Michael Brendan Ferguson, ATM Scheme Investigated by Securities Lawyers

Michael Brendan Ferguson perpetrated a Ponzi scheme that cost victims more than $10 million in connection with investments involving automatic teller machines (ATMs), according to charges brought against Ferguson.  Ferguson is charged with nine felonies, including securities fraud and grand theft.

Attorneys Jason Kane and Joe Peiffer, in the Peiffer Rosca law firm’s securities practice, are investigating the matter on behalf of investors.

Ferguson offered investors the ability to invest in ATMs by selling them the rights to a percentage of user fees from a portfolio of ATMs that were located across the country or by selling investors ATMs and a percentage of the fees associated with the ATM, according to Prosecutor Victor Chen.

However, Ferguson did not own many of the machines that were involved in the investments and Ferguson paid his investors with money from new investors he recruited, according to prosecutors handling the criminal case.

The Peiffer Rosca securities attorneys often represent investors who lose money as a result of Ponzi schemes, investment fraud, or stockbroker misconduct. They are currently investigating the possibility of assisting Michael Ferguson’s investors with the recovery of any losses. 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 invested with Michael Ferguson’s alleged schemes may contact attorneys Jason Kane or Joe Peiffer, for a free, no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at (585) 310-5140.

Peiffer Wolf (1249 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.