Connect with us

Business

GPB Capital Lawsuit Filed Against Madison Avenue Securities

mm

Published

on

The investment fraud lawyers with Haselkorn & Thibaut, P.A. have filed a customer dispute claim through the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) Office of Dispute Resolution. The private arbitration proceeding was filed against Madison Avenue Securities, LLC. (“Madison Avenue”) and its financial advisor Jeffrey Dixson (“Dixson”) on behalf of an investor who has sustained significant investment losses as a result of relying on his financial advisor’s recommendation to invest in GPB Capital (“GPB Capital”). 

It is believed that the GPB Capital funds should not have been approved for sale by Madison Avenue, and that the transactions were not properly recommended or supervised by Madison Avenue. Private placement securities such as GPB Capital are generally considered illiquid, and are often risky alternative investments. GPB Capital paid large commissions to financial advisors, and in some cases that appears to be a significant factor motivating the recommendations.

GPB Capital Holdings has worried investors because of the on-going investigations from various state and federal regulators and investigators. The raid by the FBI offices and allegations of questionable accounting and sales practices as well as inaccurate disclosures to investors has caused many investors to file claims and lawsuits.

The investigations started over a year ago, in April 2018, when GPB Capital first missed important financial disclosure filing deadlines with the SEC.

Since that time, there has been an avalanche of bad news for investors in GPB Capital. In June, GPB Capital confirmed the worst, informing GPB investors had lost between 25% and 73% of their investments. This news was shocking to many investors.

One of the primary allegations by investors is that they were misled into investing in GPB Capital and were unaware of the risks associated with private placements. Private placement investments are illiquid alternative investments that are only suitable for accredited investors and even then not always for every investor. 

If you are a GPB investor, call the investment fraud lawyers at Haselkorn & Thibaut, P.A. or visit them at www.InvestmentFraudLawyers.com, or call today at 1-888-628-5590 to schedule a free, confidential evaluation of your situation and to learn your options. 

H&T is a leading national securities law firm, www.InvestmentFraudLawyers.com, which practices almost exclusively in the field of securities arbitration and litigation on behalf of retail and institutional investors in large and complex securities matters. The firm represents high net-worth, ultra-high-net-worth, and institutional investors, such as non-profit organizations, pension funds, and trusts. H&T’s main office is located in prestigious Palm Beach, Florida and cases are handled nationwide.

The sole purpose of this release is to investigate the manner in which GPB Capital was approved for sale for investor customers at Madison Avenue. Former employees or current or former customers of Madison Avenue with knowledge relating to approval of and/or supervision of GPB Capital investments sold by Madison Avenue or to locate those individuals who have information relating to the manner in with the firm handled GPB investment recommendations and supervised such transactions at Madison Avenue. If you have any knowledge or experience with these matters you are encouraged to contact H&T at 1-888-628-5590, or visit the law firm’s website at www.InvestmentFraudLawyers.com.

The idea of Bigtime Daily landed this engineer cum journalist from a multi-national company to the digital avenue. Matthew brought life to this idea and rendered all that was necessary to create an interactive and attractive platform for the readers. Apart from managing the platform, he also contributes his expertise in business niche.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Click for Counsel: YesLawyer Wants to Make Lawyers as Accessible as Wi-Fi

mm

Published

on

Photo Courtesy of: YesLawyer

Byline: Andi Stark

For many people facing a legal problem, the most difficult part is not understanding their rights but finding a lawyer willing to speak with them in the first place. Long wait times, unclear pricing, and administrative hurdles often delay even the most basic consultations. YesLawyer, an AI-enabled plaintiff firm operating across all 50 states, is testing whether technology can shorten that gap.

Founded in 2024 by 25-year-old entrepreneur Rob Epstein, the platform offers free intake, automated screening, and, in many cases, same-day conversations with licensed attorneys. The idea is simple: reduce the friction between a client’s first request for help and an actual legal discussion. In this interview, Epstein explains how the system works, where artificial intelligence fits into the process, and what problems the company is trying to address in the broader legal system

Q: When you say you want lawyers to be “as accessible as Wi-Fi,” what does that mean in practical terms?

A: It’s a way of describing speed and availability. Someone dealing with a workplace dispute, a serious injury, or an immigration issue should be able to move from an online form or phone call to a real conversation with counsel in hours, not weeks. YesLawyer is structured so that a client begins with a free case evaluation, goes through automated conflict checks and basic screening, and, in many instances, speaks with a lawyer the same day.

Q: How does the process work once someone contacts the platform?

A: We use a structured workflow. It starts with a short questionnaire and an initial conversation to capture basic facts. That information feeds into conflict checks and internal review. The system then proposes a match with a licensed attorney and provides a calendar link for a virtual consultation, often within 24 hours. After the meeting, the client receives a written legal plan outlining next steps, deadlines, and estimated fees.

Q: Where does artificial intelligence fit into that process, and where does it stop?

A: AI is used for organizing and routing information, not for giving legal advice. It helps with conflict checks at scale, case categorization, and structured summaries so attorneys can focus on the substance of the matter. Every consultation is conducted by a licensed lawyer, and all decisions about strategy or next steps are made by humans.

Q: What problem is this model trying to solve in the current legal system?

A: Delay and cost are still major barriers. Many civil plaintiffs face long waits just to get a first appointment, along with high retainers and hourly billing that make early legal advice risky. We try to respond with faster consultations, flat-fee options, and financing. The idea is to remove administrative friction so lawyers spend less time on logistics and more time speaking with clients.

Q: Some critics say platforms like this blur the line between a technology company and a law firm. How do you describe YesLawyer?

A: We describe ourselves as a national, AI-enabled plaintiff firm that connects clients with independent attorneys. That structure does raise regulatory questions, especially around responsibility and oversight. We focus on licensing verification, attorney-written case plans, and clear communication about fees and services.

Q: You’ve said the main bottleneck is “systems” rather than people. What do you mean by that?

A: The issue isn’t that lawyers don’t want to help more people. It’s that the systems around them make it hard to scale their time. Intake, scheduling, and document handling take hours. Automating those parts means attorneys can handle more matters without being overwhelmed by repetitive tasks.

Q: Does this model risk favoring only the most profitable cases?

A: That’s a real concern in legal technology. Automation often works best for repeatable, high-volume disputes. Our view is that lowering administrative cost can actually make it easier to take on smaller or more complex cases that might otherwise be turned away. Whether that holds over time depends on the data.

Measuring Impact Over Time

YesLawyer’s attempt to compress the timeline between inquiry and consultation reflects broader changes in how legal services are being delivered. As artificial intelligence becomes more common in administrative work, firms are experimenting with new ways to reduce wait times and clarify costs.

The company’s early growth suggests that many clients value faster access to an initial conversation, even before considering long-term representation. Whether this platform-based model becomes widely adopted or remains one of several emerging approaches will depend on regulatory developments, lawyer participation, and measurable outcomes for clients. For now, YesLawyer’s experiment highlights a central question in modern legal practice: how quickly can help realistically be made available to the people who need it.

Continue Reading

Trending