2 ms·
Sure. So simply asking who their auditor is and what the custody arrangements are will tell you a lot. Hedge Funds and other asset managers use a relatively sma
by sseveran 8y ago
Sure. So simply asking who their auditor is and what the custody arrangements are will tell you a lot. Hedge Funds and other asset managers use a relatively small number of accountants to do their auditing. Madoff used a small family accountancy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_G._Friehling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_G._Friehling
This is not to excuse the SEC or let them off the hook. The SEC proved to be ultimately grossly incompetent at best, if not negligent or actually complicit. Investors should no more rely on the SEC to protect them than the hens should rely on the fox to protect the henhouse. This has been demonstrated repeatedly.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/when-chinese-stock-fraud-was-rampant-1521659454 https://www.barrons.com/articles/when-chinese-stock-fraud-wa...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123577641445497313 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123577641445497313
Finally there is a statute of limitations when clawing back money that people received. I believe in Madoff's case it was two years. Additionally there were a number of lawsuits against a subset of investors that allegedly new about the scheme and profited from it.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-madoff-trustee-opinion/judge-trims-madoff-trustees-profit-clawback-suits-idUSBRE8401JF20120501 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-madoff-trustee-opinion/ju...
- gdfasfklshg4 8y agoI guess what I am really asking is did the SEC not spot this because it was not their job or because it was their job and they didn't do their job properly?
- sseveran 8y agoIt is probably considered their job but I don't have any confidence in the SEC to proactively investigate anything of real substance. However they did not even have to spot it since Mr. Markopolos turned up with a ton of evidence that it was a Ponzi scheme. They did not even do basic things like verify that he was actually trading.
- gdfasfklshg4 8y agoBut in this case shouldn't the regulator assume some liability?
- sseveran 8y agoThe courts in the US have long upheld that law enforcement (and probably by extension, regulators) are under no obligation to protect you.