Securities Lawyers Blog

James Bracey Barred Over Allegations of Taking Loans from Customers

July 29, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) barred from the financial industry broker James Bracey (Bracey) concerning allegations that in or about February 2008, Bracey, received a $175,000 loan from a customer without notifying Multi-Financial, now known as Cetera Advisor Network LLC. FINRA alleged that on multiple occasions between 2009 and 2011, Bracey renegotiated the interest payments on the customer’s loan. FINRA also found that in December 2009, while associated with Multi-Financial, Bracey falsified a customer’s written wire transfer instructions in order to execute an unauthorized fund transfer from a customer’s brokerage account to that customer’s personal bank account outside of Multi-Financial. FINRA determined that Bracey caused the creation and maintenance of inaccurate books and records through the falsifying the customer’s wire transfer.

FINRA also alleged that between October 31, 2001 and April 30, 2012, Bracey failed to timely notify Multi-Financial, and later LPL Financial LLC, of two separate outside business activities. FINRA also found that in October 2004, after soliciting 17 investors to purchase securities away from Multi-Financial, Bracey failed to provide written notice to or firm approval to engage in private securities transactions in violation of NASD Rules 3040 and 2110. FINRA’s allegations are consistent with a “selling away” violation in which a broker solicits investors to invest in unapproved investments. Finally, FINRA found that between 2004 and 2012, Bracey willfully failed to timely disclose material information to Multi-Financial and LPL Financial in order to update his Form U4 concerning two liens and two creditor compromises.

In addition to the slew of violations alleged by FINRA, Bracey has been the subject of at least three customer complaints and terminated by three brokerage firms. The customer complaints against Bracey concern private placements (direct participation programs), equipment leasing investments, unsuitable investments, non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), and misrepresentations in the sale of securities.

Advanced Equities Fined Over Failure to Disclose Material Information Concerning Fisker Automotive Private Placements (Part II)

July 29, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

As we recently posted, our firm has covered the failures concerning the sale and recommendation of Advanced Equities private placement since the SEC brought charges against the firm. We also represent numerous clients who have unfortunately invested in these products that were alleged to have been sold as “late-stage private equities” by First Allied Securities brokers among others.

Recently, FINRA fined Advanced Equities $250,000 concerning allegations that between approximately November 1, and December 1, 2011, AEI, failed to identify material information and correct omissions of material facts made by the issuer in connection with a private placement offering.

As a background, Fisker Auto was an American automobile maker that manufactured hybrid electric vehicles. Shares in the company were sold through limited liability companies to accredited investors. In or around September 2009, Fisker Auto obtained a “loan facility” in the approximate amount of $529 million, which was overseen by the United States Department of Energy (DOE). Under the terms of the loan facility agreement, Fisker Auto could seek reimbursement costs associated with the production of two cars if the company was in compliance with certain financial covenants and project milestones. Those covenants generally included milestones requiring that Fisker Auto to achieve a certain level of earnings, sell a particular number of automobiles, and complete certification requirements related to safety and environmental matters.

Gana LLP Successfully Represented TapImmune Inc. in a Commercial Arbitration Suit

July 28, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

As reported, the law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP successfully represented TapImmune Inc. (TapImmune) in a contentious commercial litigation proceeding before the American Arbitration Association. TapImmune is a publically traded company that develops innovative vaccine technologies for the treatment of cancer and infectious disease including breast cancer.

The complaint TapImmune filed against Michael Gardner alleged that Gardner induced TapImmune to enter a very lucrative agreement where Gardner would receive a significant amount of stock in TapImmune in exchange for raising funds for the company. Thereafter, Gardner denied that he had agreed to raise funds for TapImmune.

The arbitrator found that Gardner made false representations to TapImmune in order to induce the company into the agreement and did not fully provide the services he was hired to perform. Moreover, the arbitrator concluded that Gardner did not intend to perform the stated services at the time he was hired. Further, the arbitrator found that Gardner knew that TapImmune would be hindered in its business efforts through his compensation arrangement.

Advanced Equities Fined Over Allegations of Failure to Disclose Information Concerning Fisker Automotive Private Placements

July 25, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm has covered the supervisory and due diligence failures concerning the sale and recommendation of Advanced Equities private placement since the SEC brought charges against the firm and its principals for selling one of its products by making material misrepresentations to investors. We also represent numerous clients who have unfortunately invested in these products that were alleged to have been sold as “late-stage private equities” by First Allied Securities brokers among others. Below are posts with additional information concerning these products.

Investor Alert: Brokers Matthew Bell and Craig Josephberg Indicted in CodeSmart Holdings (OTC: ITEN) Scam

July 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Gana Weinstein LLP is investigating claims were brought by securities and exchange commission (SEC) against Matthew Bell (Bell) and Craig Josephberg (Josephberg) in connection with participation in a $300 million securities fraud market manipulation scheme. The SEC brought charges against Abraxas J. Discala (Discala), Marc E. Wexler (Wexler), and Ira Shapiro (Shapiro), for manipulating the stock price of sale of CodeSmart Holdings (OTC: ITEN), Cubed, Inc. (OTC: CRPT), StarStream (OTC: SSET) and The Staffing Group, Ltd. (OTC: TSGL).

According to the complaint, in 2013, Discala and Wexler conspired with Bell and Josephberg, both registered representatives with different brokerage firms, to inflate the price of the stock of CodeSmart. The SEC found that Discala, Wexler, Bell, and Josephberg then profited by selling their shares at inflated values at the expense of Bell’s clients and Josephberg’s customers.

Bell was taken into custody by the FBI and appeared in federal court in San Antonio. In Court, Bell was informed of a 10-count indictment returned in Brooklyn, New York, and was released on bond. Bell has a long history of customer complaints and two firm terminations.

Gana LLP Investigates Broker Angelo Talebi’s Investment Activities: Attention Iranian Investors in California

July 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating claims that broker Angelo Talebi (Talebi) made misrepresentations regarding investments in alternative investments such as Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and oil and gas limited partnerships. Upon information and belief, Talebi is targeting Iranian investors in California. According to Talebi’s BrokerCheck, at least 13 customer complaints have been filed regarding Talebi’s sales practices in FINRA arbitration. Some of the complaints also allege that Talebi unsuitably invested clients in various investments including variable annuities and private placements including KBS 1 REIT, Leaf Equipment finance, Inland American Real Estate Trust, Atlas Resources. Another complaint alleges unsuitable equity investments and excessive use of margin.

From 1999 through December 2012, Talebi was associated with LPL Financial LLC (LPL Financial). Thereafter, until April 2014, Talebi was a registered representative of Royal Alliance Associates, Inc. Currently, Talebi is associated with Independent Financial Group, LLC.

The investment products that Talebi is alleged to have inappropriately recommended to clients are part of a growing industry trend of placing investors heavily in alternative investments and illiquid products. Many times brokers tell investors that these products are more stable and predictable than the stock market. After the financial crisis many investors were receptive to these sales pitches. However, brokers sometimes fail to disclose that the stability of these investments is artificially generated by the lack of disclosure and trading market for these products. In the cases of REITs and oil and gas private placements investors may only learn years after investing that the value of these assets has fallen substantially and some investors do not know of their losses until the investment goes completely bust.

SEC Alleges Broker Craig Josephberg Involved in a $300 Million Market Scheme of CodeSmart Stock (Part II)

July 22, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

In our prior post, our offices, Gana Weinstein LLP, noted its investigation of the July 17, 2014, claims brought by securities and exchange commission (SEC) against Craig Josephberg in connection with his participation in a $300 million securities fraud market manipulation scheme. The SEC brought charges against Abraxas J. Discala (Discala), Marc E. Wexler (Wexler), Matthew A. Bell (Bell), Craig L. Josephberg (Josephberg), and Ira Shapiro (Shapiro), for manipulating the stock price of four publically traded companies, CodeSmart Holdings, Inc. (CodeSmart), Cubed, StarStream Entertainment Inc., and the Staffing Group, Ltd.

According to the complaint, in 2013, Discala and Wexler conspired with registered representatives Bell and Josephberg to inflate the price of the stock of CodeSmart. The SEC found that Discala, Wexler, Bell, and Josephberg then profited by selling their shares at inflated values at the expense of Bell’s clients and Josephberg’s customers.

Josephberg has a long and troubled regulatory, criminal activity, debts, customer complaints, among a host of other supervisory “red flags” of potential misconduct in the handling of his clients. Josephberg entered the securities industry in 1996. Thereafter, he was associated with eight different firms including Maxim Group LLC, ICM Capital Markets, LTD, vFinance Investments, Inc., Halcyon Cabot Partners, LTD. (Halcoyon), and most recently Meyers Associates, L.P. (Meyers Associates). Indeed, when Josephberg was terminated from Halcoyon he was under investigation by the firm for sales practice violations including the selling of unsuitable securities, unauthorized trades, and securities fraud in connection with the sale of penny stocks including VHGI and Cell Therapeutics.

Gana LLP Investigates Craig Josephberg’s Alleged $300 Million Market Scheme

July 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating the July 17, 2014, claims brought by securities and exchange commission (SEC) against Craig Josephbergin connection with his participation in a $300 million securities fraud market manipulation scheme. According to the SEC, Abraxas J. Discala (Discala), Marc E. Wexler (Wexler), Matthew A. Bell (Bell), Craig L. Josephberg (Josephberg), and Ira Shapiro (Shapiro), assisted in manipulating the stock price of four publically traded companies, CodeSmart Holdings, Inc. (CodeSmart), Cubed, StarStream Entertainment Inc., and the Staffing Group, Ltd.

According to the complaint, in 2013, Discala and Wexler served as the CEO and President of OmniView Capital Advisors LLC (OmniView) conspired with registered representatives Bell and Josephberg to inflate the price of the stock of CodeSmart. The SEC found that Discala, Wexler, Bell, and Josephberg then profited by selling their shares at inflated values at the expense of Bell’s clients and Josephberg’s customers.

The SEC alleged that defendants accomplished their scheme following CodeSmart’s reverse merger into a public shell company in May 2013, whereby Discala and his associates, including Wexler, Bell, and Josephberg, obtained control of 3,000,000 shares of CodeSmart. Later in May 2013, the SEC found that Discala and Wexler flooded the market with CodeSmart’s shares and found ready buyers in Bell’s advisory clients and Josephberg’s brokerage customers.

Unsuitable Variable Annuity Sales A Continuing Concern for Regulators

July 18, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

As reported by InvestmentNews, A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) official recently expressed concern over the sale of variable annuities as the products continue to evolve and become more complex. Carlo di Florio, chief risk officer and head of strategy at FINRA was quoted as stating that variable annuities are now taking on features that resemble complex structured products. Structured products typically have features such as caps that limit returns during market rallies and floors that limit losses during market slumps. Now these features are appearing in variable annuity products. Variable annuities are already extremely complex products that are not suitable for all investors. Adding yet an additional level of complexity only heightens concerns that investors must understand what they are buying when they are recommended these vehicles.

As a background variable annuities are complex financial and insurance products. Recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a publication entitled: Variable Annuities: What You Should Know. The SEC encouraged investors considering a purchase of a variable annuity to “ask your insurance agent, broker, financial planner, or other financial professional lots of questions about whether a variable annuity is right for you.”

A variable annuity is a contract an investor makes with an insurance company where the insurer agrees to make periodic payments to you. A variable annuity may be purchased either in a single payment or a series of payments over time. In the annuity account the investor chooses investments and the value of the annuity “varies” over time depending on the performance of the investments chosen. The investment options for variable annuities are generally mutual funds.

FINRA Fines Merrill Lynch For Overcharging Mutual Fund Customers

July 17, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

On June 16, 2014, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced that it fined Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. $8 million for charging excessive fees relating to the sales of mutual funds in retirement accounts. FINRA also ordered Merrill Lynch to pay $24.4 million in restitution to those customers who had been wrongfully overcharged. The mandated restitution was in addition to the $64 million Merrill Lynch has already paid to compensate disadvantaged investors.

Mutual funds offer several different classes of shares. Each class has separate and distinct sales charges and fees. Generally, Class A shares have the lowest fees as compared to Class B and Class C. Class A shares, however, charge customers an upfront sales charge. This initial sales charge, however, is usually waived for retirement accounts, with some funds also waiving these fees for charities.

Merrill Lynch’s retail platform offers a variety of different mutual funds. Most of those funds explicitly offered to waive the upfront sales charges and disclosed those waivers in their respective prospectuses. According to FINRA, despite these disclosures, Merrill Lynch did not actually waive the sales charges many times since at least January 2006. On various occasions, Merrill Lynch charged the full sales charges to certain customers who qualified for the waiver. In doing so, Merrill Lynch allegedly caused nearly 41,000 small business retirement plan accounts and 6,800 charities and 403(b) retirement accounts for ministers and public school employees to pay sales charges when purchasing Class A shares. Those that did not want to pay the fee for the Class A shares were forced to purchase other share classes that needlessly exposed them to greater ongoing costs and fees. According to FINRA, Merrill Lynch became aware of the fact that its small business retirement plan customers were being overcharged, but yet they continued to sell the costly mutual fund shares and never reported the issue to FINRA for over five years.