Traverse Legal Launches Investigation Into Project 79, Hydro Whales NFT Collection, Burlcore Mining, Ocean Money, GSP, And Sahara Star Mining, And Related Projects – Mining

This blog post is part of an ongoing investigation. All
individuals mentioned are presumed innocent until proven otherwise.
The statements herein reflect allegations and concerns raised by
investors looking for more information about projects they have
invested in and for which they have been unable to get information
from the projector project founders. The investigation items listed
below are not facts and are not definitive conclusions.

We Are Looking for Information Surrounding These Projects and
People.

At Traverse Legal, we represent many investors in Project 79,
Hydro Whales, Burlcore Mining, Ocean Money, GSP, and Sahara Star
Mining. These investors have spent many months trying to obtain
critical information from these projects to understand the
circumstances surrounding the alleged misappropriation of funds,
clarify the relationships between the various founders and
associated projects, confirm that the representations made by these
projects were true and accurate, and follow up on numerous promises
to provide refunds or compensation that never materialized.

Because the founders of these projects, who are supposed to act
as fiduciaries for investors such as our clients, have refused to
provide information and, in some cases, terminate key access to the
projects to investors who are asking questions, we are trying to
determine if these events may constitute a rug
pull, a type of fraud where project founders maintain the
appearance of activity and transparency to attract more investment,
only to delay or disappear when it comes to fulfilling
promises.

Summary of Project Associations

Project 79–Sam Pitman, Adam Javaid,
Anderson Arokium, Adam Dignan, Alexandros Alexandrou, Dylan
Hatton

Hydro Whales–Sam Pitman, Adam Dignan,Adam
Javaid, Anderson Arokium

Burlcore Mining–Phil David Burley, Jack
Joseph Burley

Ocean Money –Adam Dignan, Anderson
Arokium, Sam Pitman, Adam Javaid, Sak Sitthitan, Roshi Sharma

Sahara Star Mining–Gavin MacDonald

GSP–Adam Dignan, South American Gold
Firms

Typicalindications of a slow rug
pullinclude:

1. Repeated and unfulfilled promisesof refunds,
   payouts, or transparency.




2. Superficial engagementwith investors while
   avoiding substantive communication or action.




3. Blame-shiftingamong project founders or
   scapegoating specific individuals to deflect accountability.




4. Lack of transparencyin financial operations
   and fund management.




5. Sudden disappearancesor unavailability of key
   project leaders.

Unfortunately, many of these indicators may have occurred in
these projects, deepening our clients’ concerns.

After exhausting their efforts to get answers directly from the
projects themselves, these investors engaged us to contact these
projects directly to obtain the promised information. Despite our
attempts to understand the allegations against confident founders
affiliated with Project 79, some projects refuse to provide
detailed information, while others refuse to respond. This ongoing
lack of transparency and accountability has only heightened
concerns about potential mismanagement or fraud within these
ventures.

Investigating Possible Misappropriation and Governance
Failures

Allegations of Misappropriation of Funds by Project 79
Founders

There are serious allegations of misappropriation of funds by
one or more founders of Project 79. According to some reports,
founder communications and investor statements:

1. Unauthorized Trading on Dubious Exchanges:
   Allegations have been made which suggest thatone or more
   people associated with the Project 79 platformengaged in
   unauthorized trading of investor funds on dubious exchanges. This
   trading may have adversely affected other projects related to or
   using the Project 79 platform.

2. Commingling of Funds: There
   areconcerns that funds from Project 79, initially
   designated for specific investments such as gold arbitrage and
   mining ventures, were commingled with funds from related projects,
   including Hydro Whales, Burlcore Mining, and Ocean Money. If
   commingling occurred, such malfeasance could
   destabilize the financial health of some or all these
   projects.

3. Inadequate Refund Processes: Refund agreements
   offered to investors, such as theGSP Refund Terms &
   Conditions, required investors to waive their right to
   pursue legal action against the Project 79 team. Refunds may have
   occurred for some investors, but not for all. These agreements
   sometimes limit liability while failing to deliver full refunds or
   transparency.

Representations and Governance Failures

The founders of Project 79 made several representations that now
appear questionable based on the lack of transparency and unmet
promises:

1. Gold Investment Promises: Investors were
   assured that funds would be used to purchase physical gold bullion
   through partnerships with mining operations and refineries. The
   failure to provide definitive evidence of these purchases raises
   concerns about the legitimacy of these claims.

2. Lack of Transparency: Despite assurances of
   transparency, the response from Project 79’s legal
   representatives denied all allegations without providing
   substantive proof of proper fund handling. Additionally, repeated
   delays and non-responsiveness to settlement requests have
   exacerbated investor frustration.

3. Governance Failures and Blame Shifting: The
   founders’ attempts to distance themselves from Adam Dignam
   raise questions about his role in the expressed concerns. However,
   possible governance failures and lack of oversight
   implicate the broader management team and suggest potential
   collective liability.

Key Issues Under Investigation

1. Mismanagement and Potential Fraud: Our lawyers
   are investigating whether or not the actions of
   Project 79’s founders constitute breaches of fiduciary duty and
   potential fraud. This includes the diversion of funds and failure
   to fulfill investment promises.

2. Investor Refunds: Refund processes, such as
   those outlined in the Tech Gold LLC Refund
   Agreement, impose conditions limiting investor rights.
   These agreements fail to address the core issues of
   misappropriation and lack of transparency.

3. Regulatory and Legal Violations: The sale of
   tokenized investments across multiple jurisdictions without proper
   oversight may constitute violations of securities
   laws. We are evaluating the enforceability of these agreements and
   the potential for legal action in various jurisdictions.

Please Contact Us if You Have Any Information

We continue to seek information from anyone involved with
Project 79, Hydro Whales, Burlcore Mining, Ocean Money, GSP, and
Sahara Star Mining. If you have any details regarding handling
funds, contractual agreements, or internal communications,
don’t hesitate to contact us. Your information is crucial to
ensuring transparency and accountability.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.