Traffic Monsoon Investor alert: Traffic Monsoon’s Alleged Fraud is the Subject of a Civil Action Filed by Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane Lawyers on Behalf of Certain Traffic Monsoon Investors

Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville were sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission in July 2016.  Traffic Monsoon and Scoville are alleged to have operated a fraudulent scheme that raised over $200 million from over 160,000 members/investors worldwide.  A receiver has been appointed in that action.

Traffic Monsoon Members Represented by Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane Lawyers File a New Action to Seek Compensation for Their Losses

Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane lawyers recently filed a lawsuit in federal court in California on behalf of certain Traffic Monsoon investors against PayPal, Inc. and PayPal Holdings, Inc. This new action seeks to supplement amounts that the Receiver may be able to recover from Traffic Monsoon and Scoville in the Securities and Exchange Commission action.

The Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane lawyers are not affiliated with the Receiver and their lawsuit is unrelated to the receivership.

Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane Lawyers Seek to Recover Damages for Traffic Monsoon Investors

Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged fraudulent investment schemes and have been investigating the alleged fraudulent scheme conducted by Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville.  The law firm takes most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advances the case costs.  The firm only gets paid for fees and costs out of money the firm recovers for clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of Traffic Monsoon’s alleged investment fraud scheme are encouraged to contact Jason Kane, James Booker or Lydia Floyd in the Cleveland office of Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at (585) 310-5140 or

Peiffer Wolf (1253 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.