Madoff Ponzi Scheme

Morgan Keegan & Co. Inc. Must Pay $250K to Couple that Lost Investments in Hedge Fund with Ties to Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities

Published on: March 16, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority says that Morgan Keegan & Co, Inc. must pay over $250,000 in punitive and compensatory damages to Jeffrey and Marisel Lieberman. The couple suffered financial losses after investing in Greenwich Sentry LLP, a hedge fund whose assets were funneled to Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities. FINRA contends that the brokerage firm failed to due enough due diligence on the Madoff feeder fund, and was “grossly negligent.”

The Lieberman, who are accusing the Regions Financial unit of fraudulent misrepresentation, negligence breach of fiduciary duty, and violations of Florida and Tennessee statutes, claim that Morgan Keegan and Julio Almeyda, one of its registered representatives, invested $200,000 of their money with Greenwich Sentry. The fund ended up filing for bankruptcy last November.

Per Morgan Keegan’s internal compliance rules, investors should only be allowed to place money in hedge funds if “speculation” is one among their main objectives when opening an account. “Speculation” was the last objective on the couple’s list. FINRA says that not only must the broker-dealer repay the couple’s entire loss of $200,000, but also they must also give them 6% annual interest from when the investment was made, $50,000 in punitive damages, and $14,000 in expert witness fees.

Meantime, the FINRA panel cleared Almeyda of wrongdoing, finding that he did not know that Morgan Keegan had not provided sufficient due diligence nor was he aware that he had given the Lieberman’s false and misleading information about their investments’ risks.

Over the last year, Morgan Keegan has found itself dealing with hundreds of arbitration cases nvolving mutual fund investors alleging securities fraud related to the significant losses they sustained during the subprime mortgage crisis.

Related Web Resources:
Morgan Keegan Fined $250,000 Over Madoff Fund, Reuters, March 7, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Morgan Keegan to Pay $9.2M to Investors in Texas Securities Fraud Case Involving Risky Bond Funds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 6, 2010
Morgan Keegan & Co., Inc., Morgan Asset Management, and Two Employees Face Subprime Mortgage Securities Fraud Charges by SEC, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 8, 2010
Morgan Keegan Ordered by FINRA Panel to Pay Investor $2.5 Million for Bond Fund Losses, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, February 23, 2010 Continue Reading ›

Texas Congressmen Seek Answers from SEC Chairwoman Regarding Conflict of Interest Related to Madoff Debacle

Published on: March 8, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Texas Congressman Jeb Hensarling is one of four Republican members of the House Financial Services Committee wanting to know more about Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary Schapiro’s role in managing the conflict of interest presented by appointing David M. Becker as the SEC’s general counsel. Becker, who is no longer in this post, is with someone with a financial interest in a Bernard Madoff investment account. As a senior policy director for the SEC involved in dealing with Madoff Ponzi scam, he played a role determining how victims would be compensated.

Becker’s ties with Madoff didn’t come to light until trustee Irving H. Picard sued him and his two brothers to get back more than $1million of the $2 million they had inherited from their late mother’s Madoff investment. The former SEC general counsel claims that he told Schapiro and the chief ethics officer of his Madoff-related financial interest. Now, however, SEC inspector general H. David Kotz says he wants to probe possible conflicts of interest related to Becker’s role with the SEC as someone who stood to benefit from decisions involving Madoff Ponzi scam victims. According to the New York Times, two unnamed sources say while the SEC agreed to return to investors only the funds they had placed in their Madoff accounts, Becker had pushed for allowing the victims to keep some of their investment gains.

Lawmakers say they want details of Schapiro’s talks with Becker about his Madoff ties. They also want to know whether she followed all the steps delineated in government ethics rules. Also getting into the mix is Texas Representative and Republican Randy Neugebauer, who is quoted in the New York Times as stating that he believes the SEC should be held to the same high standard of “transparency and disclosure” as it holds other companies.

Number of Ponzi Scam Collapses Increased Significantly Last Year

Published on: January 4, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The number of Ponzi scams that fell apart increased by nearly four times in 2009, compared to the year, before resulting in over $16.5 billion in investor losses. This figure comes from the Associated Press, which analyzed Ponzi schemes in all US states.

Additional findings from the AP analysis:

• Over 150 Ponzi schemes fell in 2009 • 40 scams collapsed in 2008 • Allen Stanford’s $7 billion international Ponzi scam and Scott Rothstein’s $1.2 billion scheme were among the larger plots that fell apart last year
Bernard Madoff’s $65 billion Ponzi scam wasn’t calculated into last year’s figures because he was arrested at the end of 2008.

In addition to increased enforcement efforts, the economic collapse can be credited with the discovery of many schemes that may have otherwise gone undetected. The number of people willing to invest in new ventures went down in 2009 while current investors rushed to pull out their money. As Ponzi scammers rely on new investors to not only pay the old investors but also fund their expensive lifestyles, many schemes collapsed. The discovery of Madoff’s Ponzi scam has also made investors more wary and regulators more alert.

Another scam of note is Tom Petters’ $3.65 billion scheme. Petters used Petters Group Worldwide, LLC to run his Ponzi scam. He is in prison waiting to receive his sentence. He could be sentenced to a life prison term.

In 2009, the Federal Bureau of Investigation opened over 2,100 securities fraud probes. That’s 350 more investment fraud investigations than the number of investment probes that were opened in 2008. The FBI had 651 agents working on high-yield investment fraud investigations last year. Also in 2009, the US Securities and Exchange Commission issued 82% more restraining orders against securities fraud cases than they did in 2008. Ponzi scams now compromise 21% of the SEC’s enforcement workload-up from 9% in 2005.

The number of civil actions (31) that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed last year has more than doubled since 2008. Many securities fraud cases from last year have not yet gone to trial.

Related Web Resources:
AP: Ponzi collapses nearly quadrupled in ’09, Yahoo, December 28, 2009
2009: The Year of the Ponzi, ABC News
Charles Ponzi
Continue Reading ›

Texas Securities Commissioner Not Convinced SEC Has Reformed Itself Since Madoff Ponzi Scam

Published on: December 5, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Denise Voigt Crawford, the Texas securities commissioner and current North American Securities Administrators Association president, says it isn’t evident that the US Securities and Exchange Commission has implemented key reforms to the issues that allowed the agency to fail to detect Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion ponzi scheme for almost 20 years. Speaking at the National Press Club on Friday, she accused the SEC of not doing enough to support legislation intended to increase investor protection.

Crawford claims staffers that work for the SEC hardly interact with investment fraud victims. Because many SEC employees would like to work on Wall Street, she contends that this makes it difficult for agency members to properly oversee a securities firm that could potentially become a future employer.

Seeking to make a number of changes to the financial-overhaul bill currently moving through Congress, NASAA wants states securities regulators to have jurisdiction over securities firms that manage up to $100 million in assets. It also wants broker/dealers, and not just investment advisers, to be subject to a fiduciary standard when giving investment advice. NASAA wants to terminate mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses that make investors to pursue their securities fraud claims in arbitration proceedings run by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

Responding to Crawford’s comments, SEC spokesperson John Nestor called her statements “uninformed” and cited the agency’s proposal of the Investor Protection Act, its hiring of senior management, reforms made to internal operations, new rulemaking that is focused on investors, and an increase in investigations and penalties as among the numerous “dramatic” changes that the SEC has implemented since Madoff’s massive ponzi scam was discovered.

Related Web Resources:
State regulator: Jury still out on SEC post-Madoff, AP/Yahoo! News, December 4, 2009
2nd UPDATE:Texas Securities Regulator:’Jury Is Still Out’ On SEC Reform, Wall Street Journal, December 4, 2009
Texas State Securities Board

North American Securities Administrators Association
Continue Reading ›

Number of Securities Lawsuits Increased During 3rd Quarter

Published on: November 20, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to commercial insurance consulting firm Advisen, 169 securities lawsuits were filed during 2009’s third quarter-an 11% increase from the 152 complaints that were filed during the previous quarter. 249 securities lawsuits were filed in the 1st quarter.

The most common kind of securities lawsuit filed this past quarter was securities fraud lawsuits that were brought by law enforcement agencies and regulators. 70 securities fraud complaints and 55 securities class actions were filed during 3Q. 50 securities fraud complaints and 38 cases were filed in the 2Q.

Advisen Executive Vice president Dave Bradford says the percentage of securities fraud lawsuits is expected to grow now that the Securities and Exchange Commission appears to be increasing its securities fraud enforcement initiatives under President Barack Obama. The SEC has been attempting to recoup from its failure to detect the $50 billion Ponzi scam that Bernard Madoff ran for years.

SEC, NASD, FINRA & SIPC: New SEC Report Card on Madoff Catastrophy Further Reveals How Investor Protection Is Severely Flawed!

Published on: September 3, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A new report by the Inspector General at the Securities Exchange Commission recounts 16-years of failures at the SEC which led to the financial crime of the century perpetrated by Bernard Madoff and his firm. The report states that the agency “never properly examined or investigated Madoff’s trading and never took the necessary, but basic, steps to determine if Madoff was operating a Ponzi scheme.”

The IG confirms that the SEC failed to heed direct warnings and warning signs as early as 1992 which “could have uncovered the Ponzi scheme well before Madoff confessed” to the $50 billion fraud, leading to his 150 year prison sentence.

Critics of cecurities regulators and the securities regulatory system have for years complained that the system is not only inept but perhaps corrupt. Accusations have included that regulators overlook wrongdoing by Wall Street insiders while “rounding up the usual suspects” to appear as if they are doing their jobs. Madoff may be the poster child for this theory.

SEC Securities Fraud Lawsuit Accuses Beverly Hills Money Manager Stanley Chais of Leading Investors Into Madoff Ponzi Scam

Published on: June 24, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission is suing Beverly Hills money manager Stanley Chais for securities fraud related to his alleged involvement in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scam. The SEC alleges that Chais and four others worked collectively to raise billions of dollars from investors to fund the $65 billion scheme-the largest Ponzi scam in US history.

Chais investors’ accounts were worth almost $1 billion when the Ponzi scam finally collapsed. Chais, 82, is accused of collecting almost $270 million in investor fees. The Beverly Hills money manager, his family members, and associated entities are also accused of withdrawing almost $546 million in ill-gotten profits. The SEC is seeking financial penalties and the return of ill-gotten gains to investors.

The SEC complaint contends that Chais portrayed himself to his clients as an “investing wizard” and did not let them know that Madoff was actually in charge. The SEC says that Chais either knew that Madoff was running a Ponzi scam or was reckless for not knowing about the scheme. For example, Madoff never reported even one loss on thousands of “purported” stock trades on Chase’ accounts from 1999 to 2008. This alone should have been an indicator that Madoff’s reports were bogus.

Many of Chais’s investors have suffered as a result of the money manager’s alleged misconduct. For instance, the Los Angeles Times reports that Mark Peel, who is part owner and executive chef of Campanile, claims he lost $6 million from investments that Chais is accused of secretly making with Madoff. Peel had to sell his Hancock Park home because of the investment losses he sustained and almost all of his children lost their college funds.

Chais’s attorney denies that his client did anything wrong, did not know that Madoff was bilking investors, and was also a victim of the Madoff scam. Chais, 82, had over 40 accounts with Madoff for himself, family members, and other entities.

In another Madoff-related securities fraud case, the SEC has also filed a lawsuit against Cohmad Securities Corp, Chairman Maurice J. Cohn, executive Robert M. Jaffe, and COO Marcia B. Cohn over allegations that they ignored evidence that Madoff was engaged in a Ponzi scam and actively marketing opportunities with him.

Related Web Resources:
Beverly Hills money manager Stanley Chais accused of fraud, Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2009
Stanley Chais Accused Of Fraud – Raised Billions For The Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme, The Post Chronicle, June 22, 2009
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Madoff and Stanford Victims Can Claim Theft Losses as Tax Deductions, Says Internal Revenue Service

Published on: March 18, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman, investors who were defrauded by R Allen Stanford and Bernard Madoff can claim these theft losses as deductions when filing their taxes. The IRS announced these new procedures on Tuesday. These new IRS rules are applicable to victims of any Ponzi scam but the tax filings must be filed for the year 2008.

Theoretically, the investors would have been paying capital gains taxes if their investments had made profits. Now that it has been discovered that the profits were bogus, however, the IRS says that these same investors should be refunded those taxes.

Under the new guidance, investment losses incurred because of arrangements involving criminal fraud will be classified as theft losses instead of capital losses (usually capped at $3,000 annually). This will allow the victim to receive the larger deduction. For small businesses with $15 million in gross annual receipts, theft loss deductions can be carried back up to five years for 2008 returns instead of the usual 2-years. Also, fictitious income can also be claimed as theft losses.

Investors that file securities fraud lawsuits against Bernard Madoff because they were bilked by his multibillion-dollar Ponzi scam are allowed a 75% deduction for theft losses. Investors who don’t sue the 70-year-old investment advisor can obtain an immediate 95% deduction as soon as possible and seek to obtain the rest in the future if they don’t get back any of their monies. They could also take a deduction for investment income they thought they made.

Related Web Resources:
IRS Says Madoff Victims Can Claim Theft Losses, Bloomberg.com, March 17, 2009
IRS To Allow Madoff Victims To Deduct Theft Losses For 2008, Fox Business, March 17, 2009
Securities Investor Protection Corporation

Internal Revenue Service
Continue Reading ›

UBS Sanctioned For Madoff-Related Losses by Luxembourg Financial Services Regulator

Published on: March 9, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In Europe, the Luxembourg Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (CSSF) has censured UBS’s Luxembourg-based branch for failing to execute due diligence and, as a result, allegedly allowing for the massive losses investors have incurred from the Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scam.

The Luxembourg financial service regulator is accusing Switzerland’s biggest bank of a “serious failure” in the way it managed a feeder fund that funnelled assets to Madoff-related investments. Luxembourg’s CSSF is giving UBS three months to remedy the problems.

UBS, however, is disputing the CSSF’s claim that it violated its contractual obligation to clients. The investment bank says the Luxalpha fund was set up at the request of wealthy clients that wanted a tailor-made fund that would let them invest their assets with Bernard Madoff. UBS says these clients knew that it was not responsible for their assets’ security.

Following news of the Madoff scheme and revelations that some French investors had allegedly lost billions of dollars because their investments were channelled to Madoff through Luxembourg-based mutual funds, the European Commission announced it would start investigating the way EU member states use the EU mutual fund regulatory regime (UCITS, which refers to Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities).

The EU also said that approval of a new regulatory regime will more than likely be delayed so more changes can be considered to ensure that investors are protected in the future from losses such as the ones that occurred with Madoff.

The French government accused UBS of lax supervision of mutual funds. French officials have also accused Luxembourg of being lax when it comes to EU mutual fund regulations. They’ve called on the EU to come up with stricter rules. Luxembourg, which has one of the EU’s mutual fund financial service sectors, disagrees with France’s accusations.

Madoff’s scheme has resulted in massive losses for individual investors, institutions, world financial markets, politicians, charities, and many others.

Luxembourg regulator censures UBS over Bernard Madoff, Times Online, February 26, 2009
French investors to take legal action against banks over Madoff feeder funds, Times Online, January 14, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Feds say Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scheme was worst ever, Daily News, December 13, 2008
Luxembourg’s Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier
Continue Reading ›

District Court Denies Federal Government’s Request to Detain Investment Adviser Bernard Madoff After He Transferred $1 Million in Valuables

Published on: January 26, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Earlier this month, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected a motion by the federal government to put investment adviser Bernard Madoff in jail. Madoff is charged with securities fraud over his involvement in a $50 million Ponzi scheme.

Federal prosecutors had claimed that the investment adviser violated the conditions of his bail when he removed nearly $1 million in valuables from his New York home in December and sent them to friends and relatives. Items that were mailed reportedly included more than 13 watches, an emerald ring, a diamond necklace, two cufflink sets, four diamond broaches, and other expensive jewelry.

Prosecutors say that Madoff’s actions were in violation of a preliminary injunction that prevented him from breaking up his assets so that his investor fraud victims could obtain restitution. Madoff’s attorneys, however, claim that their client did not think he was doing anything wrong and did everything he could to get the items back after he was told that he shouldn’t have sent them.

According to Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis, however, the prosecutors’ argument wasn’t enough to mandate incarceration and the government made too huge a “leap” when it claimed that the community became endangered because Madoff transferred his assets. The district court did impose more bail conditions so Madoff cannot move additional items. The court also noted that these supplemental restrictions would provide additional protections.

Meantime, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority says it has received at least 19 complaints about Madoff’s broker-dealer enterprise. However, FINRA noted that the complaints pertained to trading execution issues and not retail investment advisory issues or allegations of a Ponzi scam or fraud.

Related Web Resources:
U.S. loses another bid to jail Madoff, CNN Money, January 14, 2009
Madoff Is a ‘Danger,’ Argue Prosecutors, WSJ Online, January 8, 2009 Continue Reading ›