Victims Stanford hold Central Bank responsible

March 25, 2009 7:37 AM

ORANJESTAD –– On behalf of two clients on Aruba and Curaçao, law office Van Giffen wants to bring charges against the Central Bank of  Aruba (CBA) on account of failing supervision in the fraude case of Stanford International Bank. The clients hold the CBA responsible in view of an article in the Amigoe of February 19th, where co-workers of the bank indicated to be worried about Stanford since the law on credit institutes (LTK) was implemented ten years ago.

This law protects small investors through compulsory support and advice with investments above 100.000 florins. A large portion of the parked money amounted to just less than a hundred thousand florins.  Furthermore, Stanford was not registered as a bank in the trade register and therefore not under supervision of the Central Bank. Nevertheless, states lawyer Gabri de Hoogd that CBA has neglected to take supervisory measures to protect his clients and other accountholders with Stanford.  “The Central Bank had various instrument arias since 1998/2003 yet they did not take any action. If they had  intervened , than my clients would not have made any deposits or reclaimed monies  (and received such); now  it is too late, for which  the Central Bank is to blame",  says De Hoogd.

SEC
According to the lawyer, his two clients approached him at the moment  that their bank assets were frozen; so before the article appeared in the Amigoe on February 19th.  De Hoogd estimates the number of victims at ‘a few hundred’.  “They are not only residing on Aruba, but also (for example) on Curaçao and in the Netherlands. In principle my office does not approach anybody; clients may of course present themselves.”  Beside the article in the Amigoe, De Hoogd also wants to quote the results of the American Securities and Exchange Commission  (SEC),  where it’s concluded  hat the SEC has been monitoring Stanford since July  2008. That research accelerated when the billion fraud of Bernard Madoff came into light.  Owner Robert Allen Stanford informed his 30.000 clients in February (prior to the freezing of all assets) that he had not invested in Madoff. However, the SEC determined very quickly that such was the case and that Stanford had become a victim of Madoff. Meanwhile the SEC has started their own procedure against Stanford International Bank.  

Immediate charges
In addition, lawy office HBN Law wants to immediately press charges against Stanford on behalf of the victims on Aruba and the Antilles.
They are now busy approaching victims in order to collectively share the costs for this case. The problem with immediately pressing charges against Stanford International is that according to De Hoogd a receiver -a kind of curator- has been appointed. “Who has frozen all assets. This could take years. Meanwhile no one can do anything.” In the appeal filed by De Hoogd with the Central Bank it appears that in the case of Stanford there’s a  question of fraud to the amount of 8 billion dollars. 

“The chance that the victims will recover their monies from Stanford is highly unlikely in view of the situation”. Of course, the victims will reserve all their rights with regard to Stanford. According to my clients, the Central Bank of Aruba has neglected to supervise.  The appeal requests the return of their invested amount by March 30th at the latest.  To recover the damage from elsewhere, the Central Bank of Aruba has been charged.

(Source: National newspaper Amigoe)

March 24, 2009