Articles Posted in Hedge Fund Fraud

Below is a piece from the NY Times’ DealBook about Judge Rakoff confirming the $20.6 million arbitration award against Goldman Sachs, the largest arbitration award ever rendered against the firm.

DealBook – A Financial News Service of The New York Times November 8, 2010, 11:29 am Judge Upholds Award Against Goldman

A federal judge has denied a request by Goldman Sachs to throw out a record arbitration award levied against the Wall Street firm earlier this year.

Below is a piece from the front page of the October 23, 2010 business section of the New York Times regarding the firm’s $20.6 million arbitration award against Goldman Sachs, the largest customer arbitration ever rendered against Goldman.

DealBook – A Financial News Service of The New York Times October 21, 2010, 8:38 pm In Clearing Bayou, Quagmire for Goldman


Below is a New York Times Piece about Bayou v. Goldman Sachs

Goldman Must Pay Some Bayou Losses By LOUISE STORY and GRETCHEN MORGENSON Goldman Sachs has been ordered to pay $20.58 million to creditors of a failed hedge fund to settle claims that the bank helped the fund perpetrate a Ponzi scheme.

The award represents the first time that a bank has been held accountable for a Ponzi scheme because of its role as a middleman.

Rich & Intelisano, LLP won a $20.5 million arbitration award against Goldman Sachs related to the Bayou hedge fund Ponzi scheme. The award is 100% of the compensatory damages requested. It is the largest arbitration award ever rendered against Goldman and the sixth largest customer arbitration award against any Wall Street firm. It is also the first win in any court or arbitration forum by investors against a clearing or prime broker related to a hedge fund Ponzi scheme based upon fraudulent transfer theories.

Partner John Rich masterminded the case, and tried it together with partner Ross Intelisano, with significant help from Matt Woodruff, Diane Mall Sammarco and Eric Clem of our office.

The award is on Finra’s website. The Firm represented the Bayou Creditors’ Committee in the 18 day arbitration hearing. The three arbitrator panel held over 13 pre-hearing sessions and 36 hearing sessions in 2008 through 2010.

The investment world is buzzing about the SEC’s fraud allegations against Goldman Sachs for misrepresenting and omitting to disclose Paulson’s role in choosing RMBS securities for the ABACUS CDO and then shorting the same individual RMBS through CDS transactions with Goldman. According to the SEC, “investors in the liabilities of ABACUS are alleged to have lost more than $1 billion.” It is hard to tell whether direct investors in ABACUS lost $1 billion or whether that includes companies which had CDS risk exposure to it. Either way, what are the money losers going to do about it?

According to the SEC complaint, IKB, the German commercial bank, bought $150 million of Class A-1 and Class A-2 Notes which seem to look like the AAA-rated upper tranches of ABACUS. But there is no other disclosure of who else bought ABACUS from Goldman. I presume that IKB was very cooperative with the SEC and allowed its name to be used in the complaint as opposed to being dubbed “Investor #1”. IKB has likely been negotiating with Goldman behind the scenes. I expect to see a civil complaint filed by IKB against Goldman in federal court in New York shortly. However, they are probably better off arbitrating the dispute for numerous reasons (privacy, low cost, limited dispositive motion practice, etc.).

The SEC complaint also explains how a division of ACA, the monoline insurance company, served as the “Portfolio Selection Agent” for ABACUS, and another division of ACA (ACA Capital) also sold protection on $909 million of the super senior tranche of ABACUS through credit default swaps as well. ABN AMRO, the European bank, then assumed that same exposure through CDS deals with Goldman and ACA. The complaint alleges Goldman defrauded IKB, ACA and ABN AMRO. ABN AMRO was bought by the Royal Bank of Scotland and after ABACUS went to almost zero, RBS paid Goldman $841 million, most of which was then paid by Goldman to Paulson due to Paulson’s short bets on the underlying tranches. Got that?

Below is an article from Reuters this week regarding our client’s $3.4 million arbitration victory against Bear Stearns related to the Bear Stearns High Grade Fund. There are many investors who, for one reason or another, had decided not to file arbitrations against Bear Stearns. Investors should be aware that FINRA has a six year eligibility rule. In some jurisdictions, an investor who files a FINRA arbitration more than six years after the purchase of the High Grade Fund may be the subject to a motion to dismiss in the FINRA arbitration. Since the original High Grade Fund launched in about September 2003, early investors who are contemplating taking action should make a final decision sooner rather than later so as to avoid any potential motion. Investors who rolled over from the High Grade Fund to the Enhanced Leverage Fund should have no FINRA eligibility rule issues.

Investor in defunct Bear fund wins $3.4 mln award 3:15pm EST * Award follows acquittal of fund managers * JPMorgan Chase is responsible for paying the investor By Matthew Goldstein NEW YORK, Feb 9 (Reuters) – A Georgia-based chain of service stations that lost money with a Bear Stearns hedge fund that collapsed in July 2007 has won a $3.4 million arbitration award.

The award by the securities industry arbitration panel is the first ruling in favor of an investor in one of two now defunct Bear hedge funds since a jury acquitted the funds’ former managers of criminal charges in November.

Contact Information