Articles Posted in Securities Fraud

LPL Financial must pay $100K for its improper supervision of a broker. The Oregon Division of Financial and Corporate Securities, which fined the financial firm, reports that LPL Financial has put in place better oversight procedures since the violation was discovered. LPL Financial is a LPL Investment Holdings Inc. division.

According to the state’s securities division, Jack Kleck, an LPL Financial branch manager, sold risky gas and oil partnership-related investments to almost 36 residents. A lot of these clients were elderly seniors for whom these investments were unsuitable (considering their investment goals and age). Some even lacked the mental capacity to make such investment choices.

LPL Financial is accused of committing securities law violations, including not making sure that company procedures and policy were enforced and inadequately supervising Kleck, whose securities license was taken away in 2007. He was ordered to pay a $30,000 fine.

David Kugel, who was a long time Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BMIS), has been charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission with fraud. Kugel is accused of making fake trades to keep Madoff’s multi-billion dollar Ponzi scam running. He has consented to settling the securities fraud charges.

The SEC claims that Kugel, who worked for Madoff for nearly 40 years, was asked by the Ponzi mastermind to turn backdated arbitrage trade information into fake trades. Kugel’s own BMIS account included backdated trades. While some of the trades imitated successful ondx made by Kugel for BMIS, others were founded on historical facts that he got from old newspapers.

Over a number of years Kugel even withdrew almost $10 million in profits from these bogus trades in his own BMIS. SEC New York Regional Office George S. Canellos claims that Kugel knew such profits were fake.

Two other people accused of setting up fake trades from the information that Kugel provided were Joann Crupi and Annette Bongiorno. Both allegedly asked him for backdated data about trades that added up to millions of dollars. They would then take the information and design trades that equaled those figures. These bogus trades showed up as trade confirmations on investors’ account statements.

The SEC filed securities charges against the two women last year. The Commission claims that Bongiorno regularly set up bogus books and records and misled investors via phone calls, trade confirmations, and account statements. She also is accused of setting up false trades in her own BMIS counts that allowed her to cash out millions of dollars more than what was put in. Meantime, Crupi was accused of deciding what accounts to cash out and which investors should receive checks as Madoff’s scam stood on the brink of collapse. The two women are facing criminal charges over their alleged involvement. They have denied any wrongdoing.

Prosecutors have filed parallel criminal charges against Kugel. On Monday, he pleaded guilty to six criminal counts, including securities fraud, conspiracy, and bank fraud. He will be sentenced in May.

Meantime, Irving Picard, who has been appointed as the trustee in charge of helping Madoff’s Ponzi victims from recouping their losses, is seeking at least $22.2 million from Kugel and his family.

Ponzi Scams
A Ponzi scheme can be described as a multi-level marketing operation. The director solicits investments while promising clients a given return rate. However, rather than paying investors from real profits, the principal from new investors is used to compensate earlier investors. Ponzi scams can result in devastating losses for investors once the money dries up.

SEC Charges Longtime Madoff Employee With Creating Fake Trades, SEC, November 21, 2011
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)

Bernie Madoff Cronies Arrested, ABC News, November 18, 2010
More Blog Posts:
SEC Files Charges in $27M Washington DC Ponzi Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 21, 2011
Former Texan and First Capital Savings and Loan To Pay $4.5M for Alleged Foreign Currency Ponzi Scheme, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 11, 2011
SEC Issues Emergency Order to Stop $26M “Green” Ponzi Scam, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, October 13, 2011 Continue Reading ›

A federal court has decided that Oppenheimer municipal bond fund holders can go ahead with their securities fraud complaint against Oppenheimer Funds. The plaintiffs of In re Oppenheimer Rochester Funds Group Securities Litigation are alleging federal securities law violations. Funds involved included:

• AMT-Free Municipals Fund • Rochester National Municipals Fund • AMT-Free New York Municipals Fund • Rochester Fund Municipals • California Municipal Fund • Pennsylvania Municipal Fund • New Jersey Municipal Fund
The shareholders of seven municipal bonds had their securities fraud lawsuits consolidated into one case in two years ago. They are claiming that the Oppenheimer Funds neglected to reveal in their registration and prospectus statements that risks were being taken that weren’t in line with their declared strategy and investment goals. The investors argued that even as the funds explicitly said that preserving capital was a clear investment goal, the true objective was one of “high-risk, high-return.” Seeing as certain market conditions were foreseeable, the shareholders believe this placed their capital at great, undisclosed risk, which did come to fruition during the credit crisis of 2007-2008. This is when the Funds’ holding in highly leveraged, complex securities set off cash reserve and payment duties that required for the assets be sold under conditions that most likely were not to the funds’ advantage. The plaintiffs say that because of this, the funds underperformed compared to other municipal bond funds.

They are also claiming that the significant drop in the Funds’ shares’ values can be linked to the deviations between the stated and actual objectives. After investors were notified in October and November 2008 via prospectus supplements of what the Funds’ investments true liquidity risks were, share prices then went crashing. The net asset value of the 7 funds dropped by about 30-50% that year while similar municipal bonds only went down by 10-15%.

The defendants moved to dismiss the consolidate case, claiming that the investors’ losses were triggered by the credit crisis and not because of what was written (or not included) in the funds’ prospectuses. They also argued that they were making a forward-looking statement when they made the “preservation of capital” a goal and had adequately disclosed the risks involved.

In the U.S. District Court, District of Colorado, the federal judge turned down the Defendants’ motion to toss out the consolidated lawsuits. Judge John L. Kane, Jr. also rejected their claim that federal securities laws exempts mutual funds from liability because drops in those funds’ value are a result of corresponding downturns in the funds’ investments’ value and not of statements (whether true or false) in their prospectuses.

Oppenheimer Rochester Funds Lose Dismissal Bid, Face Trial, Bloomberg/Business Week, October 25, 2011
Oppenheimer Muni Bond Investors May Sue Over Alleged Misstatements in Prospectuses, BNA Securities Law Daily, October 26, 2011

More Blog Posts:
8/31/11 is Deadline for Opting Out of $100M Oppenheimer Mutual Funds Class Action Settlement, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 17, 2011
Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund Resulted In Significant Financial Losses for Investors from Citigroup, UBS, Merrill Lynch, and Other Large Financial Firms, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 16, 2010
Chase Investment Services Corporation Ordered by FINRA to Pay Back $1.9M for Unsuitable Sales of Floating-Rate Loan Funds and UITs, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 19, 2011 Continue Reading ›

The AARP has issued a fraud protection bulletin warning investors how to avoid becoming the victim of whoever happens to be peddling the next Ponzi scheme. Unfortunately, older investors are among the favorite prey of financial fraudsters. According Investor Protection Trusts CEO Don Blandin, one in five people in the 65 and over age group have already been exploited. Millions more are at risk.

To help investors, AARP has put out a description of five red flags warning of a possible financial scam:

1) The broker-adviser tells you that you wouldn’t be able to access your money during a “lock-up” period.

Two Florida men are accused of defrauding investors and broker-dealers by allegedly not telling them that they didn’t have enough money or securities to pay for their stock trades. The US Justice Department is charging Scott Kupersmith with securities fraud and wire fraud, while the Securities and Exchange Commission is charging him and Frederick Chelly with involvement in a front-running scam to trade free of risk at the expense of broker-dealers.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey claims that Kupersmith engaged in free riding, which happens if a client sells or purchases securities in a brokerage account while lacking the money or securities to cover the trades. Kupersmith and his associates are believed to have facilitated the securities scam by setting up several brokerage accounts at financial firms in New Jersey and outside the state.

In addition to falsely representing himself as having a personal net worth of approximately $5 million, Kupersmith is also accused of made it appear as if he ran a Manhattan hedge fund with assets of up to $20 million. These misrepresentations allowed him to raise about $500,000 of investor monies, which he then used to cover personal expenses or pay principal and interest payments to earlier investors in this Ponzi-like scam.

The SEC says that Kupersmith and Chelly’s scam caused financial fraud allowed them to make $600K in illegal trading profit while broker-dealers lost more than $2 million as a result. The Commission says that the two men presented themselves as private investors or money managers.

They allegedly set up a number of accounts for corporate entities under their control in brokerage firms while buying/selling the same amount of the same stock in various accounts. Often, this would happen during the course of one day and with the intention of making money from the changes in stock price. The SEC says that Kupermith and Chelly would take the profits from the trades but that when substantial losses were likely, they wouldn’t pay able to cover sales they had asked for, which caused broker-dealers to take the losses.

The two men also falsely made it appear as if they had assets with a third-party custody bank even though they didn’t own the stock that they were selling and often didn’t have enough money to pay for the stock that they did buy. Share sale proceeds were then used to buy the same shares.

The two men used Delivery Versus Payment/Receipt Versus Payment accounts at the broker-dealers to trade. Te financial firms offered these accounts to the two men because they were under the impression that Kupersmith and Chelly had the money to cover their trades.

Read the SEC’s Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Former Deloitte Tax LP Partner’s Wife Settles Insider Trading Charges for $1M, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 8, 2011
Houston Judge Overturns $9.2M Securities Fraud Ruling Against Morgan Keegan, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 11, 2011
Banco Espirito Santo S.A. Settles for $7M SEC Charges Alleging Violations of Investment Adviser, Broker-Dealer, and Securities Transaction Registration Requirements, Institutional Investors Securities Blog, November 5, 2011 Continue Reading ›

The Securities and Exchange Commission says that Annabel McClellan has settled for $1M insider trading allegations that she and her husband gave relatives confidential information about merger deals. Annabel is the wife of Arnold McClellan, who used to be a partner at Deloitte Tax LP where he was head of the mergers and acquisitions teams.

If a federal judge approves the securities fraud settlement, the SEC will dismiss the claims against Arnold. By agreeing to settle, Annabel is not denying or admitting to the securities charges.

Per the SEC, Annabel used confidential information that she got from her husband to tip her brother-in-law James Sander and her sister Miranda. These family members then allegedly used this knowledge to make trades before the transactions (usually involved pending acquisitions and mergers) were announced to the public. This allowed them to make millions in illicit profits.

In addition to the civil penalty, Annabel has agreed to permanent enjoinment from violating Securities Exchange Act of 1934’s Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. She also earlier pleaded guilty to obstructing the SEC’s probe into the insider trading scam after admitted to making false statements related to the investigation. Annabel maintains that her husband knew nothing about her activities.

The McClellans were charged with insider trading by the SEC last year following a parallel probe by the Commission, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Department of Justice (DOJ, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). According to the SEC’s complaint, at least seven times between 2006 and 2008, Arnold McClellan revealed confidential information to his wife, who then passed on what she knew to Miranda and James in London.

James, who owns a trading company, would then buy derivative financial instruments. He also took financial positions in US companies that were acquisition targets. When Arnold would find out that some of the deals were not certain, James would liquidate his positions. The Commission says that the trades were closely timed with phone calls made between the two sisters, as well as in-person visits between the couples. By 2008, James allegedly made over £1.5 million from the tips and his financial firm’s clients and colleagues made over £10 million.

Insider Trading
Insider trading hurts the stock market, affects investor confidence, and causes financial harm to the companies whose confidential information was used to benefit a few. Insider trading is a breach of fiduciary duty or another kind of relationship of confidence and trust. The person tipping, the one being tipped, and anyone who has access to the insider information that makes the trade can be charged with insider trading.

Read the SEC Complaint Against the McClellans, SEC
Wife of former Deloitte partner to pay $1 million, SFGate, October 18, 2011
FSA, SEC and DoJ investigation leads to two people being charged by the SEC with insider dealing in the U.S., Financial Services Authority, December 1, 2010

More Blog Posts:
Ex-Goldman Sachs Director Rajat Gupta Pleads Not Guilty to Insider Trading Charges, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 26, 2011
Dallas Mavericks Owner Mark Cuban’s Allegations of Misconduct Against the SEC Enforcement Staff are Without Merit, Says Inspector General’s Report, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 28, 2011
Insider Trading: Former FrontPoint Partners Hedge Fund Manager Pleads Guilty to Criminal Charges, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, August 20, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Without denying or admitting to wrongdoing, Banco Espirito Santo S.A. a banking conglomerate based in Portugal, has consented to pay nearly $7M in disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties to settle Securities and Exchange Commission allegations that it violated securities transaction, investment adviser, and broker-dealer registration requirements. The bank has also agreed to a bar from future violations, as well as an undertaking that it pay a minimum interest rate to US clients on securities bought through BES.

According to the SEC, between 2004 and 2009 and while not registered as an investment adviser or broker-dealer in the US, BES offered investment advice and brokerage services to about 3,800 US resident clients and customers. Most of them were immigrants from Portugal. Also, allegedly the securities transactions were not registered even though they did not qualify for a registration exemption.

The SEC says that by acting as an unregistered investment adviser and broker-dealer BES violated sections of the Exchange Act and the Advisers Act. The bank violated the Securities Act when it allegedly sold and offered securities in this country without registration or the exemption.

The SEC says BES used its Department of Marketing, Communications, and Customer Research in Portugal to send out marketing materials to clients outside the country. Customers in the US ended up getting materials not specifically designed for US residents. BES also worked with a customer service call center to service its US customers. Via phone, these clients were offered securities and other financial products. The representatives were not registered as SEC broker-dealers and had no US securities licenses even though they serviced US clients. US Customers were also offered brokerage services through ESCLINC, which is a money transmitter service in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey. ESCLINC acted as a contact point for the investment and banking activities of BES’s US clients.

Registration Provisions
The SEC has set registration provisions in place to help preserve the securities markets’ integrity as well as that of the financial institutions that serve as “gatekeepers,” said SEC New York regional office director George S. Canellos. He accused BES of “brazenly” disregarding these provisions.

State securities laws and US mandate that investment advisers, brokers, and their financial firms be registered or licensed. You should definitely check to make sure that whoever you are investing with or seeking investment advice from his properly registered. It is also important for you to know that doing business with a financial firm or a securities broker that is not registered can make it hard for you to recover your losses if that entity were to go out of business and even if the case is decided in your favor (whether in arbitration or through the courts.)

More Blog Posts:

EagleEye Asset Management LLC Sued by SEC and CFTC for Alleged Forex Trading Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 28, 2011

Continue Reading ›

The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed securities fraud charges against former United Commercial Bank executives accusing them of concealing loss from assets and loans from auditors that resulted in UCBH Holdings Inc., its public holding company, to understate its operating losses in 2008 by at least $65 million. As the bank’s loans continued to go down in value, the financial firm went on to fail and the California Department of Financial Institutions was forced to shut it down. This resulted in a $2.5 billion loss to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s insurance fund.

Per the SEC’s complaint, former chief operating officer Ebrahim Shabudi, chief executive officer Thomas Wu, and senior officer Thomas Yu were the ones that hid the bank’s losses. All three men are accused of delaying the proper recording of the loan losses and making misleading and false statements to independent auditors and investors and concealing from them that there had been the major losses on a number of large loans, property appraisals had gone down, property appraisals had been reduced, and loans were secured by worthless collateral.

Also accused of securities fraud by the SEC is former United Commercial Bank chief financial officer Craig On. The Commission said that he aided in the filing of false financial statements and misled outside auditors. To settle the SEC charges, On has agreed to pay a $150,000 penalty. He also agreed to an order suspending him from working before the SEC as an accountant for five years. He is permanently enjoined from future violations of specific recordkeeping, reporting, anti-fraud, and internal controls provisions of federal securities laws.

Criminal charges have also been filed against Shabudi and Wu. A grand jury indicted both men of conspiring to conceal loan losses, misleading regulators and investors, and lying to external auditors. Wu and Shabudi allegedly used accounting techniques and financial maneuvers, including concealing information that would have shown its decline, understating loan risks, and falsifying books, to hide the fact that that the bank was in trouble.

This is the first time such charges have been made against executives who worked at a bank that obtained government money—$298 million from TARP—to keep it running during the economic collapse.

Prior to its demise, United Commercial Bank, which was the first US bank to acquire a bank in China was considered a leader in the industry. It amassed assets of up to $13.5 billion in 2008. However, it also soon $67.7 million—way down from its $102.3 million profit in 2007. East West Bank acquired United Commercial Banks after regulators took it over in 2009.

Meantime, the FDIC is taking steps to bar 10 former United Commercial Bank officers from ever taking part in the banking industry.

SEC Charges Bank Executives With Hiding Millions of Dollars in Losses During 2008 Financial Crisis, SEC, October 11, 2011

Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)

Feds file charges against execs of failed United Commercial Bank, Mercury News, October 11, 2011


More Blog Posts:

Continue Reading ›

The Securities and Exchange Commission is suing investment adviser Kurt Hovan for allegedly misappropriating $178K in “soft dollars” that he claimed was used for investment research. The federal agency contends that, in fact, the money was used to cover other business-related expenses. When Kurt, as Hovan Capital Management president, was asked to provide documents supporting this, he generated bogus research reports. Meantime, the US Department of Justice is charging the 43-year-old with obstruction and mail fraud.

Soft dollars are rebates or credits. They come from brokerage firms on commissions for trades made in investment adviser’s client accounts. If the soft dollar credits are disclosed appropriately, the IA may keep the credits and use them to cover expenses related to a specific area research and brokerage services benefiting clients.

The SEC contends, however, that Kurt didn’t solely use the soft dollars for research services. Instead, $166,667 was used to pay for the salary of his brother Edward Hovan. Soft dollars were also used to pay for computer hardware and office rent. Edward and Kurt’s wife Lisa Hovan (Hovan Capital Management’s chief financial officer) are also named in the SEC’s complaint. The SEC is accusing all three of them for violating federal securities laws’ antifraud provisions. Kurt Hovan and HCM are also accused of recordkeeping violations.

The securities lawsuit also claims that conceal their soft dollar-related activities, Kurt, Lisa, and Edward set up a “Bolton Research,” which was a shell company that Edward Hovan secretly controlled. The company then billed Hovan Capital Management’s brokerage companies for research that was never conducted. Edward allegedly kicked back $65,000 of payments to Kurt and Lisa.

The allegedly false reporting to the SEC is said to have taken place during a January 2010 examination of HCM. Staff requested that the financial firm give over copies of the research reports that Bolton Research had prepared. Instead, Kurt allegedly gave the SEC phony research reports and doctored materials.

The SEC is seeking disgorgement with prejudgment interest, injunctive relief, and other financial penalties.

Securities Fraud
As you can see, securities charges and criminal charge can be filed against an investment adviser that commits securities fraud. You may want to file your own securities fraud lawsuit to recover your losses if you lost money because investment adviser misconduct was a factor.

Our securities fraud law firm knows that the thought of pursuing a financial firm to get your money back can be an overwhelming process, which is why you want to retain an experienced investment fraud lawyer that knows how to successfully pursue your recovery while protecting your rights.

SEC CHARGES BAY AREA INVESTMENT ADVISER FOR DEFRAUDING CLIENTS AND FALSIFYING DOCUMENTS DURING SEC EXAM, SEC, September 28, 2011
Belvedere investment adviser faces criminal charges in fraud case, Marin Independent Journal, September 28, 2011

More Blog Posts:

New Jersey Investment Adviser Who Pleaded Guilty to $11.5M Financial Fraud Gets 168-Month Prison Sentence, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 29, 2011
Investors Working with Incompetent Registered Investment Advisers Have Few Protections, Reports Bloomberg, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 11, 2011
Custodial Firms Get Tougher About Registered Investment Adviser Compliance, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 28, 2010 Continue Reading ›

Sandra Venetis, a New Jersey investment adviser has been sentenced to 168 months behind bars. Venetis had entered guilty pleas to che charges of securities fraud and transacting in criminal property. She also must pay $11,579,781 in restitution to the investors she defrauded.

The government had accused Venetis, who owns Systematic Financial Associates Inc., of soliciting her financial firm’s clients so that they would put their money in an “alternative investment program” that she ran separate from her registered investment advisory business. This was between 1997 and 2010. To get these clients to invest, she falsely told them the money was being used to pay for loans for doctors’ quarterly pension funds. There were even occasions when Venetis would tell these clients to liquidate their positions in securities so they could take part in her alternate program. 114 clients sent her about $16.7M.

None of the investors’ money went to any doctors-although she did make up fictitious physicians and forged real doctors’ names on promissory notes to make it look as if she was using her clients’ money in the manner promised. Venetis has admitted that not only did she not run a legitimate alternative investment program, but also that she created Systematic Financial Services Inc. so that she could run her financial scam. She acknowledges that she used some of the investor money to help cover her advisory’s operation costs.

It was last year that Venetis and three of her firms, Systematic Financial Services, LLC, Systematic Financial Services, Inc., and Systematic Financial Associates, Inc., settled SEC charges over the multimillion-dollar financial fraud. The Commission said that Venetis and her companies violated sections of the Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Relief defendants included Venetis LLC, which Venetis also owned and operated, her brother Kevin Persley, and her daughter Jennifer Venetis.

The Commission accused Venetis of telling investors that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation had guaranteed promissory notes that would make about 6-11% tax-free interest annually. Although investors believed their investments were paying for loans to doctors the money paid for Venetis’s business debts and personal spending, including travel abroad, property taxes, home mortgages, gambling, and money for relatives.

Venetis and the companies settled the charges and all agreed to the relief sought by the SEC, including enjoinment from future securities law violation, payment of disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, financial penalties, and appointment of an independent monitor.

N.J. IA Sentenced to 168 Months After Pleading Guilty in $11.5M Fraud, BNA Securities Law Daily, September 12, 2011
SEC CHARGES NEW JERSEY INVESTMENT ADVISER IN MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR OFFERING FRAUD, SEC, September 2, 2010

More Blog Posts:
FINRA Tells Congress It Is Ready to Act as SRO for Investment Advisors, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 13, 2011
Investors Working with Incompetent Registered Investment Advisers Have Few Protections, Reports Bloomberg, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 11, 2011
Harvest Managers, Benchmark Asset Managers, and Investment Advisor to Pay $11.6 Million to Settle SEC Charges Over Allegedly Mishandled Client Funds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, July 23, 2011
SEC Extends Temporary Rule Allowing Principal Trades by Investment Advisers Registered as Broker-Dealers, Institutional Investment Fraud Blog, January 13, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Contact Information