Traffic Monsoon’s Alleged Fraudulent Scheme Under Investigation by Peiffer Wolf Attorneys

Cleveland stockbroker fraud lawyerTraffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville are alleged to have conducted a fraudulent scheme that spanned continents, affected over 160,000 Traffic Monsoon members/investors and raised over $200 million according to a federal lawsuit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.  That lawsuit is ongoing and the court has appointed a receiver.

Traffic Monsoon Members/Investors’ Potential Recovery Options for Money Transferred to the Alleged Fraudulent

Traffic Monsoon members/investors have been in contact with attorneys at the Peiffer Wolf law firm who are investigating actions that members/investors could potentially take to supplement amounts that the receiver may be able to recover in the federal lawsuit against Traffic Monsoon.

The Peiffer Wolf are preparing to take action against entities that, their investigation indicates, likely assisted in the perpetration of the Traffic Monsoon alleged fraud.

What Traffic Monsoon Members/Investors Can Do

Peiffer Wolf lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged fraudulent investment schemes and are currently investigating the alleged fraudulent scheme conducted by Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville.  Our 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 Joe peiffer, James Booker or Lydia Floyd in the Cleveland office of Peiffer Wolf, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at (216) 589-9280 or

Peiffer Wolf (1297 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.