Articles Posted in SEC Enforcement

Texas Securities Fraud: SEC Charges Life Partners Holdings Inc. in Life Settlement Scam

Published on: January 4, 2012 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed Texas securities fraud charges against Life Partners Holdings Inc. and three of the company’s senior executives over their alleged involvement in a life settlement scam. Life Partners, which is a Nasdaq-traded company, makes nearly all of its revenue from the life settlements it brokers.

According to the SEC, CEO and Chairman Brian Pardo, CFO David Martin, and general counsel and president Scott Peden misled shareholders when they failed to reveal a significant risk, which was that Life Partners was materially underestimating the estimates for life expectancy that it was using to determine how to price transactions. The estimates have a critical effect on company profit margins, revenues, and shareholder profits.

The Commission contends that Life Partners, Pardo, Peden, and Martin took part in improper accounting and disclosure violations, which allowed the company’s books to become overvalued while making it appear as if there was a steady stream of earnings coming from the life settlement transactions that were being brokered.

Peden and Pardo are also charged with insider trading. The SEC claims that the two men sold about $300,000 and $11.5M, respectively, of Life Partners stock at prices that were inflated even though they had material, non-public information disclosing that the company had relied on short life expectancy estimates to make revenue.

In a statement issue by the SEC’s Division of Enforcement Director Robert Khuzami, the agency is claiming that Life Partners also deceived shareholders by retaining a medical doctor to designate baseless life expectancy estimates to underlying insurance policies. Dr. Donald T. Cassidy, who lacks actuarial training and had no previous experience in assigning life expectancy estimates, began working with Life Partners in 1999. (The Commission claims that Pardo and Peden neglected to perform substantial due diligence on the doctor’s qualifications to do this job. They also are accused of telling him to use a methodology created by a former underwriter, who is one of the company’s owners.)

Beginning fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2011’s third quarter, Life Partners allegedly understated impairment costs related to life settlement investments and prematurely recognized revenue. The company is also accused of improperly accelerating revenue recognition starting from the closing date until when it got a non-binding agreement with the policy owner to sell the life settlement. Because Life Partners used these Dr. Cassidy’s life expectancy estimates in its impairment calculations, millions of dollars in impairment costs were understated.

The SEC wants the repayment of bonuses and profits from stock sales.

Life Settlements
These usually involve the selling and buying of fractional interests of life insurance policies in the secondary market. For a lump sum amount, life insurance policy owners sell investors their policies. The amount that is offered is supposed to factor in the life expectancy of the insured and the policy’s terms and conditions. The longer the insured is expected to life, the more the investor has to pay in premiums. Policies owned by persons expected to not life as long cost more.

SEC fraud case could give new life to life settlements controversy, Bloomberg/Investment News, January 4, 2012
SEC Charges Life Settlements Firm and Three Executives with Disclosure and Accounting Fraud, SEC, January 3, 2012
SEC Complaint

Texas Securities Fraud: Unregistered Adviser Confesses to Selling Almost $400K in Promissory Notes and Investments Despite Cease and Desist Order, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 5, 2011
Texas Securities Fraud: Raymond James Financial Services Pays Elderly Senior Investor About $1.8M Following Loss of Appeal, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 2, 2011
Former Texan and First Capital Savings and Loan To Pay $4.5M for Alleged Foreign Currency Ponzi Scheme, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 11, 2011 Continue Reading ›

SEC Seeks to Impose Tougher Penalties for Securities Fraud

Published on: December 29, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has issued a proposal seeking to impose larger penalties on wrongdoers. The proposal comes in the wake of criticism that the agency isn’t doing enough to punish the persons and entities that played a role in the recent credit crisis and calls for:

• Capping fines issued against individuals at $1 million/violation rather than just $150,000.
• Raising penalties against firms from $725,000/action to $10 million.
• Multiplying by three how much the SEC can seek using an alternative formula that calculates the violator’s gains.
• Permission to determine penalties according to how much investors lost because of an alleged misconduct.
• Permission to triple the penalty if the defendant is a repeat offender and has committed securities fraud within the last five years.

The proposal was included in a letter sent to Senator Jack Reed by SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro last month. Reed heads up a subcommittee that oversees the Commission. In her letter, Schapiro said she believed the proposed changes would “substantially” improve the agency’s enforcement program.

The SEC has come under fire for failing to detect a number of major scandals before they blew up, including the Madoff Ponzi scam and the Enron fraud. Recently, US District Judge Jed Rakoff, who rejected the SEC’s proposed $285 million securities settlement with Citigroup, questioned a system that allows wrongdoers to pay a fine, as well as other penalties, without having to admit or deny wrongdoing. Now, the Commission appears to be working hard to rehabilitate its image so that it can be thought of as an effective and credible regulator of the securities industry.

According to Investment News, another way that the SEC may be attempting to re-establish itself is by targeting investment advisers. The Commission has reported filing a record 140 actions against these financial professionals in fiscal 2011, which is a 30% increase from 2010. One reason for this may be that a lot of the actions deal with inadequate paperwork that can easily be identified, which is causing the agency to quickly score a lot of “successes.” This approach to enforcement is likely allowing the SEC to discover small fraud cases before they turn into huge debacles. (If only SEC staffers had requested the appropriate documents related to trades made by Bernard Madoff’s team years ago, his Ponzi scam may have been discovered before the losses sustained by investors ended up hitting $65 million.

The agency’s revitalized efforts are likely prompting some financial firms to work harder on compliance. Investors can only benefit from this.

SEC’s Schapiro Asks Congress to Raise Limits on Securities Fines, Bloomberg/Businessweek, November 29, 2011

More Blog Posts:
SEC Files Charges in $27M Washington DC Ponzi Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 21, 2011

Former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Executives Face SEC Securities Fraud Charges, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, December 16, 2011

Banco Espirito Santo S.A. Settles for $7M SEC Charges Alleging Violations of Investment Adviser, Broker-Dealer, and Securities Transaction Registration Requirements, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 5, 2011

Former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Executives Face SEC Securities Fraud Charges

Published on: December 16, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged six ex-executives of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) with securities fraud. The Commission claims that they not only knew that misleading statements were being made claiming that both companies had minimal holdings of higher-risk mortgage loans but also they approved these messages.

The six people charged are former Freddie Mac CEO and Chairman of the Board Richard F. Syron, ex-Chief Business Officer and Executive Vice President Patricia L. Cook, and former ex-Single Family Guarantee Executive Vice President Donald J. Bisenius. The three ex-Fannie Mae executives that the SEC has charged are former CEO Daniel H Mudd, ex-Fannie Mae’s Single Family Mortgage Executive Vice President Thomas A. Lund, and ex- Chief Risk Officer Enrico Dallavecchia.

In separate securities fraud lawsuits, the SEC accuses the ex-executives of causing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to issue materially misleading statements about their subprime mortgage loans in public statements, SEC filings, and media interviews and investor calls. SEC enforcement director Robert Khuzami says that the former executives “substantially” downplayed what their actual subprime exposure “really was.”

The SEC contends that in 2009, Fannie told investors that its books had about $4.8 billion of subprime loans, which was about .2% of its portfolio, when, in fact, the mortgage company had about $43.5 billion of these products, which is about 11% of its holdings. Meantime, in 2006 Freddie allegedly told investors that its subprime loans was somewhere between $2 to 6 billion when, according to the SEC, its holdings were nearer to $141 billion (10% of its portfolio). By 2008, Freddie had $244 billion in subprime loans, which was 14% of its portfolio.

Yet despite these facts, the ex-executives allegedly continued to maintain otherwise. For example, the SEC says that in 2007, Freddie CEO Syron said the mortgage firm had virtually “no subprime exposure.”

It was in 2008 that the government had to bail out both Fannie and Freddie. It continues to control both companies. The rescue has already cost taxpayers approximately $150 billion, and the Federal Housing Finance Administration, which acts as its governmental regulator, says that this figure could rise up to $259 billion.

Today, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae both entered into agreements with the government that admitted their responsibility for their behavior without denying or admitting to the charges. They also consented to work with the SEC in their cases against the ex-executives.

The Commission is seeking disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus interest, financial penalties, officer and director bars, and permanent and injunctive relief.

SEC Charges Former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Executives with Securities Fraud, SEC, December 16, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Former US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Told Hedge Funds About Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Bailouts in Advance, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 30, 2011

Morgan Keegan Settles Subprime Mortgage-Backed Securities Charges for $200M, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 29, 2011

Freddie Mac and Fannie May Drop After They Delist Their Shares from New York Stock Exchange, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 25, 2010

SEC Files Charges in $27M Washington DC Ponzi Scam

Published on: November 21, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Garfield M. Taylor and a number of his relatives and friends with running a DC-area Ponzi scam. The more than $27 million financial fraud targeted investors in the area.

Taylor and his partners allegedly defrauded about 130 investors between 2005 and 2010. The scam fell apart when the money dried up as a result of trading losses and the interest payments that were made to investors.

According to the Commission, Taylor convinced mainly middle-class clients to refinance their houses and use their money, including their retirement and savings, to invest in promissory notes that were put out by his two companies, which were supposedly taking part in low-risk trading options. He touted returns of up to 20% and provided investors with false assurances that their investments were protected by either a “covered call” trading strategy or a “reserve account.”

To keep new investor money coming, Taylor is said to have persuaded current investors and others to refer prospective clients to him in exchange for commission fees that were calculated according to how much the new investors put in. Although he is not a licensed securities broker, Taylor convinced a number of investors to give him access to their brokerage accounts and he used this privilege to make trades. He promised them a portion of the profits.

The SEC contends that contrary to his promises, Taylor actually was taking part in risky options trading, which then resulted in the financial losses. He also allegedly took $5 million to pay relatives and friends and cover his kids’ education.

Also charged with securities fraud bu the SEC (allegations against the parties vary, but include: violation of federal securities’ laws anti-fraud provisions, offering registration requirements, and broker-dealer registration requirements):

• Gibraltar Asset Management Group LLC • Garfield Taylor Inc.
• Maurice G. Taylor. He is Taylor’s sibling and is Gibraltar’s chief investment officer • Randolph M. Taylor. Taylor’s sibling who was Gibraltar’s VP of organizational development.
• Benjamin C. Dalley. He formerly served as VP of operations at Gibraltar.
• Jeffrey A. King. Taylor’s brother-in-law and Gibraltar’s former COO and President.
• William B. Mitchell. He was a senior executive at both companies
These individuals and entities, along with Taylor, are accused of jointly putting together a Gibraltar PowerPoint presentation that contained false and misleading statements and giving these to prospective clients. The SEC says the documents misrepresented the financial firm’s options trading strategy, the protections offered, the expected return rate, and degree of risk involved. Institutional investors and charities, including a Baptist church, were even pursued as prospective clients.

The SEC is seeking enjoinment from future violations, the payment of penalties, and disgorgement.

SEC Charges Perpetrator of Washington-Area Ponzi Scheme, SEC, November 18, 2011
Read the SEC’s Complaint

More Blog Posts:
Former Texan and First Capital Savings and Loan To Pay $4.5M for Alleged Foreign Currency Ponzi Scheme, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 11, 2011
SEC Charges Filed in $22M Ponzi Scam that Targeted Florida Teachers and Retirees, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 29, 2011
SEC Issues Emergency Order to Stop $26M “Green” Ponzi Scam, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, October 13, 2011 Continue Reading ›

SEC and DOJ Charge Two Florida Men With Free Riding Securities Scam

Published on: November 10, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Two Florida men are accused of defrauding investors and broker-dealers by allegedly not telling them that they didn’t have enough money or securities to pay for their stock trades. The US Justice Department is charging Scott Kupersmith with securities fraud and wire fraud, while the Securities and Exchange Commission is charging him and Frederick Chelly with involvement in a front-running scam to trade free of risk at the expense of broker-dealers.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey claims that Kupersmith engaged in free riding, which happens if a client sells or purchases securities in a brokerage account while lacking the money or securities to cover the trades. Kupersmith and his associates are believed to have facilitated the securities scam by setting up several brokerage accounts at financial firms in New Jersey and outside the state.

In addition to falsely representing himself as having a personal net worth of approximately $5 million, Kupersmith is also accused of made it appear as if he ran a Manhattan hedge fund with assets of up to $20 million. These misrepresentations allowed him to raise about $500,000 of investor monies, which he then used to cover personal expenses or pay principal and interest payments to earlier investors in this Ponzi-like scam.

The SEC says that Kupersmith and Chelly’s scam caused financial fraud allowed them to make $600K in illegal trading profit while broker-dealers lost more than $2 million as a result. The Commission says that the two men presented themselves as private investors or money managers.

They allegedly set up a number of accounts for corporate entities under their control in brokerage firms while buying/selling the same amount of the same stock in various accounts. Often, this would happen during the course of one day and with the intention of making money from the changes in stock price. The SEC says that Kupermith and Chelly would take the profits from the trades but that when substantial losses were likely, they wouldn’t pay able to cover sales they had asked for, which caused broker-dealers to take the losses.

The two men also falsely made it appear as if they had assets with a third-party custody bank even though they didn’t own the stock that they were selling and often didn’t have enough money to pay for the stock that they did buy. Share sale proceeds were then used to buy the same shares.

The two men used Delivery Versus Payment/Receipt Versus Payment accounts at the broker-dealers to trade. Te financial firms offered these accounts to the two men because they were under the impression that Kupersmith and Chelly had the money to cover their trades.

Read the SEC’s Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Former Deloitte Tax LP Partner’s Wife Settles Insider Trading Charges for $1M, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 8, 2011
Houston Judge Overturns $9.2M Securities Fraud Ruling Against Morgan Keegan, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 11, 2011
Banco Espirito Santo S.A. Settles for $7M SEC Charges Alleging Violations of Investment Adviser, Broker-Dealer, and Securities Transaction Registration Requirements, Institutional Investors Securities Blog, November 5, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Former Deloitte Tax LP Partner’s Wife Settles Insider Trading Charges for $1M

Published on: November 8, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission says that Annabel McClellan has settled for $1M insider trading allegations that she and her husband gave relatives confidential information about merger deals. Annabel is the wife of Arnold McClellan, who used to be a partner at Deloitte Tax LP where he was head of the mergers and acquisitions teams.

If a federal judge approves the securities fraud settlement, the SEC will dismiss the claims against Arnold. By agreeing to settle, Annabel is not denying or admitting to the securities charges.

Per the SEC, Annabel used confidential information that she got from her husband to tip her brother-in-law James Sander and her sister Miranda. These family members then allegedly used this knowledge to make trades before the transactions (usually involved pending acquisitions and mergers) were announced to the public. This allowed them to make millions in illicit profits.

In addition to the civil penalty, Annabel has agreed to permanent enjoinment from violating Securities Exchange Act of 1934’s Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. She also earlier pleaded guilty to obstructing the SEC’s probe into the insider trading scam after admitted to making false statements related to the investigation. Annabel maintains that her husband knew nothing about her activities.

The McClellans were charged with insider trading by the SEC last year following a parallel probe by the Commission, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Department of Justice (DOJ, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). According to the SEC’s complaint, at least seven times between 2006 and 2008, Arnold McClellan revealed confidential information to his wife, who then passed on what she knew to Miranda and James in London.

James, who owns a trading company, would then buy derivative financial instruments. He also took financial positions in US companies that were acquisition targets. When Arnold would find out that some of the deals were not certain, James would liquidate his positions. The Commission says that the trades were closely timed with phone calls made between the two sisters, as well as in-person visits between the couples. By 2008, James allegedly made over £1.5 million from the tips and his financial firm’s clients and colleagues made over £10 million.

Insider Trading
Insider trading hurts the stock market, affects investor confidence, and causes financial harm to the companies whose confidential information was used to benefit a few. Insider trading is a breach of fiduciary duty or another kind of relationship of confidence and trust. The person tipping, the one being tipped, and anyone who has access to the insider information that makes the trade can be charged with insider trading.

Read the SEC Complaint Against the McClellans, SEC
Wife of former Deloitte partner to pay $1 million, SFGate, October 18, 2011
FSA, SEC and DoJ investigation leads to two people being charged by the SEC with insider dealing in the U.S., Financial Services Authority, December 1, 2010

More Blog Posts:
Ex-Goldman Sachs Director Rajat Gupta Pleads Not Guilty to Insider Trading Charges, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 26, 2011
Dallas Mavericks Owner Mark Cuban’s Allegations of Misconduct Against the SEC Enforcement Staff are Without Merit, Says Inspector General’s Report, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 28, 2011
Insider Trading: Former FrontPoint Partners Hedge Fund Manager Pleads Guilty to Criminal Charges, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, August 20, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Banco Espirito Santo S.A. Settles for $7M SEC Charges Alleging Violations of Investment Adviser, Broker-Dealer, and Securities Transaction Registration Requirements

Published on: November 5, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Without denying or admitting to wrongdoing, Banco Espirito Santo S.A. a banking conglomerate based in Portugal, has consented to pay nearly $7M in disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties to settle Securities and Exchange Commission allegations that it violated securities transaction, investment adviser, and broker-dealer registration requirements. The bank has also agreed to a bar from future violations, as well as an undertaking that it pay a minimum interest rate to US clients on securities bought through BES.

According to the SEC, between 2004 and 2009 and while not registered as an investment adviser or broker-dealer in the US, BES offered investment advice and brokerage services to about 3,800 US resident clients and customers. Most of them were immigrants from Portugal. Also, allegedly the securities transactions were not registered even though they did not qualify for a registration exemption.

The SEC says that by acting as an unregistered investment adviser and broker-dealer BES violated sections of the Exchange Act and the Advisers Act. The bank violated the Securities Act when it allegedly sold and offered securities in this country without registration or the exemption.

The SEC says BES used its Department of Marketing, Communications, and Customer Research in Portugal to send out marketing materials to clients outside the country. Customers in the US ended up getting materials not specifically designed for US residents. BES also worked with a customer service call center to service its US customers. Via phone, these clients were offered securities and other financial products. The representatives were not registered as SEC broker-dealers and had no US securities licenses even though they serviced US clients. US Customers were also offered brokerage services through ESCLINC, which is a money transmitter service in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey. ESCLINC acted as a contact point for the investment and banking activities of BES’s US clients.

Registration Provisions
The SEC has set registration provisions in place to help preserve the securities markets’ integrity as well as that of the financial institutions that serve as “gatekeepers,” said SEC New York regional office director George S. Canellos. He accused BES of “brazenly” disregarding these provisions.

State securities laws and US mandate that investment advisers, brokers, and their financial firms be registered or licensed. You should definitely check to make sure that whoever you are investing with or seeking investment advice from his properly registered. It is also important for you to know that doing business with a financial firm or a securities broker that is not registered can make it hard for you to recover your losses if that entity were to go out of business and even if the case is decided in your favor (whether in arbitration or through the courts.)

More Blog Posts:

EagleEye Asset Management LLC Sued by SEC and CFTC for Alleged Forex Trading Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 28, 2011

SEC Issues Emergency Order to Stop $26M “Green” Ponzi Scam

Published on: October 13, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has received an emergency order to stop a Ponzi scam that bilked victims of about $26 million. Investors in PermaPave Companies were promised significant returns if they would place their money behind water-filtering natural stone pavers. According to the SEC, which has filed a securities complaint, Eric Aronson, a convicted felon, is the mastermind behind the scheme.

Aronson, who pleaded guilty to fraud in another case more than 10 years ago, is now accused of persuading about 140 people to buy promissory notes from PermaPave Companies and promising up to 33% in returns. Between 2006 and 2010, Aronson and company executives Robert Kondratick and Vincent Buonauro Jr., allegedly used new investor money to pay older clients while spending some of the Ponzi funds on gambling trips to Las Vegas, jewelry, and expensive cars. He also allegedly misappropriated about $2.6 million to repay victims of the earlier securities scam to which he entered a guilty plea.

Some of the investors’ funds that went into the Ponzi scam were also allegedly used to buy Interlink-US-Network, Ltd., which was a publicly traded company. Interlink later put out a Form 8-K falsely stating that LED Capital Corp. had said it would put $6 million into it. LED Capital did not have the money and never made such an agreement.

The SEC says that when investors began demanding that they be paid the money they were owed, Aronson accused them of committing a felony because they lent PermaPave Companies money at interest rates that were exorbitant—even though he was the one who promised them such high percentages. The Commission is accusing both Aronson and attorney Frederic Aaron of making false statements to get investors to change their securities into ones that would defer payments owed for several years.

U.S. District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff is granting the SEC’s request that the defendants and relief defendants’ assets be frozen. Meantime, the Commission wants to bar Aronson, Buonauro, and Kondratick from being able to work as directors and officers of public companies and keep them from taking part in penny-stock offerings. The SEC also wants permanent and preliminary injunctions against the defendants, the return of illicit profits plus prejudgment interest, and civil monetary penalties.

Aronson, Kondratick, and Buonauro have been arrested in connection with the Ponzi scam.

Ponzi Scams
To succeed, Ponzi schemes need to bring in new clients so that their money that they invest can be used to pay older clients their promised returns. Unfortunately, with hardly any legitimate earnings, Ponzi scams can fall apart when it becomes a challenge to recruit new investors or too many investors ask to cash out.

SEC Files Emergency Action to Halt Green-Product Themed Ponzi Scheme, SEC.gov, October 6, 2011

SEC Claims Author Used Ponzi Scheme to Repay Prior Fraud Victims, Bloomberg Businessweek, October 6, 2011

More Blog Posts:
SEC Chairman Criticized For Allowing Ex-Commission Official that Benefited from the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scam to Help Craft Policy Regarding Victims’ Compensation, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, September 23, 2011

Merrill Lynch Faces $1M FINRA Fine Over Texas Ponzi Scam by Former Registered Representative, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 10, 2011

EagleEye Asset Management LLC Sued by SEC and CFTC for Alleged Forex Trading Scam

Published on: September 28, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In separate securities lawsuits, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission are both suing EagleEye Asset Management LLC, which a Massachusetts asset management firm, and Jeffrey A. Liskov, its principal.

The CFTC is accusing the two defendants of defrauding at least one US-based client while trading forex on a margined or leveraged basis for her. Per the CFTC’s lawsuit, the client decided to grant permission to EagleEye and Liskov to trade part of her retirement money because Liskov allegedly advised her that this type of trading was appropriate for her conservative investment objects.

However, Liskov allegedly did not warn her of the risks involved or tell her that he did not have a successful track record with forex trading. While the trading did generate short-term profits for the woman, she lost most of the money that she invested. The CFTC contends that instead of revealing the trading losses, Liskov allegedly forged the client’s name and set up a new account opening documents and on more than $3 million in secret wire transfers from her mutual fund account to her forex account so that trading wouldn’t have to stop. The woman client lost more than $3.24 million, while Liskov and EagleEye made about $235,000 in performance incentive fees.

Per the SEC, between 4/08 and 8/10, Liskov made misrepresentations to clients to persuade them to move funds they’d placed in securities investments into forex trading. The SEC contends that these investments were not appropriate for elderly clients that had conservative investment objectives and that this caused them to sustain significant financial losses totaling almost $4 million. EagleEye and Liskov allegedly earned performed fees of over $300K, plus management fees. The Commission believes that having clients make short-term investment gains and then earning performance fees before these gains were lost was the defendants’ plan.

Liskov allegedly did not even help some investors understand the nature of forex trading. With other clients, he deemphasized the degree of investment risk involved. The SEC also says that Liskov made false statements with claims that he had achieved success with forex trades when, in fact, the opposite was the case.

Meantime, Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Francis Galvin (D) has also filed administrative charges against the investment advisor firm and Liskov. Galvin is accusing them of violating Massachusetts’s Uniform Securities Act.

Our securities fraud law firm has helped thousand of investors recoup their losses caused by broker misconduct and investment adviser fraud. Working with a stockbroker fraud law firm is the best way to help you get back your lost investment.

Read the SEC’s Complaint (PDF)

CFTC Charges Massachusetts Man Jeffrey Liskov and His Company, EagleEye Asset Management, LLC, with Committing a $3 Million Forex Fraud, CFTC, September 8, 2011
State files complaint against local investment advisor, WickedLocal, September 13, 2011
Mass. Adviser Sued by Regulators Over Alleged Forex Trading Scheme, BNA Securities Law Daily, September 9, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Texas Commodity Trading Advisor FIN FX LLC Now Subject to NFA Emergency Enforcement Action, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 27, 2011
Commodity Options Fraud Charges by CFTC Prompts District Court to Freeze Assets and Records of 20/20 Trading Co. Inc. & 20/20 Precious Metals Inc., Stockbroker Fraud Blog, May 6, 2011
$63 Million Mortgage-Backed Securities Lawsuit Against Bank of America is Second One Filed by Western and Southern Life Insurance Co. Against the Financial Firm, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, August 29, 2011 Continue Reading ›

Some of the SEC Charges Against Investment Adviser Over Alleged Involvement In J.P. Morgan Securities LLC Collateralized Debt Obligation Are Dismissed

Published on: September 24, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has thrown out some of the Securities and Exchange Commission charges against GSCP (NJ) managing director Edward Steffelin for his alleged involvement in a JP Morgan Securities LLC collateralized debt obligation deal. GSCP (NJ) was the collateral manager for the CDO transaction.

While JP Morgan Securities settled for $153.6 million the SEC’s allegations that it misled investors about the CDO deal by agreeing to pay $153.6 million, Steffelin opted to fight the charges. He claimed that there was no reason for him to think that the CDO offering documents were problematic. He argued that nothing had been left out and nobody was “defrauded.”

In district court, Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum granted Steffelin’s motion to dismiss the SEC’s 1933 Securities Act Section 17(a)(3) claims against him. Per the Act, any person involved in the sale or offer of securities is prevented from taking part in any transaction or practice that would deceive or be an act of fraud against the buyer. Cedarbaum said it would be a “big stretch” to conclude that Steffelin owed the investors that bought the CDO a fiduciary duty. However, she decided not to throw out the SEC’s securities claims related to the 1940 Investment Advisers Act, which has sections that make it unlawful to sell or offer securities to get property or money as a result of an omission or material misstatement. The act also prevents investment advisers from taking part in a transaction or practice that performs a deception or fraud on a client.

The SEC’s charges revolved around a JPM-structured CDO called Squared CDO 2007-1. It mainly included credit default swaps that referred to other CDOs linked to the housing market. Per the Squared CDO’s marketing collaterals, GSCP was noted as the one choosing the portfolio’s deals. What wasn’t included in the disclosure was the fact that Magnetar Capital LLC, a hedge fund, played a key part in choosing the CDOs and had a short position in over 50% of the assets. This meant that Magneta Capital stood to gain financially if the CDO portfolio failed.

JP Morgan Securities is JP Morgan Chase affiliate. Under the terms of its $153.6 million settlement, the financial firm agreed to fully pay back all monies that investors lost. By agreeing to settle, JP Morgan Securities did not admit to or deny wrongdoing. Other large financial firms that have settled SEC securities fraud cases related to CDOs in the last 16 months include Citigroup, which recently reached a $250 million settlement and Goldman Sachs, which settled its case with the SEC last year for $550 million.

More Blog Posts:
Citigroup’s $285M Mortgage-Related CDO Settlement with Raises Concerns About SEC’s Enforcement Practices for Judge Rackoff, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 9, 2011

Retirement Fund’s CDO Lawsuit Against Morgan Stanley is Dismissed by District Court, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, October 27, 2011

Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. and Former Executive Faces SEC Charges Over Sale of CDOs to Five Wisconsin School Districts, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, August 10, 2011

***This post has been backdated.