Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1021

ENDORSED LETTER: addressed to Judge Victor Marrero from Alexander B. Richardson dated 1/10/2013 re: Alexander B. Richardson writes I refer to the Notice of a Proposed Settlement recently sent to Investors in the Fairfield funds. I wish to object to the terms of the proposed settlement in accordance with page 12, paragraph 19 of the notice. I object to the settlement for the following reasons as set forth in this letter. ENDORSEMENT: The Clerk of Court is directed to enter into the public record of this action the letter above submitted to the Court by Alexander B. Richardson. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 1/24/2013) (js)

PO Box 20613
Manama
Bahrain
Tel No. [phone]

Clerk of the Court
United States District Court,
Southern District of New York
United States Courthouse
500 Pean Street
New York, NY 10007-1312
U.S.A

10 January 2013

Dear Sirs,
Re. Pashar S. Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Umited et al
Civil Action No. 09-cv-118
I refer to the Notice of a Proposed Settlement recently sent to Investors in the
Fairfield funds. I wish to object to the terms of the proposed settlement in accordance with
page 12, paragraph 19 of the notice. I object to the settlement for the following reasons:
1. The sum proposed to be settled with the FG Defendants, even if the full $80 million
is eventually received, represents a pathetically small sum compared to the
hundreds of millions of dollars which Fairfield Greenwich Bermuda (and in particular
the defendants, Messrs Noel, Tucker and Piedrahita) earned in management and
performance fees over the life of the Fairfield fund. For example, from the audited
accounts of Fairfield Sentry approved by the Board of Directors, including Mr Noel.
Fairfield Greenwich received management and performance fees of $183 million for
year ended 31/1212007, $157 million for year ended 31/1212006 and $138 million for
the year ended 3111212005 -or $478 million of fees for these three years alone and
Fairfield had a twenty year relationship with Madoff. A settlement of $80 million
repres.nts I.ss th.n 17% of the tiles earned by F.irfield Grwenwioh for th.se

thrwe y••rs .Ione. In comparison investors .... being offered. return .5 •
result of this settlement of. 1.55 th.n 2% of the I.st .udited fUnd v.lu•.
2. The Board of Directors and in particular the defendant Mr Noel signed off the 31
December 2007 accounts to the effect that $6.9 Billion of Fairfield Sentry's total
assets of $7.2 Billion were invested in US Treasury Bills when this was cleany totally
fictitious. Mr Noel needs to be held fully accountable for his actions. especially as
the auditors, PWC. will undoubtedly say that they relied on his assurances that the
assets existed.
3. On its website Fairfield advertised how strong its ·undenltandlnll oIwheth.r a
hedg. fund poa..... k.y controla In the a..... 01 portfolio man.".m.nt.
con#ficca 0I1nt.weat, .."....."on of duD_ and complianc•• FGG carefully
. . . . . . . the oontroIa and pmcedu.... th", man...,. have in place and ...k.
fo t:Im""in. aotual compliance with thoae pmcedul'N, otten .ullllutinll
modlfioatlona, npanrtiona of reaponaibillti. and remedial fItIIIr actiona" .
Investors of course relied on assurances of this kind when investing with Fairfield
and in tum Fairfield, and in particular Messrs Noel, Piedrehita and Tucker, need to
be held fully accountable for their actions and statements.

4. The funds proposed to be paid to the lawyers at 25% of the settlement represent far
too high a retum compared to the 3 % being offered to investors.
In conclusion I object wholeheartedly to this proposed settlement. Fairfield Greenwich and in
particular Messrs Noel, Tucker and Piedrehita and their families made themselves
enormously wealthy by taking the decision to invest the plaintiffs savings almost exclusively
with Madoff for nearly twenty years. They need to be held fully accountable for those actions.
Similar1y the lawyers who have taken on this class aelion on behalf of the investors need to
show the stomach to take this fight on against both classes of defendants, i.e. included and
excluded defendants; to trial if necessary as many investors have lost everything and it is
inconceivable that the FG Defendants did not or should not have known of Madoffs fraud for
years.
I t;tlso feel that this settt:ement offer is seriously deficient in terms of the information provided
to investors, for example a) how mucll did Fairfield receive in terms of management and
performance fees over the life of the funds and the funds' investment in Madoff compared
with b) what was the total net investment lost by investors? I expect that the fees received by
Fairfield represent a very substantial proportion, if not the majority, of the amount lost by
investors. Similar1y how much did Messrs Noel, Tucker and Piedrehita eam from Fairfield
over the years? Again I expect it was several multiples of the amounts now being offered as
settlement. I feel these numbers need to be provided to investors before any meaningful
settlement discussions can be held with these parties.

Yours faithfully,

Investor in Fairfield Sentry (proof of holding of 34.97 shares enclosed) with nil
redemptions

'

..

CITCO
e.m. pw.u Stn"Pius
(Bw.~I') ... v.

_1'1072

.,...

.......
HoIdIr ...

:USIXlllAR

BallI

p.o.

: ....1+2008
Oct-31-2008
:03302.

: tlO430202

,,"••IIt...
Oil•...."

: AIIRDtOHCJTMAD-(X)M

fAX .........

.Al..EU1IDER IIERIIARD IIIOtAItDISOII

: 00!J714 2833895

y

DUBAI
u.A.I!.

ALI!JWIDIR IERIIA.'U) R1CHARD5OII
AaIDunt: ALEXAIIDIR IIERIIARD RICHARDSOII

7

.......

:

:00381821

FAIRFIELD SENt RY LIMITED
RIND NET ASSEIVAWES
1,350.6040
1,349.7782

MX:OUNT VAWE
OpenIng ........ YlIIIIe 01 ~
MIll AdIIIIIotw
L-= SUIIb.......
No bllllSldons In pertod
CIoIIIng . . . . . V.... 01 AalDunt
Ott-31-2008
I~ - ........ lit - a t.... due tit dIenge lit tile ..... lit tile pertod

34.9iOO
0.0000 .
0.0000

34.9700

1,350.6040

1,349.7782

47.230.62
0.00
0.00
47,201.74

-28.88

Nola: AI ........... -... Jull . . . . . . . . . . . IIIt11e ..... oI ... lIIJCIIIIptolCIMIIII............. 5.,., ..... c.t.MtClb»

IRlRlI . . . ./.

. 'The Clerk of Court is directed to enter into the public record
of . action the letter above s~mitted to the Court by
13. J:.( ( G-k.".-~ 1

For R'IOI'8 Information or any InqWtes, please contact Ctm lmIestor ReIiItIons Group
TeJ: (31-20) sn 2850 Fax: (31-20) sn 2610 E-mail: amstenJalllwebOdb::o.c:om

T,,,,,.,..,

Cit#.....lIIi.

n'""­ -

N.ri_..,l4S
1043 BW A.".,..,.,.
ThN.tIwrl. . .

Plnnt.: (31-20) 5722100
PIUI: (31-20) 5722610
c.Mu.... _/C.",,,,"" 33205112

Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

500 PEARL STREET

NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007

~~-~~~~

CrU",ivI8EAS OF

JUDGE MARRERO

RICHARD WILSON

CHiEf DEPUTY CLERK

MEMORANDUM
TO:

Hon. Victor Marrero

FROM:

Richard Wilson
Chief Deputy Clerk ~

DATE:

January 23, 2013

RE:

Pashar S. Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al
09-cv-118

~

For your review, I am forwarding you a correspondence received
from Mr. Alexander B. Richardson, regarding the above referenced
matter.

!fyou have any questions, please contact me at extension 0149.