Investor Lawyers Blog

Criminal Securities Fraud: Ex- CEO Extradited From Namibia is Sentenced to 30-Months, Long Island “Mini Madoff’s Associate Goes to Prison Over $400M Scheme, and the Trial of Two Ex-Barclays Traders is Underway in the UK

Published on: February 26, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Libor Trial Of Two-Ex Barclays Traders Begins
Ryan Reich and Stylianos Contogoulas are on trial in London on criminal charges accusing them of rigging the US dollar Libor. According to prosecutors, from ’05-’07, the two ex-Barclays Plc (BARC) traders conspired to manipulate the interest-rate benchmark in order to profit illegally.

Contogoulas and Reich have pleaded not guilty to the criminal charges. Two other ex-Barclays employees, Jonathan Mathew and Peter Johnson, were previously convicted for rigging Libor. They were tasked with submitting Libor rates.

16 banks are responsible for determining the Libor dollar rate every day. They do this by estimating how much it would cost to borrow from one another over different periods. The Libor dollar rate is linked to mortgages and loans and other financial products. Already, a number of big banks have collectively paid several billion dollars for their role in Libor manipulation.

Securities Cases: Broidy Wealth Management Advisors Founder Pleads Guilty to Fraud, Bondholders File Arbitration Claim Against BOK Financial, and SEC Files Complaint in $5M Pyramid Scam

Published on: February 26, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

RIA Misappropriated Over $865K and Withdrew $640K in Excess Fees, Say Prosecutors
Broidy Wealth Advisors CEO Mark Broidy has pleaded guilty to taking $640K in excess management fees from clients and misappropriating over $864K in stock that were in trusts of which he was the trustee. Now, the registered investment advisor must make restitutions to those whom he defrauded. He could end up serving up to five years behind barsamong other penalties.

According to the Justice Department, from around 11/2010 to 7/2016 Broidy billed more than what he was allowed to in compensation, which caused three clients to pay more than $640K in excess fees. He concealed his theft by falsifying those clients’ IRS Form 1099s.

After one client demanded that Broidy pay back the stolen funds the latter allegedly sold over $865K of stock from another client’s trust accounts, which were for that person’s children. Broidy also suggested that several clients invest in startups with which he had deals to pay him part of any money he raised on the companies’ behalf. The clients didn’t know about these arrangements.

As General Obligation Bondholders Get Go Ahead on Their Bond Fraud Case Against Puerto Rico, COFINA Creditors Seek to Intervene

Published on: February 25, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A federal judge has ruled that general obligation bondholders in Puerto Rico may go ahead with a securities fraud lawsuit arguing that the U.S. territory’s government has to pay them what they are owed even as it pays off other bondholders and workers and restructures its nearly $70 billion of debt. U.S. District Court Judge Francisco Besosa said the bondholders’ case could proceed despite a new law that has placed a stay on the majority of creditors’ legal actions brought against Puerto Rico.

Owners of general obligation bonds which includes individuals and hedge funds such as Monarch and Aurelius, are arguing that Puerto Rico general obligation bonds are supposed to be constitutionally guaranteed, therefore other Puerto Rico obligations cannot be paid before general obligation bondholders. Judge Besosa said that because the general obligation bondholders’ debt lawsuit does not seek to get any kind of payment from the territory or confiscate commonwealth property, the case should be exempted from the stay.

Following Judge Besosa’s ruling, creditors of COFINA bonds, Puerto Rico’s sales tax authority, are now asking a federal court to keep the island’s government from being told to redirect bond payments to the general bond holders. The COFINA plaintiff group, which includes funds holding more than $2 billion in debt and also hedge funds such as Canyon Capital and Goldentree, contend that the general obligation bondholders’ claims are “self-serving” and without merit.

Institutional Investor’s CDO Fraud Case Against Patriarch Partners, Lynn Tilton to Proceed

Published on: February 24, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The New York State Supreme Court has ruled that the $45M institutional investor fraud case against Patriarch Partners and owner Lynn Tilton may proceed. The financier had sought to have the fraud charges against her dropped.

The plaintiff is Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale. The German bank, known as Nord/LG, invested in Tilton’s Zohar debt fund. Nord/LG later accused Tilton of misrepresenting the fund’s structure and brought a collateralized debt obligation lawsuit against her and her firm.

The German bank contends that it didn’t know that fraud might have occurred until the US Securities and Exchange Commission brought a civil case against Tilton and her firm in 2015. The regulator wants disgorgement of about $200M in allegedly bogus fees that Tilton and Patriarch purportedly collected for their services. The SEc also wants to bar Tilton from the industry.

Institutional Investor’s CDO Fraud Case Against Patriarch Partners, Lynn Tilton to Proceed

Published on: February 24, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The New York State Supreme Court has ruled that the $45M institutional investor fraud case against Patriarch Partners and owner Lynn Tilton may proceed. The financier had sought to have the fraud charges against her dropped.

The plaintiff is Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale. The German bank, known as Nord/LG, invested in Tilton’s Zohar debt fund. Nord/LG later accused Tilton of misrepresenting the fund’s structure and brought a collateralized debt obligation lawsuit against her and her firm.

The German bank contends that it didn’t know that fraud might have occurred until the US Securities and Exchange Commission brought a civil case against Tilton and her firm in 2015. The regulator wants disgorgement of about $200M in allegedly bogus fees that Tilton and Patriarch purportedly collected for their services. The SEc also wants to bar Tilton from the industry.

FINRA Orders UBS to Pay Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas Client $9 Million Over Puerto Rico Municipal Bond and Fund Investment Losses

Published on: February 24, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LLP (“SSEK”) is pleased to announce that a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) arbitration panel has awarded an SSEK client a net of almost $9 million for his losses in Puerto Rico bonds and Puerto Rico Bond Funds. SSEK client, Dr. Luiz Romero Lopez, won his securities arbitration claim against UBS Puerto Rico with the FINRA panel awarding him a net of almost $8 million in compensatory damages and an additional $1 million in punitive damages.

According to the FINRA arbitration panel, UBS exhibited “extreme recklessness and indifference” to the consequences of abuses in its “non-purpose” loan program in Puerto Rico. The panel accused UBS of either purposely using a “non-purpose” loan to be “recycled” in a manner that violates Regulation U or doing so with “reckless” indifference to the consequences that could arise from such abusive loans.

The FINRA arbitration panel found that the loan created “additional excessive leverage.” Because of this, when the market dropped in 2013, the Claimant lost more money than if his funds had been more suitably invested with “less leverage.”

Following $586M Settlement, Western Union is Now a Defendant in Class Action Securities Case

Published on: February 23, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A class action securities case has been brought against Western Union Company (UW) by purchasers of the company’s publicly traded securities. The purchasers would have bought the securities between 2/24/12 and 1/19/17. The lead plaintiff is an institutional investor. The lawsuit is UA Local 13 Pension Fund v. The Western Union Company.

The lawsuit contends that Western Union and a number of its current and ex-directors and/or officers made false and misleading statements and did not disclose adverse information about Western Union’s business and compliance policies. Instead, Western Union and senior management purportedly told investors that the Company’s compliance program was robust and in compliance with the laws, both of which the plaintiff claims were false.

Western Union is accused of aiding and abetting a network of international criminal activities, not putting into place compliance programs that were effective, and disregarding misconduct so as to profit. The alleged violations purportedly caused Western Union shares to become artificially inflated.

New AARP Study Says Older Investors Involved in Unregulated Investments May Be at Higher Risk of Becoming Fraud Victims

Published on: February 22, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the AARP Investment Fraud Vulnerability Study, published by the AARP Fraud Watch Network, active, older investors who get involved in unregulated investments may be more vulnerable to investment fraud. 214 fraud victims were interviewed, along with 814 members of the public who are considered general investors.

The study said that there are appear to be certain traits that may identify why some people are more likely to become fraud victims, including:

· Usually men, age 70 or older.

· These men are often risk-takers.

· They’re more likely to value wealth accumulation as a sign of financial success.

· They’re typically open to sales pitches and to answering remote sales pitches.

Doug Shadel, the lead researcher for the AARP Fraud Network, noted that if an older investor is able to identify whether/not she has a predisposition toward risky conduct, this could make the person more mindful of that tendency and he/she might potentially avoid becoming vulnerable to fraud.

Purshe Kaplan Sterling Investments Must Pay Native American Tribe $3.4M Over Excessive Sales Charges Involving Nontraded REITs and BDCs

Published on: February 22, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is ordering Purshe Kaplan Sterling Investments (PKS) to pay almost $3.4M in restitution to a Native American tribe. The tribe had paid excessive sales fees for the purchase of Business Development Companies (BDCs) and non-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).

Gopi Vungarala was the Purshe Kaplan Sterling registered representative for the tribe from 7/2011 through at least 1/15/15. He was also the tribe’s Treasury Investment Manager at the same time. It was his job was to oversee the group’s investment portfolio.

FINRA’s case against Vungarala in this matter has yet to be resolved. However, Purshe Kaplan Sterling must also pay $750K for its purportedly inadequate supervision of nontraded REIT and BDC sales.

Dallas Investment Firms Charged with Texas Securities Fraud in Alleged Ponzi Scam

Published on: February 18, 2017 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has filed Texas fraud charges against Patrick O. Howard, Optimal Economics Capital Partners, LLC (OE Capital) and Howard Capital Holdings, LLC. Howard controls the two Dallas-based companies., which have raised about $13M from 119 investors. The regulator is alleging that the money went to fraudulent offerings involving private fund investments in three limited liability companies and that Howard falsely presented himself as a registered investment adviser when, in fact, he was not. In addition to offering and selling units through OE Capital, he retained two firms to do the same and paid them a 5% commission.

The SEC is charging Howard and his companies with violating the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The regulator wants permanent injunctions, disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties.

According to the Commission, which filed its complaint under seal in Dallas federal court, Howard and his two companies promised investors 12-20% yearly returns, along with minimal risk. They also purportedly claimed that almost all invested money would go toward acquiring interest in revenue streams of the portfolio companies and that promised returns were insured.