BANK AND TOP EXECUTIVE CHARGED BY SEC WITH MISLEADING INVESTORS

The following excerpt is from an SEC e-mail: 

"Washington, D.C., Jan. 18, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged the holding company for one of Florida’s largest banks and its top executive with misleading investors about growing problems in one of its significant loan portfolios early in the financial crisis.

The SEC alleges that BankAtlantic Bancorp and its CEO and chairman Alan Levan made misleading statements in public filings and earnings calls in order to hide the deteriorating state of a large portion of the bank’s commercial residential real estate land acquisition and development portfolio in 2007. BankAtlantic and Levan then committed accounting fraud when they schemed to minimize BankAtlantic’s losses on their books by improperly recording loans they were trying to sell from this portfolio in late 2007.

“BankAtlantic and Levan used accounting gimmicks to conceal from investors the losses in a critical loan portfolio," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement. "This is exactly the type of information that is important to investors, and corporate executives who fail to make that required disclosure will face severe consequences."

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, BankAtlantic and Levan knew that a large portion of the loan portfolio — which consisted primarily of loans on large tracts of lands intended for development into single family housing and condominiums — was deteriorating in early 2007 because many of the loans had required extensions due to borrowers’ inability to meet their loan obligations. Some loans were kept current only by extending the loan terms or replenishing the interest reserves from an increase in the loan principal. Levan knew this negative information in part from participating in the bank’s Major Loan Committee that approved the extensions and principal increases. BankAtlantic and Levan also were aware that many of the loans had been internally downgraded to non-passing status, indicating the bank was deeply concerned about those loans.

“BankAtlantic and Levan publicly minimized the risks in the bank’s commercial residential loan portfolio when in reality, they had significant concerns about the borrowers’ ability to pay,” said Eric I. Bustillo, Miami Regional Office Director. “Investors had a right to know this key information.”

The SEC alleges that despite this knowledge, BankAtlantic’s public filings in the first two quarters of 2007 made only generic warnings of what may occur in the future if Florida’s real estate downturn continued. BankAtlantic failed to disclose the downward trend already occurring in its own portfolio. The steady deterioration of this portfolio constituted a known trend that should have been disclosed in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) section of BankAtlantic’s filings, which were signed by Levan. During earnings calls in the same time period, Levan made further misleading statements to investors about the portfolio. BankAtlantic finally acknowledged the problems in the third quarter of 2007 by announcing a large unexpected loss. The investing public did not expect a loss of that magnitude, and BankAtlantic’s share price immediately dropped 37 percent.

According to the SEC’s complaint, BankAtlantic and Levan attempted to sell some of the deteriorating loans after this announcement. However, they failed to account for them properly as being “held for sale,” which is required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). BankAtlantic concealed the attempted sales from auditors and investors alike, because proper accounting would have required BankAtlantic to write them down and incur immediate additional losses. Instead, BankAtlantic schemed to understate its net loss by more than 10 percent in its 2007 annual report.

The SEC’s complaint seeks financial penalties and permanent injunctive relief against BankAtlantic and Levan to enjoin them from future violations of the federal securities laws. The complaint also seeks an officer and director bar against Levan.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Senior Counsel Brian P. Knight and Senior Accountant Fernando Torres under the supervision of Assistant Regional Director Thierry Olivier Desmet in the Miami Regional Office. C. Ian Anderson and Adam L. Schwartz will lead the SEC’s litigation efforts."

UBS ADVISORY ARM CHARGED BY SEC WITH MICONDUCT

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:

“Washington, D.C., Jan. 17, 2012 – The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged an investment advisory arm of UBS with failing to properly price securities in three mutual funds that it managed, resulting in a misstatement to investors of the net asset values (NAVs) of those funds. The misconduct was revealed during the course of an SEC examination, minimizing investor harm.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division began investigating UBS Global Asset Management (UBSGAM) following a referral from SEC examiners who conducted a routine exam of the firm, which is an SEC-registered investment adviser. The SEC’s investigation further determined that during a two-week period, UBSGAM did not follow the mutual funds’ fair valuation procedures in pricing certain illiquid fixed-income securities in the portfolios of the mutual funds.

UBSGAM agreed to pay $300,000 to settle the SEC’s charges.
“UBS Global Asset Management failed to fulfill one of its core delegated responsibilities on behalf of mutual funds it advises – to price securities in the mutual funds accurately,” said Merri Jo Gillette, Regional Director of the SEC’s Chicago Regional Office.

“Fortunately this misconduct was brought to light quickly, so the duration was short and the harm to investors minimal.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings against UBSGAM, the firm purchased on behalf of the mutual funds approximately 54 complex fixed-income securities in June 2008 at an aggregate purchase price of approximately $22 million. Most of the securities were part of subordinated tranches of nonagency mortgage-backed securities whose underlying collateral generally consisted of mortgages that did not conform to the requirements necessary for inclusion in mortgage-backed securities guaranteed or issued by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac. The securities purchased also included asset-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations.

The SEC’s order finds that following the purchases, all but six of the securities were then valued at prices substantially in excess of the transaction prices, including many at least 100 percent higher. The valuations used by UBSGAM were provided by pricing sources (broker-dealers or a third-party pricing service) that did not appear to take into account the prices at which the mutual funds had purchased the securities. Some of the broker-dealer quotations were based on the previous month-end pricing; other quotes were stale and not priced daily. UBSGAM did not price the securities at fair value until it held a meeting of the firm’s Global Valuation Committee more than two weeks after UBSGAM began receiving “price tolerance reports” identifying the discrepancies between the purchase prices and the valuation of the securities based on the pricing sources. By using the valuations provided by broker-dealers or a third-party pricing service instead of the transaction prices, UBSGAM caused the mutual funds to not follow their own written valuation procedures. These procedures required the securities to be valued at the transaction price until UBSGAM received a response to a price challenge based on the discrepancy identified in the price tolerance report, or UBSGAM made a fair value determination. The procedures provided that the transaction price could be used for up to five business days until a decision needed to be made to determine the fair value. By failing to implement these procedures, UBSGAM aided and abetted and caused the funds to violate Rule 38a-1 under the Investment Company Act.

The SEC’s order further finds that because the securities were not properly or timely priced at fair value, the NAVs of the funds were misstated between one cent and 10 cents per share for several days in June 2008. Consequently, the mutual funds sold, purchased, and redeemed their shares based on inaccurately high NAVs on those days. UBSGAM thus aided and abetted and caused the funds to violate Rule 22c-1 adopted pursuant to Section 22(c) of the Investment Company Act.

In settling the charges without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, UBSGAM agreed to be censured and to pay a $300,000 penalty, and also consented to a cease-and- desist order from committing or causing violations of Rules 22c-1 and 38a-1 under the Investment Company Act. The SEC acknowledges the assistance and cooperation of UBSGAM during the examination and investigation.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Jamie Davidson, Marlene Key, Steven Levine, and Eric Phillips of the Chicago Regional Office. The SEC examination team that referred the matter to enforcement officials included Maureen Dempsey, Matthew Harris, Leora Hughes, Stanton Nelson, and Susan Weis of the Chicago Regional Office.”