COViSAL is formed by families from Latin America, U.S.A., Canada, and other countries who were affected by the collapsed of Stanford Financial Group when it was seized by United States authorities in February of 2009 Our objective is to fight for the recovery of our savings, and demand an immediate restitution from the US Government. Our rights must prevail over judicial manipulations, and good conscience must be the instrument to impart justice and to stop a never-ending fraud.
Search This Blog
COViSAL's objection to BDO's proposed agreement
COViSAL For Justice
July 1, 2015
Clerk of the Court
United States District
Northern District of
1100 Commerce Street
Dallas, Texas 75242
ATTN: Chambers of the
Honorable David Godbey
Case 3:09-CV-0298-N, Case
No. 3:12-CV-01447-N and Case No. 3:11-cv-01115-N.
We object to the BDO settlement amount in Case No. 3:12-CV-01447-N
and Case No. 3:11-cv-01115-N, for $40 million, of which attorneys will receive
$10 million dollars, and innocent families pennies.
The lawsuit was originally seeking actual damages of $10.7
billion, and the proposed settlement of $40 million is less than one half of 1
percent. Why are the attorneys accepting such meager amounts?
There are 75 lawsuits awaiting ruling by the Court listed in
the Receiver’s and Examiner’s sixth joint advisory to the court regarding
pending motions that have been fully briefed in cases filed by the Receiver or
the Official Stanford Investors Committee (“OSIC”).
According to the US Receiver Ralph Janvey, in his open
letter concerning Asset Recovery Litigation dated February 14, 2014 to all
affected by the Stanford fraud, “…These lawsuits seek to recover in excess of
$680 million in total …Nonetheless, the claims are the single largest
potential source of funds which may be recovered for the benefit of the
Despite the enormous potential for recovery, Janvey has been
largely unsuccessful in retrieving this money. If the US Receiver and the
Official Stanford Investors Committee’s attorneys continue to settle cases for
less than half a percent of the original amounts sought, what hope do we have
of receiving a meaningful recovery?
We understand that the attorneys have been working thousands
of hours on this case, most of them at a profit of over $600 per hour. In
contrast Stanford’s depositors have endured over 55,224 hours of pain and
suffering, for less than 2 cents on the dollar of compensation.
This settlement is but a miniscule portion of the $7.2
billion in actual losses from the scheme, and Janvey has admitted that for the
most part, “the money is gone.”
"I think about the victims every day," Janvey told
CNBC in an exclusive interview, his first since being appointed five years ago.If that is the case, does it make sense
for his attorney's fees to be 25%, when in the past courts have authorized 20%?
So far, expenses and attorney's fees have consumed nearly half of the money
recovered. Considering the low return to investors, these fees seem exorbitant.
Courts must closely examine the manner in which a class
action has been negotiated to determine whether the deal was the result of an
The settlement negotiations must also involve all the right
people. If members of the class have divergent interests and plaintiffs’
counsel cannot fairly represent the interests of all class members, then
plaintiffs’ counsel should identify potential subclasses and appropriate
representatives who can be brought into settlement discussions.
Currently, the Official Stanford Investor's Committee is
made up entirely of attorneys. How can the victims' interests be represented
when they have little to no representation on the committee? If the Committee's
purpose is to offer oversight to the recovery process, it appears they have
conflicting interests when attorneys’ are taking such a large portion of the
In addition, the efficacy of the negotiations seems
questionable when so little time was invested. “The mediation lasted a full day
with numerous back and forth offers and demands, ultimately resulting in the
$40 million settlement for which approval is sought…” an OSIC attorney
declared. (See Appendix in Support of Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement; page
12, paragraph 23; Case 3:0-9-cv-00298N Document 2138-2 Filed 05/15/15, Page ID
59823; APP 0088).
How many hours of real negotiations took place? Is it
possible that the settlement was negotiated wisely in such a short amount of
time? Is this a fair and reasonable settlement? For whom?
The lawyers are reaping huge fees while handing out paltry
benefits to the innocent depositors.
I am enclosing a recent letter from COViSAL titled: “The
U.S. Receivership and Liquidation Processes - Hope, Punishment or Fraud? That
speaks for itself.
We ask the Court to demand meaningful settlements for the families
of this horrendous fraud.
COViSAL 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…
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
COViSAL For Restitution ___________________________ September 20, 2017 Clerk of the Court United States District Court Northern District of Texas 1100 Commerce Street Dallas, Texas 75242 ATTN: Chambers of the Honorable David Godbey SEC Civil Action: 3:09-CV-0298-N Your Honor, We write to you in order to express our objection and protest the settlements by the U.S. Receiver, the Official Stanford Investors Committee, and others related to Stanford’s case. These settlements generate millions of dollars in fees for attorneys and only pennies for the families affected. In this instance we strongly protest the proposed settlement with Hunton & Williams LLP for $34 million, of which $8.5 million is for attorney’s fees. During the past 8 years Stanford’s depositors have received less than one percent of losses from announced distributions while being subject to a waiting period of almost a year per distribution. At the same time, they have to endure a lack of response to inquiries they make to the r…