whistleblower

Two Whistleblowers Win $50 Million Award from SEC for their Smoking Gun Evidence

April 1, 2019 | Malecki Law Team

The Securities and Exchange Commission continues to make it clear that whistleblowers are among their most potent enforcement weapons in their law enforcement arsenal. In a press release on March 26, the SEC awarded a combined $50 million to two whistleblowers who provided info leading to a successful enforcement action against a major financial institution. Jane Norberg from the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower referred to the involved whistleblowers and others who lead the enforcement as the “source of smoking gun evidence and indispensable assistance.” One whistleblower received $13 million, and the other won a $37 million award, which is the SEC’s third-highest whistleblower award as of yet. Our whistleblower attorneys view this particular case as another example of the SEC’s growing willingness to provide large sums of money to qualifying individuals.

The whistleblower is said to have provided information that helped the SEC and CTFC pursue action against JPMorgan Securities and JPMorgan Chase Bank. While the SEC did not openly name any involved party, the law firm representing the whistleblowers that received the smaller award has come forward with information. The charges involve allegations that from 2008-2013 JP Morgan failed to provide certain disclosures that would have been pertinent to their wealthy investors. Allegedly, JP Morgan steered clients towards its own mutual funds and hedge funds, without providing the proper disclosures. All in all, the whistleblowers’ original information allegedly assisted the SEC and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission with securing a $307 million settlement with JP Morgan.

As this case, as well as others show, whistleblowers have a lot to gain besides just helping restore public order and market integrity. Clients represented by whistleblower attorneys know that being an asset to the SEC can pay off. The SEC’s whistleblower program launched in 2011 to incentivize people to come forward after the passing of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. As part of the program, whistleblowers with original, timely and credible information are eligible to receive a percentage of recovered funds. Whistleblowers qualify if their tip helps the agency to achieve a successful enforcement action recovering least $1 million. The award, which ranges between 10-30% of recovered funds comes from an investor recovery fund set up by Congress. The investor fund is from sanctions paid from federal securities law violations. The Dodd-Frank Act also grants whistleblowers the right to anonymity and protection from employer retaliation.

Barclay PLC Fined After CEO Allegedly Tried to Find Anonymous Whistleblower’s Identity

January 8, 2019 | Malecki Law Team

Securities employees who decide to report covert unjust employer practices to other individuals are oftentimes taking a huge personal risk for public betterment. Without legal protection, these whistleblowers could end up facing termination, workplace harassment, and other retaliation. While various federal, state, and common laws exist to provide anonymity and other protections to whistleblowers, violations are not completely unprecedented. Perhaps unsurprisingly, some employers might still try to take illegal measures to find and persecute whistleblowers without regard for the rules. Fortunately, certain federal and state laws exist to also provide whistleblowers with justice because of the infringement of their rights.

Recently, New York state regulators ordered that Barclay PLC, as well as its New York branch, pay a $15 million fine for their “shortcomings in governance, controls and corporate culture” in handling a whistleblower matter. Barclay PLC’s chief executive officer, Jeff Staley allegedly tried to uncover the identity of an anonymous employee whistleblower. A New York Department of Financial Services probe uncovered that Barclay PLC’s handling of Staley’s situation potentially compromised its whistleblower program. As an additional caveat of the settlement, Barclays will submit a detailed written plan to ensure the implementation of the whistleblowing program as well as improve the board’s oversight going forward. Big banks, such as Barclay PLC are required to have a strong program in place to protect their employees.

The alleged violation ensued when Mr. Staley requested the head of Barclay PLC group security uncover the identity of the whistleblower author of two letters circling around the bank. The purported letters criticized Barclay PLC’s management, Mr. Staley and a newly hired employee, Tim Main. As repeated, Mr. Staley claims to have needed the identity of the letter writer to protect Tim Main from “personal attack”. The group chief compliance officer, general counsel and other bank officials had advised Mr. Staley to steer clear from his inquiries into the whistleblower. Yet, Mr. Staley claimed to have not been aware that unmasking a whistleblower was even against the law, according to news sources. Our whistleblowers find it puzzling how a highly ranked bank official could not understand nor respect the sanctity of whistleblower identity protections.

How Much Time Does It Take for SEC Whistleblowers to Receive an Award? Too Long

August 16, 2018 | Malecki Law Team

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s program to reward whistleblowers for coming forward has undoubtedly been an asset in recovering fraud for the regulatory agency. Useful tips from whistleblowers have helped the Securities and Exchange Commission recover over $1 billion in enforcement actions. The SEC whistleblower program offers financial incentives and anti-retaliatory protection for individuals who report qualifying information relating to federal securities law violations. Irrespective of the potential monetary awards, courageous whistleblowers often put a lot in jeopardy when choosing to come forward. Yet, the process for SEC whistleblowers to be rewarded with payouts is slow, according to a Wall Street Journal article.

The WSJ article notes that the time in which whistleblowers receive a response regarding a reward increased from a year in 2012 to over two years presently. Whistleblower attorneys informed the Wall Street Journal that occasionally clients wait years to receive an award even after being deemed eligible by the SEC. The Wall Street Journal attributes the SEC’s slower process to an oversaturation of reward seekers. The Securities and Exchange Commission receives an influx of tips, with many not being useful, according to the WSJ article. Officials reportedly referred to the process for vetting and allocating whistleblower rewards as “demanding”.

Our whistleblower attorneys believe that a quick and efficient claims review process should be a priority given associated risks for the whistleblowers. Additionally, the value whistleblowers have in fostering a less corrupt society are unquestionable. Whistleblowers are immensely beneficial for minimizing fraudulent activity and protecting investors in the securities industry. The Securities and Exchange Commission has even deemed the whistleblower rewards program as their “most powerful weapon” in enforcement. Informative whistleblower tips have helped the SEC with detecting as well as prosecuting securities law violations and enforcement action.

BlackRock Charged By SEC For Removing Whistleblower Incentives In Employee Separation Agreements

January 18, 2017 | Malecki Law Team

BlackRock has been charged by the SEC with removing whistleblower incentives in their separation agreements with employees, per the SEC. According to the Commission, BlackRock’s charges stemmed from allegations that the company forced employees to waive their ability to obtain whistleblower awards.

Provisions such as those in Dodd-Frank provide for monetary compensation to those who provide information to the SEC concerning securities law violations, provided certain criteria are met. Whistleblowers may also file anonymously.

Per the SEC, over 1,000 employees signed such agreements, in which the employee was forced to waive the right to monetary recovery as a condition for receiving separation payments from the company.