Investor Lawyers Blog

FINRA Suspends and Fines GlobaLink Securities Principal

Published on: September 19, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

FINRA is fining GlobaLink Securities Registered Principal Junhua Michael Liao $20,000. According to the SRO’s findings, through Liao, the firm executed an agreement to sell and market a Regulation D offering comprised of promissory notes for a medical receivables financing company. The financial firm then is said to have sold over $1.2 million of the notes to certain customers, resulting in about $56,700 in commissions.

FINRA also said that during the period in question, it was Liao’s job as the compliance officer for the firm to makes sure that GlobaLink Securities set up, kept up, and enforced a supervisory system and written supervisory procedures designed to ensure compliance with regulations and laws and rules that were applicable. The agency said that while the financial firm did keep up written supervisory procedures regarding private placement sales, the WSPs were not sufficient and lacked specific details about how the firm was to perform due diligence, handle transactions, ensure that a Regulation D product was appropriate for investors, and document GlobaLink’s actions and decisions pertaining to the transactions.

FINRA said that because of the deficient WSPs and inadequate supervision, the firm did not perform proper due diligence on the offerings and that this stopped GlobaLink and Liao from finding out that the issuer had previous payment problems on other note offerings, which resulted in the private placement memorandum misrepresenting the past performance of that issuer. Liao consented to the described sanctions as well as to the SRO’s entry of findings. In addition to the fine, he received a one-month suspension from associating with any other FINRA member in any type of principal role.

JPMorgan to Pay $920M to Settle London Whale Debacle & $80M Over Credit-Card Practice Allegations

Published on: September 19, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

JPMorgan Chase (JPM) has agreed to pay a $920 million fine to resolve securities fraud investigations conducted by the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Financial Conduct Authority in London. The probes were related to the multibillion-dollar trading losses the bank is blamed for in last year’s London Whale debacle.

The regulators cited JPMorgan for “deficiencies” related to controls assessments, risk oversight, and internal financial reporting. The bank’s senior management is getting the brunt of the blame for purportedly not citing concerns about the losses to the board. However, no charges have been filed in this case against any executive.

Also, the SEC was able to extract an acknowledgement from JPMorgan that it was in violation of federal securities laws over this matter. This comes in the wake of the regulator’s decision to reverse its policy that previously let banks settle without having to deny or admit to having done anything wrong.

Imperial Petroleum Charged by SEC with Defrauding Investors

Published on: September 18, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission is charging Imperial Petroleum and a number of its executives and suppliers with involvement in an alleged renewable fuel production scheme. The complaint names the Indiana-based company, its CEO Jeffrey Wilson, three ex-owners of E-Biofuels, and New Jersey-located companies Cima Green LLC, Caravan Trading LLC, and CIMA Energy Group, as well as their operators.

The SEC is accusing them of presenting themselves to investors as a legitimate biodiesel production business while concealing the illegal activity that was going on, which was the source of 99% of the revenue. Imperial Petroleum bought E-Biofuels as a subsidiary in 2010, and the Commission said that the latter’s owners falsely presented that they were making renewable fuel from raw agricultural products. This let E-Biofuels receive government incentives based on such representations when, actually, contends the regulator, E-Biofuels had middlemen purchase finished biodiesel while making these buys appear on bogus invoices as raw feedstock for producing biodiesel. Imperial Petroleum’s subsidiary later would sell the biodiesel that was bought for up to double what it paid.

The regulator believes that Wilson discovered that E-Biofuels wasn’t making biodiesel from raw matter, he let the fraud continue and Imperial’s yearly revenue rose from $1 million to over $100 million. Meantime, its stock price flew upward as investors were falsely told that E-Biofuels was engaged in environmentally friendly biodiesel production.

FINRA Arbitration Panel Orders Citigroup to Pay Senior Investor Couple $3.1M for Alleged Broker Fraud Related to “Selling Away” Practice

Published on: September 17, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Citigroup Inc. (C) now has to pay Dr. Nasirdin Madhany and Zeenat Madhany $3.1 million over claims that the financial firm failed to properly supervise a broker, which caused the couple to sustain over $1 million losses. The broker is accused of directing them to invest in real estate developments that later went sour.

In 2010, the couple filed a FINRA arbitration case alleging fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoings related to over $1 million in real estate investments they made between ’04-and ’07. The Madhanys, who are senior investors, were customers of then-Citigroup worker Scott Andrew King, who referred them to politician Lawton “Bud” Chiles III. The latter was looking for investors for a number of real estate projects. King, who allegedly had a conflict of interest (that he did not disclose) from buying two condominiums from Chiles at a discount, is said to have connected the couple and the politician without Citigroup’s knowledge.

The Madhanys invested in two real estate projects, which began to have problems in 2007 when the US housing market failed and that is when the couple lost their money. Also, they, along with other investors, had signed personal loan guarantee related to a $12 million loan on one of the projects. When the loan defaulted in 2009, Wachovia sued all of them. Last year, a court submitted a $10 million judgment against the investors, with each person possibly liable for the whole amount.

JPMorgan Could Settle “London Whale” Fiasco for $800M

Published on: September 17, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to a source knowledgeable about negotiations, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) could pay at $800 million in penalties in the investigations conducted by regulators over the “London Whale” trading scandal. The regulators are the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the British Financial Conduct Authority, and the US Office of the Comptroller Currency. The announcement of the settlement is expected shortly.

The trading fiasco involved JPMorgan trading in complex derivatives, which were amassed by a trader who was dubbed the London Whale. Traders are accused of betting on credit derivatives, which let them wager on the supposed health of certain companies. Authorities contend that when the positions began to go bad, the traders valued them in a way that was too positive. The trades would cost the financial firm over $600 billion.

Following the debacle, the bank said that it made changes to internal controls. JPMorgan maintains that it was the one that detected the traders’ questionable activities and notified the authorities.

SEC Charges ACI Capital Group Owner with New York Securities Fraud

Published on: September 16, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed charges against Fredrick D. Scott, the New York money manager who owns investment advisory firm ACI Capital Group. The regulator contends that he falsely claimed that the company’s assets under management were as high as $3.7 billion to give him greater credibility when he promoted investment opportunities that were too good to be true. Scott allegedly ran a number of financial scams that targeted small businesses and individual investors.

The SEC says that Scott solicited investors for money by promising high return rates and then stole their funds the moment they deposited it with his investment advisory firm. He used their money to pay for personal expenses and investors never received returns.

One securities scam Scott purportedly perpetuated was what is referred to as an advance fee scheme. Investors were promised that ACI would give multimillion-dollar loans to people wanting bank financing. However, they first had to advance a percentage of the loan figure to the investment advisory firm. Afterwards, they were to get the remaining balance that was promised to them. Unfortunately, investors never received this money.

Broker Gets 1-Year Suspension From FINRA Over Inadequate Due Diligence and Supervision

Published on: September 14, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Gary Mitchell Spitz, a broker and a registered principal of an Iowa-based brokerage firm, is suspended from associating with any FINRA member for a year and must pay a $5,000 fine. The SRO says that Spitz did not perform proper due diligence of an entity—a Reg D, Rule 506 private offering of up to $2 million—even though this action is mandated by his firm’s written supervisory procedures.

FINRA’s finding state that because of Spitz’s inadequate review, he did not make sure that the offering memorandum had audited financials of the issuer or make sure that these financials were accessible to non-accredited investors prior to a sale—also, a Regulation D requirement. The SRO says that Spitz let certain registered representatives, who were associated with the firm, to sell the entity’s shares and turn in offering documents that customers had executed directly to that entity. This meant that Spitz did not get copies of the documents or perform a suitable review of the transactions before they were executed. Certain customers even invested in the entity prior to Spitz getting the subscription documents from these representatives.

Spitz also is accused of not acting to make sure that the representatives made reasonable attempts to get information about the financial status, risk tolerance, and investment goals of customers. FINRA says he did not retain and review these representatives’ email correspondence and that they worked for a company that was the entity’s manager. Spitz let these representatives use the company’s email address to dialogue with customers and prospective clients but that the firm’s server did not capture the correspondence.

Registered Representatives Get FINRA Bar Following Securities Fraud Allegations

Published on: September 13, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Texas Registered Rep Under Investigation for Financial Fraud Declined to Turn in Supplementary Documents

Conrad Tambalo Bautista, a registered representative in Texas, is now barred from associating with any other Financial Industry Regulatory Authority member in any capacity. While not denying or admitting to the SRO’s findings, Bautista agreed to the described sanction as well as the entry of findings.

According to FINRA’s findings, Bautista would not respond to its requests for supplemental documents related to a customer complaint about him. The SRO had asked for certain financial data for an investigation into whether/not he took part in fraudulent financial scams, private securities transactions or external business activities, borrowed customers’ money, or failed to disclose an IRS tax lien.

Foremost Trading LLC Must Pay $400K to CFTC for Supervisory Violations

Published on: September 12, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Foremost Trading LLC has settled the securities charges filed against it by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The regulator accused the introducing broker of failing to properly supervise the handling of specific trading accounts by employees, agents, and officers. To settle, Foremost Trading must pay a $400K civil penalty and cease and desist from future CFTC regulation violations.

According to the agency’s order, the accounts involved were held by clients who were referred to the introducing broker via three unregistered entities that sold futures trading systems. Foremost Trading and its staff are accused of disregarding warning signs that the Systems-Systems Providers were using fraudulent means and business practices to get these clients.

Clients complained to Foremost. However, contends the CFTC, the latter did not properly investigate claims or let other clients know about the allegations. Meantime, the introducing broker kept setting up accounts for clients referred to it by Systems Provider, even vouching for the latter’s track record when communicating with clients.

VSR Financial Services Agrees to Pay FINRA $550,000 Fine Over Inadequate Supervision Allegations Involving Non-Conventional Investments

Published on: September 11, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is fining VSR Financial Services Inc. $550,000 over claims that the firm did not set up, keep up, and enforce a supervisory system that was reasonable over its sale of non-conventional investments. The SRO says that the firm did not properly monitor concentrated client positions of alternative investments. Also fined was VSR owner Donald Joseph Beary, who also received a suspension from associating with other FINRA members for 45 days.

According to the SRO, the firm’s written supervisory procedures stipulated that just up to 40-50% of a client’s exclusive net worth could be cumulatively invested in alternative investments-that is, except for when there was a reason that justified going beyond the guidelines. VSR, through Beary, also set up procedures that gave a discount to certain instruments that were non-conventional, lowering the percentage of how much liquid net worth a customer had invested. It was Beary’s job to implement and oversee the discount program.

However, in a letter to the financial firm, the SEC said that it found that the SRO did not have proper written procedures for the program and that this same deficiency remained even two years after the regulator notified VSR about the problem. The Commission said that Beaury failed to take reasonable action to make sure the WSPs were implemented or to shut down the discount program if not.