Over the last few weeks there have been quite a number of unfounded rumors spread by some less than scrupulous investors, and it appears, at least one of their attorneys too, against our team members and our attorney. Amongst the unfounded rumors are that some members of the team were accused of accepting illegal referral fees and other commissions. So offended was our attorney, Dr Kachroo, she had the good grace to issue a denial and denouncement of the practice, and invited the other Stanford attorneys to do the same. So far none have accepted. There has also been unwarranted criticism of our attorney’s qualifications and experience, which amounts no less than five law degrees, a Harvard doctorate, and never having lost a case in her 23 year career. Could any of the other Stanford attorneys with comparable qualifications and experience please stand up and be counted?
One comment we saw this week, from one of the other Stanford attorneys, went like this:
“..Carefully consider any proposal, especially if a lawyer is asking for money upfront….and also carefully consider that lawyer's professional experience….there is a big difference between FILING a lawsuit and winning one…. I hope you are considering these issues”
A very valid comment, very worthy of consideration, in particular with regard to how it may equally apply to some of the other Stanford attorneys, who have collected considerable upfront fees, to have thus far only filed lawsuits that appear to be going nowhere fast, and managed to duck ‘the big one.’
The Stanford Examiner, who chairs the Investors Committee, on which four such attorneys sit, last week put in his two cents and finally issued one of his rare statements. He painted an unnecessarily dull picture of the likelihood of success of FTCA claims against the SEC; but then he is appointed by the same Judge who appointed the Stanford Receiver, at the request of the SEC, so there’s no surprise then.
The same Examiner also referred to the fact he knew of only one attorney bringing such claims (ours), but stopped short of naming her, and has still not added her firm’s details to his Counsel Roster. The Investors Committee that he chairs has waited until the very last possible opportunity to advise investors they have this option, and what if we had not taken this initiative? Would the Statute of Limitations have been allowed to slip quietly by?
Some of the investors and their attorneys who sit on the Investors Committee, insisted our attorney attend a grilling by the Committee, in Dallas not so long ago, and initially offered to pass on our attorneys details and proposal as being in the best interests of their own clients, but have since desperately sought to understand our attorneys arguments, have become very protective, and are now offering their own services to their clients, but are apparently not willing to subsequently litigate if any of their claims are rejected, or ineligible.
The deadline for FTCA claims against the US Securities and Exchange Commission is approaching fast. This is a real possibility for a full recovery of losses due to the negligence of the SEC in not spotting the fraud perpetuated by Allen Stanford from his Stanford International Bank, a part of the former Stanford Financial Group, and is open to all Stanford investors, irrespective of nationality or place of residence. The SEC were aware for 13 years that Stanford was likely operating a Ponzi scheme, and had they acted sooner instead of watching porn all day, many thousands of investors would have been spared the loss of their life savings.
Please contact your attorney without delay, or the attorney hired by the Stanford International investors: Kachroo Legal Services, Cambridge, Mass., who already has considerable experience of submitting FTCA claims for the Madoff investors, and is also willing to litigate against the SEC should it become necessary.
Email:info@kachroolegal.com
No comments:
Post a Comment