The Traders Domain Receiver files clawback lawsuits
The Traders Domain Receiver has filed five Traders Domain clawback lawsuits.
In the first round of clawback litigation, filed on October 3rd, The Traders Domain Receiver has targeted individuals and companies in the UK, an attorney in Miami, and associates of Steven Likos, Alex Santi and Mike Sims.
UK Traders Domain Clawbacks
The Traders Domain Receiver has filed clawback litigation against a UK resident and several UK companies controlled by various individuals.
- James Lees, a resident of Charfield, England, is accused of stealing $184,347
- On Off Technologies LTD, a UK company controlled by Jevgenija Sulga, is accused of stealing $86,000
- Discover Tour Plus LTD, a UK company controlled by Arturs Eglitis, is accused of stealing $187,500
- Rymax Financial Management LTD, a UK company controlled by Andrew Goldsworthy, is accused of stealing $535,000
Florida Attorney Clawback
The Traders Domain Receiver has filed clawback litigation against Nicolas Castillo and his Miami, Florida company NEC Business Consulting LLC, dba SFL Business Counsel.
Castillo is accused of representing Traders Domain promoters Alejandro Santiesteban (aka Alex Santi), Gabriel Beltran and their company Centurion Capital Group.
Santi, Beltran and Centurion Group are alleged to have stolen at least $8.4 million through The Traders Domain. All three are named defendants in the CFTC’s The Traders Domain lawsuit, filed in October 2024.
Castillo is accused of facilitating fraud by drafting Centurion Capital Group’s agreements with Traders Domain investors.
The Centurion Agreement represented that customer funds would go toward “the purchase and sale of foreign currencies in the inter-bank market,” and that a “Manager [would] apply an Expert Advisor Trading Bot” to customer funds.
The Centurion Agreement also authorized Centurion and Santi to receive up to 60% of purported trading profits as a commission.
After executing the Centurion Agreement, customers were directed to deposit funds directly into bank accounts controlled by Centurion, Santi, and/or various related insiders and third parties.
Such funds were commingled and subsequently misappropriated by Centurion and Santi, who used the funds to pay themselves and make Ponzi-style payments to certain customers.
Beginning as early as August 2022, Centurion and Santi learned that Traders Domain would not be able to process withdrawal requests, but they chose not to share this information with current customers and even solicited new customers after such time.
Specific to Castillo’s alleged role in the fraud;
[Castillo and his companies] provided legal advice and counsel, and provided legal services, to Centurion and/or Santi.
As attorneys for Centurion and/or Santi, [Castillo and his companies] owed a fiduciary duty to Centurion and Santi to, among other things, exercise diligence and care in assuring that Centurion operated in compliance with the relevant laws and in the best interests of Centurion, Santi, and Centurion customers.
At all material times, [Castillo and his companies] were or should have been aware or of the Centurion and Traders Domain business models and that:
(i) Centurion was not utilizing customer funds as outlined in the Centurion Agreement;
(ii) Traders Domain was not engaging in legitimate trading activity; and
(iii) Centurion, Santi, and Traders Domain were not operating in compliance with applicable law and regulations.
[Castillo and his companies’] actions and inactions resulted in, or significantly contributed to, Centurion and Santi continuing their fraudulent and/or Ponzi scheme.
The Traders Domain Receiver has sued Castillo and his companies for legal malpractice.
As a result of [Castillo and his companies’] breach, the Centurion and/or Santi sustained significant injury and loss including millions in damages and the payment of at least $194,000.00 in fees to the Defendants.
Alex Santi Associate
As previously noted, Alex Santi misappropriated at least $8.4 million in The Traders Domain investor funds, through his company Centurion Capital.
The Traders Domain Receiver has filed clawback litigation against Ernesto Ramos, a Miami, Florida resident.
The Traders Domain Receiver alleges Ramos is “a long-time friend and associate” of Santi’s. Ramos stands accused of receiving luxury watches valued at over $365,000 from Santi.
The funds used to purchase the watches comprising the Transfers were funds that Santi fraudulently obtained from customers in the form of commissions, fees, and/or other payments in connection with the [The Traders Domain] Ponzi scheme.
Steven Likos Associates
Steven Likos was an Algo FX Capital Advisor LLC sales representative.
Algo FX Capital Advisor was part of Algo Capital (now Quant5 Advisor LLC), a company through which millions in The Traders Domain investor funds was misappropriated by Mike Sims, Robert Collazo, Juan Herman and John Fortini (all individual defendants in the CFTC’s The Traders Domain lawsuit).
Alleging association with Steven Likos, The Traders Domain Receiver has filed clawback litigation against:
- Benjamin Joel Glaser, a resident of Miami, Florida, is accused of stealing $109,950
- Capote Diamonds LLC, a Naples, Florida company, is accused of stealing $75,000
- Influencer Media Group LLC, a Miami, Florida company, is accused of stealing $175,000
- Wolf Exotics LLC, a Montana registered company owned by Tammy Brito with its principal place of business in Hialeah, Florida, is accused of stealing $200,000
Mike Sims Associates
The Traders Domain Receiver has filed clawback litigation against Alexis Romano, an individual allegedly “closely associated” with Mike Sims.
Sims, a key player in The Traders Domain, is believed to have been heavily involved in the money laundering side of the scam.
Romano is a trustee and beneficiary of the AR Family SpendThrift Trust and Romano Family Spendthrift Trust. Through the trusts, Romano is accused of stealing $4.59 million.
Other associated individuals the Receiver has sued include:
- Alixstair Burton, a resident of Atlanta, Georgia, is accused of stealing $59,840
- Alejandro Imar Calderin, a resident of Miami, Florida, is accused of stealing $79,056
- Tiffany Jones-Evans, a resident of Chicago, Illinois, is accused of stealing $77,361
As alleged by the CFTC, The Traders Domain was a ~$283 million Ponzi scheme run by Ted Safranko. Leaked investor data suggests The Traders Domain losses could be as much as $3.3 billion.
Safranko (right), a Canadian national, went into hiding as The Traders Domain collapsed in late 2022.
Safranko was also a major player in the non-MLM SAEG Ponzi scheme, through which an additional $144 million was defrauded from consumers.
Through Mike Sims, funds from the OmegaPro MLM Ponzi scheme are believed to have been funneled into The Traders Domain. OmegaPro collapsed around the same time The Traders Domain did.
Given the scope of The Traders Domain, it’s expected additional clawback litigation will be filed at some point. Note this is not a given.
Stay tuned for updates as BehindMLM continues to track The Traders Domain clawback lawsuits.
Update 27th November 2025 – Wolf Exotics LLC was voluntarily dismissed as a clawback defendant on November 14th, 2025.
Update 25th October 2025 – On October 20th the Traders Domain Receiver filed an Amended Complaint in the Benjamin Glaser litigation, adding additional defendants;
- 36ixZero Degrees LLC
- R Acosta Consulting LLC
Update 7th March 2026 – BehindMLM documented Tiffany Jones-Evans settling with the Receiver in January 2026.
Nicolas Castillo and NEC Business Consulting filed an answer to the Receiver’s clawback lawsuit on January 30th.
In addition to Castillo’s filed answer, the court has scheduled the following trial dates;
- Nicolas Castillo – March 8th, 2027
- Ernesto Ramos – December 14th, 2026
Following the Receiver’s failure to serve Alixstair Burton, the court dismissed Burton as a defendant on February 27th.
Benjamin Joel Glaser was also voluntarily dismissed as a defendant on February 5th. This suggests that Glaser reached an out of court settlement with the Receiver.
Update 29th March 2026 – Two more trial dates have been scheduled:
- Alexis Romano’s trial date has been scheduled for December 14th, 2026
- Defendants in the James Lees litigation has been scheduled for March 29th, 2027
I’m also noting proceedings against Influencer Media Group LLC was voluntarily dismissed on January 16tth, 2026.
Update 27th April 2026 – The Trader Domain Receiver secured a $215,000 default judgment against 36ixZero Degrees LLC on April 13th, 2026.
Update 21st May 2026 – Alexis Romano has settled with the The Traders Domain Receiver. The settlement notice was filed on May 19th, following filing of an Amended Complaint on April 23rd.
The settlement applies to both Romano and in her capacity as trustee of AR Family Spendthrift Trust and Romano Family Spendthrift Trust.
As far as I know details of the settlement aren’t public (yet?). The settlement notice states the settlement is “subject to approval of
the Receivership Court.”
I don’t know what “the Receivership Court” is. I thought it might be the CFTC’s filed action against the Traders Domain but there’s no relevant filing there.
I’ll keep watching the clawback docket for an update. If we get settlement details I’ll publish a standalone article.
Article updated with The Traders Domain clawback settlements, dismissals and trial dates as of March 2026.
These voluntary dismissals are not because of out of court settlements they’re because the receivers accounting and tracing was wrong and they were not net winners
Proving to the Receivership that you aren’t a net-winner is effectively an out of court settlement. Also the Receivership doesn’t invent accounting and tracing, it’s based on The Traders Domain’s books.
Unfortunately, and this is often lost on participants in Ponzi schemes, record-keeping standards in scams is subpar.
@Oz I agree with you in most instances but being one of the many whose claim was denied and then approved, this is all on the receiver being lazy and billing for work they’re not actually doing…
For instance, in my case and many others i personally know, the receiver only tracked in vs out on one bank account at a time…. and they did not review the documents i provided to prove my claim before denying it…
Once i pointed them toward the documents they already had in their possession for over a year they approved my claim, a quick review of documents in their possession could have avoided over a month of back and forth and saved what I’m sure amounted to thousands in billing against the receivership estate…
I am part of a LARGE group of victims that believe this receiver is just as bad as Ted with their egregious billing and constant mistakes.
If true as is then fair enough. Having covered multiple Ponzi Receiverships it’s my understanding that victims are a nightmare to deal with. Verifying additional paperwork is time consuming due to additional attempts at fraud.
Sounds like you got caught up in that process. It’s possible your other bank account(s) weren’t on The Traders Domain’s books.
I have found out many of these voluntary dismissals happened because in these instances the receiver filed lawsuits without sending demand letters first, effectively catching people off guard and not having a chance to prove they weren’t net winners….
This was a clear violation of the receivers own stated procedure with the court.
Typically there isn’t any “stated procedure with the court” for clawbacks. The Receiver is charged with recovering assets.
There is a submitted proposal when it comes to distribution to victims but this isn’t that. The Receiver is free to pursue clawback litigation as he/she sees fit.
That litigation is based off obtained financial records, which are usually pretty terrible in Ponzi schemes. Added to that you have typical shenanigans from investors who sought to cover their tracks when investing.
Not saying clawback lawsuits weren’t dismissed after it was proven some of the defendants weren’t net-winners (we don’t know unless it’s disclosed), but don’t think it has anything to do with procedure violations.
If a suspected net-winner is filed against, they can contact the Receiver with additional information proving they are in fact not a net-winner. This isn’t a procedure violation, it’s standard procedure.
Their procedures are actually outlined in their motion to the judge… they are obligated to send demand letters first because their contingency fee is tiered….
If its settled at the demand letter phase the law firm keeps less funds, so if they skip that stage so they can collect a higher contingency fee then they are being sneaky for the benefit of themselves and are essentially purposefully skipping steps to steal from the victims pot of money.
More stories should be written about how the receivers end up dwindling down the victims pot of money to nearly zero in order to pad their wallets. They end up being the only winners in these types of matters.
^^ This nonsense comes up every MLM Ponzi net-winners start receiving clawback notices. Every major MLM Ponzi Receivership that has managed to seize funds and claw back stolen money from net-winners has seen significant recovery for victims with approved claims.
Legal fees are periodically applied for in Receivership filings and approved by the court. Time to pay up princess.
How different to the US OneCoin claim process.
No ambiguity there. If you can prove you lost, you get paid back and they intend to spend what they put aside. You have to be okay with whatever jurisdiction you pay taxes in so drama queens are obviously excluded
OneCoin is different. There was no significant recovery or net-winner clawbacks. Yes I know they recovered millions through criminal actions but that overall is a tiny percentage of the $4.1 billion amount.
I was thinking more TelexFree ($3 billion) and Traffic Monsoon (few hundred mill) as examples. Lots of net-winner crying in those two instances but at the end of the day recovery was significant for victims with valid claims.
Agreed.
By far the most complicated is MTI. The liquidators there are doing a scorched earth thing. If you were a winner, you pay back. And not that the price of the BTC you got back then, the price the BTC is now.
The lesson being: you should have known better; you scammed; you gambled; you lost – and you lost big, & let that be a lesson to everyone
I don’t need to “pay up” I’m the one that’s going to be getting paid (pennies on the dollar). That being said for every $1mil recovered via claw backs the receiver and their attorneys keep $500,000 and the victims get .25% meaning if I lost $100,000 I get back $250. Seems to me like the receiver is the only winner.
Can you explain why you support this? This seems like theft to me. The judge even made a comment about fees getting out of hand in response to the 7th receiver report.
Absolutely – The alternative is you get nothing.
Typically victims of MLM Ponzi schemes fall into two categories; people who thought they could beat math (“I’m the smartest person in the room at all times” syndrome), or the dumbest morons on the planet. There is of course considerable overlap between the categories.
You couldn’t pay me enough to deal with these people, let alone on money matters. So whatever Receiverships want and assuming recovery is taking place, pay them.
I pulled up the May 4th order granting the Receiver’s Seventh Fee Application filing;
There’s no representation from the court that fees are “getting out of hand”. The court noted the fee application “was the highest yet” whilst acknowledging why that is the case and that the reasons are “reasonable” – in line with previous fee applications.
I take it you fall into MLM Ponzi victim category #1? Be thankful someone is cleaning up the mess you got yourself into.
Article updated to note Alexis Romano’s The Traders Domain settlement.