Jana Seaman
profileredflag
Red Flags

1

Jana Seaman

The Seaman couple’s involvement in a $35 million fraudulent scheme has led to significant financial losses for investors and severe reputational damage.

Quick summary on Jana Seaman

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has charged Brent Seaman with orchestrating a $35 million Ponzi-like scheme, defrauding over 60 investors, many of whom were elderly church members.

Involvement of Jana Seaman: While not directly accused of orchestrating the fraud, Jana Seaman, Brent’s wife, is implicated as a relief defendant. She allegedly received substantial investor funds through loans to the Accanito Equity LLCs and holds assets derived from the fraudulent activities.

Misappropriation of Investor Funds: Investigations reveal that investor money was diverted to support the Seamans’ lavish lifestyle, including luxury automobiles, private plane trips, and expensive jewelry. Notably, jewelry worth $328,409.43, purchased by Surge LLC, was recovered from Jana Seaman.

Legal Repercussions: As part of the settlement, without admitting or denying the allegations, Brent Seaman is barred from serving as an officer or director of any public company. Additionally, relief defendant Jana Seaman agreed to pay $757,154 in disgorgement and interest, and Valo Holdings Group, managed by her, consented to a payment of $668,240.

Reputational Damage: The STARability Foundation, a nonprofit organization, has distanced itself from Brent and Jana Seaman following the fraud charges, indicating significant reputational harm.

Financial Risks to Investors: The fraudulent scheme led to substantial financial losses for investors, many of whom were elderly and trusted the Seamans due to their church affiliations. The misuse of funds and false promises of high returns have jeopardized the financial security of these individuals.

Did we miss any intel on Jana Seaman?

use feedback and discussion on Jana Seaman

1.6/5

Based on 11 ratings

Trust
20%
Risk
56%
Brand
22%
by: Crosby Bennett

Luxury jets and $300k in jewelry funded by a Ponzi scheme targeting retirees. This isn't just unethical, it's sickening.

by: Alani James

Disgorgement means you took money that wasn’t yours. The fact that she’s paying it back speaks volumes.

by: Laylani Morgan

Whether directly involved or not, Jana Seaman benefited from stolen money—no amount of denial changes that.

by: Ryland Brooks

Taking money from elderly churchgoers to fund a luxury lifestyle? There's a special place for that kind of behavior.

by: Wesley Holt

Returning $757,154 doesn’t happen if there’s no wrongdoing.

by: Juliana Boone

Major organizations distancing themselves says a lot. When a nonprofit publicly cuts ties, it’s a clear sign that reputational damage is severe.

by: Cole Chambers

Using elderly church members' trust to funnel money into personal luxuries is beyond unethical. Exploiting faith-based connections for financial gain is a massive betrayal.

by: Lauren Adams

Using elderly church members’ trust to funnel money into personal luxuries is beyond unethical. Exploiting faith-based connections for financial gain is a massive betrayal.

by: Alexander Green

Major organizations distancing themselves says a lot. When a nonprofit publicly cuts ties, it’s a clear sign that reputational damage is severe.

by: James Hill

Returning $757,154 doesn’t happen if there’s no wrongdoing.

by: Christopher Allen

Receiving investor funds through fraudulent schemes, even indirectly, raises serious ethical concerns. Benefiting from misappropriated money, whether through loans or luxury assets, only adds to the controversy.

Add Reviews

  • Trust
  • Risk
  • Brand

PROS

+
Add Field

CONS

+
Add Field
Choose Image