OffshoreAlert
Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
Spongetech - Clearview International and Double-U Trading shares
Internal Administrator
Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011
Joined: 10/12/2010
Posts: 5780


Posted: 11/10/2010 5:15:39 PM

By: Hunter

Link to Declaration of Charles C. Davis, Jr.
http://www.alabamaagainstfraud.com/ALAFBoard/OTCBB/SpongetechCharlesDavisDecl.pdf

This is from SEC v. Spongetech Delivery Systems Inc, RM Enterprises International Inc., Steven Y. Moskowitz, others

SEGMENTS FROM DECLARATION
Beginning in approximately April 2007, Spongetech and its principals began to make public statements that the fledgling company was finally taking off, pointing to millions of dollars in orders it claimed to have received from an entity
that would distribute its product in South America called, variously, "SA Trading Group Corp.," "SA Trading," or "SA Trading Company" (hereinafter "SA Trading"). (See Exhibit C annexed).

Using contact information, provided to the investigative staff by Spongetech's principals and its then counsel, the staff was unable to verify the existence of the five alleged foreign customer companies.

The investigative subpoenas sent to those companies were delivered to what turned out to be virtual offices that had
recently been set up by a Spongetech consultant, George Speranza ("Speranza"), a defendant in this action.

As of October 13,2009, based on transfer agent records I have reviewed, there were 2,999,984,950 authorized and outstanding shares of Spongetech. (See Exhibit P annexed).

Through RM Enterprises and other related entities who share a business address with RM Enterprises, Spongetech distributed approximately 2.5 billion of its shares into the public market in unregistered transactions. (See Exhibits S & T
annexed).

Restricted shares of Spongetech, distributed to RM Enterprises and other affiliates, were further distributed without restrictive legends pursuant to attorney opinion letters, many from Joel Pensley ("Pensley") and Jack Halperin ("Halperin").

For example, during July and August 2009, RM Enterprises received $8,207,750 from an entity named Acacia Investors LLC in twenty-six separate wire transfers. Brokerage records and transfer agent records I have reviewed show that Acacia
was one of the largest beneficiaries of Spongetech' s distribution of shares. Acacia received Spongetech shares through RM Enterprises, and its affiliates,
AIT Capital, Asset Management and Wesley Equities. (See Exhibits S & T annexed).

CLEARVIEW INTERNATIONAL INVESTMETS SHARES
For another example, on June 25,2009, Spongetech issued 21,000,000 restricted shares to Wesley Equities. (See Exhibit MM annexed). Four days later, using an attorney opinion letter from Halperin, those shares were re-issued by the transfer
agent as unrestricted shares to Clearview International Investments, an Israeli nominee company that I learned, from a 2007 Department of Justice press release, was implicated in an international money laundering scheme. (See Exhibit NN &
00 annexed). Clearview International Investments sold those shares for approximately $2,310,000 ($0.11 per share) and wired $1,679,985 ($.08 per share) from a Canadian bank account back to Wesley Equities. (See Exhibit PP annexed). Upon receipt of the wire, Wesley Equities immediately transferred
$1,654,985 to RM Enterprises via intra-bank debit memo. (See Exhibit PP annexed).

DOUBLE U TRADING SHARES
For another example, on June 25,2009, Spongetech issued 21,500,000 shares to AIT Capital. (See Exhibit QQ annexed). Within one week, on June 29,2009, using an attorney opinion letters from Halperin, those shares were re-issued by the
transfer agent as unrestricted shares to Double U Trading, an entity in the Virgin Islands. (See Exhibit RR annexed). Double U Trading sold those shares for approximately $2,365,000 ($0.11 per share) and then wired a total of$I,719,985
($0.08 per share) back to AIT Capital on July 2,2009. (See Exhibit SS annexed).
The wire from Double U Trading originated from the same Canadian bank account as that of Clearview International Investments. (See Exhibit PP annexed). Upon receipt ofthe wire, AIT Capital immediately transferred $1,675,000 to RM Enterprises via intra-bank debit memo. (See Exhibit SS annexed).



 

Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.