Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
What's your point?
VC
Congrats SNOFF Holders... ! Payout Soon :}
http://www.kmlaw.ca/site_documents/111100_Orderfeeapp_24jul14.PDF
If ya want another FAKE tree company I will sell you some AZFL at .003 ... Brazil Lumber Company claiming $34MM ... Got a short on this one to .0001 --- Play the DCB around .001 to 0.0013 and shorty will get out before CALS ...
No certified mail.
VC
You will have to contact and followup with FTI Consulting on it then.
Maybe it got lost in the mail? Did you certify mail it?
I specifically followed the instructions on the form.
VC
After the postmarked date?
Unfortunately your claim may not work out, you would have to ask FTI Consulting about that situation.
In the meantime, the last forms I received in the mail were from February 2014 and involved Ernst & Young:
http://www.classaction.ca/classaction-ca/master-page/actions/Securities/Current-Actions/Sino-Forest-Corp
Thanks so much, but I signed a claim after the date in the doc. you provided: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=87482596
VC
Open? Open for trading?
Anyone know how long this company gonna open
Canada's Capital Markets rotten because OSC is "regulating"
Truly inspiring, lol:
http://incakolanews.blogspot.ca/2012/11/the-fox-guarding-henhouse-why-canadas.html
Old report but it shows how OSC goes about its dirty business:
http://stevejanke.com/archives/202032.php
Angry in the Great White North
OSC and Northern Securities: The whole story, and the need for real oversight instead of window dressing.
Thursday, October 26, 2006 at 11:55 AM
From the National Post:
Add another to the list: Northern Securities Inc., a small boutique investment bank presided over by Vic Alboini. The Northern Securities case involves what looks to be serious securities-industry wrongdoing: attempted extortion, administrative bungling, retroactive back-dating to cover mistakes, mysterious shufflings of bureaucratic and legal responsibilities to dodge consequences. That's what the regulators did. As for Northern Securities, which boasts of being Canada's largest small-cap-focused investment bank, it's the victim of all this.
At Market Regulation Services, the 50%-owned enforcement arm of the Toronto Stock Exchange, and the Ontario Securities Commission, the dogged pursuit of petty enforcement has led them to reach and stretch to the point that they seem to see no boundaries between them and their objectives. Mr. Alboini is a rare market player who refuses to roll over in the face of such regulatory overkill.
Market Regulation Services descended on Northern last fall. In the course of a review of Northern's compliance with the TSX's Universal Market Integrity Rules (UMIR), the regulator found a number of what it considered to be breaches. Out of thousands of transactions, it found -- for example -- that on Dec. 22, 2003, Northern "conducted an improper off-marketplace trade" and "failed to comply with its best-price obligation." The company also allegedly failed to properly supervise trading activity. Fines of up to $1-million for each of a dozen contraventions were possible.
Now the TSX offered Northern Securities a deal -- pay $2 million and the problem never goes public. Some people call that a settlement; others would call it extortion. Interesting, when Albioni blew a raspberry at the offer, the TSX came back with a demand for $800,000, or else.
Again, no deal, and the TSX was forced to file a public notice of proceedings.
So what did Northern Technologies do wrong? I wasn't sure myself, and thanks to Corcoran, I now know that I'm not alone in being confused:
The main rule Northern supposedly broke is known as UMIR Rule 7.1, which is designed to set supervisory standards for the internal operation of trading practices. Mr. Alboini and his lawyers describe 7.1 as so "vague and subjective" that it is impossible for investment dealers to determine whether they are in compliance.
The rules and policies under 7.1 are certainly a dense soup of non-specific language. Here's a sample: "Each Participant shall adopt written policies and procedures to be followed by directors, officers, partners and employees that are adequate, taking into account the business and affairs of the participant, to ensure compliance with these rules and each policy." Elsewhere, the rule lays down the need for "appropriate supervision" of trading staff "as necessary to ensure compliance."
What does "adequate" mean? What does "appropriate" mean? What is "necessary"? What, in fact, is "compliance." The rules don't say, and 7.1 goes on for clause after clause deeper and deeper into a land where everything must be right and appropriate and in compliance, but nothing is defined. Most people who look at 7.1 find it a swamp, and calls for reform have been made since the rules were made public in 2002.
This is why we have legislators make laws in a public forum. We have committees that accept recommendations from interested parties on how these rules could be made better.
In any case, it turned out the rules weren't really rules at all:
In the course of taking on the regulator, Northern's legal team discovered that the 2002 Universal Market Integrity Rules had never been formally approved and sanctioned by the Ontario Securities Commission. The regulator, in effect, was administering rules, extorting fines and setting standards based on a structure that technically had no legal foundation.
In July this year, Northern filed a notice to Regulation Services staff telling them that the rules they were operating under had not been legally adopted by the OSC as required. The rules, therefore, cannot be enforced. A series of stalling events occurred. On Sept. 6, the regulatory staff said they needed more time to prepare a response.
That's when the TSX decided to cheat:
On Sept. 21, however, the TSX privately sent a letter to the OSC asking the commission to retroactively approve UMIR amendments. "TSX submits that the amendments should be considered effective April 1, 2002."
OK, so what does the OSC do? The organization that is supposed to make the capital markets a place where companies can trade in confidence? It agrees to change the rules retroactively in order to burn Northern Securities:
So here we have the TSX, a so-called self-regulating organization, asking the government regulator to retroactively approve rules to justify the TSX's regulatory subsidiary's three years of prosecutorial harassment of securities firms. Faced with such a claim, one would think a government regulator would hesitate.
On Sept. 29, however, the OSC published the new UMIR rules. In effect, the OSC, under the authority of the commission's director of capital markets, retroactively approved and published the TSX's bungled regime. The OSC, of course, may claim that these rules are merely internal operating things that have no great public import. But millions of dollars in fines have already been collected. And what are we to make of the precedent of unchecked retroactivity?
As indicated, millions in fines from other companies have been collected, or extorted, based on these non-rules. An ethical organization would have announced the screw-up and entered in negotiations on how to return the money. Better yet, that same organization would have also initiated an effort to put in place a process that would prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But that organization is not the OSC.
Instead, the OSC has made a bad situation worse:
All this blew up last week when a panel at Regulation Services took one look at the retroactive game played by TSX and OSC staff and promptly adjourned the proceedings against Northern. The case is now before the OSC's commissioners, who are being asked to review the story and declare the UMIR amendments to be invalid.
So there's the whole story. Now what is required here is for Minister Gerry Phillips to get involved. The OSC reports to him, and it is behaving in a rogue manner, out of control and quite possible with real malice. The OSC is not supposed to assume every trader and accountant is a crook. The OSC acts as if any means justifies the ends it has already decided must be reached.
That the OSC agreed to backdate the rules and did it in order to criminalize the behaviour of a defendent after the fact is unethical in the extreme. That lawyers on the Commission did not say anything is even more disturbing. They ought to know better, and they have a higher calling, their oaths as lawyers, that should have directed their decision-making and ought to have stopped the TSX request dead in its tracks.
These same commissioners are being asked to review the situation. But their job is to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen in the first place.
Here is the list of OSC Commissioners:
Paul K.Bates
Robert W. Davis, FCA
Harold P. Hands, LL.B.
David L. Knight, FCA
Hon. Patrick J. LeSage, Q.C.
Paul M. Moore, Q.C.
Carol S. Perry, MBA, P. Eng.
Robert L. Shirriff, Q.C.
Suresh Thakrar, FIBC
Wendell S. Wigle, Q.C.
W. David Wilson
Susan Wolburgh Jenah, LL.B.
Of these, Hands, LeSage, Moore, Shirriff, Wigle, and Jenah are lawyers. LeSage is a former judge, and not just any judge. He's a former Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario. He can't be too impressed with what has happened. But then why all these lawyers as commissioners in the first place, unless is it to impress upon people just how important the OSC takes the legal niceties? And how that respect for ethics and the law is built into the OSC already, so no need for the real courts to get involved?
But the Northern Securities story suggests that this is all window dressing. The OSC commissioners don't seem to be monitoring or questioning the actions of the OSC, at least not until something blows up in the OSC's face.
Maybe the IDA's recommendation for real judicial oversight needs to be acted on, no matter how much the OSC hates the idea, as illustrated in the Frank Dunn case. Maybe Minister Gerry Phillips needs to be subjected to some questions on this at Queen's Park. Or better yet, Attorney General Michael Bryant.
Clearly just having an ex-judge and a handful of lawyers on the OSC's Board of Commissioners is not sufficient to the task of making sure the OSC is not behaving in a way that is unethical, and quite possibly illegal.
Organized Securities Corruption
www.sinoforest.com is now http://www.emeraldplantationholdings.com/
Sino Forest being morphed into Emerald Platantion.
Emerald Plantation/NewCo now looks like an immense success.
Except for Sino Forest's shareholders all others involved with SF's restructuring scheme have been enriched. Chairman Wetston can justify his actions but he has been Emerald Plantation's largest facilitator and the champion of all others whose bank account he has enriched at retail shareholders complete annihilation.
If the OSC believes or has evidence that the Sino Forest enterprise was a total fraud then please, show us the evidence.
Could it be that the E&Y settlement was designed and was intended to free OSC from having to explain its discriminatory ("lawless") actions in this case?
E&Y is guilty. The case is closed. Next... Organized Security Criminals:
Ned Goodman blames regulators for Sino-Forest collapse
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/03/05/pdac-2013-ned-goodman-blames-regulators-for-sino-forest-collapse/
Sino-Forest Corp. collapsed amid claims that it was committing fraud on a massive scale. But Ned Goodman, the CEO of Dundee Corp., places the blame on regulators, who moved quickly to cease-trade the stock and launch wide-ranging probes following allegations by a short seller.
“Something is wrong” when a regulator can destroy a company like Sino-Forest, he told an audience at the PDAC conference.
For him, the central issue in the debacle was land ownership. He believes regulators did not understand that companies such as Sino do not own the land they work on in China, and used that as a basis to accuse it of fraud and take it down.
He has good reason to be angry about Sino’s collapse. Dundee was one of Sino-Forest’s key underwriters, and was named as a defendant in a class action lawsuit tied to its demise.
Doesn't a proof of claim release suggest cancellation?
VC
so when they open again
I received a "Proof of Claim and Release" from the US District Court Central District of California which must be postmarked by June 7, 2013.
VC
verycareful,
thanks for posting. I am been following this closely since the stock was halted, and I haven't been able to find out too much about the future of our shares. Now that this settlement is running it's course do you or anyone here know what the settlement will be, or if it's a per share proportional settlement, and if so, what the price per share will be? I have heard rumors of $1.80 per share, which feels pretty absurd but what can you do at this point. My second question is whether you or anyone has drummed up any info on the restructuring and whether or not the stock will transition to a new symbol and trade again? Thanks in advance for any insight you may have.
December 3, 2012
Sino-Forest Creditors Approve Plan of Compromise and Reorganization
http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1082679/sino-forest-creditors-approve-plan-of-compromise-and-reorganization
Sino-Forest shareholders settle with Ernst & Young -lawyer
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/03/sino-accounting-lawsuit-idUSL1E8N3AC520121203
Regulator files allegations against Sino-Forest auditor Ernst & Young
http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/regulator-files-allegations-against-sino-forest-auditor-ernst-young-1.1063943#ixzz2E20IcrkD
VC
OSC EXTENDS CEASE TRADE ORDER FOR ZZZINO-FOREST:
Till January 21,2013, for now.
http://www.advisor.ca/news/industry-news/osc-extends-cease-trade-order-for-sino-forest-93737
ZZZZ OSC hearing delayed to January 17:
Obviously OSC really helped SinoForest.
They say it's a complete fraud but they help them restructure and wipe the commons...
Canadian laws are really good to protect white collar criminals.
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/10/16/sino-forest-hearing-set-for-january/
See? No Forest
It may never trade again:
If the POR wipes out the commons,shares will be delisted,or may be put on the grey market.
Shareholders are always the last to know what's happening.
does anyone know when this snoff is gonna trade ?
POR on or before August 7th 2012:
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11612168/1/sino-forest-proceeds-to-implement-restructuring-transaction-contemplated-by-the-restructuring-support-agreement-and-terminates-sale-solicitation-process.html
Will Commons survive?
Restructuring: Hard to know if the commons will survive:
Sino-Forest Announces that Approximately 72% of Noteholders sign re-structuring.
http://www.sinoforest.com/Uploads/SF%20Press%20Release%20-%20Noteholder%20Support.pdf
Stay Extension granted Sept. 28 zzzzzzzzzz......
Sino-Forest has secured an extension of the stay through the full requested term to Sept. 28.
Just send some money to your account to keep it open.
OSC proceedings from another board
C.B. sued. Malicious as per Statement of Claim.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/SinoForestvMuddyWaters.pdf
Initial fee for a lawyer in that type of lawsuit is $5M
Add to that that the lawyer will have to go to China a couple of times during the next 7 years of the trial,GEEZ...
Good chances are that they will settle...WEEEEEEEEE
I just wish that C.Block has a foundation of his own.
If not i suggest starting one The Dead Block Funds.
Alternate analysis from another board
Just said to keep my account open send more funds......
Did they at least give you the reach around?
Didn't know they could do something like that. What did they say?
Last one out turn out the lights.
TD Ameritrade says my account will close. Only stock I had was SNOFF.
Creditex and Markit to Conduct First Credit Event Auction in Chinese Corporate Credit Market; Sino-Forest Corp. CDS on May 9
ATLANTA, May 8, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- IntercontinentalExchange's Creditex subsidiary and Markit will conduct a Credit Event Auction to facilitate settlement of credit default swaps (CDS) trades on Sino-Forest Corp. on May 9, 2012. This will be the first credit event auction conducted to settle CDS trades outside of North America, Europe and Japan.
Earlier this year, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (Isda) determined that a credit event had occurred with respect to Sino-Forest Corp., a Chinese forestry company. The final price on Sino-Forest bonds for the purpose of settling CDS transactions will be determined at auction. Participating dealers in Hong Kong and Singapore will use the Creditex Real-Time screen to enter in their price indications and settlement requests.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/creditex-and-markit-to-conduct-first-credit-event-auction-in-chinese-corporate-credit-market-sino-forest-corp-cds-on-may-9-2012-05-08
Sino-Forest Corp certainly is in a sad state of affairs.
Extension after extension, and for what purpose?
Shareholders get ZERO in this type of dissolution, but if the shares do trade, it may be a decent scalp for daytraders - but thats about it.
Wow a 9.18 Billion Class-Action Suit
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/heavyweight-shareholders-join-sino-forest-fight/article2402140/
Two of Sino-Forest Corp.'s one-time largest investors have signalled approval for a court challenge of the company’s plan to use bankruptcy-protection proceedings to sell its assets.
According to court documents, the company’s second-largest shareholder, U.S.-based Davis Selected Advisers LP, has signed on for the potential $9.18-billion class-action lawsuit against the company.
The documents also say U.S. hedge fund Paulson & Co., at one time the company’s single biggest shareholder, also supports an attempt by lawyers for the plaintiffs in that potential class action to quash Sino-Forest’s bankruptcy protection and restructuring plans.
The embattled forestry company, once worth $6-billion, saw its shares collapse after it faced fraud allegations last year. The controversy has prompted investigations by the Ontario Securities Commission and the RCMP, as well as the potential class-action lawsuit. The allegations against the company have not been proved.
On March 30, Sino-Forest went to court seek bankruptcy protection under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), buying time to find bidders for its subsidiaries and forestry assets.
Lawyers in the potential class action are trying to challenge this plan. They demand instead that the company be put into receivership, and its board of directors replaced because of the allegations the company faces.
They also want to lift the stay, or freeze on litigation, imposed by the CCAA proceedings in order to move ahead with their lawsuit against the company, its auditors and underwriters.
An affidavit filed by lawyer Daniel Bach of Siskinds LLP, one of the law firms acting for the plaintiffs, said Davis had recently retained Siskinds. Davis, which manages a family of mutual funds and has about $35-billion, held 12.6 per cent of Sino-Forest’s shares as of April, 2011.
According to the affidavit, the U.S. investment firm “completely supports” the plaintiff lawyers’ demands, including the quashing of the bankruptcy protection process and the replacement of Sino-Forest’s board.
The documents also say that on April 10, 2012, Mr. Bach spoke to a lawyer for New York-based Paulson & Co. Inc., a hedge fund run by John Paulson, a prominent figure in the U.S. financial world. The fund was at one time Sino-Forest’s largest shareholder, but sold its stake after the allegations surfaced in June, 2011.
Paulson & Co. also supports the class-action lawyers’ demands, the affidavit says. Representatives from both U.S. firms could not be reached for comment.
In Ontario Superior Court in Toronto on Friday, lawyers for the plaintiffs raised their objections to the company’s plan to seek buyers for its subsidiaries and forestry holdings in order to pay off the holders of $1.8-billion in outstanding debt.
Plaintiffs lawyer Ken Rosenberg told the court his clients objected to Sino-Forest’s request to extend the CCAA’s stay to July 9, after the company’s deadline for expressions of interest from potential buyers. Mr. Rosenberg called the proposal “excessive and beyond all reason in the circumstances of this case.”
He also said his motion calling for the removal of the board of directors was necessary because the OSC notices sent to Sino-Forest and six former and current executives, disclosed this week, create a “cloud of fraud allegations.”
After hearing Mr. Rosenberg’s arguments, Mr. Justice Geoffrey Morawetz ruled that the company has until June 1 before it must return to court to renew the stay. He also scheduled a hearing later this month to hear other arguments in the case.
It looks like Davis and Siskind is really going after the Banks and the auditors for 9 billion
Another Extension july 16th HaHaHa what a joke OSC is:
Extension gives company time to advance asset sales
* OSC extends cease trade order on company's shares to July 16
* OSC seen filing charges against Sino-Forest very shortly
By Euan Rocha
TORONTO, April 13 (Reuters) - A Canadian court on Friday extended a creditor protection order for Sino-Forest Corp by five weeks to June 1, giving the embattled Chinese forestry company more time to move forward with asset sales.
Justice Geoffrey Morawetz of the Ontario Superior Court declined the Toronto-listed company's request for an extension until July 9, but agreed to leave the order in place for about a month beyond its initial April 29 expiration.
Sino-Forest, accused of fraudulently exaggerating the size of its forestry assets, says the allegations have paralyzed its business.
"I am satisfied that the applicant is working in good faith," said Morawetz, adding that the court would consider a further extension after it weighs other motions, including those in a related shareholder lawsuit.
Sino-Forest's shares tumbled last June after short-seller Carson Block and his firm Muddy Waters accused the company of swindling investors. Sino-Forest is now battling several lawsuits, on top of investigations by regulators and law enforcement authorities.
The company's stock, halted for months, is being delisted by the Toronto Stock Exchange in the wake of the bankruptcy protection proceedings.
Sino-Forest's lawyers said in court the company had started putting its assets up for sale and that the extension of the stay period would provide stability to Sino-Forest's business while it works through the sale process.
Sino-Forest said the initial phase of the sale process involves soliciting nonbinding letters of intent from potential bidders. This phase is expected to be completed by June 28.
CEASE TRADE EXTENDED
In a separate proceeding on Friday, the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC), Canada's main securities regulator, extended its cease trade order on shares of Sino-Forest until July 16.
Hugh Craig, a senior litigator with the OSC, said the extension beyond the May 9 delisting date was necessary as the stock could still potentially be traded over-the-counter after it is delisted by the Toronto Stock Exchange.
He declined to say when the regulator will file its official statement of allegations against the company.
"I would submit that the issuance of an enforcement notice ... is a clear signal that staff's investigation has proceeded to the cusp of issuing a statement of allegations," Craig told Mary Condon, who is Vice-Chair of the OSC.
Earlier this week, the Ontario Securities Commission said it has served Sino-Forest and some current and former officials of the company with enforcement notices. Such notices are issued by the OSC at or near the end of an investigation and set the stage for the regulator to commence formal proceedings.
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Are they helping the company to get rid of the shareholders?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/13/sinoforest-idUSL2E8FDEXM20120413?feedType=RSS&feedName=bankruptcyNews&rpc=43
Sino-Forest says OSC alleges fraud
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/sino-forest-says-osc-alleges-fraud/article2395766/
I just want to know what we should do? Just wait for seeing all shares dispeared?
Some Hope a Bidding War Would be Great:
Greenheart speaks:
Greenheart headcompany for sale
The Chinese company Sino Forest, largest shareholder of the country’s biggest timber concessionary Greenheart Group Ltd (GGL) is for sale on the international market.
Last year GGL became the biggest timber concessionaire in Suriname’s history with a total concession area of 403,000 hectares – making it even larger than Brunzeel’s holdings.
GGL has had its ups and downs on the international market including a scandal on the Toronto stock exchange involving Sino Forest. But now it appears that all problems have been solved; and whether the sale of Sino Forest goes through or not, the company will make a transition from a public to a private enterprise.
Spokesman for GGl, Tony Wood disclosed that there are large potential investors lining up to buy Sino Forest and its properties, including its shares in GGL.
http://www.devsur.com/?s=greenheart&search=Search
But,will the common shareholders get anything ???
Any Ihub investor interested? Anything over 1.6 Billion will be in the pockets of the shareholders. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!!
They used the OSC and TSX as cover and got away with a heist.
It is not the first time:
If this being the end result of the sec stopping the trading for more than 15 days is the Sec an enabler here???
Sino-Forest Common Shares to be Delisted from Toronto Stock Exchange
5:24p ET April 5, 2012 (PR NewsWire) Sino-Forest Corporation ("Sino-Forest" or the "Company") (TSX:TRE) announced today that the Continued Listings Committee of the Toronto Stock Exchange ("TSX") has determined to delist the Company's common shares effective at the close of market on May 9, 2012.
The delisting was imposed due to Sino-Forest's failure to meet the continued listing requirements of the TSX as a result of the commencement of proceedings under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act on March 30, 2012 (the "CCAA Proceedings") and for failure to file on a timely basis its interim financial statements for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and its audited annual financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011. Sino-Forest continues to be subject to a cease trade order of the Ontario Securities Commission which prohibits trading in the Company's securities.
All inquiries regarding the CCAA Proceedings should be directed to the Monitor, FTI Consulting Canada Inc. via email at: sfc@fticonsulting.com, or telephone: (416) 649-8094. Information about the CCAA Proceedings, including copies of all court orders and the Monitor's reports, are available at the Monitor's website http://cfcanada.fticonsulting.com/sfc.
Followers
|
24
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
977
|
Created
|
05/29/11
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
|
Press Releases and Links About The Short Selling | |
---|---|
Paulson's Comments Upon Previous TRE/SNOFF Holdings | Link Here |
Shares Outstanding ► | 245.7 million shares (as of 12/31/2010) |
Shares in Float ► | 203.8 million shares (as of 12/31/2010) |
TSX Venture Market Information |
Email: louisa-wong@sinoforest.com
CANADA Corporate Administration Office Sino-Forest Corporation | 90 Burnhamthorpe Road West, Suite 1208, Mississauga, Ontario Canada L5B3C3 Tel: +905 281 8889 Fax: +905 281 3338 Email: info@sinoforest.com |
HONG KONG Executive Head Office Sino-Wood Partners, Limited (wholly-owned subsidiary of Sino-Forest Corporation) | Room 3815-29 38/F, Sun Hung Kai Centre, 30 Harbour Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong Tel: +852 2877 0078 Fax: +852 2877 0062 Email: info@sinoforest.com |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |