Ponzi Scheme

Gana LLP Seeks Relief for Victim of Stanford Ponzi Scheme Against Clearing Broker, Pershing, LLC

March 19, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Over the last several years, we have seen the collapse of frauds and the capture of fraudsters, who have perpetuated a mind-numbing blow to the market and its participants. When we talk about Ponzi Schemes, the first name that springs to mind is, of course, Bernard Madoff. However, two years later authorities honed in on R. Allen Stanford (Stanford) and his fraudulent empire, which may have more far-reaching consequences than people think.

While the ponzi scheme developed and operated by Stanford fleeced investors of “only” eight billion dollars, it was perhaps far more damaging than the Madoff scheme. Why? Because the Stanford case pertains to everybody—not just to Stanford investors, not just the government, and not just the upper echelon of wealthy individuals. The Stanford scheme exploited one of the oldest, safest, and most universally understood financial instruments on the market—the Certificate of Deposit (CDs).

The ultimate reality of the Stanford Financial Group was that it was a Ponzi scheme. Essentially, Stanford and his co-conspirators used the Stanford Financial Group and the promise of high-return CD’s to lure investor money into different Stanford companies, where the funds were then pooled together and used for undisclosed and impermissible purposes. Federal authorities ultimately discovered Stanford’s multi-billion dollar scheme, putting an end to Stanford Financial Group and charging Stanford, civilly and criminally, with multiple counts of fraud. In March 2012, Stanford was convicted on 13 of 14 counts by a federal jury following a six-week trial and approximately three days of deliberation. It was ultimately revealed that the Stanford Financial Group was “selling” CD’s, marketed as low-risk, high return investments, but in reality, were paying distributions with subsequent investments–the prototypical pyramid scheme.

Securities Broker Christopher Orlando Suspended Over Sale of Diversified Lending Group Promissory Notes

January 8, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Christopher Orlando (Orlando) was suspended and fined by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Orlando participated in the sale of approximately $7,000,000 in private securities transactions of promissory notes linked to Diversified Lending Group (DLG) that were not made through his member firm PlanMember Securities Corporation (PlanMember).

FINRA alleged that between March 2007, and July 2008 Orlando marketed Secured Investment Notes in DLG (DLG Notes). According to Orlando’s public disclosures, the DLG notes were supposed to invest funds in distressed real estate and mortgage lending. Investors who filed complaints against Orlando and the brokerage firms that employed him have alleged that in reality the DLG Notes were Ponzi scheme type fraud.

Orlando marketed the DLG Notes to insurance agents and financial advisors who in tum sold the DLG Notes to investors. FINRA alleged that Orlando met with his marketing agents and provided them with information and materials about DLG Notes. In addition, Orlando referred at least eight insurance agents to DLG for training so that they would sell DLG Notes to investors. According to FINRA, Orlando was also directly involved in marketing the DLG Notes to potential investors by speaking at seminars about them.

Have You Been a Victim of Securities Fraud?

November 15, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

How do you know if you have been the victim of securities fraud? The answer to this question usually begins with the feeling that something is not right with your investments. Maybe your broker is all of a sudden dodging your calls or having their subordinate answer their calls. Perhaps your broker told you that an investment would become payable to you at a certain point and despite the fact that the time for payment has long come and past, nothing seems to have happened. Its often hard to believe that the person you trusted with your savings or retirement has lied and let you down.

Securities fraud describes a whole genera of inappropriate investment activity. In some instances the broker may sell a customer a security by falsely representing the properties of the security including its terms by either written or oral statements. The broker may also provide misleading marketing materials in connection with the sales pitch. Under the securities laws misrepresentations or omissions of fact are material if a reasonable investor might have considered the fact important in the making of the investment decision. Thus, brokers have a duty to truthfully disclose all material information to an investor in order to evaluate the recommendation being made.

Other types of securities frauds involve some form of broker theft such as in cases of churning (excessive trading) or Ponzi schemes. In the case of churning, the broker engages in investment trading activity that is excessive and serves little useful purpose and is conducted solely to generate commissions for the broker. While Ponzi schemes involve the diverting of securities funds meant to be used for a certain investment purpose. Instead the funds are diverted from the purpose represented to the investor to another purpose such as a different investment vehicle or straight into the Ponzi schemer’s pocket.

FINRA Finds George Kardaras and Brian Borakowski Sell Echo Canyon, LLC Away From Their Brokerage Firms

August 30, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently entered a default decision against George Alexander Kardaras (Kardaras) and Brian Matt Borakowski (Borakowski) after having alleged that the two brokers perpetrated a Ponzi scheme. FINRA found that the two solicited at least 12 customers over four years to invest more than $665,000 in total in Echo Canyon promissory notes. The notes bore interest rates between 14 to 56 percent and had quarterly, semiannual, and annual maturity dates.

Kardas’ and Borakowski’s scheme involved soliciting customers to purchase promissory notes in Echo Canyon LLC, a limited liability company in Arizona. Kardas and Borakowski told investors that their investment would be used to purchase used vehicles in U.S. auto auctions and shipped to Russia for re-sale. FINRA determined that Kardaras and Borakowski never intended to use the customer funds as represented. Instead, only two automobiles for EchoCanyon in or around late 2007 or early 2008 were actually purchased.

FINRA found that 95 percent of the funds raised, approximately $634,000 were used by the two brokers in order to pay personal expenses, to cover expenses at their employer firms’ branch office businesses, and to make payments to earlier investors in furtherance of the Ponzi scheme.

Gana LLP Investigating Claims Against Success Trade Securities for Sale of Promissory Notes

August 29, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has filed a complaint against Success Trade Securities, Inc (STS) and its CEO and President Fuad Ahmed (Ahmed) accusing them of improperly selling $18 million worth promissory notes. The promissory notes were issued by STS’ parent company Success Trade, Inc. (STI) to 58 investors. The notes were sold primarily to sports athletes in the NFL or NBA.

The FINRA complaint alleges that the STI notes were part of ponzi scheme to simply raise capital and fund STS’ operations while purportedly offering investors 12-26% returns. The investors were not aware of the risks of investing in the STI notes. For example, STS was at all times financially insolvent and could only meet its ongoing expenses by selling more STI notes and by continuing the scheme. Crucial risks such as the viability of the company are material risks that need to be disclosed to investors. The complaint also alleges that STS and Ahmed failed to register the STI notes as a private placement offering as required under Regulation D.

Problems with the notes began to emerge once the STI notes became due in 2012 through 2013. At that time, STS and Ahmed solicited noteholders to roll over or extend the terms of the STI notes at higher interest rates or offered customers an equity interest in STS. The complaint also alleges that in connection with the rollover and extended note sales the firm failed to disclose to some investors that the firm is financially unable to repay the notes that have become due.

Customer Complaints Brought Against Andrew Rosenberg, Stuart Horowitz, NFP Securities, and Securities America Concerning Improper Investments

April 6, 2012 | by Staff Attorney

Andrew Rosenberg and Stuart Horowitz have been accused of selling unsuitable illiquid real estate investments through Andrew Stuart Asset Management, while be associated with NFP Securities, Inc. and Securities America Inc. These real estate investments include the Hennessy Financial Monthly Income Club also known as Capital Solutions Monthly Income Fund (Capital Solutions), Capital Solutions preferred Stock, True North Finance Preferred Stock (Capital Solutions), Warsowe Acquisitions Corp. Series 2 Debentures, Inland America Real Estate Trust, and G REIT, Inc.

The brokers allegedly told their customers that Capital Solutions was a “low risk investment” and it guaranteed a steady return through “short term secured loans.” The brokers also represented that Capital Solutions fund offered investors 12% returns. In one complaint, the brokers allegedly made representations that they were offering low risk investments to a 63-year-old father of five. The brokers went on to say that they too had their investments in Capital Solutions, in order to lure the client to invest. The client ultimately invested $300,000 into Capital Solutions.

Despite the broker’s statements, the investments were high risk and illiquid. In fact, the Capital Solutions (a/k/a Hennessey Fund) was a unregistered hedge fund that was involved in risky real estate loans. In September 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued the Hennessey Fund for being a Ponzi Scheme, whereby old investors in the Hennessey Fund were being paid by new investors. The case is, SEC v. True North Finance Corporation, f/k/a CS Financing Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-3995-DWF/JJK, (D. Minn).