Banking and Investments

For women wondering whether their ex-husband (or soon-to-be ex) is hiding assets on them, rest assured that you are not alone.

According to a new white paper put out by Francis Financial, a wealth-management firm that specializes in advising women, 63 percent of women the firm surveyed “felt strongly that their husband was hiding assets during the divorce process.” The firm says this was among the first such studies focusing on women who have divorced or are in the process of divorcing.

Where to begin if you are one of those women? The study said that many who thought they were being cheated out of assets “had to grapple with the decision of hiring a forensic accountant,” and this may be an advisable step.

But as we often tell our clients, a forensic account is someone you may wish to hire after you are sure you have looked everywhere for the missing assets. As we wrote last year in How Investigation Helps Forensic Accountants, “where we can offer help is to find entire new companies that Wife and her accountants (forensic included) did not know existed.”

Some basics:

  • We don’t start just by looking at what a woman thinks are the places her husband is hiding assets, because if you know where the stuff is, you don’t need us. If assets are hidden you may be surprised at where they turn up.
  • We always like to give our clients a questionnaire that asks for all kinds of information about the person we’re searching. What might he name a secret company? What was the street he grew up on? Many hedge funds and private equity firms turn out to be named for the childhood streets of their founders. I know this because I always ask where these firms get their names.
  • Don’t expect us to come up with lots of hidden cash. People hear “assets” and think “cash” because it’s the first asset listed on any balance sheet and the easiest to use once you get it. The problem is that in the U.S., it’s illegal to get bank account information without a court order. What we can do is find likely hiding places of cash, based on business relationships and other legal sources. One client gave us the home computer she and her husband used, and we found that he had visited about a dozen websites of asset management companies. These were ripe for subpoenas at the appropriate time in the proceedings.
  • You don’t have to find every last penny to get some satisfaction. Once someone knows we have uncovered a significant portion of their hidden assets, their settlement offer can improve quickly. Some women have the means and the drive to litigate for years. Others just want a fair deal and to move on with money sufficient to take care of them and their children. Either way, asset investigations and a good forensic accountant are often worth considering.

Clients always want to know what’s involved in searching offshore for hidden assets. Our usual answer is, “time and a lot more money than it’s probably worth, unless you’re looking for millions of dollars.”Woman Telescope IN MONEY SEA

Suddeutsche Zeitung, one of the recipients of the leaked Panama Papers reported that one lawyer “represented a female client in a divorce case, and it cost $2 to $3 million to uncover and disentangle the web of front companies into which the assets had been poured by her husband. That is a lawyer’s fee not many are able to pay.”

While not every divorce case involves many millions, even an onshore search follows the same principles: look not just for money in the name of the person but in the name of secret companies that person created.

As I wrote in my just published book, The Art of Fact Investigation, “Given how quickly and cheaply people can set up limited liability companies (and even ordinary corporations) it is folly to assume that a person who may be concealing assets would not have availed him or herself of this simple mechanism.”

Unless there is hard evidence that a person has hidden assets offshore, we like to start onshore for a few simple reasons:

  1. It’s a lot cheaper, and if you find a good haul of assets you may find your way to a reasonable settlement. The extra money offshore could still be there, but it may not make financial sense to go after it because of the fees and the length of time it could take to litigate in Caribbean and other tax havens.
  2. It’s easier to find onshore side companies because of the much larger store of public information in the U.S. compared with most overseas jurisdictions.
  3. The onshore records may provide good leads to the offshore companies. You may find a property deed notarized in the Cayman Islands or Isle of Man, for example. If you get the tax returns in discovery to a new onshore company, you could see payments from an offshore company that could end up being the subject’s secret company.

Wherever you look for secret companies, a few similar search rules apply. These include the propensity to use the same name in multiple companies. We’ve seen net worth statements with Alpha I and Alpha II listed, but the person has omitted Alphas III, IV and V. Other common names include streets the subject grew up on, names of summer camps, favorite pets, or combinations of children’s names or initials.

Offshore or Onshore, people are people and tend to behave the same way the world over when it comes to stashing their cash.

Want to know more?

  • Visit charlesgriffinllc.com and see our two blogs, The Ethical Investigator and the Divorce Asset Hunter;
  • Look at my book, The Art of Fact Investigation (available in free preview for Kindle at Amazon);
  • Watch me speak about Helping Lawyers with Fact Finding, here.

In a dramatic divorce case unfolding in Southern California this week, Hydee Feldstein, a retired partner at a large law firm, accused her ex-husband Peter Gregora of stealing $20 million of the couple’s money over the course of their marriage.  Feldstein claims Gregora hid the money in secret offshore companies, investment funds, and, in by far the most straightforward method, stuffing cash into envelopes and leaving the money off of the couple’s tax returns.

hidden money divorceBefore she retired, Feldstein’s practice focused on finance and bankruptcy law.  She was the primary breadwinner in the family, and she stated in divorce documents that she entrusted her husband to handle their financial affairs.  She claimed that Gregora used this as an opportunity to drain the couple’s joint accounts.

Commentators have been incredulous that a partner who specialized in finance law at a major law firm could be so out of touch with her own finances that she lost track of $20 million of her own money.  As it turns out, research shows that Feldstein is not so unusual.

As we wrote about here, a study by Prudential explained that most women, including primary breadwinners, lack confidence in investing and tend to shy away from managing the family finances.  No matter how successful women are, they still often leave the big financial decisions up to their husbands.  In fact, 73% of men report being the primary financial decision-makers in their families.  A dishonest husband combined with a lack of oversight can open the door to mismanagement and, as is alleged in this case, fraud.

We have seen this first-hand in countless cases.  Smart, accomplished women come to us looking for money they earned, but which their husbands have magically made disappear.  These women often admit to us that they left all of their financial decisions to their husbands, and have never so much as glanced at a bank statement or tax return.

Even in these cases, all hope is not lost.  Our clients often have far more valuable information than they realize when it comes to tracking down hidden assets, even if they did not control the family finances.  For example, a client may tell us that her husband loves skiing in Colorado, which would lead us to look for a vacation property in that state.  Or she may know the name and address of one of her husband’s companies, which could lead us to a dozen other LLC’s that he kept hidden from her.  We are often able to find hidden companies, real property, stock holdings, and other assets through in-depth client interviews and our meticulous investigation process.

© Sbukley | Ne-Yo Photo Dreamstime.com
© Sbukley | Ne-Yo Photo Dreamstime.com

Grammy award winner Ne-Yo and several professional athletes are among those set to testify in federal court against the principals of Ohio-based sports drink company Imperial Integrative Health Research & Development. Preston Harrison and Thomas Jackson are charged with defrauding investors out of $9.5 million. Harrison’s wife, Lovena Harrison, was hit with related tax fraud charges.

Imperial Integrative Health Research & Development made OXYwater, a drink they claimed was highly-oxygenated and would improve energy and mental clarity. Jackson and Harrison allegedly misled investors about the expertise of the company’s staff, as well as the company’s sales and profits. Federal prosecutors claim that, all the while, Jackson and Harrison were diverting company funds into their own accounts, and Lovena Harrison was hiding their ill-gotten income from the IRS.

Due diligence is always an essential first step before investing in a company. Just because the company is private does not mean that you need accept the information they give you at face value. While independently verifying information about sales and profits is difficult, it is not impossible. Former employees, investors, or people who had disputes with the company are often willing to share information. A few well-crafted interview questions posed to a disgruntled ex-employee or former litigation opponent might supply you with all the information you need.

You can also find out crucial information about the company’s principals and employees by searching the public record. In this case, had investors done even a cursory public record search, they would have seen that both of the Harrisons and Jackson all had multiple lawsuits (many involving nonpayment of debts), judgments, and tax liens against them in the past. This information may or may not have influenced the investors’ decision to put money into the company, but I, for one, would think twice about handing over my savings to someone whose financial choices had repeatedly landed them in hot water.

We usually blog here about how to find hidden assets in the context of a divorce, however, we recently came across a story that serves to caution those entering a marriage not to relinquish all control over the family finances.

Housing market collapseAccording to media reports, accused fraudster, Steven Wessel, is currently trying to seek a plea deal in a federal case alleging that he used a sham investment company to dupe investors out of money. What we found particularly interesting about Wessel from a Divorce Asset Hunter standpoint, is that, in a separate action, he has also been accused of scamming his wife, Mary Margaret Butler, and causing her Upper West Side home to go into foreclosure behind her back. While we haven’t seen this particular scenario before, we did have one client in Pennsylvania whose husband secretly conveyed her interest in a shared property to her husband’s cousin right under her nose.

So how does that happen? Wouldn’t you know if your home went into foreclosure? Butler claims that when she married Wessel in 2003, she turned over all of her finances to him, despite the fact that she was the sole owner of her apartment. She says she did this because she was under the impression that he had “extensive expertise” in investment banking. Wessel told Butler that he had paid off the mortgage on the apartment and showed her falsified letters purportedly from the bank evidencing the payoff. When Wessel was arrested for his investment scheme in June 2014, Butler went to bail him out of jail using her apartment as collateral, but instead learned that her lender had foreclosed on the apartment back in April. She also found out that she was a party to an eviction action brought against her by the bank. Wessel had accepted service of the lawsuit but did not notify Butler.

Although we think this level of fraud between spouses is uncommon, we do think it’s prudent to at least keep your finger on the pulse of the family finances. Most times, we see smaller financial secrets, like a spouse taking secret vacations with a mistress or mister, but it can’t hurt to take a peek at your monthly bank account and mortgage statements. You don’t have to be an expert in finance to know that your mortgage payments aren’t being paid, and the more you know about the family finances during the marriage, the better chance you’ll be able to find hidden assets if the marriage ever breaks down.

According to media reports, Former Apple CEO John Sculley is currently being sued by his ex-wife, of 32 years, Carol “Leezy” Sculley, for allegedly hiding more than $25 million in assets from her at the time of their divorce.  Sculley and Leezy settled their divorce in 2011, but Leezy claims that Sculley hid more than $25 million from her at that time.  According to Leezy’s petition to the Florida Circuit Court, Sculley failed to disclose “substantial private equity investments and investments in privately held companies and ventures around the globe.”

Leezy claims Sculley hid his assets by transferring them to and placing them in the name of family members. Leezy alleges that Sculley’s stakes in several startup companies were actually held in his brothers’ names.  We see this all the time and we blog about it over and over (here, here and here).  People from the ultra-rich to those with modest incomes tend to hide their assets with family members and close friends.  That’s why, to do a thorough asset search, you generally have to look into the assets of close friends and family members as well.

It’s unfortunate that Leezy didn’t do a little due diligence while the divorce proceedings were ongoing.  It would have been better to uncover the assets at that time rather than try to undo a divorce settlement agreement years later.  Chances are, if we’d done a search on Sculley and his brothers, we may have come across something that might have led us to the names of at least some of the companies Sculley was involved with.

We’re skilled at identifying debtor’s stakes in secret companies through extensive public record research and through interviewing people.  Given more information about some of Sculley’s company investments, Leezy’s attorney would have been able to seek discovery of those companies and may have learned what Sculley’s stakes were.  This might have entitled Leezy to millions of dollars in assets she did not otherwise know about.  As we often say, it’s worth spending a few thousand bucks up front on due diligence to save millions of dollars down the road.