FINRA

Morgan Keegan Ordered by FINRA Panel to Pay Investor $2.5 Million for Bond Fund Losses

Published on: February 23, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority panel has ordered Morgan Keegan & Co. to pay investor Andrew Stein $2.5 million because the bond funds that he invested in had bet poorly on mortgage-related holdings. Panel members found Morgan Keegan liable for failure to supervise, negligence, and for selling investments that were unsuitable for Stein and his companies. The claimants, who sustained financial losses, had initially sought $12 million.

Stein’s arbitration claim is just one of over 400 securities claims that have been filed against Morgan Keegan over its bond funds that had invested in subprime-related securities, such as CDO’s (collateralized debt obligations). When the US housing market collapsed, the funds went down in value by up to 82%.

Stein contends that Morgan Keegan did not reveal the kinds of risks involved in investing in the bond funds. He and his companies claim that Morgan Keegan artificially increased the fund assets’ value so that the funds would appear more stable and investors wouldn’t be able to see the actual risks involved.

FINRA Fines H & R Block Financial Advisors (Now Ameriprise Advisor Services) over Sales of Reverse Convertible Notes (RCN)

Published on: February 17, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has fined H&R Block Financial Advisors (now Ameriprise Advisor Services) $200,000 for failing to put in place the proper system to supervise its reverse convertible notes (RCN) sales to retail clients. FINRA also suspended H & R broker Andrew MacGill for 15 days while ordering him to pay a $10,000 fine and $2,023 in disgorgement for making unsuitable RNC sales to a retired couple. MacGill recommended that they invest close to 40% of their total liquid net worth in RCNs. Meantime, H & R Block has been ordered to pay the couple $75,000 in restitution for their financial losses. Without denying or admitting to the charges, the brokerage firm and MacGill consented to the finding’s entry.

According to FINRA, between January 2004 and December 2007, H&R Block sold RCNs without a system of procedures in place to properly monitor whether possible over-concentrations in RCNs were taking place in customer accounts. FINRA says that the brokerage firm relied on an automated surveillance system to monitor client accounts and review securities transactions for unsuitability but that the system was not set up to monitor RCN placement in customer accounts or RCN transactions. This caused H & R Block to miss signs of when there were potentially unsuitable levels of RCN in client accounts. Furthermore, FINRA says that the firm failed to provide guidance to its supervisors regarding the assessment of suitability standards related to their agents’ recommendation of RCNs to the firm’s clients.

This is FINRA’s first enforcement action over RCN sales.

FINRA to Assess Amerivet Securities Inc. Allegations that Certain SRO Executives Received Excessive Pay in 2008

Published on: February 9, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

At a closed-door meeting scheduled for February 10, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority board of governors will preside over a closed-door meeting to assess allegations made by Amerivet Securities Inc. that certain FINRA executives, including chief executive Mary Schapiro, received excessive pay. The brokerage firm submitted a letter to the board last year demanding that action be taken to recover this compensation, as well as the SRO’s unprecedented portfolio losses” in 2008.

A release, filed by Amerivet’s securities litigation lawyers, alleged that in 2008, under Shapiro’s leadership, FINRA failed to warn investors about auction-rate securities risks, paid senior FINRA executives close to $30 million, failed to discover that R. Allen Stanford and Bernard Madoff were engaged in Ponzi scams, and sustained close to $700 million in losses.

FINRA Executives’ Pay

Schapiro was paid $3.3 million in bonuses and salaries in 2008. Per her accumulated retirement plan benefits, She also received approximately $7.2 million.

Another 12 current and ex-FINRA executives made over $1 million in 2008, including ex-chief administrative officer Michael D. Jones, who received $4.3 million in severance, compensation, and accumulated benefits after over 10 years at the SRO. Elisse Walters, now with the SEC, was paid $3.8 million ($2.4 million was supplemental retirement benefits), and Douglas Schulman, now with the IRS, was paid $2.7 million in salary, retirement benefits, and bonuses after over eight years of service.

FINRA has called Amerivet’s statements “part of an ongoing publicity campaign” involving a counsel and a party who have been in “litigation with FINRA.”

Related Web Resources:
Finra execs overpaid? The board wants to know, Investment News, February 20, 2010
FINRA

FINRA Board of Governors
Continue Reading ›

Number of FINRA Arbitration Claims Rose in 2009 Following Market Crisis

Published on: January 13, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to FINRA dispute resolution president Linda Fienberg, the market turmoil of the last two years has led to an increase in the number of arbitration cases filed, as well as a change in the the kinds of claims that are submitted. Fienberg made her statements before the DC bar.

7,134 arbitration files were submitted last year-a definite increase from the 4,982 arbitration cases filed the year before and the 3,238 arbitration cases submitted in 2007. Fienberg said that the number of cases filed goes up when stock prices go down. For example, when the dotcom bubble burst, nearly 9,000 arbitration claims were submitted in 2003.

Fienberg told the group that in the wake of the auction-rate securities crisis, more large corporations filed claims over frozen assets last year. The last two years also saw an increase in claims over mutual funds, making this type of fund the most common security cited in arbitration cases.

SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Ordered to Pay $4.1 Million to Former Institutional Salesperson for Alleged Defamation and Wrongful Termination

Published on: January 7, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A FINRA arbitration panel is ordering SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. to pay $4.1 million to a former institutional salesperson who claims he was defamed in a regulatory filing and wrongfully terminated. SunTrust Robinson Humphrey is the corporate and investment bank services unit of SunTrust Banks, Inc.

Lance B. Beck, who worked for the company 19 years and sold debt securities, claims he was slated to gross more than $3 million when, following the auction-rate securities market collapse, he was let go. According to a regulatory filing for the former institutional salesman, his case against his former employer involves a $2.9 million ARS transaction with a institutional customer. SunTrust later decided to repurchase the securities.

Beck is accusing SunTrust of making disclosures on his Form U5 that were “devastating,” and prevented him from getting hired by other companies or take his book of business with him. Beck wanted certain language in the form, which brokerage firms have to submit to regulators when a broker leaves the company, expunged.

Even as FINRA Lost $696.3 Million in 2008, its Executives Made Millions

Published on: December 7, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Last year, 13 current and ex- Financial Industry Regulatory executives made over $1 million each, even as the regulatory organization posted a $696.3 million loss ($439 million in investment losses). Compensation included salary, retirement plan awards, and bonuses. This data, reported in Investment News, is found in FINRA’s latest tax reforms and annual report. Among the executives who received such hefty compensation in 2008:

• Michael D. Jones, former FINRA chief administrative officer: $4.43 million
• Mary Schapiro, now Former FINRA chief executive officer and now SEC Chairman: $3.3 million and $7.2 million for accumulated retirement benefits
• Elisse Walter, SEC commissioner: $3.8 million
• Douglas Shulman, who left the SEC in March 2008 to become Internal Revenue Service Commissioner: $2.7 million
• Susan Merrill, FINRA enforcement chief: Over $1 million

• Grace Vogel, FINRA member regulation’s executive vice president: Over $ 1 million
All employee compensation packages over $1 million was approved by FINRA’s management compensation committee.

FINRA’s compensation and benefits costs for its 2,800 employees went up 21.4% ($541.7 million) in (2008 from 2007) due to $30.3 million in benefit costs (including severance) from a larger retiree medical and savings plan and a voluntary retirement savings program. Also in 2008, another 400 employees joined FINRA’s payroll because of the company’s merger with NYSE Regulation.

Robert Ketchum, FINRA’s new chief executive , says that like everyone else, the SRO took a serious financial hit because of the credit crisis.

However, according to Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LTD LLP founder and securities fraud lawyer William Shepherd: “This is yet another chapter in the saga of ‘Who regulates the regulators?’ But first, you should know that FINRA is no ‘authority’ at all. Instead it is a non-profit corporation owned by each and every securities firm that it regulates! How many of us are regulated by an ‘authority’ that we literally own? This also means that just before she became Chairman of the SEC, Mary Schapiro received $10 million that was mostly tax deferred as a parting gift from all the securities dealers! Now there’s a real incentive to be tough on Wall Street! Oh, and did I mention that FINRA runs its own ‘court system’ for anyone that wants to sue a broker or securities firm? Sometimes I feel like I live in Oz.”

Related Web Resources:
Finra execs pocketed millions in ’08, while SRO was in the red, Investment News, December 3, 2009
FINRA
Continue Reading ›

Citigroup ordered to pay $600,000 FINRA fine for inadequate supervision that may have allowed foreign clients to avoid paying taxes on dividends

Published on: October 12, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Citigroup, Inc. has agreed to pay a $600,000 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority fine to settle claims that its alleged inadequate supervision of certain derivative transactions between 2002 and 2005 allowed a number of foreign clients to avoid paying taxes on dividends.

The way this allegedly worked is that during a period of dividend payments, the customer would sell stock to Citigroup. The bank would pay the client an income equal to the dividend. It would also pay any share price increase.

FINRA is accusing Citigroup of failing to control trades and failing to prevent improper trades, both internally and with trading partners. The dividend equivalent that certain foreign Citigroup clients obtained was not considered subject to withholding taxes. Citigroup’s strategy was allegedly intended to lower its tax bill.

SEC, NASD, FINRA & SIPC: New SEC Report Card on Madoff Catastrophy Further Reveals How Investor Protection Is Severely Flawed!

Published on: September 3, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A new report by the Inspector General at the Securities Exchange Commission recounts 16-years of failures at the SEC which led to the financial crime of the century perpetrated by Bernard Madoff and his firm. The report states that the agency “never properly examined or investigated Madoff’s trading and never took the necessary, but basic, steps to determine if Madoff was operating a Ponzi scheme.”

The IG confirms that the SEC failed to heed direct warnings and warning signs as early as 1992 which “could have uncovered the Ponzi scheme well before Madoff confessed” to the $50 billion fraud, leading to his 150 year prison sentence.

Critics of cecurities regulators and the securities regulatory system have for years complained that the system is not only inept but perhaps corrupt. Accusations have included that regulators overlook wrongdoing by Wall Street insiders while “rounding up the usual suspects” to appear as if they are doing their jobs. Madoff may be the poster child for this theory.

Brokerage Firm Amerivet Securities Inc. Sues FINRA for Alleged Misconduct

Published on: August 26, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Amerivet Securities Inc. has filed a complaint suing the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. The brokerage firm wants to figure out whether the self-regulatory organization’s failed to regulate large financial institutions and took part in “reckless” investment strategies. In the District of Columbia superior court, Amerivet Securities argued that it needed access to the SRO’s records and books to determine whether misconduct did occur, resulting in investment losses last year and certain executive compensation practices within FINRA. In a letter dated July 31, FINRA refused to turn over the documents.

Amerivet says that between 2005 and 2008 FINRA failed to supervise and regulate Lehman Bros. Inc., Bear Stearns & Co., Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Stanford Financial Group, Sky Capital Holdings LLC., and its other larger member firms. The brokerage firm is also accusing FINRA of recklessly pursuing investment strategies that were extremely risky and not appropriate for the “preservation of capital.” The SRO’s purchase of $862 million in auction-rate securities was one risky venture that the plaintiff cited as an example. In 2008, FINRA reported losses the equivalent of 26.5% of its investment portfolio-that’s $568 million.

Amerivet says it believes that FINRA invested with Bernard Madoff and either suffered losses or may have “clawback” claims related to their investments with him. The plaintiff says that if FINRA had been doing its job properly, the SRO would have exposed and stopped Madoff’s ponzi scam rather than becoming one of its victims.

Amerivet says that FINRA, like NASD, overpays its senior executives. For example, after NASD and NYSE Regulation Inc. merged to become FINRA in 2007, NASD chairperson Mary Schapiro’s income allegedly increased by 57%.

Amerivet made its claim per Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.

Amerivet Complaint Against FINRA Alleges Madoff Investment, NoQuarterUSA.net, August 25, 2009
Read the Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

FINRA Says Number of Stockbroker Fraud Arbitration Claims by Plaintiffs is Rising

Published on: July 14, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the amount of investor fraud claims alleging securities fraud and other violations has grown. From January to May 2009, investors filed 3,163 stockbroker fraud claims-an 85% increase from the 1,711 stockbroker fraud arbitration claims that were filed for the same period in 2008.

More investors have filed arbitration complaints since the demise of the sub-prime mortgage market in 2007. About 7,000 investment fraud claims are expected to be filed in 2009-compare this figure to the 4,982 arbitration claims in 2007 and the 2,238 securities fraud arbitration claims in 2007. In 1,718 of the arbitration cases filed through May 2009, breach of fiduciary was the most common complaint.

Also, more investors with arbitration claims are emerging victorious. This may be in part due to new rules by the Securities and Exchange Commission that limits a defendant’s ability to file a dismissal motion. For the first five months of this year, arbitration panels issued rulings in favor of investors in 47% of arbitration claims-compared to 42% of the time during the same time period in 2008.

However, Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas LTD LLP founder and Stockbroker Fraud Attorney William Shepherd says, “Considering there are about 60 million investors in the U.S., it is actually surprising that so few seek recovery. Approximately 1 in 10,000 investors file claims, but I believe at least 1 in 1,000 investors is cheated. Thus, 90% of valid claims are never filed. Claims involving money lost gambling in the market or over honest but bad advice do not succeed. Valid claims include those for fraud, misrepresentation, unsuitable investments, failure to disclose risks, or even for negligence.”

Related Web Resources:
Investor Arbitration Claims Sharply Up, Law.com
FINRA
Continue Reading ›