Ok so you might find the next few links interesting. These are from around the web, just random snippets that I’ve picked up in my reading, but I found some very cool information in them. You might too. Here goes…

Madoff trustee and law firm submit US$22.1M bill

Bernard Madoff's bankruptcy trustee and the law firm employing him have asked a US judge to be awarded. … 15, 2008 to April 30, 2009 period, comprising more than 38270 hours of work. Mr. Picard is separately seeking US$835605 of fees for the May 1 to Sept. 30 period for acting as trustee for the Securities Investor Protection Corp, the federally chartered agency that supervises brokerage liquidations. He was previously awarded US$759229 for the 4-1/2 months ended April …

Madoff Fee Watch – Bankruptcy Beat – WSJ

Irving Picard, the lawyer winding down Bernard Madoff's investment firm, has charged the firm's bankruptcy estate about $1.6 billion since he took the job. … Bankruptcy Beat. An inside look at companies in trouble from Daily Bankruptcy Review. The Daily Docket: Reliance Offers To Buy Lyondell. November 23, 2009, 1:34 PM ET …

N.J. computer programmer who worked for Bernard Madoff is arrested …

NJ computer programmer who worked for Bernard Madoff is arrested by FBI Evans Java blogging site. I use this site to write about Evans, Java and other technology related issues. If you name is Evans and would like to post here, let us know. … two former computer programmers for Bernard Madoff's investment firm on charges they helped cover up his massive fraud for more than 15 years. Thanks for information. Posted by flash speicher on November 14, 2009 at 06:26 AM GMT # …

Hope you enjoy the read as much as I did and please if you have something to say, use the comments form below to let everyone know your thoughts.

Have a great day!

Arthur Levitt, Jr. was the longest serving head of the SEC. Do a Google search on him, see what pops up.

He was appointed by Clinton in 1993 and again in 1998. He left in 2001, so he covered the entire Clinton administration.

Levitt gave Madoff a free pass because they were both members of the Harmonie Club, a social club for the ultra wealthy in NYC.

Madoff was first reported to the SEC in 1992:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/…
Report: Regulator was tipped off about Madoff fraud as early as 1992
“a suspicion of trouble at Madoff Investment Securities arose as early as 1992 when customers of Avellino & Bienes, a fund that invested all its money with Madoff, complained about documents making a seemingly impossible promise of “100%” safe investments. Although the SEC shut down Avellino & Bienes, the agency only made a “brief and very limited” examination of Madoff.”

Avellino & Bienes was shut down by the SEC in 1993, the year Levitt took charge.

Levitt also gave a special exemption to Enron, exempting it from accounting rules. This special exemption led directly to the Enron scam and the subsequent meltdown of the company, which took down a major chunk of the economy with it. It also led to the discovery of similar fraud at many other companies, fraud that got its start in the Clinton years.

BTW, this fraud was busted on Bush's watch. So if Bush was buddies with Kenny Boy, he wasn't a very good friend. Not as good as Levitt and Madoff.

If I was going to pick one individual who was most responsible for the rampant fraud of the Clinton years, it would have to be Art Levitt.

BTW, did I mention that Clinton appointed him TWICE? That's unprecedented. Most SEC chairs had a tenure of two or three years. The second longest was five years for Manuel Cohen under JFK.

Levitt stayed as the chair for Clinton's ENTIRE EIGHT YEARS.

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, madoff

Who is Bernard L.Madoff?

Another Zionists that rubbed the people of my country, 50 billion dollars, where did he hide the money ?

“He was born in New York to a Jewish family and is married to Ruth Madoff. He has homes in Roslyn, New York, Montauk, New York, and an apartment on Manhattan's Upper East Side valued at more than $5 million. He also owns homes in Palm Beach, Florida and France and is a member of the Palm Beach Country Club. He owns a 55-foot fishing boat, named “Bull.”

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Related posts on Bernard Madoff 50
• ponzi schemes and hyips – free money traps
• nrd hittop 15 nr. 3, 2e jaargang
• nrd hittop 15 nummer 2, 2e jaargang

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, Bernard Madoff 50

Who is Bernard L.Madoff?

Another Zionists that rubbed the people of my country, 50 billion dollars, where did he hide the money ?

“He was born in New York to a Jewish family and is married to Ruth Madoff. He has homes in Roslyn, New York, Montauk, New York, and an apartment on Manhattan's Upper East Side valued at more than $5 million. He also owns homes in Palm Beach, Florida and France and is a member of the Palm Beach Country Club. He owns a 55-foot fishing boat, named “Bull.”

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Related posts on Bernard Madoff 50
• ponzi schemes and hyips – free money traps
• nrd hittop 15 nr. 3, 2e jaargang
• Bolsavik.com » Blog Archive » OC Viet man prosecuted for stealing …

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, Bernard Madoff 50

Another Zionists that rubbed the people of my country, 50 billion dollars, where did he hide the money ?

“He was born in New York to a Jewish family and is married to Ruth Madoff. He has homes in Roslyn, New York, Montauk, New York, and an apartment on Manhattan's Upper East Side valued at more than $5 million. He also owns homes in Palm Beach, Florida and France and is a member of the Palm Beach Country Club. He owns a 55-foot fishing boat, named “Bull.”

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Related posts on Bernard Madoff 50
• ponzi schemes and hyips – free money traps
• nrd hittop 15 nr. 3, 2e jaargang
• nrd hittop 15 nummer 2, 2e jaargang

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, Bernard Madoff 50

Through A Lens Darkly-the Pervasive Effects Of The Economy On Divorce Are Yet To Be Revealed

By Dorothy K. Phillips And Sydney Coutts Mason
Special to the Law Weekly

The deteriorating economy has become the lens through which we view everything in these difficult days and it has changed our perspective.

There have been many articles in the news recently about the economy’s effect on divorce. Money troubles can place tremendous stress on a relationship, making some people feel it is impossible for them to stay together. But the troubles that many couples are experiencing in today’s financial climate are also making it extremely difficult for them to break apart.

On a very basic level, breaking up is more expensive than staying together because where there was once one household, now there must be two. If there is a shared child-custody arrangement, the expenses for each household are even higher, as each residence must provide enough space and supplies for the children. This may be more difficult for couples to manage in these times, especially if one or both of them is unemployed. Therefore, the media has focused on couples who are putting off divorce because they feel they simply can’t afford to do so. However, deciding not to divorce is not a remedy. The couple needs to find a way to coexist in the same household, without making each other or their children miserable.

Value of the Assets

The couple who decides to go forward with divorce must determine what the economy has done to the value of the marital assets. Historically, the most valuable asset was the marital home. A common method of distribution was to award the home to one spouse who would borrow against the property to compensate the other for his or her share of the property. Often one spouse has a retirement asset that can be awarded to offset the value of the equity in the house. Alternatively, the parties could sell the home and divide the net proceeds. In the past year, values for both of these significant assets have plummeted. The parties may now find they actually owe more on the mortgage than the property could sell for in this current depressed real estate market. These difficult times create a harrowing situation for the court, which bears the responsibility for formulating a fair and equitable distribution of the marital assets.

Courts usually rely upon real estate appraisals to set a fair market value for real property in the marital estate. Appraisals generally use recent sales of comparable properties in the area to come up with a value. But with so few sales occurring, the possibility of such appraisals is limited due to a lack of sales and, thus, a lack of “comps.” The court is then forced to place a market value on the property in a market which many economists argue is broken. Therefore, a reasonable fair market value by historical use of comps is not possible. Banks recently succeeded in arguing it was unfair to require them to use current market values in all cases. Similarly, in the context of equitable distribution, it seems clear that courts are going to have to come up with some means of valuing real property which will satisfy the Divorce Code’s policy of accomplishing economic justice between the parties.

Beyond the question of valuing the property for purposes of equitable distribution, the court and the parties will have to deal with the practical implications of this market as well. If a couple owes more on their house than it is currently worth, how to treat that situation to perform economic justice?

The parties may decide that the best course of action is to hold on to the property, hoping that market values will rebound in the future. A common situation is where one spouse wants to keep residing in the home with the children. Assuming the mortgage payment is affordable for the parties, one solution could be to put off the division of the value of the house. It may be possible to hold on to the property for a number of years, usually until the last child completes school, with the expectation that the property will be sold at the end of that time and the proceeds divided in a specified manner. The benefit of this option is that the parties do not have to risk the value of their investment in the property in the current market. On the other hand, one drawback is that they would have to wait to realize the proceeds. They would have to continue to work together to ensure that the mortgage and property taxes were paid. Also, the party not residing in the property would have to trust that the party in the home would continue to maintain it appropriately.

Once a divorce decree is granted, the fiction of the marital “tenants-by-the-entireties” ends and the parties become tenants-in-common by operation of law. Creditors of either party of a married couple cannot reach tenancy-by-the-entireties property. As to property owned as tenants-in-common, judgment creditors of one party could encumber that party’s ownership interest in the property. A judgment creditor could also file for partition and force the sale of the property. Therefore, exercising this option is not always a safe or wise choice.

Further, holding on to a home until the real estate market “comes back” is not a realistic option for parties who are already experiencing financial difficulties. If one spouse is unemployed or has experienced a reduction of income, the parties may not be able to afford to continue to make mortgage payments. One can envision a situation where a house has become a money pit, requiring exorbitant maintenance expenditures.

What was once their showplace of a home, something that felt totally appropriate when the family unit was intact, may now seem an unsupportable extravagance. An intact family may be willing to be house poor — to pay too large a proportion of their income on house payments and maintenance expenses — for a variety of reasons. However it makes little sense for a couple getting divorced to do so.

In this situation, the parties could try to sell the home in the current market, understanding that they may end up owing money rather than realizing any proceeds from the sale. They are far better advised to negotiate a short-sale for the property, in which case they would make a deal with their mortgage lender to sell the property for less than the property is worth. The lender would then take all the proceeds and mark the loan paid. Another option would be to allow the bank to foreclose on the property. Alternatively, the parties could declare bankruptcy. All of these options would have adverse effects on the parties’ credit ratings. A short-sale might even result in a tax bill from the IRS, as forgiveness of debt may be considered taxable income.

It is therefore conceivable that some parties could become divorced and receive little more than a share of the furnishings from the house, reduced retirement accounts and the family dog, yet still satisfied that they did not get saddled with further debt.

After the Smoke Clears

So you thought your divorce settlement was safe because you finalized it last year, before the economy really went sour. Think again. Sure, you may have dealt with the issue of distributing the marital home, but what about continuing obligations, such as alimony, child support and pay-outs of equitable distribution amounts?

Many have lost jobs, or are earning less, thereby affecting their ability to pay support and/or alimony. Pay-outs for equitable distribution may not be posssible. The poor economy has affected the ability to pay for extras for children, such as private school and camp. A party who has been ordered to pay for support cannot discharge the obligation by filing for bankruptcy: in general, domestic support obligations are excepted from discharge in bankruptcy. The current language of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) provides, in pertinent part:

“(a) A discharge under … this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt … (5) for a domestic support obligation; … (15) to a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor and not of the kind described in paragraph (5) that is incurred by the debtor in the course of a divorce or separation or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record, or a determination made in accordance with State or territorial law by a governmental unit.”

In Pennsylvania, a party may seek modification of a court-ordered amount of alimony “upon changed circumstances of either party of a substantial and continuing nature.” In addition, a
parent may seek a change in a child support order upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances.

Significant changes in income may qualify as a material change in circumstances thereby warranting a reduction of child or spousal support. Pursuant to Pa. R. C. P. 1910.16-2(d), a voluntary reduction of income generally will have no effect on a support obligation. But the rule does allow for a support reduction when the income reduction is not voluntary: “[A]ppropriate adjustments will be made for substantial continuing involuntary decreases in income, including but not limited to the result of illness, lay-off, termination, job elimination or some other employment situation over which the party has no control.” Pa. R. C. P. 1910.16-2(d)(2).

Even when a parent has lost his or her job involuntarily, he or she cannot go without income indefinitely. Domestic Relations Offices will attach unemployment payments to pay support orders. It is expected that the unemployed party will seek a new job that would pay an appropriate income based on his or her situation, or risk being assigned an earning capacity:

“Ordinarily, either party to a support action who willfully fails to obtain appropriate employment will be considered to have an income equal to the party’s earning capacity. Age, education, training, health, work experience, earnings history and child care responsibilities are factors which shall be considered in determining earning capacity.”

Of course, when the Pennsylvania Support statute and Rules of Civil Procedure became law, this downtrodden economy could not have even been imagined. People today have never experienced such a “recession” as is happening now. Courts will continue to face an increase in the number of petitions for modification as the unemployment rate continues to rise. In evaluating these petitions, courts will need to determine whether that party made realistic efforts to find reasonable substitute employment. In an economy where one sees news stories of former CEO’s who are delivering pizzas and of attorneys who have been laid off tending bar, the question of what is “reasonable” is going to have to change. Expenses for which parents were ordered to pay because they were a customary part of the family’s lifestyle — such as summer camps and private schools — may need to be eliminated to formulate an order that is more appropriate to the parents’ present income.

Beyond the question of ongoing support obligations, it is conceivable that we may see some parties attempt to challenge the finality of property settlement agreements. In a case out of New York, a partner in a law firm is seeking to reopen his 2006 property settlement agreement, under which he paid $2.7 million in cash to his spouse to so that he could keep the parties’ investments ($5.4 million) with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities. The husband had so much confidence in the Madoff fund at the time of the parties’ divorce that he was willing to buy out his spouse’s share of the investments.

If the New York court allows this case to proceed, it will open the door for many similar suits, truly muddying the waters for many former spouses who thought their divorces were a “done deal” and that their lives were financially secure. Perhaps Lasik is necessary to correct the economic ills of divorce court. •

Dorothy K. Phillips is the founder and managing partner of DorothyK.Phillips & Associates in Philadelphia. She focuses her practice on domestic relations law. A former family therapist, she is a frequent author and lecturer on a variety of family law issues.

Sydney Coutts Mason, a 1991 graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Law School and former law clerk to the Honorable Stephen E. Levin of the Philadelphia Court of Common
Pleas, is a member of DorothyK.Phillips & Associates. She is admitted in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

By: Dorothy Phillips

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

For more information about Dorothy K. Phillips, visit www.mydivorceattorney.com

Click the XML Icon Above to Receive Legal Articles Via RSS!Additional Articles From – Home | Reference & Education | LegalWhat Is Probably the most Thing For You Headed for Appearance For In a DWI Lawyer?
What Is The best Factor For You To Appearance For In a DWI Lawyer?
Accident Personal Injury Claim
Understanding ‘No Win, No Fee’ Agreement
Compensation claim by No Win, No Fee Agreement
There Are Loads of Different Sorts of Speed Traps On The Road
There Are Several Different Various Speed Traps On The Road
Did You Ever Noticed Politicians as well as Judges Got a Breathalyzer Test?
What Is Several Factor Used for You Toward Appearance For In a DWI Lawyer?
Primary Indulgence of DWI Laws

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Related posts on madoff
• Internet scam targets Madoff victims | Insurance Quotes Online
• Lionheart Group Scam Prevention Tips | Madoff Victims Join …
• Bernie Madoff could have created this system «blog …

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, madoff

Ok so 3 more posts today that I’ve dug up – I’m an information JUNKIE on this stuff lately. Give em a browse and let me know what ya reckon. They’re just from a few different sites I’ve been surfing lately that are generally good for information like this…

Two Former Computer Programmers for Bernard L. Madoff Charged with …

Two Former Computer Programmers for Bernard L. Madoff Charged with Conspiracy and Falsifying Books and Records. Date Tuesday, November 17, 2009 at 6:56PM. PREET BHARARA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, …

Medal that marked hanging of ’19th century Madoff’ up for grabs …

Medal that marked hanging of '19th century Madoff' up for grabs. by ANI on November 19, 2009. in World. London, November 19 (ANI): A 19th century medal created to mark the hanging of a cheating banker has been put up for sale in London. … The souvenir may remind one of Bernard Madoff, 71, who defrauded thousands of investors of billions of dollars with his Ponzi scheme, leading to speculation that his swindle was “the largest investment fraud in Wall Street history”. …

Skeptical CPA: Madoff on the SEC

Friday, November 20, 2009. Madoff on the SEC. “Bernard Madoff was dismissive of a compliance examiner involved in a [SEC] inspection into his firm, calling the man a 'blowhard' who talked tough, but didn't look at anything. …

Hope you enjoy the read as much as I did and please if you have something to say, use the comments form below to let everyone know your thoughts.

Have a great day!

Top 5 Tips For Protecting Yourself Against Investment Fraud

A down economy can inflict panic in people from all walks of life. Scam artists are professionals at exploiting these feelings of fear and uneasiness, persuading otherwise financially sophisticated individuals to participate in unrealistic, deceptive “investment opportunities.” Bernie Madoff’s recent $50 billion Ponzi scheme has heightened our awareness of investment scams, placing a much-needed spotlight on the thousands of other con artists searching for those seeking a quick way to recover losses. Scams can take on many different forms, but there are ways to protect yourself against investment fraud. The Asset Advisory Group’s Jeanette Jones offers her top five tips.

1. Beware of investment opportunities that claim guaranteed returns. No legitimate financial advisor will ever promise a risk-free investment. Periods of high financial stress often bring out scammers who promise miracle money strategies. There is no such thing as a “secret guaranteed trading strategy” – if you hear these words, insist that you see proof of the investor’s success. Also, be cautious of special access investments. Though no one is quite sure exactly how Madoff’s Ponzi scheme operated fully, we do know that the plot relied heavily on secrecy and exclusivity. When working with a financial planner or firm, transparency and accountability are key.

2. If it sounds too good to be true, walk away. Investment scammers are smart. They understand that after suffering huge losses in 2008, many people are feeling frantic – desperate to earn back money and regain a sense of control over their investment portfolios. Sophisticated con artists prey on this anxiety, and many tailor each pitch toward the needs of a person’s unique financial situation. Ask questions an
1000
d demand to see previous results. Promises of high profits are tempting, but as they say, the proof is in the pudding. If any part of the business feels shady or is kept under tight wraps, move on.

3. Understand your investments. Many investment schemes seem alluring because they’re packaged in a complex manner designed to appeal to highly educated, often wealthy, investors. If the company’s strategies or product offerings are so complicated that a normal person of normal financial literacy cannot comprehend them, they are probably fraudulent. A good rule of thumb – invest only in what you fully understand. Legitimate professionals will be able to explain their investment approach in great detail, including the risks and how the investment will make you money. Even after you engage with an investment firm, be adamant in your requests to see regular written reports and explanations. This will keep the lines of communication open and provide an avenue for accountability.

4. Perform a background check. A legitimate investment firm will be properly licensed or registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) or a state securities regulator, depending on the type of business. Make sure the investment advisor or broker has not had any previous disputes with regulators or other investors. Request audited financial statements for the organization, which should provide an independent, trustworthy outlook of the investment operation.

5. Don’t fall for high-pressure tactics. No reputable financial advisor will rush you into making a quick investment decision. Take the time to do your own investigating. If the opportunity is legitimate, there should be a plethora of information regarding the recommended investment or fund. If not, run in the opposite direction. With the recent surge of devastating investment fraud cases, it is best to play it safe and steer clear of any opportunity that is waving big red flags (or even small ones).

By: Jeanette Jones

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

Jeanette Jones is a Lead Advisor and Owner at The Asset Advisory Group, an independent Cincinnati financial advisory firm that manages investments for high net worth individuals and their families. A Cum Laude graduate of The Ohio State University, Jeannette has more than 25 years experience in the financial services industry. Prior to founding The Asset Advisory Group in 1988, she served as an auditor with KPMG International accounting firm and a commercial lending officer with KeyBank.

Click the XML Icon Above to Receive Investing Articles Via RSS!< 1000
/div>
Additional Articles From – Home | Finance | Investing

Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) Plans Using IRAs
Money Making Mentality
Retirement Income Planning Ahead
How To Swing Trade Earnings
On BSE and Stock Trading
Watching Information Live for The Right Investment
It costs you just $20,000 to buy a $1 million home
ES Emini Day Trading: Setting Profit Limits and Loss Limits a Good Idea
How does Efficient Market Account for Fear, Greed and Risk Taking?
ES Emini Day Trading: Welles Wilders Continuing Legacy in Technical Trading

Technorati Tags: Bernard Madoff 2009, madoff