Current Investigations

Big Banks Are Accused of Rigging Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae Bonds

Published on: February 27, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The City of Birmingham Retirement and Relief System and the Electrical Workers Pension System Local 103 have filed a proposed class action securities fraud lawsuit accusing a number of big banks of colluding with one another to rig the prices of Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. (Freddie Mac) and Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) unsecured bonds. The defendants in the case include JP Morgan (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Barclays Bank (BARC), Deutsche Bank (DB), Credit Suisse (CS), UBS (UBS), Merrill Lynch, BNP Paribas Securities Corp., FTN Financial Securities, Goldman Sachs (GS), and First Tennessee Bank.

According to Law360, the plaintiffs contend that the bank took advantage of the dark market nature of the “private, ‘over the counter’ (OTC) market” where these bonds are bought and sold to get investors to buy the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae bonds at prices that were “artificially high.”

Fannie and Freddie are both government-backed mortgage-finance companies. They are typically known for converting mortgages into mortgage-backed securities. This investor fraud lawsuit, however, is focused on their unsecured bonds. The proposed class contends that investors purchased the bonds because they thought they were safe, liquid, low risk, and likely to make returns. Their complaint states that the plaintiffs and other investors had not expected the “overcharges and underpayments” that resulted because of the banks’ alleged collusion.

Philadelphia Sues Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and Other Big Banks, Alleges Municipal Bond Rigging

Published on: February 21, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is suing Bank of America (BAC), Goldman Sachs (GS), Citigroup (C), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), Barclays Plc (BAR), JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), and Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) for allegedly rigging rates for variable-rate demand obligations (VRDOs). Philadelphia had issued over $1.6B of these bonds.

VRDOs are tax-exempt municipal securities that can be redeemed by investors early because they are tendered to banks. The banks can then remarket the bonds to other investors while charging issuers a fee.

According to InvestmentNews, the city is looking to represent a number of hospitals, municipalities, and universities with its lawsuit. The complaint contends that the banks worked with each other to manipulate the VRDO rates in secret so they could make hundreds of millions of dollars in unearned fees. The alleged rigging occurred between 2/2008 and 6/2016. The collusion purportedly involved the banks agreeing not to compete against each other for re-marketing services.

U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals Invalidates PROMESA Board

Published on: February 18, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

On Friday, February 15, the First Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling on Judge Laura Swain’s prior decision that had affirmed the PROMESA Board as constitutional.

In a surprise finding, the Court of Appeals overruled Judge Swain, finding that the PROMESA Board members were not appropriately appointed.

The issue in dispute is whether the members of the PROMESA Board are required to receive the consent of the U.S. Senate. In particular, under PROMESA, President Obama appointed the seven members of the PROMESA Board by using a list of board members the U.S. Congress recommended. At the time, since all stakeholders appeared to have been given a vote in the appointment process, there was little objection to the PROMESA Board members. Then, in May 2017, the PROMESA Board placed Puerto Rico in a bankruptcy-like proceeding under Title III of the Act. Prior to the enactment of PROMESA, many investors – both retail and institutional – had relied on the fact that Puerto Rico could not file for Title 9 bankruptcy as insurance against ever receiving anything less than the par value of their bonds from Puerto Rico. PROMESA, with its Title III bankruptcy-like process, changed that insurance policy for many investors.

Recover Losses From Investing With Former Ameritas Investment Corp. Broker Kristian Gaudet

Published on: February 16, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Current Investigation: Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, LLP (“SSEK Law Firm”) is currently investigating claims on behalf of former clients of Kristian “Kris” Gaudet (“Gaudet”) of Cut Off, Louisiana.

In January 2019, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) barred Gaudet from association with any FINRA member. The result of such a bar is that FINRA has effectively kicked Gaudet out of the brokerage business permanently. Kristian Guadet was most recently associated with Ameritas Investment Corp. (“Ameritas”), and had worked for Ameritas’ brokerage firm and insurance arm since 2003. Prior to Ameritas, Mr. Gaudet worked for The Advisors Group and Princor Financial Services. In November 2018, FINRA opened an investigation of Mr. Gaudet based on “suspicions that Mr. Gaudet was involved in fraudulent activities.” Then, only a few weeks later, on December 10, 2018, Ameritas terminated Mr. Gaudet based on allegations from clients that Mr. Gaudet was “using client funds for personal use.” Even after the termination from Ameritas, FINRA continued with its investigation. Rather than defend the allegations, Gaudet refused to appear or provide any on-the-record testimony, instead consenting to a permanent bar from the securities industry.

While it is unusual for brokers to find ways to steal client funds or otherwise use client funds as their own, it sadly does still happen. More importantly, our firm’s experience is that long before a broker starts taking client funds directly, that broker does many other less obvious things to hurt his/her clients while trying to profit from those same clients. The act of theft is typically the last in a series of wrongdoing that often goes undetected for years from customers.

Investor Fraud: Former MML Investors Broker Who Sold $3.5M of Woodbridge Notes is Barred, Ex-Merrill Lynch Rep Gets 40-Month Prison Term for Defrauding Clients, and Barred UBS Broker is Sentenced in $3.7M Fraud

Published on: February 15, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Ex-Merrill Lynch Broker Will Pay $5M Penalty and Serve Time In Prison

A federal judge has sentenced Thomas Buck, an ex-Merrill Lynch broker, to 40 months in prison. Buck pleaded guilty to securities fraud in 2017. As part of his plea, he admitted to lying to Merrill about telling clients about their account options, and, at certain times, making trades for them without getting their approval.

That year, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had filed a complaint against Buck accusing him of making over $2.5M in excessive commissions and fees from more than four dozen clients. The SEC contends that Buck placed clients into accounts that charged them commissions instead of ones that were fee-based and not as costly. The regulator also accused him of making unauthorized trades. The Commission barred the former Merrill broker from the investment advisory and brokerage industries last year.

Investor Fraud: Quest Capital Strategies Must Pay Investor $276K in Woodbridge Ponzi Fraud, FINRA Warns Firms About Recommending Unsuitable 529 Plan Share Classes, and Ex-Ameritas Broker is Barred from the Securities Industry

Published on: January 31, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Investor Awarded $276K in Woodbridge Ponzi Fraud

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel has awarded more than $276K to an investor that lost money in the $1.2B Woodbridge Ponzi scam. The panel found that Quest Capital Strategies did not properly supervise former broker Frank Dietrich, who sold $400K of Woodbridge-sponsored mortgage notes to the investor.

According to InvestmentNews, Dietrich sold $10.8M of Woodbridge mortgage funds to 58 investors, making nearly $261K in commissions. He retired in March. In November, FINRA barred him after finding that the former broker did not obtain Quest’s approval to sell the notes.

Criminal Securities Fraud: Another Ex-Wilmington Trust Executive Gets His Prison Term, Former Rock Capital Trader in $13.7M Fake Profits Scam to Serve 5-Year Sentence, and Ex-NJ Financial Adviser Who Defrauded Customers Waits for Jury Verdict

Published on: January 29, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Ex-Wilmington Trust VP is Sentenced to 21-Months for Bank Fraud

A federal judge has sentenced Joseph Terranova, a Former Wilmington Trust Corp. VP and commercial real estate manager, to 21 months in prison. Terranova’s sentence comes almost five years after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank fraud related to a securities fraud that involved hiding from investors and regulators that commercial real estate loans that were past due.

Terranova is one of several Wilmington Trust executive to receive a sentence for the bank fraud, which involved fraudulent actions to hide hundreds of millions of dollars in delinquent loans. When the bank’s debt burden became public knowledge, it almost failed and was sold at a severely reduced price to M & T Bank Corp. in 2011. Meantime, bank stockholders sustained serious losses.

Texas Real Estate Developer Faces SEC Charges Over Alleged Multimillion-Dollar Ponzi Scam

Published on: January 28, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has filed fraud charges against Phillip Michael Carter, Bobby Eugene Guess, Richard Tilford, and several entities accusing them of operating a multi-million dollar offering fraud. The regulator contends that the three men raised nearly $45 million from more than 270 investors in the US through the sale of high-yield, short-term promissory notes that were touted to prospective buyers as low-risk.

According to the SEC, investors thought they were getting involved in actual real estate development companies but instead ended up buying securities from entities with no assets. Carter, who is the principal of North Forty Development LLC and Texas Cash Cow Investments, is accused of then misappropriating $1.2M in investor funds for his own expenses, including a personal IRS tax lien and to operate a luxury hunting ranch. He also allegedly made over $3M in Ponzi payments that were issued to investors.

Now, the defendants are accused of offering and selling unregistered securities, violating the Exchange Act and the Securities Act, and acting as unlicensed brokers. The entities that are relief defendants in the case include:

Royal Alliance and Former Broker Are Ordered to Pay $4.2M To Widow Who Was Victim of Investor Fraud

Published on: January 17, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) panel has found that ex-Royal Alliance Associates broker stole money from Cathy Carter, a 54-year-old widow suffering from a brain injury. Former broker Gary Basralian has already pleaded guilty to defrauding clients of at least $2M and using the funds on himself.

Now, FINRA has announced two awards holding Royal Alliance and its former broker liable for the fraud. The self-regulatory authority is ordering both of them to pay the widow $2.1M and $500K for legal fees each.

Basralian resigned from Royal Alliance in 2017. FINRA barred him from the securities industry last March.

Puerto Rico Oversight Board Seeks to Invalidate Over $6 Billion of General Obligation Bonds

Published on: January 15, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Oversight Management Board for Puerto Rico (the Board) is asking a federal district court judge to invalidate over $6 Billion in general obligation (GO) bonds by disallowing any claims brought by the bonds’ holders. The legal action, brought by the Board and the island’s unsecured creditors’ committee, focuses on GO debts that the U.S. territory sold in 2012 and 2014.

The Board and the committee contend that the debt at issue violates Puerto Rico’s Constitution, including the balanced budget clause as well as the debt service limit provision. According to Law360, both parties claim that previous administrations of the island’s government engaged in different “accounting gimmicks” to get around these provisions.

For example, the petitioners maintain that bonds issued through the Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority were an attempt to get around the 15% debt service limit when, in fact, the bonds should have been factored into that limit. If that had been done, the Board and committee are now arguing, then bonds issued after March 2012 should be rendered invalid and taken off the balance sheet of what the island owes.