Suitability

Why is UBS Still Selling the UBS Puerto Rico Bond Funds?

November 10, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Albert Einstein once defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” While UBS does not challenge Einstein’s theories in physics it does challenge his thoughts on insanity. According to several news sources, including Financial Advisor Magazine and Reuters, UBS has told its brokers to continue selling its extremely speculative and risky UBS Puerto Rico bond funds to investors even after some investors have lost their entire investment and many others have suffered very substantial losses. Obviously, UBS believes a different result can be achieved with these recommendations. Let’s examine the facts and determine whether UBS has any grounds for such a belief.

Recently, investors have filed more than 500 complaints against UBS concerning the sales of the UBS Puerto Rico bond fund with more cases being filed daily. UBS’ sales tactics and recommendations to its customers to invest in 23 proprietary closed-end funds has come under fire and investors claim that the firm hid the substantial risks of the funds in order to generate sales and lucrative fees. On the surface the funds’ risks include is the excessive amount of leverage the funds employ. UBS leveraged up to 100% of the funds’ investments to raise additional cash, or the borrowing of a dollar for every dollar of capital invested in the funds. U.S. based funds by contrast are not allowed to take on such large leverage risk.

UBS has claimed that these funds have provided excellent returns and tax benefits to investors for decades. These claims appear to be the support for continuing to sell and recommend the bond funds to investors. However, investigations into UBS practices regarding the bond funds reveals that UBS’ decision to continue to sell the funds may come back to haunt the firm.

FINRA Sanctions Center Street Securities Over Sales of GWG Renewable Secured Debentures Part I

October 28, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm Center Street Securities, Inc. (Center Street) concerning allegations that: 1) between approximately March 2012, and August 2013 Center Street, through multiple brokers, made unsuitable recommendations to customers to purchase GWG Renewable Secured Debentures, an illiquid and high-risk private placement investment; 2) Center Street failed to maintain an adequate supervisory system and adequate written supervisory guidelines to reasonably supervise the sales of GWG debentures; 3) between approximately February 2012, and November 2012, Center Street also distributed an inaccurate GWG sales brochure to over 100 customers; and 4) certain Center Street customer account forms contained inaccurate information about customer net worth or other information, and thus the firm failed to maintain accurate books and records.

Center Street Securities is headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee, has been a FINRA member since 1991, has approximately 67 branch offices and approximately 84 registered representatives. This is not the first time that FINRA has brought regulatory action concerning the actions of Center Street representatives. See Center Street Securities Broker David Escarcega Investigated Over GWG Debenture Sales; FINRA Sanctions Michael Wurdinger and Anil Vazirani Over GWG Debenture Sales (FINRA sanctioned brokers associated with Center Street Securities, Inc.).

The notes are issued by GWG Holdings, Inc. (GWG) which purchases life insurance policies on the secondary market at a discount to the face value of the insurance policies. GWG pays the policy premiums until the insured dies and GWG then collects the insurance benefit making a profit, hopefully, by collecting more upon the maturity of the policies than the payment of the policy and servicing of the premiums. The Debentures have varying maturity terms and interest rates ranging from six-month at an annual interest rate 4.75% to seven years at 9.50%. The prospectus for GWG stated that the investments were speculative and involve a high degree of risk, including the possibility of risk of loss of the entire investment. An investment in the GWG Debentures, as a private placement, is illiquid and investors will not have access to their principal prior to maturity.

FINRA Fines Feltl & Company $1 Million Conerning the Firm’s Penny Stock Business

October 22, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has sanctioned brokerage firm Feltl & Company (Feltl) and fined the firm $1,000,000 concerning allegations that the firm, between January 2008, and February 2012. failed to comply with the suitability, disclosure, and record-keeping requirements for broker-dealers who engage in penny stock business. FINRA alleged that Feltl did not provide some customers with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) risk disclosure document two days prior to effecting a penny stock transaction in the customers’ accounts. failed to sufficiently supervise penny stock transactions for compliance with applicable rules and regulations, and failed to establish, maintain, and enforce written supervisory procedures for its penny stock business.

Feltl has eight branch offices located in Minnesota and Illinois, and approximately 113 registered representatives and has been a FINRA member since 1975.

The term “penny stock” generally refers to securities that trades below $5 per share, issued by a small company. Penny stocks often trade infrequently making it difficult to sell and price. Due to the size of the issuer, the market cap, the liquidity issues, and other reasons penny stocks are generally considered speculative investments. Consequently, the SEC requires broker-dealers effecting penny stock transactions to make a documented determination that the transactions are suitable for customers and obtain the customers’ written agreement to those transactions.

FINRA Files Complaint Against Former VSR and Berthel, Fisher Broker, Steven L. Stahler

October 1, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

On August 27, 2014, FINRA filed a complaint against Steven L. Stahler, formerly a registered representative with multiple broker dealers including Lowell & Company, Inc., Ausdal Financial Partners, Inc., Berthel, Fisher & Company Financial Services, Inc., VSR Financial Services, Inc., among others. On November 1, 2013, Lowell & Company terminated Mr. Stahler according to his form U5.

FINRA alleges that Mr. Stahler made unsuitable recommendations to customers in violation of FINRA Rule 2310 and 2110 and FINRA Rule 2010. Under FINRA Rule 2110 and 2310, all financial advisers and brokerage firms have a responsibility to deal fairly with their customers. All sales efforts are judged based upon the standards outlined in the FINRA Rules. Furthermore, all brokers must recommend the purchase, sale or exchange of securities that are reasonable given the customers investment objectives and risk tolerances.

According to the complaint, VSR Financial’s written supervisory procedures specify that no more than 40%-50% of a customer’s liquid net worth should be invested in alternative investments. VSR’s guidelines also required that new account forms used outline the customer’s percentage of the portfolio they would feel comfortable investing in high risk investments. FINRA alleges that from September 13, 2006 through October 24, 2006, Mr. Stahler recommended that a married couple, who had stated that no more than twenty percent of their portfolio be invested in aggressive/high risk investments, invested approximately $837,000 in twelve high risk investments at Mr. Stahler’s recommendation. These alternative investments included:

FINRA Suspends Financial Advisor Over Unsuitable Variable Universal Life (VUL) Sales Practices

September 25, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker James Moniz (Moniz) concerning allegations that while registered with Signator Investors, Inc. (Signator) Moniz made unsuitable recommendations to a married couple that they purchase a Variable Universal Life insurance policy (VUL) on the husband’s life and use the proceeds of a reverse mortgage to purchase a variable annuity and open a managed investment account. According to FINRA, after the insurance company questioned the VUL application, Moniz caused the application to be re-submitted with changed or added information without first informing the customers of his actions. FINRA found that Moniz also inaccurately represented the source of funds for the variable annuity and managed account.

VUL are complex dual part insurance and investment products that investors must fully understand the risks and benefits of prior to investing. One feature of a VUL policy is that the owner can allocate a portion of his premium payments to a separate sub-account that can be used to grow in value through investments. The other part of the investment is the life insurance policy where the policies monthly charges including a cost of insurance charge and administrative fees are deducted from the policy’s cash value. The cash value of the policy may increase or decrease based on the performance of the selected investments. However, customers must be careful in purchasing VULs because the policy terminates, or lapses, if at any time the net cash surrender value is insufficient to pay the monthly cost deductions. When the policy terminates the remaining cash value becomes worthless.

Given the costs involved in purchasing VULs, brokers must be careful to ensure that the recommendation to invest in VULs is suitable for the client. While an investor may be able to afford the initial purchase price of the policy it may be too expensive for the client to continue to make premium contributions over time causing the policy to lapse.

UBS Preparing to Face Investor Claims Over Puerto Rico Bond Funds

September 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

According to UBS’ second quarter earnings report, the bank is now looking at over $600 million in claims brought by Puerto Rico investors, who have suffered significant losses related to their investments in closed-end bond funds. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has been inundated with a plethora of claims in connection with the closed-end UBS Puerto Rico Bond Funds. Investors are looking to be made whole after they purportedly received misleading information regarding these investments. While the majority of the claims were filed against UBS Financial Services of Puerto, other firms, including Merrill Lynch, Banco Popular, Santander Securities, and Oriental Financial Services have also been named as Respondents in many of the claims.

UBS recognizes the perilous situation that it now faces with respect to these claims, explaining, “declines in the market prices of Puerto Rico municipal bonds and of UBS Puerto Rico sole-managed and co-managed closed-end funds since August 2013 have led to multiple regulatory inquiries, as well as customer complaints and arbitrations with aggregate claimed damages exceeding [$]600 million filed by clients in Puerto Rico who own those securities.”

Some of the claims that UBS face, including clients represented by our firm, include allegations of unsuitability, over-concentration, fraud, and breach of contract among others. FINRA and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board require broker dealers to have a reasonable basis to support the suitability of their recommendations to customers. Legal representatives for many claimants have said that the UBS employees prioritized commissions when they sold the closed-end bond funds to Puerto Rican investors, who were not economically equipped to make those investments.

Gana LLP Investigation – Former RBC Capital Markets Broker Michael Zukowski

September 18, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Michael Zukowski (Zukowski) concerning allegations that Zukowski recommended unsuitable transactions in inverse and inverse-leveraged Exchange Traded Funds (Non-Traditional ETFs) in the accounts of his customers.

Zukowski first became registered with FINRA as a securities representative in 1989. Thereafter, from July 2005 to November 2010, he was registered in that same capacity through RBC Capital Markets, LLC (RBC) where he worked in the firm’s Massachusetts office. On December 23, 2010, RBC filed a Termination Notice (Form U5) stating that Zukowski was permitted to resign for “failure to meet Firm expectations.”

On August l8, 2011, RBC filed a an amended disclosure stating that an Administrative Complaint filed by the Massachusetts Securities Division (MSD) stated that: “The Massachusetts Securities Division alleged Michael Zukowski made unsuitable recommendations to brokerage and advisory clients regarding the purchase and sale of leveraged, inverse and inverse-leveraged exchange traded funds.” Thereafter, on November 12, 2012, Zukowski entered into a Consent Order with the MSD concerning the allegations of unsuitable recommendations where Zukowski consented to sanctions including a Cease and Desist and a five year bar to act as a “broker-dealer agent, investment adviser, investment adviser representative and issuer-agent” in the State of Massachusetts. Finally, on November 16, 2012, RBC filed another amended Form U5 and disclosed a written complaint by two customers indicating that the “Clients allege material omissions and unsuitable advice regarding non-traditional ETFs, in period 2/2009 to 12/2009.”

Broker Sanctioned Over Allegations of Unsuitable Variable Universal Life (VUL) Policies

September 6, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

shutterstock_50740552 The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker David Herlicka (Herlicka) concerning allegations that from 2003 through 2011 Herlicka made unsuitable trade recommendations to seven customers in connection with the sales of Variable Universal Life (VULs). FINRA found that Herlicka also made misstatements and failed to adequately disclose information regarding VULs, including the fact that they have surrender fees. FINRA also alleged that Herlicka recorded false information regarding customer net worth and annual income on VUL applications for four of these customers and that he, in 2011, also effected an unauthorized trade of a VUL for a customer.

VUL are complex insurance and investment products that investors must fully understand the risks and benefits of prior to investing. One feature of a VUL policy is that the owner can allocate a portion of his premium payments to a separate sub-account that can be used to grow in value through investments. Monthly charges for the life insurance policy, including a cost of insurance charge and administrative fees, are deducted from the policy’s cash value. The cash value of the policy may increase or decrease based on the performance of the sub-account investments. In addition, the VUL policy terminates, or lapses, if at any time the net cash surrender value is insufficient to pay the monthly cost deductions. Upon termination of the policy, the remaining cash value becomes worthless.

Given the costs involved in purchasing VULs, brokers must be careful to ensure that the recommendation to invest in VULs is suitable for the client. For example, if a policy is too expensive for the client to continue to make premium contributions to the policy could lapse over time. This is precisely what FINRA alleges that Herlicka failed to consider in some recommendations to his clients.

Great American Advisors Sanctioned Concerning Supervision of Variable Annuities

September 2, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm Great American Advisors, Inc. (Great American) concerning allegations that between December 2006, and December 2007, Great American failed to have an adequate supervisory system for the sale of variable annuities. FINRA alleged that two of the firm’s registered representatives recommended and effected 301 unsuitable variable annuity transactions involving 206 customers causing customers to pay $363,173 in unnecessary surrender fees and incur longer surrender periods.

Great American has been a registered firm with FINRA since 1994. From 1994 through August 2010, the Great American operated as a full service firm selling mutual funds and annuities, among other investment products. Since August 2010, the firm serves as a principal underwriter and distributor for annuity products and has 54 registered representatives.

As a background, a variable annuity is an investment and insurance product with significant risks and features the investor should be aware of before investing. Recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a publication entitled: Variable Annuities: What You Should Know. A variable annuity is a contract with an insurance company where the insurer agrees to make periodic payments to you based upon the chosen investments made in the annuity account. The investment options for a variable annuity are usually a selection of a group of mutual funds.

FINRA Sanctions Salomon Whitney Over Non-Traditional ETF Sales Practices

August 13, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has sanctioned Salomon Whitney, LLC (Salomon Whitney) concerning allegations from July 2008 through November 2009 the firm failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to monitor transactions in leveraged, inverse, and inverse-leveraged Exchange-Traded Funds (Non-Traditional ETFs). Non-Traditional ETFs contained risks that increase over time and in volatile markets including risks of a daily reset, leverage, and compounding. FINRA found that Salomon Whitney failed to establish a reasonable supervisory system to monitor transactions in Non-Traditional ETFs, provide adequate formal training, and observe reasonable basis suitability guidelines by failing to perform reasonable due diligence to understand the risks and features associated with the products.

Salomon Whitney has been a FINRA broker-dealer since 2008 and the firm is headquartered in Farmingdale, New York where it conducts a general securities business. Salomon Whitney has approximately 19 brokers registered with the firm.

Non-Traditional ETFs use a combination of derivatives instruments and debt to multiply returns on an underlining asset, class of securities, or sector index. The leverage employed by Non-Traditional ETFs is designed to generate 2 to 3 times the return of the underlining asset class. Non-Traditional ETFs can also be used to return the inverse or the opposite result of the return of the benchmark.