog
Institutional Investor Securities Blog
Continue Reading ›

According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, under federal securities law a broker-dealer can be liable as a control person if one of its registered representatives is involved in a Ponzi scam even if the scheme was channeled through a separate entity. The court issued its ruling in Lustgraaf v. Behrens last month. In making his decision, Judge Michael J. Melloy reinstated the investors’ control person claims against Sunset Financial Services Inc. and didn’t join the other circuits in making culpable participation by a defendant a requirement in a control-person liability action.

Melloy said that even though the Ponzi scheme didn’t take place through Sunset, the broker-dealer is the one that gave scammer Bryan S. Behrens access to the markets. Melloy says that Sunset had the duty to monitor Behrens’ activities. It was in 2008 that the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained a temporary restraining order against Behrens and National Investments Incorporated. The SEC accused Behrens of raising more than $6 million from some 20 investors through promissory notes. He and National Investments, which he controls, also are accused of falsely claiming that the high percentage of interest payable on the notes would come from the lending of investors’ funds to other people at a high interest rate when actually the assets belonging to newer investors were used to pay off current clients.

A number of the investors sued Behrens, Kansas City Life Insurance Company, and its wholly owned subsidiary Sunset. They argued that the defendants should be held liable for Behrens actions on claims of apparent authority, state and federal control-person liability, and respondeat superior.

In reversing the previous ruling, the court rejected the broker-dealer’s claim that under the 1934 Securities Exchange Act Section 20 no control person liability could come from Behren’s use of National, which is an entity unrelated to Sunset. The court, however, did affirm that the control person claims against Kansas City Life were lacking.

Related Web Resources:
LUSTGRAAF v. Behrens, Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit 2010

1934 Securities Exchange Act Section 20, SEC.gov, (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

A number of FINRA arbitration claims have been filed accusing former Linsco Private Ledger (LPL) financial advisor Raymond Londo of running a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme to defraud investors. The claims allege fraud, conversion, misrepresentation and omissions, and negligence. LPL is accused of failing to supervise, discover, and stop the investment fraud scheme within a reasonable amount of time even though there were numerous signs, such as red flags and customer complaints, to indicate that Londo should have been more closely supervised or even fired.

Per the FINRA statement of claim, for nearly 10 years Londo accepted funds from LPL clients. He told them that he was investing their money in an LPL account where he could help them avail of exclusive investment opportunities. The former LPL financial adviser would then take the money he was supposed to invest and used it to support his lavish lifestyle and gambling addiction.

Linsco finally fired Londo in March 2008, but by then funds belonging to 95% of the victims had been stolen. Londo’s victims, located in different parts of the US, included his own neighbours, family members, and fellow country club members.

Soon after the Ponzi scam was discovered, Londo died.

LPL is one of the largest brokerage firms in the US. The alleged Ponzi scam surrounding Londo is not the first time the broker-dealer has been linked to securities fraud allegedly committed by one of its employees. In 2002, FINRA awarded more than $500,000 to an investor who claimed investment losses because LPL did not properly supervise one of its independent brokers.

In 2008, LPL Financial and Michael McClellan, one of its ex-brokers, lost a $1.8 million arbitration claim accusing them of securities fraud, violation of securities laws, unauthorized tradings, breach of fiduciary duties, and other violations.

Related Web Resources:
Former Financial Advisor Faces Stock Fraud Arbitration over Multi-Million Dollar Ponzi Scheme, Lawyers and Settlements, April 9, 2010
Securities Fraud Law Firm Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LTD LLP Investigates Ray Londo, Londo Financial Group, and Linsco Private Ledger For Improper Lending/Borrowing of Client Funds, October 20, 2008 Continue Reading ›

On Monday, the victims of Robert Bentley’s $1 billion Ponzi scam suffered a setback when a federal appeals court overturned a $32.7 million jury verdict against Peninsula Bank of Delray Beach, its ex-executive vice president, Joseph Marzouca, Southeastern Securities, Inc., and its president Theodore Benghiat. The defendants are accused of helping to keep Bentley’s Ponzi scheme going.

Per court documents, Entrust Group and Bentley Financial Services Inc. misled investors by making them believe they were buying federally insured CD’s when they were actually buying unregistered IOU’s. David H. Marion, the receiver of Bentley’s companies in Paoli, Pennsylvania, says the Ponzi scam would have fallen apart much sooner without the defendants’ help.

The jury found that the brokerage firm and the bank either helped or conspired with Bentley to defraud investors. They said Southeastern Securities and Benghiat should pay almost $19.7 million and Peninsula and Marzouca should pay approximately $13.1 million.

The number of Ponzi scams that fell apart increased by nearly four times in 2009, compared to the year, before resulting in over $16.5 billion in investor losses. This figure comes from the Associated Press, which analyzed Ponzi schemes in all US states.

Additional findings from the AP analysis:

• Over 150 Ponzi schemes fell in 2009 • 40 scams collapsed in 2008 • Allen Stanford’s $7 billion international Ponzi scam and Scott Rothstein’s $1.2 billion scheme were among the larger plots that fell apart last year
Bernard Madoff’s $65 billion Ponzi scam wasn’t calculated into last year’s figures because he was arrested at the end of 2008.

In addition to increased enforcement efforts, the economic collapse can be credited with the discovery of many schemes that may have otherwise gone undetected. The number of people willing to invest in new ventures went down in 2009 while current investors rushed to pull out their money. As Ponzi scammers rely on new investors to not only pay the old investors but also fund their expensive lifestyles, many schemes collapsed. The discovery of Madoff’s Ponzi scam has also made investors more wary and regulators more alert.

Another scam of note is Tom Petters’ $3.65 billion scheme. Petters used Petters Group Worldwide, LLC to run his Ponzi scam. He is in prison waiting to receive his sentence. He could be sentenced to a life prison term.

In 2009, the Federal Bureau of Investigation opened over 2,100 securities fraud probes. That’s 350 more investment fraud investigations than the number of investment probes that were opened in 2008. The FBI had 651 agents working on high-yield investment fraud investigations last year. Also in 2009, the US Securities and Exchange Commission issued 82% more restraining orders against securities fraud cases than they did in 2008. Ponzi scams now compromise 21% of the SEC’s enforcement workload-up from 9% in 2005.

The number of civil actions (31) that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed last year has more than doubled since 2008. Many securities fraud cases from last year have not yet gone to trial.

Related Web Resources:
AP: Ponzi collapses nearly quadrupled in ’09, Yahoo, December 28, 2009
2009: The Year of the Ponzi, ABC News
Charles Ponzi
Continue Reading ›

Contact Information