investment fraud

Broker Ismail Elmas Terminated Over Outside Business Activities

September 22, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

According to broker Ismail Elmas’ (Elmas) Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) BrokerCheck records the representative was recently discharged from CUSO Financial Services, LP (CUSO Financial) concerning allegations that the broker “converted client funds for personal use as well as participated in an unauthorized outside business activity involving investments without the firm approval…” Previously Elmas was associated with CUNA Brokerage Services, Inc.

Shortly thereafter, a customer filed a complaint against Elmas alleging that the broker took the client’s variable annuity contract, surrendered it, and sent the proceeds to a third-party – which the client says was unauthorized activity. In addition, since Elmas was terminated from CUSO Financial authorities have been unable to locate the broker. In articles, officials say that Elmas, 49, has been missing since July 29^th and have warned that Elmas may be armed and should not be approached. According to reports Elmas was last seen leaving his home in his gray 2008 Toyota Prius.

The allegations against Elmas are consistent with a “selling away” securities violation. Selling away occurs when a financial advisor solicits investments in companies or promissory notes that were not approved by the broker’s affiliated firm. Under the FINRA rules, a brokerage firm owes a duty to properly monitor and supervise its employees. In order to properly supervise their brokers each firm is required to establish and maintain a system to supervise the activities of each registered representative to achieve compliance with the securities laws. Selling away often occurs in environments where the brokerage firms either fails to put in place a reasonable supervisory system or fails to actually implement that system and meet supervisory requirements.

Advisor Raymond Clark Suspended Over Allegations of Securities Related Misconduct

September 17, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Raymond Clark (Clark) and imposed findings: (1) suspending the broker for three months and fined $6,000 for using his personal email account to communicate with a customer; (2) suspended for four months and fined $10,000 for making false statements to his firm; and (3) suspended for two months and fined $4,000 for failing to report a customer complaint to his firm. FINRA imposed the suspensions to run consecutively and suspended Clark for an additional three months in all supervisory capacities and ordered him to requalify by examination as a securities representative and securities principal.

According to Clark’s BrokerCheck, the broker was registered with Paulson Investment Company, Inc. from December 2008 through May 2009. From June 2007 through January 2009, Clark was registered with J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. From May 2009 until August 2010, Clark was registered with First Midwest Securities, Inc. Finally, from August 2010, through August 2014, Clark was registered with Dynasty Capital Partners, Inc. (Dynasty Capital). Clark’s background check also reveals two regulatory complaints and at least nine customer complaints. Only a relatively small percentage of brokers have any complaints on their records and fewer still have as many as Clark.

The complaints against Clark include claims of unauthorized trading, inappropriate use of margin, securities fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable investments, churning, and misrepresentations.

B. C. Ziegler and Company Sanctioned Over Allegations of False and Misleading Advertising

September 11, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm B. C. Ziegler and Company (B. C. Ziegler) and ordering the brokerage firm to pay $150,000 in connection with allegations that from January 1, 2009, through May 30, 2012 B. C. Ziegler failed to implement a supervisory system reasonably designed to ensure that material economic information regarding Church Bonds, including information concerning delinquent sinking fund payments, was disclosed to the firm’s brokers, trading desk, and customers, and was factored into the pricing of Church Bonds sold to customers in secondary market transactions. In addition, it was alleged that B. C. Ziegler used Church Bond sales material with customers that was not fair and balanced. The sales material prominently promoted the yields associated with Church Bonds without balancing the presentations by disclosing the risks. FINRA also alleged that B. C. Ziegler distributed unbalanced internal-use-only Church Bond sales material to its registered representatives, causing the firm to violate NASD Rule 2211(d)(1) and FINRA Rule 2010.

B. C. Ziegler has been a registered broker-dealer since 1948 and is a full service brokerage firm headquartered in Chicago, Illinois. A primary business of the firm is the underwriting and sale of fixed income products, including debt issued by religious institutions known as “Church Bonds” and senior living facilities (Senior Living Bonds). The firm has approximately 22 branch offices and 200 registered representatives.

According to FINRA, B. C. Ziegler specializes in underwriting and selling Church Bonds for religious institutions. Church Bonds are generally issued by nonprofit religious entities and as such are exempt from registration as a security with the SEC. While there is no established secondary market for Church Bonds, FINRA found that B. C. Ziegler frequently facilitated secondary trading among its customers for Church Bonds it underwrote. A Church Bond sinking fund is a pool of money funded with periodic payments by an issuer for the purpose of accumulating money to make annual or semi-annual coupon payments due to investors of Church Bonds. A Church Bond issuer behind on its sinking fund payments is not in strict compliance with its trust indenture and may be a sign of an issuer’s financial distress.

Broker Richard Lewis Formerly of LPL Financial Sanctioned Over Alleged Improper Use of Discretion

September 8, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Richard Lewis (Lewis) concerning allegations that Lewis exercised discretion in a customer’s account without obtaining prior written authorization from the customer. FINRA found that his conduct violated NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b) and FINRA Rule 2010.

Lewis first became registered with FINRA firm in 1989. Since then, he has been associated with several firms and from December 2010, to March 2013, Lewis was associated with LPL Financial LLC (LPL). Currently, Lewis is associated with J.W. Cole Financial, Inc.

FINRA alleged that from April 2012, to February 2013, while Lewis was associated with LPL, he effected approximately 81 discretionary transactions in the securities account of a customer without obtaining prior written authorization and without LP accepting the account in writing as discretionary.

Matthew Davis Barred Over Allegations of Conversion of Funds and Unauthorized Trading

August 25, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned and barred financial advisor Matthew Davis (Davis) concerning allegations that in connection with a FINRA investigation into allegations of misconduct in several customer accounts, FINRA staff scheduled Davis’ on-the-record (OTR) testimony and Davis failed to appear for the scheduled testimony and informed the agency that he would not appear at another time.

Davis was associated with Beneficial Investment Services, Inc. from November 2008, through April 2010. Thereafter, Davis was associated with OneAmerica Securities, Inc. (OneAmerica) from April 2010, through July 2013. He is not currently associated with a FINRA member.

FlNRA alleged that its staff requested that Davis appear and provide testimony on March 24, 2014, regarding allegations that Davis engaged in misconduct in several customer accounts. The allegations of misconduct included claims of conversion, misrepresentation of customer holdings and account value, forgery, discretionary unauthorized trading, attempts to settle a customer complaint without the firm’s knowledge, and unsuitable investment recommendations. Through Davis’ counsel, FINRA was informed that he would not appear for testimony.

SEC Releases Alert Warning Investors About Affinity Fraud

August 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy issued a Investor Alert to help educate and warn investors about the dangers of affinity fraud. Affinity fraud is a common type of securities fraud that preys upon members of a group or community such as members of certain religions or ethnic communities. Affinity frauds involve either fake investments or extremely risky investments that are conducted outside regular securities channels. The fraudster will typically lie about important details such as the risk of loss, the track record of the investment, or the background of the investment.

Many affinity frauds turn out to be Ponzi schemes. In a Ponzi scheme new investors money goes to pay earlier investors to create the illusion that the investment is succeeding all the while the fraudster skims large amounts of the funds for his or her personal use. When the fraudster’s supply of new investor money runs out and current investors seek payment the scheme collapses. Fraudsters use many legitimate investment sounding vehicles and names to mask their schemes. For example, the fraudster may tell investors that they are investing in real estate, options, precious metals, or employing leverage or other sophisticated investment tools to increase returns.

In order to carry out affinity frauds, the fraudster will be a member of the group they are trying to defraud such as a particular denomination or church. However, any close knit community or group such as an ethnic group, immigrant community, or racial minority will work. Fraudsters may also prey upon members with other commonalities such as teachers, union members, or military servicemen. The key to affinity fraud is that the fraudster can target the group and built up a high level of trust and confidence through the affinity connection to convince them to trust the fraudster with their life savings.

Gana LLP Represents Seven Former Clients of Sean Sheridan Against JP Turner (Part II)

August 18, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Continuing our prior post, the law office of Gana Weinstein LLP recently filed securities arbitration case on behalf of a group of seven investors against J.P. Turner Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner), Ridgeway & Conger, Inc. (Ridgeway), and Newbridge Securities, Corp. (Newbridge) concerning allegations that Sean Sheridan (Sheridan) churned claimants’ accounts through the use of excessive and unreasonable mutual fund switches, among other claims.

In addition to specifically finding that Sheridan committed fraud and made unsuitable recommendations in Claimants accounts, FINRA also found that JP Turner general sales practice with regard to non-traditional ETFs and mutual funds was inappropriate. On December 4, 2013, FINRA released a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) concerning JP Turner’s non-traditional ETFs sales practices and excessive mutual fund switches and fined the firm $707,559.53. FINRA v. J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C., AWC No. 2011026098501 (FINRA, January 2013). According to FINRA’s investigation, JP Turner failed to establish and maintain supervisory systems related to leveraged and inverse ETF sales and mutual fund purchases.

In another churning related action, on November 8, 2013, the SEC issued a similar order against JP Turner finding that Michael Bresner (Bresner), as head of supervision, failed to properly supervise firm employees. The SEC Order found that JP Turner employed an Account Activity Review System (AARS) to monitor customer accounts for signs of churning. The SEC found that the average number of accounts flagged by the AARS system for churning was shockingly high for each quarter in 2008-2009 and was between 300 and 325 accounts and included more than 100 JP Turner registered representatives. In sum, the SEC discovered that no one at JP Turner was willing to take responsibility in determining whether churning took place in a client’s account – a problem that directly affected the claimants in this case.

Gana LLP Files Complaint on Behalf of Seven Former Clients of Sean Sheridan Against JP Turner

August 15, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law office of Gana Weinstein LLP has recently filed securities arbitration case on behalf of a group of seven investors against J.P. Turner Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner), Ridgeway & Conger, Inc. (Ridgeway), and Newbridge Securities, Corp. (Newbridge) concerning allegations that the firms failed to supervise and prevent Sean Francis Sheridan (Sheridan) from churning claimants’ accounts through the use of excessive and unreasonable mutual fund switches and generally making unsuitable recommendations to the clients. Both FINRA and the SEC have brought actions against JP Turner and the firm’s brokers on numerous and repeated occasions concerning the firm’s failure to protect its clients from the type of unscrupulous sales practices alleged in the complaint

As discovered by FINRA, from at least January 2007, through December 2009, Sheridan recommended approximately 205 unsuitable mutual fund switch transactions in the accounts of eight customers, including some of the Claimants in the filed case. See Department of Enforcement v. Sean Francis Sheridan, Disciplinary Proceeding No. 2009019209204, (FINRA, Feb. 12, 2013) (Sheridan Action). FINRA found that Sheridan recommended the unsuitable mutual fund switches in customers’ accounts and as a result of Sheridan’s activities in claimants’ and other customers’ accounts, FINRA barred Sheridan from the financial industry.

FINRA found that Sheridan only recommended Class A mutual fund shares that require customers to pay sales charges with each new purchase when Sheridan intended to effect the switches on a short-term basis. FINRA found that the average holding period for the mutual funds Sheridan sold was just four to five months. FINRA found that Sheridan exclusively recommended Class A mutual fund shares that charged front-end sales loads of 4-5% with each new purchase, an enormous cost. FINRA also found that Sheridan would randomly switch customers between fund categories such as Growth, Natural Resources, Gold, Emerging Markets, Science and Technology without a reasonable basis for doing so.

Gana LLP Files Complaint on Behalf of Five Customers Against JP Turner and National Securities Concerning Ralph Calabro’s Churning

August 12, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Gana Weinstein LLP has recently filed securities arbitration case on behalf of a group of five investors against J.P. Turner Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner) and National Securities Corporation (National Securities) concerning the alleged complete lack of supervision at JP Turner and National Securities to monitor and prevent Ralph Calabro (Calabro) from churning customer accounts.

As a background, Calabro was expelled from the securities industry when on November 8, 2013, the SEC issued an order (SEC Order) finding that JP Turner registered representatives including Calabro, Jason Konner, and Dimitrios Koutsoubos churned customer accounts and Executive Vice President (EVP), Michael Bresner (Bresner), as head of supervision, failed to supervise the representative’s activities.

The SEC alleged that JP Turner knew that numerous accounts had a cost-to-equity ratio greater than 20%, a number sufficiently high to establish an inference of churning requiring close supervision and corrective action. The reports of these accounts resulted in an report being emailed to principals and the compliance office for review including Bresner. The SEC found that the average number of accounts being reviewed for high costs was shockingly high for each quarter in 2008-2009 and was between 300 and 325 accounts and included more than 100 JP Turner registered representatives. Even though these accounts bore the hallmarks of churning, Bresner testified that he could not recall closing an account, personally contacting any JP Turner customers, or even imposing a trading limitation.

Gana LLP Files Customer Complaint Against JHS Capital Concerning Broker Joe Alijaj

August 11, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law office of Gana Weinstein LLP recently filed a securities arbitration on behalf of an investor against JHS Capital Advisors, LLC f/k/a Pointe Capital, Inc. (JHS Capital) concerning allegations that the broker recommended unsuitable investments, churned the account, and ultimately depleted the claimant’s assets.

The claimant is sixty-one years old and spent the majority of his career running seed companies. The claimant alleged that he had little understanding of the stock and bond markets. The complaint alleged that Enver Rahman “Joe” Alijaj (Alijaj), a broker with JHS Capital, cold called claimant and aggressively pursued the opportunity to manage claimant’s money. The complaint alleged that prior to opening his account with JHS, claimant never maintained a brokerage account. The claimant alleged that he explained to Alijaj that he wanted to focus on preservation of his capital.

In reliance on Alijaj’s assurances, the claimant alleged that he provided the broker with a substantial portion of his net worth. Rather than comply with the claimant’s investment needs, the complaint alleged that Alijaj took advantage of the claimant’s inexperience by investing the funds in unreasonably volatile stocks and excessively traded (churned, a type of securities fraud) his account to generate excessive commissions. According to the complaint, within days of opening the account, Alijaj leveraged the account and actively traded speculative small cap stocks in unsuitable investments including A-Power Energy Generation Systems Ltd. (APWR), Silicon Motion Technology Corp (SIMO), and Yingli Green Energy Holdings Co. (YGE).