Financial Firms

CFTC to Pay $30M to Whistleblower in $367M Asset Management Case Against JPMorgan

Published on: February 20, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission will pay $30M to one whistleblower who provided information that brought about the $367M asset management settlement in a case against JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). Federal regulators alleged that the bank didn’t tell wealth management clients about conflicts of interests that may have affected how the financial institution managed their money between 2008 and 2013. The two JPMorgan units involved were its nationally chartered bank and its securities subsidy.

JPMorgan, which is the biggest bank in the US according to assets, neglected to tell customers that it made money when it placed their money in hedge funds and mutual funds that earned the firm fees. Both high net worth customers and retail mutual fund customers were purportedly affected.

The bank was also accused of not telling investors that it’s wealth business preferenced its own proprietary products over others’ products when deciding where to invest clients ‘funds. JPMorgan was accused of violating its fiduciary duty when it failed to notify customers that more costly share classes of proprietary mutual funds were chosen for them. Although JPMorgan acknowledged its failure to properly disclose the information, the bank maintained that such omissions were not done on purpose, and it has since remedied the matter.

Barclays Faces New Criminal Fraud Charge Over $3B Qatar Loan

Published on: February 15, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In the UK, the Serious Fraud Office is charging Barclays Bank (BARC) with engaging in illegal financial assistance when it gave Qatar Holdings LLC a $3B loan in 2008 so that the latter could acquire shares in Barclays Plc. British prosecutors had previously charged Barclays Plc. and four bank executives with conspiring to commit fraud and providing unlawful financial assistance.

In Britain, public companies are usually not allowed to lend out funds to be used to buy their own shares. Barclays has come under fire for the way it handled investments made by Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, as well as by a group of investors. The money lent to Barclays is believed to have helped the British Bank avoid getting a tax bailout during the global financial crisis. Such assistance would have likely lead to greater oversight over Barclays and closer examination of how much the bank’s executives were making at the time.

Barclays denies the charges against Barclays Plc. and Barclays Bank, which is its operating arm. Prosecutors, however, believe that the loan funds were put back into the bank to give it the capital it needed.

Deutsche Bank Securities Will Pay Back Customers Over $3.7M for Commercial Mortgage-Backed Backed Securities Sales

Published on: February 13, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In a civil settlement reached with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Deutsche Bank Securities will repay commercial mortgage-backed securities customers more than $3.7M over allegedly false and misleading statements related to their purchase of these investments. The firm and its ex-CMBS trading desk head trader Benjamin Solomon agreed to resolve the charges against them but without denying or admitting to regulator’s findings.

According to the SEC’s probe, when selling the CMBSs, Deutsche Bank (DB)’s salespeople and traders made statements that were false and misleading. This caused customers to pay too much for the securities because they were not given accurate information about how much the firm had paid for them. Deutsche Bank also is accused of not having properly designed procedures for surveillance and compliance that could stop and identify the types of wrongful behaviors that would cause commercial mortgage-backed securities buyers financial harm while allowing the firm to profit.

To resolve the CMBS fraud charges, Deutsche Bank will pay customers back all profits on the securities’ trades in which a misrepresentation was made. That figure is over $3.7M, including $1.48M of disgorgement. The bank will also pay a $750K penalty.

Ex-Morgan Stanley Executive is Sentenced in Multimillion-Dollar Fraud That Targeted Widow

Published on: February 9, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Gregory Walsh, a former Morgan Stanley (MS) Assistant Vice President, is sentenced to two years in prison and three years’ supervised release. Last year, Walsh pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud that involved defrauding a firm client of $4.8M.

Court documents state that in 2011 Walsh and his brother, ex-Bank of Oswego VP Geoffrey Walsh, convinced a Morgan Stanley client who was newly widowe, to lend Geoffrey over $1.1M to buy three condos in Palm Springs that would be put in her name and then sold. Instead, Geoffrey made his business the title owner of the properties and did not give the widow the documentation for the title or loan. He then sold two of the properties without her consent or knowledge and used the money for his own expenses instead of giving her the funds. When Gregory Walsh discovered what his brother had done, he did not tell his client.

In 2013, the brothers sought $2M from her for a real estate development project. Gregory did not tell the widow that his brother was involved when she asked. He then withdrew funds from her Morgan Stanley account without her consent or knowledge. In 2013, $1.7M of that money was used to pay off a credit line at Bank of Oswego for Geoffrey, who spent the rest of her funds that had been withdrawn.

Deutsche Bank Securities Must Pay $70M for Trying to Rig the ISDAFIX Benchmark

Published on: February 7, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In a settlement reached with the CFTC, Deutsche Bank Securities (DBSI) will pay a $70M civil penalty to resolve allegations that it attempted to rig the ISDAFIX benchmark. The regulator contends that from 1/2007 through 5/2012, the firm had a number of its traders try to rig the USD ISDAFIX, which is the benchmark used globally for interest rate products.

According to the CFTC’s order, Deutsche bank Securities would make bids, offers, and execute transactions in certain interest rate products such as US Treasuries and swap spreads at the 11am fixing time– or, if not, then close to that hour– to impact the rates seen on the electronic interest rate swap screen. They purportedly did this to lower or raise the reference rates of the swaps broker and influence the USD ISDAFIX when it was published.

Recordings of phone conversations and electronic communications show firm traders talking about taking actions in order to benefit their employer. Also, some Deutsche Bank Securities employees are accused of turning in misleading or fake submissions, again in an attempt to influence the final USD ISDAFIX rates that were published. The CFTC said that such actions were more about the traders’ attempts to manipulate USD ISDAFIX to their benefit rather than an honest assessment of the actual costs associated with going into a certain interest rate swap.

Two Former Morgan Stanley Investment Advisers Accused of Fraud Plead Guilty

Published on: January 31, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In the criminal case brought against them, two ex-Morgan Stanley (MS) investment advisers, James S. Polese and Cornelius Peterson, have pleaded guilty to the criminal charges against them. Polese was charged with conspiracy, aggravated identity theft, investment adviser fraud, and multiple counts of bank fraud. Peterson is charged with conspiracy, investment adviser fraud, and bank fraud.

In a parallel civil case, the US Securities and Exchange Commission claims that beginning in 2014, the two men defrauded three clients of almost half a million dollars. The allegations include:

*Stealing almost $450K from one client and using the funds to make their own investments and pay for Polese’s credit card bills and the college tuition of his children.
*Using a client’s assets to obtain loan financing for an entity in which they were investors.
*Investing client monies in a venture in which they both had a financial stake without telling the client.
*Getting a loan with unfavorable terms for a client.
*Charging one client advisory fees that were 50% more than what he told her they would be.

Texas Securities Cases: Ex-LPL Financial Adviser is Suspended for Charging Unreasonable Fees and Commissions, State Regulator Enters Cease and Desist Order Against R2B Coin, and Former Pharr Bank Worker Pleads Guilty to $1M Theft Involving Elderly Customers

Published on: January 30, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Beaumont, TX Investment Adviser is Suspended for 90 Days
In a Disciplinary Order, the Texas State Securities Board suspended former LPL Financial LLC (LPLA) investment adviser Jason N. Anderson for 90 days. The state contends that while registered with that firm, Anderson touted an active-trading program to clients that charged them unreasonable fees, which included commissions to Anderson, as well as trading costs.

For example, one client paid costs that were approximately 30% of “the value of the average equity securities” in the client’s account. The Texas regulator said that the trading program would have had to make “extraordinary returns” for investors to “offset” such fees or even, in some cases, allow them to merely “break-even.”

The order called the commissions and trading costs “inequitable practices” that violated the Texas Securities Act. The state accused Anderson of not having reasonable grounds for believing that the trading program would be appropriate for these clients.

Deutsche Bank, UBS, and HSBC Securities Settle Respective Spoofing Cases with the CFTC for $46.6M

Published on: January 29, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. and Deutsche Bank AG (DB) will pay a $30M civil penalty to resolve charges brought by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission accusing them of spoofing. According to the regulator, from at least 2/2008 through 9/2014, DB AG, with the help of a number of precious metal traders, sought to rig the price of precious metals futures contracts that were traded on the Commodity Exchange, Inc.

The CFTC’s order said that the traders worked alone and with each other to buy or sell these contracts while planning all along to cancel them before they were executed after a smaller offer was made on the opposite side of the market. The spoof orders were purportedly made to give the impression of market depth in order to generate trading interest.

The regulator found that through the traders’ actions, Deutsche Bank AG sought to not only rig the price of precious metals futures contracts but also to profit from these manipulations. The CFTC said the firm worked with one trader in Singapore who made orders and trades to “trigger customer stop-loss orders.”

Goldman Sachs is Lead Plaintiff in Institutional Investor Fraud Lawsuit Against Startup Outcome Health

Published on: January 25, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

After backing Outcome Health, an advertising company, Goldman Sachs Investment Partners (GS) and other investors are among those suing the startup for fraud and to get their money back. The lawsuit, filed a couple of months ago, comes in the wake of allegations that investors were fooled by inflated information financial performances and were charged for ad space that they never received. Outcome denies any wrongdoing.

It wasn’t too long ago that the company was generating high profits and revenue, while investors were told that their returns were guaranteed. Just last spring, institutional investors, including Goldman, infused $478M into the ad company, which streams pharmaceutical advertising onto tablets and flatscreens at doctor offices.

According to the Wall Street Journal, there had been red flags even back then. The newspaper noted how even the “savviest investors” can miss or ignore warnings. For example, Outcome already had a lot of debt, including $325M for a loan. It also lacked an independent board to conduct oversight and its co-founders were poised to make an “unusually large payout.”

Investors Continue to Go After Goldman Sachs in the Wake of Abacus CDO-Related Losses

Published on: January 18, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan has decided that the shareholder lawsuit brought against Goldman Sachs (GS) for its high-risk subprime securities leading up to the 2008 financial crisis cannot move forward as a class action securities fraud case. The court said that a lower court judge had put too much of a burden on the bank by mandating that it prove that the misleading statements and conflicts of interest alleged by the plaintiffs did not affect its stock price. Shareholders, however, are allowed to pursue shareholders class certification again.

The plaintiffs contend that between 2007 and the middle of 2010, they lost over $13B because the Wall Street bank was not forthcoming about being able to deal with certain conflicts. They accused Goldman Sachs of hiding short positions made in a number of subprime mortgage collateralized debt obligations, including the:

Timberwolf
Anderson Mezzanine Funding 2007-1
Abacus 2007 AC-1
Hudson Mezzanine Funding 2006-1