FINRA

FINRA fines Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH) $8 Million for Substantial Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Failures

February 13, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

FINRA fines Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH) $8 Million for substantial anti-money laundering compliance failures and suspended the firm’s global anti-money laundering compliance officer, Harold Crawford, for 30 days. The New York-based investment firm did not have an adequate program in place to look for and detect suspicious penny stock transactions, according the Financial Industrial Regulatory Authority (FINRA). The firm also failed to investigate suspicious activity involving penny stocks after becoming aware of the problem. The transaction in question generated at least $850 million in proceeds for Brown Brothers customers from January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2013.

Low-priced securities, such as penny stocks pose heightened risks because they may be manipulated by fraudsters. BBH executed transactions and delivered securities involving at least six billion shares of penny stocks, according to FINRA. BBH executed these transactions despite the fact that it was unable to obtain essential information to verify that the stocks were free trading. According to FINRA, in many instances, BBH lacked such basic information, such as the identity of the stock’s true owner. The absence of these details should trigger a review of the transactions by a firm’s anti-money laundering team.

Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President, Enforcement, said: “The sanction in this case reflects the gravity of Brown Brothers Harriman’s compliance failure. The firm opened its doors to undisclosed sellers of penny stocks from secrecy havens without regard of who was behind those transactions, or whether the stock was properly registered or exempt from registration. This case is a reminder to firms of what can happen if they choose to engage in the penny stock liquidation business when they lack the ability to manage the risks involved.”

Stifel, Nicolaus & Company and Century Securities Associates Fined by Regulator Over Leveraged ETFs

February 12, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) ordered brokerage firms Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated (Stifel Nicolaus) and Century Securities Associates, Inc. (Century Securities) to pay combined fines of $550,000 and nearly $475,000 in restitution to 65 customers concerning allegations of the improper sale of leveraged and inverse exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Stifel Nicolaus and Century Securities are affiliates and are both owned by Stifel Financial Corporation.

A leveraged ETF employs debt or leverage in order to increase and magnify the returns of the underlying securities. Leveraged ETFs are generally available for most investment indexes such as the S&P 500, the Dow Jones, commodities, or foreign exchanges. Many leveraged ETFs carry leverage as high as 300% leverage and will typically return 3% if the underlying index returns 1%. Leveraged ETFs can also be designed to return the inverse or opposite of the benchmark.

Leveraged ETFs are generally used and are only appropriate for short term trading. The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has warned that most leveraged ETFs reset daily, meaning that they are designed to achieve their stated objectives on a daily basis. As a result, the performance of nontraditional ETFs held over the long term can differ significantly from the performance of their underlying index or benchmark during the same period. Thus, even if an index is relatively flat over a period of time, a leveraged ETF may still decline in value during the same period.

Former LPL Financial Broker Donald Dahn Sanctioned Over Private Loans to Customers

February 10, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Donald R. Dahn (Dahn) has been barred by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) concerning allegations that he privately borrowed money from at least two customers, an act constituting securities fraud, while being a registered representative of Mutual Service Corporation (MSC) and LPL Financial LLC (LPL).

Dahn entered the securities industry in September 1991, as an Investment Company and Variable Contracts Products Representative (Series 6) license holder. A Series 6 license allows a broker to recommend only a limited number of securities including variable annuities and open-end mutual funds. From 1998 through 2009, Dahn was associated with MSC. In 2009, MSC was acquired by LPL and Dahn became registered with LPL until his termination in April 2013. On April 29, 2013, LPL submitted a Form U5 for Dahn.

Dahn has a long history of customer disputes and FINRA regulatory actions. On December 5, 2012, FINRA found that Dahn violated FINRA rules by borrowing a total of $240,000 from three customers while he was employed with MSC and failing to obtain approval from his member firm for the loans. At that time Dahn was suspended from the industry for six months. In addition, there have been six customer disputes filed against Dahn. The majority of the complaints involve allegations that clients loaned Dahn funds to keep his business operating. At least one complaint alleges that Dahn made unsuitable variable annuity switches.

FINRA Suspends Former NSM Securities Supervisor Irving Burstein

February 4, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Supervisor Irving Burstein (Burstein) has settled charges brought by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) by accepting a one-year bar from the securities industry. FINRA’s allegations concerned Burstein’s activities from March 2007, until July 2011, where Burstein, as Chief Compliance Officer at NSM Securities, Inc. (NSM) failed to supervise the activities of NSM’s registered representatives and also failed to implement and enforce the firm’s Written Supervisory Procedures.

Burstein first became associated with a member firm in 1988, when he joined Stuart, Coleman & Co. Thereafter, Burstein became licensed as a registered representative of at least 15 other brokerage firms including Aura Financial Services, Inc., Pointe Capital, LLC, Legend Securities, Inc., and R.M. Stark & Co., Inc.

According to FINRA, NSM’s business model is to solicit high net worth individuals of Indian descent and then engage in a highly active trading strategy in their accounts involving only a few securities. FINRA alleged that many NSM customer accounts were excessively traded in order to generate large fees for NSM registered representatives and the firm. FINRA found that Burstein, as a supervisor, failed to supervise the activities of the firm’s registered representatives and failed to implement and enforce the firm’s written supervisory procedures. FINRA alleged that NSM, through Burstein’s conduct, helped to create a “culture of noncompliance at NSM that resulted in the rampant churning of customer accounts, unsuitable recommendations, unauthorized trading, and significant customer harm.”

Benjamin Cox of Red River Securities Settles Charges Over Improper Sales Of Oil and Gas Private Placements

February 3, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Benjamin Cox (Cox) has settled charges brought by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) concerning improper sales of oil and gas private placement offerings sold by Red River Securities LLC (Red River). Cox accepted a one-year bar from the securities industry and a fine of $5,000.

Cox entered the securities industry in 2010 when he joined Red River. Cox was employed at Red River until termination in March 2012. According to Cox’s BrokerCheck, in March 2012, Red River filed a termination notice stating that a potential client called Red River explaining that his suitability information was not accurate and was not the information that the client had provided to Cox.

FINRA alleged that from September 2011, through March 2012, Cox cold called potential investors for oil and gas offerings offered and sold by Red River. During the calls with potential investors, Cox was responsible for documenting suitability information from the potential investors to ensure that the investments were appropriate for those investors. FINRA found that Cox was supposed to verify the potential investor’s name, address, occupation, and obtain financial and investment experience information in order to evaluate the suitability of the oil and gas private placements for the customer.

New Jersey Files Complaint Against George Bussanich Over Fraudulent Note Scheme

January 28, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Division of Law of the New Jersey Bureau of Securities has filed suit and taken administrative action against George J. Bussanich, 55, of Park Ridge and his son, George Bussanich, 34, of Upper Saddle River alleging they engaged in securities fraud in connection with sales to 26 New Jersey of $3.5 million of unregistered notes. The Bussanichs allegedly used the investor funds for their own personal enrichment. New Jersey also alleged that George J. Bussanich also provided funds to various members of his family as well. New Jersey alleged that investor funds were used to purchase three homes and exotic vehicles including two Maseratis and a Ferrari.

According to New Jersey, investors were told that their money would be used for Metropolitan Ambulatory Surgical Center, LLC (Metro Ambulatory) and George J. Bussanich’s other companies. Contrary to its name, Metro Ambulatory is not a surgical center but rather a holding company controlled by George J. Bussanich. New Jersey stated that the notes sold to investors purchased carried a 6% to 8% annual rate of return.

Acting New Jersey Attorney General John J. Hoffman said “This was not a legitimate investment gone bad but a scam by the defendants to line their pockets and live the high life.” New Jersey filed an Order to Show Cause with the Court asking the Court to freeze the assets of the defendants, appoint a receiver to take title to and possession of defendants’ property, and review all financial books and records.

FINRA Addresses Conflicts of Interest In the Sales of Securities

January 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

In the securities industry conflicts of interest can arise where a duty of care or trust exists between two or more parties. While the existence of a conflict does not always mean that one party will be harmed by the other party’s interest, brokerage firms have been involved in many situations where they did not effectively and fairly manage conflicts of interest.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently issued a “Report on Conflicts of Interest” that focused on enterprise-level frameworks to identify and manage conflicts of interest; approaches to handling conflicts of interest distributing new financial products; and approaches to compensating their associated persons.

Part of FINRA’s focus on conflicts on interests focused on the introduction of new financial products. FINRA recommended a number of effective practices to address conflicts in the issuance of new securities. First, firms can use a new product review process that includes identifying and mitigating conflicts that a product may present. Second, firms should disclose those conflicts in plain English to ensure that customers comprehend the conflicts that a firm or registered representative have in recommending a product. FINRA reminded firms that conflicts may be particularly acute where complex financial products are sold to less knowledgeable investors, including retail investors.

Rive, Leavell & Co. Sanctioned Over Misleading Communications In the Sale of Church Bonds

January 22, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Brokerage firm Rives, Leavell & Co. (Rives) was recently sanctioned by the the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that the firm disseminated to the investing public 29 advertisements including newspapers, brochures, offering documents, and pastor letters related to church bond investments that failed to comply with FINRA’s advertising rules. FINRA determined that these communications generally failed to adequately explain or highlight the risks associated with the investments, contained misleading language, or failed to explain investment terms sufficiently.

Rives is a broker-dealer based in Jackson. Mississippi, employs twelve registered brokers and has no branch office locations. NASD Conduct Rule 2210(d)(1) establishes content standards for public communications. All member communications with the public are to be based on principles of fair dealing and good faith, must be fair and balanced, and must provide a sound basis for evaluating the facts in regard to any particular security or service. Further, FINRA prohibits members from omitting any material fact. In addition, NASD Rule 2210(d)(1)(B) prohibits claims that are false, exaggerated, unwarranted or misleading. FINRA has reminded firms that members must consider the nature of the audience to which the communications will be directed and that different levels of explanation or detail may be necessary depending on the audience to which a communication is directed.

During the first review period FINRA examined, the agency found that Rives disseminated two newspaper advertisements, five brochures, one pastor letter, one mailed advertisement, and two offering documents that contained improper content. For example, FINRA found that a number of the communications promoted the bonds’ high interest rates but failed to disclose various risks associated with the investment including that the bonds were unrated by a rating agency, were potentially illiquid and might result in a loss of principal. The communications also failed to explain and contrast the difference between different interest options on the bonds.

The Problem of Senior Investor Abuse – A Securities Attorney’s Perspective

January 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The financial abuse of seniors continues to be a significant problem in the United States. Nearly 40 million people are age 65 and older and the number is expected to grow to 89 million by 2050. However, even though seniors comprise of a large portion of the population they make up the vast majority of clients that seek our firm’s assistance as securities attorneys.

Securities regulators have taken increased interest in recent years to stress to brokerage firms the need to implement increased supervision and devise specific policies to address issue facing senior investors. FINRA recently published its 2014 Business Conduct Priorities where the regulator stated that its examiners will continue to focus on how firms engage with senior investors with a focus on suitability determinations as well as disclosures and communications. FINRA has also stated that firms must develop policies and procedures to identify and address situations where issues of diminished capacity may be present.

In a 2010 article published by the SEC, the regulator summarized practices that financial services firms and brokers must adhere to in order to properly service the accounts of senior investors in areas including:

FINRA Sanctions Bedminster Financial Group Concerning Allegations of Supervisory Failures

January 20, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently sanctioned Bedminster Financial Group, Ltd. (BFG) and Robert M. Van Pelt (Van Pelt). FINRA alleged that at least four representatives of BFG used non-BFG email accounts for securities related communications to the public, customers and prospective customers and that Van Pelt failed to retain and review these emails. FINRA also found that BFG, through its President and Chief Compliance Officer Van Pelt, failed to enforce its written supervisory procedures by failing to 1) preserve business related emails; 2) review of business related mail; 3) inspect of non-branch offices; and 4) review and approve website content.

BFG’s main office is located in Holicong, Pennsylvania. BFG employs thirty-four registered persons, had six registered branch offices, and twenty-eight non-branch offices located across the country. BFG’s primary business is the receipt of finder’s fees for private placements and Private Investment in Public Equity (PIPE) offerings. Since 1996, Van Pelt has been registered with BFG and is the firm’s President, CCO, and majority owner.

The securities laws require firms to maintain and preserve for at least three years originals of all communications received and copies of all communications sent relating to the firm’s business. BFG’s supervisory procedures required representatives to use the firm’s email account for business related communications and prohibited employees from communicating with customers or prospects through their personal email accounts unless the outside account was first approved by the firm and records of the email activity were provided to the firm. Despite BFG’s prohibition against using personal email addresses, FINRA found that at least four representatives used their unapproved personal email accounts for business-related communications without copying or forwarding these emails to the firm.