Articles Posted in Financial Firms

Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BK) has agreed to pay $714 million to settle claims that it bilked pension funds and others by overcharging for currency transactions. The settlements resolve cases by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, as well as both private cases and probes by the U.S. Department of Labor and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The lawsuits involve the bank’s “standing instruction” for its foreign exchange program: Clients are supposed to let the bank unilaterally deal with foreign-exchange transactions.

The bank admitted that it notified certain clients that it was determined to obtain them the best rates possible even as the firm gave them the ones that were among the worst interbank rates. The bank had previously denied the claims because the lawsuits were submitted in 2011, not agreeing until the following year to modify pricing disclosures. In February, Bank of New York Mellon said it would modify 4tth quarter results to make room for a $598 million litigation cost as it was getting ready to resolve certain claims, including those involving foreign exchange.

Adam Nash, the CEO of Wealthfront, claims that Charles Schwab & Co. (SCHW) is deceiving investors by claiming that Intelligent Portfolios, its automated investing platform, is free. Nash, whose company competes with Schwab’s new service, contends that the platform will cost consumers thousands of dollars in opportunity expenses involving expensive “smart beta” exchange-traded funds and high cash allocations. These costs, he argues, are concealed in disclosure documents.

Intelligent Portfolios lets consumers manage, rebalance, and oversee their portfolios through the Internet. The program allows investors to evaluate their goals and risk tolerances using specific questions. Investors must have at least $5,000 and they would get recommendations based on their responses.

Algorithms are supposed to help clients build and maintain their portfolios in low cost ETFs with asset classes of up to 20. Intelligent Portfolios joins Wealthfront and Betterment in the robo-field for automated investing.

A panel of U.S. Judges says that Charles Schwab & Co. (SCHW) must face a lawsuit brought by Northstar Financial Advisors Inc. The investment advisory firm claims that Schwab invested the assets of a bond-index fund in high-risk mortgage debt prior to the financial crisis. The plaintiff is proposing that this case be a class action securities claim, which could include investors who have owned the fund since 2007. In particular, notes Northstar Financial Advisors Inc., the Schwab Total Bond Market Fund (SWLBX) placed lots of risky debt into the fund, resulting in losses of tens of millions of dollars, as well as underperformance against its benchmark.

Reuters reports that the plaintiffs claim that because Schwab invested over 25% of assets in non-agency mortgage securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, the firm’s portfolio managers disregarded the fundamental investment objectives of the fund to track the Lehman Brothers U.S. Aggregate Bond Index and stay away from industry bets. Because of this, they argued, the fund lagged its benchmark from 9/1/07 to 2/27/09, suffering a 4.80% loss while the index posted a 7.85% positive total return.

Northstar Financial Advisors Inc. filed its securities case in 2008 but the complaint was mired in procedural matters until now. This latest appeal was argued in 2013 in front of three federal judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Their decision, finally—albeit nearly two years later—reinstates the breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and other claims.

The 31 biggest banks in the U.S. all passed the first phase of the Federal Reserve’s stress test. This is the first time since the tests have been conducted on banks with over $50 billion in assets that all of them stayed above capital requirements.

Banks have been building their capital reserves, based on tougher Fed requirements, to protect against any losses. Included among the firms that did well are Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and Goldman Sachs (GS).

Based on the results thus far, the Federal Reserve said the big U.S. banks are healthy enough to keep lending if there were to be a serious recession, even if corporate debt markets failed, housing and stock prices dropped, and unemployment were to reach 10%.

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.

Morgan Stanley (MS) has reached an agreement in principal with the U.S. Department of Justice to resolve claims related to its sale of mortgage bonds. The government probe looked into allegations that the financial firm misrepresented the quality of home loans that were packaged into bonds.

The broker-dealer, however, still needs to negotiate with the DOJ about other terms, including what would be included in a signed statement of facts. The settlement doesn’t resolve probes by state litigators.

Morgan Stanley’s financial agreement is much smaller than what other firms have paid when settling with the Justice Department. Citigroup Inc. (C) paid $7 billion, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) paid $13 billion, and Bank of America Corp. (BAC) paid $16.65 billion.

UBS Group AG (UBS) is under scrutiny over losses related to its V10 Enhanced FX Carry Strategy. The complex financial product was sold to fund managers, businesses, and individual investors and touted as a high-yielding foreign-exchange investment that employed computer algorithms to reduce risks during volatile times.

Unfortunately, according to Bloomberg, in 2010 during the start of the debt crisis, the index to which the notes were tied lost 26% over two years. Now, sources tell Bloomberg, the U.S. Department of Justice is looking at whether traders shortchanged investors by charging them too much for executing the currency trades for the strategy.

The V10 Enhanced FX Carry Strategy created sales commissions while offering an opportunity to profit from these sales and purchases of underlying currencies. Investors bought notes tied to the V10 index, which is calculated by ranking currencies from the Group of 10 nations daily according to one-month interest rates. UBS would then bet on the three highest-yielding currencies advancing and the three lowest declining. During a rise in volatility over a predetermined level, positions would be switched. Now, investigators with the DOJ are looking at instant messages, talking to traders, and examining documents issued to customers to figure out whether UBS represented how much profit it was taking on the trades.

New information regarding HSBC Holdings PLC’s (HSBC) history of aiding tax evaders has been released by ex-employee Hervé Falciani to a number of media outlet, as well as the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. The data alleges that the bank kept secret accounts for a number of wealthy, celebrity, and/or unsavory individuals, including “dictators and arms dealers,” as well as clients that are on U.S. sanctions lists. HSBC also purportedly would advise clients on how to get around paying taxes in their home countries.

Falciani, an HSBC computer analyst who calls himself a whistleblower, has provided what the BBC is calling the largest data leak in the history of banking. He started sending information out in 2008, copying files onto personal storage devices. The information was sent to French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, who now runs the International Monetary Fund. She notified other governments.

Falciani claims that in 2006,he notified his superiors at HSBC that there were flaws in data storage that could hurt client confidentiality. He said that no one paid attention. Bank officials, however, counter that Falciani issued no such warnings.

SEC Commissioners Luis Aguilar and Kara Stein, both Democrats, say that they were among those that voted to grant Oppenheimer & Co. (OPY) special benefits even after the brokerage firm committed rules violations. It was just last month that the broker-dealer consented to pay a $20 million penalty while admitting to failures and resolving charges related to its failure to detect money laundering.

In that case, also settle with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the firm did not properly identify and report suspicious penny stock trades, even though numerous Oppenheimer customers reportedly were involved in such activities. The broker-dealer admitted that it failed to establish a suitable anti-money laundering program and did not perform proper due diligence on a foreign correspondent account.

Yet, the regulator overturned the automatic disqualification that should have come with the violation. That happened when SEC Chairman Mary Jo White and the other two members (both Republicans) outvoted the Democratic member. Now, Oppenheimer is allowed to continue selling hedge funds to rich individuals. As part of the condition for the leniency, the broker-dealer will retain a law firm and consultant to make sure that its procedures and policies fall in compliance.

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.

Contact Information