Insurance Broker Willis Sued by Venezuelan Clients of Stanford
The lawsuit filed in federal court in Dallas seeks class-action status on behalf of more than 1,200 depositors, and seeks the recovery about $1.6 billion of actual and punitive damages from Willis.
It follows a similar lawsuit last month in the same court by the same law firms seeking $1 billion of damages on behalf of Mexican clients of Stanford. Another Venezuelan investor filed a similar lawsuit in July in Miami federal court.
Willis did not return a call seeking comment. Last month, the company said it would defend against the earlier claims, and that it did not suspect any of its workers knew of fraud at Stanford.
According to Thursday’s 49-page lawsuit, Willis agreed to Stanford’s request to provide “safety and soundness” letters, and that “the clear intention” was for the letters to be used in Stanford’s marketing to help retain and attract clients.
As a result, the lawsuit said, “Willis “crossed the line from being mere insurance brokers for the Stanford Financial group, to joining the Stanford Financial/Stanford International Bank sales force.” It said this made Willis a “willing” participant in Stanford’s fraud.
Allen Stanford, who reached billionaire status, faces criminal and civil charges related to what U.S. prosecutors have called a $7 billion fraud involving high-yielding certificates of deposit issued by his bank in Antigua.
Many of Stanford’s customers lived in Latin America. A court-appointed receiver took control of Stanford Financial in February. Willis is based in London and domiciled in Bermuda.
The latest case is Canabal v. Willis of Colorado et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas (Dallas), No. 09-01474.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Toni Reinhold)
- Insurtech Root, Goosehead Partner on Tech Integration for Independent Agents
- Americans Shop Around for Insurance More Than Ever as Costs Soar
- Lyft is a Motor Carrier and State Farm Can be Sued Directly, Georgia Court Says
- Mailing a Letter, in Context With Other Clues, Is Sufficient Cancellation – NC High Court