News and Articles

Author Archives: David Weintraub

Use Care When Referring Clients to Professionals – The Elder Law Advocate

Hypothetical 1

You have just referred one of your elderly clients to a local accountant.  The accountant is in his 40’s.  You have seen him around town for years.  He regularly eats breakfast at an expensive local restaurant.  He appears to be popular at the restaurant.  His office is located in a good part of town.  He is a nice guy.  You have heard that in addition to being an accountant, he also advises his clients about investments.  So, what can possibly go wrong with referring one of your elderly clients, for accounting purposes, to this gentleman?  Well, lots can go wrong.

As it turns out, for years this accountant, while being registered as a stockbroker/financial advisor, was alleged to have been soliciting his clients to co-invest in various internet businesses operated by another accountant’s son.  The accountant was further alleged to have signed promissory notes in favor of his customers, for an aggregate amount in excess of $1 million.  When his former broker-dealer employer learned of his conduct, he was fired.  His former employer, the broker-dealer, has paid settlements in excess of $500,000 to several investors.  As the results of an investigation initiated by FINRA, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the accountant was suspended for two years from acting in any capacity with a FINRA member firm.  That suspension ends in December 2013.  The accountant’s Florida accounting license remains in good standing.

Use care when referring clients to Professionals

SEC Charges Chicago-Area Father and Son for Conducting Cherry-Picking Scheme at Investment Firm

On May 16, 2013, the SEC charged a father and son and their Chicago-area investment advisory firm with defrauding clients through a cherry-picking scheme that garnered them nearly $2 million in illicit profits, which they spent on luxury homes, vehicles, and vacations.

The SEC alleged that Charles J. Dushek and his son Charles S. Dushek placed millions of dollars in securities trades without designating in advance whether they were trading personal funds or client funds. They delayed allocating the trades so they could cherry pick winning trades for their personal accounts and dump losing trades on the accounts of unwitting clients at Capital Management Associates (CMA). Lisle, Illinois-based CMA misrepresented the firm’s proprietary trading activities to clients, many of whom were senior citizens.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Chicago, the scheme lasted from 2008 to 2012. During that period, the Dusheks made more than 13,500 purchases of securities totaling more than $350 million. The Dusheks typically waited to allocate the trades for at least one trading day, and often several days, by which time they knew whether the trades were profitable. The Dusheks ultimately kept most of the winning trades and assigned most of the losses to clients. At the time of the trading, they did not keep any written record of whether they were trading client funds or personal funds.

The Dusheks’ extraordinary trading success reflects the breadth of their scheme. For 17 consecutive quarters, the Dusheks reaped positive returns at the time of allocation while their clients suffered negative returns. One of Dushek Sr.’s personal accounts increased in value by almost 25,000 percent from 2008 to 2011 while many of his clients’ accounts decreased in value.

The illicit trading profits from his personal accounts were Dushek Sr.’s only source of regular income outside of Social Security, according to the SEC. It alleged that he drew no salary or other compensation as president of CMA and relied on profits from the scheme to make mortgage payments on his 6,500 square foot luxury home featuring separate equestrian facilities. He also spent the money on luxury vehicles, membership in a luxury vacation resort, and vacations abroad. Dushek Jr. is alleged to have used trading profits to pay for a boat slip and vacations to ski resorts and Hawaii.

The SEC’s complaint charged the Dusheks and CMA with fraud and seeks final judgments that would require them to return ill-gotten gains with interest and pay financial penalties.

Any investor interested in speaking with a securities attorney may contact David A. Weintraub, P.A., 7805 SW 6th Court, Plantation, FL 33324. By phone: 954.693.7577 or 800.718.1422.

FINRA and SEC Issue Investor Alert On Pension or Settlement Income Streams

On May 9, 2013, FINRA and the SEC issued an investor alert entitled, “Pension or Settlement Income Streams – What You Need to Know Before Buying or Selling Them.”

The alert informs investors about the risks involved when selling their rights to an income stream or investing in someone else’s income stream. The alert urges investors considering an investment in pension or settlement income streams to proceed with caution.

Anyone receiving a monthly pension or regular distributions from a settlement following a personal injury lawsuit may be targeted by salespeople offering an immediate lump sum in exchange for the rights to some or all of the payments the person would otherwise receive in future. Typically, recipients of a pension or structured settlement will sign over the rights to some or all of their monthly payments to a factoring company in return for a lump-sum amount, which will almost always be significantly lower than the present value of that future income stream.

The alert contains a checklist of questions before selling away an income stream:

  • Is the transaction legal?
  • Is the transaction worth the cost?
  • What is the reputation of the company offering the lump sum?
  • Will the factoring company require life insurance?
  • What are the tax consequences?
  • Does the sale fit your longer-term financial goals?

The investor alert also warns investors who might be attracted to the yield offered by buying the rights to someone else’s pension or structured settlement to be aware that:

  • Investors may encounter commissions of seven percent or higher.
  • Pension and structured settlement income-stream products may or may not be securities and likely are not registered with the SEC.
  • These products are illiquid, which means they can be difficult to sell. In the event you need money and want to sell the product you may not be able to do so or you may only be able to do so at a loss.
  • Your “rights” to the income steam you purchased could face legal challenges.

A direct link to the alert can be found here.

Any investor interested in speaking with a securities attorney may contact David A. Weintraub, P.A., 7805 SW 6th Court, Plantation, FL 33324. By phone: 954.693.7577 or 800.718.1422.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding Against Global Financial Services LLC

On April 25, 2013, FINRA announced that it had had fined Global Financial Services LLC $42,500.00, and that they were required to pay $16,931.30, plus interest, in restitution to customers.

In 16 transactions from October 20, 2008, through December 19, 2008, Global Financial Services failed to sell corporate bonds to customers at prices that were fair, taking into consideration all the relevant circumstances, including market conditions with respect to each bond at the time of the transaction, the expense involved, and the firm’s entitlement to a profit.  As a result, the Firm violated NASD Rule 2110, 2440, IM-2440-1 and IM-2440-2, and FINRA Rule 2010.

According to FINRA’s findings the Firm also failed to provide adequate supervision reasonably designed to achieve compliance with respect to applicable FINRA rules concerning corporate bond pricing in that the firm failed to detect the transactions referenced above.

In settling this matter, Global Financial Services LLC neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

SEC Seeks to Halt Scheme Raising Investor Funds Under Guise of JOBS Act

On April 25, 2013, the SEC announced fraud charges against a Spokane Valley, Washington, company and its owner for misleading investors with claims to raise billions of investment capital under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act and invest it exclusively in American businesses.

The SEC alleges that Daniel F. Peterson and his company USA Real Estate Fund 1 promised investors that they could reap spectacular returns from an upcoming offering in a “secured” product backed by prominent financial firms. Peterson repeatedly told investors that the 2012 JOBS Act would enable him to raise billions of dollars by advertising the offering to the general public, and produce big profits for early investors. He preyed upon investors’ sense of patriotism by promising to invest the proceeds of the offering in exclusively American businesses, and help assist in Washington State’s economic recovery. The SEC alleges that Peterson used investors’ money for personal expenses, and is continuing to solicit investors and may be preparing to tout the offering through investor seminars and public advertising.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Spokane, Peterson sold common stock in USA Real Estate Fund from November 2010 to June 2012 to more than 20 investors in Washington and at least five other states. In e-mails and in periodic e-newsletters that he used to solicit USA Real Estate Fund investors, Peterson said that he was preparing to raise billions of dollars in a second offering of additional “preferred” securities, which he claimed would be “secured” and have 10-year returns of up to 1,300 percent. Peterson claimed that two prominent Wall Street financial firms had partnered with him to bring his offering to market, and that the firms had conducted due diligence on USA Real Estate Fund and were structuring sales agreements and pricing. Peterson promised the early investors they would profit massively once the purported future offering was underway.

Peterson’s claims were false. He has no guaranteed investment product to offer, the projected returns were either fictitious or based on implausible and unsupported analyses, and he has no affiliation with any financial firm to underwrite his purported future offering, the SEC alleges.

The SEC alleges that Peterson used investor money to pay for his rent, food, entertainment, vacations, and a rented Mercedes Benz SUV. He also used investor funds on clothing for friends, luggage for his wife, and expenses at a Las Vegas casino.

The SEC’s complaint charged USA Real Estate Fund and Peterson with violating the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The SEC is seeking a court order requiring USA Real Estate Fund and Peterson to return their allegedly ill-gotten gains, with interest, and pay financial penalties. It is also seeking a preliminary injunction restraining USA Real Estate Fund and Peterson from engaging in conduct that would allow them to continue their scheme and restraining them from further violations of the securities laws.

FINRA Disciplinary Action Against Bryan R. Mackey

On April 25, 2013, FINRA announced that it had fined and suspended New York Registered Representative Bryan R. Mackey.  The suspension effective dates were from May 20, 2013 until June 10, 2013.

During his association with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, on September 28, 2012 Mr. Mackey exercised discretion in connection with 17 transactions he effected in the account of one customer.  He did not have written authorization from the customer to place discretionary trades.  Moreover, he failed to obtain written acceptance of the account as a discretionary account from Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith.  This conduct is in direction violation of NASD Rule 2510(b).

In settling this matter Bryan R. Mackey neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.  It was unclear whether the customer initiated a FINRA arbitration, or any other type of securities arbitration.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding Against Knight Capital Americas, L.P.

On April 25, 2013, FINRA announced that it had fined Knight Capital Americas, L.P. $20,000.00, and that they were required to pay $890.14, plus interest, in restitution to customers.

FINRA’s findings state that during the period of January 1, 2009 through March 31, 2009 there were 21 instances when the Firm failed to contemporaneously or partially execute a customer limit order in seven NASDAQ securities after it traded each subject security for its own market-making account at a price that would have satisfied each customer’s limit order. The conduct described in this paragraph violates FINRA Rule 2010 and NASD IM-2110-2.

During the same time period outlined above there were also 31 instances where Knight Capital Americas, L.P. accepted customer market orders, traded for their own account at prices that would have satisfied the customer market orders, and failed to immediately thereafter execute the customer market orders up to the size and at the same price at which it traded for its own account or a at better price.  This is a distinct violation of FINRA Rule 2010 and NASD Rule 2111(b)

In settling this matter, Knight Capital Americas, L.P. neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding Against RBC Capital Markets, LLC

On April 24, 2013, FINRA announced that it had censured and fined RBC Capital Markets, LLC $97,500.00.

FINRA’s findings state that during a review period of July 1, 2009 through September 30, 2009, RBC failed to use due diligence with transactions in corporate bonds for or with customers to ascertain the best inter-dealer market, and failed to buy or sell in such market so that the resultant price to its customers was as favorable as possible under prevailing market conditions.   The conduct described in this paragraph constitutes distinct violations of FINRA Rule 2010 and NASD Rule 2320.

The Firm also purchased municipal securities for its own account from a customer and/or sold municipal securities for its own account to a customer at an aggregate price (including any markdown or markup) that was not fair and reasonable, taking into consideration all relevant factors, including the best judgment of the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer as to the fair market value of the securities at the time of the transactions; the expense involved in effecting the transactions; the fact that the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer is entitled to a profit; and the total dollar amount of the transactions.  This violates MSRB Rules G-17 and G-30(a).

In addition, FINRA found that RBC failed to provide written notification disclosing to its customers its correct capacity in transactions; failed to disclose details available upon request for compensation, which is stated in a  single amount of customer confirmations; and disclosed on customer confirmations that a commission was charged for order filled in a principal capacity.  As a result, the Firm was not in compliance with SEC Rule 10b-10.

In settling this matter RBC Capital Markets, LLC neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding Against Caprock Securities, Inc.

On April 19, 2013, FINRA announced that it had censured and fined Caprock Securities, Inc. $15,000.00.  The Firm consented to the entry of findings that it failed to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system reasonably designed to review and retain its associated persons’ email communications with the public.

Between March 5, 2007 and December 23, 2011, Caprock failed to retain all of its business-related electronic communication in a non-rewritable, non-erasable format. By failing to establish a reasonable supervisory system for email review and retention, Caprock violated NASD Rules 3010(d) and 2110, FINRA Rule 2010, and SEC Rule 17-a-4(b)(4).  SEC Rule 17-a-4(b)(4) requires members to preserve, for a period of not less than three years, the first two years in an easily accessible place, electronic and other communications relating to their business as broker-dealers.

In concluding this settlement, Caprock neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding Against HKC Securities, Inc., nka AGGM, Inc., and Harold K. Cohen

On April 18, 2013, FINRA announced that it had fined HKC Securities, Inc., nka AGGM, Inc., and Harold K. Cohen collectively $60,000.00 in sanctions for materially failing to fairly present the risks and potential disadvantages of hedge fund investing.

Between January 2008 and June 2011, the Firm’s procedures for the review and approval of hedge fund institutional sales material were not reasonably designed or implemented to achieve compliance with FINRA’s contents standards for institutional sales material.  Cohen, as the Firm’s Chief Compliance Officer and the principal responsible for the review and approval of institutional sales material, did not engage in adequate supervision to achieve compliance with FINRA’s content standards for institutional sales material.  The Firm and Cohen violated NASD Rule 221(b)(1)(B), NASD Rule 3010, NASD Rule 2110, and FINRA Rule 2010.

The Firm failed to adequately supervise the use of institutional sales material by its registered representatives.  Cohen did not follow the Firm’s written procedures, which required post-hoc review of institutional sales material and a written notation of approval.  Cohen’s review was not focused on compliance with FINRA’s content standards.  Rather, he looked to see whether the Firm’s summary was consistent with his own understanding of the funds being marketed.  The failure to review documents prepared by the funds resulted in documents being sent to potential investors that were labeled “not to be distributed to clients,” among other things.

The findings also concluded that the Firm did not maintain a complete file of institutional sales material and did not notate the sales material with the name of the person who prepared the document and the date the document was first circulated.  Cohen was responsible for ensuring the Firm’s compliance with these recordkeeping requirements.

In settling this matter, HKC Securities, Inc., nka AGGM, Inc., and Harold K. Cohen neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.