July 24, 2015

SEC Probes Whether Mutual Fund Managers Are Charging Investors Undisclosed Fees

The Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into whether Franklin Templeton, Oppenheimer Funds (OPY), J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM), and other mutual fund managers are charging investors for fund fees that have not been fully disclosed. While money managers are allowed to use some of investors’ money to pay compensation to the brokers who sell a fund's shares, as well as for certain marketing purposes, the regulator wants to know whether firms are exceeding the allowed limits.

The Commission is trying to find out whether mutual fund companies have come up with ways to make extra payments to brokers by using investor assets to cover certain services, such as the consolidation of client trading records. The agency is worried that proper disclosure of these added fees are not being made to investors. The SEC is also wondering if brokers are more inclined to recommend funds that provide such additional payments, compelling them to prioritize profit over funds.

Fund companies have said that they do properly disclose fees for marketing. Oppenheimer, which is one of the companies that the SEC has investigated over this issue, has said that it doesn't bill mutual fund clients for recordkeeping costs but that the money comes from the firm.

Continue reading "SEC Probes Whether Mutual Fund Managers Are Charging Investors Undisclosed Fees" »

July 11, 2015

Massachusetts Regulator Charges Securities America Over Bait and Switch Ads By Broker Accused of Targeting Senior Investors

Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin is charging Securities America with inadequate supervision of a broker who is accused of using a “grossly deceptive” radio ad campaign to target older investors. The state regulator said that the financial firm shouldn’t have approved the spots that Barry Armstrong ran on his AM radio show. His show, which airs on WRKO-AM, is syndicated on different stations.

The broker purportedly ran ads asking listeners to call for information related to Alzheimer’s Disease when what Armstrong really was doing was collecting their contact information so he could offer to sell them financial advice. Galvin’s office said that the broker engaged in ‘bait and switch’ by falsely advertising one service when he was really selling another type of service.

The regulator contends that Securities America failed to identify or prevent Armstrong’s unethical conduct by neglecting to ask even one question about the content of the ads or attendant mailing materials. Now, the state wants a censure, a cease-and-desist order, and a fine imposed against the firm.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Regulator Charges Securities America Over Bait and Switch Ads By Broker Accused of Targeting Senior Investors " »

June 22, 2015

Investor Want Wells Fargo Advisers to Pay $100K in Damages Over F-Squared Investment Losses

A client of Wells Fargo Advisors (WFC) is looking to recover at least $100,000 in damages for losses he sustained from investing with F-Squared Investments Inc. The arbitration case comes six months after F-Squared consented to pay $35 million to resolve Securities and Exchange Commission charges accusing the asset manager of making false claims about its flagship investment product’s performance. The 68-year-old widower’s claim will test whether investors can pursue broker-dealers for selling F-Squared products.

The claimant, a moderately conservative investor who was looking for moderately conservative growth for his retirement account assets, began working with a Wells Fargo financial adviser in 2011. The brokerage firm made F-Squared managed-accounts available to advisors in 2013.

According to InvestmentNews, The investor’s advisor put about $900K of the client’s money—most of his savings, says his attorney—in products managed by two ETF strategists. Over 50% of the money went into F-Squared’s AlphaSector Allocator Select. Meantime, the investor said it paid Wells Fargo about $19,000 in fees for recommending the products. He believes that the firm had a conflict when it recommended investments because they came with such high commissions. Also, the fees erased potential capital gains for the claimant.

Continue reading " Investor Want Wells Fargo Advisers to Pay $100K in Damages Over F-Squared Investment Losses" »

June 15, 2015

FINRA Pursues Broker For Allegedly Trying to Bilk Elderly Investor with Alzheimer’s of $1.8M

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. has filed an elder financial fraud case against broker John Waszolek, who worked for UBS Wealth Management (UBS) at the time of the allegations. According to the self-regulatory organization, in 2009, Waszkolek took advantage of an 81-year-old client when he had her appoint him as a beneficiary of her trust even though she lacked the “testamentary capacity” to make such decisions and would not have been able to protect herself from exploitation. Testamentary capacity refers to a person’s mental and legal ability to make or modify a will.

The elderly widow lived by herself and had been a client of Waszolek since 1982. However, contends FINRA, it wasn’t until 2008 as her health worsened that the broker allegedly began to go above and beyond his professional obligation to her. He was the one that purportedly took her to see the doctor, who diagnosed her with Alzheimer’s. The regulator also says that he met with an estate planning lawyer so that he could be appointed as his client’s agent and given power of attorney. He wanted her trust modified so that he would be named the residual beneficiary.

When the estate planning lawyer refused because the elderly women lacked testamentary capacity, Waszolek purportedly suggested that his client see another lawyer. The amendment made to her trust would cause some $1.3 million that was supposed to be divided among four charities to go to the broker instead. That figure would eventually go up to $1.8 million.

Continue reading "FINRA Pursues Broker For Allegedly Trying to Bilk Elderly Investor with Alzheimer’s of $1.8M" »

May 14, 2015

UBS Ordered to Pay Retired Investor $200,000 For Puerto Rico Bond Fund Losses

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) panel has ordered UBS Financial Services, Inc. and UBS Financial Services of Puerto Rico (collectively “UBS”) to pay an investor $200,000 for losses she sustained by investing in UBS’s Puerto Rico closed-end bond funds. This is the first known ruling from a FINRA arbitration panel in the hundreds of municipal bond fraud lawsuits filed by investors over the last few years.

The investor, Yolanda Bauza, invested money she obtained in a car accident settlement. In her Puerto Rico bond fraud case, Bauza alleged misrepresentations, securities fraud, and other wrongdoing. In addition to the $200,000 award, the arbitrators denied the firm’s request to remove information about the case from the public records of David Lugo and Carlos Gonzalez, two of the brokers who advised Bauza.

According to Sam Edwards, a partner with Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, who is representing a number of Puerto Rico bond fund investors, “We are very pleased that FINRA’s arbitrators recognized what those of us representing the many thousands of investors in Puerto Rico and abroad have known for almost two years: UBS’s Puerto Rico bond funds were highly conflicted, very risky and completely misrepresented to investors. They were suitable for almost no investors. As a result, those who invested in these bond funds, like Ms. Bauza, should be fairly compensated.”

The slew of Puerto Rico bond cases, which come in the wake of a number of funds losing up to two-thirds of their value between 2011 and 2013, have been weighing on UBS. This is the first award. In addition to UBS’s woes with the bond funds and local Puerto Rico bonds, the territory is now contending with $73 billion in debt, which, it is estimated, Puerto Rico cannot afford to repay.

Investors, including those who should have never invested in the municipal bonds because their portfolios were never equipped to handle the risks and had no need for tax-free income, have sustained huge losses. UBS Puerto Rico brokers, in particular, have been singled out for the way they made inappropriate investment recommendations to customers, including using loans against the bond funds to buy more funds.

Specifically, some investors have complained that UBS Puerto Rico brokers, including David Lugo, convinced them to borrow money so they could invest even more cash in the bond funds. Many of these investors are retirees, like Ms. Bauza, who have lost their entire savings because they followed UBS’ advice.

In 2012, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against UBS. It accused the firm of concealing that there was a liquidity crisis, making misleading statements to investors, and hiding control of the secondary market for nearly two dozen proprietary closed-end funds. The regulator also filed charges against ex-chief executive Miguel A. Ferrer and capital markets head Carlos J. Ortiz. Without denying or agreeing to the charges, UBS settled with the SEC for $26.6 million.

In Puerto Rico and the U.S., Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LTD LLP is helping investor pursue their municipal bond fraud claims in arbitration. Please contact our Puerto Rico bond fraud attorneys today so we can help you explore your legal options. We also represent clients who purchased these municipal bonds through Banco Santander (SAN), Banco Popular, and other brokerage firms.

UBS must pay $200,000 to Puerto Rico fund investor, Reuters, May 13, 2015


More Blog Posts:
Puerto Rico’s General Obligation Rating is Downgraded to CCC+, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 28, 2015

Hedge Funds Are Moving in on Municipal Debt, Including Puerto Rico Debt, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 15, 2013

Killeen Man Accused of Texas Securities Fraud Targeting Military, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 23, 2015

May 5, 2015

City of Los Angeles, CA Sues Wells Fargo for Fraud

The city of Los Angeles has filed a civil complaint against Wells Fargo Bank (WFC). The lawsuit accuses the bank of encouraging employees to take part in conduct that was illegal and fraudulent, including setting up unauthorized accounts for customers, charging them unwarranted fees, and ruining their credit.

The city is looking to get a court order stopping the alleged wrongdoing. It wants penalties for every violation, as well as restitution for customers that were hurt. The case is applicable to residents of Los Angeles County and perhaps even customers outside that area.

According to the complaint, employees purportedly misused the confidential data of customers and neglected to close unauthorized accounts when the latter complained. Certain employees even allegedly raided customer accounts for money to set up additional accounts. When unwarranted fees went unpaid, the bank purportedly put customers into collections because of unauthorized withdrawals and damaging data on their credit cards because of these unwarranted fees.

Such actions, contends the city, occurred because the bank was pressuring employees to generate sales. Customers sustained financial harm as a result, while Wells Fargo made a profit and employees were blamed.

Meantime, the California-based bank has pinned these problems on a few rogue employees, whom it says it fired or disciplined. However, the city of LA believes that Wells Fargo has made minimal efforts at making sure such abuses stop. For example, contends the complaint, when the bank took action against an employee for sales conduct that was unethical, it didn't notify customers of the breach, refund the fees that were owed to them, or offer remedies for other injuries its staff may have caused.

The Los Angeles Times, in 2013, investigated these allegations against Wells Fargo, which is known for cross-selling financial products to customers. The paper's probe echoed similar claims as this lawsuit, with many statements made coming from current and former Wells Fargo employees who worked at different branches.

Bank workers were purportedly coached on how to inflate sales figures. Employees set up duplicate accounts without letting customers know. Pre-approved credit cards were ordered without customer consent. Complaints about the never requested cards were dismissed as having been generate by computer glitch or "mistake," with cards accidentally issued to the wrong person with a similar name as the customer who’d supposedly placed the order. According to employees, Wells Fargo expected staff to sell at least four financial products to the majority of their customers, with some shooting to sell eight per household.

Since the LA Times published its findings from the probe, dozens of Wells Fargo employees and customers have come forward to report similar issues. Complaints are coming in even today.

Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LTD LLP represents investors in recovering losses they suffered because of securities fraud.

Wells Fargo Accused of Fraudulent Behavior, Taking Advantage of Customers, ABC News, May 5, 2015

Wells Fargo's pressure-cooker sales culture comes at a cost, Los Angeles Times, December 21, 2013


More Blog Posts:
RBC Capital Markets Must Pay $1M Fine and $434K Restitution to Customers Over Unsuitable Reverse Convertible Sales, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 30, 2015

FINRA and SEC Unveil Report on Senior Investors, Cite Concerns About Unsuitable Recommendations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 27, 2015

FINRA Fines J.P. Turner, LaSalle St. Securities, and H. Beck For Report Supervision Lapses, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, March 30, 2015

April 16, 2015

Former JPMorgan Chase Investment Adviser Faces Criminal and Civil Charges for Allegedly Stealing $20M from Clients

Michael Oppenheim, an ex-JPMorgan Chase (JPM) investment adviser, was arrested this week and charged with bilking clients of at least $20 million. Oppenheim worked for the firm from 2002 until March of this year.

Authorities claim that starting as early as 2011, Oppenheim convinced clients to allow him to take money out of their accounts to invest in low-risk municipal bonds. Instead, he allegedly used the funds to get cashier’s checks that he put into brokerage accounts that he controlled. He also used the money to trade options and stocks in different companies.

Because his options trading activities were generally unprofitable, most of his investments lead to losses. By last year he’d lost some $13.5 million. Oppenheim was also purportedly using client money to pay for a home loan and cover bills. He is accused of concealing his embezzelment by using fraudulent client statements and transferring funds among his clients.

Meantime, the U.S Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a parallel claim against the New York-based financial adviser. The regulator says that Oppenheim abused his role as a private client advisor, promising customers that he would put their funds in secure and safe investments but instead using the money to aggressively play the market in stocks that belonged to him.

The SEC is accusing Oppenheim of numerous violations, including those involving the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. It wants penalties, disgorgement, and an injunction.

Contact our investment adviser fraud law firm today.


Ex-JPMorgan banker charged with taking $20 million from clients, Reuters, April 16, 2015

SEC Says Bank VP Swiped $20 Million From Clients, Courthouse News Service, April 16, 2015

Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Former UBS Puerto Rico Executives File a $10M FINRA Arbitration Claim Against the Firm, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 15, 2015

SEC Settles With Ex-Freddie Mac Executives Over Allegations They Mislead Investors Over Mortgage Risks, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, April 15, 2015

FINRA Bars Owner of Broker-Dealer, Seller of Illiquid Equipment-Leasing Funds for Misusing Investor Money, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 14, 2015

April 15, 2015

Former UBS Puerto Rico Executives File a $10M FINRA Arbitration Claim Against the Firm

Siblings Teresa and George Bravo, who formerly worked as financial advisors at UBS Financial Services Inc. of Puerto Rico (UBS-PR), have filed a $10 million Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration claim against the firm. The Bravos, both were senior vice presidents at the broker-dealer, claim that management deceived not just customers but also employees about proprietary closed mutual funds.

The Bravos said that they thought working with UBS would help them be of better service to their clients, which is why they left their old firm. However, the allegedly fraudulent conduct taking place at UBS created material conflicts of interest for them and other employees. The Bravos are contending that during the three years they worked at UBS, they were repeatedly deceived, mistreated, threatened, and coerced before being forced out.

They collectively managed over $120 million in client assets while working for UBS. According to their complaint, the Bravos said that UBS created a high-pressure atmosphere to get brokers to find and sell more of UBS’s proprietary closed-end mutual funds or risk termination otherwise. Teresa Bravo says that she was even duped into buying $100,000 in mutual funds herself. She and her brother are accusing UBS of deceiving customers for its own protection and trying to artificially preserve the Puerto Rican closed-end funds market.

It was in 2012 that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission submitted charges against UBS for allegedly making misleading statements to investors and downplaying that there was a liquidity crisis. UBS Puerto Rico settled the claims for $26 million. UBS executives Carlos J. Ortiz and Miguel A. Ferrer were cleared of the charges during a later hearing with an SEC administrative judge. Since that decision from the SEC, Ferrer made headlines concerning UBS’s closed-end funds when a recording of his voice was released. On it he can be heard pressuring UBS brokers to sell the Puerto Rican closed-end funds despite their list of concerns about the investments.

The Bravos say UBS’s behavior has hurt their business and earning potential. They believe that the firm should be liable for their loss of business and reputation, as well as for UBS’s actions stemming from fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud, negligence, breach of duty to inform an agent, negligent misrepresentation and other claims. Specifically, the Bravos have asked for $10 million in compensatory damages. They would like UBS to pay them punitive damages, too.

Puerto Municipal Bond Fraud Cases

For the past two years, our Puerto Rico bond fraud lawyers have been working with clients to file claims against UBS Puerto Rico, Banco Santander (SAN), Banco Popular, and other brokerage firms because of losses in these same closed-end funds or in similar investments. Many investors should not have been involved with these investments, which were not suitable for their portfolios, risk tolerance levels, or investment goals in the first place.

Please contact our Puerto Rico bond fraud law firm today. We represent investors from the U.S. mainland and the Commonwealth.


More Blog Posts:
Puerto Rico’s Debt Gets Downgraded to "B" by Fitch Ratings, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 28, 2015

Doral Bank In Puerto Rico Fails, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 5, 2015

April 7, 2015

LPL Financial Should Pay $3.6M in Fines, Repayments for REIT Sales to Older Investors, Says NH Regulator

The New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation wants LPL Financial (LPLA) to pay clients $2.4 million in buybacks and restitution for 48 sales of nontraded real estate investment trusts that were purportedly unsuitable for elderly investors. The regulator, which says the firm did not properly supervise its agents, is also fining LPL $1 million plus $200,000 in investigative expenses.

The securities case springs from transactions involving an 81-year-old state resident that purchased a nontraded REIT from the firm in 2008. The investor, whose liquid net worth was $2.5 million and invested $253,000 in the financial instrument, would go on to lose a significant amount of money. A probe ensued.

The state regulator contends that the 48 REIT sales, totaling $2.4 million lead to concentration that went beyond LPL guidelines and that the firm sold hundreds of nontraded REITs to clients in New Hampshire on the basis of “clearly erroneous “client financial data, while frequently violating its own policies. LPL has reportedly admitted that 10 of the 48 transactions deemed unlawful by the state were unsuitable according to its own guidelines. The Securities Bureau wants to take away the firm’s license to sell securities in New Hampshire.

Meantime, a former LPL Financial broker has been permanently barred from the securities industry by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Raymond Daniel Schmidt, previously affiliated with LPL Financial Holdings Inc. in Southern California, violated industry rules when he borrowed funds from seven clients between ’09 and ’12. He settled with the self-regulatory organization without denying or admitting to FINRA’s findings.

Schmidt borrowed close to $2.3 million to build the Pakalana Sanctuary, a vacation rental property on Hawaii’s big island. He admitted his involvement in the retreat center/vacation center in a public regulatory filing in 2013. However, said FINRA, Schmidt actually purchased the property in 2009, opening it for business as its owner and operator three years later.

Brokers are not allowed to borrow money from clients. They also can’t take part in business activities outside the firm without telling the company and typically require the latter’s approval.

FINRA says that Schmidt failed to tell LPL about the property or the loans from customers even when he filled out yearly questionnaires required by the firm. Even when he eventually told the firm about the real estate, he denied that he owned interest in the property.

Earlier this year, Schmidt told the regulator's enforcement unit that he wouldn’t give over documents or cooperate with its probe. He is currently the subject of an elder abuse and negligence case related to the Hawaiian real estate investment that the plaintiff made.

Contact our REIT losses lawyers to explore your legal options.

NH regulators seek $3.6m judgment against LPL Financial over risky real estate, Union Leader, April 7, 2015

Watchdog bars ex-LPL broker who tapped client funds for Hawaii retreat, Reuters, March 26, 2015

New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation


More Blog Posts:
Ex-LPL Financial Adviser, James Bashaw from Texas, Lands at New Brokerage Firm, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 30, 2014

CNL Lifestyle Properties REIT Dips in Value, May Sell Ski Resorts, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, March 16, 2015

Broker and Adviser News: Morgan Stanley Sues Ameriprise Broker, Former UBS Broker Alleges Investor Risk Levels Were Mischaracterized, and Ex-Bank of America Merrill Lynch Trainees Seek Overtime, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, March 5, 2015

March 31, 2015

Investor Fraud News: NFL Free Agent Sues Bank of America For $20M, FINRA Arbitration Panel Awards $1.3M to Investor in Case Involving Ex-Stifel Broker, and Tony Thompson and His Brokerage Firm are Barred from Industry

Former Colts Football Player Sues Bank of America for $20M
Dwight Freeney, formerly with the Indianapolis Colts and currently an NFL free agent, is suing Bank of America (BAC) for securities fraud. He and his Roof Group LLC say they were bilked of over $20 million.

In his securities fraud case, Freeney contends that the bank’s wealth management division is to blame for taking part, aiding, and abetting in the scam that cost him money. He noted that Bank of America went after him in 2010 to become one of its high net worth and affluent clients.

Aside from losing money, Freeney said that he was forced to close his restaurant venture. He wants compensation and punitive damages.

However, the bank disagrees with the claims, noting that the people accountable for fraud—an ex-bank adviser and a business associate—already were arrested for wiring $2.2M from the pro football player’s account. A spokesperson noted that the ex-employee committed the fraud after she was no longer with Merrill Lynch and Freeney had retained her services personally.

Ex-Daughter-in-Law of Ex-Stifel Broker Gets $1.3M FINRA Arbitration Award
A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Panel has awarded Tracy Noble Gilbert $1.3M in damages for the way that her former father-in-law, ex-Stifel Nicolaus & Co. (SF) broker Lanis Dale Noble handled her finances. Gilbert claims that while still with Stifel, Noble engaged in churning and breach of fiduciary duty related to the use of margin in her account, ManuLife and SunLife variable annuities, and a Friedman Billings Ramsey real estate investment trust (REIT). Stifel denied the allegations.

The three-person panel awarded Gilbert $1.29 million in compensatory damages and $250,000 in legal fees. However, it denied her request for punitive damages.

Tony Thompson, TNP Securities Barred by FINRA
Tony Thompson and his brokerage firm TNP Securities have been barred from the industry. FINRA said that Thompson and his broker-dealer misled investors about tenant-in-common deals. Because of this, contends the self-regulatory organization, every investor that bought Guaranteed Notes LLC notes after January 1, 2009 was misled and at the very least unjustly experienced loss of the principal on their investment.

Thompson raised some $50 million through private placement securities sales from 2008 into 2012. Thompson purportedly was responsible for marketing P Notes, 12% Notes, and PPP Notes. However, material misrepresentations and omissions were made to investors during the sales.

Thompson has said that the misrepresentations and omissions were because he depended in good faith on the advice and information that others gave him.

FINRA panel initially sought to have Thompson pay restitution. However, it didn't find sufficient basis that investor losses in the private placements were because of the misstatements and omissions that he made. He will, however, have to pay $6 million for administrative proceedings.

FINRA Bars and Fines Rep, Broker-Dealer $39.6M, ThinkAdvisor, April 2, 2015

Ex-Colt Dwight Freeney sues for $20 million in fraud case, IndyStar, March 31, 2015

Finra arbitration panel awards investor $1.3 million from ex-Stifel broker, Investment News, April 1, 2015


More Blog Posts:
Oppenheimer Must Pay $2.5 Million Fine, $1.25 Million in Restitution for Not Supervising Ex-Broker, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 29, 2015

Ex-F-Squared CEO Still Battling SEC, Firm Dealing With Fallout from Securities Fraud Charges, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 27, 2015

March 29, 2015

Oppenheimer Must Pay $2.5 Million Fine, $1.25 Million in Restitution for Not Supervising Ex-Broker

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is fining Oppenheimer & Co (OPY) $2.5M for not supervising Mark Hotton. The ex-broker stole from customers and excessively traded in their accounts. Oppenheimer must also pay $1.25 million in restitution.

To date, the brokerage firm has paid over $6 million to settle customer securities arbitration claims involving Hotton. This latest restitution will go to another 22 customers who did not file claims.

According to the self-regulatory organization, Oppenheimer did not properly investigate Hotton before hiring him, despite the fact that FINRA’s own records linked him to several customer complaints and criminal charges. After discovering that Hotton’s business partners sued him for bilking them out of millions of dollars, still the firm did not heighten supervision over him.

FINRA also said that Oppenheimer disregarded “red flags” in wire transfer requests and correspondence that indicated he was wiring money from customer accounts to entities that he controlled or belonged to him. Because of this, says the SRO, Hotton was able to move over $2.9 million of customer funds. (FINRA said that the firm did not properly supervise his trading of customer accounts even though its surveillance analysts noticed that he was trading at levels that appeared excessive.)

The regulator said that Oppenheimer made over 300 required filings to the SRO in an untimely fashion, with many submitted over 230 days late. Because of this, said FINRA, the public did not become aware of the serious claims made against some of the firm’s registered representatives, including Hotton, until later. By settling with the SRO, Oppenehimer is consenting to an entry of FINRA’s findings. It has not, however, admitted to or denied the charges.

Meantime, last year, Hotton was sentenced to 34 months in prison last year. Among his victims were the producers of the Broadway play “Rebeccca the Musical.” He also bilked a real estate firm in Connecticut.

The Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent
(PDF)

FINRA Sanctions Oppenheimer & Co. $3.75 Million for Supervisory Failures, FINRA, March 26, 2015


More Blog Posts:

Oppenheimer to Pay $20M Settlement to the SEC and FinCEN Over Penny Stock Violations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 28, 2015

SEC Sanctions UBS, Charles Swab, Oppenheimer, & 10 Other Firms For Improper Sales of Puerto Rico Junk Bonds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 3, 2014

SEC Commissioners Oppose Regulator’s Leniency Toward Oppenheimer, Despite Violations, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 12, 2015

March 9, 2015

Wealthfront CEO Claims Schwab is Fooling Investors Over “Free” Automated Investment Platform

Adam Nash, the CEO of Wealthfront, claims that Charles Schwab & Co. (SCHW) is deceiving investors by claiming that Intelligent Portfolios, its automated investing platform, is free. Nash, whose company competes with Schwab’s new service, contends that the platform will cost consumers thousands of dollars in opportunity expenses involving expensive “smart beta” exchange-traded funds and high cash allocations. These costs, he argues, are concealed in disclosure documents.

Intelligent Portfolios lets consumers manage, rebalance, and oversee their portfolios through the Internet. The program allows investors to evaluate their goals and risk tolerances using specific questions. Investors must have at least $5,000 and they would get recommendations based on their responses.

Algorithms are supposed to help clients build and maintain their portfolios in low cost ETFs with asset classes of up to 20. Intelligent Portfolios joins Wealthfront and Betterment in the robo-field for automated investing.

Nash, however, called Schwab out on his blog, referring to the firm as the new “Merrill Lynch.” As one example of why the competitor’s robo program isn’t free, he pointed to Schwab’s SEC filing, which said that every investment strategy will have a sweep allocation in which 6-30% of the value of an account will be kept in cash and consumers cannot use this for investments or get rid of it.

Schwab has responded with its own blog post, accusing the Wealthfront CEO’s post of being misleading. The firm argued that the cash Nash points to is an investment and should not be considered a source of revenue for the company.

With its new robo-advisor service, Schwab is touting that there are no advisory or accounts service fees as well as no commissions. It says it will instead collect fees on fourteen of the ETFs that it manages and are part of the Intelligence Portfolios’ program, as well as from eight other ETFs, which are run by other fund groups that pay Schwab for services. And while the firm has admitted to possibilities for conflicts of interest, it says that it has acted to minimize these.

Robo-Advisors
This type of online wealth management service gives portfolio advice that is automated and algorithm-based and doesn’t involve human financial planners. Robo-advisers work with the same software that traditional advisors do but only provide portfolio management and not wealth management. This service is typically low-cost, requiring low account minimums. They are proving to be a draw for younger investors, who are used to doing a lot on the Internet.

Excessive Fees
Excessive and hidden fees paid to broker-dealers and investment advisers can cost investors, who may not be factoring these figures in when determining whether or not they are making a profit or sustaining losses. Any fees that are charged must be made known to an investor.

If you believe that you have sustained financial losses that you shouldn’t have, you may want to speak with an experienced investment adviser fraud law firm right away. At Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LTD LLP, we have helped thousands of investors recoup their money.

Read Nash's blog post, Medium.com

Response to Blog by Wealthfront CEO Adam Nash, AboutSchwab

Schwab raises eyebrows, new issues with robo-investment tool, SFGate, Kathleen Pender, March 9, 2015

Schwab to launch adviser robo in Q2; consumer version unveiled today, Investment News, March 9, 2015


More Blog Posts:
SEC Sanctions UBS, Charles Swab, Oppenheimer, & 10 Other Firms For Improper Sales of Puerto Rico Junk Bonds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 3, 2014

FINRA Panel Orders Morgan Stanley Unit to Pay Banamex Unit $4.5M Over Alleged Unauthorized Third Party Loans
, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, August 15, 2014

District Court Imposes $26M Commodity Pool Fraud Penalty, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 7, 2015

February 25, 2015

Morgan Stanley, DOJ Arrive at $2.6B Mortgage Bond Settlement

Morgan Stanley (MS) has reached an agreement in principal with the U.S. Department of Justice to resolve claims related to its sale of mortgage bonds. The government probe looked into allegations that the financial firm misrepresented the quality of home loans that were packaged into bonds.

The broker-dealer, however, still needs to negotiate with the DOJ about other terms, including what would be included in a signed statement of facts. The settlement doesn’t resolve probes by state litigators.

Morgan Stanley’s financial agreement is much smaller than what other firms have paid when settling with the Justice Department. Citigroup Inc. (C) paid $7 billion, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) paid $13 billion, and Bank of America Corp. (BAC) paid $16.65 billion.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Goldman Sachs Group (GS) is expected to be the next firm to settle with the government over mortgage bond claims. Earlier this week, that firm disclosed in a filing that the U .S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of California sent notice that the government had “preliminarily” found that Goldman Sachs violated federal law pertaining to mortgage bond sales.

The bank said that it is estimating at least $2.5 billion in legal losses but that this doesn’t factor in future claims that may arise from future federal probes into misconduct over residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBSs).


U.S. Attorney General Eric holder recently said that federal prosecutors have 90-days to determine whether they can bring mortgage bond cases against individuals for parts they may have played in the 2008 financial crisis.

Earlier this month the DOJ, 19 states, and the District Columbia reached a $1.375 billion settlement with Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC and McGraw Hill Financial Inc. The agreement resolves claims that the credit rating agency schemed to bilk investors in Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) and RMBS (S).

The RMBS lawsuits contend that investors suffered substantial losses because S & P put out inflated ratings that did not accurately reflect the true credit risks of the securities. The credit rater is also accused of falsely representing that it was putting out objective ratings that were not influenced by its business ties with the investment banks that issued the securities.

Unfortunately, many investor suffered substantial losses during the financial crisis. In many instances, financial firms are being blamed for putting their own interests before investors.

Contact our mortgage-backed securities lawyer if you suspect you were the victim of financial fraud.

Morgan Stanley to Pay $2.6 Billion to Settle Mortgage Cases, The Wall Street Journal, February 25, 2015


More Blog Posts:
Morgan Stanley to Pay a $280,000 Fine to CFTC for Records and Supervision Failures Involving SureInvestment and $35M Ponzi Scam, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 16, 2014

Morgan Stanley Must Pay Connecticut Regulators $5M for Supervisory Violations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 18, 2014

US Probing Whether Morgan Stanley Data Breach Was Linked to Fired Financial Adviser, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 18, 2015


February 17, 2015

DOJ Investigating UBS Over Losses Related To Firm’s V10 Enhanced FX Carry Strategy

UBS Group AG (UBS) is under scrutiny over losses related to its V10 Enhanced FX Carry Strategy. The complex financial product was sold to fund managers, businesses, and individual investors and touted as a high-yielding foreign-exchange investment that employed computer algorithms to reduce risks during volatile times.

Unfortunately, according to Bloomberg, in 2010 during the start of the debt crisis, the index to which the notes were tied lost 26% over two years. Now, sources tell Bloomberg, the U.S. Department of Justice is looking at whether traders shortchanged investors by charging them too much for executing the currency trades for the strategy.

The V10 Enhanced FX Carry Strategy created sales commissions while offering an opportunity to profit from these sales and purchases of underlying currencies. Investors bought notes tied to the V10 index, which is calculated by ranking currencies from the Group of 10 nations daily according to one-month interest rates. UBS would then bet on the three highest-yielding currencies advancing and the three lowest declining. During a rise in volatility over a predetermined level, positions would be switched. Now, investigators with the DOJ are looking at instant messages, talking to traders, and examining documents issued to customers to figure out whether UBS represented how much profit it was taking on the trades.

One investor, Walter Michaelson, claims that UBS sold him the complex financial product that he never requested nor were ever properly explained to him. He said that he and UBS agreed that he would place a $1 million home-equity loan with another bank but that the paperwork was modified after he signed so that he got a business loan instead of a personal loan. This allowed UBS to take collateral assets the equivalent of five times more than his home’s value. He was required to pay back the loan by August 2010.

According to Michaelson’s complaint, the bank’s employees said the V10 notes would garner him yearly returns of 7-15% while keeping his capital preserved. When UBS contacted him to request that he invest more in V10, he found that his investment had gone up $70K. Michaelson decided to close his position and take the funds. That was when he discovered that he had lost $127,000.

Michaelson said that because of UBS-related dealings, including those involving V10, he lost $350K. Meantime, the bank says it will mount a vigorous defense against his claims. Also under scrutiny by the DOJ for a purportedly similar strategy is Barclays (BARC)

In November, UBS, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), HSBC Holdings (HSBC), Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (RBS), Bank of America Corp. (BAC), and Citigroup (C) settled with regulators for $4.43 billion for failing to stop traders from attempting to manipulate the foreign exchange market.

UBS Client Claims Losses on Currency Product Probed by US, Bloomberg, February 16, 2015

Regulators fine global banks $4.3 billion in currency investigation, Reuters, November 12, 2014


More Blog Posts:
Jury Says Ex-Envoy Involved in Stanford Ponzi Scam Must Pay $750K, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, February 16, 2015

EU Fines ICAP $17M for Helping Traders Manipulate Yen Libor, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 17, 2015

UBS Under Scrutiny in New Tax Evasion Probe, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 4, 2015

February 9, 2015

John Carris Investments Expelled by FINRA

A FINRA panel has expelled John Carris Investments LLC, along with Chief Executive Officer George Carris from the securities industry. Bot are accused of suitability violations and fraud.

According to the panel, Carris and JCI were reckless when selling shares of stock and promissory notes. They purportedly left out material facts and used misleading statements. Both have been barred for manipulating Fibrocell’s stock price via the unfunded purchases of big stock blocks and engaging in trading that was pre-arranged through matched limit orders.

The FINRA panel said that JCI and Carris acted fraudulently when they did not reveal the poor financial state of parent company Invictus Capital yet sold the latter’s stock and notes. Material facts were purportedly left out of offering documents. Rather than shutting down operations when it ran out of net capital compliance, JCI kept selling Bridge Offering notes to investors and using money from the sales to remedy its net cap deficiency, all the while not telling customers that was were the money went. Offering sales were also used by Carris to cover his personal spending.

Carris and his firm are accused of keeping inaccurate records and books, not remitting payroll taxes for employees, failing to put into place anti-money laundering procedures and policies, and not setting up and enforcing a reasonable supervisory system.

Registered representative Andrew Tkatchenko was suspended for two years for recommending the stock and promissory notes without having reasonable grounds. Jason Barter, the head trader, received an 18-month suspension for his involvement. Both also must pay fines.

Contact our FINRA arbitration fraud lawyers today.

FINRA Hearing Panel Expels John Carris Investments and Bars CEO George Carris for Fraud, FINRA, January 14, 2015


More Blog Posts:
Oppenheimer to Pay $20M Settlement to the SEC and FinCEN Over Penny Stock Violations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 28, 2015

Libor Manipulation Cases Get the Green Light from U.S. Courts, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, January 30, 2015

PFS Investments, Ex-Broker Under Investigation for Securities Fraud that Bilked At Least Twenty Customers, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 30, 2015

February 7, 2015

UBS Financial Puerto Rico’s Chairman Told Brokers to Sell More Bond Funds in 2011

Reuters is reporting that in 2011, before the prices of UBS Financial Services Inc. of Puerto Rico’s (UBS) proprietary bond funds dropped, the firm’s chairman, Miguel Ferrer, told brokers to either start selling more UBS Puerto Rico bond funds or find a new job. He spoke after the brokerage firm’s representatives began to express reservations about selling the bond funds to their customers because of, among other issues, the high risks that were involved.

According to Reuters, sources in the know said that when UBS asked their brokers about their reluctance to sell the funds, they gave Mr. Ferrer and UBS nearly two dozen reasons, including concerns with low liquidity, excessive leverage, instability, oversupply, and because of the concentration of Puerto Rican government debt, which UBS had underwritten.

UBS has come under fire not just for pushing its own funds to clients for whom they were not appropriate, but also for improperly directing some of them to borrow money from another UBS unit to purchase more fund shares. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, along with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are reportedly looking into the allegations.

Since the fall of 2013, a number of the funds have lost half to almost two-thirds of their value. Hundreds of investors have come forward to file Puerto Rico municipal bond fraud claims against UBS Puerto Rico, seeking to get their money back.

Ferrer’s comments pushing the funds was recorded and you can hear some of what he said by clicking on the link from Reuters below. The audio of Ferrer speaking could benefit investors with securities arbitration claims. Those investors are reportedly already seeking over $900M in damages.

When asked to confirm the recording’s authenticity, UBS would not. Ferrer, however, said he would provide a translation through his attorneys (seemingly confirming it is him on the tapes) and that he reminded the financial advisers during and after the meeting that it was their responsibility to recommend only the financial instruments that were suitable for each customer.

Claimants say that UBS Puerto Rico marketed the Puerto Rico bond funds as providing tax benefits and garnering high yields but failed to notify investors about the significant risks. Investors are also accusing the firm of placing its financial interests first by guiding customers to funds with UBS-underwritten bonds. Many of these investors were retirees.

Meantime, the firm maintains that it thought the funds were solid investments that would benefit investors. However, that has not proven to be the case for many. For example, Mabel Ladicani, 88, and her daughter are among the claimants. The two of them said that without their request, UBS moved their money into debt funds that were higher risk than where they were previously invested. Shortly after the move, these risky investments financially devastated Mrs. Ladicani and her daughter.

In Puerto Rico and the United States, the law firm of Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas is representing investors in Puerto Rico bond and bond fund cases with claims against UBS Puerto Rico and other financial firms that inappropriately sold the products to customers. Contact Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LTD LLP today for a free, no obligation consultation.


Recording shows how UBS drove reluctant brokers to sell high-risk Puerto Rico funds, Reuters, February 6, 2015

An Audio of Ferrer's Recording, mp4/Reuters


More Blog Posts:
Beneficiaries of Puerto Rico Trust File Securities Fraud Lawsuit Seeking Over $4.5M From UBS Financial Services, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 5, 2015

UBS Settles SEC Dark Pool Case for $14M, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 16, 2015

UBS Under Scrutiny in New Tax Evasion Probe, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 4, 2015

January 28, 2015

Oppenheimer to Pay $20M Settlement to the SEC and FinCEN Over Penny Stock Violations

Oppenheimer & Co. (OPY) has consented to pay $20 million to resolve settlements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The firm is accused of not properly identifying and reporting suspect trades in penny stocks. The low priced, highly speculative securities are easy to manipulate and involve in pump-and-dump scams.

At least 16 Oppenheimer customers in several U.S. states were reportedly identified as having engaged in “suspicious activity.” Admitting guilt, the broker-dealer acknowledged that it did not set up and implement a proper anti-money laundering program nor did it perform sufficient due diligence on a foreign correspondent account. Oppenheimer also said that it failed to comply with the USA PATRIOT Act’s Section 311, which allows FinCEN’s director to decide whether a foreign financial firm is a money laundering risk.

The government agency said that because Oppenheimer did not notify its foreign correspondent financial institutions of the special measures under Section 311, the firm ended up conducting business without setting up the necessary procedures, policies, and internal controls that allow it to reasonably report and detect suspect fraud activity from ’08 to ’14.

FinCEN noted that this is the second time it has penalized the Oppenheimer for similar violations. It fined Oppenheimer $2.8 million in 2015. In 2013, it was the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority that fined the broker-dealer $1.4 million for anti-money laundering failures and securities laws violations.

Meantime, in the SEC’s parallel action, the regulator noted two times between ’08 and ’10 when the firm took part in unregistered penny stock sales. One incident involved a financial adviser and his branch manger purposely engaging in the unregistered sales of 2.5 billion penny stock shares for one customer even though the shares were not registration exempt. The trades made $12 million and the firm got $588,400 in commissions. Oppenheimer is accused of not reacting to red flags or looking into whether sales were exempt from registration.

The other incident is over Oppenheimer’s possible involvement in purportedly illegal activities involving Gibraltar Global Securities, which is a broke-dealer in the Bahamas that is not registered to do business in the United States. The firm purportedly executed billions of shares of penny stocks in Gibraltar’s account and either knew or was negligent if it didn’t know that that firm was making transactions and providing brokerage services for customers, many of whom were based in the U.S.

The Commission said that Oppenheimer did not report possible misconduct by Gibraltar and its clients and, also, did not properly deal with over $3 million in backup withholding taxes in that brokerage’s account. The filing of Suspicious Activity Reports is a Bank Secrecy Act requirement.

As part of the SEC settlement, Oppenheimer is admitting wrongdoing and will pay $10 million. The other $10 million resolves the FinCEN claims.

Read the SEC Order (PDF)

FBI raids Florida firm with 'Wolf of Wall Street' link: witnesses, Reuters, January 14, 2014


More Blog Posts:

SEC Sanctions UBS, Charles Swab, Oppenheimer, & 10 Other Firms For Improper Sales of Puerto Rico Junk Bonds, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 3, 2014

Ex-Oppenheimer Fund Manager to Pay $100K To Settle Private Equity Fund Fraud Charges, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, January 25, 2014


Oppenheimer Told by FINRA to Pay $675,000 Fine, $246,000 Restitution over Municipal Securities Transaction Pricing, Supervisory Violations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 12, 2013


January 20, 2015

FINRA Fines Fidelity $350K for Overcharging More than 20,000 Clients $2.4M

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority says that Fidelity Investments must pay $350,000 for overcharging thousands of clients $2.4 million for transactions involving fee-based accounts in its Institutional Wealth Services Group. The overcharges are said to have occurred from 1/06 to 9/13. The group offers brokerage and trading services to investment advisers and their clients.

According to the self-regulatory organization, the inappropriate charges happened because of a supervisory oversight involving the way that Fidelity applies fees under its asset-based pricing model. The model typically charges according to assets, not transactions.

FINRA says that until 2013, the financial firm did not have a designated supervisory principal to oversee the group’s asset-based pricing program. As a result, a number of clients may have been charged excess commissions beyond the asset-based management fee or were double billed.

Fidelity was the one that identified the issue in 2012 and notified FINRA. The firm also paid back all of the clients who were affected. According to a firm spokesperson, about 1.5% of brokerage accounts held for investment advisers were impacted, with most getting a reimbursement of under $100.

Fidelity settled FINRA’s claims without denying or admitting to the SRO’s findings.

In other Fidelity Investment news, the fund manager and eight others are getting ready to launch a dark pool. While Fidelity is leading the effort to set up the private trading venue that would benefit mutual fund shareholders, other money managers involved include J. P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM), BlackRock Inc. (BLK), T-Rowe Price Group Inc. (TROW), and Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BNK).

The market—called Luminex—would allow in asset managers wanting to trade big share volumes at once.

Fidelity-backed group unveils ‘dark pool’ for big stock trades, The Boston Globe, January 20, 2015

Fidelity, other major fund managers to launch stocks dark pool, Reuters, January 19, 2015

Fidelity fined $350,000 in billing snafu, InvestmentNews, January 20, 2015


More Blog Posts:
Fidelity Investments Settles Class Action Lawsuits Over 401(K) Plan for $12 million, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, September 5, 2014

Investor Files Securities Case Against Fidelity Over Float Income Investments Involving 401(K)s, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, May 6, 2013

FINRA Orders Pershing to Pay $3M Fine for Customer Protection Rule Violations, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, January 7, 2015

January 16, 2015

UBS Settles SEC Dark Pool Case for $14M

A UBS AG (UBS) subsidiary has consented to pay $14.4 million to resolve Securities and Exchange Commission claims that the firm committed violations involving the marketing and operation of its dark pool. The subsidiary, UBS Securities LLC, is accused of placing some players at an advantage in its alternative trading system the UBS ATS, which is the second largest dark pool in the United States.

According to the regulator, the Swiss bank failed to adequately disclose the way the dark pool worked to all of its clients, which allowed only some investors to know all of its rules. The SEC said that beginning in 2008 and into 2012, UBS let customers turn in orders at prices with denominations under a penny even though market rules dictate that all orders cannot be in any denomination below one cent.

UBS pitched the PrimaryPegPlus (PPP) order type, which let traders sell and purchase securities at the under the one cent increment prices, primarily to market makers and high-frequency trading firms. This let them get in front of orders that were made at the legal, whole-penny prices.

The SEC also said that UBS did not tell all subscribers about the “natural-only crossing restriction,” which was supposed to ensure that certain orders would not execute against orders made by the high-frequency trading firms and market makers. The shield only benefitted orders made using UBS algorithms, which are automated trading strategies. It wasn't until 2 1/2 years after this feature's launch that every subscriber was notified of its existence.

The SEC is accusing UBS of other violations, including the submission of incomplete and inconsistent statements about sub-penny orders and its natural-only crossing restriction in Form ATSs. The firm also purportedly did not set up written standards for giving subscribers access to the natural-only crossing restriction.

The Commission says that from August 2008 to March 2009, and for a certain period in 2010, UBS failed to preserve certain order data for the UBS ATS. It is accused of violating confidentiality requirements when it gave employees that shouldn't have had access the private trading data of subscribers.

By settling, UBS is not denying or admitting to the SEC findings. Of the $14.4 million payment, $12 million is a penalty.

According to Bloomberg, a source said that the SEC is working on rules that will compel dark pools to follow some of the same requirements as exchanges. This would include requirements dealing with disclosure of order types available in the dark pools, as well as pricing data sources.

The regulator is reportedly considering whether to make dark pool operators tell investors who else is trading as opposed to keeping trader identities anonymous. Some critics have expressed concerns that dark pools give computerized trading firms the upper hand. Also, because certain dark pools use aggregated feeds to match traders, critics are worried that investors are getting dated data when considering whether to trade.

SEC Order (PDF)


More Blog Posts:
NY Sues Barclays Over Alleged High Speed Trading Favors in Dark Pool, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 26, 2014

Deutsche Bank, UBS Are Probed Over Dark Pools & High-Frequency Trading, While An Investor Sue Barclays, Institutional Investor Fraud Blog, July 30, 2014

SEC Working on Mutual Fund Regulations, Conducts Dark Pool Probes, Enacts New Exchange Rules, Institutional Investor Fraud Blog, November 20, 2014

January 5, 2015

Beneficiaries of Puerto Rico Trust File Securities Fraud Lawsuit Seeking Over $4.5M From UBS Financial Services

Plaintiffs in Puerto Rico who say they are the beneficiaries of a trust have filed a securities lawsuit against UBS Financial Services (UBS). The beneficiaries’ complaint asserts that UBS in Puerto Rico breached its duty to properly manage funds linked to UBS’s proprietary closed-end Puerto Rico bond funds.

The beneficiaries of Nellie Sánchez Carmona's estate claim that the brokerage firm acted against their best interests when it opted to keep the trust invested in the proprietary funds—a move that earned UBS underwriting and management fees, along with commissions, and interest. The beneficiaries contend that UBS and its subsidiaries purposely prevented Sánchez Carmona from collecting benefits she was owed so that the firm could keep investing her money in the closed-end funds, which were issued by the firm, and continue to collect fees.

Also, according to the plaintiffs, for 10 years UBS prevented Sánchez Carmona from finding out that she was a beneficiary of the trust, which was set up by her husband Robert Hargen. Even though he passed away several years ago, UBS, in federal filings up to at least 2010, represented that Hargen was still alive and in possession of the trust.

During this time, plaintiffs say, UBS reinvested about $664,000 of what the trust made, placing the money in the closed-end funds and making a profit on the initial principal rather than paying out the earnings to take care of Sánchez Carmona’s medical bills, which the trust was supposed to cover. UBS also is accused of making it appear as if Hargen was a Puerto Rico resident even though he had been living in Florida since 2001. UBS allegedly did this to comply with regulations, which stipulate that investors of proprietary Puerto Rican closed-end bond have to be residents of the U.S. Commonwealth (or liquidate their holdings upon changing residencies). The plaintiffs want UBS to pay them about $3.5 million in damages and $1 million for lost income and fees.

In the last year and a half, hundreds of claimants have come forward filing claims against UBS over its Puerto Rico bond funds, which quickly lost value in August 2013 as the territory's debt imploded after years of warnings to UBS and other market participants that the Commonwealth might not be able to meet its excessive debt obligations. Many of the investors on the island contend that the bond funds were recommended to them even though they were not suitable for their goals and came with risks beyond what their portfolios could handle.

UBS is already facing around $1 billion in Puerto Rico muni bond fraud claims from investors on the island and in the mainland.

UBS Puerto Rico Bond Fraud Attorneys
Our UBS Puerto Rico bond fraud lawyers have been working hard to help investors get their money back. Contact Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas, LTD LLP today. Your initial case consultation with us is free.

Puerto Rico investors sue UBS for $4.5 million, InvestmentNews, December 31, 2014


More Blog Posts:
UBS To Nominate Executive from BlueMountain Hedge Fund That Challenged Puerto Rico Law on Debt Restructuring to Its Board, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, December 17, 2014

Puerto Rico’s Prepa Sees 219% Rise in Overdue Accounts With At Least $1.75 Billion Owed, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, November 18, 2014

Hedge Funds Are Moving in on Municipal Debt, Including Puerto Rico Debt, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, November 15, 2013