SEC v. Brett Pittsenbargar, et al. (ponzi schemes, 2019)

Settled

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 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.

Report an error in this record (sec-brett-pittsenbargar-et-al-ponzi-schemes-2019) by email

On January 21, 2021 the Central District of California entered a final consent judgment against Brett Pittsenbargar, ordering $196,893 in disgorgement, $37,387 in interest and a $100,000 penalty. An earlier partial judgment of February 18, 2020 had left the money terms for later.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$100k

Disgorgement

$197k

Prejudgment interest

$37.4k

Total relief

$334k

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

The SEC announced the complaint on November 25, 2019 (LR-24676) in the Central District of California. It charges violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) and the broker registration provisions. Woodbridge and its owner had already been ordered to pay $1 billion.

The record named the defendants as "Brett Pittsenbargar, et al."; the individual and the company are now listed. The tag is retained pending the lead's decision on unregistered sellers of third-party Ponzi products.

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes it as a scheme paying earlier investors with later investors' money. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

Outcome. SEC judgment documents show a partial consent judgment dated February 18, 2020, which entered injunctions and left disgorgement, interest and penalty to the court, and a final consent judgment signed January 21, 2021. The final judgment orders Pittsenbargar to pay $196,893.36 in disgorgement and $37,387.32 in prejudgment interest, jointly and severally with MGM Home Remodeling LLC (formerly BP Financials), and a $100,000 civil penalty, for $334,280.68 in all. He consented without admitting or denying the allegations. These are judgment documents rather than a narrative release, and whether a separate judgment was entered against the company itself was not checked.

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

1. 2019-11-25 Litigation release published
2. 2020-02-18 Partial consent judgment entered (money terms reserved)
3. 2021-01-21 Final consent judgment entered against Pittsenbargar

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEC litigation release
• Partial judgment as to Brett Pittsenbargar
• Final judgment as to Brett Pittsenbargar

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.