Securities Fraud

Bank of America To Settle SEC Charges Regarding Merrill Lynch Acquisition Proxy-Related Disclosures for $150 Million

Published on: February 15, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Bank of America Corp. (BAC) has agreed to pay $150 million, in addition to $1 million in disgorgement, to settle the Securities and Exchange Commission’s charges over the investment bank’s proxy-related disclosures regarding the Merrill Lynch acquisition. U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff said he hopes to decide by February 19 on whether to approve the settlement. He also said he has more questions regarding the deal.

If approved, the settlement would conclude two SEC securities lawsuits against Bank of America over the Merrill Lynch merger. One complaint involves the investment bank’s alleged failure to reveal, prior to a 2008 shareholder meeting to vote on the acquisition, that financial losses were in the billions and rising at Merrill. The second lawsuit is over what the bank did and did not disclose about the billions of dollars in bonuses paid to Merrill Lynch employees right before the $50 billion merger was completed.

Under the proposed SEC settlement, the $150 million would go to Bank of America shareholders who suffered financial losses because of the investment bank’s alleged disclosure violations. Also, for three years BofA would have to maintain and implement a number of remedial measures, including hiring an independent auditor to look at its internal disclosure controls, hiring a disclosure counsel to work on bank disclosures, making sure that BofA’s chief financial officers and chief executive certify yearly and merger proxy statements, and allowing shareholders to have an advisory say-on-pay vote regarding executive compensation.

Earlier this month, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed a separate securities fraud lawsuit against Kenneth D. Lewis, who formerly served as BofA’s chief executive, Joe Price, the bank’s former chief financial officer, and Bank of America for allegedly concealing Merrill Lynch’s losses. The complaint alleges that BofA general counsel Timothy Mayopoulos was let go because he wanted to disclose the losses at Merrill Lynch before the deal was finalized.

Related Web Resources:
Bank of America Still Dealing With Fallout From Merrill Deal, Fox Business, February 5, 2010
Cuomo Sues Bank of America, Even as It Settles With S.E.C., NY Times, February 4, 2010
US judge has questions on $150 mln SEC-BofA accord, Reuters, February 16, 2010 Continue Reading ›

Dallas Securities Attorney and Former SEC Litigator Convicted of Fraud in Pump and Dump Stock Scam

Published on: February 11, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A jury has convicted Phillip Windom Offill Jr. of Texas securities fraud. The Dallas lawyer and former SEC trial attorney was found guilty of nine counts of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy for his involvement in a “pump and dump” scam that sold nine companies’ unregistered securities to investors in order to make a profit.

Court filings had accused the Texas securities attorney of using bogus press releases and “blast” emails to get investors to buy certain companies’ shares. When stock prices would go up, those involved in the scam would dump stock to make money. 10 other defendants have pleaded guilty for their part in the securities fraud scheme.

The SEC’s civil complaint against Offill accused him of conspiring with others to create bogus investment firms that obtained an offering of millions of unregistered AVL shares. Offill was one of the people who allegedly would transfer the shares to the company’s founder and associates, who would then promote the company’s potential as stock was being dumped.

According to U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride, Offill purposely broke the law, so that he and others could make millions off of innocent investors who ended up with worthless stock.

Prosecutors want $15 million in forfeiture. Offill’s sentencing is scheduled for April. He faces up to 20 years in prison for each wire fraud conviction and a maximum of five years in prison for conspiracy.

Related Web Resources:
Jury Convicts Former SEC Lawyer, The Wall Street Journal, January 28, 2010
Lawyer indicted in alleged pump-and-dump stock scheme, ITWorld, March 13, 2009 Continue Reading ›

Former JPMorgan Bankers Sued by SEC Over Swap Transactions Want Judge to Dismiss Securities Fraud Charges

Published on: February 6, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Two ex- JPMorgan Chase & Co. bankers that the Securities and Exchange Commission is suing over their alleged involvement in certain swap transactions are asking the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama to throw out most of the securities fraud charges that the regulator agency has filed against them. According to the SEC, Douglas MacFaddin and Charles LeCroy paid close friends of county commissions and broker-dealers over $8 million in undisclosed payments to make sure that JPMorgan would be chosen as the bond offerings underwriter and its affiliated bank would be selected as swap provider so that both entities could make $5 billion in underwriting and interest rate swap agreement business.

The swaps involve three Jefferson County bond transactions that took place in 2002 and 2003 and are at least partly linked to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association’s municipal swap index. The SEC says this index is securities-based because it is derived from variable-rate demand notes. MacFaddin and LeCroy’s lawyers, however, say that the SIFMA swap index is a rate index, which therefall places the swaps outside the agency’s antifraud jurisdiction. The defendants want the case dismissed.

The ex-JPMorgan bankers’ lawyers claim the undisclosed fees were connected to the swap transactions and that the investment bank was not obligated to disclose them. The defendants’ motions argue that the SEC’s failure to cite an instance in which the two men committed securities fraud is another reason the charges should be thrown out.

To resolve SEC administrative charges over its alleged part in the alleged securities scam, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. consented to pay $75 M and forfeit $647 M in termination fees.

Related Web Resources:
Ex-JPM Bankers Seek End to Swap Charges, Onwallstreet.com, January 21, 2010
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Securities Class Actions are No Longer the Fad as Investors Hire Their Own Attorney to Recover Far More!

Published on: January 23, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Advisen Ltd, 910 securities lawsuits were filed in 2009 in the wake of the economic crisis-a 13% increase from the 804 complaints filed in 2008. 239 securities fraud class action lawsuits were filed in 2009-the same number filed in 2008. Advisen reported a 22% increase in the number of regulator-filed securities fraud complaints last year compared to the year before.

The author of Advisen’s report, John W. Molka III, says lawsuits over the Madoff ponzi scam and the credit crisis kept regulators and litigators busy during the first half of last year. Plaintiffs’ lawyers then had a backlog of other complaints to work on during the second half of the year.

Molka says that even though there wasn’t a change in the number of securities class action complaints filed, overall they made up a smaller percentage (about 25%) of the total number of lawsuits submitted. This decline in securities class action lawsuits has been going on since 2005, when they comprised about 50% of all securities complaints.

Advisen says that meantime, regulators continue to increase their enforcement efforts with lawsuits and actions. Securities actions filed in state courts and breach of fiduciary complaints are also growing in number.

To obtain the maximum recovery for your securities case, you should speak with a securities fraud law firm about your legal options. Our securities fraud lawyers represent clients with arbitration claims and securities lawsuits against negligent financial firms and other liable entities.

Related Web Resources:
Advisen, Ltd.

Read the Report, Advisen Continue Reading ›

Court Stops Results One Financial LLC Adviser’s Alleged Investment Fraud Scam

Published on: January 21, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Per the Security and Exchange Commission’s request for emergency relief, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has halted an alleged investment fraud scam involving Results One Financial LLC adviser Steve W. Salutric. He is co-founder of the financial firm. Hon. William J. Hibbler ordered that all assets under Salutric’s control be frozen and he issued a temporary restraining order against him. Hibbler is also granting other emergency relief.

The SEC complaint accuses Salutric of making unauthorized withdrawals from clients’ accounts that were located in another financial institution that was the custodian of Results One Financial’s client assets, forging client signatures on withdrawal request forms, and submitting the signed forms to the account custodian.

The SEC is charging the investment advisor with misappropriating several million dollars of his clients’s finds. Beginning in 2007, Salutric allegedly misappropriated more than $2 million from at least 17 clients to support entities and businesses that are linked to him. Funds that were allegedly misdirected include $610,000 to a film distribution company, $259,000 to two restaurants, and $321,000 to the church where he is treasurer. The SEC is accusing Salutric of misappropriating over $400,000 from a 96-year-old nursing home resident who has dementia. He also allegedly made Ponzi-like payments to certain clients.

Courthouse News Service says that Salutric managed over $16 million through Results One. The SEC says that there may be more clients who were defrauded and additional funds may have been misappropriated.

The SEC is seeking penalties, disgorgement, and an injunction.

SEC Cannot Order Former Rauscher Pierce Broker to Compensate Investors for Losses, Says Court

Published on: January 19, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the Securities and Exchange Commission cannot order former Rauscher Pierce Refsnes Inc. broker Michael Siegel to uphold an award of restitution to investors who sustained financial losses as a result of his alleged broker misconduct. Siegel worked as a general securities representative for the financial firm from October 1997 to June 1999.

In 2002, NASD’s Department of Enforcement charged Siegel with “selling” away and making inappropriate recommendations to certain investors. Specifically, the investors that the alleged violations involved are Dorothy and Barry Landry and Linda and Huntington Downer, who invested in World Environmental Technologies Inc. The NASD has accused Siegel of recommending that they invest in World ET without reasonable cause for why doing so would be appropriate for them. To discipline him, NASD ordered Siegel to serve two six-month suspensions. They also fined him $30,000.

While the NASD disciplinary committee did not order restitution, an NASD appeals panel did. He was told to pay $100,000 to the Landers and $303,000 to the Downers. Siegel appealed but the SEC affirmed the appeals panel’s decision.

Dismissal of Lone Star’s $60 Mortgage-Backed Securities Texas Fraud Action Against Barclays is Affirmed by Federal Appeals Court

Published on: January 17, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of LSF5 Bond Holdings LLC and Lone Star Fund V (U.S.) L.P.’s $60 million securities fraud claims against Barclays Capital Inc. and Barclays Bank PLC. The court noted that Barclays never represented that the mortgage pass-through certificates purchased by the private equity firms did not have delinquent mortgages. Also, the court said that seeing as the language used in the parties’ agreement obligated Barclays to substitute or repurchase delinquent representation, Lone Star failed to allege misrepresentation.

In 2006, Barclays bought mortgage loans from then-subprime lender New Century Capital Corp. Barclays then pooled about 10,000 mortgage loans into the BR3 and BR2 Trusts. The trusts then gave out pass-through certificates or mortgage-backed securities. $60 million of the securities were bought by LSF5.

Although trust offerings supplements and prospectuses included representations and warranties that as of “transfer service dating” the mortgage pools did not have any 30-day delinquencies, Lone Star found that nearly 300 of the BR2 mortgages were at least 30 days delinquent beginning the date of purchase. 850 mortgages in the BR3 Trust were also over 30 days overdue.

Lone Star filed a Texas securities fraud lawsuit against Barclays claiming that the delinquent loans were misrepresentations on the investment bank’s part. Barclays sought to have the lawsuit dismissed, arguing that if there were delinquent loans then Barclays must either substitute or repurchase them.

The district court turned down Lone Star’s remand request and agreed with Barclay’s interpretation of the language in the agreement. The court dismissed the case. The appeals court upheld the dismissal.

Related Web Resources:
Lone Star Fund V (U.S), LP et al v. Barclays Bank PLC et al, Justia Federal District Court Filings and Dockets
Read the 5th Circuit Opinion (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

For Role in $2.4 Billion Refco Investor Fraud Scheme, Former Mayer Brown Partner Receives 7-Year Prison Sentence

Published on: January 15, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Joseph P. Collins, a former Mayor Brown partner, has been sentenced to seven years in prison for his role in a $2.45 billion investment fraud scheme involving Refco Inc. He had hoped to obtain a more lenient sentence.

In July 2009, a jury found Collins guilty of wire fraud and securities fraud, as well as conspiracy to commit wire fraud, securities fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, and making false filings with the SEC. During his criminal trial, his defense attorneys argued that he did not know about the Refco fraud scam. However, while Southern Judge Patterson said that he believes Collins did not commit his crimes out of greed, Patterson noted what he called the firm partner’s “excessive loyalty” to his biggest client. According to Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Garcia, Collins brought in over $40 million to his law firm from his work with Refco.

Collins provided legal counsel and drafted documents that Refco principals used to conceal the company’s actual financial state while they made themselves wealthier. The government says that the documents were used to defraud Thomas H. Lee Partners, which owned a majority stake in Refco, and investors who purchased IPO shares in 2005.

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 ›

SEC Accuses Austin Advisor, Triton Financial, and Triton Insurance of Texas Securities Fraud Scam Involving Former NFL Football Players

Published on: December 28, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed charges accusing Austin investment adviser Kurt B. Barton and his two firms, Triton Insurance and Triton Financial, of committing Texas securities fraud and raising over $8.4 million from about 90 investors. Former football stars were used as bait to target former NFL players as potential investment fraud victim.

The SEC claims the defendants used salespersons, stockbrokers, and former football players, including previous Heisman trophy winners and ex-NFL players, to sell Triton securities to potential clients. The agency says that the use of ex-football stars allowed Barton and Triton to appear legitimate and gain investors’ trust.

Potential investors were allegedly told that their money would be used to buy an insurance firm. The SEC claims such representation were bogus. Instead, the agency claims that investors’ funds were used to pay for daily expenses at the two companies.