Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Misleading Advertising Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
International Law
: Misleading Advertising LawProvident Royalties Ponzi

Image via Wikipedia
From the SEC Press Release on the Provident Royalties Ponzi
On July 2, 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and emergency asset freeze in a $485 million offering fraud and Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Paul R. Melbye, Brendan W. Coughlin and Henry D. Harrison through a company they owned and controlled, Provident Royalties LLC. In addition to the asset freeze, the court has appointed a receiver to preserve and marshal assets for the benefit of investors.
The Commission alleges that from at least June 2006 through January 2009, Provident made a series of fraudulent offerings of preferred stock and limited partnership interests for the purpose of generating promised returns through investments in oil and gas assets.
The complaint alleges the sales were made through 21 affiliated entities to more than 7,700 investors throughout the United States.
It is also alleged that Provident Asset Management, LLC, an affiliated broker-dealer, made some direct retail sales of securities, but primarily solicited unaffiliated retail broker-dealers to enter into placement agreements for each offering, and those retail broker-dealers sold the stock to retail investors nationwide.
According to the Commission's complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Provident falsely promised yearly returns of up to 18 percent and misrepresented to investors that 85 percent of the funds raised through the offerings would be used to purchase interests in oil and gas real estate, leases, mineral rights, and interests, exploration and development.
The Commission alleges that, in fact, less than 50 percent of investor funds were used for their stated purpose, and the proceeds from later offerings were used to pay expenses related to earlier offerings and returns to investors in those offerings.
Full post as published by Misleading Advertising Law on July 07, 2009 (boomark / email).
Wesley A. Snyder et al.
alleging the consultants perpetrated a Ponzi scheme by encouraging borrowers to lend more than they needed.
NiSource
Settles Natural Gas Royalties Case for $380 Million
Tulsa County Natural Gas Royalties
Plaintiffs Awarded $126 Million

The Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Act 2006 and Intestate Succession in Singapore
Unum Provident Still in Denial
Is Unum Provident Still a Hungry Vulture
Unum Provident Sold a Bill of Goods


![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=8140c142-9f37-4bc2-933a-b248d5bfb734)







