The first hurdle is to get rid of the bloodsuckers—Hamstreet and Miller Nash.
The two beneficial entities—the forensic accountants and the communications
firm—have been underutilized in my view. We still have no idea what was done
with our money and no updates on what is actually going on.
Thanks to Trey and his attorney we may accomplish the first hurdle. After that,
we have a much better chance of an equitable restitution.
I still would like to know what exactly was done with the money and see Ross
and company held responsible. The current situation, notice, seems to be
oblivious of these priorities.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, Jul 7, 2019, at 10:08 PM, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote:
aem-vanc Digest Sun, 07 Jul 2019 Volume: 01 Issue: 016
In This Issue:
[aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
[aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
[aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
[aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
[aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Doug Meddaugh" <dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 13:16:04 -0700
Hi Trey (and everybody),
I’ve been meaning to respond to the valid points you make. I would like to
suggest an idea that I believe offers a way forward while minimizing
conflicts of interest among investors:
My bottom line is that I would like to see the maximum return end up in the
hands of the investors and the minimum in the hands of receivers, attorneys,
etc. The best way to achieve that, I believe, is to essentially break down
the walls of the 15 separate pools and treat the collective as one super pool
in effect. The basic idea would be to add up the individual contributions of
everyone (original investments plus reinvested returns for those who
reinvested rather than taking monthly distributions) and then dividing each
individual’s total investment by the overall total to establish each person’s
percentage share of the whole. Then as properties are liquidated and periodic
distributions can be made, each person receives their percentage share of
that distribution.
That’s the basic idea and seems to me to address a great concern of mine that
if we get into the business of trying to unwind what has gone on with loans
from one fund to another and try to make sense of that, the process of doing
so is going to eat up a lot of potential return due to the cost of expensive
research, not to mention the potential of in-fighting among investors and
further legal action that isn’t going to serve anyone well. If ideally we
could all agree to moving forward with getting Hamstreet and Miller Nash
removed, cutting through all the conflicts of interest and put in place one
attorney and a new fund manager representing the super pool, everything could
move much more quickly and efficiently. Regardless of what happened within
any one pool and between pools, Ross blurred the lines between the pools
without knowledge or approval of any investor, no one is going to get back
what was promised us, and where we are today is where we are. I propose we
all throw in
together and move forward as a single entity to put the maximum possible
return into the pockets of the investors.
I would welcome other thoughts and perspectives.
Wishing everyone the best,
Doug
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of treytennyson3
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 9:55 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Doug, I am not advocating separate lawyers unless that is necessary. The
problem we could run into with the same lawyer is if your fund owes my fund
money or vice versa. If that is the case and we have the same lawyer then he
will have a conflict of interest and cannot represent both sides.
I think we could be represented together initially for the purpose of
opposing the receivership and appointing a new Manager. After that it could
get complicated if there are disagreements.
Trey
Sent from my Galaxy Tab A
-------- Original message --------
From: Doug Meddaugh <dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date: 7/2/19 7:18 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
I guess I misunderstood. I am invested in AEM Mexico 200. I took your
statement, ‘My attorney has requested that I find other investors in the AEM
600 fund and the other funds’ to mean he would represent all funds involved
in the receivership action. Do we really need 15 separate lawyers and actions
to navigate through this?
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of treytennyson3
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 7:04 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Agreed, but there should not be a conflict of interest. That likely means
that Tim should only represent the AEM 600 investors, since there are loans
between the funds.
Trey
Sent from my Galaxy Tab A
-------- Original message --------
From: Doug Meddaugh <dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date: 7/2/19 6:42 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Yes, Trey, I am willing to help with the costs but can only do so to a
limited extent. I would like to know how many investors are likewise willing
to do so. We really need broad participation in and commitment to sharing the
legal costs, and not have multiple lawyers duplicating efforts and
potentially working at cross purposes. I really like the fact that Tim zeroed
right in on the need to file objections and proceeded to do so.
I’d like to throw out there to the community, a request for show of interest
that we all retain Tim as our legal representative so we can more narrowly
focus our efforts, energies and resources for the common good. There is so
much to be gained by working in concert.
-Doug
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of treytennyson3
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 6:12 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Thanks, Doug. It appears we think alike. Most investors are in this for the
income, rather than a fast return of principal. I would rather receive a
lower income stream now and better return down the road than fire sale
prices. Would you be willing to consider also retaining Tim as a client? The
more we can get the lower the costs for each client.
Tim or I will be in touch soon
Trey
Sent from my Galaxy Tab A
-------- Original message --------
From: Doug Meddaugh <dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmmedda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date: 7/2/19 6:05 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
Thank you, Trey! I only today was able to get setup on the list-serve and
read through all the posts to date. All I can say is thank you for taking the
steps you have and I am happy to sign the statement. I couldn’t agree more
that we need a new manager in place. I, for one, would rather take longer to
liquidate properties and contracts and receive greater return by doing so,
than sell quickly at fire sale prices for lower return.
And I just want to say that I believe the sooner we can collectively agree on
a single legal representative who represents all interests, and share the
costs, the better off we all will be.
Again, thank you.
Douglas Meddaugh
2901 Columbia St
Vancouver WA 98660
360-241-9999
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of treytennyson3
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 4:28 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aem-vanc] Status of current objections to Receivership
Good afternoon, fellow investors. My name is Trey Tennyson. My mother and I
have very large investments in the AEM 600 fund, but no others.
I am a recently retired trial attorney from Vancouver. As I relocated to
Arizona a few years ago, I hired Vancouver attorney Tim Dack to represent my
interests in the AEM receivership.
After reviewing the legal documents (pleadings) that American Equities filed
with the court to start the receivership, I became convinced that the
receivership had been improperly started. The documents that were filed with
the court showed that American Equities (as Manager of each of the different
funds) had made what is called an assignment of assets to the Receiver in
favor of its creditors. This is a fancy way of saying that American Equities
simply transferred our assets to a third party who will now act as our new
fund Manager. Unfortunately, this new Manager (the Receiver) wants to be paid
$500 per hour and wants its attorneys (((Miller Nash) to be paid $500 per
hour. These fees are well in excess of the .50 percent management fee we were
paying to American Equities.
As you all know, each fund is set up as a separate Washington Limited
Liability Company(LLC). The investors in each LLC became its members and also
its creditors. LLCs in Washington are governed by statutes. The most
important statute relates to member voting rights, and provides that ALL
members must consent to any dissolution (dissolving) of the LLC or to any
action of the LLC Manager which is outside the ordinary course of business of
the LLC. The receivership would effectively dissolve each of the LLCs and it
is clearly not part of the normal course of the business which is managing
real estate investmen
Last week, Tim Dack filed an objection to the Receiver`s request for
compensation (including attorneys fees, receivers fees, accountants, etc) on
the grounds that the LLC investors did not vote to approve the receivership
and it is therefore illegal. We also onjected on the grounds that the
receiver and his attorneys were requesting that they be paid different
amounts of money from each LLC for work that they claimed benefitted each
fund equally. This could cause some funds to pay far more than their fair
share and hurt the investors in these funds.
My mother and I were the only investors to file an objection to the Receivers
request for compensation. However, I am sure many of you share these same
concerns and would agree with these positions. None of us voted to set up an
expensive receivership. What we need is a new Manager of the LLC funds who is
competent , will work for a reasonable fee and can gradually liquidate the
funds in the way that returns the most money to the investors.
As a result of our objection, the Receiver will have to file a legal motion
and set a hearing in front of Judge Gregerson. This will be done in the next
week or two and the hearing will likely be in late July.
The Receiver has also scheduled a hearing in July where he is requesting
approval from the Judge to sell property owned by all the LLCs. We are
objecting to this request because the receivership was not properly approved
by the investors.
My attorney has requested that I find other investors in the AEM 600 fund and
the other funds who will join in writing and support our objections. This
will show the Judge that many investors object to the receivership and the
sky high fees that come with it. If you are willing to sign such a statement,
please email me with your name, address and telephone and either myself or my
attorney will contact you. With our combined effort, the Receivership can be
terminated and a new Manager properly appointed that will return a much
larger amount to the investors.
Trey Tennyson
treytennyson3@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:treytennyson3@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent from my Galaxy Tab A
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:56:12 -0500
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
From: Belinda <bfranke@xxxxxxxxx>
!�+y�t����&��ץ�*.��&j|��g��}��j�h��h�Ɵz�b���)�z+pjƜ�Y^rدy��v�&��ez�+�����'v*n�l����j���ȧ��b�鞞ا��~����Ӆ諥��v�j����y�hm�Z�������zw�u�Z�����Z���
~��j+z�"��r�8^�筊x'y�l��Z�����'jwZ�V�����*'����+-��^��^�������ފw%�ם���zX�u�����j�^I���xjV��/��-���jp�>-1,����'{��������)ږg����������&���E
���j���'���'� ajܨ��z
'z�k��!��m���������'�
!j�)�*'��j������z�kz˥��h�ț������k�z���b�������^��^j_Ȏ�-������[i��:rn�n��M}��v�nO3��y֜��lzw^��Z���j~8��+
�
�ݙ���z+z�r���zX�����^�K����~���v�z\���f�w��v�r�zX�z�b�'��Ơ���j�azg��)�q��zYr��i�e�0��yǢ���*Z��(��0�Y`��az���W�z�v�b��+��ay����b��z)�+(�z0���������)ڔǬ������Z��/h�!��'�Z,�:!��'��(�Ƭ����������s����ڝ�߭祊�l����'����w�n�n��M}��x�d�n7����zo�jw�E���'��-��^���z{Z�*'a������b�y�y�-�����.�ǝj��_Μ��ۯ��_�j���S���������X��������f�����
��Ⱥw^��Z�֥��Z��n��^m��~+h}�%��-���ɺ��������,�+gy�l���{ej)�w�����&�bh�'w���;���h���j�fj)�~c�Y��&�������ڷ]�������jyº-{�n�'���z+-���q�z�!����^j���aj֫z����%��-���ɩݶ���z+��,�+_��ނX�zw�{az�����Ƨv+���(�w����N�yǢ���*p��]��izw��H�u�,�g���-�)�jV��譝睲�y��y�譧�z�����azZ,��,�)e��-j)�w��1��zz-z��ʉ������)��.z�b������ݡ���]��az�.��aj��(����z{b����-i�Z�Ɯ�*'v筢�^r�-���zX�u���&���zo�jw�n��q�߭祊�l����f����i�������.���~���+-��+���:p^��_9��&�bh�'u'����Y�gz�Z��n����m5�o������i��������zX�����n7����������s�^�
"{�+E�kzǧ��b���Z�Ɯ�*'��,�+p�Y[zw���'�+ay�m�������������j�^j�ky�/z�"��覊튉���Z�k0��e��r�-�����0��]�������z�^v)�z)�i�Z�ɞ������k
.����'!�u����]�ب��-��^�ا�������)h���z�,�g����ץ�g�y���دz\���fʷ�����������z�aj{az��z+ޮ�b��"����r�w^���z{kyǢ���'��q��vޅ�_���jY���zX��橢ק�&�r��x�̚����y���(�W[y��y��������z���*h���ƥ����������-jG����z{Z���)�x��'���������y�Z�Ɯ�*'j�ڞ�z{h~ק�禲�&��eɷ�y����azV�~*���y���)�x,j����e��^��n
����歶��{+�֧��b� ^~�/z��v+�u�n����
-����,i�b�zej)������Y�y�+��h~w��\��H���-������j���ƫzV�����V���+��p��Z���y�&n)�vw����á��*'zI���Z�������Yb�
h����.�Ʈ��u��r��x�̚����y�������z{_����#�w���ɺ}��m5����O���&�bh�'w��&��w�}�-������º-{������{h~j'{/����j{���j�hr��y��������&�bh�'w���;���h���j�fj)�
------------------------------
From: Sherry Beattie <sherry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 17:06:19 -0700
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
I spoke wth Ross last week. I told him everyone was unhappy with receivership
among other things . One thing he mentioned was they have spent countless
hours this last month at his office studying all the funds records files etc
and if we start over and hire new company they will have to start from
beginning. He had told them
No one wants a fire sale. He said by the end of July they should have a plan
whatever that may be. Ross also indicated he will step in and make
recommendations and assist wth building the funds back up with no charge for
his time. He has a couple buyers on some assets that have shown interest and
offers that would help wth those funds build them
Back up but can not do anything due to receivership being in control. He is
making his recommendations. Hamstreet is at his company everyday reviewing
all documents and his personal records. He said he did not co mingle. He also
has not taken any payment for several years due to insufficient funds. He
believes once the receivership has reviewed all records etc his name will be
cleared.
Time will tell. I also
Mentioned Hamstreet needs to be communicating to everyone a hell of a lot
better on there website etc. on the status of what’s going on and what there
doing. We absolutely expect an update especially where all the money is
going.
Wanted to pass this information along to everyone.
Sincerely
Sherry Beattie.
Mexico funds 200 400
360 921 5871
Praying for the best outcome for everyone 🙏
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 26, 2019, at 5:56 PM, Belinda <bfranke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I agree 100%. Cant tell you how many times in 2014 i was told how safe this
was since it was a collective fund so much less risk. And i put my life
savings in retirement in this fund. Their personal assets need to be part
of this. We need a law firm that will go after this aggressively.
The meeting needs to happen soon and a plan of action. A list of people
that want to be included.
Belinda
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: "LARRY MANSFIELD(Redacted sender "larryman44" for DMARC)"
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 6/26/19 6:14 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
On my first experience once law firm as a joint effort, charges need to be
brought against them , this money has to be accounted for and hamstreet
isn’t going to do that only liquidate things like he said, hamstreet
represents AEM not us. On my ordeal once law was involved all there
personal properties were seized and added to the kitty, I can’t tell you
how many times miles said they were examined and everything was great, if a
person could not make a profit the last nine years in real estate
especially at 60% Loan to value, something is very wrong
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 26, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Eva Johnson <los-johnsons@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry,
yes, I know that you have gone through this before. I want to know what
options we have to get the best results possible. I’m aware of the
direness of the whole ordeal, I just want to fight back.
On Jun 26, 2019, at 2:25 PM, (Redacted sender "larryman44" for DMARC)
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Eva, I unfortunately lost money in a scheme like this years ago and at
the meeting can tell you exactly how the receivership and costs will go,
the people behind this for me the first time are in prison now
-----Original Message-----
From: Eva Johnson <los-johnsons@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: aem-vanc <aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, Jun 26, 2019 1:14 pm
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
Yes, that option needs to be discussed as well.
On Jun 26, 2019, at 1:11 PM, Julia Pond <juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I understand all that. But the benefit of collectively bringing another
lawsuit needs to be explained.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 12:49 PM, bfranke wrote:
Julie, there is the receivership for the assets that are ours
collectively and then there is a lawsuit for negligence on the part of
AEM and it’s owners. The receivership would happen first I would assume
but I think a lawsuit needs to be filed for afterwards and the losses
still sustained. Maybe not everyone wants to pursue this but whoever
does could go the route that Troy is presenting. Not a class action due
to the cost.
Belinda
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julia Pond
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 2:25 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
A class action lawsuit will benefit only the attorneys. A receivership
at least recovers in proportion to claims with lower costs.
I wouldn’t be interested in being a class member of a lawsuit (which
would be in addition to the pending one!) until or unless someone can
tell me definitively that my recovery will be greater than the
receivership (with a truly independent receiver) AFTER attorneys’ fees
are paid.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 12:02 PM, Troy Rendon wrote:
I for one, am interested in pooling resources and choosing a law firm
to represent us all.
Do we have a law firm interested in taking on this case on behalf of us
all? I believe a potential contingency arraignment would be beneficial.
Where a hypothetical law firm agrees to take a percentage of winning if
successful. A true class action arrangement often seems to mostly
benefit of the law firm where any winnings are mostly chewed up by the
attorneys and anything left over is divided up amongst the class action
plaintiff. We are a group of nearly 200 investors. That’s a relatively
large group with a large combined network. Does anyone know a law firm
willing to take up our cause under a contingency arraignment?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 26, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Julia Pond <juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
“amount of money” I meant. Darn autocorrect.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------
From: "LARRY MANSFIELD" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 17:21:30 -0700
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
Ross has told me the best fund to recover is the pool 600, in the last nine
years on a 60% LTV it would be hard to lose money, hamstreet at the red lion
meeting in front of us all 200 he said funds had borrowed from other funds,
that is co mingling to me. Hamstreet could care less about us he is getting
paid with our money, not difficult to figure that out.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 7, 2019, at 5:06 PM, Sherry Beattie <sherry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I spoke wth Ross last week. I told him everyone was unhappy with
receivership among other things . One thing he mentioned was they have
spent countless hours this last month at his office studying all the funds
records files etc and if we start over and hire new company they will have
to start from beginning. He had told them
No one wants a fire sale. He said by the end of July they should have a
plan whatever that may be. Ross also indicated he will step in and make
recommendations and assist wth building the funds back up with no charge
for his time. He has a couple buyers on some assets that have shown
interest and offers that would help wth those funds build them
Back up but can not do anything due to receivership being in control. He is
making his recommendations. Hamstreet is at his company everyday reviewing
all documents and his personal records. He said he did not co mingle. He
also has not taken any payment for several years due to insufficient funds.
He believes once the receivership has reviewed all records etc his name
will be cleared.
Time will tell. I also
Mentioned Hamstreet needs to be communicating to everyone a hell of a lot
better on there website etc. on the status of what’s going on and what
there doing. We absolutely expect an update especially where all the money
is going.
Wanted to pass this information along to everyone.
Sincerely
Sherry Beattie.
Mexico funds 200 400
360 921 5871
Praying for the best outcome for everyone 🙏
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 26, 2019, at 5:56 PM, Belinda <bfranke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I agree 100%. Cant tell you how many times in 2014 i was told how safe
this was since it was a collective fund so much less risk. And i put my
life savings in retirement in this fund. Their personal assets need to be
part of this. We need a law firm that will go after this aggressively.
The meeting needs to happen soon and a plan of action. A list of people
that want to be included.
Belinda
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: "LARRY MANSFIELD(Redacted sender "larryman44" for DMARC)"
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 6/26/19 6:14 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
On my first experience once law firm as a joint effort, charges need to be
brought against them , this money has to be accounted for and hamstreet
isn’t going to do that only liquidate things like he said, hamstreet
represents AEM not us. On my ordeal once law was involved all there
personal properties were seized and added to the kitty, I can’t tell you
how many times miles said they were examined and everything was great, if
a person could not make a profit the last nine years in real estate
especially at 60% Loan to value, something is very wrong
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 26, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Eva Johnson <los-johnsons@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry,
yes, I know that you have gone through this before. I want to know what
options we have to get the best results possible. I’m aware of the
direness of the whole ordeal, I just want to fight back.
On Jun 26, 2019, at 2:25 PM, (Redacted sender "larryman44" for DMARC)
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Eva, I unfortunately lost money in a scheme like this years ago and at
the meeting can tell you exactly how the receivership and costs will go,
the people behind this for me the first time are in prison now
-----Original Message-----
From: Eva Johnson <los-johnsons@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: aem-vanc <aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, Jun 26, 2019 1:14 pm
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
Yes, that option needs to be discussed as well.
On Jun 26, 2019, at 1:11 PM, Julia Pond <juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I understand all that. But the benefit of collectively bringing another
lawsuit needs to be explained.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 12:49 PM, bfranke wrote:
Julie, there is the receivership for the assets that are ours
collectively and then there is a lawsuit for negligence on the part of
AEM and it’s owners. The receivership would happen first I would
assume but I think a lawsuit needs to be filed for afterwards and the
losses still sustained. Maybe not everyone wants to pursue this but
whoever does could go the route that Troy is presenting. Not a class
action due to the cost.
Belinda
From: aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:aem-vanc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julia Pond
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 2:25 PM
To: aem-vanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: AEM Investor Representation
A class action lawsuit will benefit only the attorneys. A receivership
at least recovers in proportion to claims with lower costs.
I wouldn’t be interested in being a class member of a lawsuit (which
would be in addition to the pending one!) until or unless someone can
tell me definitively that my recovery will be greater than the
receivership (with a truly independent receiver) AFTER attorneys’ fees
are paid.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 12:02 PM, Troy Rendon wrote:
I for one, am interested in pooling resources and choosing a law firm
to represent us all.
Do we have a law firm interested in taking on this case on behalf of
us all? I believe a potential contingency arraignment would be
beneficial. Where a hypothetical law firm agrees to take a percentage
of winning if successful. A true class action arrangement often seems
to mostly benefit of the law firm where any winnings are mostly chewed
up by the attorneys and anything left over is divided up amongst the
class action plaintiff. We are a group of nearly 200 investors. That’s
a relatively large group with a large combined network. Does anyone
know a law firm willing to take up our cause under a contingency
arraignment?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 26, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Julia Pond <juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
“amount of money” I meant. Darn autocorrect.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2019 17:37:40 -0700
Subject: [aem-vanc] Re: Status of current objections to Receivership
From: treytennyson3 <treytennyson3@xxxxxxxxx>
����������^������ܨ����{hʋ���
z�b���hb�������j�k��!�vX�z\�yۜzW�jV�u����xy��!�'�֠�筅�b�+��覸������օ�py�e�('y۩~��j�az�^r'�r�������{ki�ljwi��^�؞�)躺���+ަ�%���#�墉u�\z�Z�zh�[�֯�'^v�^���z{a��!������(!z������yƮ��a{(���oy�b���+$���!�����j|����؝��jg����v'g�֠�筢֤z�^�'^���������)�z���\�r�,��e��%������y�.���z-~��z�Z�
�j�+$��'���r���)�w����r�%��ޗ&�q��x
��'�J��؞�)ez��'(�h��W�~�ݳ�������z���Ȩ������jܨ��z�見w
.���y��r'���m��(��}����,��ȷ
.���Ǭ�g��wl�+a��^��h�Ǭ��.nȝ�7������V���h�Ǭ��ޞ�h�m�階��*�����f���-��Z��h���^������z�Z�zh�[����N��u����~��觽�-��"��^���zZ,�ƭz
+ɩݵ�뉹^~��觽�-��0����%��ފv��{����%����h�[����ڵ秶+bzƧu�er��v�y؟}�ޞ����Ɵ����^q�z�!������v�y���8^�{�+�)�i�K,(Z��az����h�'$����'1�ځ�ڝ�(�J.�����&���jب��+��jv�z��������ȶ���^i�(�{b������v����l�ר}��q�z�!���k��W���Z�+p��]m觲'^�����Ţ���+fjG����z�zw��֥�)�z�h�ȧjYi��lo+-��b�
ay�캷ez�����q�z��u�m����������ފx���y�����z�b�+�w�z�h�W[y��z�
z�(��^��h~)ܢg���"�
h������������:��'����l�jV��6���������)ږg����������&�:.�ǝu����f��]k�Zr'�z�ܢo�j��������ף��c�N��Oӣ����ڝ�߭祊�l���J��y��������s�^�+Z��(}˫������rب��hE������$�{/ڝׯz�����������y���g��)ඊ�'v�-��ږ'i�)��*.����(�We�G��ˠ��-jx�y�aj�zX���}��k�~��j�p�)^�)�,�(��br�(~)�z���������-�����2n�m�ib�謶�#
.��b��h�筅��)������ޝ۩�{az�v���������jwm�颞)��)��Z��(~��z+ޮ�ڶ�+����\�8^m�-�����!�����ޖ'�{�������퉩eɺ�jGh�{a{������ǩj��z�(�Ƨv��j�ay�%��-������^��(�)�}�����y���ȝy�(�W[z�u۩���د�ۚ��'����ب��z��ʉ����)ږ)�z�fz{l�[��觽�-y����+�,{h�觽�-y�ڶ�����"�
���e�ج����ب��ڝ�azwb�'b��r�v+�v���춋Z�)�z�fz{[��^���jYm�֥�������^i�iz�(������q��j���ޡ�a{h��Ӆ�ڲ�������b��jםjwiz��v'��k������q��zf�{��r^��'����������q��j���ޡ�aj�b���n�b���8Z�����^m�"r'^i�ݱ禲�&z�u�Ơ��r��z��~h�z�Z�'�z��{h���ȧz�(~��x-����wp��aj�(��'�+a�����蚉�~�ݶ����^��ݶ���f�zǧ������^��z�(}�"�
(��(�x-�歺������^�ؚ�����ݹ�h����h}�iz{"��ޱ�r��h��튉��h��퉩h~)�~(!�)�jj'�)�z�h�Ƨu��������-��텫b����(�x-�ǫ��ʉ���e���u楗,r��u�ej
�z�&�����+����+a��m�xjk-��jwL�Y^�֬�������˭�)��Z�[ay�'~X����{^��-jwi�ا�V�z��j�h�w�jwZ���wfjv�z�ަ��z{b�
az˩z�h�_�����.�٨��r��ꮉ�%ɩ�y��r'��\�E���^������izw��+a�v�ʉަ�%jw[z�zzh�[�F�,n[���m��b��z�z{az�(��"�.�I��W���+j�k�������)�z�h���w��
"�
h��[i�0��pj�k�h�y۬�����{���hu���^��j��"�見�楖�k������jwf������֬jȧ�W��ح��)��azf��k���,��^��n�x���az���l��az)�z�h�����(�WpzW(��-��톋�����^��^rدz���h��)�z��ʉ�z������k�o�zo�jw�n��q�߭祊�l����f����i�������.���~���+-��+���Z�������'�'����z�Z��n�-6�m5����������ڝ�߭祊�l���J��y��������s�^�+Z��(}˫������rب��hE����������ji赧o�ƭ�x,z��jץk
��˧��,�����q�,j�����z��nW���(�Wk�x���"�azƦzV����'��ߺwh��&���vj'{*+�'���k��!�ajج��jǚ�����jg�k
���^���Yaj��r�ߖ'-�����֧uƧ��kz�ޱ��n�a�'^������"�b�Lr��u��z�ޱ��y�h��az���ؚ�\���az������)��"�
az��z+ޮ�b���j�h�{b��{������^��Z�+\��]��\�je�ƭy؟��y��v+���������N�����������i��Z�$�l�������:���v���,j������Ů����1�]j�!�٦y�Z��������(��ڵ���o���������ӿ����������s��y�b��������r��i�������J֭��r��z{hn7��*'��yǢ���*���.z��+.���(w��)�z�^v)���'(�M�"�(�*.��Z�鞞����2j�h�w���+z���ם��!��v�az����-��"��^.��ަ��z{Z�W��"��%��b��^�������i�b�ã�y�e�w�w^lz��jץk
��Ƨu�-��춉ھ(��a�����b����&
������s��w���zX�����j)m�����ڝ�ۢ��{��y�b������:p^��_9�k{+^�|��}�z{�N�u��&�r�o��_{�N1:�i��������zX�����n7����zo�jw�E�ҵ�n��ܺ�ޞ���-��춄^q�z�!���
�y�ۺ�az�����vz-m朢w��h~)�z�����N��)�)�j{-��S�k!��]�yr��kzǧ��^.��^��h���i��+r��ު笵�+�0������aj�jYkz֢�8�j�.�W�jZަ��z{Z�+�q�梷�j���\��ˬ���}�+��ޝ��������q���ay�&��ࢇ�N�z+,�k���z���[�
+�)��w(�ǫ����:.��Ů��i�������.���~���+-��+����[h������s��w���zX����Μ�jW�~���ק�+(�t���ӹ�k/ɺ\��������c�N��zo�jw�~���+-��+�+���-�����ڝ��{��j۬��.������y�b�{-��z+ޮ�b��Ӆ�������Z���������b�����,�)�z�h�ƫz)�+��az)ܢg���az�ajv�j�kz۫���)܊������v�����yǢ�楣��w(��-�榞�����n�wh�{az�v�Z���zƥz��q������Wr����)e�x-��'�'^��l���j)�♫rX�����8^���������������l~��i�\�'����N)���"�Vފ{h��l����:�������z{_����f�k�i�����������)ږg����������&�:.�ǝu����f��]k�Zr'�z�ܢo�j��������ӓ��c�N��Oӣ����ڝ�߭祊�l���J��y��������s�^�+Z��(}˫������rب��hE���������jy2��ӭ��"����k,���z�
z���h��^�+-�ǫ��v��v�k��!jYm��h��-�֭{�%���Ʋ��ajy2���֤�x-��-z�2��Z��t����i��,�
��-jצz{�!�.�����Z���������y֧{
����)镧��ߢ�'{�(�Wkj�^�֤zZ'����X��'Z��k����'�jw\�{ki�ljwkyǢ��+y�^��������"�
(��Z�ǥ���rIrj�����k�Ǭ~�����n��� �";�����,k+aj�zX���az�(���yƧr�ey�b��rj
�z�ڲ)���^��kz�ޱ��jد{h��kzǧ�ƥ�)�z����ڝ�!j����(�����z�^����楗������
j)����*.��â�%j�u֮���P��雉��U�ܢ�ޭ`���:�M������}����&������s��w���zX�����j)m�����ڝ�ۢ��{��y�b������:p^��_9�k{+^�|��}�z{�N�u��&�r�o��_x�o1:�i��������zX�����n7����zo�jw�J֭��r��z{hn7��*'��yǢ���*���Ƣ�Z~��'���zYh�)�z�h����̧jg��:��7��+(���3)���jwH�����z)�z�fz{l�{ax
�M�w�n�g��az�������q��**�v��jV����{'�eZ��.�����,"���ƭy�h���v�}�2y��j
�"�y�Z��.��ڶ�+�쓊`�rKh��kzǧ�l��z�l�{ax
����������~���{���^�����g����杊x,��Z�
��'�J��؞���y�"�ay�.��h�֫��^����������q��r��wv�Z��^���������[y�⚚�����Z�ם��Ӆ�hr鞞�-��pz���W��+a������0y�aj�&z��jq*�+bz�ڰƧj����r����ޭ��~�ݳ�Zvf�{Z�+jY^u�ڲȠ�g���ڲǭ��-��^q�z��}�讇��+yح������Ȭi��s,ʇ�k(���Z�
��'�J��؞�Ȧ�\����}��y�.��,z�-��a��ij�r�0�Yg����(������tƧj�����Iߢ�n��^�/�+'{����ay�z+ޯ���-���j'��M)z�h���w��ȭ��m�������ȥ���j����ޥ����4��������N�y�������e�w�q�,��a{�t���z{fjv�zg��������Z�)&z��jq*�+bz������
2�楖I����r�ج��n����Z��^Y�!�x-�r�+^t��n)b� �������
����Ӆ觽�-��"�朄��m��譲g�m��jwZ��"��+yح������,���u�����'j�������[��Z��^������zj,�)���Z��-jۭz��j��������b�
�l��ݦ�/���+��Z��^��Z�g�m��~+myךr�ת��e�������(�W\j����~�ݲ�)k'ڮj+z�Z��^��ڊ�!j����n��az)�z�h�ȧ��y��v���̦��^���#�z�^�yr�{�+���W����y�b�{h��yǢ����z�_��(�����b���z0z�������ޙ������Z��azǬjg��w�{��(�WZ����+a��z�,�ب�����'z���-y�h��n���Ɨ��+ޭ��������օ�pzw�v+��
jv�z���,'��0���r��zק��"�\(�G譪�j�'i�^}皝��
�v楗)b��j����"��^�����kz۫��azj,�j'{+h�����������������m��.���y�b���^q�z�"�XZ��h~)^jW�jY��*'jwlz֡y���~�'��ɹ���z�(���N��)em�h�觶�{py�(��(jwm��^j�����X�z\�z)�j�\����y�z+ޮ�j[(��^v�^u�^j���)ɺ\���ޅ謭�z�b����/jW�kax����h��e��)z�r�
�u���[ax�³��Y�z��y�b�
h����z�[yƮ��az��z+ޮ�b����i��^�\�����[��^�{�+���3&����{(Z�����-y�aj��wh���{�+�)��3�4~��jwm��-��ߺwl�0�Yc�)�
�)�jwl��h��.���y�b�{�����"�[!�
ax����������{�+���y�m��^�������jwm��$�������Z��&{��+����!������)e�x-�Ƞ�˜��-jצz{��W���j)f{��*.�v�{��v����ݵ�^�'y��z+az����_���j�h�w��)er��i�r�����֊�h��(���yן~����^E������q��z�)ڵ�Z�֧{�������ɪi�)�y�aj�"�Z��jk��V���ښ����-�觽�-������N��M����'��������'��&j)�r������'����l�jV��6�
------------------------------
End of aem-vanc Digest V1 #16
*****************************