Articles Posted in Financial Firms

For decades, telemarkers in “boiler rooms” have bilked the elderly by convincing touting them to buy investments which supposedly pay high rates of return or have fabulous growth potential.

Now thieves operating in small offices in Canada and warehouses in India work day and night targeting elderly Americans. Working from lists of names and phone numbers, they call War veterans, retired schoolteachers and thousands of other elderly Americans and posed as government and insurance workers updating their files.

Then, the criminals empty their victims’ bank accounts!

Last week, Citigroup Global Markets Inc. said it would pay a $200,000 fine to settle charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The charges are connected to Leg Mason Wood Walker Inc’s allegedly improper interference with auction rate securities. Citigroup is LMWW’s merger successor.

According to the SEC, the penalty amount was determined based on LMWW’s willingness to cooperate, the “relatively small share of the auction rate securities markets,” and LMWW’s decision to report the allegedly illegal practices at a later time than did other broker-dealers from an earlier settlement.

During that related case, 15 broker-dealers-Citigroup included-said they would pay penalties of over $13 million related to charges that they participated in violative practices affecting the $200 billion auction rate securities market.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed class action claims against Goldman Sachs & Co. stemming from two Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit–or REMIC–deals with Fannie Mae.

Judge Richard Leon said that the plaintiffs–Fannie Mae investors–-failed plead a case which involved “direct acts” of securities fraud by Goldman. (In a court system friendly to those accused of securities fraud, claims are not allowed for aiding and abetting Federal Securities violations and class action claims involving securities fraud can no longer be filed under state laws.)

However, this court’s decision does not prevent members of the former class action from now seeking their own claim against Goldman in court or arbitration. Clients of Goldman who purchased shares of Fannie Mae during this period would likely have the stronger claims. Such claims could include aiding and abetting, conspiracy and other claims under state laws which were not allowed in the class action. Fortunately, statutes of limitations on individual claims are usually preserved while a class action case is pending in court.

The NASD announced this week that it fined two Fidelity brokerage firms $400,000 for preparing and distributing misleading sales literature promoting Systematic Investment Plans, which were sold primarily to U.S. military personnel. Issuance and sales of new systematic investment plans after these were prohibited by Congress last fall.

The NASD found that between January 2003 and January 2006, the two firms violated NASD advertising rules by preparing and distributing misleading sales literature. From May 2003 through January 2006, the Fidelity firms prepared and distributed a brochure entitled “Time is Money” that included misleading performance claims about its “Destiny Plans”. According to “mountain charts” contained in the brochures, these plans significantly outperformed the S&P 500 Index over a 30-year period. Yet, during the most recent 10- and 15-year periods-the time frame most relevant to current and prospective investors – Destiny Plans substantially underperformed the S&P 500 Index.

The brochures also showed average annual total returns for 1, 5 and 10 years as well as the life of the Plan, without showing comparable returns for the S&P 500 Index. This also created the misleading impression that the plans outperformed the S&P 500 Index when instead that index significantly outperformed the plans.

In the wake of the collapse of the subprime residential mortgage market, the leading bond rating agencies are beginning to crack down on what they see as risky lending practices in commercial real estate as well.

Like residential loans, commercial mortgages are pooled and packaged into bonds that are sliced up into portions carrying different degrees of risk. According to Moody’s, there were $769.6 billion in commercial mortgage-backed securities at the end of last year, representing 26.1 percent of all outstanding commercial mortgages, including apartment buildings.

The agencies that rate these securities have issued warnings in the past, but last month they sounded a new note of urgency, saying that for the first time they would adjust their ratings to reflect their concerns.

An NASD Hearing Panel issued $100,000 in fines against Kenneth Pasternak, former CEO of Knight Securities, L.P. (now known as Knight Equity Markets, L.P.), and John Leighton, former head of the firm’s Institutional Sales Desk, for supervisory violations in connection with fraudulent sales to institutional customers in 1999 and 2000.

In addition, Pasternak was suspended in all supervisory capacities for two years, while Leighton was barred in all supervisory capacities.

In March 2005, NASD’s Department of Market Regulation charged Pasternak and Leighton with failure to supervise the firm’s leading institutional sales trader, Joseph Leighton, who is John Leighton’s brother. The NASD complaint also charged Pasternak with failing to establish and enforce a supervisory system designed to ensure compliance with federal securities laws and NASD rules.

USA Capital Mortgage Company, a Las Vegas company, filed for bankruptcy last year listing approximately three-quarters billion dollars in debts to creditors. Most of this is owed to investors who purchased mortgage trust deeds and/or unit trusts which contained trust deeds. Apparently there were a number of brokerage firms involved, with an office of Financial West Investment Group, a California Based securities firm, at the center of the controversy.

According to court documents filed by Financial West in Clark County, Nevada, hundreds of investors may have been defrauded by the sale of unsuitable securities, some victims of elder abuse. The documents allege that David M. Berkowitz, a former registered representative of Financial West, sold mortgage/trust deed securities issued by USA Capital Mortgage Company; USA Capital Realty Advisors, LLC; USA Capital Diversified Trust Deed Fund, LLC; USA Capital First Trust Deed Fund, LLC; and USA Securities, LLC. When the companies then filed for bankruptcy, some investors were left wondering what will happen to their life savings.

Berkowitz was permitted to resign from Financial West Group in July of 2006 amid an “investigation of sales practice violations related to the sales of first trust deeds and trust deed funds,” according to documents made available by the National Association of Securities Dealers. According to the NASD’s “BrokerCheck” Report, Mr. Berkowitz has sixteen customer disputes recorded, eleven of which are still pending, consisting of claims of unsuitable investment recommendations, failure to supervise, breach of fiduciary duty, churning, misrepresentation and breach of contract. In addition, NASD records show that at least ten customers have filed complaints against Berkowitz for his sales of USA Capital First Trust Deeds.

After the U.S. Supreme Court decided to let brokerage firms make customers sign arbitration agreements, a lot of people thought that this was a faster, less expensive alternative than letting investors take their claims to courts. Recently, however, what seemed like a good way to resolve disputes between brokers and investors has come under close scrutiny.

Certain regulators and lawmakers are now saying that the system needs to be reviewed. According to William Galvin, the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the arbitration side of disputes need to be fairer and not “stacked against” investors.

These kinds of concerns are taking on a new importance in the wake of the upcoming consolidation of the NYSE Group Inc.’s New York Stock Exchange and the National Association of Securities Dealers.

NYSE Regulation Inc. and the Securities and Exchange Commission say that a clearing affiliate and prime broker of Goldman Sachs Group will pay $2 million in fines and penalties over its alleged role in an illegal short-sale trading scheme that was executed by Goldman Sachs customers through their accounts with the brokerage. Goldman Sachs Execution and Clearing, LP has not admitted to or denied any wrongdoing by agreeing to the censure. They are, however, agreeing to cease and desist from future violations.

The SEC charges that firm customers unlawfully sold securities short right before public offerings of the companies’ securities. It is accusing Goldman of violating the rules that mandate that brokers must mark sales short or long, while restricting stock loans on long sales. Both NYSER and SEC say that if Goldman had proper procedures in place, it would have discovered via its own records this illegal activity by its customers. Two Goldman customers have already settled SEC charges connected to their alleged participation in these activities.

SEC Chairman Christopher Cox told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the day of this announcement that the commission and its senior staff members are very concerned about abusive naked short-selling. He admitted that Regulation SHO had not properly addressed these issues and that the commission will now eliminate the regulation’s grandfather provision. Cox said that naked short-selling was connected to settlement and clearance systems and that the SEC would use technology to further deal with this issue. He said the action against Goldman was important.

The NASD is charging Albert Lowenthal, Oppenheimer & Co.’s CEO, with knowingly turning in data that was not complete or accurate when it responded to the self-regulatory agency’s request that the brokerage firm assess its own practices pertaining to mutual fund breakpoint discounts. This latest complaint stems from a report issued in 2003 by NASD and other regulators that demonstrated how almost one in three mutual fund transactions in front-end load mutual funds did not get a breakpoint discount even though they looked to be eligible for one.

Because of this, NASD told about 2,000 brokerage firms that sold front-end load mutual funds during the two years previous to perform their own assessment of self-compliance regarding related requirements and report their findings. Oppenheimer (OPY) was one of the broker-dealers that got this request.

The breakpoint sweep led to investors getting over $130 million back. These are breakpoint discounts they should have received previously.

Contact Information