Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group, LLC—Fraudulent Scheme

Rochester stockbroker fraud attorneyEmilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group, LLC Allegedly Took Part in a Continuing Fraudulent Scheme

Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group, LLC, beginning in January 2013 and continuing through at least September 2016, allegedly orchestrated a scheme to defraud at least 131 investors in 19 different offerings out of at least $9.5 million, according to an SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Joe Peiffer and James Booker.

Peiffer Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in issues related to Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group’s alleged fraudulent scheme, and are preparing to assist Chinese investors, on a contingency fee basis.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group’s alleged fraudulent scheme are encouraged to contact attorneys Joe Peiffer or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Francisco and PDC Capital allegedly made offerings in assisted living facilities, Caffe Primo restaurants, and a packaging facility, mostly to Chinese investors that purportedly qualified under the “EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program” which has been administered by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), according to the aforementioned Complaint.

It should be noted that Francisco is the CEO and Chairman of defendants PDC Capital Group, LLC and Caffe Primo International, Inc. and also controls and serves as the CEO of other entities involving the alleged fraudulent scheme, such as PDC Partners Management, Inc. which managed assisted living projects and FDC Partners Management, Inc. and which also allegedly managed assisted living projects such as Summerplace Management, LLC which is the general partner of several of the assisted living projects, the Complaint reports.

Francisco and PDC Capital allegedly raised approximately $72.05 million from the aforementioned 131 investors which subsisted of approximately $65.5 million in capital contributions in order to buy units in limited partnerships, and $6.55 million in so-called “administration fees” in order to pay expenses of the limited partnerships until said projects were built, the Complaint notes.

Francisco and PDC Capital allegedly made representations that an investor’s full $500,000 capital contribution would purportedly be implemented to develop a specific project, and that only administration fees would be available to pay expenses of the limited partnership until said project was finished, the Complaint reports.

PDC Capital then allegedly received approximately $19.2 million of investors’ funds which was purportedly $12.65 million more than the total administration fees paid by investors, the Complaint states.

From the aforementioned $12.65 million of diverted investor funds, PDC Capital and Francisco allegedly made misappropriations of at least $9.5 million of investors’ capital in order to allegedly support his luxury lifestyle including the purchase and maintenance of a yacht, and to support his businesses, the Complaint notes.

Francisco and PDC Capital also allegedly made misrepresentations to investors that their capital contributions would be put to use for the designated purposes which were laid out in the offering materials, the Complaint states.

Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group, LLC Allegedly Commingled Funds from Different Projects in Contradiction to Representations in the Offering Materials Presented for the Specific Project They Were Investing In; Francisco was Allegedly Aware that His Actions would Violate Federal Regulations and Purportedly Jeopardize any Visas for the Foreign Investors

Emilio Francisco and PDC Capital allegedly commingled funds from different projects in contradiction to representations in the offering materials that investors’ funds would purportedly be used for the stated project in which they were investing, according to the aforementioned SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Joe Peiffer and James Booker.

Furthermore, at least $1.5 million of the investors’ funds were deposited into escrow for two offerings which were not disbursed to the bank accounts of the limited partnerships that were to receive the funds, the Complaint states.

Francisco, PDC Capital Group, and Caffe Primo International, Inc., another entity controlled by Francisco as CEO and part-owner, allegedly committed their fraud via offerings for the defendant limited partnerships, the Complaint reports.

Emilio Francisco, at all relevant times, allegedly controlled the bank accounts, directly or indirectly, for all of the Defendants, and purportedly controlled and approved the terms of the various offerings, and personally benefitted from the misuse and misappropriation of funds, the Complaint notes.

The aforementioned Defendants’ conduct allegedly was ongoing and by engaging in said conduct, the Defendants allegedly violated, and continue to violate, the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act, the Complaint reports.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged investment fraud and are currently investigating Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group’s alleged fraudulent scheme. They take most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance the case costs, and only get paid for their fees and costs out of money they recover for their clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of Emilio Francisco & PDC Capital Group’s alleged fraudulent scheme may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Wolf, Joe Peiffer or James Booker, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 504-523-2434 or via e-mail at jpeiffer@pwcklegal.com or jbooker@pwcklegal.com.

Peiffer Wolf (1309 Posts)

In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow cases about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent blogs regarding various developments that may occur in such cases. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such cases and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such cases.