Investor Lawyers Blog

Ex-Perella Weinberg Partners Managing Director is Convicted of Insider Trading, Giving Tips to His Dad

Published on: August 17, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A jury has Sean Stewart, the ex-managing director of Perella Weinberg Partners LP of insider trading. Stewart is accused of giving his dad confidential tips about five health-care deals.

According to prosecutors, Stewart started giving his dad insider information in 2011 while he was VP of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.’s (JPM) healthcare investment banking group. He continued to tip his dad when he went to work for Perella. As a result of the insider information, Stewart’s dad, Robert Stewart, and Richard Cunniffe made over $1M in illegal profits. The elder Stewart has already pleaded guilty to the charges against him.

During the trial, the younger Stewart testified that his dad had betrayed him by using the information that he had shared with him during casual conversation. He testified that he lied to compliance lawyers at JPMorgan in 2011 to protect his reputation and his father. He claimed that he never thought that his dad would use the information to make trades.

Robert has already been sentenced to four years of probation for his role after pleading guilty to securities fraud. Also, he had to forfeit $150K in ill-gotten gains. The elder Stewart shared the tips he received from his son with two others, including Cunniffee, who testified that they used the tips to buy stock options. Cunniffee had earlier pleaded guilty to insider trading.

Securities Fraud News: Hedge Fund Manager Accused of Securities Fraud Involving Payoffs to the Terminally Ill, SEC Halts Trading in Neruomama Shares, and Commodity Pool Fraud Leads to More than $10M in Penalties and Restitution

Published on: August 17, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Investment Advisor Firm Accused of Paying Off Terminally Ill Patients to Commit Fraud
The SEC has filed fraud charges against Donald Lathen and his Eden Arc Capital Management. Lathen is accused of recruiting at least 60 individuals who had less than six months to live and agreeing to pay them $10K each for the use of their names on joint brokerage accounts. When one of these individuals would die, he would allegedly redeem the investments by falsely representing that he and the terminally individual person were joint account holders.

Lathen recruited the terminally ill patients through contacts he had at hospices and nursing homes. In reality, it was Lathen’s hedge fund that owned the option investments.

As a result, of the purported omissions and misrepresentations, issuers paid over $100M in early redemptions. Lathen is accused of violating the custody rule by not properly putting the securities and money from the hedge fund in an account under the name of the fund or in one that held only client money and securities.

SEC Stops Trading in Neromamam Ltd.
The SEC has stopped the trading of Neuromama Ltd. (NERO) shares. The shares trade on the mostly unregulated over-the-counter markets and the regulator is concerned about transactions that may be “potentially manipulative, as well as other red flags that have purportedly been cropping up for years.

Neruomama’s paper value went up times four to $35B this year despite not much volume. The company’s shares went up by four times to $56/share. (On January 15, ’14, its value was $4.73B.)

Ex-Goldman Sachs Trader to Pay $400K Fine to Settle RMBS Fraud Case

Published on: August 16, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Edwin Chin, an ex-Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) senior trader, will pay $400K to resolve U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges accusing him of misleading the bank’s customers when he sold them residential mortgage-backed securities at prices that were higher than they should have been. Even though he is settling, Chin is not denying or admitting to the regulator’s findings. He has, however, agreed to the entry of the order stating that he violated the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.

According to the Commission’s order, from 2010 until 2012, which is when Chin left the bank, the former Goldman trader made extra money for the firm by concealing the prices that it had paid for different RMBSs and reselling the securities at higher prices to customers. The difference in cost would go to Goldman.

The SEC said Chin made over $1.5M in additional trading profits. Because Goldman made more money, Chin did as well.

The regulator accused Chin of sometimes misleading buyers by suggesting that he was in the process of negotiating a transaction between customers when he was merely selling residential mortgage-backed securities from Goldman’s inventory. In one alleged incident, Chin earned an additional $200K by telling a hedge fund client that he would sell a bond at cost price and without compensation. Unfortunately, he purportedly neglected to tell the hedge fund that he had already bought the security, had it in inventory, and was charging the fund a worse price than what Goldman paid earlier that day. The SEC said that Chin misled the same client about the price of a different security the following day, resulting in an additional $100K in profit.

UBS to Pay $250K For Not Waiving Mutual Fund Fees

Published on: August 13, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority said that a UBS Group AG (UBS) unit will pay $250K to resolve charges accusing it of not waiving certain fees for mutual fund customers that were eligible for the reduction. FINRA said that the broker-dealer overcharged customers $277,636 to invest in mutual funds. The failure to wave these fees purportedly took place from 9/09 to 6/13.

The self-regulatory organization cited alleged supervisory failures. According to the settlement notice, UBS depended largely on its registered representatives to identify when sales charge waivers were warranted and identifying them. These waivers were linked to the reinstatement rights that let investors get around having to pay front-end sales charges.

Under these rights, individual investors are generally allowed to reinvest money made from selling class A mutual fund shares in the same fund family or the same fund without having to pay fees at the front end. They are given 90-120 days to reinvest for the waiver to be applicable.

401(K) Lawsuits Brought Against Franklin Templeton and Neuberger Berman

Published on: August 12, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Two more 401(K) lawsuits alleging self-dealing have been brought against asset management firms. In Cryer V. Franklin Resources, Inc. et al, the employees of Franklin Resources Inc. are suing their employer. Franklin Resources (BEN) operates under the name Franklin Templeton Investments.

According to the plaintiffs, the asset management firm engaged in self-dealing in its 401(k) plan. They believe that individuals overseeing the retirement plan were in breach of duty under ERISA when they chose costly, proprietary funds that performed poorly instead of selecting less expensive funds that performed better. The plaintiffs are also accusing their employer of charging excessive fees for administrative services.

In the 401(K) lawsuits, they noted that the plan had invested in hundreds of millions of dollars in mutual funds that Franklin Templeton and its subsidiaries managed even though there were many other choices available. These entities manage all of the mutual funds in the Franklin Templeton 401(K) retirement plan. The plaintiffs said that Franklin Templeton chose these funds so that it could receive fees and make money.

Texas Securities Fraud: State Fines The Investment Center and A Local Man Is Accused of Bilking Investors

Published on: August 12, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A New Jersey financial firm must pay $50,000 in Texas for allegedly not properly supervising one its brokers who loaded up too many energy stocks in his clients’ accounts. The Investment Center Inc. has been reprimanded by the Texas State Securities Board, which also imposed the fine.

It was an investor that brought the Texas securities case against the securities dealer and one of its ex-brokers. According to the state regulator’s consent order, between ’10 and ’14, some clients at The Investment Center held 95% of total investible assets in energy sector equities. The recommended securities were typically low-priced and publicly traded. There were purportedly periods when some clients’ accounts were invested in just one company instead of holding investments in different energy companies at the same time. Also, said the state regulator, with certain clients, their equity positions were 100% concentrated in the energy sector.

The Texas State Securities Board said that clients that could not sustain a lot of risk were among those affected by this broker’s investment choices.

Although the former financial representative’s actions in investing so much of his clients’ money in concentrated equity positions raised red flags when some of these accounts dropped in value, The Investment Center purportedly failed to act on the warning signs. The firm has since paid the investor who filed the Texas securities fraud complaint $98,000.

San Francisco Investment Manager is Sued Over $2M Hedge Fund Fraud

Published on: August 11, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a financial fraud lawsuit against Nicholas M. Mitsakos and his Matrix Capital Market. Mitsakos and his investment advisory firm are accused of pretending that they managed millions of dollars in assets. They allegedly stole about $800K from the first client that invested with them. The client, a Cayman Islands fund, invested $1.99M.

Mitsakos and his firm are accused of soliciting investors in a purported hedge fund. They are said to have falsely claimed they were successful money managers overseeing millions of dollars even though they had no assets. Instead, they allegedly made up a hypothetical investment portfolio in which the investments made up to 66% of yearly returns. The two of them are accused of pretending that these trades were real.

Commenting on the hedge fund fraud, SEC New York Regional Office Director Andrew Calamari said that it is important for investors to verify any information about an investment opportunity, especially one that is touted as having a “lofty historical performance.”

SEC Charges Ex-Philadelphia Eagles Football Player With $10M Fraud

Published on: August 10, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Merrill Robertson Jr., an ex-Philadelphia Eagles football player, is charged with financial fraud. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Robertson bilked investors in a $10M scam.

The SEC claims that Robertson, Sherman Vaughn Jr. and their Cavalier Union Investments LLC promised investors they would invest in diversified holdings. Instead, they took nearly $6M of investors’ money to cover their own spending and pay earlier investors. Expenditures purportedly included cars, luxury items, spa visits, family vacations, and educational expenses.

The two men are accused of claiming that the unregistered debt securities they were selling were safe and would generate up to 20%. They also purportedly told people that experienced invest advisers were running Cavalier’s investment funds when there were no advisers or funds.

The investment firm, said the SEC was “functionally insolvent” soon after it was set up, yet the defendants allegedly concealed this from prospective investors and depended on the latter’s money to stay in business. The government said that Cavalier only invested in restaurants and all of them failed.

US Attorney Bharara Asks Second Circuit To Reconsider Overthrown Mortgage Fraud Verdict Against Countrywide

Published on: August 9, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The U.S. Attorney for Manhattan’s Southern District is asking the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to look at a ruling that overturned the jury verdict that held Countrywide Home Loans liable for mortgage fraud. Countrywide, which is now owned by Bank of America (BAC), made billions of dollars on home loans that went into default following the 2008 financial crisis.

It was in 2007 that the mortgage provider introduced a new program, referred to as the “high-speed swim lane,” to process applications for mortgages. Within Countrywide, the program was dubbed the “hustle.”

The program did not include the majority of conditions required to make sure loans would be paid back after Wall Street banks, Freddie Mac, or Fannie Mae sold them to investors. Unfortunately, Freddie and Fannie were not told that these conditions had become more relaxed or that loans no longer met certain criteria. The two mortgage finance firms had tightened their own loan buying requirements and underwriting guidelines. As a result of the loosened restrictions by Countrywide, contended the Justice Department, “rampant instances of fraud” resulted.

Despite the 2013 jury verdict that found Countrywide and a Bank of America executive liable for mortgage fraud, a Second Circuit judge panel overruled the decision. It found that even though Countrywide purposely breached contracts, this was not fraud because the lender had not intended to fool customers at the time that contracts were signed.

Now, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara wants a Second Circuit panel of judges to consider that Countrywide made false statements when selling loan bundles to customers, including Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. He said that the court bypassed evidence at trial that showed how the defendants made fraudulent misrepresentations when selling the loans and while the contracts were being executed. Prosecutors are arguing that the language in the contract refers to each mortgage sale during the actual sale and not upon the writing of the contract.

Primus Pacific Partners Sues Goldman Sachs for $510M

Published on: August 5, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) is a defendant in a securities lawsuit brought by Primus Pacific Partners. Primus used to own 20% of Eon Capital, a Malaysian lender. In its complaint, brought in the New York State Supreme Court, Primus accused Goldman and ex-Managing Director Tim Leissner of hiding that there were conflicts of interest involving Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak and the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), which is a sovereign wealth fund.

Goldman had been advising Eon Capital when the latter was considering a takeover offer from Hong Leong Bank Bhd, which is a Malaysian bank. According to Primus, in January ’10, Goldman and Leissner determined that Hong Leong’s first bid wasn’t fair. A few months later later, however, they decided that a revised offer that was only 2.8% greater was fair and recommended that Eon Capital take the deal.

The plaintiff believes that Goldman approved of the higher bid because it was seeking to impress the Malaysian Prime Minster whose brothers would benefit from a merger. Nazim Rajak worked for Hong Leong as a director while Nazir Rajak was chairman of CIMB Group Holdings Bhd, which advised Hong Leong about its takeover bid of EON Capital.