Skip to content



This blog tracks highlights of the class action lawsuit against (Hellum v. Prosper Marketplace, Inc.). It is NOT the official Notification Administrator site. That site is located at

Notice going out to Class Members

May 24, 2012

There is an important development to report in the ongoing class action lawsuit against Prosper Marketplace, Inc. (

If you purchased loan notes on during the period from January 1, 2006 through October 14, 2008, you may be a class member in a class action.

At the Court’s request, notice is currently being sent via email and regaular mail to purchasers of loan notes from Prosper in the period indicated, based on information provided by Prosper.  The notice is expected to go out very shortly, so keep an eye out for it.

If you require additional information, the Court has requested the establishment of a separate web site ( where interested parties can obtain pertinent information.

One of the key pieces now available is the “Long Notice.”  If you believe you may be a member of the Class, this notice describes the nature of the claims alleged and the defenses asserted, and your right to participate in, or exclude yourself from, the Class. You may also receive a summary version of this notice by email.

The site also provides sections for you to contact the Notification Administrator, update your contact information, and access documents related to the case.



Court Orders Dissemination of Class Notice

May 17, 2012

According to court filings made available today, Judge Kramer of the Superior Court of California, has issued an order appointing a third-party “Notice Administrator” to validate the list of class members, as defined in Hellum v. Prosper Marketplace, Inc. (and as provided by Prosper Marketplace, Inc.), and prepare to disseminate a summary notice to all class members via both email and First Class mail, no later than May 30, 2012.

Additionally, the Notice Administrator has been directed to establish and maintain a case website, where class members can obtain additional information about the case, and their rights and options.

Class members will have the option to opt-out of the Class by submitting a timely request for exclusion, pursuant to instructions set forth in the mailing.

The case website is expected to be hosted at (as of this moment, the site does not yet appear to be operational).

You can find a copy of this order and several other pertinent court filings here.

Court Grants Class Certification, Appoints Class Representatives and Class Counsel

March 2, 2012

In a significant development in the ongoing securities litigation involving Prosper Marketplace (, Judge Kramer of The Superior Court of California has granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.

Details of the ruling are available here.

Court issues tentative ruling on motion for class certification

January 24, 2012

In the ongoing proposed class action securities litigation involving Prosper Marketplace ( in the Superior Court of California, the court has issued a tentative ruling to grant motion for class certification.

The court will reconvene later this week to conclude defense final argument, ruling and case management conference.

You can find more details here.

Reversal, Answer and Opposition

October 5, 2011

UPDATE: The outside directors’ answer to the third amended complaint is now available from the court’s web site.

On September 20, 2011, the Superior Court of California, in the action against Prosper Marketplace ( received the official word from the Court of Appeal, reversing its earlier decision to dismiss the outside director defendants (Breyer, Cheng and Kagle). This followed a failed attempt by the outside directors to appeal the reversal to the California Supreme Court.

With the outside directors back in the case, the outside directors filed their answer to the operative 3rd amended complaint on September 28, 2011.  No copy of this answer document is, as of yet, available from the court’s web site.

On this same date, Prosper Marketplace filed in opposition to plaintiffs’ amended motion for class certification.

You can find more details regarding developments in this case here.

September 12, 2011 Case Management Meeting

September 15, 2011

In the ongoing proposed securities class action litigation against Prosper Marketplace ( the Superior Court of California hosted a case management meeting this week.

According to minutes posted to the court’s web site,  Court and counsel conferred regarding case status and further proceedings.  The action was then continued until November 7, 2011, when the parties will meet again.  The agenda for the next gathering is expected to include status of discovery and further briefing and hearing schedule.

We are rapidly approaching the 3-year anniversary of this action being filed on November 26, 2008.


Greenwich Insurance Company files appeal

August 23, 2011

As previously reported here, Prosper’s insurance carrier, Greenwich Insurance Company, has now filed an appeal with the California Appellate Court.

The docket for this case can be found here.

This appeal appears to be related to the ruling handed down on July 1, 2001 – the text of which can be found here.

NOTE: For those who prefer to do their own document searches, keep in mind that court documents related to the insurance portion of the case operates with at least two different spellings for the insurance company, including Greenwich and Greennwich.

Prosper’s insurance company files notice of appeal

August 17, 2011

According to the docket related to PROSPER MARKETPLACE, INC. VS. GREENNWICH INSURANCE COMPANY, Prosper’s insurance company has filed a notice opf appeal related to the order filed on July 1, 2011.

Also this week, the court’s web site indicates Greenwich has filed a bond in the amount of  $213,876.79 .

Supreme Court declines to hear disgruntled Directors

July 20, 2011

The California Supreme Court has declined a petion filed by the outside director defendants of Prosper Marketplace (, seeking review of the decision handed down by the   California Court of Appeal on 4.29.2011.

Related posts:
Disgruntled Directors Petition California Supreme Court
Plaintiffs Prevail on Appeal

Prosper to insurer: We’re interested in interest

July 1, 2011

As is perhaps suitable for a lending company, Prosper Marketplace is interested in collecting interest.

There was brief action in Judge Kramer’s courtroom this morning, as the Court turned its attention to the matter of Prosper Marketplace, Inc. vs. Greennwich Insurance Company.   According to the brief information provided by the court, Court and counsel discussed the amount of prejudgment interest owed on the claim. Counsel stipulate to an agreed amount to be included in the judgment and submitted the judgment to the Court.  The judgment was signed in open Court – and Court was then adjourned.

No word on the interest rate Prosper charged.

%d bloggers like this: