Multi Advisor Fund
Exit and damages chances for investors to improve constantly the Landgericht Stuttgart their full extent followed the arguments of the shareholder represented by Attorney and lawyer specializing in banking law and capital market law Patrick M. Zagni and the the investment company on payment dismissed backlogged monthly deposits. The defendant shareholder is the multi Advisor joined on the recommendation of the external agent in May 2006 Fund I GbR and undertook to pay 6.000,00 monthly rates from EUR 95.00 for a term of twelve years to the company in addition to a single male in position by EUR. The defendant provided these rates only till including September 2006 and then ceased his payments. In August 2007, he declared the withdrawal of its Declaration of accession.
The company now unsuccessfully demanded the payment of arrears deposits and denied that the defendant in a doorstep situation to join should be been persuaded. The Landgericht Stuttgart was followed by full be the arguments of the defendant, stating that in the Accession Declaration used right of revocation is not properly. Consequence of this is that an intervener may declare his withdrawal even after the expiry of the withdrawal period. Here also, it was important that the Stuttgart regional court has considered also no claim for payment of the company up to revocation to be well-founded. This judgment joins in a variety of nationwide issued court decisions, the the payment claims by multi Advisor Fund GbR or capital Advisor Fund GbR reject, because the shareholders are incorrectly been enlightened about their right of withdrawal.
Aggrieved investors are strongly recommended that expert to verify claims her”, as lawyer and lawyer specializing in banking law and capital market law Patrick M. Zagni. In addition to the regional court of Stuttgart, also the courts of appeal, Cologne and Dresden and the State courts in Cologne, Erfurt, Potsdam, Ellwangen rejected claims the two companies. Because investors have to worry about, according to normal flow of investment only a fraction of their rendered Back to receive deposits, you should have urgently to review their claims. Patrick M. Zagni Attorney / lawyer specializing in banking law and capital market law
~
Tags: law & taxes
This entry was posted by at 4:11 pm and is filed under General.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.