Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog

Silver Law Group Files Lawsuits Against Cryptocurrency Exchanges Bitcoin Savings & Trust and Cryptsy

October 23, 2014 | Silver Law Group

Boca Raton, Florida – October 23, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE)

Silver Law Group (www.silverlaw.com) is pursing claims against multiple Bitcoin exchanges for allegedly buying and selling cryptocurrencies using false and misleading claims of easy profits, high returns, and little risk. While The Wall Street Journal recently proclaimed that it was time “for some investors – those with stomachs for volatility – [to take] a closer look at cryptocurrencies,” other investors who have already taken a look have seen an entire life’s savings lost.

With the rapid rise and fall of Bitcoin prices (Bitcoin peaked at $1,150 last year and fell to $286 this month), Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are drawing increasing interest as potential alternative investments. According to CoinDesk, there will be eight million Bitcoin trading accounts and over 100,000 companies accepting Bitcoin by the end of 2014. Despite new regulatory challenges and the struggles of some Bitcoin-related sites, the New York Times has reported that more than $250 million has been invested in Bitcoin companies, most of that in the last twelve months.

Silver Law Group Warns Investors about Alternative Investments

October 23, 2014 | Silver Law Group

If you’re investing in an instrument other than traditional stocks, bonds, or cash, then you’re investing in an alternative. In the current low-interest rate environment, many retail investors are allocating a greater portion of their portfolio to alternatives in search of higher yield. It is also common for investors to believe that alternatives help contribute to a diversified portfolio and reduce volatility. Originally offered to institutional investors and sophisticated, high net worth individuals, alternatives come in many shapes and sizes. They include private placements, precious metals, managed futures, structured products, commodities, currency, and “alternative alternatives” – just to name a few.

Let’s start by differentiating these from more traditional investments. Because alternatives frequently claim to have a low correlation with market indices, performance frequently depends more on manager skill than on market returns. Fees are often opaque and layered, and leverage may be used to magnify returns. One should also note that these investments can be highly illiquid. Their complexity explains their popularity among sellers, as complex products are often designed in favor of the issuer by having multiple layers of fees. In 2010, for the top five U.S. brokerage firms, alternatives generated $18 billion in fee revenues (McKinsey & Company: The Mainstreaming of Alternative Investments).

According to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) rules, broker-dealers have an obligation to provide their clients with adequate disclosures and follow suitability rules. The disclosures include such details as liquidity, leverage, associated fees, and conflicts of interest. With regard to suitability, broker-dealers must consider the investor’s age, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, financial and tax status, and other relevant characteristics (FINRA Rule 2111). Unfortunately, many broker-dealers have allocated a large portion of conservative investors’ portfolios to alternatives. When broker-dealers, enticed by high commissions, take advantage of retirement savers and elderly clients, investors may be entitled to compensation for their losses.

FINRA Hits Newport Coast Securities and Its Representatives with Churning Charges

August 14, 2014 | Silver Law Group

Last week, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) filed charges against Newport Coast Securities, Inc. (“Newport Coast”) and some of its current and former registered representatives, accusing them of using margin and risky securities to artificially generate huge commissions for themselves while wiping out most of their customers’ investment capital.

Newport Coast, a New York-based broker-dealer, by and through brokers Douglas Leone, Andre LaBarbera, David Levy, Antontio Costanzo, and Donald Bartlet, allegedly churned the accounts of twenty four customers — many of whom are retirees — causing more than $1,000,000 in losses to the investor-clients. “Churning,” as it is known in the industry, is the act of a broker who excessively and needlessly engages in trading in a client’s account primarily to generate commissions for the broker on each trade without regard for the client’s financial well-being. Churning is an illegal and unethical practice that violates SEC rules and securities laws. The brokers are also purported to have created new account forms for their victimized clients that misstated the clients’ net worth, investment experience, and objectives; and two of the brokers (Levy and Costanzo) attempted to dissuade several customers from cooperating with FINRA’s investigation into the matter — all of which was done to cover up the illegality of the brokers’ excessive activity in the client accounts.

According to FINRA, former Newport Coast supervisors Marc Arena and Roman Luckey saw what was transpiring but took no meaningful steps to curtail the misconduct. To the contrary, the firm’s managers, supervisors, and the former President of the company allegedly profited through overrides on the churned accounts.

Scott Silver Presents “How to Win an Alternative Investment Case” at the 2014 American Association of Justice Annual Convention

August 1, 2014 | Silver Law Group

Scott Silver, Managing Partner of Silver Law Group, is the current co-chair of the Securities and Financial Fraud group of the American Association of Justice (“AAJ”). On July 28, 2014, during the 2014 AAJ Annual Convention in Baltimore, Maryland, Scott gave a well-received presentation titled “How to Win an Alternative Investment Case.” AAJ, also known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, is the world’s largest trial bar and promotes justice and fairness for injured persons and safeguards victims’ rights.

The theme of the presentation focused on the rise of Alternative Investment or Product cases over the last several years. Driven by its desire to replace commissions lost as investors realize stocks and bonds can be traded at discount firms for less than ten dollars a trade, Wall Street has introduced many new Alternatives to investors. However, many of the new, complex Alternatives can be riddled with fees, conflicts of interest, and are frequently more speculative than marketed by the firms. Several recent FINRA arbitration claims focus on products which lose substantially all of their value in a short time. FINRA has seen a rise in arbitration claims where multiple investors all seek damages relating to the same Alternative Investments or Product and where one or more of the asserted claims center around allegations regarding the widespread mismarketing or defective development of a specific investment.

Alternative Investments which have been the subject of recent FINRA claims include:

SEC Charges Palm Beach CEO, Cecil Franklin Speight, in $3 Million Fraud Scheme

July 29, 2014 | Silver Law Group

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has filed a civil lawsuit against a Palm Beach, Florida-based transfer agent and its owner for allegedly defrauding more than 70 investors out of more than $3 million by using “aggressive boiler room tactics” to sell worthless investment securities.

According to the SEC’s lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in New York, International Stock Transfer, Inc. (“IST”) and its sole owner, Cecil Franklin Speight, committed mail fraud and securities fraud by creating and issuing fake securities certificates to both domestic and foreign investors. While orchestrating a group of “cold callers” who promised investors high returns or discounted prices, Speight and IST actually provided the investors nothing more than counterfeit foreign bond certificates and stock certificates, including some for a publicly-traded microcap company with no connection to IST. Moreover, to cloak his scheme with an appearance of legitimacy, Speight and IST told investors to send their investment funds to two attorneys who would place the funds in their own bank accounts. From there, however, the funds did not go to any issuers; instead, the funds went to IST, where Speight used the money to pay personal expenses, including purchases at Mercedes-Benz, Nordstrom, and Groupon. In the course of this scheme, Speight allegedly stole more than $3.3 million, sporadically paying prior foreign bond fund investors with new investor money in classic Ponzi scheme fashion.

Speight and IST have agreed to settle the SEC’s charges, with Speight agreeing to be barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company, agreeing to be enjoined from participating in any penny stock offerings, and requiring Speight and IST to disgorge all of their ill-gotten gains. Monetary sanctions will be determined by the Court at a later date, though Speight reportedly faces at least $3.3 million in restitution and a fine equal to double the investors’ losses. Additionally, Speight has pleaded guilty to a criminal charge in a parallel action brought against him by the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. He faces up to five years in prison.

Silver Law Group Represents 93 year old Victim of Elder Financial Abuse

July 3, 2014 | Silver Law Group

According to the Sun Sentinel, the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office has charged Sultaine Valcius of Boynton Beach with fraud after taking $1.4 million from a 93 year-old man that hired her as a medical aide.

The Sun Sentinel reports Sultaine Valcius, 48, is charged with organized scheme to defraud for taking the money from her employer for at least five years. Ms. Valcius requested the money for various reasons, including, nursing school tuition, purchasing a home as an investment property, repairing a home in Haiti that had been destroyed by an earthquake and for general financial assistance due to her husband purportedly losing his job. However, Ms. Valcius was allegedly never enrolled in school, the house that was purchased was used as the primary residence by Ms. Valcius and her husband was never laid off from the job she claimed he had.

Ms. Valcius convinced the elderly gentleman to write her numerous checks ranging from a couple of hundreds of dollars to tens of thousands of dollars from two of his brokerage accounts maintained at two national broker/dealers. However, even if convicted, it is unlikely that Ms. Valcius will have the adequate resources to repay the victim.

Winsome Investment Trust, U.S. Ventures LC, and their Individual Owners Assessed $44 Million Sanction for Commodity Pool Fraud and Misappropriation

July 2, 2014 | Silver Law Group

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has obtained a federal court Order imposing $44 million in sanctions against Robert J. Andres of Houston, TX; his company, Winsome Investment Trust (“Winsome”); Robert L. Holloway of San Diego, CA; and his company, US Ventures LC (“US Ventures”); for fraud in operating a commodities futures pool. The sanction includes a civil monetary penalty of over $32 million as well as a restitution award of $12 million to be paid to defrauded investors. The Order also imposes upon the individuals and companies a permanent trading and registration ban.

According to the Order entered by the Honorable Bruce S. Jenkins of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Andres and Winsome (from May 2005 through November 2008) fraudulently solicited and accepted over $50 million from investors who were told that they would be investing in a commodity futures pool operated by Holloway and US Ventures. To garner the investors’ funds, Andres and Winsome purportedly made false statements claiming that the investment program had a successful track record and that each investor would be guaranteed a return of his/her principal plus profits. The Court found those representations to be false, as Holloway and US Ventures’ futures trading actually suffered nearly $11 million in net losses.

The Court went on to conclude that the defendants misappropriated the majority of participant funds to pay investors false “profits” in a manner akin to a Ponzi scheme and that the defendants used investor funds for other improper purposes, such as providing money to Andres’ wife, funding Holloway’s and his wife’s lavish personal expenses (houses, cars, jewelry, etc.), and investing in various unrelated and undisclosed businesses including a business Holloway’s wife ran on eBay. The Court Order explained that Andres and Holloway attempted to conceal the fraud by directing employees to falsify participants’ account records and to falsely represent to investors that the pool funds were trading profitably with virtually no losses during the relevant period.

Silver Law Group Named Commodities Law Firm of the Year by Finance Monthly

June 27, 2014 | Silver Law Group

Silver Law Group is proud to be awarded Commodities Law Firm of the Year by Finance Monthly magazine. According to Finance Monthly, “the Finance Monthly Global Awards reflect the very best of those professionals working in or within the finance industry today. Each winner has demonstrated excellence and stands out as a first among equals in what is a highly competitive sector.”

Silver Law Group routinely represents institutional and retail investors in commodities litigation and arbitration claims. Our attorneys routinely represent investors in claims before the CFTC and NFA arbitration. Amongst other accomplishments, our attorneys obtained confirmation of an NFA arbitration award against a top commodities clearing firm, represented several victims of MF Global and currently represents multiple victims of a Forex trading scheme.

If you have questions about your legal rights, or have been the victim of investment fraud, please contact Scott Silver of the Silver Law Group for a free consultation at ssilver@silverlaw.com or Toll Free at (800) 975-4345.

Silver Law Group Settles Investor Class Action for $13 Million

June 27, 2014 | Silver Law Group

Silver Law Group settles a Class Action Complaint on behalf of a group of investors which generally alleged Regions Bank assisted U.S. Pension Trust Corp (“USPT”) in the sale of unregistered securities and failed to properly disclose the high fees and costs of the program. Plaintiffs pursued a class action because many investors were located internationally and a class action was an appropriate vehicle to pursue damages. The SEC had previously charged USPT with violating the federal securities laws and entered judgment against USPT in September 2010. Plaintiffs alleged Defendants violated the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act and aided and abetted the unregistered sale of securities, amongst other claims.

The victims were primarily from Latin America and over 5,000 investors were identified as potential class members. A United States District Court Judge in Miami appointed Silver Law Group and its co-counsel as attorneys to represent the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs further alleged Regions advised USPT on the design and content of marketing materials, had a role in drafting documents, participated in sales conventions and was paid as the trustee on USPT trust accounts. The class action ultimately settled for approximately $13 million. The case was reported by the Daily Business Review.

If you have questions about your legal rights, or have been the victim of investment fraud, please contact Scott Silver of the Silver Law Group for a free consultation at ssilver@silverlaw.com or Toll Free at (800) 975-4345.

FINRA Proposes New Rule to Make Brokerage Fees More Transparent to Customers

June 24, 2014 | Silver Law Group

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has recently sponsored a new securities industry rule that makes the information included on customer account statements more transparent. Transparent commissions will likely lower the total up-front commissions a broker can collect on certain popular securities as investors realize the steep fees they are paying.

Nontraded real estate investment trusts (REITs) are among the most popular investment products sold by registered representatives and their broker-dealers. Typically sold for less than $10 per share, the commission to a rep and the firm in this $1.4 billion “alternative investment” sector of the retail investment market is 7%, though the amount that goes toward the total upfront commission is split amongst several different players involved in selling the REIT. A problem for investors is that their account statements do not clearly show the breakdown of those commissions or the estimated per-share valuation of their investment — something that the current rules do not require be revealed to them until 18 months after the REIT sponsors stop raising funds.

Under FINRA’s proposed new rule, the time frame in which broker-dealers will have to show investors a true valuation of such purchases will be drastically sped up. By accelerating that timetable, investors will be provided quicker and much greater transparency in seeing the commissions being charged to them; and industry experts anticipate that broker-dealers are likely to lower the fees they assess to investors on such alternative investments. Both nontraded REITs and illiquid private placements known as “direct participation programs” (DPPs), which would also fall directly under this new rule, have frequently been criticized for high commissions.