Investor Lawyers Blog

Oppenheimer Found Liable for Representative Mark Hotton’s Fraud

Published on: August 29, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Recently, Oppenheimer was found liable for the conduct of one of its former brokers named Mark Hotton. Hotton joined Oppenheimer in November 2005, and proceeded to fleece a number of his clients, according to financial regulators. FINRA, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, has filed a disciplinary action against Hotton which is still pending.

According to the complaint, Hotton outright stole almost $6 million from his brokerage customers, and directed another $2.5 million to outside businesses that Hotton was affiliated with in some way. These numbers don’t even include the millions of dollars that FINRA believes that Hotton caused by excessively trading, or churning, customer accounts to generate commissions for himself.

The level of fraud that Hotton was engaging in should be shocking if it wasn’t becoming increasingly commonplace. In 2006, a customer filed a lawsuit against Hutton after it was convinced by Hotton to invest $4 million in real estate transactions. The customer claimed that Hotton simply stole the entire investment, which was accomplished by forging contracts, forging mortgages, forging account statements, and directing the investment being made into a shell corporation that he had created with a similar name to the company that was supposed to be invested in. Ultimately, that lawsuit was settled for millions of dollars which Hotton was individually liable for. Yet this lawsuit, its allegations, and its results were never disclosed to other customers as regulations require, permitting Hotton to continue to seek new customers to bilk.

Oppenheimer Continues to Show Serious Supervisory Deficiencies

Published on: August 28, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Date: August 7, 2013

The attorneys at Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas LLP are investigating claims by investors with Oppenheimer & Co. Although the firm’s investigations are usually target more specifically at particular conduct of a firm or broker, Oppenheimer & Co.’s supervisory system has been found so woefully inadequate by numerous regulators and arbitration Panels over the last several years that almost any trading strategy permitted in Oppenheimer customer accounts becomes suspect.

For example, in 2008 the Massachusetts Securities Division filed suit against Oppenheimer for its sales of Auction Rate Securities (ARSs). Specifically, the regulator alleged that Oppenheimer marketed ARSs as safe alternatives to money markets and certificate of deposits (CDs). In actuality, ARSs are complex debt securities that can suffer complete failures and ultimately leave the investor holdings a completely illiquid asset with no way to get their money back out. The regulator further claimed that Oppenheimer was aware of many disruptions and failures that occurred in the ARS market in 2007, but blithely ignored these warnings. Oppenheimer did not investigate the potential ramifications for the ARS securities that had been, and were currently being, sold to their clients. Oppenheimer did not warn its clients of these warning signs.

Transamerica Entities to Pay $97M to Investors Over Flawed Investment Models

Published on: August 28, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Four Transamerica entities have settled US Securities and Exchange Charges accusing them of misconduct involving investment models that were faulty. Collectively, the entities, AEGON USA Investment Management LLC (AUIM), its affiliated brokerage firm Transamerica Capital Inc., as well as its affiliated investment advisers Transamerica Financial Advisors Inc. and Transamerica Asset Management Inc., will pay $97M to retail investors that were impacted. However, the entities are not denying or admitting to the regulator’s findings.

The SEC’s order contends that investors placed billions of dollars into mutual funds and strategies that employed flawed investment models that AUIM developed without knowing they had errors. AUIM’s affiliated investment advisers and broker-dealer touted the quantitative models upon which their investment decisions would be made. Between July ’11 and June ’15, they purportedly offered, sold, and oversaw 15 mutual funds, variable annuity investment portfolios, variable life insurance investment portfolios, mutual funds, and separately management account strategies that were based on these quantitative models.

Unfortunately, contends the SEC’s order, the models were created by one junior analyst who was inexperienced. Not only that, but there were a number of errors in the models, which failed to operate as promised. Moreover, said the regulator, the Transamerica entities launched the Strategies and Products without first verifying that the models worked as they were meant to and without disclosing any risks identified with the models.

Securities News: Genstar to Acquire Cetera With $1B in Junk Bond Sales, Financial Adviser Admits to Fraud Involving $2M Trading Loss, and BlackRock Funds Shareholders Sue Over Excessive Fees

Published on: August 27, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

$1M in Junk Bond Sales Helps Fund Cetera Acquisition by Genstar Capital

According to InvestmentNews, private equity firm Genstar Capital will sell $1B of junk bonds to help pay for its acquisition of Cetera Financial Group, which will be bought for $1.7B. Genstar will use $700M of its own money in the purchase.

Cetera Financial Group is comprised of six independent brokerage firms with approximately 8,000 brokers and advisers, including Cetera Advisors, Cetera Advisors Network, First Allied Securities, Cetera Financial Institutions, Summit Financial Services, and Cetera Financial Specialists. Cetera initially spun out of ING Groep (ING), a Dutch insurer, in 2010.

Investor Fraud: Alleged $100M Future Income Payments Fraud, Capital Investment Group to Pay One Elderly Investor $400K, and Tech Fund Adviser is Now Facing Fraud Charges

Published on: August 24, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Over 1000 Investors May Be Victims of Alleged Future Income Payments Fraud

Dozens of stockbrokers, financial planners, financial advisers, and insurance agents are now the defendants of investor fraud lawsuits over an alleged $100M scam that may have bilked over 1000 investors. Many of these investors were retirees, which means that elder investor fraud may have been involved.

InvestmentNews reports that according to the plaintiffs, the advisers breached their fiduciary obligation and were negligent when they sold them structured cash flows offered by Future Income Payments, LLC. At least 370 investment intermediaries in the US are believed to have sold these investments to investors, with the representatives receiving 6-10% in commissions upfront.

Unregistered Brokers Are Charged With Selling More Than $243M of Woodbridge Securities to Over 1600 Investors

Published on: August 24, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Top10-3 Five unregistered brokers and their companies are now facing US Securities and Exchange Commission charges accusing them of selling Woodbridge securities to investors even though they were not registered as broker-dealers and therefore were not allowed to sell these securities. The defendants allegedly made millions of dollars from the Woodbridge securities sales.

The unregistered brokers and their companies are Barry and Ferne Kornfeld and Fek Enterprises, Andrew G. Costa and Costa Financial Insurance Services Corp., Albert D. Klager and Atlantic Insurance & Financial Services Inc., and Lynette M. Robbins and Knowles Systems, Inc. They allegedly sold over $243M of Woodbridge unregistered securities to over 1600 retail investors.

According to the regulator’s complaints, the unregistered brokers and the companies marketed Woodbridge Group of Companies, LLC as an investment that was “safe and secure.” Woodbridge, however, declared bankruptcy last December. The moment Woodbridge filed for bankruptcy protection, investors stopped receiving the interest they were due each month and they still haven’t received a return on their principal.

Ex-Wells Fargo Advisors Claim Bank Pressured Them to Sell Products That Charged Higher Fees to High-Net Worth Investors

Published on: August 23, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Yahoo Finance, a number of Wells Fargo (WFC) advisors who used to work for the Private Bank’s wealth management unit are claiming that the firm pushed them to place client funds in investments that charged higher fees to clients. The ex-bank employees contend that they were pressured to cross-sell products and bill clients for fees that they would not have had to pay otherwise.

Yahoo Finance reported that there are internal company documents verifying the former employees’ claims. The media outlet said that it conducted interviews with a number of these former advisors.

The ex-Wells Fargo advisors were reportedly encouraged to place clients’ funds in complex products and separately managed accounts. The advisors claim that they were told that if they did not meet sales quotas for certain products, their compensation would suffer.

Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LLP Investigating Claims Involving Puerto Rico UBS Bond Funds

Published on: August 21, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

San Juan, Puerto Rico – October 3, 2013

Lawyers with the Securities Law Firm of Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LLP, are investigating claims involving Puerto Rico UBS bond funds. UBS has been the most prominent broker-dealer operating in Puerto Rico for a number of years. As a result, many, if not most, individuals in Puerto Rico with brokerage accounts use UBS, resulting in UBS managing roughly $10 billion of assets of Puerto Rico residents.

Unfortunately, UBS recommended that many of these clients make significant investments in proprietary UBS bond funds. These UBS bond funds, such as the Tax-Free Puerto Rico Fund II, invest primarily in Puerto Rico municipal bonds.

GPB Capital Holdings Stops Selling Private Placements in GPB Funds to Investors

Published on: August 20, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

With already $1.8B in investor funds, GPB Capital Holdings is now placing a pause on raising more funds while it concentrates on putting in order the accounting and financial statements of two of its biggest funds, the GPB Automotive Portfolio and the GPB Holdings II. Both, collectively have raised nearly $1.3B in investor money. To date, the two funds have paid brokers $100.1M in sales commissions.

The halt comes after GPB Capital, which is a top seller of risky private placements and concentrates on purchasing auto dealerships, missed its April deadline to file financial statements for the two funds with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. According to GPB Capital CEO David Gentile, in a letter that InvestmentNews was able to get a copy of, the delay in filing is a result of having to deal with accounting standards that mandate the two funds generate yearly audited financial statements that must be in compliance with SEC regulations, as well as with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s standards.

Gentile, who headed up his own accounting and advisory firm before launching GPB in 2013, said that “best practices and efficient reporting are a top priority”— hence the temporary halt in accepting money from new investors. Meantime, fund redemptions have been suspended and reportedly will resume after the financial statements and public filings are submitted.

Alleged $135M Ponzi Scam Involving Equitybuild

Published on: August 18, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The US Securities and Exchange Commission is accusing Equitybuild Inc., a real estate investment firm that is based in Florida, and its owners of operating a $135M Ponzi scam that defrauded approximately 900 investors. The regulator contends that the company, its President/CEO Jerome Cohen, and Vice President Shaun Cohen, who are father and son, promised investors double-digit returns of 12-20%, even as their business was incurring massive losses. Meantime, investors were paid returns using earlier investors’ money in Ponzi-like fashion.

Equitybuild investors were mostly unsophisticated, non-accredited investors without much experience in investing in real estate. The Cohens allegedly touted a purportedly original strategy for identifying an undervalued property in Chicago, Illinois’ South Side that they claimed would render huge returns. Investors were promised promissory notes that named a specific property. Third parties were supposed to buy the properties with mortgages that the investors had funded and this would generate returns.

Unfortunately, there don’t appear to have been many third-party buyers. Equitybuild was the one that owned most of the properties and the real estate investment company purportedly stopped searching for third-party buyers a few years ago.