NASD Enforcement

Annuity Sales Fraud of Seniors is Growing, Says the NASD

Published on: June 6, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The National Association of Securities Dealers has issued an “Investor Alert” warning of a rise in deceptive sales practices in the sale of annuities to senior citizens

The NASD also states that consumer confusion about annuities has also risen. “This is due, in part, to questionable or deceptive sales practices employed by companies and agents looking to take advantage of uninformed consumers,” it adds.

An “annuity” is defined in the release as “a contract in which an insurance company makes a series of income payments at regular intervals in return for a premium or premiums you have paid.”

SIPC Insurance of Brokerage Accounts to be Disclosed to Investors But Not Explained

Published on: May 21, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

For decades investors have been told their accounts were protected by the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) without being told what was covered by this insurance. Few realize this protection only provided that whatever securities and cash are in an account when a firm goes out of business would be returned to the investor. (Furthermore, such claims are difficult to file and often take years to process.)

Thus, if investors are defrauded into purchasing investments, if their accounts are churned for commissions or if other wrongdoing occurs in their accounts, they are NOT protected by this Federal insurance. Even claims for unauthorized transactions, including the sale of viable securities in order to purchase worthless securities from the firm or its officers are not always refunded. In short: Fraud is not covered by SIPC!

After years of complaints, efforts by attorneys representing investors and pressure by some consumer-friendly legislators, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD) and the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) were finally persuaded to act. However, rather than force brokerage firms to disclose the insurance coverage (or lack of it) the NASD and SEC passed a much less effective requirement.

NASD Fines Two Fidelity Brokerage Subsidaries $400,000 for Distributing Misleading Sales Literature Regarding Systematic Investment Plans Sold to Military Personnel

Published on: May 10, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The NASD announced this week that it fined two Fidelity brokerage firms $400,000 for preparing and distributing misleading sales literature promoting Systematic Investment Plans, which were sold primarily to U.S. military personnel. Issuance and sales of new systematic investment plans after these were prohibited by Congress last fall.

The NASD found that between January 2003 and January 2006, the two firms violated NASD advertising rules by preparing and distributing misleading sales literature. From May 2003 through January 2006, the Fidelity firms prepared and distributed a brochure entitled “Time is Money” that included misleading performance claims about its “Destiny Plans”. According to “mountain charts” contained in the brochures, these plans significantly outperformed the S&P 500 Index over a 30-year period. Yet, during the most recent 10- and 15-year periods-the time frame most relevant to current and prospective investors – Destiny Plans substantially underperformed the S&P 500 Index.

The brochures also showed average annual total returns for 1, 5 and 10 years as well as the life of the Plan, without showing comparable returns for the S&P 500 Index. This also created the misleading impression that the plans outperformed the S&P 500 Index when instead that index significantly outperformed the plans.

NASD Hearing Panel Sanctions Former Knight Securities Executives for Supervisory Failures

Published on: April 13, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

An NASD Hearing Panel issued $100,000 in fines against Kenneth Pasternak, former CEO of Knight Securities, L.P. (now known as Knight Equity Markets, L.P.), and John Leighton, former head of the firm’s Institutional Sales Desk, for supervisory violations in connection with fraudulent sales to institutional customers in 1999 and 2000.

In addition, Pasternak was suspended in all supervisory capacities for two years, while Leighton was barred in all supervisory capacities.

In March 2005, NASD’s Department of Market Regulation charged Pasternak and Leighton with failure to supervise the firm’s leading institutional sales trader, Joseph Leighton, who is John Leighton’s brother. The NASD complaint also charged Pasternak with failing to establish and enforce a supervisory system designed to ensure compliance with federal securities laws and NASD rules.

NASD Warns Investors – Not Brokers – of the Risks Associated with Using Margin to Purchase Securities

Published on: April 11, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Washington, DC – The NASD today issued an updated Investor Alert warning investors – not brokers – about the risks associated with trading on margin. Since the release of a previous Alert on this topic in 2003, the amount of debt taken on by investors to buy securities has reached a record high of $321.2 billion in February 2007.

“We are concerned too many investors are unaware they could suffer substantial financial losses by using debt to purchase securities,” said Mary L. Schapiro NASD Chairman and CEO. “By updating our Alert on this topic, we hope to remind investors not to underestimate the risks involved.”

The Alert, Investing with Borrowed Funds: No “Margin” for Error, explains that investors who cannot satisfy margin calls can have large portions of their accounts liquidated under the market conditions at the time, favorable or unfavorable. That liquidation can result in substantial losses. Some of the risks associated with opening a margin account explained in the Alert are:

NASD Form U-5 Notice of Termination Statements Are ‘Absolutely Privileged,’ Says A Divided New York Court of Appeals

Published on: April 9, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Federal Appeals Court in New York reversed prior decisions and decided that statements in a NASD Notice of Termination Form U-5 are subject to absolute privilege from defamation actions. The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association claim the ruling is a victory for investors and that firms will now be encouraged, rather than discouraged, from offering investors full disclosure regarding a broker that has participated in any wrongful actions. Yet, observers believe it is the brokerage industry itself that won a victory.

In Judge Victoria A. Graffeo’s opinion, the court discussed that Chaskie Rosenberg was hired as a financial services representative in 1997 for defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s All-Boro agency. Based in Brooklyn, the agency served members of the local Hasidic Jewish community. Most of its employees were also Hasidic Jews.

MetLife performed an agency audit in 1999 because the agency accepted third-party checks to pay for life insurance policy premiums. Following another audit, MetLife shut the agency down and moved employees to a different office. Rosenberg was let go after a third audit by MetLife. ‘

Putnam Retail Management, Scudder Distributors, and AllianceBernstein Investments Say They Will Pay $700,000 Settlement Over NASD Allegations That They Violated Non-Cash Compensation Rules

Published on: March 5, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

While neither admitting or denying the charges by NASD, AllianceBernstein Investments Inc. of New York, Scudder Distributors Inc. of Chicago, and Putnam Retail Management Limited Partnership of Boston says they will collectively pay $700,000 to settle allegations that they violated the NASD’s non-cash compensation rules. Charges included the accusations that they improperly provided entertainment at education and training meetings and paid for guest expenses at these events.

Scudder, the distributor of Scudder investment products, said it would pay $425,000 in fines. AllianceBernstein, the distributor of AllianceBernstein LP’s investment products, agreed to pay $100,000, and Putnam, which distributes its own products, said it would pay $175,000.

NASD limits compensations so that point-of-sale incentives won’t affect a broker’s objectivity to find the appropriate investment product for each investor. Non-cash compensations are also limited by NASD, including reimbursements for meals, lodging, and travel expenses related to education and training meetings.

Raymond James Financial Services Is Fined $2.75 million By NASD

Published on: February 22, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

NASD says that it is fining Raymond James Financial Services $2.75 million for not adequately supervising more than 1,000 producing sales managers across the U.S between 2002 to 2004. NASD also permanently barred one of RJFS’s branch managers, Donna Vogt, for making unsuitable recommendations to retirement age and elderly customers regarding variable annuity purchases and mutual funds. Some of these transactions were deemed unsuitable because of their over-concentration in aggressive growth funds. She is also accused of making misleading statements when corresponding with customers, treating them as if they belonged to the same group regardless of financial status, age, objectives, and investment experience.

NASD says the St. Petersburg firm neglected to notice sales practice abuses because of its deficient supervisory system. Producing branch managers had to be their own supervisors-opening and approving new accounts, approving their own sales transactions, and checking their correspondence. Because of this, RJFS’s system for supervision was not in compliance with securities regulations and rules.

NASD also claims that RJFS does not have a proper system set up to properly oversee variable annuity sales. Only three exception reports have been used to screen variable annuity purchases, and transactions were not screened for suitability based on yearly income, net worth of the customer, concentration of variable annuity holdings as part of net worth, or investment experience. As a result, unsuitable recommendations by Vogt went unnoticed.

Securities and Exchange Commission Approves Improvements To The NASD’s Code of Arbitration Procedure

Published on: January 29, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) says that it has approved a number of improvements made by the National Association of Securities Dealers to their Code of Arbitration Procedure. The newly approved Code describes best practices and offers additional guidance to arbitrators and parties regarding the NASD Dispute Resolution forum.

Included among these changes are the reorganization of the Code into a more user friendly and logical manner, and the simplifying of the Code’s language. The Code is also now divided into three sections: The Industry Code, The Customer Code, and the Mediation Code. This separation of the code into three parts is intended to remove any confusion regarding which part applies to which disputes. The rules are now ordered in the sequence of a typical arbitration to make each rule easier to find. In addition, parties involved in disputes must either produce documents requested during the discovery process or formally object to producing them. Uniform procedures for filing, responding to, and making decision regarding motions in arbitrations can also be found in the new Code.

While the Mediation Code became effective on January 20, 2006, the Industry and Customer Codes won’t become effective until April 2007. These new Codes will affect claims that are filed on or after the April 2007 date, claims that have already been filed but do not already have a list of arbitrators, and claims where a new list of arbitrators still needs to be generated.

NASD Accuses Morgan Stanley Of Failing To Hand Over Emails And Blaming 9/11

Published on: January 10, 2007 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The NASD says that securities giant Morgan Stanley lied when it said that millions of key email messages requested by plaintiffs and investigators in numerous proceedings against the company had been destroyed during the September 11 terrorist attack in 2001.

According to NASD head of enforcement and executive vice president James Shorris, thousands of cases were affected by this deliberate lie. “The firm made the claim they didn’t know the e-mail was restored, but everyone who came back to work on Sept. 17 turned on their computer, and the e-mail was there.”

The allegations were brought forth by the NASD late December in a disciplinary complaint. Pending an NASD hearing, remedies could include censure, a fine, disgorgement of gains associated with violations, a suspension or bar from securities industries, and payment of restitution.