Defrauded investors of Bar Works obtain default judgement against Bar Works, Renwick Haddow and Zoia Kyselova.
A lawsuit targeting prominent Ponzi scammer Renwick Haddow has just concluded at the New York Southern District Court, with Judge Lorna G. Schofield issuing her final default judgement against all defendants. She ruled in favor of Pengcheng Li against Bar Works 7th Avenue, Inc., Bar Works Capital, LLC, Bar Works Chambers, LLC, Bar Works Management, Inc., Bar Works San Francisco 1, LLC, Bar Works Tribeca, LLC, Bar Works, Inc., Renwick Haddow, and Zoia Kyselova.
The Court granted the plaintiffs’ application for a default judgment against all defendants. This way, the Court found that the defendants had violated the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Ponzi scammers were also found to have breached the contracts they had with the plaintiffs and to have been unjustly enriched. Renwick Haddow and Zoia Kyselova are held personally liable for the obligations of the Bar Works companies.
The Court found that the total consideration Plaintiffs paid for the investments is $7,495,000.00, the total amount of income received by Plaintiffs is $502,221.98. Additionally, Plaintiffs are also entitled to pre-judgment interest of $341,929.81. Final judgment is hereby entered against all Defendants, jointly and severally, and in favor of Plaintiffs, in the amount of $7,334,707.83.
In June this year, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed fraud charges against Renwick Haddow, a UK citizen living in New York. The SEC alleged that he created a broker-dealer and did not register the firm with the SEC as required under the federal securities laws. Haddow allegedly used sales representatives to cold call potential investors and sell securities in Bitcoin Store Inc. and Bar Works Inc.
Haddow allegedly diverted more than 80% of the in funds raised by the broker-dealer for the Bitcoin Store, and sent more than $4 million from the Bar Works bank accounts to one or more accounts in Mauritius and $1 million to one or more accounts in Morocco.
According to the SEC’s complaint, Bar Works claimed to bring “real vibrancy to the flexible working scene by adding full-service workspaces to former bar and restaurant premises in central city locations.” Bar Works primarily sold leases coupled with sub-leases that together functioned like investment notes. The company also allegedly sold leases for more workspaces than actually existed in at least two locations. Among false claims made to investors, who invested more than $37 million in the Bar Works scheme, were that a location was profitable within months of opening and that Bar Works had engaged an auditor.