Financial Firms

Former JPMorgan Chase Investment Adviser Faces Criminal and Civil Charges for Allegedly Stealing $20M from Clients

Published on: April 16, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Michael Oppenheim, an ex-JPMorgan Chase (JPM) investment adviser, was arrested this week and charged with bilking clients of at least $20 million. Oppenheim worked for the firm from 2002 until March of this year.

Authorities claim that starting as early as 2011, Oppenheim convinced clients to allow him to take money out of their accounts to invest in low-risk municipal bonds. Instead, he allegedly used the funds to get cashier’s checks that he put into brokerage accounts that he controlled. He also used the money to trade options and stocks in different companies.

Because his options trading activities were generally unprofitable, most of his investments lead to losses. By last year he’d lost some $13.5 million. Oppenheim was also purportedly using client money to pay for a home loan and cover bills. He is accused of concealing his embezzelment by using fraudulent client statements and transferring funds among his clients.

Former UBS Puerto Rico Executives File a $10M FINRA Arbitration Claim Against the Firm

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

Siblings Teresa and George Bravo, who formerly worked as financial advisors at UBS Financial Services Inc. of Puerto Rico (UBS-PR), have filed a $10 million Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration claim against the firm. The Bravos, both were senior vice presidents at the broker-dealer, claim that management deceived not just customers but also employees about proprietary closed mutual funds.

The Bravos said that they thought working with UBS would help them be of better service to their clients, which is why they left their old firm. However, the allegedly fraudulent conduct taking place at UBS created material conflicts of interest for them and other employees. The Bravos are contending that during the three years they worked at UBS, they were repeatedly deceived, mistreated, threatened, and coerced before being forced out.

They collectively managed over $120 million in client assets while working for UBS. According to their complaint, the Bravos said that UBS created a high-pressure atmosphere to get brokers to find and sell more of UBS’s proprietary closed-end mutual funds or risk termination otherwise. Teresa Bravo says that she was even duped into buying $100,000 in mutual funds herself. She and her brother are accusing UBS of deceiving customers for its own protection and trying to artificially preserve the Puerto Rican closed-end funds market.

Plaintiffs Appeal Federal Court’s Ruling Dismissing Their 401(K) Lawsuit Against Fidelity

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

A notice of appeal was submitted with the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by plaintiffs seeking to overturn a ruling by a federal district court dismissing their 401(K) case against Fidelity Investments. The case is In Re Fidelity ERISA Float Litigation.

According to the plaintiffs, who are participants in a number of defined contribution plans, as record keeper for several of the plan, the financial firm breached its fiduciary duty when managing the plans’ float income. This is the money made from interest-bearing accounts that 401k) plans use temporarily before plan assets are disbursed and participants move their funds among different investment choices.

The plan participants believe that Fidelity used the float income to cover administrative and record-keeping costs, which was not part of their agreement with the firm in terms of the fees they were supposed to pay it. However, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper dismissed their complaint last month, finding that the plaintiffs did not plausibly allege that “float income is a plan asset.” Casper noted that she did not consider Fidelity an ERISA fiduciary in relation to float. Now, however, the plaintiffs’ lawyers are disagreeing with Casper’s ruling.

Deutsche Bank Settlement Over Libor Rigging Likely to Exceed $1.5B

Published on: April 10, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to media reports, Deutsche Bank AG (DB) could settle allegations over Libor manipulation with U.S. and British regulators as early as this month. A source reports that the settlement is likely to be larger than $1.5 billion and unit Deutsche Bank Group Services may even plead guilty.

Regulators expected to be involved in any settlement are the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Financial Services in New York, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority. Deutsche Bank is one of several banks probed over accusations of London interbank offered rate manipulation.

Libor is the key interest rate linked to mortgages, credit cards, student loans, and other instruments. The bank is accused of giving false data to a British Banker’s Association daily survey, which impacted Libor’s daily rate in numerous currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, the Euro, and the yen.

LPL Financial Should Pay $3.6M in Fines, Repayments for REIT Sales to Older Investors, Says NH Regulator

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

The New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation wants LPL Financial (LPLA) to pay clients $2.4 million in buybacks and restitution for 48 sales of nontraded real estate investment trusts that were purportedly unsuitable for elderly investors. The regulator, which says the firm did not properly supervise its agents, is also fining LPL $1 million plus $200,000 in investigative expenses.

The securities case springs from transactions involving an 81-year-old state resident that purchased a nontraded REIT from the firm in 2008. The investor, whose liquid net worth was $2.5 million and invested $253,000 in the financial instrument, would go on to lose a significant amount of money. A probe ensued.

The state regulator contends that the 48 REIT sales, totaling $2.4 million lead to concentration that went beyond LPL guidelines and that the firm sold hundreds of nontraded REITs to clients in New Hampshire on the basis of “clearly erroneous “client financial data, while frequently violating its own policies. LPL has reportedly admitted that 10 of the 48 transactions deemed unlawful by the state were unsuitable according to its own guidelines. The Securities Bureau wants to take away the firm’s license to sell securities in New Hampshire.

Barclays Must Pay Former Trader $9M, Ex-Raymond James Broker Gets Back $650K Award

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

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitrators have awarded Mayank Chamadia $3.7 million in compensation in his case against Barclays Plc. (BARC) Chamadia was placed on leave from the June 2013 to prepare testimony for a possible interest-rate manipulation case. He resigned in October 2013 to go work for another firm.

Although Chamadia wasn’t accused of any violations, he said that the leave time while at Barclays hurt not just his reputation but also his bonus earning power. Now, Barclays must pay Chamadia millions of dollars in deferred pay along with the compensation. The arbitrators found that the firm had “no basis” to reduce or keep payouts that had not yet vested. Chamadia’s lawyer says that this releases some $9 million in back pay that had vested, including interest, to his client.

In another financial representative case against a firm, Robert Fenyk, an ex-Raymond James Financial Services Inc. (RJF) adviser, recently saw his $650,000 award reinstated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The ruling comes after a five-year legal battle.

Investor Fraud News: NFL Free Agent Sues Bank of America For $20M, FINRA Arbitration Panel Awards $1.3M to Investor in Case Involving Ex-Stifel Broker, and Tony Thompson and His Brokerage Firm are Barred from Industry

Published on: March 31, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Former Colts Football Player Sues Bank of America for $20M

Dwight Freeney, formerly with the Indianapolis Colts and currently an NFL free agent, is suing Bank of America (BAC) for securities fraud. He and his Roof Group LLC say they were bilked of over $20 million.

In his securities fraud case, Freeney contends that the bank’s wealth management division is to blame for taking part, aiding, and abetting in the scam that cost him money. He noted that Bank of America went after him in 2010 to become one of its high net worth and affluent clients.

FINRA Fines J.P. Turner, LaSalle St. Securities, and H. Beck For Report Supervision Lapses

Published on: March 30, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. is fining J.P. Turner & Co., LaSalle St. Securities, and H. Beck Inc. $100K, $175K, and $425K, respectively, for lapses in supervising reports sent to clients. The reports provided asset summaries, and the self-regulatory organization is concerned that they had the potential to hide fraudulent activities.

A consolidated report typically contains information regarding most if not all of a customer’s financial holdings, wherever they are held. FINRA requires that these reports are accurate and clear. Failure to supervise these documents can cause regulatory issues, such as the possibility of inaccurate communication, data that is misleading or confusing, supervisory control lapses, and the use of consolidated reports for unethical or fraudulent reasons. The SRO’s regulatory notice 10-19 states that if a firm cannot properly supervise these reports then it should not distribute them and must make sure that registered representatives abide by this restriction.

During routine exams, FINRA found that representatives from the three firms prepared and issued consolidated reports to customers even if the documents hadn’t been properly reviewed beforehand. LaSalle St Securities, which had written procedures pertaining to consolidated reports, failed to enforce these and did not properly trained representatives on how to use the reports. The disciplinary action against the broke-dealers was related to private placement-involved matters.

Oppenheimer Must Pay $2.5 Million Fine, $1.25 Million in Restitution for Not Supervising Ex-Broker

Published on: March 29, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is fining Oppenheimer & Co (OPY) $2.5M for not supervising Mark Hotton. The ex-broker stole from customers and excessively traded in their accounts. Oppenheimer must also pay $1.25 million in restitution.

To date, the brokerage firm has paid over $6 million to settle customer securities arbitration claims involving Hotton. This latest restitution will go to another 22 customers who did not file claims.

According to the self-regulatory organization, Oppenheimer did not properly investigate Hotton before hiring him, despite the fact that FINRA’s own records linked him to several customer complaints and criminal charges. After discovering that Hotton’s business partners sued him for bilking them out of millions of dollars, still the firm did not heighten supervision over him.

Ameriprise Financial Settles 401(k) Fiduciary Breach Case for $27.5M

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

Ameriprise Financial Inc. (AMP) will pay $27.5 million to settle a fiduciary breach case filed by its retirement plan participants. The plaintiffs contend that the financial firm cost them millions of dollars in excessive fees. The agreement was reached just weeks before the 401k lawsuits were set to go to trial. Even though Ameriprise is settling, the firm is not denying or admitting to the alleged breaches.

The plan participants filed their case in 2011 against the firm and the committes tasked with supervising Ameriprise’s employee benefits administration and 401(k) investments. The plaintiffs said that the investments in the 401(k) plan included money from the firm’s RiverSource Investments subsidiary and that both companies were paid fee revenues from the plan dollars of employees.

Under the deal, Ameriprise will not have to modify its plan but it will perform a request-for-proposal bidding process for investment consulting services and recordkeeping services, as well as other modifications. Aside from direct expense reimbursements from the plan, the firm cannot get paid for the administrative services it provides to the plan. Ameriprise also must continue to pay a recordkeeper, offer participants the required plan fee disclosures, and consider using separately managed accounts and collective investment trusts.