Skip to main content

An Open Letter to the Joint Liquidators of SIBL - August 13, 2012


An Open Letter to the Joint Liquidators of SIBL
August 13, 2012

Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson
Joint Liquidators
Stanford International Bank Ltd.

Dear Mr. Wide and Mr. Dickson:

COViSAL's members are very disappointed that you chose to ignore our plea not to appeal Judge Godbey’s decision.

We also find inexcusable the fact that the order of your appointment as new Joint Liquidators by the Court in Antigua, dated May 12, 2011, did not mention the Agreement of Cooperation, which should have been signed by the previous Joint Liquidators and the U.S. Receiver in the second trimester of 2010. The purpose of the agreement was to make the recovery of our assets more expeditious and less costly.

It seems that our never-ending saga is being prolonged by design, to generate fees and expenses and to waste the remnants of our stolen savings in useless and unnecessary legal fights. You have already spent millions of dollars of our patrimony with your continued litigation against the U.S. Receiver and the U.S. Department of Justice. Now, you're confirming what Judge Godbey described in his Court Order of July 31, 2012 about your history of repeated interference with the U.S. Receiver. "… early in the action, without notice to the Receiver or the Canadian court, the Former Joint Liquidators entered one of the Stanford Entities in Canada and wiped its computer systems clean of information… the current Joint Liquidators have attempted numerous times to unseat the Receiver from his role as the recognized foreign representative in Canada."                                

The Judge continues, "Further, the Joint Liquidators have actively objected to criminal seizure proceedings by the U.S. Department of Justice in Canada, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland, and have taken affirmative steps to block the repatriation of Estate assets generally in the United Kingdom and Canada… the Joint Liquidators have proven to be extremely litigious and calculating in this Court, filing multiple notices of objection to the Receiver's requests in this and other Stanford [multi-district litigation] suits, and filing motions to pursue claims the Receiver was already pursuing. The Joint Liquidators have admitted that they seek funds first and foremost to fund their current operations, which include challenging the Receiver's authority worldwide, not to distribute to investor-victims and creditors." Judge Godbey said, this repeated interference with Janvey has "been the norm" and is "particularly worrying."                            

It is unacceptable that the Courts in Antigua and the United States have allowed you and the Receiver, who were named to prevent the squandering of the creditors' patrimony, to continue fighting for the assets - duplicating costs and efforts, and hindering the possibilities of a pro rata distribution of the victims’ patrimony.

Three and a half years have passed since our savings were stolen, and there is no end to the abuse. We ask that you focus your efforts on cooperatively and honestly coordinate the recovery of our stolen assets with the US Receiver, the Department of Justice, the SEC, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee. This cooperation would oblige the parties to share records and documents indispensable to successfully achieving third party lawsuits, it would compel you to implement only one “Process of Claims Certification,” and it would oblige you to elaborate joint reports to give the judicial process the transparency it lacks.

It is undeniable that the Stanford Case has shown a lack of ethics and morality. We are concerned that you, and the Receiver continue to be a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. Why prolong the agony of the victims?

You have a fiduciary duty to the investors/victims and creditors, and your decisions and actions must be carried out in consideration of the best interests of all of us, the Stanford’s victims. There must be accountability for the money spent in pointless litigation, and unnecessary expenditures. We will seek redress for the economic loss and damage from acts and omissions against our interests and rights.

Once again, COViSAL demands that you comply with Judge David Godbey’s Court Order. Arrogance must be abandoned in order to establish a Cooperation Agreement with the U.S. Receiver without any further delay - for the benefit of all Stanford’s victims.

The rights of the victims should prevail over the judicial manipulations, and conscience must be the instrument to impart justice. May God bless the thousands of innocent families - victims of a fraud that still continues.

Jaime R. Escalona
On behalf of COViSAL

Popular posts from this blog

COViSAL Estatus caso Stanford a Diciembre 2018

For Restitution
23 de diciembre, 2017
Estimados amigos:
Anexo un resumen del estatus del caso Stanford en USA y en Antigua.
ADMINISTRACION JUDICIAL DEL STANFORD FINANCIAL GROUP, U.S.A. (Liderada por el síndico Ralph Janvey, su abogado líder Kevin Sadler, su agente de distribución Gilardi & Co., y los abogados del comité oficial de inversionistas)
1.Recuperaciones - $407,8 millones (al 30 de abril, 2017)
2.Honorarios profesionales y gastos - $195,8 millones (al 30 de abril 2017)
3.Distribuciones a depositantes - $94,2 millones 
Hasta la fecha hemos tenido cuatro distribuciones oficiales:
a) Primera distribución interina de $55 millones (de dinero en efectivo disponible en el patrimonio) fue aprobada el 30 de mayo, 2013; 16 listas de pagos fueron publicadas desde el 20 de agosto 2013 hasta el 27 de abril 2017. A la fecha han distribuido $41,2 millones del total y todavía hay depositantes por recibir su pago de esta distribución. 
b) Segunda distribuci…

COViSAL protesta acuerdo con Hunton y Williams LLP por $34 millones de dólares, de los cuales $8,5 millones son para abogados.

Por Restitutio

Traducción al español de la versión original en inglés
20 de septiembre, 2017
Secretaría del Tribunal United States District Court Northern District of Texas 1100 Commerce Street Dallas, Texas 75242
ATN: Cámara delHonorable David Godbey
SEC Acción Civil: 3:09-CV-0298-N
Honorable Juez:
Le escribimos para expresar nuestra objeción y protesta sobre los acuerdos del Administrador Judicial, el Comité Oficial de Inversionistas de Stanford y otros, relacionados con el caso Stanford. Estos acuerdos generan millones de dólares en honorarios para los abogados y centavos para las familias afectadas. En esta instancia protestamos enfáticamente el acuerdo propuesto con Hunton y Williams LLP por $34 millones de dólares, de los cuales $8,5 millones son para honorarios de abogados.
Durante los últimos 8 años los ahorristas de Stanford han recibido menos del uno por ciento de sus pérdidas de las distribuciones anunciadas y han tenido que esperar casi un año por cada distribución. Al mismo t…

Narco-Banquero: La Historia de Allen Stanford

Narco-Banquero: La Historia de Allen Stanford Publicada el 13 de  abril,  2012 por  Daniel HopsickerTraducción al español por COViSAL

Con su reciente condena de 13 cargos por lavado de dinero—asegurando que un hombre que una vez vivió en una mansión de $57 millones, con un foso lleno de agua a su alrededor, estará entreteniendo detrás de las rejas de su celda por mucho tiempo—el escándalo de Allen Stanford pareciera ser cualquier cosa, menos que haya terminado. Pero el escándalo Ponzi de Allen Stanford está finalizando antes que la pregunta más importante acerca del escándalo ni siquiera haya sido planteada... ¿Cómo es que un dueño de un gimnasio declarado en bancarrota en Texas, por casualidad, se despierta un año después como dueño de un banco offshore? En 1982, Allen Stanford era el dueño de una cadena de gimnasios en bancarrota en Waco, Texas. En su registro de bancarrota listó $13,6 millones en deudas en contra de menos de $200.000 en activos. Paul Holt, un hombre de negocios de Waco, …