Wells Fargo

11th Circuit Revives City of Miami’s Mortgage Fraud Lawsuits Against Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Bank of America

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

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that a lower court made a mistake when it threw out the city of Miami’s claims accusing Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC ), and Citigroup Inc. (C) of engaging in predatory mortgage lending to Hispanic and black borrowers. The Florida city brought its claims under the Fair Housing Act.

Miami claims that the three banks directed non-Caucasian borrowers toward more expensive loans that were frequently not affordable to them even if their credit was good. The city said that because of this “reverse redlining,” there were a lot of foreclosures, a rise in spending to fight blight, and lower property tax collections.

A U.S. district court judge threw out Miami’s mortgage fraud lawsuits last year. Judge William Dimitrouleas claimed that the city did not have the standing to sue and the harm alleged was too remote from the conduct of the banks.

The 11th circuit, however, said that standard was too strict. It believes that the banks could have foreseen that there would be attendant harm from such alleged discriminatory practices.
Continue Reading ›

Wells Fargo Must Pay Woman Over $8M For Alleged Fraud Involving Childhood Trust

Published on: July 22, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Wells Fargo Bank (WFC) must pay a Dallas woman over $8 million. Texas State Judge Emily Tobolowsky said that the bank defrauded Angela Militello in its role as trustee for a trust that family members set up for her when she became an orphan at the age of seven.

Militello contends that in 1999, a trust officer sent to her by the bank told her to set up a new account and gave her papers for establishing a revocable trust. After Militello filed for divorce in 2006, she asked the trust officer about withdrawing $200,000 from the trust to purchase a home for her and her child.

The trust officer gave her a check for that amount and a form asking for approval of the completed sale of a percentage of the assets in the trust. The remainder of assets was to be sold within a few months. Militello claims that Wells Fargo and a third party conspired to sell the assets in her trust at way below market value and fraudulently charge her tfor the property taxes after a buyer purchased the assets.

Wells Fargo, LPL Financial, and Raymond James to Pay Investors of Retirement Accounts and Charities Over $30M for Mutual Fund Overcharges

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

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority said that LPL Financial, LLC (LPLA), Raymond James & Associates (RJF), Raymond James Financial Services, Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (WFC), and Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, LLC must pay over $30M in restitution plus interest to customers who were impacted when the firms did not waive mutual fund sales charges for certain retirement and charitable accounts. According to the self-regulatory organization, between July 2009 and the end of 2014 the financial firms either improperly overcharged certain investors who had purchased Class A mutual fund shares or sold them Class B or C shares instead. The latter two come with ongoing, high back-end fees.

Mutual funds typically offer different share classes for sale. Each class has its own sales fees and charges. Although Class A shares come with an initial sales charge, they usually have lower annual fees than Class B and C shares. However, mutual funds will usually waive Class A sales charges when selling them to charities and some retirement accounts.

The broker-dealers offered these waivers for the retirement and charitable plan accounts under limited conditions. The waivers also were disclosed in prospectuses. Yet, according to FINRA, at various times since at least July 2009, the firms did not actually waive the sales charges for these customers when they were offered the Class A shares.

Because of this, contends the agency, over 50,000 eligible retirement accounts and charitable organizations either paid sales charges for the Class A shares or bought other share classes that required them to pay higher ongoing fees and other expenses. FINRA said that the firms did not properly supervise the sale of these mutual funds and depended on its brokers to offer the waiver discounts even though they weren’t properly trained.

Investor Want Wells Fargo Advisers to Pay $100K in Damages Over F-Squared Investment Losses

Published on: June 22, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A client of Wells Fargo Advisors (WFC) is looking to recover at least $100,000 in damages for losses he sustained from investing with F-Squared Investments Inc. The arbitration case comes six months after F-Squared consented to pay $35 million to resolve Securities and Exchange Commission charges accusing the asset manager of making false claims about its flagship investment product’s performance. The 68-year-old widower’s claim will test whether investors can pursue broker-dealers for selling F-Squared products.

The claimant, a moderately conservative investor who was looking for moderately conservative growth for his retirement account assets, began working with a Wells Fargo financial adviser in 2011. The brokerage firm made F-Squared managed-accounts available to advisors in 2013.

According to InvestmentNews, The investor’s advisor put about $900K of the client’s money-most of his savings, says his attorney-in products managed by two ETF strategists. Over 50% of the money went into F-Squared’s AlphaSector Allocator Select. Meantime, the investor said it paid Wells Fargo about $19,000 in fees for recommending the products. He believes that the firm had a conflict when it recommended investments because they came with such high commissions. Also, the fees erased potential capital gains for the claimant.
Continue Reading ›

US Government Places Restrictions on Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, and Other Banks for Not Complying with Orders Related to Foreclosure Abuses

Published on: June 17, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Office Comptroller of the Currency has placed restrictions on the mortgage-servicing operations of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co (JPM), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), HSBC Holdings PLC (HSBC), Everbank Financial Corp. (EVER), U.S. Bancorp (USB), and Santander Holdings USA Inc. for their failure to totally comply with enforcement orders related to home foreclosure abuses. The OCC said that the banks did not satisfy all the requirements in consent orders that were issued in 2011 over foreclosure processing errors.

Under agreements reached with regulators, most of the biggest mortgage services in the country have consented to pay billions of dollars and fix their controls and systems to resolve claims that they robo-signed, improperly handled loan papers, or fraudulently endorsed affidavits used in foreclosures following the 2008 financial crisis. The banks are accused of improperly putting into motion hundreds of thousands of home foreclosures without assessing each case individually.

The enforcement orders led to scrutiny into US banks’ foreclosure files to assess how many borrowers should be compensated. However, in 2013, the Federal Reserve and the OCC stopped the probe without concluding its investigation.

City of Los Angeles, CA Sues Wells Fargo for Fraud

Published on: May 5, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The city of Los Angeles has filed a civil complaint against Wells Fargo Bank (WFC). The lawsuit accuses the bank of encouraging employees to take part in conduct that was illegal and fraudulent, including setting up unauthorized accounts for customers, charging them unwarranted fees, and ruining their credit.

The city is looking to get a court order stopping the alleged wrongdoing. It wants penalties for every violation, as well as restitution for customers that were hurt. The case is applicable to residents of Los Angeles County and perhaps even customers outside that area.

According to the complaint, employees purportedly misused the confidential data of customers and neglected to close unauthorized accounts when the latter complained. Certain employees even allegedly raided customer accounts for money to set up additional accounts. When unwarranted fees went unpaid, the bank purportedly put customers into collections because of unauthorized withdrawals and damaging data on their credit cards because of these unwarranted fees.

Citigroup, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, And 27 Other Big Banks Pass Fed Stress Tests’ Phase One

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

The 31 biggest banks in the U.S. all passed the first phase of the Federal Reserve’s stress test. This is the first time since the tests have been conducted on banks with over $50 billion in assets that all of them stayed above capital requirements.

Banks have been building their capital reserves, based on tougher Fed requirements, to protect against any losses. Included among the firms that did well are Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and Goldman Sachs (GS).

Based on the results thus far, the Federal Reserve said the big U.S. banks are healthy enough to keep lending if there were to be a serious recession, even if corporate debt markets failed, housing and stock prices dropped, and unemployment were to reach 10%.

FINRA Orders Wells Fargo Units to Pay $1.5M For Anti-Money Laundering-Related Lapses

Published on: December 23, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is ordering Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network (WFAFN) and Wells Fargo Advisors (WFA) to collectively pay $1.5M for anti-money laundering (AML) failures. According to the self-regulatory organization, the two brokerage firms did not comply with a main component of the anti-money laundering compliance program when it did not require some 220,000 new customer accounts to go through an identity verification process. The failures purportedly occurred from 2003 to 2012.

The anti-money laundering compliance program mandates that brokerage firms set up and keep up a written Customer Identification Program that lets them confirm the identity of every customer setting up an account. The broker-dealer should use the CIP to get and verify a minimum amount of identifying data before opening a new customer account. The firms must also keep records of the verification process and let customers know that data is being gathered to confirm their identities.

FINRA said that the firms had a CIP system but it was deficient because of the electronic systems involved. Of the 220,000 new accounts that never had to undergo customer identify verification, some 120,000 of them were closed by the time the problem was identified.

Ex-Edward Jones Financial Adviser is Criminally Charged with Bilking Disabled Woman of Over $160K

Published on: December 22, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Jason Cox, a former Edward Jones financial adviser, is criminally charged with allegedly defrauding a disabled woman. Robert C. Yeamans, who is the woman’s now deceased father, had tasked Cox with managing her account. The woman, who is in her fifties, is developmentally disabled.

According to a federal complaint, Cox took at least $160,000 from the investment account set up for her. He allegedly structured transactions by taking out small amounts during a short time period so he wouldn’t have to fulfill bank reporting requirements for bigger sums.

When worried banking officials asked the woman about the money, she told them she put it in a business that Cox owned but did not know what kind of enterprise it was. The bank closed her account.

Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch, & Other Firms Ordered by FINRA to Pay $43.5M Over Activities Related to Toys “R” Us IPO

Published on: December 11, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is fining 10 firms $43.5 million in total for letting their equity research analysts solicit investment business and offering favorable research coverage related to the the planned Toys “R” Us initial public offering. The firms were fined: $2.5 million for Needham & Co. LLC; $4 million for Wells Fargo Securities, LLC (WFC), Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. (DB), Morgan Stanley & Co., LLC (MS), and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. respectively; and $5 million each for JP Morgan Securities LLC (JPM), Barclays Capital Inc. (BARC), Goldman Sachs & Co. (GS), Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (C), and Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC (CS). FINRA rules state that firms are not allowed to use research analysts or promise favorable research to garner investment banking business.

In 2010, Toys “R” Us and its private equity owners asked the ten firms to compete for involvement in an initial public offering. The self-regulatory organization said that all of the institutions used equity research analysts when soliciting for this role.

The company asked the analysts to create presentations to determine what their views were on certain issues and if they matched up with the perspectives of the firms’ investment bankers. The firms knew that how well their analysts did with this would impact whether or not they would be given the underwriting role in the IPO.