Posts mit dem Label Stanford investors werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label Stanford investors werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen

Mittwoch, 23. Januar 2013

The District Court Rules in Favor of the Receiver in His Claim to Recover Net Winnings Paid to Stanford "Net Winner" Investors

January 23, 2013
By U.S. Receiver (Ralph Janvey)
On January 23, 2013, the District Court entered a summary judgment order in favor of the Receiver finding that the Receiver is entitled to recover from Stanford investors any funds they were paid in excess of the principal they deposited in the Stanford fraud scheme. The Court ruled that the net winner investors' contracts with Stanford are void and unenforceable and that the investors did not provide value for amounts they received from Stanford in excess of the amounts they deposited. As a result, the Court held that that allowing the net winner investors "to keep their fraudulent above-market returns in addition to their principal would simply further victimize the true Stanford victims, whose money paid the fraudulent interest." Although the District Court's order is not a final judgment, the District Court certified the order for appeal, which means that it will likely be appealed in the near future to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

The Receiver is pleased with the Court's ruling today that those investors who profited from the Stanford ponzi scheme do not have the right to retain those profits. This decision represents an important milestone in the very long and difficult process of unwinding the massive Stanford ponzi scheme. In his ruling, Judge Godbey agreed with the Receiver's position that the fictitious interest payments that Stanford made to investors on their Stanford International Bank certificates of deposit simply represented money taken from one set of investors and paid to another; it was just part of Stanford's efforts that kept the ponzi scheme going for well over a decade.

Based on his investigation, the Receiver identified over $220 million in net winnings or fictitious interest that was paid to over 800 investors. The Receiver intends to use this ruling to pursue recovery of these funds for the benefit of the thousands of investors who sustained significant losses on their Stanford CDs. Once recovered, these funds can be distributed to the victims of the Stanford fraud, which would be in addition to the $55 million that the Receiver has already proposed for distribution.

The Receiver is continuing to pursue recovery through litigation of other funds that can be distributed to victims, and he continues to work cooperatively with the U.S. Department of Justice and the Antiguan-appointed Liquidators to reach a final agreement to make available for distribution approximately $300 million in funds and assets currently frozen in foreign countries.

Read more: http://sivg.org/article/2013_Claim_Net_Winnings_Investors.html


Visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum http://sivg.org/forum/

Donnerstag, 5. April 2012

Stanford Judge Lets Receiver Raise Fee, Retains 20% Discount

April 5, 2012
By Andrew Harris and Edvard Pettersson
The court-appointed receiver for R. Allen Stanford can bill his time starting this year at 2012 rates with a 20 per cent discount in spite of objections by Stanford investors who haven't received any money so far.

U.S. District Judge David C. Godbey in Dallas, in an order yesterday, imposed a 10 per cent "holdback" on out-of-pocket expenses. In a separate order today, Godbey approved the payment of $1.6 million in fees and expenses that the receiver, Dallas lawyer Ralph Janvey, had requested and said he could apply later for the held-back amount of $382,253.

Janvey's outside counsel, Kevin Sadler, argued at a hearing yesterday that the receiver's team has been working at the same pay rates since 2009. Sadler said that Janvey, who regularly charges his clients $500 an hour, has been billing $340 an hour on the Stanford case and then discounting that by 20 per cent.

A federal jury in Houston last month found Stanford, 62, guilty of fraud in what prosecutors said was a $7 billion scheme involving bogus certificates of deposit at his Antigua-based bank. He's scheduled to be sentenced on June 14. Janvey, whom Godbey appointed in February 2009 -- four months before Stanford was indicted -- and his outside professionals, including Baker Botts LLP (1143L), have been paid more than $52 million. That sum doesn't include a court-imposed $16 million hold-back.
RESPONSE OF THE OFFICIAL STANFORD INVESTORS COMMITTEE
The Official Stanford Investors Committee (the "Committee"), respectfully submits this Response to the Receiver's Motion for Approval of Request to Amend Fee Structure and Holdback [Doc. No. 1543].

The Committee, which speaks for the more than 20,000 investor victims of Allen Stanford's Ponzi scheme, opposes the relief requested by the Receiver and his team of professionals. The Receiver's professionals have been well compensated in the 3 years of this Receivership, having collected well in excess of $52 million in fees (with an additional almost $16 million in reserve via the holdback). During this same time period the investor victims have not recovered a single penny as there have been no distributions. Given the current state of this receivership, the Committee cannot agree to giving the Receiver's professionals what is widely perceived within the investor community as a "raise".

Therefore the Committee opposes the relief requested.
Related documents:

Read more: http://sivg.org/article/2012_Judge_Lets_Receiver_Raise_Fee.html


Visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum http://sivg.org/forum/

Mittwoch, 16. Februar 2011

Class action vs. PERSHING LLC, and LOCKWOOD ADVISORS, INC.

February 16, 2011
Calling it the best chance for some investors to recover some of the money they lost in R. Allen Stanford's certificates of deposit, attorneys have sued a clearing broker-dealer for the disgraced financier.

The suit alleges that New Jersey-based brokerage firm Pershing LLC — a subsidiary of the Bank of New York Mellon Corp. — dealt in unregistered securities.

Pershing acted as a middleman between Stanford's Antiguan bank and investors who bought billions of dollars' worth of CDs that federal prosecutors say were bogus.

A similar suit was filed in Dallas federal court on December 08, 2009. Austin residents Susan Blount and Gary and Laurie Spellman are among the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, for which class action status is being sought.

"I feel this is the very best claim that has a chance of recovery" for Stanford investors, said the plaintiffs' lawyer, Joseph Brophy, a partner with Hohmann, Taube & Summers LLP in Austin. In court documents, John Ward, managing director for Pershing's global services business, estimated that more than $500 million flowed through Pershing, starting in 2006. The number of investors during that time isn't yet known, but Ward estimated that more than 1,600 transactions took place.

Brophy said the Stanford CDs qualified as securities under the Texas Securities Act and should have been registered.

Pershing should have been "acutely aware" of that fact, he said, adding that under state securities law, investors are entitled to get their money back.


Visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum http://sivg.org/forum/