LPL Financial

Financial Representative News: Ex-LPL Financial Broker Gets Suspension and Fine & Former Ex-GL Capital Partners CEO is Sentenced to Prison

Published on: June 30, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Ex-LPL Financial Supervisor Settles with FINRA

Peter Neuberg, a former LPL Financial (LPLA) supervisor and broker, will pay a $15K fine and serve a six-month suspension to settle claims accusing him of not reasonably supervising a registered representative. According to an enforcement document signed by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Neuberg stopped looking at paperwork that the representative prepared. This made it possible for the broker to modify documents about customer accounts and reuse signatures from forms that had been completed. Neuberg is settling without admitting or denying FINRA’s findings.

The purported supervisory failures would have taken place from September ’11 to June ’12. The broker, whom Neuberg supervised, falsified documents to expedite transactions to accommodate certain customers. Neuberg is accused of not properly training the broker.

Ex-GL Capital Partners CEO Gets Nine Years in Prison

In other news, Daniel Thibeault, the former CEO of GL Capital Partners, is sentenced to nine years behind bars for misappropriating at least $15M. He must pay $15.3M in restitution for the criminal charges. He also is contending with civil charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Wells Fargo to Pay UBS $1M Over Broker Departure

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

A FINRA arbitration panel has ordered Wells Fargo Advisors LLC (WFC) to pay UBS Financial Services Inc. $1.1M to resolve a claim involving financial adviser David Kinnear who went to work for the Wells Fargo & Co. brokerage arm after leaving the UBS Group AG (UBS) unit. UBS claims that Kinnear stole thousands of client and business records, as well as proprietary information, after resigning from the firm.

The Wall Street Journal reports that according to a source, Kinnear downloaded the data and distributed it to clients. UBS contends that the compensation Kinnear received at Wells Fargo was related to his ability to successfully bring UBS clients with him. UBS also claims that Kinnear owes it promissory notes.

Wells Fargo denies UBS’s allegations. It submitted a counterclaim accusing the firm of unfair completion, including preventing clients from moving from UBS to Wells Forgo.

Under the Protocol for Broker Recruiting, brokers are only allowed to bring the names and contact information of clients that they serviced while having worked at a firm when moving to another brokerage firm.

LPL Subject to Lawsuits In the Wake of Stock Drop

Published on: April 27, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A number of lawsuits have been brought against LPL Financial (LPLA) after its stock price fell. There is the securities case brought by the Charter Township of Clinton Police and Fire Retirement System, which is a Michigan pension fund. Also, in New York last March, a number of lawyers filed a shareholder lawsuit.

Both securities cases want damages that shareholders of record would have sustained between 12/8/15 and 2/11/16. A major allegation is that LPL misled investors to raise its stock price while putting through a $250M share buyback plan that benefited one private equity investor.

According to the Michigan pension fund, LPL CFO Matthew Audette and LPL CEO Mark Casady took part in a scam to let private equity investment firm TPG Capital sell LPL shares at a price that was artificially inflated. The NY shareholder lawsuit is accusing the independent brokerage firm of issuing statements that were materially false and misleading to investors and not disclosing that its clients’ assets and gross profits were becoming weaker.

Addressing the allegation, Casady downplayed the share buyback program’s timing and execution that allowed the private equity investor to sell 4.3M million stock shares back to the firm soon before the shares, as described by InvestmentNews, “went into a tailspin.” He said the stock buyback happened under a set of expectations that was reasonable.

Michigan Pension Plan Sues LPL Financial for $115M

Published on: March 24, 2016 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Charter Township of Clinton Police and Fire Retirement System is suing LPL Financial Holdings Inc. (LPLA) for $115M. In the class action securities case, the plaintiff contends that a stock buyback program cost the firm and its shareholders that amount.

Company shares closed trading at $42.91 on October 29 when LPL announced the $500M program. Less than two months later, its stock began to drop in price. The stock was trading at $25.08/share yesterday morning.

The program was supposed to improve shareholder value. The following month, LPL said it had entered into $700M of new term loans while extending $631M of existing debt to pay for the share repurchase plan. Then, in December, the company said it had arrived at an early completion of the plan.

LPL Financial to Pay $750K in Nontraded REIT Case Involving Elderly Investor in New Hampshire

Published on: December 15, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

New Hampshire’s Bureau of Securities Regulation says that LPL Financial has consented to pay $750,000 to resolve charges involving the sale of nontraded real estate investment trusts to an elderly investor. The state says that transactions were not only unlawful but also they were suitable for the 81-year-old customer.

The state says that the sale of the nontraded REITs were unsupervised, causing the investor to sustain substantial losses in 2008. Aside from the $750K, which includes $250K to the bureau, $250K in administrative fees, and $250K to the investor education fund, LPL will offer remediation to any client in New Hampshire that bought a nontraded REIT through the firm since 2007 if the sale did not meet the firm’s product-specific limitations or guidelines.

Nontraded REITS
Nontraded REITs can be high-risk investments. They are liquid and may come with substantial front-end fees of up to 15%. Distributions are not guaranteed and are determined by the alternative investments’ board of directors. REITs are not traded on exchanges and there is a limited secondary market for them, which can make them difficult for investors to sell.
Continue Reading ›

LPL to Pay $3.2M Over Nontraded REIT and ETF Sales

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

LPL Financial (LPLA) has agreed to pay 3.2 million fine to settle penalties related to its sale of nontraded real estate investment trusts and leveraged exchange-traded funds. The settlements were reached with the Non-Traded REIT Task Force of the North American Securities Administrators Association and regulators in Massachusetts and Delaware. The firm sold the REITs at issue for six years beginning in 2008.

Under the agreement, LPL will pay $1.425 million in civil penalties for its purported failures to put into place a supervisory system that was adequate enough to handle its nontraded REIT sales and enforce written procedures related illiquid trust sales. The money will be divvied up between the District of Columbia, 48 states, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. By settling with NASAA, LPL is not denying or admitting wrongdoing.

Also, the Delaware Attorney General and the Massachusetts Attorney General have arrived at their own settlements with LPL’s Boston arm. The firm consented to pay $1.8 million for putting about 200 clients from Massachusetts in high-risk leveraged ETFs. The broker-dealer and Massachusetts had come to an earlier settlement about nontraded REIT sales two years ago.
Continue Reading ›

LPL Financial Fined $250K by Massachusetts Over Misrepresentations Made to Senior Investors

Published on: July 14, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin has fined LPL Financial (LPLA) $250K to resolve charges that its representatives misrepresented their qualifications when working with older investors. The state’s regulator claims that the brokerage firm approved having brokers use senior-specific titles on their business cards. The titles were not in compliance with the state’s regulations regarding senior designations.

After Galvin’s office discovered one such incident, LPL conducted an internal probe and discovered that at least 10 brokers may have been using titles that were not in compliance with the state’s Senior Designations Regulations. The regulator said that the firm had even approved the title on one broker’s business card more than once.

Galvin contends that since June 2007, LPL failed to establish or enforce a procedure allowing it to look at senior-specific titles to make sure they complied. He noted the importance of not using titles that imply one has an expertise in advising senior investors when there is none. The Senior Designations Regulations prohibit the use of titles that imply a training or certification that the titleholder doesn’t actually possess.
Continue Reading ›

Wells Fargo, LPL Financial, and Raymond James to Pay Investors of Retirement Accounts and Charities Over $30M for Mutual Fund Overcharges

Published on: July 6, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority said that LPL Financial, LLC (LPLA), Raymond James & Associates (RJF), Raymond James Financial Services, Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (WFC), and Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, LLC must pay over $30M in restitution plus interest to customers who were impacted when the firms did not waive mutual fund sales charges for certain retirement and charitable accounts. According to the self-regulatory organization, between July 2009 and the end of 2014 the financial firms either improperly overcharged certain investors who had purchased Class A mutual fund shares or sold them Class B or C shares instead. The latter two come with ongoing, high back-end fees.

Mutual funds typically offer different share classes for sale. Each class has its own sales fees and charges. Although Class A shares come with an initial sales charge, they usually have lower annual fees than Class B and C shares. However, mutual funds will usually waive Class A sales charges when selling them to charities and some retirement accounts.

The broker-dealers offered these waivers for the retirement and charitable plan accounts under limited conditions. The waivers also were disclosed in prospectuses. Yet, according to FINRA, at various times since at least July 2009, the firms did not actually waive the sales charges for these customers when they were offered the Class A shares.

Because of this, contends the agency, over 50,000 eligible retirement accounts and charitable organizations either paid sales charges for the Class A shares or bought other share classes that required them to pay higher ongoing fees and other expenses. FINRA said that the firms did not properly supervise the sale of these mutual funds and depended on its brokers to offer the waiver discounts even though they weren’t properly trained.

LPL Financial to Pay $11.7M Fine for Supervisory Failures

Published on: May 6, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. said that LPL Financial (LPLA) must pay $11.7M in fines and restitution for widespread supervisory failures involving complex products sales. The self-regulatory organization said that from 2007 up to last month, the firm did not properly supervise certain exchange-traded funds, nontraded real estate investment trusts, and variable annuities. It also did not properly deliver over 14 million trade confirmations to customers and failed to properly supervise communications, including advertising, as well as the consolidated reports used by brokers.

According to the Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent, To grow LPL, its wholly-owned brokerage firm subsidiary, LPL Financial Holdings Inc. employed a strategy that included acquiring financial services firms, consolidating them with the broker-dealer, and bringing in more registered representatives. Unfortunately, said the SRO, the firm failed to dedicate enough resources to allow LPL to fulfill its supervisory duties.

As just one example, LPL did not have a system for either monitoring the duration of time customers held securities in accounts or enforcing concentration limits on complex products. Its system for reviewing trading activities in accounts had numerous deficiencies. Also, LPL did not submit trade confirmations in over 67,000 customer accounts.

LPL Financial Should Pay $3.6M in Fines, Repayments for REIT Sales to Older Investors, Says NH Regulator

Published on: April 7, 2015 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation wants LPL Financial (LPLA) to pay clients $2.4 million in buybacks and restitution for 48 sales of nontraded real estate investment trusts that were purportedly unsuitable for elderly investors. The regulator, which says the firm did not properly supervise its agents, is also fining LPL $1 million plus $200,000 in investigative expenses.

The securities case springs from transactions involving an 81-year-old state resident that purchased a nontraded REIT from the firm in 2008. The investor, whose liquid net worth was $2.5 million and invested $253,000 in the financial instrument, would go on to lose a significant amount of money. A probe ensued.

The state regulator contends that the 48 REIT sales, totaling $2.4 million lead to concentration that went beyond LPL guidelines and that the firm sold hundreds of nontraded REITs to clients in New Hampshire on the basis of “clearly erroneous “client financial data, while frequently violating its own policies. LPL has reportedly admitted that 10 of the 48 transactions deemed unlawful by the state were unsuitable according to its own guidelines. The Securities Bureau wants to take away the firm’s license to sell securities in New Hampshire.