Latest news with #352
GMA Network
09-07-2025
- General
- GMA Network
No winners of major lotto jackpot draws on Wednesday, July 9, 2025
The Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) said there were no winners of the major lotto jackpot draws on Wednesday, July 9, 2025. The winning numbers for the Grand Lotto 6/55 jackpot worth P29,700,000.00 are 52-13-40-27-05-11. For Megalotto 6/45, the correct combination of 22-44-37-15-28-24, would have given a jackpot of P10,352,639.60. For more lotto results, visit here. — RF, GMA Integrated News
Mint
18-06-2025
- Business
- Mint
Jefferies Sues Regional Bank Over Alleged Water Machine Scam
(Bloomberg) -- A Jefferies Financial Group hedge fund widened its legal fight to recover more than $100 million that its former portfolio manager invested in an alleged fraud scheme involving water vending machines. Jefferies' 352 Capital sued Port Angeles, Washington's First Fed Bank last week in Seattle, claiming the First Northwest Bancorp subsidiary was aware of the alleged fraud. But the bank facilitated the scheme in order to prioritize repayment of its own loans to the machine company and its franchisees, 352 said. The suit is the latest twist in the saga of 352's investment in bonds issued by WaterStation Management, which claimed to operate thousands of filtered water vending machines. According to 352, the Everett, Washington-based company used the money raised to pay guaranteed returns to franchisees and insiders in a 'Ponzi scheme,' as well as to repay loans to First Fed. First Northwest disclosed the suit in a June 13 regulatory filing in which it said it strongly disputes the allegations and intends to 'vigorously defend against the claims.' In a Wednesday interview, First Fed Chief Executive Officer Matthew Deines said he felt there was 'no merit' to the suit against the bank. 'We are a 102-year old community bank,' said Deines. 'This is a Wall Street firm that is trying to recoup funds from this. We were a victim like many others.' WaterStation could not be reached for comment. A Jefferies spokesman declined to comment. The litigation began last year when 352, which is part of Jefferies' Leucadia Asset Management arm, sued former portfolio manager Jordan Chirico. The fund claimed that he conspired with WaterStation to have 352 buy bonds backed by thousand of machines that didn't exist. Chirico has denied the claims. He has suggested in court filings that he was victimized by WaterStation and stressed that all of his investment decisions were reviewed and authorized. He accused his former employer of a 'misguided attempt to assign blame.' The case was dismissed by a federal judge last month, but 352 re-filed its claims against Chirico and others in New York state court on June 9. Neither Chirico nor his lawyer could be reached for comment on the re-filed suit Wednesday. According to 352's suit against First Fed, the bank had access to the machines' serial numbers so would have known they didn't exist. The bank was also in charge of holding the proceeds from the bonds in which 352 invested and facilitated their diversion to other loans. The fund says bond proceeds were only supposed to be used to purchase more machines but instead some were used to repay First Fed's loans, to pay WaterStation insiders or retail investors. At its peak, WaterStation and its related companies owed First Fed $30 minion, according to the suit. In its suit against Chirico, who joined 352 in 2020, the fund claimed he first invested $15 million of its money in WaterStation bonds in April 2022. At that time, 352 claims that Chirico and his wife had already invested $7 million of their own money in WaterStation franchises, a conflict he didn't disclose to his employer. He ultimately invested nearly $107 million of 352's money in WaterStation bonds, the fund claims. The fund also sued WaterStation and several people associated with it, including founder Ryan Wear. Wear couldn't be reached for comment. Last month, the Washington State Department of Financial Institutions brought regulatory charges against WaterStation, Wear and other executives. --With assistance from Yizhu Wang. More stories like this are available on
Khaleej Times
13-02-2025
- Business
- Khaleej Times
Dubai: After 14-year wait, couple reclaims over Dh265,000 in off-plan property case
After a 14-year wait, a couple finally recovered the Dh266,352 downpayment fees they paid for a house that was not built on time in Dubai. Back in 2008, Dr Bassam Mahboub and his wife bought an off-plan house in an Al Qudra residential compound's 'cluster C' from Remraam developer. Bassam paid instalments for a year and was receiving photos from the developer featuring the building process, when everything came to a halt. After paying a few instalments, he visited the site and realised that no progress had been made with his cluster. "They had not even put the foundation yet. It seems they were sending me photos from clusters A and B,' he explained. Realising the lack of progress, Dr Mahboub stopped paying the remaining instalments. Shortly after, the developer told him that he lost both the downpayments and the house for failing to meet the instalments' deadlines. 'They claimed that they issued a notice that I have lost both the house and the paid amounts, but I neither received it nor signed it. At the time I was busy with special circumstances, and when I followed up with them two years later, they said I lost everything.' 'Over a decade later, I met lawyer Ali Al Abbadi and told him my story. He said we can file a lawsuit and claim the money back because the buyer has the right to freeze payments if the seller did not fulfil his end of the contract.' The lawsuit filed in 2021 passed through five stages of litigation in Dubai Courts, starting with the first instance court ruling in favour of Dr Bassam. The other party referred the ruling to the appeals court to cancel the ruling. When their request was denied, they further appealed the verdict at the cassation court, who bounced it back to appeals for lacking proof that the company did not keep their end of the deal. Further expert reports led the appeals court to rule in favour of Dr Bassam once again, driving the company to file a second final appeal at the court of cassation. The supreme court's final verdict, which Khaleej Times received a copy of, said the company had no right to confiscate the property and instalments, even if the buyer had received a notification. A judicial expert report showed that the company breached their end of the contract, as they were supposed to hand the house to the buyer in June 2010. However, up until May 2011, the project was only 42.8 per cent ready, which proves that they did not fulfil their end of the deal. The cassation court upheld the lower court's ruling to return the instalment money to the plaintiff. The property was finally completed in May 2023. The amounts were paid back to Dr Bassam through the executive court, shortly after. 'Our firm was following up the execution process every day,' said Al Abbadi, adding: 'The company paid out of the fear that we would issue a freezing request on their assets if they don't pay.'
