Articles Posted in Audits and Investigations

A number of senior management with UBS Puerto Rico were terminated late last week, according to sources.  It is believed that individuals from marketing, investment banking, lending and other areas of the bank’s operations on the island were all let go. Read the recent report by Reuters on this here.

Consistent with industry custom, those who were let go were reportedly offered a severance package which they have roughly two to three weeks to accept or reject.  Since these packages are usually contingent upon a general release of liability (meaning that the individual cannot sue the firm), for those individuals who were offered packages, there are likely a number of factors that should be considered before deciding to accept or reject.  Once a general release is signed, virtually all claims for monetary damages that could have been brought before are then lost forever.

For anyone, being fired is a major life event.  For licensed professionals, being fired comes with the potential for an additional life-changing of having a mark on their license in connection with their termination.  If you are a licensed professional and are asked to sign an agreement, whether or not you have any intention of filing an action or any possibility of a FINRA U5 issue, it is always wise to seek the advice of a lawyer to learn about both your rights and what you might be giving up before you sign anything.  Once you sign, it is too late.  This is not the time to be “penny wise and pound foolish” – this is the time to consult with counsel to make informed decisions.  Many lawyers provide free consultations.

FINRA reported that it barred 10 former Global Arena Representatives including the former President of Global Arena Capital Corp., Barbara Desiderio, and five former representatives (David Awad a.k.a. David Bennett, James Torres, Peter Snetzko, Alex Wildermuth, and Michael Tannen) in all capacities; barred two former principals, Kevin Hagan and Richard Bohack, for supervisory failures; sanctioned two other former brokers, Niaz Elmazi a.k.a. Nick Morrisey and Andrew Marze, for failing to cooperate with FINRA’s investigation. FINRA had cancelled Global Arena’s membership and barred the owner and three other brokers for fraud in July 2015 in a separate action.

FINRA announced that a 2014 on-site audit and investigation at Global Arena Capital Corp had allegedly revealed several instances of securities fraud including product misrepresentation, use of misleading claims, account churning, unsuitability, and other misconduct like use of high pressure sales tactics to make sales of junk bonds to customers. FINRA reports that their business model involved cold calling vulnerable groups of investors including seniors to make solicited recommendations of securities. These sanctions reiterate FINRA’S focus on tracking down groups of brokers who migrate from one risky and problem-ridden firm to another, with questionable practices. In this instance reported by FINRA, seven of the ten individuals had moved to Global Arena’s new office from HFP Capital Market, a firm that was expelled by FINRA in 2013. Apparently, FINRA’s risk-based approach identified certain brokers who had moved from HFP for heightened regulatory investigation, which confirmed FINRA’s suspicions. In settling the actions, the respondents neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

According to Susan Axelrod, FINRA’s Executive Vice President, Regulatory Operations, FINRA will continue will continue to monitor brokers who move from expelled or high-risk securities firms. They will use data leveraged from their study of broker migration to expedite investigations and sanction brokers who tend to prey on vulnerable investors.

The securities fraud attorneys at Malecki Law are interested in hearing from investors with complaints involving Adam F. Coblin. Per his BrokerCheck Report, maintained by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), Mr. Coblin is currently not a registered stock broker or investment advisor. He was previously registered with the Gilford Securities Incorporated in New York.

Mr. Coblin’s BrokerCheck Report indicates that he has been the subject of at least ten customer complaints.  At the center of several of these complaints was unsuitable investments leading to huge financial losses, negligence in handling customer accounts, unauthorized sales. In 2013, Adam Coblin resigned from Gilford Securities while he was being reviewed for customer complaints involving unsuitable investments, activity and negligence.

According to BrokerCheck, there are numerous customer disputes in the past, dating from 2012 to 1995, involving Mr. Coblin which have been settled by awarding damages of $910,000, $3,000, $107,500 and $32,000. He has also been registered with the GMS Group LLC, Spencer Clarke LLC, Broadband Capital Management LLC, Dalton Kent Securities Group, Bluestone Capital Partners, Gruntal & Co., Prudential Securities Inc., Oppenheimer & Co., Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Co., Bear Stearns & Co.

The securities fraud attorneys at Malecki Law are interested in investigated possible claims on behalf of investors who have complaints regarding former stockbroker Manuel Dopazo.  According to his BrokerCheck report maintained by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), Mr. Dopazo has been the subject of multiple customer disputes in just the past ten years.

Per FINRA, in 2015 a customer complaint involving Mr. Dopazo alleged misrepresentations, omissions, failure to supervise, and the recommendation of unsuitable investments seeking $640,000 in damages.

In 2009, Mr. Dopazo was involved with another customer dispute alleging a $30,000 loss, per BrokerCheck.  Another customer complaint, in 2008, alleged more than $50,000 in losses stemming from suitability violations.

The securities fraud attorneys at Malecki Law are interested in hearing from investors who have complaints against stockbroker Michael Fasciglione.  Mr. Fasciglione is believed to be registered with National Securities Corporation, based out of Mineola, NY.  He has also recently been registered with Oppenheimer & Co. and First Montauk Securities, according to industry records.

According to BrokerCheck, as maintained by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), Mr. Fasciglione has been the subject of more than 10 customer complaints.  Stretching back as far as 1995, Mr. Fasciglione has been accused of recommending unsuitable investments to customers, breach of fiduciary duty, churning, excessive trading, fraud, unauthorized trading, taking excessive risk, misrepresentations, allowing a customer’s account to exceed comfortable margin balances, and charging excessive commissions, per FINRA records.

Of these customer disputes, FINRA records indicate that some customers received back tens of thousands of dollars in connection with their complaints.  One customer reportedly received back $300,000 in connection with an unauthorized trading complaint, while another reportedly received $120,000 in a suitability claim.

The securities fraud attorneys are interested in hearing from investors with complaints involving Dwarka Persaud.  Per his BrokerCheck Report, maintained by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), Mr. Persaud is a registered stock broker with Buckman, Buckman & Reid, based out of Shrewsbury, NJ.

Mr. Persaud’s BrokerCheck Report indicates that he has been the subject of at least six customer complaints.  At the center of several of these complaints was churning and excessive commissions.  Churning is the frequent,over-trading of a customer’s account by the broker to generate high commissions paid by the customer, benefitting the broker and the firm.  Churning is against the law and industry regulations.

Mr. Persaud is reportedly the subject of at least two currently pending customer complaints, each alleging and “unauthorized trading.”  One of these complaints also alleges churning.  The other alleges that the unauthorized trading caused more than $45,000 in losses.

FINRA has announced that it has fined Aegis Capital Corp. $950,000 for sales of unregistered penny stocks and anti-money laundering violations.    According to FINRA, this fine was also related to supervisory failures within the firm.

The firm was not the only one that FINRA appears to have come down hard upon.  Reports show that Charles D. Smulevitz and Kevin C. McKenna, who each served as the firm’s Chief Compliance and AML Compliance Offices were given 30-day and 60-day principal suspensions and fined $5,000 and $10,000, respectively, per FINRA.  Aegis’ president, Robert Eide, was also reportedly given a “time-out” in the form of a 15-day suspension for failing to disclosed more than a half-million dollars in outstanding liens, in violation of FINRA rules.

FINRA reportedly found that from April of 2009 through June of 2011, Aegis liquidated almost 4 billion shares of penny stocks which were neither properly registered nor exempted from registration with the US Securities and Exchanges Commission.  According to FINRA, Aegis committed these violations in spite of a multitude of “red flags” or warning signs that something was amiss.

“My broker dealer wants me to meet with its lawyers.”  This is the start of a FINRA registered representative’s worst nightmare.

Your heart is pounding and your head starts to race.  “Why me?” “What do they want to know?”  “What could I have done?”  “Are they going to ask me about the XYZ account?”  “I’m sure that I did everything right and by the book, didn’t I?”

If you did do something that may have been a violation of the law, FINRA Rules, or the firm’s manual, you will likely begin to think about the potential punishment (fine, suspension, termination) even before you hang up the phone or close the door to your office.  Once an investigation into your conduct starts, you are not able to leave with a “voluntary” termination, but at best would be “permitted to resign during a firm investigation.”

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced today that is has formally charged Malcolm Segal with running a Ponzi scheme and stealing investor money from his office in Pennsylvania.  According to his BrokerCheck Report, Mr. Segal was formerly a registered stockbroker with Aegis Capital Corp. and Cumberland Advisors.  Mr. Segal reportedly was a partner in J&M Financial and the president of National CD Sales.

According to the SEC, Mr. Segal allegedly sold what he called certificates of deposit (CDs) to his brokerage customers under the false pretense that he could get them a higher rate of interest than was then available through banks.  Mr. Segal allegedly represented to his victims that his CDs were FDIC insured and risk-free. Mr. Segal reportedly defrauded at least fifty investors out of roughly $15.5 million.

As his scheme was unravelling, Mr. Segal allegedly began to steal from his customers’ brokerage accounts by falsifying fraudulent paperwork such as letters of authorization. This fake paperwork reportedly allowed Mr. Segal to withdraw funds from his customers’ accounts without them knowing.  Ultimately, in July 2014, the scheme collapsed completely.  Mr. Segal has since been barred from the securities industry by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

Back in February, I wrote a piece on what to do when you get an SEC subpoena.  SEC subpoenas are only part of the securities regulatory landscape.  While the SEC can and will subpoena anyone – registered or unregistered – who is potentially the target of or may have helpful information related to an SEC investigation,  FINRA registered representatives are additionally subject to FINRA inquiries via FINRA Rule 8210.

FINRA Rule 8210 allows FINRA investigators to essentially “subpoena” a person – i.e., require that they testify on the record and/or compel them to produce documents – without actually ever getting a subpoena.  Instead, FINRA uses what is commonly (and not surprisingly) referred to as an “8210 Request.”

8210 Requests are similar to SEC subpoenas in their function, but differ slightly in practice.  FINRA investigators will regularly tell parties that FINRA is not the government, but merely a private member organization.  Why is that significant?  Some may say that it’s significant because FINRA cannot actually “require” someone to come testify under a threat of contempt or jailtime; that your response is, in a way, “voluntary.”

Contact Information