J P Morgan - Chase Category Archives — Page 4 of 5 — Investor Lawyers Blog Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys

UBS, JP Morgan, Lehman, Bank of America, and Other Banks Included on List of Co-Conspirators in CDR Bid-Rigging Scam

Published on: March 31, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Over two dozen bankers at Wall Street investment firms have been listed as co-conspirators in a bid-rigging scheme to pay lower than market interest rates to the federal and state governments over guaranteed investment contracts. The banks named as co-conspirators include JP Morgan Chase & Co, UBS AG, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Bear Stearns Cos., Bank of America Corp, Societe General, Wachovia Corp (bought by Wells Fargo), former Citigroup Inc. unit Salomon Smith Barney, and two General Electric financial businesses.

The investment banks were named in papers filed by the lawyers of a former CDR Financial Products Inc. employee. The attorneys for the advisory firm say that they “inadvertedly” included the list of bankers and individuals and asked the court to strike the exhibit that contains the list. The firms and individuals on the co-conspirators list are not charged with any wrongdoing. However, over a dozen financial firms are contending with securities fraud complaints filed by municipalities claiming conspiracy was involved.

The government says that CDR, a local-government adviser, ran auctions that were scams. This let banks pay lower interests to the local governments. In October, CDR, and executives David Rubin, Evan Zarefsky, and Zevi Wolmark were indicted. They denied any wrongdoing. This year, three other former DCR employees pleaded guilty.

While the original indictments didn’t identify any investment contract sellers that took part in the alleged conspiracy, Providers A and B were accused of paying kickbacks to CDR after winning investment deals that the firm had brokered. The firms were able to do this by allegedly paying sham fees connected to financial transactions involving other companies.

Per the court documents filed in March, the kickbacks were paid out of fees that came out of transactions entered into with Royal Bank of Canada and UBS. The US Justice Department says the kickbacks ranged from $4,500 to $475,000. Financial Security Assurance Holdings Ltd divisions and GE units created the investment contracts that were involved.

Approximately $400 billion in municipal bonds are issued annually. Schools, cities, and states use money they get from the sale of these bonds to buy guaranteed investment contracts. Localities use the contracts to earn a return on some of the funds until they are needed for certain projects. The IRS, which sometimes makes money on the investments, requires that they are awarded on the basis of competitive bidding to make sure that the government gets a fair return.

Related Web Resources:
JPMorgan, Lehman, UBS Named in Bid-Rigging Conspiracy, Business Week, March 26, 2010
U.S. Probe Lays Out Bid Fixing, Bond Buyer, March 29, 2010
Read the letter to District Judge Marrero (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

SEC Says It Has Jurisdiction to Go After Ex-JP Morgan Executives For Securities Fraud

Published on: February 28, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has countered the motion to dismiss its securities fraud case against two former JP Morgan Chase (JPM) executives. The SEC had charged defendants Douglas MacFaddin and Charles LeCroy with paying the friends of Jefferson County, Alabama commissioners $8.2 million to garner $5 billion in business for JP Morgan Chase. The two men filed motions to dismiss on the grounds that swap agreements are not “securities-based swap agreements,” which means they aren’t under the SEC’s jurisdiction and therefore not subject to its enforcement.

However, the SEC’s brief argues that the defendants’ challenge is based on the question of whether the Bond Market Association’s Municipal Swap Index is an index of securities. The SEC argued that regardless of what you call the Municipal Swap Index, this “linguistic exercise” doesn’t make a difference to what the Index actually is, the manner in which it is calculated, and the connection between the bonds and interest rates that comprise the Index. The SEC notes that interest rates are securities.

The SEC asked the court to not dismiss the case over lack of subject matter jurisdiction and pointed to the ruling made in SEC v. Rorech. In that enforcement case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York refused to decide during the pleading phase whether credit default swaps are security-based swap agreements.

Related Web Resources:
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)

Swap Transactions, All Business Continue Reading ›

Former JPMorgan Bankers Sued by SEC Over Swap Transactions Want Judge to Dismiss Securities Fraud Charges

Published on: February 6, 2010 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Two ex- JPMorgan Chase & Co. bankers that the Securities and Exchange Commission is suing over their alleged involvement in certain swap transactions are asking the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama to throw out most of the securities fraud charges that the regulator agency has filed against them. According to the SEC, Douglas MacFaddin and Charles LeCroy paid close friends of county commissions and broker-dealers over $8 million in undisclosed payments to make sure that JPMorgan would be chosen as the bond offerings underwriter and its affiliated bank would be selected as swap provider so that both entities could make $5 billion in underwriting and interest rate swap agreement business.

The swaps involve three Jefferson County bond transactions that took place in 2002 and 2003 and are at least partly linked to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association’s municipal swap index. The SEC says this index is securities-based because it is derived from variable-rate demand notes. MacFaddin and LeCroy’s lawyers, however, say that the SIFMA swap index is a rate index, which therefall places the swaps outside the agency’s antifraud jurisdiction. The defendants want the case dismissed.

The ex-JPMorgan bankers’ lawyers claim the undisclosed fees were connected to the swap transactions and that the investment bank was not obligated to disclose them. The defendants’ motions argue that the SEC’s failure to cite an instance in which the two men committed securities fraud is another reason the charges should be thrown out.

To resolve SEC administrative charges over its alleged part in the alleged securities scam, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. consented to pay $75 M and forfeit $647 M in termination fees.

Related Web Resources:
Ex-JPM Bankers Seek End to Swap Charges, Onwallstreet.com, January 21, 2010
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Judge Rejects ‘Fat Cat’ JPMorgan Chase’s $9,122 Bill for Producing Subpoenaed Documents

Published on: December 29, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A judge has turn down JPMorgan Chase‘s request that a petitioner pay the investment bank $9,122 for providing subpoenaed documents to confirm an arbitration award. Instead, Judge Arthur Schack issued an 11-page ruling granting just $1.250.27 to JPMorgan Chase for producing 18,248 pages.

The investment bank had sought to bill Abraham Klein, who was granted a multimillion-dollar arbitration award against Caring Home Care Agency and Christine Persaud, $.25/page at $25/hour for 182 hours of research. JP Morgan Chase said it cost $4,550 to find and retrieve the documents and $4,580 to print them.

Schack called the astronomical bill an example of greed among Wall Street’s ‘fat cat bankers.’ He noted that the court does not serve as a collection agency for making rich bankers even richer and called JPMorgan Chase head James S. Dimon the investment firm’s “fattest cat,” considering that he was compensated almost $20 million last year.

Schack reduced JPMorgan Chase’s bill by lowering the quoted hourly fee to $6.55, which is Indiana’s minimum wage. He also awarded the investment bank 1 cent/ page based on page prices found on major stationary supplier Web sites. He also said that because JPMorgan Chase posted 16,317 of the 18,248 pages online, rather than printing them, the bank should receive payment for labor and not supplies for those pages.

Klein says that not only did JPMorgan Chase seek reimbursement for documents it never produced, but also it sent over thousands of documents that hd did not request. JPMorgan Chase is denying the allegations.

There have been too many occasions involving investment banks that have sought to take financial advantage of investors and other clients. You can obtain compensation for the financial harm that you have suffered.

Related Web Resources:
Judge Slashes ‘Fat Cat’ Bank’s Bill for Subpoenaed Documents, Law.com, December 28, 2009
Courts See Recession’s Toll; Judge Schack Strikes Again, The Wall Street Journal, December 28, 2009
Obama Slams ‘Fat Cat’ Bankers, Wall Street Journal, December 14, 2009
Judge Arthur Schack, NY Courts Continue Reading ›

Citigroup, J.P Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Other Firms Added to Investigation of Goldman Sachs over “Front-Running” of Research

Published on: December 18, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ( FINRA) has launched an investigation into improper trading in advance of stock research and ratings at Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and ten other financial firms, it was reported today by the Wall Street Journal and Reuters News Service.

FINRA – formerly the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) – has since August examined weekly meetings at Goldman Sachs where research analysts offer tips to traders and then to big clients. According to the Wall Street Journal, this examination has now been expanded to include ten other firms and FINRA is now seeking information concerning any meetings where unpublished research opinions or trading ideas were disclosed to non-research employees or clients.

“FINRA does not reveal names of firms that have received sweep letters,” said its spokesman Herb Perone to Reuters. Citigroup, JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley could reportedly not be reached immediately for comment.
Continue Reading ›

JP Morgan Chase to Pay $75 Million in Penalties and Forfeit $647 Million to Settle SEC Charges Over Alleged Municipal Bond Payment Scam

Published on: November 16, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

JP Morgan Chase has settled Securities and Exchange Commission charges that the securities firm was allegedly involved in an illegal payment scam to get municipal securities business from Jefferson County, Alabama. As part of its settlement with the SEC, JP Morgan Chase agreed to pay penalties of $75 million and forfeit $647 million in termination fees that it says the county owes. JP Morgan Securities will also pay Jefferson County $50 million, as well as a $25 million penalty. By agreeing to settle, the securities firm is not admitting to or denying the commission’s charges.

The SEC had accused JP Morgan Securities and former managing directors Douglas MacFaddin and Charles LeCroy of making over $8 million in undisclosed payments to friends of certain Jefferson County commissioners. These friends either worked for or owned broker-dealers in the area. The SEC says that these payments led to the commissioners voting for JP Morgan Securities as its managing underwriter of bond offerings. They also voted for JP Morgan Securities’s affiliated bank as the transactions’ swap provider.

The SEC claims JP Morgan Securities charged Jefferson County higher interest rates on swap transactions. This allowed it to pass on the unlawful payments’ costs. According to Robert Khuzami, SEC Enforcement Director, senior bankers with JP Morgan made illegal payments to earn fees and garner business.

The SEC has filed a civil lawsuit against LeCroy and Macfaddin. The SEC is accusing the two men of committing securities fraud for allegedly directing the illegal payments to the Jefferson County commissioners’ associates.

The commission claims the two men knew that the transactions, which occurred between October 2002 and November 2003, were “sham transactions.” The SEC says the men’s failure to disclose these payments or related “conflicts of interest” to either Jefferson County or bond offering investors or the county in the challenged swap agreements deprived those involved of swap agreement negotiations and bond underwriting processes that were impartial and objective. The SEC is seeking disgorgement plus prejudgment interest and permanent injunctions against the two men.

Related Web Resources:
JPMorgan to Pay $75 Million in Alabama Case, NY Times, November 4, 2009
Read the civil complaint (PDF)

Read the administrative complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

JP Morgan to Repurchase $480 Million in ARS from Michigan Investors

Published on: October 24, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

JPMorgan Chase & Co. is offering to repurchase $480 million in auction-rate securities from investors in Michigan. The full buybacks are for investors who bought ARS between 2006 and early 2008. JPMorgan’s offer is part of a settlement that it reached with the Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation.

The broker-dealer is also paying the state of Michigan $664,000 to settle allegations that it misled clients into thinking that the ARS they were buying were liquid like cash. 90% of the settlement went to the state’s general fund, while 10% was deposited in the OFIR’s Michigan Investor Protection Trust.

OFIR also reached similar agreements with Citigroup, Banc of America Securities, Merrill Lynch, Comerica, and Wachovia. The state of Michigan has negotiated over $3.5 billion in payments for investors and received over $6.5 million.

Many investors were caught off guard when their ARS accounts froze after the market collapsed. Many broker-dealers were accused of misleading clients and making it seem as if auction-rate securities were as liquid as cash.

Michigan is not the first state that JPMorgan Chase & Co. has settled with over allegations that it misled clients about ARS. In August 2008, JP Morgan Chase, along with Morgan Stanley, agreed to give back more than $7 billion to ARS investors as part of the settlement they reached with New York State Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo.

Related Web Resources:
OFIR Announces $480 Million Auction Rate Securities Settlement with JPMorgan Chase, MichNews.org, October 8, 2009
Cuomo Settles JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley ARS Claims, CFO, August 14, 2008
Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation
Continue Reading ›

Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, UBS Securities, Bank of America, Moody’s Investment Services, and Fitch Ratings are Among Defendants Sued On Behalf of Wells Fargo Certificate Investors for Alleged Securities Fraud Violations

Published on: March 5, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Boilermaker-Blacksmith National Pension Trust is suing a number of investment banks, credit rating agencies, and underwriters, including Wells Fargo, WFASC, Morgan Stanley & Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Barclays Capital Inc., Bear Stearns & Co., Countrywide Securities Corp., Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., JPMorgan Chase Inc., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., McGraw-Hill Cos., Moody’s Investor Services Inc., and Fitch Ratings Inc., over allegations that they made false statements in the prospectus and registration statement for certificates that were collateralized by Wells Fargo Bank, NA. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of thousands of investors that bought the certificates from Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp., accuses the defendants of violating the 1933 Securities Act by engaging in these alleged actions.

According to the securities fraud lawsuit, the defendants concealed from investors that Wells Fargo revised its underwriting practices in 2005 and became involved in high risk subprime mortgage lending. The complaint contends that WFASC and a number of defendants submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commision prospectus and registration statements representing that the mortgages were backed by certificates that were subject to specific underwriting guidelines for evaluating a borrower’s creditworthiness. The plaintiffs contend that these prospectuses and registration statements were false because they neglected to reveal that the Wells Fargo-originated certificates were not in accordance with the credit, underwriting, and appraisal standards that Wells Fargo, per the companies, had supposedly used to approve mortgages.

The lawsuit also claims that because Wells Fargo decided to enter the subprime mortgage mortgage market in 2005, the investment bank had to take significant write-downs in 2008 because of its massive exposure to the subprime market and the WFASC certificates that these mortgages backed dropped significantly in value. The Boiler-Blaksmith fund reports that it lost about $5 million, which is more than half of what it invested.

Related Web Resources:
Read the Complaint

The Boilermakers National Funds
Continue Reading ›

Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan and Others fail to Obtain Dismissal of IPO Case by Houston Judge

Published on: February 9, 2009 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In Texas, a Houston judge has ruled that a would-be class securities lawsuit filed against JP Morgan Securities, Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith and a number of other defendants can move forward. The plaintiffs were investors in Superior Offshore International Inc., a company that collapsed following a failed initial public offering. The four other defendants are former Superior company executives.

In the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Judge Nancy Atlas found that the plaintiffs met their burden when pleading material misrepresentations and omissions in Superior’s registration statement. She denied the defendants’ request to dismiss the complaint.

Superior Offshore International Inc. had provided commercial diving services and subsea construction to the natural gas and crude oil industry in the Gulf of Mexico. The company began IPO proceedings of about 10.2 million commercial shares at $15/share in April 2007. Merrill Lynch and JP Morgan acted as the primary underwriters. It was after this that Superior experienced major losses and its price dropped until it reached $1.08/share in April 2008. Soon after, Superior announced that it was shutting down operations.

In their consolidated class action, the plaintiffs claimed that while the registration statement revealed that the Superior board chairperson’s two sons were receiving salaries of $48,000 and $120,000, it failed to note that the two men weren’t doing any significant tasks for their respective incomes. The plaintiffs also questioned Superior’s claims that there was a high demand for its services and that certain hurricane-related projects were expected to continue for a number of years when, in fact, that work had declined significantly. They challenged Superior’s claim that it had multiple customers and maintained that the company had provided materially misleading data about its management team.

The defendants had tried dismissing the complaint by citing a failure to state a claim. They said they could not be held liable for events that transpired after the IPO. While the Texas court said it recognized that Superior’s registration statement included warnings about possible risks that could arise, it determined that the plaintiffs were not questioning the accuracy of the potential risks that were noted. Rather, the court said they were challenging the completeness and accuracy of the information Superior had provided about its current state at the time of the IPO. Continue Reading ›

NASAA Says Investors with Frozen Auction-Rate Securities Should Ask Investment Firms About Buyback Opportunities

Published on: November 19, 2008 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The North American Securities Administrators Association is reminding investors to ask the investment firms that sold them any now-frozen auction-rate securities about repurchase opportunities. Following the ARS market collapse, securities regulators in 12 US states joined together to form a multi-state Task Force dedicated to finding out whether Wall Street investment firms had misled investors when persuading them to invest in the ARS market.

As part of their settlement agreements reached with the firms in question, 11 major Wall Street investment banks have said they will buy back over $51 billion in ARS from charities, retail investors, and small companies. However, these repurchase offers may not be available indefinitely.

NASAA President Fred Joseph says the best way to avail of any redemption offers is to contact the investment firms as soon as possible. So far, 11 firms have agreed in principle to buy back over $50 billion in ARS. NASAA says additional repurchase opportunities are expected to become available in the coming months.

Investment Firms with ARS Hotlines:

Bank of America 1-866-638-4183 Deutsche Bank 1-866-926-1437 Citi 1-866-720-4802 JP Morgan 1-866-450-8470 Goldman Sachs 1-888-350-2857 Merrill Lynch 1-888-706-1381 UBS 1-800-253-1974 Morgan Stanley 1-800-566-2273 Wachovia 1-866-283-794
Meantime, more investigations are under way into the sales practices of US firms that marketed and sold auction-rate securities to investors. Unfortunately, many investors who were told ARS were liquid investments are now dealing with frozen securities and cannot access their funds.

If you invested in the auction-rate securities industry and your ARS became frozen during the market’s collapse, you may be the victim of securities fraud.

Related Web Resources:
Small firms caught in ARS buyback vise, November 16, 2008 Continue Reading ›