Tag: Kenneth D. Bell

  • ZEEK RECEIVER: No More Tax Withholdings On Distribution Checks; Prior Money Withheld By Receivership For Taxes Will Be Returned By Receivership To Affiliates In Mailing On Dec. 23

    This just in from Kenneth D. Bell, as published on the receivership website and dated Dec. 19, 2014 (bolding added):

    ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE RECEIVER – December 19, 2014

    The Receivership will no longer withhold taxes from distributions paid to affiliates. If the Receivership previously withheld taxes from a distribution, we will issue a new check on December 23, 2014 to distribute the previously withheld funds to that affiliate. As I have said before, so that we do not expose the receivership to potential fines and penalties that would dramatically decrease the amount of money available to those claimants eligible for a distribution, we have sought assurance from the United States Internal Revenue Service that no withholding is required. We have not been able to get such assurance. However, I have received a tax opinion from a professional that persuades me that tax withholding is not necessary.

    On December 23, 2014 we will mail approximately 58,000 checks to claimants that were mailed a distribution on September 30, 2014 from which a withholding was made. Those checks will be in the amount of the taxes previously withheld for tax purposes from that affiliate’s distribution. On that day we also will mail checks to those individuals who requested (through a formal request on the claim status portal) that their September 30 check be reissued because the original check out was not properly delivered, was lost or was made payable to the wrong name through inadvertent error of the claimant.

    In late January 2015, we also will send distributions to those qualified affiliate claimants who completed the online claim allowance requirements after August 15, 2014 and have not yet received a check. Somewhat frustratingly, there are nearly 62,000 affiliate claimants that have received a letter of determination but have not yet accepted (or objected to) the recognized claim. We have the funds on reserve to make a distribution to all these claimants in the same manner we did for approximately 90,000 affiliate claimants in September. But, unless a claim is accepted (or has had an objection resolved) and the affiliate claimant completes the release and OFAC certification, a distribution check cannot be mailed. I encourage all of these affiliate claimants to go online and complete the process to be eligible for a distribution check in late January 2015. For cost efficiency reasons, we will issue checks only quarterly, so if an affiliate claimant has not completed these steps by December 31, 2014 the next opportunity to receive a distribution check will not be until late April 2015. I would much rather send all qualified affiliate claimants a check than hold those funds in a bank account.

    Finally, we are making great progress in recovering and marshalling additional funds which, together with the funds we currently hold, will be later distributed to all qualified claimants.

     

  • DEVELOPING STORY: More Than $800,000 In Funds Potentially Due Zeek Victims May Have Been Stolen By Credit-Card Vendor’s California Lawyer

    From a filing by Plastic Cash International in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi case. The screen shot above reflects a partial page from "Exhibit P," a copy of an investigative report by the California State Bar dated July 28, 2014.
    From a filing by Plastic Cash International in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi case. The screen shot above reflects a partial page from “Exhibit P,” a copy of a report by the California State Bar dated July 28, 2014.

    UPDATED 9:15 A.M. ET DEC. 19 U.S.A. If its presence on the Ponzi boards and similarity to the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme were not enough, the morass surrounding Zeek Rewards and operator Rex Venture Group may be getting even muddier.

    A Zeek credit-card vendor being pursued by the court-appointed receiver in the SEC’s 2012 Ponzi- and pyramid case says a California lawyer facing multiple bar investigations has stolen at least $800,000 that originated in Zeek transactions.

    It is possible that the number could be even higher, potentially on the order of $1 million or more, according to an estimate by the State Bar of California.

    A July 28 report by the Bar says the lawyer — Scott Stone Mehler of Long Beach — has invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Mehler, according to records, already has been recommended for disbarment for the alleged misappropriation of $1.4 million in funds from other clients.

    Whether a criminal investigation into Mehler’s alleged activities is under way was not immediately clear.

    Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell has been pursuing Plastic Cash International, formerly represented by Mehler, to return millions of dollars Bell alleges to be receivership assets. But PCI claims it is a victim of both Mehler and Zeek and, in any case, is unable to pay because working with Zeek destroyed its reputation in the financial community.

    “As a direct result of [Rex Venture Group’s] criminal and otherwise fraudulent conduct, all of PCI’s partners and customers eventually ceased doing business with PCI, ultimately resulting in PCI’s involvency,” Paul Schafer, PCI’s director of brand partnerships, said in a Dec. 17 affidavit.

    The Bar has alleged moral turpitude, misrepresentation to client, falsification of accounting, failure to maintain entrusted funds and failure to account against Mehler in the PCI matter involving Zeek funds. Bar documents strongly suggest that Mehler was using client funds, including PCI funds that originated via Zeek-related transactions, to play a shell game.

    If that proves to be the case, it would mean that Zeek Ponzi funds were being used to prop up Mehler’s personal scam.

    PCI, which says it first learned about Zeek operator Rex Venture Group in March 2012, five months before the SEC’s fraud complaint, potentially faces questions about whether any due diligence it conducted into Zeek was adequate.

    On Nov. 19, Bell asked Senior U.S. District Judge Graham C. Mullen for an order directing PCI to turn over more than $8.3 million to the receivership that PCI allegedly “failed to freeze and return to the Receivership Estate.” Bell also is seeking a contempt finding against PCI.

    For its part, PCI contends that it “never” held receivership assets and that “any” funds in dispute are not recoverable assets. The firm also contends that, through Mehler, it paid more than $1.1 million in fines issued by VISA. It also said it paid legal fees in excess of $600,000 and  Zeek-related chargebacks in excess of $2 million.

    NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.

  • BULLETIN: Extraordinary Drama Playing Out In Zeekland; Credit-Card Processor Says It Has Been ‘Rendered Insolvent’ Through Misconduct Of Paul Burks And Rex Venture Group

    breakingnews72BULLETIN: (8th Update 10:09 p.m. ET Dec. 18 U.S.A.) Payment vendor for a Ponzi-board “program?”

    More than two years after the shutdown of Zeek Rewards by the SEC, Plastic Cash International, a credit-card processor and would-be debit-card vendor for Zeek, said it has been “rendered insolvent as a result of the misconduct of [Rex Venture Group] and [Paul] Burks,” the operator of the Zeek scheme.

    PCI also says its onetime attorney in California who advised the company on Zeek matters has been disbarred and that the attorney stole $800,000 in funds that originated in transactions it processed for Zeek.

    Filings today by PCI identify the attorney as Scott Mehler. Details on the alleged Zeek-related theft were not immediately clear.

    On Sept. 3, 2014, Judge Donald F. Miles of the California State Bar Court issued an order recommending Mehler’s disbarment to the California Supreme Court.

    Filings in the case say Mehler misappropriated $1.4 million from two businessmen who sold their sheet-metal business to a company in Canada. In the papers, Mehler is accused of spending “all” the money entrusted to him, creating bogus screen shots to dupe the businessmen, ducking them for months and blaming his unresponsiveness to their demands for payment on mistakes with decimal points, miscalculations, a son who was ill, a wife who was out of town and an “injured dog.”

    In November 2014, Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell asked for an order directing PCI to turn over more than $8.3 million that he believes are receivership assets. PCI now contends that it is insolvent, that it is a victim of Zeek and that its very business relationship with Zeek triggered a series of epic disasters that led to its demise.

    Brian Newberry is the president, CEO and principal owner of PCI.

    From a filing by PCI today (italics added):

    Immediately upon discovering that RVG had been operating an alleged Ponzi Scheme, PCI directed PCI’s processing partner, without qualification, to honor all chargeback requests made by Customers, including those to whom monthly services had been rendered . . . To date, PCI has paid out at least $2,000,000 on Customer chargeback requests and related fees.

    Severe fines and penalties have been imposed on PCI because PCI contracted with RVG, which has since been exposed for various fraudulent and unlawful practices. Such fines and penalties continue to accrue. To date, PCI has paid an aggregate of at least $1,100,000 in fines based directly on PCI having processed transactions related to RVG . . .

    Furthermore, PCI has paid, to date, an aggregate of at least $600,000 in legal fees incurred by PCI, PCI’s processing partner and PCI’s merchant bank specifically related to handling the ZeekRewards fallout . . . Under the Agreement, these legal fees are RVG’s responsibility . . .

    Based on the advice of PCI’s (now disbarred) attorney, Scott Mehler (“Mehler”), that the funds in dispute belonged to PCI and not RVG, PCI used the funds PCI received from processing monthly memberships that remained after payment of the aforementioned chargebacks, fees, fines and penalties in an attempt to mitigate the damages resulting from RVG’s conduct . . .

    In addition to fines and legal fees, PCI and one of PCI’s principals, Brian Newberry, were themselves placed on the “MATCH List” based on the transactions processed for RVG . . . As a result, PCI’s processing partner, SecureNet, immediately ceased doing business with PCI altogether, thereby cutting PCI off from all sources of cash . . . Without any cash, PCI could not service the financial obligations imposed by contracts with other parties or otherwise meet operating expenses as they became due. PCI has asserted a Class 2 secured claim against the Estate, which claim is concurrently being pursued in accordance with the claims determination procedures established applicable to this SEC Enforcement Action, as ordered by this Court.

    NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.

    UPDATE DEC. 18 7:32 P.M. ET: The PP Blog is working on an update to the story above.

    UPDATE DEC. 18 10:09 P.M. ET. See related story here.

  • URGENT >> BULLETIN >> MOVING: Court Denies Zeek Winners’ Motions To Dismiss Clawback Actions, Upholds Jurisdiction

    breakingnews72URGENT >> BULLETIN >> MOVING: (3rd Update 10:03 a.m. ET Dec. 10 U.S.A.) The federal judge presiding over clawback cases against alleged Zeek Rewards “winners” has dismissed jurisdictional challenges and a claim by the winners that Zeek was not selling securities under the Howey Test.

    The rulings mean that clawback claims seeking millions of dollars from the winners remain intact.

    Senior U.S. District Judge Graham C. Mullen of the Western District of North Carolina also has ruled that the receiver’s request to impose a constructive trust against the winners to prevent further dissipation of Zeek winnings was proper.

    The clawback defendants, including Trudy Gilmond, Trudy Gilmond LLC, Jerry Napier, Darren Miller, Durant Brockett, Rhonda Gates, Innovation Marketing LLC, Aaron Andrews, Shara Andrews, Global Internet Formula Inc., T. Lemont Silver and Karen Silver, had contended the fact they performed some work to score their winnings took a Howey prong out of play because they did not expect profits based solely upon the efforts of others. Absent this prong, the winners argued, receiver Kenneth D. Bell could not prove Zeek was selling unregistered securities as investment contracts.

    “Defendants’ emphasis upon the long hours they worked to recruit . . .  others is misplaced,” Mullen ruled. “Without the essential managerial efforts of [Zeek President Paul] Burks and [Zeek operator Rex Venture Group], no profits would have been generated at all.”

    And, Mullen added, “As the Court finds that it clearly has subject matter jurisdiction, it is unnecessary to address the Receiver’s ancillary and supplemental jurisdiction argument or his argument that the Court also has diversity jurisdiction.”

    Meanwhile, Mullen ruled that the winners’ claims that Bell could not pursue fraudulent-transfer claims under North Carolina law were without merit.

    “Defendants argue that this claim must be dismissed because neither the Receiver nor RVG  (in whose shoes he stands) is a ‘creditor’ as defined in the North Carolina Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (‘NCUFTA’) and therefore he has no standing to pursue fraudulent transfer claims. Defendants’ argument is without merit.”

    On the issue of the imposition of a constructive trust against the winners, Mullen ruled (italics added):

    “Defendants’ argument that they should not be subjected to the imposition of a constructive trust because their own fraud is not the subject of the complaint fails. The Complaint sets forth allegations sufficient to show that ‘some other circumstance’ makes it inequitable for these Defendants to retain the funds they received . . .  This ‘other circumstance’ is that Defendants received the funds from an admitted Ponzi and pyramid and that the funds are nothing more than other people’s money wrongfully diverted from RVG. Therefore, Defendants have received property which they ‘ought not, in equity and good conscience, hold and enjoy.’”

    Zeek figures Dawn Wright-Olivares and Daniel Olivares pleaded guilty to investment-fraud conspiracy earlier this year.

     

  • Full Statement From Zeek Receiver On New Information Available Through Claims Portal

    EDITOR’S NOTE: Zeek Rewards receiver Kenneth D. Bell has issued the statement reproduced below. It is dated Nov. 25, 2014. Source: Zeek Rewards Receivership Website.

    ** ________________________________ **

    ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE RECEIVER – November 25, 2014

    Today, new features were added to the claim status portal in response to issues that have arisen in the distribution process. The claim status portal can be accessed by following: https://cert.gardencitygroup.com/zrwdet/fs/home. These updates allow for a claimant who is eligible to receive a distribution to be able to check the status of that distribution by logging on to the claim status portal. In addition to claim status, that portal will now provide those affiliates who are eligible to receive a distribution with: the date on which his/her distribution check was issued; the amount of the distribution check; whether the distribution check has been cashed; and whether the distribution check was returned to us as undeliverable. Second, if your check was returned to us, lost, destroyed, or your check was issued in the wrong name (for example, if you inadvertently provided your Zeek username instead of your real name when you provided your payment information), you will now be able to request a new check be issued to you in the proper name. We hope that these updates will address many of the issues you have been asking us about.

    With these improvements to the claims status portal we will no longer respond to emails and calls that request the status of a claim that can otherwise be answered by logging into the claim portal and checking on the status of your claim. We have been spending a considerable amount of receivership assets responding to affiliate claimants’ inquiries about the status of their claim, all of which can now be answered through self-help. The savings generated by this automated system will allow us to make larger distributions to all affiliate claimants holding allowed claims.

    Among the inquiries to which we will no longer be responding are requests from affiliates who registered on the claims portal but did not complete and finally submit a claim. The claims system was continuously operational and was tested and verified as accurate during the claims period and afterward. If review of your claim status shows that you did not finally submit a claim through the claim portal by the Court ordered deadline of September 5, 2013, I have no authority to accept or permit you to file a claim thereafter, including now. I regret that anyone who could have validly submitted a claim failed to do so.

    If you hold a claim eligible for a distribution, but were not mailed a check on September 30, 2014, I encourage you to login to the claims status portal and accept the letter of determination you were issued (or have any objection you raised to the claim determination resolved) and submit the required Release and OFAC certification so that we may distribute money to you. If you take these steps, you will be mailed a first interim partial distribution at the end of January 2015.

    By the close of business on December 1, 2014, we will have issued Letters of Determination to all affiliate claimants who timely filed claims.

    Finally, we continue to receive many inquiries about tax withholdings from distribution checks. We are trying very hard to get reliable guidance from the Internal Revenue Service. I do not want to withhold taxes from distribution checks, but unless and until I receive assurance that the IRS agrees with me, withholdings will be made. We cannot expose the receivership, and the assets which we have and from which we will make distributions to victims, to potential penalties and fines by the IRS.

    ** ________________________________ **

    Visit the receivership website.

  • BULLETIN: Zeek-Like Situation Surfaces In TelexFree Case — Dishonored Cashier’s Checks; Trustee Seeks Authority To Subpoena Banks, Including Bank In Puerto Rico

    newtelexfreelogoBULLETIN: The court-appointed trustee in the TelexFree bankruptcy case is seeking authority to issue subpoenas and obtain information from eight financial institutions, including Puerto Rico-based Oriental Bank.

    The other seven are Digital Federal Credit Union, based in TelexFree’s headquarters city of Marlborough, Mass., Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citizens Bank, Santander, TD Bank and Wells Fargo.

    All of the banks ended up in the TelexFree stream of commerce, but precise details of the relationships are not known publicly. What is known is that some TelexFree bank accounts were seized in criminal or civil forfeiture actions and that a cascading avalanche of litigation continues to roar down the mountain.

    Why MLM firms continually tempt this ruinous fate is one of the great business mysteries of current times.

    In the instances of Bank of America and TD Bank, it is known that TelexFree affiliates were given instructions to make walk-in deposits at the banks, some in the name of TelexFree Inc., others in the name of TelexFree LLC. Those instructions were highly similar to instructions given to members of the $119 million AdSurfDaily MLM Ponzi scheme in 2008.

    Court filings by Trustee Stephen B. Darr say he is trying to get to the heart of TelexFree-related money flow and communications involving the banks. Notably, one of the concerns is that all eight of the banks allegedly issued TelexFree-related cashier’s checks prior to the firm’s April 2014 bankruptcy filing, and later dishonored some of the checks.

    Cashier’s checks also were an issue in the ASD case. At the time of the ASD related actions in 2008, the enterprise was the largest known MLM HYIP Ponzi scheme. It since has been surpassed by Zeek Rewards, TelexFree and others.

    Dishonored cashier’s checks became one of the earliest issues in the $850 million Zeek Rewards MLM scheme in 2012. Citing the Uniform Commercial Code, Zeek’s receiver and lawyers have been been pursuing remedies from the banks for more than two years — at a cost of money and time.

    Kenneth D. Bell, the Zeek receiver, has said that “[i]f a bank refuses to pay a cashier’s check or teller’s check presented by the Receiver, it may be required to pay for the Receiver’s expenses and loss of interest resulting from the nonpayment, as well as consequential damages.”

    In the Zeek case, the Virginia Bankers Association provided guidance to member institutions that “the court’s order relied on the Uniform Commercial Code to establish that the uncashed cashier’s checks in the receiver’s possession were receivership assets, and that the receiver was required to present those cashier’s checks for payment and had no discretion not to.”

    Now, the TelexFree trustee appears to be wading into the same or highly similar MLM waters. Among the information Darr is seeking is “information respecting the remitters of the cashiers’ checks and the reasons for the dishonor of such checks.”

    Because MLM Ponzi- and pyramid schemes spread virally, have common promoters and often rely on cashier’s checks, it is conceivable that some promoters might have bought their way into both “programs” with cashier’s checks, possibly even with cashier’s checks recruits paid to their upline sponsors, rather than to the “programs” themselves.

    In the case of Zeek, tens of millions of dollars in checks allegedly had backed up at Zeek’s office in North Carolina in the weeks prior to the SEC’s August 2012 Ponzi- and pyramid action.

    The TelexFree case may add a new wrinkle. Indeed, nearly $38 million in cashier’s checks from Wells Fargo allegedly were found in TelexFree’s Marborough office in the possession of Joseph Craft two days after TelexFree’s April 13 bankruptcy filing. Craft, who has denied wrongdoing, was a TelexFree executive. He has been charged civilly with securities fraud.

    In April, the SEC said that a check dated April 3 in Craft’s possession was “remitted to” TelexFree principal Carlos Wanzeler and made out to “TelexFree Dominicana SRL in the amount of $10,398,000.”

    One check for more than $2 million in Craft’s possession was made out to Katia B. Wanzeler, Wanzeler’s wife. She later was arrested at JFK Airport in New York and detained for more than a week as a material witness.

    The SEC alleged that Carlos Wanzeler was amassing a small-real estate empire in Massachusetts and Florida. He is alleged to have ducked out of the United States via Canada in April, ultimately flying to his native country of Brazil. The United States describes him as an international fugitive.

    Darr now is seeking not only information about the cashier’s checks, but also information on communications between the banks and TelexFree or its principals James Merrill and Carlos Wanzeler, and information on any TelexFree-related investigations conducted by the banks, including “information related to ‘Know Your Customer’” rules and regulations.

    In addtion, Darr is seeking bank statements, canceled checks, deposit slips, wire-transfer communications and remittances, documentation concerning fees and contracts, minutes from bank board meetings at which TelexFree matters were discussed, documentation on why the banks ended relationships with TelexFree, documentation on communications the banks had with the SEC and state regulatory bodies, documentation the banks may have on the Massachusetts Securities Division TelexFree investigation and documentation “concerning whether the remitters have been refunded any amounts advanced to purchase” the dishonored checks.

  • In Extraordinary Development, Federal Judge Approves Temporary Restraining Order ‘Without Notice’ That Directs Zeek Vendor ‘To Immediately Deposit With The Receivership’ Nearly $5 Million

    Paul Burks.
    Paul Burks.

    DEVELOPING STORY: (Updated 10:02 p.m. EDT U.S.A.) In an extraordinary development on this Halloween Friday, the federal judge presiding over the SEC’s Ponzi- and pyramid-scheme case against Zeek Rewards has issued a Temporary Restraining Order and directed a Zeek vendor to immediately turn over to the receivership more than $4.85 million.

    The order was entered “without notice,” owing to concerns the money could go missing. It applies to Zeek financial vendor Preferred Merchants Solutions LLC and Jaymes Meyer, Preferred’s California-based sole member and manager.

    Events that led to the order involve a bizarre circumstance that allegedly occurred in June 2012, when tens of millions of dollars in undeposited checks — enough to fill six to eight mail bins — had backed up at Zeek, starving the Rex Venture Group LLC enterprise for cash during a period in which Zeek was having banking problems in North Carolina and its alleged Ponzi was crumbling.

    Zeek operator Paul Burks allegedly hired Preferred to solve the problem and also to provide trust services. According to a document filed by Preferred in August 2014, the first time the company visited Zeek headquarters, “ex- or off-duty police officers [were] providing security.”

    Preferred contends it solved Zeek’s problem with the backed-up checks and legitimately is owed the $4.85 million at issue.

    But receiver Kenneth D. Bell, who is seeking a contempt sanction against Preferred and alleges that Preferred effectively transferred Zeek Ponzi cash to itself after it learned from the SEC on Aug. 16, 2012, that an order freezing Zeek assets was imminent, asked Mullen for the TRO on Oct. 28.

    Bell alleges that “the evidence establishes that Preferred Merchants and Meyer directed the $4.8 million transfer from the RVG trust account to Preferred Merchants’ account just 19 minutes after the SEC told them about the asset freeze and imminent shutdown of RVG” on Aug. 16, 2012.

    He further alleges that “[n]ot only did Meyer fail to tell the SEC about his custody and control over RVG assets, Meyer also failed to disclose that he anticipated making any transfers, or, after the transfers were executed, that he had done so.”

    From the order entered at 11 a.m. today by Senior U.S. District Judge Graham C. Mullen of the Western District of North Carolina (italics added):

    The Receiver has satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) and established that an order is appropriate in this case to avoid irreparable injury, loss, or damage to the Receivership Estate of Rex Venture Group, LLC, including the further waste and dissipation of Receivership Property. Notably, the Court finds that the large amount of money at stake, the liquidity of the funds which could be transferred overseas or hidden, and Preferred Merchants’ and Meyer’s apparent pattern of misconduct present a likelihood of irreparable harm and necessitate this order being entered without notice. Accordingly, and for the reasons stated in the motion and memorandum, the Court will GRANT the motion.

    IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
    1. This Order is entered at 11 a.m. on October 31, 2014.
    2. The Receiver’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED;
    3. Preferred Merchants Solutions, LLC (“Preferred Merchants”) and Jaymes Meyer (“Meyer”) are directed to immediately deposit with the Receivership $4,854,010.40, which is the amount they transferred from RVG’s trust account after the SEC notified them of the asset freeze and requested that they freeze all RVG accounts and assets;
    4. The Receiver is directed to deposit and maintain these funds in a segregated account;
    5. This injunction shall expire no later than fourteen (14) days from the entry of this Order or sooner upon further order of the Court.
    6. The Court will conduct a hearing on this matter on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 3 at the Charles R. Jonas Federal Building, 401 W. Trade Street, Charlotte, NC 28202. The Receiver is directed to use all reasonable efforts to notify Meyer and Preferred Merchants of the date, time, and location of the hearing.

    Burks, 67, of Lexington, N.C., was indicted a week ago today on criminal charges, including mail fraud, wire fraud and conspiracy. A separate lawsuit filed by Bell last month against alleged Zeek winners in Canada contends that Zeek “insiders often worried about being caught.”

    Mountains of undeposited checks also were an issue in the AdSurfDaily Ponzi-scheme case in 2008. ASD purported to pay a dividend of 1 percent a day. Zeek’s average daily payout was about 1.5 percent, according to the SEC.

    ASD and Zeek had members in common.

    NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.

  • Some Zeek Claimants From Outside The United States Unable To Deposit Distribution Checks; Receiver Provides Guidance

    Kenneth D. Bell, the Zeek Rewards receiver, published an announcement last night that certain Zeek claimants from outside the United States who received a distribution check were unable to deposit it. Here is the announcement, dated Oct. 30, 2014 (italics/bolding added).

    ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE RECEIVER – October 30, 2014

    Various foreign claimants have reported that their banks have refused to deposit the distribution checks I have sent to you. It is likely that these banks are mistakenly seeking to deposit the checks in the local currency instead of in United States dollars. ALL checks issued by the Receivership are issued in United States dollars. Please inform your bank when you are depositing your check that it is in United States dollars. I am unable to issue checks in any currency other than United States dollars.

    Visit the receivership website.

  • BULLETIN: Receiver Sues Zeek ‘Winners’ In Canada

    breakingnews72BULLETIN: New court filings today in the Western District of North Carolina show that the court-appointed receiver in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi- and pyramid-scheme case has sued 26 alleged “net winners” in Canada.

    Each of the defendants allegedly received at least $50,000, according to filings by receiver Kenneth D. Bell.

    More . . .

  • CKB/CKB168, WCM777 And TelexFree Prosecutions Make SEC’s 2014 Highlight Reel; Agency Says Its Job In MLM Sphere Isn’t Done

    recommendedreading1The prosecutions of the CKB/CKB168, WCM777 and TelexFree “programs” made the SEC’s highlight reel for fiscal year 2014, which began on Oct. 1, 2013 and ended on Sept. 30 of this year.

    In a statement today, the SEC said “new investigative approaches and the innovative use of data and analytical tools contributed to a very strong year for enforcement marked by cases that spanned the securities industry.”

    Noting the FY 2014 pyramid-scheme actions against the MLM or direct-sales firms included allegations that the “programs” used social media and targeted immigrant communities, the SEC said its work wasn’t done.

    “The Enforcement Division will continue to root out pyramid and Ponzi schemes that prey on vulnerable investors,” the agency said.

    Not specifically noted in the agency’s statement today were the actions against the eAdGear and Zhunrize “programs” announced just prior to the close of the 2014 fiscal year. The eAdGear case was announced on Sept. 26; the Zhunrize case was announced on Sept. 23.

    Since the Zeek Rewards action in 2012, it has become clear that MLM HYIP schemes have tapped participants for spectacular sums. The Zeek scheme alone gathered on the order of $850 million. Filings suggest TelexFree may have gathered on the order of $1.2 billion.

    CKB/CKB168 appears to have gathered at least $20 million. WCM777 gathered on the order of $80 million. Zhunrize gathered on the order of $105 million, and eAdGear gathered on the order of $129 million, according to court filings.

    Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell, who is managing Zeek-related cases that involve hundreds of thousands of victims across the world, described Zeek this week as an attempt to put lipstick on a pig.

    It’s a description that could apply across the MLM HYIP sphere. The cross-border, murky nature of the “programs” raise concerns about both economic security and national security.

    On Sept. 21, the PP Blog reported that a small sampling of data from 95-self-identified victims of TelexFree shows they lost an average of $27,578 each. TelexFree potentially created 1 million victims or more.

    The SEC has broad responsibilities across the securities industry and its sectors — from Wall Street to Main Street.

    From the SEC’s statement today (italics added):

    The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that in fiscal year 2014, new investigative approaches and the innovative use of data and analytical tools contributed to a very strong year for enforcement marked by cases that spanned the securities industry.

    In the fiscal year that ended in September, the SEC filed a record 755 enforcement actions covering a wide range of misconduct, and obtained orders totaling $4.16 billion in disgorgement and penalties, according to preliminary figures. In FY 2013, the Commission filed 686 enforcement actions and obtained orders totaling $3.4 billion in disgorgement and penalties. In FY 2012, the Commission filed 734 enforcement actions and obtained orders totaling $3.1 billion in disgorgement and penalties.

    The agency’s enforcement actions also included a number of first-ever cases, including actions involving the market access rule, the “pay-to-play” rule for investment advisers, an emergency action to halt a municipal bond offering, and an action for whistleblower retaliation.

    “Aggressive enforcement against wrongdoers who harm investors and threaten our financial markets remains a top priority, and we brought and will continue to bring creative and important enforcement actions across a broad range of the securities markets,” said SEC Chair Mary Jo White. “The innovative use of technology – enhanced use of data and quantitative analysis – was instrumental in detecting misconduct and contributed to the Enforcement Division’s success in bringing quality actions that resulted in stiff monetary sanctions.”

    “Time and again this past year, the Division’s staff applied its tremendous energy and talent, uncovered misconduct, and held accountable those who were responsible for wrongdoing,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “I am proud of our excellent record of success and look forward to another year filled with high-impact enforcement actions.”

  • RECEIVER: Zeek Rewards Was ‘Pig’ To Which MLM Lawyers Attemped To Apply ‘Lipstick’ — While One Of The Lawyers Participated On Massive Ponzi Scheme’s ‘Leadership Calls’

    EDITOR’S NOTE: Kevin Grimes, MLM Compliance VT LLC and the Grimes & Reese law firm have argued that the claims against them should be dismissed. Zeek’s receiver argues otherwise, saying a “bogus ‘compliance course’” advanced by Grimes helped dupe the Zeek masses. Zeek affected hundreds of thousands of people, the SEC has said.

    Legal malpractice and other claims against MLM attorney Kevin Grimes, his entity MLM Compliance VT LLC and the Grimes & Reese law firm should stand, the court-appointed receiver in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi- and pyramid-scheme case said in court filings yesterday.

    One of the reasons, receiver Kenneth D. Bell argued in a motion to Senior U.S. District Judge Graham C. Mullen, is that the defendants “in effect attempted to put lipstick on the ZeekRewards pig.”

    Another reason is that Grimes participated in at least three affiliate “leadership calls” with Zeek insiders and “actively assisted the Insiders in promoting and legitimizing the scheme,” Bell said.

    “Grimes allowed his name and his firm’s name to be used to promote the scheme,” Bell said.

    Mullen should reject bids by the defendants to have the claims dismissed, Bell argued.

    Read the receiver’s argument, courtesy of the ASD Updates Blog.

    Read the Grimes’ brief in support of his motion to dismiss. Read the Grimes & Reese brief in support of its motions to dismiss.

    The SEC has described Zeek as a massive securities fraud that gathered hundreds of millions of dollars in a combined Ponzi- and pyramid scheme.