Financial Firms

Merrill Lynch to Settle Short-Selling Case for $11M, Admits to Wrongdoing

Published on: June 2, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The SEC said that Merrill Lynch (MER) would pay $11 million to resolve allegations of short-selling-related noncompliance. The regulator said that the wirehouse executed short sales in certain securities when the supply for this type of transaction was restricted.

Customers frequently ask brokerage firms to “locate” stock that can be used for short selling. The financial firms generate easy-to-borrow lists made up of the stock they believe is accessible for such locates. However, contends the SEC, from January 2008 through January 2014 Merrill used information that was dated to create these ETB lists.

For example, there were times when certain securities that were placed on the ETB list in the morning were no longer as easily available for borrowing later in the trading day. Yet Merrill’s platforms were set up so that they continued to process short sale orders according to the now-dated list—even as firm personnel appropriately stopped using the list for sourcing locates when certain shares’ availability had become restricted.

Deutsche Bank Ordered to Pay $55M for Misstating Financial Reports During the Economic Crisis

Published on: May 26, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is ordering Deutsche Bank AG (DB) to pay $55M to resolve charges accusing the firm of misstating financial reports during the peak of economic crisis. The regulator believes that the financial institution did not factor the material risk for possible losses of billions of dollars.

According to the regulator, in its order instituting a resolved administrative proceeding, Deutsche Bank overvalued a derivatives portfolio the bank had used to buy protection against losses involving credit default. Due to the to the Leveraged Super Senior trades’ “leveraged” nature the collateral for the positions was minimal compared to the $98 billion in purchased protections.

This generated a “gap risk” that the protection’s market value could potentially go beyond the available collateral. Also, because the sellers that put down the collateral could choose to unwind the trade instead of putting more collateral down in such a situation, this meant that technically the bank was protected only up to its collateral level and not its credit protection’s full market value.

UBS, J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, RBS, and Barclays to Pay $5.6B in Penalties Over Fx, Libor Investigations

Published on: May 20, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Five global banks have consented to pay $5.6B in penalties to resolve claims related to a U.S. probe into whether traders at these institutions manipulated foreign-currency rates for their benefit. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), UBS AG (UBS), Citigroup Inc. (C), and Barclays PLC (BARC) will also plead guilty to criminal charges that they conspired to rig prices of U.S. dollars and euros.

According to officials involved with the Department of Justice investigation, which went on for 19 months, traders withheld offers or bids to avoid getting the rates going in directions that would hurt the open positions of other traders, with whom they were colluding. These traders, who were from the different banks, formed what they dubbed as “The Cartel.” They would meet in online chatrooms and communicate via coded language to coordinate efforts to manipulate rates. Hand signals also were reportedly used during calls with clients. Aside from the $5.6B in peanltlies, the firms are paying another $1.6 billion in fines to the U.S. Federal Reserve.

Citibank is paying the biggest criminal fine of $925M plus a $342M penalty to the Fed. The bank was allegedly involved in currency manipulation from the end of 2007 through the beginning of 2013. Meantime, J.P. Morgan will pay the DOJ $550M and the Fed $342M.

Morgan Stanley to Pay $2M for Violations Involving Short Sales and Short Interest Reporting

Published on: May 19, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is fining Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (MS) $2M for violations involving short sale and short interest reporting rules. The violations purportedly took place over six years. The financial firm is also accused of not putting into place a supervisory system designed in a reasonable enough manner that it could identify and prevent such violations.

Financial firms are supposed to report to the SRO on a regular basis their total short positions involving equity securities in proprietary firm and customer accounts. However, according to the self-regulatory organization, Morgan Stanley did not accurately and completely report such positions in certain securities that involved billions of shares. FINRA also said that the firm’s supervisory system was deficient.

Meantime, under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation SHO for regulating short sales, firms are supposed to aggregate their positions in a security to determine whether they are short or long. Through an aggregation unit, Regulation SHO lets firms track positions in a security separate from other positions at the firm and via certain trading desks or operations.

Nomura & Royal Bank of Scotland Must Pay $806M in Mortgage-Backed Securities Case

Published on: May 18, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Nomura Holdings (NMR) and Royal Bank of Scotland group Plc (RBS) must pay $806 million in the mortgage-backed securities lawsuit filed against them by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. $779.4 million will go to mortgage lender Freddie Mac (FMCC) while $26.6 million will go to Fannie Mae (FNMA).

Judge Denise L. Cote of the Federal District Court in Manhattan was the one who found the two banks liable for making false statements when selling the securities to the two lending giants. The banks will also take back the mortgage bonds that are the basis of this lawsuit. As of the end of March, these bonds were worth up to $479 million.

It was Nomura that sponsored $2 billion of the securities purchased by Freddie and Fannie. RBS was the underwriter on four of the deals.

Barclays Also Likely to Be Fined For Libor Settlement Breach

Published on: May 15, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Bloomberg says that according to sources familiar with the matter, in addition to the penalty that Barclays Plc (BCS) is expected to pay to resolve the U.S. Justice Department’s case for interest currency benchmark rigging, the bank will also likely have to pay a fine for violating an earlier settlement reached over interest rate rigging.

These sources say that as of a few weeks ago, the fine was at around $60 million, although negotiations are ongoing. If Barclays is fined it would be the second bank to be subject to penalization for such a violation.

The firm had arrived at a non-prosecution deal with the DOJ over allegations that it rigged the London interbank offered rate, even as it agreed in 2012 to pay $452.3 million to the DOJ, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and U.K.’s Financial Services Authority. As part of the non-prosecution agreement, Barclays consented not to commit criminal actions.

UBS Ordered to Pay Retired Investor $200,000 For Puerto Rico Bond Fund Losses

Published on: May 14, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) panel has ordered UBS Financial Services, Inc. and UBS Financial Services of Puerto Rico (collectively “UBS”) to pay an investor $200,000 for losses she sustained by investing in UBS’s Puerto Rico closed-end bond funds. This is the first known ruling from a FINRA arbitration panel in the hundreds of municipal bond fraud lawsuits filed by investors over the last few years.

The investor, Yolanda Bauza, invested money she obtained in a car accident settlement. In her Puerto Rico bond fraud case, Bauza alleged misrepresentations, securities fraud, and other wrongdoing. In addition to the $200,000 award, the arbitrators denied the firm’s request to remove information about the case from the public records of David Lugo and Carlos Gonzalez, two of the brokers who advised Bauza.

According to Sam Edwards, a partner with Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, who is representing a number of Puerto Rico bond fund investors, “We are very pleased that FINRA’s arbitrators recognized what those of us representing the many thousands of investors in Puerto Rico and abroad have known for almost two years: UBS’s Puerto Rico bond funds were highly conflicted, very risky and completely misrepresented to investors. They were suitable for almost no investors. As a result, those who invested in these bond funds, like Ms. Bauza, should be fairly compensated.”

Goldman Sachs Must Pay National Australia Bank $100M in Mortgage Fraud Case

Published on: May 13, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) arbitration panel recently ordered Goldman Sachs Inc. (“Goldman”) to pay $80 million in compensatory damages plus millions more in interest to National Australia Bank Ltd. (“NAB”), resulting in an award likely to cost Goldman (GS) more than $100 million. According to the award and NAB’s complaint, Goldman sold NAB several collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”), including the Hudson Mezzanine Funding 2006-1 Ltd.

In particular, NAB paid $80 million for its stake in Hudson Mezzanine Funding, a Goldman-backed product, shortly before the financial crisis began. The investments failed when the market for CDOs and other asset backed securities fell apart in 2007 and 2008. In 2011, a U.S. senate report disclosed that while pitching Hudson Mezzanine Funding, Goldman did not tell investors such as NAB that it was betting against the assets supporting Hudson and other CDOs. As a result, according to NAB’s attorneys, when the economic crisis ensued, Goldman profited from the Hudson CDO while NAB and other investors lost all of their investment.

In its complaint, NAB contended that the mortgage-related deal posed a substantial conflict of interest between Goldman and its clients, and, therefore, Goldman was required under FINRA rules to disclose the conflict. Goldman argued it had no such disclosure obligation and, in fact, filed a counterclaim against NAB.

Barclays, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase & Royal Bank of Scotland to Settle FX Rigging Allegations

Published on: May 7, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Wall Street Journal says that U.S. prosecutors are getting ready to announce settlements reached with Barclays PLC ( BCS), Citigroup Inc. (C), Royal Bank of Scotland Group (RBS), and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) over allegations involving foreign currency exchange rate rigging. All four banks are expected to plead guilty to charges of criminal antitrust related to their traders’ alleged collusion in foreign currency markets. The Department of Justice has been investigating whether traders manipulated exchange rates so that their positions would benefit even if this meant financially hurting customers.

Barclays is expected to settle with a number of agencies in the U.S. and Europe for over $1 billion. Also expected to settle is UBS AG (UBS), which was the first bank to cooperate with federal investigators in this probe. The Swiss bank, however, will reportedly be granted immunity from prosecution.

Guilty pleas by the other firms, however, aren’t going to resolve all of the investigations into forex rigging. Other banks are still under scrutiny and settlements from them may be pending.

LPL Financial to Pay $11.7M Fine for Supervisory Failures

Published on: May 6, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. said that LPL Financial (LPLA) must pay $11.7M in fines and restitution for widespread supervisory failures involving complex products sales. The self-regulatory organization said that from 2007 up to last month, the firm did not properly supervise certain exchange-traded funds, nontraded real estate investment trusts, and variable annuities. It also did not properly deliver over 14 million trade confirmations to customers and failed to properly supervise communications, including advertising, as well as the consolidated reports used by brokers.

According to the Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent, To grow LPL, its wholly-owned brokerage firm subsidiary, LPL Financial Holdings Inc. employed a strategy that included acquiring financial services firms, consolidating them with the broker-dealer, and bringing in more registered representatives. Unfortunately, said the SRO, the firm failed to dedicate enough resources to allow LPL to fulfill its supervisory duties.

As just one example, LPL did not have a system for either monitoring the duration of time customers held securities in accounts or enforcing concentration limits on complex products. Its system for reviewing trading activities in accounts had numerous deficiencies. Also, LPL did not submit trade confirmations in over 67,000 customer accounts.