Securities Lawyers Blog

James Busch of Wells Fargo Advisors Barred Over Allegations of Misappropriating $1.3 Million from Customers

January 6, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker James Arnold Busch (“Busch”) was barred from the broker industry by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Busch engaged in securities fraud by misappropriating customer funds from approximately 8 different clients’ bank accounts. FINRA alleged that most of Busch’s victims were elderly women.

In 1989, Busch first became registered with FINRA as a Series 6 (Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Limited Representative). In 1992, Busch became licensed as a Series 7 (General Securities Representative). In 2000, Busch became registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (“Wells Fargo”) where Busch remained working out of various Georgia branch office locations until his termination in October 2013.

FINRA alleged that Busch worked in various branch offices of Wells Fargo that were also located in the firm’s affiliated bank. Many of Busch’s customers had both Wells Fargo brokerage accounts and Wells Fargo bank accounts. FINRA found that Busch had access to his customers’ bank account information through his relationship to the customers’ brokerage account. From 2006 to 2013, Busch used his customers’ bank account information to misappropriate approximately $1.3 million from approximately eight of his Wells Fargo brokerage customers. FINRA alleged that Busch took advantage of mostly elderly women.

Saxony Securities Fined by Securities Regulator Over Sale of Nontraditional ETFs

January 3, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker-dealer Saxony Securities, Inc. (“Saxony”) was recently fined $15,000 over allegations by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the regulator of securities broker-dealers, that Saxony failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written procedures, regarding the sale of leveraged or inverse exchange-traded ETFs that was reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the FINRA rules.

Saxony has been registered with FINRA since 2002. Saxony has its main offices in St. Louis, Missouri and employs approximately 100 registered representatives at the firm’s 50 branch offices.

Nontraditional ETFs are designed to return a multiple of some underlying index or benchmark such as the Dow Jones, S&P 500, or other targeted index. Some nontraditional ETFs return the inverse of that benchmark or index. These nontraditional ETFs are supposed to be held only for a one trading session – usually a single day. As a result, the performance of nontraditional ETFs over periods of time longer than a single trading session can be significantly different from the performance of their underlying index or benchmark. Accordingly, Nontraditional ETFs are inherently risky and complex products. FINRA has advised brokerage firms that nontraditional ETFs are typically not suitable for retail investors who plan to hold them for more than one trading session, particularly in volatile markets.

Paul Renard of SII Investments Suspended Over Unsuitable Sales of Nontraditional ETFs

January 2, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Paul Renard (Renard) a broker with SII Investments, Inc. (SII) was recently suspended for two years and fined $60,000 by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Renard: (1) recommended that at least four customers buy and hold nontraditional ETFs without having reasonable grounds for believing that the recommended investments were suitable for those customers; (2) distributed at least nine independently prepared reprints to customers without Ameriprise’s review and approval; (3) used a personal email account, which Ameriprise did not monitor, to distribute the materials; and (4) failed to disclose two tax liens filed against him by the State of Wisconsin. In addition, at least 21 customer complaints have been filed against Renard.

Renard was previously a registered representative of Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc (Ameriprise) from August 21, 2009, until June 22, 2011, when Ameriprise terminated his registration alleging that Renard failed to comply with company policies by soliciting prohibited securities, use of external email account, and failed to properly update his disclosures. Prior to Ameriprise Renard was registered with Securities America, Inc. from November 2009 through May 2011. Renard’s BrokerCheck discloses that he is also the president of First Tee of Green Bay, a managing director of Reedsville Granary LLC, and employed with PDI Financial.

FINRA alleged that Ameriprise implemented a policy prohibiting its representatives from recommending or soliciting nontraditional ETFs. Under the policy, customers could hold existing nontraditional ETF positions but any new purchases could only occur on an unsolicited basis. On September 2, 2009, Renard entered a solicited buy order for an inverse ETF in a customer’s account. Ameriprise’s compliance department informed Renard that Ameriprise did not allow its representatives to solicit nontraditional ETF purchases. Nonetheless, according to FINRA, Renard continued to solicit customers to purchase nontraditional ETFs.

Senators Probe Broker Background Check Expungement Practices

December 31, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

A InvestmentNews article recently highlighted the efforts of two U.S. senators that have asked the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to provide new details on the process that allows brokers to clean their disciplinary records of customer complaints. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) also said Wall Street’s industry-funded securities regulator should respond to criticism that the current expungement practice creates BrokerCheck reports that could mislead investors.

“We believe that meaningful investor protection includes the disclosure of whether a customer dispute was settled,” the senators wrote. “Not just for transparency sake, but also to help prospective investors make informed decisions about which individuals or firms with whom to do business.”

Under the current system FINRA Rule 2080 allows brokers to petition the organization to clean their public disciplinary reports if an investor files a complaint and “the claim, allegation, or information is false.” However, in my opinion the process is abused and cases which should not be expunged are routinely cleaned from broker records. Attorneys representing claimants are placed in the position of agreeing to expungement in order to settle their client’s case. Thus, a process that was meant to provide a mechanism to remove untrue claims against a broker is often times being used as a low-cost bargaining chip in settlement negotiations concerning meritorious claims. Further, there is no incentive for an attorney to argue against including a consent to expungement as part of the settlement agreement language because it costs the client nothing and the settlement conversation itself may be made contingent upon expungement as being a part of the ultimate resolution.

Jeffrey Isaacs of Investors Capital Corporation Suspended Over Unsuitable Sale of Securities

December 30, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Jeffrey M. Isaacs (Issacs) of Investors Capital Corporation (ICC) was recently suspended and sanctioned by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Isaacs made negligent material misrepresentations of fact in connection with the unsuitable sale of two private placements to ICC customers. In addition, after the customers complained to Isaacs, he settled their claims without notifying ICC.

From January 12, 2005, through December 12, 2011, Issacs was associated with Investors Capital Corporation. On December 12, 2011, ICC filed a Form U5 stating that Isaacs “submitted a voluntary request to terminate association with the firm while under investigation for failing to follow firm policies.” Thereafter, Isaacs was registered with TFS Securities, Inc. (TFS) from November 21, 2011 through December 15, 2011. On December 15, 2011, TFS filed a Form U5 stating that Isaacs’ termination was voluntary. Issacs’ BrokerCheck discloses that he is also employed by JB Financial Resources.

FINRA alleged that Isaacs negligently misrepresented two customers that an investment in the Insight Real Estate LLC 2007 Secured Debenture Offering (Insight) was a safe, low-risk investment, misstated its payment terms, and omitted material facts relating to the speculative nature of the investment. The customers invested $100,000 in Insight in reliance on Issacs’ representations. Thereafter, FINRA alleged that Isaacs negligently misrepresented to the customers that an investment in CIP Leverage Fund Advisors, LLC (CIP) was for moderately conservative investors and would pay interest to the investors on a monthly basis. In fact, the CIP was a speculative investment that paid interest only on an accrued basis with the final payment of principal. The customers also invested $100,000 in CIP in reliance on Issacs representations.

FCC Clamps Down on Unsolicited Texts and Phone Calls

December 25, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Consumers receive unwanted texts and calls from companies. Overtime consumers become frustrated by the plethora of messages on their home phones, faxes or mobile devices. The intrusion can not only be harassing, but also is costly for consumers. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (CAN-SPAM) address the underlying problems faced by many consumers.

The TCPA restricts solicitation and the use of automated telephone equipment. Unsolicited communications under the TCPA is broadly defined to include “any material advertising the commercial availability or quality of any property, good or services which is transmitted to any person without that person’s prior express invitation or permission in writing or otherwise.” The types of restricted activity include:

To make any call using any automated telephone dialing service or prerecorded voice.

Maurice Chelliah of World Group Securities Barred Over Allegations of Improper Investment Recommendations

December 23, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Maurice Joseph Chelliah (Chelliah) was recently barred from the financial industry by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Chelliah converted $90,000 from two World Group Securities, Inc. (WGS) clients and made unsuitable recommendations to five WGS customers. FINRA alleged that Chelliah recommended that these customers refinance their primary residences and use the proceeds to purchase securities and insurance policies that they did not need and that were beyond the customers’ ability to afford. FINRA found that as a result of Chelliah’s recommendations some of the customers lost their securities, their life insurance policies, and their residences when they were unable to keep their mortgages current.

FINRA alleged that Chelliah violated NASD Rule 2110 and FINRA Rule 2010 by converting customer funds. These rules provide that a member, “in the conduct of his business, shall observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.” FINRA found that two of Chelliah’s customers were 80 and 75 years-old respectively and were unsophisticated investors. Chelliah recommended that the customers liquidate their mutual fund shares. Following the liquidation, $90,000 in proceeds was transferred to Chelliah’s three outside businesses. The customers had provided these funds to Chelliah in order for him to pay monthly bills and expenses on their behalf but instead Chelliah used these funds for his own personal benefit.

FINRA also alleged that Chelliah made unsuitable transactions in at least five customer accounts. NASD Rule 2310 provides that “in recommending to a customer the purchase, sale or exchange of any security, a member shall have reasonable grounds for believing that the recommendation is suitable for such customer upon the basis of the facts, if any, disclosed by such customer as to his other security holdings and as to his financial situation and needs…”

David Kauffman of First Allied Barred Over Allegations of Sale of Private Placements

December 20, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Broker David Charles Kauffman (Kauffman) was recently barred by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over his failure to respond to FINRA’s investigation over allegations that he engaged in personal private securities transactions, used unapproved email addresses, and introduced clients to individuals associated with non-approved investment opportunities.

Kauffman began his career in the securities industry in 1993 and has been registered with 13 FINRA member firms. From March 2006 through September 2010, Kauffman was registered with FINRA as a General Securities Principal and a General Securities Representative at First Allied Securities, Inc. (First Allied). First Allied terminated Kauffman for violating firm policies pertaining to his personal private securities transactions, used unapproved email addresses, and introduced clients to individuals associated with non-approved investment opportunities. Thereafter, Kauffman was registered with MCL Financial Group, Inc. through December 2011. Kauffman’s BrokerCheck discloses that Kauffman was also employed by David Kauffman Insurance Services, One-Less Putt, MCS Golf, 928 LLC, and EDT Property Services.

In September 2010, First Allied made two filings with FINRA disclosing it had terminated Kauffman for conduct including engagement in private securities transactions in connection with several private placement offerings without providing written notice to the firm. FINRA alleged that one of the offerings Kauffman was involved in was entity named Gulf Coast Oil & Rig, LLC (Gulf Coast). Thereafter, FINRA staff sought information, documents, and testimony from Kauffman to determine, among other things, his role and compensation in connection with the private securities transactions, as well as the status of Gulf Coast’s business. Initially, Kauffman cooperated with the examination by providing some information and documents. However, FINRA alleged that Kauffman failed to respond properly to further requests.

Broker Joseph Giordano of Capital Investment Group Sanctioned Over Empire Debenture Sales

December 19, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Joseph Anthony Giordano (Giordano) was recently barred from the financial industry by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that he participated in the distribution of unregistered debentures issued by Empire Corporation, a Maryland corporation (Empire Debentures) to customers of Capital Investment Group, Inc. (CIG). FINRA alleged that Giordano violated FINRA Rules by soliciting the sales of the Empire Debentures. In addition, FINRA found Giordano’s Empire Debentures sales to customers were without a reasonable basis for making such recommendation. Finally, FINRA found that Giordano engaged in securities fraud by making intentionally false and misleading statements in connection with the sales of the Empire Debentures to customers.

Giordano was registered with Capital Investment Group from September 1992 until his termination on June 20, 2012. Giordano’s U5 states that he was terminated for “selling away” and making false and misleading statements to the firm. On July 2, 2012, Giordano became registered with Meyers Associates, L.P. (Meyers) until his registration was terminated by Meyers on July 10, 2013. Giordano’s BrokerCheck states that he is the general manager of Giordano Asset Management LLC and treasurer of Giordano Holding Corporation.

FINRA found that Giordano sold approximately $3.1 million of the Empire Debentures to at least 45 customers of CIG. The Empire Debentures had varying maturities but the majority had a five-year maturity and promised interest at an annual compounded rate of ten percent paid at maturity. FINRA alleged that the Empire Debentures were speculative investments considering their high-yield, lack of credit analyses or an effective registration statement, and the complete absence of a secondary market. The sale of the Empire Debentures was in contravention of Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 requiring the registration of securities. The securities were also not registered with the State of Maryland. In addition, FINRA alleged that Giordano failed to conduct adequate due diligence regarding the registration status of the Empire Debentures prior to recommending and selling the debentures to customers.

HFP Capital Markets’ Employees Sanctioned Over Metals Millings and Mining Private Placement Offering

December 18, 2013 | by Staff Attorney

Advisor Thomas Mikolasko, (Mikolasko) of HFP Capital Markets LLC (HFP) was recently suspended and fined by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Mikolasko engaged in the sale of $3 million in Senior Secured Zero Coupon Notes sold to 58 customers of HFP for Metals Millings and Mining LLC (MMM) in a private placement offering. The MMM Notes defaulted and investors were not repaid either principal or the 100 percent return promised. FINRA found that Mikolasko negligently caused material misrepresentations and omissions of material facts to be made in connection with the sale of MMM. FINRA also alleged that Mikolasko facilitated the offering even though he knew or should have known that HFP had conducted inadequate due diligence concerning the offering and that the limited due diligence the firm had conducted identified significant “red flags.”

Metals Millings and Mining LLC was an entity created in 2009 with HFP’s assistance. MMM was formed as a vehicle to aggregate and process certain ore materials. The investment’s sponsor had presented to HFP a plan to extract precious metals from the ore concentrate through a process known as “plasmafication.” HFP’s former chief executive, Vincent J. Puma was primary responsibility for HFP’s involvement in the MMM offering. From December 2009 to February 201l, HFP sold approximately $3 million of MMM Notes to 58 HFP customers. The MMM notes provided for the repayment of principal in one year together with the ownership of ore concentrate.

Pursuant to a repurchase agreement, MMM was then obligated repurchase the ore from the investors at an agreed price so that they would receive a 100 percent return on their investment in addition to the return of principal. There was no private placement memorandum for the transaction and investors were provided only with limited disclosures as forth in a subscription agreement. The MMM notes have defaulted and investors have not been repaid either principal or the promised 100 percent return.