OSC v. Mughal Asset Management Corporation and others (ponzi schemes, 2022)
Judgment entered
Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.
In June 2022 Ontario Securities Commission staff alleged that Usman Asif used Mughal Asset Management and Lendle Corporation to run a Ponzi scheme that also funded his lifestyle. The tribunal's June 2024 order imposed permanent bans, an $800,000 joint penalty, a further $350,000 on Asif and disgorgement of $661,077 plus US$245,000, and $70,000 for the Lendle fraud.
The record
| Agency | OSC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 2022-15 |
| Date filed | 2022-06-16 |
| Date resolved | 2024-06-03 |
| Court | Capital Markets Tribunal (Ontario) |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | crypto |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Bars imposed | trading ban |
| Defendants | Mughal Asset Management Corporation ; Lendle Corporation ; Usman Asif |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Ontario Securities Act s.126.1 |
| Techniques | Ponzi schemes |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- C$800k
What is alleged to have happened
The statement of allegations said Mughal presented itself as a Toronto investment manager with client agreements and monthly statements, and that Asif used it and Lendle, formed in 2019, to operate a Ponzi scheme in which new investors' money paid returns to earlier ones and funded residential property purchases.
After a merits decision in 2023, the sanctions order of June 3, 2024 bans the respondents from trading and from acting as registrants or promoters permanently, orders Mughal, Lendle and Asif jointly to pay an $800,000 administrative penalty and to disgorge $661,077 and US$245,000 for the Mughal fraud, orders Lendle and Asif to disgorge $70,000 for the Lendle fraud, orders Asif to pay a further $350,000 penalty and bars him as a director or officer, and awards costs of $295,413.65. The earlier summary said no monetary figure had been extracted.
This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the tribunal or the court it relies on describes money from later investors being used to pay earlier ones. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.
- Ponzi schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2022-06-14 Statement of Allegations
- 2022-06-16 Notice of Hearing
- 2022-07-21 Reasons and Decision
- 2022-10-21 Other
- 2022-10-28 Reasons and Decision
- 2022-11-18 Reasons and Decision
- 2022-12-14 Reasons and Decision
- 2022-12-14 Statement of Allegations
- 2023-01-17 Reasons and Decision
- 2023-04-26 Reasons and Decision
- 2023-11-02 Reasons and Decision
- 2023-11-02 Reasons and Decision
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
- Tribunal proceeding
- Statement of Allegations
- Notice of Hearing
- Reasons and Decision
- Other
- Reasons and Decision
- Reasons and Decision
- Reasons and Decision
- Statement of Allegations
- Reasons and Decision
- Reasons and Decision
- Reasons and Decision
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Mark D. Hanf and Hoai-Nam Chu Phan (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Ponzi Schemes | — | settled |
| SEC v. Leor Moshe, Jacob Goldman, Isaac Odes (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-13 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| CFTC v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher Delgado (ponzi schemes, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-11 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| SEC v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| SEC v. Aras Investment Business Group S.A.P.I. de C.V. and others (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-07-24 | Ponzi Schemes | $449k | judgment |
| CFTC v. Trevor L. Vernon and Argent Capital Management LLC (ponzi schemes, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-07-07 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |