Bank of America

Citigroup Could Pay $872M in Securities Lawsuit by Allied Irish Banks

Published on: November 30, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Twelve years after Allied Irish Banks Plc (AIB) filed a securities lawsuit against Citigroup (C) accusing the bank of helping a rogue trader conceal about $691 million in losses, the case is slated to go to trial next month. AIB reportedly wants $872M from the New York-based bank— $372M in damages and about $500M in pre-judgment interest.

It was in 2003 that AIB sued Citigroup subsidiary Citibank and Bank of America Corp. (BAC). AIB contends that the defendants were linked to a scam that led to significant losses for its former unit, Allfirst Financial. Bank of America has already settled the allegations against it.

In 2002, trader John Rusnak’s losses were discovered and he pleaded guilty to banking fraud. Rusnak admitted to concealing $691M in trading losses while employed at Allfirst. The losses were sustained over five years and came from primarily trading the Japanese yen and for taking even bigger risks as he sought to get back some of these losses.

While Rusnak did not make a direct profit from the losses, he made over $650K in bonuses when he made it appear as if Allfirst was making money. He was released from prison in 2009.

Securities News: J.P. Morgan Face Restrictions on Raising Clients Funds In the Wake of Improper Product Disclosures to Investments, Intel Sued Over Improperly Investing 401K Funds, and Citigroup, Bank of America, Other Big Banks Get New Bailout Rules

Published on: October 30, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

SEC Seeks to Limit JP Morgan’s Ability to Raise Client Money
An Over $200K settlement between J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and regulators has stalled because of efforts by federal regulators to limit the firm’s ability to raise money for clients. The move is an attempt to place a wider variety of consequences on financial firms accused of breaking regulations.

J.P. Morgan had settled allegations accusing it of failing to make proper disclosures when marketing its investment products to clients over the products offered by competitors. Now, the SEC wants the firm to say yes to limits on its ability to sell bonds or stocks through private placements for several years. Such a restriction could hamper its private bank’s efforts to raise funds for hedge funds and other clients through a key channel or sell bonds or stocks privately to rich investors and other sophisticated investors.

While banks are allowed to conduct private placement offerings, firms that violate the rules that these securities are under will lose privilege unless they are given a waiver.

Lawsuit Accuses Intel of Investing 401K Monies Improperly
An ex-Intel Corp. employee is suing company officials for breach of fiduciary duty. According to Christopher M. Sulyma, the company invested defined 401K participants’ retirement funds in high risk, costly private equity funds and hedge funds.

Securities News: Deutsche Bank to Pay $2.5M For Swaps Violations, Fifth Street Finance Sued in Class Action Lawsuit, and Countrywide’s $8.5B MBS Settlement Gets IRS Approval

Published on: October 23, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Deutsche Bank Reaches Swaps Violation Settlement with CFTC
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Deutsche Bank AG (DB) have reached a settlement over the regulator’s order accusing the firm of not properly reporting its swaps transactions from 1/13 through 7/15. The regulator also said there were supervisory failures and that the bank failed to modify the reporting errors at issue until after it found out that the CFTC was conducting a probe.

According to the regulator, Deutche Bank did not properly report swap transaction cancellations in all asset classes, resulting in somewhere between tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of reporting errors, violations, and oppositions in its reporting of swaps. CFTC believes that the bank knew about the problem but did not notify its Swap Data Repository in a timely manner, nor did it properly probe, deal with, and modify the information deficiencies until last year when it became aware of the investigation. As a result of the reporting failures, the wrong information was put out to the public.

The CFTC believes that the bank’s reporting failures were partly because of deficiencies in its swaps supervisory system. A more adequate system could have better supervised Deutsche Bank’s activities involving compliance with reporting requirements.

Because the bank is a provisionally registered Swap Dealer, it has to abide by certain recordkeeping, disclosure, and reporting duties related to swap transactions. These requirements are supposed to improve transparency, encourage standardization, and lower systemic risk in swaps trading.

Investors File Class Action Securities Case Against Fifth Street Finance
An investor has filed a class action securities fraud case against Fifth Street Finance Corp. on behalf of shareholders. According to the plaintiff, and for those who bought Fifth Street Finance common shares between 7/7/14 and 2/6/15, the company, Fifth Street Asset Management, Inc., and specific directors and officers violated federal securities laws by allegedly taking part in a fraudulent scam to artificially inflate Fifth Street Finance assets and investment income to raise revenue of Fifth Street Management.

Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, & Other Big Banks Settle $1.87B Settlement Over Swaps Price-Fixing Case

Published on: September 12, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

$1.87B securities settlement has been reached with 12 major banks. The case resolves investor claims that the financial firms conspired to rig prices to hold back competition in the credit default market. For now, the resolution is an agreement in principal and the parties have two weeks to work out the details before turning the deal over to U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan for preliminary approval.

The defendants in this credit default case are:

· Bank of America Corp. (BAC)

· UBS AG (UBS)

· Goldman Sachs Group Inc., (GS)

· Barclays (BARC)

· Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc (RBS)

· BNP Paribas SA (BNP)

· Morgan Stanley (MS)

· Citigroup (C)

· JPMorgan Chase (JPM)

· Credit Suisse Group AG (CS)

· Deutsche Bank AG (DB)

· HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBC)

Markit Ltd and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association are also defendants.

11th Circuit Revives City of Miami’s Mortgage Fraud Lawsuits Against Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Bank of America

Published on: August 31, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that a lower court made a mistake when it threw out the city of Miami’s claims accusing Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC ), and Citigroup Inc. (C) of engaging in predatory mortgage lending to Hispanic and black borrowers. The Florida city brought its claims under the Fair Housing Act.

Miami claims that the three banks directed non-Caucasian borrowers toward more expensive loans that were frequently not affordable to them even if their credit was good. The city said that because of this “reverse redlining,” there were a lot of foreclosures, a rise in spending to fight blight, and lower property tax collections.

A U.S. district court judge threw out Miami’s mortgage fraud lawsuits last year. Judge William Dimitrouleas claimed that the city did not have the standing to sue and the harm alleged was too remote from the conduct of the banks.

The 11th circuit, however, said that standard was too strict. It believes that the banks could have foreseen that there would be attendant harm from such alleged discriminatory practices.
Continue Reading ›

SEC Investigates Bank of America Merrill Lynch

Published on: April 28, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Bank of America Corp. (BAC) and its Merrill Lynch unit to find out if the lender broke rules established to protect customers accounts. According to sources in the know, over a three-year period, Merrill Lynch used different kinds of big, complex trades and loans to save on funding expenses and free up billions of dollars in money and securities for trading that it otherwise would have needed to keep off-limits.

Bank of America put a halt to the trades in 2012 in the wake of internal dialogue over possible risks involved. The trades involved strategies that existed when the bank purchased Merrill Lynch in 2009.

Now, the SEC wants to know if the strategies violated the protection rules and if regulators were misled about the bank’s actions. It also is trying to determine if retail brokerage funds were placed at risk for the purpose of making more money.

Investor Fraud News: NFL Free Agent Sues Bank of America For $20M, FINRA Arbitration Panel Awards $1.3M to Investor in Case Involving Ex-Stifel Broker, and Tony Thompson and His Brokerage Firm are Barred from Industry

Published on: March 31, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Former Colts Football Player Sues Bank of America for $20M

Dwight Freeney, formerly with the Indianapolis Colts and currently an NFL free agent, is suing Bank of America (BAC) for securities fraud. He and his Roof Group LLC say they were bilked of over $20 million.

In his securities fraud case, Freeney contends that the bank’s wealth management division is to blame for taking part, aiding, and abetting in the scam that cost him money. He noted that Bank of America went after him in 2010 to become one of its high net worth and affluent clients.

Bank of America’s Merrill Lynch to Pay $2.5M to Massachusetts Over Compliance Rule Relapse

Published on: March 23, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, a Bank of America unit (BAC), will pay the state of Massachusetts $2.5 million to resolve charges that it did not abide by its own compliance rules. According to Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, the firm did not properly supervise employees in January 2013 over two presentations that were made to financial advisers in Boston.

The presentations, which allegedly were not properly vetted by compliance staff, were geared toward helping advisers grow their business and oversee the services that they offer clients. Part of the presentations provided training on how to double production via the transfer of customer assets from brokerage accounts that were commission-based to ones with fiduciary fee-based options. Disclaimers about client suitability or advisers’ fiduciary duties were not provided.

According to Merrill Lynch’s own procedures and policies, its compliance team must approve these types of presentations beforehand. A Bank of America spokesperson, however, maintains that no clients were harmed. The firm has since reemphasized to its employees the importance of making sure that internal presentations are properly approved first.

Broker and Adviser News: Morgan Stanley Sues Ameriprise Broker, Former UBS Broker Alleges Investor Risk Levels Were Mischaracterized, and Ex-Bank of America Merrill Lynch Trainees Seek Overtime

Published on: March 5, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Morgan Stanley Accuses Ex-Broker, Now With Ameriprise, of Trying to Take Clients

Morgan Stanley Wealth Management is suing one of its ex-brokers, John McCallion, who is now with Ameriprise Financial Services (AMP). The wirehouse claims that McCallion went into Morgan Stanley’s (MS) computer system before leaving the firm and changed his clients’ phone numbers so he could take their business with him.

The firm contends that while McCallion gave it a list of his clients’ information, he put the data on a USB drive that could not be opened on Morgan Stanley’s computers because of security issues. The Ameriprise broker has consented to a temporary restraining order that blocks him from pursuing the firm’s clients. He also is facing a FINRA arbitration claim over the matter. McCallion had at first tired to argue against the temporary order and he denied taking the confidential list or trade secrets.

Bank of America Used Subsidiary to Finance Trades, Helped Hedge Funds, Others, Avoid Taxes

Published on: February 11, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to The Wall Street Journal, internal documents show that Bank of America Corp. (BAC) used its Bank of America National Association, a subsidiary backed by the U.S. government, to finance controversial trades that allowed certain clients to get around paying taxes. A bank spokesperson said that the practice, which involved transactions by its investment banking arm in Europe, was phased out last year.

However, as far back as at least 2011 senior Bank of America investment bank officials in England purportedly began pressing at staff to avail of the lower funding costs of the U.S. unit, which doesn’t pay as much as business units for borrowing money. The purpose was to bring in more hedge fund clients, including those involved in dividend arbitrage tax trades. With that strategy, sophisticated investors are able to avoid or lower their withholding taxes on stock dividends.

There have been questions as to whether using an entity that holds federally insured deposits to pay for high-risk investment banking trades is appropriate. One employee even filed a whistleblower submission to the SEC about the banking subsidiary’s involvement.