Six years after Stanford Financial Group’s debacle – families receive pennies; US Receiver and Joint Liquidator Millions of Dollars
COViSAL
For Justice & Restitution
_____________________________________________________
Six years
after Stanford Financial Group’s debacle – families receive pennies; US
Receiver and
Joint Liquidators millions of dollars
Today marks the six-year anniversary of the Stanford’s debacle that
destroyed the lives of thousands of innocent families around the world when on
February 17, 2009, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”),
abruptly seized Stanford Financial Group worldwide. These families have
watched with sadness while the possibility of receiving an economic relief that
could mitigate their losses has all but vanished. The reality is that injustice
continues for them as the U.S. Receiver and the Joint Liquidator generate fees
and expenses for themselves, their attorneys, and other professionals - the
sole beneficiaries so far, charging millions of dollars.
Latin
American families are the largest defrauded group; 15,270 families representing
70% of the total depositors in the Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (“SIBL”)
with more than $4 billion in losses, who entrusted their savings to a company
belonging to an American conglomerate regulated and supervised by the U.S.
Government.
The
majority of Stanford’s depositors are modest people; families with children
with special needs. Many are living off of charity from
neighbors, others are ill and unable to pay for their medical treatments and
medicine; lives are being lost because of an inability to pay for lifesaving
operations - dreams shattered, and families destroyed.
The U.S. Receiver, Ralph Janvey has
“recovered” approximately $240.9 million as of December 31, 2013, and spent more
than $127.5 million in fees and expenses. Mr. Janvey’s accomplishments in the
recollection of assets for the depositor’s distribution fund have been lacking.
According to Examiner John Little, “The Receiver and his professionals have not
identified any significant Stanford assets or accounts that were not identified
in the earliest days of the Receivership.” In contrast, Irving Picard, the
trustee unwinding Bernard Madoff’s fraud has recovered more than $10 billion
for victims. That is 59 percent of the $17 billion in principal lost by
thousands of investors in Madoff’s investment advisory business.
It is unacceptable that the Courts in the
United States and Antigua, to the detriment of Stanford’s depositors, have
allowed the U.S. receivership and the liquidation, named to prevent the waste
and squandering of the creditors' patrimony, to continue prolonging the
recovery of assets for so long – generating endless billable hours and expenses
for the professionals managing the receivership and liquidation.
Furthermore, the signing of a Cross-Border
Insolvency Cooperation Protocol between the U.S. Receiver and the Joint
Liquidators, seems only to benefit their attorneys and professionals. They have
divided the pie and are eating it too. Why do the Courts and responsible
government authorities allow the US Receiver and the Joint Liquidators to
continue depleting the Stanford depositors’ patrimony with an agreement that
allows the continual enrichment of attorneys without showing any significant
recovery results and reasonable compensation to the victims of the moneys
recovered?
In a response to the Receiver’s motion for
approval to release of portion of the holdback, Examiner John Little states,
“What has actually been distributed to Stanford’s investors – approximately $30
million – is less than half what has already been paid to the Receiver’s
professionals.
Who are the real beneficiaries of the settlement agreement between the U.S. Receiver and the Joint Liquidators?
As far as
the undeniable responsibility of the regulatory entities, COVISAL asks,
"Why did the regulatory entities of the United States connive to deny
protection to thousands of innocent depositors, clients of Stanford, violating
the mandate from the U.S. Congress to “protect the investment public”? Why were
the “red flags” that appeared in Stanford’s examinations conducted since 1997
disallowed? Why were the complaints from clients and former Stanford employees,
which year after year warned of the vertiginous growth of an alleged pyramidal fraud,
not investigated?
What honest
and transparent legal entity is providing oversight of the liquidation
process?
Where are
the checks and balances?
Because of
its implications, the Stanford Case is an example of how the United Stated
handles issues of ethics and morality in the financial arena, set on a world
stage that has already been witness to so much political and financial
corruption.
Therefore,
we are convinced that if this monstrous fraud, which operated with impunity for
more than a decade in and from the United States, is not resolved
satisfactorily for all the victims, the worldwide discredit of the United
States in regards to securities fraud will deepen, further increasing the
distrust that currently exists in its financial sector.
In God we
trust that the rights of innocent families prevail over the judicial maneuvering,
and that the responsible authorities’ good conscience is the instrument to
impart justice and compensation to all families affected.
/s/ Jaime R. Escalona
Jaime R. Escalona
On behalf of COViSAL
Director
http://covisal.blogspot.com/ jaenrodes@gmail.com
Twitter: @COVISAL
