25 Jul
Posted by: Max Wiedermann in: Business Tips
The trustee seeking money for victims of Bernard Madoff’s fraud reached a more than $1 billion settlement with Tremont Group Holdings Inc., one of the largest feeders of customer funds into the Ponzi scheme.
Thursday’s cash settlement raises the sum that trustee Irving Picard said he has recovered for Madoff victims to $8.6 billion, or half the $17.3 billion lost by former customers of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC who filed claims.
He had first sued Tremont in December. In an amended complaint filed on Feb. 28 and seeking $2.1 billion, he accused Tremont of missing “red flags” and “blindly relying on Madoff to drive their funds’ returns” for nearly 15 years.
Video: Authorities arrest 91 after year-long federal gun, gang investigation in Palm Beach County
The Tremont settlement covers more than one dozen U.S. and foreign investment funds and their affiliates.
Combined with earlier accords, it “sends a strong message that the financial community cannot deliberately ignore indicia of fraud,” David Sheehan, a lawyer for Picard, said in a statement.
As part of the accord, once the more than $1 billion sum is released from escrow, Picard will allow in excess of $3 billion of customer claims related to the Rye Select and Tremont funds against the Madoff firm’s bankruptcy estate.
The accord gives Tremont customers a chance to recover a “substantial portion” of their losses, spokesman Montieth Illingworth said in a statement. “Bringing this matter to a close, with proofs of claim preserved, was the best outcome.”
Madoff, 73, pleaded guilty in March 2009, and is serving a 150-year prison sentence inNorth Carolina.
Tremont and its now-defunct Rye Investment Management unit lost more than $3 billion of client money sent to Madoff’s firm, whose liquidation is being overseen by Picard.
Picard had alleged in his complaint that Tremont earned as much as $240 million in fees tied to Madoff, including more than $180 million in the six years before the fraud was uncovered in December 2008.
“If the defendants were ignorant of the fraud, it was because they failed in their due diligence and investment management obligations,” Picard said. “They quite simply did not want to know, remaining willfully ignorant in order to maximize their own profits and serve their own self-interest.”
Leave a reply