Articles Posted in UBS

Puerto Rico’s Electrical Power Authority, also known as PREPA, is experiencing a surge in overdue accounts. According to a report from an FTI Consulting subsidiary, since 2012, the U.S. territory’s electrical authority has seen a 219% increase in the number of company and residential accounts that are at least 120 days late in making their payments. The report was generated as part of an agreement with the creditors, which retain more than $9 billion of the electrical utility company’s debt.

By September 2014, late balances owed to PREPA not just among businesses and residents, but also by government entities had hit $1.75 billion. At least $708.6 million were payments that were late by a minimum of four months.

Puerto Rico’s governmental entities owe about $758 million, with certain public corporations unable to even pay their electricity bills and refusing to agree to payment plans to get their accounts current. The FTI report recommends that Prepa put into place an amnesty period for clients that are delinquent, retain a collection agency, increase late fees and charges for reconnection, and push for timely payments.

Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc (RBS), UBS AG (UBS), (HSBC), Bank of America Corp (BAC), HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), and Citigroup Inc. (C) will pay $4.3 billion in penalties to regulators in the United States and Europe for failing to stop traders from attempting to manipulate the foreign exchange market. Further penalties could also result not just for the banks but also for certain individuals in the wake of litigation accusing bank dealers of colluding amongst themselves to rig benchmarks that are used in determining foreign currency.

According to authorities, the dealers exchange confidential data regarding client orders and worked it out so their trades would enhance profits. This information was purportedly exchanged in online chat rooms. Regulators say the misconduct occurred from 2008 through October 2013. The probe has also widened to look into whether traders used confidential information to take bets on unauthorized personal accounts and if clients were charged excessive commissions by sales desks.

The currency rigging probe has led to the firing or suspension of over 30 traders while the number of automated trade transactions have increased. In the U.S. the Federal Reserve, the Justice Department, and New York’s financial regulator continue to investigate banks over foreign exchange trading. Meantime, some lawyers have spoke out about how the settlement doesn’t address client compensation.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has sanctioned thirteen financial firms, including UBS Financial Services (UBS), Charles Schwab and Co. (SCHW), J.P. Morgan Securities (JPM), and Stifel Nicolaus & Co. (SF), for the improper sales of Puerto Rican junk bonds. A $100,00 minimum denomination had been established in junk bonds of $3.5 billion made by Puerto Rico several months ago. An SEC probe, however, revealed that there had been 66 instances when firms sold the bonds in transactions of under $100,000.

Municipal bond offerings are supposed to have a set minimum denomination that determines the smallest amount that a firm can sell to an investor during a single transaction. Typically, municipal issuers will establish high minimum denominations for junk bonds with a greater default risk. This is done to limit the bonds from ending up in the accounts of investors who may not be able to handle the risks.

The firms and their fines: UBS Financial Services for $56,400, Charles Schwab & Co. for $61,800, Oppenheimer & Co. (OPY) for $61,200, Wedbush Securities Inc. for $67,200, Hapoalim Securities USA for $54,000, TD Ameritrade (AMTD) for $100,800, Interactive Brokers LLC for $56,000, Stifel Nicolaus & Co. (SF) for $60,000, Investment Professionals Inc. for $67,800, Riedl First Securities Co. of Kansas for $130,000, J.P. Morgan Securities for $54,000, National Securities Corporation for $60,000, and Lebenthal & Co. for $54,000.

In its third-quarter earnings reports this week, UBS noted that claims involving its Puerto Rico closed-end municipal bond funds are reaching close to $1 billion. That is a significant jump from the $600M mark those cases reached during the second quarter of this year, and this shows that the number of cases being filed against UBS continue to grow. According to multiple reports, the investors seeking almost $1 billion in losses are alleging unsuitability, fraud, and misrepresentation.

The third quarter has been a rough one for the Swiss banking giant. Reuters reports that the entity has put aside $1.9 billion for possible legal costs.

In the past year, UBS has been in the spotlight over claims that brokers in UBS’s Puerto Rico unit persuaded customers to get involved in the proprietary bond funds even if the funds were not suitable for the investors’ portfolios. Some clients reportedly were even encouraged to borrow so they could invest more.

The European Commission has found that Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), JPMorgan (JPM), UBS AG (UBS) and Credit Suisse (CS) engaged in cartel behavior. Except for RBS, which received immunity from having to pay any fines by disclosing the cartel conduct, the other banks were fined $120 million for their activities. For cooperating, UBS and JPMorgan received fine reductions. Along with Credit Suisse, both banks got a 10% reduction for consenting to settle.

All four financial institutions are accused of running a cartel involving bid-ask spreads of Swiss franc interest-rate derivatives in the European Economic Area. Banks and companies typically use interest rate derivatives to manage interest rate fluctuation risks. A “bid-ask spread” is the difference between how much a market maker is willing to sell and purchase a product.

According to the European Commission, between May and September ’07, the four banks agreed to quote to third parties wider fixed bid-ask spreads on certain short-term, over-the-counter Swiss franc interest rate derivatives while keeping narrower spreads for trades between them. The purpose was to reduce their transaction costs and keep liquidity among themselves, as well as keep other market makers from competing on equal terms in the Swiss franc derivatives market. In one action, JPMorgan Chase (JPM) was fined €61.7 million euros for purportedly manipulating the Swiss franc Libor benchmark interest rate in an illegal cartel with RBS, which, again, had immunity from fees.

Even after the slew of municipal bond fraud arbitration claims from investors blaming UBS AG (UBS) for their losses sustained in Puerto Rico municipal bonds, the brokerage firm has told its brokers to continue selling the funds to clients. However, notes the broker-dealer, representatives should make sure to evaluate their recommendations in a way that is in line with UBS policies and those of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

The instructions to keep selling the bond funds were documented in a four-page, unsigned memo from UBS. The firm also instructed brokers to direct any questions about the suitability of any investment recommendations to the compliance department or a branch manager. According to Financial Adviser Magazine, a UBS spokesperson said that individual financial plans are customized to a client’s goals and wealth management needs. She also pointed out that Puerto Rico municipal bonds and closed-end funds had for over a decade rendered excellent returns and tax benefits.

Nevertheless, over the past twelve months, the losses from both Puerto Rico bonds and UBS’s closed-end bond funds tied to Puerto Rico debt have been huge. Already, UBS has been named in over 500 arbitration claims after there was a sharp drop in the value of Puerto Rico bonds last year. According to Reuters, FINRA intends to add another 800 arbitrators in Puerto Rico to hear these securities cases. Previously, there were about 70 arbitrators designated to preside over the muni bond fraud claims.

UBS Financial Services Incorporated of Puerto Rico (UBS) has reached a settlement with the Commonwealth’s Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCIF) over UBS’s offering and sale of closed-end mutual funds in Puerto Rico. As part of the agreement, UBS will pay a $3.5 million fine, as well as $1.7 million in restitution to 34 clients. As is typical with such settlements, UBS is not denying or admitting to any wrongdoing.

After examining UBS’s operations between the periods of 1/1/06 through 9/30/13, OCFI discovered that UBS had placed clients with conservative risk tolerances in high concentrations of Puerto Rico Closed-End Funds (PRCEF). OCIF further alleged that UBS recommended or allowed these clients to use “non-purpose” loans to buy more PRCEF, which should have never happened. OCFI also reported irregularities in the way some clients’ accounts were managed and said UBS had engaged in inadequate supervision and recordkeeping.

The clients that are entitled to restitution are primarily elderly investors with low net worth and conservative financial profiles. UBS is going to pay them almost $1.7 million in restitution. This offer has to be made within 45 days of the settlement’s execution. The $3.5 million penalty will go to the Securities Trading, Investor Education and Training Fund.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA), Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), Credit Suisse (CS), and fourteen other big banks have agreed to changes that will be made to swaps contracts. The modifications are designed to assist in the unwinding of firms that have failed.

Under the plan, which was announced by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, banks’ counterparties that are in resolution proceedings will postpone contract termination rights and collateral demands. According to ISDA CEO Scott O’Malia, the industry initiative seeks to deal with the too-big-to-fail issue while lowing systemic risks.

Regulators have pressed for a pause in swaps collateral collection. They believe this could allow banks the time they need to recapitalize and prevent the panic that ensued after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. failed in 2008. Regulators can then move the assets of a failing firm, as well as its other obligations, into a “bridge” company so that derivatives contracts won’t need to be unwound and asset sales won’t have to be conducted when the company is in trouble. Delaying when firms can terminate swaps after a company gets into trouble prevents assets from disappearing and payments from being sent out in disorderly, too swift fashion as a bank is dismantled.

Even though UBS Wealth Management Americas (UBS) has been generating record revenue, the financial firm saw its profits drop upon reporting that had it put aside $44 million for litigation costs primarily related to Puerto Rico bond fraud cases. UBS’s second quarter earnings of $238 million are 3% lower than last year.

Already, UBS clients have filed hundreds of arbitration cases and a number of securities class action lawsuits contending that the brokerage firm put investors’ money in highly leveraged and unsuitable Puerto Rico municipal bond funds that dropped in value last year. These funds begun to lose value again recently.

OppenheimerFunds Inc. (OPY), which is the biggest mutual fund to hold Puerto Rico debt, has also taken a financial hit. Bloomberg reports that in the past year, the firm has seen a loss of close to a third of its funds’ assets. For example, the Oppenheimer Rochester Maryland Municipal Fund (ORMDX) directed approximately 35% of its holdings to the islands as of the end of June. As of August 4, its assets had dropped to $64.9 million. At this time last year, the fund had $96.1 million in assets.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed charges against ex-UBS Wealth Management Americas (UBS) broker Donna Tucker for a Ponzi fraud that allegedly bilked elderly investors of over $730,000. Tucker is accused of misappropriating the money from UBS customers over a five-year period while she worked at the financial firm.

According to the SEC, Tucker took part in unauthorized trading, made misrepresentations to customers about the status of their funds, and forged documents and checks. She allegedly gained customers’ trust by becoming friends with them.

For example, she helped one blind couple take care of their medical needs and pay their monthly bills. The latter action gave her access their checkbook. She used this authorization to forge checks written to cash that she then gave to herself.

Contact Information