Investor Lawyers Blog

Morgan Stanley & Co. and TD Ameritrade Inc. to Repurchase Over $338M in Auction Rate Securities from New Jersey Investors

Published on: May 4, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. (MS) and TD Ameritrade Inc. (AMTD) will buy back over $338 million in auction rate securities from New Jersey investors. The repurchase is to settle securities allegations by the state’s attorney general that the financial firms did not adequately disclose the risks involved with investing in ARS.

Per the settlement, Morgan Stanley (the ARS underwriters) will repurchase $322.27 in ARS that it sold to retail investors and pay civil penalties of $1.56 million. The New Jersey Bureau of Securities claims that not only did the financial firm fail to tell investors of the risks involved in the financial instruments—even after knowing the ARS market was in trouble—but Morgan Stanley also failed to adequately train financial advisers and brokers about the possible illiquidity that could impact ARS.

TD Ameritrade (the ARS distributor) will buy back $16.1 million in ARS. The bureau claims that the broker-dealer’s registered representatives failed to inform clients of the risks involving ARS.

In a release issued late last month, Thomas R. Calcagni, Acting Director of the Division of Consumer Affairs, said that efforts have led to financial firms either buying back or offering to repurchase over $2.7 billion in ARS. The settlements with Morgan Stanley and TD Ameritrade are the ninth and tenth ones that the Division has reached with firms that sold ARS to investors. Earlier this year, UBS agreed to buy back $1.5 billion in ARS from New Jersey investors.

Morgan Stanley Consent Order (PDF)

TD Ameritrade Consent Order (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Anschutz Corp.’s Securities Fraud Lawsuit Against Deutsche Bank and Credit Rating Agencies Over Their Alleged Mishandling of Auction-Rate Securities Can Proceed, Says District Court, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, April 21, 2011

Class Auction-Rate Securities Lawsuit Against Raymond James Financial Survives Dismissal, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 27, 2010

Tribune Bondholders Can Sue Shareholders for Over $8.2B

Published on: April 30, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A bankruptcy court judge has cleared the way for Tribune Co. (TRBCQ) bondholders to file securities complaints in state court against ex-shareholders who made money from the 2007 leveraged buyout that is thought to have caused the media giant’s demise. They contend that for real estate magnate Sam Zell to raise the money to pay off the shareholders and gain control of the Tribune, the company ended up taking on level of debt that it could not sustain and which resulted in bankruptcy in 2008.

The bondholders claim that the 2007 buyout was made at their expense and they want to get back the over $8.2 billion that was paid out to ex-shareholders. Unfortunately, seeing as there are billions of dollars in secured debt, it is not likely that bondholders will recover all of the over $2 billion in notes that the media giant issued before the buyout unless creditors prevail in their lawsuits against shareholders, Zell, lenders, and other parties.

The bondholders needed to get permission to file their lawsuits outside the bankruptcy court. Led by Aurelius Capital Management, they say the action was necessary because the statute of limitations for pursuing such claims under state laws in Illinois and Delaware ends in June, when it will have been four years since the buyout. The bondholders are worried that Tribune, which is based in Illinois, won’t get out of bankruptcy by then. Possible securities lawsuit targets are the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, which sold $1.5 billion in company stock for a $963 million profit for the buyout and Stark Investments, a hedge fund that invested in Tribune.

Related Web Resources:

Bondholders Can Sue Over Tribune, The Wall Street Journal, April 27, 2011

More Blog Posts:

SEC is Finalizing Its Whistleblower Rules, Says Chairman Schapiro, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 28, 2011

Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. Ordered by FINRA to Pay Wright Family Trust $1.6M

Published on: April 29, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel says that Lincoln Financial Advisors Corporation must pay the Wright Family Trust $1.6M over securities claims related to investments that were made in a number of funds. Andrew and Blenda Wright, the claimants, alleged fraud, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, failure to supervise, elder abuse, unauthorized and unsuitable transactions, and breach of contract. Other respondents named in the claim are Rollance Vekennis and John Marshall.

The claims are related to the investments made in:
• Rye Select Broad Market Fund, which is a Bernard L. Madoff Investment Services LLC feeder fund
• Johnston Asset Management International Equity Fund
• Mount Yale Large Cap Growth Fund
• Mount Yale Mid Cap Growth Qualified Fund
• Mount Yale Large Cap Value Qualified Fund
• Mount Yale Small Cap Qualified Fund
• Kinetics Advisers Institutional Partners Fund

The claimants had sought $1.5 million in compensatory damages.

The FINRA panel has ordered the respondents to pay $1.17 million in compensatory damages, including 10% annual interest between the date of the award and the time it is paid. Lincoln Financial must also pay another $590,000 in compensatory damages (also with 10% yearly interest until paid), the $600 initial filing fee, $22,800 in hearing session fees, and $8,550 in member fees.

Related Web Resources:

FINRA

More Blog Posts:
SEC Approves FINRA’s Proposal to Give Investors an All-Public Arbitration Panel Option, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, February 12, 2011

Linsco Private Ledger Clients File FINRA Arbitration Claims Accusing Former Financial Adviser Raymond Londo of Running Multi-Million Dollar Ponzi Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 13, 2010

SEC is Finalizing Its Whistleblower Rules, Says Chairman Schapiro

Published on: April 28, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In an interview with AdviserOne, Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Mary Schapiro spoke about the agency’s new Whistleblower Office. The office was created per a Dodd-Frank mandate that entitles individuals who voluntarily give the Commission original information leading to an SEC enforcement action and other related actions a reward.

Schapiro says that the SEC is in the process of “finalizing” its whistleblower rules. She also noted that the agency’s newly acquired whistleblower authority is increasing the quantity of quality tips it is receiving, which should allow for better enforcement. The SEC receives thousands of tips annually.

Schapiro says that under a new Tips, Complaints, and Referral System, tips can all be placed in one database that will allow the information to be shared throughout the agency. She said that the previous inability to share information was a factor in the Madoff Ponzi scam that bilked investors of billions.

Prior to Dodd-Frank, the SEC could only award whistleblowers in insider trading cases. There was, however, a cap of 10% of the penaliteis collected in the action.

Whisteblower Awards
To be considered for an award, a whistleblower will have to provide information that results in successful enforcement action or an administrative one that leads to monetary sanctions of over $1 million. The whistleblower could receive 10-30% of the total sanctions collected. The amount awarded will depend on the type of help the whistleblower provided and the significance of the information given.

Also, the information from the whistleblower needs to either have led to a new investigation or examination, or if the alleged misconduct was already under investigation, then the whistleblower needs to have provided information that couldn’t have been obtained otherwise and was key to the action’s success.

Our securities fraud law firm represents victims of investment fraud and other financial scams.

More Blog Posts:
Ex-UBS Employee Can Proceed with Her Whistleblower Claim, Says District Court, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 15, 2011 Why Whistleblowers Should Act Quickly and Consult Competent Legal Counsel, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 18, 2010
Whistleblower Sues Moody’s Investors Service for Defamation, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 15, 2010 Continue Reading ›

Texas Commodity Trading Advisor FIN FX LLC Now Subject to NFA Emergency Enforcement Action

Published on: April 27, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The National Futures Association has taken an emergency enforcement action against FIN FX LLC (FINFX) and its principal Leon L. Wolmarans. FIN FX LLC is a Texas Commodity Trading Advisor.

According to NFA, FIN FX LLC and Wolmarans used misleading and false information to solicit customers. The advisor even allegedly published deceptive performance claims on its company Web side and not cooperating with the NFA during the latter’s examination of the financial firm.

NFA’s Executive Committee has issued an Associate Responsibility Action (ARA) and a Member Responsibility Action (MRA) against Wolmarans and FIN FX LLC. The two are also suspended from NFA membership and are not allowed to solicit or accept money from investors or customers or solicit investments from investment vehicles. They also cannot transfer or disburse funds from any commodities, securities, forex, or any other accounts without NFA approval first. The enforcement actions will stay in effect until FIN FX and its principal show that they are now in compliance with NFA requirements.

If you are someone who suffered financial losses because a financial adviser gave you misleading information, you may be the victim of investment adviser fraud. Our Texas securities fraud lawyers know how upsetting it can be to lose money after placing your trust in someone who should have been helping you make decisions that are in your best financial interests. Fortunately, there may be a way to recoup your losses.

Related Web Resources:
NFA takes emergency enforcement action against Texas CTA FIN FX LLC and its principal, ForexMagnates, April 26, 2011
National Futures Association

More Blog Posts:
Texas Securities Fraud: FINRA Suspends Pinnacle Partners Over Failure to Comply with Temporary Cease and Desist Order Involving “Boiler Room” Operation, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 19, 2011
Texas Securities Fraud Lawsuit Against MetroPCS Communications is Dismissed, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 11, 2011
Texas Securities Fraud: SEC Charges Talk Radio “MoneyMan” Over Promissory Note Offerings, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 4, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Ameriprise to Sell Securities America Even as it Finalizes Securities Settlement with Investors of Medical Capital Holdings and Provident Royalties Private Placements

Published on: April 26, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In its first quarter earnings report, Ameriprise Financial (NYSE: AMP) says it intends to sell Securities America. The news comes while the financial firm is still in the process of finalizing its securities fraud settlement with investors accusing the brokerage unit of selling allegedly fraudulent private placements of Medical Capital Holdings and Provident Royalties.

Investors sustained about $400 million in losses after taking part in Medical Capital Holdings-sponsored debt sales and shale gas investments with Provident Royalties. Although originally Securities America had about $400 million in outstanding obligations, the proposed settlement is worth $150 million. The independent broker-dealer unit is accused of failing to do proper due diligence on millions of dollars in investments that it sold, which later proved to be worthless.

Investors who filed securities arbitration cases against Securities America will receive $70 million. Those who are seeking to get back their losses through a class action securities lawsuit will get $80 million. The financial firm could be facing over $300 million more in arbitration claims over the fraudulent placements.

There is speculation over why Ameriprise’s decision to sell comes now. Does this mean that the financial firm has other issues of concern, beside the securities allegations, with Securities America? The sale may also mean that Ameriprise has decided to focus on its core business.

Per the earnings report, Securities America entered into the settlement agreements last month. This has resulted in a $118 million pre-tax charge for Ameriprise during 2011’s first quarter, as well as the $40 million pretax charge it incurred during last year’s fourth quarter.

Related Web Resources:
Securities America Agrees To Settlement With Investors-Sources, The Wall Street Journal, April 13, 2011
Ameriprise profit up, selling Securities America, AP/Bloomberg Businessweek, April 25, 2011
Ameriprise profit up, selling Securities America, Bloomberg Business Week, April 25, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Texas Securities Fraud: Three FINRA Cases Against Securities America Over Sale of Private Placements Halted, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, February 22, 2011
Securities America Inc. to Pay $1.2M in Compensatory and Punitive Damages Over Allegedly Fraudulent Medical Capital Notes, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 6, 2011
Securities America & Ameriprise Financial Inc. Sued For Selling Allegedly Faulty Private Settlements, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 10, 2009 Continue Reading ›

AIG Trying to Get More Investors to Buy Life Settlements

Published on: April 26, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

American International Group Inc. (AIG) is trying to get credit-ratings firms and investors to get behind the sale of life settlements, which are securities backed by the life insurance polices of older people. Per the insurer’s recent proposal, a subsidiary of AIG’s Chartis property casualty unit would collateralize notes valued at $900 million with 1,157 policies. AIG would like to sell $250 million to outside investors.

So far, AIG’s efforts have been met with resistance. It doesn’t help that Standard & Poor’s won’t rate the securities, which could help rally investors. In fact, S & P’s March report emphasizes the securities “unique risks.” It doesn’t help that some critics call these securities “collateralized death obligations,” “blood pools,” or “death bonds” because they pay off upon the insured’s death.

Investors who buy life settlements are betting that the benefits they get upon the insured’s death will be greater than the cash they’ve paid for both the policy and its premiums. However, due to the 2008 credit crisis or because some of the insured ended up living longer than expected, many life settlement investors have lost money on these securities. Securities lawsuits have followed and the market has stayed depressed. AIG says that as of the end of 2010, it has paid over $177.8 million to settle 479 claims. In exchange, it received the policies. Per AIG’s financial filings, the insurer has about $18 billion in anticipated death benefits. That’s more than 1/3rd of the approximately $45 billion in these benefits that have changed hands in the last decade.

The Wall Street Journal reports that generally, life insurers consider investor ownership of policies—especially involving those betting on someone’s death—as not good for the industry. There are even some insurance companies that have gone to court claiming that they were misled buy buyers who said they wanted policies for estate planning when, in fact, they actually wanted to flip them for investors.

Our institutional investment fraud law firm are dedicated to helping investors recoup their losses.

AIG Tries to Sell Death-Bet Securities, The Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2011

Seniors Beware: What you should know about life settlements, FINRA

Life Settlement Securitizations Present Unique Risks, Standard and Poor’s

More Blog Posts:
Texas Lawyer Pleads Guilty to Involvement in Alleged $100M Life Settlement Scheme, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 7, 2010

Life Settlements or Viaticals should be Considered “Securities,” Recommends the SEC to Congress , Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 5, 2010

Securitization of Life Insurance Settlements Might Lead to Next Financial Crisis, Say Lawmakers, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 27, 2009

Morgan Keegan Ordered by FINRA to Pay RMK Fund Investors $881,000

Published on: April 24, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel is ordering Morgan Keegan to pay a group of investors $881,000 for losses they sustained in Morgan Keegan’s proprietary funds that were concentrated in high-risk subprime mortgage assets. Customers lost about $2 billion.

The Morgan Keegan funds that investors had placed their money in included the:
• RMK High Income Fund
• RMK Multi-Sector High Income Fund
• RMK Advantage Income Fund
• RMK Select Intermediate Bond Fund
• RMK Strategic Income Fund

The claimants alleged misrepresentations and omissions, unsuitable investments, breach of fiduciary duty, failure to supervise, negligence, vicarious liability, breach of contract, FINRA rule violations, and Securities and Exchange Act violations. The FINRA panel found Morgan Keegan liable to the claimants on a number of the claims and ordered the financial firm to pay the following in compensatory damages:

• $33,382 to Palmer and Kathy Albertine • $105,844 to Jon Albright • $254,642 to Susan and Sam Davis • $458,625 to Kendall and Peter Tashie
FINRA also ordered Morgan Keegan to pay $26,850 for all of the forum fees for the arbitration against the financial firm, $28,500 for the Claimaints’ expert witness fee, and $600 for the portion of the filing fee that is non-refundable. Morgan Keegan is a Regions Financial Corporation subsidiary.

Related Web Resources:
FINRA Rules

Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Cornell University Law School
More Blog Posts:
Morgan Keegan & Co. Inc. Must Pay $250K to Couple that Lost Investments in Hedge Fund with Ties to Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 16, 2011
Morgan Keegan to Pay $9.2M to Investors in Texas Securities Fraud Case Involving Risky Bond Funds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 6, 2010
Morgan Keegan & Co., Inc., Morgan Asset Management, and Two Employees Face Subprime Mortgage Securities Fraud Charges by SEC, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 8, 2010 Continue Reading ›

Securities Lawsuits Expected to Reach Record High in ’11, Says Advisen Ltd. Report

Published on: April 23, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Per Advisen Ltd’s latest quarterly report on securities litigation, the number of securities lawsuit filings will likely set a new record high for yet another year in a row. Records were set in 2008, 2009, and 2010 following the credit crisis. Advisen’s quarterly report was sponsored by ACE.

John Molka III , the report’s author, says that even with the credit crisis has eased up, the submission of securities lawsuits has not. 1,293 securities lawsuits were filed in 2010. Now, Advisen is saying that based on the number of securities complaints filed during the first quarter of 2011, you can expect the number of lawsuits for this year to beat that number. Molka speculates that this “elevated level of filings” could be the “new normal.”

During Q1 2011, 362 securities lawsuits were filed—a 47% jump from the number of complaints that were submitted in Q1 2010. Compare this first quarter to last year’s last quarter when 342 securities complaints were filed. Also, with 1,448 new filings as this year’s first quarter annualized rate, that’s already12% more than last year’s total filings. The complaints include those for breach of fiduciary duty, shareholder derivative cases, securities fraud, and securities class actions.

Although securities fraud complaints comprised the greatest portion of filings for the first quarter, breach of fiduciary duties lawsuits, which include merger objection complaints, are the real cause of securities lawsuit growth. Meantime, 18% of new filings were securities class action complaints, which in the past made up over 1/3rd of securities lawsuits. Securities class action lawsuits, however, still make up for the majority of the largest settlements. During this first quarter, the average securities class action case settled for $54.6 million.

More Blog Posts:

Class Members of Charles Schwab Corporation Securities Litigation Can Still Opt Out to File Individual Securities Claim, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 6, 2010

Securities Fraud Lawsuit Against Calamos Investments Filed on Behalf of Calamos Convertible Opportunities and Income Fund Shareholders, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 17, 2010

Citigroup Chair Says Bank’s Crisis is Over

Published on: April 22, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

At the financial firm’s annual shareholder meeting, Citigroup chairman Richard D. Parsons says that even though there will be challenges this year, the investment bank is “clearly through the crisis.” Parsons statement reflects a significant shift for Citibank from last April when the financial firm made its first profit since the 2007 financial collapse and the government was still in possession of a large ownership stake. Citigroup, which received three government bailouts, has since paid back the Treasury Department and reported profits for five quarters in a row. Most recently, the investment bank has just reported a $3 billion profit.

The New York Times says that unlike in recent years when Citigroup shareholders that attended the annual meeting would complain about board members or former US Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin, this year, the shareholders that did show up primarily complained that Citi’s stock price would have to hit almost $600 for them to break even on shares.

The bank’s shares, which used to trade at over $50 each, now trade at under $5 dollars. After the reverse share split, share prices will rise to approximately $45. Each investor’s total, however, will go down by 90%.

Over 95% of shareholders had approved the stock split. At the meeting, Citi’s chief executive Vikram S. Pandit explained that while the share count was changing the value of ownership position was not. He also spoke of the benefits of drawing in institutional investors who couldn’t buy shares of companies that had stock that traded under $10. Pandit said there was potential for short-sellers to beat down the stock.

Related Web Resources:
Citi’s Annual Meeting Ceases to Be a Battleground, New York Times, April 21, 2011
Citi CEO tries to shed bank’s “survivor” image, Reuters, April 21, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Citigroup Ordered by FINRA to Pay $54.1M to Two Investors Over Municipal Bond Fund Losses, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 13, 2011

Ex-Smith Barney Adviser Pleads Guilty to Securities Fraud In $3.25M Scam to Bilk Citibank and Firm Clients, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 13, 2010
Securities Fraud Lawsuit Against Citigroup Involving Mortgage-Related Risk Results in Mixed Ruling, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 30, 2010 Continue Reading ›