Lawsuit 2021 — Ferrum Capital

Ferrum Capital denied wrongdoing. In court filings, Ferrario and his legal team argued that Versus was already insolvent and mismanaged. They contended that the loan default was legitimate—Versus had failed to provide required financial statements and personal guarantees. Ferrum portrayed itself as a creditor simply exercising its legal contractual rights to protect its investment, not as a predator.

: Over 400 investors collectively lost more than $100 million through various Ferrum entities (Ferrum Capital, Ferrum II, and Ferrum IV).

The refers to a series of legal actions that began surfacing around 2021, eventually exposing a massive $67 million to $100 million Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Lubbock and San Antonio-based financial advisors . The scheme primarily targeted elderly retirees through promissory notes issued by entities known as Ferrum Capital LLC, Ferrum II, Ferrum III, and Ferrum IV. Background: The "Lending Program" Strategy

While there isn't a single "feature" article with that exact title, the Ferrum Capital controversy centers on Ponzi scheme alleged to have defrauded hundreds of investors of over $100 million ferrum capital lawsuit 2021

Beyond the warning of Bank's conviction, 2021 also saw Ferrum Capital actively raising and misappropriating investor funds. A lawsuit filed on behalf of a Wisconsin plaintiff in 2025 details that two of the victim's largest investments were made in 2021 with funds from a man who had recently suffered a stroke and was having cognitive difficulties. The lawsuit claims that in January and June of 2021, the plaintiff invested a total of $2 million in promissory notes issued by a Ferrum entity. The court documents allege that the plaintiff "has never received any return of his principal or interest payments".

. While several major legal actions and indictments reached critical milestones in 2025 and 2026, the roots of the litigation trace back to investments made and defaulted upon in the 2021 timeframe. The Core Allegations Lubbock-based Ferrum Capital, co-founded by Joshua Allen Michael Cox

The agreement allegedly contained standard provisions for litigation funding: a non-recourse loan against future settlements, coupled with a priority lien on any proceeds. Ferrum Capital denied wrongdoing

The lawsuit against Ferrum Capital alleged that the company [specifically, e.g., failed to disclose material information, made false statements, or engaged in unauthorized trading]. The plaintiff(s) claimed that they suffered significant financial losses as a result of Ferrum Capital's actions, which they believed were [negligent, reckless, or intentional].

into a Ferrum company but used the funds for personal expenses and other investor payments The Scheme's Nature

for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and securities fraud Guilty Plea : On March 20, 2026, Brooklynn Chandler Willy pleaded guilty to 10 counts of investment fraud , including her role in the 2021 Ferrum transactions. Department of Justice (.gov) Key Players in the Scheme Ferrum portrayed itself as a creditor simply exercising

[ Retail Investors ] │ ▼ (Promissory Notes: 8%–10% Return) [ Ferrum Capital LLC ] (Allen & Cox) <─── (Radio Ads & Promos) ─── [ Brooklynn Chandler Willy ] │ ▼ (Master Loan Agreement) [ Collins Asset Group (CAG) ] ───► (Purchased Distressed Debt Portfolios)

Promising high, fixed annual returns between 8% and 10%, the defendants pitched these vehicles as secure, fully backed positions. They told clients that their money was being used strictly by third-party agencies to buy up underpriced, distressed consumer debt portfolios for pennies on the dollar and collect the balances for high margins.

The most prominent and documented 2021 lawsuit involving Ferrum Capital centers on . Below is a breakdown of the case, its outcome, and what it means for investors and business partners.